Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?

[Hammer]

OS4 on a G5 (which is 64bit, btw) would scream past x86, in GUI performance and most video applications. Of course I'm assuming that OS4 or OS5 will be ported to the G5 in the future. AmigaOS was designed for a low MHz 68000 processor. If the design is kept tight, then think of what it could do on a 64bit processor like the G5.

AMD64 and 970FX are about the same in terms of general performance e.g Cinebench 2003.

[Hammer]

All this willy waving is well and good, but is there an existing amiga application, or any in development that can even tax the existing G4 sytems?

Any 3D rendering applications would tax any MPUs e.g. AOS's Cinema 4D R4.2.

PS; I don’t if AOS4’s primary media player can play Microsoft’s WMV-HD 1080p formats.

[Hammer]

mdwh2 wrote:

Karlos wrote:

Hammer wrote:

All this willy waving is well and good, but is there an existing amiga application, or any in development that can even tax the existing G4 sytems?

Any 3D rendering applications would tax any MPUs e.g. AOS's Cinema 4D R4.2.

Raytracers are not typical applications.

So what's a "typical" Windows application that taxes the latest CPUs? I guess there's games, but I can't really think of applications (at least, ones that couldn't be similarly discounted as "not typical").

Note that, the "typical" Windows applications will be moving to Avalon.

[Hammer]

When you're on PPC you are not in the MS sandbox

In the past, Microsoft (with Motorola's funding) has promoted MS Windows NT 4.0 PowerPC edition. PowerPC’s failing in the desktop market is due to PPC's desktop infrastructure issues. Microsoft can’t fix PPC’s fundamental issues.

IF we have AMD running Freescale; the results would have been different. AMD would have SledgeHammer style PowerPC with 64bit extensions which doesn’t compromised with 7447A’s desktop application compatibility. Then they will apply Geode's low power processes for embedded deployments but without altering the ISA compatibility**.

**X86’s standard for uncompromised legacy support.

Freescale's screwing with MPC7447A's compatibility with e500 core(MPC8548E) is unacceptable in desktop PC market e.g. FPU opcodes. Freescale hasn’t learnt anything from mucking around with various 68K compatibility.

The minor compatibility difference between 750FX and 750GX is also an issue that X86 desktop ISVs would not tolerate.

[Hammer]

Wow. Any idea what those compatibility issues are?

Recall in AW.net threads about 750FX Vs 750GX and AOS4-Pre issues. There are *minor* different between the two PPC32, but sufficiently enough to cause some issues to AOS4-pre.

"POWER everywhere" is nice IF they freeze ISA standard i.e. none of this 68K style ISA cut&paste. The *minor* incompatibility between PowerPC chips simply sucks from mainstream programmer’s view point.

One thing I still find remarkable about the PC (if little else) is that you can still run DOS software written for a 386 on the Pentium4 EE. If you can't, it's probably an issue with a sound card or something stupid like that.

I verify that IBM's DisplayWrite and DOS 3.30 (still in a box) can still run on Athlon 64 3200+.

[Hammer]

I'm not disagreeing (somehow disagreeing with Hammer about anything CPU related seems about as sensible as jamming one's tongue in a breville), but what level of incompatibility are we talking about here?
.

Able to run unmodified ~1985 OS on 2004 HW.  

 I mean almost every member of the 680x0 series had minor differences with those before it - quite majorly so in the 68040 / 68060, but I don't recall it ever being a major problem.

Why do you need a 68040.library or DeciGEL/SetAlert command(e.g. for 68010)?

In a strict sense, such mucking around would be undesirable in the PC desktop corporate world. The administration and governances are the real issues with wana’be alternative PC camps e.g. Freescale's 8641 (Q4 2005 sampling) should be 8548 when done right the first time(sigh).

[Hammer]

2. An "Early Startup" menu

During the BIOS checks; Pressing F12 on the old IBM ThinkPad T2x enables the user to select other bootable devices.  

[Hammer]

bloodline wrote:

DonnyEMU wrote:

Karlos wrote:

dammy wrote:
by Karlos on 2005/1/26 17:59:19

f it had gone x86, then great, I would have saved money too.

Then what do you call AROS, chop liver?

Dammy
TeamAROS

I have downloaded AROS periodically and taken it for a spin on the old PC. And I have to confess, it's about as much fun as one can have with x86 :-)

However, and don't take it personally but for me, AROS is not AmigaOS. It is source compatible and I do intend to code on it at some point but I prefer to wait until it has matured further. Also, I want to see where the OS is going as opposed to just where it has been. In this regard, I feel AROS and AmigaOS will diverge considerably. So, which route to follow? For me, that depends on which of the two is presently the most compatible.

It's probably not a good quantifiable reason, but one of the reasons I feel more of a connection with OS4 is that it already runs on my classic PPC, which has several bootable versions of AmigaOS. It runs the old 3.x applications (well the 680x0 ones), even the hardware banging ones, without UAE , as well as the newer OS4 native ones. I appreciate that the A1 does not have this level of compatibility, but it will always be more compatible with existing software than AROS (that is, until, AROS develops some kind of internal 680x0 emulation).

This leads me to the question just HOW compatible is OS/4 with old Amiga software.. I know that OS 3.9 enabled some PPC compatibility, but honestly to me emulation is emulation. Whether you have to run it through software or some OS later.. If you were to run a "classic" mac application on OS X it would load an entire copy of the old Mac OS just to run that application. At the chip level the PowerPC really has nothing in common with the 680x0. Most people today run a version of "UAE" just to be compatible with applications for compatiblity with old custom chips.

I think karlos's argument revolves around being able to run the OS (Be it AmigaOS4 or AROS) on his existing hardware. Funnily enough that is my argument too... the only difference is that I have invested in newer hardware, which I had to do since I now have a large x86 software investment spanning nearly 5 years. Despite exclusivly owing an Amiga for 10 years (and inclusivly for 16 years), I probably only have maybe 3 or 4 years worth of software invesment, 100% of which is not irrepalceable with modern software.

Like karlos, AmigaOS 4 only becomes interesting to me when I can run it on my existing hardware, but unlike karlos I can't get OS4 to run on my BlizzPPC... yet. But I can run AROS on my existing hardware.

What does interest me is what happens when Karlos's BlizzPPC dies... :-(

Just *hope* that uA1 is *cheap* enough when that time arrives i.e. Eyetech must sell uA1 to other markets ASAP.

This might be tricky since Eyetech is competing with other PPC vendors with MPC8548E (as an example).

[Hammer]

Besides, I can't believe that account security is that difficult to do (SNIP)

Amiga‘s legacy message system would be an issue. This is related to memory protection issues.

out making it a complete joke, a la Windows

It can be secured with an aggressive application lockdowns and usage of non-root/admin user accounts.

[Hammer]

What I meant was that basic computer tasks could still be done on an 040 or 060 processor. Tasks such as word processing, spreadsheets, small to medium sized databases, web browsing, some game play, etc.

68060 @50Mhz may not be enough for basic personal computing for 21st century i.e. easy MP3 play back, DVD(Mpeg2)player, full featured web browser (with WMV/Real Player/QT6 and Java VM content).

PS; AMD's PIC* reference (mainly targeted for third world countries) already blows away 68060@66Mhz based Amiga PC. *Based on the AMD’s Geode GX SoC (includes video acceleration infrastructure, integrated DDR memory controller and ‘etc’). The power consumption of 1.1Watt at 533MHz or 0.9Watt at 466Mhz. AMD’s Geode GX also includes MMX and 3DNow SIMDs.