The comparison really didn't cover some aspects that I think are valid points of comparison for C64 emulation:

- Sound: The quality and authenticity of the sound produced by the various emulators varies widely, with CCS64 probably reproducing the most authentic SID chip emulation.

- Cartridge support: Some emulators support cartridges (CCS64, VICE/WinVICE) such as EPYX fastload, Super Snapshot, etc.; some do not.

- GEOS functionality: GEOS doesn't work correctly on all the C64 emulators, and this would be considered a significant problem for any C64 "power user" (yes, I use that term with tongue planted firmly in cheek :). Likewise, the ability of WinVICE to provide Internet connectivity to the C64 build of the Contiki OS is a notable advantage as well.

- Ethernet support: WinVICE is the only emulator I know of at this time that supports emulated C64 network adapter cartridges (TFE & RRNet), but this is something that should be looked at, even if it's only applicable (to my knowledge) for running the Contiki OS.

- Speed: The article mentioned in passing that Hoxs was the slowest of the emulators, but a somewhat objective speed comparison would have been nice to include. (I recall using the old C64S emulator running at full speed on my old 486DX2/66 back in the day.)

Just some points I thought were worth considering. Also, as far as compatibility, not all emulators are equal; several compatibility issues do exist, although I can't recall the specific programs or games off the top of my head. Here's a link, though, that contains some C64 disk images with tools that can be used to test various emulators' compatibility to a real C64 (search for "compatibility" on this page):

http://www.censor.net/newdesign/tools/