On 12 Aug 2006 at 16:45, Darcy James Argue wrote: > On 12 Aug 2006, at 3:03 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > On 11 Aug 2006 at 22:47, Darcy James Argue wrote: > > > >> On 11 Aug 2006, at 7:50 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > >> > >>> So, then, you're saying that, on the Mac at least, my use of the > >>> analogy of printer drivers and vector-based font descriptions does > >>> not hold? > >> > >> Again, David, if you're interested in learning more about how > >> drawing is handled in OS X, I highly recommend the Ars Technica > >> pages I linked to earlier: > > > > Im not really interested in how drawing works on OS X. What I'm > > interested is your assertion about how drawing interacts with > > graphics cards *on PCs*. My reading and understanding lead me to > > believe that it works differently than the way you've described the > > process. > > I don't think I *have* described the process on PCs, except to say > that my understanding is that 2D drawing in WinXP does not rely as > heavily on the graphics card as Mac OS X does. (And, of course, that > Vista will bring considerable changes in this area.)
Well, we really aren't talking about Vista, so it's quite irrelevant. Tyler is telling you that he's demonstrated that the graphics card on Windows *does* greatly affect 2D operations. You continue to deny it, but that's what his experiment has shown. For me, everything you've written has been very confusing. When you provide citations of articles that show the way OS X works, it is to show how much the CPU is involved. Yet, when I talk about Windows, you say the CPU is more involved on Windows than on OS X. So, I'm completely confused by what you're trying to demonstrate. All I know is that Tyler has shown a situation where 2D drawing is vastly improved by certain graphics cards. And you have minimized the main point, which is the only reason he brought up the issue of 2D drawing and graphics cards, which was that investing in the graphics card gives more bang for the buck for application performance *in Finale* than adding processor cores. I don't think you've contested that point (just minimized its importance), only the subsidiary evidence of whether or not the graphics card has a major impact on Finale performance (which you've disputed in the face of direct evidence to the contrary). I'm not really arguing anything either way. But I do think you should acknowledge that Tyler really does have a point, that better graphics cards have more impact on Finale performance than additional CPU cores *on Windows*. On all other points, I'm completely done with this thread, as it further discussion just seems to increase the confusion. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
