Phoebus Dokos wrote:
> Emulators are supposed to completely "simulate" the native hardware.
That's your definition.
> However QPC doesn't do that with the latest QL hardware (which is
> the Q40).
Of course not. QPC is a platform all by itself. It does not need to
imitate anything.
> My belief is that QPC should completely incorporate all the features
> of a Q40
Which are? Limiting the available screen resolutions? Limiting SER to
4 ports again? The sound is the only difference I see. Something I
might take care of someday.
Anyway QPC was on the market *long* before the appearance of the Q40.
Why doesn't the Q40 simulate QPC? Just kidding.
> What is the sense of say writing a game which makes use of the SSS
> if QPC cannot use it?
Currently.
> And what about hi-colour modes. Why shouldn't they be compatible
> across SMSQ/E systems that share similar capabilities?
QPC is compatible to the QXL, both use a standard 16 bit layout. I
haven't seen the Q40 layout anywhere else.
> If more than one factors of incompatibility occur, the more difficult it
> would be to have hi-end programs for SMSQ/E-QDOS.
That's because the screen driver is only provides a good starting
point. But from this start to the finish line it's still a loooooong
way to go. The OS simply has to provide device independent routines,
which it doesn't.
When Tony announced the screen drivers some years ago I thought "How
does he solve the problem of the big memory waste the QL system
currently incorporates? It must be a lot of work". Well, he simply
didn't. What's needed is a new pointer environment. But I doubt this
will ever appear.
Marcel
