On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 01:39:28AM -0800, Brian Morris wrote:
> realistically, the value of 68k as a teaching tool is high. because of
> its limitations partly. you learn how to make best use of limited resources.
> with new computers you learn the opposite...
I agree. When I was still doing 3D computer graphics, many newcomers
modelled nice things in Maya, but way too heavy, because they had a (back
then) fast dual CPU machine at hand, but OTOH, they complained about the
hardware being too slow to render all their stuff in a reasonable amount of
time. When I looked at their objects, I found that they modelled with too
much unnecessary details like a tube mit 10 segments instead of 1 segment.
When I learned PowerAnimator/Maya, I had to use an old Indy which was rather
slow, but I taught me how to model effeciently. (Well, doing 3D graphics on
my Amiga taught me that anyway ;).
Same is valid for todays software, IMHO.
> i think though it would be hard to get maintainers to focus on bugs where
> most of the software is (realistically) unuseable on this platform, because
> of the hardware limitations. if at least one of the members of the port
> was reasonably fast (not counting virtual machines) it could make a big
> difference, especially if it were represented at least hope of a portable
> machine... (at least hope of popular, not too popular of course). or/and
> another way is to cut the list packages from 14,000 to say, ?3000??
I agree that there are too many packages without any use for m68k. Imagine
how much time is wasted on fixing bugs for packages that are unusable on
m68k.
--
Ciao... // Fon: 0381-2744150
Ingo \X/ SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gpg pubkey: http://www.juergensmann.de/ij/public_key.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
