🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <adtDKD2D7.8Fw@netcom.com>,
   adt@netcom.com (Anthony D. Tribelli) wrote:
>Branden R. Williams (brw@wtch.com) wrote:
>: The neat thing about macintosh, is that it get's faster the longer you
>: have it!  As software becomes optimized for the chip, it runs faster. 
>: Neato huh!
>
>This is not unique to the Macintosh. Minor OS revisions often have 
>performance improvements: Win3.0 -> 3.1, OS/2 2.0 -> 2.1, WinNT 3.1 -> 
>3.5, ... Win96/97 will probably have better performance than 95.
>
>What will be really interesting is how Copeland performs compared to
>System 7.5. Will the greater percentage of native code overcome the
>"enhancements" that slow down other areas. Getting those candy-striped
>window frames cost CPU cycles. Personally I'm expecting Copeland to be a 
>Win95-ish wimpy upgrade, Gershwin is what I really want. 
>

Then you should read the Copland Technical Overview on Apple's site. It is a 
complete rewrite - true backward compatibility is a factor - but the rewritten 
kernel and memory management should give a BIG improvement over 7.5