Re: Apple // emulation contention

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Gabriel Morales <Togega@concentric.net> wrote:

>        I don't know what some people have against emulation of a (fantastic)
>computer not being manufactured anymore for quite a few years now. Emulation
>ensures that Apple II software can be run in computers that are now being
>manufactured, as well as future computers.
>
>        If you're an informed Mac user, you know that the Power Macintosh
>(every Mac being made today) actually runs in emulation mode when running
>programs made for non-PowerPC Macs. I don't see many Macintosh users
>complaining. They know that they can run most every Mac program on their
>computer while taking advantage of a more powerful system. Like the 16-bit
>IIGS and 8-bit Apple //s.

Bernie is a work of art and certainly the best IIGS emulator ever.

It is not, however, up the the level of Mac emulation on a PowerMac
or Apple II emulation on a IIGS.  Those are flawless emulations
designed from scratch and built into the hardware.

To give you an example, Bernie can't emulate 3200 color mode
for the simple reason that it is probably impossible to duplicate
in software the hardware that makes this happen.  So you end
up with Bernie video that is basically as limited as Second
Sight SVGA Apple IIGS video card's emulation of the IIGS video
modes.  Simply put, there is hardware that's missing.  Slots for
cards are another thing.

The reason PowerMac emulation of Mac is so flawless and
IIGS emulation of the IIe is so flawless is that Apple took
pains to PUT the necessary hardware into the unit.  That's why
a IIGS is an Apple II and a PowerMac is a Mac even though
they are both also something more.  A Mac, however, will
never be fully a IIGS.

It does not mean emulation is bad, but that it is simply that,
just emulation...and always a step away from the real thing.

Otherwise, I'd call a Pentium II with Gemulator running
MacOS 8 a Macintosh or a PowerMac running SoftWindows
a Wintel....