Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site drivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!hplabs!amdahl!drivax!steve From: steve@drivax.UUCP (Steve Williams) Newsgroups: net.micro.mac Subject: Re: dumb GEM question... Message-ID: <104@drivax.UUCP> Date: Sun, 3-Mar-85 19:19:43 EST Article-I.D.: drivax.104 Posted: Sun Mar 3 19:19:43 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Mar-85 10:43:10 EST References: <706@unmvax.UUCP> <272@unm-cvax.UUCP> Organization: Digital Research, Monterey, CA Lines: 19 > From the picture in the January 28 cover-dated issue of Infoworld, GEM looks > very poor on Atari's ST line. From the picture, it appears that GEM makes > extensive use of character fonts (rather than bit-mapped graphics) to create > windows and icons. Compared to the Macintosh, it looks like garbage. Anyone > who expects this to be a color Mac may get their color, but it won't be much > of a Mac. Frankly, I don't believe Apple has much to worry about from these > machines. On a real computer, GEM might be fantastic. On the Atari ST? > Buaaaaaa! > .rne. > Real World . . Ernie Longmire / 311 Don St. SE / Los Lunas, NM 87031-9405 > UUCP . . . . . {{purdue,cmcl2,ihnp4}!lanl,ucbvax}!unmvax!unm-cvax!cs2532aa > ----- The GEM developers are known as the "BitMap Mafia" for a good reason. GEM does *NOT* use "character fonts" (I assume you mean special characters in a hardware character generator) to do anything. It's all bit-mapped. I thought the Atari hardware was quite reasonable at first inspection. Magazine pictures can be deceiving. -Steve