Atari Emulation with MacOS

[Sub(Function(:))]

 

 

What is it? Making people buying less for more money and putting biased truths on hardware with just a bitten Apple on it ?

 

For me it's simple, I spend a lot of time on the road with work, I need a laptop, on MAC I can run anything, Windows, Linux and Mac OS X. Mac OS X has a terminal that is UNIX like in the tools available. Macs are a lot more productive for me personally. But this is just my personal view. I don't try and convert any one.

 

Use what you want

 

And this thread is descending into a modern atari Vs C64 again. Please for the love of god get back on topic or take this some where else

[Mirage]

The only point here is that you simply do less with an apple, so the chance of doing something wrong is less in following ...

 

OK, I hate to feed trolls, but... how in the world can anyone say that less can be done on a Mac, when that Mac can run Windows, OS X, Linux, and whatever else? If you're talking hardware-wise, then maybe, but software wise, there is simply no way this position is in any way defensible. They simply are in no way limited. This view is so antiquated from the old Mac days, it's ridiculous.

 

But anyway... how is this on topic? I shouldn't even bother.

[Sub(Function(:))]

hm.. 1-5% use mac, other people have windows+consoles (xbox, etc)

 

Who cares? please stay on topic.

[Mirage]

hm.. 1-5% use mac, other people have windows+consoles (xbox, etc)

 

Your stats are way off and out dated. Get a clue. And on topic!

[emkay]

 

OK, I hate to feed trolls, but...

 

I guess, you have to overcome it, because you have to eat everyday?

 

 

 

how in the world can anyone say that less can be done on a Mac, when that Mac can run Windows, OS X, Linux, and whatever else? If you're talking hardware-wise, then maybe, but software wise, there is simply no way this position is in any way defensible. They simply are in no way limited. This view is so antiquated from the old Mac days, it's ridiculous.

 

 

For the money, a Mac cost more than a PC, you get the double performance there.

Simple as that.

 

But anyway... how is this on topic? I shouldn't even bother.

 

The Topic refers to the Atari emulation, which runs in several types on a Windows PC.

So why not loading Windows in a virtual machine on the Mac, for running a proper working emulation...

 

Edited December 29, 2011 by emkay

[Sub(Function(:))]

The Topic refers to the Atari emulation, which runs in several types on a Windows PC.

So why not loading Windows in a virtual machine on the Mac, for running a proper working emulation...

 

 

Title: Atari Emulation with MacOS

First line of post: What's the best atari 8bit emulator for MacOS?

 

Feel free to tell me where PC was mentioned or even running on Windows.

 

And regarding emulation I refer you to Rybags comment, a few months back, about painting a face on your hand. It has it's uses but "proper working" in not on the scene yet. as good as it is it's still missing.

 

Atari800MacX works fine for most things. Also you can run Altirra on Mac OS X with Wine rack, and then you will not need to buy a WIndows license

Edited December 29, 2011 by Sub(Function(:))

[+poobah]

Must.... resist.... feeding.... uninformed troll.....

darn it....

 

For the money, a Mac cost more than a PC, you get the double performance there.

Simple as that.

Ha, NO. If you'd like to have an adult discussion about this, start a thread in the appropriate forum.

 

On to Altirra... I haven't checked out the source yet, but my understanding is that all the windows-y stuff has been segregated, it may be an easy task to port to OS X.

[flashjazzcat]

I haven't checked out the source yet, but my understanding is that all the windows-y stuff has been segregated, it may be an easy task to port to OS X.

 

This would be astoundingly great. All I'd then need is an iMac.

[emkay]

[quote name=Sub(Function()' timestamp='1325165943' post='2433402]

 

 

Title: Atari Emulation with MacOS

First line of post: What's the best atari 8bit emulator for MacOS?

 

Windows virtualized in Mac OS and running one of the best emulators there?

 

Best solution, referring to "Apple" users logics.

[Heaven/TQA]

Altirra on my OSX without to start parallels? need to check wine...

[emkay]

Must.... resist.... feeding.... uninformed troll.....

darn it....

 

For the money, a Mac cost more than a PC, you get the double performance there.

Simple as that.

Ha, NO. If you'd like to have an adult discussion about this, start a thread in the appropriate forum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adult discussions about Apple... forums ? Where?

 

[Heaven/TQA]

since my Amiga and Atari ST days I never had less hassle and a lot of fun with computers again since I switched 2 years ago from Windows to Mac...

 

I still wonder how anyone could have any real hassle with Windows PCs.....

 

The only point here is that you simply do less with an apple, so the chance of doing something wrong is less in following ...

 

W7 is so unlogic in terms of usability and so ugly compared to Lion I have to admit... it has too many "old usability nerd things" carried within that it is simply imho not as easy to use like Lion... and when looking and using W8 dev preview (yes, I have) then it does not getting better but worser with the new tablet metro ontop. hopefully in productive mode they get W8 back to old W7.

 

and I am writing that here on a XP Samsung NC10 (beeah... ). And you really start to love OS X when using it for a while and then switching back to a Microsoft OS and you think what the hell... ok. back to the topic... I would love Altirra to have on OSX but Atari800Mac is really good emulator to develop and play stuff on A8. and it is modern. and not outdated like Atari800Win f.e.

[kogden]

OK, I hate to feed trolls, but...

I guess, you have to overcome it, because you have to eat everyday?

how in the world can anyone say that less can be done on a Mac, when that Mac can run Windows, OS X, Linux, and whatever else? If you're talking hardware-wise, then maybe, but software wise, there is simply no way this position is in any way defensible. They simply are in no way limited. This view is so antiquated from the old Mac days, it's ridiculous.

For the money, a Mac cost more than a PC, you get the double performance there. Simple as that.

But anyway... how is this on topic? I shouldn't even bother.

The Topic refers to the Atari emulation, which runs in several types on a Windows PC. So why not loading Windows in a virtual machine on the Mac, for running a proper working emulation...

 

The OSX Core API's are much cleaner and offer a richer set of services and features than Win32 shortening development time considerably and making for a better app in the end that integrates with other apps, services and the system incredibly well.

 

You can claim greater performance but it's not the case because you need Antivirus software which eats lots of cycles and causes lots of disk access. Your OS also requires several times more resources to run well. As far as apps go.... Quantity != quality.

 

You also get easy access to the plethora of UNIX/Linux apps out there and even an X11 server for UNIX GUI apps. Yeah, I can run Windows, Mac and Linux software all from the same environment with no rebooting and great performance along with a slick UI that makes a lot of common tasks more efficient and easier. That Macbook was a total waste of money. Should have gotten a $400 Toshiba instead with tons of bundled crapware. Or maybe run Linux because being "cool" is better than having native commercial apps.

 

MacOS X has been around longer (though not as MacOS X, as NeXTstep). Windows NT is the younger, more unproven product. If Windows and DOS were never bundled with PC's they would have been stamped out of existence by GEM and CP/M86 which would have been better for the world and made porting apps between the ST and the PC easier as well.

 

Can we get back to bashing Apple II's instead of Macs? At least the Atari 800 vs Apple II arguments are a bit more valid.

 

And back on the original topic, how much of Altirra's code is OS-dependent? Would porting to FreeBSD or OSX be a massive undertaking or would it be fairly trivial? I haven't looked at it at all yet.

Edited December 30, 2011 by kogden

[+MrFish]

 

hm.. 1-5% use mac, other people have windows+consoles (xbox, etc)

 

Hmmm... what is the percentage of Atari users to C64 users?

 

Did you ever want to play a C64 game that you couldn't find on the Atari?

 

Interesting that you'd choose Atari, eh?

[Lynxpro]

MacOS X = Influential high-end UNIX workstation OS dating back to 1988 (NeXTstep 0.

 

"classic" MacOS = early flaky GUI-based OS lacking many modern features which caused NT to eat its lunch for a while until it was finally replaced. Was good for its day in the 80's and early 90's but when other OS's started gaining features like memory protection, etc it really started showing its age.

 

 

And in my opinion, this is what the Amiga [or ST] OS platform needs to do today [err, a decade ago]. Bring out their own FreeBSD-based OS [or their own port of Darwin] which rings true to the originals but is actually "modern", not to mention easy to port software from iOS/Mac OS X to it...as well as software ported from Linux and the other BSDs to it too. And ARM-based.

 

 

Anyway.... figured I'd clarify some. Switched to macs after the downfall of the ST in the US.

 

 

I actually switched to PCs [first] because circa 96, it looked like Apple was going to take a dirt nap [not to mention I felt MacOS was inferior until OS X] and I didn't want to "jump from a burning platform" to another "burning platform" in the words of Nokia CEO - and proxy Microsoft executive - Stephen Flop. I switched after my first WinXP desktop died with SP2...

 

 

As far as running on other platforms, as of 10.7 (Lion) only one architecture is supported.... x86. Now iOS is a MacOS X derivative and targets the ARM architecture. The only difference between an Intel Mac and a PC is the firmware, Apple switched to EFI before the Windows crowd. EFI is easily emulated on stock PC's by the way.

 

 

Had HP been smart, they would've switched to EFI on their PCs with webOS built in. But alas, Mark Hurd was fired.

 

I'm sure Apple will be the first to jump to ARM for desktops/laptops after the 64-bit versions debut.

 

But I digress...back to the regularly scheduled broadcast...

[Sub(Function(:))]

 

Hmmm... what is the percentage of Atari users to C64 users?

 

Did you ever want to play a C64 game that you couldn't find on the Atari?

 

Interesting that you'd choose Atari, eh?

 

Totally correct.

 

And seeing as the original thread is lost and sunk with out trace.

 

This (the picture) is exactly what is annoying/saddening about the posts from a couple of members here. Looking back today I really wish I had got myself a C=64 back in the day (keeping my Atari of course). There was and is some really cool stuff there.

 

Without really experiencing some thing else you cannot really appreciate it. the walking in some one else shoes is correct

 

Today I have a great job where I get to play with nearly everything, MAC, Windows, Linux, Tablets, Phones. and all the back end stuff as well. My preference now-a-days is for MAC and close second Linux. But that is my opinion, I will not tell anyone this is better than that, life too short and as some one told me recently "I am not being paid to be a teacher, to tose that don't want to listen". I guess either, I grew up or just realized the world in bigger than one platform.

 

But then some members here are still fighting the battle we ALL lost many years ago

 

Sorry for the rant

[atarixle]

Altirra on my OSX without to start parallels? need to check wine...

 

For me, Altirra doesn't even work on wine for Linux (32 bit), althru people say it'd work.

[emkay]

OK, I hate to feed trolls, but...

I guess, you have to overcome it, because you have to eat everyday?

how in the world can anyone say that less can be done on a Mac, when that Mac can run Windows, OS X, Linux, and whatever else? If you're talking hardware-wise, then maybe, but software wise, there is simply no way this position is in any way defensible. They simply are in no way limited. This view is so antiquated from the old Mac days, it's ridiculous.

For the money, a Mac cost more than a PC, you get the double performance there. Simple as that.

But anyway... how is this on topic? I shouldn't even bother.

The Topic refers to the Atari emulation, which runs in several types on a Windows PC. So why not loading Windows in a virtual machine on the Mac, for running a proper working emulation...

 

The OSX Core API's are much cleaner and offer a richer set of services and features than Win32 shortening development time considerably and making for a better app in the end that integrates with other apps, services and the system incredibly well.

 

The programmer's point. Getting rich by doing nothing. I understand. But Windows didn't lead Software and Hardware - pools, by that.

It was always the more complex way of doing something new and keep a huge part of backward compatibility.

System like Apple's and Linux have been aboard of this, using the huge base of what has been gathered by the work of Microsoft.

 

You can claim greater performance but it's not the case because you need Antivirus software which eats lots of cycles and causes lots of disk access. Your OS also requires several times more resources to run well. As far as apps go.... Quantity != quality.

 

LOL. It's not really a good argue FOR a system, if no one really cares of writing virues for it.

Btw. Microsoft has a save OS, It's called Vista 64 Bit. People weren't able to put their malware easily to it, so they put lies on the internet, spreading Vista was anything bad. So Microsoft got a step back with the security of the Win 7 System.

 

 

 

You also get easy access to the plethora of UNIX/Linux apps out there and even an X11 server for UNIX GUI apps. Yeah, I can run Windows, Mac and Linux software all from the same environment with no rebooting and great performance along with a slick UI that makes a lot of common tasks more efficient and easier. That Macbook was a total waste of money. Should have gotten a $400 Toshiba instead with tons of bundled crapware. Or maybe run Linux because being "cool" is better than having native commercial apps.

 

MacOS X has been around longer (though not as MacOS X, as NeXTstep). Windows NT is the younger, more unproven product. If Windows and DOS were never bundled with PC's they would have been stamped out of existence by GEM and CP/M86 which would have been better for the world and made porting apps between the ST and the PC easier as well.

 

The only real benefit has been the comaptibility. They tried to put other OSes to the PC, but everytime they lost due to incompatibility.

 

 

 

Can we get back to bashing Apple II's instead of Macs? At least the Atari 800 vs Apple II arguments are a bit more valid.

 

And back on the original topic, how much of Altirra's code is OS-dependent? Would porting to FreeBSD or OSX be a massive undertaking or would it be fairly trivial? I haven't looked at it at all yet.

 

Still the same argue: If it is easily possible to run Win in a virtual machine (where OSX also would run on a PC) , the solution had been to run the A8 emualtion there.

[spookt]

Guys, the OP is obviously using a Mac, hence the question. He's made his decision regarding what machine and OS to use, so I'm not sure why this has turned into a Mac vs PC bash.

 

As I said in my post somewhere above, I'm a Mac user and I recommend Atari800MacX. It does the job nicely for me and I use the debugger when I'm playing around with code. You're right, it's not as advanced as Altirra but for me it does everything I need.

 

For the record I'm an IT professional and have been for 20 years. In that time I've experienced just about every architecture and OS going. I chose to move to Mac about 6 years ago and have been extremely happy with my choice. Anyone who thinks you can 'do less' on a Mac hasn't used one recently. BUT - it's my choice made for my reasons. I fully respect others are happy with their choices made for their reasons, and I don't want to try to change their minds. Why should I ? Variety is good. Perhaps we could either close this thread or move back to a discussion on emulation on OS X?

[Heaven/TQA]

If there is a nice way to run Altirra on OS X without to load parallels plus W7 please let me know. But atari800macx is good, too but Altirra has little bit advanced debug features for me as coder...

[+MrFish]

[quote name=Sub(Function()' timestamp='1325241888' post='2434054]

But then some members here are still fighting the battle we ALL lost many years ago

 

I look at it as a gain. The lack of some software and hardware means there are plenty of interesting projects to work on. Part of my interest in working on the Ataris is that I know there is plenty of unexploited potential. From a creative standpoint that gives coders, graphic designers, musicians and hardware designers a big playing field. I can't think of a more perfect setting for a retro hobby.

[Lynxpro]

Your OS also requires several times more resources to run well. As far as apps go.... Quantity != quality.

 

 

Ain't that the truth. You can run Microsoft Office 2008 on a MacBook Core2Duo with 1GB of RAM and OS X 10.6 decently but you'd be a fool to try to run Office 2007 on a similarly equipped PC with Windows XP SP3 on anything less than 2GB of RAM, if not more.

 

 

Can we get back to bashing Apple II's instead of Macs? At least the Atari 800 vs Apple II arguments are a bit more valid.

 

 

Isn't that an unfair fight since the Apple II line is inferior to the A8 line in every way except for standard expansion options?

[Lynxpro]

Anyone who thinks you can 'do less' on a Mac hasn't used one recently. BUT - it's my choice made for my reasons. I fully respect others are happy with their choices made for their reasons, and I don't want to try to change their minds. Why should I ? Variety is good. Perhaps we could either close this thread or move back to a discussion on emulation on OS X?

 

 

True in almost all regards but the Mac platform is still deficient compared to Windows for gaming but that's mainly because Apple stubbornly refuses to offer reasonably priced mini-tower Mac that would allow for easy video card expansion. Instead, Apple sells the Mac Mini that doesn't appeal to PC "gamers" for that very reason. If Apple were to do this, they'd gain more gamers to the platform but Apple would never do this because they believe it would cannibalize the sales of both the Mac Mini and the iMac despite the fact that neither of those lines appeal to PC gamers. If Jobs were still alive, he'd dismiss the whole point since he'd say PC gaming is in decline anyway...

 

Personally, I'd much rather have a modern version of the end-of-life PowerMac G4 series than a modern iMac. It would certainly compel Nvidia and AMD to write better OS X video card drivers.

 

Perhaps this will be revisited now that Tim Cook doesn't have Jobs looking over his shoulder before making business decisions...

[emkay]

Your OS also requires several times more resources to run well. As far as apps go.... Quantity != quality.

 

 

Ain't that the truth. You can run Microsoft Office 2008 on a MacBook Core2Duo with 1GB of RAM and OS X 10.6 decently but you'd be a fool to try to run Office 2007 on a similarly equipped PC with Windows XP SP3 on anything less than 2GB of RAM, if not more.

 

Actually, on my main PC I'm still running Vista 64 bit... even I have 16GB installed, the system won't use more than 2GB. What a resource hungry beast

 

 

 

Can we get back to bashing Apple II's instead of Macs? At least the Atari 800 vs Apple II arguments are a bit more valid.

 

 

Isn't that an unfair fight since the Apple II line is inferior to the A8 line in every way except for standard expansion options?

 

Since, it's an Atari related forum ....

[Lynxpro]

Since, it's an Atari related forum ....

 

No, I'd say that's a fair statement. Other than being an Atari fan, I don't have a horse in the race because I never had an A8 growing up in the 80s. I had my 2600, 7800, and my 1040ST. But I knew people with A8s and I used Apple //es at school.

 

I said the Apple // line had superior expansion capabilities. As such, it was easier to upgrade the RAM and the display to 80 columns, and the later edition of the //e had a numeric pad, but in every other regard I can't see it being superior to A8 at all. The Apple // 6502 was slower, the graphics and sound capabilities weaker [not counting the //gs], etc. So if I'm missing anything, let me know... Oh, and Applesoft Basic was Microsoft BASIC, but some might consider that actually a handicap....