Dick,

Comparison with VisualWorks is apples-to-oranges and probably not very
fruitful in figuring out what's going on. We moved away from
BitBlt-oriented graphics with ObjectWorks 4.0 in 1990, and one key reason
was that X graphics implementations at the time were pessimized against it.
Although things have gotten much better BitBlt-wise in X-land, it's still
probably not worth trying to compare VW and Squeak graphics behaviors,
because they're too different.

glenn

At 01:12 PM 7/7/99 -0400, Richard L. Peskin wrote:
>I find that the window refresh and other BitBlt operations of Squeak2.4c
>under Linux (Intel) is quite slow. My base of comparison is the Mac
>version, and, more to the point, VisualWorks 3.1 under the same Linux. What
>have others experienced?
>
>Also, I cannot get any sound output with 2.4c under Linux. I have an
>Ensonic 1370 board and it appears to work in other situations. Any idea
>what might be wrong?
>--dick peskin
>
>
>=================================
>R. L. Peskin,  Rutgers Univ.
>;<peskin at caip.rutgers.edu>;<http://www.caip.rutgers.edu/~peskin>
>RLP Consulting <rlpcon at sover.net>; <http://www.sover.net/~rlpcon>
>
>
>