One unified OS for the future?

[amigadave]

I talked about the choice of 32 bit 68k for the low end and 64 bit PPC for a high end Amiga with one unified API. Let's let the consumers choose:

1) 68k laptop Amiga for $1000
 o CPU speed of a Raspberry Pi or better
 o 1GB of memory
 o 40GB SSD
 o SAGA gfx with chunky
 o supports most 68k Amiga software
 o battery life of 16 hours

or

2) PPC laptop Amiga $7000
 o CPU speed of an i3 or better, 64 bit, 2-4 cores, virtualization support
 o 8GB of memory
 o 1TB hard drive
 o integrated modern gfx card
 o 68k software is sandboxed, PPC AmigaOS support is possible, no virtualization software
 o battery life of 4 hours

Like Olaf said, it's not just about wants (or even needs in this case) but what is realistic. We could probably realistically have option 1 as it would sell in the thousands. Option 2 would have a few hundred buyers and not enough high end Amiga software to take advantage of it.

I have been programming, debugging, using a web browser and transferring files with SMBFS on my Amiga for the last few weeks with several days of uptime. I have done up to 32 bit gfx editing for a web site using TVPaint, ImageFX and PPaint. I can do a lot with 128MB on a 68k classic Amiga. I could use more speed and a little more memory would be nice but I can't see any way that I would use more than 1GB of memory with current Amiga apps.

I take one from column A (#1 above) now and one from column B (#2 above) after it has been out for several months and is proven stable with completed drivers, and I have had the time needed to save up the money to buy it.

Perhaps #1 from your post could be done very soon-ish, using FPGA technology and existing laptop components for battery storage and management, plus an LCD screen, but I am not convinced it could be done for only $1,000 US dollars.  Maybe 1,000 UK pounds, but who knows, maybe if the people creating it don't ask for a huge markup profit, then maybe $1,000 US dollars is possible.  I would suggest 2gb of RAM though, as that would provide us with more room to develop new software that takes advantage of the SAGA video resolutions and features, plus more demanding 68k software, which can take advantage of the increased speed of a Soft-Core 680x0 CPU running at close to Raspberry Pi speeds.

I also agree that such a laptop could sell thousands of units, compared to at best a few hundred PPC laptops meeting your #2 description, and selling for $5,000 to $7,000 and up prices.  I can't wait to test how fast LightWave3D v5.03 will run on one of these Phoenix accelerators in one of my Commodore Amiga computers!  LightWave3D for 68k runs on both AmigaOS4.1.6 and MorphOS3.7, but has some rendering or display problems that should not exist on an accelerated Commodore Amiga.

What would be the best way to fund the creation of #1?  A bounty, a Kickstarter project?  A "Do-it-Yourself" design using common off-the-shelf laptop parts (if you can really find laptop parts for sale to "Do-it-Yourself" builders)?

@Blinx123,

It is in the Amiga community universe where you will find 2 to 3 thousand buyers for a 68k laptop as described in #1.  There are more Amiga users who remain interested in 68k Amiga software and hardware, than all of the NG Amiga Inspired platforms combined, or at least it appears that way to me and many others.  If we will soon have 68k Amiga accelerators and stand alone clones that can provide performance equal to or faster than the SAM440ep, I think that interest will grow even higher for 68k software and hardware.  Only time will tell, but thankfully, we don't have much longer to wait, as it appears that progress has been good, and reports seem to indicate that these new FPGA accelerators and stand alone systems will be released within the next 2 to 6 months.  

@ Blinx123, Paolone, itix, etc.

This thread seems to have evolved into at least 2, if not 3 or 4 different discussions.  The question of should NG Amiga OSes use 64bit memory space, or 32bit memory space, IMO should be a separate question from the running of AmigaOS3.x on 68k and FPGA hardware.  I agree with you that if we are talking about the topic of this thread, one OS to unify Amiga users as a possible future choice, then 4gb RAM is not enough.  I think any new OS should provide the possibility to expand as far as possible in the future and should not be designed with limitations that are already known, or tied to any single hardware choices.  One of the other discussions is about how much is enough, when thinking of improving existing Amiga 68k hardware, software and actual enhancements to AmigaOS3.x for 68k and FPGA hardware.  In that discussion, the decision to have 32bit (or even 31bit) memory space, or 64bit memory space is less black or white.

As different as apples and meatloaf to me, but maybe you see all of this differently.

[biggun]

I talked about the choice of 32 bit 68k for the low end and 64 bit PPC for a high end Amiga with one unified API. Let's let the consumers choose:

1) 68k laptop Amiga for $1000
 o CPU speed of a Raspberry Pi or better
 o 1GB of memory
 o 40GB SSD
 o SAGA gfx with chunky
 o supports most 68k Amiga software
 o battery life of 16 hours

or

2) PPC laptop Amiga $7000
 o CPU speed of an i3 or better, 64 bit, 2-4 cores, virtualization support
 o 8GB of memory
 o 1TB hard drive
 o integrated modern gfx card
 o 68k software is sandboxed, PPC AmigaOS support is possible, no virtualization software
 o battery life of 4 hours

To be honest I find both way to expensive...

I would rather target something like this:


* 68K CPU with enhanced feature set and instruction providing multimedia acceleration
* 1 GB of fast main memory
   My design target would here by to reach 1.5 to 3.0 GB/sec memory copy speed.
   This means this 68K system would be about 10 times more powerful in memory than a PowerPC G4 Amiga.
* USB, Network and HDMI connectors
* Amiga Chipset with P96 und truecolor
* Video resolution up to full HD
* SDCard storage

We have the know-how to produce the above today.
The whole could be sold for $300-ish

[Fats]

AmigaOS uses cooperative multitasking with a preemptive scheduler. Where it falls short of the definition of preemptive multitasking is memory protection and task protection.

What a very strange definition of preemptive multitasking...

[takemehomegrandma]

We have the know-how to produce the above today.
The whole could be sold for $300-ish

Perhaps in theory...

[guest11527]

Perhaps in theory...

Hard to say - and depends on what you want. If you want a complete system, professional manufacturer, plus casing, ready to buy in stores - no. I believe Gunnar is more stating what the whole thing would cost as the price of all of its components, probably self-assembly, or as a turbo-board ready to be plugged into an existing machine. That's simpler. FPGAs aren't really that expensive anymore, and it doesn't take much more than this chip plus a bit of glue-logic around it.

Anyhow, the whole discussion shows again that its not so easy to identify what people actually want. Yes, "of course" I want memory protection and a larger addressing space and a more modern Os. However, this creates a machine that would rather require a x64 architecture to run on a PC. It would probably not have much in common with AmigaOs as we have it, though could run old applications in a sandbox. That was basically one option I gave. Given my background, you should really know that I'm all for memory protection and resource management. Just to let you know: The result would only have remote connection to AmigaOs.

The other option is Gunnar's option: It is just stating the fact that it is unrealistic that Amiga will ever become mainstream again, and if you want mainstream features, you'd better get a mainstream machine in addition. If you just want a bit more computing power for the old stuff, this is quite realistic as a hobbist project. It's of course creating a machine that cannot compete in any aspect to a modern system - but what the heck - it's a hobby after all.

Anyhow - make your pick.

[takemehomegrandma]

@Thomas Richter

There has been a lot of talk over the years. Talk, talk, talk. And dreams. But even if "the know-how" would truly be there to actually accomplish this in practice, it still takes *a completely different* kind of know-how to actually take it beyond some basement prototype stage, set up production and marketing the thing at an end-user retail price of $300.

[psxphill]

AmigaOS uses cooperative multitasking with a preemptive scheduler. Where it falls short of the definition of preemptive multitasking is memory protection and task protection. Without both, you're going to have badly behaved programs trashing daemons, other programs or the kernel itself. On UNIX, Windows NT and Linux, for example, the worst a badly behaved program will usually do is coredump with a segmentation fault, vs on the Amiga where it will lock up the system or send it into a guru meditation error.

AmigaOS is pre-emptive and not co-operative. You can't just redefine the terminology.

On Unix, Windows NT & Linux you can take down the entire machine from software.
 
 I would quite like to see a modern x86 or an ARM on an A1200 accelerator card.

 It's kinda interesting to have AGA for an A500, although I don't know if I'd actually buy one.

[TeamBlackFox]

Uhh guys I'm not redefining any terminology: preemptive multitasking by definition requires the OS have the ability to cull tasks that overrun other tasks, or hijack the scheduler, as one can effectively do currently with the forbid() system call.

It has been described as preemptive multitasking, but the de facto definition of preemptive multitasking requires the OS to be able to protect tasks against each other. Task protection and memory protection are two different things, but they're both integral to stable systems.

Furthermore, I never said other OSes can't be taken down from software, but there are countermeasures which can be applied to enforce that. On Linux, for example, cgroups effectively isolate and control processes in such a way that the OS can't be resource starved. UNIX and Linux further use ulimits, privilege separation and permissions to act as countermeasures. This is in addition to memory and task protection.

What I'm trying to say is, the AmigaOS is a fossil, effectively. If it ever is to stand a chance of being a stable, secure,general use OS it will need to evolve and break compatibility if needed. If your proprietary binaries can't keep running, then get the developer to update and fix them or else release the source code under a proper licence like the MIT, BSD or ISC licence so others can continue and if needed, fork it.

[amigadave]

To be honest I find both way to expensive...

I would rather target something like this:


* 68K CPU with enhanced feature set and instruction providing multimedia acceleration
* 1 GB of fast main memory
   My design target would here by to reach 1.5 to 3.0 GB/sec memory copy speed.
   This means this 68K system would be about 10 times more powerful in memory than a PowerPC G4 Amiga.
* USB, Network and HDMI connectors
* Amiga Chipset with P96 und truecolor
* Video resolution up to full HD
* SDCard storage

We have the know-how to produce the above today.
The whole could be sold for $300-ish

I would not want to add any new ideas or demands to delay your Phoenix accelerator projects, but it sure would be great if the Apollo Team, or someone else that has the engineering and design talent, would take the next step and create an FPGA based 68k Amiga laptop.  It is one hole in our available hardware that is only filled by AROS and MorphOS users, and at least for me, a portable system is much more useful to most peoples lifestyles these days, more than a desktop system, though I am not advocating that everyone switch to using laptops or tablets (personally don't like tablets myself), or abandoning the creation of Phoenix accelerators for all or most models of the original Commodore Amiga computers.  After production and sales of Phoenix accelerators, and maybe even stand alone desktop systems, it just would be great to have a laptop option available.

It is just so much more convenient for myself anyway, to use a laptop and be around other family members and friends, instead of being alone in another room with my desktop system, or being unable to use my preferred platform except through emulation when I am traveling, because there is no Amiga 68k laptop option available.

Your cost estimates are impressive and admirable, but don't under estimate hidden costs.  It is better to estimate the costs a little higher than actual and then be able to deliver a product at a lower than anticipated price, instead of giving the impression that a lower price will be possible, and then having to raise the actual selling price to an amount that is higher than your original estimates and be criticized for making the original low estimates.

@TeamBlackFox,

I think that users or programmers in the Amiga community who think that any of the 4 different directions the Amiga has survived in will ever become competitive again with any mainstream platform, are seriously delusional, or hopelessly out of touch with reality, IMHO.  I don't think you believe that the hobby OSes that have sprung up since the demise of Commodore and all other companies who have come and gone, who purchased the rights to the Amiga API since Commodore went bankrupt, plus AmigaOS3.x, which has fallen to the status of a hobby OS, due to a lack of support and slow development to provide any current modern features, will ever be able to compete with mainstream OSes.  It is doubtful that any of these hobby OSes will even be able to compete with any Unix, or Linux based niche distributions, which have many more programmers available to work on upgrading them than any of the Amiga Inspired OSes.  I only bring this up, because several statements in this thread have compared what we currently have and what some users believe we should strive for in the future, to mainstream OSes.  No doubt, we should learn from platforms which have much greater resources, and strive to copy as many features and improvements as we can from them to our tiny niche OSes, but if some of those features and improvements comes at the cost of throwing away all or most of what makes an Amiga Inspired OS related to our Amiga legacy and heritage, then why even bother?  If we have to give up almost all legacy support, then why not just abandon any connection to the Amiga and use the mainstream choices available to us?

If we instead wish to continue working toward an improved Amiga Inspired OS, some compromises must be made with the understanding that we will never be able to compete with mainstream OSes, but we can provide "Better" Amiga Inspired OSes, than we currently have available to us.  That is where we fall into 4 different directions where people think their direction is the right choice for themselves and several others and why we can't, or won't be able to ever agree on one unifying OS that satisfies all remaining Amiga users and programmers.

[TeamBlackFox]

Amigadave,

My point exactly. People are delusional to compare it to other OSes favourably, especially in its current state. On the same hand I'm not denying UNIX and workalikes as a whole don't have a very different set of problems from AmigaOS, namely the fact that there is a massive undertaking to remove a boatload of retrospectively bad design decisions, from the System V init daemon, to the X11 protocol of over 20 years ago and implementations, to newer mistakes such as HAL, systemd, udev and Weston which the community is dealing with in very divisive manners. What I do know is that they're much more advanced, even in the state of division that plagues the communities.

My comments are more to people who think, in an asinine manner, that the AmigaOS can be satisfactorily used as a daily driver without serious limitations. I looked into it years ago, when I had my 3000UX ( Amiga UNIX is a pile of garbage, in retrospect ) and discovered that there is a tone of poorly written implementations out there of various programmes, so one has to spend a lot of time auditing, writing dirty hacks and modifying the machine's underlying OS. Which I'll admit, is fun at time, but to use the now antique computers as daily drivers of any kind is pretty asinine. The only reason I can still run IRIX for example is because the UNIX APIs for a lot of things are cross platform, and one can replace old, proprietary libraries and OS parts with new equivalents that are open source. Also since IRIX is almost 10 years ahead of AmigaOS in terms of development, since OS 3.x ground to a halt ~2000-ish while IRIX still was regularly patched until the SGI bankruptcy in 2009-10.
Finally as a refrain to the original topic, I like the state of how things are now in the community: There are well-defined differences between each major project and its goals, and their user bases. Nothing wrong with a little bit of choice now!

[matthey]

I would not want to add any new ideas or demands to delay your Phoenix accelerator projects, but it sure would be great if the Apollo Team, or someone else that has the engineering and design talent, would take the next step and create an FPGA based 68k Amiga laptop.  It is one hole in our available hardware that is only filled by AROS and MorphOS users, and at least for me, a portable system is much more useful to most peoples lifestyles these days, more than a desktop system, though I am not advocating that everyone switch to using laptops or tablets (personally don't like tablets myself), or abandoning the creation of Phoenix accelerators for all or most models of the original Commodore Amiga computers.  After production and sales of Phoenix accelerators, and maybe even stand alone desktop systems, it just would be great to have a laptop option available.

A 68k laptop is my dream but it is quite a bit more work to make with quality and it really needs high enough production numbers to make it worthwhile. A small tower board makes more sense although it may be possible to make it in a shape that would fit in an existing laptop shell. My point with the laptops in general was to show how much more difficult and costly it would be to make a modern competitive laptop compared to a fun but still useful 68k netbook/laptop.

Your cost estimates are impressive and admirable, but don't under estimate hidden costs.  It is better to estimate the costs a little higher than actual and then be able to deliver a product at a lower than anticipated price, instead of giving the impression that a lower price will be possible, and then having to raise the actual selling price to an amount that is higher than your original estimates and be criticized for making the original low estimates.

I think Gunnars estimates may be a little low but not that far off by looking at the Mist and fpga Arcade. I wish these boards would put more memory on board.

Amigadave,
My comments are more to people who think, in an asinine manner, that the AmigaOS can be satisfactorily used as a daily driver without serious limitations. I looked into it years ago, when I had my 3000UX ( Amiga UNIX is a pile of garbage, in retrospect ) and discovered that there is a tone of poorly written implementations out there of various programs, so one has to spend a lot of time auditing, writing dirty hacks and modifying the machine's underlying OS. Which I'll admit, is fun at time, but to use the now antique computers as daily drivers of any kind is pretty asinine. The only reason I can still run IRIX for example is because the UNIX APIs for a lot of things are cross platform, and one can replace old, proprietary libraries and OS parts with new equivalents that are open source. Also since IRIX is almost 10 years ahead of AmigaOS in terms of development, since OS 3.x ground to a halt ~2000-ish while IRIX still was regularly patched until the SGI bankruptcy in 2009-10.

My 3000T with CSMK3 68060@75MHz, Mediator with Voodoo 4 and ethernet and mostly standard AmigaOS 3.9 feels like it's almost as fast as my older 2.3GHz Pentium M laptop with Windows XP. My Amiga doesn't pause for several seconds with low CPU usage and in general feels more responsive. The laptop is faster after it gets up to speed but I would be quite happy with the speed and memory of my 68060 Amiga in a laptop. The worst problem is not the AmigaOS which is quite useable even today but rather the lack of more modern apps. My Amiga is stable which is different than secure, cooperative or not. Yes, programs have to cooperate in behaving but I simply stop using what doesn't. It's not that big of a handicap. I would like to see partial memory protection as we could have most of the benefits of memory protection with the speed of shared message passing. A 68k compatible Amiga will never be a high security OS necessary for servers and workstations but most users don't need it. Users seem to like the idea of security until they realize they lose freedom and end up with Windows Vista annoyances. I prefer a fun computer to be on the freedom end of the freedom vs security scale. I wouldn't mind having a more secure high end Amiga for more serious work but it would be a lot more effort to create. My laptop analogy was to show how much more effort this would be. I believe it would be better to sell fun computers to the masses instead of high end computers to the classes. If Amiga APIs were more similar then expanding the Amiga to the masses would help the classes with their lack of software problem.

[Minuous]

Uhh guys I'm not redefining any terminology: preemptive multitasking by definition requires the OS have the ability to cull tasks that overrun other tasks, or hijack the scheduler, as one can effectively do currently with the forbid() system call.

No, it doesn't require that at all; preemptive multitasking is about task scheduling, nothing to do with memory protection. See eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preemption_(computing)

[biggun]

A 68k laptop is my dream but it is quite a bit more work to make with quality and it really needs high enough production numbers to make it worthwhile. A small tower board makes more sense although it may be possible to make it in a shape that would fit in an existing laptop shell. My point with the laptops in general was to show how much more difficult and costly it would be to make a modern competitive laptop compared to a fun but still useful 68k netbook/laptop.



I think Gunnars estimates may be a little low but not that far off by looking at the Mist and fpga Arcade. I wish these boards would put more memory on board.

$300 for the system is not low.


Very similar FPGA systems as I did describe
* 1 GB memory
* video out,
*  SDCard,
and an FPGA actually twice as big
and twice as expensive as we need.

= the complete systems were sold for a retail price of $99.

This means is absolutely possible to produce such a system for less than $100.

[ElPolloDiabl]

Here's where we left off. Quickpak wanted to develop high end workstations.

http://www.amigahistory.plus.com/quiky.html

Their migration path was the DEC-Alpha.

I was doing a search for when the PowerPC was adopted. I remember not everyone was happy with that.