Login  •  Register


The time is now: Wed Nov 26, 2014 1:18 am

Emaculation wiki  •  Delete all board cookies



Post new topic  Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ]
Print view Previous topic  |  Next topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 8:01 am 
Offline
Space Cadet

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:24 am
Posts: 8
The old thread is about fetching the latest source code, so it might not be the most appropriate to track progress of the port, thus created this one (hope this is OK).

I now managed to overcome the blitter issue (with fast and dirty hack), but for now it works only for 16M on Mac. More details (and new screenshots) on http://droidmac.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2011 2:15 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 4:37 am
Posts: 3297
Location: Canada
Thanks for the update and the new screenshots. Please do post updates in this thread!


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 10:41 am 
Offline
Space Cadet

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:24 am
Posts: 8
I just wonder, as JIT cannot be enabled (not even compiled) on non-x86 machines (like Arm Androids), would it run faster if i roll back to non-JIT code version?

In other words do anyone know, what is an [estimated] speed difference between Basilisk non-JIT code (older versions, like 142) and Basilisk JIT-code (but with JIT disabled?).

Currently it runs a bit slow on the phone. Barely usable, if we wanted to do some serious works inside the MacOS.


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 12:45 pm 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 3445
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
Hi,

The Basilisk 142 build is a windows specific build. In my opinion it is the most versatile/feature rich version ever built.
It performs wonderfully and allows setting performance options in many areas (through process priorities). The benefits of the JIT are clear, but I don't think the pre JIT versions were faster then the JIT disabled version you now have. Perhaps someone else knows better?
The pre-JIT versions for Linux might also be more versatile compared to the JIT versions, as the develop focused more on performance and less on features when the JIT was introduced. You can see that the feature set of the current windows jit built is smaller than the old 142 version.

However, along with development of the JIT also other problems were solved, so the current code should provide the best quality to base your build on.

Do you also have plans to build a SheepShaver version?

Best,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:35 pm 
Offline
Tinkerer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:39 pm
Posts: 83
The JIT versions have better performance all around, but the 142 build has great floating point performance, better than the latest JIT from CVS.


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:10 pm 
Offline
Space Cadet

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:24 am
Posts: 8
Checkout http://droidmac.blogspot.com You can [finally] get a works in progress there for your android device :).

On my Defy it works quite fine, a bit slower than Mac IIfx, but still quite playable. On newer devices (1GHz+) it will probably fly :). I'm getting general result of 8.5 in Speedometer 3.06.

MODERATOR EDIT: I fixed the URL to your blog for you. It contained the dot (.) you ended the sentence with ;-)


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:55 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 4:37 am
Posts: 3297
Location: Canada
Thanks for sharing the news... and for your hard work!


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:38 am 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 3445
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
Hi,

I downloaded the android SDK with qemu based emulator and wanted to try your new emulator, but I gave up. The qemu android emulator is way to slow to allow that ;-(

Best,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:33 am 
Offline
Tinkerer

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:37 am
Posts: 65
I found out that for work I'll soon be getting a Motorola Milestone, so I'll finally be able to try Android out!

Will be happy to test this port once I do.


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:37 pm 
Offline
Space Cadet

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:24 am
Posts: 8
Sorry guys. Nothing personal to you, as this forum is simply great!, but I got so pissed that now DroidMac is dead :(. Details on the blog. Cheers.


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:57 am 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 3445
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
Hi,

I read something similar on OSNews.com. I can understand your emotion, but at the same time feel sorry for the now stopped development.

Best wishes,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:12 pm 
Offline
Forum All-Star

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:47 pm
Posts: 760
Location: Germany
I know this thread is dead in the water for years...
But still, is there anything that could be done to revive the project?
I only recently got a Y300 Android 4.1.1 (in fact its my wife´s) and found that Tomek´s apk is running pretty smooth.
What I am missing is a usable config for my 480x800 IPS screen.
How can I enable a landscape screen? The setting is there, but DroidMac quits with an error if I select it.

I already have MiniVMacII, which is great too, but a BasiliskII port would be very useful.
DroidMac already has virtual screens for Mac which can be scrolled on the Android screen, this really does look promising.


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:07 am 
Offline
Space Cadet

Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:17 am
Posts: 8
Cat_7 wrote:
Hi,

The Basilisk 142 build is a windows specific build. In my opinion it is the most versatile/feature rich version ever built.
It performs wonderfully and allows setting performance options in many areas (through process priorities).


No love for OS X :sad:


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:01 am 
Offline
Expert User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 3445
Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
Ah,

But you are wrong there: Basilisk build 142 was created in 2001 by one specific windows developer, who did a great job.
The original developer kept the versions of BB/SheepShaver mostly in sync for all supported hosts. After he left the scene in 2008?, most improvements have been targeted at OSX. Nowadays, I guess, most users of Basilisk/SheepShaver are OSX users.

Best,
Cat_7


Top
 Profile  
Post a reply  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
 

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group