Re: PowerPC GS?

[shack@crash.cts.com (Randy Shackelford)]

In article <3af31n$55k@jadzia.CSOS.ORST.EDU>,
Brian Ballweber <ballweb@CSOS.ORST.EDU> wrote:

>If I remember right, this idea was bounced around csa2.programmer a while
>back, and the notion that a mac emulator was much easier to write for a PPC
><due to the way it handles memory, general architecture, whatever> gave a
>false idea that a GS emulator should be just as easy...  However, everyone
>pointed out, quite correctly, that the GS memory map, ensoniq chip, emulation
>of an 8-bit apple II, etc... would make a GS emulator just plain hellish to
>write.  In fact, wasnt it this same reasoning that killed the concept of
>putting a GS on a card, which is why we now have a IIe on a card instead?

One thing to remember is that the 68000 emulation on a PMac only has to emulate
the processor, as the hardware architecture is the same. A II emulator would
have to emulate the whole machine. So naturally the Mac emulation is easier.
I think software issues were why there was a //e card but no IIgs card. For
example, why would anyone want to run Appleworks GS when the same machine could
already run Word or Excel or Clarisworks? That's my theory anyhow. I doubt it's
because Apple didn't think they could.
--
Randy Shackelford                                Huh huh, that was cool.
shack@crash.cts.com