🚀 go-pugleaf

I received some queries about how well PC-DITTO works.  Well, I don't have
an extensive (or even large) collection of MS-DOS programs, but I haven't
found one that doesn't work yet.
Everything is sluggish...it isn't too bad in most applications, though the
programs that produce slight pauses on a real pc will seem to choke in
PC-DITTO, and if you get impatient you might hit reset too soon.  Overall
it has the feel of a slightly overloaded time-sharing system...I've used
those enough that PC-DITTO doesn't bother me.  However if you are
accustomed to the instant gratification of micros, PC-DITTO might get
on your nerves.
The worst-case performance seems to be on cpu-intensive tasks.  Here's
the WORST comparison I've found, for a number-crunching program compiled
from QuickBasic and running on MS-DOS 2.11 on all systems:

IBM PC:  1:30       Leading Edge "D":  1:02      PC-DITTO:  10:28

As I say, this is worst case, and most programs don't seem 10 times
slower.  However you should think twice before using a heavy-duty PC
program on PC-DITTO...at least be prepared for 10:1 time increases.
Overall I like the program.  It is quite adequate for the sort of stuff
I need to do, and obviously a lot cheaper than PC clones.  My only gripe
so far is that it doesn't support the ST monochrome monitor yet, though
they say they are working on that.  Where text is concerned I prefer using
the monochrome monitor rather than the color monitor (or just about any
other display, including Macintosh).  Oh well.
Don Rice
FXDDR@ALASKA