Is emulation based x86 machines in Amiga cases really a no no? or......

[Daedalus]

I already use Emulation (on a Notebook with Windows 7) so I do not need a new "emulated" system. There is nothing innovative in the concepts that justify to buy it.

QFT

I have an x86 laptop which I use to do some coding / tinkering when I'm away from home. It's running UAE and OS3.9, and it would be very easy to make it "boot" directly into UAE. That's old hat at this stage though, and there are pleny of options there already. While a new machine sold with that configuration might be nice, it's hardly new or exciting, or anything more than vaguely interesting.

[Daedalus]

"old hat" is old hat you know.  

Why would you pay all that money for something you can basically set up for free.  Most people throw out x86 PCs that will run Linux/XP and Win UAE fine.

Umm, I think you slightly missed my point there. I'm basically saying the same as you, that it's all been done before, years ago, and isn't anything to get even remotely excited about.

Ive got a pentium 4 2.2 Ghz with a Nvidia 5500 sitting idle on the floor beside me.  Hmmmmm  

As for the case. Well if you wanna pay the $ then enjoy...

Indeed. The laptop I use for UAE on the move is an early Core2 Duo which performed miserably under Vista. I was given it *for free* when the owner bought a Macbook to replace it. It runs UAE just fine - I couldn't bring myself to pay good money for a machine like that when, as you say, you can do it all for free.

[Daedalus]

I am in agreement for once in my life *shock*. For me personally PPC stuff like x1000 and and SAM460 running UAE for Amiga OS4.2 are no more Amiga than a DELL PC running Windows and WinUAE for me either.

Some people like to run the OS natively on their computers, which is their reason for owning these machines. If WinUAE works for you then fine, and chances are you don't need to buy a CUSA machine to use it. I'm well aware that the X1000 and SAM machines aren't classic Amigas, but they're an evolution of it, hence the tag "next generation." They run the OS, and for me that's what's important. I'm not that interested in running 25 year old games that bang the hardware, so I only use UAE when I need a mobile solution, and for the odd time I do want to play games, I've a customised A1200 as part of my home entertainment system which does everything I want in that respect.

Other people have their reasons for needing 1ghz OS4 compatible machines sure but I don't see it as Amiga if it can't load my original Cinemaware 3.5 floppy disks directly. For me that is the definition of an Amiga.

I have bunches of PC software on 3.5" floppy disk I can't put on my PC either. Does that make my PC not a PC? Running Cinemaware 3.5 is a pretty esoteric definition of an Amiga, although as your opinion it's fine. But it's not something I've ever tried on any of my Amigas. Does that mean my Amigas aren't Amigas, just because they've never run Cinemaware?

[Daedalus]

What we are talking about here are new machines, is there any difference between a x86 based motherboard and a PPC one in an "Amiga" case?

Very little, if the x86 box was running AmigaOS or, say, a mature AROS with more seamless 68k integration... Then they're pretty similar indeed.

[Daedalus]

@commodorejohn

Is that sarcasm? Any "normal" users could not tell the difference between Tiger on a PPC and Tiger on an Intel Mac, apart from the fact that PPC apps ran a bit slower due to Rosetta. Apple executed the switch excellently, and if the resources were available, OS4 & MOS would do well to follow the same path.

[Daedalus]

No, it's an OS4 compatible, OS4 being some software some Germans THINK is what is Amiga and need UAE to run Rocket Ranger.

How the fek is that Amiga? I can run classic software Amithlon on X86 hardware just as fast as on MOS or OS4 so that's full of fail.

It's not Amiga. It's AmigaOS. Like it or not, that's just the way it is. Like others have said, there haven't been "Amiga" computers produced since the Escom / AT days. You've got AmigaOS running on some Amigas and some other machines, Amiga-like OSes running on other machines, and emulators running OS3.x. None of them are actually Amigas, but they're all close, all have their advantages and disadvantages, and all suit different tasks.

Amiga has a Paula chip and loads Cinemaware floppy disk originals with realtime access FACT. Anything else is emulation sorry if that offends people.

True, that's a fact, but it's also a rubbish definition. What if Paula had been upgraded for AGA? I personally think Paula should've been ditched and replaced for the AGA chipset, but would that have meant the A1200 and 4000 weren't Amigas? Also, I have a couple of Amigas without floppy drives, thus they can't run Cinemaware from the original disks. Does that mean they're no longer Amigas? I really don't get this obsession with Cinemaware anyway, and certainly can't understand how that makes an Amiga, especially since none of my Amigas have ever run it. It is a fact that Amigas have Paula and run Cinemaware, but that's only a couple of arbitrary features which are conveniently cobbled together to take the place of a proper definition. Sorry if that offends you.