home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- id m0uC94m-0007sBa; Wed, 24 Apr 96 12:14 MDT
- Sender: owner-executor
- Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
- (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0uC93y-0007sGn; Wed, 24 Apr 96 12:13 MDT
- Path: sloth.swcp.com!usenet
- From: Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
- Subject: Re: DOS vs. LINUX
- Date: 24 Apr 1996 12:02:18 -0600
- Organization: ARDI
- Lines: 24
- Message-ID: <ufu3y94i1h.fsf@ftp.ardi.com>
- References: <317D57BE.41FF@ix.netcom.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.ardi.com
- In-reply-to: "S. Duhaime"'s message of Tue, 23 Apr 1996 18:20:46 -0400
- X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0
- To: executor@ardi.com
- X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
- Sender: owner-executor@ardi.com
- Precedence: bulk
-
- >>>>> "Steve" == S Duhaime <smd3@ix.netcom.com> writes:
- In article <317D57BE.41FF@ix.netcom.com> "S. Duhaime" <smd3@ix.netcom.com> writes:
-
-
- Steve> Are there any functionality improvements over having E/L
- Steve> than E/D. I'm getting another drive soon, and I intend to
- Steve> install linux on that, and keep Win95. I will be able to
- Steve> run both DOS, and LINUX versions of executor. But I want to
- Steve> know if one runs Mac apps better/faster...
-
- Right now E/D supports fast graphics on a larger set of video cards
- than E/L does, but E/L handles multitasking better and, because it's
- the platform that the main Executor development takes place on, is
- usualy the first version of Executor to incorporate new features.
-
- After Executor 2 is released we'll probably support some new
- extensions to X-Windows (DGA) which will then allow E/L to support
- fast graphics on a large set of video cards. At that point I would
- think E/L would be preferable to E/D if you can run Linux.
-
- Steve> steve... (smd3@ix.netcom.com)
-
- --Cliff
- ctm@ardi.com
-
-