The Truth about Apple II emulator...
Kevin Kralian
> The Apple ][ emulator that I have shown at a few shows was by Kevin
> Kralian. It is nearly identical to a another Apple ][ emulator released
> quite some time ago, and I am sure (as is the author) that Kevin's code
> came from it. Until the legalities of this can be resovled, Utilities
> Unlimited will not be distributing the Apple ][ emulation.
My god, I can't believe these unfounded accusations. Let's get some things
straight. My emulation is indeed an original piece of software written by
me over the last 2 years. I have progressive, dated backups showing it's
development from its earliest days when it was a C program. Many people
have witnessed and tested this program throughout its evolution. There
is NO other 6502 emulation available on the amiga that runs as fast as
mine, nor is there ANY other Apple II emulation on the amiga that handles
the hardware emulation as accurately as mine (video/timers/etc). My 6502 &
Apple emulation routines are genuine, distinct, and innovative. From simply
looking at the many other "attempts" at Apple II emulation on the amiga,
its obvious that my emulation looks & performs quite differently (better).
Jim states my program is "nearly identical" to another emulator (not very
specific). Is he referring to my 6502 emulation? In that case, why not
compare the many different C64 / Vic / Apple emulators to each other?
Anybody doing so will find that all these programs are quite similar to
each other. I wouldn't dare say everybody is copying everybody else. Why?
Because all the people who write a 6502 emulation (including myself) are
writing some 150 small routines that are going to be FUNCTIONALLY
IDENTICAL. That is, each 6502 instruction emulated is going to be
implemented EXACTLY as any 6502 reference manual says (I used "6502
Assembly Language Programming by Lance A. Leventhal", Copyright 1979 by
Osborne/McGraw-Hill, which my 6502 emulation is based upon). Each 6502
instruction essentially has 4 simple steps: Read data, peform an operation,
save the data, and update flags. As expected, most routines end up being
remarkably similar. However, even though all those independently created
6502 emulations are quite similar to each other, mine is the exception. I
use unique and innovative routines and approaches that are much faster than
what anyone else has previously done. Any programmer can see this is true.
Perhaps Jim was referring to my Apple hardware emulation routines? I will
point out that all my video support is both color & resolution perfect
reproductions of a real Apple II. My program is the first (and only) to
attain this level of accuracy. I also am the only person to have
implemented automatic "disk image" loading/saving. The only apple emulator
I have seen attempt to do even simple disk drive emulation was on the IBM
PC (with freely distributable source code). All my apple hardware emulation
is based upon various Apple reference manuals.
Or maybe Jim was referring to the remaining "glue" that holds the
components of my emulation together. Everything I use (windows, subtasks,
signals, copperlists, hardware access) are documented in Commodore's Rom
Kernal Manuals, used for the purposes they are intended, and implementated
according to the examples in these books.
There isn't anything left in my program to have been "copied" from
something else. Except, of course, that I have written a program with the
same purpose as the many previous substandard attempts at Apple II
emulators. However, I did it right, I did it well, and I did it myself.
(Requestors done via ReqTools.library, Copyright (c) by Nico Francois, and
disk compression is based on algorithms by "Dalton")
I had sent Jim several exclusive evaluation versions of my program early
during its development to see if his company was interested in purchasing
it. He (apparently) felt it was original work and the highest quality Apple
emulator in existance, because he started showing it at World Of Commodore
shows (as a preview of "their newest invention"), and he even had it
(p)reviewed in Amiga Computing Magazine (Issue 71, March 94) under a larger
review of the Emplant (I was shocked when my friends pointed out a picture
of MY Apple emulator to me). In a recent letter from him he said "I would
like to purchase the emulator", and asked me exactly what I wanted in
terms of cash for the emulation rights outright. I told him. His response
was that he is declining the offer, and then he accused me of copying
someone else's program.
I find it quite ironic that my program was held in such esteem for the last
year, until the day I say how much it will cost. Then, overnight, it
somehow becomes "nearly identical to a another Apple ][ emulator released
quite some time ago" ?
I would expect any respectable business/businessman to honestly and
tactfully tell the public that an "agreement was not reached" or
"negotatiations failed", instead of blaming others for a company's broken
promises or repeated "delays".
What really pisses me off is the unfounded accusation, the attempt to
discredit me and my work, and what I interpret as "threats" over me
releasing this program at all. He told me of the alleged author, "...if you
even release the program as PD, I would expect him to come after you..."
To this day, I have never heard from ANY author of any program suggesting I
have copied anything of theirs. After comparing my program to many other
emulators, I have found nothing that even resembles mine (In code,
performance, appearance, or features). Run mine and judge for yourselves.
I will not sit idly by while my honor & integrity are attacked. I feel the
bottom line here is money. In my opinion, Jim Drew didn't want to pay my
price and so now he's trying to discredit my work (sour grapes), and that
these actions are the result of dirty business politics (judge for
yourselves). I will interpret any further unfounded accusations as libel
and defamation of my character. -Kevin Kralian (Author, Apple 2000)
Dan
Kralian) says:
[mucho stuff deleted]
>of MY Apple emulator to me). In a recent letter from him he said "I would
>like to purchase the emulator", and asked me exactly what I wanted in
>terms of cash for the emulation rights outright. I told him. His response
>was that he is declining the offer, and then he accused me of copying
>someone else's program.
>I find it quite ironic that my program was held in such esteem for the last
>year, until the day I say how much it will cost. Then, overnight, it
>somehow becomes "nearly identical to a another Apple ][ emulator released
>quite some time ago" ?
>I would expect any respectable business/businessman to honestly and
>tactfully tell the public that an "agreement was not reached" or
>"negotatiations failed", instead of blaming others for a company's broken
>promises or repeated "delays".
>What really pisses me off is the unfounded accusation, the attempt to
>discredit me and my work, and what I interpret as "threats" over me
>releasing this program at all. He told me of the alleged author, "...if you
>even release the program as PD, I would expect him to come after you..."
If you had been listening to what I and others have been saying about Jim
Drew (specifically his level of trustworthiness exhibited in this forum and
elsewhere) this could have been avoided. But I'm perhaps assuming wrongly
that you've a regular reader of c.s.a.e...if not, you have my full
sympathy.
Dan
James Cooper
In article <Kevin_Kra...@sacbbx.com>, Kevin_...@sacbbx.com (Kevin Kralian) writes:
> [LOTS of text deleted]
>
>To this day, I have never heard from ANY author of any program suggesting I
>have copied anything of theirs. After comparing my program to many other
>emulators, I have found nothing that even resembles mine (In code,
>performance, appearance, or features). Run mine and judge for yourselves.
How can we? I don't have an opinion on your dealings with Mr. Drew,
other than that I wish these sorts of conflicts could be cleared quietly
and cleanly without using a public forum to "bash" one another... but
the simple fact is that it is impossible for us to "judge for ourselves"
in this matter, since no one can see your program.
Good luck! I hope this matter can be resolved such that the Amiga
community at large can benefit from your work, Mr. Kralian. Writing a
true emulator of another machine can be a MAJOR task, no matter how good
your documentation, since there are *always* undocumented "gotchas" in
any complex system.
--
---------------
Jim Cooper
(ja...@unx.sas.com) bix: jcooper
Any opinions expressed herein are mine (Mine, all mine! Ha, ha, ha!),
and not necessarily those of my employer.
Remember, "Euphemisms are for the differently brained."
Frank Branham
I've collected over the years were 6502 emulators with copies of the Apple
//+ ROM images in a file. They could run some Apple Basic programs, but
not the ones with graphics.
Moo
Frank
Chris Brennan
I assume you have no legal worries.. right?
--
_________________________________________________________________
--==*> "I'll never see myself in the mirror with my eyes closed" -TMBG <*==--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Did you know there is a scuba term for the way you pop your ears by
plugging your nose? It's called the Valsalva Manouver" -Skippy
100% FOR Global Warming
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris
Jim Drew
writes:
>
> during its development to see if his company was interested in purchasing
> it. He (apparently) felt it was original work and the highest quality Apple
> emulator in existance, because he started showing it at World Of Commodore
> shows (as a preview of "their newest invention"), and he even had it
> (p)reviewed in Amiga Computing Magazine (Issue 71, March 94) under a larger
> review of the Emplant (I was shocked when my friends pointed out a picture
> of MY Apple emulator to me). In a recent letter from him he said "I would
> like to purchase the emulator", and asked me exactly what I wanted in
> terms of cash for the emulation rights outright. I told him. His response
> was that he is declining the offer, and then he accused me of copying
> someone else's program.
was byte for byte identical to another emulator that was written 2 years
prior to his, and I suggested that he make severe changes to his program.
I even provided the suggestions for which his 6502 emulation routines are
based on, possibly the only thing that is different at this point.
> I find it quite ironic that my program was held in such esteem for the last
> year, until the day I say how much it will cost. Then, overnight, it
> somehow becomes "nearly identical to a another Apple ][ emulator released
> quite some time ago" ?
>
> I would expect any respectable business/businessman to honestly and
> tactfully tell the public that an "agreement was not reached" or
> "negotatiations failed", instead of blaming others for a company's broken
> promises or repeated "delays".
contract discussed both verbally and in writing. Mr. Kralian presented
offers to my corporation early on in the development of the emulation,
which were accepted. Now that the emulation is completed, he wants much
more than we agreed to, especially for an emulation that is to be free.
> What really pisses me off is the unfounded accusation, the attempt to
> discredit me and my work, and what I interpret as "threats" over me
> releasing this program at all. He told me of the alleged author, "...if you
> even release the program as PD, I would expect him to come after you..."
>
> To this day, I have never heard from ANY author of any program suggesting I
> have copied anything of theirs. After comparing my program to many other
> emulators, I have found nothing that even resembles mine (In code,
> performance, appearance, or features). Run mine and judge for yourselves.
>
> I will not sit idly by while my honor & integrity are attacked. I feel the
> bottom line here is money. In my opinion, Jim Drew didn't want to pay my
> price and so now he's trying to discredit my work (sour grapes), and that
> these actions are the result of dirty business politics (judge for
> yourselves). I will interpret any further unfounded accusations as libel
> and defamation of my character. -Kevin Kralian (Author, Apple 2000)
with the emulation, however, when the original author contacted me
threatening to sue my corporation if your emulation was distributed with
our product, I knew he was right. So, I have negotiated the rights to
his emulation so that we can have a emulator that has no legal questions
pending.
Bruno Fernandes
emulation is always kept in secret and why he in no way contacted Kevin
Kralian.
Sounds fishy to say the least. It would seem like a convenient way for
UU to scam Kralian's emulation, woudn't it? And I certainly would not
rule it out.
As far as all the bandwidth about this I have seen, I would first off
believe Kevin.
You don't disassemble someone's code and have it come up _EXACTLY_ (byte
for byte even!) the same as another piece of code. One would also have
to think about UU now having a completely dissassembled copy of this
emulation. Hmmmm...
In any case, this emulation does not need the Emplant board for
anything. Passing it off as some Emplant product is just complete false
advertising. It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
software can also be programmed to work without the board.
Bruno
Hybrid Developments
No offence intended to anyone of course...
--
"Also believe that peanut butter | The ideas expressed may very well be my
and bacon have been neglected as | own.
food groups, particularly when |
eaten together." - D. Cooper | e0f1...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca
Borge Noest
>There
>is NO other 6502 emulation available on the amiga that runs as fast as
>mine
How fast is it?
I have a 68020+ emulator of the 6502 (it only handles pure CPU functions,
but there are openings for all the needed hw emulation) based on the Atari
800XL emulator that Darek Mihocka wrote for the Atari ST.
The speed on my 4000/040 is approx as fast as a 5MHz 6502. HW emulation
will slow it down (way down).
>Kevin_...@sacbbx.com
--
|/// bor...@stud.cs.uit.no (Børge Nøst) | Amiga 4000/040 \\\|
|// Box 218, 9001 Tromsoe, Norway | Remember to :-) when needed \\|
|/ The worlds northernmost university | Life is worth living. \|
#Disclaimer: This university does not speak for me.
Craig Ganoe
In article <19940412.7...@cryo.cryogenic.com>, jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com (Jim Drew) writes:
> In <Kevin_Kra...@sacbbx.com>, Kevin_...@sacbbx.com (Kevin Kralian)
> writes:
> >
> > I had sent Jim several exclusive evaluation versions of my program early
> > during its development to see if his company was interested in purchasing
> > it.
[ stuff deleted ]
> > In a recent letter from him he said "I would
> > like to purchase the emulator", and asked me exactly what I wanted in
> > terms of cash for the emulation rights outright. I told him. His response
> > was that he is declining the offer, and then he accused me of copying
> > someone else's program.
>
> I told Mr. Kralian from day one that after disassembling his emulation it
> was byte for byte identical to another emulator that was written 2 years
> prior to his, and I suggested that he make severe changes to his program.
> I even provided the suggestions for which his 6502 emulation routines are
> based on, possibly the only thing that is different at this point.
>
I read this as: "The latest version of your your software is byte
for byte identical to another author's except for a few changes
I suggested. (i.e. None of the work is yours.)" Now read on.
[ more stuff deleted ]
> > What really pisses me off is the unfounded accusation, the attempt to
> > discredit me and my work, and what I interpret as "threats" over me
> > releasing this program at all. He told me of the alleged author, "...if you
> > even release the program as PD, I would expect him to come after you..."
> >
> > To this day, I have never heard from ANY author of any program suggesting I
> > have copied anything of theirs. After comparing my program to many other
> > emulators, I have found nothing that even resembles mine (In code,
> > performance, appearance, or features). Run mine and judge for yourselves.
> >
> > I will not sit idly by while my honor & integrity are attacked. I feel the
> > bottom line here is money. In my opinion, Jim Drew didn't want to pay my
> > price and so now he's trying to discredit my work (sour grapes), and that
> > these actions are the result of dirty business politics (judge for
> > yourselves). I will interpret any further unfounded accusations as libel
> > and defamation of my character. -Kevin Kralian (Author, Apple 2000)
>
> I am not attacking your 'honor & integrity',
Sounded like it to me. If he did copy someone else's work and try to sell
it for his own, you have every right to attack his honor and integrity.
> you have done a great job with the emulation,
Huh? You just said above he copied it byte for byte from someone else.
Where's this great job? You said above he didn't do any of it. Which is it?
> however, when the original author contacted me
> threatening to sue my corporation if your emulation was distributed with
> our product, I knew he was right. So, I have negotiated the rights to
> his emulation so that we can have a emulator that has no legal questions
> pending.
Guess what? If this emulation is byte for byte the same as the one
Mr. Kralian is claiming to have written himself, I'd have to think there
are still legal questions pending.
I'm not taking sides here, but I want to point out that Jim's reply to
Kevin's post was confusing, if not just plain wishy-washy.
Craig
Jim Drew
writes:
> In article <Kevin_Kra...@sacbbx.com> Kevin_...@sacbbx.com (Kevin
>Kralian) writes:
> >There
> >is NO other 6502 emulation available on the amiga that runs as fast as
> >mine
>
> How fast is it?
> I have a 68020+ emulator of the 6502 (it only handles pure CPU functions,
> but there are openings for all the needed hw emulation) based on the Atari
> 800XL emulator that Darek Mihocka wrote for the Atari ST.
> The speed on my 4000/040 is approx as fast as a 5MHz 6502. HW emulation
> will slow it down (way down).
(2Mhz 6502 emulation) on an A1200. Our routines are *very* fast.
Jim Drew
writes:
>
> In any case, this emulation does not need the Emplant board for
> anything. Passing it off as some Emplant product is just complete false
> advertising. It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
> software can also be programmed to work without the board.
u898...@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
> I am not attacking your 'honor & integrity', you have done a great job
> with the emulation, however, when the original author contacted me
> threatening to sue my corporation if your emulation was distributed with
> our product, I knew he was right. So, I have negotiated the rights to
> his emulation so that we can have a emulator that has no legal questions
> pending.
I think there is an intresting conclusion coming out of this argument,
that is off the topic from the argument. The Emplant board is advertised as
an Emulator platform, were you can use the board characteristics, hardware to
emulate another platform. Remember that emplant is supposed to emulate
in hardware so as to speed things up. These emulators seem to be in SW
completely. The other point is why does the SW get improved all the time if
emulation is in HW ? It appears that the Emplant board isn't anything other
than a platform to mount the roms, the scsi and other ports. Pretty much like
Amax II+. It's not that I question the quality of the SW, but it the advertised
harware that I cannot see why it is for.
Oh, and aonother point for this argument. JDrew mentions that the
author of the other apple IIe emulator contacted him, threatening to sue
him. How did he get the unreleased version of the software ? Unless
it had been offcourse so that point is mute.
George
Anthony Kilna
the start. The ONLY bad things I have heard about the author of the
Apple II Emu is from Jim. Jim doesn't give the name of the author or the
program for the supposed original copyrighted emulation.
The very fact that he leads people to believe that you need the Emplant to
run an apple emulation proves he is intent on misleading people.
I smell heavy BS.
--
__
/ \// r i c o c h e t
| // | TECH : 21 ENTERPRISES ----------------------
//\__/ @ n e t c o m . c o m
Bruno Fernandes
Thanks for the elaborate reply. :) Oh, it is VERY possible. In fact,
it's been done. For _both_ programs I might ad. I have neither of them
nor do I have any intention to go out and try and obtain them. But for
those who want them, I assure you that it's not very hard to find them.
Bruno
Hybrid Developments.
Bruno Fernandes
One now has to wonder why you DISSASSEMBLED Kevin's 6502 program... Hmmmm...
Pure speculation of course. :)
Stefan Boberg
Is too.
--
Stefan Boberg, Amiga/SEGA/CD32 programmer - Team 17 Software / LhA Devel.
Applied Physics and Electrical Engineering Student, Linkoping University
InterNet: bob...@lysator.liu.se bob...@team17.adsp.sub.org
========== Disclaimer: I only speak for myself, not Team 17. ============
Stefan Boberg
>> I will not sit idly by while my honor & integrity are attacked. I feel the
>> bottom line here is money. In my opinion, Jim Drew didn't want to pay my
>> price and so now he's trying to discredit my work (sour grapes), and that
>> these actions are the result of dirty business politics (judge for
>> yourselves). I will interpret any further unfounded accusations as libel
>> and defamation of my character. -Kevin Kralian (Author, Apple 2000)
>
>I am not attacking your 'honor & integrity', you have done a great job
>with the emulation, however, when the original author contacted me
>threatening to sue my corporation if your emulation was distributed with
>our product, I knew he was right. So, I have negotiated the rights to
>his emulation so that we can have a emulator that has no legal questions
>pending.
So, how do you know this person did the emulator and not Kevin? This
smells, and the smell isn't exactly sweet.
On a totally unrelated issue, have you finished your PD virtual memory
manager yet? What is the status of the Sega / SNES emulations ? How is the
Emplant Macintosh networking driver development progressing ?
Just curious.
Marc N. Barrett
>jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com (Jim Drew) writes:
>
>>In <Co649...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca>, e0f1...@tuzo.erin (Bruno Fernandes)
>>writes:
>>>
>>> In any case, this emulation does not need the Emplant board for
>>> anything. Passing it off as some Emplant product is just complete false
>>> advertising. It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
>>> software can also be programmed to work without the board.
>>
>>Not possible.
>
> Is too.
If it's possible, then why don't you do it? Jim Drew has said that
he would hire anyone who could "crack" the Emplant software to work without
the board.
+++++++
++++ Marc Barrett -MB-
++ IRC nick: Cyclone | e-mail: bar...@iastate.edu
+
Brett Bourbin
is it just me, or do other people read, and then have to
re-read JD postings to see if you are deaming?
disassemble and call them a theif? some unnamed author has
now sold you the rights? come on, please give us a break...
next you will be disassembling my sega game and telling me
that it is byte for byte the same as sonic and that sega
has already sold you the rights.. 8^)
endc
-- _ _ _ _
Brett Bourbin (_ |_ | /__ | |(_ 4431 Lehigh Road, Suite 151
br...@netcom.com __)|_ |_\_/ \_/__) College Park, Maryland 20740
LIMITED 703.758.2733
flam
: In <Co649...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca>, e0f1...@tuzo.erin (Bruno Fernandes)
So Bruno what if the Emplant even COULD be hacked to run without a board.
I am so sick of this piss-ant attitude... Whats wrong with the Emplant
like it is? It's VERY reasonably priced for one thing. There are people
out there that act like: -- Its not fair for the people that work hard to
make products for the amiga suck because they dont give them too us for
free. People like Jim Drew are pulling a fast one on us since they want
us to actually PAY for their product. --
: > It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
: > software can also be programmed to work without the board.
Whats your point, bud... spit it out?
--
__________________________________________________________
Flam A4000/040/Emplant fl...@netcom.com I play drums.
__________________________________________________________
michael v mascari
I second that! If there is one creature whose existence I
cannot tolerate it is that of a theif. If there weren't so many damn
thieves around Jim Drew would never have had to design the damn
board in the first place because companies like Word Perfect wouldn't
have been scared out of the market. The software industry is the perfect
example of MORAL HAZARD. I'm paying 40% of my income to the government
and high retail prices for software because of the human riff-raff which
leeches off of those that take responsibility for their lives.
-Mike Mascari (mas...@cis.ohio-state.edu)
SChampion
bar...@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:
>
> If it's possible, then why don't you do it? Jim Drew has said that
>he would hire anyone who could "crack" the Emplant software to work without
>the board.
Yeah... He'll hire them after he finishes sueing them on criminal
and civil charges. People who do things like crack software are usually
smarter than to come out and say "Hey! Look what I did!" to the people
who's software they cracked.
/* Stephen Champion | Amiga 3000/25 */
/* SCha...@Hamp.Hampshire.edu | 275Mb HD + 10Mb RAM */
/* Hampshire College - Amherst, MA | USR Courier Dual Standard */
#include "Text:Legal/Standard_Disclaimer"
Borge Noest
> If it's possible, then why don't you do it? Jim Drew has said that
>he would hire anyone who could "crack" the Emplant software to work without
>the board.
Umm...
Didn't Dan Babcock (?) once say he had parted the software from the card?
Dan
Noest) says:
>In article <2ok7l5$7...@news.iastate.edu> bar...@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett)
>writes:
>> If it's possible, then why don't you do it? Jim Drew has said that
>>he would hire anyone who could "crack" the Emplant software to work without
>>the board.
>Umm...
>Didn't Dan Babcock (?) once say he had parted the software from the card?
[I'm Dan Babcock]. No, I said that my friend Dan Zenchsleksy had succeeded
in booting Emplant (1.1 or some other ancient version) without the hardware.
This required changing almost nothing, although some things (like the
keyboard :)) didn't work. I have no interest in persuing this "argument",
just clearing this up.
Dan
Bruno Fernandes
> If it's possible, then why don't you do it? Jim Drew has said that
>he would hire anyone who could "crack" the Emplant software to work withou
>the board.
Well, it's been done. :) It's been done twice now I believe. I don't
have any intention of going out to find it or try it out, but I do know
it's been done.
BTW, I think you're getting treated a bit unfairly as of late and some of
the other people on here are the ones being the jerks. Not that I agree
with anything you often have to say. :)
Bruno.
Hybrid Developments
Bruno Fernandes
>Jim Drew (jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com) wrote:
>: In <Co649...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca>, e0f1...@tuzo.erin (Bruno Fernandes)
>: writes:
>: >
>: > In any case, this emulation does not need the Emplant board for
>: > anything. Passing it off as some Emplant product is just complete false
>: > advertising. It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
>: > software can also be programmed to work without the board.
>:
>: Not possible.
>
>So Bruno what if the Emplant even COULD be hacked to run without a board.
>I am so sick of this piss-ant attitude... Whats wrong with the Emplant
>like it is? It's VERY reasonably priced for one thing. There are people
>out there that act like: -- Its not fair for the people that work hard to
>make products for the amiga suck because they dont give them too us for
>free. People like Jim Drew are pulling a fast one on us since they want
>us to actually PAY for their product. --
>
>: > It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
>: > software can also be programmed to work without the board.
>
>Whats your point, bud... spit it out?
Flam... My point is I'm into software. I don'y like to see people like
Kevin, the author of the Apple 2000 get ripped off or get the short end
of the deal. I'm also not into seeing people lie or mislead other
people. If I wanted Mac emulation I'd be more than happy to pay the $300
or whatever it is for the Emplant. I don't need nor do I want Mac
emulation, therefore I don't bother with the Emplant at all. With the
exception of reading some threads on here of course. :) Threads in which
I see mostly users supplying good information and good arguments and a
certain Jim Drew just quoting everything back and adding little one
liners. Not that I'm saying anything bad about that. Just that I've
been the owner of some previous UU items and wasn't really satisfied.
But that's something else.
I'd like to know this fabled author of the Apple emulator Jim claims
Kevin ripped off. I want to also know the date which he first made his
emulator and a source for that original program. Seems very much like
Kevin is in the hot seat to be taken advantage of if you ask me.
Bruno
Hybrid Developments.
Evan Kirchhoff
> Yeah... He'll hire them after he finishes sueing them on criminal
>and civil charges. People who do things like crack software are usually
>smarter than to come out and say "Hey! Look what I did!" to the people
>who's software they cracked.
Errr...unless I woke up in an awfully weird police state this morning, I
don't think cracking software is illegal. _Distributing_ cracked software
is probably illegal (in most places). Cracking software _is_ a violation
of most software licenses, and is thus grounds to have those licenses
revoked, along with your legal right to use the software. But I seriously
doubt that you can be brought up on criminal charges for simply taking
apart your software, your computer, or your car.
--
Evan Kirchhoff, kir...@ccu.umanitoba.ca ..."Peter flung out his arms.
There were no children there, and it was night-time, but he addressed
all those who might be dreaming of the Neverland...'If you believe,'
he shouted to them, 'clap your hands; don't let [Commodore] die.'"
Jim Drew
Ganoe) writes:
> > you have done a great job with the emulation,
>
> Huh? You just said above he copied it byte for byte from someone else.
> Where's this great job? You said above he didn't do any of it. Which is
>it?
is a good programmer, one that I would liked to have had working for us
(we are in a hiring process right now). But, you must understand
copyright laws and how they work. If a routine or set of routines can be
found to be identical to that of previous work, there are grounds for
assumption of copyright infringement. The process from that point is to
obtain legal council (experts in the field... settle for NO LESS!) and do
comparisons between the code. There are no clear definitions in the
copyright laws pertaining to the amount of code necessary to be identical
before a copyright infringement is legtimate. The laws really center
around the intention of person(s) involved, and if the code was
deliberately used to advantage of the person(s) without consent. The
issue is very confusing, even for me, having gone to US federal court and
the British courts on major copyright infringement cases, in which I won
both.
If Kevin just replaced the existing code with code of his own (which he
is quite capable of doing), there would not be any problems what so ever
with possible copyright infringements.
The problem with Kevin's emulation (which I did want to use) and EMPLANT
is the deal negotiated suddenly changed when it was completed. All we
wanted to add hardware level compatibility using the EMPLANT hardware
(for applications that poked at the hardware directly) and distribute it
with EMPLANT. We did not want the rights to it, or hinder it's
development in any way. The agreement was also that he could sell it,
give it away or whatever at the same time it was being distributed with
EMPLANT.... it didn't matter to me. I have several letter documenting
this.
It's sad that these things get ugly like this. I just wanted to add to
EMPLANT's emulation line, and using the EMPLANT hardware would make any
emulation more compatible at a hardware level. Since we will not charge
customers for the 8 bit emulations, there is no money in it for us and I
highly doubt somebody is going to buy a $400 piece of hardware because it
will emulate an Apple ][, Atari 400/800, or a TRS-80...
Jim Drew
Boberg) writes:
> jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com (Jim Drew) writes:
>
> >In <Co649...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca>, e0f1...@tuzo.erin (Bruno
>Fernandes)
> >writes:
> >>
> >> In any case, this emulation does not need the Emplant board for
> >> anything. Passing it off as some Emplant product is just complete false
> >> advertising. It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
> >> software can also be programmed to work without the board.
> >
> >Not possible.
>
> Is too.
the MAC OS than any single person at Apple. We have the source to our
own software (obviously) and we spent several days attempting to use
Amiga resident hardware to make the emulation work (without the EMPLANT
hardware). Due to the incredibly time sensative nature of the MAC (the
reason why can't even use CHIP memory WITH the hardware), it is not
possible to duplicate it's complex interrupt structure and timer mess
with the Amiga's hardware... believe me, if it could have been done, I
would have released it for free to bury ReadySoft two years ago after our
big fiasco...
Mark C. Langston
> Kevin took an existing foundation and added a lot of functionality. He
> is a good programmer, one that I would liked to have had working for us
> (we are in a hiring process right now). But, you must understand
> copyright laws and how they work. If a routine or set of routines can be
> found to be identical to that of previous work, there are grounds for
> assumption of copyright infringement. The process from that point is to
> obtain legal council (experts in the field... settle for NO LESS!) and do
> comparisons between the code. There are no clear definitions in the
> copyright laws pertaining to the amount of code necessary to be identical
> before a copyright infringement is legtimate. The laws really center
> around the intention of person(s) involved, and if the code was
> deliberately used to advantage of the person(s) without consent. The
> issue is very confusing, even for me, having gone to US federal court and
> the British courts on major copyright infringement cases, in which I won
> both.
Not that this is relevent to anything, but there _IS_ precedent in U.S.
Law -- namely, all cases dealing with copyright infringement in the music
industry. If you will recall the Michael Jackson case some time ago, where
the courts had to listen to each note, each instrument, in several bars,
and (coupled with determining intent), decided that although the song was
_VERY_ similar (identical unless you have a trained ear) to the disputed
song, the two were different enough to disallow for copyright infringement.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark C. Langston "I want to live as an honest man,
Institute for Intelligent Systems to get all I deserve, and to give
Dept. of Psychology all I can, and to love a young
Memphis State University woman whom I don't understand."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Compton
JD> > anything. Passing it off as some Emplant product is just complete false
JD> > advertising. It's even more obvious than knowing that the Emplant
JD> > software can also be programmed to work without the board.
JD>
JD> Not possible.
Apple2000 works on non-Emplant systems, yet it multitasks with the Emplant Mac
emulation. I'd say that qualifies, since all it would require to turn it into
a module would be for you to release it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Jason Compton Nothing Absolutely :
: jcom...@tcity.com Amiga and CD32 advocate...:
: Only Amiga makes it possible... ...as only we know. :
: Emulation Editor for Amiga Report ...read it, it's good. :
: What is popular is not always right. What is right is not always popular. :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.emplant.jimdrew.advocacy. Thanx.
Stefan Boberg
>>jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com (Jim Drew) writes:
>>
>>>In <Co649...@credit.erin.utoronto.ca>, e0f1...@tuzo.erin (Bruno Fernandes)
>>>> software can also be programmed to work without the board.
>>>
>>>Not possible.
>>
>> Is too.
> If it's possible, then why don't you do it?
If it's possible to dive off a cliff into the ground, why don't you do it?
You don't have to do everything that's possible, and I haven't got the time
nor the inclination.
>Jim Drew has said that
>he would hire anyone who could "crack" the Emplant software to work without
>the board.
I wouldn't want to work for Jim - I've got a better job already. And
anyway, if I needed to run Mac software I would just buy an Emplant and
be happy. I'd rather do something more constructive than breaking other
people's code.
> ++++ Marc Barrett -MB-
> ++ IRC nick: Cyclone | e-mail: bar...@iastate.edu
--
Jonas Warnqvist
In article <1994Apr14.2...@ida.liu.se> y91s...@odalix.ida.liu.se (Stefan Boberg) writes:
> jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com (Jim Drew) writes:
> manager yet? What is the status of the Sega / SNES emulations ? How is the
> Emplant Macintosh networking driver development progressing ?
>
> Just curious.
Dito.
> --
> Stefan Boberg, Amiga/SEGA/CD32 programmer - Team 17 Software / LhA Devel.
> Applied Physics and Electrical Engineering Student, Linkoping University
> InterNet: bob...@lysator.liu.se bob...@team17.adsp.sub.org
> ========== Disclaimer: I only speak for myself, not Team 17. ============
--
--- \|/
@ @
+-----------------------------+--------------------oOO-(_)-OOo+-------------+
| _ _ ____ | Jonas Warnqvist | "Life is a |
| ////| /____) | Sandgardsgatan 11 | sexually |
| ////|| <<___ | 58252 Linkoping | transfered |
|_ _ //// ||_ _ __ \___ \ | | decease, |
|\\\\ ////==|||| ||/__\ \ \|jonas_w...@taxfree.augs.se| with 100% |
| \\\X/// ||||_|||||| ___/ /|jo...@lysator.liu.se | mortality."|
| \XXX/ ||\'__|\__/(____/ |i92j...@ida.liu.se | |
| Amiga user group /--\Sweden | tel+fax +46 13131818 | |
+------------------\__/-------+-------------------------------+-------------+
Rich Will Powers
> This has REALLY gotten out of hand, please take it to
>comp.sys.amiga.emulations.emplant.jimdrew.advocacy.
There has been nothing in this thread inappropriate for this
newsgroup. Either learn to skip posts you don't like, figure out how
to use a kill file or simply get lost.
>Thanx.
For this education? Your welcome. Please make use of it.
rwp
--
What is "scratch" and why can everything be made from it?
-><- Rich Powers -><- rpo...@panix.com -><-
u898...@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
!!! What kind of an answer is that ?!?!
The point is that you stated that the Emplant works with the A500 !!!
And now you are just ignoring your own point !! Who is the other programmer
that contacted you, threatening to take you to court !! How did he get his hands
on Kevins emulator !!
My guess is that you wanted the code to be altered, so that the emplant
can become a dongle to it, well at least part of the reason. It is an guess,
money is also another reason. But the way kevin was treated is not pretty
good, especialy with all those inconcistancies in your arguments.
George
PS: Tell us how you get Emplant to work with the A500 ??
Jan Holler
In article <19940412.7...@cryo.cryogenic.com> jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com (Jim Drew) writes:
> In <Kevin_Kra...@sacbbx.com>, Kevin_...@sacbbx.com (Kevin Kralian)
> writes:
> > was that he is declining the offer, and then he accused me of copying
> > someone else's program.
>
> I told Mr. Kralian from day one that after disassembling his emulation it
> was byte for byte identical to another emulator that was written 2 years
> prior to his, and I suggested that he make severe changes to his program.
If this is the case why don't you just keep this out of the public and care
for a solution?
Jim, you are doing harm to your society. All these public fightings sound
bad to potential customers.
> > I would expect any respectable business/businessman to honestly and
> > tactfully tell the public that an "agreement was not reached" or
> > "negotatiations failed", instead of blaming others for a company's broken
> > promises or repeated "delays".
>
> I would also expect the person conducting business to stick with the
> contract discussed both verbally and in writing. Mr. Kralian presented
> offers to my corporation early on in the development of the emulation,
> which were accepted. Now that the emulation is completed, he wants much
> more than we agreed to, especially for an emulation that is to be free.
Mr. Kralian has the right to demand whatever he thinks is correct. It's
none of his business if YOU will give the emulator away for free. A
completed work is more worth than a not-completed. I don't understand your
point here.
> > What really pisses me off is the unfounded accusation, the attempt to
> > discredit me and my work, and what I interpret as "threats" over me
> >
> > To this day, I have never heard from ANY author of any program suggesting I
> > have copied anything of theirs.
This is indeed strange. If this is true it sure shows us that something is
not going on correctly here. I suggest to Mr. Drew, that he stays out of
the argument because:
1. It's not his program (yet) (Or did you buy he other "original" one?)
2. He is not the original programmer of the so called copied programm.
I ask: What is it, what you try to reach, Jim? I'd say, it's none of your
business. Of course it's different if you bought the rights of the other
programm.
But then: keep this out of the public!!!!
--
Jan Holler, Bern, CH, hol...@holli.augs1.adsp.sub.org
Float: Some think it has to do with C - some know better...
Nico Francois
All:
S> This has REALLY gotten out of hand, please take it to
S> comp.sys.amiga.emulations.emplant.jimdrew.advocacy. Thanx.
As this kind of thing pops up every couple of months, why not create a
comp.jim.drew.compulsive.liar newsgroup ;-)
What surprises me is to see some of the things Jim writes here are so obviously
untrue.
What surprises me even more is that the vast majority of this newsgroup
apparently believes every word the man says.
Just a couple of examples, these are all Jim Drew "facts":
- The A4000/030 has been discontinued. Oh really ? This "fact" was
presented by Jim at least half a year ago.
- The CEI 4000 (A4000 + Emplant) will sell 4000 a month (or was it even a
week). Stated several months ago. Jim must be a billionaire right now.
Does anybody know _anyone_ with a CEI 4000 ? Does the CEI 4000 even
exist ?
- UU's chunky to planar routines are patented and licensed by Commodore --
they are even faster than Akiko. Anybody that has been on this newsgroup
long enough will remember this thread methinks ;-) Ken Dyke (who still
worked for Commodore at the time) specifically stated on the newsgroup
that _nobody_ from Commodore engineering has even _seen_ the UU routines.
- The promised PC emulation. Yeah, right... Was supposed to go to the
magazines for review in April. Instead it still has never been seen, has
according to Jim left alpha testing, but is only being beta tested inside
UU. Oh, almost forgot: it's faster than a 468DX50 on a 4000/040.
I mean, wow, this is certainly worth waiting for, like forever...
- The Apple II emulator, discussion still going on...
- Plenty more I'm sure... :-)
I'm starting to wonder why I even bother to write this message. Perhaps I'm one
of the very few people with some decency left who really hates to see such
dishonesty go on, and on, and on, and on... Oh well :-)
I'll go take my pills now...
_o
Nico Francois #> Software Engineer
<ni...@augfl.be> 4 SCALA - Why make it harder ?
... We were rich once
Before your head exploded
Taka Torimoto
>Check out what Steve (li...@u.washington.edu) wrote on 15 Apr 94 in a message to
>All:
> S> This has REALLY gotten out of hand, please take it to
> S> comp.sys.amiga.emulations.emplant.jimdrew.advocacy. Thanx.
>As this kind of thing pops up every couple of months, why not create a
>comp.jim.drew.compulsive.liar newsgroup ;-)
>What surprises me is to see some of the things Jim writes here are so obviously
>untrue.
>What surprises me even more is that the vast majority of this newsgroup
>apparently believes every word the man says.
>Just a couple of examples, these are all Jim Drew "facts":
>- The CEI 4000 (A4000 + Emplant) will sell 4000 a month (or was it even a
> week). Stated several months ago. Jim must be a billionaire right now.
> Does anybody know _anyone_ with a CEI 4000 ? Does the CEI 4000 even
> exist ?
Sure... I am a BIG fan of EMPLANT and I think that it's an amazing product
from a company of (looks like) 2 people... I believe MOST of what he says...
I believe that there is and will be a 386/486 emulator module, but NOT as fast
as he states... of course, that's until I see it. I really doubt that he
would push a product that does not exist... especially the PC emulator...
cause if he doesn't come up with it soon, people are going to start chasing
after him with a shotgun.
As for the CEI4000M, yes my local dealer here in Atlanta (Showcase) has
them. They supposidly show one out on the floor a few times (but don't
keep it out because, according to the person I talked to there, he doesn't
want it stolen... :) ANyways, they also advertise the CEI4000M's in a few
mail-order places in AmigaWorld...
-Taka
--
Takahito "Dr.Love" Torimoto Techwood Soccer Team: '93 B-League Undef.Champs!
E-mail: gt0...@prism.gatech.edu Amiga 1200/030 + Amiga 4000/040 _
Georgia Tech: Electronics/Computer Engineer + Social/Personality Psychology _ //
Atlanta Humane Society Mascot/Volunteer :) :) :) SMILE!! :) :) :) \X/
Bruno Fernandes
>As for the CEI4000M, yes my local dealer here in Atlanta (Showcase) has
>them. They supposidly show one out on the floor a few times (but don't
>keep it out because, according to the person I talked to there, he doesn't
>want it stolen... :) ANyways, they also advertise the CEI4000M's in a few
>mail-order places in AmigaWorld...
Anyone care to update the masses that aren't into these fictitious/vapour
products about this 4000??
Bruno
Hybrid Developments
Jim... Did you have that other Apple 2 emulator first, or did you get
contacted by that author and threatened AFTER having only Kevin's
program? You put forth both stories. Too many inconsistencies if you
ask me. Too much like a giant web being spun real-time for the
entertainment of the few believers.
Mark A. Thomas
>
>As this kind of thing pops up every couple of months, why not create a
>comp.jim.drew.compulsive.liar newsgroup ;-)
>
>What surprises me is to see some of the things Jim writes here are so obviously
>untrue.
And Jim always takes opposition to what other intelligent people say.
Often he has elaborate reasons. I'm beginning to wonder if he has frontal
lobe damage. I think confabulations are a symptom of frontal lobe damage.
>I'll go take my pills now...
You, me, and everyone else.
Mark
--
Mark A. Thomas | GEnie: m.thomas24
mth...@cs.utexas.edu | BIX: mathomas
Jim Drew
Boberg) writes:
>
> So, how do you know this person did the emulator and not Kevin? This
> smells, and the smell isn't exactly sweet.
public by request, as he frequents here) not long after EMPLANT was
released and received an eval copy of this emulation. When Kevin
contacted me (about 8 months later), I told him that we already had an
Apple ][ emulation we were looking at, but I would like to see his as
well. After going through Kevin's program (which is no more illegal than
reading a book), I told Kevin that his program was identical to the
version I got from someone else, quite some time before his.
I have every version still that Kevin sent to me (4 I think), and
although the some of the things were refined (HGR mode now fits with
pixels touching), the routines were the same.
You can think what you like, but fortunately for me, usenet is no jury.
:-)
> On a totally unrelated issue, have you finished your PD virtual memory
> manager yet? What is the status of the Sega / SNES emulations ? How is the
> Emplant Macintosh networking driver development progressing ?
>
> Just curious.
incorporating it into the emulation modules at low level (486 and MAC).
After it has been proven to work effectively with the emulations, I will
go ahead and release it to the public.
I am not sure what is going on with the SNES/GENESIS stuff. We never
intended to play with that fire. Several companies in Germany approached
us asking for developer info and such when EMPLANT was first announced..
they have the stuff, and I have heard it actually 'works' now...how well,
I do not know. Because we had grumblings (lots of questions) being asked
by someone claiming to be a Nintendo rep, I pulled the info out of the
ads.
The SANA-II support works. :-) We have made things a little different
for the EtherNet support though... we have the ability to use ANY type of
device (serial, parallel, parnet, A2065, Hydra, etc.) as an EtherNet
connection. So, you can do EtherTalk through parnet between two machines.
Maxwell Daymon
: Kevin took an existing foundation and added a lot of functionality. He
: is a good programmer, one that I would liked to have had working for us
: (we are in a hiring process right now). But, you must understand
: copyright laws and how they work. If a routine or set of routines can be
: found to be identical to that of previous work, there are grounds for
: assumption of copyright infringement. The process from that point is to
: obtain legal council (experts in the field... settle for NO LESS!) and do
: comparisons between the code. There are no clear definitions in the
You will also have to prove that Kevin copied the code - not the other
way around. If the mystery author doesn't have documentation and
witnesses as to the creation of his program, you/he/she will be
liable for the copyright infringement against Kevin!
At what point was it byte-for-byte the same? When it was first written?
It's final stages? Unless Kevin has been stealing the code constantly for
the past few years, that explanation (stealing the code) doesn't wash...
In fact, that in itself would prove he was STOLEN FROM.
Unless, of course, there is evidence otherwise...
--
//
// Maxwell Daymon
\\ // mda...@rainbow.sosi.com
\X/
Mark A. Thomas
>
>Jim... Did you have that other Apple 2 emulator first, or did you get
>contacted by that author and threatened AFTER having only Kevin's
>program? You put forth both stories. Too many inconsistencies if you
>ask me. Too much like a giant web being spun real-time for the
>entertainment of the few believers.
Yes. And, the burden of proof is on the person who was infringed. And
there are steps this person must take. First the person must prove that
he actually owns the copyright to the code (must be registered to go to
court). Then the person must prove Kevin had access. Did this other
person make his code publicly available? And where? Then you have to
prove damage occurred.
So, who is the person who was infringed? Why can't the name be known?
I would say that before the above steps are taken, we have to prove
that there is actually a person who exists, whose copyright ownership
was infringed.
Let's stay tuned.
Stefan Boberg
>So, who is the person who was infringed? Why can't the name be known?
Probably for the same reason as why the names of the fabled SNES/SEGA
emulation developers can't be known ... (Draw your own conclusions)
>Mark A. Thomas | GEnie: m.thomas24
>mth...@cs.utexas.edu | BIX: mathomas
--
Harv R Laser
n
>e
>of the very few people with some decency left who really hates to see such
>dishonesty go on, and on, and on, and on... Oh well :-)
>
>I'll go take my pills now...
>
> _o
> Nico Francois #> Software Engineer
> <ni...@augfl.be> 4 SCALA - Why make it harder ?
>
rest of us. Here's another little tidbit for you:
Before Emplant was released, and, if you remember your history
here from a couple years ago (or was it even that long ago?) there
was a lot of skepticism here, and in other newsgroups and elsewhere that it
even existed, or that it would even be released.
At one point in time, Mr. Drew publically posted to this group
that in order to prove his product was real, he was going to ship
one to me, since he felt that I had a certain amount of credibility
with the Amiga products market, if he sent me one, and I used it,
and it worked as advertised, then I could report same to the public
to help put an end to the doubts about the veracity of his
claims. I would've been willing to do this. I've done so with
other products in the past.
The Emplant was not sent to me. Some months later, the product
was released. It was still not sent to me. I wrote Mr. Drew
a number of email messages asking when I would receive the
Emplant from him. I received replies from him, at first expressing
shock and dismay that I had not yet received it, later blaming
some kind of office screw-up and that he would see to it that it
was sent. It wasn't.
At the WOCA show in Pasadena last fall, where Mr. Drew had a
booth, I tried to get to him to relay to him that even at that
time, I had never received his product. But I failed to do that
due to the crowds constantly surrounding him, and after standing
around for a while trying to get his attention (with my name
plainly visible on the press pass badge hanging from my shirt
pocket, and I was no more than 3 feet from him) I gave up.
Since that show I have emailed him a few more times - he again
expressed surprise that I had never received the product in a
reply to my letter sent to him a few weeks after that WOCA show,
but since then, my letters to him have gone unanswered.
In total, I think I'm accurate in saying that I received no fewer
than five email responses from Mr. Drew promising that the product
would be sent to me, and this does not even count his original
public posting where he said I would be receiving one (note: at
the time of his original post, I had not even asked for the
product - he was volunteering to send me one to begin with).
So to sum up - despite the many public and private promises
by Mr. Drew to send me an Emplant for my review/evaluation,
he has never done so. I do not have the product and at this point
I've resigned myself to the fact that for whatever reason Mr.
Drew may have had, he used my name in order to prove to the
public that his product existed, but in fact, at some point in
time, he made a conscious decision not to send the product to me.
I'll have one of those pills now, Nico. :)
Regards, Harv
ha...@cup.portal.com
John D Harris
>apparently believes every word the man says.
>
>Just a couple of examples, these are all Jim Drew "facts":
We could come up with just as many things that have come true.
What I would say, is that the majority of people are willing to give him a
chance, for several reasons. And that's not the same thing as blind belief.
1. Sometimes, it comes true.
2. A lot of us have nice multitasking Mac emulators, or other Jim Drew
products, that work very well. Why should we not expect more of the same?
3. There's little to be gained by calling him a liar. I think most of us
realize that everyone makes mistakes, and are willing to forgive. As
long as some of the things do materialize, which they obviously have.
4. It's extremely easy to just 'wait and see'. For some people anyway.
Sure, some of his statements have been of a dubious nature--we aren't blind
to that. But most of us aren't willing to put a blanket statement over
everything he will say in the future, and assume they will all be lies.
That seems as ludicrous as absolute belief of everything he (or anyone
else) says.
Let's take the PC emulation example. I can't understand why people flame
this, when they can't prove that it won't come out in the future. (Delays
aren't proof.) Especially when the log of Mac emulation updates clearly
shows large chunks of development time that weren't spent on the Mac
emulation. Heck, this would be a nice product to have. What's wrong with
hoping that it's real? The reward would be so much better, and it takes so
little effort to 'wait and see'.
80x86 code is supposed to be all converted to native 680x0, with no
interpretation while the emulation is running. I'd expect that to run
fast. And all it has to do is be able to run one thing at 486x50 speed for
Jim's claim to be valid, in a technical sense. Jim himself claims it isn't
going to have blazing speed for some games and other applications. If
you'll note, he talked about speed as an SI speed rating, and doesn't say
it will run all applications at that speed. Like most advertising, he
describes the product in a way that makes it sound best. I may not like
that aspect of advertising, (I loved the movie Crazy People), but I at
least understand it and keep it in mind when I judge what others say.
I'm hoping the IBM emulation comes out this summer, and that it will be
substantially faster than any other software emulation, which would make it
worth the $100 investment.
John Harris - jha...@cup.portal.com
Jim Drew
u898...@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au writes:
> I think there is an intresting conclusion coming out of this argument,
> that is off the topic from the argument. The Emplant board is advertised as
> an Emulator platform, were you can use the board characteristics, hardware
>to
> emulate another platform. Remember that emplant is supposed to emulate
> in hardware so as to speed things up. These emulators seem to be in SW
> completely. The other point is why does the SW get improved all the time if
> emulation is in HW ? It appears that the Emplant board isn't anything other
> than a platform to mount the roms, the scsi and other ports. Pretty much
>like
> Amax II+. It's not that I question the quality of the SW, but it the
>advertised
> harware that I cannot see why it is for.
The EMPLANT hardware does so much more than you realize. Without it, the
emulation would not be possible. The PC emulation is also using the
hardware, and won't be able to be 'cracked' from the board as some have
suggested could be done with the MAC emulation. All of the PC's I/O
addressing, timers, interrupt control and such as handled in HARDWARE...
The software updates for EMPLANT's MAC emulation are for adding
additional features. The emulation works because of the underlying
hardware, and not any amount of software would do it.
> Oh, and aonother point for this argument. JDrew mentions that the
> author of the other apple IIe emulator contacted him, threatening to sue
> him. How did he get the unreleased version of the software ? Unless
> it had been offcourse so that point is mute.
Evidently, Kevin released a version of his emulation (newer than what I
have even!) to several reviewers and it made it all over the world.
George Lin
: Check out what Steve (li...@u.washington.edu) wrote on 15 Apr 94 in a message to
: All:
: S> This has REALLY gotten out of hand, please take it to
: S> comp.sys.amiga.emulations.emplant.jimdrew.advocacy. Thanx.
: As this kind of thing pops up every couple of months, why not create a
: comp.jim.drew.compulsive.liar newsgroup ;-)
Yes, that would be really nice.
: What surprises me is to see some of the things Jim writes here are so obviou
: untrue.
: What surprises me even more is that the vast majority of this newsgroup
: apparently believes every word the man says.
Can you say "blindly followers/cultists"? heh! :)
: Just a couple of examples, these are all Jim Drew "facts":
[Jim Drew Lies (TM) deleted]
: - Plenty more I'm sure... :-)
Yes. I've been keeping an eye out on this group ever since the very
first day that he posted/annouced Emplant back in '90 I believe. I'm not
sure what the Emplant can do now, but I think the only thing it fulfilled
the article posted back in the 1990 was it will emulate a Mac w/ 256 colors
(if you have a gfx board that'll do that job. I think back then he was
saying HAM will do it).
I remember that I got blasted when I posted a question in this group
asking what good Photoshop is with only 16 colors in the Emplant emulation.
That was a while ago though.
: I'm starting to wonder why I even bother to write this message. Perhaps I'm
: of the very few people with some decency left who really hates to see such
: dishonesty go on, and on, and on, and on... Oh well :-)
No. We're the ones who are not blind.
I think Jim did a good job with the emulation. I would've bought one myself
except after reading some of his postings, I realized that he's a weasel
and knew that it wouldn't be out of the ordinary if his company disappears
tomorrow with all the $ and no support.
Integrity and honest of a company speaks a lot, and his childish lying
behavior (including some "rumor" posts on the c.s.a.a. about Commdore
being bought out or UU buying some Commodore stocks), just turns me
completely off.
And as for you guys who will probably accuse me of slendering (sp?), Jim's
done a good job arealdy with ReadySoft and Apple. The line where he stated
"UU knows Mac's OS better than Apple" was just sooooooo stupid that
conceded that.... oh nevermind!
GL
Bob Henry
Can you say "loud-mouth," "slandering," or "idiot?"
Now, wasn't that a nice exercise in ego-stroking?
: I remember that I got blasted when I posted a question in this group
: asking what good Photoshop is with only 16 colors in the Emplant emulation.
: That was a while ago though.
Why would you "get blasted?" Also, my Emplant seems to run Photoshop in
256 colors just fine. Was this supposed to be another "lie" told by Mr.
Drew?
Ah! The moral arguments abound, eh?
: And as for you guys who will probably accuse me of slendering (sp?), Jim's
Naw, we will only accuse you of not being able to spell. Slander? Never.
: "UU knows Mac's OS better than Apple" was just sooooooo stupid that
: conceded that.... oh nevermind!
I have no problem with that. The Mac O/S is hardly the work of art that
most people claim it is. The Amiga -lowly as it is taken to be- is far
superior.
I got your Quadra running as a task, bucky!
-henry
Robert Du Gaue
archives.
Here's the directory/info:
Apple2000v1.lha misc/emu 183K+Emulates Apple ][+ on 68020 or higher Amig
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
rober...@sacbbx.com The CrossRoads BBX
ZyXel 19.2 : (916)383-2263 ZyXEL 19.2 : 383-8937 ZyXEL 19.2 : 383-1503
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Heyboer
<Long but interresting story deleted for mental health reasons>
>So to sum up - despite the many public and private promises
>by Mr. Drew to send me an Emplant for my review/evaluation,
>he has never done so. I do not have the product and at this point
>I've resigned myself to the fact that for whatever reason Mr.
>Drew may have had, he used my name in order to prove to the
>public that his product existed, but in fact, at some point in
>time, he made a conscious decision not to send the product to me.
>
I have a similar story going back before that. Anyone remember SuperCard Amy
(the original, not Supercard II)? Jim was using Q-Link (where I was and still
am SysOp of the Hardware Area) as a platform for his "marketing" (aka
exaggerations, half-truths, and downright falsifications). We exchanged EMAIL
on the Amiga hardware that supported disk drives enough for me to realize that
he hadn't even bothered to buy a Tech Reference or Hardware Manual even though
he was supposedly designing Amiga-based hardware. In exchange for my
assistance, I was to be a beta tester of the product.
I never received anything (he beta tested in-house, or is that in-garage?), and
the product absolutely didn't work when released. Jim said you had to adjust
your floppy drive speeds (even though CBM hadn't used floppy drives with
adjustible speeds since the A1000). Jim said CBM gave him bad info on the CIA
chip (he got the info from ME, not CBM, and it was right). Jim released
updated versions of the software and it worked on maybe 10% of the machines out
there. Finally, Jim (or someone he hired to do it right) redesigned and it
worked on most machines.
Essentially, Jim used his paying customers as unwitting beta testers. He has
done likewise on Sybil and Emplant and had done so on C-64 products before
that. When he does so, he has 1001 excuses except the truth -- that the
product was released before its time. He doesn't follow through on his
promises.
Jim Drew
Who the hell are you? I don't know you, and I sure the hell never used
any beta testers for any of the Super-Card Ami copiers. I am not sure
where you got your information from buddy, but it is incorrect. We
*still* have the #1 backup utility (Super-Card Ami I/II) with more than
20,000 units sold in the US alone.
If there were problems to the extent that you state, we would have been
contacted by the Better Business Bureau, and we have not.
If you had a problem with a defective unit, it would be understandable
for it not to function (that is the meaning of defective), but to state
that 10% of the units worked, that is simply rediculous. :-)
BTW, I left Q-Link about 6 months before we ever got into the Amiga
business... so, you did not talk to me.
Nightblade
>this, when they can't prove that it won't come out in the future. (Delays
>aren't proof.) Especially when the log of Mac emulation updates clearly
>shows large chunks of development time that weren't spent on the Mac
>emulation. Heck, this would be a nice product to have. What's wrong with
>hoping that it's real? The reward would be so much better, and it takes so
>little effort to 'wait and see'.
>
>substantially faster than any other software emulation, which would make it
>worth the $100 investment.
Although I have not (and will not) participate in the flaming I
do have a complaint relevant to this issue.
1) In chat with Jim Drew on his BBS last August I was told that the
IBM emulation was ready and would debut at the WOC on Sept. 10th.
I was also told that this module would be FREE for Emplant owners.
I have a log of this conversation.
2) Based on this conversation I immediately purchased an Emplant.
3) I really don't have a use for Mac emulation, although it is
interesting, fun to play with, and nice to show off. My
father does need Mac emulation, and I will be ordering another
Emplant for him or giving him mine, but that really doesn't
have anything to do with my point.
4) The module is still not available and now I'm told that it will
cost $100 extra rather than being part of the original purchase
price. I bought the board based on the assurance that the IBM
emulation was no additional cost and would be available in less
than a month and now I can't even get a rough estimate of when
the module will be available...
I just thought that this was relevant and you might want to know
that there IS a real basis for some people feeling a bit dis-
gruntled. I don't have anything against Jim Drew and I think
that the Emplant is a *great* product. I am definately not one
of the people who doubts that the module will ever come out, but
I am a bit put off that I was misled (although I don't know if
it was purposeful or not). I am very much looking forward to
running IBM software at a decent speed on my Amiga and will
hopefully be one of the first people to get the module. :-)
Gary Rients dar...@sage.cc.purdue.edu
hey, my first internet post!! :-)
Brian Heyboer
(Jim Drew) writes:
>Who the hell are you? I don't know you, and I sure the hell never used
>any beta testers for any of the Super-Card Ami copiers. I am not sure
>where you got your information from buddy, but it is incorrect. We
>*still* have the #1 backup utility (Super-Card Ami I/II) with more than
>20,000 units sold in the US alone.
Perhaps you don't REMEMBER me, but you once knew me as "SYSOP BJH" on Q-Link.
I know you never beta tested, that's what I said; you SHOULD HAVE beta tested,
though. You did promise me that I'd be a beta tester, and when you didn't beta
test, you broke your word to me.
>If there were problems to the extent that you state, we would have been
>contacted by the Better Business Bureau, and we have not.
You had DOZENS of folk on Q-Link who couldn't make the thing work (and being an
8-bit-Commodore network, these were a minority of your customers). A friend of
mine was one of them, and he returned it. None of your proposed solutions
worked, many were ridiculous (like adjusting the speed on a non-adjustable
drive). As best I know, you gave refunds or upgrades to SC-II to everone who
asked, which is likely why you didn't hear from the BBB.
Yes, SuperCard Ami II did work. You had plenty of beta testers in the form of
SC-I owners to tell you what you did wrong.
>If you had a problem with a defective unit, it would be understandable
>for it not to function (that is the meaning of defective), but to state
>that 10% of the units worked, that is simply rediculous. :-)
>
>BTW, I left Q-Link about 6 months before we ever got into the Amiga
>business... so, you did not talk to me.
>
Bullshit. Your selective memory is amazing. You left a month or two after you
started selling Super Card Ami, and you left a LOT of really pissed-off
customers when you did. You did leave before you started selling SC-II and
Sybil. Don't you remember all of your "connecting to Q-Link on an Amiga"
stories? You were in the Amiga market then.
You most certainly DID talk with me. You also promised to appear at an online
conference and failed to show. I tried to call you when you didn't show, and
only got an answering service who said they could not or would not contact you.
I was left with a "room" full of people and no "guest speaker". Yet another
broken promise. While you may forget, others remember; and we pass along our
rememberances to others so that they might be wary where we were not.
mar...@minsk.docs.uu.se
|> where you got your information from buddy, but it is incorrect. We
|> *still* have the #1 backup utility (Super-Card Ami I/II) with more than
|> 20,000 units sold in the US alone.
Nice to hear. I have sent you three emails requesting for information about
this product and how I should be able to buy one. All of the mails were
short and clear, included my home address, my fax number and my email
address. I sent them at an interval of about a month before I gave up on you.
(I don't mind if you talk about mail dissapearing in black holes -- as long as
you don't suggest that you can't reach my address ;-) AND tells me where I
can find this thing in europe, preferable Sweden.
/Morten Norman email: mar...@minsk.docs.uu.se
Norman Kraft
> As of Sunday the 17th, Kevin's Apple2000v1 emulator is on the Aminet
> archives.
>
> Here's the directory/info:
>
> Apple2000v1.lha misc/emu 183K+Emulates Apple ][+ on 68020 or higher Amig
I picked this emulator up from AmiNet. It looks interesting enough, but
suffers from one fatal flaw in my book: it requires that you have a real
Apple ][ on hand or nearby to capture ROM images. Now, I can see going
to all the time and trouble to get ROM chips for a good Mac emulation, but
I am much less motivated for an Apple ][ emulator, no matter how much fun
it might be to play with.
Considering the limited usefulness of such an emulator, as nicely put
together as it appears to be, I'm not sure I understand what all the noise
is about.
Norm.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Kraft INET : nkr...@ucsd.edu (work)
Peptide-T Clinical Trial or try: nkr...@bkhouse.cts.com (home)
HIV Neurobehavioral Research Center UUCP : ucsd!nkraft
Dept of Psychiatry, School of Medicine
University of California, San Diego Usual disclaimers...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Drew
It is sold only by Utilities Unlimited in the US.
Harv R Laser
>In <2ouo4t$j...@spacenns.space.honeywell.com>,
>heyboer...@space.honeywell.com (Brian Heyboer) writes:
>> In article <109...@cup.portal.com> Ha...@cup.portal.com (Harv R Laser)
>>writes:
>>
>> <Long but interresting story deleted for mental health reasons>
So, Jim, since you quoted Brian's article, which quoted my
article, this could actually mean you read my article.
I await your reply.
Morten Eriksen
|> As of Sunday the 17th, Kevin's Apple2000v1 emulator is on the Aminet
|> archives.
|>
|> Here's the directory/info:
|>
|> Apple2000v1.lha misc/emu 183K+Emulates Apple ][+ on 68020 or higher Amig
|>
How do you go about to get:
a)
o Apple ][ ROM and disk controller ROM images
b)
Some programs to run on it?
Morten
--
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
| M. Eriksen, student at NTH, Norway. Email to mor...@stud.unit.no |
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
| High-level languages are for low-level programmers. And vice versa. |
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
James Cooper
In article <PgUFu*W...@bkhouse.cts.com>, nkr...@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft) writes:
>In article <Robert-...@sacbbx.com>, Robert Du Gaue writes:
>> Apple2000v1.lha misc/emu 183K+Emulates Apple ][+ on 68020 or higher Amig
>
>I picked this emulator up from AmiNet. It looks interesting enough, but
>suffers from one fatal flaw in my book: it requires that you have a real
>Apple ][ on hand or nearby to capture ROM images. Now, I can see going
>to all the time and trouble to get ROM chips for a good Mac emulation, but
>I am much less motivated for an Apple ][ emulator, no matter how much fun
>it might be to play with.
Umm... How were you supposed to run it *without* having access to Apple
][ ROMs? He couldn't include the ROM images in the archive, or Apple
would have more than enough excuse to stomp him down, and possibly get
some sort of restraining order to shut down all the sites that carried
this file, because of quite blatant copyright infringement...
>Considering the limited usefulness of such an emulator, as nicely put
>together as it appears to be, I'm not sure I understand what all the noise
>is about.
Many people invested thousands of dollars into Apple ][ software. Many
schools have hundreds of old program lying around that could be put to
good use, if they had a machine to run 'em on, etc., etc., etc.
Basically, its as useful as any other emulator - some need it desperately,
while others couldn't care less.
--
---------------
Jim Cooper
(ja...@unx.sas.com) bix: jcooper
Any opinions expressed herein are mine (Mine, all mine! Ha, ha, ha!),
and not necessarily those of my employer.
Remember, "Euphemisms are for the differently brained."
Daniel Hansson
>In article <PgUFu*W...@bkhouse.cts.com>, nkr...@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft) writes:
>Umm... How were you supposed to run it *without* having access to Apple
>][ ROMs? He couldn't include the ROM images in the archive, or Apple
>would have more than enough excuse to stomp him down, and possibly get
>some sort of restraining order to shut down all the sites that carried
>this file, because of quite blatant copyright infringement...
But I can't understand why Apple would care if the ROM's were included
in the archive. As they do not sell the Apple][ anymore they couldn't
be harmed in any economical way. Commodore hasn't even care about when
the C64 ROM's has been spreaded, and the C64 is even produced and sold
right now!
Sinqlair gave a permision to spread the Spectrum ROM's with that
emulator, has anyone cared to ask Apple if they would have anything
against letting the ROM's be included in the package?
>Jim Cooper
/ Daniel Hansson
George Lin
: ja...@cdevil.unx.sas.com (James Cooper) writes:
: >In article <PgUFu*W...@bkhouse.cts.com>, nkr...@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft) writes:
: >Umm... How were you supposed to run it *without* having access to Apple
: >][ ROMs? He couldn't include the ROM images in the archive, or Apple
: >would have more than enough excuse to stomp him down, and possibly get
: >some sort of restraining order to shut down all the sites that carried
: >this file, because of quite blatant copyright infringement...
: But I can't understand why Apple would care if the ROM's were included
: in the archive. As they do not sell the Apple][ anymore they couldn't
: be harmed in any economical way. Commodore hasn't even care about when
: the C64 ROM's has been spreaded, and the C64 is even produced and sold
: right now!
But remember, Apple still sells quite a few Apple ][ cards themselves for
the Macintosh LC series. I think it helped them push the Mac into the
K-12 Schools by offering a sort of a upgrade path...
GL
Yoda
: In article <19940419.8...@cryo.cryogenic.com> jd...@cryo.cryogenic.com
: (Jim Drew) writes:
: >Who the hell are you? I don't know you, and I sure the hell never used
: >any beta testers for any of the Super-Card Ami copiers. I am not sure
: >where you got your information from buddy, but it is incorrect. We
: >*still* have the #1 backup utility (Super-Card Ami I/II) with more than
: >20,000 units sold in the US alone.
: Perhaps you don't REMEMBER me, but you once knew me as "SYSOP BJH" on Q-Link.
: I know you never beta tested, that's what I said; you SHOULD HAVE beta tested,
: though. You did promise me that I'd be a beta tester, and when you didn't beta
: test, you broke your word to me.
Perhaps, but this obviously belongs in email. Please, please... take it
there.
:
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bruce Baltzer bru...@vnet.ibm.com |
| NLTC, IBM Canada Software Lab balt...@newton.ccs.tuns.ca |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Carlos Amezaga
::Bullshit. Your selective memory is amazing. You left a month or two after you
::started selling Super Card Ami, and you left a LOT of really pissed-off
::customers when you did. You did leave before you started selling SC-II and
::Sybil. Don't you remember all of your "connecting to Q-Link on an Amiga"
::stories? You were in the Amiga market then.
I can vouch for Brian. He may not remember me either, but I was on
Q-Link as GeoBasic and as The Smee. The above mentioned is true. Jim and
his support area were expunged from� Qlink quite suddenly after months of
claims of being able to log into Q-Link using Amiga software. (Rumors at
that time were many and so what actually happened between him and the folks
at Q-Link is anyones Guess.)
::
::You most certainly DID talk with me. You also promised to appear at an online
::conference and failed to show. I tried to call you when you didn't show, and
::only got an answering service who said they could not or would not contact you.
:: I was left with a "room" full of people and no "guest speaker". Yet another
::broken promise. While you may forget, others remember; and we pass along our
::rememberances to others so that they might be wary where we were not.
::
Yeah, I remember the talks areas. Boy were they mad.
Carlos
--
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% __A500 % UUCP: postm...@megalith.miami.fl.us % I Tried MS-DOS Once %
% __/// 030 % DATA/FAX: +1.305.559.3145 % But Didn't Inhale. %
% \\//Amiga % System Administrator - PGP on Request % --D.Atkin-- %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Jason Compton
BF> >them. They supposidly show one out on the floor a few times (but don't
BF> >keep it out because, according to the person I talked to there, he
BF> doesn't
BF> >want it stolen... :) ANyways, they also advertise the CEI4000M's in a
BF> few
BF> >mail-order places in AmigaWorld...
BF> Anyone care to update the masses that aren't into these fictitious/vapour
BF> products about this 4000??
It's an Amiga 4000 (probably 040, but I'm not sure) re-packaged by Creative
Equipment (one of the 15 companies which has taken over Commodore in the past
month) with an Emplant inside.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Jason Compton Nothing Absolutely :
: jcom...@tcity.com Amiga and CD32 advocate...:
: Only Amiga makes it possible... ...as only we know. :
: Emulation Editor for Amiga Report ...read it, it's good. :
: What is popular is not always right. What is right is not always popular. :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Brown
> But I can't understand why Apple would care if the ROM's were included
> in the archive. As they do not sell the Apple][ anymore they couldn't
> be harmed in any economical way. Commodore hasn't even care about when
> the C64 ROM's has been spreaded, and the C64 is even produced and sold
> right now!
Apple Inc. has NEVER been shy about defending their commercial rights
to the fullest extent of the law. If they do not, then whatever rights
they do not defend vigorously can be considered in the public domain.
They might, for example, want to produce their own Apple ][ emulator
for various reasons.
Please... let's not even compare CBM and Apple in the area of business
management. Apple is a viable company, while CBM seems to blunder from
one disaster to another. Much as I like and enjoy my A3000, CBM IMHO
is one helluva fine example of how NOT to run a company.
--
* Edward E. Brown II * Internet: ebr...@pacifier.rain.com *
* Chemist On A Mission From GOD! * FidoNet: 1:105/135 *
* ------------------------------------------------------------------- *
Jason Compton
With a Bogeda Bay, SlingShot, Trumpcard 500 case, i.e. anything that gives you
Zorro slots...I guarantee it'll work.
(I realize that's not what you're asking, but it's the only answer you're
likely to get that everyone can agree to.)
Traveler Ltd.
Nico Francois (ni...@augfl.be) wrote :
>As this kind of thing pops up every couple of months, why not create a
>comp.jim.drew.compulsive.liar newsgroup ;-)
>What surprises me is to see some of the things Jim writes here are so
It's not just here that he does it.
>What surprises me even more is that the vast majority of this newsgroup
>apparently believes every word the man says.
good lesson in why certain people are successful in political campaigns.
>Just a couple of examples, these are all Jim Drew "facts":
>
>
>- The CEI 4000 (A4000 + Emplant) will sell 4000 a month ...
>
>- UU's chunky to planar routines are patented and licensed by Commodore
>
>- The promised PC emulation ...
>
>- The Apple II emulator, discussion still going on...
>
>- Plenty more I'm sure... :-)
actually has in his posession a AAA machine on which he is writing AAA
Emplant video drivers "right now".
He also claims to have received a letter from Mr. Pleasance in the U.K.
which told him that Commodore was still working on AAA.
And you forgot to add his current thing - the "patch" that would allow the
system to use multiple processors. And how Dave Haynie, Mike Sinz, Bryce
Nesbitt, et all were "unimaginative" in the failing to see this. If only
we'd had Jim Drew in charge of C= engineering from the start! (there's a
thought)
The guy's amazing.
To all of you who believe these things, why not put your money where your
mouth is? Jim Drew also announced on GEnie that he is about to go public
with UU. As Nico points out, Jim *should* be mega-rich already from the
A4000 + Emplant deal with C= U.K. (If you were really wealthy would you be
spending your time spinning very odd tales on various on-line systems?) If
even 25% of the things he has promised, suggested, hinted at or claimed to
be "so simple I'm amazed no one spotted it", the company should go through
the roof (if he isn't wrapped in canvas and rubber first (g)).
>I'm starting to wonder why I even bother to write this message. Perhaps
>see such dishonesty go on, and on, and on, and on... Oh well :-)
nuts he is and the level of his delusions.
>Nico Francois <ni...@augfl.be>
traveler inc.
u898...@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
> One has to wonder why this second author of the supposed _original_
> emulation is always kept in secret and why he in no way contacted Kevin
> Kralian.
>
> Sounds fishy to say the least. It would seem like a convenient way for
> UU to scam Kralian's emulation, woudn't it? And I certainly would not
> rule it out.
Well the weirdest thing, given we beleave JDrew is that the
so called copied emulator has now been released to the public as Apple2000.
This author threatened JDrew to send him to court, but he is silent even
though he frequents csa.emulations.
> Bruno
> Hybrid Developments
George
Chris Kemp
YOU DID NOT respond to my message a few weeks ago. My A4000 (rev3.1) .