MorphOS on x86???

[Piru]

@ferrellsl

You are wrong in more than one ways. I don't even bother going into this porting stuff, mschulz is more than capable in skinning you alive on that.

Until the MorphOS team and its investors can make money from a MorphOS port, it will never be ported.

If you're thinking we're making any profit you're gravely mistaken.

It is not about making money. It's about having the whole codebase written for big endianity in mind (except the parts which loan from AROS). It would be horrible nightmare to go thru all of it. Plus there would be the requirement to not only rewritete the 68k emulation (two of them in fact!), but to write PPC emulator aswell.

And lets not even go into the gazillion different HW configurations that users would like to have supported. Sure in theory you could set some strict limitations on what you support, but that HW would be obsolete in 6 months anyway. With the limited resources we have it would be just impossible to keep writing new drivers all the time.

Thanks, but no thanks.

This site as well as the one at Amigaworld.net is full of people who have no idea what they're talking about who simply lay in wait to troll, flame others and spread disinformation.

There always are some.

[Piru]

@ferrellsl

you certainly wouldn't continue its development if it was losing money, at least not for long.

8 years is not long?

All I've been saying is that it's technically possible to port MorphOS to x86.....nothing more, nothing less

Bollocks, you were saying a lot more than that.

Other operating systems have done it and I'm certain you and your team are more than smart enough to do it as well.

That's not the problem. Read my previous post again.

But you won't do it if it means you and the team lose money in the process with no chance to recoup your investment in time or in money.

Again: It is not about money.

I don't want to see you or anyone on the team go bankrupt either!

We all (as far as I know) have full time jobs you know (can't remember if some of the team members are still students, though). No-one is making a living from MorphOS, that's for sure.

So please stop this "losing money" BS. Thank you.

[Piru]

@warpdesign

Why ? Did Apple include a 68k emulator with OSX-Intel ?

How would Apple's situation compare to ours in any way?

Apple had quite a bit more resources don't you agree?

It's the opportunity to remove these stupid emulations layers

I don't think they're stupid, nor I think they could be removed. We wouldn't have any software then.

most software could be recompiled

You live in a dreamworld.

I'm really wondering why developers do not look more in the future... It would be so great to have a true *modern* OS..

Feel free to write one.

[Piru]

@cicero790

LLVE

How exactly does that solve the driver issue?

[Piru]

Yes. And we could start writting software...

Who exactly? I don't see that many devs around anymore. And it would be really hard to attract anyone to platform with zero existing apps.

Do we have that much software right now ?

More than would be with x86, that is none.

If we exclude 68k software

But I don't. Granted I only use couple of the m68k apps anymore, but it is invaluable SW library to have in case you need something. Having aminet to look into is way better than having no software at all. And no, UAE just doesn't cut it IMO.

And aren't already all native software available in x86 ?

No, for some hypothetical OS we have 0. Just being x86 doesn't automagically give you software.

Provided the OS and some third-party libs (SDL,...) are available, wouldn't it be possible to easily port these apps on an hypothetic x86 MorphOS ?

Only slightly easier when dealing with bad little endian dependant code. Other than that it wouldn't make porting  easier.

But seems like people writting the original Quark/QBox also lived in such a dreamworld... I doubt Quark/QBox was only meant to run ABox... Or what a waste!

Quark works just fine thank you. Just because all the possibilities weren't used doesn't make it any less valuable. Not a waste at all.

I'm really wondring what's the fear of moving forward. This could not work at all, so what ? It's not for the money, right ? so...

There is no fear, there is the reality of the situation that I've explained couple of times already. Making 10 (20 in some cases) years of code suddenly work in an endian safe manner would be a massive workload, too much to handle. Coding drivers for every imaginable HW would be ever more work. Plus the quickly moving target the x86 is wouldn't make it any easier.

And no I couldn't write my own... Designing an OS is a huge work... And you need to be experienced in both OS design and programming. I'm in neither...

So I guess I can just ignore your comments in the future?

[Piru]

@warpdesign

Not being experienced in OS design doesn't mean I cannot make any interesting remarks...

Interesting perhaps, but those remarks are somewhat misguided due to lack of insight and practical experience. Thus, if you don't mind I won't continue this particular discussion further.

Obviously you're entitled to have your opinion, but I don't agree with it. If you feel I'm wrong, you can always prove me wrong by starting your own x86 OS and making it successful. Good luck.