On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 08:46:02 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

You're a dumbass because you didn't follow
directions, obviously didn't understand the directions as written and
didn't seek additional clarification or assistance before attempting
(and failing) to act on them.

I openly admit I am only of average intelligence (if that), where I concede
easily that I still haven't gotten the java code to work on an Android
emulator on the Windows AMD-based desktop.

Moving forward on that problem, it seems that Microsoft may have induced
Google to attempt to fix their hardware acceleration bugs on AMD-based
Widnows desktops.

It appears that Microsoft implies the following sequence of events:
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5287229emulation01.jpg
a. Google (apparently) didn't support hardware acceleration on Windows
b. So Microsoft built an Android Emulator that did work on Windows
c. Some time thereafter, Google responded by fixing their bugs

At least that's implied when you read the orange header he
https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/vs/msft-android-emulator/
"Note: After we released the Visual Studio Emulator for Android,
Google updated their Android emaulator to use hardware acceleration.
[Hence] We recommend you use Google's emulator when you can, as it
offers access to the latest Android OS images and Google Play services.
If you have enabled Hyper-V, try out our Hyper-V Android emulator
compatibility preview to run Google's emulator on Hyper-V directly"
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/xamarin/android/get-started/installation/android-emulator/hardware-acceleration?tabs=vswin&pivots=windows

The good news is that this implies that Google's Android emulator "should"
work with hardware acceleration on Windows PCs, where I've learned the hard
way that Intel-based Windows PCs are far better supported for hardware
acceleration than are AMD-based Windows PCs.

It turns out that any reference that does not mention AMD is worthless when
it comes to getting an AMD-based Windows desktop to work with emulation.

The good news is that the reference above _does_ mention AMD, so it's at
least useful for those of us on the lowly AMD-based Windows desktops.