Re: Why the original RT seemed/was slow (was ...)

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt

Article #1472

Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt Previous Next

#1472

From: Joe Keane
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 1988 14:10

8 lines
811 bytes

> The APA8 display was a joke, and I am disappointed that IBM believes they
> fixed things with the APA16 display.  Although both look great on a desk when
> they are shut off, both are too small to use for editing.

The APA16 card looks quite good with a Moniterm or AED monitor (even if it
doesn't do clipping in microcode).

--Joe

Technical Details

Message-ID: <wXZJ=Fy00junB-optY@andrew.cmu.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!*!postman+

References: <5046@polya.Stanford.EDU> <1287@auschs.UUCP> <1309@auschs.UUCP>, <3736@pt.cs.cmu.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!*!postman+
From: jk3k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joe Keane)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt
Subject: Re: Why the original RT seemed/was slow (was ...)
Message-ID: <wXZJ=Fy00junB-optY@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: 1 Dec 88 14:10:25 GMT
References: <5046@polya.Stanford.EDU> <1287@auschs.UUCP> <1309@auschs.UUCP>,
 <3736@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon
Lines: 8
In-Reply-To: <3736@pt.cs.cmu.edu>

Reply to Parent Message