Executor 2.0/executorv2.0.iso/pc/dos/extra/docs/maillist/text/archive.96/text7265.txt

Text File | 1996-07-25 | 8.1 KB | 168 lines

    id m0uVbJR-0007u1a; Mon, 17 Jun 96 04:13 MDT
Sender: owner-executor
Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
    (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0uVbIv-0007tyn; Mon, 17 Jun 96 04:13 MDT
Path: sloth.swcp.com!usenet
From: Clifford T. Matthews <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.emulators.mac.executor
Subject: Re: PPC vs Pentium Pro Read it and spell
Followup-To: comp.emulators.mac.executor
Date: 17 Jun 1996 03:29:36 -0600
Organization: ARDI
Lines: 134
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
    <4mj73f$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
    <4nh2da$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
    <4o2c84$[e-mail]> <4o3k52$[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]> <4ot50r$[e-mail]>
    <4pg78v$[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.134.3.198
In-reply-to: tokarek ryan matthew's message of Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:15:43 -0500
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0
Xref: sloth.swcp.com comp.sys.mac.advocacy:116645 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:129430 comp.emulators.mac.executor:3521
To: [e-mail]
X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

NOTE: I wasn't aware of this thread until just now.  I realize that
some extra Executor informatin has already been posted, but there are
a few pieces of information in this and a few other posts that I think
need addressing.

>>>>> "Ryan" == tokarek ryan matthew <[e-mail]> writes:
In article <[e-mail]> tokarek ryan matthew <[e-mail]> writes:


    Ryan> On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Harry Menegay wrote:
    >> [e-mail] (Psychedelic Harry) wrote:
    >>
    >> >>Simply because you are not.  I'm a both user myself and I've
    >> found I >>prefer Mac, especially nice as I can emulate the PC
    >> whereas the PC cannot >>emulate me.......every PC type I've
    >> turned on to my Power PC has been >>hooked and I doubt many of
    >> them will stay with sheep......
    >>
    >> Sigh.  There has been a PC program out for years now called
    >> executor that is a mac emulator that runs on PC's.  Never heard
    >> of it?  Probably because most PC users have enough software and
    >> don't need to any from the mac .  Softwindows/Softdos however
    >> seem to be farily popular in the mac community. Hmmmm.

    Ryan> Executor does not emulate the Mac OS in any way. It provides
    Ryan> the ability to run some Mac applications (some of those that
    Ryan> are compatible with System 6).

I don't know what you mean by emulate the Mac OS, but using my
definitions, Executor emulates the Mac OS in all but a few ways.
MacOS is defined by an Application Programming Interface.  A program
running under MacOS will make calls and on a Mac, MacOS will service
those calls and do whatever is appropriate (draw a window, return the
last character typed, etc.).  When run under Executor (if the app
runs, see the next paragraph for more info), *Executor* services those
calls and does whateveris appropriate (draw a window, etc.).

>From most applications perspective, MacOS is present when a program is
running under Executor.  The look and feel is the same, so with the
exception of limitations, the user sees the same thing that he would
see in the Mac OS known as System 6 (i.e. before Multifinder).
However, we've written Executor from scratch, so there are some pieces
that we haven't yet written and there are also potential problems
associated when people write programs that don't strictly conform to
the MacOS API as documented.

One big difference between Executor and System 7 is that Executor
itself does not do cooperative multitasking other than Executor's weak
support for Desk Accessories.  That's because Executor is a virtual
operating system and it depends on the underlying OS to do the
multitasking for it.  That means that on systems that support it, you
can run multiple instantiations of Executor and hence have multiple
Mac apps running simultaneously and get memory protection and
pre-emptive multitasking.

On the other hand, each Executor runs in its own screen, so you don't
have windows from different applications sharing windows on the same
virtual Macintosh.  In addition, file sharing and cut and paste are
least supported on the most popular Executor platform (DOS) and most
supported on the least popular platform (NEXTSTEP).  That's because we
originally did our work under NEXTSTEP, then supported DOS later.  DOS
itself doesn't do multitasking and we haven't yet done a Win32
subsystem native port.  We will, and when we do, we'll also beef up
the interprocess communication side of Executor.

NOTE: Executor does not run Finder, but that's primarily because of
the "clean room" reverse engineering techniques we've used to write
Executor.  However, Finder is no more the Mac OS, than the Bourne
Shell is UNIX.

    Ryan> The current version of SoftWindows will run programs that
    Ryan> will run on Windows95, and runs Windows 95.

Yes, SoftWindows definitely has an advantage over Executor in
compatibility.  On the other hand, Executor is *much* faster than
SoftWindows and you can play shoot-em-up games, like Apeiron,
Maelstrom, Space Madness, Peg Leg, etc. under Executor.

    Ryan> There is a huge disparity between the respective "emulation"
    Ryan> packages.

True.  The brief summary is that SoftWindows is much more compatible
and Executor is much faster.

One not uncommon misconception is that Executor is faster because it
leaves things out.  That's not true.  Executor is faster and Executor
does leave things out, but Executor's faster because we have rewritten
the OS and toolbox codes so that they run native on the x86 and also
because of architecture differences that make it much easier to
emulate a 680x0 on an 80x86 (which is what Executor does) than vice
versa (which is what SoftWindows does).

Insignia licenses Windows from Microsoft.  ARDI is hoping to be
able to license some portions of Mac OS.  We should know more in a
couple of months.

    >> I realize there are some apps out for mac only that don't run
    >> under this emulator, but the same can be said of many PC apps
    >> not running under the Mac's PC emulator.

To be fair, there are *many* apps that don't run under Executor,
although in general the Mac-only apps are more likely to run under
Executor than the apps that are available for both platforms.  That's
just because, in general, cross-platform apps are larger (because big
companies can afford to make cross-platform products) and the larger
an app is the more likely it is to do something that Executor doesn't
yet understand.  Of course this is a generalization and there are
many exceptions.

    Ryan> According to what I have heard, there are very few
    Ryan> mainstream apps that don't run on Insignia's PC emulator
    Ryan> (with thier newer version).

My understanding is that no version of Executor runs on any version of
SoftPC or SoftWindows, but that older versions of SoftPC run under
Executor.  Linux Journal did an article on Executor about a year back
and had a screenshot of Executor running SoftPC.

    Ryan> Many mainstream apps won't run on Executor.

Yes, that's true.

    Ryan> Ryan Tokarek <[e-mail]>

I'm not really happy that Executor gets tossed into Mac vs. PC
arguments, because then I feel compelled to point out mistaken beliefs
about Executor in threads that I normally wouldn't even read, much
less contribute to.  Pro PC people often over-represent Executor in
these threads, and if I see that happening, I'll step in and correct
people.  Of course when people misunderstand fundamental issues about
Executor I'll correct them, too.

--Cliff
[e-mail]