aros fork?

[itix]

but when it does (E-UAE) then that can be put on top of the new system

That is not different from EUAE on Linux or WinUAE on Windows.

Even more so if you break API compatibility you can not integrate UAE into OS more than you could integrate UAE into Windows.

I see, if one breaks backwards compatibilty at soure/binary level then it's "anything but amiga-like" (quoting you from above), yet, somehow magically, a different *premade* OS *is* !

If somebody wrote Windows clone which is not binary or source compatible with Windows, is it Windows at all? ;-)

[itix]

Can you open WinUAE/AmigaOS windows as host (Windows) windows ? screens ? not even these ? how does it compare then ?

I dont know. But AROS2 with EUAE integration can not, because none of those two yet exist.

Depends what your definition of "integration" is, for me it's files, windows, screens. So, why could this not be on top of an API incompatible OS ? files are already integrated in WinUAE at least, sure it would be more code invloved than on a API compliant or -like system, but nevertheless, what would be the obstacle ?

So, what is actually this EUAE integration? If one can integrate EUAE into AROS2 which is neither API or source compatible, why one can not integrate EUAE into Linux in the same fashion?

What is so special in EUAE integration that it could not be done in other systems? And how one can guarantee it works in the system which does not yet exist.

If you had a blind cousin and if he got his vision back but suddennly and unfortunately became deaf would you not still regard him your cousin ? you see, you would (learn to) communicate differently with him now, in an "incompatible" way.

It is more like that blind cousin would be both blind and deaf.

There is nothing wrong in AROS2 idea and it is very good one. I just hope Amiga (community) does not ruin it. AROS is  already sidetracked to PPC and UAE integration ideas.

Welcome to the ship, AROS. Together we stand, and together we sink.