[Summary]: SoftWindows

From: <risler_at_cgm.cnrs-gif.fr>
Date: Sat Sep 2 17:07:08 1995

Dear all,

Thank you for all the answers concerning my previous inquiry about
SoftWindows. Some users are satisfied with it, some others definitely not.
In any case, there is some general consensus about the SLOWNESS of
SoftWindows, about problems related to the fact that some applications
require a full 386 inst. set (not a 286) and about its huge memory
requirements. As pointed out several times, a new version that will emulate
a 386 instruction set should be released soon. I'll therefore wait for it.
Note also that two replies pointed to a solution by Tektronics.

Since the answers can be radically different, I include them in extenso.

Thanks again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Bertrand Hutin (hb_at_interlagos.o2tech.fr)

I've tried it on HPUX and IBM. It is fine but slow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Arun Sanghvi (sanghvi_at_proto.wilm.ge.com)

DEC will announce a new version of softwindows. It is suppose
to emulate a 486/60. It should be out in next few weeks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Robert Richmond (richmond_at_covenant.edu)

The newest version is supposed to be at 486 speed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Bernard Belew ( belew_at_user1.wilm.ge.com)

I've used SoftWindow v1.0 on DEC 3000/300 under VMS/AXP. It's really too
slow there for practicle use - like running on a 16 MHz AT class PC.
However, Insignia Software is working on a i486 emulation. I believe that
it is supposed to be out before the end of 1995. Their target speed for the
new version is to emulate the speed of a 33MHz i486 class PC. My opinion is
that you should wait for the new version and then evaluate it yourself on
your systems.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Benoit Maillard (benoit_at_fgt.dec.com)

Next version (v2.0) emulates a 80486, and allows to run a program in
enhanced mode.
Performance depends only of the host cpu. Quite decent on a 200MHz AXP...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Rob Lembree (lembree_at_zk3.dec.com)

A very, very fast 286, yes. By 286, they mean that there is no protected
mode operations (mem. mgt), and isn't a representation of emualated
clock speed.
I use it on my AlphaStation 400 4/166 a lot, and like it very much. I
use it mostly for large (>50 slides) powerpoint presentations.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Andrew Gallatin (gallatin_at_isds.Duke.EDU)

Its slow. An AlphaStation 200 4/233 w/160M of RAM runs Windows apps
at approx. the same speed as a 486dx33, perhaps slower. Also, the
swin process consumes 50M of virtual memory, and keeps about 25M
resident when its running. Furthermore, the process 'runs' whenever
the swin window is in focus, this can bog down a system if, for
example, you bump the mouse and it slides into the swin window
accidentally. Now (for example) the simulation that you've got
running in the background will run twice as slow because it has to
compete for the CPU.
I'd recommend WABI on a sun sparc or hp 9000 machine if it runs the
apps you need. WABI on a 64M, 75Mhz SS5 will run circles around our
Alpha running softwindows. I'd imagine that it would be much faster
on an HP, if you have any.
Also, depending on what app. you need, you might be able to run a unix
version of it.
Bear in mind that Insignia has announced a new, 486-level emulator for
their primary MAC market. This emulator will probably make it into
the unix world eventually and fix a lot the above problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Sid Fagan (fagan_at_large.fnal.gov)

        I use it all the time on my R4400 150MHz SGI Indigo, It's not
        bad at all. Plus the way you can designate directories as
        disks and everything is great for sharing documents and I
        even do this into AFS space. I can only assume the performance
        should be relatively the same except OSF SUCKS memory like
        a FAT PIG compared to the SGI or a Sun, much like AIX does...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Alan B. Hanson (abhanson_at_cca.rockwell.com)

we have installed it. almost everyone here who uses it has indicated that
it is very slow, but it does work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Thomas P. Blinn (tpb_at_zk3.dec.com)

I have a DEC 3000 Model 500 (128MB memory, plenty of disk) and it's slow as
molasses, but for some things (like copying files to and from floppies that
need to be DOS FAT format) it's hard to beat. I don't think I'd want to be
running real applications on it very much, though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Dirk Grunwald (grunwald_at_foobar.cs.colorado.edu)

Although it emulates a 286, it emulates a very fast 286, and
performance is quite good if you have a fast alpha.
The problem is that many applications expect & demand a 386, and won't
work with that version of SoftWindows. A new version is supposed to be
available that emulates a 486.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Olle Eriksson (olle_at_cb.uu.se)

We are using Softwindows on a 2000 4/233 server. We get something like a
486-performance. No problems running Word, Excel and such programs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Marcel A. Bernards (bernards_at_ecn.nl)

We got that and it's painfully slow, especially on Xterminals.
Also it creates a huge C:\ container which is read/write for everyone
This is also a immense security hole.
2 solutions for that problem are:
1 - Give everyone one's private drive -> eats up disk space fast
2 - Heavily alter the provided environment autoexec stuff and
    make it a R/O E:\ container and create a separate R/W C:\ drive
    for each user.
This is heavy DoS/Windoze hacking and I don't wanna know anything about
that
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Peter Blaser (blaserp_at_gdr.telco.swissptt.ch)

We used this SoftPC on an old ULTRIX (V. 4.4) system.
With the DOS functionality (80286) we were well satisfied. (file transfer)
Some tests on a Digital Unix System ( DEC AXP 3000/600 )with the
Digital Unix version of this software didn't really pointed to our
convenience.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From John Rosenberg (jcr_at_bgumby.bwh.harvard.edu)

Don't bother with Windoze under SoftWindows. DOS apps (esp. older ones)
are somewhat OK, but that about covers it. Allegedly a '386 or '486 emu-
lator is in the works Real Soon Now. It has been Real Soon Now for about
two years, I think. That's about all I can supply for info, except that
the thing DOES work in '286 mode (slowly), for what little that is worth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Herve Demarthe (demarthe_at_alpha.cad.cea.fr) if you can read french ...

J'utilisais SoftWindows sur une 3000/600 et sur un 2100 4/275
les performances etaient satisfaisantes (~= 486).
Nous avons maintenant installe WinDD sur nos terminaux X Tektroxix
et nous pouvons nous connecter sur un serveur Windows NT, c'est
une solution nettement plus efficace a mon avis (un serveur Windows NT
base sur un Pentium 90 MHz "made in Taiwan" nous coute ~= 25 KF et l'on
peut a la fois avoir une session Unix sous X11 et une session "PC" sous
Windows)
Quelques pb de jeunesse :
pas encore de copier/coller entre X11 et Windows (ca devrait venir),
pb des accents si clavier US, un seul lecteur de disquette pour tous
les terminaux X (sur le serveur).
Le client WinDD devrait sortir prochainement sur les stations Alpha
sous Digital Unix -> contacter Tektroxix aux Ulis (Courtaboeuf).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From David Warren (warren_at_atmos.washington.edu)

It doesn't emulate the performance of a 286, but the instruction set. This
causes problems if you have software that needs a 386. I tried loading
VIRTUS Walkthrough and the installation sequence told me to get a 386 or
better computer and wouldn't load. They are supposed to be releasing a 486
version soon. I believe it is being held up by their NT port for
Microsoft.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Pam Riss (af998_at_fs.cummins.com)

I have played around with various emulations, etc. for windows applications
on workstations and Xterminals. SoftWindows for the Alpha is better than
286...probably around a 386. I have also dabbled with WABI from IBM, but
it is a version behind the Sun version. For example, it only runs Word
v2.0, where the Sun version runs Word version 6.0. We are now looking
into a new technology from Tektronix (makers of Xterminals, oscilloscopes,
etc.), called WinDD. It is not an emulator like the others listed above.
It actually lets windows from a WindowsNT server show up on your Alpha box
or Xterminal. These are the only two clients available. We are in the
process of testing this software. We are utilizing the NT box with NFS,
so our files do not have to be ftp'd to the NT machine. The setbacks are
that the NT box has to be Intel (I argued about this with them, but they
couldn't give me a good reason why), and it has to be fairly loaded with
memory. The specs follow:

PC server hardware requirements: Intel-based systems expandable with
multiple processors preferred. 32 MB RAM (minimum). For more than four
users, add 4 MB RAM for each additional user or 8 MB RAM for each
additional power user. 200 MB additional disk space as needed for
applications and user data (If using NFS, or something similar, I don't
think this requirement needs to be met)

We are still testing, but from what I've seen, this is the most practical
solution. No emulations involved, and huge amounts of CPU aren't chewed up
 from the SoftWindows or other processes.

I only have a number here in the US, but I'll forward it to you anyway:
Tektronix, Inc. Network Displays Division PO Box 1000, M/S 60-787
Wilsonville, OR 97070 Phone: 1-800-547-8949 Fax 1-503-685-2454
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From John Schellenberg (schell_at_mr.picker.com)

My opinion of this emulation package is low. The 286 instr set
just isn't enough to run some of the newer pgms my bosses wanted. It's
really only good for extremely simple applications.
When a 486 costs less than $400 it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to
get this.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Steve Rosen (SM_Rosen_at_fccc.edu)

We use it on a 3000/700 and it runs OK and is quite useable. Don't put
to many concurrent users on it though and have a decent DEC machine and
you should be OK.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Loup Risler Tel: (33 1) 69 82 31 34
CNRS Fax: (33 1) 69 07 49 73
Centre de Genetique Moleculaire Email: risler_at_cgmvax.cgm.cnrs-gif.fr
91198 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France
---------------------------------------------------------------------

MAIL>
Received on Sat Sep 02 1995 - 17:07:08 NZST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed Nov 08 2023 - 11:53:45 NZDT