cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) (03/10/91)
I am aware of a Mac emulator for the Amiga called Amax. I have
been told that it is not as "up to snuff" as a similar product
for the ST called Spectre 128. Could someone who has the latest
version of this device post a message or send me email detailing
its abilities/shortcomings?
The reason I am interested is that I am currently borrowing a
friend's computer at home, but I will have to return it shortly.
I need Mac compatibility since most of my work-related stuff is
done on a MacII.
On a related note, is it true that Apple is trying to dry up
the supply of 128K ROMs floating about? What is to prevent
someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead?
Any information would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Chris
------------------------------+---------------------------
Chris Mauritz |D{r det finns en |l, finns
cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |det en plan!
(c)All rights reserved. |
Send flames to /dev/null |
------------------------------+---------------------------patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Patrick Meloy) (03/11/91)
Chris Mauritz writes: >I am aware of a Mac emulator for the Amiga called Amax. I have >been told that it is not as "up to snuff" as a similar product >for the ST called Spectre 128. Could someone who has the latest AmaxII is the current implementation of the program and is superior to Spectre 128. The current version of Spectre however is 'Specter GCR v 3.?'. This GCR version is quite a bit better than any Amax available. Amax II+ (for the 2x00/3000 as an internal card) promises to be better than Spectre but since I have not seen it (I don't think its available yet) I can't really say. If anyone wants more details on Spectre GCR then please post that in the atari.st newsgroup. --------------------------------------- | patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca | | 'The Outbound' BBS Vancouver BC | ---------------------------------------
jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) (03/12/91)
In article <1991Mar10.142932.14676@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: > >On a related note, is it true that Apple is trying to dry up >the supply of 128K ROMs floating about? What is to prevent Yes. >someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? Nothing, in a strictly physical sense. You wouldn't want to get caught doing it, of course. -- * From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | "There's UFOs over New Jim Shaffer, Jr. | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | York, and I ain't too 37 Brook Street | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms | surprised." Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | (John Lennon)
phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au (Phil Kernick) (03/13/91)
pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes: >jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: >>>someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? >WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >how that is, I don't know exactly. What I understand it to be is that you >need to strobe a location several times before they will dump their image >to you. The A-Max software does in fact do this and if you are using an >EPROM copy, it will not work. Who told you this? It is *completely* false, at least with the 128K ROMs. Next time you have a chance, look at a real Mac ROM. It is just a 64Kx8 JEDEC package ROM. Nothing more, and nothing mysterious. Next, have a look inside the AMax cartridge. On opening mine I see a handful of standard 74 series logic chips. Consult the data book, and it seems we have a counter on the address lines and then a parallel to serial converter on the data lines and a bit of glue logic. All the cartridge does is: Reset the counter Increment the address Strobe out the data Using an EPROM copy *will* work, and if Apple did not have it's restrictive policies I would suggest that you *NOT* do this. However, if Apple insists on it, they will simply move the market into the grey area and will lose money. Seems to me they are "cutting off their nose to spite their face". If the company (Wombat?) that was cloning the ROMs succeeds then this will all be moot anyway. Phil. -- o| /// Phil Kernick EMail: phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au |o | /// Departmental Engineer Phone: +618 228 5914 | o| \\\/// Dept. of Psychology Fax: +618 224 0464 |o | \/// University of Adelaide Mail: GPO Box 498 Adelaide SA 5001 |
mitroo@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Varun Mitroo) (03/13/91)
In article <1991Mar12.224108.822@javelin.es.com> pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com writes: >jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: > >>>someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? > >>Nothing, in a strictly physical sense. You wouldn't want to get caught >>doing it, of course. > >WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >how that is, I don't know exactly. What I understand it to be is that you >need to strobe a location several times before they will dump their image >to you. The A-Max software does in fact do this and if you are using an >EPROM copy, it will not work. >-- > > "This special edition of The Gulf War will continue after these messages." > -ABC >Pete Ashdown pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com ...uunet!javelin.sim.es.com!pashdown Actually, I have seen in the past a copy of the Mac ROM saved as a file on disk. If I remember correctly, they were the 128K ROMS. Amax was modified to load in the file from disk. Amax worked directly from one floppy. Now, why someone would want to change an _Amiga_ to a mac, I still don't know... Varun Mitroo mitroo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
anderson@mrcnext.uiuc.edu (Brent James Anderson) (03/13/91)
pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes: >jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: >WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >how that is, I don't know exactly. What I understand it to be is that you >need to strobe a location several times before they will dump their image >to you. The A-Max software does in fact do this and if you are using an >EPROM copy, it will not work. hmmm... this must be why the "hard drive roms" load in so much faster. -Beej
pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) (03/13/91)
phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au (Phil Kernick) writes: >pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes: >>jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: >>>>someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? >>WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >>A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >Who told you this? It is *completely* false, at least with the 128K >ROMs. Excuse me, but have you attempted this? _People I know_ have and without success. _Other people I know_ have also tried to read the image directly off the Mac PROM with a burner, without success. >Phil. -- "This special edition of The Gulf War will continue after these messages." -ABC Pete Ashdown pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com ...uunet!javelin.sim.es.com!pashdown
kudla@rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) (03/13/91)
In article <1991Mar13.140125.3711@javelin.es.com> pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes:
Excuse me, but have you attempted this? _People I know_ have and
without success. _Other people I know_ have also tried to read the
image directly off the Mac PROM with a burner, without success.
Well, no wonder they're having trouble if they're trying to read it
while also attempting to burn blank space into the thing :)
Seriously though, I've seen enough copies of the ROM on disk floating
around and/or working in someone's AMAX system to know it's possible
to read the ROMs. I don't doubt Apple went to some trouble to protect
them, but the fact remains it's possible, whether via an Amiga with
AMAX or a Mac I don't know.rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) (03/14/91)
In article <jms.3407@vanth.UUCP>, jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: > In article <1991Mar10.142932.14676@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: >> >>On a related note, is it true that Apple is trying to dry up >>the supply of 128K ROMs floating about? What is to prevent > > Yes. > >>someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? > > Nothing, in a strictly physical sense. You wouldn't want to get caught > doing it, of course. Well, at least Spectre for the ST checks for real ROMS, and knows the difference between them and EPROMs. I don't know how they do it though, but it was in a deal Dave Small made with Apple when he first came out with an emulator. (Dave Small own Gadgets by Small, maker of Spectre for the ST.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ryan 'Gozar' Collins Question for IBM Users: rlcollins@miavx1.BITNET |||| Power Without How DO you move/copy a rc1dsanu@miamiu.BITNET / || \ The Price!! Subdirectory? R.COLLINS1 on GEnie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au (Phil Kernick) (03/14/91)
pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes: >>Who told you this? It is *completely* false, at least with the 128K >>ROMs. >Excuse me, but have you attempted this? _People I know_ have and without >success. _Other people I know_ have also tried to read the image directly off >the Mac PROM with a burner, without success. Yes I have attempted it, and it *does* work. That is how I can catagorically state it. I don't know what trouble your friends had but it is not a problem with using EPROMs. I will state it again, really clearly this time. AMax works perfectly well using an image of the Mac 128k ROMs burned into EPROMs. This is not legal, but it is functional. I have directed followups to c.s.a.emulations where they belong. Phil. -- o| /// Phil Kernick EMail: phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au |o | /// Departmental Engineer Phone: +618 228 5914 | o| \\\/// Dept. of Psychology Fax: +618 224 0464 |o | \/// University of Adelaide Mail: GPO Box 498 Adelaide SA 5001 |
hawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) (03/14/91)
>>>someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? >> >>Nothing, in a strictly physical sense. You wouldn't want to get caught >>doing it, of course. > >WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >how that is, I don't know exactly. What I understand it to be is that you >need to strobe a location several times before they will dump their image >to you. The A-Max software does in fact do this and if you are using an >EPROM copy, it will not work. Is this why it takes so long to copy the Mac OS from the cartridge to the computer? Or is it because the disk drive port is slow?
jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) (03/15/91)
In article <1991Mar12.224108.822@javelin.es.com> pashdown@javelin.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes: > >WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >how that is, I don't know exactly. What I understand it to be is that you >need to strobe a location several times before they will dump their image >to you. The A-Max software does in fact do this and if you are using an >EPROM copy, it will not work. So what effect does this have on the speed of a Macintosh? Would it run noticeably faster if it didn't have to do this? -- * From the disk of: | jms@vanth.uucp | "There's UFOs over New Jim Shaffer, Jr. | amix.commodore.com!vanth!jms | York, and I ain't too 37 Brook Street | uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms | surprised." Montgomery, PA 17752 | 72750.2335@compuserve.com | (John Lennon)
jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) (03/15/91)
I just wrote: >So what effect does this have on the speed of a Macintosh? Would it run >noticeably faster if it didn't have to do this? Sorry folks, I posted this before I read the followups. Cancelling it would mean rooting around in the spool directory, so I'm just letting it stand, with this note.
phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au (Phil Kernick) (03/15/91)
hawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) writes: >>WRONG. Dumping the Mac ROM image to an EPROM, then using the EPROM in the >>A-Max cart will NOT work. The actual Mac ROMs are 'special' in some way, >>how that is, I don't know exactly. What I understand it to be is that you >>need to strobe a location several times before they will dump their image >>to you. The A-Max software does in fact do this and if you are using an >>EPROM copy, it will not work. As I have pointed out, the above assertion is incorrect. There is nothing special about the Mac ROMs. >Is this why it takes so long to copy the Mac OS from the cartridge to the >computer? Or is it because the disk drive port is slow? As I also said earlier, it is slow because the AMax cartridge strobes that ROM image out 1 bit at a time. Small calculation gives: 128 x 1024 x 8 = 1048576 bits or 1 Megabit If this were strobed in at 28.6kHz (system clock speed) it would take: 1048576 / 28600 = 36 seconds Which is about what it takes. There is really no mystery about it. Phil. ** Followups directed to comp.sys.amiga.emulations ** -- o| /// Phil Kernick EMail: phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au |o | /// Departmental Engineer Phone: +618 228 5914 | o| \\\/// Dept. of Psychology Fax: +618 224 0464 |o | \/// University of Adelaide Mail: GPO Box 498 Adelaide SA 5001 |
jeremym@chopin.udel.edu (Jeremy A Moskowitz) (03/16/91)
Please consider this thread officially dead... I will have a follow up
and my comments in c.s.a.emualtions concerning the ROM's
and the legalitys and the posibilitys of burniong your own...
please find the article entitled MAC ROMS BUURNING FOLLOWUP
in c.s.a.emulations.
monitor of c.s.a.emulations
-jeremy
--
E Pluribus // Contacts: jeremym@brahms.udel.edu or jeremym@chopin.udel.edu or
Unix // jeremym@freezer.acs.udel.edu -amiga clasic 2000-
\\ // --->Monitor of comp.sys.amiga.emulations<---
\X/ 2001 Dalmations - My stars, its full of dogs...EVERHART@arisia.dnet.ge.com (Glenn Everhart 215 354 7610 Everhart%Arisia.dnet.ge.com) (03/16/91)
There have been two versions of MacRom; if the developer of Amax II modified it to fail with macrom version I, it is of no concern. AmaxII runs perfectly with macrom2 loading rom images off disk. I've never I've never tried the old macrom with amaxII so can't say whether it fails. glenn
rodent@netcom.COM (Ben Discoe) (03/19/91)
rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) writes: >In article <jms.3407@vanth.UUCP>, jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: >> In article <1991Mar10.142932.14676@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: >>> >>>On a related note, is it true that Apple is trying to dry up >>>the supply of 128K ROMs floating about? >> Yes And they've been very successful at it. I tried to buy a legal ROM, but couldn't find one, so I had to consult the underground. >>>What is to prevent someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? >> >> Nothing, in a strictly physical sense. You wouldn't want to get caught >> doing it, of course. Oh yeah, like Apple is going to call the police to harrass potential pirates. Somehow I don't think that would be good PR for Apple. Of course, what's to stop people from just copying the ROMs onto disk and using that (ala MacROM) for a totally-software macintosh? Nothing at all. >Well, at least Spectre for the ST checks for real ROMS, and knows the >difference between them and EPROMs. I don't know how they do it though, but >it was in a deal Dave Small made with Apple when he first came out with an >emulator. Even I have have enough EE knowledge to know that this is physically impossible. An EPROM can be made indistinguishable from a ROM. But of course, why bother when you can put the ROM on disk. -------------- Ben, in San Jose, city of thoughtless uncaring human sheep.
zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle) (03/19/91)
In article <1991Mar19.020929.14769@netcom.COM> rodent@netcom.COM (Ben Discoe) writes: *#>What is to prevent someone from dumping them to EPROM and using that instead? *> Nothing, in a strictly physical sense. You wouldn't want to get caught *> doing it, of course. >Oh yeah, like Apple is going to call the police to harrass potential pirates. >Somehow I don't think that would be good PR for Apple. You obviously don't know much about Apple. They have a long standing history of attacking ANYBODY who does anything that smells of a violation of their property rights. Notably, they've attacked Franklin for emulating their Apple II's a few years back. They attacked Microsoft in an extremely unpopular (and stupid, and arrogant, IMHO) move because their Windows software too closely resembles the Macintosh interface. There are other incidents, too. They wouldn't flinch at raising a huge stink and suing someone personally. They have to do something with all those lawyers. >Of course, what's to stop people from just copying the ROMs onto disk and >using that (ala MacROM) for a totally-software macintosh? Nothing at all. Because it's ILLEGAL. That's why. If I didn't know that it would start the traditional piracy flame war, I would also say that it is IMMORAL, even though a lot of people would disagree with me and send me hate mail. I would say this because someday I want to make a living selling software I work on. Note, however, that I'm not saying this because if I did, lots of people would start the repetitive, useless piracy discussion. I have other reasons to post this message than to merely state that piracy is wrong. *#>On a related note, is it true that Apple is trying to dry up *#>the supply of 128K ROMs floating about? *> Yes >And they've been very successful at it. I tried to buy a legal ROM, but >couldn't find one, so I had to consult the underground. [ Discussion about EPROMs and ROMs being different ] >Even I have have enough EE knowledge to know that this is physically >impossible. An EPROM can be made indistinguishable from a ROM. But of >course, why bother when you can put the ROM on disk. You are saying that you are going to run the Mac operating system without legal access to the images that are on the ROMs. A later post of yours talks about using the AMAX software without the hardware, which is sold together. Look. This is patently illegal (pun intended). You shouldn't discuss this here. Period. Right now, there are no external controls on Usenet. I, for one, want to keep it this way. The best way to do this is to keep from attracting attention. No, we're not invisible. Newsweek, a couple weeks ago, printed the contents of an article I read in rec.humor.funny. Just imagine the headlines: CRIMINALS USE GOVERNMENT NETWORK TO PLAN SOFTWARE PIRACY The press is notoriously inaccurate when it comes to this sort of thing. They also tend to interview exactly the wrong people. Apple is so paranoid about protecting its intellectual properties, their representatives would blow the situation completely out of proportion. Ok. There are thousands of fingers out there twitching anxiously over the "F" key. Let me try to defuse a few of those responses before they start. Obvious response #1: ]IMMINENT DEATH OF USENET PREDICTED BY NET.COP!!! Yeah, I know. Usenet will survive. But do you really want the trouble? Do you want your system administrator to be forced to give you an application before you can get on Usenet? Do you want some of the Internet nodes (particularly the .gov sites) to stop carrying Usenet? Do you really want the attention? However far out you might think these things are, do you really want to take a chance? I don't think it's worth it. Obvious response #2: ]Apple's actions in witholding the ROM's are reprehensible. They ]deserve whatever they get. Since they are being jerks, I can do ]whatever I want. That's not the point. I agree that Apple is being a bunch of jerks. People who buy ROMs for emulators are people who already bought a computer. They won't buy another computer. But who cares? I can't stop you from doing whatever you want. Just don't discuss it here. We don't need the governmental paranoids making trouble for us. Obvious response #3: ]I can't get Mac ROM's any more. Since this is the only way I can ]run AMAX, it's ok for me to do this. Wrong, on two points. First, there's a company making a "clean room" version of the ROMs. Apparently they'll be even better than the real thing. Once this goes through, you'll be able to thumb your nose at Apple. Second, Apple OWNS those ROMs. They can control how they are sold. That's their right. If they don't want to sell them outside of a Mac, they are allowed to do that. It might not be nice, but they did in fact invent it. It took work, and it's theirs. Obvious response #4: ]Once you get the ROMs, it's fair use for me to put the information ]on them on my disk, so that it can load faster. I don't like waiting ]for the ROMs to load. I'm not talking about this. The post I'm responding to was talking about piracy. I don't have any objection to doing this sort of thing once you have the ROMs. I don't have any objection to people discussing how to do this to make their system work better. I object to people talking about they way they can get stuff from the "underground" illegally. .... Talk about what's technically possible. Talk about what you think pirates will do. Don't talk about how you are a pirate. Don't talk about how your friends are pirates. As long as I'm complaining, this thread belongs on .emulation. Followups are redirected there. Dan Zerkle zerkle@iris.eecs.ucdavis.edu (916) 754-0240 Amiga... Because life is too short for boring computers.