dsk@cbnewsj.att.com (donald.s.klett) (10/10/90)
I tried to reply to the previous discussion on SLS, but I did not seem to do the correct things. So this is really a continuation of the previous discussions. I have a Mac SE, 4MB, HP DeskJet, about 10 INITs, MacPrint 1.2. Also I am running ATM 2.0. At first the SLS would completely monopolize the system. I talked with 5th Generation (Supermac sold SLS) tech support and they suggested the maximum buffer. This helped somewhat but did not cure the problem. Forgot to mention that I also run 6.0.5. Called 5th Generation tech support back today, and it was suggested that the system heap was not big enough. I had this type of problem in the past with DiskTop. So I will use HeapFixer and enlarge the system heap. Maybe it will help. So far I am not impressed with SLS and if the heap enlargement does not help, I will send it back for a refund. Don Klett att!mtdca!dsk
glf@sppy00.UUCP (Hill) (10/11/90)
In article <1990Oct9.210343.3330@cbnewsj.att.com> dsk@cbnewsj.att.com (donald.s.klett) writes: >I have a Mac SE, 4MB, HP DeskJet, about 10 INITs, MacPrint 1.2. Also I am >running ATM 2.0. At first the SLS would completely monopolize the system. >I talked with 5th Generation (Supermac sold SLS) tech support and they >suggested [... suggestions and (very little) results removed ...] And I thought it was just me. I'm running a Mac+ with System 6.0.3, 2.5 MEG and a LaserWriterIISC with about 8-10 VERY standard, VERY stable INITs, as well as ATM and TypeAlign (which is not to imply that these last two aren't stable ... they are). When SLS2.0 is spooling a document, it can take 4, 6, or even 8 seconds for the application to get control JUST so I can pull down a menu. Move-to-Menu, Point, Click, W A I T A L O N G T I M E, Menu-shows-up AARRGGHHH! 5GS told me that it wasn't their fault, something else (another INIT) was hogging the system. The only INIT I have that should be continuously monitoring the system would be Moire (screen saver), since it's checking out the mouse position all the time as well as running a timer to know when to kick in. So, I removed it to see if they were trying to steal CPU cycles from each other. NOPE! Almost no difference. I don't really care how long I wait for a doc to print. I know that the more work I'm doing in an application, the slower the doc will be to print, but *I* want to decide that. I'll choose a faster responding application and a slower to print doc. I guess 1) I'll live with it, 2) I'll try some more stuff to speed SLS up, or 3) ... >I will send it back for a refund. > Not quite a happy camper. -=< Greg >=- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Greg Feldman-Hill {seismo|cbosgd}!osu-cis!sppy00!glf -OR- gfh@rsch.oclc.org OCLC - Online Computer Library Center ... Dublin, Ohio "If winning is not important, then Commander, why keep score?" -- Worf -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Greg Feldman-Hill {seismo|cbosgd}!osu-cis!sppy00!glf -OR- gfh@rsch.oclc.org OCLC - Online Computer Library Center ... Dublin, Ohio "If winning is not important, then Commander, why keep score?" -- Worf
paul@u02.svl.cdc.com (Paul Kohlmiller) (10/12/90)
dsk@cbnewsj.att.com (donald.s.klett) writes: >tech support back today, and it was suggested that the system heap was not >big enough. I had this type of problem in the past with DiskTop. So I will >use HeapFixer and enlarge the system heap. Maybe it will help. >So far I am not impressed with SLS and if the heap enlargement does not help, >I will send it back for a refund. I also had a lot of problems with SLS. Increasing the heap size did help as did increasing the application size of Word 4.0 which might have been the culprit. Still, SLS had problems when going through the network to the Apple LW NTx and it had problems with heavy-duty Postscript files. It may not be the fault of SLS but I stopped using it and went back to Apple's Print Monitor. This still has problems with some PS files. I also have the option of sending my output to a Print Spooler Station (i.e. a dedicated MAC that handles printing and spooling, etc.). This works less than SLS so I stopped that and now everyone else attached to that Laser hates me. Good Luck. [ I hope that 5GS does a better job with SLS. ] -- // Paul H. Kohlmiller // "Cybers, Macs and Mips" // // Control Data Corporation // Internet: paul@u02.svl.cdc.com // // All comments are strictly // America Online: Paul CDC // // my own. // Compuserve: 71170,2064 //
lee@quincy.cs.umass.edu (Peter Lee) (10/15/90)
In article <966@sppy00.UUCP> glf@sppy00.UUCP (Hill) writes: From: glf@sppy00.UUCP (Hill) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Date: 10 Oct 90 20:44:45 GMT References: <1990Oct9.210343.3330@cbnewsj.att.com> In article <1990Oct9.210343.3330@cbnewsj.att.com> dsk@cbnewsj.att.com (donald.s.klett) writes: >I have a Mac SE, 4MB, HP DeskJet, about 10 INITs, MacPrint 1.2. Also I am >running ATM 2.0. At first the SLS would completely monopolize the system. >I talked with 5th Generation (Supermac sold SLS) tech support and they >suggested [... suggestions and (very little) results removed ...] And I thought it was just me. I'm running a Mac+ with System 6.0.3, 2.5 MEG and a LaserWriterIISC with about 8-10 VERY standard, VERY stable INITs, as well as ATM and TypeAlign (which is not to imply that these last two aren't stable ... they are). When SLS2.0 is spooling a document, it can take 4, 6, or even 8 seconds for the application to get control JUST so I can pull down a menu. Move-to-Menu, Point, Click, W A I T A L O N G T I M E, Menu-shows-up AARRGGHHH! . . . =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Greg Feldman-Hill {seismo|cbosgd}!osu-cis!sppy00!glf -OR- gfh@rsch.oclc.org OCLC - Online Computer Library Center ... Dublin, Ohio "If winning is not important, then Commander, why keep score?" -- Worf -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- I've been using SLS with ATM 2.0, about 11 other inits (including Moire and SuperClock), system 6.0.4., and my DeskWriter for about a month now without any problems. I have a 4 meg SE (pre-SuperDrive), run under Multi-Finder, and allocate a 256K print-buffer by default. My only complaint is the $(*&(@#$ non-standard WDEF they use for the LaserQueue DA, which puts the close box in the wrong place. In any event, the best thing to do in any situation like this, rather than assuming all of your other inits are 'standard' or 'stable' is to remove them all and see if the problem persists. If it goes away, re-introduce them one-by-one until it returns. Various INIT-choosers, such as the INIT-CDEV make this task much easier. BTW, I did find one definite bug in SLS that only occurred using HyperCard 1.2.5. and the ImageWriter driver, so there may be other driver-specific bugs in SLS... -- |- Peter E. Lee, Staff Assistant -| | Software Development Lab at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst | | lee@cs.umass.edu or Fuligin@umass.bitnet or (413) 256-1329 | "When you expect whistles, it's flutes. When you expect flutes, it's whistles"