Next step for Amiga(like)OS?

[TheMagicM]

codenetfx:

uuuhhh.. have you heard of "bug fixes" ?  yea, they're working on it.

[amigadave]

codenetfx wrote:
I almost got the Efika board to run MorphOS but then I read a review and learned how unstable MorphOS actually is. Is there a hardware platform that MorphOS runs *reliably* on? (more or less)

Yes, it is reported to run much more stable on the Pegasos I & II machines than it does on the Efika.  Probably just a matter of releasing it a bit too early for the Efika and the team should soon have the bugs squashed, not unlike most other software releases from small teams of developers.

[koaftder]

There is no next step. AmigaOS is a dead end. People forget that AmigaOS was a series of compromises. By design it provided a lot of features present on the high end machines of the day by compromising on security and stability while being able to deliver on affordable hardware at the time. It made for a damn nice system during its reign.

The folks who wrote AmigaOS knew from the very beginning that it wouldn't carry on for decades. If Commodore hadn't gone tits up and became a dominant player in the computing world, AmigaOS today would be something completely different than the OS we all love and are familiar with and all those legacy apps would be running in sandboxes, well not really, we would have dropped them long ago just like the mac people don't give a damn about pre OSX apps.

We move forward by writing something better, not by hanging on to obsolete technology.

There was nothing OS wise that was particularly original or ground breaking on AmigaOS. Almost all of the ground breaking stuff was the hardware, which by todays standards is completely irrelevant.

[Manu]

I agree with koaftder, and I am pretty sure if Commodore
had survived they would have been forced to start to use
"common" hardware just like all other in the business.

To me both MorphOS and AmigaOS is dead end because they
are still living in their own sandbox. Amiga can't extend
it's userbase enough with just sticking to home-made hardware.

Just look at the current situation, new versions and only
crap hardware to run them on, not even a laptop..and we are
living in 2008 for **** sake.  :crazy: There's not a even
a tiny chance userbase could grow beoynd 5000 with what they
are doing today.

I'm not looking back, I gladly use what's out there Win, Linux, Macs. If AROS one day can handle my web needs I have
a spare laptop for it.

[Painkiller]

Uhh I hate the so called modern OSs... Software developers just don't care anymore what they make, instead its quanity at the cost of usability. Many programs are way too heavy than what they should be and new hardware are used to make up for that... Back in the days of Amiga, software were created for the hardware not the other way around.

People just don't seem to care nowadays they just think that hey this is the way it should work when many things could be done a hundred times better...

[AeroMan]

Painkiller wrote:
Uhh I hate the so called modern OSs... Software developers just don't care anymore what they make, instead its quanity at the cost of usability. Many programs are way too heavy than what they should be and new hardware are used to make up for that... Back in the days of Amiga, software were created for the hardware not the other way around.

People just don't seem to care nowadays they just think that hey this is the way it should work when many things could be done a hundred times better...

I´m not a big fan of "modern" OS also. They cost 10 times more disk space than they should, and there are no reasons for that. And how I hate ctrl+alt+del and those blue screens.
Unfortunately, I´ve never tried Mac OS X, so I can´t have an oppinion about it. My Mac died before OS X release

@persia:

Moving to Intel would put the OS side by side with Linux, Win, OS X and all the obscure alternative OSs. It would be just another flavor of PC.
Besides this, there would be the nightmare of writing drivers for tons of different hardware. Linux guys have it, and there are tons of programmers writing stuff for it...

[bloodline]

AeroMan wrote:

Painkiller wrote:
Uhh I hate the so called modern OSs... Software developers just don't care anymore what they make, instead its quanity at the cost of usability. Many programs are way too heavy than what they should be and new hardware are used to make up for that... Back in the days of Amiga, software were created for the hardware not the other way around.

People just don't seem to care nowadays they just think that hey this is the way it should work when many things could be done a hundred times better...

I´m not a big fan of "modern" OS also. They cost 10 times more disk space than they should, and there are no reasons for that. And how I hate ctrl+alt+del and those blue screens.
Unfortunately, I´ve never tried Mac OS X, so I can´t have an oppinion about it. My Mac died before OS X release

A "Modern" OS has to do a huge amount... the size of the source code can probably be measured in the Billions!

They might be using more space than they should, but that is a side effect of the evolutionary nature of features added to the system. Apple have recently released a beta of OSX 10.6 "Snow Leopard"... the aim of which is to slim the codebase down to just what is needed. But it will still be gigabytes in size, it will use a massive amount of disk space, because it has to do so much!

@persia:

Moving to Intel would put the OS side by side with Linux, Win, OS X and all the obscure alternative OSs. It would be just another flavor of PC.

As opposed to now, where it is just another flavour of PC with a technologically dead CPU...

Besides this, there would be the nightmare of writing drivers for tons of different hardware.

Nightmare? Why not do as AROS and use generic drivers, most hardware will work... then if you have a specific driver you get better functionality... that's how all OSs deal with this problem.

Linux guys have it, and there are tons of programmers writing stuff for it...

It's relativly easy to build a machine for running Linux, do a quick search on the net, find out which hardware you can get a linux driver for and then buy that bit of hardware... simple.

And if you think about it that's like searching on the net to see which Motherboard you need to run MOS or OS4... and then if you want to run one of those OSs you buy the compaible board... simple... :idea:

[Manu]

@persia

Moving to Intel would put the OS side by side with Linux, Win, OS X and all the obscure alternative OSs. It would be just another flavor of PC.
Besides this, there would be the nightmare of writing drivers for tons of different hardware. Linux guys have it, and there are tons of programmers writing stuff for it...

Eh? The OS is side by side all others already, it only
makes it 100 times worse to have it on an obscure platform.

Drivers is made today also aren't they ? It's better to develop drivers for hardware that EXISTS than first have
to find a harware manufacturer and THEN wait XX months for
their board to get ready and which anyway will cost many many times more and is much slower.

[AeroMan]

bloodline wrote:


A "Modern" OS has to do a huge amount... the size of the source code can probably be measured in the Billions!

They might be using more space than they should, but that is a side effect of the evolutionary nature of features added to the system. Apple have recently released a beta of OSX 10.6 "Snow Leopard"... the aim of which is to slim the codebase down to just what is needed. But it will still be gigabytes in size, it will use a massive amount of disk space, because it has to do so much!

I still can´t see this huge amount to justify gigabytes of code. AROS itself is just some megs. Many Linux distros with a nice GUI and everything are also some Megs. Sure those gigs are not just filling disk space, but it seems that some people can do the same amount of work without the same burden.

As opposed to now, where it is just another flavour of PC with a technologically dead CPU...

Now you are comparing a technology of the 90´s with today´s PCs. Would you say the same about PS3 or XBox ?
I´m not stating that keep with a 68K is better, but competing in the same hardware means it would need to be so much better than the other OS to have a real advantage. A hardware/software solution could provide some advantage

Nightmare? Why not do as AROS and use generic drivers, most hardware will work... then if you have a specific driver you get better functionality... that's how all OSs deal with this problem.

Unfortunately, PC peripherals are not that generic. Old versions of AROS worked nice with my PC, bu the last ones do not recognize my graphics card. Ubuntu 7 stretches the image in my monitor (I need to try 8...). Win 98 works nice, XP too.
Not to mention generic chinese hardware that comes with an install CD

It's relativly easy to build a machine for running Linux, do a quick search on the net, find out which hardware you can get a linux driver for and then buy that bit of hardware... simple.

And if you think about it that's like searching on the net to see which Motherboard you need to run MOS or OS4... and then if you want to run one of those OSs you buy the compaible board... simple... :idea:

Now, I agree with you. Find the hardware for the software you need is the solution.
I´ve never said MOS or OS4 have compatible hardware in each corner. I´ve just stated that hardware different than common PCs might be an advantage, considering that it might be more efficient.

Think about a race with common people running against Schumacher driving the same ordinary cars. They do not have a chance, but give a Viper to someone, and he would be king

[AeroMan]

Manu wrote:

Eh? The OS is side by side all others already, it only
makes it 100 times worse to have it on an obscure platform.

Drivers is made today also aren't they ? It's better to develop drivers for hardware that EXISTS than first have
to find a harware manufacturer and THEN wait XX months for
their board to get ready and which anyway will cost many many times more and is much slower.

There are still some stuff that needs to be done to reach the others, and I know that it will be done at some point in time.

Slower means that you designed it slower. Efika is based in a SOC, for example. It is not state of the art, and wasn´t designed to be. You can´t ensure it will cost more. Perfomance and cost are design compromises that needs to be balanced. An EEE PC will not perform the same as a Quad Core, but it will not cost the same also

[Dr_Righteous]

[rant]
As far as I'm concerned AROS is a fully functioning ready to use OS. It installs, it runs programs, it's fast and works on anything I would use it on.

The ONLY reason I don't use it is the lack of applications. Primarilly a good web browser with JAVA capabilities (preferably a Firefox port). Seconded by some kind of IM client FULLY compatible with Yahoo Messenger (every clone I've seen seems to lack stealth capabilities).

I have been here for the highs and lows of Amiga Inc., and the projects that have come and gone. The ray of hope crushed by people who seem to only want to screw us Amiga fans out of money and sue their contractors... or anyone else who tries to come up with something new (Amithlon anyone?)

I like my classic Amigas, but I have lost ALL faith in a next generation Amiga product. The Hyperion suit is the final nail in the coffin of Amiga IMHO.

AROS is the only thing we have left. If we as a community have any interest in the future, EVERYONE should stand behind it.
[/rant]

[persia]

I really don't get this race idea.  there is no race, there is no competition, that took place a decade and a half ago and Amiga lost.  Amiga now is in a place of being something that you use in addition to a PC or Mac,  it's not and never will be a replacement.

Now since this isn't a race it makes sense to have the Amiga run on the same hardware as Macs and PCs.  Especially in this day of virtualisation.  You can have a PC with a virtual Amiga, an Amiga with a virtual PC or Mac.  The hardware should be the same to make this easier.

This whole idea that I even need a computer for each OS is just plain silly.  Why?  Because that's how they did things back in  the 20th Century?  

I have a Mac, I run OS X, XP, Gentoo Linux, one box, one screen, on keyboard.  Intel/AMD equipment is cheap, can you say that about Amiga equipment?  Stuff that you would throw out if it we're Amiga, and you pay 100s of dollarsfor it, where's the sense?  

[Painkiller]

Uh well we are now in an era where you have to constantly upgrade your computer to use the same freaking features and for what? For nothing. I think modern computers should be more consolised, so that you wouldn't have to upgrade every 2 to 3 years. Maybe a 5 year life span would be nice. That way it would be quaranteed that the software would be made for the specific hardware in mind and most likely a lot more effort would used to optimize it. It would be even easier for the devs, because they wouldn't have to be worrying about wide range of different hardware setups and will their code run on it.

It is really a sad state where modern day computing is, we have so much horse power on these machines yet even half of its potential isn't even used due sloppy coding and differences in hardware. Consoles are a perfect exsample how much platforms can actually be pushed once it matures and people learn to code for it, but that isn't going to happen in PC world ever.

That being said I think it would make perfect sense to port MOS 2 to PS3 as it is going to be around for many years to come and its succesor most likely will also support other OSs.

So please MOS team let us have it on PS3 Other hardware that you are planning on using it are pretty much dead.

[bloodline]

@Painkiller

You don't want technology, you want a flower garden...

[persia]

Not everyone's demands are that sofisticated, my 10 year old son does fine on a 700 MHz G4, that's pretty old technology.  My wife have a single core AMD 3200.  Not too sophisticated.  But they don't push the machine, my wife does email, surfs the web, does a little word processing.  My son does similar plus itunes and some games.

I on the other hand do animation, video editing, photo editing, 3D modelling, so I have 8 cores all running at 3.2 GHz.  Having to update is the price I pay for staying on the edge.  

You could always borrow spare computer power from other machines in your house, look up the Condor Project or use X Grid if you just have Macs.

[Painkiller]

@bloodline

No I want a computer that actually works and is not bug ridden I don't see how that is possible when there is so much variety in hardware.

People have different opinions you know...

Surely MOS is quite full of bugs, but a small team is working on it and I would think it is a lot easier for them to get rid of the bugs with one hardware in mind than thousands of different combinations.