[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Executor (was Re: MACINTOSH IS BEST)
-
To: executor@ardi.com
-
Subject: Re: Executor (was Re: MACINTOSH IS BEST)
-
From: Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com>
-
Date: 05 Mar 1996 18:47:34 -0700
-
In-reply-to: quinlan@news.sfu.ca's message of 3 Mar 1996 22:24:25 GMT
-
Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
-
Organization: ARDI
-
References: <4bdter$5os@netaxs.com> <4eal6n$e3t@zippy.cais.net> <DLuKzH.76M@news.cis.umn.edu> <4eqqve$1f7@complete.org> <4f9mh8$t84@giant.seas.smu.edu> <31195A5D.2781E494@valley.net> <31199EAC.3E6C@basic.net> <4fdl14$rul@news.iii.net> <4fdrl3$6f6@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <4fe6i2$ca7@madrid.visi.net> <jragosta-0902961517110001@ppp-1002.dca.net> <4gjfid$do@complete.org> <jragosta-2302961340020001@ppp-1002.dca.net> <ufka1cbkhd.fsf@ftp.ardi.com> <jragosta-2602961354040001@ppp-1012.dca.net> <ufg2bvskdp.f <4hd66p$8mu@morgoth.sfu.ca>
-
Sender: owner-executor
-
Sender: owner-executor@ardi.com
-
Xref: sloth.swcp.com comp.emulators.mac.executor:1371 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:92297
>>>>> "Brian" == Brian Quinlan <quinlan@news.sfu.ca> writes:
In article <4hd66p$8mu@morgoth.sfu.ca> quinlan@news.sfu.ca (Brian Quinlan) writes:
Brian> Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com> writes:
>> Although the specific claim that "MHz per MHz Executor runs 68k
>> code faster than a PPC601" is no longer true (it was true when
>> SynPaper was written, when Apple was still shipping their first
>> 68k emulator), the point I was making in the exchange between
>> Joe and me is still correct. SoftWindows can run a greater
>> percentage of applications than Executor can, but Executor is
>> significantly faster than SoftWindows.
Brian> This may be true but it's not a useful comparison. People
Brian> who use PowerMacs probably don't use 68K programs to do any
Brian> work where speed is important so the rate at which the PPC
Brian> macs run 68K programs isn't important. A better comparison
Brian> chart would be.
Brian> PowerMac Pentium
Brian> Speed of native
Brian> applications.
Brian> Speed of other
Brian> platform emulated
Brian> applications
Executor runs 68k based Mac programs on the x86 architecture *much*
faster than SoftWindows runs runs x86 based programs on the PPC
architecture. I tossed in the erroneous comparison because I thought
that would be a good illustration of Executor's speed that many
readers would relate to. Of course since it was incorrect, it didn't
make a good illustration at all, which is why I was so quick to
retract the statement.
My point wasn't that Executor is better than SoftWindows, only that
they each have strengths and weaknesses. Although the specifics of my
speed claim was not correct, there really is a substantial difference
in speed of the two programs (it's much easier to emulate a 68k on an
x86 than vice versa). Occasionally the speed differences will matter
to the potential end-user, but more often than not it won't matter at
all, since more often than not people buying Executor will already
have a PC (they're pretty common), or will be buying one for some
other reason.
Only a relatively few number of people are going to buy a new machine
*and* want to be able to run some apps from both universes *and* are
going to use the differences in the two emulators to decide which
machine to buy.
--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com
Follow-Ups: