Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: rebol/view on a 486?

From: kolla:nvg:ntnu:no at: 21-Jun-2001 14:11

On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Holzammer, Jean wrote:
> >Writing the program shouldnt be much of a problem, all it does is the > >above as well as gathering the info on how many pecks were wrong or right > >etc. but one thing I am a little concerned about is how well /view runs on > >such a 486, and what OS to use below would be the best to get as little > >overhead as possible, the choices are limited by the avaible drivers for > >the touch screens; Linux/X11 and Win9x. I might be able to dig up a few > >pentium100 machines to use instead, but if I could use those 486s it would > >be splended :) > > CPU: I'm using /view on a 68060/50 (comparable to a Pentium I with same > frequency). I only use it for creating images and as has some function > (write clipboard://...) not yet available in current /Core. I try to avoid > to actually view something on the screen as it is too slow. When typing > text into an input field it takes almost 1 sec. for one character to be > drawn !
You dont say if you have a gfx card on your amiga or not, and I do know how fast rebol/view is on my a3k/060/CVPPC/cgfx :) But in genereal I experience rebol/view on PC as faster anyways, yesterday I used it one a P120 with win98, and it worked faster than on my amiga. I had problems testing it on a 486 with win95 due to lacking DLLs in win95 (MSVCRT.DLL and COM*32.DLL, maybe something that should be mentioned in the installation documentation?!)
> So I think, using view on a 486 or a Pentium I/100 for the GUI doesn't make > much sense. > > OS: Rebol need at least Win 95 that will run quite slowly itself on a 486.
In 640x480x8bit.. nah, ok :)
> Linux itself should be a bit faster, but graphics is slowed down by X.
Exactly, X is the bugger here. -- kolla