Re: [NTLK] uMP2000/2100 vs. eMate

From: Mark Rollins (mark_at_mrollins.com)
Date: Mon Jul 23 2001 - 08:44:42 EDT

Next message: Victor Rehorst: "Re: [NTLK] Newton 120 ram chips"
Previous message: carpman_at_newtontracker.net: "[NTLK] Newton 120 ram chips"
Maybe in reply to: Samuel Jacobson: "Re: [NTLK] uMP2000/2100 vs. eMate"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

From: Brian McEwen <bmcewen_at_cowboy.net>
Subject: Re: [NTLK] uMP2000/2100 vs. eMate

> Did you divide it up into <32k chunks? I found when I was working
>on longer (but under 32k) text entries the lag started to really bug me,
>too, when making changes (MP130 I tried this a lot, only a little on the
>2100).

> hmm.. or does the 32k limit/slowdown when making changes to long
>notes not apply to Works? Guess I need to experiment a little more now
>that I have the 2100...

I imported a 1+ MB RTF file into NewtWorks on a MP2000U - workes fine,
no perceptible delays in screen scrolling, compared to a 1 page Works document.

Mark Rollins, CIH, CSP mark_at_mrollins.com www.mrollins.com

-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe

Next message: Victor Rehorst: "Re: [NTLK] Newton 120 ram chips"
Previous message: carpman_at_newtontracker.net: "[NTLK] Newton 120 ram chips"
Maybe in reply to: Samuel Jacobson: "Re: [NTLK] uMP2000/2100 vs. eMate"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Sep 09 2001 - 19:50:10 EDT