5574Re: New version of SheepShaver install in progress - what needs to be added/fixe
- Jan 12, 2009--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Edward Mendelson" <em315@...> wrote:
> My only question: is there any benefit to using SheepShaver ratherWhen I first did this I compared SS and Basilisk, comparing not load
> than Basilisk II? Basilisk II is a lot faster, and WP doesn't include any
> features that require a PowerPC computer instead of the 680x0
> machine emulated by Basilisk II. On my machine, Basilisk II boots
> in three seconds; SheepShaver takes fifteen. I'm not sure I see
> what the real-world benefit is of using SheepShaver instead, but
> maybe I'm missing something obvious.
times but speed times in intensive operation such as spell-checking.
I found SS (using PowerPC WP) slightly faster than Basilisk with 68K
WP, but nothing decisive. I remembered that the 68K version seemed
to have a couple of bugs the PPC version didn't, including something
with hyphenation. I also found it harder to set Basilisk to a large
screen size, but I didn't take a close look there.
What I think's best would be to keep an SS install available along with
your fine WPApplianceFiles setup with Basilisk, as some users may have
other reasons to choose one or the other, e.g. running another
legacy app as well that needs either PPC or 68K.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>