🚀 go-pugleaf

>>>>> "Hal" == Hal G Meeks <hgm@unity.ncsu.edu> writes:
In article <44sc5s$ki7@taco.cc.ncsu.edu> hgm@unity.ncsu.edu (Hal G. Meeks) writes:


    Hal> sg928ah5@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu (James Ianni) writes:
    >> Clifford T. Matthews (ctm@ardi.com) wrote: : >>>>> "James" ==
    >> James Ianni <sg928ah5@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu> writes: : In
    >> article <449qno$nf0@noc2.drexel.edu>
    >> sg928ah5@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu (James Ianni) writes:


    Cliff>> Photoshop is only now just starting to limp.  We will be
    Cliff>> doing extensive bug fixing aimed at getting Photoshop 3 to
    Cliff > run well, starting the 8th of October.

The above was poorly worded.  Specifically we'll start the extensive bug
fixing on the 8th of October, rather than the bug fixing will be aimed at
getting PhotoShop 3 to run well on the 8th.  Sorry about that.

    Hal> Don't hold your breath....read on...

    >> I would like to purchase it, but until you can run it more
    >> reliabley I'm going to stick with AMAX-II which is very, very
    >> stable, I forget that I'm working on an Amiga!!! I believe WORD
    >> is reliable and shouldn't crash,

    Hal> Executor isn't an "emulator" in the same sense that
    Hal> SoftWindows or ShapeShifter (or Emplant or Amax) are
    Hal> emulators. Executor is a "program launcher". You _don't_ get
    Hal> to use the Mac's finder, or any of the capabilities that
    Hal> MacOS buys you.

It's a little more complex than that.  In many aspects, Executor is very
similar to SoftWindows, less similar to ShapeShifter.  Both Executor and
SoftWindows make one CPU run programs originally meant for another
CPU.  Both Executor and SoftWindows have restrictions on what programs
may run.  At one time SoftWindows could not run any programs requiring
386 enhanced mode.  At this time, Executor has many restrictions,
including the inability to run Apple's Finder.

As to not getting any of the capabilities that MacOS buys you, please
remember that Executor/DOS gives you a windowing environment under
DOS.  In that sense, probably 80% to 90% of what the MacOS provides
you is indeed provided by Executor.  However, this is just a matter of
semantics.

Executor is useful for some people but currently useless for others.
We are up front about that and we encourage people to read our answers
to Frequently Asked Questions
(ftp://ftp.ardi.com/pub/executor-faq.ascii) to get a feel for what
Executor provides now and beyond that we have a time limited demo that
people can run to see what Executor does and doesn't do (the FAQ tells
you how to get it).  We also have WorldWide Web pages
(http://www.ardi.com), an Executor mailing list (the FAQ tells how to
subscribe) and there's currently a Request For Discussion regarding
the creation of a newsgroup to discuss Executor.

We have a 30 day, return Executor for any reason money back guarantee,
so it's in our best interest to let people know what Executor can and
can't do and to let them test drive Executor for themselves before
making a purchase.

    Hal> You do get the capability to run a few pieces
    Hal> of Mac software, and not necessarily very reliably, from my
    Hal> experience.

I am sure that people would like to hear the specifics of your
experience so that can help them decide whether Executor would
potentially be useful to them.

    Hal> Executor might make a few Linux users happy, in that they can
    Hal> point to their box and say that it runs Mac applications (so
    Hal> why have a Mac), but it is far from usable for day to day
    Hal> work.

It depends on what your day to day work is.  Executor running compute
intensive programs *if they work*, on a 90 MHz Pentium will run about
60% faster than they would on a 25 MHz 68040 base Mac.  At ARDI we
wrote a 100 page manual running Microsoft Word for the Macintosh under
Executor (Microsoft Word is not available for Linux).  Our customers
have other uses for Executor.

    Hal> You are better off buying an old Mac and networking it,
    Hal> or using a real platform emulation, like ShapeShifter or
    Hal> Emplant (and even these are dicey).

This is true for some "you"s, but for others, Executor is now a useful
tool, and for others Executor will be a useful tool in the future.

    Hal> Sorry, but I wasted a lot of time with Executor.

I believe you, but I think everyone would profit from a more detailed
explanation of how you wasted your time.  That way we can prevent it
from happening with other potential Executor users.

    Hal> It's a neat hack, but not of much use for productivity.
    Hal> Anyone who truly needs to run Photoshop on their PC, would be
    Hal> better off simply buying Photoshop for the PC. If you find
    Hal> that you can't get by with your current platform, emulation
    Hal> is not going to be your long-term solution. Real application
    Hal> support is.

I leave this to our potential customers to decide for themselves.

--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com