I am not sure either why software is becoming larger, but there may texist a good reason for that. Anyway, please check the following address http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=52938
Also, as a side comment, I think the math co processors were of the x87 family and not x86 :D On Apr 25, 6:37 pm, tomot <[email protected]> wrote: > I have a Quad core CPU running at 2.4GHz with 4gb of ram, and a > Geforce 8800GT video card with 512mb of ram. It becomes the family > computer at night so my Sonny Bunny can play his computer games on it. > > I have never seen my system brought to its processing knees. Till I > started using Grasshopper. I'm not a computer programmer, but there > appears to me to be a huge disconnect between Grasshopper and Rhino > which is trying to display the 3d information. ParaCloud Gem is vastly > faster in processing 3d information. > > It reminds me of the days when I bought an 8086 Math Co-processor for > $800.00 so I could run AutoCad faster. It appears to me, we are losing > computing power, through the trend of build application specific > API's, and by stacking one scripting language, on top of another,etc. > > Its beyond comprehension why it now take 126mb of HDD space for Adobe > Reader to read PDF files? The list goes on. Its not my intent to > create a rant. The above is simply intended as a general observation. > > On Apr 24, 4:45 am, andres m <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi david, > > > Thanks for the quick response. > > I am really finding gh 6.0 slower. but at the end has being good as i > > have pass throwout my whole definition and make it work faster. > > > i will make my definition more user friendly and send it over. i am > > new in vb.net and my scripts are rather messy which does not help. > > > About saving. i always have the impression that things does not get > > saved. i hardly ever use ctrl + s for the same reason. i am actually > > used to it. > > > Maybe is the network. my rhino file is on a network. but my xml is on > > my local hard drive. > > > On Apr 24, 12:16 pm, David Rutten <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Andres, > > > > it should actually be faster, I added a bunch of optimisations in 0.6. > > > If you can give me a ghx file that seems to run slower, I can profile > > > it more accurately. > > > > Saving should obviously work, if it doesn't, it's a bug. If you save > > > through the menu, it will always call the Save function. If you save > > > via Ctrl+S, then it only calls save if Grasshopper is the active > > > window (otherwise it saves the Rhino file). > > > > Are you saving to a local disk or a network drive? > > > > -- > > > David Rutten > > > [email protected] > > > Robert McNeel & Associates > > > > On Apr 24, 12:36 pm, andres m <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > I am finding a couple of things strange in grasshopper 6. > > > > > first Is it really slower than gh 5 or is it just my imagination. my > > > > current definition is heavily scripted. (Which i have not optimized > > > > and i will not do it any time soon) > > > > > second, i feel that no change is ever saved. if i do something and i > > > > want to make sure it will be saved i have to save as. otherwise no > > > > change is saved. > > > > > any idea why?
