Re: LTspice
From: ldg (asfd_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 03/21/05
- Next message: ldg: "Re: LTspice"
- Previous message: ldg: "Re: LTspice"
- In reply to: Chuck Harris: "Re: LTspice"
- Next in thread: Ken Smith: "Re: LTspice"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:56:12 -0800
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:12:38 -0500, Chuck Harris
<cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote:
>> Actually, I was wondering how wine itself works as an emulator.
>
>The acronym for Wine is: <W>ine <I>s <N>ot an <E>mulator
>
Ha! Good to know ... :-)
There must be a lot of booze and good natured humor coming up with
some of these names.
>Wine is an applications interface for windows code that runs under
>x86 based linux systems. Just like 'doze 98 is an applications
>interface for windows code that runs under DOS.
>
> I'm
>> supposing it adds another layer between the application and the
>> hardware and would incur some overhead. Is this not the case?
>
>No more so than the layer between windoes and dos. The underlying
>operating system, linux, is a whole bunch more efficient than the
>windows/dos mess.
I'm hoping to transition to linux on all my machines, but first I
guess I have to jump through the Redhat hoop.
Thanks for the info!
Regards,
Larry
- Next message: ldg: "Re: LTspice"
- Previous message: ldg: "Re: LTspice"
- In reply to: Chuck Harris: "Re: LTspice"
- Next in thread: Ken Smith: "Re: LTspice"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]