'openamiga' is a joke!

[iamaboringperson]

LMFAO!!
here

check out the so called min. specs:

Kernel:
AmigaOS 3.1 compatible
2D Graphics:
CGX v4 compatible
3D Graphics:
MESA 5.5
Audio:
AHI 5.5
Networking:
BSDSocket compatible
Media Layer:
SDL 1.2
GUI Tool Kit:
MUI 3.8 compatible
Executable File Format:
ELF
C compiler:
GCC
Scripting:
A/REXX compatible

basically, a couple of dudes have rushed together some favorite programs of theirs and proclaimed this to be a standard
what a joke!

and what if i dont use GCC or dont have it installed? or if i prefer reaction or some other gui kit to MUI? my OS, or software, or ME or whatever is deemed 'uncomplient with the openamiga specifications'?? LOL!
what a joke
anybody can start up a web site, put a few old amiga favorites down - and call it a standard

[KennyR]

The list looks fine to me...

This stuff should be on every Amiga. A nice list of good quality standards, IMO.

What is it you find silly or funny? :-?

[iamaboringperson]

kenny, who's to tell me which programs on my hard drive are standard and which are not??

why cant individuals/companies decide for them selves?



 :-o i might just start up another web site called 'closedamiga.org' and list a whole bunch of crap that I call standard :crazy:

[meerschaum]

OpenAmiga makes alot of sense to me... so long as it dosent mean a whole bunch of apps that need to be emulated...it appears to only be an API thing though...so apps can quickly recompile ... it seems like a good idea..

[KennyR]

It's a standard, not a rulebook. People can choose for themselves. This is a guideline.

For example, you brought up MUI. A lot of people hate this, but it is powerful, easy to code for and works on all systems (MOS/OS3.x/OS4). ReAction for instance is too weak to be a standard gui, and the improved OS4 version will only run on OS4. Not much use as a standard. I suppose if one was really anal they'd say 'use gadtools' - but you can see why that wasn't used. ;-)

[Karlos]

You can please all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but iamaboring person.... :-P

Look dude. If you want to write programs its totally up to you what you use. Maybe your code works on your machine fine.

Openamiga is aimed at people who want to get their programs working on the widening spectrum of amigaesque systems we have now.

I think the specs chosen are pretty sensible all things considered. There isn't anything there that excludes any 'current' systems from the standard.

I have some preferences that maybe differ (I'm not a big MUI fan) a bit but I'm sure every amiga programmer has his/her unique foibles. Overall its a very good comprimise.

I've not said anything about Open amiga yet nor have I made any contribution, but your derision at what is clearly a positive community effort has earned you my 'join in or f*ck off' award 2003. Congratulations :-)

[mdwh2]

iamaboringperson wrote:
and what if i dont use GCC or dont have it installed?
 or if i prefer reaction or some other gui kit to MUI? my OS, or software, or ME or whatever is deemed 'uncomplient with the openamiga specifications'??

I think the idea is that GCC or MUI should be available on all the platforms, not that you personally have to have it installed. Certainly, having a common compiler and GUI toolkit makes porting to multiple platforms a lot easier than if they all have different compilers and different toolkits.

If you prefer the Reaction UI, then fine, use Reaction programs, no one is stopping you. If you prefer it from the point of view as a developer then again, fine, but don't expect to be able to port your program to the various Amiga platforms that OpenAmiga covers, since Reaction isn't available on all of them.

anybody can start up a web site, put a few old amiga favorites down - and call it a standard

True, what makes it a standard is whether people support it or not. But even if not, it still stands as a list of APIs which are available across the various Amiga platforms that they list (ie, AmigaOS 4, MorphOS and AROS). That "anyone can do it" is beside the point, if previously no one had done it.

[Karlos]

Perhaps a little OT:

One idea which I had many moons ago was to have an abstract GUI (a C++ design pattern) that would encapsulate MUI / Reaction behind a common OOP interface. A similar thing could be achieved in C too (function pointers are your friend ;-) ) - but its no secret I use C++ for everything...anyhow I digress.

The layer would then open either reaction or mui depending on which was available or on a user setting if both were.

Given the underlying commonality I don't think its such a bad idea but it makes it slightly tricky to take specific advantages of either GUI.

[Floid]

Well, the intention of the 'standard' is to allow some portability between the 3+ implementations on the market.  You would, of course, only need those libs if you had an interest in running software written to that spec; in practice, the 'project' seems to have done a decent job of pointing out APIs that should be usable across AROS/MOS/OS4 *anyway.*  (MUI might be a bit contestable, SDL is third-party - but generally-accepted in the larger universe, and I'm not sure if *anyone* holds usage rights to ARexx anymore?)

So, on the one hand, they haven't really done anything (and thus haven't been able to hose anything up ;-)); on the other hand, having it documented nicely in one place can't hurt for third parties and external hobby coders trying to make sense of the scene's forkiness.

It's always nice to have software that takes advantage of the native features of a platform- I certainly hope we'll see things like AmigaInput and Warp3D put to good use on OS4, AROS continue to develop some new standards useful to all comers, and MOS introduce some differentiating APIs of its own (maybe you guys have, but if so, could you *please* make such developments more obvious to morons like me?)... but on the other hand, this could clarify the target for agnostic projects, like AmiZilla.

[iamaboringperson]

k, when i first heard about it, i thought its probably whats needed, its a good idea,
and it probably is a good idea

but today i saw a list(probably rather quickly put together) of third party apps that some mug thought should be included

the way to create a standard is to begin by outlineing the general requirements(by a broad range of developers and users)
this type of thing isnt even visible on this site
its hard to see how this is going to be a proper and accepted standard: "ok we need this, this, this, and this..."

second to the generalized requirements(which are not to be specifics of particular software), should be the sort of functions and libraries that are required
e.g.
audio support:
-should have the same function & library names as used in AHI
-should fit in with library abc... etc...
blah blah blah...
2d graphics:
-need for compatability with old 8bit bitplane software, with structures as specified in ARKRM's compatable with graphics.library
-chunky graphics support
-16/24 bit support
...

then the specific libraries can be workout(or worked on later)

if its source level compatability that matters, worry about the functions and structures etc...
so that the libraries and the applications can be made to fit together
so when some new mob comes along to produce an amiga os type os instead of using cybergraphics they might want their own software
but they can still write their own graphics libraries, they can then be made to the same basic standards
but specific software/apps/libraries dont have to be included

the GUI side of it i dont know about... too many people have their own ideas as to which set of libraries to use
IMO it should all be OOP and based on BOOPSI
so that all the classes can be intermixed/ added to

[CodeSmith]

@Karlos:
I agree with this. MUI is not being developed outside of AROS and MOS.  Hyperion are providing it as a "crippled shareware" version only so that people can run their older stuff; they would rather ppl use Reaction on new programs.  The AROS/MOS crowd have spent way too much time and energy to give up on their effort, so I believe that the only way for the largest number of people to be able to use any given program is if that program has been written to use some sort of GUI abstraction layer.  The user would decide what GUI toolkit to use, not the coder.  If this abstraction layer happens to be one of the Linux APIs like Qt, wxWindows or GTK, so much the better; it will make porting many Linux programs a lot easier, and also help attract Linux coders because they won't need to learn yet another GUI API.

This is something that is definitely needed, but it's too big for a weekend coder.  We need a determined team who has the respect and credibility of all three sides (AROS, MOS and Hyperion), because they will need to work closely with all three.  In my opinion this project is a lot more important than getting an office suite, because we need anything and everything that will prevent people from thinking that writing programs for the Amiga is too much of a hassle.  What good is an office suite if that's the only program you have?

@The OpenAmiga crew: if you're looking for a good cause to back, consider backing this one!

[Kronos]

@that boring guy  :-P

There is only one audio-API on the Amga and it is available for all sorts of "Amiga" including
AROS. No need to hide that behind "has to be compatible with AHI-API".

And even if, someone wanted to create an AHI-clone for their OS, so what ? AROS uses Zune
instead of MUI, but since it is compatible with MUI, and most developers know MUI, but may
have never heard of Zune it is best to just say "MUI".

8bit bitplane modes are DEAD !! No one sensible codes SW anymore that needs them, and
since Openamiga is more targeted at "modern" Amiga I would even say noone really uses them anymore.

Just no sense in restricting new SW by making it compatible with AGA.

iamaboringperson wrote:
LMFAO!!
here

check out the so called min. specs:

Kernel:
AmigaOS 3.1 compatible
2D Graphics:
CGX v4 compatible
3D Graphics:
MESA 5.5
Audio:
AHI 5.5
Networking:
BSDSocket compatible
Media Layer:
SDL 1.2
GUI Tool Kit:
MUI 3.8 compatible
Executable File Format:
ELF
C compiler:
GCC
Scripting:
A/REXX compatible

basically, a couple of dudes have rushed together some favorite programs of theirs and proclaimed this to be a standard
what a joke!

and what if i dont use GCC or dont have it installed? or if i prefer reaction or some other gui kit to MUI? my OS, or software, or ME or whatever is deemed 'uncomplient with the openamiga specifications'?? LOL!
what a joke
anybody can start up a web site, put a few old amiga favorites down - and call it a standard

OT: I had sex with my wife to be last night you boring twat.  you have a nice wank loser?

OpenAmiga is a joke.

Not because the list is bad.

But because they have nothing to do. Can you imagine anyone's Amiga system NOT having the features as above? AROS is about a week away from matching most of it already, OS3.9 matches and therefore AmigaOSXL and Amithlon match, AmigaOS 4.x is based on 3.9 so automatically matches, and MorphOS has had the features of the list since the year 2000.

So what are they enforcing here? Are they expecting a new project to pop up that they can encourage to use this standard? I seriously doubt this will happen

Again we have another bunch of Amiga users trying to make a name for themselves by doing something in the public eye. Now, if they were offering money like DiscreetFX, then it'd be interesting, but they're not, so it's actually just redundant.

By the way, Mesa 5.5 doesn't exist yet, and saying "we must have Mesa" anyway is a joke in itself

mdma, what has your wife got to do with this? It's sad when you can't defend your views in any other way than "I'm shagging and you ain't".

[Rodney]

OT: I had sex with my wife to be last night you boring twat.  you have a nice wank loser?

Ahh the old fight fire with fire trick. That one never works. You always end up with more fire. Try throwing some water on it.

BTW - who really wants to hear about other peoples sex lifes? *quivers*