Is It Emulation or Not -- the Dilemma

[Iggy]

If it runs well...fun.

[Iggy]

When the system used to run the emulation is significantly more powerful then the original hardware and the emulation runs flawlessly there isn't much to argue against this approach.
Therefore, when I see something running under AmigaForever (often BETTER then it would on some native hardware), or on a PPC based system running AOS4.1 or MorphOS, I get a perverse delight in knowing I can take this stuff to the next level.
 
After all fire created with a bic lighter is just as useful as fire created by rubbing two sticks together, and much easier to implement.

[Iggy]

The lighter is emulating two sticks being rubbed together....

 
But its doing it much faster and with much less effort, which is all that matters to me.
I'm not into pain.

[Iggy]

Nonsense. Amigas are hardware, produced by Commodore and Escom. The software doesn't define what the hardware is, the hardware defines what the hardware is. Or I suppose an Amiga running an MSX emulator is an MSX? Right :rofl:

This "issue" is pointless if the emulation is flawless.
I don't need an Amiga to run Amiga software.
And I don't need an MSX machine to run MSX software.
Am I then running an Amiga or MSX computer?
Of course not, but regardless of whether or not its via emulation, I am running the software (getting the intended results).
 
And  Mac OS moved across three ISAs, aren't Macs still Macs?
AOS4.1 has more in common withAOS3.1 then OSX does with previous revisions of Mac OS (the API has been preserved).
 
So yeah, a PPC Amiga is an Amiga.

[Iggy]

Yes, they are, because Apple calls their machines Macs, and they get to decide what their machines are called and not anyone else.
 
 
I beg to differ, and so do many classic users.

EXACTLY! The entity assigned the rights to a trademark and related IP gets to control the naming of their product.
 
So Amiga OS4.1 IS Amiga OS.
And the AmigaOne is an Amiga.
 
Of course, the problem comes when we consider CUSA.
Unfortunately they fit my definition, because I find myself siding with you and against consideration of their hardware as Amigas.
 
"I beg to differ"
Entirely your right.
I'm not sure how I can justify my contradictory points of view.
 
But it is the way I feel about the situation.
 
And a MorphOS system is not an Amiga, but its a lot closer then a CUSA system.
Completely confusing.
No wonder we have so few new users.

[Iggy]

Thanks Desiv,
Moving forward is an important issue to me.
On MorphOS and emulation.
Many system calls (essentially all) are native PPC code.
And when running a PPC Amiga title like Heretic or Quake2, virtually everything is native.
 
Its rare to see an OS so seemlessly suport two ISAs.
Even OSX didn't do this this well with Rosetta.

[Iggy]

So if it runs Windows then it's a PC, if it runs MacOS then it's a Mac. If it runs Linux, well I'm not sure what it is as Linux runs on my phone, my NAS, my TV but not one computer I own.
 
Running windows on a macbook air makes it ?

How about running Snow Leopard on a system you put together with a Gigabyte motherboard and an i5 processor (and only running Windows under Parallels 7)?
 
People tend to refer to hacked systems like that as a Hackintosh, but lets face it, its still a PC (not a Mac).
Muddy waters indeed.
This discussion is being to sound like a blues jamb.

[Iggy]

@persia
 
That's funny because when I run OSX 10.8 on my Dell D630 or my desktop PC, the Apple fanboys call it criminal. I call it damned convenient and flexible.

I stuck with Snow Leopard, but it too runs pretty good on the right PC.
BTW - I think the fanboys might be upset because we're violating Apple's Eula (and maybe because I only had to pay $25 for OSX).

[Iggy]

Sorry, but the hardware has always defined the computer.

You keep saying that as a acticle of faith, but as someone with a background in th design and sales of computers I have a slightly different opinion.
In the early '90s my company was rapidly learning that we would need to design software that worked with an OS' drivers rather then hitting hardware directly.
While the code was still processor specific, everything else could be platform agnostic and still function.
And higher level code itself did not even require CPU specificity.
So no, the hardware does not define the system.
 
I can claim to have a Linux based system and this will still not describe the hardware.
Your statement is based on ideas that were getting old at the time of Commodore's demise.
They beome less valid each year.

[Iggy]

Thank you, you have finally agreed with us! MorphOS is an emulation layer allowing Amiga software to run on non-Amiga hardware.
 
So are we done?

We should be, since its a premise I've never denied.
But then I consider it a feature I like, so its not a issue with me.
It would be foolish to incorporate backward compatible hardware if this solution is entirely adequate.

[Iggy]

I'm sorry you thought this was directed at you, Iggy, but it was not; your position is clear and acceptable; no dilemma there!

No, I understand your point of view. I'm just not sure why anyone would question it.
The only time MorphOS is not using emulation is when its running all native code.
 
We're just lucky that the emulators used in our community are as capable as they are. A lot of work has gone into this stuff and its shows the persistance and commitment Amiga users have to continuing to enjoy their software and even see it continue to expand.
 
With no major backer, our community still continues to produce new hardware and software as well as modern variants of AmigaOS.
If anything, the size of our community is expanding as old users return and new users explore.
 
Another post ask where you'd like to be in Amiga history.
Well we know we can't change the past, but right now is one of the more exciting periods I've experienced. We've real hope to see things continue to grow and expand.
 
I really hope you legacy users take the time to explore the NG offerings.
As we hone emulation of legacy hardware and provide a compatible API for futher development we move the Amiga market forward.
 
"Amiga", to you its a beloved hardware platform.
To me, its either a much abused trademark or an environment with a specific look, feel, and programming interface.
 
No, I'm not using an Amiga. I've moved forward.

[Iggy]

Not interested at all.

Not a problem, as there are plenty of other more open minded users.
 

I use an A1200, but I've moved forward, too: I bought a PC that flies around anything next gen 'Amiga' so fast it ain't funny.

 
I actually downgrade my X86 systems by breaking down and selling the parts of the Socket AM3/Phenom II system I had.
Right now I'm collecting parts for a hackintosh, but my primary X86 system is a lowly Atom based netbook.
 
So my X86 system doesn't fly circle around my PPC hardware. And I'm exploring ARM (which also isn't that powerful).
 
What I really like about run MorphOS is the fast boot times and the ability to run some of my older software (with, of course, improved performance)
 
As far as performance goes, I have a balance that suits my purposes.
 
Funny, but I find myself agreeing more with danbeaver than those of you who are arguing against his basic proposition.
 
Frankly, I'd say use what works for you and keeps you happy.

[Iggy]

It has nothing to do with being closed minded. I like classic Amiga computers and simply don't have any interest in PPC+AOS4/MorphOS, just like I have no interest in graphics and sound cards for classic Amiga computers, or watching professional sports for that matter. Lack of interest doesn't imply closed mindedness.
 

 
You're right, that was a cheap shot and I appologize. And I too have little interest in professional sports.
 

And I use my PC as a simple and boring workhorse.
I don't need the fastest PC either, which is why I didn't spend a lot on mine.

 
Yeah, they're just tools.
 

Eh, what was that again? Too many posts
 

 
Sorry for the verbose posts.
 

Always. Clearly there's simply a difference in hobby and needs here

Yep, I don't really spend a lot of time on hobbyist oriented stuff outside of MCUs and older processors and hardware (some older then Amiga).
When I use something Amiga or Amiga-like, I want it to do useful work.

[Iggy]

Oh thats going to stir this one up.
In my opinion JIT is a form of emulation.
After all, you translating non-native code to PPC instructions.