Executor 2.0/executorv2.0.iso/pc/dos/extra/docs/maillist/text/archive.96/text0070.txt

Text File | 1996-07-25 | 11.2 KB | 253 lines

The post that caused this is a rerun.  Mr. Timbol obviously has this
response stored on his system and periodicially puts it up as a
response to an inquiry about Executor to watch us go.  I think the best
answer is not to give him the satisfaction.

Stu

From owner-paper Mon Jan  8 15:59:44 1996
Return-Path: <owner-paper>
Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
    id m0tZQXK-0007qDa; Mon, 8 Jan 96 15:59 MST
Sender: owner-paper
Received: from kitsune.swcp.com by ftp.ardi.com with smtp
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tZQWX-0007qCC; Mon, 8 Jan 96 15:58 MST
Received: from sashimi.wwa.com ([e-mail] [198.49.174.1]) by kitsune.swcp.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA12922 for <[e-mail]>; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 15:44:09 -0700
Received: from vh3-014.wwa.com by sashimi.wwa.com with smtp
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #2) id m0tZQDW-001W00C; Mon, 8 Jan 96 16:39 CST
Received: by vh3-014.wwa.com with Microsoft Mail
    id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 16:36:37 -0600
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Bill Miller <[e-mail]>
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Soft Windows
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 16:36:25 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

Soft Windows 2.0 should not function under Executor because it requires =
that you have a PPC.  There was a version that ran on the 040 processor, =
but it couldn't do a whole lot.  It didn't emulate the PC hardware =
period, except enough to allow its fixed version of Windows.  It did =
however run it in Enhanced mode.  You can't buy this one anymore.  =
However, SoftPC 3.0 should work under Executor because it runs fine on =
an 040.  SoftWindows 1.0 may also work under Executor, but that only =
emulates a 286, and runs in standard mode.

System Requirements generally are about 12 megs of ram, and a massive =
amount of hard drive space, IE 40 megs for the system itself.

Bill Miller
[e-mail]

From owner-paper Mon Jan  8 16:14:10 1996
Return-Path: <owner-paper>
Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
    id m0tZQlQ-0007qGa; Mon, 8 Jan 96 16:14 MST
Sender: owner-paper
Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tZQkp-0007qDn; Mon, 8 Jan 96 16:13 MST
Path: sloth.swcp.com!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!ncar!uchinews!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!skypoint.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Richard Steiner)
Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
Subject: Re: ANYBODY HAVE A MAC EMULATOR FOR PC ?
Date: 8 Jan 1996 01:43:11 -0600
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mirage.skypoint.com
X-Newsreader: Yarn 0.84 with YES 0.20 and TDE 3.2a
X-Info: PC Yarn is a freeware SOUP-packet threaded offline newsreader,
        YES is the Yarn Editor Shell, a freeware utility for Yarn, and
        TDE is the Thomson-Davis Editor, a *wonderful* PD text editor!
To: [e-mail]
X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

Here in comp.emulators.mac.executor, [e-mail] (Scott Hagie)
spake unto us, saying:

> Richard Steiner ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : Executor's requirements are somewhat user-configurable through the use
> : of command-line switches, and it might depend to some extent on the
> : version you're using (NextStep, Linux, DOS) and other factors.  But it
> : ran here in 8MB fairly well, and now with 20MB it's very fast.
>
> Pardon me for cutting in, and don't get me wrong, it is nothing short
> of a miracle that they can make a Mac emulator at all, but I think you
> seriously overstate it's speed and capabilities. With 8 megs of Ram on
> a 486 DX4 100, it will run Wolfenstein 3-D (in 320x200) like a 286.

All I know is I've been comparing it to my little 8MB Mac IIci at work
running various games, and Executor/DOS running on my 486DX4/100 is
*considerably* faster here than my IIci is.  It's more than fast enough
to be useful.  Heck, it was fast enough to be useful on my 486DX/33.
NIH Image 1.55 can flip a largish 256-color bitmap here in less than a
second.  That, to me, is "very fast".

Not the kind of motherboard-burning speed you see in a PowerMAC, but I
didn't claim it was state-of-the-art swift or anything.  Executor/DOS
beats a lot of real Macs into the dirt when running on 486 hardware,
and that impresses me.

I play Glypha III here all the time in E/D at 1024x768x256 with sound
now, and it's very fast compared to the IIci.  Night and day.

> It's a neat toy, a very neat toy, but it's not quite really a full
> blown product right now.

That depends on the user.  For me, it's well worth the $$ I invested
in it when I registered Executor/DOS 1.0.  I'd pay ARDI's suggested
$249 price for v2.0 now if I had to.  For my uses, E/D 1.99Q more than
suffices, and it's the #1 reason I've not gone out and purchased a
real live older Mac.  But I use it as a game platform and little else.

> What Ardi has done is impressive, but don't overstate it.

I'm not.  Compared with the Mac II machines I've used, it *is* fast.

No, it's not a PowerMac, but on one of the newly announced Pentium/166
boxes it'd be a high-end 68k Mac.  That sure ain't slow.  :-)

--
  -Rich Steiner  >>>--->  [e-mail]  >>>---> Bloomington, MN
         Written offline using PC Yarn + Yes + TDE in a Warp VDM
                               day++; dollar++;

From owner-paper Mon Jan  8 22:14:00 1996
Return-Path: <owner-paper>
Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
    id m0tZWNf-0007qDa; Mon, 8 Jan 96 22:13 MST
Sender: owner-paper
Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tZWN8-0007qCn; Mon, 8 Jan 96 22:13 MST
Path: sloth.swcp.com!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!ferrari.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!ncar!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!hacgate2.hac.com!va24669.tu.hac.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Carl M. Holmberg)
Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
Subject: Re: Executor - a CHRP PowerMac clone?
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 1996 11:52:37 -0800
Organization: HMSC
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4cnaai$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: va24669.tu.hac.com
To: [e-mail]
X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

[e-mail] (Chad Page) wrote:

>Clifford T. Matthews ([e-mail]) wrote:

>: My understanding is that they not only license the ROMs, but they also
>: license much more, too, including ASICs that are in such short supply
>: that Gateway wasn't able to cut a licensing deal with Apple because
>: they weren't able to turn out the ASICs quick enough.
>
>        Ayee.  Apple isn't *really* opening up the Mac platform, is it?
>(as in, it's impossible for anyone else to make a large number of Macs -
>unless they did something like license ARDI technology or something)

My interpretation of the relationship between Apple and it's licencees
would be like that between Sun and the SPARC cloners (ie. the 3rd parties
are dependent on the leads for certain critical components). Are you
thinking that Apple is intentionally limiting supplies to Power, Radius,
and Daystar, et al?

I think the truth of the matter is that Apple screwed up it's projections,
resulting in ASIC shortages, resulting in Apple, it's licencees, and it's
potential licencees not being able to put out the iron. Whether they
*would* limit supplies given adequate stocks is another matter.

-Carl Holmberg-------------HMSC Bldg 842/9---------"Fine Guided------
[e-mail]-P.O. Box 11337------Missiles, Ask for Our-
---------------------------Tucson, AZ--------------Free Catalog"-----
---------------------------85734-1337 USA-------Well, you can ask...-

From owner-paper Tue Jan  9 04:15:54 1996
Return-Path: <owner-paper>
Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
    id m0tZc1u-0007qGa; Tue, 9 Jan 96 04:15 MST
Sender: owner-paper
Received: from nacm.com by ftp.ardi.com with smtp
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tZc1H-0007qCC; Tue, 9 Jan 96 04:15 MST
Received: from didvx2.polito.it (didvx2.polito.it [130.192.8.2]) by nacm.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA17285 for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 02:57:50 -0800
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 11:18:30 GMT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Memory settings under DOS
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

I have Executor 1.99p8 running under MS-DOS 6.22 on a 486DX-50 and it is
noticeably slower then 1.99o9 was (Speedometer performance index is now 9
and before was 13 !!!). May I improve this speed adjusting the memory
settings ? I have 8 megs of RAM and I load EMM386 and UMB, I do right?
Please, tell me the right settings userfull to get the speed I lost !

Paolo

From owner-paper Tue Jan  9 05:13:46 1996
Return-Path: <owner-paper>
Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
    id m0tZcvv-0007qEa; Tue, 9 Jan 96 05:13 MST
Sender: owner-paper
Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tZcvN-0007qCn; Tue, 9 Jan 96 05:13 MST
Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
Path: sloth.swcp.com!news.dgsys.com!news.sprintlink.net!newshub!not-for-mail
From: TPub <[e-mail]>
Subject: 199q E/D Oddities...
Message-ID: <187cc$141c33.35b@newshub>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 1996 04:28:51 GMT
Lines: 33
To: [e-mail]
X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

I don't want to post this directly to ARDI until I'm sure
that it is a real problem and not me... (I assume it's my
system, since no one else seems to be mentioning this.)

I use Executor to copy files PC<-->Mac. Currently, I'm working
on a small 20-page catalog using my PC, saving the files in
Mac format and then using Executor to format Mac disks and
move the .SIT files.

Anyway, I've now gotten several errors where folders empty
and cannot be deleted. (Mentioned in earlier posts.) I use
MakeHFV to create new "drive volumes" and move the surviving
folders, then delete the old volume file in DOS.

My volumes are  < 60M, on a WD 1.6GB drive, no compression,
no fancy drivers. The box is a P75, DOS 6.2X.

In addition, I ran Crystal Quest 2.2.5 without any problems
under 1.99p9, but when I upgraded to 1.99q several strange
things now occur:

1) The game starts in B&W.
2) Some sounds vanish after playing one level.
3) The control panel (cmd key) does not work.
4) The volume controls do not respond (keys 0-9).

If I lose Crystal Quest, I can survive, but drive volume
errors actually affect my work. At that point, Mac-in-DOS
or some other file transfer program becomes a standby. Yuck.

I still hope to buy Executor 2.

C. S.