🚀 go-pugleaf

In <rmcassid-0208950934330001@dante.eng.uci.edu> rmcassid@uci.edu (Robert Cassidy) writes:

>In article <ericb.512.301F8F68@psu.edu>, ericb@psu.edu (Eric Bennett) wrote:
>
>> In article <davis-0108951934350001@pppsb1.itg.ti.com>
>davis@adrs1.dseg.ti.com (Tom L. Davis) writes:
>
>> >If Apple's new emulator (on the 9500) can outperform all 040 Macs, why
>> >can't Softwindows do the same relative to a 66 MHz 486DX2 (which I assume
>> >is equivalent to a 33 MHz 040)?
>
>> A 68040 @ 40 mhz is just a tad slower than a 486/66.  Also keep in mind that 
>> we're talking about a BETA of SoftWindows 2.0, which could have some
>debugging 
>> code holding it back.  We'll have to wait until it's release to see how fast 
>> it really is.
>
>Well, the argument still holds. The 9500 in emulation is still quite a bit
>faster than even a 040/40. If SpeedDoubler lives up to the hype then it
>could show that even a little better is possible.
>
>So even if a 486DX2/66 were 50% faster than an 040/40 (sounds like an
>awfully safe margin) then I'd expect that some proper combination of
>engineers from Apple, Insignia, Connectix could probably emulate close to
>that speed.

Eric posted a very good advice: wait until it's released.

Speculations about future products are a waste of time and bandwidth.
Leave the hype to the marketing divisions of the interested companies.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
CERN, CN Division
Email: Dan.Pop@mail.cern.ch 
Mail:  CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland