> No you didn't. You implied that the previous MAME versions were inferior and could > threaten your reputation when adopted through other channels. Like Android ports.
> I can understand that, but it implied embarrassment on your part. Then you go off and > make that reply.
There is no embarrassment. There is simply the fact that MAME emulates nearly every game that was in 0.37 more correctly in at least one aspect now than it did 10 years ago. 0.37 was a state-of-the-art piece of software in 2001. It's not in 2011, and it is not an accurate or correct representation of the current state of MAME or of hobbyist emulation in general. WinUAE also got a lot better since 2001, for instance. But the WinUAE Android port is based on recent code (I have it on my EVO 4G to run demos - trying to play games is of course not happening on the touchscreen).
> What would be more apt? OS2 and NT3x? Secret Society for Windows 1.0? A Gem (sic) > conspiracy, no doubt.
On a 10 year time scale, I like Windows 3.0 (the best available in 1991) vs. Windows XP (the best available in 2001). MAME's evolution is not quite as obvious to end users (although the on-screen display UI has changed significantly), but internally it's every bit as drastic as going from segmented DOS-based Win16 to flat-model NT kernel Win32.
> Your reputation is at peril because of an earlier work, which you base your future > and improved work on. Due to its availability on several mass produced platforms.
You're trying to insert drama where there is none. Iterative products improve over time. It's as true for software as it is for hardware.
Index 
Flat 
Re: Interesting Statement
Reply
Re: Interesting Statement
