Changes
/* Mass-storage and network dilemma */
*[https://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=4012 Advanced OCP Art Studio] To test [[AMX Mouse|AMX]] and [[Kempston Mouse|Kempston mouse]] emulation
== Mass-storage , RTC and network dilemma ==
*[[Dobbertin Harddisc|Dobbertin HD20]] and [[Dobbertin Smart Watch]] are the true historically-accurate solution. But it's clumsy to use (4 partitions of 5MB) and did not use the FAT filesystem. While it clearly has historical value, is it still relevant to the community today?
*[[X-Mass]] IDE/PATA mass-storage with [[Nova]] NVRAM/RTC or [[Symbiface II]]. It is the historically-plausible solution (the IDE/PATA interface was created in 1986). But it's a lie as the IDE interface was effectively introduced on the CPC with the [[CPC-IDE]] prototype in 2004, the Symbiface II being available in 2006.
*[[Symbiface III]], [[Albireo]] and [[M4 Board]] are the modern solutions that feed the CPC a direct file view of the mass-storage instead of a sectors view. So the FAT filesystem does not need to be handled on the CPC itself. Which means there is no need for the [[Nova]] NVRAM to help handling the filesystem. It's overall a simpler more convenient approach but that means throwing away historical-accuracy completely. On the other hand, it is definitely more future proof.
*Symbiface III possess an onboard mp3 player. Are we still talking about Amstrad CPC here?
*Albireo provides low level access to internet via SLIP which mean having the IP stack on the CPC side instead of it being done by the peripheral like in the M4 board, and having a bridge server gateway so on the other side. So it is not convenient at all. Also no RTC onboard the Albireo which mean another peripheral is needed for it.
*M4 Board is [https://unidos.cpcscene.net/doku.php?id=en%3Aannexes the fastest measured solution for mass-storage on the CPC]. It is a very complete and convenient solution with RTC and wifi network and very future proof. But that means sacrificing all historical ressemblance as the M4 board does all the hard work regarding the filesystem and network protocols for the CPC.
The dilemma is that emulating multiple mass-storage and network solutions mean fragmenting the already small CPC community and so having less compatible CPC software and bringing confusion to users. So a choice has to be made. What solution should we emulate?
