PV9Y@cornella.BITNET.UUCP (01/26/87)
Received: by CORNELLA (Mailer X1.23b) id 9751; Mon, 26 Jan 87 09:21:35 EST
Date: 26 January 87 09:21 EST
From: PV9Y@CORNELLA
Subject: mac sac - magic sac - mac bongo
To: INFO-ATARI16@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I'm getting tired of hearing everyone talking about their various Mac
emulators without telling those of us who don't have access to one what
they can do. I've also heard about three different people talk about
what seems like three different emulators. Are all of the software
emulators really the same thing, or are they different programs
entirely? What percent of Mac software do they actually run? Could
someone post a list of software that they personally KNOW to run? Also,
where are we supposed to get an image file of 64K Mac ROMS? I don't
have the equipment or expertise to download them from some actual ROMS,
and I am not sure as to where I could even get those. Do all the
software emulators require that you transfer the software via modem, as
does David Small's Magic Sac? And the most important question . . . are
any of these emulators good enough so that I should go out and buy a
monochrome monitor? Thanks go to the person that can answer these
questions.
Adam Engst
pv9y@cornella
engst%tcgould.tn.cornell.edu@crnlcs.bitnet (<- send mail here, please)
The opinions expressed above are representative only of my own and
those of the penguins with whom I am in constant communication.
None of us are connected with anyone mentioned in the above message.grunau_b@husc4.UUCP (01/27/87)
In article <8701270057.AA00189@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> PV9Y%CORNELLA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu writes: >Received: by CORNELLA (Mailer X1.23b) id 9751; Mon, 26 Jan 87 09:21:35 EST >Date: 26 January 87 09:21 EST >From: PV9Y@CORNELLA >Subject: mac sac - magic sac - mac bongo >To: INFO-ATARI16@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU > >I'm getting tired of hearing everyone talking about their various Mac >emulators without telling those of us who don't have access to one what >they can do. I've also heard about three different people talk about >what seems like three different emulators. Are all of the software >emulators really the same thing, or are they different programs >entirely? What percent of Mac software do they actually run? Could >someone post a list of software that they personally KNOW to run? Also, >where are we supposed to get an image file of 64K Mac ROMS? I don't >have the equipment or expertise to download them from some actual ROMS, >and I am not sure as to where I could even get those. Do all the >software emulators require that you transfer the software via modem, as >does David Small's Magic Sac? And the most important question . . . are >any of these emulators good enough so that I should go out and buy a >monochrome monitor? Thanks go to the person that can answer these >questions. > Adam Engst > >pv9y@cornella >engst%tcgould.tn.cornell.edu@crnlcs.bitnet (<- send mail here, please) Well, I am not going to post the entire "runs/doesn't run" list just yet, though I suppose I could be talked into uploading the README files one gets with the Magic Sac. I CAN say (happily) that each revision of the software (and the most appealing thing about David Small's product is that there have been 4 new software releases since the summer, and they are entirely free for all owners of the sac) HAS increased the quantity of software that does run. The most recent revision (3.5, or 4.0 beta) fixed a bug that had stopped the Notepad and the DA part of Font/DA mover from working, for instance. As far as the monochrome monitor question is concerned, Rev. 3.5 of the Magic Sac *HAS COLOR SUPPORT*!!! He gives you alternatives of a full-resolution scrolling screen, which can show you only the top two-thirds of the screen at any one time, or a scrunched mode where some resolution is lost but you can see the whole screen at once. BTW, you don't need a modem to transfer software -- if you can get a mac and your ST into the same room, the Magic Sac comes with a null-modem cable that allows you to hook directly to the Mac for transfers. It is true, however, MacIntosh diskettes cannot be read by ST drives, since the Mac drives are so non-standard and run at variable speeds. The Magic Sac diskettes are formatted in the same way MacIntosh diskettes are, with 400K per side (and are therefore unreadable by TOS or MS-DOS, also), and so constitute a kind of halfway limbo. Oh, it does run MacWrite (which is quite a feat!), MacDraw, MacPaint, REdit, Missile Command, Write Now, some RAMdisks .. I am logged onto the VAX right now on MacIntosh software, emulating a VT102 quite nicely, in a scrolling window that gives me full access to the mouse, menu bar, etc (it is a deficiency of GEM that to go into scrolling mode you have to give up the menu bar, etc.). Oh, it also runs various desk accessories, including SkipFinder. It also runs Switcher, version 5.0, I think (not earlier versions). One last thing: there is no legal way to get the ROM images without buying the ROMs and putting them in a ROM cartridge -- I don't see what the big deal is about this, though -- it is marvelously convenient to have a ROM cartridge port, and the Magic Sac gives you a clock/calendar with battery backup, too (tho it gains time a little). If you are worried about finding a Sac with ROMs, call ST Plus in Berkeley at 1-800-433-6222, and I'm sure they'll be happy to pack a couple of ROMs in with the Sac for you. They also sell all ST hardware at 20% off: I got my 1040 + mono monitor + 20M HD for $1424 (no tax); the Magic Sac + ROMs is $170, there. Hope this is useful; JJMG { seismo | rutgers | decvax!ihnp4 } !husc6!husc4!grunau
cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (01/27/87)
In article <8701270057.AA00189@ucbvax.EDU>, PV9Y@cornella.BITNET writes: > ... Also, > where are we supposed to get an image file of 64K Mac ROMS? I don't > have the equipment or expertise to download them from some actual ROMS, > and I am not sure as to where I could even get those. Do all the > software emulators require that you transfer the software via modem, as > does David Small's Magic Sac? And the most important question . . . are > any of these emulators good enough so that I should go out and buy a > monochrome monitor? Thanks go to the person that can answer these > questions. > Adam Engst What Adam and others apparently don't realize is that there is absolutely, positively, no way to get a legal copy of the Mac ROMs on floppy disk! Thats right folks, if you have a copy of MacBozo with it's illegal copy of the Mac ROMs on disk, Apple has an *iron clad* case for suing you for copyright infringement. And for those of you who have a copy don't kid yourself into believing that Apple won't sue you because your "just some guy with an ST." They have lot's of resources and *lots* of idle cash in the bank. That cash can pay for a bunch of lawyers who will drag you into court. I suspect the most they would be able to sue for would be court costs and the cost of a Mac that you didn't buy. Let's call it 5 to 8 thousand. No, I am not trying to scare anyone, just pointing out the realities of the situation. Certainly one does not help oneself by posting a message to the whole world requesting information on how to rip off Apple Computer Corp. And for those friends of ours in europe who have a somewhat different attitude toward copyrights and software copying, you should realize it is only yourself you are hurting. I know of at least three companies that will not sell any software to europe period. -- --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
braner@batcomputer.UUCP (01/28/87)
[] One person (I forget who) who has tried out the magic sac has commented that the mac desktop is very much slower than GEM (running on the same hardware, mind you) and that it is NOT recommended for a development environment. Why WOULD one want the magic sac? Yes, I know, there is a lot of software for the mac. Some of it is very good. But there is more software for the ST all the time. Mixing text and graphics is now possible, TEX is available, CADD and PC-board design is here, music software is exploding (thanks to the ST's built-in MIDI interface), and so on. There are rumors that Microsoft WORD is being (has been?) ported, and I suppose (and hope) that Excel will come after that. I suggest that we ST users stop jumping up and down around every rumor of yet another mac emulator, legal or not, and instead press the publishers to ignore Apple's (presumed) pleas and port it all to the ST's native OS (with its bugs and all :-). - Moshe Braner
ravi@mcnc.UUCP (01/29/87)
In article <2138@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> braner@batcomputer.UUCP (braner) writes: >[] > >Why WOULD one want the magic sac? [etc.] > ........... Some of it [mac software] is very good. That's exactly it.. there are many, many _very_ useful tools available for the Mac that are simply not there for the ST (yet). I just finished polishing off 11 fairly complex figures and plots (for a presentation) that would have taken me weeks to do by hand. I could not have done that with my ST, (or with any other PC for that matter, as far as I know.) With the Sac, one can start something on the Mac at work, and if one then feels like carrying on at night, dial up and d/l the relevant files and carry on. Also, goodies like dumping to laser printers, etc. are not yet available for the ST. This is not a flame, I agree entirely with Moshe that good stuff should be ported to the ST. However, the Sac is very useful, and I feel users would like to see it discussed here along with other ST products. -ravi ps: wouldn't a lawyer be proud of that one? <-)
kagle@batcomputer.UUCP (01/29/87)
As I remember, I once saw a program for the Mac which allowed the Macintosh to run Apple ][, ][+, //e, and //c software by downloading the system ROMs to the Macintosh via a serial port. This seems to be a blatant violation of copyright laws, but Apple didn't say a word that time :-). -Jonathan C. Kagle