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

Re: Win95, and Why...?



I run Exec199o5 under Win95 by simply using the 'run under MS_DOS' mode.
Go to shutdown and just pick this option and then start Executor making sure
you 
load your mouse first. I found one program worked this way *much* better than
under DOS (ie pre-Win95)!  Also just openning a DOS window (ie C:>) and
typing Executor 
 it again worked for me, expanding to a normal window, the only problem being
 memory settings - check under the preferences option for  the Executor
folder and adjust
it according to your computer and your needs.(Right mouse button). I have a
Pentium
60mhz 8mb RAM.

I will say I get excited when I find one more program that works under Exec,
but like most I get frustrated when I get a string of them that don't. But my
main concern about the ultimate success  of Executor  is not files but it's
price ie, what you get for the price.
Up until Exec199m it was a curiosity, a toy-and exciting; barely worth $99.
But if Exec2.00 is little different from Exec199o5 it will be a hard sell at
$249 to the public,
but not to institutional/educational organizations  *if*  it fully supports
at least one popular Mac word-proccessor/DTP and those programs they use the
most. Even then...
But as for the public (ie me included), without sound, Quicktime, and
modem(serial)
support I would suggest they would think $249 gives you very little in todays
 world of CD-ROMs(gaming and videos), Faxing, and  the Internet.

But if I may ask, *with time/money in such short supply*,and * from a
strictly business viewpoint*, why work on multiple platforms at the same
time? EVERYBODY knows
Executors success will come from the DOS/PC world not Linux or NEXT(?). It
sounds like its more do to personal interest of individual engineers there
and not a business
decision. And when you are way overdue on a project I would think you would
do only what is essential and would contribute most to its/your success.
Linux?! Next?!
Criticism?No.Puzzled?Yes.

jim210


Follow-Ups: