Executor 2.0/executorv2.0.iso/pc/linux/extra/docs/maillist/text/archive.95/partmessage2350

Internet Message Format | 1996-04-02 | 19.0 KB

Received: from nacm.com by cyber1.servtech.com; Wed, 15 Nov 95 00:48 EST
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by nacm.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id SAA21201 for executor-digest-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 18:47:09 -0800
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 18:47:09 -0800
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: executor-digest V1 #334
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Content-Length: 18962
Content-Type: text
Precedence: bulk


executor-digest          Tuesday, 14 November 1995     Volume 01 : Number 334


  In this issue:

    RE: Zip100 parallel and E/D
    Re: Zip100 parallel and E/D
    Re: System 7.x (5)
    Re: baud compared to bps, ignore if you really don't care, WAS: , Re:, 1.99p6 for everybody!
    Re: System 7.x (5)
    Re: System 7.x (5)
    Re: System 7.x (5)
    Re: System 7.x (5)
    Is executor mailing list available in digest form?
    Stop whingeing!
    Re: Stop whingeing!
    Beam Wars
    [none]
    Re: Beam Wars
    Another possible problem with Stuffit Expander under 1.99p6
    Photoshop functions
    Re: Non-functional cursor control keys in BBEdit?
    INIT, CDEV

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Anton Callaway)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 21:46:08 -0500
Subject: RE: Zip100 parallel and E/D

Andrew Smith <[e-mail]>
wrote...
(deleted stuff)
>Included on the setup disk for your zip drive is a ASPI driver for the
parallael prot zip.
>
>I believe it is acalled ASPIPPA3.SYS and can be loaded in the config.sys
>The guest.exe driver that you use to set up your zip drive actually uses
this driver if you are not scsi. This driver will also work with the Iomega
Parallel port Zip interface. Question? Can the IOMEGA Mac Zip Tools run
under executor?

I tried running Mac Zip Tools under Executor and it crashed Executor (did
not write down the error stuff, but I could repeat it).  If anyone has run
MZT successfully under E/D, let us know... By the way, I am still back on
1.99o, so the newer versions may be fine.

Anton


------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:37:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Zip100 parallel and E/D

In a message dated 95-11-13 22:24:47 EST, [e-mail] (Anton Callaway)
writes:

>
>I tried running Mac Zip Tools under Executor and it crashed Executor (did
>not write down the error stuff, but I could repeat it).  If anyone has run
>MZT successfully under E/D, let us know... By the way, I am still back on
>1.99o, so the newer versions may be fine.
>
>Anton

I have the SCSI version of the drive, and even on 1.99p6 you can't run the
ziptools. for everyone with the SCSI drive-  if you set the scsi bios to
support ALL removable drives as fixed drives, and then run the guest
software, you can read and write MAC formatted Zip diskettes. ( i actualy
move files from and to mac like that.)

Ziv

------------------------------

From: Devastator <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:41:32 +0800
Subject: Re: System 7.x (5)

>I was wondering, what would happen if I were to install system 7.x on top
of Executor.  If you don't know,  I may be able to try it at school.  We
have a site license for System 7, and a bunch of macs that have the DOS
compatibility

Now this sounds like a great idea. Installing Mac software on executor. I
believe, going from myself, that I would rather pay $300 for ardi's ppc code
which would enable me to run almost anything, than to pay $99 for which just
might run software that I happen to use.

Cliff: Why doesn't ardi just sell the engine, instead of the whole product?


------------------------------

From: THOMAS MICHAEL KLUDY <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:07:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: baud compared to bps, ignore if you really don't care, WAS: , Re:, 1.99p6 for everybody!

On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Michael Brown wrote:

[stuff about compression standards]

I am sure that somewhere out there, there is someone who cares.. not I,
though.  And I don't think the executor mailing list is the correct place
to discuss modem protocols.

My $0.02

------------------------------

From: Scott Shuchart <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:22:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: System 7.x (5)

On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Devastator wrote:
> Now this sounds like a great idea. Installing Mac software on executor. I
> believe, going from myself, that I would rather pay $300 for ardi's ppc code
> which would enable me to run almost anything, than to pay $99 for which just
> might run software that I happen to use.
>
> Cliff: Why doesn't ardi just sell the engine, instead of the whole product?

    I'm sure Cliff will take this himself, but basically:  read the
documentation.  Everyone at ARDI would, I think, love to just write a
bridge between non-Apple hardware and the MacOS.  It isn't anywhere close
to that simple.  They're not breaking their own code to keep you from
having to buy Apple products; but the difference between a Mac and a
DOS/Linux box, say, is a whole lot bigger than a processor swap.  For one
thing, ROMs.  ARDI has had to figure out what's in the Mac ROMs without
reverse-engineering them.  Try to figure out how to copy a 4-cylinder
engine by throwing wadded-up kleenex at the thing and seeing which way
they get deflected, and you'll have an idea of how hard their job is.
Even once the ROMs and the processor emulation are perfected, there's a
lot of kludging to trick the system into thinking everything--sound,
video, hard disks, etc.--are where they ought to be.

Waiting for Quark to run without memory errors,
    and absolutely stunned that it loads at all,
Scott Shuchart
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Clifford T. Matthews)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 22:35 MST
Subject: Re: System 7.x (5)

>>>>> "Bill" == Bill Miller <[e-mail]> writes:

    Bill> I was wondering, what would happen if I were to install
    Bill> system 7.x on = top of Executor.

I would guess that it will crash immediately, since we don't support
low-level I/O operations.

    Bill> If you don't know, I may be able to try it at school. = We
    Bill> have a site license for System 7, and a bunch of macs that
    Bill> have the = DOS compatibility cards, and a T1 link to the
    Bill> net.

That site license is for Macs, so putting one of those copies of
System 7 on top of Executor on a PC is probably a violation of the
license, even if you were to put it on the DOS compatibility card
within the Mac, although I am not a lawyer and I haven't seen the
terms of our site license.

My understanding was that Executor wouldn't run on the DOS cards
inside of Macs.  Is that the case, or not?

    Bill> The other question is, can it be done in under 10 minutes
    Bill> under = Executor?

    Bill> I think that by putting Apple System 7.5, you will
    Bill> elliminate the = problems, because they all (at least the
    Bill> program crashes I have = observed) seem to come from the
    Bill> faked system 6 implementation.  Your = Syn68K seems to run
    Bill> fine, if it can run PhotoShop, and Pagemaker, and =
    Bill> Illustrator.

Yes and no.  Syn68k is pretty solid, indeed.  The problem is there's
more to a Mac than a CPU and the ROMs/System File; there's also all
sorts of I/O and "glue" that holds everything together.  To write the
glue and to get it correct, we'd need to disassemble what the glue
connects to (i.e. the ROMs and System File).  That would turn our
"clean" engineers into "dirty" engineers -- that's a price that's too
high for us.

Once we have enough money to be able to afford a dirty team that is
separated from the clean team, then we can do what you propose.  We're
hoping that 2.0 sales will give us that money.  If not, we'll probably
have to start dealing with venture capital people, something we've
avoided so far.

    Bill> Just out of curiosity, why not make it a Dynamic recompiler,
    Bill> so that it = only needs to be translated once.  Do the same
    Bill> thing Connectix Speed = Doubler does.

Executor is a dynamic recompiler, which is why we get speeds better
than what Connectix Speed Doubler does.  Check out
ftp://ftp.ardi.com/pub/SynPaper for more details.

    Bill> Bill Miller [e-mail]
    Bill> [e-mail]

- --Cliff
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Clifford T. Matthews)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 22:38 MST
Subject: Re: System 7.x (5)

>>>>> "Dev" == Devastator  <[e-mail]> writes:

    >> I was wondering, what would happen if I were to install system
    >> 7.x on top of Executor.  If you don't know, I may be able to
    >> try it at school.  We have a site license for System 7, and a
    >> bunch of macs that have the DOS compatibility

    Dev> Now this sounds like a great idea. Installing Mac software on
    Dev> executor. I believe, going from myself, that I would rather
    Dev> pay $300 for ardi's ppc code which would enable me to run
                             ^^^
?

    Dev> almost anything, than to pay $99 for which just might run
    Dev> software that I happen to use.

    Dev> Cliff: Why doesn't ardi just sell the engine, instead of the
    Dev> whole product?

It takes "dirty" work to build the interface between our synthetic CPU
and the Mac ROMs and System File.  The work isn't actually very hard,
but whoever does it would never be able to work on ROMlib (our
OS/Toolbox rewrite).  This is something we plan to do, but the order
in which we do things is very important from business and legal
perspectives.

Sorry that I don't have the time to go into this more in depth, but
it's something that we are well aware of over here.

- --Cliff
[e-mail]


------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 01:36:56 -0500
Subject: Re: System 7.x (5)

At 10:41 PM 11/13/95 +0800, you wrote:
>>I was wondering, what would happen if I were to install system 7.x on top
>of Executor.  If you don't know,  I may be able to try it at school.  We
>have a site license for System 7, and a bunch of macs that have the DOS
>compatibility
>
>Now this sounds like a great idea. Installing Mac software on executor. I
>believe, going from myself, that I would rather pay $300 for ardi's ppc code
>which would enable me to run almost anything, than to pay $99 for which just
>might run software that I happen to use.
>
>Cliff: Why doesn't ardi just sell the engine, instead of the whole product?

The reason is quite simple. Executor will crash with Apple's system files
installed instead of ARDI's. Likewise, if you tried to replace the system
files of a Mac with Executor's system files, the Mac would crash.  This is
because Cliff & Co
had none of the fine nitty gritty details of the innerworkings of the
Macintosh.  Rather, all they had was the info provided by the book series
"inside the Macintosh" put out by Apple for programmers.  What Cliff & Co
had to do is follow the books to the 't' and run test algorithms to try and
extrapolate as much info as possible. If I'm not mistaken, this is the
'clean room' process of reverse engineering that Cliff sometimes mentions.
This is all explained in great detail in the text file EARNSTOUD.TXT which
resides in the docs directory undr the executor directory.  -Matt Galgoci

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Seifarth)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:28:31 +0100
Subject: Is executor mailing list available in digest form?

Is executor mailing list available in digest form? I seem to have seen
replies a few weeks ago with a subject line mentioning re: executor digest
xxx.

Any pointers?


______________________________________________________________________
John Seifarth                       http://www.eunet.be/eunet_ear/waw/
Words & Wires SPRL                    [e-mail]
Computer Consulting & Language Services       Voice: (+) 32-2-660-3943
1160 Brussels, Belgium                          Fax: (+) 32-2-675-3922



------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alex Newman)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 10:30:37 EST
Subject: Stop whingeing!

Executor is a phenomenal piece of work. If people don't like it, they should go
and buy a Mac instead, or write their own emulator! Give ARDI a break!

Alex Newman


------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Clifford T. Matthews)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 06:00 MST
Subject: Re: Stop whingeing!

>>>>> "Alex" == Alex Newman <[e-mail]> writes:

    Alex> Executor is a phenomenal piece of work.

Thank you.

    Alex> If people don't like it,

Like professional juggling, the better we do our job, the easier it
should look, so if people sometimes say "Cool.  You've done
<whatever>, now do <something perceived as similar>" then that too is
a compliment.  So we don't consider the last few messages to be
complaints.

    Alex> they should go and buy a Mac instead,

For many people, a Mac is the way to go.  We're trying hard, Executor
still has several limitations.

    Alex> or write their own emulator!

Throughout my life I've heard "If you can't do better, you shouldn't
criticize", but I've never believed it.  Consider crossing a chasm.
You see three people before you walk across a rickety bridge, step on
a weak board that breaks, then plunge to their death.  You know
nothing about building bridges, but you can surely say "hey!  that
bridge isn't for me."

Now I certainly don't want to imply that Executor is a rickety bridge
that will kill its users, but the above example should put to rest the
idea that criticism is inherently invalid when coming from a user
rather than a designer.

We welcome criticism and believe that Executor 2 will be a much better
product than it would have been if we had created it in the dark or
let our egos get in the way of accepting valid criticism.  That
doesn't mean we always agree with our critics or even when we do that
we will necessarily attach the same priority to addressing a
particular complaint, but a wide gene pool is the only way to prevent
inbreeding.

    Alex> Give ARDI a break!

We appreciate the respect for us that your letter shows, but I
honestly believe the original comments were sincere requests for
information (which I have answered in separate pieces of mail) and
although we hope everyone will always look in our FAQ and READMEs
before asking questions, we certainly don't want to hinder any
Executor Enthusiast's quest for knowledge.

    Alex> Alex Newman

- --Cliff
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Calvin Smith)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:31:51 -0600
Subject: Beam Wars

Does any one know how to get beamwars to work?  It works until the time for
the board expires at this point it is supposed to bring up the high scores
list but instead it just sits there (probably crashed).

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Calvin Smith)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:48:06 -0600
Subject: [none]

Does any one know how to get beamwars to work?  It works until the time for
the board expires at this point it is supposed to bring up the high scores
list but instead it just sits there (probably crashed).

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Clifford T. Matthews)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 07:24 MST
Subject: Re: Beam Wars

>>>>> "Calvin" == Calvin Smith <[e-mail]> writes:

    Calvin> Does any one know how to get beamwars to work?  It works
    Calvin> until the time for the board expires at this point it is
    Calvin> supposed to bring up the high scores list but instead it
    Calvin> just sits there (probably crashed).

I haven't tried beamwars recently, but we've definitely had it (at
least a version of it) running under Executor for a long time.  Have
you tried turning off sound from within BeamWars.  A lot of programs
call the operating system and tell it to play a sound and to either
set a flag or actually interrupt when the sound has finished playing.
Our sound spoofing code doesn't handle this properly, so the program
will just wait forever.

Maelstrom and Space Madness both do this unless you turn sound off
from within the game (this is separate from turning Pretend Sound on
in Executor, something you also have to do).  We can't wait to get
Executor 2 out the door so we can make sound work.  It will solve a
bunch of bugs and also make our demos more impressive.

- --Cliff
[e-mail]


------------------------------

From: "Jon Hall" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 18:25:37 +0000
Subject: Another possible problem with Stuffit Expander under 1.99p6

I think I've discovered another problem with Stuffit Expander under 1.99p6.

Choosing "Preferences..." seems to cause Executor to give a fatal
error report "unknown,unimplemented trap `ABC9'" while drawing the
Preferences box. I've checked that it doesn't seem to happen under 1.99p
or 1.99p5.

------------------------------

From: "Kyle Silfer" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 14:40:51 +0000
Subject: Photoshop functions

Got 1.99p6/DOS running and succesfully launched Photoshop 3.0, loaded
up a small file, ran a filter on it... and then crashed. Better than
my 1.99p5 experiences, that's fo' sho'.

Unfortunately, after my crash, Photoshop will not run any more. I
get a message that it can not be initialized because there is
another file with the same name. Or something like that. Problem
repeats despite rebooting/restarting my computer. Does this mean my
copy of Photoshop is corrupt? Or my copy of Executor?

- --Kyle


------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Clifford T. Matthews)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 19:01 MST
Subject: Re: Non-functional cursor control keys in BBEdit?

>>>>> "Bob" == Robert Cradock <[e-mail]> writes:

    Bob>     THe main program I use under E/D is BB-Edit, and
    Bob> it's fine except fotr one annoying thing.  When I try to
    Bob> use the 6 cursor control keys (Ins, Dekl, Home, End, PgUP,
    Bob> PgDn), they aren't recognized.  Is there a solution to this?
    Bob> If not, can it go on the to-do heap?  Thanks a lot

Might be fixed in 1.99p6.  Can you give it a try and tell me if it's
not?  Right now we're having disk space problems so it's kind of hard
for me to check.

    Bob> Bob Cradock [e-mail]

- --Cliff
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: David Danziger <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:22:14 -0500
Subject: INIT, CDEV

I have a question about E/Dp6. I know that the answer is possibly in the =
documentation, but I was just wondering if someone could answer it here =
for me. I am wondering whether you can use extensions and control panels =
with Executor. =20
Thank you-
C:\>David

------------------------------

End of executor-digest V1 #334
******************************


  To subscribe to executor-digest, send the command:

    subscribe executor-digest

in the body of a message to "[e-mail]".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-executor-digest":

    subscribe executor-digest [e-mail]

  A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "executor-digest"
in the commands above with "executor".