Re: The best way to upgrade your IIGS

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Lim <limtc@imedia.com.sg> wrote:

Supertimer wrote:

>> Regarding the speed...isn't it true that unless your PowerMac is
>> above 150Mhz, you can forget about perfect "N-sonic" emulation?
>
>I used to run it in Performa 5200, the slowest PowerPC computer
>(Macbench = 100, the same as 6100/66). It runs Bernie with stereo
>sound at about the same speed as a 2.8MHz GS. The only problem is
>one of the note in Arkanoid II is off, but for the rest, it is
>fine.

BUT...try synthlab or diversitune...anything that taxes the Ensoniq
(not just loops of sound like Arkanoid, but real synthesis) will
cause problems.  It takes a 150Mhz unit to do it right!

>150MHz is a rough guess, since I jump from 5200's 75MHz to 225MHz,
>and the speed improvement is... 10x? 50x? simply amazing.

10x?  Makes no sense.  225Mhz is 3x 75Mhz.  I think you are
overrating the speed of Bernie.  Sure, you can run a CPU bench
program and get what says is 50Mhz, but you know that's not
what you are going to get...when a program uses sound, graphics,
etc., the emulator is going to slow down whatever the core uP
emulation engine says...

On a 225Mhz PowerMac, I think the REAL speed from the
user point of view is equivalent to a 15Mhz to 20Mhz GS, from
what I have seen.  Fast, but not as fast as you claim...

>> Not true...Gemulator on a Pentium II 233Mhz will run rings around
>> a real 40Mhz Quadra 68040...that's the target emulation
>> computer.
>
>Virtual PC emulates a real Pentium MMX computer - a Pentium, not
>386/486. Bernie emulates the real GS - Rom 1 or Rom 3. Gemulator
>emulates a Mac which is heavily outdated and cannot run half of
>the software. This is different comparison.

I am talking about the many 68040 (Quadra etc.) or other 68k Mac
users who have not yet upgraded.  I am saying they are no longer
the slave of Apple.  They can go Wintel and still keep all their old
68k Mac software.  Gemulator will run them better and faster and
you can run new Wintel software too!  Exactly the same thing you
are talking about with GS upgrade to PowerMac.  Here, you can
slowly change to Windows 95 even though you have many 68k
Mac software.

>> It is real hardware...the emulation will never be the same!
>
>If it looks the same, act the same, as compatible as the original,
>use the same 3.5" drive (but better), support all resolutions,
>use the same ADB bus (and keyboard and mouse), what's not the same?

To many users, it is made by a company that did them wrong.
These Apple II users refuse to support Apple for a reason...

>You put in a disk, it reads it, even eject have the same IIGS
>eject sound. :) Not to mention it runs at the same speed or
>faster.

At least now we are talking about reality.  One minute you were
claiming 100Mhz Zip GS equivalent and now you are saying
"at the same speed or [a little] faster [than 15MHz Zip/TWGS]"

>This reminds me of a very long arguments of "Apple IIGS is not
>Apple II" in this thread long time ago, simply because Apple IIGS
>uses a different processor, and not compatible with some Apple II
>software. To me, it is the same.

The Apple IIGS is not an Apple II in a very real sense.  It was
a new class of computer, separate from the rest.  What makes
it an Apple II is the ability of users with some electronics
experience to easily build their own hardware slot cards and
plug them in...like many college labs did...

If you are looking only at software, the IIGS is not an Apple II.
It is the hardware that swings the balance to "Apple II-ness".