Re: Survey: Do you run on II hardware or an emulator?

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

"Warren Stramiello" <uebergeek@iname.com> wrote:

>Hardware, I'm running:
>
>Rom 3 GS, 8mb of Ram, 40mb ext SCSI HDD, and bunch of stuff inside
>
>I also have lying about a bunch of IIe's, some II+, and a single IIc
>I basically use them to store expansion cards that aren't actively in use
>inside my GS.
>
>As for emulators, I mainly run Applewin, and I'm trying to get XGS to work
>under NT.
>
>I run Apple stuff all the time... usually through emulators on my
>overclocked dual-celeron system... *grin*
>
>Nothing like a IIgs running 1ghz...

XGS?  In your dreams!  XGS on a Pentium 166 or 6x68 PR166
creeps along at 1Mhz to 3Mhz.  Or so it says according to the
bootlog file, but in reality if you time it doing tasks rather than
doing empty loops on idle, you'll find it averages slower than
emulated Mhz in performance (the bootlog file lies in other
words).

It is not so hot in a PR200 unit either.

Even if a Celeron was double the performance of a PR200, it
will not BEGIN to approach what a 12.5Mhz TWGS can do
(my own Win unit used to be a PR200 and I have a 12.5Mhz
TWGS).

If you were running Bernie on a G3 Mac, you'd at least get
some real speed.  But XGS sucks so much, it'll pull ANY
hardware down.  It is not the hardware's fault, but XGS.

Besides, what good is an emulator that can't run 3/4 of your
programs or print a document and use a modem.  ;-)