Pandora (Open Hardware) now available to pre-order

[Dunny]

I remember Gnostic's UAE2x, and the subsequent hilarity on the forums when UAE4ALL was released.

Basically, UAE4ALL handed UAE2x's arse to it on a plate in terms of speed and compatibility - it really was exceptionally fast, running the vast majority of games at full speed on a GP2X clocked at 200mhz, where previously UAE2x could only manage few games when overclocked. Reports are that UAE4ALL has better compatibility, but seeing as very few people are testing UAE2x there's not much hard evidence to go on.

Gnostic is noted as one of the developers of UAE4ALL, along with Notaz and Critical. I don't know if Gnostic will be going back to UAE2x now that UAE4ALL is so much more matured, or if he will have any input with the Pandora port of UAE (whichever source is chosen).

D.

[Hungry Horace]

i've never understood the appeal of UAE4ALL given it's massive lack of functionality myself. I guess 'speed over substance' :/


sorry, kinda OT, although perhaps i'd show more interest in UAE on Pandora knowing it had decent functions.

[FOL]

Originally Posted by Dunny

I remember Gnostic's UAE2x, and the subsequent hilarity on the forums when UAE4ALL was released.

Basically, UAE4ALL handed UAE2x's arse to it on a plate in terms of speed and compatibility - it really was exceptionally fast, running the vast majority of games at full speed on a GP2X clocked at 200mhz, where previously UAE2x could only manage few games when overclocked. Reports are that UAE4ALL has better compatibility, but seeing as very few people are testing UAE2x there's not much hard evidence to go on.

Gnostic is noted as one of the developers of UAE4ALL, along with Notaz and Critical. I don't know if Gnostic will be going back to UAE2x now that UAE4ALL is so much more matured, or if he will have any input with the Pandora port of UAE (whichever source is chosen).

D.

Didnt really want to reply, but had to.

Think you need to look more into it, there are 3 versions of UAE4ALL. So your comment about UAE4ALL being released and handing UAE2x's arse to it on a plate (as you put it) is wrong.

As I remember it, GnosTiC released UAE2x and UAE4ALL FAMEC was in the process of being released. I also remember people over at the gp2x forums, giving me crap, saying I stole GnosTiC which simply wasnt the case. We were helping each other.

When UAE2x was released only the standard 68k core was used in UAE4ALL, then FAMEC was added, then ASM core.

GnosTiC is proberly noted as 1 of the devs, due to him helping E-UAE, UAE4ALL and PSPUAE with blitter optimizations.

Anyways, we all want the same thing. Fullspeed Amiga Emualtion in your HANDS, .

[Photon]

Yeah, the screen, the keyboard, and all the renders instead of photos, and the tons of software yet to be ported killed it for me.
To the confused poster that said that 320x200 is 16:10... I can find no words. It's 5:4 in NTSC, which is why US games have graphics that look squashed on 4:3 PAL.
The Dpads... well, they couldn't do worse than GamePark, and certainly not as bad as Sony. I like my GP2X. There's also The Wiz, which has 3D acc and much faster ARM cpu, which is more attractive to me, if it weren't for one thing, at least it *looks* like they f'ed up the dpad again...
Good screen, awesome buttons and dpads, plenty of horsepower, and a card slot is all any handheld needs to succeed, really. The GP2x at least has 3 of those :P

Speccy fans should go bananas over the Pandora keyboard tho

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by Photon

Yeah, the screen, the keyboard, and all the renders instead of photos, and the tons of software yet to be ported killed it for me.

kinda unsure if that sarcasm was directed at my comment about functions?

if so, i was talking about UAE functions, not Pandora functions.


And that speccy-like keyboard might have looked cute for a 1982 machine, but in 2008?

and lastly, the Sony d-pad thing is a myth perpetuated by Nintendo fans and/or people with fat fingers

[chiark]

Couldn't the devs of UAE4All/UAE2x/etc get together on this, or am I being hopelessly naive?

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by chiark

Couldn't the devs of UAE4All/UAE2x/etc get together on this, or am I being hopelessly naive?

imho, the best thing would be for them all to work on one project, ditch UAE4ALL and go for an optimised e-uae port (like uae2x and pspuae are) and reap the benefits of all the extras e-uae has which uae4all as an a500-only emulator does not.

[FOL]

Originally Posted by chiark

Couldn't the devs of UAE4All/UAE2x/etc get together on this, or am I being hopelessly naive?

This is why myself and gnostic used to talk alot, and share ideas and code to help each other projects.

[john4p]

Originally Posted by Photon

To the confused poster that said that 320x200 is 16:10... I can find no words.

16 x 20 = 320
10 x 20 = 200

320:200 = 16:10 (= 8:5)

Go back to school.

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by FOL

Didnt really want to reply, but had to.

Think you need to look more into it, there are 3 versions of UAE4ALL. So your comment about UAE4ALL being released and handing UAE2x's arse to it on a plate (as you put it) is wrong.

But that's pretty much what happened - at least to the users that have no real idea what goes on in the PSP scene, or the UAE development history. All of a sudden, this amazing A500 emulator came along which blew the other one out of the water, so to speak.

As I remember it, GnosTiC released UAE2x and UAE4ALL FAMEC was in the process of being released. I also remember people over at the gp2x forums, giving me crap, saying I stole GnosTiC which simply wasnt the case. We were helping each other.

Anyways, we all want the same thing. Fullspeed Amiga Emualtion in your HANDS, .

Absolutely - that's the goal, after all. I'm hoping for AGA emulation at least, but I'm not too bothered about applications - mostly games for me. Being able to run a nice workbench would be a bonus, but one that I mostly reserve for my Desktop machine.

imho, the best thing would be for them all to work on one project, ditch UAE4ALL and go for an optimised e-uae port (like uae2x and pspuae are) and reap the benefits of all the extras e-uae has which uae4all as an a500-only emulator does not.

What exactly is the difference between the two? A500 was pretty much as good as it was going to get on the 2x, there's no way in hell it could have handled AGA.

I'm all for doing things better now that we have the horsepower. Hell, if I can help out, then let me know.

D.

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by Dunny

What exactly is the difference between the two? A500 was pretty much as good as it was going to get on the 2x, there's no way in hell it could have handled AGA.

on the amiga side... 020+, expansion of memory, HD support = greater compatibilty, faster running/use (the most essential quality for a portable emulator imho) and no need to use of ADFs loaded with stupid cracktros.

on the emulator side UAE4ALL (original code) doesnt feature functions like save-states, which are then a further burden on the developer to add.


you dont need AGA in order for it to be 'beyond' A500. This is where the (once) faster UAE4ALL really suffered on the PSP. It was incompatible and loaded games slower than has been possible with PSPUAE - hardly a promising trait for an emulator you're likely to want to use in short-bursts. Without the extra options, there's no way to fix the incompatibilities either.

[chiark]

Originally Posted by john4p

16 x 20 = 320
10 x 20 = 200

320:200 = 16:10 (= 8:5)

Go back to school.

I think the point is that the pixels themselves aren't square - those 200 lines fill a 4:3 TV set... Or at least that's my understanding, which could be utterly wrong.

So quoting pixel metrics for non-square pixels is irrelevant in this case. (I think that's the point that was being made, but as said I could be wrong!)

[T_hairy_bootson]

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

i've never understood the appeal of UAE4ALL given it's massive lack of functionality myself. I guess 'speed over substance' :/

Of course thats it, I know I prefer smooth games and better sound over convenient loading of whdload etc. If the games arent as close to fullspeed as they can be the extra features arent very usefull.

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by T_hairy_bootson

Of course thats it, I know I prefer smooth games and better sound over convenient loading of whdload etc. If the games arent as close to fullspeed as they can be the extra features arent very usefull.

but my point is, half the games didnt load when PSP UAE4ALL was made, and the lack of options made that impossible to fix.

i'd have to go for compatibilty first every time. There's no point in having a fullspeed kickstart viewer imho, for the sake of it being fullspeed.

[T_hairy_bootson]

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

but my point is, half the games didnt load when PSP UAE4ALL was made, and the lack of options made that impossible to fix.

i'd have to go for compatibilty first every time. There's no point in having a fullspeed kickstart viewer imho, for the sake of it being fullspeed.

Can't comment on PSP UAE4ALL but on the gp2x UAE4ALL is a different story. Compatibility and speed are very good and tweaking can be done via the cpu/chipset settings. Since the pandora will be using the cyclone ASM core as it is an arm processor in the pandora, I expect more of the same just with more horsepower and available resources for extra features.

[xc8]

Originally Posted by Charlie

Just a quick thought:
...I'd absolutely buy one if it could run RiscOS - and develop software for it!

if it could run RiscOS? yeaaaaaa!!
count me in , bro!

chris

[gklinger]

Anyone notice that preorders that were made with PayPal have been cancelled because PayPal doesn't allow pre-payments for things that will be sent more than 20 days into the future?

[chiark]

Yes, there's *big* threads on it over at the forums. It was a cock up to offer that payment mechanism...

[john4p]

Originally Posted by chiark

I think the point is that the pixels themselves aren't square - those 200 lines fill a 4:3 TV set... Or at least that's my understanding, which could be utterly wrong.

So quoting pixel metrics for non-square pixels is irrelevant in this case. (I think that's the point that was being made, but as said I could be wrong!)

This applies for example to SuperNES-games which have a resolution of 256x224 and get stretched to 4:3.


It's not the case for Amiga 320x200-games: that's why they have black bars on 4:3 or 5:4-screens like here:




On a 16:10-screen this fits perfectly without any bars:




If you'd stretch this to have fullscreen on a 4:3-display it'd look like this:




Or even worse stretched on a 5:4-screen:




That's not how the games are supposed to look. Because of that we have black bars on standard displays for these games. But they are perfectly suited for widescreens.

And that's why these 320x200-games are almost fullscreen (zoomed) on the PSP's ~16:9-screen and the Pandora's 15:9-screen (5:3).


P.S. 320x256 is exactly 5:4 - so for these games a 1280x1024-screen is perfect while for 320x200-games a 16:10-widescreen is best (1280x800, 1440x900, etc.).

[john4p]

Originally Posted by T_hairy_bootson

Can't comment on PSP UAE4ALL but on the gp2x UAE4ALL is a different story. Compatibility and speed are very good and tweaking can be done via the cpu/chipset settings. Since the pandora will be using the cyclone ASM core as it is an arm processor in the pandora, I expect more of the same just with more horsepower and available resources for extra features.

I'm with you that speed is most important. But considering the Pandora's power I think it would be possible to get a port of "PSPUAE" running fullspeed on it which would then be better than UAE4All because of its features...

sorry 'bout doublepost