MorphOS 3.0 released - PowerBook G4 support and new pricing

[Crumb]

Well, the Amiga demos that you can run under MorphOS are a serious minority, so judging by your own requirements you'd probably be better of with classic hardware and OS 3.x, I think. There's no point arguing over what OS is better if there's no common point of reference, anyway.

I care about Amiga software. The only unix software I'm interested is the correctly ported one. CLI ported apps are crap. alien-GUI ported apps are crap too

At this point I assume that you are just trolling. What I'm trying to say is that a CLI is very useful for some tasks, regardless of the GUI. If you disagree with that, I guess you have been too busy watching Fluffy Digital Snowflakes to do anything seriously productive with your computer.

I use cli to launch scripts that automate tasks and to compile, but for normal use it's usually slower than GUI (unless your GUI is absolutely crap).

[pVC]

Here's a little article with pics and video of MorphOS 3: What's New in MorphOS 3

[Iggy]

Here's a little article with pics and video of MorphOS 3: What's New in MorphOS 3

Doesn't mention this (which I think is significant):

"SATA

• Fixed SATA cards support on PowerMacs.    
  

SCSI

• Fixed Symbios SCSI cards support on PowerMacs"
  

[/FONT]

[dreamcast270mhz]

Another looney says

[MorphOS, OS4 and Classic Amiga systems are the only ones who are real 'Amigas', not that joke AROS or Amiga Forever.]

It is so nice of you to let us know what real Amiga's are, since I was with the REAL Amiga two weeks after it hit the market, I would dare to say that MorphOS is just another Amiga emulator that works on just a MAC. I do not consider MorphOS or OS4 to be real Amiga's. They are very poor emulators of the Amiga system. The Amiga Forever emulator is closer to the real Amiga then anything else out there, it is mostly automatic so any beginning computer user can load up an Amiga program wheter it be NTSC/Pal, AGA or PAL. It even emulates a 4 disk system when you have a program that has more than 1 floppy disk, by this I mean it will run an old 4 disk program by automatically sensing that this program has 4 disks and automatically sets up for a four disk drive system. Amiga Forever even senses CD32 cd when placed in your CD drive. It is the utmost in Amiga Emulation, nothing else compares to it's simplicity, not even the real Amiga itself.

To say that MorphOS is a classic Amiga, is like saying a VW is like a Ferrari, there is just no way that MorphOS can compete with Amiga Forever, it is just too simple of a computer emulator that needs a lot more work to even compare with version one of the original WinUAE.

Sorry but the truth should be known.

smerf

I have a few issues with this post of yours:

• You childishly call me a looney, when many here may say the same about you. He who lives in a house made of glass should NOT throw stones.
• You misinterpret my statements. By grouping OS4, MorphOS and Classic Amigas together, I am NOT calling them Amigas in the sense of C=. I am merely stating that, by this development chart here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/AmigaOS_3_and_clones.svg/500px-AmigaOS_3_and_clones.svg.png You can clearly see the relationships of MorphOS and OS4 to OS 3.1. I am discounting AROS because it has many, many underpinnings of Linux, plus the majority of the community arent very courteous. Amiga Forever is discounted because of a few reasons. First off, it is merely a wrapper for the original 68k OS, with not a single line of contributed code to the OS 3.1-3.9 codebase. MorphOS has transcended the classic Amiga, while retaining WarpOS compatibility and adapting to more recent hardware. All Amiga forever acts is as a "Franken Amiga" reanimating the original OS on modern PCs. It therefore is a glorified DOSBOX for the Amiga platform. Also, ever since MorphOS, when i do use it, allows for moutning of floppies and images i can move beyond the contrains of floppies, which I have always hated. When I make some programs for MOS and Amiga, I plan on releasing them via digital distribution.
  
• Finally, this: "To say that MorphOS is a classic Amiga, is like saying a VW is like a Ferrari, there is just no way that MorphOS can compete with Amiga Forever, it is just too simple of a computer emulator ." First of all, I never claimed that it was a classic Amiga. See above list. Secondly, Cloanto has been an arse to the Amiga community by not providing a free, if basic, legal solution to the distribution of Kickstart and WB. By profiting on us, they are biting us in the arse. And anyways, by your line of reasoning I could say that the M4 rifle is nothing more than an AR-10 emulator. Kind of paradoxical since the original AR-10 only shares some design architecture (direct impingement gas operation) with the M4

Finally, I just plain don't like the fact that you sit there and bring nothing but chaos to conversations. So, I have a suggestion for you: Go sodo**** some other fora, such as 4chan.

[takemehomegrandma]

Here's a little article with pics and video of MorphOS 3: What's New in MorphOS 3

A very nice little article indeed, with screenshots and a video, well worth having a look at!

[takemehomegrandma]

I am merely stating that, by this development chart here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f8/AmigaOS_3_and_clones.svg/500px-AmigaOS_3_and_clones.svg.png You can clearly see the relationships of MorphOS and OS4 to OS 3.1.

IMHO, that is a poor picture, misleading in several ways — The 3.1 API is *the* common denominator for all of them (with their respective "additions"/evolution on top of that), but the pictures makes it look like OS4 would be built on some "3.9 API" (the 3.5 and 3.9 releases were merely OS 3.1 that had most of the common third party apps, patches and add-on's that people used bundled with it, no real OS API evolution to speak of, right?), and the graphical design is erroneous in the way that it makes AROS look "on par" with OS 3.9, MorphOS as being derived from AROS and OS4 as being derived from OS 3.9 (AFAIK there never was any such connection), and OS4 as being "on par" with MorphOS. It also has some strange "Source code" line, which has always been a somewhat artificial as an argument (and not entirely true, technically speaking) with no relevance in practice anyway. Here is an alternative picture, that illustrates the various flavors from an Amiga OS 68k *time line* perspective instead:



The leftmost column is Amiga OS (68k), the three rightmost columns represents the "NG" options in the order in which they were introduced, and the lines symbolizes their respective introduction from a 68k release perspective (note that the month for MorphOS introduction is wrong, first public MorphOS release was 02-Aug-2000). At the bottom (in the "Modern times" row) of the Amiga OS (68k) column there is something that symbolizes the efforts of making new/updated 68k OS releases (connections to AROS there) for use either with UAE, real Amigas, or something like NatAmi (if that ever gets here). There is also a line symbolizing a connection between AROS and MorphOS (not in any way meaning that they are the same at all, of course).

Again — the 3.1 API is a *given*, that's what defines "Amiga" post Commodore, and no "lines" are needed to illustrate this in misleading charts IMHO.

[cha05e90]

I couldn't see any misleading in the original Wikipedia chart - but in regards of misleading, where, please, can I obtain that "AmigaOS +"?

[itix]

There are some API extensions in OS 3.9 which made it to OS 4.0. Mostly AVL stuff in Exec and some Workbench extensions. AROS and MorphOS on the other hand dont implement 3.9 API.

But I agree that drawing is giving an impression that AROS is stuck at 3.9 level. It is misleading in many ways.

[takemehomegrandma]

in regards of misleading, where, please, can I obtain that "AmigaOS +"?

Depends on what you mean? What *I* meant was some kind of common term describing all the developments post 3.9 for enhancing the 68k Amigas (including UAE, and indeed (if it ever will get here) the NatAmi) during the past 12 years, that either replaces (Open Source) or extends the features (or both) of the original OS, in parts, or as a whole. Some people are still interested in working on the 68k part of the community, Amikit is proof of that, and AROS 68k. An eventual NatAmi would be pointless if it didn't update parts of the OS to utilize the "new chips", and some obviously see a point in having an open source 68k OS, for various reasons. Not everyone considers 68k to be dead and replaced by OS4; it's not like Amiga "moved" to OS4 (or MorphOS), that's more of a parallel thing. The real Amigas are still here, there is *still* some development going on, maybe not very visible, but I really don't think it would be fair to neglect this in a chart aiming to describe the evolution and the situation of the Amiga platform at large.

BTW, What do you mean by "misleading"? If anything, it's that *other* picture that gives the false impression that all Amigans natural evolution path and interest would go from 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.9 to "4.0" in a straight line of descendants (and putting MorphOS and AROS aside BTW(!!)) and leaves no room for a *continuation* of the 68k, which obviously isn't the case! Many Amigans couldn't care less about OS4 (or MorphOS, or PPC, or x86 AROS or whatever), they think Amiga is 68k. Again, OS4 is more of a "parallel" thing, interesting to some, but it *has not* replaced the 68k Amigas if looking at the community as a whole, not by far, and AFAIK (and as I said above) development work is being put into *all four* parts of the community.

[Terminills]

I have a few issues with this post of yours:

I am discounting AROS because it has many, many underpinnings of Linux, plus the majority of the community arent very courteous.

You do realize OS4 has more linux/unix like features than AROS correct?  Wait I know you still think it's 2001 and AROS has to run on linux right?

[Kesa]

What's going on with this "AmigaOS+"? Was it really worth swapping the ng for a + symbol?

[wawrzon]

id say amiga os+ is clearly rather meant for additionally patched 68k system.

[dreamcast270mhz]

You do realize OS4 has more linux/unix like features than AROS correct?  Wait I know you still think it's 2001 and AROS has to run on linux right?

Hmm? I am well aware AROS does not need Linux, and frankly there is nothing wrong with Linux. However, when I used it about 2 years ago, I found the interface sugar-coated, and it generally did not stimulate much interest to me. But my point is that AROS has much less influence from the Amiga side compared to MorphOS. MorphOS and MUI/Ambient are both quite mature GUIs, very much like Aqua on the mac, simple, visually appealing and customizable. I just got a bad taste from AROS and the community as a whole. When I asked them for help on some issues I had transitioning from Amithlon's 3.9 shell, they sat and trolled me for a whole page of a thread. Idiotic to the max. I really have no need for a community project that reminds me of 4chan's userbase.

[hbarcellos]

Anyone know how many people actually work on MorphOS development?
- I see several complains about it, not only here (lack of Wireless & 3D for PBooks) but also at MorphZone (keymaps, network speed,...)
- I understand the herculean effort of the team in order to put something live,

I think this is a no-future situation. Even if it's a hobby for developers, I think it's time to re-think the "business model" of MorphOS development. Maybe open-source it and invite all the community to write drivers and etc (similar to Linux)...
I don't know the answer, but what I know is that we're close to a situation where
* MOS developers would "quit" and invest their free time on something more fun & profitable
* No more than 10 guys will complain about it

[dreamcast270mhz]

Anyone know how many people actually work on MorphOS development?
- I see several complains about it, not only here (lack of Wireless & 3D for PBooks) but also at MorphZone (keymaps, network speed,...)
- I understand the herculean effort of the team in order to put something live,

I think this is a no-future situation. Even if it's a hobby for developers, I think it's time to re-think the "business model" of MorphOS development. Maybe open-source it and invite all the community to write drivers and etc (similar to Linux)...
I don't know the answer, but what I know is that we're close to a situation where
* MOS developers would "quit" and invest their free time on something more fun & profitable
* No more than 10 guys will complain about it

No, linux's model is not bad but currently Ubuntu is rife with issues, such as the crappy unity GUI and competing standards.  And the MorphOS SDK is available, for any developers who wish to make drivers. I think it is more of a lack of full time developers and a unified community that create the current rifts. My model would be partially close off Morphzone to host only actual users who bought the OS, leaving a news and prospective user forum for non-users. From there we can get a more unified opinion of the community of users ( I myself will be buying a new license as soon as I have time to use MorphOS on a regular basis) and reduce the squabbling we have currently there. From that we could form a sort of "vote" where users have some say in what is worked on, when, at the developer's discretion. Once MorphOS has a bigger library of users we can begin to have full time developers who will develop for it.

[Kesa]

No, linux's model is not bad but currently Ubuntu is rife with issues, such as the crappy unity GUI and competing standards.  And the MorphOS SDK is available, for any developers who wish to make drivers. I think it is more of a lack of full time developers and a unified community that create the current rifts. My model would be partially close off Morphzone to host only actual users who bought the OS, leaving a news and prospective user forum for non-users. From there we can get a more unified opinion of the community of users ( I myself will be buying a new license as soon as I have time to use MorphOS on a regular basis) and reduce the squabbling we have currently there. From that we could form a sort of "vote" where users have some say in what is worked on, when, at the developer's discretion. Once MorphOS has a bigger library of users we can begin to have full time developers who will develop for it.

So your way to unify the community is to close off the forums and make them exclusive? I think is a terrible idea! i don't understand how making the forums exclusive will stop the squabling.

The forums should be available for everyone not just a select few. We are trying to bring in users into the community not keep them out!