Name change?

[gryphel]

I've been contemplating renaming the Mini vMac emulator, so I thought I'd check if anyone has any opinions about it. Some reasons for change are:

* People have difficulty with the capitalization of Mini vMac.

* The term "vMac" and the icon seem a bit questionable in terms of trademarks. Though Apple has never said anything about it in ten years. It did become an issue when trying to make a t-shirt design for fund raising, and using the icon was felt too risky.

* "Mini vMac" gives the impression of just being a toy and that the "vMac" is the real thing. Which was exactly the original intention. But the situation has changed since then, and with the many refinements to Mini vMac, I don't think there are many reasons left to use the original from a decade ago. But some people still refer to vMac when probably meaning Mini vMac, and then new users may look for vMac and assume the original vMac is what is meant.

* I'm thinking about shifting focus a bit, away from trying to encourage people to compile it for themselves, since most people simply aren't going to. And probably shouldn't. Even for myself, I only use a few variations, rather than compiling specialized versions for different purposes. Now matter how easy it is to compile, there is more involved in making an application that one can really trust. So for the future, I'm thinking that the default compile would remain the same, but that I'd try to drastically cut down the number of variations. This would be done by loading settings from an optional configuration file when feasible, instead of just the compile time options that have been used up until now. Options like what machine is being emulated would remain only compile time options, but some others settings would be fairly simple to load as the program starts. After that the term "Mini" wouldn't really apply any more.

I'm thinking of calling it the "Gryphel Emulator", or just Gryphel for short, reusing the name and icon of some software I haven't done anything with for a while. I already have the "gryphel.com" domain (The main page of which has the logo I'd use for the icon). Gryphel may not be too mellifluous, but perhaps it would do. Or does it have some undesirable associations for anyone that I'm not aware of?

[Ambassador]

I'm thinking of calling it the "Gryphel Emulator", or just Gryphel for short, reusing the name and icon of some software I haven't done anything with for a while. I already have the "gryphel.com" domain (The main page of which has the logo I'd use for the icon). Gryphel may not be too mellifluous, but perhaps it would do. Or does it have some undesirable associations for anyone that I'm not aware of?

Well, it is kind of, obscure. "Gryphel Emulator" would suggest that it emulates Gryphels.

I don't really know the secret behind a good emulator name. Basilisk, Sheepshaver...

Personally, I like the name the way it is. It's an established brand, and I really don't see any reason to change besides trademark issues. Then again, SoftMac has "Mac" in its name, and that hasn't seems to be a problem.

As for the capitalization, maybe just make it Mini V-Mac or something. Or one word *Minivmac*.

[Cat_7]

Perhaps something like describing what vMac does: virtualize your Mac?

"Virt-u-Mac"
"Emu-Mac"

Best,
Cat_7

[gryphel]

Thanks for the feedback. I'm not actually too concerned about finding the best possible name. I'm just considering moving away from a name with problems to one that hopefully has less problems. It would be so much less work to use the Gryphel name and icon that I'd be inclined to use them if there aren't major problems.

Also, I was thinking of using the Gryphel name and icon just for my personal version, and strongly encouraging people who compile and distribute their own versions to pick a different name and icon (perhaps just the existing Mini vMac name and icon.) Somewhat like the Firefox/Iceweasel distinction, or Red Hat and CentOS.

[ClockWise]

I like the history of the "vMac" name. But you're right in saying that "Mini vMac" doesn't totally fit. We even wrote here in the wiki that "Mini vMac's name is misleading." So changing it would be reasonable.

Maybe someone could ask PC to put up a reference to Mini vMac on the very old vmac.org site to reduce confusion.

[Ambassador]

I still think the original name is still valid and fitting. Had this been one or two years after Mini vMac was released, I would have agreed, but Mini vMac has been out for a long time. It's name has been established as a brand. Besides, I don't think many new users even know about vMac anymore, and the connection can only die over time.

The name is fitting even without the connection:

"Miniature Virtual Macintosh" -> A small, portable Mac emulator.

Please keep the name.

[gryphel]

Besides, I don't think many new users even know about vMac anymore, and the connection can only die over time.

A google search for "vMac" gives the original vMac as the first result. Mini vMac is the third result. It's even worse for some other search engines. "vMac" has many other meanings that have nothing to do with emulation.

The advantage of "Gryphel" is that it is more than obscure, it has no other meanings that I know of. So I'm free to try to establish a meaning for it.

"Miniature Virtual Macintosh" -> A small, portable Mac emulator.

Another problem with the Mini vMac name is that in current common usage, virtualization and emulation have different meanings, and Mini vMac does emulation, not virtualization.

As for small, as I said, I'm contemplating shifting to supporting some run time configuration options, in which case the program would no longer still be so small. (I would probably keep a compile time option to not have run time options, keeping the ability to compile a specialized small version.)

I still think the original name is still valid and fitting. Had this been one or two years after Mini vMac was released, I would have agreed, but Mini vMac has been out for a long time. It's name has been established as a brand.

I'm glad you're fond of the Mini vMac brand. But not a large enough number of people are sufficiently fond, to support full time development. So I'm inclined to try experimenting with changing some things.

[Arbee]

Another problem with the Mini vMac name is that in current common usage, virtualization and emulation have different meanings, and Mini vMac does emulation, not virtualization.

I'm not sure you're using those terms the way I understand them. Virtualization solutions like VMWare and VirtualBox ultimately *are* emulators, they just cheat on the CPU emulation in various ways. But the peripherals are typically real live register-level emulation just like I do in MESS.

I'm glad you're fond of the Mini vMac brand. But not a large enough number of people are sufficiently fond, to support full time development. So I'm inclined to try experimenting with changing some things.

Personally, I'm a big fan of Mini vMac as it exists even though I kind of compete with it. It has sort of a cute-and-cuddly vibe that's very appealing. Does it actually matter if it supports full-time development? IMO, the best advice I ever got about emulation is that it's good to have multiple projects going, so if one frustrates you another will sound good. In other words, if you aren't being paid to do something full time, do it part time.

I do agree that getting "Mac" out of the name is probably smart though.

[gryphel]

Virtualization solutions like VMWare and VirtualBox ultimately *are* emulators, they just cheat on the CPU emulation in various ways.

Yes, the CPU is the difference between virtualization and emulation as the terms are now commonly used, as I understand it. In virtualization, software for the most part runs directly on the real CPU, at near native speeds. It doesn't in emulation, and so runs at least several times slower, even with the fanciest and fastest dynamic translation.

Some example references around the web: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

Mini vMac is fairly simple, and so runs more like 50 times slower than native. (But computers are so much faster these days than the original Macintosh that software from back then works fine.)

Of course Mini vMac can't use virtualization, because modern computers don't have 680x0 CPUs anymore.

Personally, I'm a big fan of Mini vMac as it exists even though I kind of compete with it.

Thanks. I'm a fan of MESS. The goal of the Mini vMac project is to help preserve Macintosh 680x0 software forever. Having no other emulators would fail that goal. The more the better.

It has sort of a cute-and-cuddly vibe that's very appealing.

Do you think the proposed new icon goes with the cute-and-cuddly vibe? It's the end result of years of doodling in classes instead of paying attention. I'm out of practice now, not having taken classes lately.

Does it actually matter if it supports full-time development? IMO, the best advice I ever got about emulation is that it's good to have multiple projects going, so if one frustrates you another will sound good. In other words, if you aren't being paid to do something full time, do it part time.

Part time doesn't doesn't work so well for me, because of what programmers call context switch time, or I might call momentum. It takes a while for me to get up to speed after interruption. So if I can now find periods to work on Mini vMac about a third of the time, I'm only getting maybe about a tenth as much done as I would working full time. The inefficiency is frustrating.

As for multiple projects, there are so many different things to do to advance the goals of the Mini vMac project. The emulator is just one means to that goal. There is also writing documentation, answering questions, publicity, and fundraising. And writing utilities and software for Macintosh 680x0, which is what I prefer.

I do agree that getting "Mac" out of the name is probably smart though.

Good. So far, no one has said "Gryphel" is a horrid name.

[fanman93]

I'm usually against change, but I think changing the name might be a good idea. I remember when I first saw Mini vMac for the DS on an emulation site, and thinking "what? have they ported OS X to the DS?". Although I'm now very familiar with the name and do like it, I think that it might spawn interest for new users if it was changed. I personally like the Gryphel name. I'd put it into the same category as SheepShaver and Basilisk II, emulators with names that mean nothing to you but spawn interest. I think that it'd make me want to check it out more. Only my opinion, but hey, I support it either way.

[Arbee]

Yes, the CPU is the difference between virtualization and emulation as the terms are now commonly used, as I understand it. In virtualization, software for the most part runs directly on the real CPU, at near native speeds. It doesn't in emulation, and so runs at least several times slower, even with the fanciest and fastest dynamic translation.

That's true, but on Intel-style CPUs without the virtualization extensions even VMWare ends up just doing binary translation, and at that point it's tough to make any distinction. (Admittedly it's mostly 1:1 translation so you don't need a fancy optimizer on the back end). Obviously on CPUs that can self-virtualize like the 68040 and PowerPC that's never been an issue.

Of course Mini vMac can't use virtualization, because modern computers don't have 680x0 CPUs anymore.

Right. And of course the *hard* problem with 680x0 emulation is restartable instructions so you can run A/UX or Linux or NetBSD. Performance is more of a secondary consideration.

Do you think the proposed new icon goes with the cute-and-cuddly vibe? It's the end result of years of doodling in classes instead of paying attention. I'm out of practice now, not having taken classes lately.

The big Gryphel icon or the little Mac by Mini vMac?

Part time doesn't doesn't work so well for me, because of what programmers call context switch time, or I might call momentum. It takes a while for me to get up to speed after interruption.

Understood - it takes a fairly hard wall for me to switch contexts, although I've become better at it over the years also as a result of demands at work. The Portable's refusal to pass the MOD3TEST may get me to switch again soon.

As for multiple projects, there are so many different things to do to advance the goals of the Mini vMac project. The emulator is just one means to that goal. There is also writing documentation, answering questions, publicity, and fundraising. And writing utilities and software for Macintosh 680x0, which is what I prefer.

Would you be interested in writing something to dump the internal firmware from Egret/Caboose/Cuda? They're all 6805 microcontrollers and they all have a command to read out their internal memory, including ROM. I've got people lined up with working machines that contain the necessary chips, but I've never written software for 680x0 Macs.

As far as "Gryphel" as a name, it works for me. It's certainly not worse than "SheepShaver" or "Basilisk II"

[ClockWise]

Much like Basilisk II, Gryphel makes me think of mythological creatures. I dig it!

[gryphel]

That's true, but on Intel-style CPUs without the virtualization extensions even VMWare ends up just doing binary translation, and at that point it's tough to make any distinction. (Admittedly it's mostly 1:1 translation so you don't need a fancy optimizer on the back end).

I had thought that most of the time it still ran the non dangerous code directly. But looking into it just now, I don't see evidence of that. http://www.vmware.com/pdf/asplos235_adams.pdf seems to indicate VMWare, for software virtualization, always runs translated code, as you say. Anyway, usually the translated code is very similar to the original, and runs almost as fast, so they still claim to be doing virtualization.

The big Gryphel icon or the little Mac by Mini vMac?

The big Gryphel icon. In its current form, it's a smoothed version of an earlier 32x32 icon. If the 2048x2048 master version is scaled down you basically get the 32x32 back, except now anti-aliased.

Would you be interested in writing something to dump the internal firmware from Egret/Caboose/Cuda? They're all 6805 microcontrollers and they all have a command to read out their internal memory, including ROM. I've got people lined up with working machines that contain the necessary chips, but I've never written software for 680x0 Macs.

That would be difficult for me to develop since I don't have that hardware. But for someone whose does, it should be possible to adapt the trivial CopyRoms program to the purpose. The first step would be to figure out how to compile it. The MPW 3.5 GM disk image from Apple can be used as is with the Mini vMac Mac II emulation alpha. Then replace the C code that writes out the ROM image with code to write out the firmware. Feel free to ask me questions about adapting the CopyRoms code.

As far as "Gryphel" as a name, it works for me. It's certainly not worse than "SheepShaver" or "Basilisk II"

Good.

Much like Basilisk II, Gryphel makes me think of mythological creatures. I dig it!

Good. It does seem to fit in, even though the Gryphel icon and named preceded my involvement in emulation, or even hearing about Basilisk II.

[gryphel]

I'm usually against change, but I think changing the name might be a good idea.

That makes 3 to 1 or so in favor. Not that I'm really trying to hold a vote.

[Arbee]

I like the Gryphel icon. It has kind of a 1930s Streamline Moderne/Art Deco feel that I think is very appropriate for an emulator. It does lose the cute-and-cuddly aspect that vMac currently shares with the original form factor Macs, but then so did most of the later Macs so it works.

[Ambassador]

I must admit, the more I read the name "Gryphel", the more I have warmed up to it. It really isn't a bad name at all.

It's just that I've gotten so used to Mini vMac. Like "New Beetle".

Still, Mini vMac has and is changing in a way in that original name may not be as fitting as it once was.

[fanman93]

I agree. The more I think about it, the more I support it. I think that others might warm up to it as well, even though we're all quite used to the current name. I would, however, suggest that if the name change does go through, to maybe put the original name in brackets or something. I'm sure that's already been considered, but I thought I might mention it anyway.

[gryphel]

I would, however, suggest that if the name change does go through, to maybe put the original name in brackets or something.

A transition period is a good idea. Joshua Juran also suggested something of the sort, in private email.

I'm thinking that that the first step could be to rename the Mini vMac Project to the Gryphel Project. So the emulator would be Mini vMac from the Gryphel Project. This makes clearer that the emulator is just one aspect of a project to help preserve Macintosh 680x0 software. I've just reworked http://www.gryphel.com a bit to be the homepage of the Gryphel Project, instead of my personal homepage.

Next step would be to use the Gryphel icon for Mini vMac. I'll do this for the next alpha. The next stable release (3.2.x) would have the new icon but still be named "Mini vMac".

For 3.3.x, I'd rename it to the Gryphel Emulator, or Gryphel for short. I'd move the homepage to gryphel.sourceforge.net, but minivmac.sourceforge.net would still be present, and direct people to the new site.

[fanman93]

That sounds good to me! I checked the homepage, and I'm liking it. I think that's a pretty good idea, gryphel!

[macgeek41796]

Hm, Gryphel does have a nice ring to it! And Mini vMac doesn't flow very well.

(And I would be all FOR having a few run-time options, so I don't have to compile 9001 versions! =P)