Amiga.org
Operating System Specific Discussions => MorphOS => MorphOS -- Application questions and support => Topic started by: Mazze on April 03, 2012, 11:51:02 AM
-
Hi,
I've read several times from the blue smurf propaganda department that MorphOS is so way ahead of AROS. Care to elaborate?
-
Do you have doubts? :)
It is years ahead and Aros is just alpha :laughing:
Hmmm when you want to know in detail why MorphOS is years ahead then there is the big silence...
-
Indeed it is. Far less crashes, a much better method at backwards compatability, MUI just works, USB works (including writing to NTFS), the GUI (Ambient) is AMAZING!!!
I think the only thing AROS has that is fully worth mention is the 3DCard Support, but even most of the drivers have bugs and the screen flakes out.
But hey, AROS is free, if you are interested, download it, install it, and submit bug reports.
-
I cannot compare the crashes or ambient with MorphOS because I do not have it (I use it on Kubuntu on a Notebook). It has also UAE integration (Janus-UAE), it can be combined with Linux, it offers X86 and ARM-Support (propably you forgot to mention...)
-
Hi,
I've read several times from the blue smurf propaganda department that MorphOS is so way ahead of AROS. Care to elaborate?
/me says hello to Blue Smurf Mazze :)
Anyway, to me AROS is lacking on Wanderer, MUI and Intuition department. Zune requires more work to support all MUI3 features since it makes porting software to AROS bit cumbersome sometimes. I.e. basics like screennotify.library support is missing and Zune windows are not autoclosing when adjusting screen mode or window decorations.
I dont know if alpha blending blit calls or dos64 api is supported in AROS. 64-bit dos api is not that important. It has been in MorphOS for years but in the end most of time you dont need large file support.
-
Wanderer is one of the weak points and MUI-Support (Zune). There is a Scalos-port that i hope to test at easter and Zune-Update is in development. So I am sure that these issues will be solved.
-
Wanderer is one of the weak points and MUI-Support (Zune). There is a Scalos-port that i hope to test at easter and Zune-Update is in development. So I am sure that these issues will be solved.
Lets discuss it when it is done. Scalos is OK (more advanced than Workbench and Wanderer) but certain problems dont go away until Intuition/Zune is updated.
Btw,
It has also UAE integration (Janus-UAE), it can be combined with Linux, it offers X86 and ARM-Support (propably you forgot to mention...)
This was why I was curious to try Icaros on my laptop but you have to buy Amiga Forever to use it. Until Amiga Forever dependency is replaced by Aros68k distribution I dont consider it very practical...
In the end installing Icaros is very easy but 68k support should be built-in without having to buy external software.
-
I have worked a lot in Aros 68k (but in WinUAE). I am right now finishing my Aros 68k distribution (hopefully at easter) and i know that both maintainers (icaros and AspireOS) plan to integrate it so this issue will also be solved in the near future. The combination aros 68k / kickstart replacement is of course not 100% compatible but a lot of programs (and games) work with it.
-
I have worked a lot in Aros 68k (but in WinUAE). I am right now finishing my Aros 68k distribution (hopefully at easter) and i know that both maintainers (icaros and AspireOS) plan to integrate it so this issue will also be solved in the near future. The combination aros 68k / kickstart replacement is of course not 100% compatible but a lot of programs (and games) work with it.
I know. I am not so much interested on games because I can play old games on my Amiga 500. What is interesting to me is running some old 68k software I might need but then problem is that you can not mix 68k and AROS native libraries... and in fact if I install 68k software using Installer will it install files over AROS native files?
Nevertheless having some 68k integration in AROS is better than none ;-)
-
you can heavily mix both (68k, at least as long as you only add). replacing original aros libs can create problems of course (testing...)
I will integrate some recommendations what you can copy from the original files (f.e. narrator.device, Arexx...)
-
Indeed it is. Far less crashes, a much better method at backwards compatability, MUI just works, USB works (including writing to NTFS), the GUI (Ambient) is AMAZING!!!
I think the only thing AROS has that is fully worth mention is the 3DCard Support, but even most of the drivers have bugs and the screen flakes out.
But hey, AROS is free, if you are interested, download it, install it, and submit bug reports.
I completely agree, as does (probably) most people who has MorphOS experience coming in contact with AROS.
Anyway, since you already gave such a good answer, I'm going to dedicate my post entirely to speculations! :) Maybe the future way forward for MorphOS will be to abandon the integrated, seamless 68k emulation at some point, together with the ambition to maintain the API as tight to the original Amiga OS API as they do today, maybe changes will be necessary at some point, if you are to make a jump to a different architecture/ISA. While it would lead to some sacrifices (turning it more into AROS, but still more than that), it could also lead to many great things, like a better HW platform, true SMP, true MP, true 64-bit, etc.
Then you would have to run the old Amiga apps through UAE or whatever, like they do on AROS, maybe that will be good enough on a x86 machine (it's not much fun on PPC). It will be a completely different manner than what we are used to on MorphOS (or OS4) today, it won't be integrated, it wont be as seemless, it's a different philosophy on "Amiga backwards compatibility" altogether, but although the thought might be a bit shocking to us at first, it seems to be enough for AROS people? Anyway, it wouldn't stop by just becoming a new "AROS Copy", since most new (and most interesting) MorphOS SW are in PPC, and is still maintained and could probably be ported to a new MorphOS "v4.0" architecture without greater troubles. Some good SW has even been brought under the MorphOS Team's wings for integration into the MorphOS package, and I think this strategy might continue.
So MorphOS would (probably) still have most of its native SW stack available, but you would have to run Amiga apps in the AROS way. MorphOS will of course still have its unique polished look and feel, the same features (and more), the feeling of a real, usable desktop, etc from MUI4, Ambient, etc, not anything like AROS. And somehow I doubt the MorphOS Team will ever settle with running MorphOS in some process on top of another OS (as they seem putting a lot of pride into building a complete OS themselves)? And as a result, it could have a better HW platform, true SMP, true MP, true 64-bit, etc, a package completely new to Amiga, a "2nd Next Generation" (meaning Third of course :lol:, "3D miga"), which neither AROS or OS4 could match. But who knows, these things are *highly* hypothetical speculations, and might not happen at all (though they have been suggested by some MorphOS developers as one of several plausible ways to a future). I guess we'll learn in time... :)
-
Nevertheless having some 68k integration in AROS is better than none ;-)
Maybe I misunderstood, but to me it sounds like a mish-mash of UAE emulation boxes...?
-
"and in fact if I install 68k software using Installer will it install files over AROS native files?" I do not understand. For software it is feeling like a normal 68k environment and it is no problem to install 68k software there. I do not know the 68k integration in Icaros but when it is similar to WinUAE then you work in your own environment and not mixing it with the X86 outside world.
You cannot destroy Windows by installing amiga-software. All other concepts would be extremely dangerous. You cannot mix X86 and 68k libs.
-
Maybe I misunderstood, but to me it sounds like a mish-mash of UAE emulation boxes...?
There does seem to be a lot of BS spread on this subject. I was asking in the AROS irc channel lately if AROS supports integrated 68K emulation yet and was told yes, I was called a troll for asking if it was seamless/coherence mode or simply a UAE window popping up. After a good 20 mins of being fed various round-the-houses explanations, from what I see it is simply a UAE window popping up with its own Workbench and the program loaded inside there.
It works like RuninUAE on OS4, but it's not the same as JIT integration in MOS/OS4.
-
Janus UAE is a fork of E-UAE and I have seen that installed on Mac. I think there is a misunderstanding. You do not mix f.e. X86 and 68k libs but you have a complete 68k install (the system libs are 68k versions from Aros). So there is no danger to destroy something by overwriting X86 (or PPC) system libs.
-
"and in fact if I install 68k software using Installer will it install files over AROS native files?" I do not understand. For software it is feeling like a normal 68k environment and it is no problem to install 68k software there. I do not know the 68k integration in Icaros but when it is similar to WinUAE then you work in your own environment and not mixing it with the X86 outside world.
To my understanding I could run (almost) any 68k software from AROS desktop just by doubleclicking on its icon. I dont care what executes the software in the background as long as it feels like native one sharing clipboard, screens, whatever.
You cannot destroy Windows by installing amiga-software. All other concepts would be extremely dangerous. You cannot mix X86 and 68k libs.
On Amithlon you can ;)
@tmhgm
They are UAE emulation boxes. On the other hand as long as emulation boxes are hidden under the hood it doesnt matter how it is implemented.
But indeed it is not seamless and transparent like it is in MOS/OS4. To AROS users 68k support is running 68k software directly from Wanderer, to OS4/MOS user 68k support is installing 68k components as part of your system.
-
But that propably only works because you have PPC. I do not think that you can do the same with ARM or X86.
-
yes that is what I meant. It is a different environment, a directory on your HD
-
It works like RuninUAE on OS4, but it's not the same as JIT integration in MOS/OS4.
Indeed, AROS plays in a different league (never said "worse" league, just *different*). I haven't got anything against AROS at all, it's just that it follows a different philosophy (grown through anarchy and lack of management), and as a result it's simply not as usable as OS4/MorphOS is to many Amigans, since they will expect both more and different. It's a cool "research" project though (in its anarchistic, unguided way), and I think it proved useful for picking up a few MorphOS components in the early days... ;)
-
They are UAE emulation boxes. On the other hand as long as emulation boxes are hidden under the hood it doesnt matter how it is implemented.
Yes, like two applications running on two separate computers (with separate OS code), instead of the two applications running in the same environment.
-
both "philosophies" have advantages and disadvantages. The mixture of 68k and PPC sometimes creates problems that can be avoided by not mixing both. And as far as I know this direct mixing only works because of using PPC and so making it even more difficult to change to another platform. So both ideas are not better or worse, they are different with advantages and disadvantages.
The main advantage (what I have read) of direct integration like on MOS/AOS is that 68k environment directly make use of improvements of the new libs and it should run a little faster. But for me (when I developed the distribution) it would have been a nightmare because the main libs change all the time, there are different versions of different distributions used (propably not everyone update it immediately so i would need to test it everywhere) and there are different processors (68k, ARM, X86). Now i have a defined environment.
-
I have both OS', and I'd have to say that MorpHOS is more polished and less prone to crash.
On supported hardware it is also more reliable during installation.
That said, I like the direction AROS is taking with 3D support.
-
I do not use MorphOS but I am sure that it is more polished. Aros is opensource so it is a kind of "creative chaos" :-). But it is going in the right direction (from my view) and it is a matter of time till it is as usable as MorphOS.
-
I use both MorphOS and AROS, but there is a huge difference between them when it comes to stability. AROS is nowhere near compared to the stability level of MorphOS.
Zune is still lacking a lot of functionality to be on par level (well even to MUI3-level)
And Wanderer (frankly) really sucks compared to Ambient.
This is my POW as a user of both systems.
But I do like AROS and I do follow its steps when there is bigger changes.
I also try to support it with my own programs since the API is of a kind I really like =)
-
I dont know what the fuss is over with MorphOS... Whats so special about it, reminds me of a Mac OS?
-
First do you use a distribution or nightly build?
Then it seems that stability strongly depends on used (and supported) hardware. I use it combined with Linux and will use it heavily in the next days to see how is the stability. Zune update is in work (2 bounties).
And Scalos is planned to replace wanderer.
So you speak of this moment but in opensource all rapidly changes (what I like :-) )
In the next days i want to finish the 68k distribution you already know and start with a linux hosted distribution (installable in linux-distributions)
-
i think this discussion is sensless. i dont know mos, but aros is most certainly well behind. first thing wee need a reasonable redistributable desktop, be it scalos, i hope it will not expose major bugs.
although aros is a perfect meeting ground for us all.
-
I ordered Mac Mini PPC G4 and downloaded MorphOS. I should be installing MorphOS into my MacMini and turn this system into MorphOS only OS. I will register for MorphOS too. I think they whole interface and system is sexy and it is way ahead of AmigaOS 4.1 and get the feeling of AmigaOS 4.1 and be advance!
-
I am sure it is a nice OS and you will not regret it...
-
I want to test the new scalos version in the next days. Wanderer is certainly not a perfect solution but the situation changes every month (of course improves :-) ). Wanderer will be replaced and Zune updated to be there on par with AOS and MOS.
-
I dont know what the fuss is over with MorphOS... Whats so special about it, reminds me of a Mac OS?
There is nothing special about it. MacOS on Apple PowerBook hardware is better for too many reasons to mention them there.
Currently Amiga.org is down on visitors/traffic, so two-three fans can generate enough fuss about whatever they want. Probably the fans mentioned above are the main reasons for the low traffic, but that's another topic.
-
In regards to the 68k intergration on x86, while it does share somethings in common with something like RunInUAE or EUAE-Load it also has the ability to make it appears apps are running natively on AROS. Windows will be AROS windows, you have aros menus for 68k software, you can run 68k software on its own screens, and so on and so forth.
I think a lot of the confusion surrounding it, is because to be honest its somewhat cumbersome to set-up properly so people give up half way through with a misleading impression. Yes its different to how os4 and mos'es 68k intergration works, but it gives a broader compatibility and really, how many 68k libs does a person use/want to use on os4/mos apart from those that are needed for specific software (in which case aros is also covered has).
Not saying its better or worse, but as far as "NG" systems go I personally dont think 68k implementation should be a focus, so good enough is good enough.
-
I think a lot of the confusion surrounding it, is because to be honest its somewhat cumbersome to set-up properly so people give up half way through with a misleading impression. Yes its different to how os4 and mos'es 68k intergration works, but it gives a broader compatibility and really, how many 68k libs does a person use/want to use on os4/mos apart from those that are needed for specific software (in which case aros is also covered has).
Using any 68k library from an X86 program isn't that important. Allowing the 68k programs access to the network, hard drive, cdrom etc is. Being able to run a 68k ftp server for example and having it indistinguishable from an x86 ftp server when you connect to it. Sound and graphics as well should be integrated, so either type of software can open screens and play sounds.
Nice to have would be one workbench where iconified apps will appear no matter whether they are ppc or 68k.
Even better would be allowing x86 apps to access 68k datatypes and vice versa (I'm not entirely sure if this is possible, but it's a well defined interface so it might be possible to create a thunking layer). The same for xpk.
-
the idea is nice and it would be great to have it. On WinUAE you can include "PC-drives" at startup but I do not know if that is possible in Aros (Janus-UAE) too
-
combining datatypes (or other components) is certainly not possible. Only if you could use 68k multiview from Aros X86 as preference (instead of the X86 version). But I do not know if that is possble.
-
Yeah, you can share drives and cdrom, etc. Just need to add the device to the janus config file. Different programs can also have their own screens regardless of whether theyre 68k or x86 aros native. Using some 68k dataypes with x86 aros apps could be handy I guess though.
-
is it possible that you use Multiview 68k instead of the X86 version when you klick on f.e. a graphic file? (When you are in Aros X86)
-
I dont know what the fuss is over with MorphOS... Whats so special about it, reminds me of a Mac OS?
For me it reminds advanced AmigaOS. Luckily not Mac OS *shrug*.
-
I bought Mac Mini G4 it is arriving soon, I am going to have fun trying out MorphOS now.
-
In short I will say this.
MorphOS feels like a polished commercial project that only gets better with each release. It feels like the next step in Amiga OS progression and is fully configurable. So for instance if you don't like Mac OS then you can configure the new Mac like prefs to work like they did on Workbench. Likewise no one is forcing you to use BoingIconBar. So as far as being Mac like, that's where it ends. Everything else behaves like an Amiga with a form of Magellen installed.
AROS: feels like a ssslllloooowwwllly evolving hobby/toy OS with a few cool bells and whistles to lure you in, but under the hood it can be temperamental, flakey, and crash happy, not to mention that unlike MorphOS rather than feeling like an evolution from Workbench 3.1, it feels like a major step backwards. One release may fix things, the next breaks them and so forth. Unlike MorphOS or Haiku, there does not seem to be a unified strategy amongst developers as to where to take it next. Though again, as I said before it is free and maybe in 5 to 10 years it may become more matured And will able to be used as a serious dedicated OS, but as for now I stick it in the ReactOS camp...
...a nice dream for another day.
-
Comparing AROS and MOS is a little unfair. Both are good in their own rights.
MOS has the luxury of being a for pay product. While I doubt that is making anyone rich, even a little income can be a great motivator. MOS also has the luxury of having a certain select number of machines it'll run on. While it'll run on a lot of PPC Mac's, I'm sure developing it for known, consistent hardware bases is a hell of a lot easier than the piecemeal "whatever I put together" approach that AROS has to contend with. I haven't, and likely won't ever register MOS due to problems with select members of the community. A community I would assuredly need to deal with at some time. It is a hobby OS - the support structure involves me posting on forums and such, and I'm not going to pay for that pleasure when even just 1-2 of them are just abhorrent to deal with. Hate to paint a whole fence with one brush like that, but it is true for me. It only takes one turd in the swimming pool for me to not want to stick my toe in the shallow end.
AROS is a tremendous product in its own right, and undoubtedly gets the short end of the stick a lot of the time, even from guys like me. I toy with AROS quite a bit lately, but admittedly I don't use it all that much because of the select hardware it'll run on, and I certainly can't expect them to code drivers for graphics cards that are released every 10 weeks.
I see both as a labor of love, really - but there is absolutely zero doubt MOS is a more polished product from the users end. I've had great luck with MOS, and it supports legacy programs extremely well. If AROS could run on all my machines, I'd use it a lot more. The machine I have AROS on also runs as a Amithlon box, which between AROS and Amithlon I actually get more use out of the Amithlon side of that machine.
-
Hi,
I've read several times from the blue smurf propaganda department that MorphOS is so way ahead of AROS. Care to elaborate?
I am an AROS developer and find all these 'my amiga-like OS is better then your amiga-like OS' discussions counterproductive. Unfortunately some people here think it is a very important discussion.
I can't speak for all AROS devs but IMO as an AROS developer I find people who use AROS to brag to other amigans don't get what AROS is about. I am developing AROS for the whole amiga community and everybody who wants to use my code is free to do so. Don't mind if he is a classic OS, OS4, MOS or AROS user and/or developer. The only thing I ask is to obey the open source nature of the code.
greets,
Staf.
-
P.S. I am not paid by the MorphOS devs to spread propaganda, my stance is that of an alt OS user who has high hopes for both options.
-
A very good (and refreshing) attitude to have, Fats. It astonishes me how people are so willing to bad mouth all the other Amiga-like OS variants other than their particular choice. Different strokes for different folks.
We're all on the same boat with this hobby, but some people still seem hell bent to drill holes in the bow of the very boat they are sailing on, effectively sinking everyone, including themselves.
-
I am an AROS developer and find all these 'my amiga-like OS is better then your amiga-like OS' discussions counterproductive. Unfortunately some people here think it is a very important discussion.
I can't speak for all AROS devs but IMO as an AROS developer I find people who use AROS to brag to other amigans don't get what AROS is about. I am developing AROS for the whole amiga community and everybody who wants to use my code is free to do so. Don't mind if he is a classic OS, OS4, MOS or AROS user and/or developer. The only thing I ask is to obey the open source nature of the code.
greets,
Staf.
A very good (and refreshing) attitude to have, Fats. It astonishes me how people are so willing to bad mouth all the other Amiga-like OS variants other than their particular choice. Different strokes for different folks.
We're all on the same boat with this hobby, but some people still seem hell bent to drill holes in the bow of the very boat they are sailing on, effectively sinking everyone, including themselves.
Thank god!! Sometimes comments like these are like an oasis in the desert. Try as I might I really can't bend my poor little head around the "My OS rulez, urs suxxxx!" attitude, always reminds me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=gb_qHP7VaZE
-
Thank god!! Sometimes comments like these are like an oasis in the desert. Try as I might I really can't bend my poor little head around the "My OS rulez, urs suxxxx!" attitude, always reminds me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=gb_qHP7VaZE
Well, I can understand how you feel, but I'd have to back up Xdelusion's statements.
MorphOS is polished enough to rely on and AROS is interesting, and even fun, but not reliable (sorry Staf).
-
I follow AROS developments, but its still not ready for me to make my primary usage platform, like I used an Amiga back in the early 90s in place of unix variants and windows. I don't have a machine that runs MorphOS, but as far as I'm aware from what I've read....
Graphics wise, MorphOS has video overlay and some hardware accelerated alpha channel aware graphics functions implemented which are missing or incompletely implemented in AROS. I'm not sure which are HIDD/driver features, and which are higher levels, but it will be nice to see AROS continue to improve in these areas.
MorphOS has commercial quality Poseidon USB and TurboPrint printers support. Other areas AROS is slightly lagging in.
MorphOS allows partitions greater than 128GB with their newer SFS, while AROS is lagging in Amiga style native file systems that support the larger disks of today, unless you partition into many slices.
MorphOS has had better MUI and GUI theme integration system wide.
Probably better console and text editor implementations.
AROS has been improving much in the past couple of years, but still has a ways to go. The m68k-amiga emulation environment probably needs some more hooks into the native environment and a gui-less AROS kickstart rom workbench program that just communicates to the aros-native one to do its work, with a single shared mui/theme prefs between the two, so a user never needs to see a second disconnected GUI that behaves differently than the native environment.
-
Sometimes I wonder what you guys actually DO on your Amiga likes.
(Coders aside of course, I can clearly see why you are into them)
For me none of the Amiga-likes are good enough yet for heavy work.
Simply because for me the applications & OS are equally important.
The Amiga like OS:es all either lack processing power or applications
that I need. Dpaint simply doesn't cut it for me anymore. :)
Sure all three are good enough for browsing playing mp3's chatting etc. etc.
but that's only a small percentage of my computer usage. And I got tired of
playing lots of old games too.
Because of my history I have a preference for Amiga like OS'es so I look forward to
the day I could have both worlds. Phoenixconsole's Linux/AROS hybrid could eventually
be what I'm looking for.
So do keep on fighting in your sanboxes about who's better than the other for all I care.
I don't see many differences.
-
I completely agree, as does (probably) most people who has MorphOS experience coming in contact with AROS.
Anyway, since you already gave such a good answer, I'm going to dedicate my post entirely to speculations! :) Maybe the future way forward for MorphOS will be to abandon the integrated, seamless 68k emulation at some point, together with the ambition to maintain the API as tight to the original Amiga OS API as they do today, maybe changes will be necessary at some point, if you are to make a jump to a different architecture/ISA. While it would lead to some sacrifices (turning it more into AROS, but still more than that), it could also lead to many great things, like a better HW platform, true SMP, true MP, true 64-bit, etc.
Then you would have to run the old Amiga apps through UAE or whatever, like they do on AROS, maybe that will be good enough on a x86 machine (it's not much fun on PPC). It will be a completely different manner than what we are used to on MorphOS (or OS4) today, it won't be integrated, it wont be as seemless, it's a different philosophy on "Amiga backwards compatibility" altogether, but although the thought might be a bit shocking to us at first, it seems to be enough for AROS people? Anyway, it wouldn't stop by just becoming a new "AROS Copy", since most new (and most interesting) MorphOS SW are in PPC, and is still maintained and could probably be ported to a new MorphOS "v4.0" architecture without greater troubles. Some good SW has even been brought under the MorphOS Team's wings for integration into the MorphOS package, and I think this strategy might continue.
So MorphOS would (probably) still have most of its native SW stack available, but you would have to run Amiga apps in the AROS way. MorphOS will of course still have its unique polished look and feel, the same features (and more), the feeling of a real, usable desktop, etc from MUI4, Ambient, etc, not anything like AROS. And somehow I doubt the MorphOS Team will ever settle with running MorphOS in some process on top of another OS (as they seem putting a lot of pride into building a complete OS themselves)? And as a result, it could have a better HW platform, true SMP, true MP, true 64-bit, etc, a package completely new to Amiga, a "2nd Next Generation" (meaning Third of course :lol:, "3D miga"), which neither AROS or OS4 could match. But who knows, these things are *highly* hypothetical speculations, and might not happen at all (though they have been suggested by some MorphOS developers as one of several plausible ways to a future). I guess we'll learn in time... :)
From what I read, I do believe this basically is the game plan.
On the one hand, I can honestly say that even if MorphOS wasn't backwards compatible (as in not having to rely on some half assed WinUAE wanna be, but being able to install and run classic apps natively), I would cringe, but I can also say that the OS is awesome enough on it's own that I would still use it and still consider it Amiga in spirit, much like I do with Haiku which has NOTHING to do with Amiga except for that "in spirit" it feels like a continuation of the technology I have grown to love over the past couple of decades.
The only thing that worries me is that I don't see to many new software releases coming out. A stand alone OS that may at some point no longer support the MASSIVE software library from yesterday would suffer without a slew of new and original apps to replace the ones we had. ImageFX comes to mind.
Likewise, as you have said, UAE is not quite as exciting as it is on x86, though as it stands, unless you are running WinUAE, the experience still isn't the greatest. Sure you can run classic non-PPC games from disk images, and that it does well, but when it comes to running a virtual environment or integrating the emulation into the OS itself...
Well I'll just say that UAE is still lacking majorly in that department and the experience is NO WHERE near at good as using a real Amiga, or the MorphOS method for that matter (even with the added ability to emulate the old chip sets which is primarily just for old games anyhow).
UAE cuts off support for classic PPC apps and games, it wastes valuable resources, and again, if the OS it is running on is not stable, then the emulation is not going to be stable (though stability is not an issue MorphOS suffers from).
On top of that, I must once again state that no version of UAE can compare to WinUAE, and that's just sad because that means that if we want to emulate classic Amiga and do it well, we have to use the OS that many of use avoided for all these years. I mean wasn't it our loathing for Windows and Mac that helped inspire so many of us to chose Amiga in the first place?
Granted, I really hope things get better for the non WinUAE varients of UAE, but so far the progress has been TERRIBLY SLOW!!!!!!! And I can only imagine that bringing JIT to PPC UAE is only going to take longer, but then if MorphOS goes to ARM, won't JIT have to be ported to ARM too?!?!
All in all I don't like this idea. I have been looking for modern(ish) hardware that I could score at a cheap price, and be able to run a large chunk of my more resoure intensive classic Amiga apps on, and until my eMac died, despite it's limited resources, has been the answer to my praryers! I would only hope that in the future that the MorphOS team would strive to maintain classic support on what ever new hardware that they may be targetting, for as long as possible. I like not needing Amiga rom images, I like not having to load up an emulator, I like being able to run my old software as if it were native, and it does not bother me in the least that I am not able to play the old games without emulation because of the chip set because when you are gaming, you are not using the OS, so I could really care less. It's when I'm running classic apps that I don't want to be running an emulator.
As for that handful of classic Apps like OctaMED S.S. that MorphOS does not run (and OS 4 does for what ever reason), I can always resort to using Amithlon, which to me, was the prefered way of taking Amiga to the future in regards to using the x86 family of processors. It still pains me deeply that Amiga Inc. (Bill) killed the project off.
Anyhow, there is my UAE rant, and why I prefer MorphOS like it is. Backwards compatible. Though again, by the time all this takes place, we'll probably be at version 4.x which I'm sure is going to be VERY impressive, and I'm sure that when 3.x comes out, developers will get excited again and will begin to start coding fresh new apps and games for it.
Besides the FPGA and Natami should be out some day, so even if my classic Amigas die some day, I'll have those hardware platforms to consider for high end Amigaing. :)
On a final note, one comparison I can make between AROS and MorphOS is with FPSE. I was actually able to get the MorphOS port to out perform the AROS port that was running on a 2.6 Dual Core Intel Machine with GeForce Graphics, 2Gb RAM, etc. Ironically the MorphOS port was running on my crappy little eMac with 1Gb or RAM, a 1.2Ghz PPC CPU, and classic built in ATI graphics with 32Mb RAM. All using the same exact settings at that, go figure...
And for the note, I am not here to bash AROS and start the (My Amiga OS is better than your Amiga OS) war. I am just stating the facts from what I have experienced, having gone into both OS' with high hopes. On that note I wish ALL Amiga varients the best of luck. I hope the devs from all four camps continue to work together and help each other benefit from their knowledge and experience. If it were not my love for these OS's then I would not bother to write and complain when one of them or all of them fail to live up to my expectations. ;)
-
And not to sound all pro MorphOS and anti-AROS again, but...
MorphOS is perfectly fine with your USB drives. It won't freak out, write slow as hell to it, nothing. And again if your USB drive is formatted to NTFS, not a problem.
Kind of an important thing in today's computing world where we like to put all our movies and musick on such devices. And on that note, I must say that FAB's port of Mplayer rivals all other ports I've used, and I'm not just talking Amiga OS varients. The user interface is sublime!!!
I won't even get into his version of OWB. ;)
-
MorphOS is polished enough to rely on and AROS is interesting, and even fun, but not reliable (sorry Staf).
NP, I think most AROS devs are well aware of the current shortcomings of AROS but I do think we have to potential to overcome a lot them quite fast.
It's just the old ethernal infighting in the amiga community that annoys me; and I have to admit this thread has been one of the less loaded once.
greets,
Staf.
-
BOH... Now that's a game worth installing ArOS for!!!
I almost forgot to mention it. :)
-
I work on my own linux hosted distribution. It is really cool to start Aros from KDE and it is surprising fast. I am looking forward to see Broadway X with integrated Linux Apps too.
-
I do not know if you understand me why I prefer Aros. For me it is most important that it is free. You can take and combine what you like. You can change or add functionality. You must not ask any person or group for permission. And it has a real dynamic. The more people think like you the faster development is. And of course you do not need to invest huge sums in new hardware or buy old and used hardware. You can use what you already have.
It is just fun :-) if all is already perfect is not important because you know it is only a matter of time. And you are a part of it...
-
NP, I think most AROS devs are well aware of the current shortcomings of AROS but I do think we have to potential to overcome a lot them quite fast.
It's just the old ethernal infighting in the amiga community that annoys me; and I have to admit this thread has been one of the less loaded once.
greets,
Staf.
Actually Staf, long term AROS may surpass all the other NG OS'.
It has the strength of a larger developer base and its open architecture.
Should a major OS4 developer burn out (or a few MorphOS developers) the other two NG OS' could potentially be devastated.
-
Hi,
I've read several times from the blue smurf propaganda department that MorphOS is so way ahead of AROS. Care to elaborate?
Who cares what others say? Test it out yourself. A x86 is easy to grab, some PowerMac as well (if you happen to not like MorphOS dump it off again to ebay). AROS is freely available, MorphOS Demo as well. The good thing about AROS and MorphOS is that the hurdles to get a 1st hand experience are pretty low and nothing's better than a 1st hand experience.
-
I dont know what the fuss is over with MorphOS... Whats so special about it, reminds me of a Mac OS?
It take just 5 minutes to get a clue about MorphOS, i.e. read http://via.i-networx.de/wim.htm
-
I'm eager to try out the upcoming Linux/AROS distro that is supposed to come with Wine.
Sounds like an interesting approach.
-
Who cares what others say? Test it out yourself. A x86 is easy to grab, some PowerMac as well (if you happen to not like MorphOS dump it off again to ebay). AROS is freely available, MorphOS Demo as well. The good thing about AROS and MorphOS is that the hurdles to get a 1st hand experience are pretty low and nothing's better than a 1st hand experience.
lol I think Mazze knows that. ;)
@Mazze
Trouble maker.
As for the question. My Morphos box is the perfect size to level my dryer :P Other than that who cares. I use them both I however prefer my AROS boxes even tho they aren't as polished. To quote a friend of mine finished OS' bore me.
-
lol I think Mazze knows that. ;)
@Mazze
Trouble maker.
As for the question. My Morphos box is the perfect size to level my dryer :P Other than that who cares. I use them both I however prefer my AROS boxes even tho they aren't as polished. To quote a friend of mine finished OS' bore me.
That's why I let you guys lure me in haiku!
But, then again, its also why Linux bugs me. Its never quite finished.
-
@XDelusion
From what I read, I do believe this basically is the game plan.
...
All in all I don't like this idea. I have been looking for modern(ish) hardware that I could score at a cheap price, and be able to run a large chunk of my more resoure intensive classic Amiga apps on, and until my eMac died, despite it's limited resources, has been the answer to my praryers! I would only hope that in the future that the MorphOS team would strive to maintain classic support on what ever new hardware that they may be targetting, for as long as possible. I like not needing Amiga rom images, I like not having to load up an emulator, I like being able to run my old software as if it were native, and it does not bother me in the least that I am not able to play the old games without emulation because of the chip set because when you are gaming, you are not using the OS, so I could really care less. It's when I'm running classic apps that I don't want to be running an emulator.
...
Anyhow, there is my UAE rant, and why I prefer MorphOS like it is. Backwards compatible. Though again, by the time all this takes place, we'll probably be at version 4.x which I'm sure is going to be VERY impressive, and I'm sure that when 3.x comes out, developers will get excited again and will begin to start coding fresh new apps and games for it.
Thank you for your long and well written post! :)
I agree that this route would be a big and non-trivial mental step of acceptance a MorphOS user would have to take, *should* it happen (which again is highly hypothetical, and something in the future anyway). There is a beauty in MorphOS's way of simply not caring if the binaries are 68k or PPC but treats them just the same, allowing them to truly work together in the same environment, they all using the very same resources, arexx communicating with them and binding them together (arexx being 68k itself even), etc, etc.
1) But if you want this to remain unchanged in the future, I think you must sacrifice the possibility of moving to a different architecture (due to big/little endian problems (at least on x86, not sure about ARM) *together* with the enormous effort it is to write a good 68k JIT native for that new ISA, which again would be pointless (at least on x86) due to endianness issues), and by that you will sacrifice the chance of having MorphOS running on future proof HW (the PPC is dead, and everything tied to it is bound to die as well). You would also sacrifice the possibility of having true SMP, true MP, 64-bit, etc, i.e. many of the things people have been crying for for several years now. You would also sacrifice the only chance for MorphOS of reaching a wider audience, outside this shrinking little community, or to even survive more than a couple of years ahead from now.
2) The flip side of the coin is that if you want to move the MorphOS platform to an architecture that still has a pulse and is future proof (meaning a chance of long term survival of MorphOS, the PPC is dead), and if you want to harvest the benefits of multiple CPU cores, memory protection, 64-bit, etc, then you are in for a break from the past. It means a new endian model and an Amiga API that is different in maybe few but way too fundamental ways for even trying to uphold any kind of backwards compatibility to the old Amiga API environment, a new set of API's, rules and guides would apply. The old (and current) 3.1 API centric applications have prerequisites, a way of function, and makes assumptions of their surrounding environment that simply wouldn't be true anymore. It would be a "3rd generation" system, and it won't be free of sacrifices to go there. To a user, it would look and feel the same, have much of the same features, the same Ambient, the same applications in a recompiled version (mostly, at least). It wouldn't at all be like the Mac's migration from OS9 to OSX, not even close, it would still be MorphOS with most of its advantages intact (and a couple of major *new* advantages on top of that). But we would probably have to settle with something like AROS is doing today for the 68k emulation part. And personally, I honestly think that would be an *acceptable* price to pay. And as has been construed by many people in this thread (including you), MorphOS is about so much more than just its superior 68k emulation...! :)
So the way I see it, there are basically two choices, leading in two different directions, and there are sacrifices to them both. Question is - which one do we prefer?
-
I am happy that the discussion here is ok and not that "high emotional" :-)
I can not decide what MorphOS users (and the core developers) want only give my personal view. Here X86 (including Apple) dominates the market, most people (including ex-amigians) have one at home. ARM is niche (expecially for the new devices/tablets) but it has no meaning on the desktop. So the only logical choice can be to take X86. Then it would be the question how to get there (example would be to work together with the Aros community). It might be that the integration of 68k is now more tight than it is possible with Janus-UAE but i think it is a small price compared with sticking on a oldfashioned hardware. There was cooperation between Aros and MorphOS in the past on a smaller scale but it could be much extended and both sides would benefit. And I am personally convinced that Aros will reach "MorphOS-Level" with or without help of the MorphOS-Community. But working together would help both camps.
-
I am happy that the discussion here is ok and not that "high emotional" :-)
Less people suffering from Amiga Persecution Complex (http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/A/Amiga-Persecution-Complex.html) trying desperately to defend outright moronic decisions without any rational arguments whatsoever... ;) :lol:
ARM is niche (expecially for the new devices/tablets) but it has no meaning on the desktop.
While ARM indeed has its application-specific uses today, its volume and market is huge, it has many benefits compared to x86, its areas of use is growing rapidly (it's "kicking upwards"), and its "meaning" on the desktop might very well change within 2-3 years, with the introduction of ARMv8 and nVidias announced "x86 killers".
So the only logical choice can be to take X86.
Agreed, especially if the plan is still to persue the "MorphOS is Desktop Only" route, I wrote something about this (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=683697&postcount=210) a few weeks ago.
Anyway, depending on how they go ahead with this new developments, maybe it will be possible to support *both* architectures without any bigger troubles? I mean, if they shift focus to "Ease of Portability" from "Evolved Amiga features while maintaining excellent and seemless 68k backwards compatibility"? Some extra work would have to be put into SDK development etc, and maybe they will *mostly focus* on x86 for the desktop but could accept deals for more or less embedded ARM based applications without greater effort, should the opportunity arise? Will need work, yes, but it will be much easier after having gone through the changes needed to get to "3rd Generation" anyway (i.e. any 68k by UAE in AROS style, and an evolved environment/API more flexible than the rigid, old 3.1). Anyway, they are apparently using a virtual environment (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59765) (if you haven't done it yet, you should browse through that first post, there are lots of cool info there) for this development, so they can work on development without even having a machine, and will be making the decision of which architecture to choose later on. IMHO, this sounds like a clever and flexible approach! :)
-
Well, I can understand how you feel, but I'd have to back up Xdelusion's statements.
MorphOS is polished enough to rely on and AROS is interesting, and even fun, but not reliable (sorry Staf).
That's true. I can see from a business point of view why people want features that differentiate themselves from the opposition, but I just think it works better if people go "hey your os has got that ace dancing monkeys feature and ours has the banjo-playing hippo, fancy a swap?". I think things like Fab's browser, ports from AROS and Cinammon writer, etc., just gives a win-win approach. I guess I'm so used to a collaborative approach in my work so it's kind of my default setting. There are quite a few people with more than one of the ng systems and I assume they don't have vehement arguments with themselves!
-
Less people suffering from Amiga Persecution Complex (http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/A/Amiga-Persecution-Complex.html) trying desperately to defend outright moronic decisions without any rational arguments whatsoever... ;) :lol:
You really can't see the irony of you saying this, can you? /me crawls back under a rock.
-
I read some time ago that there was a opensource project to emulate PPC on X86 but I do not find it (just a Mac-Emulator). For (old) PPC Applications there should be something like VirtualPC, for 68k Janus-UAE. 68k and PPC can be integrated but of course not so tight as now. Everything has its price.
-
you could differentiate even when you work together and have a common base. Ask the Gnome and KDE fans :-)
-
@ billyfish
There are many joints between MorphOS and AROS, there has been "cooperation" (MorphOS using AROS stuff, and returns the changes/improvements), and still is (WPA/WPA2 seems like one recent example?). As you say, porting MorphOS apps like Odyssey to AROS is a good thing, etc. But MorphOS developers are developing MorphOS, not AROS, and I think this will continue... ;)
Less people suffering from Amiga Persecution Complex (http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/A/Amiga-Persecution-Complex.html) trying desperately to defend outright moronic decisions without any rational arguments whatsoever... ;) :lol:
You really can't see the irony of you saying this, can you?
Actually no, since:
1) I don't suffer from Amiga Persecution Complex (the opposite actually, I have a complete and rational understanding of Amiga's (and MorphOS's) problems, and I'm at peace with that, there are even links in this page that proves it)
2) I'm trying to *expose* those outright moronic decisions...
3) ... *using* rational arguments!
So no, the only ironic thing here was your comment about irony... :lol:
/me crawls back under a rock.
Good! And stay there! :)
@ OlafS3
I read some time ago that there was a opensource project to emulate PPC on X86 but I do not find it (just a Mac-Emulator). For (old) PPC Applications there should be something like VirtualPC, for 68k Janus-UAE. 68k and PPC can be integrated but of course not so tight as now. Everything has its price.
I think a PPC emulator would cost more in effort than it would gain in reward; most PPC software is still maintained and can be recompiled, so it would probably only be a waste of time...?
-
when a PPC emulation is not needed then the change would be no big problem. I do not know how big is the difference between Aros and MorphOS API but as MorphOS seems to be very compatible to 31 and Aros is the reimplementation of 31 (+improvements) it should be not impossible (if there is the interest to go that way)
-
@ billyfish
There are many joints between MorphOS and AROS, there has been "cooperation" (MorphOS using AROS stuff, and returns the changes/improvements), and still is (WPA/WPA2 seems like one recent example?). As you say, porting MorphOS apps like Odyssey to AROS is a good thing, etc. But MorphOS developers are developing MorphOS, not AROS, and I think this will continue... ;)
True, but I think when it's worth the effort of developing something to be cross-platform you can start doing that the outset. Apps like YAM, SimpleMail, Odysssey, etc. exist for all 4 platforms. When you write code in a modular fashion, it's pretty easy to hive off the platform-specific bits.
I wish OS3.5/9 and OS4 had settled upon MUI rather than Reaction since IMHO it's way better. It's good that the port of Odyssey has brought the OS4 port of MUI up to spec and hopefully Zune can follow. Similarly I think DOpus being ported to all ng systems would be ace as, again in IMHO, I prefer it to what I've seen of the OS4 workbench, Wanderer and Ambient.
So how about a MUI/Zune & DOpus-based UI as a future basis for the NG systems? I'd like that!
Actually no, since:
1) I don't suffer from Amiga Prosecution Complex (the opposite actually, I have a complete and rational understanding of Amiga's (and MorphOS's) problems, and I'm at peace with that, there are even links in this page that proves it)
LOL, your Freudian slip betrays you! :-) I think you do suffer from "Amiga Prosecution Complex" :-)
2) I'm trying to *expose* those outright moronic decisions...
3) ... *using* rational arguments!
Rational arguments are great, using terms like "outright moronic" are the opposite.
-
I think the discussion here is more fact-based and rational than the discussions when "red" and "blue" are involved. There are already many ties between both camps and there could be a win-win situation for both without giving up all differences.
-
I think the discussion here is more fact-based and rational than the discussions when "red" and "blue" are involved. There are already many ties between both camps and there could be a win-win situation for both without giving up all differences.
Totally agree, I must admit the choice of processor concerns me less than the software available. I admire all of the OSes and I'd extend it to being not just how can MorphOS and AROS collaborate, but bring in OS4 and, heck, even OS 3 stuff with DOpus being a case in point. I still have Magellan and use DOpus 9 on my PC, great piece of software.
Hypothetically if you could draw up a wishlist of software/features taken from any of the OSes, or indeed new features, what springs to mind?
-
It's just the old ethernal infighting in the amiga community that annoys me; and I have to admit this thread has been one of the less loaded once.
greets,
Staf.
Once again, I couldn't agree more.
-
Features:
Aros:
I think the main advantages (between others) are that it is available for different hardware (X86, ARM, 68k and I think PPC) and even hosted (f.e. on Linux what is a nice option :-) ) and 3D support.
I try but I am no expert for AOS and MOS...
MorphOS:
MUI4
Ambient (or similar)
Poseidon (already in MorphOS and Aros)
and a lot more I do not know :-)
AOS:
I do not know much about AOS to say any features because I do not use it. I know that there are many components done different like Reaction instead of MUI, another USB-Stack...
3.1.:
Most things you can do in 3.1. you already can do in any of the NG-platforms. I think main advantage is the huge software-base, so tons of software :-)
What I think what should be there:
common drivers (USB, PCI)
cross-platform support (including hosted versions)
cross-plattform development tools
common software
API should be equal (as far as possible), GUI can be different (like KDE or Gnome)
-
I think you do suffer from "Amiga Prosecution Complex" :-)
:lol:
OK I get it now, "prosecution", "persecution" — English isn't my native language and some words *do* look kind of the same... :)
Rational arguments are great, using terms like "outright moronic" are the opposite.
Well, "moronic" is actually a very good (and rational) adjective for describing a strategy for platform building that involves $3,000 computers of 2007 level that offers little more than a $100 computer from 2004, believing this will lead to platform growth and a sustainable future, and getting upset when someone makes posts *in a forum* on how it *won't*! ;)
Anyway, meta discussions about discussions are off-topic in *any* thread (also in this one!), and it would be much better if you would stop this, or at least take it to AW.net where this is seems to be the norm. If you have arguments to counter mine about the A1X1K, bring it on (preferably in the now running thread that *is about* the A1X1K and not here), but please stop filling the forums with pointless discussions about the discussion, it only brings up the noise...
-
just ignore it. Here it is about relations between Aros and MorphOS and not X1000 or AOS
-
Is there a quick reference that shows all of these options and explains what they exactely are?
I haven't ever used anything except the original hardware (1000, 500, 2000, 1200 and 4000).
thanks
DLH
-
What options do you exactly mean?
Differences between the platforms?
-
Yes, like two applications running on two separate computers (with separate OS code), instead of the two applications running in the same environment.
Wrong. AmiBridge is a set of scripts which does a completely different things. When Janus coherency mode was not available, it opened a new UAE/Workbench session for every 68K program you launched, moreover restricting the screen resolution to AGA pal hi res. But once coherency mode was completed by Oliver, this model has been immediately abandoned and Amibridge just became a faster, easier way to integrate AmigaOS and KickStart files into the Icaros installation. Once this has been done, it also assists the user in setting up coherency mode correctly, in a semi-automated way. Done that, you can even run the Amiga M68K virtual machine inside AROS at every startup. It will just sit there until you run any 68K application, and then you'll see applications windows seamlessly integrated in the AROS workbench. You can move and resize them as you wish. Programs will run in a single, shared instance of UAE just like they ran on a single physical Amiga machine. M68K programs can then access to AROS partitions (with the only default limitation of read-only mode for system drive - but the user is free to change it) and read/save the same files. AROS and AmigaOS share the clipboard too, and this ensures there is enough communication between the two world to just forget about messing with 68k and x86 libraries in the same environment (I can't understand why you OS4/MOS people still continue considering this as a feature: I don't even want to imagine how many context-switches and bytecode translations are needed to use, in the same program, libraries written for totally different architectures like m68k and PPC, really!). In the end, I consider this approach safer and better than others, since M68K programs run in a coherent M68K environment, while x86 ones do the same on a coherent and well separed x86 one. User just will see little differences on the screen, due to different fonts used in the systems and maybe some slower refresh in M68K windows. But this is something they can quitely live with, counting they have paid nothing for the OS, less than 10 euros for the Amiga environment (last time I looked into Cloanto's site, Amiga Forever Value - which is perfect for Amibridge! - was priced € 9,99), and surely not € 2500 for the hardware (or maybe they did, but not with AROS in mind).
-
or nothing for both using Aros 68k :-) Thank you for explanation
-
I follow AROS developments, but its still not ready for me to make my primary usage platform, like I used an Amiga back in the early 90s in place of unix variants and windows. I don't have a machine that runs MorphOS, but as far as I'm aware from what I've read....
Graphics wise, MorphOS has video overlay and some hardware accelerated alpha channel aware graphics functions implemented which are missing or incompletely implemented in AROS. I'm not sure which are HIDD/driver features, and which are higher levels, but it will be nice to see AROS continue to improve in these areas.
MorphOS has commercial quality Poseidon USB and TurboPrint printers support. Other areas AROS is slightly lagging in.
MorphOS allows partitions greater than 128GB with their newer SFS, while AROS is lagging in Amiga style native file systems that support the larger disks of today, unless you partition into many slices.
MorphOS has had better MUI and GUI theme integration system wide.
Probably better console and text editor implementations.
AROS has been improving much in the past couple of years, but still has a ways to go. The m68k-amiga emulation environment probably needs some more hooks into the native environment and a gui-less AROS kickstart rom workbench program that just communicates to the aros-native one to do its work, with a single shared mui/theme prefs between the two, so a user never needs to see a second disconnected GUI that behaves differently than the native environment.
Perfect. I think this is exactly the kind of answers Mazze expected from this topic. You listed some "cons" AROS developers should look at in the future.
-
Wrong.
...
you'll see applications windows seamlessly integrated in the AROS workbench. You can move and resize them as you wish.
...
M68K programs can then access to AROS partitions
...
M68K programs run in a coherent M68K environment, while x86 ones do the same on a coherent and well separed x86 one. User just will see little differences on the screen
Maybe I don't understand, but from what you just said there, it pretty much sounded *exactly* what I meant when I said "like two applications running on two separate computers (with separate OS code), instead of the two applications running in the same environment", one host/AROS box, and one 68k box. You are talking about making it *look* like the same system in a purely visual/theme sense (and have access to a common clipboard), but in my view it's still a lot more like running WinUAE on a Windows7 machine (where the 68k part also can access the host systems file system, etc) than what both MorphOS and OS4 offers today, where you simply don't have any HW emulation or separate/shielded off "boxes" at all, but all binaries are run the same way, share the same memory space, the same resources, data, sheduling, messaging, arexx, *everything*, no matter if they are 68k or PPC, there simply is no difference at all (it *is* one and the same, not just visually so)!
Maybe that would be a necessary trade-off approach for MorphOS as well in the future (after an architecture jump), but there is a *vast* difference from what is here in MorphOS today, both in a practical/pragmatical manner, as well as in a philosophical manner.
-
yes that is right. It is 68k started as application so to say (hidden from the user) but not mixed with the host system like on MOS or MorphOS. More like a sandbox concept.
On Aros you have plenty of different architectures like X86, ARM, PPC, 68k and hosted options. I think it would be a nightmare when you could mix all the systems. That this is possible on MOS, AOS has certainly something to do with PPC. All has its price.
-
By the way...
Features:
Aros:
I think the main advantages (between others) are that (...) and 3D support.
I've read several times from the black furry propaganda department that 3D support in AROS is so way ahead. Care to elaborate?
-
the discussion was not about "my OS is better than ..." anymore. But if you want... Aros has full Mesa and Gallium3D support and MorphOS not. But MorphOS has a lot of features that Aros has not...
-
:lol:
OK I get it now, "prosecution", "persecution" — English isn't my native language and some words *do* look kind of the same... :)
No worries! :-) Believe me, your English is wayyyy better than my equal-second (more like equal last! :-)) languages; French and Greek!
-
Features:
Aros:
I think the main advantages (between others) are that it is available for different hardware (X86, ARM, 68k and I think PPC) and even hosted (f.e. on Linux what is a nice option :-) ) and 3D support.
I try but I am no expert for AOS and MOS...
MorphOS:
MUI4
Ambient (or similar)
Poseidon (already in MorphOS and Aros)
and a lot more I do not know :-)
I don't know either! Iggy, Itix and TMHG, what are the MorphOS features/software that stand out for you?
AOS:
I do not know much about AOS to say any features because I do not use it. I know that there are many components done different like Reaction instead of MUI, another USB-Stack...
Off the top of my head, the (admittedly not-perfect) shared object suppport, Timberwolf and QT are the ones that spring to my mind. I really like QT once you get your head around its extra declarations in C++.
3.1.:
Most things you can do in 3.1. you already can do in any of the NG-platforms. I think main advantage is the huge software-base, so tons of software :-)
Absolutely agree, so that implies 68k (and for games I would love AGA) emulation is really important.
What I think what should be there:
common drivers (USB, PCI)
cross-platform support (including hosted versions)
cross-plattform development tools
common software
API should be equal (as far as possible), GUI can be different (like KDE or Gnome)
Yup when you've used eclipse or visual c, it shows how our development tools are lacking. Even though I often stick with a test editor and a sheel, an easy to use debugger, etc. are worth their wait in gold. I use SAS/C on the 68k side, Codeblocks/Eclipse for Linux too. I know that OS4 has codebench, what are the options on MorphOS/AROS? I'm guessing they're gcc- and vbcc-based too?
But yes commonality across the API and for drivers can only be a good thing.
-
Greek as second language? Here most people take English (and French) as second language, some also spain. But greek is certainly seldom.
-
By the way...
I've read several times from the black furry propaganda department that 3D support in AROS is so way ahead. Care to elaborate?
Could you refrain from using the "furry" reference. :rofl:
-
I don't know either! Iggy, Itix and TMHG, what are the MorphOS features/software that stand out for you?
TinyGL with its support for many OpenGL commands is nice.
The Ambient desktop is a big improvement over other Amigoid desktop environments.
Trance JIT 68K interpretation to speed emulation.
Native support for the FAT filesystem.
HTML5 support in Odyssey(OWB).
Really fast boot times.
Quick support from the developers (Fab suggested a solution for a problem I was experiencing within OWB the same day I posted the inquiry).
Support for affordable hardware.
Reliable, crash free.
Plenty more...
-
Could you refrain from using the "furry" reference. :rofl:
Well, it is accurate after all:
http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Eric_W._Schwartz
;)
-
I don't know if morphos is ahead of aros but that seems to be what most people who have had or used both say... I really want to try MorphOS soon.
I never got to play with Morphos because every time I have extra money to buy a mac or something to run it on, something else comes up. I've been saying if they add g5 support I'm all in, I don't think I'd wait anymore.
I've stuck with aros for now because it runs on anything.
Yes Aros needs work, but its convienant, runs on anything and its free.
-
I don't know if morphos is ahead of aros but that seems to be what most people who have had or used both say... I really want to try MorphOS soon.
I never got to play with Morphos because every time I have extra money to buy a mac or something to run it on, something else comes up. I've been saying if they add g5 support I'm all in, I don't think I'd wait anymore.
I've stuck with aros for now because it runs on anything.
Yes Aros needs work, but its convienant, runs on anything and its free.
As soon as I receive my mac mini from USPS the first thing I will do is completely wipe clean the HD and install a fresh copy of MorphOS into the system and make it as main and only system for the MacMini.
I have couple of questions to ask:
1) Is there a MorphOS logo sticker that I can can put on top of the Apple Logo of my MacMini?
2) Does the OS update with new versions and are there still plans to constantly update the OS with latest patches, features, fixes, etc?
I am going to buy MorphOS officially but I just want to make sure that my money is not wasted if there are no plans on updating it. (I should have asked before buying the system, but oh well, I was in hype for MorphOS :knuddel:).
-
Wow. I didn't expect that much answers. Thank you all for your insightful replies.
The weak GUI is likely caused by the fact that most core developers are cross-compiling from Linux. For short tests a GUI with all whistles and bells isn't that important.
MUI lacks some features because we have to rewrite everything from scratch while MorphOS team has access to the MUI sources.
Stability: the Linux-hosted version is quite stable, so it must be the native drivers which cause troubles. I'm assuming that driver development is quite difficult because of the amount of available hardware and there is no native debugger.
Okey, we are a bit behind but you can already feel Kitty's breath :-)
-
Well, it is accurate after all:
http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Eric_W._Schwartz
;)
:rofl: yeah that is mildly disturbing... >.< however I wouldn't call AROS users/ trolls furies ;D
To be fair I wouldn't call morphos users smurfs either. :)
-
the discussion was not about "my OS is better than ..." anymore. But if you want... Aros has full Mesa and Gallium3D support and MorphOS not. But MorphOS has a lot of features that Aros has not...
I didnt mean it too seriously ;) Wondering how Mesa and Gallium3D in AROS would compare with TinyGL/Goa in MorphOS.
-
2) Does the OS update with new versions and are there still plans to constantly update the OS with latest patches, features, fixes, etc?
Yep. For instance we're currently in progress of finalizing MorphOS 3.0 release. We already have plans for 3.1, too.
-
To be fair I wouldn't call morphos users smurfs either. :)
Yeah, though at least smurfs have pants.
-
I didnt mean it too seriously ;) Wondering how Mesa and Gallium3D in AROS would compare with TinyGL/Goa in MorphOS.
I would say it's almost impossible to compare until either MorphOS gets an Nvidia driver or AROS gets a Gallium ATI driver. But my guess would be this. TinyGL/Goa is faster on the hardware it supports. However Mesa supports more recent versions of OpenGL and more advanced features.
-
Yeah, though at least smurfs have pants.
this is true. lol
-
I don't know either! Iggy, Itix and TMHG, what are the MorphOS features/software that stand out for you?
I dont know... I have been using MorphOS so many years now it is difficult think anything else. But maybe the most important software to me is MUI. I have always loved MUI and developed MUI software some 15 years now. Even console window in MorphOS is using MUI. Another is 68k compatibility in source and binary level without noticing difference. Third is GeekGadgets. Someone may find GeekGadgets cumbersome but I love it when I can run configure scripts from MorphOS shell and get my stuff done.
-
Personally I'm kind of hoping that the MorphOS team goes with ARM. I can only see good things coming from that (portability comes to mind), and apparently Microsoft seems to think so too. Despite the fact that I HATE that company, I still have to take notice when they step up and decide that the next incarnation of their OS must be written for ARM at well, and who knows, maybe after JIT gets ported over to PPC, the transistion to ARM won't be that difficult since ARM and PPC are said to be somewhat similiar...
...or so I heard.
Also, assuming MorphOS goes to ARM, and assuming ARM gets JIT and all that Jazz, perhaps the brilliant minds behind the MorphOS team will come up with a way to make it seem that we are still able to run our old Amiga programs natively, but in a way much differently than how it works on AROS. A way that feels less like a hack job....
And I apologize to those who have put tons of hard work into Janus, I know there are people who love it, but as for me, there is something about it that just don't seem quite right, though again, maybe it's just AROS itself in its current state.
@XDelusion
Thank you for your long and well written post! :)
I agree that this route would be a big and non-trivial mental step of acceptance a MorphOS user would have to take, *should* it happen (which again is highly hypothetical, and something in the future anyway). There is a beauty in MorphOS's way of simply not caring if the binaries are 68k or PPC but treats them just the same, allowing them to truly work together in the same environment, they all using the very same resources, arexx communicating with them and binding them together (arexx being 68k itself even), etc, etc.
1) But if you want this to remain unchanged in the future, I think you must sacrifice the possibility of moving to a different architecture (due to big/little endian problems (at least on x86, not sure about ARM) *together* with the enormous effort it is to write a good 68k JIT native for that new ISA, which again would be pointless (at least on x86) due to endianness issues), and by that you will sacrifice the chance of having MorphOS running on future proof HW (the PPC is dead, and everything tied to it is bound to die as well). You would also sacrifice the possibility of having true SMP, true MP, 64-bit, etc, i.e. many of the things people have been crying for for several years now. You would also sacrifice the only chance for MorphOS of reaching a wider audience, outside this shrinking little community, or to even survive more than a couple of years ahead from now.
2) The flip side of the coin is that if you want to move the MorphOS platform to an architecture that still has a pulse and is future proof (meaning a chance of long term survival of MorphOS, the PPC is dead), and if you want to harvest the benefits of multiple CPU cores, memory protection, 64-bit, etc, then you are in for a break from the past. It means a new endian model and an Amiga API that is different in maybe few but way too fundamental ways for even trying to uphold any kind of backwards compatibility to the old Amiga API environment, a new set of API's, rules and guides would apply. The old (and current) 3.1 API centric applications have prerequisites, a way of function, and makes assumptions of their surrounding environment that simply wouldn't be true anymore. It would be a "3rd generation" system, and it won't be free of sacrifices to go there. To a user, it would look and feel the same, have much of the same features, the same Ambient, the same applications in a recompiled version (mostly, at least). It wouldn't at all be like the Mac's migration from OS9 to OSX, not even close, it would still be MorphOS with most of its advantages intact (and a couple of major *new* advantages on top of that). But we would probably have to settle with something like AROS is doing today for the 68k emulation part. And personally, I honestly think that would be an *acceptable* price to pay. And as has been construed by many people in this thread (including you), MorphOS is about so much more than just its superior 68k emulation...! :)
So the way I see it, there are basically two choices, leading in two different directions, and there are sacrifices to them both. Question is - which one do we prefer?
-
Hi,
I've read several times from the blue smurf propaganda department that MorphOS is so way ahead of AROS. Care to elaborate?
Hi,
Well the only thing I can say since I have never used MorphOS is that any other type of OS used on a MAC has to be better, especially if it emulates Amiga OS as a fake copy.
I have used AROS on some of my PC's and never could get it to do anything important, so I took it off, as far of MorphOS, I have never used it so really don't know.
As far as Blue smurf propaganda, this is the first time I have heard of that, the old original smerf says if catch this blue smurf, he will be arrested and thrown in jail for copying a smerf. This is completely outrageous.
One thing AROS has over MorphOS is that sooner or later those old PPC Macs are going to die, disappear or run out, then all that programming no matter how good it was will be for naught.
AROS on the other hand if it continues to be programmed on MODERN DAY COMPUTERS WITH INTEL OR AMD CHIPS will survive and surpass the people who are using old outdated PPC Macs. Face it Apple (who all you Apple fan boys say is so good) got rid of the old PPC chips years ago and went to dual core Intel chips ( a semi modern but outdated chip today).
So my unbiased opinion is AROS wins in the long run by an Intel chip.
As good as MorphOS? don't know, only the future will tell, but I don't think I will live that long to see it as fast as everyone is programming these two OS's.
I will use Linux as my main OS, and Windows to run games (anyone who trusts windows for anything else are fools). I can afford to lose my games (although it ticks me off) and reload them, but to lose my data like music, pictures, home movies, tax reports etc. would really hurt.
So can your OS keep data?
I wrote this before reading takemehomegrandma's report, and I totally agree with her, since I said basically the same thing as she did.
smerf
-
I think you must sacrifice the possibility of moving to a different architecture (due to big/little endian problems (at least on x86, not sure about ARM)
ARM is bi-endian meaning it can be switched. NO i'm not making a joke...
-
ARM is bi-endian meaning it can be switched. NO i'm not making a joke...
IIRC most modern ARM cores only support Little Endian mode now, it wasn't a very used feature and I'm sure it is easier to interface with devices in little endian due to the ubiquity of x86.
-
IIRC most modern ARM cores only support Little Endian mode now, it wasn't a very used feature and I'm sure it is easier to interface with devices in little endian due to the ubiquity of x86.
even in the data? maybe just code or address...
-
Here's a question, could some sort of FPGA based USB 3 or PCI expansion board be created to substitute for the lack of the classic chip set on future MorphOS hardware (in theory).
If possible, AROS and OS 4 could benefit from this as well.
-
And while I too can see a day when we might need an ISA change, right now MorphOS is doing fine using the current PPC hardware supported.
Yeah, I'd like to have G5 support, but a 1.5GHz G4 performs pretty good. (and its really cheap).
I''m about to move from my 1.53GHz accelerated Quicksilver to a newer MDD (which I'll also overclock), I've replaced my R200 video card with an R300 (which should soon have 3D support), and my other cards will move right over (USB2.0, SBLive).
So, for a fraction of the cost, I've got a system that performs better then a SAM (almost as fast as an X1000).
-
Nice nice nice!!!
What's your bus speed?
-
Nice nice nice!!!
What's your bus speed?
Hi,
My bus speed is a little bit slower than an 18 wheel truck traveling on the interstates, this is usually around 70 mph.
smerf
-
Hi,
My bus speed is a little bit slower than an 18 wheel truck traveling on the interstates, this is usually around 70 mph.
smerf
VW?
-
Nice nice nice!!!
What's your bus speed?
Currently 133MHz, but as of next Monday 167MHz.
I'm also sitting on a couple of R400 based cards that have been modified to work in a G4 Mac.
-
IIRC most modern ARM cores only support Little Endian mode now, it wasn't a very used feature and I'm sure it is easier to interface with devices in little endian due to the ubiquity of x86.
even in the data? maybe just code or address...
It's true that ARM is "bi-endian", at least in some "higher/application" level sense (and so are some PPC chips AFAIK), even modern ARM cores:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CPU_architectures
However, this has been debated many times over at morphzone.org (nestled into those very long threads that literary goes on for years, where it's impossible to find it now, at least I have trouble, but I found this!), and the ARM was developed as little endian from the beginning, and it seems it still operates like this *internally*:
"ARM doesn't support Big Endian in anything but a bullet-point feature sense. The same is true of PowerPC processors which supposedly support Little Endian operation. The basic promise made in supporting these features is that it reorders bus transactions so they fit the right data format - memory is laid out in Big Endian, but when you load it into a register, it is flipped automatically and in the register on your Little Endian processor, you have Little Endian data. On PowerPC, you can fudge this manually without changing modes at all if you know the data format ahead of time (stwbrx, lwbrx). I'm not sure what the equivalent is on ARM.. maybe it doesn't have it, maybe it does. Instruction opcodes are still Little Endian in ARM whatever mode it's in. Internal registers and devices are all Little Endian. All that changes is how it routes data from memory into the cache and then the register. It is a limited subset. The SOLE reason for these features is because both ARM and PowerPC targets can and do run as device targets (e.g. on a PCI bus with another host processor doing the control) and they need to be able to interoperate with those buses. It does not magically turn your system into a Other Endian chip.
...
However absolutely NONE of this is relevant to MorphOS. MorphOS is for all practicality endian-independent - the only reason it gets thorny is trying to mimic PowerPC and/or m68k operation. So, the solution is.. drop those things in the trash where they belong. MorphOS has plenty of developer support and a huge amount of open-source software out there that can simply be recompiled. AROS is proof positive of this - it runs on x86 AND PowerPC, and it certainly does not run the PPC in little endian mode."
http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=6268&start=54
All in all, I think this might cause troubles when trying to run old/existing 68k binaries ("translated" of course) in "the MorphOS way", yes?
(These things makes me dizzy, and I won't even pretend to understand them... :lol:)
-
combining datatypes (or other components) is certainly not possible. Only if you could use 68k multiview from Aros X86 as preference (instead of the X86 version). But I do not know if that is possble.
Yoi don't think it could auto generating a PPC proxy datatype that communicates with the 68k datatype running in UAE? I thought the API was simple and well defined enough for that. You'd need a unified set of paths, but that again should be possible without having to configure it.
-
So, the solution is.. drop those things in the trash where they belong. MorphOS has plenty of developer support and a huge amount of open-source software out there that can simply be recompiled.
Well said. I don't get why we are even talking about custom chips, endianess,... All these belong to the past!
-
Just my 2 cents...... I like winuae better than ether of these :D
-
I didnt mean it too seriously ;) Wondering how Mesa and Gallium3D in AROS would compare with TinyGL/Goa in MorphOS.
As I see it, TinyGL might be faster (at least in some cases) but Gallium3D is way more complete.
Don't have any experience with Gallium3D, but if I had to mention 2 major things that Gallium3D has (and TinyGL doesn't), they would be:
1)VBO (Vertex Buffer Object) support.
Instead of sending mesh data over (relatively slow) memory bus each time drawn, the data is uploaded to gfx ram (whenever it's initialized / changed) and drawn from there. According to my tests, that can even achieve 5x speedup. Basically it "adds a few functions around what you have with vertex arrays", so it's (relatively) easy to #ifdef for tinygl compatibility.
Should be relatively easy to implement in TinyGL too, at least compared to:
2)Shaders.
With shaders the coder can have (almost) total control what happens with vertices when given to OpenGL, and how the pixels will get their final color. Includes a C/C++-like language that's compiled when the program is ran (so the same binary will work on different gfx cards). This is totally different way to code for OpenGL, when compared to fixed function pipeline (which TinyGL uses)
OpenGL ES2 doesn't have any fixed function pipeline (Which ES1 was based on), and the entire fixed function pipeline was also deprecated in OpenGL 3.0 (and removed from 3.1, current version being 4.2).
While the fixed function pipeline will likely never be removed from "desktop implementations", more and more code will be written using shaders instead, as that's the "current" way of doing things.
In addition, TinyGL is also missing several "minor" features, such as color index mode and stipple support (both of which are almost totally useless, and also deprecated) - occassionally you might find some OpenGL game that uses some exotic functionality that TinyGL is missing, or just isn't working as expected.
-
Just my 2 cents...... I like winuae better than ether of these :D
That's your choice. It's good to have choice and it's great that your happy with UAE. Maybe you'll get tempted by a Natami when it's ready and make the move over to hardware. Maybe the Natami super AGA will one day also be available within UAE. Either way, your not going past OS3.9 with it. MOS on the other hand can run a lot of the same software as OS4. I would like to see MOS for SAM, classic PPC, A1 and X1000 myself, but that's another story.
-
There are also Amikit (updated) and AmigaSys with countless addons and software.
-
Indeed it is. Far less crashes, a much better method at backwards compatability, MUI just works, USB works (including writing to NTFS), the GUI (Ambient) is AMAZING!!!
I think the only thing AROS has that is fully worth mention is the 3DCard Support, but even most of the drivers have bugs and the screen flakes out.
But hey, AROS is free, if you are interested, download it, install it, and submit bug reports.
Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs but MOS will not run on a G5 Mac so if we compare progress of Aros Intel i7 vs Powermac G5 Mos config clearly the truth is Mos is still on a tiny scale compared to Aros's ambitious PC configurations supported. When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:
For me the issue is the PPC requirement, Commodore never made a PPC Amiga, Native OS for PPC or even A4000 upgrade card so Mos + UAE running on smelly old 90s Macs from a dumpster is no more "Amiga" than Aros + WinUAE running on a brand new dodgy brand of PC.
Mos is a hobby OS which costs more than Win7 and needs the inferior [to WinUAE] UAE emulator to run 90% of Amiga software.
Each to their own, but OS4/Mos are a waste of money IMO (just like Clownto's Amiga [shaft you] Forever is) :)
-
2)Shaders....
Oh yes that would be useful.
It could be implemented in later versions of MorphOS.
-
Here's a question, could some sort of FPGA based USB 3 or PCI expansion board be created to substitute for the lack of the classic chip set on future MorphOS hardware (in theory).
If possible, AROS and OS 4 could benefit from this as well.
This was discussed back in 2000'ish. I seem to remember the original Escena AmigaOne design included a connection to the A1200 motherboard for just this purpose - access to the custom chips.
I can't see any benefit it would hold now, emulation is so much easier and probably more compatible.
-
This was discussed back in 2000'ish. I seem to remember the original Escena AmigaOne design included a connection to the A1200 motherboard for just this purpose - access to the custom chips.
I can't see any benefit it would hold now, emulation is so much easier and probably more compatible.
http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/prototypes/amigaone1.html
Added a linky to Lando's post, he remembers correctly.
I would rather see a Natami-on-a board add-on for OS4 and MOS machines than a standard AGA add-on to be honest. That would be interesting.
-
http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/prototypes/amigaone1.html
added a linky to lando's post, he remembers correctly.
I would rather see a natami-on-a board add-on for os4 and mos machines than a standard aga add-on to be honest. That would be interesting.
exactly!!!
-
Currently 133MHz, but as of next Monday 167MHz.
I'm also sitting on a couple of R400 based cards that have been modified to work in a G4 Mac.
Impressive! It's amazing how fast machines with such low Bus Speed (by today's standards) can perform with the right OS/Software!
-
Just my 2 cents...... I like winuae better than ether of these :D
And for that you must have a love for Windows...
...which again it is that lack of that love that many of us chose Amiga over Windows and Mac OS so many years ago.
Mind you, I do have a Windows machine for Video/Audio Editing, and Gaming, but I don't use WinUAE except as a means to read and write to my Amiga Hard Drives (SD/CF cards). It just feels wrong to use it for anything else when my machines are perfectly capable of playing all the games and running all the apps on their own, but alas, to each their own. Glad you are enjoying your self....
TRAITOR!!! ;) He he he.
-
This doesn't bother me (yet). There are no apps or games for MorphOS that I was not able to run and run well even on my meager piece of crap eMachine.
What I expect from an OS is a fluid and flexible GUI, a stable environment, and for it to be friendly with the resources, not to mention to have a nice collection of practical software.
MorphOS delivers in that arena RIGHT NOW. AROS on the other hand is still catching up, despite it's ability to run on faster more modern processors.
Speaking of which, I have a 2.6Ghz machine at home that I've been able to over clock to 3.4Ghz. I use it to run Haiku and AROS, just as I run both on my Eee PC 900. So don't get me wrong, I am an AROS user, I do donate to the Magellan bounty, but I'm more impressed by MorphOS in the long run.
Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs but MOS will not run on a G5 Mac so if we compare progress of Aros Intel i7 vs Powermac G5 Mos config clearly the truth is Mos is still on a tiny scale compared to Aros's ambitious PC configurations supported. When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:
For me the issue is the PPC requirement, Commodore never made a PPC Amiga, Native OS for PPC or even A4000 upgrade card so Mos + UAE running on smelly old 90s Macs from a dumpster is no more "Amiga" than Aros + WinUAE running on a brand new dodgy brand of PC.
Mos is a hobby OS which costs more than Win7 and needs the inferior [to WinUAE] UAE emulator to run 90% of Amiga software.
Each to their own, but OS4/Mos are a waste of money IMO (just like Clownto's Amiga [shaft you] Forever is) :)
-
Impressive! It's amazing how fast machines with such low Bus Speed (by today's standards) can perform with the right OS/Software!
Actually, I'm amazed at how long we held on to such crappy expansion standards.
33MHz PCI slots? Argh!
If you calculate out the additional bandwidth, PCIe is a Godsend.
PCIe 2.0 even better, and PCIe 3.0 incredible.
Think about it, I've got a 1.53GHz processor operating on a 133MHz bus.
That's a rediculous I/O bottleneck.
-
"Originally Posted by Digiman (http://www.amiga.org/forums/web/buttons/viewpost.gif) (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?p=687174#post687174)
Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs"
Yeah, if you want to run on one quarter of the processor, AROS will run on an i7.
Its a pointless misuse of a multicore processor, but it can be done.
"Commodore never made a PPC Amiga"
Who the f*ck cares? You guys act like Commodore was something special.
They didn't design the Amiga, they bought it.
And when it came time to enhance and develop it, they flubbed it up.
WE dictate the direction(s) that our community develop into now.
I, for one, am proud of that.
-
Mind you, I do have a Windows machine for Video/Audio Editing, and Gaming, but I don't use WinUAE except as a means to read and write to my Amiga Hard Drives (SD/CF cards). It just feels wrong to use it for anything else when my machines are perfectly capable of playing all the games and running all the apps on their own, but alas, to each their own. Glad you are enjoying your self....
TRAITOR!!! ;) He he he.
He he he.
I've got three.
And I don't use WinUAE either.
-
And for that you must have a love for Windows...
...which again it is that lack of that love that many of us chose Amiga over Windows and Mac OS so many years ago.
in truth i run E-UAE since i have only used fedora for many years. I only boot up windows when I have too, which thankfully is not much. However it must be said, if good reasonably priced hardware came out that ran some real amiga OS or something close, I would use it.
-
Yeah, if you want to run on one quarter of the processor, AROS will run on an i7.
Its a pointless misuse of a multicore processor, but it can be done.
Don't think Morphos or any other amiga-like OS is doing better in that regard; only their CPUs are a little slower.
Nothing is stopping you from starting 4 AROS hosted versions under Linux though ;)
greets,
Staf.
-
Don't think Morphos or any other amiga-like OS is doing better in that regard; only their CPUs are a little slower.
Nothing is stopping you from starting 4 AROS hosted versions under Linux though ;)
greets,
Staf.
But...
I would rather avoid using Linux... :)
Though I still wanna see that AROS/Linux distro see the light of day.
-
Don't think Morphos or any other amiga-like OS is doing better in that regard; only their CPUs are a little slower.
Nothing is stopping you from starting 4 AROS hosted versions under Linux though ;)
greets,
Staf.
Actually Staf,
You have a point. And I have an AROS box with a single core Athlon64 running at 2.7 GHz that I can overclock to over 3.0GHz (so basically twice the speed of my G4). But I'd still rather run MorphOS, and I'd really like to run it on a 2.5GHz G5 (I'm purchasing one soon).
And its not really the ISA that matters to me, its the API and how well its implemented.
Currently we have three NG OS' that attempt to re-implement the OS3.1 API, each with its own enhancements. Mine isn't perfect, but I prefer it. The other two aren't bad either.
I don't understand the argument.
All three OS' are, at their core, quite similar. I may even opt for a third machine to run OS4 soon.
But I'm still going to have a favorite.
And its not AROS.
Especially when its not finished (maybe not even when it finally reaches 1.0 status).
And certainly not when its crash prone with un-impplemented features.
In a way, the AROS development team is lucky.
Since neither OS4 or MorphOS runs on X86 equipment, they have that segment to themselves.
You'll notice that you don't see much drive to carry on the PPC AROS variant.
-
I do not want to destroy your illusions. The reasons why there is not much drive regarding PPC because anyone fears MorphOS or AOS but because there is not much need. The world outside speaks X86 (and in parts ARM) but noone is interested in PPC. That is the reality. There is a nightly build for PPC but that is not enough. You must build a distribution and you need a lot of software to be compiled for PPC. Noone is interested to do that for such a small number of potential users.
-
Nobody wants to stop people be happy with MorphOS and nobody tries to force anybody to use Aros. Many people are now working to remove the weak points from Aros and I am convinced that in 6-12 Months the situation will have changed and I try to do my part in this process.
That is what I believe and you can of course think different. We can talk in a few months about it :-)
I always hear how superior MorphOS is, "Aros is years behind" and "68k users are just retros and only want to play games". Do not be too convinced of "your OS", the world can faster change when you think.
I am just finishing my Aros 68k distribution and I will start soon with a Linux hosted distribution (X86/Kubuntu) and I am proud to be part of the change. And comments like this are only motivating me more.
-
Actually, I'm amazed at how long we held on to such crappy expansion standards.
33MHz PCI slots? Argh!
If you calculate out the additional bandwidth, PCIe is a Godsend.
PCIe 2.0 even better, and PCIe 3.0 incredible.
Think about it, I've got a 1.53GHz processor operating on a 133MHz bus.
That's a rediculous I/O bottleneck.
Very true, but at the same time I don't think we have any software that is held back by that bottle neck. When we have such software (I.E. After Effects or Final Cut), then the demand for better hardware will be undeniable.
-
Don't worry Olaf, I don't have any illusions, especially any about Amigoid OS' regaining significant market share.
And I'm not particularly worried that PPC CPUs no longer have a share of the desktop market as they are very much alive in other devices.
Further, I'd really love to see more cross platform development and support without so much of this ridiculous "my systems better then your sentiment".
I mean come on, do AROS users really think that the ISA is a significant selling point when there are so many more powerful options running on that hardware?
X wasn't kidding, most people would rather use Linux (or Windows or OSX0.
We're the mutants that want to run derivatives of an over twenty year old, basically dead, 32bit OS.
I kind of like the idea of running my OS on a CPU that isn't mainstream. heck, that why I find ARM appealing (once that becomes more popular I'll probably lose interest).
-
Very true, but at the same time I don't think we have any software that is held back by that bottle neck. When we have such software (I.E. After Effects or Final Cut), then the demand for better hardware will be undeniable.
Well, the X1000 is the first PPC in our market that offers PCIe expansion (and there's still no software that really requires it there either), unless you count the meager expansion on the SAM460ex.
Consider this, PCI is inadequate for one USB 3.0 connection (it can only provide a fraction of the needed bandwidth), but one 4X PCIe connection has more then enough bandwidth for two full USB 3.0 connections.
BTW - As to your "I'd rather use Linux" comment. Do you realize that when you use an X1000 under OS4 you only have support for one processor core and 2 GBs of memory. When you run Linux you use both cores and can access 6 or more GBs of memory (not to mention better video cards)?
-
Oh, to close this whole argument, "Is MorphOS ahead of AROS?".
MorphOS current revision 2.7.
Aros? It hasn't reached revision 1.0 yet.
Ahead? Yes, obviously.
Why does this matter?
Who brings up these silly decisive topics?
-
And for that you must have a love for Windows...
...which again it is that lack of that love that many of us chose Amiga over Windows and Mac OS so many years ago.
Mind you, I do have a Windows machine for Video/Audio Editing, and Gaming, but I don't use WinUAE except as a means to read and write to my Amiga Hard Drives (SD/CF cards). It just feels wrong to use it for anything else when my machines are perfectly capable of playing all the games and running all the apps on their own, but alas, to each their own. Glad you are enjoying your self....
TRAITOR!!! ;) He he he.
Most people who are content with Windows + WinUAE do so for 2 reasons....
Cost/mhz of a Wintel/AMD box and Windows does more [badly] than any other OS.
Not really any exclusive Amiga PPC software worth getting a useless PPC Apple doorstop for so WinUAE covers our needs.
All that has happened is we have realized ALL OSs today are $hit ESPECIALLY pathetic style over substance Apple computers, computing will never be as awesome as the pioneering 80s and the last Amiga computer designed was the A1200 ;)
Don't really care what brand my socket set is, only care they undo bolts. Computer is just a tool for us now.
(IMO)
-
Oh, to close this whole argument, "Is MorphOS ahead of AROS?".
MorphOS current revision 2.7.
Aros? It hasn't reached revision 1.0 yet.
Ahead? Yes, obviously.
Why does this matter?
Who brings up these silly decisive topics?
And Apple G5 version of MorphOS release is at 0.000001 so yes it is a stupid attitude as without G5 or x86 Mac support MorphOS is a toy/nostalgic antique OS.
-
And Apple G5 version of MorphOS release is at 0.000001 so yes it is a stupid attitude as without G5 or x86 Mac support MorphOS is a toy/nostalgic antique OS.
Except for the fact that we've got the best browser, OS4 has a decent word processor (Cinnamon Writer), and AROS?
Oh yeah, it crashes.
And as I just upgraded to a dual 1.42 GHz G4 with a Radeon 9800XT video card, I don't have the most up to date system, but its quite functional.
A "toy" would be something that only looks like what it is, so...
-
Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs but MOS will not run on a G5 Mac so if we compare progress of Aros Intel i7 vs Powermac G5 Mos config clearly the truth is Mos is still on a tiny scale compared to Aros's ambitious PC configurations supported. When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:
For me the issue is the PPC requirement, Commodore never made a PPC Amiga, Native OS for PPC or even A4000 upgrade card so Mos + UAE running on smelly old 90s Macs from a dumpster is no more "Amiga" than Aros + WinUAE running on a brand new dodgy brand of PC.
Mos is a hobby OS which costs more than Win7 and needs the inferior [to WinUAE] UAE emulator to run 90% of Amiga software.
Each to their own, but OS4/Mos are a waste of money IMO (just like Clownto's Amiga [shaft you] Forever is) :)
Hi,
@digiman,
You made some good points here. Those old rotten apple cores sure do smell, and your right the MorphOS is no more Amiga than a Mac is Amiga or a PC is an Amiga. The only thing I can say though is that Cloanto's Amiga forever (which is no more Amiga than a PC computer) emulates the Amiga pretty accurate today. I use it all the time when I want to use Amiga programs. This saves wear and tear on my Amiga's.
I just like all these people who sing the praises of MorphOS and AROS and make fun of what CUSA is doing (which I don't like either, but believe it or not their name is showing up in PC type mags for what they are doing and PC people are liking it, can you say that about the other two contenders?) but CUSA is getting all the attention by other people, while real Amiga people are still living with and clammering about OLD PPC's.
OK, lets get something straight, I am a real Amiga person, I use my Amiga's everyday and use them. I am not a fake Amiga person who sold their old silicon and then chime in that I use "MorphOS Amiga done right" right where, how and why, prove it. Run Pen Pal, Wadsworth, Final Copy, DPaint, etc. Show me a new browser that can keep up with todays sites so you can surf the web, play mp3's, watch videos and play movies. I have a hard time loading up MorphOS (I don't and won't buy old used up Mac silicon, for that matter I won't buy new Mac silicon)
I am an Amiga person, if I wanted a Mac, I would be using a Mac. If I wanted a PC, I am using a PC, why, because PC's have the best games right now, the best graphics, the fastest processors and GPU's.
So who cares if MorphOS leads AROS, do they really, lets talk 5 years up the road, when the G4 Mac silicon starts to disappear. Pfffffft!!!!
At least AROS who is behind right now has the chance to continue on, why because they see some of the future, NEW USABLE CPU'S AND GRAPHICS PROCESSOR UNITS, the PPC boys are still living in the past, just like me using the old Amiga.
Seems like a lot of brains and programming power going to waste, being used for a losing cause.
smerf
MorphOS leads today, how about the future.
-
Instead of beating around the bush, start to list the software that AROS crashes up on, or is missing completely and make MorphOS so much desirable.
-
Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs but MOS will not run on a G5 Mac so if we compare progress of Aros Intel i7 vs Powermac G5 Mos config clearly the truth is Mos is still on a tiny scale compared to Aros's ambitious PC configurations supported. When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:
I suppose MorphOS could quite "easily" (relatively speaking) be made running on every mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 by lowering its standards by running hosted, on top of a complete alien OS like Yellow Dog Linux that provides all the true low-level "OS stuff", but so far the ambition behind MorphOS has been a lot higher than simply providing some Amiga environment with a GUI on top of Linux, the ambition has always been to make a complete OS, from the ground up. One of the most important functions of an OS is to provide low level support for the hardware, and MorphOS does this in an extremely lean and effective way, from the top of the API and all the way down to the silicon.
-
Maybe I don't understand, but from what you just said there, it pretty much sounded *exactly* what I meant when I said "like two applications running on two separate computers (with separate OS code), instead of the two applications running in the same environment", one host/AROS box, and one 68k box.
Sorry, I misread your statements and thought you were saying AMIGA PROGRAMS were working EACH ONES in ITS OWN Amiga sandbox, while you were really saying ALL AMIGA PROGRAMS work in THEIR OWN Amiga sandbox while AROS programs do the same in the rest of the OS. Which is absolutely true.
You are talking about making it *look* like the same system in a purely visual/theme sense (and have access to a common clipboard), but in my view it's still a lot more like running WinUAE on a Windows7 machine (where the 68k part also can access the host systems file system, etc)
Yes, it's much like running WinUAE inside of Windows, or even XP programs in Windows 7's XP mode, or MacOS Classic programs in earlier versions of MacOS X, as you can see baci AmiBridge's idea has been used before (Apple), and found very famouse followers afterwards (Microsoft).
...than what both MorphOS and OS4 offers today, where you simply don't have any HW emulation or separate/shielded off "boxes" at all, but all binaries are run the same way, share the same memory space, the same resources, data, sheduling, messaging, arexx, *everything*, no matter if they are 68k or PPC, there simply is no difference at all (it *is* one and the same, not just visually so)!
Half true. You have to place some boxes here and there, in order to run M68K bytecode on PPC processors. Why are so many OS4/MOS users so sure there isn't any emulation at all in the process? It must be somewhere, hidden to the eyes of users, but 68K software doesn't run on PPC hardware by magic. Translation necessarily introduces overhead and potential flaws, not counting that much software relies on classic hardware specs to run correctly. That's why I prefer emulating the whole hardware and run M68K software on its own, no matter that's the only one option available on AROS: I would do the same on MorphOS and AmigaOS 4, if safeness and stability would get more important than speed.
-
OK, lets get something straight, I am a real Amiga person, I use my Amiga's everyday and use them.
Fine, many people here are retro enthusiasts whose only/primary interest is the "Classic" HW and OS. That's great, have fun! :) Also UAE is still being developed, and who knows, maybe there will become something tangible of NatAmi one day that you can use as well?
But many others are more into "Next Generation" Amiga, we who wants the evolution to continue, we who wants to use the Amiga in a more modern way (MorphOS, AROS, OS4), and you will just have to accept that!
I am not a fake Amiga person who sold their old silicon and then chime in that I use "MorphOS Amiga done right" right where, how and why, prove it. Run Pen Pal, Wadsworth, Final Copy, DPaint, etc.
I have no idea of what Pen Pal is, never came in contact with that back in the days. WordWorth runs, most people seem to prefer Final Writer though. Final Copy seems to run, I haven't done it myself, but at least it's listed in the MorphOS Software Database (http://morphos.lukysoft.cz), so I guess *someone* has tried it. Deluxe Paint V works, and so does Personal Paint, etc.
For most of these old apps you will have to make some one time edit in some configuration setting or/and there may be one or two visual glitch in their GUI's, search amiga.org and morphzone.org for info about settings etc if you are really interested. But they work and are usable. And so does Directory Opus, Magellan, etc, as they have done from the very beginning (many used them back when Ambient still were young and underdeveloped, but these days Ambient has many Magellan features integrated so there is little point now).
Heck, you can even run the original 68k Amiga OS 3.1 *Workbench* on MorphOS (or at least you could back in the v1.4 days, I doubt anyone have tried post 2.0), should ambient feel too modern and advanced for you to handle! :lol:
Show me a new browser that can keep up with todays sites so you can surf the web, play mp3's, watch videos and play movies.
Odyssey is part of MorphOS, and will do just that for you. HTML5/CSS3/JS etc, no problem. Odyssey even beats Internet Explorer 9 when it comes to CSS3, which is kind of amusing actually! :) Not at all like the Classic days, where Ibrowse users on Amiga could only look with jealousy on how the Web technology went on without them, and constantly be bugging website developers to avoid using CSS and stick to stone-age and deprecated HTML-tags and tables for their design... :lol:
I am an Amiga person, if I wanted a Mac, I would be using a Mac.
A Mac box running MorphOS is no longer a Macintosh, but a MorphOS box! We're just talking about the silicon here after all, it's the OS that makes the computer...
At least AROS who is behind right now has the chance to continue on, why because they see some of the future, NEW USABLE CPU'S AND GRAPHICS PROCESSOR UNITS, the PPC boys are still living in the past, just like me using the old Amiga.
Few people in the MorphOS camp are PPC fanboys today. PPC made sense back in the days when PowerUP and later the MorphOS project was started. Apple was using it and it seemed to have a future on the desktop just as bright as x86 seemed to have.
One MorphOS developer said on MorphZone.org (about choosing PPC as target architecture in the first place) something in the lines of: "if we would have known back then what we know today, we would have chosen differently" (not an exact quote)
In a response to the comment "I only regret that again we have an announcement about old hardware", a developer said: "Fair enough, but don't whine if it ain't a PowerPC based box ;)"
In a response to the comment "Due to lack of another new PPC-based hardware, I can make the only conclusion: this is the end of MorphOS ", a developer said: "IMHO Apple hardware is the only target that makes sense for PowerPC MorphOS at the moment." (and no, the bold emphasis was not put there by me, but by the dev himself)
MorphOS leads today, how about the future.
OK, since you asked so politely, here it is:
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59765
:)
-
OK, lets get something straight, I am a real Amiga person, I use my Amiga's everyday and use them. I am not a fake Amiga person who sold their old silicon and then chime in that I use "MorphOS Amiga done right" right where, how and why, prove it. Run Pen Pal, Wadsworth, Final Copy, DPaint, etc. Show me a new browser that can keep up with todays sites so you can surf the web, play mp3's, watch videos and play movies. I have a hard time loading up MorphOS (I don't and won't buy old used up Mac silicon, for that matter I won't buy new Mac silicon)
Most of these legacy apps work just fine (and faster than any Amiga). Most of my settings and software from my good old A4k are still there on my Pegasos and Macs. It just feels faster. :)
As for the browser, i guess you haven't followed too closely. Odyssey scores currently 365 + 15 points at html5test.com, i.e better than FireFox 11, Opera 11 and Safari 5.1, even though a couple features like workers and webgl had to be disabled, unfortunately. It will also play many streaming sites like youtube, dailymotion, vimeo (and more efficiently than OSX in that regard, since there's much less overhead).
As for playing movies and playing MP3, we also have several players out there that handle about all known formats (mplayer for instance). The only trouble is playing 1080p h.264 content fast enough (it still does it faster than OSX and Linux by a good margin, in any case).
-
"Except for the fact that we've got the best browser, OS4 has a decent word processor (Cinnamon Writer), and AROS?
Oh yeah, it crashes.
Aros? It hasn't reached revision 1.0 yet."
I am really tempted to response in the same tone but I will not do that...
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLWw1OpDrpI
The ideal war song for this thread.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLWw1OpDrpI
The ideal war song for this thread.
For some reason I feel slightly nervous after watching that.... :/
-
"Except for the fact that we've got the best browser, OS4 has a decent word processor (Cinnamon Writer), and AROS?
Oh yeah, it crashes.
Aros? It hasn't reached revision 1.0 yet."
I am really tempted to response in the same tone but I will not do that...
But Olaf, you have been, that's why I went there.
As I mentioned, I have an AROS system set up, so its not like I haven't used it (unlike Smerf and others that have posted here with no experience about what they're talking about).
-
Oh, to close this whole argument, "Is MorphOS ahead of AROS?".
MorphOS current revision 2.7.
Aros? It hasn't reached revision 1.0 yet.
Ahead? Yes, obviously.
Why does this matter?
Who brings up these silly decisive topics?
pfft shows how much you know about AROS.
(http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w131/Kalamatee/AROS/Wanderer/AROSx86_64-2012-04-06-14-05-55.png)
See says 1.61 right there. :P
-
pfft shows how much you know about AROS.
(http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w131/Kalamatee/AROS/Wanderer/AROSx86_64-2012-04-06-14-05-55.png)
See says 1.61 right there. :P
1.61? So we're no longer dealing with a beta product and all libraries are now complete?
-
1.61? So we're no longer dealing with a beta product and all libraries are now complete?
:rofl:
Apparently you didn't get the joke.
because Morphos is 2.7 and AROS isn't even 1.0 correct? You obviously don't get how foolish that sounded. If that's the case AmigaOS is at 4.1 so therefore because it's version number is 1.4 higher it must be better correct?
-
"Aros? It hasn't reached revision 1.0 yet."
Thats a bit of a strange benchmark for a systems usefulness and ability.
Usually a 1.0 designation is given when the system is fully matured, has been bug checked and bug checked again and gain, is stable and more or less a completely working system. If you think that os4 has been through that level of work and streamlining your sadly mistaken.
Just because its called os4.0 dosn't mean its as progressed as a 4.0 revision os would usually be. It was called that simply because of the previous version numbering.
Morphos 2.7 (and the coming 3.0) however, I will say actually DESERVE that version numbering. Os4.0 does not. In its current form, Its more like newamigaos 0.5 alpha. I don't believe os4 deserves the distinction of a 1.0 designation myself, but thats purely my opinion after using it for awhile. I found it buggy and crashy as hell. (so does my friend with a sam board, who by the way thought that expense was a ripoff when he saw what the machine could do, or more importantly what it could not do)
I've heard other people complain about Aros crashing but I've used it for years with very little crashing. (much less than any classic amiga anyway) So long as your using supported hardware, it runs great.
I don't believe aros is far off from what would be considered a 1.0 release by just about any coder or software developer. Go look at windows 3.0 or 3.1. or windows me if you think version #'s are important.
Steven
-
Still waiting on that long list of software that crashes AROS that is so needed in 2012.
This is a very unproductive thread, I would have thought we would have a long list by now. Could it be there's a load of FUD into all this ? Maybe Mazze would like to have a look at some of those software's crashing that you list here ?
-
:rofl:
Apparently you didn't get the joke.
because Morphos is 2.7 and AROS isn't even 1.0 correct? You obviously don't get how foolish that sounded. If that's the case AmigaOS is at 4.1 so therefore because it's version number is 1.4 higher it must be better correct?
Nope, didn't get the joke.
Must have a different sense of humor, because MorphOS' and OS4's revision numbers make sense to me.
The first number is for major revisions and the second number for minor enhancements.
The different product revision numbers aren't related to each other.
-
Still waiting on that long list of software that crashes AROS that is so needed in 2012.
This is a very unproductive thread, I would have thought we would have a long list by now. Could it be there's a load of FUD into all this ? Maybe Mazze would like to have a look at some of those software's crashing that you list here ?
That's pretty easy.
All of it.
In fact, you don't even have to be running any additional software (and it crashes).
-
...Morphos 2.7 (and the coming 3.0) however, I will say actually DESERVE that version numbering...
Steven
Yes Steven,
That is fair. And you might be right about OS4.
The primary logic behind the numbering of that coming from the fact that it comes after OS3.9 and is a major revision changes (to a new ISA).
And I'm not saying AROS isn't an impressive product.
But the libraries aren't finished yet, so its not like the major problem is bugs.
Its not finished yet.
-
I can understand the AOS user now a little better... bye
-
Nope, didn't get the joke.
Must have a different sense of humor, because MorphOS' and OS4's revision numbers make sense to me.
The first number is for major revisions and the second number for minor enhancements.
The different product revision numbers aren't related to each other.
And yet you've been asked to back up your claims. And you have nothing. AROS crashes just sitting there? Are you for real? I call bull****. My AROS box has been up running and being used for over a month without a crash or reboot.
What libraries are missing? I'd like a list(Please go ahead and point me to the status page that hasn't been updated in 2-3 years.). I'll be sure to get it back to the dev team so they work on it for you.
-
Please go ahead and point me to the status page that hasn't been updated in 2-3 years
Yes, an update of that would be nice.
Bizarre that they would leave information that dated on their web page.
You guys are far too touchy.
-
That's pretty easy.
All of it.
In fact, you don't even have to be running any additional software (and it crashes).
Whow, thank you for that, now I can just leave this thread be and spend my time on something productive. You pretty much revealed yourself as the troll you are with that.
-
Whow, thank you for that, now I can just leave this thread be and spend my time on something productive. You pretty much revealed yourself as the troll you are with that.
Interesting idea.
Leave, post, do whatever.
As I've mentioned, I'm using AROS on a system I built just for that purpose.
And it has greatly improved since the last time I tried it (I can actually use it now - and lo and behold it actually installs!).
But I didn't start this thread with its lame premise.
Of course MorphOS is ahead of AROS and OS4.
Its been around the longest and has had occasional cash infusions from commercial companies for development/support.
As I said before, you guys are too touchy.
Take your ball and go home if you like.
-
Touchy, naah I don't think so. But you can believe whatever you want.
I don't care.
-
I suppose MorphOS could quite "easily" (relatively speaking) be made running on every mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 by lowering its standards by running hosted, on top of a complete alien OS like Yellow Dog Linux that provides all the true low-level "OS stuff", but so far the ambition behind MorphOS has been a lot higher than simply providing some Amiga environment with a GUI on top of Linux, the ambition has always been to make a complete OS, from the ground up. One of the most important functions of an OS is to provide low level support for the hardware, and MorphOS does this in an extremely lean and effective way, from the top of the API and all the way down to the silicon.
Are you really so out of touch that you don't know that by far the most popular variant of AROS is the one that runs natively, on the silicon, without any trace of Linux?
-
Interesting idea.
Leave, post, do whatever.
As I've mentioned, I'm using AROS on a system I built just for that purpose.
And it has greatly improved since the last time I tried it (I can actually use it now - and lo and behold it actually installs!).
This is obviously the user. I was able to install AROS fine with no problems for years. So it's not AROS it's the user in my opinion. :P
As for touchy nope. Not touchy at all. But if you are going to claim something is missing could you at least give a real example. For ****s sake I don't recall any AROS user claiming AROS is perfect I think most if not all understand it has a ways to go. But the whole my dick is bigger than yours bs is a joke. As I stated before not only am I an AROS user I'm also a MorphOS user. I even said MorphOS is more polished.
-
Touchy, naah I don't think so. But you can believe whatever you want.
I don't care.
Yes, it would ssem that way too me.
And I'm not here to make enemies, so I do care.
Are you really so out of touch that you don't know that by far the most popular variant of AROS is the one that runs natively, on the silicon, without any trace of Linux?
I do not believe he isn't aware of that.
The Linux hosted version was useful back when the product was in its earlier revisions, but native is the fastest way to run it.
-
Yes, it would ssem that way too me.
And I'm not here to make enemies, so I do care.
Nor am I. Peace brother :)
PS. AROS doesn't crash a lot. ;)
-
Nor am I. Peace brother :)
PS. AROS doesn't crash a lot. ;)
I officially stand corrected by someone who has more experience with this then me.
I'm just starting out after two years using MorphOS.
I like what I see and promise to stop commenting on crashes as they very well could be due to something I'm doing or a problem with my hardware that I have not diagnosed yet.
-
No no no, I would rather NOT use Linux! Talk about a hack job on top of a hack job on top of a hack job. I've got my sights set on Haiku for the future! :)
As for none of the Amiga OS's having multi-core or CPU support...
...ya sucks don't it? :/
Well, the X1000 is the first PPC in our market that offers PCIe expansion (and there's still no software that really requires it there either), unless you count the meager expansion on the SAM460ex.
Consider this, PCI is inadequate for one USB 3.0 connection (it can only provide a fraction of the needed bandwidth), but one 4X PCIe connection has more then enough bandwidth for two full USB 3.0 connections.
BTW - As to your "I'd rather use Linux" comment. Do you realize that when you use an X1000 under OS4 you only have support for one processor core and 2 GBs of memory. When you run Linux you use both cores and can access 6 or more GBs of memory (not to mention better video cards)?
-
No no no, I would rather NOT use Linux! Talk about a hack job on top of a hack job on top of a hack job. I've got my sights set on Haiku for the future! :)
As for none of the Amiga OS's having multi-core or CPU support...
...ya sucks don't it? :/
You got me looking into that too.
Looks neat.
And, yeah, since the Quark kernel that underlies MorphOS can support SMP it does suck. Where the f*ck is Qbox?
-
You got me looking into that too.
Looks neat.
And, yeah, since the Quark kernel that underlies MorphOS can support SMP it does suck. Where the f*ck is Qbox?
What is Qbox?
Also, I presume you never used BeOS back in the day? Well my man, you are in for a treat, especially once Haiku finally gets version 1.0 out the door and more people begin to code for it.
It's really really cool! Unlike ANY other OS that I've ever used, but I think you'd have to read the tech docs and play around to see that. On a side note, Haiku/BeOS has always had Multi-CPU/Core support. And it will never tell you it can't move or delete a file because it is in use (Like some operating systems I know). I.E. lets say you are downloading a file that is a few hundered Mb is size, then you decide that you didn't want to save it to where you are saving it to, and might forget where it's at when you come back later to move it. Well, no problem, you can move it while it is being downloaded, and Haiku as well as what ever software you are using to download the file, will automatically adjust! Likewise you can do this with any movie or song file that you are playing, etc.
There is a way to monitor all your running programs, see how much RAM and CPU each one is using, and even asign what CPU/Core you want to app to run on.
There is so much to say about this OS, but I'll just leave it to their web page to educate you more. :)
-
Too bad that Haiku API is C++
-
But I didn't start this thread with its lame premise.
I was a little bit offended when someone asked how we could even mention MorphOS and AROS in the same sentence. Hence I wanted to know if the difference is really that big.
-
What is Qbox?
Qbox was to supercede or run alongside Abox and provide the functions that would break AmigaOS compatibility (like SMP).
Also, I presume you never used BeOS back in the day? Well my man, you are in for a treat, especially once Haiku finally gets version 1.0 out the door and more people begin to code for it.
It's really really cool! Unlike ANY other OS that I've ever used, but I think you'd have to read the tech docs and play around to see that. On a side note, Haiku/BeOS has always had Multi-CPU/Core support. And it will never tell you it can't move or delete a file because it is in use (Like some operating systems I know). I.E. lets say you are downloading a file that is a few hundered Mb is size, then you decide that you didn't want to save it to where you are saving it to, and might forget where it's at when you come back later to move it. Well, no problem, you can move it while it is being downloaded, and Haiku as well as what ever software you are using to download the file, will automatically adjust! Likewise you can do this with any movie or song file that you are playing, etc.
There is a way to monitor all your running programs, see how much RAM and CPU each one is using, and even asign what CPU/Core you want to app to run on.
There is so much to say about this OS, but I'll just leave it to their web page to educate you more. :)
No, I'm old enough to remember the glowing reviews of BeOS when it was new.
Didn't it originally run on Apple hardware/
-
No, I'm old enough to remember the glowing reviews of BeOS when it was new.Didn't it originally run on Apple hardware/
I think it first ran on the BeBox, then Mac, and finally PC.
I still have an Amiga magazine where it is featured on the cover as the potential future OS of Amiga. :)
-
I was a little bit offended when someone asked how we could even mention MorphOS and AROS in the same sentence. Hence I wanted to know if the difference is really that big.
Actually, they're not (except that Gallium may provide an advantage to AROS).
A few parts of MorphOS actually borrow from early AROS code.
And they are both re-implenentations of the 3.1 API.
In fact, they're quite similar.
I'd never want to discourage anyone from either camp from exploring the other environment.
As each runs on different hardware, they don't even directly compete.
-
About 3D in AROS...
(http://i44.tinypic.com/359wldk.jpg)
-
About 3D in AROS...
(http://i44.tinypic.com/359wldk.jpg)
oooo purdy. ;D
what were we talking about again?
-
About 3D in AROS...
(http://i44.tinypic.com/359wldk.jpg)
That is stunning!
What do you think legacy guys?
You can't match that with a "real" Amiga (unless you bought it from Barry Altman).
-
The Linux hosted version was useful back when the product was in its earlier revisions, but native is the fastest way to run it.
When I dabble, I tend to run the hosted version regardless. It's already so stupidly fast that native doesn't add a lot, but on a quad core machine, detracts. I can get on with a lot of other stuff on the linux side in conjunction.
-
I was a little bit offended when someone asked how we could even mention MorphOS and AROS in the same sentence. Hence I wanted to know if the difference is really that big.
Whilst I don't know for sure who said that, I think it's safe to say such a viewpoint places this individual in the minority. I've found most people in the Amiga community are generally supportive of AROS, even if they may prefer another operating system. Can we view the commenter as the troll they are and move on now?
-
Can we view the commenter as the troll they are and move on now?
No we can't because we want to know the truth.
-
@HenryCase
I was a little bit offended when someone asked how we could even mention MorphOS and AROS in the same sentence. Hence I wanted to know if the difference is really that big.
Whilst I don't know for sure who said that, I think it's safe to say such a viewpoint places this individual in the minority. I've found most people in the Amiga community are generally supportive of AROS, even if they may prefer another operating system. Can we view the commenter as the troll they are and move on now?
I'm afraid Mazze is "bending the truth" a bit in his claims above. This is what happened: AmigaNG said in another thread: "if you really want a cheap Amiga ng type of experices then I would personally recommend getting an old pc and installing Aros on it, not a PowerMac", to which I replied "It would be interesting to hear how you can even compare MorphOS [or indeed OS4] to AROS like they would be playing in the same league? ... you are solely focusing on x86 hardware *for the sake of it*, totally neglecting the differences in features of the two OS's, which probably is the most important variable of them all for the user experience and *usability* at all. "An old PC" is hardly any cheaper than an old PowerMac, and if it's the user experience you want (i.e. really being able to *use* it as an Amiga), then MorphOS is the one NG solution that has the most to offer..."
All this is absolutely true, which most of us already knew, and which this thread clearly has shown to those who didn't. One of the things that most OS4 and MorphOS users appreciates the most, is probably the mix of evolution *combined* with the best way of obtaining Amiga backwards compatibility, and by that I mean these two OS's capability of running Amiga 68k programs in the completely seemless way they do, that they treat 68k binaries exactly the same as PPC ones, there simply is no difference! All programs run in the same memory space, by the same scheduler, sharing the same resources, the same data, signaling, arexx, etc. It's one and the same! While in AROS, 68k compatibility has for decades been totally under prioritized, and relies completely on UAE to emulate a "separate" Amiga on top of AROS, like two separate (albeit somewhat connected) computers in one.
This is *very far* from MorphOS and OS4 of today. I think many MorphOS and OS4 users would say that this fact alone (the different way it treats Amiga applications) makes AROS run in a completely different league than MorphOS and OS4. Not necessary a worse league, but *clearly* different. And if you go on in your comparisons about MorphOS usability and user experience (since the root of this thread is AmigaNG's "if you really want a cheap Amiga ng type of experices then I would personally recommend getting an old pc and installing Aros on it" comment), you will find *many* things that several people in this thread has put forward, that gives MorphOS a far better (the best really!) "AmigaNG type of experience". Only the fact that someone would *recommend* (which AmigaNG did) a system that uses a "Wanderer/Zune" combo that is of sub Amiga OS 3.1 level in favor of MorphOS current "Ambient/MUI4" combo is absolutely ridiculous, and only shows ignorance and cluelessness!
Nobody ever said that AROS couldn't be fun for those into it (which traditionally mostly is the people developing it), nobody was kicking on it, AROS is a good thing, it has *some* advantages (being free, running on x86), it has contributed some to MorphOS evolution etc, but it clearly *does* play in a completely different league than MorphOS (and OS4 for that matter) when it comes to giving the user an "AmigaNG type of experience".
-
@people who more or less deliberately misread Iggy's comment about "version numbers" :rolleyes:
In the context it was put, wasn't it kind of obvious that he was talking about level of maturity, and *not* explicitly version numbers per se? Compared to MorphOS (and OS4 for that matter), AROS as a whole *is* immature, who are you trying to fool here? There is not without reason you *won't* see this kind of warnings on MorphOS's download page:
Warning
AROS is alpha quality software. This means that it is currently mostly fun to play with and cool to develop for. If you came here because you thought AROS was a finished, complete and fully usable operating system, you will most likely be disappointed. AROS isn't there yet, but we're slowly moving in the right direction.
...and...
Note
Although AROS can be installed to a hard drive, please be aware that the installer is known to contain bugs. It should not remove or wipe any partitions if not asked to do so, but this cannot be guaranteed. So please note that generally you should not install AROS on a working machine whose HD contains valuable data, as there is a real possibility of data loss. We take no responsibility for any data loss that occurs. Any bug reports on the installation process will however be appreciated.
Again, not at all kicking on AROS, not trying to belittle the efforts of its developers etc, I'm sure it's very fun for those into it, but please don't pretend it's something it clearly isnt...
-
One last sentence from me
when you want cooperation and that people are interested to look at your OS (and even buy it) it is not helpful to bash them (68k, Aros, AOS). But the MorphOS community seems to be happy that they tell each other how great they are. That the community is stagnating (at best) seems noone to disturb. The outsiders just do not understand how great it is... So obviously there is no common ground for cooperation between both camps, I personally regret that but it is not possible... then stay the best (how you think) and be happy with your Macs
-
Are you really so out of touch that you don't know that by far the most popular variant of AROS is the one that runs natively, on the silicon, without any trace of Linux?
It was a reply to Digimans "When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:" comment, mocking MorphOS for not running on all Mac's and Laptops. Clearly AROS doesn't run natively on *all* x86 desktops and laptops either. I have hardware it won't support, for example. But hosted or in a virtual machine, yes it will, and the same could be achieved with MorphOS (actually, I think it already is/will be, purely for development purposes while developing stuff like 64-bit support, etc).
When it comes to *silicon*, I think there is much truth in Cammy's post (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=644066&postcount=13) here on amiga.org that the Aros/Platforms/x86 support page (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Aros/Platforms/x86_support) links to: "You are better off if you build a PC out of supported components to begin with rather than hoping it will work on an existing PC because it usually ends in disappointment. There are just too many different chipsets for the two or three occasional/casual Aros developers to handle. It doesn't help that the three major distributions are handled nearly entirely by a single person each, usually only with their own PC and a virtual PC setup to test it on." and this one the support page itself: "It is very hard to recommend a completely supported motherboard because as soon as newer motherboards arrive so their features change subtly, often introducing non-supported parts like ethernet and audio. It is a moving target."
Silicon needs drivers, a fact that is equally true for AROS as it is for MorphOS, so mocking MorphOS for not natively supporting *every* PPC Mac out there is kind of a moot point, don't you agree? Like throwing stones in a glass house, yes?
-
when you want cooperation and that people are interested to look at your OS (and even buy it) it is not helpful to bash them (68k, Aros, AOS).
Where is the bashing?
:confused:
-
@takemehomegrandma
I had a feeling that the comments that sparked this thread would've been from you, but chose not to name you. Let's see your explanation...
I'm afraid Mazze is "bending the truth" a bit in his claims above. This is what happened: AmigaNG said in another thread: "if you really want a cheap Amiga ng type of experices then I would personally recommend getting an old pc and installing Aros on it, not a PowerMac", to which I replied "It would be interesting to hear how you can even compare MorphOS [or indeed OS4] to AROS like they would be playing in the same league? ... you are solely focusing on x86 hardware *for the sake of it*, totally neglecting the differences in features of the two OS's, which probably is the most important variable of them all for the user experience and *usability* at all..."
Sounds to me that Mazze's comments are spot on. Let me break it down even further. AmigaNG basically said 'if you're interested, here's how to get a "NG Amiga"-like experience for the cheapest price'. There is no denying that AROS is cheaper than OS4 or MorphOS, so basically what you end up doing is questioning whether AROS should even be classed as a NG Amiga system.
What I've found following the evolution of AROS is that the complaints levelled against it have shifted as its improved. I see now that the complaint du jour is about seamless running of 68k software. Whilst it's not the first time I've heard this complaint, you seem more willing to use this as the key point that separates AROS from OS4/MorphOS. So is what you're saying that once AROS has seamless 68k software usage, like say Amithlon, it can be seen as NG, but not before?
As for your other comments about AROS, I'm glad you're generally supportive of the project. You know, you'd be a much more effective advocate for MorphOS if you could speak to others more respectfully. Food for thought.
-
Except for the fact that we've got the best browser, OS4 has a decent word processor (Cinnamon Writer), and AROS?
Oh yeah, it crashes.
And as I just upgraded to a dual 1.42 GHz G4 with a Radeon 9800XT video card, I don't have the most up to date system, but its quite functional.
A "toy" would be something that only looks like what it is, so...
This thread will always be subjective hence the IMO. As long as you're happy it's cool.
AFAIC neither AROS/MOS/OS4 can replace my Win XP boxes personally and all 3 need a software emulator to run Dpaint 3 or 5 IIRC so personally it's no different. Why would I stop using WinUAE,Chrome browser or Zoom player (media player) for MOS alternatives after purchasing their draconian restrictions of a licensed OS? Aros is free AND not locked to one computer unlike MOS (which is why for me it's not worth the money) but you can't bitch about FREE Aros in comparison. The whole topic is like saying my 1.2L Yugo is better than your 950cc Yugo as far as MOS vs AROS. Amiga was the Ferrari of the 80s computer world! And whilst I have no affection for Win or OSX systems they are my only sane choices for running my business or home cinema setup.
This post will make me unpopular for sure. :lol:
-
@takemehomegrandma
I had a feeling that the comments that sparked this thread would've been from you, but chose not to name you.
No, it didn't, don't try to make it look like I have created some Anti-AROS thread here, because that's not true!
Sounds to me that Mazze's comments are spot on.
Mazze started this thread by asking a question, which has now been answered in many ways, by many people during this thread.
Let me break it down even further. AmigaNG basically said 'if you're interested, here's how to get a "NG Amiga"-like experience for the cheapest price'.
Let's *not* "break it down"/re-interpret what he said, he said *exactly*: "if you really want a cheap Amiga ng type of experices then I would personally recommend getting an old pc and installing Aros on it, not a PowerMac", and nothing else!
He advised *against* getting a PowerMac, despite them costing the same as an "old PC", and he also recommended AROS as "the NG Amiga experience". All of this is *fine* of course, he is entitled to his opinion, but so am I! So I merely pointed out that the "NG experience" doesn't come from x86/PPC, but from the OS, and that AROS plays in a different league when it comes to this, no matter that it can run on x86. This is what made Mazze run off like a hurt little primadonna and start this thread asking how MorphOS is better, a lot of people answered, and now he (and OlafS3, Manu, etc) is like hurt little children, which is just hilarious. If you don't want to know, don't ask the questions!
There is no denying that AROS is cheaper than OS4 or MorphOS
The OS in itself, yes, but not necessarily by a great deal if looking at total system cost. It's not that it's expensive to get a MorphOS system up and running.
But that's not even the point - the point is that the level of "NG Experience" doesn't come from the price either, it comes from the OS.
so basically what you end up doing is questioning whether AROS should even be classed as a NG Amiga system.
WTF?! Absolutely *not*, what is this?! Of course it is a NG Amiga system, it was the first of its kind, and I have *never* kicked at it in any way!
But there are many differences between AROS and MorphOS, and in the end MorphOS is the one giving the better "NG Experience" (actually it offers *the best* of all three NG Options).
What I've found following the evolution of AROS is that the complaints levelled against it have shifted as its improved. I see now that the complaint du jour is about seamless running of 68k software.
That has *always* been on the topic, it was lifted forward by Amiga NG Enthusiasts to the AROS devs more than a decade ago (search ANN.lu for example), but it was always discarded as a low/non-priority thing that no developer thought would be necessary or interested in working with.
Whilst it's not the first time I've heard this complaint, you seem more willing to use this as the key point that separates AROS from OS4/MorphOS.
*I* seem? Ask *any* MorphOS or OS4 user used to their system how much they would like this feature to be removed? It's *not* a trivial thing!
Note that it possibly *will* be removed in "MorphOS 4" or whatever, but as a trade-off you might get x86, 64-bit, SMP, MP etc (who knows).
So is what you're saying that once AROS has seamless 68k software usage, like say Amithlon, it can be seen as NG, but not before?
AROS can never have the same seemless 68k Amiga compatibility by using UAE, it will always be like an Amiga computer running on top of the AROS computer, although *looking* like it isn't!
-
I have sent you what was written here. When someone behaves like little childs than it your side (when we start it this way). I would personally excuse me if I read similar written by Aros supporters. Badmouthing of others is very very bad style. By this "MorphOSs" only harm their side. So do not talk of "childs" here...
-
Hi,
@digiman,
You made some good points here. Those old rotten apple cores sure do smell, and your right the MorphOS is no more Amiga than a Mac is Amiga or a PC is an Amiga. The only thing I can say though is that Cloanto's Amiga forever (which is no more Amiga than a PC computer) emulates the Amiga pretty accurate today. I use it all the time when I want to use Amiga programs. This saves wear and tear on my Amiga's.
I just like all these people who sing the praises of MorphOS and AROS and make fun of what CUSA is doing (which I don't like either, but believe it or not their name is showing up in PC type mags for what they are doing and PC people are liking it, can you say that about the other two contenders?) but CUSA is getting all the attention by other people, while real Amiga people are still living with and clammering about OLD PPC's.
OK, lets get something straight, I am a real Amiga person, I use my Amiga's everyday and use them. I am not a fake Amiga person who sold their old silicon and then chime in that I use "MorphOS Amiga done right" right where, how and why, prove it. Run Pen Pal, Wadsworth, Final Copy, DPaint, etc. Show me a new browser that can keep up with todays sites so you can surf the web, play mp3's, watch videos and play movies. I have a hard time loading up MorphOS (I don't and won't buy old used up Mac silicon, for that matter I won't buy new Mac silicon)
I am an Amiga person, if I wanted a Mac, I would be using a Mac. If I wanted a PC, I am using a PC, why, because PC's have the best games right now, the best graphics, the fastest processors and GPU's.
So who cares if MorphOS leads AROS, do they really, lets talk 5 years up the road, when the G4 Mac silicon starts to disappear. Pfffffft!!!!
At least AROS who is behind right now has the chance to continue on, why because they see some of the future, NEW USABLE CPU'S AND GRAPHICS PROCESSOR UNITS, the PPC boys are still living in the past, just like me using the old Amiga.
Seems like a lot of brains and programming power going to waste, being used for a losing cause.
smerf
MorphOS leads today, how about the future.
Some of this is covered in my post above so won't repeat that.
However just because as an Amiga user I didn't buy PC in the 80s/90s doesn't mean I will buy Apple products ever in my life now Commodore is dead. I agree there. PC improved massively since 80386 and DOS/WIN 3.1 (OS AND hardware) but Apple STILL supplies one mouse button and think this is a good design idea :roflmao:
Secondly MOS and Hyperion are wasting time true, they are stupid not to be working on x86 conversion. PPC is very expensive per mhz and a dead product line. Like you say only Aros has longterm future.
As for C= USA, I can see why people would use C64X + Competition Pro USB joystick + Win XP + WinVICE for a half the current asking price ($500 max!) because it does look like a C64. The Amiga Mini doesn't even look like any Amiga Commodore ever sold and has lame graphics on compromised Mini ITX motherboard. A real turd, Mini ITX has terrible bus performance whether you use i7 or not and will be as fast as a $300 i5 at best. And it runs Linux so that's $100 extra for Windows compared to buying a regular PC so only a $199 worth of PC. What an absolute clusterfook of a joke machine!
Amiga forever doesn't do anything a free download of WinUAE does IMO and as I own 7 Amigas from KS1.1 to CD32 Kickstart the only illegal KS ROM I could potentially download is a CDTV Kickstart so no need to waste my money on their "legal emulation" scam. People use it to illegally play pirated Amiga game ADFs so pretty much a joke product.
-
but Apple STILL supplies one mouse button and think this is a good design idea :roflmao:
Yeahsurewhateveryousay.....
Magic Mouse has 1 physical button, so much is true, but whit the help of it touch surface it can simulate pretty much as many as you like.
Even if paired with a MorphOS-computer it will come out as 2 button (without any drivers on the MorphOS-side).
-
. This is what made Mazze run off like a hurt little primadonna and start this thread asking how MorphOS is better, a lot of people answered, and now he (and OlafS3, Manu, etc) is like hurt little children, which is just hilarious. If you don't want to know, don't ask the questions!
Oh please, what a prick you are, there have some name calling back. Could you please leave me out of your agenda. I'm not hurt, nor am I acting like a little child. On the contrary that could be said about you.
I have said though that I see no evidence that AROS is worse off than MorphOS in this thread
there are a few plus for MorphOS and equally for AROS. No big issues actually.
What I said was, start listing the software AROS crashes on or misses badly in 2012, if you stand by your claims that MorphOS plays in a different league (as mine is bigger than yours).
They play in the very same league and nowadays there's not much AROS looses out on.
That's just the facts, sorry I can't change the history but AROS is growing up.
-
I suppose MorphOS could quite "easily" (relatively speaking) be made running on every mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 by lowering its standards by running hosted, on top of a complete alien OS like Yellow Dog Linux that provides all the true low-level "OS stuff", but so far the ambition behind MorphOS has been a lot higher than simply providing some Amiga environment with a GUI on top of Linux, the ambition has always been to make a complete OS, from the ground up. One of the most important functions of an OS is to provide low level support for the hardware, and MorphOS does this in an extremely lean and effective way, from the top of the API and all the way down to the silicon.
AROS doesn't need Linux, that's a user choice.
I question the sanity of a company that STILL has no G5 version of MOS. The last hope for MOS is to get G5 distro delivered ASAP and stop messing about with limp Mac Minis.
OS4 + X1000 was their only competition, and G5 Mac the only uncompromised PPC OSX machine (so you don't waste money and can still use the G5 Mac you bought even if you hated MOS). Clearly they have a technical barrier because only crazy people would miss such a business opportunity!
With no G5 version and no x86 migration plan MOS is third in the group IMO, at least OS4 for G5 exists and Aros has plentiful x86 hardware new and used available FOREVER.
-
No, it didn't, don't try to make it look like I have created some Anti-AROS thread here, because that's not true!
I didn't say you started the thread, I said your comments sparked it. Mazze has already said that your comments were the reason the thread was started.
Let's *not* "break it down"/re-interpret what he said, he said *exactly*: "if you really want a cheap Amiga ng type of experices then I would personally recommend getting an old pc and installing Aros on it, not a PowerMac", and nothing else!
I broke down the comments as you didn't seem to understand them in their unedited form. AmigaNG made a personal recommendation for a cheap NG Amiga system, he proposed AROS as a solution. AROS is undeniably cheap, so the only bone of contention you could have was whether it was 'NG' enough.
But that's not even the point - the point is that the level of "NG Experience" doesn't come from the price either, it comes from the OS.
In the comment AmigaNG made, both the price and the 'NG Amiga'-like experience were what his choice of AROS was being qualified using. Is AROS cheap? Yes. Is AROS an 'NG' system? In my (and many other people's opinion), yes. So it's a valid choice given the criterion set.
So I merely pointed out that the "NG experience" doesn't come from x86/PPC, but from the OS
WTF?! Absolutely *not*, what is this?! Of course it is a NG Amiga system, it was the first of its kind, and I have *never* kicked at it in any way!
If you truly believe you've "*never* kicked at it in any way!" then you really need to work on your people skills. There seems to be a big disconnect between what you say and what you think you're communicating.
That has *always* been on the topic, it was lifted forward by Amiga NG Enthusiasts to the AROS devs more than a decade ago (search ANN.lu for example), but it was always discarded as a low/non-priority thing that no developer thought would be necessary or interested in working with.
As I said before, it's not the first time I've heard this complaint, but it seems to me that as AROS improves the more weight is placed on the remaining features it's missing. I've got a feeling that if 68k integration on par with OS4/MorphOS was achieved, you'd shift your attention to another feature (like MUI4 or something) instead of accepting AROS as a decent system. I'm not saying that OS4 and MorphOS don't have some desirable features, but if you could just accept that AROS is making good progress then we could start a more respectful dialogue.
AROS can never have the same seemless 68k Amiga compatibility by using UAE, it will always be like an Amiga computer running on top of the AROS computer, although *looking* like it isn't!
Why can't AROS have seamless compatibility with 68k software? Is it because of the x86 thing? Do you understand why I brought up Amithlon in this conversation?
-
OS4 for G5 exist ???
Assuming you mean that A1X1K thingie .... much closer to a modest G4 than any G5 in terms of performance.
MorphOS-team at one point decided that it's more important to support decent laptops (PowerBooks) than hunting down more power only sensible for apps we don't have.
Sure I can run AROS from 20-core-AMD-you-don't-need-no-heating-anymore down to some obscure ARM-SOC (but I have to be ultracarefull to choose the right HW when I don't want to go hosted), but what than ???
Run those same old 3D-demos at 400fps ?? Or maybe that minimalistic OWB-version (as long as Wanderer doesn't crash on me) ?
All 3 flavours allready have enough HW to run on, whats missing is the SW to make the systems really useable and in the field I see MorphOS clearly ahead (to some great extent due to Fab's OWB).
-
Yeahsurewhateveryousay.....
Magic Mouse has 1 physical button, so much is true, but whit the help of it touch surface it can simulate pretty much as many as you like.
Even if paired with a MorphOS-computer it will come out as 2 button (without any drivers on the MorphOS-side).
In 1984 Mac had one mouse button. Today the Macbook Pro has one mouse button so WTF do laptop users do. There is my point, style over substance crap for 3 decades rather than admit they NEED two buttoned mouse. In true Apple mentality they produce something less useful than a 1990 Naksha mouse for Amiga.
And don't get me started on that iMac slimline keyboard B0LL0X, my Inspiron 9400 laptop has a better Keyboard, desktop computer + crap externally cased laptop keyboard! lol
-
Secondly MOS and Hyperion are wasting time true, they are stupid not to be working on x86 conversion. PPC is very expensive per mhz and a dead product line. Like you say only Aros has longterm future.
Digiman, I would prefer it if you didn't make statements like this. Bashing other platforms like this does not help anyone. The challenges that PPC adds to OS4 and MorphOS development are well understood by all, we're all doing the best we can with the limited resources we have.
-
@Digiman
Have you actually ever used a MacBook ??
You know that those trackpads are multitouch and OSX regognises "gestures" ?
Sure it's not the same as a trackpad with 3 buttons + dedicated scrolling area, no it's much better !
Heck I find the relative primitive 2 touch touchpad of my PBs much more intuive/useable than any touchpad I've come across on Wintel-laptops.
-
@Digiman
Have you actually ever used a MacBook ??
You know that those trackpads are multitouch and OSX regognises "gestures" ?
Sure it's not the same as a trackpad with 3 buttons + dedicated scrolling area, no it's much better !
Heck I find the relative primitive 2 touch touchpad of my PBs much more intuive/useable than any touchpad I've come across on Wintel-laptops.
Just out of interest, how does MorphOS currently get 'right click' functionality on Powerbooks? If I remember correctly, when using AROS on Macbooks you press a key on your keyboard to get a 'right click', can't remember which button though, don't have a Mac.
-
Well, I'm not allowed to tell you details, but 3.0 can detect multitouch and utilizes them similar to MacOS10.5.
-
Well, I'm not allowed to tell you details, but 3.0 can detect multitouch and utilizes them similar to MacOS10.5.
I see. Fair play. :)
-
OS4 for G5 exist ???
Assuming you mean that A1X1K thingie .... much closer to a modest G4 than any G5 in terms of performance.
MorphOS-team at one point decided that it's more important to support decent laptops (PowerBooks) than hunting down more power only sensible for apps we don't have.
Sure I can run AROS from 20-core-AMD-you-don't-need-no-heating-anymore down to some obscure ARM-SOC (but I have to be ultracarefull to choose the right HW when I don't want to go hosted), but what than ???
Run those same old 3D-demos at 400fps ?? Or maybe that minimalistic OWB-version (as long as Wanderer doesn't crash on me) ?
All 3 flavours allready have enough HW to run on, whats missing is the SW to make the systems really useable and in the field I see MorphOS clearly ahead (to some great extent due to Fab's OWB).
And 1080p MKV or HD Flash/Youtube or Blu-Ray playback? 1 core of a 2.8ghz i7 can do this but G4 can not for sure. Like I said PPC iMO is 90s CPU design so OS4/MOS are stuck unless an IBM Xenon PPC motherboard and AOS/MOS version comes out. Aros only needs a VLC software port, the hardware is there, massive difference.
There is no right or wrong just giving you my reasoning. I respect everyone's opinion I just can't share it as far as overpriced Apple or PPC OS4 hardware dies in the face of cheap and powerful i7/AMD CPUd PCs which Aros is closer to supporting it.
Perhaps MOS and OS4 should be modified for Windows/Intel OSX PearPC? Don't know. But the G4 dependence artificially dates MOS/OS4.
Will we never have a need for more than G4 speeds? Unlikely. Will HD Youtube capable browser exist for Aros/MOS/OS4 or something like VLC? Eventually. Will things like 1080p video make an OS more appealing? Definitely. Can even G5 deliver this power? Unlikely.
-
Sure I can run AROS from 20-core-AMD-you-don't-need-no-heating-anymore down to some obscure ARM-SOC (but I have to be ultracarefull to choose the right HW when I don't want to go hosted), but what than ???
Run those same old 3D-demos at 400fps ?? Or maybe that minimalistic OWB-version (as long as Wanderer doesn't
All 3 flavours allready have enough HW to run on, whats missing is the SW to make the systems really useable and in the field I see MorphOS clearly ahead (to some great extent due to Fab's OWB).
I can also play 3d games that require shaders etc on my AROS box. As for Odysessy THANKFULLY fab isn't like many users. He seems to see the advantage of co-operation and it was ported to both AROS and AOS4(Currently both AROS and AOS4. Need video support.). BTW it seems the advantage of X86 is showing already since it seems some people are already testing the JIT enabled version for AROS(not claiming this is AROS' advantage merely an X86 one.).
BTW isn't wireless support for MorphOS coming from the work done on AROS?
-
Personally, I don't see what the obsession with single button Mac mice is about.
I have a two button PC mouse on My computer.
And, as I've mentioned before, most of my hardware didn't come from Apple (my keyboard, mouse, memory, CPU, hard drive, DVD drive, video card, sound card, & USB card all not Apple parts).
And the computer itself was bought as non-functioning surplus on Ebay for $17 plus shipping.
If I had to buy from Apple (at their outrageous prices) it wouldn't have been a consideration.
And btw, regardless of your prejudices, its well made hardware.
I've never liked Steve Jobs or Apple, but I REALLY like MorphOS on a PPC Mac and I'm not apologizing for that AND I don't want to move to X86 any time soon.
-
Well, I'm not allowed to tell you details, but 3.0 can detect multitouch and utilizes them similar to MacOS10.5.
Whoa! Too cool!
-
or something like VLC?
All three NG Amiga platforms already have ports of MPlayer, which offers practically the same video support as VLC.
-
AROS doesn't need Linux, that's a user choice.
I question the sanity of a company that STILL has no G5 version of MOS. The last hope for MOS is to get G5 distro delivered ASAP and stop messing about with limp Mac Minis.
OS4 + X1000 was their only competition, and G5 Mac the only uncompromised PPC OSX machine (so you don't waste money and can still use the G5 Mac you bought even if you hated MOS). Clearly they have a technical barrier because only crazy people would miss such a business opportunity!
With no G5 version and no x86 migration plan MOS is third in the group IMO, at least OS4 for G5 exists and Aros has plentiful x86 hardware new and used available FOREVER.
I agreed with you up to that point I've highlighted.
"OS4 for G5 exists", Huh?
But you're right MorphOS for the G5 is a natural progression.
I've made plans to get one even if its never announced.
-
All three NG Amiga platforms already have ports of MPlayer, which offers practically the same video support as VLC.
Mplayer is cool, but its not VLC.
Still, it will do.
-
@Digiman
Have you actually ever used a MacBook ??
You know that those trackpads are multitouch and OSX regognises "gestures" ?
Sure it's not the same as a trackpad with 3 buttons + dedicated scrolling area, no it's much better !
Heck I find the relative primitive 2 touch touchpad of my PBs much more intuive/useable than any touchpad I've come across on Wintel-laptops.
Example of daily use:Right click.....extract all. 1 second operation. Multitouch on screen for tablets OK but on a little trackpad for Powerbook/Macbook with 1 kindrgarden size single button? no thanks. A good OS design uses 2 mouse buttons, not 1 not 3...just 2. Mouse buttons do not need to be 2 inches wide on a notebook unless a baby or the worlds fatest man is using it surely ;)
And try using those"gestures" on the train in rush hour.
The myth that Apple always make the "best" laptops is wrong. I have sold 1000s of laptops since 2001, I know what the best were/are even removing the OSX vs Windows OS argument because I used them all. Their desktop machines are just ornaments/pieces of aesthetic design, not very cost effective and no more pleasurable in use than a quality built branded Wintel.
There has only been one laptop model that was clearly superior to others by Wintel groups, not great covering 2 decades.
(Windows isn't great before you wonder, just overall OSX is no better, just different IMO)
-
I agreed with you up to that point I've highlighted.
"OS4 for G5 exists", Huh?
But you're right MorphOS for the G5 is a natural progression.
I've made plans to get one even if its never announced.
The ridiculously expensive AmigaOne X1000, with G5 class CPU and being sold with OS4.
-
And 1080p MKV or HD Flash/Youtube or Blu-Ray playback? 1 core of a 2.8ghz i7 can do this but G4 can not for sure. Like I said PPC iMO is 90s CPU design so OS4/MOS are stuck unless an IBM Xenon PPC motherboard and AOS/MOS version comes out. Aros only needs a VLC software port, the hardware is there, massive difference.
MorphOS was experimented on a G5 a couple months (years?) ago, and playing 1080p H.264 was definitely no trouble, even on a single core of the dual/quad 2.7GHz G5.
And what's with VLC? MPlayer (which is available on MorphOS, AROS and OS4) is very capable in this regard (often more, actually), and more efficient than VLC...
Will we never have a need for more than G4 speeds? Unlikely. Will HD Youtube capable browser exist for Aros/MOS/OS4 or something like VLC? Eventually. Will things like 1080p video make an OS more appealing? Definitely. Can even G5 deliver this power? Unlikely.
Sure, more speed is wanted for this kind of things. Noone will deny that. Odyssey Web Browser for MorphOS can actually play HD Youtube itself (in overlay mode for best speed), for your information. 720p ones should be playable on some 1.5-2GHz G4 machines... And it's definitely no trouble to play them in MPlayer as well.
Here's a screenshot for you (try to do this on UAE :)):
http://fabportnawak.free.fr/owbshots/youtube.png
-
(Windows isn't great before you wonder, just overall OSX is no better, just different IMO)
True, but again I don't use the pad on a laptop if I can avoid it.
I use a two button wireless mouse (in the old days I used to use a trackball that mounted on the edge of my keyboard, perfect for your right thumb).
So multi-touch is neat, but I'll still be using a PC mouse.
BTW - Why keep bringing up Windows and OSX?
We're not discussing those OS'.
-
MorphOS was experimented on a G5 a couple months (years?) ago, and playing 1080p H.264 was definitely no trouble, even on a single core of the dual/quad 2.7GHz G5.
And what's with VLC? MPlayer (which is available on MorphOS, AROS and OS4) is very capable in this regard (often more, actually), and more efficient than VLC...
Sure, more speed is wanted for this kind of things. Noone will deny that. Odyssey Web Browser for MorphOS can actually play HD Youtube itself (in overlay mode for best speed), for your information. 720p ones should be playable on some 1.5-2GHz G4 machines... And it's definitely no trouble to play them in MPlayer as well.
Here's a screenshot for you (try to do this on UAE :)):
http://fabportnawak.free.fr/owbshots/youtube.png
Nice Fab, I'll admit.
And I've played 720p video on my machine.
VLC does support an idiotic number of codecs (though I will admit that Mplayer is easier to use).
"MorphOS was experimented on a G5 a couple months (years?) ago"
I got a laugh out of that till I looked up an old message from Pega-1 on that, it WAS a couple years ago.
-
All three NG Amiga platforms already have ports of MPlayer, which offers practically the same video support as VLC.
VLC is much more advanced than mplayer. If you have any doubts just look up people trying to use a hdhomerun with mplayer vs vlc. I personally would love to have the latest version on AROS with libbluray support.
-
The ridiculously expensive AmigaOne X1000, with G5 class CPU and being sold with OS4.
We all kind of figured that's what you meant.
Actually though, the PA6T performs closer to a G4 then a G5.
The X1000 has faster memory and better display cards, so it should perform well.
But if MorphOS is ever ported to a G5, that processor will mop the floor with the PASemi CPU (after all, the real use the PA6T was intended for was laptops).
-
VLC is much more advanced than mplayer. If you have any doubts just look up people trying to use a hdhomerun with mplayer vs vlc. I personally would love to have the latest version on AROS with libbluray support.
Sorry for making so many responses, (to much caffeine).
VLC doesn't support encrypted blurays so its not too useful for playing that format.
-
Sorry for making so many responses, (to much caffeine).
VLC doesn't support encrypted blurays so its not too useful for playing that format.
yes it does ;)
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/22428/vlc_gets_encrypted_blu_ray_playback_capabilities_thanks_to_a_hack/index.html
-
yes it does ;)
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/22428/vlc_gets_encrypted_blu_ray_playback_capabilities_thanks_to_a_hack/index.html
OMG! That's fantastic!
Well, that product just keeps getting better.
No wonder I haven't needed Media Player under Windows for the last several years.
-
VLC does support an idiotic number of codecs (though I will admit that Mplayer is easier to use).
Well, so does MPlayer. Both VLC and MPlayer rely mainly on ffmpeg for video/audio decoding plus a couple other libraries. Both can also make use of libbluray for instance, though it's still not mature enough.
The latest MPlayer version I compiled supports 175 audio codecs and 376 video codecs. Show me something MPlayer can't play, actually. :)
Anyway, I don't like VLC too much, the only advantage i see with it is its streaming server abilities. VLC was also ported to MorphOS a couple years ago, btw. It didn't bring anything compared to MPlayer, though.
-
Is really os4 running on g5's?. Note that the pasemi is not a g5.
-
OMG! That's fantastic!
Well, that product just keeps getting better.
No wonder I haven't needed Media Player under Windows for the last several years.
I was to lazy to post a link to the tutorial on how to do it. That plus I didn't want to get yelled at over the whole it could be used for piracy issue.
-
Is really os4 running on g5's?. Note that the pasemi is not a g5.
You're right, it's not a G5, the X1000 was designed by the Far East Movement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4s6H4ku6ZY
;)
VLC is much more advanced than mplayer. If you have any doubts just look up people trying to use a hdhomerun with mplayer vs vlc. I personally would love to have the latest version on AROS with libbluray support.
As I said before, practically the same, not exactly the same. As Fab pointed out, both MPlayer and VLC rely heavily on FFMPEG. Other than the BluRay support you pointed out, I can't think of much that MPlayer can't play. In fact, it looks like MPlayer does support encrypted BluRays with a workaround:
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html
MPlayer does support encrypted BluRay playback, though not all steps are handled by MPlayer itself. The two alternative methods use the URL schemes bd:// (always supports decryption, but you need the key for each and every disk in ~/.dvdcss/KEYDB.cfg and only works well with very simple BluRays, similar to dvd:// vs. dvdnav://) and br:// (uses libbluray and should support the same as VideoLAN in the link below but that is untested).
End correction
MPlayer needs some documentation on how to play encrypted discs. Patches are welcome. VideoLAN users can follow the instructions here | Mirror
I have not tested, but it looks like it works on Mac OS X, Linux and Windows. Thanks to whoever created this and hopefully no one will have to rip the discs to a hard drive before playing now.
-
You're right, it's not a G5, the X1000 was designed by the Far East Movement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4s6H4ku6ZY
;)
As I said before, practically the same, not exactly the same. As Fab pointed out, both MPlayer and VLC rely heavily on FFMPEG. Other than the BluRay support you pointed out, I can't think of much that MPlayer can't play. In fact, it looks like MPlayer does support encrypted BluRays with a workaround:
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html
Multicast video streaming also comes to mind. I can't watch my network tv tuner with Mplayer but I can with VLC.
-
Multicast video streaming also comes to mind. I can't watch my network tv tuner with Mplayer but I can with VLC.
Look, I use VLC, I know it's good, but can't you see that MPlayer is very similar in functionality?
-
Look, I use VLC, I know it's good, but can't you see that MPlayer is very similar in functionality?
Pretty much. And since I don't stream content over my home network the difference is negligible.
-
Hi,
Just got done checking on the G5 Macs, didn't know that they go up to 2.7 ghz on a ppc chip. Also noted that they have dual core, and quad core PPC chips. OK so the MorphOS team is trying to duplicate what WinUAE had done years ago. Make a good emulator for a Mac machine. I am for that. It is about time someone has tried to improve old Mac hardware.
My question is will they try to do the newer Intel run apple products?
I mean if apple abandoned the PPC chips years ago will the MorphOS team do the same in the future?
I mean the newer Intel machines need improvement to. Don't you think so?
Just loaded up AROS on my old Toshiba laptop. Doesn't see the USB wifi thumb drive that I am using. Didn't really expect it to, since they are also about 10 years behind on modern day computers, but for what they have it runs pretty good. I mean I watched the lines demo running in 4 seperate windows, but this was as far as it went because it was pretty late last night, didn't see anything usable as of yet.
The thing I like though is that it does run on PC gear, and there is lots and lots and lots of that old stuff laying around and most of it you can get for free if you find someone throwing the old junk out.
Now a sad note
Our town had a turn in old electronics day last week, I say plenty of g4 and g5 mac's being thrown in the piles (smile) but there in one pile I saw a couple of Amiga's, C64's, commodore monitors etc. Tried to talk to a person about buying that pile, but he said he couldn't sell, the people turned this stuff over to the city for destruction and by the law the city had to destroy them. So these products are going to Pittsburgh were their usable materials will be recycled and reused in newer junk. They took over 30 truck loads of old electronic equipment there. I wonder how many Amiga's where on those trucks.
smerf
-
Hi,
"Pretty much. And since I don't stream content over my home network the difference is negligible. "
Probably because that old G4 can't handle steaming, you need a fast processor that runs over 1.6 ghz to get proper streaming done right (at least in the PC world).
OK I stirred to poop really good on this one, gotta run
smerf
-
Multicast video streaming also comes to mind. I can't watch my network tv tuner with Mplayer but I can with VLC.
MPlayer supports multicast streaming, and rtp/rtsp protocols (it might require live555 library to work with some streams). But you might have a built where it's disabled. Also, multicast won't work with AmiTCP-likes. MIAMI supported it, though.
As for TV tuners, that's quite a mess, but it mostly depends on v4l on Linux, anyway, so it should work, in theory (might need esotheric options, though).
-
Look, I use VLC, I know it's good, but can't you see that MPlayer is very similar in functionality?
playing the same codecs does not equal being an equal product. I never said mplayer wasn't good but I did however point out ways it was behind vlc. If you would like I could add some more.
VLC has transcoding built in Mplayer doesn't. Mplayer is a good player. VLC is more than a player. It's more geared towards being a network video tool.
-
MPlayer supports multicast streaming, and rtp/rtsp protocols (it might require live555 library to work with some streams). But you might have a built where it's disabled. Also, multicast won't work with AmiTCP-likes. MIAMI supported it, though.
As for TV tuners, that's quite a mess, but it mostly depends on v4l on Linux, anyway, so it should work, in theory (might need esotheric options, though).
Nah hdhomerun doesn't use v4l on linux. It streams the video via a built in server in the box and the stream is picked up via vlc or mplayer. However most people give up on mplayer because it seems to have issues with it.
-
Hi,
"Pretty much. And since I don't stream content over my home network the difference is negligible. "
Probably because that old G4 can't handle steaming, you need a fast processor that runs over 1.6 ghz to get proper streaming done right (at least in the PC world).
OK I stirred to poop really good on this one, gotta run
smerf
Not a problem with my Phenom based X86 system. I just never got around to putting a PC near my living room entertainment center.
-
Hi,
@Iggy,
Thats not what I meant, and you know it.
You have a nice system there, but need to upgrade that video card. I am using a 5770 MSI radeon card in my 6 core AMD machine. They are inexpensive and run real well, I also have a 5750 in my quad core Intel Q6600 (old silicon) computer.
Probably will upgrade next year, if AMD brings out something better. Don't like buying Intel products (hate them just a little bit less than Macs).
On a high note though, I am interested though in a G5 Mac, 2.7 ghz. You know if MorphOS will run on it?
OK, curiosity caught the old dog, I may suffer through touching a Mac just to see if there is any progress made since I last threw up.
smerf
-
playing the same codecs does not equal being an equal product.
When it comes to video players, equal support of codecs does mean an equal product, by and large. All the rest is just bells and whistles on top of this core functionality. Think about how you use a video player.
1. Open video file.
2. Press play.
That's it. As long as the video player plays the file without incident, you don't really interact with it much. This is different from, let's say, spreadsheet software, where you're frequently interacting with the UI.
It's more geared towards being a network video tool.
Most people use VLC as standalone video player.
-
Hi,
@Iggy,
Thats not what I meant, and you know it.
You have a nice system there, but need to upgrade that video card. I am using a 5770 MSI radeon card in my 6 core AMD machine. They are inexpensive and run real well, I also have a 5750 in my quad core Intel Q6600 (old silicon) computer.
Probably will upgrade next year, if AMD brings out something better. Don't like buying Intel products (hate them just a little bit less than Macs).
On a high note though, I am interested though in a G5 Mac, 2.7 ghz. You know if MorphOS will run on it?
OK, curiosity caught the old dog, I may suffer through touching a Mac just to see if there is any progress made since I last threw up.
smerf
I only have an old 4870 in my X86 box..:confused:
And we're only looking at R400s in the G5.
Although...The PCIe G5's could support better cards (especially if we found a way around the firmware limitations).
BTW Smerf, I already have a line on a dual 2.5 GHz G5.
-
When it comes to video players, equal support of codecs does mean an equal product, by and large. All the rest is just bells and whistles on top of this core functionality. Think about how you use a video player.
1. Open video file.
2. Press play.
That's it. As long as the video player plays the file without incident, you don't really interact with it much. This is different from, let's say, spreadsheet software, where you're frequently interacting with the UI.
Most people use VLC as standalone video player.
the bells and whistles as you put it are part of the product. so <> features = <> product.
ooo care to point out where you got idea most people use vlc as a stand alone player? Because it certainly wasn't from vlc's site or forums.
-
the bells and whistles as you put it are part of the product. so <> features = <> product.
Okay, apart from the networking features that are clearly important to you, what features (that you care about) does VLC have that MPlayer does not?
ooo care to point out where you got idea most people use vlc as a stand alone player? Because it certainly wasn't from vlc's site or forums.
You might have heard of these things called torrents. They're kinda popular for getting videos. Are you suggesting more people stream videos rather than download them (aside from flash-based sites like YouTube and premium services like Netflix?)?
-
Okay, apart from the networking features that are clearly important to you, what features (that you care about) does VLC have that MPlayer does not?
You might have heard of these things called torrents. They're kinda popular for getting videos. Are you suggesting more people stream videos rather than download them (aside from flash-based sites like YouTube and premium services like Netflix?)?
even for torrents many ps3 users use vlc to transcode the video and stream it to thier ps3's instead of filling up the hard drive. You know the ps3 you might have heard of it? there's 1 or 2 people who own one. Just because you are to simple to do it doesn't mean it's not a popular feature.
-
even for torrents many ps3 users use vlc to transcode the video and stream it to thier ps3's instead of filling up the hard drive. You know the ps3 you might have heard of it? there's 1 or 2 people who own one. Just because you are to simple to do it doesn't mean it's not a popular feature.
Seeing as many people have laptops with HDMI ports built in, you're right, I don't see the point.
-
Seeing as many people have laptops with HDMI ports built in, you're right, I don't see the point.
you don't have to see the point. However millions of people do see the point. I have a latop with hdmi out. However I don't see the point of pulling it out to hook up to my projector when I can simply stream the video to my already hooked up ps3. On top of that I can stream to multiple machices at once.
-
you don't have to see the point. However millions of people do see the point. I have a latop with hdmi out. However I don't see the point of pulling it out to hook up to my projector when I can simply stream the video to my already hooked up ps3. On top of that I can stream to multiple machices at once.
I get it for the geek factor, but apart from that, I don't see why anyone would bother. Let's look at the two solutions:
1. If in worst case scenario you don't have any free HDMI ports in TV/projector, pull cable out and plug in laptop (if do have spare port, then can just keep spare cable around for this).
2. Set up network video stream on laptop/PC, find stream on PS3.
Scenario 1 means no transcoding necessary, no network bandwidth is used up. Scenario 2 requires use of two machines, and if you want to broadcast at a decent level of quality is going to tie up a decent sized chunk of your home network bandwidth. Setup time with both scenarios is roughly equal. You mention streaming to multiple machines at once, just how many PS3s do you own! ;)
Plus, if it's something you do frequently, you'd be far better off with investing in a proper HTPC (running XBMC or similar) and cutting out all this faffing about.
-
I get it for the geek factor, but apart from that, I don't see why anyone would bother. Let's look at the two solutions:
1. If in worst case scenario you don't have any free HDMI ports in TV/projector, pull cable out and plug in laptop (if do have spare port, then can just keep spare cable around for this).
2. Set up network video stream on laptop/PC, find stream on PS3.
Scenario 1 means no transcoding necessary, no network bandwidth is used up. Scenario 2 requires use of two machines, and if you want to broadcast at a decent level of quality is going to tie up a decent sized chunk of your home network bandwidth. Setup time with both scenarios is roughly equal. You mention streaming to multiple machines at once, just how many PS3s do you own! ;)
Plus, if it's something you do frequently, you'd be far better off with investing in a proper HTPC (running XBMC or similar) and cutting out all this faffing about.
2 ps3's 1 htpc, 2 hdhomerun boxes, 3 xbox360's. 1 Media server ;)
It's not about hooking up a hdmi cable. It's the fact that I only setup my home theater once period. I don't have to touch it again. so by your own logic hooking up a laptop is more work.
-
2 ps3's 1 htpc, 2 hdhomerun boxes, 3 xbox360's. 1 Media server ;)
Nice. :D
It's not about hooking up a hdmi cable. It's the fact that I only setup my home theater once period. I don't have to touch it again. so by your own logic hooking up a laptop is more work.
You don't have to touch the cables, but you do have to setup the video stream each time. As I said before, probably looking at similar setup time (about 30 seconds I reckon).
Anyway, horses for courses and all that jazz, do whatever works for you. Sounds like you've got a nice home media setup, what software does the HTPC run? Also, what's the media server? I've been putting together plans for some HTPC goodness, so it'd be good to share notes. :)
EDIT: Just to say, my current plans are along the lines of Intel ION-based PC running the Ion build of OpenElec http://openelec.tv/ , once they've made their XBMC Eden-based release. I've also been thinking about how I can use some Raspberry Pi as media centre devices, giving them away as presents to friends. Possibly using them as network-connected radio/music streamers.
-
Nice. :D
You don't have to touch the cables, but you do have to setup the video stream each time. As I said before, probably looking at similar setup time (about 30 seconds I reckon).
Anyway, horses for courses and all that jazz, do whatever works for you. Sounds like you've got a nice home media setup, what software does the HTPC run? Also, what's the media server? I've been putting together plans for some HTPC goodness, so it'd be good to share notes. :)
The htpc is simply a XBMC box in my living room. As for my media server it's a headless ubuntu box sitting in a closet that I store my ripped blurays on. each hdhomerun has 2 tvtuners this gives me 4 tuners I can watch pause play with. I do it this way so I don't have to lug anything from room to room. If you want more details pm me and we can discuss further.
-
The htpc is simply a XBMC box in my living room. As for my media server it's a headless ubuntu box sitting in a closet that I store my ripped blurays on. each hdhomerun has 2 tvtuners this gives me 4 tuners I can watch pause play with. I do it this way so I don't have to lug anything from room to room. If you want more details pm me and we can discuss further.
Ah, I see, cool. With regards to your media server running Ubuntu, just in case you didn't know Plex Media Server (which can run on Ubuntu) now supports DLNA, so you can stream direct to any modern TV in your house (if you have a network connection to them of course):
http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/30/plex-media-server-beta-dlna-wp7/
http://www.plexapp.com/getplex/
News only came out about a week ago, thought it was worth sharing.
EDIT: Serviio is another option for this:
http://www.serviio.org/
-
I can not believe you guys are still going on about this!
-
I can not believe you guys are still going on about this!
Not sure what you are talking about this thread has made it's way through 4 topics >.<
-
When it comes to video players, equal support of codecs does mean an equal product, by and large. All the rest is just bells and whistles on top of this core functionality. Think about how you use a video player.
1. Open video file.
2. Press play.
That's it. As long as the video player plays the file without incident, you don't really interact with it much. This is different from, let's say, spreadsheet software, where you're frequently interacting with the UI.
Most people use VLC as standalone video player.
@Terminills: I hate to say this but HenryCase has a good point, most people do use VLC as a standalone player. I know loads of people who use VLC daily (or close to daily). They use it because it plays damn near every bit of video thrown at it and the only button that matters is the play button. They also don't post on VLC forums and only visited the website once. That was when they downloaded VLC in the first place. These people are typical users, not people like you, HenryCase, or most other users of this forum. They are the same people who keep asking you to fix their damn PC when it goes wrong. ;)
As for media players, I find my original XBox with XBMC far more reliable for streaming than the PS3 and for the price you can get them for (£10 on ebay.co.uk being commonplace) you might as well stick one in every damn room. Add some NAS solution for storage of those ripped BD's and it's job done without your PC wasting electricity.
-
Not sure what you are talking about this thread has made it's way through 4 topics >.<
You have been talking about VLC since early this morning, T!
Its late in the afternoon (here) and I'm going out to get some dinner.
Don't you guys eat?
-
@Mazze
Transparent m68k emulation: I can copy any old amiga filesystem to L: and use directly partitions in that format, e.g. PFS3. I can copy any datatype and all my native apps will use them. It really feels integrated, not like running in a separate box (I prefer that). For old m68k games I double click them and the ADF is launched if EUAE is installed. For launching m68k apps Fab included another config (haven't used it as most serious apps run directly)
Wide variety of available filesystems: fat, NTFS, ext2, 3G, all m68k ones...
Great desktop: Ambient, miles ahead from Wanderer or WB.
MUI4: IMHO the best Amiga toolkit
CGX: ahead from P96. Does AROS still lack overlay?.
Console: MUICON is simply great. AROS console is pretty basic
HD Tools: Partition tools, recovery tools, mounting tools are great. Is there any AROS file recovery tool? (just curious, I don't know)
OS4/WOS/PUP compatibility: AROS doesn't have that.
Latest OWB&MPlayer: Fab rules. MorphOS versions are the most complete and stable ones.
Nice SDK: I prefer MorphOS SDK editors
Good translations (spanish one is on sync with other languages) ;-)
-
@Mazze
OS4/WOS/PUP compatibility: AROS doesn't have that.
Good points all, except maybe that one.
-
Sorry Aros community for apparently starting this debate.
Personally for me, I don't care how old apps are handled as long as the machine can run them, the easier the better. I have no problem in how aros is handling this, in fact the main reason I stayed interested in Amiga and kept wanting a dedicated New Amiga machine is largly because I had winuae on my pc that kept reminding me that their was and use to be a better way of doing things.
May be this is a bit daft but I will admit to it, one of the reason I got amigaone x1000 is because I didn't see the future of Amiga as buying a second hand apple product or a second hand pc. Daft, stupid, maybe but I like the fact that custom hardware is made for Amigaos, would I like it to be more advance, yes, would I liked to have been cheaper, yes, would I liked more classic features on it, ie classic joystick port and castWeasel mk4 built in on board, yes but I understand the limitation of what is possible.
I got aros about 6 months befor my x1000 for my acer aspire one, and was very impressive with how finished and complete it felt and it nearly put me off getting the Amigaone, I even started thinking image if I put the £2000 in to the aros community to advance their efforts. In the end I felt "well tried that it not quite what I'm after, I will get my x1000, give os4 it's chance, see how I get on, i can sell it if it doesn't impressive me and build a aros machine with the money" so far os4 has won me over, but aros is a lot closer than I thought and is only getting better each year, but now I can enjoy both systems and os. Hell maybe even one day I might end up gettting a Morphos machine. Their no reason why can't support both os.
So my point is at the end of the day if one of my friends wanted a Amiga experices today (they all have pc) the first thing I get them is actually winuae setup if they wanted more or a dedicated machine then aros, because its free and it's what they already have, generally most people don't have an old ppc mac lying around, if they did, of course I recommend Morphos. If they enjoyed that and where big fans of Amiga and had a bit of spare cash then os4, but very rearly is that going to happen wich is why I do feel that aros has the big advantage
-
@AmigaNG
There is absolutely no reason for you to apologize for anything, especially not for recommending people to get AROS. Even the thought of that is crazy, of course you have every right to do so in this free world if that is your opinion. But also I should have the rights to express my opinion that MorphOS brings a far better Amiga NG experience than AROS on an old PC (I'm actually quite convinced that *no* MorphOS user (and no OS4 user either for that matter) would accept to *completely* replace their systems with AROS, it's simply not the same thing, it plays in a different league), and that PPC Mac's aren't very expensive either (often costing between 20-200 dollars) without HenryCase insinuating that I am causing hate threads against AROS, which obviously isn't true.
This is ridiculous. What's wrong with people on amiga.org these days (and no, I am not talking about you), it seems it's getting worse by the hour... :crazy:
-
This conversation is still going on?
I thought we had settled this and decided DOS was the way of the future?
-
Don't laugh, freedos rocks!
http://www.freedos.org
Was I the only bitter one when he realized you HAD to use windows eventually?
Dos was good. DRDOS was awesome. Windows is what was ****ty.
Steven
-
This conversation is still going on?
I thought we had settled this and decided DOS was the way of the future?
Two days later, I check in, and yep its still going on. WTF?
@AmigaNG
There is absolutely no reason for you to apologize for anything, especially not for recommending people to get AROS. Even the thought of that is crazy, of course you have every right to do so in this free world if that is your opinion. But also I should have the rights to express my opinion that MorphOS brings a far better Amiga NG experience than AROS on an old PC (I'm actually quite convinced that *no* MorphOS user (and no OS4 user either for that matter) would accept to *completely* replace their systems with AROS, it's simply not the same thing, it plays in a different league), and that PPC Mac's aren't very expensive either (often costing between 20-200 dollars) without HenryCase insinuating that I am causing hate threads against AROS, which obviously isn't true.
This is ridiculous. What's wrong with people on amiga.org these days (and no, I am not talking about you), it seems it's getting worse by the hour... :crazy:
Hey, I got slammed pretty hard for this too (apparently I'm a troll and I didn't even know it).
And I use both OS'.
Can I help it if, at this stage of development, I prefer MorphOS?
And, as to the state of our community, we're losing people over the lack of civility here.
AmigaDave asked Transition to delete his account last week.
I haven't seen a post from Redrumloa in awhile (although he's on MorphZone quite often).
We're getting a little too polarized and too argumentative.
Have I mentioned that I support all three NG OS' and can sympathize with those holding on to legacy systems?
-
And I was called a child.
(http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/tears/t2309.gif) (http://yoursmiles.org/t-tears.php)
I will never post here again... ;)
-
And I was called a child.
(http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/tears/t2309.gif) (http://yoursmiles.org/t-tears.php)
I will never post here again... ;)
Yeah, me neither. :laugh1:
Hey Manu, I've been playing around with my AROS system (which I would add to my signature, but then it wouldn't fit within the space limitation).
There's a fair amount of software out there for this OS.
I was surprised.
Then again, thanks to Xdelusion, I've been checking out Haiku and it too has a lot of software written for it (and both still beta, amazing).
-
Don't laugh, freedos rocks!
http://www.freedos.org
Was I the only bitter one when he realized you HAD to use windows eventually?
Dos was good. DRDOS was awesome. Windows is what was ****ty.
Steven
FreeDOS does rock! :)
-
FreeDOS does rock! :)
Can you make a boot floppy with it for BIOS flashing?
Currently I boot my machines with a Win98 CD to a command prompt to do this, but it would be simpler if I could just have the flashing software and BIOS file on the same floppy I boot with.
-
Can you make a boot floppy with it for BIOS flashing?
Currently I boot my machines with a Win98 CD to a command prompt to do this, but it would be simpler if I could just have the flashing software and BIOS file on the same floppy I boot with.
Prolly... Though I use USB drives to flash my machines.
-
even for torrents many ps3 users use vlc to transcode the video and stream it to thier ps3's instead of filling up the hard drive. You know the ps3 you might have heard of it? there's 1 or 2 people who own one. Just because you are to simple to do it doesn't mean it's not a popular feature.
Hmmm no. People like Bricktop and PS3team etc on tpb regularly do PS3 and 360 friendly 4.37gb "burn n go" BDRIPS on various sites, which you just pop in the DVD/BD drive and enjoy the film :)
I doubt less than 1% of PS3 owners do it the VLC way.
As for controls many are required, I use Zoom player because it has far more useful "extras" like per pixel H or V zoom/adjustment, and then there are the exhaustive FFDshow 7.1 audio controls. VLC is more king in the Linux world or for people who haven't installed codec pack. I only use it to play broken files or test to make sure I don't have a codec problem for zplayer and it is actually media file problem. Don't even use it to play Amiga mods. The full screen interface is annoying!
-
I can not believe you guys are still going on about this!
Especially as he is the only person not using flash memory or DVDr to play the films like everyone else does :lol:
-
Especially as he is the only person not using flash memory or DVDr to play the films like everyone else does :lol:
Funny, right before checking back on this thread I was playing back a ripped copy of a Godzilla movie (don't worry, I actually own a DVD of it).
I don't use DRDrs too much.
BTW - Its scary how much old programs like DVDdecrypter still work on.
-
Especially as he is the only person not using flash memory or DVDr to play the films like everyone else does :lol:
your time must not be worth much. ;)
-
your time must not be worth much. ;)
Strange also that everyone I know who has a PS3 (including myself, before its inadequacies pi55ed me off to the point I sold it) uses PS3mediaserver. Far easier (and quicker for those whose time is precious) to set up.
-
Funny, right before checking back on this thread I was playing back a ripped copy of a Godzilla movie (don't worry, I actually own a DVD of it).
I don't use DRDrs too much.
BTW - Its scary how much old programs like DVDdecrypter still work on.
Godzilla rules!!!
-
Strange also that everyone I know who has a PS3 (including myself, before its inadequacies pi55ed me off to the point I sold it) uses PS3mediaserver. Far easier (and quicker for those whose time is precious) to set up.
Lol if we want to talk about easiest then the latest Buffalo NAS' come with DLNA servers. However Since my setup includes Tvtuners which are network based I don't have a standard setup and I will admit that. However my point still stands. I was not able to do what I needed with Mplayer. Which was my main point. :)
-
Last Sunday I watched "Avatar". Big blue smurfs which followed some cult. SCNR
-
Lol if we want to talk about easiest then the latest Buffalo NAS' come with DLNA servers.
Synology (http://www.synology.com) have had that in their DiskStations like forever (along with *tons* of other features, I can really recommend one of their DiskStation... ;))
-
Synology (http://www.synology.com) have had that in their DiskStations like forever (along with *tons* of other features, I can really recommend one of their DiskStation... ;))
I like the cloud apps. They have a torrent client?
-
@mazze
a cult like those weird OSS guys perhaps?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NicoBZH_-_Richard_Stallman_%28by-sa%29_%289%29.jpg
-
I like the cloud apps. They have a torrent client?
Yes! :)
-
Like I said PPC iMO is 90s CPU design so OS4/MOS are stuck unless an IBM Xenon PPC motherboard and AOS/MOS version comes out.
Just curious. Are you an X86 fan (1978's design), a 680x0 fan (1979's design) or an ARM fan (1983's design) or what?
I don't claim that X86 (or ARM) didn't have many advantages over PPC, but surely "recentness of the design they are based on" isn't among them :hammer:
-
Which one allows you to encode 1080p/50 video and burn it to BD?
-
Just curious. Are you an X86 fan (1978's design), a 680x0 fan (1979's design) or an ARM fan (1983's design) or what?
I don't claim that X86 (or ARM) didn't have many advantages over PPC, but surely "recentness of the design they are based on" isn't among them :hammer:
:hammer: is exactly what the i7 does even to IBM's Xenon PPC derived CPU, the fastest possible remotely PPC derived CPU suitable for hosting an OS.
The first Intel CPU I had any respect for was Centrino Pentium M, Arm was similar to 2:1 advantage per mhz of 68030 in 1987, actually 030 was pretty lame 25mhz 020 and 030 give same MIPS more or less. Point is not only does the i7 wipe the floor with even Xenon let alone G5/G4 but most expensive i7 is cheaper too than the cheapest G4 based SAM board.
Framerates on my games/movies and speed of encoding my own videos are what concern me not emotionally attached to the OS/brand of manufacturer. I hate Windows/Linux AND OOS X equally. I use the most competitively priced hardware with the OS with largest library of apps available.I7 WINTEL. Not the same as when I loved using my Amiga 1000.
Arm is low power netbook/tablet level CPU so why waste money porting OS4 to something that computationally restricts performance. If that's your cup of tea then use AMD Zacate CPU. I suspect you are someone who can't separate x86 (ic 64bit) and Microsoft Windows computer. Same top end CPU and GPU are found in Macs too ;)
It's all about being the fastest and still cheapest price per MIP etc.
-
....It's all about being the fastest and still cheapest price per MIP etc.
x86 is the best bang for the $ + most widely available hardware crap. Port it all over to this then. Why re-invent hardware when you can ride for free? Morph currently making good use of old Apple stuff. I say good for now with this strategy. Riding for free! But...the future will have to be something else obviously. Screw ARM and the horse it rode in on regarding a desktop hardware architecture. So back to the x86 possibility. Makes sense. MorphOS team various comments seems to indicate a future shift in this direction. I say, 'good !'
-
x86 is the best bang for the $ + most widely available hardware crap. Port it all over to this then. Why re-invent hardware when you can ride for free? Morph currently making good use of old Apple stuff. I say good for now with this strategy. Riding for free! But...the future will have to be something else obviously. Screw ARM and the horse it rode in on regarding a desktop hardware architecture. So back to the x86 possibility. Makes sense. MorphOS team various comments seems to indicate a future shift in this direction. I say, 'good !'
Hard to say what the shift will be, but you guys could be right on track.
However, currently we are about to receive v3.0 and v3.1 has been announced. So the PPC track is still being followed.
I'm running v2.7 on a 1.42MHz G4 Powermac and it runs quite well.
My total investment is quite low (a fraction of what I've spent on my X86 system) and my Powermac runs circles around hardware like the stuff used on Acube motherboards.
I wouldn't count out the possibility of G5 support before an ISA shift. We have a far amount of native PPC software.
-
I bet I never spent a penny more on my TWO Athlon64 3800+ PC systems than anyone's MOS Mac purchase ;) They were getting tossed out. I have ended up with 6 PCs now and all can run Vista/7 very well if I make them 2gb RAM.
I agree if all you want to do is run MS Office/surf/email/mp3/non HD AVI a 1.2ghz P3 laptop level power with even 256mb and XP SP2 is enough. Trouble is for such slow hardware nobody would buy new unless as a tablet/netbook. Even 7cm x 7cm Micro ATX/Mini ITX home theatre PC builds with i3 2100k can do 1080p 5.1DTS Blu-ray decoding....and i3 is the slowest x86 from Intel (AMD E-450 18w low power APU may be faster)
-
1.61? So we're no longer dealing with a beta product and all libraries are now complete?
Hi,
My software is better than your software, my software is better than yours, my software is so much better, and if you don't believe it I will give you all youtube tours.
smerf LOL
Where is this all taking us. Wish they would bring CPM back!!!
-
I suspect you are someone who can't separate x86 (ic 64bit) and Microsoft Windows computer.
No, personally I mostly use X86 nowadays with linux (my ARM-equipped phone being on secondary place), although that would be Atom in most of the cases, as I don't really need that much CPU power for "most things", and it definitely makes sense for any "always on" system (Yes, I know ARM could save even more on the electricity bill). PowerPC (with MorphOS) comes as third, sometimes when you have to spend entire day fighting with certain system, you might want to use something different at home :hammer:
Basically I just find it funny how someone considers PowerPC's "90's design" to be a bad thing, as the CPU it's most often (f.ex. in this thread) compared to, is based on 1978's design. Unlike in many other areas, in CPU design, I'd say "newer == better". Of course that won't automatically make it fast, popular or good choice (usually due to lack of previous point)
-EDIT-
And as for Microsoft windows, I know that earlier NT versions (3, was it?) supported several processors, including PowerPC. Current (desktop) Windows only runs on X86 / X86-64, but next version will add ARM support. Windows Mobile / Phone of course runs on other hardware, but that's almost totally different story.
-EDIT-
And where "official" Windows doesn't run, wine will run windows binaries compiled for the platform it's running on. Which is quite useless, as even if a program is 100% open source, if it depends on some (X86-only, as most) library which isn't, no chance running it. Of course wine itself provides own versions of some "Windows internals".
-
To be fair to X86 (and I'm as much a critic of it as anyone) the current processors are entirely different to the 1978 architecture. They don't even run the same code any more (the 8-bit part was taken out when they went 64-bit).
Essentially the current processors are a 2000's design with backwards compatibility externally, that's all.
-
I think the whole "my system is better than yours" is wrong. Aros has some advantages (like supporting different platforms, processors and hosted versions and it is good in 3D). It also has weaknesses that all Aros-Developers are aware of and working on it (like me and others working to integrated sophisticated 68k integration and distributions, Zune-Updates, Scalos to replace Wanderer as Workbench-Replacement etc.). In some areas like 68k integration it can not reach MorphOS level, but that is a price for using modern hardware. Some say they will only support and use Aros if it is better than MorphOS or AOS in all areas, I myself have decided where can I do more, commit directly and what has the best chances in the world of today and that is clearly Aros (for me). But that can everybody decide for himself/herself. The question is do we waste time and energy to "prove" each other that the own choice is the "best and only true" or discuss if and where working together is possible?