[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: FW: Let's get System 7.x on top!



Dan Guisinger (dan_g@ix.netcom.com) wrote:


:  Here I'll explain the reasons for a port to Win95/NT and OS/2.
:  (Note, I don't use OS/2, and don't know how easy the features that 
:  windows can handle can be put into OS/2 since they aren't designed the 
:  same since 1991)
:  
:  1) IFS	--	Windows 95 and NT 4.0 (Not sure about 3.51) use an 
:  Installable File System.  This was, ALL programs can read from Mac disks.
I believe that this also applies to Windows 3.11
:   Not only that, it would guarrentee that if you wanted it, you could make

:  an actual partition on the Mac side.
:  
:  2) Very Large API  --  Both OS/2 and Win32 have thousands of API calls 
:  that hide hardware from the programmers, making the development time 
:  decrease.
:  
:  3) True 32-bit OSes -- All three OSes do MOST of their work in 32-bit 
:  (Yes, I know that window management in 95 IS 16, but thats all)
:  
:  4) Cut & Paste -- You'll beable to share information via the Clipboard 
:  with Mac and PC programs.
That *could* be done with a dos version.  
:  5) Fonts -- Windows and OS/2 support True Type Fonts.  ARDIs generic 
:  system doesn't.  What could they do?  Route calls thru to Windows or 
:  OS/2.  I don't even know if they can do it any other way.  Microsoft and 
:  IBM had to licence TTF code.  It could be that its a patented technoligy 
:  or something, and ARDI would have to licence it too (Correct me if I'm 
:  wrong)
OS/2 does not support True Type fonts.  
:  6) Control Panels -- The way Windows uses control panels is this.  A 
:  singe CPL file can represent many different applets.  ARDI can make a CPL

:  file that searches for Mac control panels and then displays icons for 
:  those, making settings for both the PC and Mac work together seamlessly.
:  
:  7) Multitasking -- OS/2 and Win32 are thru multitasking and 
:  multithreading. This means ARDI doesn't exactly have to spend too much 
:  time on getting the system to multitask.
:  
:  8) Same Desktop -- All programs can run on the same desktop.  Windows, 
:  OS/2, and Mac (Especally true with OS/2 for Windows or OS/2 with 
:  Windows)
:  
:  9) DirectX.  Video/Sound/Networking are all much **FASTER** when using 
:  these APIs, thus improving preformance to or above a DOS machine with the
:  same hardware.
:  
:  10) Virtual Memory -- Executor currently has the limit of NO virtual 
:  memory.  Win95 has an dynamic swap file that grows/shrinks with use.
:  Executor can report the maxinum amount of memory a 68040 (and in
:  the future, PPC) can handle, and thus no memory problems.
:  
:  I  also saw mentioned that with Win95 you need more than 8 megs ram.  
:  That may be true, but by the time Executor/95 comes out, 8 megs of ram 
:  will cost around $80!  There is a shift in the market that is making all 
:  RAM prices drop this year, its already started, and will finish later 
:  this year.
:  And to that mention of using a 386.  Give me a break.  Who would 
:  seriously try emulating anything as complicated as a Mac (68040) on such 
:  a slow machine.  Besides for one person, I don't know any body with one 
:  If you have a 386 and don't want to pay for a new system, may I suggest 
:  Evergreens MakeIt 486??????

: And to say Win95 runs on top of DOS.  You don't know much about the system
: your insulting do you?
: Windows 95 loads in real mode, and loads real mode drivers for items not
: supported under Windows 95.
: IFS.SYS and HIMEM.SYS are replaced with 32-bit versions (same with
: DriveSpace) and the rest run off
Don't you remember 32-bit disk access and 32 bit file access in Windows 
3.11? That wasn't an operating system. Let's just see Windows 95 working 
without MS-DOS 7. (That's what it's called inside IO.SYS.)
: of emulated DOS and BIOS calls.  The only time your using True DOS 7.0 is
: when you boot **to** DOS!
You could say the same thing about Win4WG 3.11 and Dos 6.22!
: And like I said above, the only part of Win95 that is 16 bit is the part
: that handles Windows and Menus,
: etc.  That would be why its slow on a Pro is because GDI objects and calls
: are the most used part of
: Windows.  If you want speed on a P6, get NT.  Don't complain here (Notice,
: I haven't complained about
: any OS.  I think they all have their advantages and disadvantages.  And I
: don't want to see any OS wars
: in reply to this).
:  
:  -=Dan Guisinger=-
:  A registered user of E/D and E/L
:  



Follow-Ups: References: