breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) (05/23/91)
Last time I read about an IBM emulator which had a speed of 10% of a 4.77 Mhz IBM. In my opinion a 4.77 Mhz IBM is very slow, so how can people work with a .477 Mhz IBM? All this talk about emulating other computers is stupid, you never use them. The first reason why you will use such an emulator is to run software which isn't on the Amiga (like PageMaker, WordPerfect 5.5 or Turbo Pascal 6.0). The speed of these packages, if they work, is to slow to be really usefull. Second you use an emulator if you can't buy the original computer. But that means that you don't have money: the packages you want to run have to be copied (piracy). For example, it is better to buy an IBM 80386 clone (25 Mhz, 4MB, XGA, 40Mb harddisk) for $2000. This machine is more than 16 times faster as a 4.77 Mhz IBM (faster as an A3000?). For twice the price of a (good and complete!) emulator you can most times buy the original computer. I think it is a little arrogant to think that an Amiga can emulate any computer. The programmers can better spend their efforts on programming packages like PageMaker, Ventura, WordPerfect, Oracle, Dbase IV than waist their time with emulators. Erwin.
rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rick Francis Golembiewski) (05/24/91)
breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) Writes: > All this talk about emulating other computers is stupid, you never > use them. The first reason why you will use such an emulator is to run > software which isn't on the Amiga (like PageMaker, WordPerfect 5.5 > or Turbo Pascal 6.0). The speed of these packages, if they work, is > to slow to be really usefull. This is not nescessarily the case, I've used AMAX on a A1000 and it gave performance comparable to a Mac SE, which is quite useable for wordprocessing. I've also run IBeM on my A3000, and it was very much comparable to an IBM PC. I wouldn't use it for running CPU intensive programs, but it ran ancient art of war descently. >Second you use an emulator if you can't buy the original computer. But >that means that you don't have money: the packages you want to run have >to be copied (piracy). For example, it is better to buy an IBM 80386 clone >(25 Mhz, 4MB, XGA, 40Mb harddisk) for $2000. It's not that I CAN'T go out and buy an IBM or a Mac... In fact I currently own an Zenith IBM compatable Laptop computer. However, if I only want to run a few IBM or Macintosh packages, then it is unreasonable for me to spend another $2000 when the machine I already own has the capacity to emulate both of those machines at a far lower cost. Especially in the case of the Macintosh which has the same CPU as the Amiga, and thus even a lowly 500 can do a very reasonable emulation of it in software. Also if I were to spend another $2000 or more on another CPU, then I REALLY wouldn't have any $$$ to spend on software. If I needed the speed of a 25Mhz 386 then the cost would be justified, but I don't and I'm sure many other people don't either. > I think it is a little arrogant to think that an Amiga can emulate >any computer. Well I don't expect to see a Cray emulator... but emulating an IBM PC, a C64, an Apple II, Z80, or a Mac is definately reasonable, especially for an accelerated Amiga (ie '020 or '030). >The programmers can better spend their efforts on programming >packages like PageMaker, Ventura, WordPerfect, Oracle, Dbase IV than waist >their time with emulators. For one thing I don't think that there are THAT many programmers working on emulators... Most of the work is already done (ie there is a emulator for just about every PC I can think of...) Although it WOULD be good to see more professional applications, PageStream 2.01 has lots of features, but is pretty buggy (and it's terrrible with refreshes). Excellence! has the potential to be a very good WP, but it has some problems such as the postscript output having a very strange aspect ratio, making it appear to be squashed (not very professional). // Rick Golembiewski rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu \\ \\ #include stddisclaimer.h // \\ "I never respected a man who could spell" // \\ -M. Twain //
sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) (05/25/91)
I beg your pardon. I have and use AMAX, Bridgeboard, and A-64 to do development of software for those platforms, and I find them adequate. Yes, they aren't as fast as the top of the line for those architectures, but I don't need that speed. I also don't have the space in my home for 6 complete systems, monitors, drives, keyboards, cpus etc. (I have 3 already). As for saying, "Second you use an emulator if you can't buy the original computer. But that means that you don't have money: the packages you want to run have to be copied (piracy)" Apart from being bad english, this is totally false. Just because one doesn't choose to buy a system instead of emulating it, doesn't mean that they are criminals. I guess I should copy the Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++, Microsoft C, and Microsoft Windows that I have and send them back for a refund. I think that you are way off base in your allegations, and should carefully consider your responses before your let them fly. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent Distributed High Performance Computing | or actions of my employer, and their IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Facility | actions don't reflect mine either.:) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "And there's no more toliet paper - It's gone just like the trees. Do you like the taste of honey - Isn't it best without the bees? Be careful what you're doing - you're messing up my life, And if the world's a cake - then you cut too big a slice!" -P.I.L.
ravi@TECHUNIX.TECHNION.AC.IL (avi rozen) (05/26/91)
breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) writes: >Last time I read about an IBM emulator which had a speed of 10% of a >4.77 Mhz IBM. In my opinion a 4.77 Mhz IBM is very slow, so how can >people work with a .477 Mhz IBM? All this talk about emulating other >computers is stupid, you never use them. The first reason AmaxII is even better than an original Mac plus (bigger screen and faster) :) >why you will use such an emulator is to run software which isn't on >the Amiga (like PageMaker, WordPerfect 5.5 or Turbo Pascal 6.0). The I agree that those programs don't work on amiga but there are some programs that perform pretty well (Pro-Page,excellence!,LightSpeedPascal). >speed of these packages, if they work, is to slow to be really usefull. >Second you use an emulator if you can't buy the original computer. But >that means that you don't have money: the packages you want to run have >to be copied (piracy). For example, it is better to buy an IBM 80386 clone >(25 Mhz, 4MB, XGA, 40Mb harddisk) for $2000. This machine is more than I can't agree with you more, the prices of the Bridgeboard in Israel as high as a PC compatible. >16 times faster as a 4.77 Mhz IBM (faster as an A3000?). For twice the >price of a (good and complete!) emulator you can most times buy the original >computer. I think it is a little arrogant to think that an Amiga can emulate >any computer. The programmers can better spend their efforts on programming >packages like PageMaker, Ventura, WordPerfect, Oracle, Dbase IV than waist >their time with emulators. My friend has been working on a same project as IBem for over a year now, he has a very good knowledge by now of the amiga and I hope afetr seeing the IBeM he'll start programing some usefull stuff. :) >Erwin. I think that the amiga community should work towards the following goals: 1. asking software companies to convert their programs to amiga, I think that public pressure will make those companies realize as byte did that among the amiga comunity there is a demand for serious software and that the amiga environment can support those companies demands. 2. work for creating standarts in the amiga world in terms of standart fonts format , standart structured drawing format similar to the iff standarts, I think that by this programmers will find greater support in developing packages for the amiga. Avi Rozen.
breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) (05/27/91)
In article <1991May24.171257.12609@watson.ibm.com> sck@biko.watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: > As for saying, >"Second you use an emulator if you can't buy the original computer. But >that means that you don't have money: the packages you want to run have >to be copied (piracy)" > Apart from being bad english, this is totally false. Just because one doesn't My english is not as good as dutch, but you could read it. >choose to buy a system instead of emulating it, doesn't mean that they are >criminals. I guess I should copy the Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++, Microsoft C, and >Microsoft Windows that I have and send them back for a refund. I think that you >are way off base in your allegations, and should carefully consider your responses >before your let them fly. I am speaking for in general. Most people have a plain A500 and don't have the money to buy expensive packages. There are of course developers with an A3000 and several thousands of dollars to spend on software. The only people who find the emulators (apart from AMAX) really usefull are those with an A3000 or 68020/68030 boards. On a plain A500 the emulators (again apart from AMAX) aren't really usefull. They are nice and can bring you back for a moment to the old days but thats it. But if you are a serious IBM developer you should consider buying an IBM. I have worked on an 4.77 Mhz IBM which is not suitable for development using TP. To have some editing speed you need at least a 8 Mhz XT (V30) or better an AT. >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent >Distributed High Performance Computing | or actions of my employer, and their >IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Facility | actions don't reflect mine either.:) >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >"And there's no more toliet paper - It's gone just like the trees. > Do you like the taste of honey - Isn't it best without the bees? > Be careful what you're doing - you're messing up my life, > And if the world's a cake - then you cut too big a slice!" -P.I.L. -Erwin-
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (05/30/91)
In article <1991May23.083822.10099@rulway.LeidenUniv.nl> breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) writes: >Last time I read about an IBM emulator which had a speed of 10% of a >4.77 Mhz IBM. That's roughly what Commodore's Transformer program did. >In my opinion a 4.77 Mhz IBM is very slow, so how can people work with a >.477 Mhz IBM? All this talk about emulating other computers is stupid, you >never use them. The first reason why you will use such an emulator is to run >software which isn't on the Amiga (like PageMaker, WordPerfect 5.5 or Turbo >Pascal 6.0). Of course it isn't. You use an IBM emulator to run one or two program types that aren't on the Amiga. I couldn't personally care the less for PageMaker when I can use Professional Page or PageStream. Same goes for WordPerfect 5.5 vs. ProWrite or Excellence, for those with a taste for wordprocessors. And for Pascal of any flavor; I used it for four long years in college, that was 3.5 years too long. If you really want IBM PC applications instead of their equivalents or betters on the Amiga, you get a PC or at least a Bridge Card. However, there are some programs you may need that only run on a PC. One example I use are a PAL compilers. They doesn't have to run often, nor do they have to run all that fast. But without one, you can't make PALs. Without PALs, you can't make expansion boards. If it takes 100 seconds versus 10 to run through the PAL equations, no big deal. I'm sure other people have other examples. >Second you use an emulator if you can't buy the original computer. But >that means that you don't have money: the packages you want to run have >to be copied (piracy). There's a great deal of difference between running a low cost or free program (some companies, for example, gives away their PAL compilers so that you'll use their PALs) for an additional $10-$30 on your already paid for system. You would be a fool, or taken for one, if you had to spend $1000-$2000 to run one lousy program. >For example, it is better to buy an IBM 80386 clone (25 Mhz, 4MB, XGA, 40Mb >harddisk) for $2000. Yeah, dream on. IBM is currently the only one selling XGA boards, and their XGA systems go for substantially more than $2000. You can certainly get a VGA+ system for that. So what, when it's all said and done, you still have a PClone. I'd rather buy an emulator, and spend the remaining $1975 on beer. Or a trip to the Bahamas. >This machine is more than 16 times faster as a 4.77 Mhz IBM (faster as >A3000?). CPU wise, a '386 system at 25MHz is about as fast as an A3000. With cache, faster than a basic A3000. The corresponding el-cheapo VGA boards are way slow. The hard disks are worse, as is the expansion bus, on most of these cheap puppies. All depends on what you want. -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (05/30/91)
In article <EcCzZ9S00WAJQ1cIIG@andrew.cmu.edu> rg20+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rick Francis Golembiewski) writes: >breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) Writes: >> The speed of these packages, if they work, is to slow to be really usefull. >This is not nescessarily the case, I've used AMAX on a A1000 and it >gave performance comparable to a Mac SE, which is quite useable for >wordprocessing. Of course, AMAX isn't really an emulator, it's a hostile port of the Mac OS to a different 680x0 based system. -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
soverlies@cc.curtin.edu.au (05/31/91)
> terrrible with refreshes). Excellence! has the potential to be a very > good WP, but it has some problems such as the postscript output having > a very strange aspect ratio, making it appear to be squashed (not very > professional). > The reason for the squashed output of your postscript printouts is the cruddy fonts supplied with excellence! If you copy the amigados 2 fonts (courier etc) into the font directory of excellence and rename them with a 'p' at the beginning, the output will be quite good. Using hires (interlaced) mode will show you on the screen what sort of aspect ratio you'll get on the output. I agree that the supplied fonts give an unprofessional output. It is disgusting that such expensive programs are sold with such glaringly bad deficiencies. Ian O. -------- Nobody really gives a flying squirt what my opinions are anyway
paulz@hpspdra.spd.HP.COM (Paul Zander) (06/01/91)
Here is why I resurrected a copy of an olde emulator, AmigaTransformer: In the USA, we have a very complicated set of laws and forms for income taxes. The tax computation programs for the Amiga do not have any where near the capability of those written for MSDos. (I suspect that the Amiga ones are really ports of ones that had been originally written for MSDos, but were not accepted there because there were better ones.) Anyway, I found it better to buy an original copy of the program for IBM, and put up with the slooow response, because it was still better than my having to study the forms and use a calculator. When I sent in my registration form, I boldly wrote AMIGA in answer to what computer model I was using, and suggested that they make a real Amiga version available for next year.
liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) (06/04/91)
soverlies@cc.curtin.edu.au writes: >> [unattributed] >> terrrible with refreshes). Excellence! has the potential to be a very >> good WP, but it has some problems such as the postscript output having >> a very strange aspect ratio, making it appear to be squashed (not very >> professional). >> >The reason for the squashed output of your postscript printouts is >the cruddy fonts supplied with excellence! >... Wait, if I print out using a standard resident Postscript font like Times I am not sending the screen font to the printer anyway. His problem is that he didn't read every single word of the mediocre documentation. If he had he would know to change the pitch to 15 before printing to Postscript from excellence!. That is the cause of the aspect ratio problem on his printouts. You are correct, however, in pointing out that you can substitute fonts as long as the proper metric is also in the fonts directory. -- Jimmy Liberato liberato@dri.com ...uunet!drivax!liberato