rec.autos.simulators

by **Ruud Dingeman** » Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:12:03

>>Except in usability ;)

> Really? How long you been running GPL on it?

I would call GPL a lot of things, but 'usable' isn't one of them ;)

Regards, Ruud

by **Ruud Dingeman** » Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:16:02

> MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86 operating
> system.

Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally. 68030 on Cube... (I've only
got a NeXT 'Slab', but with its 68040 it's faster though ;)

Regards, Ruud

PS. Yes, Apple will have OS X running on a Pentium somewhere, but it's
highly doubtful they'd ever use it for anything than insurance - "hand
us some faster CPUs pronto or we can always go to a little company
called Intel!"

by **Ruud Dingeman** » Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:20:43

> Most humiliating thing for Macintosh owners was that a Amiga with its 68000
> 7.14MHz CPU emulating a Macintosh was faster then a real Macintosh with a
> 68000.
> Thats just showed how fast the graphics etc in a real macintosh were :)

True, I ran Shapeshifter on a 68060 Amiga rig during testing, it was
faster than any real 68k Mac anywhere, at the time.

The humiliating part for the Amiga came when the lowly Mac surpassed its
(originally superior) hardware in the end with the PPC etc etc, when
Commodore was driven into the ground and it's successors amounted to
virtually nothing 8(

(It's a real sad story.. I lived right through it... Pray that your
favorite computer never meets a horrid fate like the poor Amiga had.)

Papy's Indy 500 on a lowly Amiga 1000 with 512 Kb was *amazing* though,
and *smooth* too ;)

Regards, Ruud

by **Ruud Dingeman** » Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:33:18

> You cannot believe how shocked I was when I finally bought PC port title
> for my Amiga. My little A500 had screamingly fast graphics, until I tried a
> PC port. Gawd was it slow...I couldn't understand how the Pysgnosis guys
> could put out really fast paced high framerate titles and a major PC title
> would just BOG everything down.

Well, it's not *that* surprising when you retroactively realize the Ami
had video acceleration and smooth scrolling *and* great multitasking
*and* a great sound card when most pc's were only just able to display
EGA/VGA images and make white noise thru a tinny speaker.

Animation and video acceleration came later to the pc, partly 'inspired'
by what the Amiga could do.

It wasn't the last time an "obscure and expen$ive but superior" system
was used to build a cool game - DOOM and Quake were later developed on a
NeXT (as was the WWW).

Stunt Car Racer was darn cool on the Amiga, too.

Regards, Ruud

by **Larr** » Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:19:28

I ASSURE you Apple had NextStep/OpenStep available for x86. I was a member
of Apple's Developer Services at one time, and I still (somewhere) have the
x86 versions of Rhapsody lying around somewhere.

Larry

> > MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86
operating
> > system.

> Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally. 68030 on Cube... (I've only
> got a NeXT 'Slab', but with its 68040 it's faster though ;)

> Regards, Ruud

> PS. Yes, Apple will have OS X running on a Pentium somewhere, but it's
> highly doubtful they'd ever use it for anything than insurance - "hand
> us some faster CPUs pronto or we can always go to a little company
> called Intel!"

> >>I've heard rumors that Apple has had OS X running on a P4 machine for
> >>quite some time.
> >>Jim

by **Larr** » Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:21:15

I never felt humiliated, especially since Amiga's are all but forgotten.

Larry

> Most humiliating thing for Macintosh owners was that a Amiga with its
68000
> 7.14MHz CPU emulating a Macintosh was faster then a real Macintosh with a
> 68000.
> Thats just showed how fast the graphics etc in a real macintosh were :)

> > Yes, but it can still be a damned nice fiddle :)

> > -Larry

> > > > yes, but when the amiga could display 4096colors, and the Atari ST
512
> > > > colors, the Macintosh were still limited to black and white :/

> > > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and
> now
> > > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years.

by **Ruud Dingeman** » Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:02:33

> I ASSURE you Apple had NextStep/OpenStep available for x86.

Larry - do read the last word in my first sentence (again), repeated
hereunder ;)

I know it had a x86 version later on.

Regards, Ruud

by **Larr** » Wed, 01 Jan 2003 13:43:23

Ok, so long as you admit it :)

Larry

> > I ASSURE you Apple had NextStep/OpenStep available for x86.

> Larry - do read the last word in my first sentence (again), repeated
> hereunder ;)

> I know it had a x86 version later on.

> Regards, Ruud

> >>>MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86
operating
> >>>system.

> >>Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally.

rec.autos.simulators

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

MacOS X now has Force Feedback!