CompuServe Messages

Marc, Actually you got my SGI optimization issue in a strange really weird way. I was only establishing a parallelism between how SGI apps are bad and slow enough that they have to depend on superfast processors and arrays to be productive, even if they do wonders in the meantime. In the same way, Windoze 3.0 was so poorly wrote, no matter what "new" things it brought to the _Intel_ arena, that a 386 was barely capable of running it. But people got crazy about how "new and cool" were the things Windows 3.0 was able to do, they buy it and the "GUI revolution" (?) created a need for faster. In a sense, you are right, Windoze 3.0 started the revolution. "We give you not efficient code and slow performance to make you buy new and faster processors" is the motto of that revolution and since then, it has been carved in stone in many walls of many companies that wrote, write and will wrote software for Windows (and other platforms). Seem that you are old enough to remember Windows 1.02! Wow! I am impressed! Maybe you are old enough to remember what other operating systems were arround, specially one that really started a true revolution in how we use or we want to use computers today (althought to be honest, that revolution started at PARC, not at Apple). Personally, my first version of Windows was Windows/286. I think I still have the original disks somewhere. And I got it because I needed it for my first full page truecolor scanner, back when scanners prices were of $3,000 minimum for greyscale models (I was 18 when I got that one). I didn't use it too much because most of the time I were very busy learning Topas, Lumena and my old humble used Targa. And yes, I was too young, I have to admit it. I never said the contrary BTW.(I even posted a photo of mine in the forum, so anyone can guess my actual age). But hey, some people start in the business at 25, some, like me I guess, got an Apple II and started at 16. Windows 3.0 or 3.1 or WFWG 3.11 or whatever could be the invention of the millenium (maybe until Windows 95 or Bob come, right?) for you and many other people, but really, it is not. Windows 3.0 put 386s to the max, I agree, but not only because it brought so many "new" things, but also, and mainly, because the design and coding was not so brilliant as you seem to think. I hope Gus is reading this and could jump in with some comments about Windows 3.0 "structure". I only understand about what computers could do, not how they do it (so slow). Everyone's entitled to their opinon, yes. Even when they are wrong, I can't agree more. Yours truly, ana /krazy images