Message from discussion
BenchMac - the sequel
Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!rudiak
From: rud...@garnet.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: BenchMac - the sequel
Message-ID: <1991Jul30.062612.1586@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 30 Jul 91 06:26:12 GMT
References: <231.2893F6F9@resq.fidonet.org>
Sender: use...@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 35
In article <231.2893F...@resq.fidonet.org> Dennis.McClain-Furman...@resq.fidonet.org (Dennis McClain-Furmanski) writes:
>
>First thing to note is: much depends on how the word "Mac"
>is placed in the text file. . . . From this experience,
>I would like to know how "Mac" was formated in the original
>tests done by MacWorld!
I sure hope MacWorld explained this. Otherwise they might
just as well not have explained what their benchmarks were
at all. If anybody read the article, did they mention this?
> Next, I'll agree with #2 of Robert's
>conclusions. Just imagine what a Mac IIfx could be without
>that worthless GUI!!!!!!
Seems to me that the GUI shouldn't have much to do with it.
All the searching and replacement is going on in memory, not
on the screen. Also, I don't think the Mac GUI is worthless;
It's easy to use, and it's a hell of a lot better than
Microsoft Windows.
> Just imagine what the IIgs would
>be without emulating that same worthless GUI.
You don't have to use it if you don't like it (unlike Macintosh).
There are plenty of text-based programs and program launchers
available. You're welcome to use them if you want.
>--
>Dennis McClain-Furman...@resq.fidonet.org
\ "It's not how high you are, / Disclaimer:
Ben Rudiak-Gould \ it's Hi, how are you?" / Opinions are mine...
rud...@garnet.berkeley.edu \ -- Mike Sugarbaker / Mine... ALL MINE!!!!
\_______________________/ HA HA HAAA HAAAAAA!!
|
