A simulation's focus is more on the modeling of the internal state of the target - and the simulation does not necessarily lead to emulation. That's an important point. They model as much as possible every detail of the target to represent what the target does in reality.EDIT: Other responses have pointed out that the goal of an emulation is to able to substitute for the object it is emulating. There's no need to model the arcade machine or a terminal in detail to get the desired emulated behavior.Flight Simulator is a simulator SPICE is an electronics simulator. In practice, there may some shortcuts to the simulation for performance reasons - that is, some internal aspects of the simulation may actually be an emulation.MAME is an arcade game emulator Hyperterm is a (not very good) terminal emulator. The end result of a good simulation is that the simulation model will emulate the target which it is simulating.Ideally, you should be able to look into the simulation and observe properties that you would also see if you looked into the original target.An emulator may use different set of protocols for mimicking the thing being emulated, but the result/outcome is always the same as the original object. For example the flight simulator "appears" to be a real flight to the user, although it does not transport you from one place to another.Emulator, on the other hand, actually " does" what the thing being emulated does, and in doing so it too " appears to be doing the same thing". It "appears"(a lot can go with this "appears", depending on the context) to be the same as the thing being simulated. SPICE, for example, cannot substitute for an actual electronics circuit (even if assuming there was some kind of magical device that perfectly interfaces electrical circuits to a SPICE simulation.)A simulation does not always lead to emulation -A simulator is an environment which models but an emulator is one that replicates the usage as on the original device or system.Simulator mimics the activity of something that it is simulating.
E.g you want a circuit to work like a ROM (read only memory) circuit, but also wants to adjust the content until it is what you want. Without the features of the orginal, the simulator cannot replace it in the real environment.An emulator is a device that mimics something close enough so that it can be substituted to the real thing. A simulator is not desgined to copy the features of the original, but only to appear similar to the original to human beings. Both mimic something, but are not part of the same scope of reasonning, they are not used in the same context.In short: an emulator is designed to copy some features of the orginial and can even replace it in the real environment. How to run android emulator on mac os xThe simulation will take care only of some aspect of the actual thing, usually those related to how a human being will perceive and control it. So emulator definition would be: something that mimic the original, has all of its functional features, can actually replace it to some extend in the real world, and may have additional features not visible in the normal context.A simulator is used in another thinking context, e.g a plane simulator, a car simulator, etc. Said otherwise the emulator will act exactly as the actual thing in its motherboard context (maybe a little bit slower due to actual internal model) but there will be additional functions (like re-writing) visible only to the designer, out of the motherboard context. The motherboard will not see any difference when working, but you will be able to change the emulated-ROM content easily. The emulator will be plugged into the device in place of the real ROM. Identity V Emulator Software Instead OfA ROM emulator model will likely be software instead of hardware, MS Flight Simulator cannot be more software than it is.This comparison of both terms will contradict the currently selected answer (from Toybuilder) which puts the difference on the internal model, while my suggestion is that the difference is whether the fake can or cannot be used to perform the actual function in the actual world (to some accepted extend, indeed).Note that the plane simulator will have also to simulate the earth, the sun, the wind, etc, which are not part of the plane, so a plane simulator will have to mimic some aspects of the plane, as well as the environment of the plane because it is not used in this actual environment, but in a training room.This is a big difference with the emulator which emulates only the orginal, and its purpose is to be used in the environment of the original with no need to emulate it. In addition the pilot will know that the simulator is a simulator.I don't think we'll see any ROM simulator, because ROM are not interacting with human beings, nor we'll see any plane emulator, because planes cannot have a replacement performing the same functions in the real world.In my view the model inside an emulator or a simulator can be anything, and has not to be similar to the model of the original. So simulator definition would be: something that can appear to human, to some extend, like the original, but cannot replace it for actual use. To allow ground training (including in unusual situations like all-engine failure). The simulator is not intended to work, but to appear to the pilot somehow like the actual thing for purposes other than its normal ones, e.g. The plane simulator will not fly or carry someone, it's not its purpose at all. In addition, applications tested on the Simulator are compiled into x86 code, which is the byte-code understood by the Simulator. However, the Simulator itself uses the various libraries installed on the Mac (such as QuickTime) to perform its rendering so that the effect looks the same as an actual iPhone. For example, in the case of the iOS Simulator, it simulates the real behavior of an actual iPhone/iPad device. Its benefit is difficult to see, hum.As a conclusion, the emulator is a real thing intended to work, the simulator is a fake intended to trick the user.To understand the difference between a simulator and an emulator, keep in mind that a simulator tries to mimic the behavior of a real device. What could be a plane emulator? Maybe a train that will connect two airports - actually two plane steps - carrying passengers, with stewardesses onboard, with car interior looking like an actual plane cabin, and with captain saying "ladies and gentlemen our altitude is currenlty 10 kms and the temperature at our destination is 24☌". To simulate this, you pretend to cut yourself with a knife and groan in pain. The emulator executes the application by translating the byte-code into a form that can be executed by the host computer running the emulator.To understand the subtle difference between simulation and emulation, imagine you are trying to convince a child that playing with knives is dangerous. Applications tested on an emulator are compiled into the actual byte-code used by the real device. Typically these have a variant of the processor on them to actually execute the software with glue logic to allow the user to break executation and single step under hardware control. It allows you to run the system as if the actual processor was present. And remember products that allowed you to have ICE (In Circuit Emulation) capabilities to debug a PC platform, I find the use of the term "Emulation" to be a somewhat of a misnomer for software that SIMULATES the behaviour of a piece of hardware.My justification for the current use of the term is Emulation is that it may "augment" the functionality, and only is concerned with a "reasonable" approximation of the behaviour of the system.A piece of hardware that is plugged into a board in place of the actual processor. Coming from a world where "Emulators" are pieces of hardware that allow you debug embedded systems.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorEmily ArchivesCategories |