[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Executor usefulness?
>>>>> "Howard" == Howii <chenhh@cs.purdue.edu> writes:
In article <49hrhc$vm@leepai.cs.purdue.edu> chenhh@cs.purdue.edu (Howii) writes:
Howard> Does anybody else question the usefulness of Executor? I
Howard> like macintoshes but have a PC and have used Executor, but
Howard> I balk at buying it because I never actually use a
Howard> macintosh for any of my important tasks these days. There
Howard> was a time that I liked Macs better for word processing,
Howard> but these days, I'd rather use windows programs because
Howard> they are native to my machine (and thus faster).
No problem. I would guess that most PC owners do not need Executor in
its current form and may never have a need for Executor. However,
there are enough people who do need Executor that we expect to bring
in enough money selling Executor 2 to hire many more engineers and
clean up much of what is rough in Executor 2.
Some uses of Executor that I know of:
bringing apps to Linux and NEXTSTEP that aren't available otherwise
the ability to read and write Macintosh formatted media and not
lose resource fork information
Mac-only programs like NIH Image, HyperCard
Companies that make Mac and Windows software can use one laptop
to demo two different flavors of their software to customers (assuming
the software in question runs under Executor -- not everything does)
More flexibility when setting up computer labs that have Macs and
PCs -- some of the PCs can run Executor and be used for overflow
when the Macs are all full
Running the Mac version of a piece of software that *is* available
under Windows just to avoid the niggly little UI differences that
you get when you run the Windows version
A cheap pseudo-Mac for the kids to use when they come home to the
PC, but use Macs at work.
Speed -- A 90 MHz Pentium can run 68040 code faster than various
Quadra 68040 based Macs
Nostalgia
Cutting Edge emulation kicks
The last two are obviously stretching it, but all of the above are
uses that I know some of our customers have for Executor. If you
don't fit in any of the above categories, or perhaps you do, but the
Mac applications that you'd like to run don't yet run under Executor,
well, we understand. We never try to force Executor down people's
throat; we'll recommend MAE (Apple's own Macintosh Emulator for other
platforms, or a real Mac, or a native Windows application) to any
potential customer who would be better served by any of those
alternatives.
Howard> Also, Macs are moving to PowerPC these days... is Executor
Howard> planning on emulating that in the future?
Yup.
Howard> This might sound pretty critical, but I tend to find that
Howard> most of the things I end up running are my old Mac
Howard> shareware games.
Well, if you have a PC and those games run under Executor and you'd
like to continue running them, then the student registration fee of
$49 may be something you're willing to part with. If not, no big
deal; we really have a *lot* of potentical customers for Executor 2
and we'll have even more as Executor gets better compatibility and
functionality.
Howard> Is there a major flaw in my line of reasoning?
Nope. A totally valid question.
Howard> -Howard Chen chenhh@cs.purdue.edu
Howard> P.S.: I do like Executor and it is very impressive despite
Howard> my criticisms
Thanks. Anyone who has seen the difference between where Executor was
at the beginning of the year and where it is now, might correctly
suspect that Executor will get *much* better in 1996, since everything
looks like we'll have much more money and more engineers. Heck, we
might even have a neat surprise in December.
Thanks for your interest!
--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com
Follow-Ups:
References: