I'm working on some updates on the emulator comparison once again, and although I'm planning to leave most of the testing as it is, I'm wondering what you think of the current emulators...

What do you like about the emulators, and what don't you like? In what way is the interface of -say- RuMSX more intuitive than fMSX's UI? What would an ideal emulator look like? Or do you prefer seperate launchers (like VisualMSX?)

It's pretty much how you look at this. I think the perfect combination of an emulator would be the core of openMSX or NLMSX with the user-interface of RuMSX. That is the most complete interface I've ever seen. And when it comes to a REAL user-friendly interface, MSXPLAYer really scores quite high.

Launchers can be quite useful when they can be used with more emulators, but then you would ask about user-friendlyness of launchers as well.

'inserting' a rom or a diskimage should be done in only 1 action. (so not like nlmsx where you insert roms down in the config screen)

however nlmsx is still my choice..

Frits is still working on a better user interface, so NLMSX may turn out very user friendly in the end. Everybody involved with NLMSX development (only Frits still needs to make it then ) is thinking about how the interface can improve.

An emulator is interesting to me only if I can make debugging operations in real time.

Because of this, the only MSX emulator user-friendly to me is BrMSX.

It's a pitty it doesn't work on Windows 2000 or Windows XP.

NLMSX could be a good choice if it had implemented a good debugger.

ok, but a debugger is mostly/only interesting for the developers of software and the developers of the emulators . I admit, it's an essential, but it doesn't make the software more or less useable

Quote:

ok, but a debugger is mostly/only interesting for the developers of software and the developers of the emulators . I admit, it's an essential, but it doesn't make the software more or less useable

Yap. That's true. It has nothing to do with useability. Maybe I should move this subject to another forum.

Anyways, most of emulators of other platforms such as MAME, NES, SNES, etc. have a debugger as well though it's only interesting to developers.

If MSX emulators had a debugger, many people could decide to start assembler programming easier.

Quote:

If MSX emulators had a debugger, many people could decide to start assembler programming easier.

NO$MSX

Does NO$MSX run on NT/XP systems?

It doesn't on mine

Well i am currently making a program to run msx games just by selecting the game (you see 2 screenshots of it) and by pressing the run key. The program then starts the game automaticly (and it fills in what rom type etc.)

At the moment i am using 2 versions of fmsx, a old one for fast game play and fmsx-sdl for better sound and because you can save with this version.

At the moment i have about 130 games (with 260 screenshots ) inserted in the program.

I will put the program and the games +emulators online soon. (zipped it will be about 15 mb i think)

My favorite emu is paraMSX, but the GUI is not important for me, I use it for the compatibility with the .ROM and .DSK (other emu like RuMSX and NLMSX crash several times... )

In my opinion, the best user-friendly emulator is MAME (a complete list, icons for ROMS working or non-working, a big options pannel...) I think MAME is the best way to follow to make a user-friendly environment

Quote:

Does NO$MSX run on NT/XP systems?

NO$MSX works on XP, at least on mine. As I said you in other thread, run it in "W98 compatible mode"

MAME is a console application. Unless you are talking about MAME32 or any of the available frontends or variants.

It would be REALLY user-friendly if it could make coffee