jm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") (10/07/88)
>> >>I just hope that software writers write software that takes advantage of such >>speed. In response to this, Paul R. Wenker writes.... >If the Transwarp GS is done right, it will be transparent to any >application. It's going to be awfully hard to sell an accelerator >that is supported by 3 applications with "more coming real soon now." what I meant is that I would hope software writers would write software that would take advantage of the Transwarp's speed. I know it should be transparent, but speed opens up a variety of new possibilities. If software writers wrote their programs for a 7 MHz GS under a Transwarp, Apple may feel more pressure to support such an accelerated machine themselves and thus start manufacturing one. The resulting software would be painfully slow on an unenhanced GS, but the idea is to raise the the standard of what people can expect from the //gs. As I understand it, Appleworks GS is like that right now; it is awfully sluggish at 2.5MHz, but when demo'ed on a Transwarp, it runs smooth and sweet. Apple may cave in to this. They sure caved in to pressure from Zip Technology and Laser to the point of putting out a //c+. Capt. Albatross jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu ============ Apparently hoping in vain for a GS+... (*sigh*) disclaimer: These opinions are mine and will remain so until more intelligent or insightful or informed people are kind enough to show me the error of my ways because in the barbecue of life, a mind is a terrible thing to baste.