Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: Free2Nukeu on August 10, 2010, 09:37:20 PM
-
WOAAAHH, now before everyone jumps on me and pummels me into the ground i have to ask this question. but before I do here is my background. I started with a vic 20 then went to the Commodore 64 later i bought an amiga 500, then a 1200 then was given another 1200 and used an amiga 2000 before buying my own amiga4000 030 which if you look at my other posts you can see is now a 060 cyberstorm 200mhzppc with picaso iv and paloma module and a zoro iii expansion board with more ram than i thought possible on an amiga? over 104,000,000bytes? all my cards are maxed out is what im trying to say. now i use a 6400 amd dualcore pc with 4gb ram and a 8800gtx 768mb graphic card. now i loved my 4000 and is why im trying to make it work again but just how far behind is an amiga to a pc in real terms? i left the community then amiga format left us and didnt bother with the amigaone and dont know anything about the amiga since then. just what would an amiga have to improve to be on equal (or even) better than a pc in todays speed vs software world? again i always preffered my amigas than pcs but eventually had to goto the dark side.
-
There is no competition between Amiga and PC, that died with Commodore all those years ago. Today people have multiple computers to do their tasks, plus tablets, mobile phones and the like. It's a hobby.
Say you collected Model Ts, would you post a Model T v Holden Commodore thread? No, the enjoyment you get out of your Model T is different to the utility that you get out of your Holden Commodore and a trip to Costco...
-
just how far behind is an amiga to a pc in real terms? [...] just what would an amiga have to improve to be on equal (or even) better than a pc in todays speed vs software world?
Again, it's a completely crazy question to ponder. The Amiga isn't even remotely similar to a modern PC. And if you want to try to use one as such, you're in for a very rough ride. That 4000/060/ppc you have has less processor and RAM than your average cell phone, nowadays. Now take a deep breath and wait for that to really sink in. Then wait a little longer and realize just how insane that really is.
The industry went a different direction. The Amiga is a relic from an old possible future that didn't happen.
-
I'm afraid I also have to point out that the Amiga is technologically soooooooooooooo far behind the "PC" architecture it's just not funny.
Just use the Amiga for what you used to use it for all those years ago and have fun with it, and don't expect to be watching Youtube, playing H.264 encoded videos all while calculating pi to 10billion decimal points.
(I fully expect a rabid Amigan to point out that they do all of the above every day on their upgraded A600) ;-)
-
The Amiga is a PC
-
I'm afraid I also have to point out that the Amiga is technologically soooooooooooooo far behind the "PC" architecture it's just not funny.
Just use the Amiga for what you used to use it for all those years ago and have fun with it, and don't expect to be watching Youtube, playing H.264 encoded videos all while calculating pi to 10billion decimal points.
(I fully expect a rabid Amigan to point out that they do all of the above every day on their upgraded A600) ;-)
One very rabid Amigan responding... :swords:
If your one of those sad, sad people who use a PC / MAC / Mobile Phone or any other modern day piece of crapnology , then good luck to you. :)
The true Amigan uses real Amiga hardware, for the simple fact that it is and was the best home computer ever created. They learn not just how to play games on it but how the actual hardware and OS works, they use it for creativity and using their minds to come up with some brilliant and ingenious solutions to keep the thing up and running. :)
Now if you simply want to play games that all look the same. have no gameplay and think that cos the graphics look cool, then by all means stick to your Pee,Cee's Crapple Macs and eggBoxes.
Or if you just want to point and click on something and hope it works, and when it doesn't you sit there staring blankly at the screen, because you've never used you brain to figure out how it works or how to solve the problem. then that what comes of using such boring mundane technology.
But why oh why, if these Pee'Cees and Craple Macs are so good do you run an Amiga emulator on them... :huh:
The answer... cos you know deep down in your heart that the Amiga is better than the machine your running the emulator on... :roflmao:
Bring back the good old day's when computers were made of wood and ran on steam... :biglaugh:
Bit of an Ironic thought here... I'm typing this on my Crapple Mac... :o
-
Bit of an Ironic thought here... I'm typing this on my Crapple Mac... :o
Sounds more like hypocrisy than irony, to me!
-
Hi,
The Amiga can't hold a candle to todays modern PC. The modern PC has faster and more memory, hard drives that are 10 times faster for reading and writing data, graphic cards that put the Amiga's AGA chips to shame, sound that is just about like the band played it and processing power beyond belief, but also the PC has no soul, it doesn't have people that stand behind it, cherish it and love turning it on, it doesn't have games that rock your soul like the Mackey's Megaball, Scorched Tanks and Soliton.
Is the PC really that much faster, it moves pixels and does math calculations at blinding speed something the Amiga will probably never do, but when you hit the on switch, it loads in faster than a Bill Gates bloated windows 7 system, it has your files up on the screen faster than a PC and is ready to use. It will run serveral programs at the same time without wimpering.
It is as Franko said better than the machine your running your emulator on.
AND
besides that
It is just plain fun.
Now if only someone could come up with some modern day printer drivers the Amiga would probably be real cool and could get some work done again.
Why do I run an emulator on my PC?
Simple, to keep from wearing out my Amiga's. I couldn't bear to see them die.
How many of you can say that about your PC or MAC?
smerf
-
One very rabid Amigan responding... :swords:
If your one of those sad, sad people who use a PC / MAC / Mobile Phone or any other modern day piece of crapnology , then good luck to you. :)
I'd rather be one of those sad but productive people typing on your so called crap, than be flailing around on a computer that has charm, but isn't practical for me anymore. If I tried doing 6502/z80 assembly and cross development on an Amiga, I'd have slashed my wrists awhile ago.
That being sad, it's cool to see some people who use the thing as a day to day machine still. I can't do it since it doesn't suit my needs.
The true Amigan uses real Amiga hardware, for the simple fact that it is and was the best home computer ever created. They learn not just how to play games on it but how the actual hardware and OS works, they use it for creativity and using their minds to come up with some brilliant and ingenious solutions to keep the thing up and running. :)
The price to get a solid Amiga up and running these days is pretty bad. and once you're done, you'll still find 5+ year old modern hardware outperforms it. The Amiga can't do like 32 channel stereo audio w/ MIDI and line-in recording out of box, and once you set it up to attempt it, it'll still yield a worse experience than a PC running Fruity Loops or whatever you like to use.
It also can't play the latest 3D games. If it was the best thing ever it would somehow magically be able to.
Such is the nature of 20+ year old hardware. I think the Amiga engineers would point and laugh at you for spewing this nonsense. They'd be reading this from a PC of some sort for sure.
Now if you simply want to play games that all look the same. have no gameplay and think that cos the graphics look cool, then by all means stick to your Pee,Cee's Crapple Macs and eggBoxes.
Macs don't play games, everyone knows that.
If you think they all look the same and have no gameplay, then you're a moron and should remove your penis from your Amiga for a day or two and play some new games.
also, your name-spinning is pretty horrible. eggbox? really? Is that the best you could come up with? I thought since you're such an AMIGAN, you'd be able to problem solve a better insult for an Xbox.
Or if you just want to point and click on something and hope it works, and when it doesn't you sit there staring blankly at the screen, because you've never used you brain to figure out how it works or how to solve the problem. then that what comes of using such boring mundane technology.
So you're saying that unless you have gone through the hassle of setting up an Amiga, you are unable to solve problems?
also, it isn't like the Amiga is void of problems. It's got its fair share of "WTF" moments.
But why oh why, if these Pee'Cees and Craple Macs are so good do you run an Amiga emulator on them... :huh:
The real answer: For the same reason you run a C64, NES, Sega or Atari emulator on your PC: You can't be arsed to fuck around with ancient hardware that takes up time/space, when a fast solution is right there and all you want to do is play a few games and then get on with life.
The answer... cos you know deep down in your heart that the Amiga is better than the machine your running the emulator on... :roflmao:
If its better, how come you can't emulate Windows 7 on it, dingus.
Bit of an Ironic thought here... I'm typing this on my Crapple Mac... :o
That explains alot. and its not irony, its hypocrisy.
How many of you can say that about your PC or MAC?
smerf
I can. Solid state drive, 8gb ram, Phenom II X6 w/ Windows 7.
boots up faster than I can say "Franko's on meth"
-
I'd rather be one of those sad but productive people typing on your so called crap, than be flailing around on a computer that has charm, but isn't practical for me anymore. If I tried doing 6502/z80 assembly and cross development on an Amiga, I'd have slashed my wrists awhile ago.
That being sad, it's cool to see some people who use the thing as a day to day machine still. I can't do it since it doesn't suit my needs.
Why is it 99.9% of you folks in the good ole U S of A, have not the tinyist bit of sense of humor... :)
I mean after all you voted in George. W. Bush, Good old Ronnie RayGun and eat things called weaners... :)
That to me proves you must have a very good sense of humor, lurking about somewhere in your minds... :lol:
I can indeed be arsed to play my SNES games on the original console and spend anything up to £100 per game just to buy the old classic RPG games for this little beauty of a machine... :)
And why on earth would a dingus like me be sad enough to want to use MickySoft Windoze OS or even a Pee'Cee in the first place... :)
If your quite happy with whatever you use then, good for you. Im quite happy with what I use, so good for me, but a good old exchange of very differing points of view, is just what's needed in these days of the sheep who queue up for 3 days to buy the latest Crapple gadget just to look cool and trendy whether it even works or not. :)
Irony or Hypocrisy... I like to think I have a bit of both, as like the Amiga I too can multitask... :)
-
Why is it 99.9% of you folks in the good ole U S of A, have not the tinyist bit of sense of humor... :)
I mean after all you voted in George. W. Bush, Good old Ronnie RayGun and eat things called weaners... :)
That to me proves you must have a very good sense of humor, lurking about somewhere in your minds... :lol:
Man your play on words are just TOO CLEVER.
just kidding, they blow.
I can indeed be arsed to play my SNES games on the original console and spend anything up to £100 per game just to buy the old classic RPG games for this little beauty of a machine... :)
Sucks to be you. I own them all already. and we weren't talking about SNES, we were talking about getting an Amiga up and running. The SNES works out of box to its fullest potential. You plug it in and go. The end. Success.
And why on earth would a dingus like me be sad enough to want to use MickySoft Windoze OS or even a Pee'Cee in the first place... :)
I don't know, you said you were using a mac. You make no sense.
and jesus christ youre like 45. Get better insults for Microsoft. Every time you type mickysoft you sound like you need a helmet, or that you're already wearing one and the chin strap is too tight.
If your quite happy with whatever you use then, good for you. Im quite happy with what I use, so good for me, but a good old exchange of very differing points of view, is just what's needed in these days of the sheep who queue up for 3 days to buy the latest Crapple gadget just to look cool and trendy whether it even works or not. :)
Well, you're the one calling us sad and implying were dumb for not being balls deep in an Amiga 24/7.
Irony or Hypocrisy... I like to think I have a bit of both, as like the Amiga I too can multitask... :)
Don't multitask too hard, you might get man batter on the hardware.
-
With all you little sexual innuendoes, methinks that your a bit frustrated... :)
Why not try taking your stubby little fingers of the keyboard for a while and giving yourself a bit of light relief... :)
-
With all you little sexual innuendoes, methinks that your a bit frustrated... :)
Why not try taking your stubby little fingers of the keyboard for a while and giving yourself a bit of light relief... :)
lol, stubby fingers. You sure are a riot.
(http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/8922/lolxx.jpg)
Don't look stubby to me.
and yes that's a mickey table cloth, and no I don't give a rats ass if someone thinks its homo.
PS: Already relieved myself. played some Elvira, if yknow what im sayin.
-
>Warning...may cause significant flaming (I hope not)<
I think it kinda depends on exactly what you see amiga as. For me, Aros as a rewrite of os3.x, counts. And given the advances the Aros team has made, I don't think there is any reason Aros can't be a perfectly usable desktop os in just a few years time.
The biggest difference between Aros, Morphos, and OS4 is the same difference between a modern pc and a PPC amiga. Aros has access to gigabytes of ram, Gigahertz multicore cpus etc. etc. for CHEAP.
Aros needs full Web capability, more media capability, and more apps and games and it is good to go. And as it is based directly on os3.x I would say that Amiga is capable of being very fully modern.
-
lol, stubby fingers. You sure are a riot.
Don't look stubby to me.
and yes that's a mickey table cloth, and no I don't give a rats ass if someone thinks its homo.
PS: Already relieved myself. played some Elvira, if yknow what im sayin.
Ah, Thank you for proving me wrong that pic, just goes to show you do have a sense of humor... :biglaugh:
I'll reduce that earlier percentage to 99% now... :)
-
@KThunder
for me the most important thing about AROS is tht made for me computing "fun" again: it is a nice feeling to boot your AROS stick and check the latest nighty for the progresses; i was excited when last year was able to run the first OWB version for AROS, and am delighted when i see all the interface shortcomings slowly being filled: at first the pointer, then the list view on the files, now the scrolling display and the scrolling shell... and the satisfaction in trying to do something with amilua, drawing my cursor graphics and, most recently, my icons for Amifig put up by Yannick, is a very nice feeling :)
Saimon69
-
lol, stubby fingers. You sure are a riot.
(http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/8922/lolxx.jpg)
Don't look stubby to me.
and yes that's a mickey table cloth, and no I don't give a rats ass if someone thinks its homo.
It wasn't the table cloth that made me think it...not that there's anything wrong with that..
-
It wasn't the table cloth that made me think it...not that there's anything wrong with that..
ROTFLMAO!
Don't shoot, he's a man! :lol:
Damn LP didn't advertise it would come with an mp3 CD on the packaging. Oh well, now I have Something For Everybody on CD, LP & mp3 which my brother will get as he's half deaf anyway :laughing:
-
Hi,
@Arkhan,
I do believe you mis interrpeted my post. What I am saying here is that the Amiga has a soul, and that a lot of people are still using it because it is a fun type computer. It has something a PC lacks, people who will keep it for many years and use it, they don't care if it has fallen behind, it is a hobby to them to keep it and use it, the Amiga has spirit, and a lot of people supporting it.
Lets look at a PC, where is it at 5 years later?
Do you still have your old 8088 pc?
How about a 80286?
The answer is probably NO, and why because they are outdated pieces of cow manure.
Now how many people still have their Amiga?
I know all my Amiga friends still have it and some since 1985.
The Amiga has heart, and a soul, so that is why we still like it and use it, nothing more nothing less
smerf
-
It wasn't the table cloth that made me think it...not that there's anything wrong with that..
ah youre just mad I get hot wimins, and youre still an idiot.
Hi,
@Arkhan,
I do believe you mis interrpeted my post. What I am saying here is that the Amiga has a soul, and that a lot of people are still using it because it is a fun type computer. It has something a PC lacks, people who will keep it for many years and use it, they don't care if it has fallen behind, it is a hobby to them to keep it and use it, the Amiga has spirit, and a lot of people supporting it.
Lets look at a PC, where is it at 5 years later?
Do you still have your old 8088 pc?
How about a 80286?
The answer is probably NO, and why because they are outdated pieces of cow manure.
Now how many people still have their Amiga?
I know all my Amiga friends still have it and some since 1985.
The Amiga has heart, and a soul, so that is why we still like it and use it, nothing more nothing less
smerf
Thats because the Amiga hardware didn't advance the same is all. Its a shame it didn't. Itd probably be kick ass if there was modern Amiga compatible stuff competing with the rest of the computers.
-
The Amiga has heart, and a soul, so that is why we still like it and use it, nothing more nothing less
smerf
Hi smerf
Couldn't have put it any better myself... (you are indeed a true Amigan) :)
(uh oh.. you back Arkhan...) ;)
-
I thought smerf was saying noones modern PCs can boot up super fast.
my computers blue and glowy. It has a soul
-
Hi smerf
Couldn't have put it any better myself... (you are indeed a true Amigan) :)
(uh oh.. you back Arkhan...) ;)
Hi,
Why Thank You Franko,
I have been an Amigan since the 2nd day that the Amiga 1000 hit Jacksonville Florida. Didn't buy it the first day because I had to think about it, it looked good but I just couldn't understand at the time why df0: and not just a:
seemed like a lot more typing to get something done, especially when you wanted to copy a disk or a file.
smerf
-
Why is it 99.9% of you folks in the good ole U S of A, have not the tinyist bit of sense of humor... :)
I mean after all you voted in George. W. Bush, Good old Ronnie RayGun and eat things called weaners... :)
That to me proves you must have a very good sense of humor, lurking about somewhere in your minds... :lol:
just for the record i have never voted for those guys and don't eat "weaners"
I do have a great sense of humor and love my Amiga because it gave me a long and productive career in special effects/graphic arts
I keep pointing this out but I guess some people just don't understand that "Amiga" isn't just a piece of hardware, it's a WAY of thinking about using computers...and THAT has lasted way longer than the company commodore made and lost.
Without THAT idea we wouldn't have Weta in New Zealand.....for example
-
ah youre just mad I get hot wimins, and youre still an idiot.
Thats because the Amiga hardware didn't advance the same is all. Its a shame it didn't. Itd probably be kick ass if there was modern Amiga compatible stuff competing with the rest of the computers.
Hi,
Know what you mean, just imagine, a quad core 68090 chip running at 4.5ghz, with an awsome modern ATI or NVIDIA graphics card, with 64 gigs of memory, a USB 2.0 or 3.0, and a sata hard drive with blue ray player. Someone please find that CEO from India what was his name ali, and shove a PC or MAC or both up his butt.
smerf
-
just for the record i have never voted for those guys and don't eat "weaners"
I do have a great sense of humor and love my Amiga because it gave me a long and productive career in special effects/graphic arts
I keep pointing this out but I guess some people just don't understand that "Amiga" isn't just a piece of hardware, it's a WAY of thinking about using computers...and THAT has lasted way longer than the company commodore made and lost.
Without THAT idea we wouldn't have Weta in New Zealand.....for example
Hi cecilla
Take anything I post with a very large pinch of salt... :)
(my sister lives in Portland Oregon and she and her husband (he's American by the way) and all there friends over there in the USA, all have a great time having a good bit of banter, like I have been having in this thread)... :)
The only things I take serious in this life are the Amiga and having a laugh... :D
PS: Smerf, your a gentleman and a scholar sir... ;)
and that little piece of S**t was Medhi Ali :destroy:
-
no comparison the PC just kicks the Amigas arse but it should being 20 years newer.
I have an 060 3000T that I still use. Great for emails (sometimes you can read the PC virus in a text editor), I use TV Paint for touching up photos, I use Web Design for all of my HTML work, I use Vista Pro for rendering, the colors just look better then on the PC for some reason and I also use Image FX, Turbo calc and a few other programs daily.
The PC is mainly my web browser and a few speciality programs for audio.
-
My PC is for work, my amiga is for fun.
-
Sigh. This again.
Computers don't have souls. You do. Whether that's a transcendent immortal part of you that continues on after death or simply your personal drive and spark and creativity. You get out of computers what you put in to them in terms of creativity. There's no magic fairy dust sprinkled inside a CIA chip, there's no ancient hexagram carved on the surface of a Fat Agnus. Amigas are like Macs and PCs - they're ABS plastic and/or steel housings containing PCBs made from toxic materials, leaking ELF into you and shortening your existence every time you get near one. Commodore wasn't a church, Jay Miner wasn't Jesus Christ. If C= had managed to continue on you'd be using a standard PC with a boing ball or rainbow check mark sticker on the outside, period. You can debate whether or not Amiga OS would still be running on it, but if you don't believe me about the hardware, go ask Dave Haynie. AAA would've been outdated had it been released after AGA and AGA was outdated when it was released.
Yes it was a neat computer. So's an Imsai 8080. And in spite of what others have said in this thread, old x86 systems are (or can be) fun, too.
-
There is no comparison, the Amiga is far superior than a PC...in terms of an Amiga lover. Hardware wise the PC is of course far superior in processing power, just think the RAM speeds alone of a PC is well over 10x's the speed of an 060 CPU. Windows 7 is an excellent OS and the games on PC now are unparralelled. Now for the real comparison the Amiga is in my opinion the ONLY computer I love and collect. My Amiga's (2000, 500, 3000, 4000, 1000 and CD32) are the best. I still game on them, still compute with them and still love to turn them on and do just about anything from graphics, music and internet on them (the ones that are able to). The PC for me lets me game, work and go to school but never will a PC take the place of my Amiga's. If you loved your A4000 so much get her running again and go back to enjoying computing and use your beefy PC for the other stuff:) Cheers!!!
-
My PC is for work, my amiga is for fun.
+1..well said:D
-
Yeah when people say PC do they mean x86 hardware and all those shiny cards built for them today vs various Amiga badged hardware sold like AmigaONE/x1000 in identical time frames (ie XT EGA vs A1000. 386 VGA vs A1200 i7 DX11 PC vs x1000 etc etc)?
Or do you mean Windows vs Amiga OS (again Wb 1.2 vs Windows 1.x/2.x if keeping timeframes consistent) etc.
And then of course are we trying to compare 2010 computers with 1993 technology that was never updated when Commodore tanked in the mid 90s ie AGA machines only as far as custom chipsets go?
In either case the Amiga has been unloved for far too long to win anything today. A1000 vs any other computer = WIN. A4000 machines vs PC 386/486 of the time...not such a slam dunk at all hardware wise ie audio!. Today with stuff like £1500+ x1000 vs i7 £1500 set up...I don't fancy those odds much :lol:
Vista is actually acceptable for multitasking under heavy CPU/resource loading (and by inference so is Win7 as it is an identical kernal pretty much) on most machines above a certain age but there is no version of Windows that was as efficient as its rival Workbench/KS set up in the time of Commodore. But then KS/Wb 3.x had some major omissions (TCP/IP stack?)
So it depends what anyone wants it to mean then ;)
-
there's more to pc's than windows my friends.
-
>Warning...may cause significant flaming (I hope not)<
I think it kinda depends on exactly what you see amiga as. For me, Aros as a rewrite of os3.x, counts. And given the advances the Aros team has made, I don't think there is any reason Aros can't be a perfectly usable desktop os in just a few years time.
The biggest difference between Aros, Morphos, and OS4 is the same difference between a modern pc and a PPC amiga. Aros has access to gigabytes of ram, Gigahertz multicore cpus etc. etc. for CHEAP.
Aros needs full Web capability, more media capability, and more apps and games and it is good to go. And as it is based directly on os3.x I would say that Amiga is capable of being very fully modern.
Enlighten me if you will, does AROS have the capability to make use of more than one core/CPU and how much RAM can it access? There is no doubt that AROS has all other Amiga OSes beat on price, since it is free and I am not opposed to switching to AROS someday when it is fully mature and has more apps and games to run. It might give me a reason to keep my Quad Core 3.0GHz, w/dual 512mb video cards and all the other bells and whistles PC, but by that time my PC will be very outdated anyway.
Looks like I missed all the fun that was going on in this thread. I usually just ignore any thread that tries to compare the Amiga with anything else.:roflmao:
-
I can't speak for every PC ever built (there's always soemone who seems to come up with something "unusual" in these threads), but I can honestly say that compared to the PC's I've used and seen used by other, the Amiga could do more (FAR more) with far less.
An A1200 running at 14 mhz and 8 mb fast ram could fit a TCP stack, a browser, an email client, newsreader, an FTP client, IM, a paint package like Dpaint, a word processor and even do a 3D render in the background ) especially if you had an FPU, play music/mods, a file manager like Dopus on top of a GUI OS-with god knows how many little commodities running in the background and the thing was still responsive to the user. I can't imagine any x86 platform doing that.
I'm not sure if that advantage in the efficient use of hardware resources was there by design or as a consequence of little hardware development since Commodores demise, nor if that would have continued if AmigaOS survived today. But what has been achieved by tiny teams of programmers with Morphos/AmigaOS/AROS suggests it might have (yes I know they run on limited hardware, but thats what custom chips were in a way).
So for me, Amiga was all about efficiency, elegance and making me feel that the system obeyed me, and for me that made up for the lack of the brute power of a PC.
-
I can't speak for every PC ever built (there's always soemone who seems to come up with something "unusual" in these threads), but I can honestly say that compared to the PC's I've used and seen used by other, the Amiga could do more (FAR more) with far less.
Wheres the far-less solution to using 10+ VSTs in fruityloops and making a 32 channel tune with line in and midi input added in as well? I don't think there is one. If there is, it probably isn't a great one and would induce suicidal thoughts.
An A1200 running at 14 mhz and 8 mb fast ram could fit a TCP stack, a browser, an email client, newsreader, an FTP client, IM, a paint package like Dpaint, a word processor and even do a 3D render in the background ) especially if you had an FPU, play music/mods, a file manager like Dopus on top of a GUI OS-with god knows how many little commodities running in the background and the thing was still responsive to the user. I can't imagine any x86 platform doing that.
Funny story! Don't we all do that on an x86 platform every day? I know I do:
TCP stack: Yep.
Browser to reply to this kind of stupidity: Yep!
e-mail: lol duh?
FTP: sho' am good
IM: 3 of them at once! + IRC
paint: Lol Photoshop CS3 to make 4chan.org funnies
among other stuff too, and then I usually even play a game at the same time! 3D rendering! Networked gaming even!
Maybe the PC's you are using are pieces of shit or you don't know how to keep them running properly.
I'm not sure if that advantage in the efficient use of hardware resources was there by design or as a consequence of little hardware development since Commodores demise, nor if that would have continued if AmigaOS survived today. But what has been achieved by tiny teams of programmers with Morphos/AmigaOS/AROS suggests it might have (yes I know they run on limited hardware, but thats what custom chips were in a way).
I think the efficiency is due to the nature/era of the platform. When you introduce unique chips, they tend to function better.
-
Screw Amiga, I'm wondering why I could surf the web in Windows 95 with only 8MB of RAM. When I upgraded to 16MB I could run Excel and have a dozen pages (i.e. the whole internet) open in netscape.
Windows is not a home OS. They design it for businesses and then let you 'borrow' it.
-
Screw Amiga
What? What's that you say Devil Chicken? You best skip town before the lynch mob catches up with 'ya. :laughing:
BTW: you don't need 8mb of RAM, Windoze 95 or Netscape to "surf the web" on an Amiga ;)
-
BTW: you don't need 8mb of RAM, Windoze 95 or Netscape to "surf the web" on an Amiga ;)
No you just need one of the Amiga browsers, crossed fingers, and some patience as Google attempts to load.
Did you quote "surf the web" because rather than surf the web, you doggy paddle?
Yeah you can get a decent browsing experience if you set it up right and have the right hardware...it sure aint out-of-box internets ready.
any PC with a modem or NIC is though.
-
Did you quote "surf the web" because rather than surf the web, you doggy paddle?
No, no, no... I was trying to compare apples with apples timeframe wise. In the mid to late 90's, the few Amiga browsers we had handled the web just fine. Early 2000's even. It wasn't until support stopped, computing "evolved" and we started seeing new inefficient web languages that the Amiga started to choke on. Java, CSS, PHP, Flash and more, not to mention all the commercially unnecessary crap we deal with today ad and banner wise. The web is a world wide mess today compared to the late 90's, early 2000's.
-
No, no, no... I was trying to compare apples with apples timeframe wise. In the mid to late 90's, the few Amiga browsers we had handled the web just fine. Early 2000's even. It wasn't until support stopped, computing "evolved" and we started seeing new inefficient web languages that the Amiga started to choke on. Java, CSS, PHP and more.
oh. Well, those old windows 95 boxes can handle all that nonsense just fine. Must be magic.
I mean you can still browse the lolernet with a 486. It'll be kinda herpyderpy, but it sure does work.
-
oh. Well, those old windows 95 boxes can handle all that nonsense just fine. Must be magic.
I mean you can still browse the lolernet with a 486. It'll be kinda herpyderpy, but it sure does work.
And browsing the web with win 95 and whatever browser was out in 95 will pretty much suck as bad as doing it on an amiga will today, because its mid 90's technology.
These sorts of conversations are amusing because its like saying the T34 was a shit tank, because the T90 is so much better.
-
Win95 w/ IE works better than the Amiga in my experience. *shrug*
-
Win95 w/ IE works better than the Amiga in my experience. *shrug*
I imagine every persons experience will differ based on their observations :)
-
Yes, admiring,even treasuring well-made old technology is one thing;expecting it to outperform newer technology with more features is silly.
Another miltaristic comparison might be:
Amiga =crossbow built by England's finest craftsman
Today's generic PC=Thompson .45 submachine gun.
IF Motorola/IBM/Apple/Commodore had continued to push development of PPC chip and the platform it was originally meant we could buy a box and then run whatever OS we cared to,Amiga to Windows.
But they didn't;and no one can design a multi-million transistor LSI IC in the garage.That's why the old science fiction stories of "American inventor Joe builds spaceship in backyard are so ridiculous.Some tasks require a large team with vast resources.
-
Wheres the far-less solution to using 10+ VSTs in fruityloops and making a 32 channel tune with line in and midi input added in as well? I don't think there is one. If there is, it probably isn't a great one and would induce suicidal thoughts.
...
I don't get as much time these days for these threads, but your inconsistency is that you compare latest and greatest hardware add-ons with standard Amiga setup.
About an hour later (post #39) you wrote: "Yeah you can get a decent browsing experience if you set it up right and have the right hardware...it sure aint out-of-box internets ready."
You can also buy audio cards for the Amiga or even some sort of PCI interface. None of my PC machines have 32 channels audio (which you keep mentioning). Perhaps, it's being emulated in software but you can also do the same then on the Amiga. Perhaps, the API is misleading in claiming its supporting all those functions which may or may not be present in your hardware. When I write to a color register Move.w #$F00,$DFF180, it takes a lot more work on the PC and a lot more cycles because the hardware standard is gradually disappearing and it's more drivers and software calls and thus more inefficient and slower. Of course, you have the faster processor and video cards but you see how his point of getting more done with less is valid.
-
Hi,
The Amiga can't hold a candle to todays modern PC. The modern PC has faster and more memory
I wish it didn't. That just makes things so inconsistent. Every machine can have a different speed memory and you need to program for the worst case of the slowest one.
hard drives that are 10 times faster for reading and writing data
Hard drives are obsolete and wish they were never invented. Ataris had cartridges originally (some banked) and these flash devices seem to be taking things back full circle to back to memory types of drives rather than mechanical moving ones. Hard drives are like a glitch in computer progress-- slow, prone to crash, inconsistent in read/writes, etc. Better to use flash drives.
graphic cards that put the Amiga's AGA chips to shame
And hardly anyone programs its registers to get the maximum out of it. Such a waste.
sound that is just about like the band played it and processing power beyond belief, but also the PC has no soul, it doesn't have people that stand behind it, cherish it and love turning it on, it doesn't have games that rock your soul like the Mackey's Megaball, Scorched Tanks and Soliton.
For games, sound is fine on the Amiga. But there are issues with the PC games-- controllers are too complex and analog, gameplay is more like watching a movie-- not as addicting as pixel-exact collisions and where every pixel has significance, the games just look good but there are many DVD movies that look better. If I didn't need to argue with people like you and wanted to play games, I wouldn't be using a PC.
-
I wish it didn't. That just makes things so inconsistent. Every machine can have a different speed memory and you need to program for the worst case of the slowest one.
Hard drives are obsolete and wish they were never invented. Ataris had cartridges originally (some banked) and these flash devices seem to be taking things back full circle to back to memory types of drives rather than mechanical moving ones. Hard drives are like a glitch in computer progress-- slow, prone to crash, inconsistent in read/writes, etc. Better to use flash drives.
And hardly anyone programs its registers to get the maximum out of it. Such a waste.
For games, sound is fine on the Amiga. But there are issues with the PC games-- controllers are too complex and analog, gameplay is more like watching a movie-- not as addicting as pixel-exact collisions and where every pixel has significance, the games just look good but there are many DVD movies that look better. If I didn't need to argue with people like you and wanted to play games, I wouldn't be using a PC.
modern computers are very consistant, mine is 64bit cpu, dx10, etc. You have to think differently when HAL and drivers are concerned , you are stuck back in 1994 if you think systems arent consistant.
Hard drive are still here and better than anything else including flash by orders of magnitude when size speed and reliability are concerned.
Drivers do hit the registers otherwise no graphics card would ever work, do you know what HAL is (Hardware Abstraction Layer) you seem to really be stuck in 1994. We are talking about "modern computers" here.
@others
there is no reason Aros cannot support dual core quad core etc. and become a more user-freindly version of what linux is today.
-
modern computers are very consistant, mine is 64bit cpu, dx10, etc. You have to think differently when HAL and drivers are concerned , you are stuck back in 1994 if you think systems arent consistant.
...
You never experienced 1994 or little of it so you made a statement whose exact opposite is true. In 1994, you can consistently write to I/O ports for VGA, serial/parallel ports, even estimate cycle counts, etc. Do you even know what the word consistent means in the context stated by me above? Calm down and think before you write.
Hard drive are still here and better than anything else including flash by orders of magnitude when size speed and reliability are concerned.
More bullcrap. Flash technologies is faster and more reliable. I have destroyed several hard drives before there MTBF just because they were in the cold weather in my car or because of hitting bumps on the road. Hard drives are less reliable and I was speaking of cartridge type comparisons which is not restricted to just flash-- you can have SRAM, EEPROM, EPROM, etc. They are all more reliable than hard drives.
Drivers do hit the registers otherwise no graphics card would ever work, do you know what HAL is (Hardware Abstraction Layer) you seem to really be stuck in 1994. We are talking about "modern computers" here.
Yeah, but one graphics card hits one register while another one hits another-- inconsistent and non-standard. You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. First understand and then reply.
-
@others
there is no reason Aros cannot support dual core quad core etc. and become a more user-freindly version of what linux is today.
No reason it cannot support multiple cpu's, or cores IN THE FUTURE, but what does it support today?
There is no reason AmigaOS4.x/MorphOS2.x can't do the same, given a couple hundred full time developers working 24/7 for a few years with an unlimited budget. Of course it would hardly be the same OS by the time SMP, or something different that supports multiple cpu's/cores in some weird way.
-
Yeah, but one graphics card hits one register while another one hits another-- inconsistent and non-standard. You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. First understand and then reply.
Well, you are a fine one to talk :)
You're still thinking of graphics cards as they were a decade ago. They have totally and utterly changed. I guarantee you wouldn't know where to begin trying to bang modern GPU hardware if you are still thinking in terms of direct register access, at least if you want to use any modern features.
Drivers exist for a good reason. My graphics card, for example, has literally thousands of GP registers (as well as "constant" memory) that are shared between 240 stream processors on demand by a hardware many-thread scheduling engine. Even when writing code for the GPU using CUDA, the object code that NVCC produces is not specific to that GPU. Instead, it's a bytecode that is JIT translated at runtime for the hardware.
And, FYI, the VESA compatible registers haven't really changed much, which is why it's almost always possible to use a modern card without any specific drivers. As long as "use" means open a basic frame buffer. If you want to bang those registers, you'll probably get away with it just fine.
-
Having read through every post here, it seems to me we should not be debating or arguing over silly little things like gfx card speeds/ flash drives are better than HDs and so on. :(
We should instead just be saying why we use our Amiga / PC / Mac or whatever machine your using, for what we as individuals use them for and how we are happy with the machines we use... :)
For example I use my Amiga for all my computing needs except for one, I use my iMac for the internet only and it's more than adequate in that task for me.
My Amiga however, I use for all other computing needs I have ie: GFX/Photo Editing, Programming, audio editing, creating MP3s and music CDs / burning Video DVDs, letters, printing and a whole lot more beside. :)
This set up for me is just about perfect, only when I finally set up one of my Amigas to go online, will I then be able to decide whether my Amiga is suitable for this one final task or if I shall have to continue using the Mac for being online.
So come one folks be a bit more positive about why you use the machine you do, and share with us all, the benefits of using your particular set up. :)
-
Wheres the far-less solution to using 10+ VSTs in fruityloops and making a 32 channel tune with line in and midi input added in as well? I don't think there is one. If there is, it probably isn't a great one and would induce suicidal thoughts.
Funny story! Don't we all do that on an x86 platform every day? I know I do:
TCP stack: Yep.
Browser to reply to this kind of stupidity: Yep!
e-mail: lol duh?
FTP: sho' am good
IM: 3 of them at once! + IRC
paint: Lol Photoshop CS3 to make 4chan.org funnies
among other stuff too, and then I usually even play a game at the same time! 3D rendering! Networked gaming even!
In 8 meg with 2 meg video ram..I doubt it!!!
Maybe the PC's you are using are pieces of shit or you don't know how to keep them running properly.
The essence of the post was that you can do more with less on Amiga. I know a fair bit about making my PC run properly, But even with smaller footprint of Win 3.1, I doubt I'll get all the software I mentioned or equivalents to run in 8 meg and 2 meg video in x86.
I think the efficiency is due to the nature/era of the platform. When you introduce unique chips, they tend to function better.
I think you're wrong about the era being the reason, because PC's and Macs of the same era needed more hardware resources and did less, but you're right to say it was the "nature" of the Amiga platform.
-
It depends on what the purpose of this discussion is. If the purpose is to feel good about the Amiga then we can talk about what makes us happy, but if the purpose is to try to find more users then we need to coat things in realism. A handful of Linux ports are not going to convince anyone to buy an AmigaOS/AROS/Morphos machine. The question needs to change from why do we use an Amiga to why would anyone with a molecule of sanity use an Amiga. Two very different questions.....
-
The question needs to change from why do we use an Amiga to why would anyone with a molecule of sanity use an Amiga. Two very different questions.....
My one molecule of sanity is more than happy with what can be done using an Amiga... :)
-
modern computers are very consistant, mine is 64bit cpu, dx10, etc. You have to think differently when HAL and drivers are concerned , you are stuck back in 1994 if you think systems arent consistant.
Hard drive are still here and better than anything else including flash by orders of magnitude when size speed and reliability are concerned.
Drivers do hit the registers otherwise no graphics card would ever work, do you know what HAL is (Hardware Abstraction Layer) you seem to really be stuck in 1994. We are talking about "modern computers" here.
I think you over-estimate the success in the real world of the HAL's. People still have problems getting particular video/audio/wireless/bluetooth etc and motherboard combinations to work properly or at all. In Windows and Linux. And no its not due to shit HW/bleeding edge HW, with immature drivers either.
IMO the best test of just how well HAL's work or don't work is trying to set up a gaming and media centre PC. It can be real simple, or it can be every bit as difficult as getting hardware to work together as it was in the Win 3.1. For example, I have NEVER been able to get my TV tuner to show the TV guide through Mediacentre without crashing it-thats with Vista Home premium and now Win 7 Ultimate. Yet it works in Ubuntu, and the same USB tuner works on a different motherboard. And this is pretty generic hardware I'm talking, not some bleeding edge thing with immature drivers. Log onto the various media centre forums and you'll see countless posts with similar problems.
The usual come back to this is that MS and Linux community can't test every hardware combo out there. Well that's the whole point of the HAL: you shouldn't need to, it should just work. And I no longer buy the MS claim that the HW vendor didn't follow the rules or the drivers was bad, in all such cases-maybe the rules/concepts themselves aren't right?
That brings me to the other philosophical advantage of Amiga: custom, uniform hardware. Oh yes, I know that over time custom hardware may get out-performed. Yet if we look at the PS3 and Xbox-5 or so years old-has that really happened in a way that matters to the user? PC gaming and PC media centres? The relative sales would suggest people care less and less for this. 1080p games and bluray from a PS3 on a 55 inch plasma looks stunning. And more is being achieved on the same hardware every year. Because the software programmers have no choice but to write ever more clever, efficient, code, coz they won't get another gig of ram to be sloppy with, or another couple of cores to pay with. Conceptually very amiga-like.. And its closer to plug and play than any x86 platform ever was.
-
And browsing the web with win 95 and whatever browser was out in 95 will pretty much suck as bad as doing it on an amiga will today, because its mid 90's technology.
These sorts of conversations are amusing because its like saying the T34 was a shit tank, because the T90 is so much better.
You do realise it was less about the OS and more about the supported browser. I ran Netscape on the Win95 machine and it worked fine. I still use IE6 on this XP machine cus anything later plays havoc with my local intranet. For the Amiga use of the internet needed more power and graphics card power, thats got nothing to do with the OS. All browsers I used with Win95 and Win98 worked magic on the Internet. They were, are superior to anything I used on the Amiga, but then that was to do with computer power and not the browser. I have a G4 Mac with Safari and thats great also. Hell I even have the Dreamcast on the internet. The Amiga was just a real struggle for me in terms of getting the hardware. Its even worse today for classic machines. And what killed Win95 and Win98 on the internet for me was the removal of support and then Norton and AVG dumped the virus checker. Windows is lethal without firewall and virus checker. My Win98 machine outperforms this XP machine on local htm in terms of speed but I struggle getting modern graphic cards to work with it. Both my Win98 and Win95 machines still work just fine and all open my local intranet pages at the same speed. And don`t forget the mid 90s probably meant dial up. There is really no comparison today.
The browsers of the mid 90's still work fine with the hardware on the internet. You just can`t use them cus of support for security.
-
COMPUTERS ARE GOOD!
ANYONE WHO SAYS OTHERWISE IS A LIAR!
*pbbbbtbptp*
-
@Original Post
You can purchase newer hardware and run the new AmigaOS4.1. It's available from AmigaKit.com, which services the UK, and other vendors.
There is also Amiga Forever which allows you to emulate AmigaOS3.1 on a PC; it works well. My virtual A1200 works much faster than my physical A1200, and functions the same for what little I do on it--code mostly.
I wouldn't call it the dark side. Times change, so we often have to switch; otherwise, we'd all still be using rotary phones or morse code for telegraphs.
-
I don't get as much time these days for these threads, but your inconsistency is that you compare latest and greatest hardware add-ons with standard Amiga setup.
About an hour later (post #39) you wrote: "Yeah you can get a decent browsing experience if you set it up right and have the right hardware...it sure aint out-of-box internets ready."
You can also buy audio cards for the Amiga or even some sort of PCI interface. None of my PC machines have 32 channels audio (which you keep mentioning). Perhaps, it's being emulated in software but you can also do the same then on the Amiga. .
in regards to the original post, if the Amiga is so great it should be able to stand toe to toe with anything modern computing throws at it, and it should just be so easy and simple to get it to that competitive state.
It doesn't have the music setup I am looking for, so that means it can't.
I don't care about the behind the scenes stuff because its all relative. I care about ease-of-use. my fruityloops setup is more expansive and easy to use than an Amiga sound setup.
its called changing times. thats all. More power to people still using octamed, etc.... but I have found better solutions. *shrug*
In 8 meg with 2 meg video ram..I doubt it!!!
Lol, doing all of that on an Amiga w/ 8meg and 2meg is about as fun as jamming your shaft in a bugzapper.
-
in regards to the original post, if the Amiga is so great it should be able to stand toe to toe with anything modern computing throws at it, and it should just be so easy and simple to get it to that competitive state.
It doesn't have the music setup I am looking for, so that means it can't.
I don't care about the behind the scenes stuff because its all relative. I care about ease-of-use. my fruityloops setup is more expansive and easy to use than an Amiga sound setup.
its called changing times. thats all. More power to people still using octamed, etc.... but I have found better solutions. *shrug*
i see. so what you're saying is that 1992 hardware and software can't match 2010 hardware and software. really! Well according to Moore's law, computing power should have increased by 2 to the power of 12 in that time (doubles every 18 months) so I'd say you're about right.
Lol, doing all of that on an Amiga w/ 8meg and 2meg is about as fun as jamming your shaft in a bugzapper.
A PC of the same era wouldn't even find enough resources to move the mouse pointer, if you actually managed to load the browser.
-
Pc's on the whole bore me... Unless its a very customized pc running linux, or aros then thats a whole different animal.
OR unless its a customized pc using windows in the background but booting to amiga os3.x (replace windows shell with os3.x and never
know windows is even involved)
Windows pcs on the whole do seem so generic and soul less. I love amigas, I just use the pc and don't care much how it looks or care
to customize the interface/gui. They are so cheap now I don't even care to upgrade or enhance the windows boxes I have, I just keep track of my files in backup and buy a new one every so often. It is just like an appliance, a throw away and replace appliance at that.
On the other hand...
I've spent tons of time customizing my linux box though. Sometimes I think that a great linux pc gives me the same feeling amiga gave me back in the day. I am in control of everything, its fast, its reliable and it works how I want it to. I am also often tinkering with adding more drives or other hardware upgrades, quite like I did with my amiga's back in the day.
Hopefully, linux will get some more powerful audio and video apps, (or run winxp running windows audio/video apps in a window better) then I can never use windows again.
Steven
-
Hi Arkhan, just wondering why the link you post in your signature opens up a MALWARE WARNING for it, do you know about this ... :(
If anyone would like to check out the WARNING for this site then I suggest you view this 'Google Safe Browsing diagnostic' about this site first.
http://google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?tpl=safari&site=www.aetherbyte.com&hl=en
-
The usual come back to this is that MS and Linux community can't test every hardware combo out there. Well that's the whole point of the HAL: you shouldn't need to, it should just work. And I no longer buy the MS claim that the HW vendor didn't follow the rules or the drivers was bad, in all such cases-maybe the rules/concepts themselves aren't right?
That brings me to the other philosophical advantage of Amiga: custom, uniform hardware. Oh yes, I know that over time custom hardware may get out-performed. Yet if we look at the PS3 and Xbox-5 or so years old-has that really happened in a way that matters to the user? ....
Awesome point. Let me tell a quick story. One of my friend's brother works at Microsoft as some type of support Engineer. Very smart guy--even assembled his own audio amp with vacuum tubes because he thought they performed better than the digital equivalent. Anyways, he works with large MS business clients and his department has a blank check to purchase identical equipment to mimic a client's software or hardware problem. I went to his house once and noticed that he had several iMac computers--one for the kid's room, one in the kitchen and a PowerMac in his office. I asked him why the Macs if he worked at MS. He said because the hardware and software are designed to work together and it works well. He mentioned how there are so many different possible configurations for [Intel] PCs that it is often difficult to pinpoint problems. The OS and selected hardware are optimised. So I also think that customization has credibility and advantages.
With regard to the benefits of customization, I agree with those who say that a "true" Amiga contains the original chipsets. It was all designed to work together, and it worked well. Modernize the chipset with the faster chips of today, and the efficiently designed Amiga system architecture continues.
@Arkhan and stefcep2
Interesting comparison talk between Amiga and x86 in that timeframe. I actually bought my A1200 around 1994 because the x86 couldn't keep up with what I wanted. The A1200 booted within a few seconds, it swapped between running applications quickly and the GUI was quicker in response. Those were my main decision making factors. The other factors included graphics and sound. I was able to play a song on the A1200 and switch between it and other applications (maybe 4 apps running) such as Final Writer with no wait time.
I HATE waiting for a computer to boot. The C64 spoiled me for life (along with the old Intellivision System)--turn the power on and the sucker was ready within two seconds. And the Amiga followed it as my A1200 booted within 5 seconds (I timed it once) compared to that of W95/W98 which took at least 30 seconds. I couldn't stand Win31, W95, or W98! To make any stupid little change required a reboot, and the shutdown and startup took forever! I almost quit tech support because it was so frustrating to troubleshoot and work with. I switched to W2K as quick as I could because it required much fewer reboots; it still took forever to boot, though. For me the only good thing about Microsoft is that they've provided me a job, but there are other jobs or paths I could have (should have) taken instead. When I bought my A1200 in 1994 and started learning it, I was so glad to be done with the MS crap that I thought I'd never go back. Then C= went bankrupt and Amiga International followed suite, and the computer world, IMO, has sucked ever since until recently when Intel/AMD chips are finally fast enough to decently run Windows and Linux; just waiting for the SSDs to drop in price for quicker boot times.
My $0.02 ~ 0.03 euro. Sorry for the long soap box post.
-
Nice story, but you don't need to be smart to build your own Tube Amp (and many people agree that they have a unique sound that can't be reproduced digitally). Every student, including me built one in my High School Electronics 1 class. All you really needed to know is which end of the soldering iron to pick up. Of course, when I went to High School in the '70's we could get all the Tubes we needed from all the old TV sets that were dead and donated to the school.
I still remember one day while working on that Tube Amp I turned it off, turned it upside down, plugged in my soldering iron and walked away to talk to another student until it warmed up. When I came back and started to solder I got a nice surprise when my little finger brushed up against the high voltage lead and a ground, that was about a 750 volt jolt from that monster transformer I had. Low amperage, but it still made me jump and then decide to sit down for a bit and look for the a$$h0le that had switched my Tube Amp back on and sat back to watch the fun. Another day my instructor came by while I was putting together a HeathKit Power Supply for the class to use and he leaned over the lab counter and put all of his weight on his palms on the counter. It would have been okay if my soldering iron had not been under one of those palms.
Man, those were the good ole days. We were a tiny High School on top of a mountain in Southern Calif., but we were the first school in the whole country that had it's own video production equipment and taped every football game for the coaches & team to study, as well as many other school events. All the gear was old out of date equipment that had been donated, but it worked great.
-
Well, you are a fine one to talk :)
You're still thinking of graphics cards as they were a decade ago. They have totally and utterly changed. I guarantee you wouldn't know where to begin trying to bang modern GPU hardware if you are still thinking in terms of direct register access, at least if you want to use any modern features.
Drivers exist for a good reason. My graphics card, for example, has literally thousands of GP registers (as well as "constant" memory) that are shared between 240 stream processors on demand by a hardware many-thread scheduling engine. Even when writing code for the GPU using CUDA, the object code that NVCC produces is not specific to that GPU. Instead, it's a bytecode that is JIT translated at runtime for the hardware.
And, FYI, the VESA compatible registers haven't really changed much, which is why it's almost always possible to use a modern card without any specific drivers. As long as "use" means open a basic frame buffer. If you want to bang those registers, you'll probably get away with it just fine.
I am not against drivers but it's better to have both options-- being able to go direct to hardware as well as driver or API interface. I would think you already know some of the great stuff written using direct to hardware method on old PCs and Amiga. And it's a superior interface to have the standardized hardware.
About VESA, that was also an API since when VGA started to add modes like 640*480*256, manufacturers started doing it their own ways. Currently, my PC that I write this message from only gives me option for 16-bit or 32-bit-- nothing standard. Perhaps, it exists in my hardware but OS won't let me get to it. And all the modes which are superior to Amiga's standard graphics are non-standard from the hardware perspective.
Even a frame buffer of 640*480*256 requires accessing nonstandard I/O ports even by different version of cards made by SAME manufacturer. I have an ATI VGA with 16MB that uses some port 0x56EC to set the 64K window whereas a later ATI RADEON uses some other I/O ports. Then there are some cards that use 4K windows and some 16K windows and so on.
-
I am not against drivers but it's better to have both options-- being able to go direct to hardware as well as driver or API interface. I would think you already know some of the great stuff written using direct to hardware method on old PCs and Amiga. And it's a superior interface to have the standardized hardware.
It was fun, banging the metal. However, you cannot deny that many 68000 OCS/ECS titles that did it, mysteriously stopped working on 68020/AGA and point blank refused to do so without degraders and so on. Ultimately this is where blindly depending on hardware configuration X gets you. Hardware changes, even on the Amiga.
The driver model exists not just to ensure that applications have a consistent API to hardware but to allow hardware vendors to radically change their internal hardware. This has to be done, if you want to improve performance. If graphics card manufacturers stuck to using a fixed IO/commandset that any old hacker could bang away at, there's no way we'd ever have migrated from old fixed function graphics pipelines to modern fully-programmable stream-processor machines.
-
It was fun, banging the metal. However, you cannot deny that many 68000 OCS/ECS titles that did it, mysteriously stopped working on 68020/AGA and point blank refused to do so without degraders and so on. Ultimately this is where blindly depending on hardware configuration X gets you. Hardware changes, even on the Amiga.
The driver model exists not just to ensure that applications have a consistent API to hardware but to allow hardware vendors to radically change their internal hardware. This has to be done, if you want to improve performance. If graphics card manufacturers stuck to using a fixed IO/commandset that any old hacker could bang away at, there's no way we'd ever have migrated from old fixed function graphics pipelines to modern fully-programmable stream-processor machines.
i'd say in another 5 years, the PS3 and Xbox 360 will still have new software available. All backwards compatible with the very first editions. And that generation of software will in likelihood make the HW do things that no-one thought was possible. Eventually pushing the HW to its limits. Like some of the amazing demo's that we see running on '030 A1200' with just a bit of fast ram.
-
I am not against drivers but it's better to have both options-- being able to go direct to hardware as well as driver or API interface. I would think you already know some of the great stuff written using direct to hardware method on old PCs and Amiga. And it's a superior interface to have the standardized hardware.
Superior ? Is it superior that any change in the hardware (evolution means change usually) will break pretty much every application coded using direct access ?
And I think you underestimate the complexity of hardware today: it's not just 3 registers you play with. It's far too complex to be accessed directly.
Last but not least, software was bypassed for a reason at that time: software wasn't complete and/or slowed everything down. As big as the OS are now (and yes, every OS, including OS4/MorphOS even though they are both less heavier than modern OS) the resources needed are negligeable compared to what's available, so it isn't a problem anymore.
Accessing hardware directly only would introduce problems today.
Again: welcome to 2010.
-
Superior ? Is it superior that any change in the hardware (evolution means change usually) will break pretty much every application coded using direct access ?
I question the trade off in stability that is made to have so much choice of HW, and by the frequent upgrading to better-specced PC HW ( which history shows never seems to match the hype anyway. )
The PS3 and Xbox are pretty complex beasts, and those platforms will be going for another 5 years (10 in total) without the need for changing interfaces/video cards/sound cards. Sure they have HAL, due to complexity, not for backward compatibility as the HW won't change for 10 years. And its likely that the games and media playnack facilities will compete with whatever the PC is doing (1920x1080 and 7.1 sound FFS). Ease of use and stability is unsurpassed. So if not not games and media playback what's left for the PC? Comms and Office work, which a single core cpu and 512 MB RAM can do? Software development-hardly mainstream. Maybe some niche things like video-editing, image editing, music making.
-
It was fun, banging the metal. However, you cannot deny that many 68000 OCS/ECS titles that did it, mysteriously stopped working on 68020/AGA and point blank refused to do so without degraders and so on. Ultimately this is where blindly depending on hardware configuration X gets you. Hardware changes, even on the Amiga.
The driver model exists not just to ensure that applications have a consistent API to hardware but to allow hardware vendors to radically change their internal hardware. This has to be done, if you want to improve performance. If graphics card manufacturers stuck to using a fixed IO/commandset that any old hacker could bang away at, there's no way we'd ever have migrated from old fixed function graphics pipelines to modern fully-programmable stream-processor machines.
It's quite possible to have upgrading of hardware and maintain hardware register compatibility. It happened up to point of VGA (as far as graphics cards go); they went from CGA->EGA->VGA. After that manufacturers started concocting their own methods and I/O ports as there was no one setting a standard. The fact that there are OCS/ECS demos/games/etc. that do work on AGA proves my point.
-
The fact that there are OCS/ECS demos/games/etc. that do work on AGA proves my point.
And the fact there are many that don't equally proves otherwise.
-
Superior ? Is it superior that any change in the hardware (evolution means change usually) will break pretty much every application coded using direct access ?
And I think you underestimate the complexity of hardware today: it's not just 3 registers you play with. It's far too complex to be accessed directly.
Last but not least, software was bypassed for a reason at that time: software wasn't complete and/or slowed everything down. As big as the OS are now (and yes, every OS, including OS4/MorphOS even though they are both less heavier than modern OS) the resources needed are negligeable compared to what's available, so it isn't a problem anymore.
Accessing hardware directly only would introduce problems today.
Again: welcome to 2010.
VGA is not 3 registers-- it's hundreds of registers. More were added from EGA. It's superior; if you know the difference between BASIC or C and ASSEMBLY, then you know what I'm talking about. Assembly language is superior, but I'm not against BASIC/C. Going direct to standardized hardware is optimal whereas going through some software API is slower, inefficient, and inexact although it may help you develop faster. And last but not least, software has caused problems by their incompatibility and bugs. Many Windows 3.x functions are obsolete in modern Windows API. Ooops, you can't even run Windows 3.x stuff anymore-- "Please obtain copy of 32-bit/64-bit version from vendor or obtain Microsoft version." What a joke! Nice sales pitch given most technical people know that processor is quite capable of supporting Windows 3.x. What if vendor is long dead and gone or no longer developing for Windows? Old PCs from 1990s were backward compatible; now the incompatibility, bloated ware, dead code, etc. have increased. Yeah, welcome to 2010. You would screw up if you went directly to hardware nowadays because the hardware is non-standard and inconsistent. So Amiga wins, it has a superior interface-- I can still write OCS code that works on AGA going directly to hardware.
-
And the fact there are many that don't equally proves otherwise.
No, it doesn't. That it's do-able is the point. You can directly go to the hardware and still have it work across the board on all Amigas. There's a lot of API-based software that no longer works on modern PCs. See my other post.
-
And the fact there are many that don't equally proves otherwise.
I haven't found one yet, that without a bit of hacking, or using degraders or WHDload slaves that don't work with AGA. :)
But then again Im not a big demo fan, but the ones that I considered to be good enough to run on AGA were worth going to the bother of making them work... :)
-
in regards to the original post, if the Amiga is so great it should be able to stand toe to toe with anything modern computing throws at it, and it should just be so easy and simple to get it to that competitive state.
It doesn't have the music setup I am looking for, so that means it can't.
...
That's subjective. There are certain things where Amiga excels at even without having been upgraded all these years. So it's not like the rotary phone->touch tone phone analogy which is an enhancement in all respects.
-
I haven't found one yet, that without a bit of hacking, or using degraders or WHDload slaves that don't work with AGA. :)
That's the point though. Without hacking or degrading, such examples just don't work, which is the only proof you need that hacking hardware directly is not a good idea if compatibility is important to you.
-
That's the point though. Without hacking or degrading, such examples just don't work, which is the only proof you need that hacking hardware directly is not a good idea if compatibility is important to you.
I accept your point Karlos, but for me one of the most enjoyable things about using the Amiga is the challenge in making something work on it that really shouldn't... :)
-
Well, first let me say sorry for making a post that obviously caused so much fuss, second while we went off topic in places the question I was originally asking was what would it take if the money was endless to make a super amiga? I was thinking that a motherboard with pci express or agp express would be a start, this would give the graphics a leap start, second a new processor, not an intel or an amd but something new, the amiga was good because it didnt depend on one huge processor to do all the work but instead shared the work load through various chips. add to that solid state hdds to keep size and sound and costs down and a nice new OS with inbuild touch screen technology support and its the foundation of a new amiga? no?
-
A PC of the same era wouldn't even find enough resources to move the mouse pointer, if you actually managed to load the browser.
Windows 3.11 + IE4 on a 8 Meg 486 was more capable and standards compliant than AOS was up until the relatively recent release of webkit based browsers.
I've done internet on an 8Meg Amiga, there are a lot of words one could use to describe the experience, fun doesn't feature among them however.
Every single website loading up was a concern - would this one take up too much ram to display and knock out the system?
The only really safe way to do it was to disable image loading and run one application at a time if you were going anywhere near the internet.
-
That's subjective. There are certain things where Amiga excels at even without having been upgraded all these years. So it's not like the rotary phone->touch tone phone analogy which is an enhancement in all respects.
No, it's completely objective Mr Joystick bounce. Seriously, stop using words you don't understand.
He requires X capabilities to be able to do his job. These capabilities are offered in product A more or less out of the box, but product B doesn't offer these capabilities either at all or without a huge amount of hard work on his part.
Product A therefore gets the sale.
-
No, it doesn't. That it's do-able is the point. You can directly go to the hardware and still have it work across the board on all Amigas. There's a lot of API-based software that no longer works on modern PCs. See my other post.
By your own (flawed) reasoning the fact that API-based software still does work on modern PC's demonstrates that it is doable, and thus proves that API based systems are the way forward.
You're trying to have your cake and eat it. Hardware banging, in the modern age, is for embedded projects and the like. it has _no_ place whatsoever on modern desktop machines except for the implementation of hardware drivers.
Recent GPU's have billions of transistors crammed onto their dies dedicated to the job at hand. How far do you think they would actually have gotten if they had to waste precious silicon to appease people that insist on total hardware backwards compatibility with 20-year old designs? Apply the same observation to every other component in your machine.
As for not being able to run old software thanks to hardware changes, I take it you forgot about features like hardware virtualisation or even emulation? After all, there's not much you could do in DOS on a 286 that you couldn't comfortably emulate today if you really wanted to.
Hardware banging and ignoring the OS was never truly encouraged on the Amiga (at least by the people that designed the hardware and software), you are lucky that anything worked from ECS to AGA. And, given that post AGA was set to go in wildly different directions, you'd be even luckier if anything worked beyond that.
You can assume all sorts of utterly ridiculous nonsense if, as an application developer, you view your machine as hardware up rather than software down. For example, the VBR on the 68000 was at a fixed location starting at address 0. From your standpoint, it's t thus perfectly fine when taking over the machine to put your own handlers in that first 1K of memory. And some obviously did, which is why when 68010+ based systems started appearing and the OS got the opportunity to relocate the VBR to somewhere helpful, like fast ram, their code failed miserably. And that's just from "hardware banging" the CPU, let alone assuming other facets of the system architecture would never change.
Frankly I'm glad that not too many people thought your way about development or there's no way we'd ever be using 68060, RTG or AHI. You might find it comfortable in 68000/OCS-only land, but don't assume everybody else did.
-
Careful Karlos, you carry on like that and he'll start accusing you of being biased ;)
-
lol, stubby fingers. You sure are a riot.
(http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/8922/lolxx.jpg)
Don't look stubby to me.
and yes that's a mickey table cloth, and no I don't give a rats ass if someone thinks its homo.
PS: Already relieved myself. played some Elvira, if yknow what im sayin.
avatar makes sense now (;
-
WOAAAHH, now before everyone jumps on me and pummels me into the ground i have to ask this question. but before I do here is my background. I started with a vic 20 then went to the Commodore 64 later i bought an amiga 500, then a 1200 then was given another 1200 and used an amiga 2000 before buying my own amiga4000 030 which if you look at my other posts you can see is now a 060 cyberstorm 200mhzppc with picaso iv and paloma module and a zoro iii expansion board with more ram than i thought possible on an amiga? over 104,000,000bytes? all my cards are maxed out is what im trying to say. now i use a 6400 amd dualcore pc with 4gb ram and a 8800gtx 768mb graphic card. now i loved my 4000 and is why im trying to make it work again but just how far behind is an amiga to a pc in real terms? i left the community then amiga format left us and didnt bother with the amigaone and dont know anything about the amiga since then. just what would an amiga have to improve to be on equal (or even) better than a pc in todays speed vs software world? again i always preffered my amigas than pcs but eventually had to goto the dark side.
Lucky bastard. Vic 20 was my first machine, then c64, a1k and pc after that. Folks moved to NC and I never saw an amiga in the wild after 1989. Used that a1k until like 95 though.
-
Hi,
@ElpolloDiabl,
Did I hear you right, "Screw Amiga"
What in the hello are you doing here?
This is an Amiga Channel, if you like PC's that much go to a PC channel if you can find one that doesn't charge you bucks (thats all PC people are looking for).
smerf
-
Hi,
@ElpolloDiabl,
Did I hear you right, "Screw Amiga"
What in the hello are you doing here?
This is an Amiga Channel, if you like PC's that much go to a PC channel if you can find one that doesn't charge you bucks (thats all PC people are looking for).
smerf
You tell em smerf... :biglaugh:
Starting to wonder why this site has AMIGA in it's title... :p
Even a certain moderator, who shall remain nameless (Karlos !!!! :lol:) seem to be pushing the pc side a bit far... :roflmao:
(wonder if I can have them, under the Trades Description Act...) :biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:
-
That's the point though. Without hacking or degrading, such examples just don't work, which is the only proof you need that hacking hardware directly is not a good idea if compatibility is important to you.
They work without hacking or degrading. You are mixing up OCS/ECS/AGA registers with OS calls and memory differences. The AGA chipset was purposely made to be backward compatible and register compatible. Have you narrowed it down to the registers-- no. You just assumed it.
-
By your own (flawed) reasoning the fact that API-based software still does work on modern PC's demonstrates that it is doable, and thus proves that API based systems are the way forward.
...
You are misunderstanding and mixing things up. I never said that API doesn't work. I said I can find API examples that don't work just like you can find some OCS-based software that doesn't work on AGA machines. According to your FAULTY logic, no one should use APIs because it can cause trouble. But the fact that it's do-able means there's nothing wrong with it. Similarly, just because you can have some software that abused OCS registers beyond their definition, that doesn't mean that you should stop going direct to hardware. Can you ban Leander from this topic-- that's one troll that wasted my time previously and I won't deal with her side-kick bullcrap.
You're trying to have your cake and eat it. Hardware banging, in the modern age, is for embedded projects and the like. it has _no_ place whatsoever on modern desktop machines except for the implementation of hardware drivers.
Hey even for embedded stuff and hardware drivers, you have inferiority to Amiga since you have to write drivers for every graphics device, audio device, etc.
As for not being able to run old software thanks to hardware changes, I take it you forgot about features like hardware virtualisation or even emulation? After all, there's not much you could do in DOS on a 286 that you couldn't comfortably emulate today if you really wanted to.
I think there's DOSBOX, but it doesn't run Windows 3.1 and it has its limits unlike running it in native mode. Hey, if they can run Windows 3.1 in Windows XP and 98, they should be able to do it in 64-bit OSes.
Hardware banging and ignoring the OS was never truly encouraged on the Amiga (at least by the people that designed the hardware and software), you are lucky that anything worked from ECS to AGA. And, given that post AGA was set to go in wildly different directions, you'd be even luckier if anything worked beyond that.
It's a science-- nothing hodge podge like you are making it out to be. From what I have debugged, only OCS stuff not working on AGA was API-related-- making calls to wrong areas of older OSes or mixing up different memories-- fast memory, chip memory, and 16-bit/32-bit whatever.
You can assume all sorts of utterly ridiculous nonsense if, as an application developer, you view your machine as hardware up rather than software down. For example, the VBR on the 68000 was at a fixed location starting at address 0. From your standpoint, it's t thus perfectly fine when taking over the machine to put your own handlers in that first 1K of memory. And some obviously did, which is why when 68010+ based systems started appearing and the OS got the opportunity to relocate the VBR to somewhere helpful, like fast ram, their code failed miserably. And that's just from "hardware banging" the CPU, let alone assuming other facets of the system architecture would never change.
Frankly I'm glad that not too many people thought your way about development or there's no way we'd ever be using 68060, RTG or AHI. You might find it comfortable in 68000/OCS-only land, but don't assume everybody else did.
I'm so sorry you missed the point entirely. There's nothing wrong with having APi standard and hardware level compatibility. I'm glad many people banged the hardware as that's the really cool software that now exists on Amiga and is more efficient and faster than API-based stuff. Yeah, I agree processors did change but even in that case if many people utilized features that weren't doable on 68020 or later-- they would made the chip more compatible.
-
Well, first let me say sorry for making a post that obviously caused so much fuss, second while we went off topic in places the question I was originally asking was what would it take if the money was endless to make a super amiga? I was thinking that a motherboard with pci express or agp express would be a start, this would give the graphics a leap start, second a new processor, not an intel or an amd but something new, the amiga was good because it didnt depend on one huge processor to do all the work but instead shared the work load through various chips. add to that solid state hdds to keep size and sound and costs down and a nice new OS with inbuild touch screen technology support and its the foundation of a new amiga? no?
I think there's some natami forum for the next generation amiga.
-
I accept your point Karlos, but for me one of the most enjoyable things about using the Amiga is the challenge in making something work on it that really shouldn't... :)
The OCS registers work 100% on ECS and AGA. It's not a big challenge to make OCS stuff work on AGA. Just have to avoid assuming 7.16Mhz 68000 and few other details. The OCS stuff that doesn't work with AGA isn't just using OCS registers-- the problems are mostly caused by other factors.
-
avatar makes sense now (;
And my avatar looks like his reality :lol:
-
Windows 3.11 + IE4 on a 8 Meg 486 was more capable and standards compliant than AOS was up until the relatively recent release of webkit based browsers.
I've done internet on an 8Meg Amiga, there are a lot of words one could use to describe the experience, fun doesn't feature among them however.
Every single website loading up was a concern - would this one take up too much ram to display and knock out the system?
The only really safe way to do it was to disable image loading and run one application at a time if you were going anywhere near the internet.
Bullshit.
-
Well, first let me say sorry for making a post that obviously caused so much fuss, second while we went off topic in places the question I was originally asking was what would it take if the money was endless to make a super amiga? I was thinking that a motherboard with pci express or agp express would be a start, this would give the graphics a leap start, second a new processor, not an intel or an amd but something new, the amiga was good because it didnt depend on one huge processor to do all the work but instead shared the work load through various chips. add to that solid state hdds to keep size and sound and costs down and a nice new OS with inbuild touch screen technology support and its the foundation of a new amiga? no?
I have noticed that rabbit chasing occurs frequently around here. As amigasi mentioned, the Natami project desires to simply upgrade the Amiga chipset hardware and keep going.
PCI express would probably be the better starting point as AGP is old school now. ARM is a possible contender, and there is a rumor that AmigaOS4 will be ported to it.
Amiga needs more software now than anything else.
Need some popcorn reading about the API vs. direct access discussion. Would an API that maintains an optimized, hardware banging code base adequately satisfy?
-
He requires X capabilities to be able to do his job. These capabilities are offered in product A more or less out of the box, but product B doesn't offer these capabilities either at all or without a huge amount of hard work on his part.
Product A therefore gets the sale.
Or Product B gets the sale because Manager Z read an article, written by a journalist instead of a technician, in a magazine and decided Product B would be better because everybody else uses it.
-
I think there's some natami forum for the next generation amiga.
<3 By the looks of things, natami will come out sooner than the a1x1k, cost a hell of a lot less and deliver more fun. <3 <3 <3
-
I have noticed that rabbit chasing occurs frequently around here. ........
Amiga needs more software now than anything else.
This thread is getting really ....... boring I guess is the best description as it goes down hill into name calling and "yes it is" - "no it isn't" arguments.
I will agree that the Amiga needs more software, or more accurately, it needs new software, as the archives of old software are really quite impressive. We need users that can show other computer users the FUN of using an Amiga and all of its variants and encourage more bedroom programmers to write code, or join with others writing code and porting existing apps and games to the Amiga, AOS4.x, MorphOS2.x & AROS. Ports from other platforms are not a bad thing, but original software would be a great thing to have as well.
-
Bullshit.
Is that your qualified opinion? Browsing on my old A1200 with 040/16MB fast (when the 040 card works, but that's a different story) on AGA is not a lot of fun, either. It starts off fine but sooner or later (depending on how many image intensive pages I've visited), I'm down to my last MB of memory and my 040 feels more like an 020 until I either flush the images or turn them off. That's with a minimal installation of OS3.5 and the usual 040 speedup patches installed (RemApollo, 040 ieee math libraries etc).
It's not just a case of misremembering either. This behaviour was observed recently, during the development of the old browser proxy for iBrowse/Aweb.
-
They work without hacking or degrading. You are mixing up OCS/ECS/AGA registers with OS calls and memory differences. The AGA chipset was purposely made to be backward compatible and register compatible. Have you narrowed it down to the registers-- no. You just assumed it.
On software that shuts down the OS and takes over the hardware, you can only blame the OS for instability so far.
The point is that making assumptions about the hardware configuration is not sensible. To claim otherwise is to ignore the advice of the people that actually designed and built it and I'm sure they were better qualified than you to make that call.
-
Is that your qualified opinion? Browsing on my old A1200 with 040/16MB fast (when the 040 card works, but that's a different story) on AGA is not a lot of fun, either. It starts off fine but sooner or later (depending on how many image intensive pages I've visited), I'm down to my last MB of memory and my 040 feels more like an 020 until I either flush the images or turn them off. That's with a minimal installation of OS3.5 and the usual 040 speedup patches installed (RemApollo, 040 ieee math libraries etc).
It's not just a case of misremembering either. This behaviour was observed recently, during the development of the old browser proxy for iBrowse/Aweb.
I don't know why anyone would argue with you and claim that it is any fun trying to use the Internet on an Amiga today. I have my A1200 w/256mb RAM & 060/50mhz w/Indivision and it is not a pleasant experience. Sure it can be done, but it does not compare to using the Internet on any Mac or PC. I have been using Amigas since 1986 and even back in 1990 when I first started using the Internet on a regular basis, I would do it from my Bridgeboard in my A2000/030, or while running Shapeshifter and MacOS7.6 and Netscape most of the time as it was a better experience than my registered version of AWeb2 or IBrowse. Maybe others had better luck with their Amiga browsers on more powerful Amigas than what I owned at the time, and maybe some are just too biased to admit that by the time the A3000 was released the Amiga was already falling behind the PC in many areas. Not that I wanted to switch at that time because I still preferred the AmigaOS's responsive behavior, but I could tell then that being an Amiga user meant that I was going to miss out on certain hardware advances and lots of software that was being written (hence my purchase of the Vortex GG Bridgeboard)
-
Is that your qualified opinion? Browsing on my old A1200 with 040/16MB fast (when the 040 card works, but that's a different story) on AGA is not a lot of fun, either. It starts off fine but sooner or later (depending on how many image intensive pages I've visited), I'm down to my last MB of memory and my 040 feels more like an 020 until I either flush the images or turn them off. That's with a minimal installation of OS3.5 and the usual 040 speedup patches installed (RemApollo, 040 ieee math libraries etc).
When? In the Win 3.1 days or today?
It's not just a case of misremembering either. This behaviour was observed recently, during the development of the old browser proxy for iBrowse/Aweb.
Aah so its today. You want to view the bloated mess thats the web today on a 40 mhz cpu with 32 Mb ram. Sheesh.
FYI I used the same spec A1200 in 64 colors dblscan(fblit and Ftext) till about 2002 with Aweb/Ibrowse. Sure over the years, it got slower as web pages became bloated with more and more useless banners and images. Being on dial up didn't help matters so i switched off images. I also ran netscape 4 communicator under shapeshifter with Mac SO 7.5.5 and the savage driver in 640x480 256 colors (the screen was in fast ram mapped with the MMU). The Aweb/Ibrowse set up was faster. The speed advantage of YAM over communicator was even more stark.
Eventually i went to the A4000/68060/CV64 running Ibrowse 2, on dial up till 2007 or so, and never experienced this BULLSHIT about worrying if the next web page would crash the system!
With some of posts some "Amigans" here make, you'd think their machines did nothing but crashed at the first single mouse pointer movement after booting. All the software on aminet must have been created with amiga's in an alternate reality, as according to Leander, the Amiga was one useless, perpetually crashing mess. For him NOTHING worked.
-
PCI express would probably be the better starting point as AGP is old school now. ARM is a possible contender, and there is a rumor that AmigaOS4 will be ported to it.
I agree that AGP is too out of date. As far as ARM is concerned, AROS is currently being ported to ARM by Dr. Schulz. IMO, OS4's fate should remained locked to PPC. With AROS being x86 and soon ARM, it would be a waste of Hyperion's limited resources to support anything but PPC.
-
When? In the Win 3.1 days or today?
Aah so its today. You want to view the bloated mess thats the web today on a 40 mhz cpu with 32 Mb ram. Sheesh.
It was 16MB and 25MHz. So I guess you feel even more let off the hook. FYI, the proxied version of amiga.org has considerably less "bloat", especially while it was in early development, so comparable to the good old days. The first version was somewhat overzealous in what it stripped out, the resulting pages could hardly be described as bloated.
FYI I used the same spec A1200 in 64 colors dblscan(fblit and Ftext) till about 2002 with Aweb/Ibrowse. Sure over the years, it got slower as web pages became bloated with more and more useless banners and images. Being on dial up didn't help matters so i switched off images. I also ran netscape 4 communicator under shapeshifter with Mac SO 7.5.5 and the savage driver in 640x480 256 colors (the screen was in fast ram mapped with the MMU). The Aweb/Ibrowse set up was faster. The speed advantage of YAM over communicator was even more stark.
Eventually i went to the A4000/68060/CV64 running Ibrowse 2, on dial up till 2007 or so, and never experienced this BULLSHIT about worrying if the next web page would crash the system!
I'm also guessing your 060 had more than 16MB?
With some of posts some "Amigans" here make, you'd think their machines did nothing but crashed at the first single mouse pointer movement after booting. All the software on aminet must have been created with amiga's in an alternate reality, as according to Leander, the Amiga was one useless, perpetually crashing mess. For him NOTHING worked.
That's not true, his needs simply exceeded what his machine was capable of. It happens to most people.
-
It was 16MB and 25MHz. So I guess you feel even more let off the hook. FYI, the proxied version of amiga.org has considerably less "bloat", especially while it was in early development, so comparable to the good old days. The first version was somewhat overzealous in what it stripped out, the resulting pages could hardly be described as bloated
Be that as it may, I was viewing this site's pages under a different user name from about 1998. I never experienced this event that you and Leander describe. NEVER. Sounds like the lack the of protected memory argument: yeah you could crash your amiga, yeah you could lose data, yet gigabytes of software, pics, songs were created by users anyway.
I'm also guessing your 060 had more than 16MB?
128 MB. But I don't think I got less than 112 MB free. Unlike what's been said here I don't recall accessing sites I needed to being unusually difficult, although I did need to install some encryption update to do my banking. To have hardware built in 1992 still function like that is remarkable.
That's not true, his needs simply exceeded what his machine was capable of . It happens to most people.
No issue with people buying whatever meets their needs. Its the incessant revisionist negativity that is tiresome.
-
An Amiga's gotta know its limitations.. The upper boundary of those was ruled off in 1994.
Why try to prove something that has no worth. Use your PC, Mac or Linux box for browsing and use your Amiga for what it's good at.: Being an Amiga. That should be enough.
Unless of course you have a need to pit your stock Edsel in a current day Saloon car race.
You don't want it to be the same...trust me..
Vive la difference.....!
-
Win95 w/ IE works better than the Amiga in my experience. *shrug*
(http://eehard.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/dunce-778614.jpg)
And this comment is about as reliable as his one stating a 5bit 15khz sample chip produces better quality than an 8bit 48khz sample chip...........and then argue it on the basis of a CD-ROM mastered soundtrack using studio hardware not the actual soundchip lol classic comments from little arkhan.
1 IE was always iffy as hell compared to the likes of Netscape at the time, which is what most people used simply because IE was really that slow and buggy and rendered pages incorrectly at that time. As any web designer knows, you finish your site, then modify it so IE can render it in an identical fashion to how it already renders ;)
2 Win95 had a notoriously famous world wide bug of a memory map as solid as a leaky old bucket when it comes to web browsing/emailing activities lol.
3 There's the Win95 GDI resource issue to compound that socket related leakage into oblivion problem with the effects of gradually losing GDI memory resource due to using graphically intense programs (for 1995 that is) like web browsers all day long. Result = crash city/loss of OS functionality = frequent reboots.
So it turns out you have no experience of how 'good' IE was originally in that time frame, and no awareness of two of the biggest reasons corporations found Win95 nothing but a toy OS for business applications lol surprise NOT.
Maybe it's time we ALL had a poll vote to decide if Arkhan should be banned, clearly the moderators here are going for quantity rather than quality as far as member numbers go on Amiga.org haha
As usual bullshit off-topic trolling has actually derailed an interesting thread, the simple facts are....
A1000 vs 8086/80186 PC XT etc = slamdunk to A1000 on every possible aspect.
A1200/4000 vs 386SX/486DX ISA PC = grey area of swings and roundabouts.
£1500+ x1000 vs i7 latest gen PC = I think even here we've all seen how that went lol
Comparing today's PCs with souped up A1200/A4000s is about as useful as comparing an IBM XT with 128k ram and Hercules graphics card and PC speaker audio to a 512k A1000.
Now had you pointed out that something like an A500/2000 etc didn't have a serial port capable of utilising a 33.6/56k modem unlike your average early 90s PC.............
(above 3 examples compared on like for like timescales, PC OS = DOS+Windows of the time and price is similar for both items)
-
Now had you pointed out that something like an A500/2000 etc didn't have a serial port capable of utilising a 33.6/56k modem unlike your average early 90s PC.............
but you could get them easily enough as add-ons for zorro, clock port etc..not sure about the A500 though..
-
Now had you pointed out that something like an A500/2000 etc didn't have a serial port capable of utilising a 33.6/56k modem unlike your average early 90s PC.............
Huh? 56k maybe - I never tried. But I ran a BBS off my A500 with a 33.6 modem, and did extensive downloads with the same modem. All at full speed with no problems.
I may have used an optimized serial port driver, I remember messing around with serial drivers a bit, but it certainly worked.
-
@Leander
Dare I ask _why_ you used IE4, a program released in late 1997, on a 486 running Windows 3.11?
-
Be that as it may, I was viewing this site's pages under a different user name from about 1998. I never experienced this event that you and Leander describe. NEVER. Sounds like the lack the of protected memory argument: yeah you could crash your amiga, yeah you could lose data, yet gigabytes of software, pics, songs were created by users anyway.
The experience I described was of system slowness, not of system instability. My old 040 machine was unstable for a number of reasons but not because of web browsers using too much memory.
As for the protected memory issue, well, over the years, I had applications crash my entire machine many more times than I care to remember. It's just something you learn to live with, until you get used to a system that doesn't require a reboot because something has corrupted Exec's free memory list resulting in amber alerts every time an application calls AllocMem() of FreeMem() or trashes some other resource that ultimately causes a crash or freeze.
You can keep saying "never" in your experience, but obviously you are exceptionally lucky. I don't know any other users that have "never" experienced any of these problems.
-
Bullshit.
Systems in question were as follows:
A1200 040@28, 8Meg ram (later upgraded to 32Meg ram - the 8Meg stick then went into a CD32) AGA.
OS3.5, using a mix of Aweb, Ibrowse 2.2 (later 2.3) and Voyager 3.3 (beta)
The PC was a no name box I was given because it would otherwise have gone to the dump.
It ran Windows 3.11, had 8 Meg of ram and used IE4 (later upgraded to 16Mb of ram and IE5)
IE4 was more standards compliant than any Amiga browser up until the release of the webkit browsers for Amiga.
IE5 was so far ahead of the game that it got to the stage that I would only browse the web on the Amiga using shapeshifter running MacOS 7.1 with IE5 installed. There was absolutely nothing on the Amiga that could match it for compatibility on the web.
Read that again: I could emulate a Mac on my Amiga and get better, faster, more compatible results than I could natively.
I also met a couple of people who actually purposefully built 3.11 boxes with similar specs for the sole purpose of testing netgoing capability. Sorry to say that the Amiga failed both in terms of cost and ease of getting the software going.
Or Product B gets the sale because Manager Z read an article, written by a journalist instead of a technician, in a magazine and decided Product B would be better because everybody else uses it.
Problem is, that Product B is the Amiga. To get even a fraction of the capabilities of even a entry level PC one must prat around with hacked up DSP cards that go on the clockport or if the zorro route hunt down near non existent stocks, mess around with AHI, upgrade the hell out of the cpu slot, oh and likely pay more for just the Amiga soundcard than that low end PC in its entirety.
-
Eventually i went to the A4000/68060/CV64 running Ibrowse 2, on dial up till 2007 or so, and never experienced this BULLSHIT about worrying if the next web page would crash the system!
Try it with only 8Meg of ram and watch your system scream.
Bonus points if you dare to try it on an 020 with 8megs of fast ram. (Yes, I did get that CD32 online on a couple of occasions when the 1200 was being reinstalled.)
Sure, 32Meg helped no end, but then again 16 meg on the PC did much the same, with the added benefit of being able to use a swapfile.
But as Karlos says, even with 32Meg under the keyboard, a heavy website would bring the Amiga to its knees with a native browser. IE5 on the same hardware under emulation suffered far less slowdown and got me a whole hell of a lot further
With some of posts some "Amigans" here make,
I'm not an Amigan. Never have been, never will be.
you'd think their machines did nothing but crashed at the first single mouse pointer movement after booting.
Never said that, so great strawman.
All the software on aminet must have been created with amiga's in an alternate reality, as according to Leander, the Amiga was one useless, perpetually crashing mess. For him NOTHING worked.
Never said that either, but hey why let piddling little things like facts get in the way of a logical fallacy...
What I said was, as far as the net went, the Classic Amiga blows chunks. It simply wasn't up to the task without hideously expensive upgrades to the hardware. And even then you were better off emulating MacOS to use a web browser on account of the fact that ALL Amiga web browsers pre the new webkit ones sucked.
They did. They still do.
Amigas were leagues ahead in some areas. But the Net was imho its single greatest weakness compared to other platforms. Even when comparing like for like.
No issue with people buying whatever meets their needs. Its the incessant revisionist negativity that is tiresome.
There is nothing revisionist about it. That you have never ever once had any issue whatsoever with an Amiga is not my concern.
-
@Leander
Dare I ask _why_ you used IE4, a program released in late 1997, on a 486 running Windows 3.11?
For much the same reason I used an Amiga daily until around 2004 - because I could. The hardware was free and so was the software.
Imagine my surprise then, when IE4 outperformed Amiga native browsers on just about every level.
Finding IE5 for Win3.11 was an absolute pain. But with 16Meg installed it absolutely flew - indeed it was the performance of this box that convinced me to setup sheepshaver and run MacOS emulated so I didn't have to keep swapping machines. It was still slower than the PC due to the PC having a better graphics card, but it was a whole hell of a lot faster and more capable than Amiga native.
Fun times. Great experiments.
It's conversations like these that make me realise just how much I've forgotten over the years.
-
Maybe it's time we ALL had a poll vote to decide if Arkhan should be banned, clearly the moderators here are going for quantity rather than quality as far as member numbers go on Amiga.org haha
Coming from Mr Signal Bounce himself, bitching about others spamming comes off as more than a little hypocritical. Same goes for complaining about others posting a lot.
Given the drubbing you faced the last time you brought up your lunacy about doing away with APIs, I would have thought you might have sat down and evaluated your position.
Sadly (but not entirely surprisingly) you haven't.
I would recommend you go back to sitting on your joystick until you do personally.
-
I'm not an Amigan. Never have been, never will be.
the_leander... don't know if i've picked you up wrong, but if your statement 'I'm not an Amigan. Never have been, never will be.' is true, then what on earth are you wasting your time for posting biased opinions on an AMIGA forum ! :rolleyes:
It's quite clear from the posts in this thread that it's just going round in circles with the, my pc is better than the amiga or my amiga is better than the pc nonsense.
We should all just agree that you use the machine that you do, because it suits your needs and your either happy or unhappy with it and stop this never ending mine's is better than yours crap and cramming as many quotes into a post as you possibly can. :(
Use a PC/MAC for what it does best, accessing the internet and erm... (well that about it)
And use an Amiga for what it does best, creativity, fun, enjoyment and almost every other computing need you may have (except for using the internet)... :)
-
Or Product B gets the sale because Manager Z read an article, written by a journalist instead of a technician, in a magazine and decided Product B would be better because everybody else uses it.
The problem there was that she denounced amiga because of her needs and going by some specialized non-standard audio card; if you allow for hardware add-ons, you could have gotten 20 bits DAC/ADC audio card for Amiga in 1990s as well:
http://amiga.resource.cx/exp/search.pl?product=soundstage&company=
-
I have noticed that rabbit chasing occurs frequently around here. As amigasi mentioned, the Natami project desires to simply upgrade the Amiga chipset hardware and keep going.
PCI express would probably be the better starting point as AGP is old school now. ARM is a possible contender, and there is a rumor that AmigaOS4 will be ported to it.
Amiga needs more software now than anything else.
Need some popcorn reading about the API vs. direct access discussion. Would an API that maintains an optimized, hardware banging code base adequately satisfy?
Problem with API is not only efficiency of code and speed, but also that it's restrictive and inexact. For example, on standard VGA you can write to an I/O port to do hscroll, vscroll, and line replication (all via hardware). You can do similar on Amiga (of course). Now, when nonstandard VGA cards took over many didn't even support these three features for the better graphics modes so even if you had an API that does hscroll, vscroll, and line replication-- the ones that don't support it will be emulating it via copying buffers and slower means. And then add to that trouble, suppose you wanted to read in user input during VBI and do the hscroll/vscroll at that time, you are in some trouble. So if you program for worst case scenario, you would avoid doing it in VBI.
-
I belive Amiga has a soul.
I have unending love towards Amiga.
PC lost its soul long time ago :smack:
-
the_leander... don't know if i've picked you up wrong, but if your statement 'I'm not an Amigan. Never have been, never will be.' is true, then what on earth are you wasting your time for posting biased opinions on an AMIGA forum ! :rolleyes:
I'm guessing "Amigan" has very different connotations for us.
I'm a long time Amiga User. Currently my Amiga of choice is UAE. In the future it may well be a minimigAGA. I post here because I have a good few (IRL and online) friends who share similar interests to me.
An Amigan to me is simply another name for BAF. The term first started becoming fashionable around the time of the exodus.
Other synonyms include: Chump, sucker, retard, fraudster worshipper, cultie.
-
And this comment is about as reliable as his one stating a 5bit 15khz sample chip produces better quality than an 8bit 48khz sample chip...........and then argue it on the basis of a CD-ROM mastered soundtrack using studio hardware not the actual soundchip lol classic comments from little arkhan.
Wow, you're still gripping onto that whole argument that you barely understood at the time?
I argued the PCE soundchip and the PCE CD audio as two separate points. It's not a sampling chip. It's a WSG. It just happens to be able to sample on each channel also (6 channels!). The CD audio argument is that it surpasses everything since it can have music made up of sound from whatever in the piss you want. Studio mastered audio on a CD based game is going to beat the piss out of any sound chip. Mix Amiga, Atari, a kazoo, and a friggin roland from 2010. Who cares. It can do it all. You do know what a CD is right? It's those shiny discs you stare at and drool as the light reflects off the bottoms?
I also never said it's (the WSG) is better quality. I said it sounds better and works better for games. There is a reason why arcade machines used FM/PSG/WSG instead of sampling a majority of the time. It fits and is much smoother for the type of game in question. Kind of like how if you were to have a live band for the soundtrack of a NES game.... it wouldn't fit at all. Having the music and sfx blend properly is very important in games.
I know you're sort of dopey and don't really get it so I will just leave it at that.
1 IE was always iffy as hell compared to the likes of Netscape at the time, which is what most people used simply because IE was really that slow and buggy and rendered pages incorrectly at that time. As any web designer knows, you finish your site, then modify it so IE can render it in an identical fashion to how it already renders ;)
Thats nice. Doesn't change the fact that iBrowse loads pages up kind of slow and jerky, and a comparable win95 machine doesn't have the same dilemma.
Also, now that you mention it, Netscape works better too. Thats two browsers.
2 Win95 had a notoriously famous world wide bug of a memory map as solid as a leaky old bucket when it comes to web browsing/emailing activities lol.
man, nothing gets past the AMIGA_NUT.
3 There's the Win95 GDI resource issue to compound that socket related leakage into oblivion problem with the effects of gradually losing GDI memory resource due to using graphically intense programs (for 1995 that is) like web browsers all day long. Result = crash city/loss of OS functionality = frequent reboots.
Hmm. Don't recall that problem. then again I was like 9 at the time. My computer didn't crash alot back then, and doesn't now.
It only crashed when we got AOL.
So it turns out you have no experience of how 'good' IE was originally in that time frame, and no awareness of two of the biggest reasons corporations found Win95 nothing but a toy OS for business applications lol surprise NOT.
Yet Win95 and then 98, and beyond, are what most corporations used and still use. Maybe you have no experience with what the real world is doing past 1993.
Maybe it's time we ALL had a poll vote to decide if Arkhan should be banned, clearly the moderators here are going for quantity rather than quality as far as member numbers go on Amiga.org haha
Big words from the flid whose opening argument here was a direct attack, and who bounces from computer scene to computer scene being fanboy of said computer until he's gone so r-tard that he has to leave. Your problem is you have tunnel vision love for the computer the forum you are currently hamfisting on is about. You can't see past it being the best thing since sliced bread because you just want approval.
As usual bullshit off-topic trolling has actually derailed an interesting thread, the simple facts are....
Dumbass, go read the title of the thread. In fact, here let me help you since you will probably go ADD on the way to reading it and start spewing more idiocy:
AMIGA vs PC.
I don't see how discussing the pros/cons of a PC is off topic in a thread where PC IS IN THE FRIGGING TITLE. As usual, hamfisted fliddery has made you look like the forum tard. You know, sort of like your opening comment in this post. What is on topic about insulting me and bringing up a thread thats been done for awhile now? Good job. Loosen the chin strap on your helmet. It's cutting off the circulation to what little brain you have left.
A1000 vs 8086/80186 PC XT etc = slamdunk to A1000 on every possible aspect.
I should hope so considering an A1000 is newer by some years.
A1200/4000 vs 386SX/486DX ISA PC = grey area of swings and roundabouts.
Oh, but I thought it was clear that the Amiga was superior no matter what. Now you change your stance to a "maybe", depending on how you have everything configured? Simpleton.
Comparing today's PCs with souped up A1200/A4000s is about as useful as comparing an IBM XT with 128k ram and Hercules graphics card and PC speaker audio to a 512k A1000.
So you're saying this whole thread is useless? Try leaving then. You've contributed nothing but nonsense, as per the AMIGA_NUT standard.
LITTLE ARKHAN, OVER AND OUT.
-
I'm guessing "Amigan" has very different connotations for us.
I'm a long time Amiga User. Currently my Amiga of choice is UAE. In the future it may well be a minimigAGA. I post here because I have a good few (IRL and online) friends who share similar interests to me.
An Amigan to me is simply another name for BAF. The term first started becoming fashionable around the time of the exodus.
Other synonyms include: Chump, sucker, retard, fraudster worshipper, cultie.
Having been around long before the exodus (helped an old chap build a little boat he was making, Noah I think he was called...) and long before it was fashionable to be fashionable, Id be more than happy to be associated with those synonyms. :)
(except the BAF one, never been a member of the Belgian Air Force...) :(
At least back then we all used the same computer, the Abacus it was called, crappy gfx but did it's job well, and still runs the same OS even after some 4000 odd years. :biglaugh:
-
Everything looks better or worse in memory than it really was....
(http://www.insidesocal.com/friendlyfire/dunce2%20copy.jpg)
And this comment is about as reliable as his one stating a 5bit 15khz sample chip produces better quality than an 8bit 48khz sample chip...........and then argue it on the basis of a CD-ROM mastered soundtrack using studio hardware not the actual soundchip lol classic comments from little arkhan.
1 IE was always iffy as hell compared to the likes of Netscape at the time, which is what most people used simply because IE was really that slow and buggy and rendered pages incorrectly at that time. As any web designer knows, you finish your site, then modify it so IE can render it in an identical fashion to how it already renders ;)
2 Win95 had a notoriously famous world wide bug of a memory map as solid as a leaky old bucket when it comes to web browsing/emailing activities lol.
3 There's the Win95 GDI resource issue to compound that socket related leakage into oblivion problem with the effects of gradually losing GDI memory resource due to using graphically intense programs (for 1995 that is) like web browsers all day long. Result = crash city/loss of OS functionality = frequent reboots.
So it turns out you have no experience of how 'good' IE was originally in that time frame, and no awareness of two of the biggest reasons corporations found Win95 nothing but a toy OS for business applications lol surprise NOT.
Maybe it's time we ALL had a poll vote to decide if Arkhan should be banned, clearly the moderators here are going for quantity rather than quality as far as member numbers go on Amiga.org haha
As usual bullshit off-topic trolling has actually derailed an interesting thread, the simple facts are....
A1000 vs 8086/80186 PC XT etc = slamdunk to A1000 on every possible aspect.
A1200/4000 vs 386SX/486DX ISA PC = grey area of swings and roundabouts.
£1500+ x1000 vs i7 latest gen PC = I think even here we've all seen how that went lol
Comparing today's PCs with souped up A1200/A4000s is about as useful as comparing an IBM XT with 128k ram and Hercules graphics card and PC speaker audio to a 512k A1000.
Now had you pointed out that something like an A500/2000 etc didn't have a serial port capable of utilising a 33.6/56k modem unlike your average early 90s PC.............
(above 3 examples compared on like for like timescales, PC OS = DOS+Windows of the time and price is similar for both items)
-
@ Leander
The problem I have in believing just how great IE on an 8 meg 486 and Win 3.1 ran is that at the time virtually everyone used Netscape,and even payed to do so. None of the PC magazines recommended it, and everyone I knew agree IE4 was shit. Evryone at the time was running Win 95 at least a well. Secondly I did have a 200 mhz 603e power mac with 32 mb ram and both IE4 and Netscape communicator ran like a three-legged dog on that machine under Mac OS 8. I honestly can't see how IE 4 under 3.11 and 486 could have run as well as you say it did.
would bring the Amiga to its knees with a native browser.
If you say so. A graphics card made all the difference to me.
E5 was so far ahead of the game that it got to the stage that I would only browse the web on the Amiga using shapeshifter running MacOS 7.1 with IE5 installed. There was absolutely nothing on the Amiga that could match it for compatibility on the web.
Read that again: I could emulate a Mac on my Amiga and get better, faster, more compatible results than I could natively.
IE5 on the same hardware under emulation suffered far less slowdown and got me a whole hell of a lot further
You could not have run Win 95 under emulation without it looking like a slideshow, so i'm assuming you emulated a Mac on your Amiga. The thing is I spent an eternity on PPC cyberstorm 68060/604e trying Fusion ppc to boot PPC MacOS 7.6 and 8.0 and NEVER got past the bomb screen. You do know that IE 5 was PPC MacOs 7.6+ only, right? So 68K 7.1 would not have done. So I'd like to know how, exactly, you got a PPC IE5 to run in your Amiga under emulation?
-
An A1200 running at 14 mhz and 8 mb fast ram
Ok, so basically a setup identical to my CD32...
could fit a TCP stack,
That's about 2 megs right there.
a browser, an email client, newsreader, an FTP client
Unless you're talking Lynx, Pine and the text based ftp client that shipped with MiamiDX, you're going to struggle to have more than the first item on your list.
The latter three probably, assuming you were using a version of YAM that only leaked ram slowly.
, IM,
With MDX I could run AmIRC and Jabber side by side quite comfortably.
But that'd be about it. Much of anything else and you'd be knocking on the door of the ram limit.
Take a guess what happens when you do.
a paint package like Dpaint, a word processor
Sure you could. Right up until you started to mess with your paint package much, especially if you were running a high res.
and even do a 3D render in the background )
Horseapples you could. Unless you were planning on rendering the size of a postage stamp.
Rendering hammered the ever loving crap out of the Amiga. Even assuming your 8meg limit was enough for your render... On an 020? Are you daft?
By the time any such render finished, chances are Duke Nukem Forever would have been ported to Amiga!
especially if you had an FPU, play music/mods,
Mods would be all you could do.
a file manager like Dopus on top of a GUI OS-with god knows how many little commodities running in the background and the thing was still responsive to the user. I can't imagine any x86 platform doing that.
As someone who actually used such a setup for a great deal of time, I am flat out telling you you are talking utter bollocks.
There are items on that list that alone could nom up 8Meg without so much as blinking. As to the rest, I'm sorry, but no.
A few at a time, maybe, a few more if you really played around and experimented to push your memory use right up to the red-line.
But the closer you get to the limit, the more likely you are to find out to your cost that one or more of your applications (web apps especially) leaked ram thanks to MUI and blam!
Reboot time.
Where is your "never happened to me" now?
I'm not sure if that advantage in the efficient use of hardware resources was there by design or as a consequence of little hardware development since Commodores demise, nor if that would have continued if AmigaOS survived today.
Amiga was efficient.
But not that efficient.
So for me, Amiga was all about efficiency, elegance and making me feel that the system obeyed me, and for me that made up for the lack of the brute power of a PC.
Given the above claims, I think you might want to talk to your doctor about changing your prescription.
Or selling it on the black market, because that is some serious stuff!
-
By the time any such render finished, chances are Duke Nukem Forever would have been ported to Amiga!
quote of the year!
:afro:
-
And the award for most quotes posted in a post, goes to... :D
-
@ Leander
The problem I have in believing just how great IE on an 8 meg 486 and Win 3.1 ran is that at the time virtually everyone used Netscape,and even payed to do so. None of the PC magazines recommended it, and everyone I knew agree IE4 was shit.
There you go again, trying to put words in my mouth. WTF is up with you?
I didn't say it wasn't a complete dogs dinner.
What I said was: It was more compatible than anything on the Amiga. Using shapeshifter I could, for instance, access my account online without the browser shitting itself over some javascript....
Which is entirely true.
Words
And?
You could not have run Win 95 under emulation without it looking like a slideshow, so i'm assuming you emulated a Mac on your Amiga.
Obviously, since I never once mentioned emulating a PC.
The thing is I spent an eternity on PPC cyberstorm 68060/604e trying Fusion ppc to boot PPC MacOS 7.6 and 8.0 and NEVER got past the bomb screen.
Compared to the 68k versions of both shapeshifter and fusion, the ppc version was an utter PITA. Incredibly fickle about the versions of macOS it would run on my mates A4k. I think I must have tried 4 or 5 different releases before I got one to play ball (many were copies that shipped with machines rather than a generic OEM copy).
I think the thing that annoyed me the most about it was, that after a week of trying to get it to work and then getting it to work... My mate decided he didn't much care for I think it was 7.6 and deleted the setup.
Have to say though of the two 68k emus, shapeshifter was by far the easiest to get going, even if you were limited to IE4.
Which was still miles ahead of anything on the Amiga.
So I'd like to know how, exactly, you got a PPC IE5 to run in your Amiga under emulation?
The power of the typo.
It should have read: IE5 was so far ahead of the game that it got to the stage that I would only browse the web on the Amiga using shapeshifter running MacOS 7.1 with IE4 installed. There was absolutely nothing on the Amiga that could match it for compatibility on the web.
-
And the award for most quotes posted in a post, goes to... :D
Meh, a hangup from Usenet.
Top-posting aught to be a hanging offence :p
-
So about that Atari ST ?
-
So about that Atari ST ?
(http://jungle.net/tone/tramiel.gif)
-
AMIGA RULES!! People who say otherwise have Never tried AmigaOS and Workbench! Windows is crap compared!
-
(http://jungle.net/tone/tramiel.gif)
I love that poster, thanks :)
At least we'd be comparing reasonably comparable technology.
People talking about IE4 or 5 and comparing it to the amiga are doing the usual "lets take stuff made years later and compare it to a computer from 1992"
For edification, this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet_Explorer_2.PNG is IE2, which came out in November 1995.
The original version came out a bit earlier that year, according to wikipedia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZixhLSooH8
this gentleman has a video of browsing the web on windows 3.1, using a 486 though using a later browser maybe ?
-
I love that poster, thanks :)
At least we'd be comparing reasonably comparable technology.
People talking about IE4 or 5 and comparing it to the amiga are doing the usual "lets take stuff made years later and compare it to a computer from 1992"
For edification, this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet_Explorer_2.PNG is IE2, which came out in November 1995.
The original version came out a bit earlier that year, according to wikipedia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZixhLSooH8
this gentleman has a video of browsing the web on windows 3.1, using a 486 though using a later browser maybe ?
Ahem, iBrowse was released around 1996. If you want to compare things properly (in a timeframe when amiga machines were still relatively new and on sale), then you can compare AMosaic (released around the end of 93) with either Mosaic itself or Netscape which appeared around the last quarter of 94.
-
People talking about IE4 or 5 and comparing it to the amiga are doing the usual "lets take stuff made years later and compare it to a computer from 1992"
Not so. The hardware and software is of a similar vintage - 040 vs 486 MacOS 7.x and Windows 3.x
With regard the browsers, heh, no.
IE4 was released in 1997, IE5 in 2000
Voyager, Aweb and Ibrowse were all still being actively developed within this time frame. None of them came close in terms of capabilities to either IE or Netscape.
IE4 running on Shapeshifter offered a far more useful experience than running any of the contemporary native browsers within that time.
This is a like for like comparison.
-
Ahem, iBrowse was released around 1996. If you want to compare things properly (in a timeframe when amiga machines were still relatively new and on sale), then you can compare AMosaic (released around the end of 93) with either Mosaic itself or Netscape which appeared around the last quarter of 94.
Unable to find any videos of Amosaic at a first glance.
But hey, here's a dude using ibrowse on a 1200 with no processor card :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9s5IsXl8f4&feature=related
Workable it looks like, but pretty gruelling.
-
Not so. The hardware and software is of a similar vintage - 040 vs 486 MacOS 7.x and Windows 3.x
With regard the browsers, heh, no.
IE4 was released in 1997, IE5 in 2000
Voyager, Aweb and Ibrowse were all still being actively developed within this time frame. None of them came close in terms of capabilities to either IE or Netscape.
IE4 running on Shapeshifter offered a far more useful experience than running any of the contemporary native browsers within that time.
This is a like for like comparison.
Thanks for the clarification. I figured by late 90's the PC market had switched to pentiums more or less completely, so I don't think I've ever seen IE or Netscape on a 486 in person.
and hey, hooray for shapeshifter :) Knew a guy who used that quite a lot to use app's and even some games that weren't coming out for the amiga once commodore tanked, and it always looked impressive. Heck, sometimes it even looked faster than comparable mac's I dealt with at work, but Im not sure if thats true or not.
-
But hey, here's a dude using ibrowse on a 1200 with no processor card :)
Workable it looks like, but pretty gruelling.
It is.
Tbh when I used the CD32 online, of the three browsers, unless I absolutely needed that little extra bit of compatibility that Voyager 3.3 offered me, I stuck with Aweb and switched off image loading and set it to not bother dithering - it just took too long on pages which had a lot of images on.
-
I actually used Shapeshifter to run MSOffice when at university. Those pesky professors and their insistence on MS word documents and the like.
It was actually pretty usable, especially under RTG.
-
It is.
Tbh when I used the CD32 online, of the three browsers, unless I absolutely needed that little extra bit of compatibility that Voyager 3.3 offered me, I stuck with Aweb and switched off image loading and set it to not bother dithering - it just took too long on pages which had a lot of images on.
Is there an amiga version of Lynx ?
-
Thanks for the clarification. I figured by late 90's the PC market had switched to pentiums more or less completely, so I don't think I've ever seen IE or Netscape on a 486 in person.
No worries!
Lets put it this way, Microsoft didn't exactly advertise the 3.x version of IE5. It took me about a month of digging to find a link to it on their site that worked :lol:
And yeah, you're right - the vast majority of people had moved onto much bigger and better things than the humble 486 by the time of IE4's release, much less IE5 :D
But it was a freebie, which like the Amiga, I couldn't resist putting it through it's paces to see just what it was capable of. It was an interesting experiment for sure. Certainly as far as browsing went, the PC, even of the vintage I trialled was a much more capable system. Though on the usability front it simply couldn't hold a candle to the Amiga.
Ended up giving the system away iirc. Or at least what remained of it.
and hey, hooray for shapeshifter :) Knew a guy who used that quite a lot to use app's and even some games that weren't coming out for the amiga once commodore tanked, and it always looked impressive. Heck, sometimes it even looked faster than comparable mac's I dealt with at work, but Im not sure if thats true or not.
Well I read the same quotes - that an 040 equipped Amiga could outpace a like for like equipped Quadra. Though if I'm honest I never saw benchmarks backing it up. It's cited on wikipedia too, though I've not really bothered to look into it.
-
It's quite amazing how everyone here keeps going on about how one shitty browser was better than another shitty browser... I see no reason why any peecee software couldn't have had a proper Amiga version, except for the fact that no companies cared to make it happen. Big deal. Blame Commodore's lame ass for not promoting the machine properly and not giving a damn.
As for the hardware: peecee's won simply because they kept being developed, while Amigas were milked, and then afterwards Commodore went bust. Compare Amigas and peecees from the early days of the Amiga, and stop comparing a machine which wasn't developed to it's fullest (AGA anyone?), to a machine which has been steadily improved up to this day. It's pointless, because we all know which one is going to win.
-
Is there an amiga version of Lynx ?
Oh yes (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=50016)!
-
Oh yes (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=50016)!
I've been meaning to get a wireless PCMCIA card for my 1200, and I figured Lynx would be the best way to go :)
Still a bit daunted at the task of setting up TCP/IP and all that
-
peecee
peecee's
So mature!
and stop comparing a machine which wasn't developed to it's fullest (AGA anyone?), to a machine
We weren't.
But... You'd actually have to bother to read what was being discussed to understand that rather than skim though like you just did.
-
I've been meaning to get a wireless PCMCIA card for my 1200, and I figured Lynx would be the best way to go :)
I think at one point there was supposed to be a version of Elinks floating around out there that had been compiled for the Amiga... Gods only know where it resides if its not on Aminet however.
Still a bit daunted at the task of setting up TCP/IP and all that
MiamiDX, accept no substitute. Makes light work of networking. I found the Cappa version on Aminet to be the most stable for me, though your mileage may vary :)
-
I think at one point there was supposed to be a version of Elinks floating around out there that had been compiled for the Amiga... Gods only know where it resides if its not on Aminet however.
MiamiDX, accept no substitute. Makes light work of networking. I found the Cappa version on Aminet to be the most stable for me, though your mileage may vary :)
I'll look into it.
On a totally unrelated note but somewhat tangential to this thread... can you bring any of the atari machines online ? Howd they fare ?
-
I'm not an Amigan. Never have been, never will be.
Go home and cradle.
-
I'll look into it.
On a totally unrelated note but somewhat tangential to this thread... can you bring any of the atari machines online ? Howd they fare ?
Here (http://forums.atari.org/list.php3?num=3) might be the best place to ask.
I have almost no knowledge of the Atari
-
the_leander... FOR GAWDS SAKE, please stop quoting quote upon quote and then only answering with one or two word reply's... :)
Good job your not having to type all this on paper or you'd have used up a rain forest by now... :biglaugh:
-
I've been meaning to get a wireless PCMCIA card for my 1200, and I figured Lynx would be the best way to go :)
Still a bit daunted at the task of setting up TCP/IP and all that
I seem to recall Patrik and Fx put up a no-nonsense guide for configuring AmiTCP somewhere, but I can't seem to find it atm.
Anyway, the trick is to tell it you have an A2065 network card when installing it. After installation, edit the file AmiTCP:db/interfaces file and change the line that reads "a2065.device" to "cnet.device" (assuming that's what you are using for your NIC).
Job done.
-
the_leander... FOR GAWDS SAKE, please stop quoting quote upon quote and then only answering with one or two word reply's... :)
No.
Breaking up a post is realistically the only way to clarify what specifically you're replying to whilst trimming out the bits you're not responding to is best practice. The other alternative is to manually paste in bits with quotation marks, which whilst would probably suffice, isn't as clear as the system offered by this forum or top posting.
If you don't like this style of posting, I suggest you take it up on Usenet, where you are sure to find a warm reception to the idea of top posting especially :p
Very warm, in fact...
-
So mature!
I always write peecee on Amiga fora, what's the big deal?
We weren't.
But... You'd actually have to bother to read what was being discussed to understand that rather than skim though like you just did.
Perhaps you're right, but you still missed the point, namely that discussions such as this aren't very useful, because comparing the Amiga to the peecee isn't very useful because of the history of both machines (second paragraph of my post).
On EAB there was something similarly pointless in the form of Amiga vs Atari ST. Great. And on a certain MSX forum there are people who will argue that MSX is better than Amiga/peecee/St/whatever. How mature is that?
-
No.
Breaking up a post is realistically the only way to clarify what specifically you're replying to
Is it
whilst trimming out the bits you're not responding to is best practice.
A matter of opinion
The other alternative is to manually paste in bits with quotation marks
must be another way, surely
which whilst would probably suffice, isn't as clear as the system offered by this forum or top posting.
maybe
If you don't like this style of posting,
I don't
I suggest you take it up on Usenet,
wrong suggestion
where you are sure to find a warm reception to the idea of top posting especially :p
What's 'top posting' !!! :D
-
I always write peecee on Amiga fora, what's the big deal?
It's not a big deal (to me), it just lessens the strength of any following argument.
discussions such as this aren't very useful
On the whole I would agree. However, a little nostalgia trip, comparing the relative strengths and weaknesses between various systems of a given era on what is essentially a hobbyist board can be interesting, so long as it doesn't devolve into flames.
Which with the exception of a couple in this thread, it hasn't.
How mature is that?
All depends on how you handle it.
-
Is it
Yes.
I don't
Suck it up.
wrong suggestion
Followed up with...
What's 'top posting' !!! :D
Now see, if you'd followed my suggestion, you'd have your answer. Failing that JFGI.
-
@the leander
You signed up in 2002? You're just a dummy doll. LOL!
-
Now see, if you'd followed my suggestion, you'd have your answer. Failing that JFGI.
First of all, you might have told me what JFGI stands for (had to google it to find out) :)
Once I found out what that meant I then googled Top Posting and the answer was...
Definitions of Top posting on the Web:
When a message is replied to in e-mail, Internet forums, or Usenet, the original can often be included, or "quoted", in a variety of different posting styles.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Top+posting&sa=X&ei=UZdlTOG-MsfQ4wbu6YzLCg&ved=0CBcQkAE
So by this definition, then using all those quotes makes you a Top Poster... :)
Glad that's cleared up now... :biglaugh:
-
No, _this_ is an example of "top posting".
First of all, you might have told me what JFGI stands for (had to google it to find out) :)
Once I found out what that meant I then googled Top Posting and the answer was...
Definitions of Top posting on the Web:
When a message is replied to in e-mail, Internet forums, or Usenet, the original can often be included, or "quoted", in a variety of different posting styles.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Top+posting&sa=X&ei=UZdlTOG-MsfQ4wbu6YzLCg&ved=0CBcQkAE
So by this definition, then using all those quotes makes you a Top Poster... :)
Glad that's cleared up now... :biglaugh:
(Whereas _this_ is bottom posting)
-
^ what the_leander uses is interleaved or inline posting. It's also what I use, unless I'm replying to something very short.
Quoting a long message then shoving an equally long reply above or below it is just tl;dr fodder.
-
I always write peecee on Amiga fora, what's the big deal?
Typing more letters to get the same phonetic thing out makes you look dumb. It'd be like me typing some scholarly reply and typing "uhmeeguh" in it. The whole post is reduced to: Dumb.
And on a certain MSX forum there are people who will argue that MSX is better than Amiga/peecee/St/whatever. How mature is that?
Are you talking about MSX.org? That forums so n00b about the MSX its not even funny lol. their infighting drama is the stuff legends are made of.
On a side note, I like the MSX more for music making. having 17 channels of chip-noises is pretty neat, and I like that more than sampling.
and for games usually... but only because they have that distinct (obvious) Japanese style that has been attempted by the whiteman, but never duplicated. ... and metal gear 2... :D talk about awesome.
Its an opinion, not a fact.
-
Typing more letters to get the same phonetic thing out makes you look dumb.
You're not serious, right? Oh man... :(
First someone who thinks it immature to write 'peecee', now someone who thinks it dumb because he doesn't understand :lol:
Here's the explanation: 'peecee' is similar to 'M$', 'Winblows XPee' and 'Linsux'. Get it? I sure hope so...
-
Here's the explanation: 'peecee' is similar to 'M$', 'Winblows XPee' and 'Linsux'. Get it? I sure hope so...
Yeah, yeah. Any 10 year old would get it. Leave it for the 10 year olds.
-
You're not serious, right? Oh man... :(
First someone who thinks it immature to write 'peecee', now someone who thinks it dumb because he doesn't understand :lol:
Here's the explanation: 'peecee' is similar to 'M$', 'Winblows XPee' and 'Linsux'. Get it? I sure hope so...
Except for this simple break down
M$: $ = money, fight the power.
Winblows XPee: Blows is an insult.
Linsux: Sux is an insult.
winblows and linsux aren't phonetic clones of the original.
PeeCee is just you trying to be cool. I think you're done.
I mean it's almost funny with the Pee, but whats so insulting about a Cee. What is a Cee.
Flid.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0jG9RslVgU
Amiga_Nut, at the office.
-
Amiga Rules!!!1
-
Amiga Rules!!!1
lookout brother. anymore post-content and you might blow up the internets!
3 jawesome posts all in one thread. YOU ARE ON A ROLL.
-
Been awhile since I posted on Amiga.org.. I do check this site every now and then, but then this thread has been up for a few days, so figured I would throw more into the fire.
As far as the Amiga vs PC argument.. Pointless. I remember growing up I was a die-hard Amiga fan. This being as a kid up until I was 17 or 18, when I realized times were switching fast. Now im 24, and I hardly use Amiga anymore. I still have my A1200 in pieces in the closet. Had to replace capacitors that leaked, but managed to get it running.
For what I do, there could be no way I could do all my work on an Amiga. Even something as simple as signing onto facebook or webcam with my friends and family. Does the Amiga do that? Sure eventually they could make a client to do such things, but it would be painful.
Maybe I want to play Team Fortress 2 with a few buddies online while we are all on Skype or Ventrillo... I know my Amiga would never do that.
Sure if your comparing an ancient 486 and Windows 3.11, id pick the Amiga up any day, but we are talking for today's standards.. No Amiga programs could ever touch the features/abilities of that on PCs today. Sure you might be able to do something good or produce something worthwhile on your Amiga, but it will take awhile...
If an Amiga fits your needs, then cool. Nobody should even be wasting their time to try to convince you otherwise. I just know your Amiga will not do Flash, Java, or even be able to ever play a 1080P movie. When I say doing any of them, I mean without conflicts. Even try to play a simple game like Runescape.. Go ahead, go try to load it up on the Amiga and let me know if you're successful. :)
Let this thread go to rest. The only reason why I like visiting Amiga.org is because I have a soft spot for the Amiga since I grew up on it as a kid. Ill definately play a game of Shadow of the Beast, Agony, Benefactor, Deluxe Galaga, Deluxe Pacman, Rise of the Dragon, Willy Beamish, Kings Quest 4, Lemmings, Push-Over, Body Blows Galactic, Second Samaurai, Nitro, Overdrive, or Leander. ;)
Amiga was good for its time no question, but for today? Forget it. :)
-
Amiga RULES!!!!!!!
-
This thread went the far side of pointless at least six pages ago, yet it continues to gather posts.....
-
Computer stuff all depends on what you do with it.
I use my amiga as much, time wise, as I do my linux PC. I just do different things on them
On the PC, I play a few games (Nexuiz, Steel Panthers WW2 and MBT, Battle for Wesnoth) and browse the web. Also listen to OGG or MP3 files.
On the amiga, I play old games (too many to mention), mess around with Dpaint etc. Listen to MOD files.
Word processing I can do on either without too much fuss.
Been awhile since I posted on Amiga.org.. I do check this site every now and then, but then this thread has been up for a few days, so figured I would throw more into the fire.
As far as the Amiga vs PC argument.. Pointless. I remember growing up I was a die-hard Amiga fan. This being as a kid up until I was 17 or 18, when I realized times were switching fast. Now im 24, and I hardly use Amiga anymore. I still have my A1200 in pieces in the closet. Had to replace capacitors that leaked, but managed to get it running.
For what I do, there could be no way I could do all my work on an Amiga. Even something as simple as signing onto facebook or webcam with my friends and family. Does the Amiga do that? Sure eventually they could make a client to do such things, but it would be painful.
Maybe I want to play Team Fortress 2 with a few buddies online while we are all on Skype or Ventrillo... I know my Amiga would never do that.
Sure if your comparing an ancient 486 and Windows 3.11, id pick the Amiga up any day, but we are talking for today's standards.. No Amiga programs could ever touch the features/abilities of that on PCs today. Sure you might be able to do something good or produce something worthwhile on your Amiga, but it will take awhile...
If an Amiga fits your needs, then cool. Nobody should even be wasting their time to try to convince you otherwise. I just know your Amiga will not do Flash, Java, or even be able to ever play a 1080P movie. When I say doing any of them, I mean without conflicts. Even try to play a simple game like Runescape.. Go ahead, go try to load it up on the Amiga and let me know if you're successful. :)
Let this thread go to rest. The only reason why I like visiting Amiga.org is because I have a soft spot for the Amiga since I grew up on it as a kid. Ill definately play a game of Shadow of the Beast, Agony, Benefactor, Deluxe Galaga, Deluxe Pacman, Rise of the Dragon, Willy Beamish, Kings Quest 4, Lemmings, Push-Over, Body Blows Galactic, Second Samaurai, Nitro, Overdrive, or Leander. ;)
Amiga was good for its time no question, but for today? Forget it. :)
-
Not to thread hijack, but Nexuiz is a great game! Fun! :)
-
Not to thread hijack, but Nexuiz is a great game! Fun! :)
Im not particularly great at it, but it always seemed to carry the torch of the likes of Unreal Tournament, setting out to deliberately not be "grey and brown realism!!!". Just fun levels with fun weapons
-
Think about it: the PC is not a relic, but it is still designed upon a relic standard. Take a brand new workstation that has a floppy disk drive in it (as many servers do) and try accessing the drive when the drive is empty.
The PC will give it's entire life to try and read a nonexistent floppy.
I would say the PC is overdue for a redesign: when Google comes out with its seconds boot will be the beginning of a whole new PC era... so, relic or no, the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286.
The Amiga approach was stellar and very powerful in its day and age and today's equivalent would be a Sony Playstation or X-Box... leaving the PC in the dust when it comes to moving data to and from the bus.
-
the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286.
Hmm, let's see. Current x86-64 architecture and supporting components:
16-bit ALU? Nope.
External FPU? Nope.
Segmented memory? Nope.
ISA slots? Nope.
Mono/CGA/EGA video? Nope.
In my previous job, none of the server machines bought in the 4 years I was there had a floppy drive, nor did most of the already installed ones. USB or CD only. Most had their OS installed via a bootimage on a USB or CD and used a network based install procedure.
-
Think about it: the PC is not a relic, but it is still designed upon a relic standard. Take a brand new workstation that has a floppy disk drive in it (as many servers do) and try accessing the drive when the drive is empty.
The PC will give it's entire life to try and read a nonexistent floppy.
I would say the PC is overdue for a redesign: when Google comes out with its seconds boot will be the beginning of a whole new PC era... so, relic or no, the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286.
The Amiga approach was stellar and very powerful in its day and age and today's equivalent would be a Sony Playstation or X-Box... leaving the PC in the dust when it comes to moving data to and from the bus.
(http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q285/the_leander/facepalm1.jpg)
There are no words for this level of stupid.
-
Razter, bobs and sprites!
-
PeeCee is just you trying to be cool.
No, I'm not trying to be cool :(
I think you're done.
I am indeed done with these useless posts :)
-
Who the freak has vomit on my floor?!
-
Sheesh, what is it with some of you people.... never learned basic manners or courteousies? Also to those who seem to be driven to point out amigas shortcomings,... you do realise that most people are aware of these "problems" don't you? Some people simply dont care and enjoy what the Amiga gives them.... I read over and over again posts by people who seem to think theyre enlightening people,... too arrogant to realise that theyre not the only ones who know what it is they point out.
I understand that this thread is a comparitive thing, so in some ways is probably the place for comparisons, but the tone and attitude some people here take based on things they "know" is quite childish and rude... ever heard of the concept of discussing things without resorting to stupidity ? I wont name people, but I suspect those who are responsible already know it, so it's not necessary.
Rant aside, I like Amiga OS,.... knowing the system inside out and being able to easily customise it to my hearts content. Simple, effective, user friendly, fun software is sometimes a better option than needlessly complicated software. I'll personally use the right tool for a job, be it on Amiga, Windows, or other options..... I'll happily be content just being content without the need to complain about shortcomings of software I dont use..... each to thier own though.
-
(http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q285/the_leander/facepalm1.jpg)
There are no words for this level of stupid.
That's not even fair. Having recently had to write bootstrap code his post is pretty spot on albeit from a specific and narrow perspective.
-
I wonder if Commodore 64 forums ever have to put up with this crap.
-
I think there's DOSBOX, but it doesn't run Windows 3.1 and it has its limits unlike running it in native mode. Hey, if they can run Windows 3.1 in Windows XP and 98, they should be able to do it in 64-bit OSes.
Wrong. (http://vogons.zetafleet.com/viewtopic.php?t=9405)
-
I would say the PC is overdue for a redesign: when Google comes out with its seconds boot will be the beginning of a whole new PC era... so, relic or no, the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286.
My box boots in 13 or 14 seconds, and shuts down in 2 or 3.
WIth SSD's, its possible to get ubuntu up and running in 5 seconds.
-
Sheesh, what is it with some of you people.... never learned basic manners or courteousies? Also to those who seem to be driven to point out amigas shortcomings,... you do realise that most people are aware of these "problems" don't you? Some people simply dont care and enjoy what the Amiga gives them.... I read over and over again posts by people who seem to think theyre enlightening people,... too arrogant to realise that theyre not the only ones who know what it is they point out.
I understand that this thread is a comparitive thing, so in some ways is probably the place for comparisons, but the tone and attitude some people here take based on things they "know" is quite childish and rude... ever heard of the concept of discussing things without resorting to stupidity ? I wont name people, but I suspect those who are responsible already know it, so it's not necessary.
Indeed.
-
I wonder if Commodore 64 forums ever have to put up with this crap.
Maybe from spectrum users? :lol:
-
I moved from a ZX Spectrum to a C128 so I could do music and use a real keyboard. Damn Amiga 1000 came out the same year.
I agree with RayTech70:
"I would say the PC is overdue for a redesign: ..... the PC is still using the same design architecture as the 286."
I love to see the same old bios interupt list on bootup on my beefy 6600 that I used to see on my work borrowed 386. "Girl Interupted" or "Architecture Interupted." 20 Years later let's subsublet....
-
I don't get these posts about, "on the pc, the architecture is old and needs to change". Change? How? Like what, remove super i/o and a bios rewrite? What difference does it make? End result will be the same, a computer that runs windows, *nix, OS X, aros, etc. End user won't even be aware of anything different.
-
I don't get these posts about, "on the pc, the architecture is old and needs to change". Change? How? Like what, remove super i/o and a bios rewrite? What difference does it make? End result will be the same, a computer that runs windows, *nix, OS X, aros, etc. End user won't even be aware of anything different.
Let's face it, it has changed a lot over the years. Here are just some of them:
Processor:
16-bit -> 32-bit -> 32-bit + SIMD (MMX, 3DNow, SSE etc) -> 64-bit multicore
Peripheral buses:
ISA -> PCI -> PCI + AGP -> PCIe -> PCIe 2.0 (not to mention the other PCI fork, PCI-X)
PCIe couldn't be more different to PCI, using high speed point to point serial "lanes" rather than parallel (which limits the achievable speeds significantly).
HD interfaces:
PC/XT -> IDE (PIO) -> UDMA IDE -> SATA -> SATA II (not to mention SCSI variants)
Other peripheral buses:
Serial/Parallel/PS2 -> USB -> USB2 -> USB3
Video:
Mono -> CGA -> EGA -> VGA -> SVGA -> HD
Audio
Beeper -> 8-bit + FM -> 16-bit + wavetable -> 24-bit HD + wavetable + DSP etc
I'm not really sure what there is that needs to change, other than people's concepts of what a PC actually is. It's not a "PeeCee", wintel box or any of the other decade old names people like to use. It's a modular computer made from standardised parts that is capable of running a myriad of different operating systems.
-
Let's face it, it has changed a lot over the years. Here are just some of them:
Processor:
16-bit -> 32-bit -> 32-bit + SIMD (MMX, 3DNow, SSE etc) -> 64-bit multicore
Peripheral buses:
ISA -> PCI -> PCI + AGP -> PCIe -> PCIe 2.0 (not to mention the other PCI fork, PCI-X)
PCIe couldn't be more different to PCI, using high speed point to point serial "lanes" rather than parallel (which limits the achievable speeds significantly).
HD interfaces:
PC/XT -> IDE (PIO) -> UDMA IDE -> SATA -> SATA II (not to mention SCSI variants)
Other peripheral buses:
Serial/Parallel/PS2 -> USB -> USB2 -> USB3
Video:
Mono -> CGA -> EGA -> VGA -> SVGA -> HD
Audio
Beeper -> 8-bit + FM -> 16-bit + wavetable -> 24-bit HD + wavetable + DSP etc
I'm not really sure what there is that needs to change, other than people's concepts of what a PC actually is. It's not a "PeeCee", wintel box or any of the other decade old names people like to use. It's a modular computer made from standardised parts that is capable of running a myriad of different operating systems.
So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?
-
So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?
It is actually transistor count that is suppose to double.
-
It is actually transistor count that is suppose to double.
Maybe, but I've heard the general expression "computing power" being used, whatever that means.
"David House, an Intel colleague,[18] had factored in the increasing performance of transistors to conclude that integrated circuits would double in performance every 18 months.[19]"-Wiki
-
So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?
Motorola 68040 ~ 27.5 MIPS at 25 MHz
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE ~ 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz
That's 5367 times the power of an A4000.
-
For what I do, there could be no way I could do all my work on an Amiga. Even something as simple as signing onto facebook or webcam with my friends and family. Does the Amiga do that? Sure eventually they could make a client to do such things, but it would be painful.
...
Internet was pretty much something that came after Amiga architecture was designed just like game ports, digitized audio/accelerated graphics was something of an afterthought on PCs of the 1980s.
Sure if your comparing an ancient 486 and Windows 3.11, id pick the Amiga up any day, but we are talking for today's standards.. No Amiga programs could ever touch the features/abilities of that on PCs today. Sure you might be able to do something good or produce something worthwhile on your Amiga, but it will take awhile...
It works both ways even today. Atari 800 Pac-man is 8K cartridge (like many other games) and Amiga games are also pretty small given what they do whereas same things on PCs use up a ton of more code assuming you have some good interface to play them. I'm glad you picked Amiga over 486 as processor should not be the only determining factor. You have to take into account graphics power, audio power, gaming control, collision detection, etc. Digital joysticks are always superior to analog for most games.
-
BOOTDISK WROTE:
Re: Amiga vs PC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by amigaksi
I think there's DOSBOX, but it doesn't run Windows 3.1 and it has its limits unlike running it in native mode. Hey, if they can run Windows 3.1 in Windows XP and 98, they should be able to do it in 64-bit OSes.
---------
Wrong.
__________________
Back away from the EU-SSR!
No, you misunderstood the post. I admitted even 64-bit processors can run older 16-bit stuff but the OS doesn't allow. Similarly, DOSBOX runs DOS stuff fine but it won't run Windows 3.x stuff. I.e., it doesn't have the required windows files.
-
Motorola 68040 ~ 27.5 MIPS at 25 MHz
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE ~ 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz
That's 5367 times the power of an A4000.
Too bad all that power is wasted on Windoze and modern computing in general ;) And the internet, Adobe products, flash, ad banners, pop-ups, spyware, virus protectors, etc. being what they are today - todays boxes sure don't "feel" all that more powerful. Just bought the latest and greatest computer. Great... now all the crap I don't want to be bothered with in the first place, works that much quicker. Yay. lol
This new job of mine has me working with Windoze 7, Office apps, IE and more. Having ditched the PC world shortly after ME came out, I gotta say... Windows & M$ products *still* suck. Some of the least intuitive and just plain ugly looking garbage to ever grace computing. Blech. Even my company's interweb e-mail looks better and responds quicker through Safari on my Mac. I won't even get into how buggy & clunky their proprietary card reading/Retail POS system software is - all modeled around what looks to be a Windows for Workgroups GUI.
-
Maybe from spectrum users? :lol:
and they both hate on the dude with the atari 400 :)
-
Having read through every post here, it seems to me we should not be debating or arguing over silly little things like gfx card speeds/ flash drives are better than HDs and so on. :(
We should instead just be saying why we use our Amiga / PC / Mac or whatever machine your using, for what we as individuals use them for and how we are happy with the machines we use... :)
For example I use my Amiga for all my computing needs except for one, I use my iMac for the internet only and it's more than adequate in that task for me.
My Amiga however, I use for all other computing needs I have ie: GFX/Photo Editing, Programming, audio editing, creating MP3s and music CDs / burning Video DVDs, letters, printing and a whole lot more beside. :)
This set up for me is just about perfect, only when I finally set up one of my Amigas to go online, will I then be able to decide whether my Amiga is suitable for this one final task or if I shall have to continue using the Mac for being online.
So come one folks be a bit more positive about why you use the machine you do, and share with us all, the benefits of using your particular set up. :)
Hi,
I use my Amiga to keep hold of all my important data, pictures, music, documents, insurance stuff, etc. My Amiga 4000 has been doing it all with old antiquated programs like pen pal, Miamiga file, word perfect, and Final Writer. Things I don't use the Amiga for is guess what, can you spell internet.
but
I have never lost any data on my Amiga 4000 since I bought it in 1992. (heh, heh one of the benefits of being a Commodore salesmen back then).
Look if I didn't think that the Amiga was the best thing since salted peanuts, I wouldn't of sold it and yes I did own PC's back then, I had an Otrana portable, a PC-10, PC-20, and a C128 (a very enjoyable computer). Never owned a MAC because it seemed like such a dead piece of locked up system and hardware piece of crap.
Anyhow when you compare an Amiga with a PC think of the most important thing you keep on your PC, and that is data. I have a new quadcore, screaming gamming machine, and you know what, it is a miracle when I complete a game, because the darn computer keeps either locking up, getting infected, or just plain crashes. I find myself reloading about every 6 months. Can any of you mighty mouth PC owners tell me everything that is running on your PC? Can you tell me if your registery is completely clean? Can you tell me when you are on the internet who is lurking in the background? Can you tell me what files belong where and if they are really part of the Winblows os?
Probably not, I have several years of administrative training, and sometime it take me and several other people to solve a problem.
smerf
-
So if computing power doubles every 18 months, and the A4000 was circa 1992, do you feel that your 2010 PC gives you the power of 2^12 (ie 4096) A4000's working at the same time?
Well, I built this PC in 2008. Core2 Quad is old news now, all the real hardcore PC enthusiasts are on i7 or better.
That said, depending on the benchmark, it can be a lot more than 4096x faster.
My 040, which is the same speed as those found in the A4000/40 (only without the crippled memory interface) manages about 5-7 MFLOPS in most amiga CPU benchmarks. In real code that I've written (a hand-optimised all-pairs solver for spacing an arbitrary number (read hundreds to thousands) of vertices in a spherical shell such that they are all as far apart as possible), that processor managed the equivalent of about 2MFLOPS, which is a very respectable outcome given the fact that a lot of memory read/write is also required. The unusually stressful nature of the work meant that unless the process was run at a low priority, the machine would freeze until an iteration was complete.
A vanilla, non-threaded version for linux on my PC ran around 400MFLOPS. Of course, that's not really making best use of it, since there are 4 cores. A threaded version (using pthread), compiled for SSE3 reached about 1.2GFLOPS. I suspect it could go higher, with hand-optimised SSE3 vector operations, but I don't really know enough SSE3 assembler to write it.
Again, though, that's not the best utilisation of the machine as a whole. Far and away the fastest version I've built reached ~450GFLOPS via the GPU when the number of vertices to solve for was 30,720 (number of streaming multiprocessors * maximum threads per multiprocessor). That's a speedup of 375x the threaded CPU version and 225,000x compared to the single-thread 040 version.
Suffice to say, the GPU is the coolest coprocessor I've ever toyed with ;)
-
Motorola 68040 ~ 27.5 MIPS at 25 MHz
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE ~ 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz
That's 5367 times the power of an A4000.
I've never seen a 68040 manage more than 1 instruction per cycle sustained. Of the 4 68040's I have at my disposal, none of them manage more than 0.8MIPS/MHz on the various benchmarking tools I've used. The 27.5MIPS figure looks far more like a 33MHz part to me. Which benchmark was this?
-
Hi,
I use my Amiga to keep hold of all my important data, pictures, music, documents, insurance stuff, etc. My Amiga 4000 has been doing it all with old antiquated programs like pen pal, Miamiga file, word perfect, and Final Writer. Things I don't use the Amiga for is guess what, can you spell internet.
but
I have never lost any data on my Amiga 4000 since I bought it in 1992. (heh, heh one of the benefits of being a Commodore salesmen back then).
Look if I didn't think that the Amiga was the best thing since salted peanuts, I wouldn't of sold it and yes I did own PC's back then, I had an Otrana portable, a PC-10, PC-20, and a C128 (a very enjoyable computer). Never owned a MAC because it seemed like such a dead piece of locked up system and hardware piece of crap.
Anyhow when you compare an Amiga with a PC think of the most important thing you keep on your PC, and that is data. I have a new quadcore, screaming gamming machine, and you know what, it is a miracle when I complete a game, because the darn computer keeps either locking up, getting infected, or just plain crashes. I find myself reloading about every 6 months. Can any of you mighty mouth PC owners tell me everything that is running on your PC? Can you tell me if your registery is completely clean? Can you tell me when you are on the internet who is lurking in the background? Can you tell me what files belong where and if they are really part of the Winblows os?
Probably not, I have several years of administrative training, and sometime it take me and several other people to solve a problem.
smerf
Friends don't let friends use windows :)
-
I've never seen a 68040 manage more than 1 instruction per cycle sustained. Of the 4 68040's I have at my disposal, none of them manage more than 0.8MIPS/MHz on the various benchmarking tools I've used. The 27.5MIPS figure looks far more like a 33MHz part to me. Which benchmark was this?
Freescale claims 44 MIPS @ 40 MHz. Who am I to argue?
-
I belive Amiga has a soul.
I have unending love towards Amiga.
PC lost its soul long time ago :smack:
yes, the amiga has a soul
I can't measure this, but I have always Felt it.
even though I have to sometimes use Windows 7, I still find it annoying. it may be "better" than some other windoze OS's, but they ALL have something obnoxious about them.
linux is way more fun than windoze. that's why i HAVE to have a multi-boot system. I just couldn't live with only one OS
-
Motorola 68040 ~ 27.5 MIPS at 25 MHz
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE ~ 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz
That's 5367 times the power of an A4000.
benchmarks don't reveal true performance. I wonder if you could render a Lightwave animation in 1/4096th of the time?
-
benchmarks don't reveal true performance. I wonder if you could render a Lightwave animation in 1/4096th of the time?
I take it you haven't seen some of the recent developments in lightwave 10? It has a realtime "Viewport Preview Render" mode. For some examples, see here (http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/lw10.php).
How long do you think it would take an A4000 based toaster to render this?
(http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/images/lw10/Car_VPR.jpg)
Of course, there probably wouldn't be a lightwave 10 without the Amiga trailblazing the earliest versions ;)
-
No, you misunderstood the post. I admitted even 64-bit processors can run older 16-bit stuff but the OS doesn't allow. Similarly, DOSBOX runs DOS stuff fine but it won't run Windows 3.x stuff. I.e., it doesn't have the required windows files.
(http://www.nataliedee.com/102605/i-said-what.jpg)
YES.
YES IT CAN.
-
Freescale claims 44 MIPS @ 40 MHz. Who am I to argue?
As with most claims by the manufacturer (intel included), this is probably a best case scenario for a cache hit (no latencies) case and without dependencies on still executing instructions (no stalls), register only arguments (no memory IO). Real code invariably doesn't behave like that.
-
Similarly, DOSBOX runs DOS stuff fine but it won't run Windows 3.x stuff. I.e., it doesn't have the required windows files.
When you say it "won't run", you are giving the false impression that it "can't run". It doesn't do it out of the box since including windows 3.1 with it would get the authors nailed up in Ballmer's trophy room quicker than you could say "developers" four times.
However, you can install windows 3.x on DosBOX, provided you have a copy of it that is still readable after all these years ;)
Why anybody would want to, of course, is another matter.
-
Friends don't let friends use windows :)
I've made the case for open source alternatives to friends that have nothing but pain with Windows day after day. Yet, despite not actually doing anything with their machines that really needs it, they seem unduly resistant to the idea. I guess they have a masochistic streak :)
Anyway, back on topic, we all know the Amiga was better back when it actually counted; in the days of genuine home computing. That era has gone. People may actually do more stuff with their computers nowadays, but precious little of it is what I'd call computing. Farting about on farcebook and the like seems to be what it has all come down to for many people today.
-
amiga vs pc here
RetroPlayer :D :D
http://www.amigapage.it/index.php?pl=intro
-
I've made the case for open source alternatives to friends that have nothing but pain with Windows day after day. Yet, despite not actually doing anything with their machines that really needs it, they seem unduly resistant to the idea. I guess they have a masochistic streak :)
Anyway, back on topic, we all know the Amiga was better back when it actually counted; in the days of genuine home computing. That era has gone. People may actually do more stuff with their computers nowadays, but precious little of it is what I'd call computing. Farting about on farcebook and the like seems to be what it has all come down to for many people today.
Out of curiosity,what do you consider "computing" ?
Ive been meaning to open some sort of thread about this, but I guess this is as good as any.
-
I take it you haven't seen some of the recent developments in lightwave 10? It has a realtime "Viewport Preview Render" mode. For some examples, see here (http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/lw10.php).
I have a copy of Lightwave 9, and have done a few renders with it, don't use it much though, on an AMD x2 5000 ( I know). Its render speed is dog slow, certainly compared Cinema 4D. Not sure how well this V10 real time render works-or the hardware you need-but unless they've worked a minor miracle, I wouldn't believe everything you read in the glossy brochure.
How long do you think it would take an A4000 based toaster to render this?
(http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/images/lw10/Car_VPR.jpg)
i don't know but the wall, ceiling, and floor are simple, with repeating tile maps/bump maps so not that long. And the tubing is simple relflective color map, not even texture. The car's reflective paint would take more time though. But if I could screamernet 4096 A4000's...
Of course, there probably wouldn't be a lightwave 10 without the Amiga trailblazing the earliest versions ;)
-
Each to thier own, and it's sort of off topic, but has been mentioned a few times within the thread..... anyway, I just wanted to disagree about linux being more fun and/or having more "soul" than Windows. Linux feels more mechanical and personality barren than any other OS Ive used.... having said that Ive only used Ubuntu (yuck), Madriva (my fav. from what Ive tried), and Fedora Core as far as Linuxes go. Not to say it's not effective, I just find it completely bereft of any sort of personality. Windows (the OS itself, has always been software I enjoy on Windows) for me started being fun once I started playing with Nlite.... I currently have XP Pro + SP3 installed and its roughly 150meg total,... Windows, program files folder, etc, while retaining everything needed (yet to find software that doesnt work (including recent games)).... was quite fun to see how much it can be stripped without losing functionality, sort of the opposite to OS3.x (the end results of enhancing os3.x to a XP+SP3 level of usability arent too dissimilar in size). System now boots in literally 5 seconds after bios post.... makes a very nice host for a dedicated emultor machines/media centre/etc.
-
Each to thier own, and it's sort of off topic, but has been mentioned a few times within the thread..... anyway, I just wanted to disagree about linux being more fun and/or having more "soul" than Windows. Linux feels more mechanical and personality barren than any other OS Ive used.... having said that Ive only used Ubuntu (yuck), Madriva (my fav. from what Ive tried), and Fedora Core as far as Linuxes go. Not to say it's not effective, I just find it completely bereft of any sort of personality. Windows (the OS itself, has always been software I enjoy on Windows) for me started being fun once I started playing with Nlite.... I currently have XP Pro + SP3 installed and its roughly 150meg total,... Windows, program files folder, etc, while retaining everything needed (yet to find software that doesnt work (including recent games)).... was quite fun to see how much it can be stripped without losing functionality, sort of the opposite to OS3.x (the end results of enhancing os3.x to a XP+SP3 level of usability arent too dissimilar in size). System now boots in literally 5 seconds after bios post.... makes a very host for a dedicated emultor machines/media centre/etc.
heck, Damn Small Linux is 50 megs including apps. :)
I guess :soul: is dependent on what you want from it and what you put in. Linux I can mess with, nothings off limits, and I am not borrowing the software or having to agree to a bunch of limitations on what I can do.
That gives it soul to me.
I know a few people who swear by win2K so obviously it has soul to them.
As a few people has alluded to, its all about what makes it tick for you :)
-
Out of curiosity,what do you consider "computing" ?
Ive been meaning to open some sort of thread about this, but I guess this is as good as any.
Apparently "computing" meant fucking around with your computer to make it do things.
-
When you say it "won't run", you are giving the false impression that it "can't run". It doesn't do it out of the box since including windows 3.1 with it would get the authors nailed up in Ballmer's trophy room quicker than you could say "developers" four times.
Yeah, legality is one reason. At least you understood it better than Bootdisk. I wrote: "Similarly, DOSBOX runs DOS stuff fine but it won't run Windows 3.x stuff. I.e., it doesn't have the required windows files." I can say "Windows 3.1 doesn't run Windows '95 stuff" but you can install Win32S and a few other files and force it to run Windows '95 stuff, but my statement still remains correct.
However, you can install windows 3.x on DosBOX, provided you have a copy of it that is still readable after all these years ;)
DOSBOX does run sound blaster and VGA stuff without requiring installation of any drivers-- it's built-in so if it had the "Win" command somehow virtualized in it, I would agree it runs Windows 3.x stuff. And as far as installing Windows 3.x, add to the problem of legality that people asking me for 64-bit version of my software don't have a floppy drive and I'm also writing to I/O ports.
Why anybody would want to, of course, is another matter.
I haven't upgraded all of my software to pure 32-bit or 64-bit; I wrote the software so it starts up in 16-bit mode and switches to 32-bit mode once it's running. That way back when Windows 3.x was popular, I was able to use 32-bit ASM and it didn't gain anything by running under Windows '98SE/XP. But now, 64-bit OS refuses to run it. There's no way I can tell the customer "DOSBOX will run the software."
-
(http://www.nataliedee.com/102605/i-said-what.jpg)
YES.
YES IT CAN.
Saying "YES IT CAN" doesn't change reality nor refute my point. See my previous reply (post #215).
DOSBOX doesn't run Windows 3.x stuff. Now that I think about it, it may not even run all DOS software properly-- haven't really extensively tested it.
-
@stefcep2,
You don't have to believe the "glossy brochure", just go find one of the many videos of the Lightwave10 demos to see it in action yourself.
As for all this talk about the "soul" of the Amiga (it is really silly), the only soul the Amiga has is what is put into it by the person handling the mouse and keyboard (or joystick if you like). Amiga computers and its 1.3 to 3.1, or 3.9 OS are fantastic for their time and remarkable in that they are still used today by many people for what ever reason, but they can't be seriously compared to modern hardware and OSes because they lack so much that has been created over the last 15 to 20 years.
Enjoy Amiga hardware and the OS for what it was and still is and don't try to make it into anything else. I have had as many as 25 Amiga computers at one time, so count me as one of the faithful fans, but it does not diminish my ability to realize and appreciate the strengths and uses of other hardware, software and OSes. I don't have to run down Windows, (which I really don't care for much) or MacOSX, or Linux, just to justify why I like to use Amiga computers and its OS.
Anyone trying to convince another person which hardware or OS they should use solely on its merits is wasting their time, because everyone is going to use what they prefer, no matter what anyone else says to them.
-
It's became quite apparent from this thread, that a lot of the folk posting in it are obviously too young to understand or so lost in their own little world of trying to convince themselves that, they are right and everybody else is wrong or are even able to comprehend just what the true meaning and whole experience using a home computer should really mean.
It's nothing to do with quoting the best specs you can google, or trying to make yourself look smart and clever by saying X chip can do this and Y board can do that or you'd need a quadzillion transistors running at X amount of Mhz to make this do that.
If that's your idea of fun and enjoyment from using a home computer, then my friend sadly you haven't even lived.
If you care to read my blog you will find my last word on this subject, its not a putdown of anyones opinions or choice, it's merely an observation and an opinion on what I feel about something that a whole generation of computer users has missed out on.
My Blog- Amiga Vs PC... A Final Thought
http://www.amiga.org/forums/blog.php?b=203
Cheers :drink:
Franko
-
Out of curiosity,what do you consider "computing" ?
Karlos summarized it perfectly: "farting around farcebook" *is* most peoples definition of "computing" today. Read my other posts as to what defines the internet "experience" for further clarification.
Todays computing is much like owning the fastest car on the Autobahn. Doesn't matter how "fast" you think you're going since you're still going nowhere fast. :laughing:
-
It's became quite apparent from this thread, that a lot of the folk posting in it are obviously too young to understand or so lost in their own little world of trying to convince themselves that, they are right and everybody else is wrong or are even able to comprehend just what the true meaning and whole experience using a home computer should really mean.
It's nothing to do with quoting the best specs you can google, or trying to make yourself look smart and clever by saying X chip can do this and Y board can do that or you'd need a quadzillion transistors running at X amount of Mhz to make this do that.
If that's your idea of fun and enjoyment from using a home computer, then my friend sadly you haven't even lived.
Yeah I think everyone is so obsessed with speed and new features they forget about backward compatibility. If your old software simply won't run on your latest system how do you know you're really going faster? Backwards compatibility is worth paying for.
-
It's became quite apparent from this thread, that a lot of the folk posting in it are obviously too young to understand or so lost in their own little world of trying to convince themselves that, they are right and everybody else is wrong or are even able to comprehend just what the true meaning and whole experience using a home computer should really mean.
It's nothing to do with quoting the best specs you can google, or trying to make yourself look smart and clever by saying X chip can do this and Y board can do that or you'd need a quadzillion transistors running at X amount of Mhz to make this do that.
If that's your idea of fun and enjoyment from using a home computer, then my friend sadly you haven't even lived.
If you care to read my blog you will find my last word on this subject, its not a putdown of anyones opinions or choice, it's merely an observation and an opinion on what I feel about something that a whole generation of computer users has missed out on.
My Blog- Amiga Vs PC... A Final Thought
http://www.amiga.org/forums/blog.php?b=203
Cheers :drink:
Franko
While I agree with the crux of your post, do you not see the hypocricy in what you write ? On one hand youre saying a person should enjoy whatever it is they like about computers, and in the same breath are telling people that if they enjoy computers for "X" reason theyre not living. Some people are interested in the technological side of computers, talk of speed, etc. isn't always a big dick contest. I started my computer hobby in the late 70's / early 80's and it's been a fun ride. While some aspects of yesteryears computers are great the same can be said of todays machines, it's all down to the user as to what they enjoy. So many people seem stuck on one or the other, why the heck not both ?
-
When the Amiga first came out, home computers were something special, you were almost a Geek just by having one in your home. Print quality of most dot matrix printers was not up to typewriter (dad, what's a typewriter?). Everything was expensive in terms of hours worked. The current minimum wage A$569.90 (€397.70/£325.81/US$510.90) would have been an executive wage back then. Yet the price of computers has come down. In terms of hours wored computers have never been cheaper.
Today everyone has a computer in their home, kids have them in school. Libraries have become computer stations that also have books. It's a different world. People don't tinker anymore, in fact on iPhones, iPads, iPods and to a lesser extent Android devices, they aren't allowed to.
-
So many people seem stuck on one or the other, why the heck not both ?
Quoted for agreement! I've never stopped loving my Amigas, but I'm not about to forego enjoyment of all that the latest tech has to offer.
-
DOSBOX doesn't run Windows 3.x stuff. Now that I think about it, it may not even run all DOS software properly-- haven't really extensively tested it.
http://vogons.zetafleet.com/viewtopic.php?t=9405
Here's a guide for you to run win3.1 in dosbox. Happy now?
-
Saying "YES IT CAN" doesn't change reality nor refute my point. See my previous reply (post #215).
DOSBOX doesn't run Windows 3.x stuff. Now that I think about it, it may not even run all DOS software properly-- haven't really extensively tested it.
jesus christ man yes it does, I've run Fleet Defender and Pirates! Gold in 3.1 under DOSBox.
-
Today everyone has a computer in their home, kids have them in school. Libraries have become computer stations that also have books. It's a different world. People don't tinker anymore, in fact on iPhones, iPads, iPods and to a lesser extent Android devices, they aren't allowed to.
Don't know why some people live under the delusion that everyone has a computer in their home, or use a mobile phone etc, etc...
Perhaps it's the environment or social group in which they live and obviously never venture outside of that makes them believe this myth, afraid thats something I can't answer.
What I can answer with 100% certainty is that not everyone has a computer in their home, not everyone uses a mobile phone, etc. How can I say this, simple, because of personal experience. I know more people who have no computer in their home than do. Whether its through choice or financial reasons. I know people who don't own or use a mobile, people who don't even have any form of mp3 player.
As for tinkering there are still many folk who tinker with things, be it computers, TVs, old VHS recorders, the list could go on and on.
Point is, if you are under the illusion that everyone has the above mentioned items in their home then perhaps it's time to leave your keyboard, switch off your computer and venture outside into the real world and experience a bit more about life and people and even try a bit of tinkering.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=868
-
jesus christ man yes it does, I've run Fleet Defender and Pirates! Gold in 3.1 under DOSBox.
@Bootdisk:
I think you're on the other side of a semantic arguement here:
Can I run a Workbench application on WinUAE? No
Can I install Amiga OS3.1 on WinUAE and run a Workbench application on that? Yes
Now, transposing the principle:
Can I run a Windows3.1 executable file on DosBox? No
Can I install Windows3.1 on DosBox and run a Windows3.1 executable file on that? Yes
The point is that dosbox is not capable of running a Windows 3.1 applications without installing the Windows 3.1 operating system.
-
http://vogons.zetafleet.com/viewtopic.php?t=9405
Here's a guide for you to run win3.1 in dosbox. Happy now?
I'm touched that you would enquire so tenderly after the emotional wellbeing of another member.
-
You're not serious, right? Oh man... :(
First someone who thinks it immature to write 'peecee', now someone who thinks it dumb because he doesn't understand :lol:
Here's the explanation: 'peecee' is similar to 'M$', 'Winblows XPee' and 'Linsux'. Get it? I sure hope so...
Still doesn't invalidate Arkhan's original assessment. It doesn't matter WHY you're doing it, you still look dumb doing it.
-
jesus christ man yes it does, I've run Fleet Defender and Pirates! Gold in 3.1 under DOSBox.
I can't even run this DOS application I wrote many years ago-- IRQ8.EXE (it runs fine on my Windows machine if I boot to DOS).
I think they should update it to WinBOX so it runs old Windows stuff w/o requiring any installation or mounting crap. I never even used the mount command before in DOS and now you are required to use it in addition to installing Windows 3.X on top of it. And no, my customers will not buy and install Windows 3.X as the whole problem here is they upgraded from 32-bit to 64-bit.
-
I think they should update it to WinBOX so it runs old Windows stuff w/o requiring any installation or mounting crap. I never even used the mount command before in DOS and now you are required to use it in addition to installing Windows 3.X on top of it.
:roflmao:
Perhaps they should upgrade hard disks so that you never have to install crap. They'd just come pre-filled as if by magic with everything you'd ever want.
Do you ever read any documentation for software?
Firstly, the mount command is used by DOSBox so that you can mount a host directory as a drive from within the emulation.
Secondly, do you have any idea what would happen to any person, organisation or company that went around giving out Windows 3.x for free with their application?
Tell you what, why don't you try that? Let us know how you get on, will you?
-
I'm touched that you would enquire so tenderly after the emotional wellbeing of another member.
quit sounding like a pompous bag of dicks. and no kidding you have to install Win3.1 to run Win3.1 apps. Your argument is the equivalent of going
THE COMPUTAR SEZ THERE NO OS INSTALLED NOW I CAN'T RUN GOOGLECHROME, THIS IS A POS. I'M GOING BACK TO MY AMIGA.
Everyone that says M$ blows, WINDOZE IS SUCK, etc. etc. is an idiot. End of story. Its fine if you think Amiga computers are still the bees knees, but take off your rose tinted glasses and get with the times already.
If they (M$) blow so bad explain why any computer you buy has the latest Windows on it. Explain why most corporations use Windows and other M$ stuff. I think the majority of the haters had a PEBKAC issue they were too dense to solve, and decided the entire thing was worthless.
Explain why M$'s Xbox 360 is a pretty massive success and the first console to easily allow homebrew development on?
If omgLINUX was packaged on every PC at BestBuy, IT would be what is most targeted for bullshit spyware/nonsense. Why would spyware people want to target the minority. That's why your Amigas don't get viruses when you go on the googlemachine. The world at large doesn't give a damn about them anymore.
The times have changed, everything has evolved, Commodore/Amiga dropped the ball and lost. Now there are sleeker, better, faster things to do your computing on. Amiga's are nice nostalgia trips, and still nice to play games on if thats your thing, but they can't compete with modern hardware. Do you think Pixar is using Amiga's? No.
Nasa? Nope.
If all you're doing on the modern computer is jacking off on facebook, whatever. Go for it. It may be mundane to alot of people who do more intense stuff........ but you still can't do it on an Amiga.
-
Still doesn't invalidate Arkhan's original assessment. It doesn't matter WHY you're doing it, you still look dumb doing it.
The word 'peecee' is just a derogatory term for PC, nothing more, and I don't know why using it makes me look dumb in some peoples eyes, especially not seeing how this is an Amiga forum :(
Actually, people who say that someone looks dumb because they're using a term such as 'peecee' on an Amiga board, need to look at themselves first, instead of pointing fingers at others.
Really, this makes no sense at all to me. Now, if I were to use this term on other forums I visit which have nothing to do with Amigas, such as VeggieBoards, then it's used completely out of context, and then it's indeed plain stupid.
The bottom line: I'll never stop using 'peecee' in context, whether some people think it's stupid or not :)
-
Actually, people who say that someone looks dumb because they're using a term such as 'peecee' on an Amiga board, need to look at themselves first, instead of pointing fingers at others.
I only point the finger at dumb people, so I'd never have to point at myself.
Really, this makes no sense at all to me. Now, if I were to use this term on other forums I visit which have nothing to do with Amigas, such as VeggieBoards, then it's used completely out of context, and then it's indeed plain stupid.
If you can't say it everywhere and have it be legit, odds are its a waste of time and you're being a tard.
The bottom line: I'll never stop using 'peecee' in context, whether some people think it's stupid or not :)
Nothing like willful stupidity!
-
:roflmao:
Perhaps they should upgrade hard disks so that you never have to install crap. They'd just come pre-filled as if by magic with everything you'd ever want.
Do you ever read any documentation for software?
Firstly, the mount command is used by DOSBox so that you can mount a host directory as a drive from within the emulation.
Secondly, do you have any idea what would happen to any person, organisation or company that went around giving out Windows 3.x for free with their application?
Tell you what, why don't you try that? Let us know how you get on, will you?
You are running in a GUI environment-- it's an easy enough thing to make something like a PIF that runs the DOSBOX and runs your application. No mount needed. No need to read documentation if it's same setup as current GUI. By the way, I already accepted that there are legal issues, but that never stopped people from cloning other people's software. I think there are many Windows clones and even Photoshop clones in the PD. And you didn't even address the point that it's still perfectly legitimate to say that DOSBOX doesn't run Windows 3.1 stuff (period). Even if you go through all the trouble to install it and find the original floppies, you have cross your fingers and hope the application runs.
-
I only point the finger at dumb people, so I'd never have to point at myself.
If you can't say it everywhere and have it be legit, odds are its a waste of time and you're being a tard.
Nothing like willful stupidity!
If you think I'm dumb then I can happily live that :)
-
quit sounding like a pompous bag of dicks. and no kidding you have to install Win3.1 to run Win3.1 apps.
You misunderstood that argument completely. It's a fact that PCs have been backward compatible since 1980s when they first came out. Now all of a sudden you have this 64-bit OS that refuses to run Windows 3.x stuff although processor is quite capable to do so. So some suggest using DOSBOX. But DOSBOX itself has problems with even DOS applications and clearly it isn't as simple as saying "DOSBOX runs Windows 3.x stuff."
...compete with modern hardware. Do you think Pixar is using Amiga's? No.
Nasa? Nope.
They aren't running your standard PCs either so that's a straw man argument. And Amiga is good at running stuff it was designed for just like any machinery. When you want to bloat it with gigabytes of mostly useless dead code in running internet and seeing bloated websites, you will experience a slow-down.
-
You misunderstood that argument completely. It's a fact that PCs have been backward compatible since 1980s when they first came out. Now all of a sudden you have this 64-bit OS that refuses to run Windows 3.x stuff although processor is quite capable to do so. So some suggest using DOSBOX. But DOSBOX itself has problems with even DOS applications and clearly it isn't as simple as saying "DOSBOX runs Windows 3.x stuff."
Yet noone bitches about having to use WHDLoad on newer Amigas, or that old Mac stuff requires emulation on new macs.
They aren't running your standard PCs either so that's a straw man argument. And Amiga is good at running stuff it was designed for just like any machinery. When you want to bloat it with gigabytes of mostly useless dead code in running internet and seeing bloated websites, you will experience a slow-down.
funny, the NASA research center by me uses PCs.
-
Yet noone bitches about having to use WHDLoad on newer Amigas, or that old Mac stuff requires emulation on new macs.
Assuming you are right, two wrongs don't make a right. And actually WHDLoad is trying to make things run off the hard drive rather than the floppy although there are few that misbehave in the way they use the OS calls or memory. So that's not the same issue as purposely preventing stuff from running-- seems more like someone just boasting his power to drive out old software. Mac switched processors so that requires emulation but Intel processor are backward compatible.
funny, the NASA research center by me uses PCs.
You means the employees using the internet or the ones they use for the fancy stuff.
-
Yet noone bitches about having to use WHDLoad on newer Amigas
Of course not, why would they :confused: WHDLoad removes the need for floppies, and is a massive improvement over how it used to.
-
Assuming you are right, two wrongs don't make a right. And actually WHDLoad is trying to make things run off the hard drive rather than the floppy although there are few that misbehave in the way they use the OS calls or memory. So that's not the same issue as purposely preventing stuff from running-- seems more like someone just boasting his power to drive out old software. Mac switched processors so that requires emulation but Intel processor are backward compatible.
True, 100% backwards compatibility is a wet-dream noone will ever perfect. Deal with it.
You means the employees using the internet or the ones they use for the fancy stuff.
I mean the ones doing research. I like how you just spew ignorance about a place you have never been to.
-
True, 100% backwards compatibility is a wet-dream noone will ever perfect. Deal with it.
Hah, you are not dealing with it by dismissing something that can still be avoided. I'm dealing with it by telling people not to use 64-bit OSes. It's a waste of time. By the way, even Photoshop for Windows 3.x runs pretty well on XP and I don't see any reason to buy a 64-bit version or use a 64-bit OS.
I mean the ones doing research. I like how you just spew ignorance about a place you have never been to.
You're wrong. They used souped up machines last time I visited. They even used souped up Amigas at one time at least some of them. You're the one spewing out ignorance. You can't dismiss something because NASA or Pixar don't use it. What kind of argument is that. You use what gets the job done (period). For me 64-bit OSes don't get the job done; 32-bit OS and 16-bit OSes do and Amiga is one of them. Amiga was meant for gaming and multimedia stuff and it still serves that purpose for me.
-
Hah, you are not dealing with it by dismissing something that can still be avoided. I'm dealing with it by telling people not to use 64-bit OSes. It's a waste of time. By the way, even Photoshop for Windows 3.x runs pretty well on XP and I don't see any reason to buy a 64-bit version or use a 64-bit OS.
My games get better benchmark scores with the 64bit OS on my 64 bit processor. But you dont play games since you don't seem too fun.
You're wrong. They used souped up machines last time I visited. They even used souped up Amigas at one time at least some of them. You're the one spewing out ignorance. You can't dismiss something because NASA or Pixar don't use it. What kind of argument is that.
Oh, really now? When did you visit last? 1993? I was there twice in the past two years and one time was for classes.
In the rapidly evolving world of technology, you'll find most big-name places use state of the art, not relics of the past just because they remember how cool it was 20 years ago.
You use what gets the job done (period). For me 64-bit OSes don't get the job done; 32-bit OS and 16-bit OSes do and Amiga is one of them. Amiga was meant for gaming and multimedia stuff and it still serves that purpose for me.
Oh I thought NASA used souped up amigas!?
You use what gets the job done, yes.
I don't know how to you can manage state of the art research on a machine that can barely hit up the googlebox9000, etc.
I'd trust something designed on a s.o.t.a PC over something designed on a rickety Amiga3000 with a buncha addons.
-
My games get better benchmark scores with the 64bit OS on my 64 bit processor. But you dont play games since you don't seem too fun.
Actually, I play more games than you. I have 5 different machines from 1980s to present for playing games. I don't care about benchmarks of the CPU-- I only care about how good the game is, the controls, the collision detection, and the smoothness and wait time. You're just getting too emotionally involved because of your attachment to PCs and can't see the clear cut argument.
Oh, really now? When did you visit last? 1993? I was there twice in the past two years and one time was for classes.
In the rapidly evolving world of technology, you'll find most big-name places use state of the art shit, not relics of the past just because they remember how cool it was 20 years ago.
...
As I said, the argument has no basis to decide the machine for someone. Most people nowadays are addicted to and involved with internet so that's a reason to use modern PCs. NASA is using a mix of various PCs-- it's no clear cut that they use a standard PC-- you are going by your limited one-sided experience. Nor does their research warrant someone else imitating them.
Oh I thought NASA used souped up amigas!?
In your emotional irrational frenzy to reply, you misread my statement. Go back and re-read what I wrote.
You use what gets the job done, yes.
I don't know how to you can manage state of the art research on a machine that can barely hit up the googlebox9000, etc.
Huh, I already agreed internet is better on modern PCs, but I still use 32-bit OS for it. You have any reason to tell me I should stop using Amigas for gaming and multimedia?
I'd trust something designed on a s.o.t.a PC over something designed on a rickety Amiga3000 with a buncha addons.
Again, since you already agreed that use what gets the job done, it depends on the task.
-
Actually, I play more games than you. I have 5 different machines from 1980s to present for playing games. I don't care about benchmarks of the CPU-- I only care about how good the game is, the controls, the collision detection, and the smoothness and wait time. You're just getting too emotionally involved because of your attachment to PCs and can't see the clear cut argument.
You mayyyy want to rethink that remark there chief. You are again stepping foot on ignorant soil.
Unless you wanna come over and play:
MSX, CoCo 3, C64, 286, 486, new stuff, or basically any console released between pong and now. I'm talkin intellivision, coleco, astrocade, and all the other fun stuff.
I'm a gamer. That's what I do. I play more than you'll ever know. Bet me.
Also benchmarks matter if you want optimal performance with your new 3D intense games. If you don't understand that, you aren't a gamer.
As I said, the argument has no basis to decide the machine for someone. Most people nowadays are addicted to and involved with internet so that's a reason to use modern PCs. NASA is using a mix of various PCs-- it's no clear cut that they use a standard PC-- you are going by your limited one-sided experience. Nor does their research warrant someone else imitating them.
It's not one sided. I sure didn't see any Amiga's in action. Find me a NASA project running on Amiga, and also, you dodged the "when were you there last" question. Probably because you weren't there recently, or may not have even been to the one where I am from.
In your emotional irrational frenzy to reply, you misread my statement. Go back and re-read what I wrote.
what statement, I was too busy laughing at you and playing games.
You have any reason to tell me I should stop using Amigas for gaming and multimedia?
1) You can't play new stuff on the Amiga, and homebrew is lacking
2) If you think an Amiga trumps any modern multimedia experience, you're even stupider than I thought.
You got bluray and surround sound coming out of your Amiga?
-
You mayyyy want to rethink that remark there chief. You are again stepping foot on ignorant soil.
Name calling won't help you nor your opinions.
It's not one sided. I sure didn't see any Amiga's in action. Find me a NASA project running on Amiga shit, and also, you dodged the "when were you there last" question. Probably because you weren't there recently, or may not have even been to the one where I am from.
what statement, I was too busy laughing at you and playing games.
Exactly. You have to read before you reply. I didn't dodge anything-- you misread my statement or never read it. Once you read my statement properly, we'll continue. I don't have to go there; I have an easier way to get in touch and find out although I have been there.
1) You can't play new stuff on the Amiga, and homebrew is lacking
Just your speculative, concocted excuse.
2) If you think an Amiga trumps any modern multimedia experience, you're even stupider than I thought.
You are lost. You agreed that it's to get the job done so it gets my job done and I NEED to go directly to I/O ports to control my devices. Once again calling names won't help you-- you need to calm down and think things over. In fact, you may need to learn to read before you reply. That's the normal procedure in forums and emails.
You got bluray and surround sound coming out of your Amiga?
I threw that away as it didn't fit my needs nor my audiences. I stick to multimedia CD since they work on majority of machines-- don't need anything more at this time.
I'll tell you whose REALLY stupid-- the person who just goes and gets a 64-bit OS and makes most of his previous software useless. You are using ancient technology at 32-bits or 16-bits; why not try the truly over-bloated 64-bit OS that's incompatible with your software.
-
Name calling won't help you nor your opinions.
But it's fun!
Exactly. You have to read before you reply. I didn't dodge anything-- you misread my statement or never read it. Once you read my statement properly, we'll continue. I don't have to go there; I have an easier way to get in touch and find out although I have been there.
What statement are you talking about. Show me so I can understand what it is I am missing.
Just your speculative, concocted excuse.
Speculation? Concoction? Ok then. Explain how you keep up with the rapidly evolving gaming world on an AMIGA. Can you play DirectX 10 stuff on that puppy? Do you have a PS3 emulator on there also?
You are lost. You agreed that it's to get the job done so it gets my job done and I NEED to go directly to I/O ports to control my devices. Once again calling names won't help you-- you need to calm down and think things over. In fact, you may need to learn to read before you reply. That's the normal procedure in forums and emails.
What is your job? You just blab about nonsense and make it out like all you need is an Amiga.
I read before I post. And I laugh before I do also.
I threw that away as it didn't fit my needs nor my audiences. I stick to multimedia CD since they work on majority of machines-- don't need anything more at this time.
Oh so your excuse/defense is "Don't need it". Everyone needs holyshitblurayonhugetvwithsurroundsound. Anyone who says otherwise is in denial.
I'll tell you whose REALLY stupid-- the person who just goes and gets a 64-bit OS and makes most of his previous software useless. You are using ancient technology at 32-bits or 16-bits; why not try the truly over-bloated 64-bit OS that's incompatible with your software.
They make this thing, I am not sure if you have heard of it. It's called a partition?
Make more than one? DUhHHr?
Or, use more than one computer?
I'd rather keep with the times than convince myself that all I need in life is a computer that can't even play fuckin Diablo 2.
-
@Arkhan
Im sure (well hope) you're a decent person in real life, but are you aware how ridiculous and pompous you sound right now ? Make no mistake here, you're embarassing yourself.
-
@Arkhan
are you aware how ridiculous and pompous you sound right now ?
Yes. :afro:
I am in one of those moods this week.
-
Yes. :afro:
I am in one of those moods this week.
See I knew he was a good person really,:)
Just his sense of humor can be a little misunderstood, like mine :D
-
I'll tell you whose REALLY stupid-- the person who just goes and gets a 64-bit OS and makes most of his previous software useless. You are using ancient technology at 32-bits or 16-bits; why not try the truly over-bloated 64-bit OS that's incompatible with your software.
No, the person who is really stupid is the one that thinks a 64-bit OS is incapable of running 32-bit applications and offers no benefit over a 32-bit OS.
You obviously know very little about how x86_64 is implemented. My system runs both 64-bit linux and 64-bit windows, both of which have ran every 32-bit application I've tested without complaint (although the only 32-bit applications I run under linux just now are actually windows ones in WINE). The machine has 4GB of RAM and 896MB of video RAM, which just isn't possible in a 32-bit OS 4GB address space (unless the OS supports PAE). Plenty of the applications (read games) I run in Windows are 32-bit, though drivers and codecs are 64-bit.
Generally, the benefits are that 64-bit optimised code runs faster on the CPU than legacy x86 code does (there are a few rare exceptions, even in some of my own code), since 64-bit code can make use of 16 64-bit general purpose registers for integer code and at least SSE2 for floating point/vector ops.
Furthermore, 32-bit applications in the 64-bit environment can allocate more physical RAM than they could in a 32-bit one, since on 32-bit, only around 2GB was addressable in total (1GB of address space reserved for OS/hardware space, another 1GB used to map in the video memory. Again, PAE can mitigate this slightly). Now in a 64-bit OS, the 1GB address space used for hardware doesn't get in the way and if the process doesn't need direct access to the video memory, it doesn't have to be mapped into it's address space either. You might think that no 32-bit application should ever need 3GB of RAM, but then you probably haven't played Fallout 3 (after patching for large address awareness on 64-bit) with half a dozen resource hungry add-ons and HD texture packs. It certainly helped in this instance.
In short, if you have 64-bit hardware, which let's face it, every new desktop/server PC in the last 5 years (at least) has, using a 32-bit OS is pretty pointless. Even without more than 4GB total memory installed, 64-bit optimised code is usually a better fit for the hardware.
-
If they (M$) blow so bad explain why any computer you buy has the latest Windows on it. Explain why most corporations use Windows and other M$ stuff. I think the majority of the haters had a PEBKAC issue they were too dense to solve, and decided the entire thing was worthless.
Right. Just like the black eyed peas are a better band than the beatles because they sell more CD's.
Marketing my friend. Nothing else matters.
You know this. Everybody know this.
As far as "most corporations" it depends. The computer the secretary is sitting at probably runs XP and office. The server, probably not. Mission critical computers, likely not.
Heck, Google has officially tossed MS products out for their machines.
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/05/31/google-to-employees-mac-or-linux-but-no-more-windows/
Most IT managers don't want to explain to their GM why the server just happens to break once a month.
If omgLINUX was packaged on every PC at BestBuy, IT would be what is most targeted for bullshit spyware/nonsense. Why would spyware people want to target the minority. That's why your Amigas don't get viruses when you go on the googlemachine. The world at large doesn't give a damn about them anymore.
If virus and malware writers wanted to do real damage, why aren't they infecting the linux/unix/BSD machines that actually run just about any server of importance.
Heck, imagine the geek cred you would get if you actually brought down a linux server cluster.
And yet, it doesn't happen.
Do you think Pixar is using Amiga's? No.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/Pixar_An_Intel_Shop_Say_It_Aint_So_Steve/
Looks like Pixar and ILM use linux, and were swapping from unix.
If windows is so great, why don't million and billion dollar corporations like ILM, Pixar and Google use it ?
Why does virtually no US Government website run on windows ?
-
No, the person who is really stupid is the one that thinks a 64-bit OS is incapable of running 32-bit applications and offers no benefit over a 32-bit OS.
You obviously know very little about how x86_64 is implemented. My system runs both 64-bit linux and 64-bit windows, both of which have ran every 32-bit application I've tested without complaint (although the only 32-bit applications I run under linux just now are actually windows ones in WINE). The machine has 4GB of RAM and 896MB of video RAM, which just isn't possible in a 32-bit OS 4GB address space (unless the OS supports PAE). Plenty of the applications (read games) I run in Windows are 32-bit, though drivers and codecs are 64-bit.
Generally, the benefits are that 64-bit optimised code runs faster on the CPU than legacy x86 code does (there are a few rare exceptions, even in some of my own code), since 64-bit code can make use of 16 64-bit general purpose registers for integer code and at least SSE2 for floating point/vector ops.
Furthermore, 32-bit applications in the 64-bit environment can allocate more physical RAM than they could in a 32-bit one, since on 32-bit, only around 2GB was addressable in total (1GB of address space reserved for OS/hardware space, another 1GB used to map in the video memory. Again, PAE can mitigate this slightly). Now in a 64-bit OS, the 1GB address space used for hardware doesn't get in the way and if the process doesn't need direct access to the video memory, it doesn't have to be mapped into it's address space either. You might think that no 32-bit application should ever need 3GB of RAM, but then you probably haven't played Fallout 3 (after patching for large address awareness on 64-bit) with half a dozen resource hungry add-ons and HD texture packs. It certainly helped in this instance.
In short, if you have 64-bit hardware, which let's face it, every new desktop/server PC in the last 5 years (at least) has, using a 32-bit OS is pretty pointless. Even without more than 4GB total memory installed, 64-bit optimised code is usually a better fit for the hardware.
(psst, Karlos, all my 32 bit games work under Win7 x64, please don't tell amigaski that his head will explode)
-
Looks like Pixar and ILM use linux, and were swapping from unix.
No doubt, not only is the software then free of gargantuan licence fees, but you can install it and tweek it on whatever this months top of the line CPU/GPU combo is the fastest/cheapest/most readily available.
If windows is so great, why don't million and billion dollar corporations like ILM, Pixar and Google use it ?
They probably do in the office. But server side? Linux is pretty much the dominant force these days.
Want a basic webserver running off of a recycled dell desktop? Linux will more than likely run on it...
Want a mainframe with 24 cores? Yeah linux will run on that...
Want a beowolf cluster with 1000+ nodes, linux'll do that too....
Why does virtually no US Government website run on windows ?
Because Windows makes for a piss poor web facing server.
But as a desktop OS, especially in business, it rules supreme.
-
Actually Pixar use a combination of Windows, Mac, and Linux. A quick glance around thier website shows that. The link provided is more than 7 years old. Linux is probably the least prominent of the OSes they use if thier website is any indication.
-
Linux is probably the least prominent of the OSes they use if thier website is any indication.
Least prominent maybe, but probably the most numerous in terms of the number of units running it in their render farms.
All of the software they use that does the donkey work seems to support Linux, with the media creation stuff being left to Mac and Windows, which really isn't all that surprising.
-
Actually Pixar use a combination of Windows, Mac, and Linux. A quick glance around thier website shows that. The link provided is more than 7 years old. Linux is probably the least prominent of the OSes they use if thier website is any indication.
Im poking around their website and Im not seeing anything specific about OS use. Care to link what you found ?
http://searchdns.netcraft.com/?host=pixar.com&x=0&y=0
As an aside, they are of course running their server on linux :)
-
In short, if you have 64-bit hardware, which let's face it, every new desktop/server PC in the last 5 years (at least) has, using a 32-bit OS is pretty pointless. Even without more than 4GB total memory installed, 64-bit optimised code is usually a better fit for the hardware.
"some some questions that were asked over time regarding 64-bit, which I have included below.
1) Does more bits mean better performance?
Answer: Depends. What is the machine used for. How was the program in question coded. The one thing that is said most often (Do not expect some of your applications to run any faster than they do on your 32-bit systems.) Examples: your web browser will still be limited by your Internet connection speed, and your word processing program speed will still be tied to how fast you can type, etc.
2) Should I upgrade now, or sit on the fence?
Answer: Again, it depends. In some cases users are advised not to, if their systems are working as they need, however. The end user will always have to decide for themselves based on current, and possible future needs.
3) My workstation is used primarily for office productivity software, e-mail, etc?
Answer: You will probably not need the scalability of 64-bit any time soon, however. If your system has 4-8 GB of ram or more you might want to look into installing a 64-bit OS so you can make use of that memory. Even having 4-8 GB might still not necessitate a move to 64-bit, as you can also make use of a PAE enable Kernel on a 32-bit install, if you want the ability to address more ram.
Some other possible reasons to research a move to 64-bit.
1) All your hardware, and software needs are supported.
2) You need to run memory-intensive applications such as graphics, CAD, video editing, or other programs that will benefit from the larger memory allocation offered by 64-bit systems.
Some possible reasons for not moving to 64-bit.
1) Everything you use under 32-bit works without issue, and you find having to put a bit more work into making some items function is not a path you want to travel.
2) You have programs that you use that are outside of the Ubuntu repositories, that are available as 32-bit only, and you do not feel like compiling them, or just cannot seem to make work under 64-bit.
3) You have hardware / peripherals that are not yet supported for some odd reason under 64-bit.
Side Note: To make full use of 64-bit you will need native 64-bit applications, and this is where the problem starts for some users. Some programs a user might make use of may not provide native 64-bit applications (Note there is now a 64-bit version of flash, Java, and there appears to be a 64-bit version of Skype.)
After reading through the above. you find making the move worth a try, please proceed to the below sections.
---------------------------------------------
Beginning the move testing, and research to see if 64-bit is the path for you. The tactic suggested is running a dual-boot configuration of 32-bit, and 64-bit. As this will allow you to research, and test your hardware, and software configuration, While maintaining a fall back if 64-bit is not for you, it is also suggested that testing is done for thirty or more days to find out if running 64-bit fits your needs."
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=765428
i think thats a more sensible and balanced view of where 64-bit sits in the Linux world anyway.
I did try encoding and decoding video in Ubuntu 64 bit about 12 months ago (?) on my AMD X2-5000 and the speed difference was negligible ( using 32 bit and 64 bit versions of the codecs). I have no intention in moving to 64 bit as I see no advantage for me, but there always looms the spectre of incompatibility.
Anyway when home users start saying things like they need 8 cores and 16 GB ram, the PC industry upgrade con is complete.
-
@runequester
There's links on pretty much every bit of software they mention using/developing that has a "tech specs" link.
-
(psst, Karlos, all my 32 bit games work under Win7 x64, please don't tell amigaski that his head will explode)
Looks like you missed first half of the argument like he did (or purposely misinterpret it so you can blurt out some nonsense). I already cited two examples -- all of my software is internally 32-bit and doesn't run on 64-bit OSes. Photoshop for Win 3.x that cost me $700 doesn't run on 64-bit Windows OS.
-
"Anyway when home users start saying things like they need 8 cores and 16 GB ram, the PC industry upgrade con is complete.
Depends on a users needs/wants. Many people these days use virtualisation to run multiple OSes concurrently. A lot of users also are interested in 3d rendering (as has always been the case) and other image processing. Although Im not a fan, I do have to use it sometimes, and something like Photoshop can use use gigs of memory alone when dealing with multiple hires textures over many layers. Real time sound processing can also be resource hungry when working with high quality sound. Then there's the more obvious ones like gaming which can use as many resources as a user can throw at it.... so back to your quote, need, no, take advantage of, absolutely. Also your link is 2 1/2 years old, 64bit computing is somewhat more mature these days. As for your references to the athlon x2 5000+, many people would consider that obsolete these days and it's hardly the best machine to test extreme scenarios with (32bit vs. 64bit). I understand what you're saying, and for some people you have a point, however for some your ideas are way off base.
-
No, the person who is really stupid is the one that thinks a 64-bit OS is incapable of running 32-bit applications and offers no benefit over a 32-bit OS.
...
Is that what I wrote? I said and "16-bit and 32-bit" and if you followed the context you know exactly what I meant.
You obviously know very little about how x86_64 is implemented.
That's your speculation. I can run all of my stuff in 64MB of RAM -- don't need 4GB+ of addressing space. Anyway, given your misunderstanding, I'll just dismiss your insult.
I don't need to know the benefits of 64-bit OSes if compatibility is sacrificed for hundreds of utilities and software that I use daily. As far as games go, I play games on old machines like Amiga and Ataris. 64-bit OSes are more bloated than 32-bit OSes.
-
Even having 4-8 GB might still not necessitate a move to 64-bit, as you can also make use of a PAE enable Kernel on a 32-bit install, if you want the ability to address more ram.
Yes and no. I cannot speak for other operating systems, but Windows, in particular, and Solaris 8 x86 only supports 4GB on the 32-bit kernels. Sun had a really damned good document (I believe written by Casper Dik) which discussed the 4GB memory hole. Mark Russinovich from SysInternals (now part of Microsoft) discussed this 4GB and PAE issue in a Technet document as well. The short for Windows was that with the release of Windows XP, PAE-capable systems would see 4GB of memory using PAE and the 36-bit address space to remap RAM under the PCI I/O space above the 4GB barrier of 32-bit addressing.
However, the vast majority of BSODs and crash reports sent to Microsoft (that "Send Report" button really does do something, Virginia) were due to piss poor drivers which could not handle living or addressing above the 32-bit range. Thus, with the release of either SP1 or SP2, PAE support in XP was eliminated and the maximum RAM available in any system would be 3.25GB or 3.5GB, depending upon PCI address space required and the AGP aperture. Vista and 7 follow the same rules. 32-bit Server 2003 and 2008 will absolutely support the full 4GB (2008 will actually do more, I believe, in 32-bit
Side Note: To make full use of 64-bit you will need native 64-bit applications, and this is where the problem starts for some users. Some programs a user might make use of may not provide native 64-bit applications (Note there is now a 64-bit version of flash, Java, and there appears to be a 64-bit version of Skype.)
In particular, the Linux 64-bit version of Flash is (at my last check) beta and not officially supported by Adobe. And there is not one for Windows at all. *sigh*
Beginning the move testing, and research to see if 64-bit is the path for you. The tactic suggested is running a dual-boot configuration of 32-bit, and 64-bit. As this will allow you to research, and test your hardware, and software configuration, While maintaining a fall back if 64-bit is not for you, it is also suggested that testing is done for thirty or more days to find out if running 64-bit fits your needs.
This is precisely what I did when moving from XP to XP x64. I have not looked back since, though I did have one crappy old invoicing program which refused to run in 64-bit, so I have to run an instance of XP in VirtualBox. If/when I have to upgrade to Windows 7 I will go 64-bit. As well, I am pushing 64-bit 7 to all of my customers. Microsoft did a smart thing with Windows 7: to obtain WHQL certification you must produce 32- and 64-bit drivers. Thus, a device which says it is Windows 7 ready with the logo and WHQL signing, it will work with your system whether it is 32- or 64-bit.
Irrespective of the operating system, I believe we should have been 64-bit 15 years ago, but Intel was really damned good at flogging their aging 32-bit architecture. Granted, in some cases a good dual-core 32-bit Intel gave faster benchmarks than AMD's 64-bit procs, but that never meant 32-bit was superior.
Anyway when home users start saying things like they need 8 cores and 16 GB ram, the PC industry upgrade con is complete.
OMFG. Yeah, I remember a couple coming in to see me in the retail store in 1997. They were told they needed a 233MMX system (PIIs were either just around the corner or just released, IIRC) with 64MB RAM and what not. At the time to OS of choice was Windows 98 and 166MMX and 200MMX were more than adequate. Thinking about the performance versus what they planned to do, I remarked that the computer would be bored between keystrokes and we could save them a couple hundred bucks going with a 166MMX and 32MB. The machine still purred on a TXPro mobo. Anyway.
Yeah, I use a quad-core system, but I also do a small amount of video encoding and virtualization. I would not mind a dual-quad core, but that will come later. I am building those for customers with CAD or multimedia requirements. Average office user, we are still doing simple dual-core P4s.
Okay, I feel like a twat throwing in my $.02 this late in the thread, but this post just made me think a little bit.
-
The machine has 4GB of RAM and 896MB of video RAM, which just isn't possible in a 32-bit OS 4GB address space (unless the OS supports PAE). Plenty of the applications (read games) I run in Windows are 32-bit, though drivers and codecs are 64-bit.
Generally, the benefits are that 64-bit optimised code runs faster on the CPU than legacy x86 code does (there are a few rare exceptions, even in some of my own code), since 64-bit code can make use of 16 64-bit general purpose registers for integer code and at least SSE2 for floating point/vector ops.
Furthermore, 32-bit applications in the 64-bit environment can allocate more physical RAM than they could in a 32-bit one, since on 32-bit, only around 2GB was addressable in total (1GB of address space reserved for OS/hardware space, another 1GB used to map in the video memory.
As an example of the benefits of this: I'm working on a mapping application that runs on Linux. This app frequently have to work on datasets way larger than 2GB, often over 4GB.
For the legacy 32 bit version, which I'm facing out, this code has to seek to a location and do one or more reads to get to specific data.
For the 64 bit version, it just uses mmap() to map the entire data file into memory at once (ca 2GB is really the practical limit for this on 32 bit Linux, regardless of PAE, since PAE only helps with the *total* amount of RAM in the system, not the per-process addressable space), and reads from wherever it wants to, and leaves the OS to optimize the disk IO accordingly (e.g. how many/few bytes are worth reading.
As it turns out, Linux does a pretty good job of that, and in any case not having to do explicit seek()'s and read()'s saves a massive amount by reducing the number of context switches.
-
This is precisely what I did when moving from XP to XP x64. I have not looked back since, though I did have one crappy old invoicing program which refused to run in 64-bit, so I have to run an instance of XP in VirtualBox.
Unfortunately, not all old software is crappy like your program may have been. And VirtualBox doesn't run unless you have some Professional Version of Windows 7 64-bit so haven't seen what restrictions that has when it does run. Nor can you request people who buy machines with 64-bit OSes to partition their hard drives afterwards. Many don't even give the original OS Cd with the machines even if they wanted to. Dropping compatibility with old software (16bit and/or 32-bit) was a mistake.
If/when I have to upgrade to Windows 7 I will go 64-bit. As well, I am pushing 64-bit 7 to all of my customers. Microsoft did a smart thing with Windows 7: to obtain WHQL certification you must produce 32- and 64-bit drivers. Thus, a device which says it is Windows 7 ready with the logo and WHQL signing, it will work with your system whether it is 32- or 64-bit.
That's the other crap pulled of my Microsoft-- certification of software. I originally thought that was to prevent viruses/spyware but nope. They give warning and sometimes fail to install perfectly fine usable software.
Irrespective of the operating system, I believe we should have been 64-bit 15 years ago, but Intel was really damned good at flogging their aging 32-bit architecture. Granted, in some cases a good dual-core 32-bit Intel gave faster benchmarks than AMD's 64-bit procs, but that never meant 32-bit was superior.
Looks like we don't have much in common. Intel retained compatibility while Microsoft got rid of it. Intel was always ahead of Microsoft-- when 80286 was 24-bit addressing Microsoft was still using 640K DOSes mainly. When Intel had 80386, Microsoft was mainly Windows 3.x in segmented mode. It's a bigger boost going from 16-bit to 32-bit but not so as much going from 32-bit to 64-bit. That also introduces the 64-bit pointer issues which many high level languages didn't support. And you can always bank in RAM into the 32-bit space (for the rare apps needing 4GB+ RAM) like they did with EMS and they could have mapped flash drives directly to memory mapped areas and avoid the obsolete hard drives. You can adapt basically any algorithm to less than 1 or 2 GB of linear RAM.
OMFG. Yeah, I remember a couple coming in to see me in the retail store in 1997. They were told they needed a 233MMX system (PIIs were either just around the corner or just released, IIRC) with 64MB RAM and what not. At the time to OS of choice was Windows 98 and 166MMX and 200MMX were more than adequate.
It's still adequate to get most jobs done if you don't upgrade the OS which hogs up more and more memory with every upgrade.
-
Anyway when home users start saying things like they need 8 cores and 16 GB ram, the PC industry upgrade con is complete.
Hey, thats what I'm packin for the FF14 release at the end of september.
Gotta be top notch, or its no good.
-
quit sounding like a ******* * ** *****
Thankyou for proving my point.
There is a certain etiquette in interacting in the forums which it seems you have yet to learn.
and no kidding you have to install Win3.1 to run Win3.1 apps. Your argument is the equivalent of going
THE COMPUTAR SEZ THERE NO OS INSTALLED NOW I CAN'T RUN GOOGLECHROME, THIS IS A POS. I'M GOING BACK TO MY AMIGA.
Actually, I was simply clarifying a point that was going round in circles over several pages. The nub of the arguement was being lost in recrimination, and clarification seemed to be the way to go.
Everyone that says M$ blows, WINDOZE IS SUCK, etc. etc. is an idiot. End of story. Its fine if you think Amiga computers are still the bees knees, but take off your rose tinted glasses and get with the times already.
If you read back through my arguements in this thread you'll find that... err, I haven't made any. Consequently, your ramblings against me are totally inane.
If they (M$) blow so bad explain why any computer you buy has the latest Windows on it. Explain why most corporations use Windows and other M$ stuff. I think the majority of the haters had a PEBKAC issue they were too dense to solve, and decided the entire thing was worthless.
Explain why M$'s Xbox 360 is a pretty massive success and the first console to easily allow homebrew development on?
If omgLINUX was packaged on every PC at BestBuy, IT would be what is most targeted for bullshit spyware/nonsense. Why would spyware people want to target the minority. That's why your Amigas don't get viruses when you go on the googlemachine. The world at large doesn't give a damn about them anymore.
The times have changed, everything has evolved, Commodore/Amiga dropped the ball and lost. Now there are sleeker, better, faster things to do your computing on. Amiga's are nice nostalgia trips, and still nice to play games on if thats your thing, but they can't compete with modern hardware. Do you think Pixar is using Amiga's? No.
Nasa? Nope.
If all you're doing on the modern computer is jacking off on facebook, whatever. Go for it. It may be mundane to alot of people who do more intense stuff........ but you still can't do it on an Amiga.
Still not relevant, see above.
However I believe that for my main computer use (FEA) a 64-bit system (rather than 32-bit) would actually slow down my solve times, due to the iterative addressing of a matrix of several hundred thousand/millions of simultaneous equations (overhead of translating 64-bit addresses vs 32-bit).
Obviously, in the case where the matrix exceeded the available physical memory in a 32-bit system, a 64-bit system would be better (still quicker than paging).
I would also not be surprised if this were the case for large renders, but that is not something I am currently working on (although I'm looking at expanding into this overlapping field in the near future as an additional tool in the kit)..
Enjoy your games...
-
Hey, thats what I'm packin for the FF14 release at the end of september.
Gotta be top notch, or its no good.
Ahh, consumerism 101.
Enjoy your life contributing to the landfills of this world.
-
However I believe that for my main computer use (FEA) a 64-bit system (rather than 32-bit) would actually slow down my solve times, due to the iterative addressing of a matrix of several hundred thousand/millions of simultaneous equations (overhead of translating 64-bit addresses vs 32-bit).
Have you investigated GPGPU for this class of problem? Finite Element Analysis is one of the areas there are several CUDA precedents for.
-
Thankyou for proving my point.
There is a certain etiquette in interacting in the forums which it seems you have yet to learn.
What etiquette is that? Don't tell it like it is? I treat forums like I treat outside. I don't talk like I'm sitting on a throne in a castle. ******** Whoopeedoo. If you can't handle being talked to harshly, how do you survive the real world? Earmuffs?
If you read back through my arguements in this thread you'll find that... err, I haven't made any. Consequently, your ramblings against me are totally inane.
They weren't all directed at you.
Ahh, consumerism 101.
Enjoy your life contributing to the landfills of this world.
*********
*********
-
Have you investigated GPGPU for this class of problem? Finite Element Analysis is one of the areas there are several CUDA precedents for.
Given that the largest models I've been working with (around 600,000 elements) have tended to be overnight solves (just linear static analysis with a sparse solver) it would be the natural way to go, but as yet I haven't: lack of suitable hardware myself, and lack of forward thinking employers willing to spend a few £ to save a lot of £ (in man-hours) than anything else.
I just need a cash injection of a few thousand though if you'd like me to look into it for you... just a drop in the ocean on those Amiga.org moderator's wages, right? ;-)
It always surprised me that the likes of Ansys did not supply dedicated hardware on a PCI(/e) card for higher-end customers (dedicated fastest ram available, dedicated co-processor, and optimised code for said processor.
-
What etiquette is that? Don't tell it like it is? I treat forums like I treat outside. I don't talk like I'm sitting on a throne in a castle. You sound like a twat when you type, and I sound like a sarcastic prick. Whoopeedoo. If you can't handle being talked to harshly, how do you survive the real world? Earmuffs?
No, I usually find walking away from arseholes helps quite a lot though.
If a person cannot engage with arguements, resorting to child-like foot-stamping, name-calling, and posturing, that's usually a good sign that they have nothing of value to contribute.
They weren't all directed at you.
Then perhaps you should learn to address your comments towards the person at whom you are directing them.
Way to be a bigot.
Bigot? Explain how..
You need deck as eff hardware for FF14. Otherwise you're going to be pulling shit FPS and crying.
No, you would be crying, I'd be looking for something more interesting to do than online wanking with a group of anonymous strangers who are the nearest thing to a group of friends I can insinuate myself into.
Damn, say what you want about me from here on friend, I'm not going to get drawn further into a flamefest with someone who is clearly not interested in intelligent discussion of any kind.
/thread interest
-
No, you would be crying, I'd be looking for something more interesting to do than online wanking with a group of anonymous strangers who are the nearest thing to a group of friends I can insinuate myself into.
:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::laughing: :laughing: :roflmao: :roflmao:
-
No, you would be crying, I'd be looking for something more interesting to do than online wanking with a group of anonymous strangers who are the nearest thing to a group of friends I can insinuate myself into.
Damn, say what you want about me from here on friend, I'm not going to get drawn further into a flamefest with someone who is clearly not interested in intelligent discussion of any kind.
/thread interest
Haha, that's funny. Not in a "haha" funny way though.... one sentence of absolute trite (who are you to dictate what computer entertainment people enjoy?) followed by a claim of a lack of interest in non intelligent conversation.
-
Haha, that's funny. Not in a "haha" funny way though.... one sentence of absolute trite (who are you to dictate what computer entertainment people enjoy?) followed by a claim of a lack of interest in non intelligent conversation.
1) I have not dictated what computer entertainment people can enjoy, merely refuted the implication that I would be upset over such things (and reversed the insinuation).
2) I have not claimed a lack of interest in unintelligent conversation - hell, the majority of my leisure time is spent talking shite with my friends - merely a lack of interest in continuing a flamefest with one individual when the thread itself had (some pages ago) some content of interest.
3) Trite is an adjective, not a noun. I may have been talking tripe (putting it politely), or my comments may be seen as being trite (I have no problem or particular disagreement with either of these statements) but I can state with certainty that I have never in my life produced a sentence of absolute trite.
4) Add pedantic to the list... :P
-
But why oh why, if these Pee'Cees and Craple Macs are so good do you run an Amiga emulator on them... :huh:
Nostalgia. It brings back memories of simpler times.
The Amiga was very efficient at what it did, but this goes in waves.
Everything started custom. Then there became general purpose CPU's that were fast enough, mass market means cheaper. While the CPU manufacturers get on with the next generation, you can make some custom hardware that outperforms it. This has happened in the PC market as well, early 3d cards that once were highly prized can now be beaten by software rendering.
We're so many CPU generations down the line that you can emulate the Amiga on some very cheap hardware. At that point you can't really claim any superiority.
The OS hasn't aged particularly well either, while there were good concepts there are too many drawbacks to outweigh the positives.
It was good for it's time. I still have my a500, though it's had two replacement motherboards since then, but I'm back on a rev 5 board now so it is original.
-
@ amigaksi
Unfortunately, not all old software is crappy like your program may have been. And VirtualBox doesn't run unless you have some Professional Version of Windows 7 64-bit so haven't seen what restrictions that has when it does run.
I use Win7 x64. and i run VMWare. and i run Win98se. and play diablo, quite well i must say. I also run dosbox. in win7 X64. and play old 16bit dos games, and it works quite well.
I have not tried UAE yet. but i bet ya a dollar it works just fine. Then i can play most amiga games on my win7 x64 install.
Nor can you request people who buy machines with 64-bit OSes to partition their hard drives afterwards.
Partition hard drives afterwards?
Exactly what do you mean by that?
I run the same disks with the same partitions as i did with xp. (some disks even W2K) I have just reformatted them with an updated version of ntfs, or converted them on the fly.
Many don't even give the original OS Cd with the machines even if they wanted to.
Is it the OSs fault that some retailers don't include the OS disks?
Dropping compatibility with old software (16bit and/or 32-bit) was a mistake
What compatibillity has been dropped?
I still use old software. Name some REALLY usefull old software that don't work under win7 x64.
(I still use windows commander 4.0 (which i did under 98se)).
For those rare software (read games) not working on modern computers, i like you have a shitload of old computers. ranging from p133 and up.
Plus my amigas.
That's the other crap pulled of my Microsoft-- certification of software. I originally thought that was to prevent viruses/spyware but nope. They give warning and sometimes fail to install perfectly fine usable software.
The certification referred to in previous post is certification of drivers. If someone want to have certified drivers, they must make both 32 and 64bit drivers for their hardware. Uncertified drivers still works, though.
-
Nostalgia. It brings back memories of simpler times.
The Amiga was very efficient at what it did, but this goes in waves.
Everything started custom. Then there became general purpose CPU's that were fast enough, mass market means cheaper. While the CPU manufacturers get on with the next generation, you can make some custom hardware that outperforms it. This has happened in the PC market as well, early 3d cards that once were highly prized can now be beaten by software rendering.
We're so many CPU generations down the line that you can emulate the Amiga on some very cheap hardware. At that point you can't really claim any superiority.
The OS hasn't aged particularly well either, while there were good concepts there are too many drawbacks to outweigh the positives.
It was good for it's time. I still have my a500, though it's had two replacement motherboards since then, but I'm back on a rev 5 board now so it is original.
While I disagree about your comments on the Amigas OS and the point that you can emulate the Amiga on modern hardware, I can only say that for me, my various Amiga set ups can perform all the computing needs that I have (as I have stated elsewhere). I don't think anyone could ever convince me to buy a new PC or Mac.
The only non Amiga computer that I own was purchased about two months ago, an old iMacG4, which I am using to see what the internet is all about, but very soon thank to various good folk on Amiga.org, I shall be able to use my Amiga to perform the tasks I require on the internet and will be able to say goodbye this iMac and use the HD & DVD burner from it on one of my old miggies.
Each to their own I suppose, but the main thing to me is no matter type of computer you use the main purpose of it should be fun & enjoyment. :)
Cheers :drink:
Franko
-
GO GO GO GO GO, AMIGA, AMIGA. GO GO GO GO GO, AMIGA, AMIGA. Yeay AMIGA RULES!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejYsavwoRhQ
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejYsavwoRhQ)
-
You know what's sad? When the Amiga was top of the heap, and I was running rings around PCs with my souped up A500, all I heard from PC luddites stuck with DOS, crappy semi-graphical file managers or Windows 2.x was "You don't need this, you don't need that, why multi-task you can only do one thing at a time anyway lol". I was as smug as a bug because I had an (at the time) world beater of a computer that was high tech. Left the competition in the dirt. It was really the next big thing. C= dropped the ball, but that's a whole different issue, this was 1989 and I was on top of the heap technically speaking.
Now?
Now I see the same counterarguments being offered by the remaining Amiga users. "You don't need this, that or the other". Sheesh. Sad, really.
-
Given that the largest models I've been working with (around 600,000 elements) have tended to be overnight solves (just linear static analysis with a sparse solver) it would be the natural way to go, but as yet I haven't: lack of suitable hardware myself, and lack of forward thinking employers willing to spend a few £ to save a lot of £ (in man-hours) than anything else.
For CUDA, you can test the theory even on an old GTX 8800, provided you don't mind single precision arithmetic only. If you need double precision, the GTX260, though it isn't fully IEEE754 compliant and the double precision performance is only about 1/8th the single.
Not sure what ATI's stream stuff is like, but if you used OpenCL, you are pretty much free from having to worry too much which way to go.
I just need a cash injection of a few thousand though if you'd like me to look into it for you... just a drop in the ocean on those Amiga.org moderator's wages, right? ;-)
You got it. A mod's salary is priceless... ;)
It always surprised me that the likes of Ansys did not supply dedicated hardware on a PCI(/e) card for higher-end customers (dedicated fastest ram available, dedicated co-processor, and optimised code for said processor.
Dedicated hardware can get old fast, I guess. An example would be GRAPE, an n-body solver for gravity simulation. GPU implementations on current hardware are capable of outperforming it comfortably.
-
Now?
Now I see the same counterarguments being offered by the remaining Amiga users. "You don't need this, that or the other". Sheesh. Sad, really.
Ha ha ha, you got that that right :lol: It is still very sad that Commodore screwed up what could've still been the best machine.
Anyway, I'll keep using this wonderful machine until I can't get any second hand ones anymore (that will be a very sad day indeed), and use my peecee for surfing (Amiga browsers suck donkey balls) and a few other things, because Amigas (real Amigas, not those PPC+peecee parts things) have a coolness factor that the peecee will never beat.
Amiga forever :)
-
Now I see the same counterarguments being offered by the remaining Amiga users. "You don't need this, that or the other". Sheesh. Sad, really.
This is so true.
I guess it's easier to say "we don't need it" than "you're right, it would be great, but we don't have it now, that's too bad". Seems like some people still live in 1989, thinking the Amiga is still cutting edge in a lot of areas... Problem is it's 2010, and it's lagging in pretty much every areas instead.
-
Ha ha ha, you got that that right :lol: It is still very sad that Commodore screwed up what could've still been the best machine.
In some ways, I wonder what might have happened if they'd succeeded. We're quick to assume it would have been a good thing but perhaps we might not have liked the direction it may have taken.
-
This is so true.
I guess it's easier to say "we don't need it" than "you're right, it would be great, but we don't have it now, that's too bad". Seems like some people still live in 1989, thinking the Amiga is still cutting edge in a lot of areas... Problem is it's 2010, and it's lagging in pretty much every areas instead.
In the process of becoming more and more obsolescent, I actually find it quite interesting to see just what can still be done with it though.
I still find it much more fun writing code for AmigaOS and m68K than I do for modern kit. The only thing that's really piqued my interest on the latter is GPU stuff.
-
No, I usually find walking away from arseholes helps quite a lot though.
If a person cannot engage with arguements, resorting to child-like foot-stamping, name-calling, and posturing, that's usually a good sign that they have nothing of value to contribute.
Theres plenty to contribute, you just think it all has to be delivered in a 5-page essay format complete with douche-tastic sounding phrases that you probably don't use in real life but do here because you have plenty of time to formulate everything. If you talk like that in real life, do you also prance around in robes and wave a scepter around and demand your subjects bring you crisps and whatnot?
Not everyones going to deliver statements and opinions in a high and mighty Tolstoy approach. You tout intelligence. Use it to comprehend this simple fact.
Then perhaps you should learn to address your comments towards the person at whom you are directing them.
Everyone but you can connect the dots. You're too busy polishing your scepter and demanding tea from your servants to lrn2forum.
Bigot? Explain how..
Everyone buys computer hardware. You do, I do, the rest of the forum does. Acting like you're above it all because you don't buy the latest stuff is pretty stupid of you.
No, you would be crying, I'd be looking for something more interesting to do than online wanking with a group of anonymous strangers who are the nearest thing to a group of friends I can insinuate myself into.
Aww whats the matter wittle baby? Now YOU ran out of things to contribute so you have to resort to spewing ignorance?
All of my friends preordered the game too. If you read the rest of this thread, you'd see that I stated I am a gamer. A pretty serious one, as is the rest of the group I game with. Sounds like you are projecting, and butt-hurt that you have noone to game with so you fap to your Amiga since noone wants to interact with wannabes like you on games.
If you don't believe me, have your subjects draw up the private jet and come here in a month. Theres a gaming convention. We're playing a ton of stuff. Starblazers, mordheim, who knows what else. Real people! Friends! Things your ignorant ass seems to think I don't have.
That stupid little statement from you really reduced all of your pompous nonsense to nothing. YOU DONE GOOFED SON.
Damn, say what you want about me from here on friend, I'm not going to get drawn further into a flamefest with someone who is clearly not interested in intelligent discussion of any kind.
/thread interest
You say this yet continue to post in the thread. Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk. Shut up and go diddle around in a new thread, or stay and cope with the madness.
-
@ B00tDisk
Now I see the same counterarguments being offered by the remaining Amiga users. "You don't need this, that or the other". Sheesh. Sad, really.
You imply by you own words that we remaining Amiga users are sad, so therefore you don't class yourself as an Amiga user, so why on earth are you blurting out such trash on an Amiga forum.
@Thorham
Anyway, I'll keep using this wonderful machine until I can't get any second hand ones anymore (that will be a very sad day indeed), and use my peecee for surfing (Amiga browser suck donkey balls) and a few other things, because Amigas (real Amigas, not those PPC+peecee parts things) have a coolness factor that the peecee will never beat.
You've got that right...
@Warpdesign
I guess it's easier to say "we don't need it" than "you're right, it would be great, but we don't have it now, that's too bad". Seems like some people still live in 1989, thinking the Amiga is still cutting edge in a lot of areas... Problem is it's 2010, and it's lagging in pretty much every areas instead.
What happened in 1989 that made that year so special to live in, if I was thinking that the Amiga was still cutting edge, then I would also be thinking that you were almost intelligent.
@Karlos
In some ways, I wonder what might have happened if they'd succeeded. We're quick to assume it would have been a good thing but perhaps we might not have liked the direction it may have taken.
In the process of becoming more and more obsolescent, I actually find it quite interesting to see just what can still be done with it though.
I still find it much more fun writing code for AmigaOS and m68K than I do for modern kit. The only thing that's really piqued my interest on the latter is GPU stuff.
At least you seem able to understand and appreciate why there are still some who are quite happy to use their Amigas.
-
Real people! Friends! Things your ignorant ass seems to think I don't have.
Considering how you behave, it's no wonder that people might think that :p
-
This is so true.
I guess it's easier to say "we don't need it" than "you're right, it would be great, but we don't have it now, that's too bad". Seems like some people still live in 1989, thinking the Amiga is still cutting edge in a lot of areas... Problem is it's 2010, and it's lagging in pretty much every areas instead.
Yes and no.
No-one thinks the Amiga is cutting edge any more. BUT:
A GUI-driven OS and multitasking, graphics and sound co-processors capable of functioning with more or less zero CPU dependence are things that an A500 had and did, and a DOS box did not. These things provided fundamental improvements in the usability of the home computer. So much so that todays computers have them as well, and even must have them. It really WAS a revolution in the home computing paradigm, whereas what todays machines do is merely evolution, they still use a GUI, they multitask, they have GPU's that can function more or less independently of the CPU: they just do it faster, with more pixels and colors and more sound channels at higher sample rates.
One could easily argue that you can't do without a GUI-driven OS, multitasking and co-processors/GPU's. Becasue most people really would NOT be able to use or want to use a two color single tasking beeping cli-only OS, without investing an inordinate amount of time in learning text commands and actually getting something done. But many, many people can(and contrary to what users on computer forums like this who like think that everyone runs 8 cores and 16 gig ram), quite happily run with smaller resolutions, less colors, and a few minutes longer to rip and encode the odd DVD or CD, and maybe play the odd PC game since an XBOX/PS3/Wii sits in front of their 50 inch plasma. But take away their GUI, the multi-tasking and the co-processors and the PC becomes a boat anchor. They NEED all that.
When people went form Win 95 to Win 98 to Win 2000 to XP, Vista, and Win7 no-one went WOW! This is f'en AMAZING. Because each step was just an incremental improvement on what was there before.
The Amiga was a revolution, it was 10 years ahead of the game: the PC has merely evolved
-
Yes. :afro:
I am in one of those moods this week.
See you next week! Hope you are in a better mood then.
Don't forget to review the posting guidelines. :rtfm:
-
@ amigaksi
I use Win7 x64. and i run VMWare. and i run Win98se. and play diablo, quite well i must say. I also run dosbox. in win7 X64. and play old 16bit dos games, and it works quite well.
I have not tried UAE yet. but i bet ya a dollar it works just fine. Then i can play most amiga games on my win7 x64 install.
Looks like VMWare also requires installing the older OS as well as VMWare itself which doesn't look like freeware.
Partition hard drives afterwards?
Exactly what do you mean by that?
I run the same disks with the same partitions as i did with xp. (some disks even W2K) I have just reformatted them with an updated version of ntfs, or converted them on the fly.
I need to run 16-bit and 32-bit software that works on Windows 3.x like Photoshop and most of my stuff. Windows 98SE and XP run my software fine but not 64-bit Windows. One proposed solutions were partition the hard drive, but that also still requires installing/buying Windows 3.x OS and head-ache repartitioning for customers that may not be so technically inclined. They basically went and bought a new computer and told me my software no longer works. Unfortunately, they bought a machine with a 64-bit OS.
Is it the OSs fault that some retailers don't include the OS disks?
What compatibillity has been dropped?
I still use old software. Name some REALLY usefull old software that don't work under win7 x64.
Yes, it's the OS's fault that there was no solution given to run old software that doesn't need any upgrade or newer OS features to run with full functionality. The fact of the matter is, when I benchmark my software on Windows 98SE w/64MB and Windows XP w/1GB RAM, it runs better on Windows 98SE.
The certification referred to in previous post is certification of drivers. If someone want to have certified drivers, they must make both 32 and 64bit drivers for their hardware. Uncertified drivers still works, though.
Yeah, most uncertified drivers like belkin WIFI still work but those dialog boxes sure try to create doubt in people's minds with messages like: "WARNING: Press continue to install, but if your hard drive crashes or monitor blows up, don't tell us."
-
This is so true.
I guess it's easier to say "we don't need it" than "you're right, it would be great, but we don't have it now, that's too bad". Seems like some people still live in 1989, thinking the Amiga is still cutting edge in a lot of areas... Problem is it's 2010, and it's lagging in pretty much every areas instead.
Not true for me in 1989. I had an Atari 800, Amiga 500, and AT&T 286 w/LAN card connecting to my college VAX (sort of like internet). Each one had their uniqueness-- the math processing (microcap?) and communications were better on the 286 as it had a math coprocessor, the Amiga 500 had the unique Copper (amongst other things), and the Atari 800 had fast booting cartridges and programmable text/gr. modes in BASIC.
Now the PC has progressed a lot, but nonetheless some aspects of the older machines remain unique. Just like a parrot is inferior to a human yet has some unique features like ability to fly and it's colorfulness.
-
In response to those droning on about lack of backwards compatibility of 64bit oses on modern hardware,... how is this different to *any* new hardware/software combo? Even the modern versions of amiga os arent completely backwards compatible with its existing software base. PS3/xb360/amiga/mac/pc,... all require a form of emulation to be completely compatible with the back catalogue.... time moves on and things change.
-
Not sure what all this is about. I'm using a 2.8 GHz Dual Core running Windows 7 Pro 64 Bit. I was abit surprised, but Mechwarrior 4 runs just fine. That was released on November 24, 2000. Almost 11 years ago. No compatibility mode.
I just build a new computer for a friend this Spring to replace her 7 year old Dell. The new computer is slightly better than mine. Same OS. I installed all the software that was on her old computer. A good bit of it was from 1995 to 2000 release programs. All of it ran, no issues, no comparability mode.
-
Theres plenty to contribute, you just think it all has to be delivered in a 5-page essay format complete with douche-tastic sounding phrases that you probably don't use in real life but do here because you have plenty of time to formulate everything.
Mainly force of habit. Amiga forums are generally full of people from varying nationalities, which makes the use of slang phrases etc a barrier to communication.
Just for you, I've tried to extend this post to 5 pages :)
If you talk like that in real life, do you also prance around in robes and wave a scepter around and demand your subjects bring you crisps and whatnot?
[...]
You're too busy polishing your scepter and demanding tea from your servants to lrn2forum.
[...]
If you don't believe me, have your subjects draw up the private jet and come here in a month.
Never been to Hull, have you mate?
Not everyones going to deliver statements and opinions in a high and mighty Tolstoy approach. You tout intelligence. Use it to comprehend this simple fact.
But... you weren't delivering statements, or even opinions, just bile & insults. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to proof-read prior to posting.
Everyone buys computer hardware. You do, I do, the rest of the forum does. Acting like you're above it all because you don't buy the latest stuff is pretty stupid of you.
Yes, but there's a difference between buying a new computer/component because it's needed (or wanted), and rushing out every couple of months to buy Teh l33test sh1t!1!!1
The consumerism comment was just meant as a half-joke/half-truth. Try to pick either half.
Aww whats the matter wittle baby? Now YOU ran out of things to contribute so you have to resort to spewing ignorance?
Guilty as charged, I am ignorant of your personal circumstances and should not have commented in such a way: I unreservedly apologise.
Personally, I am not interested in gaming (at least, not in the currently available arenas which I have seen), but do not seek to disparage those who are. Nor, if I were, would I do it by putting on a baby voice (in written form). Jeez.
All of my friends preordered the game too. If you read the rest of this thread, you'd see that I stated I am a gamer. A pretty serious one, as is the rest of the group I game with. Sounds like you are projecting, and butt-hurt that you have noone to game with so you fap to your Amiga since noone wants to interact with wannabes like you on games.
Err... no.
Haven't powered up my A4KT in around 12 months, pretty much since MorphOS was released on the Mac-mini. Before that it has lived in a box in my wardrobe for a couple of house-moves.
It's been many years since I saw a PC-game which has held my interest for more than an hour or two.
One of the reasons I've decided to sell my PS3 (amongst many) is that the gaming interface is shite (at least, for FPS's). Going back to a joystick control system (moving a cursor around the screen) after the responsive point'n'shoot of the Wiimote is just plain wrong for me.
Plus the annoyance.. it's like being on call all the time.
Plus its inability to deal with external USB drives properly, inability to multitask (at all), shit indexing system, inability to handle many media formats, poor networking capabilities, etc, etc, etc.
Basically, the PS3 ended up being pretty much only a media centre. A task to which it is entirely inadequate.
I decided that my MorphOS system will perform better as a media centre once AMC is released than my PS3 (for my purposes - I have no blu-ray/HD collection), and I won't miss the PS3 as a gaming platform.
That stupid little statement from you really reduced all of your pompous nonsense to nothing. YOU DONE GOOFED SON.
You say this yet continue to post in the thread. Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk. Shut up and go diddle around in a new thread, or stay and cope with the madness.
Please enjoy your holiday from Amiga.org... ;)
-
Yes, it's the OS's fault that there was no solution given to run old software that doesn't need any upgrade or newer OS features to run with full functionality. The fact of the matter is, when I benchmark my software on Windows 98SE w/64MB and Windows XP w/1GB RAM, it runs better on Windows 98SE.
Well if you have win7 64bit pro. And your CPU has hardware virtualisation then you can download XP mode for free which includes a copy of winXP
If you have more basic version or like me your CPU is pretty old (AMD64x2) and doesn't support hardware virtualisation then you can just use the free microsoft virtual pc 2009 and install a copy of your own xp disk.
-
@amigaksi
What are you running that "run in XP" mode in Windows 7 won't handle?
-
Yes, it's the OS's fault that there was no solution given to run old software that doesn't need any upgrade or newer OS features to run with full functionality. The fact of the matter is, when I benchmark my software on Windows 98SE w/64MB and Windows XP w/1GB RAM, it runs better on Windows 98SE.
16bit support in an x64 os is hard, because the processor can't easily switch between those modes. The only way to run it would be to use an emulator. Microsoft give you a free copy of Windows XP to run in an emulator on Windows 7 Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate.
I'm sure you'd love Microsoft to spend a load of money on supporting your application, but there is no justification for them to do so.
64 bit is better for a number of reasons. I use it wherever I can, unfortunately my netbook only supports 32bits.
Maybe it's about time you sold your customers an upgrade.
-
People seem to forget era and function.
Amiga was unique in its time and badly managed
PC is popular and badly driven
-
Looks like VMWare also requires installing the older OS as well as VMWare itself which doesn't look like freeware.
Yes and no. you download VMWare server (i think it was...) and request a key from VMWare site... you install the software and run it. quite simple..
Though, the enterprise versions are quite expensive.
And BTW if you already have the old 98se install cd collecting dust. its nice to be able to use it again.. :D
I need to run 16-bit and 32-bit software that works on Windows 3.x like Photoshop and most of my stuff. Windows 98SE and XP run my software fine but not 64-bit Windows. One proposed solutions were partition the hard drive, but that also still requires installing/buying Windows 3.x OS and head-ache repartitioning for customers that may not be so technically inclined. They basically went and bought a new computer and told me my software no longer works. Unfortunately, they bought a machine with a 64-bit OS.
I am puzzled by this. i dont understand where that comes from.
Out of curiosity i installed photoshop 5.5. the oldest photoshop i have.. been with me since 98se days. it work like a charm...
And i installed sonicfoudury vegas video 4.0 video editing suite. it works like a charm to. and it has been with me since 98se/W2K times...
I just cant understand what the problem is.... So far there is one thing i have been unable to get to work in my pc. that is my SCSI II controller. not because its incompatible. but because adaptec just ain't writing drivers for it to W7... (it does not work with 32Bit vista either)
And BTW partitioning the drives. do you really expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware? Even 2K have problems with that. (mostly driver availability of modern motherboards). The answer is quite simple; virtualize it. Or even emulate it.. (dosbox)
Yes, it's the OS's fault that there was no solution given to run old software that doesn't need any upgrade or newer OS features to run with full functionality. The fact of the matter is, when I benchmark my software on Windows 98SE w/64MB and Windows XP w/1GB RAM, it runs better on Windows 98SE.
1. No, it aint the OSs fault that retailers don't include the disks with the computer when purchasing it!
2. Compatibility can be achieved by selecting compatibility mode.
3. Benchmarks is just a figure... So far my newer PCs have graveled any W98se setup in any benchmark. (3D benchmarks like 3Dmark 99, 2k, 01....)
Rendering: Vegas video have increased performance at every step i have upgraded so far, even OS upgrades.
That goes for working with photoshop as well... I would like to see you edit a RAW format 18mp image from your canon eos... in win 3.11 with a P90 and 16mb ram... i would pay to see that.. the image is 30MB in size...
4. What software are you talking about? photoshop is the only software you have mentioned so far... give me examples so i can compare with my figures..
Yeah, most uncertified drivers like belkin WIFI still work but those dialog boxes sure try to create doubt in people's minds with messages like: "WARNING: Press continue to install, but if your hard drive crashes or monitor blows up, don't tell us."
The warning message actually serve a purpose.. false written drivers have existed...(from 3rd party writers...).
It just tells you to be aware of what you are doing. if you are in doubt, ask a friend with computer knowledge, or call tech support..
-
Not sure what all this is about. I'm using a 2.8 GHz Dual Core running Windows 7 Pro 64 Bit. I was abit surprised, but Mechwarrior 4 runs just fine. That was released on November 24, 2000. Almost 11 years ago. No compatibility mode.
I just build a new computer for a friend this Spring to replace her 7 year old Dell. The new computer is slightly better than mine. Same OS. I installed all the software that was on her old computer. A good bit of it was from 1995 to 2000 release programs. All of it ran, no issues, no comparability mode.
Another Mech warrior 4 player... cool. i play that too.. (on W7 X64) :D
Do you play perpetuum? (MMO game, currently in beta)
-
People seem to forget era and function.
Amiga was unique in its time and badly managed
PC is popular and badly driven
Thumbs up. best comment so far. :D
-
Wow, you're still gripping onto that whole argument that you barely understood at the time?
I argued the PCE soundchip and the PCE CD audio as two separate points. It's not a sampling chip. It's a WSG. It just happens to be able to sample on each channel also (6 channels!). The CD audio argument is that it surpasses everything since it can have music made up of sound from whatever in the piss you want. Studio mastered audio on a CD based game is going to beat the piss out of any sound chip. Mix Amiga, Atari, a kazoo, and a friggin roland from 2010. Who cares. It can do it all. You do know what a CD is right? It's those shiny discs you stare at and drool as the light reflects off the bottoms?
I also never said it's (the WSG) is better quality. I said it sounds better and works better for games. There is a reason why arcade machines used FM/PSG/WSG instead of sampling a majority of the time. It fits and is much smoother for the type of game in question. Kind of like how if you were to have a live band for the soundtrack of a NES game.... it wouldn't fit at all. Having the music and sfx blend properly is very important in games.
I know you're sort of dopey and don't really get it so I will just leave it at that.
Thats nice. Doesn't change the fact that iBrowse loads pages up kind of slow and jerky, and a comparable win95 machine doesn't have the same dilemma.
Also, now that you mention it, Netscape works better too. Thats two browsers.
man, nothing gets past the AMIGA_NUT.
Hmm. Don't recall that problem. then again I was like 9 at the time. My computer didn't crash alot back then, and doesn't now.
It only crashed when we got AOL.
Yet Win95 and then 98, and beyond, are what most corporations used and still use. Maybe you have no experience with what the real world is doing past 1993.
Big words from the flid whose opening argument here was a direct attack, and who bounces from computer scene to computer scene being fanboy of said computer until he's gone so r-tard that he has to leave. Your problem is you have tunnel vision love for the computer the forum you are currently hamfisting on is about. You can't see past it being the best thing since sliced bread because you just want approval.
Dumbass, go read the title of the thread. In fact, here let me help you since you will probably go ADD on the way to reading it and start spewing more idiocy:
AMIGA vs PC.
I don't see how discussing the pros/cons of a PC is off topic in a thread where PC IS IN THE FRIGGING TITLE. As usual, hamfisted fliddery has made you look like the forum tard. You know, sort of like your opening comment in this post. What is on topic about insulting me and bringing up a thread thats been done for awhile now? Good job. Loosen the chin strap on your helmet. It's cutting off the circulation to what little brain you have left.
I should hope so considering an A1000 is newer by some years.
Oh, but I thought it was clear that the Amiga was superior no matter what. Now you change your stance to a "maybe", depending on how you have everything configured? Simpleton.
So you're saying this whole thread is useless? Try leaving then. You've contributed nothing but nonsense, as per the AMIGA_NUT standard.
LITTLE ARKHAN, OVER AND OUT.
A post full of more bullshit than Bush trying to explain away the lack of any evidence for WMD development in Iraq after Gulf War 2.0 haha.
It would be funny except that in his deluded sense of reality he actually believes he is right. And it took two pages of bullshit to try and dispel a handful of factual inconsistencies that go at odds with surfing the web on it's debut years on PC being anything other than an exercise in frustration thanks to sockets getting lost and GDI memory being eaten by the kernal and spat out into oblivion. I remember all too well the problems with Win95....I was a bloody service manager for one of the worlds largest re-insurance companies with users totalling 20,000+ And believe me seeing the back of 95 was cause for massive celebration in the IT department here.
Oh well over and out indeed, kicked off the forum for trolling and negative repeated comments with bullshit facts to back it up no doubt. Sanity has indeed prevailed.
As far as I'm concerned, at the time Commodore launched the A1200 up to their bankruptcy the only machine worth a crap for surfing the internet was Unix box + Netscape. Decent OS and decent browser. PCs were expensive, Win 3.1 was a farce and their only plus point was regular releases of Netscape but certainly NOT IE.
The difference is whilst Commodore were fighting off creditors, so you can understand them not exactly wasting millions on developing a web browser for WB 3.x in 93/94, Microsoft were making money in the billions and they still had an inferior browser (IE 1, 2, 3) compared to Netscape AND their next gen OS (Win95) had major flaws in dealing with both sockets AND graphically intensive (for the time) applications like a web browser surfing pages full of GIFs and JPEGs ;)
FACT Win95+surfing on IE continuously = Reboot city. Trust me I know, it was a major deal breaker for SLA reporting!
Win 98 + Netscape + 16mb + Pentium 120 was indeed quite OK. But seeing as that's 4 years after Commodore went bankrupt and ESCOM were nothing more than box shifters for 12 months what do you really expect from Amiga? And actually iMac was far easier to get onto the internet with out of the box than PCs come to think of it.
As for the 8086 and 80186+187 it was much more expensive than the 68k new kids on the block and 286 was mainframe prices, and anyway PCs needed another 5 years to exceed Agnus/Denise/Paula specs with VGA and SB16 too. And we won't even talk about Himen/XMS/EMS for DOS/Windows when I owned a 2.5mb multitasking A1000 in 87 ;) And anyway I'll take Guy Kewney's (RIP technical editor for Personal Computer World magazine) words at the time who clearly stated it [A1000] was light years ahead of all machines from all other manufacturers in all areas (as did Byte) from FD capacity to microkernal code in the multitasking GUI OS over someone who can barely remember how bad IE+Windows was in 93/94/95 era for the sake of trolling and anti-amiga stance. OS/2 on the other hand....
Bless his little socks, he didn't even understand why it's pointless to compare hardware a decade out of step with something that just came out ie A4000+PPC vs i7 PC or A1000 vs IBM XT+PC Speaker+Hercules ISA graphics. My car out accelerates a 1952 Ferrari...doesn't mean squat in real terms ;)
As for corporations using Windows and not Amigas....same reason nobody really bothered with the Mac/ST in corporate circles. A plain vanilla x86 office DOS box = Windows box = same engineers to support IT hardware/same software and servers and so change on massive <> likely. Mac and Amiga are nothing like PC architecture or OS support terms AND the cost of adding 4mb to run Win 3.x to PCs is cheaper than buying everyone an Amiga 2000/3000 or Mac LC3 AND sending engineers off to be retrained and staff in software training course costs and then changing the entire IT infrastructure. If this was ever going to happen it would have been mid 80s with the A1000 or original Mac. But we all know how good Commodore were at marketing and sales........ Truth is the ST and Mac were better than the PC in 85...let alone Amiga.
And just as a final note for those who missed it, Arkhan's exact comments were that the NEC PC-Engine (Turbo Grafix 16 in USA) had superior sound hardware to the Amiga because "Shadow of the Beast on PC-E CD has better music than the A500 version" and "it has 6 channels not 4 so it's better" in a thread about why were programming standards so low for Amiga coin-op conversions worldwide compared to other machines/consoles so all off topic trolling anyway. This of course is putting aside the fact the Rib's awesome MODs on Super Stardust (software 6 channel sound with FX on game) are far superior to anything I've heard on a Genesis/SNES/PC-E and that those exact same MOD tunes have been cleaned up and offered as downloadable content for the PS3 game Stardust HD as an alternative soundtrack.
-
my usual yardstick for comparing amiga and pc sound is Turrican 2 vs Doom.
-
my usual yardstick for comparing amiga and pc sound is Turrican 2 vs Doom.
Doom uses midi, which (almost) always sounds like crap, and Doom also sounds like crap on the Amiga :p
-
FACT Win95+surfing on IE continuously = Reboot city. Trust me I know, it was a major deal breaker for SLA reporting!
Win 98 + Netscape + 16mb + Pentium 120 was indeed quite OK. But seeing as that's 4 years after Commodore went bankrupt and ESCOM were nothing more than box shifters for 12 months what do you really expect from Amiga?
All the cool kids were running NT4 back then, yeah you needed more ram. I had 192mb,why anyone would buy a machine with 16mb I have no idea. Bonus points if you could get drivers for all your hardware and find a game that you could actually run (hacked directx from windows 5 beta ftw).
Amiga was hard to get online untill Miami etc came out, Windows 3.11 was a bit of a pain to get online too though. Microsoft didn't even think the internet was worth supporting when Windows 95 came out.
I still only had an Amiga at home until 2000 though. At some point an 68030 doesn't cut it anymore and faster hardware is too expensive.
It's taken Microsoft a long time to get something that is an order of magnitude better than the Amiga. However I don't think Commodore would ever have gotten there. The competition was always going to catch up on their initial head start.
-
I still only had an Amiga at home until 2000 though. At some point an 68030 doesn't cut it anymore and faster hardware is too expensive.
Depends on what you do with your computer. I know a guy from another forum who still swears by Amigas, and doesn't have/want/need a peecee because he hates the things.
-
Doom uses midi, which (almost) always sounds like crap, and Doom also sounds like crap on the Amiga :p
Correction: Midi usually sounds crap when played through OPL-2/3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQoJGpe28t0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v5tkJuJ368
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLdO9mZ-RpY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18TTxhoF_EI
-
All the cool kids were running NT4 back then, yeah you needed more ram. I had 192mb,why anyone would buy a machine with 16mb I have no idea. Bonus points if you could get drivers for all your hardware and find a game that you could actually run (hacked directx from windows 5 beta ftw).
Amiga was hard to get online untill Miami etc came out, Windows 3.11 was a bit of a pain to get online too though. Microsoft didn't even think the internet was worth supporting when Windows 95 came out.
I still only had an Amiga at home until 2000 though. At some point an 68030 doesn't cut it anymore and faster hardware is too expensive.
It's taken Microsoft a long time to get something that is an order of magnitude better than the Amiga. However I don't think Commodore would ever have gotten there. The competition was always going to catch up on their initial head start.
NT4 Workstation is a really bad OS for your employee's desktop computers, we looked into that but it was horrible and in Win95 days would have needed a CPU/HDD/RAM upgrade that Win98 needed years later.
I'm not sure really what would have happened with Workbench had C= not folded, Most of it is the work of Dr Tim King (ie KS/Wb 1.x) and he was from Metacomco...ie Tripos an existing multitasking OS. Fair's fair, Wb 3.x had important bits missing but it wasn't a piece of crap like Win 3.x.
Wb 3.x in 1994 needed a well resourced browser initiative from Commodore, and some changes to the serial port max speeds in hardware, other than that it was OK for the next 5 years of non broadband surfing in the western world. Their biggest problem was they didn't take the sane route of just going from 680x0 to PPC and started waffling on about NT on some strange CPU that would cost a fortune....truly clueless by this time so I guess you're right about the OS, I'm sure they would have screwed that up just like the hardware innovation was all down hill from the A1000 onwards lol
XP multitasks OK, and Vista, if you have the machine for it, multitasks better under extreme load (ie 99% CPU hit....the GUI is still smooth and responsive if slow...unlike XP which just goes into shock until CPU usage goes down again. Win 7 is just Vista SP3 with a shit GUI made by 5 year olds ;)
-
...mostly nonsense...
Wow... I don't know where you're getting this from, you seem fairly ill informed, but maybe that was your point.
-
A post full of more bullshit than Bush trying to explain away the lack of any evidence for WMD development in Iraq after Gulf War 2.0 haha.
.....
etc
etc
tl;dr
oh wait, something about the PCE at the end...
go back and read that PCE argument again. I said the CD AUDIO is better. That isn't 6 channels.
the CHIP tunes are 6 channels. SotB on PCE CD doesn't use the chip.
If you're going to type a master thesis reply trying to insult me with your ever-so-lol condescending tone, try to get your facts straight before you commit yourself to permanent failure by hitting "submit reply".
The CD AUDIO is a studio remastered version of the original soundtrack. Have you even listened to it? If you think 4 channels of sampled audio beats out a studio soundtrack, I am going to just ignore any more filth you continue to spew on the internet. It would prove without a shadow of a doubt that you're delusional.
I have an even better idea too, shut your mouth for an hour or so, and go listen to the CD soundtrack. Tell me what you think.
-
Ha ha ha, way to go guys :) And they call me stupid for using the term 'peecee' :lol: The advantage is that I at least know who not to take seriously around here :)
-
The advantage is that I at least know who not to take seriously around here :)
yourself?
-
That's some neat quoting...
-
That's some neat quoting...
O_O you're right.
fixed. No idea what happened there lol
-
yourself?
I don't always take myself too seriously ;)
-
I don't always take myself too seriously ;)
Why would anyone posting to this thread take themselves too seriously?
Those who insist on defending the idea that original Amigas are a potential alternative to modern computers:
The world REALLY is flat!
We never went to the moon.
Elvis did not die on the throne.
Government intelligence is NOT an oxymoron.
AppleII forever!
Trust me.:hammer:
-
Those who insist on defending the idea that original Amigas are a potential alternative to modern computers:
They can be, but it depends on what you do with them. Some people happily only use classic hardware, and nothing else. I know a guy who hates peecees, and he won't get one, so he sticks with his A1200+'030. He has to use peecees at work, and thinks that is enough peecee use for him :) Somewhere I can't really blame him, and the only thing I'd miss would be Opera and some old peecee games (I have an old 667 Mhz Pentium 3 here), such as Diablo 2 LOD, Warcraft 2, Starcraft Broodwar, and some others.
Side note: I see classic Amigas as modern machines, new peecees are simply much faster, but that's all they are, faster. Compare 70ties and earlier computing to the 80ties/90ties and later, and you'll get a good idea of why I think this ;)
Why would anyone posting to this thread take themselves too seriously?
:lol:
-
Gawd... Is this thread still running... :lol:
Think I'll revive my "Wish Jim Was Still Here.." thread... :roflmao:
-
I'm baffled to see this thread still has life myself.
I haven't seen anyone posting that they are completely willing to give up newer computers to stick solely with Amigas.
The closest I come to that is using MorphOS and that's not a fair comparison as a MorphOS based computer is not an Amiga.
-
Side note: I see classic Amigas as modern machines, new peecees are simply much faster, but that's all they are, faster.
I could add a few things to the list other than "faster". How about
cheaper
better supported
better modularity
more compatible (consumer devices, network protocols etc)
more operating system choice
more application software choice
These are all tangible benefits for most users. Let's face it, the Amiga as a hardware platform is not modern. It was modern in mid 80's, but every hardware advantage it had has been either surpassed by it's rivals or rendered redundant in some other way (planar pixels were great for scrolling but nobody uses them now). Whatever could not be beaten by elegance has certainly been bested by orders of magnitude increases in performance applied to whatever less elegant solution was used instead.
Try running AROS, amithlon or even just UAE on a current "peecee" and tell me you don't find any advantages at all.
-
Well, For me, PC's always will have some place. My miggies aren't set up to burn DVD's or do custom VCD's... and frankly, web surfing on my A1200T is painful with most sites. Gawd, I need a graphics card....
You know, there are some people that are perfectly satisfied with the same old hardware they've always used.... Not sure if the guy's around anymore, but just a few years ago, I saw/read something about a man in his 60's needing a computer only to help run his home business, something fairly cheap, that works.... His system: C-64, 2 1541 drives, C= printer and monitor.... the retail software he got at a resale shop or some such place..... I can imagine he could have had a full C-64 system for ~ $45.00. I got nearly 2 full C-128 systems for that much some years back.......
(We need a 'wistful' or 'nostalgic' smilie .... ;) )
-
I'm baffled to see this thread still has life myself.
I haven't seen anyone posting that they are completely willing to give up newer computers to stick solely with Amigas.
The closest I come to that is using MorphOS and that's not a fair comparison as a MorphOS based computer is not an Amiga.
Still not sure why it's going myself... :)
Ok heres a post about someone not willing to give up their Amigas in order to use newer machines... :)
Me... :) For the past 20 odd years I've only ever used Amigas up until about 2 months ago, when purchased this ruddy iMac I'm typing on here on the spur of the moment, so far the only use I've found for it is accessing the internet.
I am just about to purchase a new PC for the first time ever and thanks to all the folk here who advised & educated me on what I should buy. :)
But I know myself and can honestly say it will never replace the enjoyment that I get from using my A1200s. In fact when my internet subscription runs out I will also be going back to never using the internet, it's just not for me I reckon... :)
-
These are all tangible benefits for most users. Let's face it, the Amiga as a hardware platform is not modern.
What is it then? An antique? No, a Cray 1 is antique, or all the other machines that came before it. In the 80ties computing changed. Nice and simple machines that you plug in and can use. That is modern is to me. In this sense new computers are just more of the same and nothing else.
The modern era of computing didn't start a few years ago, but a few decades. Don't confuse power and extended features with modernity, it's about the essence.
A good example is modern medicine. It's not a couple of years old, but started a relatively long time ago. Sure we have more advanced techniques today, but medicine 50 years ago was already modern, and it could be argued that it was decades before.
It's easy to call something not modern because it doesn't perform as well as machines of today ;)
Try running AROS, amithlon or even just UAE on a current "peecee" and tell me you don't find any advantages at all.
Yeah, it will be faster. If I want speed, then I'll just do it on my peecee. To me it's about using an Amiga, and if I find something it won't do fast enough (or badly because of crappy software), then I'll use something else. Speed on my Amiga isn't all important too me, and my Blizzard '030 is fine (wouldn't use an '060 much, for example).
-
Would that be the same Cray 1 that in 1975 ran at over 10x the clockspeed of your first Amiga and supported SIMD/vector execution?
Let's face it, those are techniques we still use today, but the Amiga never did (well, unless you count the altivec unit in OS4/MOS machines or SSE in AROS boxes).
-
Franko!
You have got to retain internet service! You've set off such a brilliant sh*t storm.
It's been damned interesting interacting with you.
Besides, after viewing the internet and the useful information you can dig up on it, do you want to give it up?
-
Would that be the same Cray 1 that in 1975 ran at over 10x the clockspeed of your first Amiga and supported SIMD/vector execution?
Let's face it, those are techniques we still use today, but the Amiga never did (well, unless you count the altivec unit in OS4/MOS machines or SSE in AROS boxes).
Surprised at you Karlos coming out with a crazy statement like that, I mean comparing a Cray 1 to the Amiga...
Forget about the development costs etc, and just compare the cost to the end user a couple of hundred quid Vs several million quid ($7.9 million to be exact & that didn't include any software) for only 10x the clockspeed, guess who wins that one.
Thoram is quite right in what he says, it's nothing to do with how modern something is, it's all about the individual and the enjoyment that they get out of using the technology they choose to use.
I mean were not talking about using a computer here to run your business were talking home computing for enjoyment & entertainment, a principle which the Amiga created & founded upon, whereas the PC or microcomputer to give it it's proper name came a background of academic institutions and R&D labs, and was then adopted mainly for use in the business environment.
-
It appears that Homecraft Furniture AKA Commodore USA, are in negotiations for a license to the Amiga name, so you won't have to choose between PC and Amiga, you'll be able to buy an Amiga PC!
-
Would that be the same Cray 1 that in 1975 ran at over 10x the clockspeed of your first Amiga and supported SIMD/vector execution?
Yes, that one. Cost million of dollars, needed a room to operate, had a power consumption of 15000 Watts (or something similar), no ide hard disks, and probably some I didn't mention. That's not very modern.
An A1200 with a 50 Mhz '030 isn't quite as fast (it wouldn't be even at the same clock speed), but it's cheap, easy to operate, doesn't use much power, and if it's Ide, it'll run it (with drivers) and of course it doesn't need a room to operate and has a nice (although simple) multitasking GUI OS. No contest really.
This is exactly what I mean with computing in the 70ties and before VS the 80ties and after. The Cray 1 is probably still more powerful than the fastest 680x0 based Amiga, but I wouldn't want one even if you paid me, because they're not easy to use, while an Amiga is easy, just like peecees.
In terms of cars it would be simple: A horse and carriage is old fashioned, while high end sports cars from the 60ties aren't, they're simply outperformed by todays best sports cars. That's what I mean by modern.
-
Wow the never ending thread LOL. We still trying to debate this? Let me finalise it for everyone Some people love Windows, some love Mac OS, some love Linux and some love Amiga OS. There are even those who prob still swear by DOS, BIOS MorphOS and so on and so on. I love my Amiga, I really like my Windows 7 computers and don't care much for Mac or Apple,...but that is me and I'm sure we can argue forever on this so everyone has the computer(s) they love. Now new thread?
-
Wow the never ending thread LOL. We still trying to debate this? Let me finalise it for everyone Some people love Windows, some love Mac OS, some love Linux and some love Amiga OS. There are even those who prob still swear by DOS, BIOS MorphOS and so on and so on. I love my Amiga, I really like my Windows 7 computers and don't care much for Mac or Apple,...but that is me and I'm sure we can argue forever on this so everyone has the computer(s) they love. Now new thread?
Okay what about "PC vs Amiga" for a change... :roflmao:
It's a bit like religion, as long as their are people who either believe or disbelieve, they'll always be willing to share their viewpoint on it, reckon this is a thread that that'll keep on cropping up whenever someone new finds it and wants to have their say. :)
-
Just drop the versus. It's "Amiga PC" now....
-
Yes, that one. Cost million of dollars, needed a room to operate, had a power consumption of 15000 Watts (or something similar), no ide hard disks, and probably some I didn't mention. That's not very modern.
Using your earlier argument I could just say that modern systems are simply smaller and use less power and thus the Cray 1 counts as a modern machine. After all, architecturally it shares things in common with SSE etc.
-
Surprised at you Karlos coming out with a crazy statement like that, I mean comparing a Cray 1 to the Amiga...
He didn't bring the Cray up, someone else did. He just responded accordingly.
anyway
the Amiga isn't modern just like a 1985 Toyota isn't modern. Yeah it drives nice and can play next to a 2011 model Toyota on the highway..., but to get it to the same drivable state, you have to upgrade the shit out of it with aftermarket nonsense.
and then a part breaks and you're like SHIT. and you wait a week to locate a new one, then it gets put in.
then you drive away, something else breaks. 800$ later you wish you had a new car with a warranty.
that and you wish it had a better more efficient engine, newer car features and bells/whistles an 80s car didn't really have....
and eventually break down and get with the times.
Amiga's aren't antiques. They're just old. Technology gets better. Theres a reason they aren't flying friggin wright brothers planes around anymore.
-
Sorry posted in wrong thread
-
Not sure what all this is about. I'm using a 2.8 GHz Dual Core running Windows 7 Pro 64 Bit. I was abit surprised, but Mechwarrior 4 runs just fine. That was released on November 24, 2000. Almost 11 years ago. No compatibility mode.
I just build a new computer for a friend this Spring to replace her 7 year old Dell. The new computer is slightly better than mine. Same OS. I installed all the software that was on her old computer. A good bit of it was from 1995 to 2000 release programs. All of it ran, no issues, no comparability mode.
After trying some more Windows software the past week or so:
Windows 64-bit runs ZERO programs from Windows 3.x whether 16-bit or 32-bit. I have tried Photoshop 3.x, all of my software, etc. This is not some I/O port stuff which can have problems due to newer OSes blocking and checking every I/O port call, but even API-only stuff. So what was once a big thing about PCs-- compatibility is no longer true. Obviously, they got rid of real-mode DOS as well since Windows 2000, but they did emulate the DOS calls and some I/O ports in the command prompt. Mechwarrior must have been a 32-bit Win 95/98 program. These also have issues, but many of them run.
-
boohoo. use DosBox.
Amiga doesn't have 100% OMGCOMPATIBILITY either.
-
Why would anyone posting to this thread take themselves too seriously?
Those who insist on defending the idea that original Amigas are a potential alternative to modern computers:
I only use PCs for internet these days. My computer time is split between Atari/Amigas (80%) and PCs (20%). So if something had to go, PC would go. If someone's work was just computing math stuff that is supported by a calculator, he doesn't need to use a power-hungry and bigger PC for the task. Perhaps, we should stop using calculators since they don't run at 3Ghz or stop using those Nintendo DSi which use a pretty slow processor.
The world REALLY is flat!
We never went to the moon.
Those are debatable, but someone can be quite happy just using Ataris/Amigas and no PC.
-
I only use PCs for internet these days. My computer time is split between Atari/Amigas (80%) and PCs (20%). So if something had to go, PC would go. If someone's work was just computing math stuff that is supported by a calculator, he doesn't need to use a power-hungry and bigger PC for the task. Perhaps, we should stop using calculators since they don't run at 3Ghz or stop using those Nintendo DSi which use a pretty slow processor.
.
integrals are supported by calculators. Until you need to do alot of large ones quickly and realize its a PITA. Powah Howngry PCs do it good with minimal effort.
You're saying NASA or some other engineering place should just do all the mathematics with a TI calculator?
Nintendo DSi is for games not work, and it's the best selling handheld on the market. It also browses the internet easier than an Amiga, and fits in your pocket!
Good try.
Those are debatable, but someone can be quite happy just using Ataris/Amigas and no PC.
I don't know if you saw these things called photographs. They were taken from space. They clearly show that the earth is round. If you would like to debate this, allow me to direct you to the nearest padded cell.
-
Yes and no. you download VMWare server (i think it was...) and request a key from VMWare site... you install the software and run it. quite simple..
Though, the enterprise versions are quite expensive.
And BTW if you already have the old 98se install cd collecting dust. its nice to be able to use it again.. :D
No, I don't want to install 98SE and VMWare on an already bloated Windows 7 64-bit and hope it works. The more compact the OS, the better for my stuff. And I am talking Windows 3.x not Windows 98SE.
And BTW partitioning the drives. do you really expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware? Even 2K have problems with that. (mostly driver availability of modern motherboards). The answer is quite simple; virtualize it. Or even emulate it.. (dosbox)
Yes, I expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware. That's what compatbility means. I shouldn't have to buy some other emulation scheme (assuming it exists).
1. No, it aint the OSs fault that retailers don't include the disks with the computer when purchasing it!
2. Compatibility can be achieved by selecting compatibility mode.
3. Benchmarks is just a figure... So far my newer PCs have graveled any W98se setup in any benchmark. (3D benchmarks like 3Dmark 99, 2k, 01....)
Rendering: Vegas video have increased performance at every step i have upgraded so far, even OS upgrades.
That goes for working with photoshop as well... I would like to see you edit a RAW format 18mp image from your canon eos... in win 3.11 with a P90 and 16mb ram... i would pay to see that.. the image is 30MB in size...
It's the OSes fault that it's incompatible with previous windows API. I won't even mention I/O ports yet, but suffice to say that up to windows 98SE, they were backward compatible on API level as well as I/O port level. Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft. It allowed direct port I/O and APi access just like Amiga OS.
Compatibility is NOT achieved for Win 3.x through selecting compatibility mode. And even for many Win98 stuff, it doesn't work. Windows 3.x will beat Windows 98SE given the same hardware setup since you can do 32-bit stuff in Windows 3.x. So editing an image of 30MB using 16MB machine and a more bloated OS will degrade performance.
-
If one system does something better/easier than the other then that systems wins. Some people treat Amiga like a religion, they are sticking it to 'the man' to only use an Amiga.
I'm interested in Amiga because Amiga is interesting. A simple customisable user interface from the dawn of GUIs. I guess that means the software is the deciding factor whether I like it or not.
-
If thats what you want, then you don't understand how any of this stuff works, lol.
and what "stuff" do you need a compact OS for? You just said all you do is use PC for internet. How compact does your nonsense have to be if you're just opening a browser and typing on a forum.
-
You're saying NASA or some other engineering place should just do all the mathematics with a TI calculator?
Hi Arkhan, good to see your back on form again... ;)
The preferred choice of calculators at NASA seems to be HP & not TI ones... :)
http://hpinspace.wordpress.com/category/hp-35s/
-
yeah and they hook up robots to them to frantically type batches of calculations in, because noone actually uses modern computers on this flat world.
The moons also flat. its going to collide into earth and fold us in half.
-
Yes, I expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware. That's what compatbility means. I shouldn't have to buy some other emulation scheme (assuming it exists).
It's the OSes fault that it's incompatible with previous windows API. I won't even mention I/O ports yet, but suffice to say that up to windows 98SE, they were backward compatible on API level as well as I/O port level. Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft. It allowed direct port I/O and APi access just like Amiga OS.
I think you're in a very small minority. Not being able to access I/O ports from every program is a good thing, I don't want everything to be able to access my hard drive directly. You can access I/O ports on x64 versions of windows, but you have to have a signed driver installed to do it.
Also, not everyone wants to pay extra so their hardware will be compatible with windows 3.1.
Before Windows 7, every graphics card had to support 256 colour mode X. Which was a clever hack back in 1995, but these days it just adds cost.
To run Windows 3.1 you'd need your VGA card to support planar graphics modes, which I have no idea if mine supports. 99.9% of people in the world have no use for them. So if they are sitting there on my graphics card, then I've had to pay for them.
If you really want to run 16 bit software, then a 32 bit Windows 7 would be your best bet. I wouldn't use it, because 32bit has more security risks but if you'd rather use Windows 98 then it's going to be better than that.
Well written 32 bit software should run without any problems. What you're trying to use is probably just buggy. You can't blame Microsoft for that (although they do go out of their way to make sure big name software works, no matter how badly written it is).
-
He's just grasping for reasons to complain. I wonder what Win 3.1 software is really crucial in 2010.
I busted out the russian 6 pack of games yesterday.
Installed off a floppy on Win7, ran in Win 3.1 w/ dosbox, and laughed at amigaski the whole time I was playing crete.
-
Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft. It allowed direct port I/O and APi access just like Amiga OS.
you understand zero about OS design if that's what you think.
Compatibility is NOT achieved for Win 3.x through selecting compatibility mode. And even for many Win98 stuff, it doesn't work. Windows 3.x will beat Windows 98SE given the same hardware setup since you can do 32-bit stuff in Windows 3.x. So editing an image of 30MB using 16MB machine and a more bloated OS will degrade performance.
So what? Who uses 3.1 stuff aside from you?
Besides you've been told time and again: DOSBOX + 3.1 works. Run it in that environment; it won't break into your house and kill you and your family, you know.
-
you understand zero about OS design if that's what you think.
So what? Who uses 3.1 stuff aside from you?
Besides you've been told time and again: DOSBOX + 3.1 works. Run it in that environment; it won't break into your house and kill you and your family, you know.
This++
-
Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft.
Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft.
Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft.
Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft.
Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft.
Here we see Amigaski out-do his previous record for burning stupid.
Now tell us again about the Amiga's joystick port. We could do with a good laugh.
-
Okay, I guess I can't get my point across, but it doesn't really matter, because people can always agree to disagree ;)
-
Originally Posted by Iggy
@Franko
Re: Amiga vs PC
Franko!
You have got to retain internet service! You've set off such a brilliant sh*t storm.
It's been damned interesting interacting with you.
Besides, after viewing the internet and the useful information you can dig up on it, do you want to give it up?
Glad to know at least someone gets my sense of humor... (Iggy have you nicked my happy pills...) :lol:
You'll be glad to know I'll be around for at least another 10 months (others may not be so glad !!!), being a stereotypical Scotsman I have to get my moneys worth, I mean after all it cost me 30 quid for a years 20Mb unlimited Broadband from SKY, one of my best haggles ever I reckon... :D
Think I should start a new Thread & Poll, something along these lines
Franko... Should he stay or should he go now...
Or
Franko... Amusing or Annoying...
Or
Franko... Pain In the Ass or A Wee Touch O Class
Or maybe a poll on a poll about what to call my poll... :biglaugh:
(Reckon I've asked for it now... oh well it's no skin of my nose... you should see the size of the ruddy thing...) :)
Now where did I leave me medication... :roflmao:
-
Surprised at you Karlos coming out with a crazy statement like that, I mean comparing a Cray 1 to the Amiga...
It was in response to somebody else that brought it up. However, let's be realistic here, it's a far less silly comparison than a classic 680x0 machine versus a modern 64-bit x86 one. Cost aside, the performance gap between the latter pair is far greater than the performance gap between the first.
-
No, I don't want to install 98SE and VMWare on an already bloated Windows 7 64-bit and hope it works. The more compact the OS, the better for my stuff. And I am talking Windows 3.x not Windows 98SE.
Yes, I expect Win 3.x to work on modern hardware. That's what compatbility means. I shouldn't have to buy some other emulation scheme (assuming it exists).
It's the OSes fault that it's incompatible with previous windows API. I won't even mention I/O ports yet, but suffice to say that up to windows 98SE, they were backward compatible on API level as well as I/O port level. Windows 98SE was the LAST good OS by Microsoft. It allowed direct port I/O and APi access just like Amiga OS.
Compatibility is NOT achieved for Win 3.x through selecting compatibility mode. And even for many Win98 stuff, it doesn't work. Windows 3.x will beat Windows 98SE given the same hardware setup since you can do 32-bit stuff in Windows 3.x. So editing an image of 30MB using 16MB machine and a more bloated OS will degrade performance.
OMG...
To all of us: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnhF1QAEZjU
-
I guess this whole Amiga vs PC debate is over now the Amiga is a PC.
-
Oh but i thought amiga was best why does it need to be pc and stuff.
-
Think I should start a new Thread & Poll, something along these lines
Franko... Should he stay or should he go now...
Or
Franko... Amusing or Annoying...
Or
Franko... Pain In the Ass or A Wee Touch O Class
Or maybe a poll on a poll about what to call my poll... :biglaugh:
You forgot "attention seeking" :lol:
-
Wait, what?
He's calling Win3.x and Win98 OS'es?
-
Hi,
@Arkhan
[I can. Solid state drive, 8gb ram, Phenom II X6 w/ Windows 7.
boots up faster than I can say "Franko's on meth"]
I am sorry but I do believe that you misunderstood me.
What I am saying is that if I lose a PC or a (ugh) MAC it is really no big deal, the are such worthless pieces of junk, I just go online and buy another one for just about $300. OK MACS do cost a little more by about $2700 (if you buy one that is worth something).
Now if I lost my Amiga, it would be like losing a good friend or maybe my pet dog.
smerf
-
you understand zero about OS design if that's what you think.
It's actually the opposite. You understand ZERO about OSes period. You don't even understand the simple point that Windows 64-bit does not run Windows 3.x stuff. You keep repeating the same point-- "oh, there's some dosbox where you can install Windows 3.x on top of it." I already know that, but it's an emulator that has problems with even DOS stuff what to speak of an OS running on top it. This I already told you before in this thread and gave you a simple DOS program that doesn't run but you keep repeating the samething as if you are blind or maybe a PC fanatic who can't accept the deficiencies when they are factually pointed out. This is my last reply to you regarding this DOSBOX crap-- if you have the ears read on. And I'm already done with two PC fanatics who keep just spewing out their insulting venom without any sense of reasoning. I only reply to those who I feel know something about PCs and Amigas. Don't have much time to waste on name-calling. I can get a few kindergarten kids to do that.
So what? Who uses 3.1 stuff aside from you?
Just admit you don't know here and are just speculating.
Besides you've been told time and again: DOSBOX + 3.1 works. Run it in that environment; it won't break into your house and kill you and your family, you know.
It doesn't work for distribution even if it ran perfectly. Next point, if I were going to run an emulator for things that use only DOS calls and ask people to install Windows 3.x, I mine as well tell them to install a 32-bit version of Windows instead which does run Windows 3.x stuff. Next point, let's say I have a license for windows 3.x, why in the world would I want customers to screw around with installing Windows 3.x when I can just make a boot-CD that boots to Windows 3.x using REAL DOS.
-
OMG...
To all of us: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnhF1QAEZjU
You need some brains to reply to what I wrote. I was close to 100% PC programmer in 1990s and know the Windows 3.x/95/98se stuff enough to know how many cycles it takes for I/O instruction in protected mode and non-protected mode, how much memory each OS hogs up, and how to flip/flop 16-bit/32-bit with simple 66h or 67h prefix opcodes. You have ZERO understanding like some other PC sidekicks and fanatics here-- just caught up in the frenzy of the modern OS. I guess you also own Beta Videos and Laserdiscs as well since those were also supposedly "new" and "modern" when they came out but turned out to be a passing fad.
Heck, I haven't even spoken against PCs yet; I joined this topic to support some of the points being raised by others and my current issues with compatibility.
-
Kudos to Free2Nukeu! For setting up the Troll Honeypot...
This derailed off-topic some time ago, around 15 pages back it look and going nowhere....