IUBio

[Q]:?how to run MAC SW on PC (Windows95)

Mad Dan Eccles rpgrant at molbiol.ox.ac.uk
Mon Feb 12 06:57:27 EST 1996


<4fj26r$rle at news.gate.net>, trussman at gate.net (trussman at gate.net) writes:
>>Two more points: 
>>One:
>>for $$/computing power, PowerMacs are far faster than P5s, which is not 
>>surprising because of the RISC technology.  I mean, who wants two 486s 
>>soldered back to back?? At least it keeps the room warm in winter. :)
> 
> RISC technology is not the be-all and end-all of chip design. In fact
> it is, IMHO, a great leap backward. Have the chip less capable but
> faster so that it can do 4 simple instructions at the speed of 1
> complex instruction? This reminds me of people who bought 20 mhz 80286
> machines instead of 16 mhz 386 machines. It doesn't always work.
> Witness the Pentium Pro. Second, P5's are not the slower chip, PPc's
> are, based on all tests I've read.

We're obviously reading different reports.  The only reports I've seen which 
favour the P5 were based on Microsoft software usage.  Need I say more?

> I don't care how much it costs them to make it. I care what I have to
> pay for it. P5 costs me less and I can choose my software from a far

Less? hmmmmmmm

> wider variety pack. Show me one Roof Truss Design program on the Mac.
> I can show you 10 on the PC and I have personally used  at least 5 of
> them, plus several that have been discontinued because they weren't
> competitive.

Oh please.  How many [word processors/spreadsheets/design packages/publishing 
packages] do you want?

There is PLENTY of software for Mac.  Over 800 PPC-native programs that aren't 
available for PCs.  And a similar number of 'Mac-first' apps.  Not to mention 
the stuff that is multiplatform or PC-first and ported.

>>> Apple is in deep deep trouble - face it.  The Amiga of the '90s.
> Well, he's wrong this time. Amiga is still out there, doing great
> business, but not where we're used to looking. They just announced
> that they're going to be building a PPc reference platform.
<snip>
> time. When was the last time you saw one. As far as licensing the OS,
> well lots of people copied IBM's OS by buying copies from Microsoft.

Well, that's because M$ bought DOS.

> The end result was not increased strength for IBM. As far as being
> real computers, keep it decent. Slinging of mud means that you'd
> better get teflon clothes. Frankly Apple doesn't know how to build

Sorry ;)

> computers. What they know is how to build a user friendly OS and make
> it integral to the hardware.

Yes, and the hardware is fantastic!  I don't know what you want from the mac, 
but have you seen the machines now, especially the tower series?  What do you 
call building computers????
But I don't want to get into a "yes they do, no they don't" argument.

> How many OS's can you run on your Mac? I
> have three on my 80x86, and could have many other's. OS/2, DOS, Win
> 3.1, Win95, Unix (in many variations), Pick OS

Again, how many do I _want_ to run?  Or to be crude, so what?

I have, or can easily find, everything I need to be a molecular/cell biologist 
using the Mac platform.  (apart from data ;-) 
And everyone in the lab prefers using the mac because 
it's easier and faster to get things done.  We had the choice just now whether 
to get a (2nd hand) peecee for our platereader or a MacSE.  The verdict was 
unanimous; we went for the 8 yr old Mac.  This is in a lab where the 
'official' policy was to have ibm-compatibles only, no macs.

There are Unix emulators around for the Mac (or coming up), but _everyone_ at 
this University has unlimited access to a central Unix box.  I also have 
access to OpenVMS on a DEC alpha. Every room in every building (except the 
toilets ;) has an ethernet socket, so accessing these central machines is not 
a problem.  (Except, it seems, if you've got a peecee.  This is not meant to be 
provocative, but the Macs network a whole lot easier than the PCs.  I've even 
got a Mac at home on the dialin service that's connected via a PACE Mobifax 
144 borrowed from a friend with a 486 - and the only software required to make 
it run are the generic mac comms stuff - MacTCP, MacPPP and configPPP.)

Um, the point is, we don't need Unix on a desktop.

Phew, sorry, I didn't mean to go on.  However, I felt it important to leap to 
the defence of Apple because they make damn good machines that (generally - 
with notable exception :-[ ) run fantastic software extremely well.

I'm a scientist, I don't really want to spend time in the insides of 
computers (unless I get paid for it ;) - although I have to occasionally 
because people get stuck.

Anyway, you keep to the stuff you're happy with, I'll keep to mine, and we'll 
try not to make newbies too prejudiced... OK? :-)

Richard




More information about the Bio-soft mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net