Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: QBit on September 30, 2019, 06:49:29 PM
-
Watch these Videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2i1v71EZT3w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUNHFXDSn-se
8)
-
Isn’t it the purpose of AROS?
-
It still won't run most OS3.5/3.9 software, so still not useful for any practical purpose IMO.
-
It runs OS3.3/3.9 software fine once you install the Reaction classes and resource.library.
What software btw? Most of it is just irrelevant prefs programs for the OS itself, I cannot think of any software title that requires OS3.5+, the very few titles that rely on Reaction (AWeb) also work with ClassAct.
-
It defeats the point of an AmigaOS replacement if you still need to add components from AmigaOS. Why not just use AmigaOS then?
Software like MCE, Report+, AmiArcadia, etc. requires ReAction rather than ClassAct as they use some additional features that are not present in ClassAct.
-
Because it upsets you, that alone makes it worth while - IMO.
AROS has software AmigaOS doesn’t have, for example a maintained Poseidon USB stack.
Care to name those software titles that really require 3.5+?
-
Software like MCE, Report+, AmiArcadia, etc. requires ReAction rather than ClassAct as they use some additional features that are not present in ClassAct.
Huge popular must have titles, not.
-
Because it upsets you, that alone makes it worth while - IMO.
Trolling again eh obviously...why am I not surprised...
It's disappointing that AROS is lacking, but hardly upsetting. I just use the real thing instead.
-
Because it upsets you, that alone makes it worth while - IMO.
Trolling again eh obviously...why am I not surprised...
It takes one to know one, eh?
You keep jumping on just about any AROS thread just to say that it doesn't work for you and that you're not at all interested in it.
-
I just don't like the way they conveniently omit that the version of AmigaOS they replicate is 25 years obsolete and modern "Amiga OS Conform Software" is actually not supported, it's misleading.
-
I just don't like the way they conveniently omit that the version of AmigaOS they replicate is 25 years obsolete and modern "Amiga OS Conform Software" is actually not supported, it's misleading.
Noone wrote "supported", the word used is "runs", which is true. And "modern" Amiga software? Let us not kid ourselves, nothing "modern" going on here. What AROS does is replicate the APIs, not the the software that the OS shipped with - all APIs are in place for also Reaction to run, it just happens that the owners of Reaction do not wish to see it on AROS - which is totally fine, because Reaction has _very little_ to offer over what is already present. And if you _REALLY_ desperately need Reaction on AROS, you can have it - you have shown up through the years that you have no problem ignoring copyrights and distribution licenses, so you should have no trouble using unpacking a reaction.lha archive on your AROS/68k system partition.
Anyways - AROS moves on with or without you, you can mix and match with "real" AmigaOS all you like.
-
What AROS does is replicate the APIs, not the the software that the OS shipped with - all APIs are in place for also Reaction to run
ReAction itself is part of the API. By your line of reasoning AROS (or indeed AmigaOS itself) is just really exec.library, all APIs are in place for the rest of the system components to run.
And it is a wider issue than just ReAction: there are other features in OS3.9 and last time I checked AROS implemented few of them.
Anyways - AROS moves on with or without you, you can mix and match with "real" AmigaOS all you like.
AmigaOS moved on 20 years ago, it is AROS that still hasn't.
-
AmigaOS moved on 20 years ago, it is AROS that still hasn't.
*slow clap*
-
amiarcadia works with ClassAct and not needs ReAction
I tested it
Aweb works with ClassAct too
I also tested it
and the rest of your list is hardly relevant for most users
-
Maybe someone should put up a web page with "unofficial boingbags for AROS/68k, only for owners of AmigaOS 3.9"
-
What AROS does is replicate the APIs, not the the software that the OS shipped with - all APIs are in place for also Reaction to run
ReAction itself is part of the API. By your line of reasoning AROS (or indeed AmigaOS itself) is just really exec.library, all APIs are in place for the rest of the system components to run.
And it is a wider issue than just ReAction: there are other features in OS3.9 and last time I checked AROS implemented few of them.
Anyways - AROS moves on with or without you, you can mix and match with "real" AmigaOS all you like.
AmigaOS moved on 20 years ago, it is AROS that still hasn't.
ReAction isn't part of the normal API, it's just a newer library that was added later, and not a whole lot of software used it. MUI is technically a library as well that was added later on, but it's definitely used by far more things than ReAction. While I do enjoy my Amigas, I think the real future of the Amiga platform is open source, and AROS is the attempt to provide that. Need something like the Vampire or a kickstart rom switcher really for developing the m68k version. Would love a fully open source stack on an Amiga.
One of the reasons the Amiga has been a stagnant platform is because there are just so many alternative operating systems. It's like Linux, with it's 100s of distributions out there, yet with dwindling amounts of users instead of growing. While I have played a bit with MorphOS (and bought a license for it for my Mac PPC Laptop), and with AROS and AmigaOS 4.1, I tend to think AmigaOS4.1 is the most Amiga-like, followed by AROS then MorphOS. But I do believe AROS to be the future if we want any growth in the platform.
AmigaOS really hadn't moved on 20 years ago, while AROS is still being developed. The IP of AmigaOS is still being battled upon, I'm shocked some finally just said screw it and started developing 3.1 again!
-
ReAction isn't part of the normal API, it's just a newer library that was added later, and not a whole lot of software used it.
Err, what? Reaction (or classact - that is its historical name) is a collection of boopsi classes that logically extends the already present Os interface. If you look at Os 3.1, then it already shipped with a couple of "reaction classes" aka "boopsi classes", namely the colorwheel.gadget, the tapedeck.gadget and the gradientslider.gadget. The preferences system makes use of them, and includes an additional gadget that was not factored out as a separate class, namely the sketchpad.gadget. The classes that shipped with 3.9 were a logical continuation of this development as it extended the existing classes, made some of the existing classes openly available (such as the sketchpad.gadget) and added new classes that filled in missing functionality. Thus, this was a very logical step that continued the direction in which the Os was going anyhow.
AmigaOS really hadn't moved on 20 years ago, while AROS is still being developed.
Eh, what? We are moving on here. The pace is slow, but there is certainly movement. And no, it's not that "we screw 4.x". A lot of development from 4.x is merging into the 3.x line right now, but we need to make sure - and this is the real work - that it is compatible to the existing software basis, avoiding compatibility problems to the highest degree possible, and to make it run at acceptable speed even on low end machines.
The problem I see with AROS and the like is that - unfortunately - quite some software depends on undocumented internal featuers of the Os, and that the line between "official features" and "implementation details" is not very clearly drawn. Consider for example how "Monitor drivers" work (would that stuff work on AROS?) or how a user shell can be launched and written (would that work on AROS?). Whenever you deprecate such (non-)interfaces (probably to the best of the software development, understood) you also break programs depending on it. The willingness to make such steps is quite different, depending on the development goals, and I would assume that AROS has different goals than the 3.x team.
Quite frankly, I do not quite understand what AROS is about, or why one would follow this type of development. After all, AmigaOs is not a very good operating system in first place (see above for some reasons), and *if* I had the motivation to rewrite one, I would certainly not start at AmigaOs. There are better open source architectures, more suitable ones. Either compatibility has priority - but then you need to work with the existing code base - or clean code and clean design has priority - but then AmigaOs is not the right starting point.
-
Err, what? Reaction (or classact - that is its historical name) is a collection of boopsi classes that logically extends the already present Os interface.
and aros contains already reimplementation of a number of these classes. in most cases in order to use reaction based software you can simply download free to use classact package. this applies to aweb as well as number of other applications i have once tried. minous here is insisting that it is too outdated, taking his own software as example reference. personally i have an impression that he is on rampage against aros as a valid alternative wherever he can, using a technics of selective argumentation and alternative facts.
said that, i dont imply that aros is already a perfect reimplementation in every respect. as example the colorwheel gadget shows some flaws. bnut it is free and open. and it provides and contains much more that the basic 3.1 distribution. which is what people like minous are trying to suggest aros is inferior equivalent of.
Eh, what? We are moving on here. The pace is slow, but there is certainly movement. And no, it's not that "we screw 4.x". A lot of development from 4.x is merging into the 3.x line right now, but we need to make sure - and this is the real work - that it is compatible to the existing software basis, avoiding compatibility problems to the highest degree possible, and to make it run at acceptable speed even on low end machines.
im pretty grateful for your effort, but according to what you say working on implementing or reimplementing stuff from os4 (or aros or morphos for that matter), you need to ensure the compatibility which is the same we need to do on aros. of course since you work on a smaller scale it is possible to dedicate more work to details. unfortunately you have picked up your work only lately and already the code base you are working on has been subject of legal actions, which can make this work in vain. thats a part of the situation that aros is a solution for. an open source accessible for everyone.
The problem I see with AROS and the like is that - unfortunately - quite some software depends on undocumented internal featuers of the Os, and that the line between "official features" and "implementation details" is not very clearly drawn. Consider for example how "Monitor drivers" work (would that stuff work on AROS?) or how a user shell can be launched and written (would that work on AROS?). Whenever you deprecate such (non-)interfaces (probably to the best of the software development, understood) you also break programs depending on it. The willingness to make such steps is quite different, depending on the development goals, and I would assume that AROS has different goals than the 3.x team.
if you recall once upon a time quite long ago you privately advised me against reimplementing monitor files on aros because their obsolete and undocumented nature. aros has of course different goals than 3.1. but it tries to stay compatible where it makes sense. i was convinced by your argumentation that in case of moniotors it doesnt, and in such cases it is better to find modern, consequent and portable solutions.
Quite frankly, I do not quite understand what AROS is about,
i think its different to different people (involved or not). at the time it started there was apparently no other ng alternative and aros team has from apparently most of todays amiga-ng audience perspective the most sensible choice to port amiga api to the most popular architecture. at the time the distance to catch up with other operating systems have not been so dramatic.
now if you ask me today, aros is still a valid alternative in order to run the installed 68k software base providing it with a number of features and subsystems the genuine os doesnt offer. as example you can support hardware that didnt exist at the time of 3.x release at boot time. but also you have lan, usb, rtg and other stacks out of the box at disposal. and so on and so on.
there are other people involved with aros who have completely different goals, like multiprocessing, modern gl hardware support an and 64bit architecture. or big endian arm implementation inclusive transparent 68k compatibility. the house is big and considering how individualistic is the scene everybody might find his place and sobject of interest within this effort. one just needs to realize.
-
With the current situation, though, there is no room in AROS for Amiga OS developers and others who may "have seen the real sources" :)
-
i think its obvious that im not trying to recruit anyone, just didnt wanted to leave these accusations without a comment. thor isnt interested anyway and has his own project, which is fine. and what would that help trying to involve people who have their own strong bias.
-
I couldn't work on AROS for the same reason as Thomas, we are already working on the official OS.
Many years ago I was interested in adding some OS3.5+ functionality to AROS, but the AROS team did not seem interested in anything beyond 3.1 so I didn't bother.
-
ReAction isn't part of the normal API, it's just a newer library that was added later, and not a whole lot of software used it.
Err, what? Reaction (or classact - that is its historical name) is a collection of boopsi classes that logically extends the already present Os interface. If you look at Os 3.1, then it already shipped with a couple of "reaction classes" aka "boopsi classes", namely the colorwheel.gadget, the tapedeck.gadget and the gradientslider.gadget. The preferences system makes use of them, and includes an additional gadget that was not factored out as a separate class, namely the sketchpad.gadget. The classes that shipped with 3.9 were a logical continuation of this development as it extended the existing classes, made some of the existing classes openly available (such as the sketchpad.gadget) and added new classes that filled in missing functionality. Thus, this was a very logical step that continued the direction in which the Os was going anyhow.
Isn't that pretty much a library vs API? At least that's how I always viewed classes.
AmigaOS really hadn't moved on 20 years ago, while AROS is still being developed.
Eh, what? We are moving on here. The pace is slow, but there is certainly movement. And no, it's not that "we screw 4.x". A lot of development from 4.x is merging into the 3.x line right now, but we need to make sure - and this is the real work - that it is compatible to the existing software basis, avoiding compatibility problems to the highest degree possible, and to make it run at acceptable speed even on low end machines.
The problem I see with AROS and the like is that - unfortunately - quite some software depends on undocumented internal featuers of the Os, and that the line between "official features" and "implementation details" is not very clearly drawn. Consider for example how "Monitor drivers" work (would that stuff work on AROS?) or how a user shell can be launched and written (would that work on AROS?). Whenever you deprecate such (non-)interfaces (probably to the best of the software development, understood) you also break programs depending on it. The willingness to make such steps is quite different, depending on the development goals, and I would assume that AROS has different goals than the 3.x team.
Quite frankly, I do not quite understand what AROS is about, or why one would follow this type of development. After all, AmigaOs is not a very good operating system in first place (see above for some reasons), and *if* I had the motivation to rewrite one, I would certainly not start at AmigaOs. There are better open source architectures, more suitable ones. Either compatibility has priority - but then you need to work with the existing code base - or clean code and clean design has priority - but then AmigaOs is not the right starting point.
[/quote]
Fair, I wasn't talking about the fine and fantastic work you guys have been doing with improving 3.1. It is great and I've bought it for the 500, 4000 and 4000T (even though I don't actually have a 4000T, I have a Toaster Oven 4000....)
I still think a fully open source AmigaOS would be more useful though. Though I do think 3.1 should be open source instead of having to recreate everything from scratch, which is why it's taken AROS so long.
-
I couldn't work on AROS for the same reason as Thomas, we are already working on the official OS.
Many years ago I was interested in adding some OS3.5+ functionality to AROS, but the AROS team did not seem interested in anything beyond 3.1 so I didn't bother.
I always thought AROS' intention was to make sure EVERYTHING was compatible to 3.1 before doing improvements upon it to match 3.5+. But I do know there are a lot of Amiga users that are of the opinion that 3.1 or GTFO. And that anything after 3.1 is 'not Commodore' so it should burn in hell.
I've used 3.9 long enough that going back to 3.1 is painful. This new A4000 that I got had 3.0 installed... couldn't even drag an icon into the Information window to change it. So yeah, there certainly are 3.5+ features that are just very useful to have.
Ha, my one complaint now (not really the fault of 3.1.4) but is that when I installed BestWB, it seems to have eaten a LOT of memory. Went from having 14mb free fast ram to like 6mb. But that's for another forum post...
-
Maybe someone should put up a web page with "unofficial boingbags for AROS/68k, only for owners of AmigaOS 3.9"
I would call it a bit differently to make sure people understand is for AROS, like Kitty Bags, or something on the same topic?
-
I still think a fully open source AmigaOS would be more useful though. Though I do think 3.1 should be open source instead of having to recreate everything from scratch, which is why it's taken AROS so long.
Considered IMO that the legitimate OS is on the mercy of [insert whatever company that has IP here] and that in practical keep from any evolution and possible spin-off/ port to other machines and FPGA - and even devs to contribute if they did work on the real OS, i would say that at least now an alternative is here, albeit incomplete; i did see AROS 68k growing from the first attempts of Toni and Jason to something that can be used by archive.org to boot apps in a virtual machine, and now delivered to a FPGA; and would love to see some glimpse of common sense to put aside the Amigan mindset and for once to work on this plan B - ok is just wishful thinking...
...just to ask, how long would take to have an clean room reimplementation of reAction and how troublesome that would be - legally - if that is what is considered missing?
[btw i remember reading similar things on ReactOs forums about drivers and other technologies not provided yet so that had to be imported by windows packages - we did reach that point]
-
@minous
I couldn't work on AROS for the same reason as Thomas, we are already working on the official OS.
thats fine and understandable. none blames you for that. but that isnt a reason to constantly jump on every other aros thread and bash it just because it lacks few reaction classes.
btw. if it was your own code you probably still could contribute such missing modules/classes to aros contribs. there are os4 developers who contributed their code to aros. but it is your choice, what you are working on and how, of course.
Many years ago I was interested in adding some OS3.5+ functionality to AROS, but the AROS team did not seem interested in anything beyond 3.1 so I didn't bother.
i guess it might have conflicted with the set up goals to have 3.1 api compatibility set up and tested before anything else. if these features were optional/contributions, it probably wouldnt be an issue. but then it isnt always easy to interact even on open projects, admittedly.
-
Right, let’s make a portable AROS ProAction ;)
(Or better, extend Zune with Reaction classes and the resource.library)
-
Maybe someone should put up a web page with "unofficial boingbags for AROS/68k, only for owners of AmigaOS 3.9"
I would call it a bit differently to make sure people understand is for AROS, like Kitty Bags, or something on the same topic?
Kitty Bags :)
I really like that name and find it suits perfectly.
-
Maybe someone should put up a web page with "unofficial boingbags for AROS/68k, only for owners of AmigaOS 3.9"
I would call it a bit differently to make sure people understand is for AROS, like Kitty Bags, or something on the same topic?
Kitty Bags :)
I really like that name and find it suits perfectly.
So let's do it - who wants to be a pirate? :p