What's wrong with openMSX?

Página 2/6
1 | | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

Por Manuel

Ascended (18734)

imagem de Manuel

12-12-2003, 21:09

OK, here my first reaction to your reaction.


I think that, to many people, openMSX is just way too extended. Most people just want to 'click and play', which explains the success of RuMSX and the recent newcomers BlueMSX and RedMSX.

openMSX can do a lot indeed. But you won't notice it if you don't use it. So, I think this is not a good argument. You can still click and play. E.g. try to drag and drop a ROM file on the openMSX binary in Windows. Will work. With a GUI it will be even better of course, but I already mentioned that.
As I said above, Catapult already solves most of that. Why not use that people?
(So, I can now skip most of the other reactions, since they're all abuit GUI... Wink


The main problem is that the system roms are not included.

Nothing we can do about that of course. Copyrights are copyrights.


Futhermore, a 'machineeditor' would be nice. I have no problem editing xml (actually: I don't like xml a bit) but a editor where you could drag&drop your msx machine would be nice.
And general msx, msx2, tweeplus and turbor machines would be nice, most people don't
care about emulating a specific machine, just a standard is enough.

As I already said in the original post: we are going to add some standard machines with loads of extensions. A machine editor is currently out of the scope of openMSX. Anyone can make such a thing though. Someone may include it in a complete GUI or so.

Mars2000you: as I said in that other post: 2 versions doesn't seem to be a good option. Adding the aforementioned boosted configs does.


if i receive an IM from someone, i switch back from fullscreen with prt scr/sys rq, But, sometimes i accidentally press F12!! please do something about that. the F12 button is too close to some other buttons

You can change the default key bindings in share/settings.xml Smile

So, actually, there's nothing that I haven't mentioned yet or that is possible Smile come on! You guys can do bettter! Wink

Por Bart

Paragon (1422)

imagem de Bart

12-12-2003, 21:33

End-users don't want to download more then 1 zip/rar/tar/tgz/etc. to get what they want. So offering a 2nd party GUI to openMSX is just not enough for Windows users(allright, I'll admit, the whole GUI thing is only important to the users of the win port).

Example; if one would like to use openMSX, they'll have to download openMSX win port, rom package and catapult. that 3 things from 3 different websites. On the openMSX website (http://openmsx.sourceforge.net/) I cannot even find any links to Catapult (just a 5 minute search). And I know it exists. How should anyone who doesn't visit MRC (or any other MSX news site for that matter) be able to find Catapult?

Make sure the end-user will find what he came for. The whole package. Not just some obscure tarballs.

I'm speaking from a Windows end-user point of view, because I think that's an audience openMSX should give more attention to. As long as the team doesn't see this, openMSX will never reach the popularity of, a technically weaker, emulator like ruMSX.

Por mars2000you

Enlighted (6182)

imagem de mars2000you

12-12-2003, 23:30

I don't understand why you want 2 versions.
2 versions means 2x more work for developers, or a lot of #IFDEF stuff in the source code.

Again, a simple frontend can solve this problem.

It's simply not true ! I've just tested a "new" emulator called liteMSX on my harddisk.
liteMSX is the light version of openMSX that is created by
- deleting all specific machines and replacing by the general boosted configurations that you can download on my site http://www.marsupone.com
- deleting all extensions that seems me no useful, as my configurations are boosted with MSX-AUDIO, MSX-MUSIC, Moonsound, 2 drives, 2Mb Mapper, 2Mb Megaram, X-BASIC (I only keep the following extensions : debugdevice, ide, msxdos2, rs232, scc, scc+)

You know what ? liteMSX works even good as openMSX, with or without a frontend !

Conclusion : no real double work for the programmers, but a good step in the right direction if openMSX wants to become really more populair 8)

Por DarQ

Paragon (1038)

imagem de DarQ

13-12-2003, 00:14

hmm, the current openMSX is still aimed at developers, as i read on their homepage. since im still a developer, i like the thing! let is become truly a astonishing emu which is for the n00bs Tongue and judge again Wink

n00bs should simply (still) stay away from openMSX... until later

Por Manuel

Ascended (18734)

imagem de Manuel

13-12-2003, 13:39

End-users don't want to download more then 1 zip/rar/tar/tgz/etc. to get what they want. So offering a 2nd party GUI to openMSX is just not enough for Windows users(allright, I'll admit, the whole
GUI thing is only important to the users of the win port).

In general this is probably true. Windows users seem to fear the command line. But it's not OS specific. Some Linux users do love clicking 'n stuff. (And I totally disagree that Linux programs are always user unfriendly (seems you have little experience with LInux), but that's an other discussion...)


Example; if one would like to use openMSX, they'll have to download openMSX win port, rom package and catapult. that 3 things from 3 different websites. On the openMSX website (http://openmsx.sourceforge.net/) I cannot even find any links to Catapult (just a 5 minute search). And I know it exists. How should anyone who doesn't visit MRC (or any other MSX news site for that matter) be able to find Catapult?

You are right. This is because Catapult is still in an unofficial status: it's not supported by the openMSX team. However, we are working on a completely new portable Catapult that will be officially released on our web site (and maintained in CVS). Just be patient. I'll think about adding links to the currently unofficial Catapults.
It will remain a seperate release though for now, since the GUI is completely optional.

Again, the ROMs: we can't do anything about that, I hope you understand.

Make sure the end-user will find what he came for. The whole package. Not just some obscure tarballs.

Obscure tarballs? Those are only for the *nix people... And some won't even need those anymore. E.g. Gentoo Linux already has an openMSX package in their distribution. We're trying to get more of those for the other distros.


I'm speaking from a Windows end-user point of view, because I think that's an audience openMSX should give more attention to. As long as the team doesn't see this, openMSX will never reach the popularity of, a technically weaker, emulator like ruMSX.

It's hard to work for Windows people if you don't run Windows yourself. Reikan is our only WIn32 developer. Having more people who know about Win32 development would help. (Yep: this is an invitation to help us...)

About liteMSX as mars2000you talks about:
The configs are not really a part of the emulator. So, I don't understand why you're talking about 2 versions of an emulator. What's wrong with just adding these boosted configs? I mean, there may be more configs there you won't use then, but what's wrong with that? Anyone could delete them. Heck, anyone out there could create his own set of configs and make them available on the web, to replace the default configs of openMSX....

Por mars2000you

Enlighted (6182)

imagem de mars2000you

13-12-2003, 15:50

There's nothing wrong to add boosted general configurations to the existing specific machines, but for the common user (I'm not speaking about me, but about the users that prefer fMSX clones or RuMSX) that wants to access to a more "basic" emulator, it's really a NEMESIS 4 walthrough :

1 - Download on openMSX site the emulator with all his specific machines

2 - Install openMSX

3 - Delete all the specific machines (with exception maybe for cbios and cbios2)

4 - Delete almost all extensions (with exception for some indicated in my previous message)

5 - Go to my site to download general configurations and alternative settings

6 - Install these general configurations and alternative settings

7 - Go on FUNET and/or download NLMSX to get access to the system roms

8 - Install the system roms in the good directories with the general configurations

9 - Go to the Catapult site to download the frontend

10 - Link the frontend with openMSX (or liteMSX)

Do you think really that most of the common users will make all these actions ? NO, THEY WON'T !!!

It explains why fMSX clones and RuMSX are so populair.

It explains also why I prefer NLMSX that comes with system roms, general configurations and an extended config editor. Yes, NLMSX is indeed a more advanced emulator (by comparison with fMSX clones), it's not for a newbee, it's not for an expert, but for an advanced user (although the last version includes a more simple way to lauch ROM games)

If you use NLMSX and want to emulate a specific machine, you must only download the plugin that interests you and install it ! Alas, the developers of openMSX prefer the other way ... Don't complain if openMSX is not populair ....

When I see the evolution of this discussion, I think that openMSX will remain reserved for the experts and some advanced users (I use openMSX only when NLMSX doesn't work correctly : for example, some demos with special VDP tricks or when I need a feature that I can't find in NLMSX, like Midi emulation)

Por snout

Ascended (15184)

imagem de snout

13-12-2003, 16:15

I can only praise the fact that openMSX doesn't come with System ROMs. Every emulator-developer should have made that choice long time ago, as distributing the System ROMs is simply illegal.

For the rest I do agree with mars2000you. Most people do not want to take that much efforts to get an emulator running.

The question is... should the openMSX developers care about that? There are plenty of alternatives for the "click and run" people out there, who on their turn don't care if they can watch the entire Unknown Reality demo or not. They can run their favorite MSX1 (and MSX2) games on their fMSX-derivatives and are happy with that. Why on earth would they switch to different emulators?

Por mars2000you

Enlighted (6182)

imagem de mars2000you

13-12-2003, 16:23

Just a remark about the system roms : the official fMSX-Windows emulator of Marat comes with system roms, you can also download these roms on Marat's site ... and we know also that Marat has an agreement with MSX-Association (as the MSX-PLAYer uses great part of the Marat's code). Apparently, there's no problem between Marat and MSX-Association about the system roms !

Por snout

Ascended (15184)

imagem de snout

13-12-2003, 16:38

fMSX/Windows is not "an official" emulator like MSXPLAYer is. Furthermore it's not MSX-Association, but Microsoft (Japan?) who are the cause of the systemROMs not being free. Last but not least, just because no organization has taken action against spreading system ROMs yet doesn't make it more or less (il)legal. I think it is a good thing that developers like the openMSX team and JR of fMSX/S60 choose the safe side and don't spread system ROMs (or use C-BIOS).

BUt, we are getting offtopic here. The openMSX team aims for perfect emulation of the MSX, all MSX machines ever released and even all MSX hardware ever released. It's very hard (if not impossible) to get a versatile, flexible, always in development emulator like openMSX in a small, simple and user-friendly GUI without degrading its capabilities.

A lite version would of course be an option, but like I was trying to state... I do not really see the purpose for that either...

Por Manuel

Ascended (18734)

imagem de Manuel

13-12-2003, 16:48

Reacting to mars2000you:

As you'll undestand by now I hope, we simply cannot add the ROMs to openMSX distributions. So, steps 7 and 8 are something we can do nothing about.

I still don't see why someone would do steps 3 and 4. Of course you can do that if you don't use these configs, but why bother?

Steps 5 and 6: this will be fixed in the next release I hope, as I said earilier. We will add boosted configs.

Regarding step 8: yes. But this will be fixed in the future, as I also explained already. You'll be able to download it from the same location as openMSX itself then.

So, step 1, 2, 7, 8 and 10 remain. Of course some one could write a small installer script that does this for the user. Feel free to do so, on your own responsibility, but since it involves downloading system ROMs, we certainly won't do that.

Página 2/6
1 | | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6