real amiga vs winuae

[Hammer]

Hi,

I had my Amiga attached to a Panasonic monitor and te pixels were rounded.

smerf

The dot pitch is not small enough. 320x200 NTSC on a good 15 inch SVGA monitor shows blocky pixels and they not rounded.

[amigaksi]

nuff said.

Blind leading the blind.  Or blind following the blind.  You can easily prove what I wrote-- just time things on CIA interrupts, Audio Interrupts, Copper lists, etc. on OCS/ECS/AGA and you will see that they are using same timing.

[amigaksi]

No, you were using the term "emulate" as used in the context of psychology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulation_(observational_learning)

In the context of computer emulation, the following definition is used:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator

Another confirmation of this can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulation_(disambiguation)

Also check this link:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/emulate

You are using the wrong definition, and use that to support some of your claims. And even when people point this out to you, you stick to it. That's just amazing.
...

I know what people mean from the context.  You want to PURPOSELY MISLEAD people knowing well the correct definition.  You are such a shameless person.  You should read what people think about emulation being a better amiga.

>It's not my definition. Cycle exact means the system is emulated at the cycle level. It does not dictate how long a cycle is - in such case it would be refered to as "timing". You cling to your own definition, since that would support your claims. Again that's just amazing.

There's something called definition by context which is more significant than randomly quoting things from websites.  I understand your definition but that's not what people are implying when I reply to them.

[jjans]

I suggest you try it for yourself and not listen to all the clatter on this board.  Functionally there's very little if any difference between Amiga hardware and UAE.  Just try UAE and see if you like it.

I agree - do not let all the negative bantering scare you off. I say, go ahead and dive right into both  WINUAE and the real hardware.

I find them both quite amazing, and yes it takes a bit of a learning curve to get used too, but this is not an unpleasant task. The Amiga's were intended to be fun, (and still can be). My first computer was an Amiga and back then I could not even spell computer...

For WinUAE might I suggest purchasing CLOANTO's Amiga Forver. The included AExplorer connects to the real Amiga via serial, and is very easy to setup. Installation is very easy, and also works with the Amikit package (which is quite stunning).

You can then capture ADF floppies from your Amiga and run a lot of them with WINUAE which also gives the added bonus of having a backup of your software,

[shoggoth]

I know what people mean from the context.  You want to PURPOSELY MISLEAD people knowing well the correct definition.  You are such a shameless person.  You should read what people think about emulation being a better amiga.

I'm not misleading anyone, you are. I'm presenting facts, and you choose to ignore it. That's worse than ignorance.

AFAIK I've never claimed that emulation is "better", because that's a matter of opinion. The only thing I've claimed is that cycle accurate emulation is perfectly possible, and you've claimed it's not.

And in this discussion, you've clinged on to the wrong definition of "computer emulator" and "cycle accurate", because your own definitions would support your claims.

There's something called definition by context which is more significant than randomly quoting things from websites.  I understand your definition but that's not what people are implying when I reply to them.

Definition by context. Exactly. And I'm using the definition suitable for the context of computer emulation, whereas you are using a definition which is intended for psychology/sociology - for the simple reason that the actual wording for that definition support some twisted idea of yours.

Stay in your bubble, Amigaski. The real world is horrible anyway.

[amigaksi]

I'm not misleading anyone, you are. I'm presenting facts, and you choose to ignore it. That's worse than ignorance.

AFAIK I've never claimed that emulation is "better", because that's a matter of opinion. The only thing I've claimed is that cycle accurate emulation is perfectly possible, and you've claimed it's not.
...

You are presenting the same definition over and over again which does NOT apply to the people I'm replying to.  I'm not referring to you and your definitions.  I know your definitions:  emulate -- attempt to mimic; cycle accurate -- does not refer to time of cycle.  Great for you.  If everyone agreed with that, that would be great.

There's no opinion when timing is wrong and someone thinks it's right.  That means they are NOT referring to your definitions.

>And in this discussion, you've clinged on to the wrong definition of "computer emulator" and "cycle accurate", because your own definitions would support your claims.

You are too ignorant to see the context.  

>Definition by context. Exactly. And I'm using the definition suitable for the context of computer emulation, whereas you are using a definition which is intended for psychology/sociology - for the simple reason that the actual wording for that definition support some twisted idea of yours.

They are NOT going by your wiki bullcrap.  The context is within this topic.  You are once again distorting what is actually being stated by people with your own definition.  Or you are just desperate to reply to your mistakes from last year.

>Stay in your bubble, Amigaski. The real world is horrible anyway.

You are stuck in the bubble and don't even know it.

[shoggoth]

There's no opinion when timing is wrong and someone thinks it's right.  That means they are NOT referring to your definitions.

You're being silly now.

>And in this discussion, you've clinged on to the wrong definition of "computer emulator" and "cycle accurate", because your own definitions would support your claims.

You are too ignorant to see the context.  

Ignorant? You're the one that's constantly refusing to check up facts, check emulator sources, reading common knowledge bases such as wikipedia. You even claim that these sources of information is wrong - but refuse to back that up with facts (claiming you don't need to, because you "already know" - which you obviously don't).

I don't have anything against a person just because that person happens to lack knowledge in a certain area. I'm just happy to help that person. What you suffer from is denial. You don't want to accept truth, since it doesn't suit your own needs.

That's much worse than ignorance.

They are NOT going by your wiki bullcrap.  The context is within this topic.  You are once again distorting what is actually being stated by people with your own definition.  Or you are just desperate to reply to your mistakes from last year.

You moron - I didn't write that stuff. It's not my definitions. It's the definition found in 99% of the dictionaries found on planet earth. What you're saying is that I shouldn't stick to the actual definition of the word, but rather a definition which isn't intended for that context.

That's pure stupidity.

If distorting = pointing out wrong facts and providing references to the correct ones - then I'm guilty.

You're the one that's constantly misleading people and bending the truth. I have no interest in doing so. The reason I reply to your posts is because I think it's wrong of you to mislead people like you do. Some people with less technical expertise might actually believe you, and I think that's wrong.

[AmiKit]

It's time to move your discussion to PM, guys.

[shoggoth]

It's time to move your discussion to PM, guys.

You're right. This doesn't belong in a public forum. I highly doubt a PM will help, so I better just leave it as it is instead.

A wise man once said: "Arguing on the internet is like the special olympics - even if you win, you're still a retard". Very true.

[GadgetMaster]

A wise man once said: "Arguing on the internet is like the special olympics - even if you win, you're still a retard". Very true.

:roflmao:

[amigaksi]

You're being silly now.


...

That's a "good" argument.

>Ignorant? You're the one that's constantly refusing to check up facts, check emulator sources, reading common knowledge bases such as wikipedia. You even claim that these sources of information is wrong - but refuse to back that up with facts (claiming you don't need to, because you "already know" - which you obviously don't).

I know your references and I did back up with facts that CONTEXT is different.  If the people I replied to went by your definitions that cycle exact does not refer to timing, and emulation is just an attempt I wouldn't be wasting my time with them.

>...denial. You don't want to accept truth, since it doesn't suit your own needs.
>That's much worse than ignorance.

Your emulation can not work for my timing needs so I am not going to accept someone claiming "it's functionally equivalent to a real amiga."

>You moron - I didn't write that stuff. It's not my definitions. It's the definition found in 99% of the dictionaries found on planet earth. What you're saying is that I shouldn't stick to the actual definition of the word, but rather a definition which isn't intended for that context.

You have to POINT out those definitions to those people that are claiming it's functionally equivalent or it's better than a real amiga.  Name calling doesn't help you establish the truth-- it just shows you are biased.

>That's pure stupidity.

It's stupidity on your part that you want me to stick to the definition and remain silent while people use some other distorted definition and mislead people.  That makes you a misleading personality as well.

>You're the one that's constantly misleading people and bending the truth.

PROVE IT.  Anyone can blurt out whatever comes on the top of his head like you have done in this topic.  Go read the dictionary and answer each reply by looking each word up in the dictionary and you'll see what I mean by CONTEXT.

>I have no interest in doing so. The reason I reply to your posts is because I think it's wrong of you to mislead people like you do. Some people with less technical expertise might actually believe you, and I think that's wrong.

You have problems with English language that's why you write bullcrap like above.

[GadgetMaster]

You have problems with English language that's why you write bullcrap like above.

You use "bullcrap" a lot don't you? :confused:

[amigaksi]

You use "bullcrap" a lot don't you? :confused:

That's a technical question.

[GadgetMaster]

That's a technical question.

:lol:

[AmiKit]

You're right. This doesn't belong in a public forum. I highly doubt a PM will help, so I better just leave it as it is instead.

A good decision. Discussing with the "owners of the truth" is pure waste of time...

[amigaksi]

A good decision. Discussing with the "owners of the truth" is pure waste of time...

That should be followers of the truth (without having some selfish ambition to fulfill).