[rescue] ARGH

[joshua d boyd]

On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:44:38PM -0500, ward at zilla.nu wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 11:21:29PM -0400, joshua d boyd wrote:
> 
> > I'm told that OS X, for most people, will feel a bit faster for
> > somethings, a bit slower for others, but it is just MacOS with some fancy
> > gui things.
> 
> Right on the speed stuff, but wrong on the MacOS+fancy gui part.  The
> entire OS is different.  MacOS 9 runs as a Mach personality, which I
> personally think is a great use of Mach.

So far the "normal" users I've talked to said that it is MacOS+fancy
gui.  "normal" users don't care that OS X is one Mach personality, and
that another is used for compatibility.  They care how easy it was to pick
up, and how fast it is, and how little it crashes.
 
> > I'm told that you did deaper it also feels a lot like FreeBSD, but I
> > didn't dig that deep.
> 
> It's a lot like FreeBSD or NetBSD in the userland stuff, but much more
> like NeXTStep deeper in.  NetInfo, Mach, distributed objects, etc.

I knew about about NetInfo (never messed with it though), and Mach.  I'm
still not clear on what FreeBSDs involvement was.  Unix more or less feels
like Unix.  The only reason solaris and irix feel that much different to
me from linux, is because everything on linux uses readline, and almost
nothing on the others does.  Of course, that tells you a lot about how
deep I did into my OSs.

What are Dist. Objects used for?  Where to learn more?
 
> > I really wish I could afford one though.  But I'm hearing iffy things
> > about GL, and what I most need is something that does GL well.  After
> > that, I need something with decent video capture and playback.  I think an
> > O2 would fit the bill nicely, and that why I'm hoping, hoping, hoping to
> > be able to get one come fall.
> 
> Does GL just fine for me, but I strongly dislike GL, so I don't use it
> for much besides canned apps.  What have you heard about it being iffy?
> There may be some weird parts of it I just haven't encountered.

I've heard that acuracy is poor, and performance slow, and I've
heard rumors (from people who might not be the most reliable) that
GL on OSX has buffer limitations like NT, meaning that you aren't allowed
anywhere near enough buffers for doing things like stereo double buffering
with extra hidden buffers.  On NT, you can only do one of those 3 things
at a time, or at least that is the way it was on 3.51.

These complaints also apply to linux, except for the buffer complaint
(although I believe that after the first two buffers, the rest are
software, but that is a driver issue, I think).

-- 
Joshua D. Boyd