Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Iridium Banner AMIStore App Store A600 Memory

AuthorTopic: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?  (Read 7120 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Golem!dk

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #30 on: December 03, 2009, 08:53:56 PM »
Quote from: persia;532453

Morphos, originally scheduled to be OS 4, is available to run on old PPC Mac Minis and soon G4 Power Macs, they had access to 3.1 source but may or may not have license to it currently

Mkay... would this be the sources Ben Hermans supplied them with?
~
 

Offline F1Lupo

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #31 on: December 03, 2009, 08:55:42 PM »
yes indeed it is! it's the best and fastest Amiga OS to date.  Now that the course case is finally over much better things are on the way for AmigaOS.
Honestly people make me laugh when they need a 4 GHz machine to write the same letter that my 133Mhz PII machine can write...it really all depends on what you 'need' from your computer.
____________________________________________________________________
c64-dual sids, A1000, A1200-060@50, A4000-CSMKIII
Indivision AGA & Catweasel MK4+= Amazing
! My Master Miggies-Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
--- www.mancave-ramblings.blogspot.ca ---
  -AspireOS.com & Amikit- Amiga for your netbook-
***X1000- I BELIEVE *** :angel:
 

Offline B00tDisk

  • VIP / Donor - Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2002
  • Posts: 1670
  • Total likes: 0
    • http://www.thedelversdungeon.com
Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #32 on: December 03, 2009, 10:49:14 PM »
Quote from: klx300r;532464
yes indeed it is! it's the best and fastest Amiga OS to date.  Now that the course case is finally over much better things are on the way for AmigaOS.
Honestly people make me laugh when they need a 4 GHz machine to write the same letter that my 133Mhz PII machine can write...it really all depends on what you 'need' from your computer.


There's no such thing as a "133 mhz PII machine", unless you have got some SERIOUS underclocking going on...
Back away from the EU-SSR!
 

Offline zylesea

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2009, 11:05:48 PM »
Quote from: klx300r;532464
yes indeed it is! it's the best and fastest Amiga OS to date.  Now that the course case is finally over much better things are on the way for AmigaOS.
Honestly people make me laugh when they need a 4 GHz machine to write the same letter that my 133Mhz PII machine can write...it really all depends on what you 'need' from your computer.


Define "fastest Amiga OS".
Faster in overall execution?? Failes - Amithlon can be faster due to much faster hardware.
Getting more things with lexx cpu cycles done? Maybe - but I somehow doubt all rewritten and/or new ppc routines are faster/cycle than the 68k counterparts.

If you count native code only the fastest system in overall performance would be some probably some AROS maschine (Core i7 someone?). The fastest PPC maschine supported by an Amigaish system: Mac Mini G4 1500 MHz (MorphOS). Fastest OS4 maschine: PegasosII or overclocked A1XE.
Performance of OS4 on the same hardware as MorphOS (namely the PegII) doesn't look too good for OS4.
Thus I finally conclude: OS4 supports the least powerful hardware and is cpu power independent slower than e.g. MorphOS. At least these points made my choice pretty easy. That OS4 is the most exensive system is another issue (but that wouldn't have stopped me, luckily my bank account is pretty loaded).
But yeah - it is AmigaOS (tm).

Offline redfox

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #34 on: December 04, 2009, 03:58:57 AM »
@trekiej

I'm not here to fight with anyone.  We all have our own opinions.  I think there are many good solutions available for the Amiga user.  And I feel they are equally valid.

Some years ago I chose to go the OS4 route.  The following are my opinions based on my actual experiences.  IMHO, OS4.1 is worthy of the Amiga name, and a worthy successor to my old system.  It is not the only worthy successor.

I went straight from a Commodore Amiga 2000HD running AmigaOS 3.1 to a MicroA1 running an early pre-release version of AmigaOS 4.0 called update 1.

As soon as I powered up my new system, I was able to use it.  OS4 was familiar and yet it was new.  I had that "amiga feeling" again like when my A2000 was new.  All the concepts were there with more colour and eye candy than I had on my old machine.  The major differences for me were the keyboard and no floppy disk.

At that time, the price of entry was high, approx $1039 Canadian dollars plus tax and shipping, just for the motherboard bundled with an OS4 CD.  I purchased a new case and power supply and DVD-ROM drive locally, and used a spare keyboard, mouse, hard drive and monitor.

That was 4 years 11 months ago and I have seen lots of upgrades in the OS since that time.  Now I am running AmigaOS 4.1.

I use a mixture of 68K programs and PPC programs.
Final Writer 97, KingCON, IBrowse, PPaint, TVPaint, Real3D, MicroRexx, AWebPPC, OWB 3.20, NetSurf 3.0, AmigaAMP, TuneNet, WarpView, DVPlayer, WookieChat, SimpleMail, YAM.

My main focus is web browsing and that is why I use several web browsers.

I am also interested in trying out newer programs like OWB, NetSurf and Cinnamon Writer.

I also have the AmigaOS4PPC version of E-UAE to run a few really old programs which require AmigaOS 3.1.

---
redfox
« Last Edit: December 04, 2009, 04:33:02 AM by redfox »
 

Offline trekiej

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #35 on: December 04, 2009, 04:32:00 AM »
@RedFox
Thanks, I wanted to basically know if OS4.X had the same lineage or uh source code as 3.X. It also seems that OS4.X has received the," its nice but ...", kind of response.
I like it, but I do not have it yet. I do have a machine that I am turning into an AROS machine. It boots off DVD, I have not installed to HD yet.
It has been running for about a day and a half without locking up and I have Luna Paint running too.
By the end of Dec. I am going to have my C++ book read and I am going to tackle AROS and then hopefully OS3.X and 4.X.
Thanks to all that have posted.
Amiga 2000 Forever :)
Welcome to the Planar System.
 

Offline F1Lupo

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #36 on: December 04, 2009, 05:14:51 AM »
@ zylesea
I am referring to all the previous classic Amiga OS's before OS4.1 (including OS4.0) of which I have experience with and not any of the Amiga like variants that yoiu have described.

@ BOOtdisk

:-)..guess I should have said my first peecee...a 20 Mhz wopping fast 286
____________________________________________________________________
c64-dual sids, A1000, A1200-060@50, A4000-CSMKIII
Indivision AGA & Catweasel MK4+= Amazing
! My Master Miggies-Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
--- www.mancave-ramblings.blogspot.ca ---
  -AspireOS.com & Amikit- Amiga for your netbook-
***X1000- I BELIEVE *** :angel:
 

Offline Piru

  • \' union select name,pwd--
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2002
  • Posts: 6946
  • Total likes: 0
    • http://www.iki.fi/sintonen/
Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #37 on: December 04, 2009, 06:13:36 AM »
Quote from: persia;532453
@treklej
they had access to 3.1 source but may or may not have license to it currently

I've been involved with MorphOS development since year 2000, and I can assure you that no AmigaOS source has been used.

Obviously we have no AmigaOS license.
 

Offline bernd_afa

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #38 on: December 04, 2009, 10:21:57 AM »
Quote from: Fab;532391

No, but let's note that the supplied cairo library in OS4 is totally unaccelerated and even slower than the plain image surface, which is why joerg used a straight cairo recompilation for OWB instead.
I also use my own cairo "port" for OWB MorphOS port and related projects.


Here can also read about problems of OS4 Cairo from a OS4 dev.

http://vlists.pepperfish.net/pipermail/netsurf-dev-netsurf-browser.org/2009-August/001454.html

""""
The Cairo clipping is so ridiculously slow on OS4 that I'm not able to
fully Cairo-ise it unfortunately,......
""""

And this is the biggest Problem i think is in OS4.

There is a big and lot announcment of OS4 Feature but when you look deeper in it, you notice that it work worser than on other Systems.

sure showing lots feature on paper is maybe good for sell.
But what every future AOS need are more developers.And if maybe a developer buy such a system and he see, its only on paper good, maybe he sell soon his OS4 system because he think the OS4 devs are not qualified ebough to do a attractive System for more Users/dev than Fans that see OS4 as last Hope.

every developer knows its easy to make a software in parts running so its good enough to announce the feature and it is in some way usable.

But if a software should have a future, the software must be rock solid or near rock solid.
Cairo is btw since long time in AROS in and its not so complicate to compile.
But when a program run without Cairo its always faster not use Cairo.

maybe there do somebody a Cairo bench that show speed between MOS and OS4 Cairo and clipping.

Cairo on MOS is opensource, but OS4 devs fiddle it in OS4 so its hard to add a new cairo on OS4.

Waht Cairo Version OS4 have ?

look what Cairo Version OS4 have and look what currently opensource Cairo is here.
and what bugs are since then fixed in opensource Cairo.
same is with other libs, as newlib.OS4 with the closed source strategie have old newlib.


http://utilitybase.com/forum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=3&topic=1744&page=0

""""""
Posted: 2009-Jul-8 16:29:27
.....

Despite any open status it has (that you guys have been discussing) it has no debug symbols in it. All I found in the binary are errors. And on my system it dates back to 2005!

Is that right? The newest-library in OS4 is four yars old? :-?
""""""

And when build a opensource Version, then there can also debug symbols build in to make it more easy to find Bugs

the next thing is the OS4 compositing Engine.Here in Forums can read that it es near unusable slow when a System have only 32 megabyte GFX Card(as micro aone many user have)
with 64 mb it work better, but still can run in some slowdown Problems.so there need at least 128 megabyte to get no large slowdown on compositing in OS4 it seem

I dont know how MOS transparency and shadow work, but i have not read in Forums that it better switch off, on 32/64 meg GFX Cards.

So for my eyes MOS transparency seem better implement.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2009, 10:29:04 AM by bernd_afa »
 

Offline takemehomegrandma

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2009, 03:56:18 PM »
Quote from: Nostromo;532354
Amiga OS4.1 is an official, modern version of the classic workbench. MorphOS is the same, except its not really official. So if I had to choose on an equal stand, I'd get OS4.1

Quote from: smf;532368
OS4 is great and the only true successor to the classic amigaos.

Quote from: Fingers;532370
Agreed with the above...using MorphOS to type this right now on my G4 Mini...if 4.1 was available for this machine I'd probably be using it instead.


So, since you make a choice, but obviously disregard from factors like the level of Amiga compatibility, OS performance, features, price, and HW performance, it's basically about the brand and boing ball then?

Just curious...
MorphOS is Amiga done right! :)
 

Offline tone007

  • sad moaning faced git
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2008
  • Posts: 3238
  • Total likes: 0
Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #40 on: December 04, 2009, 04:00:17 PM »
Quote from: takemehomegrandma;532584
So, since you make a choice, but obviously disregard from factors like the level of Amiga compatibility, OS performance, features, price, and HW performance, it's basically about the brand and boing ball then?


It's all about the brand and the Boing Ball.

If you want price, features and performance, you go with a modern PC.
3 Commodore file cabinets, 2 Commodore USB turntables, 1 AmigaWorld beer mug
Alienware M14x i7 laptop running AmigaForever
 

Offline zylesea

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #41 on: December 04, 2009, 04:15:23 PM »
Quote from: tone007;532586
It's all about the brand and the Boing Ball.

If you want price, features and performance, you go with a modern PC.


It is? Well fo you mayeb, but my agenda it is about *how* things work. And which apps work. I am used to the Amiga way of things since ages (1989?) and refuse to change my mind about that as long as possible. I couldn't care less about boing balls or butterflies or #? as long as the system executes the same software I am using since ages and the system is as fast as possible, clean and known by me. The system qualifies when it feels as I am used to feel and when it acts exactly as I want it to act.

Offline cha05e90

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #42 on: December 04, 2009, 04:45:51 PM »
Quote from: zylesea;532590
The system qualifies when it feels as I am used to feel and when it acts exactly as I want it to act.

So for all of us who came from OS3.x a standard multi ghz intel pc with winuae would qualify for the same?!? I don't really believe that your reasons are really the reasons you mentioned - there is/was more than that...
X1000|II/G4|440ep|2000/060|2000/040|1000
 

Offline cha05e90

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #43 on: December 04, 2009, 04:46:57 PM »
@tone007

+1   ;-)
X1000|II/G4|440ep|2000/060|2000/040|1000
 

Offline itix

Re: Is OS4.1 worthy of the Amiga name?
« Reply #44 on: December 04, 2009, 05:08:25 PM »
Quote from: tone007;532586
It's all about the brand and the Boing Ball.

If you want price, features and performance, you go with a modern PC.


I guess we MorphOS users are Amiga nuts :D
My Amigas: A500, Mac Mini and PowerBook