Well. Now that I've traded my A3000 for Amiga Forever/UAE, I can see what
I've been missing all these years. It may not be a PPC, but it sure is
faster than my "real" machine was. And cheaper than a traditional upgrade.

WinUAE has been running PGS very nicely so far. Still lags when you're
typing, but the screen redraws are snappy enough. Stroked text is actually
tolerable at this speed. I haven't done any speed tests on non-Postscript
printing yet.

This is running under Win98 on a PIII-600 with 128 MB (40 MB assigned to
the Amiga side) and a fast hard drive, which is already falling into the
lower-midrange for new PCs. I saved myself $250 bucks going with a
refurbished Dell system.

For the sake of comparison I tried Uffe's gocr test (OK, maybe this wasn't
exactly what he had in mind) using the text3.pcx file. The standard version
took a hair less than 5 minutes; the optimized one cut that to 3:15. So it
won't beat an 060 CPU on the heavy number crunching, but might give a stock
4000 a run for its money.

Bottom line: If you've been wondering whether a reasonably fast PC with UAE
is a good replacement for an aging Amiga -- are you listening, Deron? --
the answer seems to be yes. Granted that I'm not using a Video Toaster or
software that relies heavily on the custom chips. If you already need a PC
anyway (like I do), this'll save you from keeping two computers on your
desk if nothing else.

Next stop: Shapeshifter. Why settle for just TWO operating systems when I
can run three of them at once?

[= Randall =]

--
Randall Blank
home@randallblank.com

On 28-May-00, Randall Blank wrote:

> For the sake of comparison I tried Uffe's gocr test (OK, maybe this
> wasn't exactly what he had in mind) using the text3.pcx file. The
> standard version took a hair less than 5 minutes; the optimized one
> cut that to 3:15. So it won't beat an 060 CPU on the heavy number
> crunching, but might give a stock 4000 a run for its money.

My A4000/040 did the text3.pcx file in exactly 2 minutes, so I won't be
changing to UAE just yet. Looks like it needs a 2GHz processsor to reach
060 speeds. What we need is to be able to run existing amiga software at
several times _faster_ than the 060, not slower.

I've prepared some evil scans of difficult text which I will send to the
program author when he tells me what format he wants. The .pnm files are
enormous, even when gzipped.

I think he has some work to do, but this is a good project and should
be encouraged.

Regards
--
Don Cox
doncox@enterprise.net

G'day Don

On 28-May-00, Don Cox wrote:
> On 28-May-00, Randall Blank wrote:
>
>> For the sake of comparison I tried Uffe's gocr test (OK, maybe this
>> wasn't exactly what he had in mind) using the text3.pcx file. The
>> standard version took a hair less than 5 minutes; the optimized one
>> cut that to 3:15. So it won't beat an 060 CPU on the heavy number
>> crunching, but might give a stock 4000 a run for its money.
>
> My A4000/040 did the text3.pcx file in exactly 2 minutes, so I won't be
> changing to UAE just yet. Looks like it needs a 2GHz processsor to reach
> 060 speeds. What we need is to be able to run existing amiga software at
> several times _faster_ than the 060, not slower.

I believe that a UAE on a PII running at 333 is about equal to a stock
standard A3000. I'm not sure how much faster a PIII is (I don't believe they
are much faster than a PII) but you would need plenty of extra horsepower to
get to 040/25 let alone 060/50.

Alan Hughes
Melbourne, Australia

Hello alandot@netdocs.com

On 28-May-00, alandot@netdocs.com wrote:
>> My A4000/040 did the text3.pcx file in exactly 2 minutes, so I won't be
>> changing to UAE just yet. Looks like it needs a 2GHz processsor to reach
>> 060 speeds. What we need is to be able to run existing amiga software at
>> several times _faster_ than the 060, not slower.
>
> I believe that a UAE on a PII running at 333 is about equal to a stock
> standard A3000. I'm not sure how much faster a PIII is (I don't believe they
> are much faster than a PII) but you would need plenty of extra horsepower to
> get to 040/25 let alone 060/50.

One of the reasong I didn't get PC and 'move' to WinUAE:

a) I'll need the FASTEST (1GHZ?) PC available on the market (and it could be
very expensive), and it will be possible to emulate 060/50 correctly
(maybe a little bit faster than real 060).

b) I won't have any PPC support in UAE ;} so I'll just throw money on a PC...

Regards
--
<tsb>D.J.Nick | D-Tronic, Sindjeliceva 11/8, 14000 Valjevo, Serbia (YU)
<tsb>Tel: +381 (0) 14 223 655 Email: DJNick@ptt.yu ICQ: 13794052
<tsb>personal:http://members.xoom.com/djnick2k
<tsb>agency:http://www.crosswinds.net/~amigads
<tsb>
<tsb>Amiga1200T PPC 603e 166mhz 060/50, BlizzardVision 8MB,
<tsb>64MB; 5.1 & 1.1GB HDs; Sony 12X CDRom; 33.6K modem;
<tsb>17" DTK mon; MIDI; Prelude1200 soundcard; HP 6L printer

On Sun, 28 May 2000, you wrote:
> G'day Don
>
> On 28-May-00, Don Cox wrote:
> > On 28-May-00, Randall Blank wrote:
> >
> >> For the sake of comparison I tried Uffe's gocr test (OK, maybe this
> >> wasn't exactly what he had in mind) using the text3.pcx file. The
> >> standard version took a hair less than 5 minutes; the optimized one
> >> cut that to 3:15. So it won't beat an 060 CPU on the heavy number
> >> crunching, but might give a stock 4000 a run for its money.
> >
> > My A4000/040 did the text3.pcx file in exactly 2 minutes, so I won't be
> > changing to UAE just yet. Looks like it needs a 2GHz processsor to reach
> > 060 speeds. What we need is to be able to run existing amiga software at
> > several times _faster_ than the 060, not slower.
>
> I believe that a UAE on a PII running at 333 is about equal to a stock
> standard A3000. I'm not sure how much faster a PIII is (I don't believe they
> are much faster than a PII) but you would need plenty of extra horsepower to
> get to 040/25 let alone 060/50.
>
> Alan Hughes
> Melbourne, Australia
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Old school buds here:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/4057/4/_/_/_/959524705/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PageStreamSupport-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Also I have PageStream running on Uae ( as well as my A2000 030/40) Uae is on a
PII 200mghz Pro. Program runs about the same slower on some things (graphics
sound etc). I am not concerned about AGA as I bench mark based on RTG as most
Amiga people would. I wonder has he ever printed from his UAE emulation I did
once and will never again try this ( about 15 min for one text only black and
white page) as the reason you use DTP is to have hard copy out put it would
be dum for me to use the emilation with the unreasnoble print times.
--
Vice President AMICUE Amiga Computer Users of Edmonton Home of Amitrix and
Raechel Racoon Amiga Lets You Decide

In a message of 28-May-00 Randall Blank wrote:

> For the sake of comparison I tried Uffe's gocr test (OK, maybe this wasn't
> exactly what he had in mind) using the text3.pcx file. The standard version
> took a hair less than 5 minutes; the optimized one cut that to 3:15. So it
> won't beat an 060 CPU on the heavy number crunching, but might give a stock
> 4000 a run for its money.

I had a friend of mine compile it with GCC under Linux. His Pentium 300 MHz
or something like that and it used around 5 seconds to process txt3.pcx.

> Bottom line: If you've been wondering whether a reasonably fast PC with UAE
> is a good replacement for an aging Amiga -- are you listening, Deron? --
> the answer seems to be yes. Granted that I'm not using a Video Toaster or
> software that relies heavily on the custom chips. If you already need a PC
> anyway (like I do), this'll save you from keeping two computers on your
> desk if nothing else.

I have over the years known a couple of people using the "two computers on
the desk" excuse to warrant that they abandon the Amiga. I also have a PC
(okay, it's a 486DX2 66 MHz) which I need for running WordPerfect 5.1 (it
is actually the only think installed on the PC )). Though it is a bit
difficult with two keyboards, it is very easy to get a monitor selector so
I can use only one monitor with the two computers. The two actual computers
can always be store behind the desk or somewhere else.

Uffe Holst

In a message of 28-May-00 Don Cox wrote:

> My A4000/040 did the text3.pcx file in exactly 2 minutes, so I won't be

Only two minutes. This makes me nervous -- I purchased the Amiga 4000 that
I am using from some guy, and he said it had a CyberStorm 060, and it is
definitely faster than my old A4000 that was 030-based. But I would have
thought that the 060 was more than twice as fast as the 040.

> changing to UAE just yet. Looks like it needs a 2GHz processsor to reach
> 060 speeds. What we need is to be able to run existing amiga software at
> several times _faster_ than the 060, not slower.

Indeed, but as long as you have to emulate the compiler, it is bound to
demand a much faster processor. The reason why ShapeShifter and the like
is as fast as it is, is because it doesn't have to emulate the processor.

> I've prepared some evil scans of difficult text which I will send to the
> program author when he tells me what format he wants. The .pnm files are
> enormous, even when gzipped.

> I think he has some work to do, but this is a good project and should
> be encouraged.

Well, perhaps because it is the only free OCR project ))

I will happily toss it at my compiler each time he releases a new version.
Please let me know about any such. I still need a scanner to have any
use of the program.

Uffe Holst

Subject: [PageStreamSupport] I didn't dump my Amiga, I upgraded it

> Well. Now that I've traded my A3000 for Amiga Forever/UAE, I can see what
> I've been missing all these years. It may not be a PPC, but it sure is
> faster than my "real" machine was. And cheaper than a traditional upgrade.
>
> WinUAE has been running PGS very nicely so far. Still lags when you're
> typing, but the screen redraws are snappy enough. Stroked text is actually
> tolerable at this speed. I haven't done any speed tests on non-Postscript
> printing yet.

Just to add my .02 cents into this thread, I have been running UAE for about
6 months using an AMD K-6/2 at 400. I find that Pgs is about as fast as with
my 3000 with an 040/40 in it with 24 megs of ram. Non postscript runs just
fine and prints in reasonable time. I usually assign 64 megs of fast Z-3
memory and 8 chip. Since i don't do any high end work with it I can't say
it's 100% compatable but it sure is close.

> This is running under Win98 on a PIII-600 with 128 MB (40 MB assigned to
> the Amiga side) and a fast hard drive, which is already falling into the
> lower-midrange for new PCs. I saved myself $250 bucks going with a
> refurbished Dell system.
> the answer seems to be yes. Granted that I'm not using a Video Toaster or
> software that relies heavily on the custom chips. If you already need a PC
> anyway (like I do), this'll save you from keeping two computers on your
> desk if nothing else.
Sorry to say this is the opposite for me, I do have two computers on the
desk, sometimes I want to be using the pc to do things like burn a cd and
print with the Amiga, thank goodness for A/B switches.
>
> Next stop: Shapeshifter. Why settle for just TWO operating systems when I
> can run three of them at once?
>
> [= Randall =]

On 28-May-00, Uffe Holst wrote:

> Only two minutes. This makes me nervous -- I purchased the Amiga 4000
> that I am using from some guy, and he said it had a CyberStorm 060,
> and it is definitely faster than my old A4000 that was 030-based. But
> I would have thought that the 060 was more than twice as fast as the
> 040.

It depends what you are doing, but generally only about 30-40% faster.

Regards
--
Don Cox
doncox@enterprise.net

On 28-May-00, Don Cox wrote:

> My A4000/040 did the text3.pcx file in exactly 2 minutes, so I won't be
> changing to UAE just yet. Looks like it needs a 2GHz processsor to reach
> 060 speeds. What we need is to be able to run existing amiga software at
> several times _faster_ than the 060, not slower.

Oh well. As long as it's faster than my old 3000, I'm happy. Considering
that I needed a PC anyway, this is far more cost effective than adding an
accelerator card, more RAM, bigger hard drive, faster graphics card, etc.
Plus an ethernet card to connect it to the PC. Instead, for $30 I got me
a better Amiga -- even if I have to boot Windows (blech) to get to it.

Of course, once I install Linux on this here PC, I won't need Windows for
that no more. ;)

Lord knows how much longer I could've kept the old machine running anyway.

A week before I ordered the PC, there was a lightning strike in the
neighborhood that wrecked all the modems in our house. The computers were
on surge protectors and survived, but it reminded me just how mortal they
can be. This way I'm not dependent on 10-year-old hardware anymore.

Heck, I could put the whole system on a CD and carry it to work with me.
Now THAT'S what I call portable.

[= Randall =]

--
Randall Blank
home@randallblank.com

On 28-May-00, Robert Habkirk wrote:

> I wonder has he ever printed from his UAE emulation I did once and will
> never again try this ( about 15 min for one text only black and white
> page) as the reason you use DTP is to have hard copy out put it would be
> dum for me to use the emilation with the unreasnoble print times.

There could be a huge difference between 200 MHz and 600. In any case,
there's been nothing unreasonable about my print times. A text document,
printed to a file in RAM: using the HP LaserJet driver, took 28 seconds
to print (versus 39 seconds on the 3000). Emulation may not make sense on
an older machine, but today's PCs are fast enough to be usable. Just make
sure you load up on RAM, 'cause Windows needs a lot just for itself.

[= Randall =]

--
Randall Blank
home@randallblank.com

On 29-May-00, lenl wrote:

> Just to add my .02 cents into this thread, I have been running UAE for
> about 6 months using an AMD K-6/2 at 400. I find that Pgs is about as
> fast as with my 3000 with an 040/40 in it with 24 megs of ram.

One of these days we should set up some "real world" tests using stuff like
ImageFX and Pagestream for a better comparison. That OCR program might be
more demanding than the typical day-to-day stuff I do.

> Non postscript runs just fine and prints in reasonable time. I usually
> assign 64 megs of fast Z-3 memory and 8 chip. Since i don't do any high
> end work with it I can't say it's 100% compatable but it sure is close.

How much total RAM on your PC? I've been giving the Amiga 32 MB of ZIII
and 4 MB chip (plus 4 MB video) to avoid overstressing Windows, though I
know someone who runs Win95 with only 16 MB. On a 486, yet. =:O

> Sorry to say this is the opposite for me, I do have two computers on
> the desk, sometimes I want to be using the pc to do things like burn
> a cd and print with the Amiga, thank goodness for A/B switches.

I can see the advantage to that. A more likely scenario for me would be
jumping back and forth between IBrowse/AWeb and Netscape/IE, which I can
actually do now without disconnecting and reconnecting all the time.

[= Randall =]

--
Randall Blank
home@randallblank.com

On 28-May-00, Uffe Holst wrote:

> I had a friend of mine compile it with GCC under Linux. His Pentium
> 300 MHz or something like that and it used around 5 seconds to process
> txt3.pcx.

Well, heck. If I compared the emulation to something running native on
this PC it would be no contest. I'm sure PGS Win would eat the Amiga
version for lunch.

When I need speed I use Windows software; when I need something I can't
get from Windows software, I turn to the Amiga. If speed was my only
consideration I wouldn't even bother with UAE -- and would've trashed
the 3000 months ago. But running the emulation is convenient enough
that I've gone back to YAM for my email. Eudora always feels awkward
by comparison.

[= Randall =]

--
Randall Blank
home@randallblank.com

In a message of 29-May-00 Randall Blank wrote:

> Oh well. As long as it's faster than my old 3000, I'm happy. Considering
> that I needed a PC anyway, this is far more cost effective than adding an
> accelerator card, more RAM, bigger hard drive, faster graphics card, etc.
> Plus an ethernet card to connect it to the PC. Instead, for $30 I got me
> a better Amiga -- even if I have to boot Windows (blech) to get to it.

> Of course, once I install Linux on this here PC, I won't need Windows for
> that no more. ;)

I have been told that only WinUAE can do proper networking, so if you want
you "Amiga" to be connected to the Internet, you will still need Windows.

Uffe Holst

>I have over the years known a couple of people using the "two
>computers on the desk" excuse to warrant that they abandon the
>Amiga. I also have a PC (okay, it's a 486DX2 66 MHz) which I need
>for running WordPerfect 5.1 (it is actually the only think installed
>on the PC )). Though it is a bit difficult with two keyboards, it
>is very easy to get a monitor selector so I can use only one monitor
>with the two computers. The two actual computers can always be store
>behind the desk or somewhere else.

I used an A4000 until it died, but my job situation changed, and
argued for a portable computing solution. Now I live on a Mac
Powerbook, but I have a PC emulation that run on it, and Mac UAE.
Unfortunately, at the moment, MacUAE doesn't run, while it did
earlier, and I haven't figured out why....
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@iname.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Randall Blank <home@randallblank.com>
To: <PageStreamSupport@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 11:44 AM
Subject: [PageStreamSupport] Re: I didn't dump my Amiga, I upgraded it

> On 29-May-00, lenl wrote:
>
> > Just to add my .02 cents into this thread, I have been running UAE for
> > about 6 months using an AMD K-6/2 at 400. I find that Pgs is about as
> > fast as with my 3000 with an 040/40 in it with 24 megs of ram.
>
> One of these days we should set up some "real world" tests using stuff
like
> ImageFX and Pagestream for a better comparison. That OCR program might be
> more demanding than the typical day-to-day stuff I do.
>
> > Non postscript runs just fine and prints in reasonable time. I usually
> > assign 64 megs of fast Z-3 memory and 8 chip. Since i don't do any high
> > end work with it I can't say it's 100% compatable but it sure is close.
>
> How much total RAM on your PC? I've been giving the Amiga 32 MB of ZIII
> and 4 MB chip (plus 4 MB video) to avoid overstressing Windows, though I
> know someone who runs Win95 with only 16 MB. On a 486, yet. =:O

I thought I mentioned it before - I have 128 megs with an AMD K6-2 400. I
think the way you tweak UAE might make a difference but it's better than I
thought it would be and the printing time isn't too far from the native PC
printing, using an HP 855 color printer.
Do you actually know of someone using only 16 megs with windows? can you do
anything more than load the OS?
>
> > Sorry to say this is the opposite for me, I do have two computers on
> > the desk, sometimes I want to be using the pc to do things like burn
> > a cd and print with the Amiga, thank goodness for A/B switches.
>
> I can see the advantage to that. A more likely scenario for me would be
> jumping back and forth between IBrowse/AWeb and Netscape/IE, which I can
> actually do now without disconnecting and reconnecting all the time.
>
> [= Randall =]
>
>
> --
> Randall Blank
> home@randallblank.com
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PageStreamSupport-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>

I have my A3000 w/'060/50MHz, 128 Megs. And a W98 w/AMD K6-2 3D 400MHz,
128 Megs (screaming for more RAM), and a laptop 486DX2/50 with 20 Megs
with W95. Lots of VMem use on that. I wouldn't try and run UAE on the
laptop.

> Do you actually know of someone using only 16 megs with windows? can you do
> anything more than load the OS?

I have Pagestream 3.3, is there any advantage to dl'ing and installing
the 3.4 beta version yet? Is it beyond beta yet?

I'm using a Lexmark 4029 Postscript level 1 printer, I have it on one of
those printer sharing devices, it enables the Amiga to print to it, and
transparently shares it with my W98 system. I wish I could do the same
with my Canon inkjet.

Steve

On 30-May-00, lenl wrote:

> Do you actually know of someone using only 16 megs with windows? can you
> do anything more than load the OS?

As long as you stick to Win95, yes. He uses it to run Word, Excel and the
usual gang of idiots. Photoshop 5 is installed but I don't think he's ever
tried to run it on that machine...

A few weeks ago he got Win98 for the other (Pentium) machines at the
office. Then he decided to install it on the 486.

As a direct consequence, he's decided to buy a new computer.

[= Randall =]

--
Randall Blank
home@randallblank.com