[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: WHy not take executor into Windows?
In your message (Thu, 4 May 1995 08:01 CST), you wrote:
>I've noticed that executor still runs as a Dos application, why? It's the onl
>y
>Dos application I have on my machine now, but I remember the old days, every
>application used to have it's own printer drivers, fonts, etc. It was a mess.
>
>If you fully integrated it into windows you could take advantage of the
>intalled Sound drivers, printer, fonts etc.
Windows does have this advantage, yes. It also has some serious
disadvantages:
1) It does not allow flat memory allocation. All 680x0 chips allow
this, so to translate this accurately to 80x86 you need to use 386
protected mode. Windows does not do this, even in 386 enhanced mode.
Trying to kludge flat address spaces in Windows programs is a
nightmare (believe me, because I've done it!). You need to use DOS,
or to use a proper 32bit OS (Linux, NextSTEP, OS/2). You will notice
that two of these have executor, and the third is planned. It could
probably be ported to Windows NT, although Windows 95 is less likely,
since it still contains a lot of 16 bit code which could cause real
problems porting executor.
2) GUIs are *slow*. Compare Executor/Linux and Executor/DOS on the
same machine and you'll see. Executor/Linux uses the X window
system, and screen updates are very slow compared to the DOS version,
which is orders of magnitude faster at screen manipulation. If you
want executor to crawl, run it under Windows. This is why some Linux
users are asking for an SVGALib version. SVGALib gives Linux
programs DOS-style access to the video hardware.
You certainly won't see a 16 bit Windows version in the near future,
I bet. You might just see a Win32S version if ARDI get really keen.
But if you want mac apps, do you really want them in a Windows
window? Euch!
Tim.
References: