2 Jun
2007
2 Jun
'07
9:31 a.m.
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:52:43 -0400
From: Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at gmail.com>
Jim Leonard wrote:
> Cameron Kaiser wrote:
>> This is a fascinating, if somewhat qualitative, comparison of user
>> interface and functionality of a Mac Plus and an AMD dual core.
>> Presented without further commentary.
>>
>> http://hubpages.com/hub/
>> _86_Mac_Plus_Vs_07_AMD_DualCore_You_Wont_Believe_Who_Wins
>>
>
> A bit skewed, to say the least. The AMD would have won if it were
> running a Mac Plus emulator, for example :-)
This is very interesting, and I'm sure true, but they're comparing
the modern system as a modern system to the older one. The article
makes a good point in regard to performing these basic office app tasks.
I have a 2GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 with 1GB RAM that gets
booted into
MS-DOS
7.1 at least twice a week. Anyone care to guess the boot time on
that?
The only thing is, in DOS, it won't function as a true GUI with true
GUI apps, so the comparison is moot. How about GeoWorks Ensemble? How
about Windows XP on a system with no additional "stuff" loaded, like
anti-virus, etc. It's an interesting article, but just how optimized
was this system for just office apps. Obviously the Mac Plus didn't
go online, etc., but I get the point, it was a standard system then,
compared to a standard system now. Where's the productivity advantage?
Best, David
David Greelish
classiccomputing.com
The Classic Computing Podcast
Home of Computer History Nostalgia
Stan Veit's History of the Personal Computer
Audio Book Podcast
2 Jun
2 Jun
4:10 p.m.
David Greelish wrote:
The only thing is, in DOS, it won't function as a
true GUI with true GUI
apps, so the comparison is moot. How about GeoWorks Ensemble?
Now that would indeed make an interesting comparison. Oranges to
Oranges. (Geoworks Ensemble 1.0 or 2.0 on an XT, and Windows Vista on a
modern machine, for example)
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
9:29 p.m.
David Greelish wrote:
I don't know, the machine runs WYSIWYG Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS 3.1 like a
champ. On the rare occurrence (I think I may have done it once -- just
to show I could do it) that I've needed to open a word processor on the
DOS boot on this machine, WordPerfect 6.0 worked like a champ, and my
output from it would have been identical (or close to it) to my output
with Microsoft Word or Lotus Word Pro. And anyway, it doesn't take long
to bring up Windows 3.1, and it really, really wouldn't take long if I
added "win" to the end of my autoexec.bat file.
Peace... Sridhar
I have a 2GHz
AMD Athlon 64 X2 with 1GB RAM that gets booted into MS-DOS
7.1 at least twice a week. Anyone care to guess the boot time on that?
The only thing is, in DOS, it won't function as a true GUI with true GUI
apps, so the comparison is moot. How about GeoWorks Ensemble? How about
Windows XP on a system with no additional "stuff" loaded, like
anti-virus, etc. It's an interesting article, but just how optimized was
this system for just office apps. Obviously the Mac Plus didn't go
online, etc., but I get the point, it was a standard system then,
compared to a standard system now. Where's the productivity advantage? 
6412
days inactive
6413
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
cclist＠sydex.com -
dgreelish＠mac.com -
ploopster＠gmail.com -
trixter＠oldskool.org