Comments on: the easy way bundle

By: DRATHAS

DRATHAS — Sun, 29 Dec 2019 06:54:47 +0000

In reply to leecher1337. I want to know all the inner workings of the NTVDM on RISC and i386. I am curious about this software. I don't know abotu very much of NTVDM CPU, all I know is that have a V86 mode on i386 and a CCPU on RISC. I want to know the workings of CPU, devices on NTVDM on RISC and I386.

By: leecher1337

leecher1337 — Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:43:11 +0000

I think the reason why Microsoft hasn’t continued it on x64 is that the emulated CCPU is slower compared to the native V86 mode that we are used to in NTVDM.exe on i386. The CPU emulation is acceptable, but the video emulation is not the fastest of its kind. Even though when looking at the MIPS/PCC builds of NTVDM, there must have been some SDK to make a faster Assembler CPU for specific processors rather than using the universal CCPU.
The emulation of the video cards seems to be written in something called “J code”, perhaps some kind of universal assembler that assembles to C-code which is then being processed by the normal C-compiler (but is barely readable) as part of the build process.

Nevertheless, I ported NTVDM to x64 (https://github.com/leecher1337/ntvdmx64), so at least the curious ones can see how it would work if Microsoft would include it on their x64 machines. Imho this would be a better choice than not shipping a NTVDM at all.

If you want to know more about the inner workings of the NTVDM, just ask.

By: Another Linux Guy

Another Linux Guy — Sat, 29 Sep 2018 21:57:05 +0000

In reply to neozeed. Thanks for the response. I'm going to have to try getting it all set-up later on.

By: neozeed

neozeed — Sat, 29 Sep 2018 17:38:20 +0000

In reply to Another Linux Guy.

Basilisk II will run it happily and much more faster than the real thing… As I mentioned above my LC gets a score of 2.6Mhz, which my 2010 MacPro gets a score of about 200Mhz, and that is with JIT disabled on Basilisk II.

When I was lucky enough to have a cube, the disk came with NS 2, and a copy of SoftPC 2 for NeXTSTEP. I used to run it on the 68040 25Mhz board it had, and it was acceptable. And of course there is the Qemu MIPS builds that can run Windows NT so you can use it via NTVDM.

At least modern machines are so fast, the penalty of emulating ancient single digit machines within another layer of emulation (or two) isn’t so bad.

By: Another Linux Guy

Another Linux Guy — Sat, 29 Sep 2018 15:11:35 +0000

I find old computer emulators to be interesting, but I don’t have a Mac or an SGI workstation to play around with the SoftPC family of emulators.

By: neozeed

neozeed — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 06:28:56 +0000

In reply to Chris M..

I recently got an Macintosh LC to work, so I fired up the SoftPC install on that. In the Landmark 2.0 test it’s about a 2.6Mhz AT. Granted the 16Mhz 68020 on the LC isn’t exactly a powerhouse, but for such a crappy entry machine getting half XT speed in software ins’t so bad, although yeah, I wouldn’t want half an XT, or 1/3rd an AT either.

Those ‘bridge boards’ of the Apple world were interesting cards, but never could run stuff like OS/2 or Windows NT, they were okay for plain DOS+Windows. I forget if it ran DooM at all.

By: Chris M.

Chris M. — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 04:03:32 +0000

Microsoft eventually bought Connectix even though they used the Insignia emulation core for x86 emulation on the various NT ports. SoftPC on a 68030 was SLOW and SoftAT was likely unusable (leave that for a Quadra). One of the marketing points for the original PowerPC line was faster x86 PC emulation, but even then Insignia SoftWindows only supported emulating Windows 3.1 in Standard Mode until a later release. People who really needed to run PC software ran DOS Compatibility Cards.

By: Chris M.

Chris M. — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 03:58:09 +0000

In reply to neozeed. That pricing is for Wordperfect Office, which includes Quattro Pro and presentation software. Government contracts tend to include only WordPerfect itself.

By: neozeed

neozeed — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 17:44:51 +0000

In reply to Blue. Wow, $249 for WordPerfect x9! That's crazy! I'd rather spend a few hours, and re-follow the steps, and re-compile Word 1.1a from source... Except I did! It's just amazing how they lost almost all momentum in the market, but they continue on. I guess it must be diehard secretaries, or government contracts that are just all too easy to renew.

By: Blue

Blue — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 17:21:16 +0000

“Does WordPerfect even exist anymore?”

Actually, it does. See https://www.wordperfect.com/

Incidentally, I received a copy of this with an upgrade to Parallels Desktop, one of those modern virtualization products you referred to.