MorphOS 2 vs. AmigaOS 4.1 (pros/cons)

[skurk]

Does anyone know if the AOS4.x and MOS2.x binaries are interchangeable?

I.e. will one platform run the other's binaries?  (I doubt it, but I'm interesting in knowing why, and the effort required to pull it through)

[itix]

@skurk

Does anyone know if the AOS4.x and MOS2.x binaries are interchangeable?

They are not binary compatible with each others. There is OS4Emu which adds OS4 API layer to MorphOS allowing some OS4 software to run on MorphOS. But it is not complete package at all.

[redfox]

@amiga4ever

I have lots of experience with one of these two OS's but have never even seen the other in action at all.  So any opinions I give would naturally be slanted towards the one I own and use daily.

In my opinion, if you a have a chance to try both systems without having to purchase either system first, then you should try out both and decide for yourself which you like better.

The official AmigaOS 4.1 GUI is Reaction, but MUI is also included for compatibility with programs which require MUI, such as IBrowse, YAM, SimpleMail, WookieChat.

Other than that, either system should meet the needs of the average Amiga user.  System friendly 68K applications should work on both.

---
redfox

[Varthall]

Cygnix is available on OS4.

And MorphOS has ixemul.

Which aren't the same thing. Cygnix provides a complete X11 environment, and thanks to this software like Abiword, Gnumeric, Gimp and Amaya have been ported to OS4/Cygnix.

Varthall

[takemehomegrandma]

@amiga4ever

The Amiga backwards compatibility is better in MorphOS than in OS4, but then it's a matter of taste how important this feature is for you personally. To me it's essential.

The MorphOS desktop (Ambient) is light years ahead of any Workbench.

The integrated USB stack of MorphOS (Poseidon) is the best USB stack, period! It supports USB 2.0 and a *great* number of peripheral equipment.

I think the printing system of MorphOS (Turboprint) is better than in OS4 (although I feel that printing isn't a prioritized feature in any of these two OS's).

Personally I like MUI4 (and *the many programs*(!) using it) much better than Reaction, and since the entire desktop is using this, it gives a clean and consistent user experience and opens up for some nice customization possibilities.

Sputnik (the web browser under development) is said to be ported to OS4 when it's finished for MorphOS, but until that happens it's only available for MorphOS (in beta versions).

MorphOS also has a lot of nice features that you could learn about yourself by going here and click on the "Overview" and "Features" tabs. What's important to you? Think about that for a minute, and then go read about the features yourself. And then feel free to ask more specific questions! :-)

In my eyes, MorphOS is the clear winner! :-)

[Piru]

@Varthall

Which aren't the same thing. Cygnix provides a complete X11 environment

ixemul had it 12 years ago already. Most of the stuff would require configure && make.

I guess no-one bothers with those X11 apps.

[Varthall]

@piru

Dind't know that. I remember running a couple of ixemul-compiled programs which opened their own GUI on the Workbench, I didn't know ixemul could open an entire X11 desktop, too. As for the ported X11 programs, I'd be surprised to hear that no one uses at least Abiword and Gnumeric, since they're for now the best office applications available for OS4. I use both to open .doc and .xls files, and they have worked flawlessly on my system so far.

Varthall

[Fab12]

@Varthall

like piru said, geekgadgets environment allowed all that for years (or even decades now).

Some time ago, I even gave a try at recompiling X11 server, Enlightenment and GTK2 toolkit (which is the main dependancy for applications like abiword or gnumeric) to evaluate how usable it would be. While it mostly worked correctly, it felt really alien to the system, and quite slow, especially with the original X11 server. Xami X11 server (68k) is way faster.

So, after seeing that, i really thought it was useless to ""port"" x11 apps that way. That would be wasted efforts IMO.

Just some screenshot showing GTK2 demos, to "backup" my claim: http://fabportnawak.free.fr/gtk2.png

[Piru]

@Varthall

Personally I've gotten too used to M$ Office for Mac to learn anything else. Yes, it's my failure. ;-)

[zyphoid]

As Varthall implies, how is it that we "morphos" doesn't have a abiword port using the same logic?


disregard i guess, just saw Fab12 response....stil though, would be nice on this side!

[Piru]

@zyphoid

how is it that we "morphos" doesn't have a abiword port using the same logic?

The problem is that everyone seems to have a thumb up their *ss. There is nothing preventing the port, except someone actually bothering with it.

With these niche platforms it usually boils down to:
A) learn to program and do it yourself,
B) convince someone else to do it, or
C) forget about it.

So far everyone has chosen C it seems.


I'm sorry it's late and I'm not very receptive to rethorical questions at this hour. My apologies.

[Lorraine]

/

[Hans_]

@amiga4ever

Very few people have used both MorphOS 2.0 and Amiga OS 4.1 enough to be able to give you a proper comparison. For example, I doubt that takemehomegrandma has actually tried Amiga OS 4.1 enough to support his claims about the system. You're not going to get particularly good or neutral comparisons, although you'll get some that try to sound neutral. I'm an Amiga OS 4.1 user not a MorphOS user so I can't give you a good comparison either. I can say, however that Amiga OS 4.1 is a great system.

Now to clarify a few things. I can say that Amiga OS 4.1 is a big step up from OS 4.0, so Matt_H's comparison is a little behind the time. Amiga OS 4.1 has both MPlayer and DvPlayer (an OEM version, but the full version is pretty cheap). DvPlayer is very good as a movie player. MorphOS has Sputnik, but OS 4.1 has OWB, so both have CSS capable browsers. Both have hardware compositing. Both have a lot of ports of open-source games/apps. Developers for both OSes are continually working to improve the OS and expand the number of apps.

In the end, both should feel like an Amiga, but faster and more powerful. I prefer Amiga OS 4.1; others prefer MorphOS. Take your pick, or try out both if you can.

Hans

[takemehomegrandma]

@Varthall

As for the ported X11 programs, I'd be surprised to hear that no one uses at least Abiword and Gnumeric, since they're for now the best office applications available for OS4.

"Ported" you say? In my world, those aren't OS4 programs in any way. I'd run those programs in their *proper* environment instead, and Amiga apps on the Amiga OS, but perhaps that's just me? To me, this isn't what Amiga is about...

[takemehomegrandma]

@Hans_

For example, I doubt that takemehomegrandma has actually tried Amiga OS 4.1 enough to support his claims about the system.

It would be interesting to know exactly which one of "my claims" you are referring to?

Amiga backwards compatibility? Well this is an established fact, and it hasn't happened by itself, but by hard and persistent work from the MorphOS developers to make the OS that way. This should be acknowledged, not belittled. The OS4 team didn't have this feature as prioritized as the MorphOS team, they had another vision and wanted to do things in a different way instead. I'm *not* saying OS4 sucks in this regard, only that MorphOS has *better* backwards compatibility. For instance, read what "Toaks" has to say about it here. He has both MorphOS and OS4, and what he says on that page and a few pages forward is that both systems are nice and good and all, but due to some different priorities and views, MorphOS has better backwards compatibility.

Or was it that the MorphOS desktop (Ambient) is light years ahead of any Workbench? Anyone that has used and followed Ambient's development knows how it started as an inferior desktop that everyone replaced with the original Amiga Workbench or Directory Opus Magellan the first thing they did. In MorphOS 2.0 I seriously doubt that anyone has replaced Ambient with Workbench, and this is for a reason!

Or was it the USB stack? Can you *really* claim that OS4's USB stack is better in *any* way? And the same with printing, where are the OS4 advantages?

Whether you like MUI 4.0 (and all the MUI apps out there) and appreciates a clean and consistent user interface experience when using them, as well as the MUI customization options for all the programs and the desktop itself, is a matter of taste. As I said.

Sputnik is a *native* browser, the other one is a SDL recompile. A matter of taste. Sputnik is said to become available for OS4 as well, so there might not even be a problem there. But if you are going to degrade the Amiga to some kind of loader for recompiled X11 and SDL apps, then I think someone missed a point somewhere. Use Linux instead. Heck, with a simple VNC client you could even run Internet Explorer and Microsoft Office, how about that! :-P

[KimmoK]

@Piru

Not going to argue further about currently not existing advantage...


but...

It seems that it is possible to buy second hand G4 MacMini for the price of a new Efika. But MOS is not yet available for MacMini.

When will it be? Any rough deadline set yet?

(not going to buy any hardware that does not have any usable AmigalikeOS)

update:
According to the official information, MOS supports only Efika and Pegasos1&2. Is the classic Amiga support discontinued?
http://www.morphos.de/hardware.html

update:
Found a collection of MacMini specs:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/index-macmini.html

It seems that the 1.5Ghz version is the only sensible option. But some MOS guys say that 128M is minimum for accelerated Ambient whatever? Macmini never had that much??