Is It Emulation or Not -- the Dilemma

[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.

[persia]

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

[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.

[B00tDisk]

As an aside, I think it's fascinating that IBM basically invented virtual machines in the 1960s; that was when the Hypervisor was first created.  Running a copy of the then-new S360 on the S360.

[danbeaver]

When the system used to run the emulation is significantly more powerful then the original hardware and the emulation runs.

Thank you, it is emulation.  By the way, you can not argue a point by using a non-comparative example.  Fire (except by malfeasance on your systems) is not remotely similar to what is being discussed.

An Amiga running 68K Apple code of a Mac (ShapeShifter or whatever), is emulation of an non-Amiga operating system on dissimilar hardware. The OS I am running (OS 4.1) is emulating a 68K Amiga.  It is not a "PPC Amiga," as the Amiga was never designed to use a PPC processor; it might have been in past future connotations... What?  I sound like a Dr. Who episode!

In any event, it is emulating an Amiga on an Amiga; as long as it doesn't cross its own timeline, we should be safe.  It is like the folks with "OS 4.1 on a Classic Amiga" who get excited about Update 4 & 5's RuninUAE; they miss the Big Picture -- who would emulate an Amiga on an Amiga?

[danbeaver]

As an aside, I think it's fascinating that IBM basically invented virtual machines in the 1960s; that was when the Hypervisor was first created.  Running a copy of the then-new S360 on the S360.

Alan Turing has that beat by 30 years, he wrote a virtual computer language without a machine to run it.  In fact Charles Babbage beat them both by 200 years by inventing a virtual machine without a virtual operating system.

[TheBilgeRat]

Anything above binary and switch toggling is a virtual machine/ emulator.

[Thorham]

An Amiga running 68K Apple code of a Mac (ShapeShifter or whatever), is emulation of an non-Amiga operating system on dissimilar hardware.

In the case of 68K Mac OS this isn't completely true, because much of that operating system runs directly on the Amiga's 68K CPU. In fact, it might be the case that all the Aple specific hardware code has been replaced with Amiga equivalents, in which case there isn't any emulation going on at all (but I don't know that).

In fact Charles Babbage beat them both by 200 years by inventing a virtual machine without a virtual operating system.

Don't you mean that Babbage designed the Analytical Engine (first Turing complete computer), which he wasn't able to build due to being unable to raise the finances for it's construction?

[dreamcast270mhz]

Well emulation is when you add a layer that translates the code and system calls for another system, so Trance or E-UAE is emulation since it enables non-native programs to run on MOS.

Its not emulation, in my opinion, to run something like WIPEOUT on MOS because 90% of whats going on isn't emulation, its natively running via clever coding of API, which is what makes MOS so unique. Even today there are programs for win9x that don't run 100% on NT windows, because the architectures ARE different. They do work sometimes due to wrappers and such, and that is emulation.

[danbeaver]

In the case of 68K Mac OS this isn't completely true, because much of that operating system runs directly on the Amiga's 68K CPU. In fact, it might be the case that all the Aple specific hardware code has been replaced with Amiga equivalents, in which case there isn't any emulation going on at all (but I don't know that).


Don't you mean that Babbage designed the Analytical Engine (first Turing complete computer), which he wasn't able to build due to being unable to raise the finances for it's construction?

First, the CPU alone does not define the computer; I've got a 68000 CPU stored in a shoe box, that doesn't make the shoe box an Amiga nor an Apple.

B) Alan Turing proposed his design for an instruction set in 1938 long before Bletchley Park and hardware to run it.  That is virtual

[itix]

OK,

Here is the thread, so go at it: When you run software written for one computer (let us say an Amiga) on another computer (for instance a PC, MAC, or DEC PDP 11/40), what is it?

It depends. It is either binary compatibility or emulation. There is WINE (Wine is not an emulator) to enable Windows applications on Linux and Mac.

http://wiki.winehq.org/Debunking_Wine_Myths

WikiPedia: In computing, the "native" adjective refers to software or data formats supported by a certain system with minimal computational overhead and additional components. This word is used in such terms as native mode or native code.

Would not an "API" be an additional component?

If the API is not supplied with the OS then it is an additional component. For example Linux cant run Windows binaries natively. But it can run Windows applications without emulation if you add support for Windows binaries and API.

[itix]

An Amiga running 68K Apple code of a Mac (ShapeShifter or whatever), is emulation of an non-Amiga operating system on dissimilar hardware.

Correction: ShapeShifter doesnt emulate Mac OS. It only emulates run time environment for Mac OS so it thinks it is running on a real Mac.

It should be possible re-implement Mac OS API on Amiga and run Mac OS binaries without emulation.

[Thorham]

First, the CPU alone does not define the computer; I've got a 68000 CPU stored in a shoe box, that doesn't make the shoe box an Amiga nor an Apple.

Of course it doesn't and I never said it does. It's simply a fact that you don't need to emulate an OS if it can run on the CPU directly, as is the case with 68K Mac OS. Only the hardware specific parts would have to be replaced.

B) Alan Turing proposed his design for an instruction set in 1938 long before Bletchley Park and hardware to run it.  That is virtual

In his case you're probably right, but I was talking about Babbage, who designed his computer to be built, making it non-virtual, unless every machine design is virtual.

[Digiman]

Yes!

[lsmart]

Let me summarize:

Emulation means only one thing: A machine was there before (Amiga) and another machine (PC?) which is different by design(!) tries to do the same things in the same way as the emulated machine.

Java is not emulation. There is no original bytecode machine. An FPGA-Amiga emulates the original 68000 CPU but not the Amiga (which is more than the sum of its part), because it is really a machine that works the same way the original does.

Natively on the other hand just means that you can run it out of the box without adding anything (like a ROM file).

Oh, and WINE is not an emulator, only because it doesn't try to run Windows programs the same way the PC with windows would. It runs them the way linux would. Else it would be an emulator! AROS is similar in a way.

[ElPolloDiabl]

If the program runs well without bugs/crashes and it is not a resource hog then it is  great program.
Linux is great for reliable use of productivity software. I just found out that Direct 3D is not yet implemented. I need to go back to dual booting for the moment.
Windows is still necessary to play some games. All I do is play games on Amiga.
Since I found out that the x86 core converts things into RISC micro-ops - I could care less about what hardware I'm running on.


I agree with the above. There are several levels of emulation. An FPGA is not original hardware, but if it is programmed well or better than the original - it sounds like an advancement not an emulation.