Re: So, what do you think? real IIgs or emulated IIgs?

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Blake Patterson writes ...
> 
> I just wanted some feedback from the crowd.  I was in a chat on
> Delphi's A2 section when the subject of emulation came up (perhaps not
> too rare a thing over there).  There were those that much preferred the
> emulated IIgs--being able to run @ 15MHz or so right off on a PC or Mac.
 ....

> Something about the real machine, even if it is going to
> run way slower, places it worlds above an emulated experience.  And it's
> more than just the feel of a GS keyboard and mouse--it's just the whole
> "I'm sitting in front of this fine machine" thing.  Actually adding
> boards into it.  Maybe, say, the TransWarp I found will only run at 7MHz
> - but I am holding it in my hand and will place it in the machine and
> fire it up, etc.  Zen and the Art of Apple IIgs Maintenance, etc.
> 
>         I guess this explains why I spent ~$100 on a full IIgs system, and
> in less than two tweeks had gotten so carried away with the expansion thing
> that I've spent another $500 in adding everything to this machine.  But
> it's great fun, etc.  I just don't think I'd be spending most of my free
> time (these past few weeks, my wife could angrily vouch for this...)
> getting deep down into an emulated IIgs.
> 
 ....

     Space is surely a consideration. Doing 'everything' on your PC or Mac
frees up the space which would be needed by a real Apple II.

     Emulation has a number of other advantages. It can run many programs
faster than the real thing, the SVGA display leaves space for handy on-screen
controls and multiple screens in windows, 'media' (disk image files) is easier
to store, and (being 'inside' a PC or Mac) you are closer to having a direct
connection to the net.

     Some of the above emu features are yet to be fully realized; and, there
are still problems with compatibility running a number of applications. Even
so, when we consider the 'emulator option', it makes sense to think in terms of
what emulation can reasonably become.

     In fact, the emulated Apple II or IIgs can become more than the current
hardware version. It could acquire features allowing it to use software
runnable _only_ on emulator. It would eventually become a fully integrated PC
or Mac subsystem able to utilize all of the hardware, the OS, and important
software systems like Netscape and 'Explorer.


     On the downside, with emulation you are always in 'second class' mode on
the host machine. Whatever you do on the emulated Apple II, you know the host
machine could do it much better and faster in native mode.

     No major software producer is likely to ever develop software for an
emulated II. Software will be developed for the host machine.

     Logically, once you leave the original hardware behind, the not-so-distant
endpoint of emulation is the morphing of the emulated machine into a kind of OS
shell which, mainly, 'plays' Apple II software. Sustaining interest in this
kind of 'Apple II' would be impossible. As you say, there is "something about
the real machine".


     It's just as well that we do not face an 'either - or' situation.
Emulation has been good for the II series. At the least it has promoted
interest in Apple II software. Were it not for emulation, most old commercial
software might not now be available. Very likely, too, quite a few emu users
have been inspired to become users of the real thing.

     Emulation is also a useful tool. It lets real A2 owners test many kinds of
downloaded software before transferring it to their machines. And, emulators
can be helpful in developing new software and hardware.

     As always, the future of the II series is in better Apple II hardware--
i.e. a machine on which A2 software runs in first class mode. For now, II users
will find the room for an 'extra' computer. Given the possibilities, in time we
may decide that it is those PC's and Macs which take up a bit too much space.




Rubywand