Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: wonea on May 31, 2003, 08:07:47 PM
-
Been thinking it through what will win? To become the true successor of OS3.1.
AmigaOS4 has the name, development team, original core, and committed followers.
MorphOS popular through actually producing the goods, excellent community work, and marketing.
AROS the outsider, slowly mulling along till recently. Now with only a few features missing to bring it mainstream (development tools, 68k emulation, & internet enability). Plus being open source, and hardware availability/pricing are major bonuses as well.
Please share your views.
-
by wonea on 2003/5/31 15:07:47
Been thinking it through what will win? To become the true successor of OS3.1.
AmigaOS4 has the name, development team, original core, and committed followers.
OS4 is not out yet and it's chained to A1. A1 is pricey an may or may not have significant bugs still left in it. A1 now runs Linux, which is a good thing.
MorphOS popular through actually producing the goods, excellent community work, and marketing.
MOS is chained (atleast for now, dunno if/when CS version will be released, or if it already has) to Peg1. Peg1 is no longer in production but a upgraded Peg2 is due out in three months. Pegs also have the ability to run Linux, and shortly AROS. Hopefully OpenBEOS (or whichever Open Source Be clone is called) and bsd flavors won't be too far behind.
AROS the outsider, slowly mulling along till recently. Now with only a few features missing to bring it mainstream (development tools, 68k emulation, & internet enability). Plus being open source, and hardware availability/pricing are major bonuses as well.
AROS works on mulitple platforms, from x86 to ARM and hopefully PPC shortly. UAE has been ported. There is a far amount of hope that network capability will be added by the end of this summer.
All in all, I would say MOS and AROS are most likely to survive. OS4's release will be the life or death of it. That is if Amiga Inc does not fall into hands that are not friendly to OS4, else all bets are off as it's sure to die.
Dammy
-
What? Didn't you hear Bill Buck, in another thread,? He's planning on buying up the OS in, an assumed, Amiga, Inc. bankruptcy sale. Genesi will then, shortly, go bankrupt ala the Amiga curse. Therefore, AROS is the winner. :-D
What will really happen? Don't know. I think we'll have a better idea at the end of Summer (mid September) . As by then we'll have seen the fruits of the OS4 tour, AmiWest, AROS summer development, and probably more on the Pegasos II.
So, our little soap opera goes on....
-
I think the Amiga community is the real winner.. Let's face it Intel type cpu's dominate the home and business computer market and that doesn't look like it's changing.
However, software wise people are looking for alternatives that's why I am betting AROS has a good chance. The latest version is very stable and has great base level graphics drivers, and runs on a lot of intel boxes. People don't have to change their hardware investment that they are spending a lot of money on. Apple moved from 68k processors to power pc processors, what's wrong with having an Amiga interface on whatever CPU you want to. It has more of a chance of breaking thru if it does.
-
Does seem like AROS is the case of nearly there! If Aros was as complete as MorphOS what would happen?
-
I can see a flame war developing... Hell, I'll just be brave and say what I think.
Software will win the contest between the three. This is a definite. IMHO, AROS is so behind it can't realistically compete in these stakes. It's an interesting project but will stay just a project for a long while to come. Its advantage is obvious - cheap, common, convenient and very fast hardware (in theory, as it may only work on certain PCs...).
MorphOS has a 4 year head start on OS4 from a coding point of view, 2 year from a usage point of view. It has many ports already and a relatively large sofware base. Say what you like, but IMO it also has superior hardware to the A1.
Note also that OS4 does not have any special development team that AROS and MOS do not. All three OS's are developed by a small group in part time. OS4 has committed followers, yes, but also a huge number of fanatics and trolls who have no real idea about anything. Don't get me wrong, all sides have 'em but the OS4 ones are more conspicuous. The only substantial thing OS4 has to its advantage is the name. This is an importantant advantage but by no means a saving grace.
From where I'm sitting, MorphOS looks like it's the winning option. It has no real competitor until OS4 is ready, fully stable, and has a software base - which may be years away. There may only be a handful of Pegasos users but the high price of the A1 will ensure that there aren't many OS4 users either.
It will be interesting to see how things go, but an objective analysis is impossible until OS4 is ready to be compared and AROS is running Amiga software.
-
Well said.
-
Personally, I don't see much of a future in MOS: from a technical point view it targets the same restricted hardware as OS4, and feature wise, there's not much difference between the two.
On the marketing side, it lacks the Amiga name and that makes a big difference. As it is, it's just another OS that runs on the Pegasos platform.
OS4 is the new AmigaOS, and that fact alone is enough to raise a few eye browses. If Amiga and partners remain commited to it, deliver the promised regular updates and follow the path to OS5 as they scheduled some time ago, it's probably the most likely to suceed.
AROS is developing very well and at this pace, it seems likely that soon enough it will be in a usable state. The fact that it's free and runs on x86 can attract a lot of curious/nostalgic ex-Amigans to it. On the other hand it lacks the backing of a company to market it.
So, IMHO and if I have to predict the future:
Today - OS4 is the one to place your bets on
In 2-3 years - Both AROS and OS4 will be kicking ass
-
Ruben : oh BTW Ruben, are you still working on a Protracker clone ? Thanks for bringing immortal too :)
As for the subject, well, I think we should compare OS4 and MOS when both are available to find out which one is the way to go. The only amiga name is not particularly an advantage in 2003 I think ? And MOS is the only usable one ATM. Anyway, ppl who don't have a pegasos have to wait and ppl who have an A1 have to wait :)
-
In 2-3 years - Both AROS and OS4 will be kicking ass
Well I hope so, but keep in mind that they said the same 2-3 years ago.
-
If Amiga OS4 was released today, it will be dominant. It has the Amiga name, that's all there is to it. And given Hyperion's track record, it will no doubt be a very polished product when it finally is released.
But every week its delayed more people drift off to MacOS or windows or MorphOS and its chances of success dwindle!
-
The successor to OS 3.1 will be 3.9
The other choices, AROS, MorphOS, OS 4, will only get fractured support from the community, and there will never be any unifying event, or breakout winner. Eventually they will all fade into obscurity, but the retro scene will remain alive.
That scene would probably use 3.1 forever, and there would be no successor, but I predict, that
someday when Amiga, Inc. is bankrupt, and no one else to watch over the IP, that 3.9 will became the favorite as the last release that runs on emulators like WinUAE. People won't pay for it, but they'll pirate it freely, if, well, there is no IP owner to stop them and it doesn't hurt anyone, people who wouldn't normally pirate something, won't see objection to it.
Thats what I consider the most likely scenario...still, I don't think its overwhelmingly likely, maybe 10% chance...I just don't see anything else as being more likely to happen. I certainly don't *want* that to happen.
-
ruben wrote:
Personally, I don't see much of a future in MOS: from a technical point view it targets the same restricted hardware as OS4
Not really. MOS will run on:- Pegasos, Pegasos II, Teron (has been tested, and works), CyberStormPPC, BlizzardPPC, and (as stated by Bill Buck) PPC Mac hardware by the end of the year.
Meanwhile, OS4 will only run on CSPPC and Teron, thanks to AInc's licensing policy.
-
The dominatant system will simply be the one which prvides the following:
1. A customisable Amiga environment.
2. Gives good Price to performance ratio.
3. Has the "Killer Apps".
I personally think all three projects can forefill requirement 1.
The price performance requirement is a subjective one, depending on what hardware you have now, and how much it was cost to use the OS.
As for requirement 3... I'll bet that any app worth it's salt will probably be ported to all three... (Though I imagine, the MOS team and Hyperion could probably secure a few exclusive deals).
So... to me the future look uncertain, but then again I've already made my choice... :-)
-
This is hard to predict. In my opinion the AmigaOS4 looks (hears? ;) better than the MorphOS. In fact, I think that AOS4 has every chance to be much better system. In all aspects.
Yet, it still isn't freely available, therefore its lacking developers.
In my opinion, we are about to see a situation when better AmigaOS4 is being finally released but it will be a system without support from developers and companies.
Time IS the factor in this race.
-
I think you cannot compare AROS to OS4 or
MorphOS because AROS has different aims.
Comparing OS4 and MOS: the company which has
more money will win at the end.
-
The name Amiga doesn't mean as much outside this community as some people think. Sure, in the past it may have meant something but it doesn't now unless antiquated hardware and software means something positive to you. A lean operating system running on expensive hardware isn't going to mean much to the average computer user when the applications it runs are so far behind.
Compare browsers, cd writing software, word processors or almost anything else and that's where you'll find the Achille's heel.
And no, porting GPL'd software isn't going to change things.. It still doesn't do enough to make the system stand out.
What does it mean? It means that OS4 capable systems will outsell MOS systems inside the community. Outside of the community, however, there's one hell of an uphill climb to make.. And at this point, it's hard to tell if either can even make it half-way up the hill let alone over it.
-
zacman wrote:
I think you cannot compare AROS to OS4 or
MorphOS because AROS has different aims.
Comparing OS4 and MOS: the company which has
more money will win at the end.
Heheheh, that's very very true!!! :-D
-
Well, AmigaOS4 will be the only true successor (in both name and sourcecode), and my belief is that it has also has the better chances of dominance. But who knows for sure what the future will bring? Not me. I'll do my best to support the AmigaOne/OS4 effort, and see how it works out. :-)
For now, I'm happy exploring Linux and MacOS while waiting. :-D
Kay
-
@Madgun68:
Good point. I still think the Amiga name can open *some* doors though.
Kay
-
I forgot to include the "fun factor" in my list...
Concidering all three OS's are hobby OS's it is important to remember that these OS's should be fun to use. And that I guess depends on what you want to use it for!!
Being a frustrated control freak, I prefer to be able to "hack" away at the internals of the OS and see what happens... That makes the Open source option best for me.
-
Good point. I still think the Amiga name can open *some* doors though.
I'm not so sure of that any more, Kay. The Amiga name has been dragged into the mud. These days, the name is a laughing stock and synomymous with vapor and mad projects that just couldn't succeed. Good once, but these days just a laugh.
I think the Amiga name is more influencial with ex-Amiga users, rather than outsiders who have never used an Amiga. But then again, many of the people who are most obnoxiously contemptuous of the Amiga are ex-Amigans. "I had a 030 AGA Amiga and it was crap. My machine is much better, blah blah..."
-
Personally I don't think the 'name' or the old
3.1 sourcecode have much relevance these days
to anybody outside of the community, which has
to be the eventual target in order for any of
the commercial OS's to survive. I know hardly
anybody who 'remembers the amiga' anymore, let
alone would buy one based on "the name".
Even in its prime years, the amiga was only
popular among gamers/geeks and editors, it
was never a 'mainstream' platform. I think
a company with a fresh outlook (and "name")
probably stands a better chance in today's
market than the resurface of an antiquated
retro - brand. Recent history has shown that
most things "retro" remain passing fads (like
the 6 month return of the 'bell - bottom')...
however 'now" I think the amiga needs a modern
image in order to win the type of support
necessary to build a solid foundation 'outside'
of the community.
:edit:
As far as Aros, it's open source, has a solid
development team who seem to be kicking *ss at
the moment...it's looking pretty good.
-
Been thinking it through what will win? To become the true successor of OS3.1.
why must either of them win? i hope they are both (equally)succesfull
i want a future in which i may chose either
-
@-D-
Maybe in the US the Amiga wasn't maintream, but in Europe the Amiga was mainstream for home users. People either had a console to play games only, or an Amiga to play games on, do some work on, and even kids learned on it..
As for the name, many people have fond memories of the Amiga (500 era, and early AGA period, before the PC booming and C='s demise) and also rember the ease of use and power.. If anything, the abilty to just "turn off" the power and not having to shut down is for some a real + ;).
Whether or not OS4 or MOS will survive, who knows.. The targeted markets aren't just home users, more Kiosks and controller type stuff, not Office PC types... Maye Hyperion / Genesi should show their OS to Nasa, they could be intersted in a stable / fast booting OS (Note; not the current hardware).. This won't make them mainstream, but at least keeps the money comming to further develop the OSes.
As for Aros.. As long as the main developers love to code for it, it will survive... After all, they are not in it for the money, but for the love of it... :-D
-
@ KennyR:
The Amiga name has been dragged into the mud. These days, the name is a laughing stock and synomymous with vapor and mad projects that just couldn't succeed.
That's true only to a certain extent. People that stayed after Commodore's and Escom's failures will probably laugh at the name, but lots of people left when Commodore went bust and have no idea of the soap opera that was to come. To those, Amiga means Megademos and Sensible Soccer; or "the right way of doing things", not Escom's or Gateway's vapourware.
-
DonnyEMU:
> I think the Amiga community is the real
> winner..
I agree here, mostly. Having multiple options is a good thing, especially in this very early stage. If one company or programming team dissolves, there's somewhere else to turn.
At the same time, though, we've also taken on a not-so-constructive aspects of the Linux community, where so many people spend their time trying to reinvent the wheel with different distributions, that the platform itself tends to tread water. Can you imagine where we'd be if the efforts directed at just one of OS4/MOS/AROS/Amithlon was directed toward somethig everybody could enjoy? Perhaps we'd already have a Mozilla port, an OpenOffice port, or a handful of other really good apps? :-(
> Let's face it Intel type cpu's
> dominate the home and business computer market
> and that doesn't look like it's changing.
I don't think you can say that, because nobody's really given it a proper try. Apple was on course in the mid-90's, but then Steve Jobs returned and killed the Mac clones. This is probably our last, best shot at establishing a competing platform to the PC, and I think it's certainly worth the effort.
Todd
-
Theres only on OS that everyone can safely know that will never die or suffer from all the vunerabilities that commercial OSs do...
Thats right, AROS... As to whos going to win. I'd say that AmigaOS has a larger following right now. But, their following nothing really :)... just a dream... and hope...
We'll i think i hate these topics :) who cares who wins? They're both great products, and they both may very well have a great future. Good luck too them. (of course AROS doesnt need any luck :) its OpenSource)
-
BillBuck cant buy AmigaOS. Hyperion owns all the code. Maybe, he coudl aquire Amiga Inc the company, then under the company, buy AmigaOS back from hyperion (as stated in Hyperion/Amiga incs contract).
But thats a lot of effort for a small company!!!
-
seer said:
Maye Hyperion / Genesi should show their OS to Nasa, they could be intersted in a stable / fast booting OS
I doubt that NASA would be very interested. First, neither AmigaOS4 nor MorphOS could be certified for critical tasks. Second, they already have thier non-critical tasks covered by more mature and stable OSs. And, unless my memory is failing, I think they were investigating Linux for many ground-based operations.
-
by seer on 2003/5/31 19:17:34
Maye Hyperion / Genesi should show their OS to Nasa, they could be intersted in a stable / fast booting OS (Note; not the current hardware)..
NASA has bought some small RTOS in the past for their projects. But this would mean OS4/MOS would have to go head to head with the likes of River Wind and QNX which have years (decades?) of experience ahead of Hyperion and Genesi.
Which brings up a question, is either OS4 or MOS a proper RTOS or are they not even close to that standard?
Dammy
-
*shrughs*
ATM MOS is superior in both usability state, and planned architecture.
Yet, a very important point: MOS has to face negative discrimination, OS4 on the other hand receives positive discrimination, sometimes to a frightening degree. Is it just because the name? Maybe.
I bet OS4 as a winner, but not feature, stability or application wise. It will take 2-6 yers for OS4 to reach the current MOS state. (judging from public and not so public information) Not that it will count.
This community is driven by emotions. So be realistic. AROS will remain with us just as before, MOS will make very happy those who use it, but most of the sales will come from OS4.
(Absolutely IMHO of course :-))
-
The problem is that most ex-Amiga owners, will either
say "The Amiga is dead, bury it" or "Amiga? AHAHAHA, Commodore, then Escom, then HAHAHA,
Gateway, LoL!"
That's what happens in Greece with most people.
Here, the Amiga was dominating 13-12 years ago.
-
@Warface
Please elaborate on:
ATM MOS is superior in both usability state, and planned architecture.
Id also like to know if you have used OS4 and if so, which build?
MOS is inferior in its usability to AOS3.5/9 in at the least the Ambient stakes ( based on an over the shoulder waggle or twenty with the mouse ) and from my experience of OS4 *very* inferior to that.
But maybe you mean something else?
-
Actually, say MOS "was" inferior Ambient-wise.
MOS1.3 is old already, 1.4 is about to be released
and its Ambient is much more useful.
(Edited: Typo-fest)
-
@DaveP:
Please notify me when ur using your OS4 build on an A1 with a Radeon. (With which Eyetech delivers the AmigaONEs) Or visiting this page from OS4 not using the 68K CPU at all.
Since when usability depends on 3.5/3.9 features? I had 3.1 before and was very happy with that.
I meant an everyday usability state, not incorporating each single feature OS3.5/3.9 has. Wonder if I were really that misunderstandable? Or you just wanted to argue?
-
Usability is, in development terms here at least, a statement of the "usability" of the human/computer interface. As in UCD analysis. Given we use "usability" as a formal term scoped by roughly what I just described at work in our ODC process I presume this is what you mean.
If AOS4 works the same on A1 as it does on CyberStorm as it does on Blizzard ( with obvious differences such as speed and what-have-you ) does it matter? Does it effect the way the HCI behaves?
Again, what do you mean everyday usability state. Its running on my Amiga all the time?
Im not asking purely to argue, I just want to find out what you mean and frankly Im still at a loss.
-
@AmiGR
Is it going to be demonstrated at any shows coming up so I can lean over shoulder and waggle mouse again?
-
Following your argument MOS 0.4 is superior to MOS 1.4, right?
-
@Warface
No. Following my argument MOS 0.4 working with Workbench 3.9 is superior to MOS1.3s "usability". I haven't used MOS1.4 even in a waggle test yet so how on earth can I comment on that.
You cannot seperate AOS4 from all the "features" of previous operating systems. Whilst it is a "revolution" in terms of its PPC nature and its boundary architecture it is an evolution in terms of features available on the HCI.
MOS 1.x up is "unable" to use that HCI heritage ( WorkBench ) but it is advancing rapidly on its own technological merits in this area with Ambient.
If we aren't talking about "usability" in the software development cycle terms that I know and understand can you please explain it from your understanding?
Also, can you take a stab at the other questions.
-
I've mentioned the word "usability" in it's most general meaning. Still have no clue why do you want to narrow it down to something specific. Except if you have some intentions with that.
-
??????????????????
(dictionary.com/programming) The effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction
with which users can achieve tasks in a particular environment
of a product. High usability means a system is: easy to learn
and remember; efficient, visually pleasing and fun to use; and
quick to recover from errors.
Ive defined the term that I use for usability, and where I get it from ( our Software Engineering process at work - ODC classifications etc ).
I want to tie you down to something specific because I want to understand how you came to the conclusion you did. Is it so hard to understand that I want to understand you?
PS: (edit) I suspect you mean "availability" which is literally whether or not a product/function is available for end use. Usability is a trigger that can only be employed once "availability" has been succeeded.
-
Sigh. It's getting tiring.
High usability means a system is: easy to learn
and remember; efficient, visually pleasing and fun to use; and
quick to recover from errors.
Then MorphOS has high usability. What do you want to achieve with all this?
Are you missing OS3.5/3.9 features? That makes MOS inferior in your eyes?
MOS offers you to resize/move windows by borders, select screens/windows from lists, even with small pictures, use all existing icons and widely spread RGBA png icons in additions, stunning ways of navigation in window contents, either by holding down the middle button or pressing it twice, when a special navigational image appears, and a whole lot - which OS3.5/3.9 does not have and cannot provide. Despite that I haven't said OS3.5/3.9 is inferior.
The interface is NOT inferior/superior but DIFFERENT, and to say: pretty modern. And new features are added continuously.
Not to mention, we're discussing OS4, MOS and AROS - 3.5/3.9 is pretty off topic.
-
AmiGR wrote:
The problem is that most ex-Amiga owners, will either
say "The Amiga is dead, bury it" or "Amiga? AHAHAHA, Commodore, then Escom, then HAHAHA,
Gateway, LoL!"
That's partly why i'm selective who I tell about my crush on 'Amiga' ;-)
-
by DaveP on 2003/6/1 7:22:36
Id also like to know if you have used OS4 and if so, which build?
MOS is inferior in its usability to AOS3.5/9 in at the least the Ambient stakes ( based on an over the shoulder waggle or twenty with the mouse ) and from my experience of OS4 *very* inferior to that.
But maybe you mean something else?
Then again, OS4 is inferior to AROS because OS4 is *vaporware*. Until iOS4 released to the public, it's going to remain inferior to any OS, even Windows. ;)
Dammy
-
Warface wrote:
Sigh. It's getting tiring.
I don't see why. However if you don't think that being tired out by substantiating bland assertions is worth it in the end because of the common understanding it can achieve then perhaps you might avoid the bland assertions in the first place or just ignore those that ask questions about "why"? You could have said "Im not going to tell you" or "none of your business" or "its subjective" or "I have no idea why" or "I made it up" if you really can't be arsed. I don't know why this has to lead to you getting irritated. Certainly was *not* my intent.
Then MorphOS has high usability. What do you want to achieve with all this?
I want to know why, in *your* eyes why you think that MOS1.x is more usable than AOS4. I don't know how else to restate this to make you understand.
Are you missing OS3.5/3.9 features? That makes MOS inferior in your eyes?
From what I used it is missing AOS4 and AOS3.5 and AOS3.9 functionality that I find convenient. But we are talking about what YOU think because it is YOU that made the claim.
MOS offers you to resize/move windows by borders,
Which is neat. Haven't seen this on AOS3.5 and AOS3.9.
select screens/windows from lists, even with small pictures,
Really, so you have never used a taskbar, storm screen select or any other screen select utility?
use all existing icons and widely spread RGBA png icons in additions, stunning ways of navigation in window contents, either by holding down the middle button or pressing it twice, when a special navigational image appears, and a whole lot
Someone is going to have to show this off at a demo, it is nothing *I* saw with my mouse waggle test.
- which OS3.5/3.9 does not have and cannot provide. Despite that I haven't said OS3.5/3.9 is inferior.
No, you said that AOS4 is inferior in terms of usability which is odd because it incorporates, fixes and extends AOS3.5 and AOS3.9 functionality ( which is according to you not inferior in terms of usability )....
The interface is NOT inferior/superior but DIFFERENT, and to say: pretty modern. And new features are added continuously.
Right, OK I can accept that maybe true for versions I haven't sampled yet ( although AmiGR seems to disagree with you ) but you were the one that claimed AOS4 had inferior usability which is contradictory with your statement about OS3.9/3.5. If OS4 is inferior in terms of usability ergo so is OS3.9/3.5.
Not to mention, we're discussing OS4, MOS and AROS - 3.5/3.9 is pretty off topic.
No it isn't off topic. AOS4 incorporates and extends OS3.5 and OS3.9 Workbench functionality, you brought up MOS0.4 which lead to me pointing out that MOS0.4 was evaluated on my machine with Workbench 3.9. MOS originally, if you recall, was to use Workbench and did not have ambient.
Now you have answered why you think that MOS is superior in usability to AOS3.9/3.5 ( although to do a proper analysis it would have to be UCD tested but thats out of the bounds of this discussion ) can you explain now why you think it is superior in usability to AOS4 ( your original claim )?
And then can you answer the second question I had.
-
dammy wrote:
by DaveP on 2003/6/1 7:22:36
Id also like to know if you have used OS4 and if so, which build?
MOS is inferior in its usability to AOS3.5/9 in at the least the Ambient stakes ( based on an over the shoulder waggle or twenty with the mouse ) and from my experience of OS4 *very* inferior to that.
But maybe you mean something else?
Then again, OS4 is inferior to AROS because OS4 is *vaporware*. Until iOS4 released to the public, it's going to remain inferior to any OS, even Windows. ;)
Dammy
With all due respect to Hyperion, I must say it would be nice to see some real evidence of AOS4.
So far I've only seen some screen shots of something that looks like AmigaOS... but nothing that can't already be done with AmigaOS 3.1 (or AROS for that matter) or easily faked.
-Edit- What I'd like is a downloadable (time/feature/whatever) limited demo, that I can put on my A1200 (with it's Blizz PPC) and run and see for myself.
-
I don't see why
Because you render my OPINION into a pointless flamewar of yours. You asked when the 1.4 MOS will be presented so you can try it out - I ask the same from you then. When can I try out OS4, except that you state that it's superior? (which contradicts to what I hear from people involved in OS4 development)
-
@Warface
What flameware? How do you classify me asking you questions and trying to understand your claims from a logical point of view a flamewar?
From what I can see the only person getting emotional in this is you.
I wanted to know what you base your OPINION on.
(which contradicts to what I hear from people involved in OS4 development)
Names please. So I can ask them independantly.
I claimed that OS3.5 and OS3.9 is superior to what I had tried in terms of "usability". I admitted that I haven't tried MOS1.4 and frankly Im not budging from that opinion until I have. AOS4 is suprior to OS3.9/OS3.5 ergo also in my view it is superior to what I had tried. And I even admitted that I only had a few moments on it ( mouse waggle test ).
You made the claim that MOS is superior in terms of usability as well as a few other claims you have yet failed to substantiate. Lets have some meat on the bone please.
This is not about flames, this is about trying to find out the reason for why *you* have come to the conclusion you have given you know MOS in much greater depth than I so not only can I understand it ( and even may be persauded that what you claim is so ) but so can everyone else who reads this thread.
You are not known for BS so there must be something in it. Hence I want to know what.
-
I have to conceed that what Dammy sayes is right, until the "availability" of AOS4 for people to use/try out ( and maybe the roadshow will go some way to sorting this out ) then this will remain the case as harsh as the classification may be.
Once availability is sorted out, maybe then we can get onto an objective analysis of usability.
-
:griping:
-
DaveP:
I think we can't really say that OS4 is better in usability than OS3.9. It's too early to say:
because it'll depend on the stability of OS4 (many crucial new parts on new hardware); on the compatibility (emulation)...
This is really a very different product.
Right now MOS lacks a few details, but has new feature and is very compatible and stable.
But of course time will tell and we must all remain open and cheerful :)
-
@mahen
This is indeed the truth. At the moment you only have my entirely subjective ( and plus Im used to it ) evaluation of a usability improvement.
But of course time will tell and we must all remain open and cheerful :)
Yep. Best not to draw any conclusions about usability of one over the other until we can do a head to head test.
:)
-
DaveP: yep :) To answer the subject, I'm sure OS4 would be dominant if it was released now, even if it was less good than MOS. So as always, I'll say that if the MOS & AOS team had cooperated we would have something great right now and no wars :)
-
I'd like to offer my 'UNINFORMED' opinion.
I belong to the largest group of Amiga users ..
The 'UNINFORMED' . I know little about MOS or
Linex or A1 or OS4. Actually it doesn't matter
since IMHO AROS is already the clear cut successor
to the 'Clasic Amiga' . No computer to buy.. No card
to buy .. just plug AROS into my PC and I have the
look and feel of my clasic Amiga.
AROS is going to grow all it needs is a good Basic
language for the masses. I can even see many of
the X-Amigans coming back. It will be easy and
painless for them. I don't discont the merits of the
other systems, I'm sure they have their good points.
But an objective look at our options tells us that
AROS is the one.
And thats fine by me.
Mel Ott
-
Melott: You hit the nail on the head!
I would love to buy a PPC motherboard (pegasos or A1), but frankly there aimed at the old propiertory die hards. I hope Amiga Inc go bust, I really do. Then Hyperion can have a chance at reaching A market. Then market the OS as it should be marketed for the complete PPC crowd. Not at the moment in a niche inside a niche inside a niche.
Open source is the best option, because it means the community controls the OS. No moaning, because if you do it will be like your lazy, because you could make a difference.
As soon as AROS gets 68k emulation its gonna be like a steamroller!
-
Now: MorphOS
In 2 years: AmigaOS 4.0
In 19 years: AROS!!!!!
And the losers is Amiga DE Inc os 5.0, which will never ever exist!
-
mahen wrote:
Right now MOS lacks a few details, but has new feature and is very compatible and stable.
Relative to what (e.g. AmigaOS 3.9 or AmigaOS 4.0)?
IF your reference is AmigaOS 4.0, how did you obtain a copy of this operating system?
"Very compatible and stable" doesn't quite jive with OSnew’s reviews regarding Pegasos and MorphOS (i.e. Eugenia Loli-Queru’s review(2003-05-19)?
PS; My point of reference in regards to AmigaOS usability and stability is a Birdie/VisualPref/AmiStart/StackAttack/Executive enhanced AmigaOS 3.9**.
**Running on WinUAE-JIT .8.22.R7, Athlon 1800+ (Tbread core) @1.9Ghz(o/c), ASUS nForce II 400 (with MCP-T Southbridge), 512Mb PC3200 DDR SDRAM, nVidia Geforce 4 TI VIVO.
-
"Very compatible and stable" doesn't quite jive with OSnew's reviews regarding Pegasos and MorphOS (i.e. Eugenia Loli-Queru's review(2003-05-19)?
Understandable. You can't go on a aminet downloading spree and expect to find everything compatible. People might even need to refine their definition of system friendly.
There's plenty of software out there that appears to be system friendly and some of it varies on just how system friendly it is. The CIA's aren't there and as such neither are the resources. There is no audio device redirector either. Anything that relies on either of those will most likely fail to operate or do so poorly. (This applies to MOS 1.3... Don't know what's been implemented in AOS4.)
A perfect example is one of my favorite wb games on my Amiga machines.. Soliton. Technically, it works under MOS.. But it is unable to generate random numbers due to the method it uses. As such, the game is the same every time you start the program.
My uptime isn't terribly great right now.. I reset the machine a couple of days ago after I installed the poseidon update. Before that, I was at 5 days. YMMV.
PS; My point of reference in regards to AmigaOS usability and stability is a Birdie/VisualPref/AmiStart/StackAttack/Executive enhanced AmigaOS 3.9**.
MOS has something similar to Birdie/Visual Prefs. Last time I tried, AmiStart failed to work. StackAttack isn't needed.
Can't really think of anything I miss from 3.9.
-
There's plenty of software out there that appears to be system friendly and some of it varies on just how system friendly it is.
Of course.
The CIA's aren't there and as such neither are the resources.
Can they create a virtual device emulator (e.g. nallepuh) ?
There is no audio device redirector either.
What about nallepuh?
-
"Very compatible and stable" doesn't quite jive with OSnew’s reviews regarding Pegasos and MorphOS (i.e. Eugenia Loli-Queru’s review(2003-05-19)?
Eugenia expected memory protection. Stability for the time being is similar to an Amiga system, not a recent, memory protected Operating System with applications made with memory protection in mind.
-
Warface wrote:
Eugenia expected memory protection.
That’s one issue…
Stability for the time being is similar to an Amiga system,
Not without the missing devices and services. Virtual devices could help the overall application compatibility.
Note that I’m not referring to memory protection issues. I’m referring to application compatibility and the stability to run them. Missing services will reduce the overall stability to run legacy applications.
This unknown factor (i.e. will this run or will this not run) doesn’t help MOS’s cause.
-
MOS has something similar to Birdie/Visual Prefs. Last time I tried, AmiStart failed to work. StackAttack isn't needed.
That was not the issue. Note that I’m well aware of MOS's 2D GUI texturing/skinning capabilities. The statement was a brief summary of my current AmigaOS 3.9 set-up and patches.
The issue is; Can MOS 1.3 ecosystem replace AmigaOS 3.9 ecosystem?
**AmigaOS 3.9 based set-ups can cover from Amithlon/Berniethlon, WinUAE-JIT and Classic Amiga HW.
-
I have managed to convince my gf that the amiga is the best computer ever, and even made her use and enjoy it (mostly for dpaint and scala). How about that? :-)
It took a little while, though. FIrst I had to talk her into buying an ibook instead of a pc laptop and then we went from there.
Oh, did I mention that I now have an ibook? :P
Sincerely,
-Kenneth Straarup.
-
Nahlepuh and stuff like it are mostly MMU hacks.
Such MMU hacks are not even considered, as they
will slow down everything significantly. Every poke
to Paula would produce MMU exceptions that would
have to be handled with multitasking disabled.
Such stuff have no place in a clean OS.
The goal with both solutions is not only to produce a
compatible and extended OS but to clean it up as well.
-
I am biased, as most must know by now.
I bought my A2000 in 1989. I still use it today.
I will buy an A1 by Oct. 2003.
I expect it'll last till at least 2016, how could that be wrong??
AmigaOne! Let's do the Time Warp again!
-
I am biased, as most must know by now.
There is very few unbiased out there (if any :-)). This way or the other, everyone is biased - or just ignorant. :-)
-
Hi, isn't this a silly discussion?
Each effort will go its own way. Best wishes to all.
Take it easy...;-)
R&B
-
@bbrv
Please tell us why its a silly discussion?
The subject is quite interesting to a lot of people ( although it should say Amiga-derived OS ) and the discussion within has been far from silly and has been the most productive we have seen for a long time.
( which probably sayes more for the quality of debate we usually get )
-
OK, Dave, fair enough. Have fun. We just think "dominant" is the wrong word.
We did not read the thread. If you think the discussion was that useful we will try to catch-up and read it later.
R&B :-)
-
DaveP wrote:
@bbrv
Please tell us why its a silly discussion?
The subject is quite interesting to a lot of people ( although it should say Amiga-derived OS ) and the discussion within has been far from silly and has been the most productive we have seen for a long time.
( which probably sayes more for the quality of debate we usually get )
coming soon to all platforms under the sun , MiffyOS (tm). Multitasking/Multithreaded/MemoryProtected/Amiga-BeOS-NT-Intent-Linux-BSD ABI and API compatible. The one true OS. :-D
Please donate funds to the Church of Miffy then we can accelerate the development. We might send a T-Shirt to you, then again, we might not. ;-)
-
@DaveP
I have to admit, I love DaveP-s bunny. Being teethy, but his devotion is something I must admire. Hope I cleared up most issues in my PM. And once more - it was just an opinion. (as I stated so in the last line) :-)
I'd love to hear your opinion on the subject however. I bet it will be detailed and interesting.
-
I have to admit, I love DaveP-s bunny.
Loving the bunny is the first step to enlightenment Warface! ;-)
-
It's silly for one reason... The one who dominates the
Amiga market is NOT the winner. Every team will start
targeting other markets, thus following other paths.
-
AmiGR wrote:
It's silly for one reason... The one who dominates the
Amiga market is NOT the winner. Every team will start
targeting other markets, thus following other paths.
Hahahaha, I like that: "The one that gets the Amiga Market is not the winner", talk about cussing the Amiga community :-D
A better Topic is: "Which Clone is the most interesting and/or has the most interesting future..."
-
I don't know that dominant is the word I'd use for an OS that very few people use.
However, in the long run I do have a pick.
AmigaOS has pretty much been abandoned by Amiga Inc in favor of a new hardware/software solution because it should be more profitable. The only reason they support the old one at all is they needed money. It will continue to have a good sized but ever shrinking user base. Old hardware dies sometime.
Amiga Inc just doesn't have the money to push a new platform. OS4 will be cool but few people will spend that much on hardware. No killer app... few sales. DE will continue to give them cash in small doses but none of their stuff will gain wide use.
MOS... Amiga Inc part two... and these guys don't even have a name they can live off of.
AROS... has a life of it's own. It isn't dependant on a company to give it life. It will have to go through a phase where the current developers give up some control to new developers or it will plod along at a snails pace till they have to move on. *If* it can do that and provide runnable, easy to install releases with actual applications then it will gain a steady following.
So... who's the winner? Right now and for some time it will be AmigaOS. WinUAE will become the platform used to run it thanks to attrition killing off old hardware. Actually, if you count kids pirating games to run on UAE it's already the dominant platform and will probably stay that way. But then they aren't really using AmigaOS... just running games.
Long term? There are a few things that have to happen in order for what I'm going to say to come about but I'm going to go out on a limb.
AROS
It's going to be two years before these guys figure out they have to start doing releases that work like Linux distros, take time to fix the build system so that the more hacker types stop killing the nightly builds and someone will actually have to port a couple apps to it. But I think it has to happen for the project to continue.
I also say this because UAE under windows isn't really using the OS. Their dominant environment is Windows. Most people will run one or two programs every now and then or a favorite game but never really use the OS.
-
MOS... Amiga Inc part two... and these guys don't even have a name they can live off of.
--
They don't have THE name, but they do have 10(100?)
or even more times more money than Amiga Inc, have
a plan and have the connections. They even have the
connection to get a very good name (that will let many
people down) and many stuff that come with that name,
for the last few years. Take a look at www.morphos-news.de...
-
And who outside of this board has ever heard of them?
You can rant, stomp your feet, jump up and down and say mine is better than yours till hell freezes over and it wont change the fact that over 90% of the people that have even heard of the Amiga have never heard of them let alone people that haven't heard of Amiga.
100 times the money of Amiga Inc? 100 times nothing is still nothing. Chicken feed. It takes a lot of money to become a niche player in this business and they don't even have something to put them in that position.
The only reason AROS can succeed is it's free and can outlive it's original developers.
-
Oh, and cheap hardware you can find anywhere.
-
You ignored half my posting...
Take a look at morphos-news.de and morphzone.org
to see which name I'm talking about.
And no, this is no joke, they have the connection to get it.
-
MorphOS does seem to be going places, espicially with 1.4. As stated before, to run it on a Mac would be awesome. Why don't they release it for the AmigaONE and finish Amiga Inc off for good. I would pay <£50 for a copy.
AOS4 isn't even out the door yet. How are they going support it, if they can't even pay the programmers to write it?
-
The BEST way for AOS4.0 to get strong FAST is, upon release, start working on 4.2, BUT at the same time, maybe ask Amigaworld.net to set up a section, for ONLY reporting bugs.
That way, everyone can see which bugs have been reported, and if they face the same ones, can maybe add something extra to how it may have occurred.
Then Hyperion should address that bug immediately, and re-release that C: command or whatever it is.
Not wait and release a group of programs, as a boing bag, or implement it in 4.2.
The KEY to selling more machines will be "rock solid stability", not features, in the first 6-12 months.
Who cares if they add 35 features in 4.2, if 4.0 is unreliable???
AmigaOne! MTBF = Infinity!
-
AmiGR wrote:
Nahlepuh and stuff like it are mostly MMU hacks.
Such MMU hacks are not even considered, as they
will slow down everything significantly.
Did you forget 68K CPU emulation? One could use sound blaster emulation within WinXP’s dos box as another example.
Every poke to Paula would produce MMU exceptions that would have to be handled with multitasking disabled. Such stuff have no place in a clean OS.
What about newbaer.lha (Paula-to-AHI redirector for AMIthlon)?
The goal with both solutions is not only to produce a
compatible and extended OS but to clean it up as well.
Nice goals but how does one reach that goal in a realistic fashion?
-
Did you forget 68K CPU emulation? One could use sound blaster emulation within WinXP’s dos box as another example.
--
Depends on the implementation. For example, MorphOS uses emulation traps instead.
Newbaer uses the mmu stuff outside of the emulation box, on the linux side.
It still slows stuff down, but on a 2ghz machine it's not visible.
-
"Which Clone is the most interesting and/or has the most interesting future..."
AROS because
1. Can be made run on every current amigaowners hardware( except if you only own an A1000 or A500)
2.Linux is becoming to mainstream....
which means no geekfactor, tons of viruses and no community
-
You ignored half my posting...
Well... if you would narrow down what your talking about it might help!
And until whatever your talking about is signed, sealed and delivered... I'll believe it when I see it.
-
90% of the people that have even heard of the Amiga have never heard of them let alone people that haven't heard of Amiga.
Every idea/company/product starts out small. Well OK, not every, but many. You have to start somewhere. Whether or not n people have heard of MorphOS/Pegasos on June 3 2003 is not in itself a determining factor for success. Exposure grows fast if there's something interesting to say. MorphOS got a pretty good review overall at osnews.com, for example. Of course the rough spots were noted, but, coming from a reviewer with no Amiga background, it was actually more positive than I expected, as it's easy to shoot down "for all the usual reasons" products that aren't based on cheap, commodity hardware, etc. This exposure in the alt OS geek community is the logical next step beyond the Amiga starting point. One step at a time. No one expects Pegasos boards at WalMart next week. It takes a lot of money to become a niche player in this business and they don't even have something to put them in that position.
That remains to be seen. The Pegasos board is a really neat device that has generated good feedback from different kinds of users, and Pegasos II should be a big step forward. Niche players don't have to have unlimited funding, just a product line that produces solutions for a sufficient number of people. The fact that Genesi is encouraging other OS ports to Pegasos and has other hardware devices and projects to leverage Pegasos development bodes well for the future, I'd say.
-- gary_c
-
Take a look at morphos-news.de and morphzone.org to see which name I'm talking about. And no, this is no joke, they have the connection to get it.
I would actually think that Atari themselves might be a bit reluctant, but that is just a hunch.
In case you did not know Infogrames (one of the largets game publishing companies in the world) renamed themselves into Atari about a month ago. So I really have a hard time seeing Genesi being able to use that name :)
//Johan
-
Unless of course we are working together...:-o
R&B ;-)
-
And what if I tell you that that's their connection? :-)
-
Well AmigaOS 4.0 and MorphOS will be the final fight I think. But I would prefer AmigaOS 4.0 that runs Linux at the moment.
-
In case you did not know Infogrames (one of the largets game publishing companies in the world) renamed themselves into Atari about a month ago. So I really have a hard time seeing Genesi being able to use that name :)
Is that what his post was about? LOL Talk about way off base!
Infogrames bought the Atari name some time ago (year ior more) and finally decided to make real use of it. And you can find press releases on several credible sites.
I think someone should stop taking rumors as fact. I kinda questioned the source anyway (both sites are MorphOS advocacy sites).
-
bbrv wrote:
Unless of course we are working together...:-o
You wish!
Look... one webmaster heard a rumor and made a post... the owner of the other web site read it and posted it on their site. That or someone working on MorphOS expressed some wishfull thinking.
-
@BBRV
Out of interest, why would you like the Atari name? MorphOS has always been similar to AmigaOS (and will stay pretty much compatible with it through the ABox), but it doesn't have any similarity with Atari. IMO "Pegasos" is a good name anyway.
Besides, most of your users will probably believe that Atari lost the Amiga/Atari wars. And even if you say that "Atari is coming back to beat Amiga" it won't make much sense as many MorphOS users would consider themselved "Amigans" :-D
-
But I would prefer AmigaOS 4.0 that runs Linux at the moment.
Eh??
:huh:
-
alx wrote:
@BBRV
Out of interest, why would you like the Atari name? MorphOS has always been similar to AmigaOS (and will stay pretty much compatible with it through the ABox), but it doesn't have any similarity with Atari. IMO "Pegasos" is a good name anyway.
Besides, most of your users will probably believe that Atari lost the Amiga/Atari wars. And even if you say that "Atari is coming back to beat Amiga" it won't make much sense as many MorphOS users would consider themselved "Amigans" :-D
I couldn't agree more... Pegasos is a cool name... And I think I speak for most when I say... Atari sucks... :-D Sorry but old habbits die hard ;-)
Given that the Peg run MOS and soon AROS...(both clearly Amiga inspired) it a bit weird to call a machine Atari.
Can't you just buy Amiga Inc.? How hard can it be?
-
I'm not talking about any rumours...
Yes, Infogrames uses the Atari name.
The connection to get that name *IS* Infogrames.
Ask BBRV for more info, I can't say anything without
his consent.
-
Without going into speculation, I seem to remember Infogrames got their start on the Amiga platform. Wow, the irony here is great.
Speculation time:
I suspect BBRV isn't thinking of the AtariST, which we remember long wars about.. We must also remember the history of both the Amiga and Atari are very much intertwined. At one point Atari was supposed to purchase the rights to the original Amiga instead of Commodore. Jay Miner designed much of the pre-Amiga Atari stuff. Atari was one of the handful of "founders" of the home computer market.
I still think I like using the name Pegasos though....
-
@Targhan
That's Jay "Miner"
-
LoL! Didn't notice that mistake he did, Jay was CERTAINLY not "minor" ;-)
-
For example, MorphOS uses emulation traps instead.
It that for audio (Paula compatible) or the 68K CPU?
Newbaer uses the mmu stuff outside of the emulation box, on the linux side.
It still slows stuff down, but on a 2ghz machine it's not visible.
In regards to speed, it’s fine on 1.33Ghz Athlon model 4. Also, it can’t be slower than WinUAE-JIT, i.e. emulates the entire Amiga Classic ecosystem.
Amithlon was tested from the following AMD boxes
1. 1.13Ghz Athlon (Thunderbird) MSI VIA KT266
2. 1.33Ghz Athlon (Thunderbird) MSI VIA KT133A or/and MSI VIA KT266
3. 1.53Ghz Athlon XP(Palomino), ASUS nForce II or/and MSI VIA KT266
4. 1.90Ghz Athlon XP(Thoroughbred) ASUS nForce II 400 (@333Mhz FSB)
All has at least 512 MB RAM. Video cards ranges from Geforce 2 MX/400 to Geforce 4 TI.
-
It that for audio (Paula compatible) or the 68K CPU?
--
68k.
In regards to speed, it’s fine on 1.33Ghz Athlon model 4. Also, it can’t be slower than WinUAE-JIT, i.e. emulates the entire Amiga Classic ecosystem.
--
Well, as I said, on Amithlon, it's done externally afaik.
Such stuff have no place in a cleanly made OS.
About UAE now, that emulates the whole, synced,
environment and speeds the whole thing up to become
faster. That's not how it could work on a native OS.
-
@HMetal
darn typos... Thank you.
-
Well, as I said, on Amithlon, it's done externally afaik.
Such stuff have no place in a cleanly made OS.
That would be a point of contention i.e. a bias for legacy (investment protection, boat anchor) VS a bias for pure clean OS.
That's not how it could work on a native OS.
What about midi softsyns** (virtual midi wave table)? Also, what about software channel audio mixing, software audio reverb and chorus?
I don’t think PowerPC G3 @800Mhz is a slow processor; it’s definitely not a Celeron/Duron Class CPU.
**With Windows, example of softsyns is Yamaha's Soft XG50 (approximation of Yamaha's XG-50 HW). This software can at least consume the entire 150Mhz Pentium MMX’s processing power. But the result is very good. It beats SBlive's HW midi wave table's results. It’s not a problem when you have at least full L2 cache equipped 800Mhz CPU. This virtual device can also be use as the primary wave device (one could apply Soft XG’s reverb and chorus).
Just like Soft XG50, virtual devices can give the user options. I’m not for one-size fits all dogma.
-
Well, the problem is that all Paula using proggies, just bang it directly, without going through audio.device.
To make them work, you need a way to find out when a proggie tries to access the Paula registers,
this can be done via the MMU, by setting us a virtual
paula register setup there. Any access there would
cause a nice MMU exception, disabling the multitasking
for a while, that would have to be
passed to the emulator. That would slow down the
system a lot if it's not done in a careful and sufficiently dirty and hackish way.
-
Well, the problem is that all Paula using proggies, just bang it directly, without going through audio.device.
It’s a matter of the current implementation. Unlike X86 world, skill sets, manpower and financial support is in short supply within the Amiga land.
To make them work, you need a way to find out when a proggie tries to access the Paula registers,
I recall, AmigaOS 4.0 reserve some address space for this kind of problems? It’s probably incomplete at AmigaOS 4.0 state.
Well, the problem is that all Paula using proggies, just bang it directly, without going through audio.device.
Does MorphOS 1.3/1.4 handles any audio.device issues? Does MorphOS 1.3/1.4 handles any CIA resources issues?
-
AmiGR wrote:
Well, the problem is that all Paula using proggies, just bang it directly, without going through audio.device.
To make them work, you need a way to find out when a proggie tries to access the Paula registers,
this can be done via the MMU, by setting us a virtual
paula register setup there. Any access there would
cause a nice MMU exception, disabling the multitasking
for a while, that would have to be
passed to the emulator. That would slow down the
system a lot if it's not done in a careful and sufficiently dirty and hackish way.
Would that be a problem for IPC bias PowerPC G3@800Mhz? The slower CyberStormPPC users may not have to worry about these issues since they usually equipped with classic Amiga hardware.
PS; I’m factoring Motorola/IBM’s roll out of their new PowerPC CPUs, thus making the older PowerPCs cheaper.
-
It’s a matter of the current implementation. Unlike X86 world, skill sets, manpower and financial support is in short supply within the Amiga land.
--
Actually there are quite some skilled people in here.
The problem is that such stuff take time and it would
require strict understanding to do such tasks with
big teams.
I recall, AmigaOS 4.0 reserve some address space for this kind of problems? It’s probably incomplete at AmigaOS 4.0 state.
--
Yep, but we'll have to see how it works. It sounds that it will slow the system down, but we'll really
have to see that in practice.
Does MorphOS 1.3/1.4 handles any audio.device issues?
--
There's an audio.device replacement but the
problem is that most apps that open up the audio
device, allocate the channels and then just bang
paula. No Paula emulation is there and it's not planned.
Does MorphOS 1.3/1.4 handles any CIA resources issues?
--
It does handle the interrupts but that's it. Chipset
emulators are generally not there.
-
*Raises hand up a little*
Well... what's the difference between Amiga OS, MOS, and AROS? Please excuse my newbieness. (If you wish, Private Message me your answer so we don't clutter this thread)
-
AROS is an Open Source reimplementation of AmigaOS 3.1, adding many features to the API.
MorphOS is a modern AmigaOS compatible OS that
extends the API quite a lot and had many stuff
needed in AOS for years. It shares some code with
AROS. It's released right now.
OS4 is the official PPC AmigaOS update that does
pretty much the same as MOS, but was started much
later, uses a different implementation and is not out
yet.
About differencies to the user interface etc., I'll have
to see OS4 before I comment.
-
Actually there are quite some skilled people in here.
One may need more them.
The problem is that such stuff take time and it would require strict understanding to do such tasks with big teams.
To reduce time for R&D, one may have to throw in money and manpower at the problem. These factors wouldn’t be abundant for any of the Amiga related companies.
Yep, but we'll have to see how it works. It sounds that it will slow the system down, but we'll really have to see that in practice.
What about in X86 world? Note that, this particular feature is just an option (it's a user's choice).
There's an audio.device replacement but the
problem is that most apps that open up the audio
device, allocate the channels and then just bang
paula. No Paula emulation is there and it's not planned.
That would answer most of the questions on which product would be the dominant. If Windows is anything to go by (i.e. best legacy bias while moving forward).
Forced** to buying new/replacing existing applications feels like going to yet another platform.
**Lost of application collections due incompatibilities. People generally wants to migrate slowly (i.e. obtaining new software at their own time). Only the 'new' applications (with 'new' capabilities and features) open up new possibilities.
-
Atheist wrote:
The BEST way for AOS4.0 to get strong FAST is, upon release, start working on 4.2,
Are you sure there will really be a 4.2? From ann.lu:
OS4.0 on tour : Comment 25 of 85 Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion (Trusted user) on 01-Jun-2003 18:20:39
In Reply to Comment 21:
Hyerion signed the agreement with Amiga in November of 2001.
That's not even 2 years.
Meanwhile all the functionality originally planned for 4.2 has been folded into 4.0.
BTW, what happened to 4.1? ;-)
BTW2, is Hyperion supposed to/allowed to develop the OS further than 4.0? Perhaps they can go everywhere as long as it's 4.x? Then I guess they could call the next release 4.00000001, the release after that 4.00000002, and so on! :-D
-
Well, most up to date apps work, anyway. The
software bundle will have replacements for some
other needed stuff.
We'll see how it unfolds.
It's not as if it's not possible in MOS, they don't wanna
do it, for speed reasons and in order to keep the OS
clean. It could be implemented by a third party, like
on AmigaOS, for example.
-
takemehomegrandma wrote:
Atheist wrote:
The BEST way for AOS4.0 to get strong FAST is, upon release, start working on 4.2,
Are you sure there will really be a 4.2? From ann.lu:
Well, they're ahead of the game, that's good for us users. 4.2 will be even more advanced (yes, laugh if you want, but that's how I feel, advanced).
If they can't go beyond 4.99... then crawl those fractions up, but I think that, as long as Amiga Inc. doesn't buy the rights back, they can do almost whatever they want to.
AmigaOne! I have no doubts or reservations! :-)