🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct6.044605.787@mercury.cair.du.edu>  
lbrahm@denver.cba.du.edu (Lans Brahmantyo) writes:
> In article <1992Sep29.203803.12888@terminator.cc.umich.edu
> srosie@ftp.ifs.umich.edu (Steven S. Rosenblum) writes:
> > > Well, the subject says it all.  I was wondering if anyone's loaded
> > > 3.0 onto a 68040 cube with only 8 megs (sniff) of memory?  How
> > > slow should I expect the system to run compared with 2.0? 
> 
> It is so very very slow... it is almost unbearable. A lot of users are  
> complaining about the slowness already. On our 20 MB and 32 MB machines,  
the  
> speed reduction is almost minimal although you can still see.  NetInfo  
> operations, however, is a lot faster than 2.1.
> 

Ok, now that 3.0 has arrived to Italy (WOW!) and been running on my cube  
for a couple of days I'll add my $0.02 to this thread.
I have an 8 MB cube and, yes, I admit that 3.0 is perceivably slower than
2.0.
Windows redraws and scrolls, which were snappy on 2.0, are noticeably
slower now. However, if the workload is light, i.e. simple
editing/compiling tasks from a terminal window, I don't notice an
appreciable degradation in performance. If you run DTP or graphics
application that's a different story ...

-Arrigo
-- 
Arrigo Benedetti             e-mail: arrigo@cube.sublink.org (preferred)
University of Bologna                benedett@deis01.cineca.it
undergraduate student (EECS)         
Via S. Agata, 11               Tel:  (home)   +39 59 224929
41100 Modena - Italy                 (office) +39 59 216688 (fax) +39 59 220727