Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 12:03:47 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Cc: terry@lambert.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 2.2 Splashkit Message-ID: <199705131903.MAA10538@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199705130206.LAA12359@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at May 13, 97 11:36:00 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The rotation in Win95 is caused by the loading of the systray.exe dll > > by the explorer, actually, so it would not be inconsistent to call > > the rotate function from the boot stage probe iteration code. > > I don't honestly think that the probe code has any business doing that, > unless we're trying to add a periodic-update hook to the whole boot > process. > > Right now, the splash go-away poll happens during console text output, > which is IMHO about the most sensible place to put it. I was planning on > doing one rotation for every ~10 characters output, or perhaps one per > newline. Heh. Do whichever makes the output co slightly faster than the output under Windows 95 when the same bitmap is used there. 8-). "It's not actualy speed the users are itnterested in, it's the *appearance* of speed. A program which comes up in 10 seconds and paints part of the screen every 2 seconds is considered 'slow'. A program which comes up in 16 seconds and then page-flips to draw the screen is considered 'fast'" Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705131903.MAA10538>