Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!udel!sbcs!csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu!dtiberio
From: dtiberio@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Sorry Guys, There is NO WAY!
Keywords: AMIGA 3000 vs NEXT
Message-ID: <1990Dec9.164313.17586@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 9 Dec 90 16:43:13 GMT
References: <22055@well.sf.ca.us> <16654@brahms.udel.edu> <22069@well.sf.ca.us>
Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster)
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 29

In article <22069@well.sf.ca.us> yoo@well.sf.ca.us (Young-Kyu Yoo) writes:
>>   SoftPC doesn't allow you to plug in IBM graphics cards, memory, etc.,
>>nor does it run on its own processor without slowdown of the "real"
>>computer.
>
>A NeXT comes with 8 MB RAM, mininum, plus virtual memory.  Adding on IBM
>memory chips wouldn't be useful considering that PC software is designed to run
>on systems with less than a 1 MB of RAM.  And heavy-duty AT apps take two, or
>at most four MB of RAM.  As for IBM graphics cards, they may be useful for
>some.  But the NeXT itself is much better graphical environment than the
>PC, and it already comes with the hardware to take advantage of it
>(though no color for less than $5000).   The NeXT has the SCSI and serial
>ports for other types of IBM add-ons.  
>
>True, SoftPC will take up CPU cycles.  But how many apps will one user be
>running anyway?  And with 15-20 Mips to spend, you could run a fair number
>of MS-DOS apps on a NeXT before large performance impact.  
>
>One thing you will be able to do that you couldn't do on a traditional PC
>or with a MS-DOS bridgecard, and that's run several MS-DOS applications at
>once in separate windows on the NeXT. This is because SoftPC will run as
>just another Unix process, and you can have multiple SoftPCs (Unix processes)
>running at one time.  IBM PC owners, eat your hearts out :-).
> 

  I have been looking all over for this SoftPC program, but only seem to
find it for the Mac. And even the AT version of the Mac is pitifully slow.
How does it compare to the ATonce IBM emulator? I was thinking about getting
one of those for my Amiga, since it multitasks too.