plogan@mentor.com (Patrick Logan) (10/10/90)
I'd like to get some feedback on the performance and features of Smalltalk/V 286. Please tell me anything you want. I am aware of the differences between V and 80, so I'd like to stick with what's good and bad about V-286, in and of itself. What would be great would be a list of, say, three good things and three bad things. (More if you like to type.) Thanks -- Patrick Logan, uunet!mntgfx!plogan Mentor Graphics Corp. 8500 SW Creekside, Beaverton, Oregon 97005-7191
MUHRTH@tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de (Thomas Muhr) (10/13/90)
(Three good and three bad things about V/286) We are developing a hypertext like ISS (interpretation support system) for researchers using hermeneutic methods working with text and use Smalltalk V/286 for several reasons: + Affordable hardware resources: 2-4 MB RAM and 2MB Harddisk 286-based PC + fast graphics (moving windows, resizing etc.) + integrated Prolog written entirely in Smalltalk, thus modifiable + excellent manuals + low price - some accesses need sequential memory runs (no object table) - textediting subclasses are not very sophisticated - images tend to "fall over" There is a version announced for Windows 3.0 which will improve (theore- tically) ST V/286 considerably: SAA-standards for your programs, virtual memory for your image, multiprocessing (use WordPerfect and your ST-prog concurrently), small programs,..... The latter features are what I think will be the improvements, maybe someone else nows better? - Thomas ------- Thomas Muhr, Technical University of Berlin, BITNET: muhrth@db0tui11 Project ATLAS - Computer Based Tools for Qualitative Research "Computers, like every technology, are a vehicle for the transformation of tradition." (WINOGRAD/FLORES)