Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: asian1 on May 28, 2003, 02:46:09 PM
-
>AmiZilla US$ 4000 fund
Hello
If there is a similar US$ 100,000 fund for OpenSource Amiga software developments, which software projects should be given priority?
Is it GeekGadget, OpenOffice, AbiWord, GTK, X-Windows, or others?
Is it better to port "commercial" portability tools first? (such as MKS, Bristol, QT others)
-
I had an idea a while ago, and linking it to the idea of the AmiZilla bounty makes it quite interesting. Basically, there would be a website where people would vote on what software they wanted made/ported. The top few would then be listed, and people could donate money to the project of their choice.
Drastic maybe, but perhaps this kind of thing is what's needed to spark Amiga software development?
As for me, I'd personally like any M$ compatible office suite.
-
asian1 wrote:
>AmiZilla US$ 4000 fund
Hello
If there is a similar US$ 100,000 fund for OpenSource Amiga software developments, which software projects should be given priority?
Is it GeekGadget, OpenOffice, AbiWord, GTK, X-Windows, or others?
Is it better to port "commercial" portability tools first? (such as MKS, Bristol, QT others)
Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system :-D
Wouldn't you agree?
-
Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system
Wouldn't you agree?
NO
-
by bloodline on 2003/5/28 10:18:57
Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system
Wouldn't you agree?
I thought we already had one. :-D
Dammy
-
bloodline wrote:
Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system :-D
Wouldn't you agree?
In all honesty, absolutely not. This is not a sleight against AROS, which I'm interested to see, but in my experience large-scale open source applications (such as Linux, Open Office, Mozilla etc.) tend to "evolve" as many programmers contribute (often having different, even conflicting goals), rather than follow a designed path. This quite often leads to problems with consistency across the application, large size, etc.
With AROS and OpenBEOS this isn't so much of a problem as they have a blueprint to follow. Sure there are examples of good and bad in both proprietory and open source applications (Windows is a badly implemented proprietory system, for example), but I don't like the way large open-source applications tend to evolve.
This is, of course, just my opinion.
I should note that i'm not against Open Source per se, but I don't think as a development model it is the ideal one for an AmigaOS-like system.
And again, I do recognise that AROS seems to be pretty cool, and I do not underestimate the value of the code it has contributed to both MOS and AmigaOS. AROS has benefitted from having a blueprint to follow, and from being in such a small niche that it has remained withing the control of a select group that can shape it.
-
dammy wrote:
by bloodline on 2003/5/28 10:18:57
Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system
Wouldn't you agree?
I thought we already had one. :-D
Dammy
We almost do :-D
-
well money is a motivator, but in kind of an oblique way.
I would recommend that AmiZilla be kind of a test case. I know the 50k Amiga, Inc. got, bot the community zilcho, and the prepayments, though generous, sent to phase5, bought the community zilcho, and the nice wad of cash, sent for iFusion, got us only a partially working iFusion.....
lets see if this produces results. I could see 100K easily being spent on a big bunch of nothing. You see, once you get 100k, people will look at projects that really need 250k, and you never win that game, it probably would cost 500 million or more to really take the world by storm again....
if this produces results, lets do it again. if it doesn't...lets call it a failure and don't do it again.
I think AmiZilla is a nice idea, but let it prove itself with results.
-
Indeed, I too believe AROS is too important to be open source... Freeware and open to contribution, but not redistributable like Linux.
S'Just how I see it... *shrug*
-
Dr_Righteous wrote:
Indeed, I too believe AROS is too important to be open source... Freeware and open to contribution, but not redistributable like Linux.
S'Just how I see it... *shrug*
Interesting frame of refreance there!?!? AROS will never be like Linux... For one thing we will keep the Distributions together. That is to say the cores should be all the same, thus all DI's should be compatible, differing in only look and supplied programs.
I don't like linux for many reasons, but one of these is that I can't get an x86 Linux binary and know it's going to run on my Linux box... but I do like the fact I can get the source code and compile it for my Linux box... Swings and roundabouts
-
@ Bloodline:
Funny, I have the opposite problem with Linux... I can never find a binary for decent programs... End up having to download 5000 libraries to get one program to compile.
@ Coders:
If you're going to use an outside library to write your program, INCLUDE IT IN YOUR DISTRIBUTION! Don't make people search for it.
-
>Linux library -recompile
Hello
I got similar problems with MPLAYER, involving buggy GCC compiler (W_Char), buggy ID3 TAG program, Cassowary, unfinished LIBDVDNav, in-compatible library version etc.
If you got special hardware (ie AMD, Pentium CPU without MMX), then the program may not run or run slowly.
Perhaps this is an opportunity for AmigaDE (AMP capability) + Utility computing.
If AmigaDE is ported to AROS / Linux, perhaps if someone need a program, he can order automatic cross-compiling using Utility computing, without downloading source / libraries.
The user will receive complete pre-compiled binaries, optimized for his computer/PDA/ preferences.
-
Dr_Righteous wrote:
Indeed, I too believe AROS is too important to be open source... Freeware and open to contribution, but not redistributable like Linux.
I'm an AROS developer and for me being open source is a must to be able to contribute to the project. The assurance that I will have access to what other people do with the AROS code is a condition on which I contribute my code.
But then I also like linux.
-
Well, my point really is this... I only want to see one distribution of AROS... As in I want to see AROS, not RedHat AROS or SUSE AROS or some crap like that.
Versions for different CPUs not withstanding, of course :-D
-
Edited by Argo: Flamebait and Off topic
-
If we obtain the AmigaOS in the bankruptcy this is what we will do:
I can't believe you posted that sentance in quite that wording, to be honest.
3. Give the AmigaOS to AROS!
You can't "give AmigaOS to AROS". Releasing the source code to the official AmigaOS would infringe all sorts of patents and licenses, or so i'm lead to believe.
-
Tickly wrote:
If we obtain the AmigaOS in the bankruptcy this is what we will do:
I can't believe you posted that sentance in quite that wording, to be honest.
3. Give the AmigaOS to AROS!
You can't "give AmigaOS to AROS". Releasing the source code to the official AmigaOS would infringe all sorts of patents and licenses, or so i'm lead to believe.
I think they mean give the AmigaOS name to AROS, so we can call ourselves AmigaOS rather than AROS.
That's rather nice of them, actually. It's good to see some one with both sense and money.
If Gensi were able to buy the Amiga IP, it would be nice to think they would do everything possible to keep the Aros Dev Team together hint hint :-D
-
Well, its nice to some.
Personally, while I have nothing against AROS, I don't really think it should be the official successor to AmigaOS; having read the AmigaOS4 featurelist, *if* OS4 actually follows it, I think I would much prefer that.
Maybe if AROS copied some of those features, i'd agree :-D
-
Tickly wrote:
Well, its nice to some.
Personally, while I have nothing against AROS, I don't really think it should be the official successor to AmigaOS; having read the AmigaOS4 featurelist, *if* OS4 actually follows it, I think I would much prefer that.
Maybe if AROS copied some of those features, i'd agree :-D
Which features are those...?
-
bloodline wrote:
Tickly wrote:
If we obtain the AmigaOS in the bankruptcy this is what we will do:
I can't believe you posted that sentance in quite that wording, to be honest.
3. Give the AmigaOS to AROS!
You can't "give AmigaOS to AROS". Releasing the source code to the official AmigaOS would infringe all sorts of patents and licenses, or so i'm lead to believe.
I think they mean give the AmigaOS name to AROS, so we can call ourselves AmigaOS rather than AROS.
That's rather nice of them, actually. It's good to see some one with both sense and money.
If Gensi were able to buy the Amiga IP, it would be nice to think they would do everything possible to keep the Aros Dev Team together hint hint :-D
If they were to buy it... Who would they buy it from? I was thinking Gateway? Im prolly wrong, but i though Amiga Inc were only licencing their rights to the name?
But from what BBRV was saying, it actualy sounded as if he was talking about if he got AmigaOs, not the name, cause you cant opensource the name :/
I dont think BBRV could get AmigaOS, it belongs to Hyperion. Not Amiga Inc. But A inc can buy it from Hyperion according to their contract at a specified time.
I dont know why BBRV says this. Maybe he's just talking hypatheticly? In which case, i'll shutup, and enjoy the rest of the thread.
-
Those patents and licenses cover specific areas of AmigaOS, such
things as the font engine and ARexx. Also the right mouse click
patent. But these can be removed from the sourceocde before giving to
AROS or any other agent. I'd note, they had to be removed before
giving it to Hyperion too. (Or at least I hope they had, or else
Hyperion is in deep doo-doo)
The font engine is a great example. The original font engine was
licensed, therefore it could not be used in any next-generation Amiga
design, as the license was to Commodore itself. Both AROS and
Hyperion have a replacement font engine as a result.
Similar things would occur, and be to the benefit of all.
-
I dont know why BBRV says this. Maybe he's just talking hypatheticly? In which case, i'll shutup, and enjoy the rest of the thread.
Everything is hypathetical until it's true :-D
Anyway, I am enjoying this thread. It's not often that a Company can make me smile with a few simple words.
-
Go Bill and Raquel!! :-D
-
downix wrote:
Those patents and licenses cover specific areas of AmigaOS, such
things as the font engine and ARexx. Also the right mouse click
patent.
I can't comment on the font engine, but AFAIK, the exact same ARexx binary from 3.x will be included in OS4, and I presume they know what licensing needs to be attained to include this.
As for the right-click patent, I was under the impression this was owned by Gateway, licensed to Amiga, Inc., and sublicensed to Hyperion.
Actually, for the font engine, I presume you are talking about the bullet engine, not the whole Amiga font system, since the bitmap support is very much created to be easily done almost entirely by the Amiga's blitter, and hence would have been done inhouse.
-
I can't comment on the font engine, but AFAIK, the exact same ARexx binary from 3.x will be included in OS4, and I presume they know what licensing needs to be attained to include this.
ARexx was third party, that can be relicenced. AROS chose to remake ARexx from scratch, Thus our ARexx is called Regina. And yes it is fully compatible :-)
As for the right-click patent, I was under the impression this was owned by Gateway, licensed to Amiga, Inc., and sublicensed to Hyperion.
The patent runs out at the end of this year IIRC, and notice that all AmigaOS 4.0 screen shots have shown the AROS style Menus (i.e. floating menus).
Actually, for the font engine, I presume you are talking about the bullet engine, not the whole Amiga font system, since the bitmap support is very much created to be easily done almost entirely by the Amiga's blitter, and hence would have been done inhouse.
Who needs that old thing, We have much better systems now.
-
Who needs that old thing, We have much better systems now.
I know, I was just not sure what was meant by "font engine", is all.
-
Tickly wrote:
Who needs that old thing, We have much better systems now.
I know, I was just not sure what was meant by "font engine", is all.
Indeed, anyway what about these so called "Feature" that AOS4 has that AROS doesn't have.
Cheers
-
Indeed, anyway what about these so called "Feature" that AOS4 has that AROS doesn't have.
First, my understanding of AROS is that its goal is to first provide the functionality of OS3.1 + MUI and only THEN to improve upon it. AOS4 already *is* OS3.1, and they are adding improvements. Has this changed? Has AROS reached its primary objective?
OK, here is a list of features which are currently touted for inclusion in OS4 that I think make it more apt for a continuation of the "official" AmigaOS.
Note, this doesn't stop AROS being a fine product in its own right.
Please correct me if AROS already has any of these, or has them marked to be included any time this year. (i think "this year" is a fair limit, since the majority of people expect OS4 to be delivered this year).
1) A JIT 68k emulation for starters. AROS can only run 68k apps on 68k.
2) Unified input system. AmigaInput looks really good.
3) Resource tracking for memory, message ports, messages, and semaphores
4) Unified MMU interface (difficult to implement for a system with multiple CPU targets.)
5) Limited memory protection. Protection for critical memory areas; Kernel memory areas, all code areas, unused memory.
6) WarpUp emulation
7) Symmetric Multi-Processing (SMP): support for multiple CPU's
8) Multithreading
9) New library model with dynamic interfaces depending on the methods used to invoke the library by the application
10) Fully virtualised address space
11) 3D drivers (Warp3D followed by Warp3D Nova)
12) The application library (something that should have been there since at least 2.x)
13) Roadshow (although I understand other Amiga-like OS's will get this later)
14) Mount Rainier support
15) AmiDock. I was never a big fan of Docks, but AmiDock in 3.9 won me over. 4.0 looks great, and from what I hear will be quite well integrated with the OS (for example application management through application.library)
Extra disclaimer :-D
I do like AROS, I appreciate the value of the code that has been contributed from it to MOS and AmigaOS, and I also want to see AROS do well.
Of course, if OS4 doesn't live up to its featurelist, this is all irrelevent anyway :-D
-
ARexx was third party, that can be relicenced. AROS chose to remake ARexx from scratch, Thus our ARexx is called Regina. And yes it is fully compatible
Of course it is fully compatible; currently AROS 68k is not being worked on, so all AROS applications require a recompile, and thus will work happily with any ARexx implementation.
The problem is, some AmigaOS programs have old amiga.lib routines actually linked into the binary, which would break. You would notice some problems with AROS 68k, and software that hasn't been recompiled.
This means that Hyperion, or anyone else for that matter, making an AmigaOS binary-compatible operating system would lose some compatibility if they scrapped the current ARexx implementation.
-
1) A JIT 68k emulation for starters. AROS can only run 68k apps on 68k.
Ok this is one we don't have any real plans for, but we have made sure it can be added is so desired, and the hardware is capable.
2) Unified input system. AmigaInput looks really good.
I think our Prefs system is certainly over a very high standard.
3) Resource tracking for memory, message ports, messages, and semaphores
Yup, AROS has RT.
4) Unified MMU interface (difficult to implement for a system with multiple CPU targets.)
Difficult one, as we have had many disscusions as to how this is best done, and since there are so many different types of MMU, an mmu.library has been considered.
5) Limited memory protection. Protection for critical memory areas; Kernel memory areas, all code areas, unused memory.
MP has been talked to death,,, we can add limited MP (as you mention) with realative ease, but old APPs won't like it or care about it, which totally defetes the point. And limited MP is only one step away from useless.
6) WarpUp emulation
Not applicable. This has never been a goal, no doubt, on a PPC it could be easy, very easy to write a warpos.library.
7) Symmetric Multi-Processing (SMP): support for multiple CPU's
Yup, much has be talked about. And is certainly planned.
8) Multithreading
Hello, this is an AmigaOS clone :-D Of course you can multithread :-)
9) New library model with dynamic interfaces depending on the methods used to invoke the library by the application
We have decided to stick with the original AmigaOS library interface (it's smaller, faster and is just as flexable imho), but Fabio has plans to improve it... I personally don't think we need it improved (each to their own)
10) Fully virtualised address space
No, I don't think that is a planned feature, though I remember the PCI guys talking about something to do with this...
11) 3D drivers (Warp3D followed by Warp3D Nova)
Of course 3D drivers are being planned, though AROS has chosen OpenGl rather than Warp3D
12) The application library (something that should have been there since at least 2.x)
I'm not sure what you mean... I'm sure AROS has an equivilent.
13) Roadshow (although I understand other Amiga-like OS's will get this later)
Roadshow? if it can be compiled for AmigaOS 3.1, it can be compiled for AROS.
14) Mount Rainier support
I have no Idea what that is, see comment 13
15) AmiDock. I was never a big fan of Docks, but AmiDock in 3.9 won me over. 4.0 looks great, and from what I hear will be quite well integrated with the OS (for example application management through application.library)
see above comments.
This is correct to the best of my knowledge :-D
-
1) A JIT 68k emulation for starters. AROS can only run 68k apps on 68k.
Ok this is one we don't have any real plans for, but we have made sure it can be added is so desired, and the hardware is capable.
So AROS won't have it this year then? (which was my point). This is the big one, the main fundamental reason why AROS isn't the best contender for the continuation of the *official AmigaOS*; you can't run Amiga apps on it without recompilation, except on 68k. Nobody thinks 68k is the future. :-D
Can you imagine the confusion if AROS became the official AmigaOS? New users getting a new AmigaOS machine, downloading software from the internet "for the Amiga", only to find they can't run it because AmigaOS doesn't run 68k apps? And this would be 99.999999999% of the software out there!
2) Unified input system. AmigaInput looks really good.
I think our Prefs system is certainly over a very high standard.
"Unified input system" has nothing to do with the preferences system. I suggest you read the CAM article that has since been made public. (its on os.amiga.com).
3) Resource tracking for memory, message ports, messages, and semaphores
Yup, AROS has RT.
Nice :)
4) Unified MMU interface (difficult to implement for a system with multiple CPU targets.)
Difficult one, as we have had many disscusions as to how this is best done, and since there are so many different types of MMU, an mmu.library has been considered.
But it won't have one this year?
5) Limited memory protection. Protection for critical memory areas; Kernel memory areas, all code areas, unused memory.
MP has been talked to death,,, we can add limited MP (as you mention) with realative ease, but old APPs won't like it or care about it, which totally defetes the point. And limited MP is only one step away from useless.
Memory trashing is a common cause of crashes on the Amiga. Limited MP won't break existing apps (since it doesn't limit memory on a per-task basis for legacy apps), but it will help stability. Admittedly, OS4's intelligent stack management will have a much bigger impact on that stability, but even so. Laying the foundations and all that.
6) WarpUp emulation
Not applicable. This has never been a goal, no doubt, on a PPC it could be easy, very easy to write a warpos.library.
Indeed. Its still a plus point for OS4, and something I want to see.
7) Symmetric Multi-Processing (SMP): support for multiple CPU's
Yup, much has be talked about. And is certainly planned.
Will it have it this year?
8) Multithreading
Hello, this is an AmigaOS clone :-D Of course you can multithread :-)
AmigaOS has never had proper multithreading (remember: multithreading is not multitasking). Therefore your quote is meaningless.
10) Fully virtualised address space
No, I don't think that is a planned feature, though I remember the PCI guys talking about something to do with this...
Its a very good idea; and very doable now that AmigaOS is migrating to another architecture and keeping JIT for legacy applications.
11) 3D drivers (Warp3D followed by Warp3D Nova)
Of course 3D drivers are being planned, though AROS has chosen OpenGl rather than Warp3D
OK. If they have them this year, I'll concede that point.
12) The application library (something that should have been there since at least 2.x)
I'm not sure what you mean... I'm sure AROS has an equivilent.
I'd ask the developers about that :)
13) Roadshow (although I understand other Amiga-like OS's will get this later)
Roadshow? if it can be compiled for AmigaOS 3.1, it can be compiled for AROS.
Yep. I'm sure AROS will get Roadshow. In fact, I'll concede this isn't one of the reasons OS4 is a better choice to continue the official AmigaOS.
14) Mount Rainier support
I have no Idea what that is, see comment 13
OK, well, its a good thing to have.
This is correct to the best of my knowledge :-D
Great. I'm not contesting that AROS is, or will be brilliant. I'm confident that if it continues as it has so far, it will be fantastic. I'm looking forward to running it myself.
My point is that AmigaOS4, IF it comes out this year and IF it lives up to its featurelist is a better choice for the official AmigaOS for the reasons above, simply because it should, in theory, get those features out sooner rather than later.
So, really, I think AROS should stay called AROS, AmigaOS4 should stay as the next AmigaOS.
Anyway, this is all hypothetical until either AROS matures enough to be used as a main operating system, or OS4 arrives.
Doubtless many will call me hopelessly optimistic, but I like to think the latter will happen first :-D
-
@Tickly
Yes, all that is in the feature list for OS4, but
if and when all that will be actually included
is another question.
Latest quotes from Hyperion suggested that both
AmigaInput and MP may not make it into the 1st release,
and even if, the 1st isn't really important or
a "biggie", while the 2nd isn't really possible without
breaking lots of older apps.
Same goes for SMP (one that goes beyound what
we had with PuP/WOS). AOS is just not cut out for
stuff like that.
RoadShow does seem to become a fine TCP_stack, but
in the end it is only getting online that counts,
and I'm sure AROS will manage that someday.
Docks are many and plentifull, some even better than
AmiDock (which ain't bad). Get one ported to AROS,
problem solved.
To put it simple : There is NOTHING breathtaking
in the OS4-featurelist (or in the MOS one), these
list just tell what a OS needs as absloute minimum
these days.
-
Kronos wrote:
To put it simple : There is NOTHING breathtaking
in the OS4-featurelist (or in the MOS one), these
list just tell what a OS needs as absloute minimum
these days.
So? The question was "what features will OS4 have that make it a better choice for the official AmigaOS", *NOT* what features does OS4 have compared to mainstream operating systems.
Besides, protecting the kernel, unallocated RAM, and certain other areas won't break legacy applications, and neither will giving OS4 native apps true memory protection (since the 68k apps can overwrite eachother all they like but not touch native applications). This limited MP isn't spectacularily useful from a legacy point of view, but is clearly a way to introduce proper memory protection for native applications.
The thing that would kill legacy apps is protecting memory on a per-task basis for 68k applications.
-
@Tickly
O.k. this is OT, I admit it ;-)
But ...
The reason why you CAN'T have anything worth the
name "memory-protection" on AOS lies within
the AOS-API (message-ports and such), and as
long as these APIs are in use you can't protect
the kernel, and you can't protect native Apps
(which still use that API).
Replacing that API with something MP-friendly
is what the Q-Box in MOS is (planned) for, and
sooner or later Hyperion will also have to introduce
new APIs, but as long as you still run old SW,
you won't be able to fully protect the kernel.
-
OK. I'm going to end this discussion here, since i'm tired of it, and i'm certain that i have put forward a strong case for my original statement about AROS's aptitude for being called the "next official AmigaOS" (in a purely hypothetical world) anyway.
I do not agree with the idea that the sandbox and "jam tomorrow" q-box approach is the best one, or the only way to introduce memory protection, but the relative merits of MOS vs. AmigaOS are so off topic its off scale. It is also a very tired argument.
Lets just agree that all solutions have their merits, the future looks bright, and leave it at that :-D
-
Anyway, this is all hypothetical until either AROS matures enough to be used as a main operating system, or OS4 arrives.
This I'll agree with you on. And is a good place to end the disscussion.
Still, I like what Bill and Rachel said :-D
-
by Rodney on 2003/5/29 10:41:30
If they were to buy it... Who would they buy it from? I was thinking Gateway? Im prolly wrong, but i though Amiga Inc were only licencing their rights to the name?
Who knows who owns it. It maybe one of their financial backers or even the primary owner, Net Ventures. IIRC, Peake did say they bought the OS from Gateway, but then again, that was an Amiga Employee speaking at the time, so YMMV.
I dont think BBRV could get AmigaOS, it belongs to Hyperion. Not Amiga Inc. But A inc can buy it from Hyperion according to their contract at a specified time.
Depends on which OS your talking about. OS/WB .x - 3.1 should be owned by either AI, AI's backers, or maybe GW. OS 3.5 and OS 3.9 is, more or less depending on what code was pirated for the final releases, owned by H&P. Hyperion owns their OS and have a license to call it OS4.
If I understand correctly, the AROS devs don't want AOS/WB source code. I can see their point, WB/AOS is old and outdated. AROS, OTOH, has a modern design that runs on different platforms. Now a BoingBall as apart of AROS' logo, OTOH, would be kinda nifty to see, IMO. ;)
Dammy
-
Now a BoingBall as apart of AROS' logo, OTOH, would be kinda nifty to see, IMO. ;-)
We'd all love to see the Boing Ball in AROS's logo... but unless Gensi are right, there's not much hope of that :-(
-Edit- Yeah, AROS has no need of the AmigaOS sources, except to speed up a port to the 68K maybe... :-/
-
Edited by Argo: Flaming and Off Topic
-
Edited by Argo: Reposting Flame
Please don't feed or repost other users flames/b]
That wasn't called for. :-(
-
@HMetal
I'm assuming that's sarcastic, though you might want to make it a bit more clear.
@All
Amazing how this thread has changed, isn't it :-?
-
bloodline wrote:
That wasn't called for. :-(
IMHO, the post by BBRV wasn't called for.
If he's allowed to have a dig at Amiga Inc/Hyperion, why can't we have a dig at Genesis?
-
bloodline wrote:
That wasn't called for. :-(
Hmm, so Genesi are allowed to spout crap here, but Amiga Inc. aren't? :-?
-
Agreed.
-
Hmm, so Genesi are allowed to spout crap here, but Amiga Inc. aren't?
Genesi made a Hypathetical statment... HMetal
was was just being nasty.
-Edit- Anyway, I don't want to continue this. It's just flame bait.
-
Yes, it is. After one little message too.
Let's get back to discussing the virtues of Open Source projects, such as the Amizilla Prize and such.
-
Argo wrote:
Yes, it is. After one little message too.
Let's get back to discussing the virtues of Open Source projects, such as the Amizilla Prize and such.
I think that OpenOffice is more important than Amizilla, but I guess much much harder to do... :-(
-
Because two flames don't make a right.
He's been moderated. It's over. Move along. Nothing to see here.
-
LOL. Well, at least I can say that you're equally fair, Argo, even if it wasn't until after a little prodding. ;-)
-
"Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows it"
Obi-Wan Kenobi
-
Edited by Argo: Off Topic
-
Edited by Argo: Off Topic
-
Edited by Argo: Off Topic
Reedited by TBone :-P
"Help, Help! I'm being repressed" - Monty Python
:python: :python: :python:
-
Edited by Argo: Off Topic
Anyways, back to the topic.. :-)
-
Tickly wrote:
Nobody thinks 68k is the future. :-D
If somehow someone could come up with a 1GHz+ 68060, I'd go with that over anything else!
-
Dr_Righteous wrote:
Tickly wrote:
Nobody thinks 68k is the future. :-D
If somehow someone could come up with a 1GHz+ 68060, I'd go with that over anything else!
Facinating thought... A quick look at the Pentium III documentation show that the microcode* can be updated by the BIOS during the POST...
hmmm, my brain starts to wander... Some with expereince in PentiumIII microcode code could, I'm sure recode the PIII to become 68k compatible... of course there is the endieness issue :-? (which could be worked out, though I imagine at a performace price).
If the PIII can be microcode updated on the fly... maybe the Athlon64 could be too!!! :-D
BTW, if anyone did write a 68k compatible microcode update for a 1Ghz PIII, I'd by it from them in a flash!!! :-o
*Microcode is the lowest low level programming language of the CPU... the CPU instructions are coded in Microcode, and one can alter the CPU's instruction set by Coding the Microcode.
-
I'd sh** a gold brick!
-
Isn't micro-code rom circuits? Unalterable.
AmigaOne! 1GHz 68060 + 500 MHz AGA? Wish upon a star....
-
bloodline wrote:
Dr_Righteous wrote:
Tickly wrote:
Nobody thinks 68k is the future. :-D
If somehow someone could come up with a 1GHz+ 68060, I'd go with that over anything else!
Facinating thought... A quick look at the Pentium III documentation show that the microcode* can be updated by the BIOS during the POST...
hmmm, my brain starts to wander... Some with expereince in PentiumIII microcode code could, I'm sure recode the PIII to become 68k compatible... of course there is the endieness issue :-? (which could be worked out, though I imagine at a performace price).
If the PIII can be microcode updated on the fly... maybe the Athlon64 could be too!!! :-D
BTW, if anyone did write a 68k compatible microcode update for a 1Ghz PIII, I'd by it from them in a flash!!! :-o
*Microcode is the lowest low level programming language of the CPU... the CPU instructions are coded in Microcode, and one can alter the CPU's instruction set by Coding the Microcode.
When rumors of "Transmeta & Amiga" were flying about a few years ago, I figured they had something like this up their sleeves.
-
Atheist wrote:
Isn't micro-code rom circuits? Unalterable.
AmigaOne! 1GHz 68060 + 500 MHz AGA? Wish upon a star....
Well often it is!!! But when I was playing around with Open BIOS (in an effort to Replace the PC BIOS with AROS), I discovered that the PIII requries a microcode update during POST.
I imagine the intel chip is so buggy, that they had to allow updates after the unit has been shipped. :-o
-
Facinating thought... A quick look at the Pentium III documentation show that the microcode* can be updated by the BIOS during the POST...
Yes, that is true. It can also be done at runtime through fiddling with MSRs.
Some with expereince in PentiumIII microcode code could, I'm sure recode the PIII to become 68k compatible...
Sorry to bust your dream here, but this will never happen.
a) Only very few instructions in the P6 family is implemented with microcode, mainly things that are slow and seldom used (divisions etc.)
b) If you know Intel P6 microcode, get a highpaid job at Intel at once, they'll love to have you onboard I'm sure. Reverse engineering CPUs is no easy feat :)
So no, this will not happen. Even the Transmeta Crusoe is known to be geared towards x86 emulation, and Linus T has said that the native assembly is hairer than mr. Stallmans beard.
So no go here.
-
Ogun wrote:
Facinating thought... A quick look at the Pentium III documentation show that the microcode* can be updated by the BIOS during the POST...
Yes, that is true. It can also be done at runtime through fiddling with MSRs.
Some with expereince in PentiumIII microcode code could, I'm sure recode the PIII to become 68k compatible...
Sorry to bust your dream here, but this will never happen.
a) Only very few instructions in the P6 family is implemented with microcode, mainly things that are slow and seldom used (divisions etc.)
b) If you know Intel P6 microcode, get a highpaid job at Intel at once, they'll love to have you onboard I'm sure. Reverse engineering CPUs is no easy feat :)
So no, this will not happen. Even the Transmeta Crusoe is known to be geared towards x86 emulation, and Linus T has said that the native assembly is hairer than mr. Stallmans beard.
So no go here.
Ahh!!!! Well that clears that up :-D
Why didn't you pipe up when I was ranting about this on the Mailing list, last year ;-)
Cheers
-
Hi bloodline,
Do any CPUs after that (486, P1, etc.) have that "feature"?
If you just reverse the binary instruction (to fix endian prob.), I guess it's not that simple, it never is, is it?
AmigaOne! closer and closer.
-
Atheist wrote:
Hi bloodline,
Do any CPUs after that (486, P1, etc.) have that "feature"?
If you just reverse the binary instruction (to fix endian prob.), I guess it's not that simple, it never is, is it?
AmigaOne! closer and closer.
As Johan, pointed out only certain instructions are microcoded (as such instructions tend to be slower than raw instrucitons.), a much better solution would probaby be the Transmetta Crusoe... I have Spoken to a Transmetta engineer, and he says that it would very simple to write 68K firmware for the chip, but no one has any need to do it :-( so it won't be done.
If only someone with a lot of money could afford to hire the Entire Alpha... I mean Athlon design team adn amke a 68K version :-/
-
Edited by Off Topic: Argo
P.S. We were serious! :-)
-
PS: We don't care.
-
I thought I had more to say than I did... It turns out that I didn't and thus this message is just wasting band width... :-D
-Edit- Why not start a new thread then? Possible Opensource futures for AmigaOS...
-
We understand how you feel Dave...:-p
R&B
_________________
Declared lack of interest:
AmigaONE XE purchasers.
Owner of AmigaBooks.org community authorship programme.
Undeclared lack of interest:
Loads. :-o
-
Change that little p to a capital P and you get the icon version. :-)
-
It was just a little "p" ...
:-D