Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: Samuar on June 25, 2003, 02:03:14 AM
-
Here's a theory: An interesting solution to Amiga's development problems: merge the companies behind AmigaOne and Pegasos - to produce a real replacement and Amiga system environment. Such a radical thing might be what is needed to really re-start the Amiga following.
Somehow, though, I suspect it will never happen...
-
You'd just have the Peg dev team, as the A1 is a licensed board, not designed by Eyetech itself.
-
Eyetech sells licensed Mai boards and don't
do any engineering so they may be an ok reseller
but not really involved in hardware development.
So you are left with only the Pegasos and
MorphOS teams anyway...
-
It will never happen. It is to late for that Hyperion
offered and Morph OS developers rejected the offer.
It is very amusing seeing 2 companies fighting over
so few customers. What a waist of talented programers.
Attacking MicroSoft was a admirable, attacking Amiga is
ludicrous.
-
An interesting solution to Amiga's development problems: merge the companies behind AmigaOne and Pegasos..
Riiiiight. Schmidt is so paranoid of the competition that he won't even let developers working for or with Amiga sit in his precious MorphOS IRC channel as they might be "moles." :lol:
-
@Russ
since when does Hyperion have anything to do with the AmigaONE nor Pegasos? Nor have anything to offer in light of either platform.
Please keep the arguement to the topic at hand, which is A1 and Pegasos.
-
@HMetal
And what does that have to do with the price of tea in china.
The topic clearly says Pegasos and AmigaONE, not "pick on your favorite developer."
Heck, I've never seen a Pegasos channel.
-
First of all, there seems to be so much interest to happenings on this channel, that "the competition" (as you put it), ran logging irc client on the channel, and certain high position person used these logs for his own purposes. The logging was done without permission, and the text was quoted without permission from the author.
Second, you were asked to leave the channel. And you did leave after some pretty civil discussion about the issue. What's the problem now mr Akey?
-
Realistically, that will not happen with the core development teams. But, it could happen with the broader community here:
A new kind of online experience! (http://amiga.org/forums/viewtopic.php?topic_id=9320&forum=6)
After all, we are already a "Community" full of different opinions, ambitions and skills...exactly what one needs in setting up an online world.
Best regards,
Raquel and Bill :-)
-
...
So you're planning to release it on OS4 too? Or just A1 Linux? Ok, I just had to say that, since this is A1 vs. Pegasos... which isn't MOS vs. OS4 or Hyperion, or Eyetech, and I thought Genesi hired someone else to make their boards too (since it'd cost a fortune to make their own)
...
-
Hi Jeffmix, check it out:
bplan (http://www.bplan-gmbh.de/)
...is part of:
Genesi (http://www.pegasosppc.com/quick_help.php)
See answer there to the question who is Genesi...:-)
Best regards,
Raquel and Bill
-
Riiiiight. Schmidt is so paranoid of the competition that he won't even let developers working for or with Amiga sit in his precious MorphOS IRC channel as they might be "moles."
Just an outsider view (I'm not a developer).
Weeks after the MOS1.4 screenshot with gradients, antialiased fonts everywhere appeared, there were gradients and antialiased fonts in OS4. Coincidence? Most probably, as these features were presumably planned for both in their initial stage. Yet the impressions are there.
And there is competition going on. :-) As to either side is being paranoid... It's OS4 which has not a public beta to this day, and have all involved under NDA.
(To be honest, in the beginning I was a little mad at the OS4 developers, as when they begin their work they didn't know anything about morphos, and they didn't care. That changed by now)
Now we have two wheels, with minor differences.
Sorry for being off topic. But your personal insult Mr Akey was absolutely uncalled for.
-
Does anyone believe opening up the source under the GNU General Purpose Licence (GPL) Agreement would benefit AmigaOS?
It could drastically speed up the development, and help the followers of Amiga to feel more involved - so that it becomes their AmigaOS, rather than a corporate thang.
-
Samuar, you're beating a dead old nag that's been hauled away from the catfood factory so many times there's a rut there ; }
Companies aren't about to give away the store just because people are uncomfortable with the dichotomies. They already set course.
-
What about convincing developers to leave their current projects, instead using their valuable skills on an open source project that could be available for ever?
I don't like to sound like an Anti-AmigaOS -ophile but, I dont have high hopes for AmigaOS 4. AmigaOne will only be worthwhile if the software is modern and useful.
I might be interested in porting a PPC Linux to AmigaOne or Pegasos. Already ported x86 Linux to SH4 based Sega Dreamcast :-) Would anyone else be interested in creating or using said port?
-
@Russ
No, whats sad is how Amiga inc is run. Thats sad. "Club Amiga" "The Fun Pack" "On schedule and rockin" Thats sad.
I dont blame Ralph for being paranoid he tried to work with Ainc and they tried to lowball him and he turned them down so he wouldnt have to sell out to them. Cant blame him especially since all their development was their own in a time when Amiga looked dead as a doornail. MOS has been out a long time. I have an older Amiga mag that has an Amiga press release stating Bplan to make A1. Now, its a rebadged Teron board.. which is cool if its running something.. like an operating system
magnetic
btw you of course know if it wasnt for Ralph and Carda and the Phase5 guys we wouldnt even be talking about any of this becuase they created the first PPC implementation for Amiga. :-o
-
Samuar,
Phoenix and Genesi have a number of Open Source OSes being ported to the Pegasos. Get in touch if you wish : }
-
>What about convincing developers to leave their >current projects, instead using their valuable skills >on an open source project that could be available >for ever?
Please understand that people for OS 4 (and I assume the same is true for MOS) are being *payed*
for the work they do on the OS. Few people would
quit a payed job in order to do OpenSource developement which nobody pays instead. Also I'd
name the developement of OS 4 "extremely important" (and the MOS-developers surely think the
same about MOS), while some OpenSource
apps might at best be "important, but someone else can do this too". Actually I *will* port some OpenSource things in the future - but I will only support Amiga OS 4 then :)
>I don't like to sound like an Anti-AmigaOS -ophile >but, I dont have high hopes for AmigaOS 4.
Well, I have, though.
> AmigaOne will only be worthwhile if the software >is modern and useful.
Agreed. And it will :)
>I might be interested in porting a PPC Linux to >AmigaOne or Pegasos. Already ported x86 Linux to >SH4 based Sega Dreamcast Would anyone else be >interested in creating or using said port?
I assume you are not aware that several PPC-Linux'es are already available for both machines ?
You ever read any reports on the machines at all ? :)
BTW: I do not see any sense in a "merger" of both teams. Both OSes are drifting fast apart - more every week -, and neither of them could do this without giving up a considerable part of the features of their OS (or loosing compatibility...). Also there has been a lot of bad blood. Furthermore I do not see any advantage in a merger. It's not both AmigaOS, it
is AmigaOS on this side and MOS on the other side.
Some prefer AmigaOS, some prefer MOS.
Of course one team could
give up their OS totally, but that will not happen.
On the long hand of course one of them might
disappear, but we will see.
What are these "Amiga's developement problems" in the original post referring to BTW ? I am on the OS 4 Developement team and am not aware of any problems...
Steffen Haeuser
-
Thanks greenboy:
Who should I talk to/which sites should I be looking at?
-
Samuar wrote:
Does anyone believe opening up the source under the GNU General Purpose Licence (GPL) Agreement would benefit AmigaOS?
It could drastically speed up the development, and help the followers of Amiga to feel more involved - so that it becomes their AmigaOS, rather than a corporate thang.
Ever heard of AROS (http://www.aros.org/)? They have come a long way by now, but there is still some distance left. And it has not been *that* speedy, despite the open source, but then of course, they don't have ... !
-
Development problems. Timescales. The longer amiga users wait, the more likely they are to be swallowed by x86 fanatics. Its only a matter of time before they give in to peer pressure, unfortunately. brand new x86 systems running linux are available for £350 - and if your a student, thats a tempting offer.
My concern is that I am studying Computer Science at UMIST, Manchester, U.K. - the Computation Dept. of which is rated highly - and I have not heard the word "Amiga" uttered once. I find that sad and daunting.
So, when is AmigaOS going to be released?
-
I wouldn't have said it four months ago, but a collaboration is something I'd rather not see. The AOS4 effort is basically targeting a specific community where-as the Pegasos/MorphOS is looking at the point and beyond.
And, with the exception of Hyperion, I have lost my faith in those currently involved with the new Amiga.
-
Hi Samaur,
Someone mentioned AROS, which is also being ported to Pegasos in Phoenix. You should also be aware of the Genesi/Phoenix Summer Promotion (http://amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=44466). In fact, I am even taking applications for Phree Boards! These are going to qualified developers only. Originally I requested TEN of these, but due to the quality of applicants, I have dickered with Bill Buck of Genesi for TWENTY more (in several rounds), to get a total of THIRTY.
See A Peggin' I will go! (http://amiga.org/forums/viewtopic.php?topic_id=9405&forum=1#128242) for a little more on this ... I like working with Genesi because they believe in seeding development : }
I only have a couple left, but if your short CV looks right, you might be able to nab one. These are what are known as Betatesters - Pegasos boards that were made before the Mai Articia bugs were fixed by adding Genesi's April chip. They work for development and were in fact in other developers' machines until they got free upgrades to April-fixed boards. We will NOT sell or give them to end users, but we do see their value for the next round of seeding. Actually you could have a lot of fun with one of these!
Sig has Phoenix website (which has my email @ddress),
-
@ MagicSN
Suddenly "Clone Wars" (Star Wars) pops up in my head. We have clones, we have Pegs in Space and we have the Friedens brothers with their light sabres! :-)
I'm sure that all clones will do well in the future, AROS because of it's independence and openness, MOS because of it's design and business, and OS4 because of it's legacy and the name.
-
>I wouldn't have said it four months ago, but a >collaboration is something I'd rather not see. The >AOS4 effort is basically targeting a specific >community where-as the Pegasos/MorphOS is >looking at the point and beyond.
I have to admit I see our project as being more "also looking into the future" :)
takemehomegrandma:
>I'm sure that all clones will do well in the future, >AROS because of it's independence and openness, >MOS because of it's design and business, and OS4 >because of it's legacy and the name.
i'd put the OS design as a "pro" for OS 4... :)
Steffen
-
i'd put the OS design as a "pro" for OS 4... :)
Well, some people, me included, disagree with you on that one.
-
Samuar wrote: ... My concern is that I am studying Computer Science at UMIST, Manchester, U.K. - the Computation Dept. of which is rated highly - and I have not heard the word "Amiga" uttered once. I find that sad and daunting. ...
Why would your curriculum mention the name Amiga anywhere? It could perhaps be mentioned as an example of the efficiency of doing without virtual memory spaces: the performance on (by today's standards) mediocre hardware is sufficient testimony of that. Other that that, all the features of a multitasking OS (scheduling, messaging, signalling, deadlocks, ...) are present in something like Linux, Minix, Windows, and the Lord knows what else too. And they come with the added bonus of having a working implementation of a VM subsystem ;-). Bottom line: if you know how an Amiga handles things, you know how another OS handles it, and vice versa.
-
And again many people agree with me and disagree with you. Interestingly those who agree with you usually don't know much about the design of OS 4.
Sorry, a statement that an advantage of MOS over OS 4 would be the better design I cannot leave standing. I would state it the other way round.
Steffen
-
What a waist of talented programers.
Couldn't agree more. It is a shame that the situation is what it is today with a small community struggling to survive being divided up.
Although I have a lot of respect of the work acheived by both camps, I'd be happier if it was just one.
-
And again many people agree with me and disagree with you. Interestingly those who agree with you usually don't know much about the design of OS 4.
Just as the opposite is true. I remember those interviews when OS4 developers were asked about MOS - they didn't know it and were not interested in knowing more about it. Also, aren't you working for Hyperion? :-)
-
I would rather not see a merger ..and I seriously doubt that would happen anyway. It promotes competition and a better product. What I think will probably happen is that software will get developed for the Peggy and then ported to the A1 or vice versa.
-
Sorry for being off topic. But your personal insult Mr Akey was absolutely uncalled for.
Well, since this got turned around on me instead of given the proper thought, I'll expand on why I made the comments..
What is uncalled for is that I get crap because I bring up an issue which should be adressed, not shrugged off.
What is uncalled for is calling my (factual) representation "uncalled for" yet people do that same thing to and about Amiga Inc. and everyone jumps on the bandwagon. Do you see the pattern here? No? Look harder.
What is uncalled for is that I went into the supposed MorphOS "support" channel to see if AmiFTPd (and other products of my own personal development) worked under MorphOS. I got mixed replies. One said yes, another said it ran slowly, another said it wouldn't run at all for them under MorphOS. The actual users and application developers (at least those who weren't getting the "camp standard" Amiga Inc. digs in) were very helpful but I couldn't continue my investigation..
What I was doing was trying to determine if it would be worth my while to investigate WHY some could run it and others couldn't as it runs fine on AmigaOS, for newbies and advanced users alike, out of the box so-to-speak.
While there were quite a few very helpful and courteous attendees, I would have expected more from the creator of MorphOS than asking me to leave simply on the basis of my association with Amiga Inc. Amiga has never and would never ask anyone to leave our PUBLIC support channel simply based on association. There would have to be some netiquette offense for that to happen.
Maybe instead of criticising my comments and calling them "uncalled for," you might think of being a little more encouraging and a little less suspect of developers who enter your support channel and want to develop for both solutions, no matter who they are and for whom they work.
My only question is wouldn't it be easier to just FIX the problem instead of biting the hand of the messenger?
..I shall now exit this thread after having to expand unnecessarily on my initial complaint, in hopes that it may be fixed if I should ever get the will to enter that channel again..
-
Hello there Ray :-)
If you want I can try AmiFTPd on my Pegasos. As you might know I registered it a couple of years ago, and yes I'm still using it here :-) It works quite ok on the Amiga. I did try it ones on the Pegasos, when i used the first betatester-machine. It didn't work properly then, but that was also a very early version of MorphOS. I will give it a try tomorrow again, and come back to you.
Bye
-
@HMetal
All I have to say is:
You rock! =) I am impressed for how you can present yourself after being tooken down from tons of MorphOS gurus.
@MorphOS Gurus
Its a pity seeing 2 companies that are small right now fight at it. (Amiga RULES!)
When AmigaOS4 is available, I am going to buy that. MorphOS????? Heard of it a few times, but naw, AMIGA RULES! :) Don't care who developes it. I know some of you argued that "They have developers that don't know nothing about a real-time operating system." You know what, No one wants to hear your moaning and go fix it yourself if you think you know what is happening.
@Everyone
Its simple. You want an Amiga, buy an Amiga. You want MorphOS, then buy it. Arguments are not even needed.
I said what I needed, so thanks for reading. :) If anyone opposes, I might read it a few weeks afterwards. Thanks.
-
Hi kd7ota :-)
So, you are fighting... :-) ???
-
magnetic wrote:
I dont blame Ralph for being paranoid he tried to work with Ainc and they tried to lowball him and he turned them down so he wouldnt have to sell out to them. Cant blame him especially since all their development was their own in a time when Amiga looked dead as a doornail. MOS has been out a long time. I have an older Amiga mag that has an Amiga press release stating Bplan to make A1. Now, its a rebadged Teron board.. which is cool if its running something.. like an operating system
magnetic
btw you of course know if it wasnt for Ralph and Carda and the Phase5 guys we wouldnt even be talking about any of this becuase they created the first PPC implementation for Amiga.
anyone have a scan of that article? I'd like to see it.
-
@GGS
Any input or test results you have regarding AmiFTPd would be most welcome. Thank-you.
-
kd7ota wrote:
All I have to say is:
You rock! =) I am impressed for how you can present yourself after being tooken down from tons of MorphOS gurus.
It's not necessary to compliment me for being honest and factual but thanks anyways.
As always, I speak the truth, even if others do at times try and read between the lines; failing miserably in the process. :-)
-
@HMetal
ya know you could have asked.
I run AmiFTPd on my Peggy with only minor problems. Speed-wise it's fine, but Miami keeps having the TCP stack lock-up when I run it.
-
MagicSN wrote:
And again many people agree with me and disagree with you. Interestingly those who agree with you usually don't know much about the design of OS 4.
Sorry, a statement that an advantage of MOS over OS 4 would be the better design I cannot leave standing. I would state it the other way round.
Steffen
What do you mean by this specifically?
-
While there were quite a few very helpful and courteous attendees, I would have expected more from the creator of MorphOS than asking me to leave simply on the basis of my association with Amiga Inc. Amiga has never and would never ask anyone to leave our PUBLIC support channel simply based on association. There would have to be some netiquette offense for that to happen.
I was there when you were asked to leave.
First of all, owner (that is a guy with op :) of IRC channel can decide who can be there and who not. So, if they dont want Amiga Inc. employees, then they dont. Maybe not nice for you but such is life. And to be honest, you are not always that kind person either.
Another thing is that IRC channel is not strictly dev support channel. It is also for general discussion and you were not only one asking if his app works in MOS. Although me and many other are often helping and testing if requested it can get boring.
And about AmiFTPd: As I told on IRC it should work if it is written in system friendly. Nothing worry about.
-
itix wrote:
While there were quite a few very helpful and courteous attendees, I would have expected more from the creator of MorphOS than asking me to leave simply on the basis of my association with Amiga Inc. Amiga has never and would never ask anyone to leave our PUBLIC support channel simply based on association. There would have to be some netiquette offense for that to happen.
I was there when you were asked to leave.
First of all, owner (that is a guy with op :) of IRC channel can decide who can be there and who not. So, if they dont want Amiga Inc. employees, then they dont. Maybe not nice for you but such is life. And to be honest, you are not always that kind person either.
Another thing is that IRC channel is not strictly dev support channel. It is also for general discussion and you were not only one asking if his app works in MOS. Although me and many other are often helping and testing if requested it can get boring.
And about AmiFTPd: As I told on IRC it should work if it is written in system friendly. Nothing worry about.
Ralph Schmidt used to be on (and occasionally post) the official AmigaOne Mailing list. No-one ever asked him to leave, even when he posted crap. Why should Ray not be allowed to join the MorphOS channel? He has been an Amiga developer for far longer than he has worked for Amiga Inc.
Also that whole thing about system friendly is bollocks quite frankly, there are bound to be cases where things don't work quite properly, it comes with the territory when you are reimplementing and emulating a computer system. I've heard of a few programs that don't work properly straight out of the box on MOS, checking this is something sensible to do. First rule of networking - "Assumption is the mother of all ####-ups"
If Amiga Inc are really as broke as you people say, and AOS as ####e and doomed as the fanatics claim surely it would be beneficial for Ray to look at MOS. Or is it just all crap, and you guys are bricking it? :-o
-
@HMetal
the way I see it is this... bieng asked to leave shouldnt be a big deal... your an Amiga.inc employee(helper?) and thats fine...that biend said...you made some feel uncomfortable bieng there and they asked you to leave(you didnt do anything bad of course, but you bieng an amiga.inc worker was enough)... it shouldnt be that big of a deal ... I dont even know for sure that you really ever left ;-) but ignorance is bliss of course.....
IRC isnt real life, and IRC isnt a democracy... you can get banned for anything...and sometimes you just need to take it with a grain of salt...
-
Why should Ray not be allowed to join the MorphOS channel?
Remember chat is like a living room where you spend your time and have fun. Mailing list is merely technical forum. I dont keep logs from IRC channels but from my memory:
»»RS said he has no personal problems with Ray, but he doesnt want to be careful with his sayings when a guy from rival company is hanging around.
Could you imagine RS on #OS4 if there were Frieden brothers chatting, maybe talking about future plans? RS asking if some of his old apps work in OS4... I think they would not feel too comfortable either.
Also that whole thing about system friendly is bollocks quite frankly, there are bound to be cases where things don't work quite properly, it comes with the territory when you are reimplementing and emulating a computer system.
If application is written in system friendly manner but doesnt work then problem is more likely in the OS. There were cases when certain application was not working until OS update.
Whatever, I tried AmiFTPd on MorphOS now and it works. System: A1200/BPPC/MOS.
I've heard of a few programs that don't work properly straight out of the box on MOS, checking this is something sensible to do.
Absolutely. But I doubt Ray was going to change anything since apps seemed to be old. (AmiFTPd doesnt know even 060).
-
MagicSN wrote:
I have to admit I see our project as being more "also looking into the future" :)
i'd put the OS design as a "pro" for OS 4... :)
Steffen
Steffen, how about ACM for OS4? :-?
-
@HMetal:
I apologise for my attack. I was not aware of your incident. I honestly thought from your comment it was just something general.
-
Warface: That I work for Hyperion does not mean that I have to accept if someone posts in a way
as if it would be a "well-known fact" that the design
of MOS would be better, while there are many reasons why it would be not as good. Which of the systems would be better has been disputed a lot,
though I myselves think the OS design is a clear "pro" for OS 4. That I am not a neutral person
does not mean I have to accept any claims.
Darth_X: This all has been discussed over and over
already, so I do not want to drag it into length AGAIN,
but heavily discussed issues between the two camps would be the ABox/QBox issues (a lot of stuff only available on QBox, while current MOS Apps only can use ABox, while on ExecSG you can use all features already) and the Emulation-integration (here both camps claim to have the best solution :) )
Note I did not claim the design of MOS would be crap,
only that the design of OS 4 would be better :)
When such discussion comes up again and again, please also be aware that many people are more
interested in "system advocacy" than in actual
examination of the systems. And of course many
MOS advocates do not know anything about
OS 4 nor do they care (this applies in the opposite
direction too, of course).
I think I will log off from this thread now... with "such discussions" be aware there are tons of rumours and misconceptions flying around, and people trying to actively push such...
Steffen
-
Well, i think that proves such a merger could never happen. A pity.
-
I rather stick with Aone and AmigaOS 4. Not worth the time & effort to pursue with a totally different community like MorphOS and that ever-so-dominating Microsoft.
-
Could you imagine RS on #OS4 if there were Frieden brothers chatting, maybe talking about future plans? RS asking if some of his old apps work in OS4... I think they would not feel too comfortable either.
...would I have to imagine that they are horribly ignorant about IRC, then? What, software teams just discuss all future plans out in the open?
Ever heard of private, secret channels? Channels with passwords? /opnotice? /msg? /dcc chat?
I'm glad some of the movers and shakers in the Amiga community go out of their way to take the high road with this stuff. Sheesh.
This is akin to going to E3 and having ATI and Valve talk about special business negotiations on the floor in front of the ATI booth. Gee, I wonder why there are private conference rooms and closed rooms for business meetings and discussions? Same analogy you use for the "living room." If you have something important to say, you step outside and chat in private or you go to the basement for discussion while the main party is going on upstairs.
I certainly don't follow every word in the holy wars that go on here, but to ask someone to leave when he wants to perhaps get his programs working on your platform just sucks. Then to have some rabid followers then act all haughty and justified and flame that person for ASKING FOR FEEDBACK on the platform that said rabid followers support, that's just low class.
Maybe he's part of the "enemy" but instead of embracing a potential ally/turncoat, people just take partisan sides and flame away because he OBVIOUSLY has only malicious intent.
Jesus. For the longest time the name Amiga was, to me, synonymous with fun and friendliness, creativity and camaderie. The longer I read this site (and this is supposed to be one of the "tame" and "friendly" Amiga sites, right?), the more I see how the entire community has turned into spite and jaded users flinging mud back and forth.
It used to be that cracking groups had friendly competitions to out-do each other, that was the extent of conflict (from my outsider view of the Amiga users/community) that Amiga had. Now I see only people flaming each other, taking verbal swipes at one another, and generally being rude.
If this is what "Amiga" has become, why bother? Most of y'all are trying to hold onto and preserve a dream, the Amiga of yesteryear. While I find that highly admirable, well, look around. It's dead. It's dead in the top of the current Amiga world and all that is happening is that the same crap is trickling down.
Sure, take this point to start pointing fingers and laying blame, but hell, that's part of the problem. And it ain't going to change. I don't know what Amiga has become in the last 5 years, but it ain't so good. I don't mean hardware and software, either, but I mean the people and the community. I was looking forward to the time when I got some spare $ to pick up an old A1200 to play around with and find out where the roots of moddemos and tracker programs came from.
Now? It hardly seems worth the effort. I used to be somewhat excited at the prospect of new Amiga hardware and software coming out, but what's the point? I'll have to enjoy things in seclusion, I guess, because the online community is now just a few elitist groups who are too blinded by animousity and history to ever reconcile. I just look forward to the day that I join #mos-support and get instantly kickbanned because someone saw me post something pro-AINC on some messageboard.
That's where the community seems to be going. Or, should I say, the various splinter groups. The sad part is that they don't even have the class to be civil to each other or deign to help each other out.
Heh, there's one advantage of OpenSores--no money to come between people/groups, eh.
Feel free to flame based on my rant. It's honestly expected.
-
@BlackMonk
Nothing to flame over, you stated an opinion, and honestly I do agree with it.
I think part of the problem is paranoia, that or jealousy. One group is jealous over the other one, and that jealousy makes them blind to the common insterest of the community.
From my angle (mind you, I work for Genesi) I see resistance, and fear, regarding our products. Resistance because we lack the name. Fear because, from my observation and opinion, we have the superior product.
However, I see it from the other viewpoint as well. Genesi is the upstart, the new kid on the block. It is taking away mindshare and loyalty from AInc's solutions. From their angle, this is a low-blow, and cheating ones way to the top. Add on top of it announcments that hurt your products or those of your licensees. It seems Genesi is going for an all-out war, so you retaliate in kind.
But this schism goes deeper than just Genesi/AInc. I saw it during the GateMiga days, with competing vendors kept pushing their own, proprietory API's on the market. Over time, these API's consolidated into 2 groups, the MorphOS and the AmigaOS4 camps. MorphOS gained the CyberGFX, MUI, PowerUP, AROS strengths while AOS4 gained the Picasso96, ReAction/ClassAct, WarpUP and AmigaOS strengths. This polarization of the community is difficult to heal, and is only a direct result of ignorance by those that have held the trademark in the past to define a STANDARD. This resulted in a splitting of the community, and the situation we have today, with 2 OS's, 2 motherboards, 2 solutions to everything.
I'd point out, an attempt to correct this has begun, with the openamiga project at: http://www.openamiga.org
If you really want to see this community heal, that's where to look, in my personal opinion.
-
Keep in mind please that what follows are merely my opinions. I have zero inside information and may be wrong about a few points. If some of the companies involved were actually willing to discuss the future with us, we'd obviously know a bit more.
My thoughts on this matter are simply that individual developers should be able to make up their mind. Let them work with, or for whatever company makes them feel as though their future is secure.
Trying to "combine efforts" is a bit like trying to force a square block through a round hole. AmigaOS4 and the AmigaOne is seemingly for the existing (and unfortunately dwindling) Amiga community.
The Pegasos is intended to fill a LOT of niche markets, from the Amiga community (MorphOS) to embedded devices such as slot machines and kiosks (a much bigger market than the Amiga community) via Linux and about a dozen other Operating systems.
As such, I believe individual programmers and companies will make the difference here, and there are no mystical "groups" to combine.
I simply wish that some of the people whose replies I see in this thread would realize that not everything they firmly believe to be true, is actually factual.
Quite sadly, I see several people here who seem to be suffering from "CNN syndrome". "CNN syndrome" describes a condition where people form their opinions on world events from what CNN tells them is true rather than making up their own minds for themselves.
-
@ BlackMonk on 2003/6/27 13:47:37
I'm going to get flamed for this, but I don't care. I don't think either "side" WANTS to communicate with the "side." Am I being too critical of both sides? I doubt it. To demonstrate what I'm saying that neither side wants open dialog with devs from the other "side", I've setup on irc.onlyirc.net a channel called #AmigaDMZ. I'll gladly give a OS4-Dev, a MOS-Dev, and a AROS-Dev who will camp out there with chan ops so no one can be banned for mearly political reasons.
Flame away.
Dammy
-
HMetal wrote:
While there were quite a few very helpful and courteous attendees, I would have expected more from the creator of MorphOS than asking me to leave simply on the basis of my association with Amiga Inc. Amiga has never and would never ask anyone to leave our PUBLIC support channel simply based on association. There would have to be some netiquette offense for that to happen.
I'm curious, what would you consider to be a netiquette offense Ray?
-
I'd point out, an attempt to correct this has begun, with the openamiga project at: http://www.openamiga.org
Thanks for the plug Nate! :-D
I've been quite ill recently, but now I'm mostly fine, so the OpenAmiga SDK v0.1 will be released to testers by the end of July.
Having said that, I've been kindly given a Pegasos developer board by Genesi, so I might take a little longer if needed to have both 68k and PPC environments on the same CD.
Also, may I add if any developers want to help and also be alpha-testers, then email me on (mdma AT aros DOT org).
-
@Golem
Being an IRC regular, you should know what IRC netiquette is, my friend.
I'm not going to turn this into a Ralph bash-fest, but for the sake of discussion and answering the questions asked here in this topic (assuming they weren't just trolls) .. :-)
1) The only time we in our PUBLIC Amiga channels would kick/ban a user is if they are breaking long-standing IRC "rules" such as flooding, bringing on clonebots just to disrupt the channel, riding netsplits in attempt to get OP status, etc.
2) For those people saying that Ralph was right to be concerned about my presence because "private" information is being disseminated, if you are going to use IRC for discussions, that's what private and/or secure IRC channels are for. What person or company in their right mind would discuss company secrets or private discussions in a public channel?
In any case, there's no need to elaborate on this further. I've said my piece and there are those (in this thread and some in e-mail) willing to discuss the initial development issues/questions that I intended to discuss within, outside of that biased IRC channel.
I guess that will have to do until someone more interested in working with developers comes along, or until something else comes along to shake things up (or down).
-
LOL!
Yeah right! :-D :-D :-D
-
Ralph just doesn't want to have to watch every single
word of his knowing that if he says something
"interesting" or a joke, it will run circles around
the "other site" in no time. It's his channel after all,
like it or not.
-
Somehow, though, I suspect it will never happen...
:roflmao:
-
HMetal its basically like this... people dont want to run ther risk that every word they say will be vomited back up into web forums and whatnot... I understand perfectly well why he didnt want YOU(or any other upper echelon amiga camper) there, and I think he was right... as people like to talk freely without pressure from amiga.inc zealots bieng brought onto them in a Morph channel... I dont see why it would be wrong if I was banned from an amiga channel for sitting there lurking or asking timid/pointless questions as an excuse to linger... I think I'd deserve a proper kicking/banning post haste for that... and in my opinon the same goes for the other side..
now remember it all comes down to opinon...and we all have one...so before you say 'I wasnt trying to linger, whatever' I'm not saying you where... I'm saying what I saw... as I was in the channel when you where asked to leave....and this all my opinon
-
Does anyone believe opening up the source under the GNU General Purpose Licence (GPL) Agreement would benefit AmigaOS?
and who is going to do that? amiga inc.? genesi?? you???
are you going to break into the offices at night and (physically)steal the source code you you may release it as open source?
It could drastically speed up the development, and help the followers of Amiga to feel more involved - so that it becomes their AmigaOS, rather than a corporate thang.
im not the first to mention AROS, if you dont like the corporate thng(what ever that is supposed to mean) you can get stuck into the code of your own damn os, base it on AROS if you like
-
What about convincing developers to leave their current projects, instead using their valuable skills on an open source project that could be available for ever?
convice them to leave their current (reletivly)stable jobs and then what? you will pay them??
how will they get paid for an open source project
where does the money come from?
Samuar you come up with all these ideas, none of them practical
-
I agree about AmigaOS bieng open sourced..from what I've heard the source isnt good for much aside from making emulators run better... if you want a community project I advise AROS or MorphOS...as they both came from this community...
-
im not saying opensourced amigaos is such a bad idea
i would love to get hold of the amigaos source
but its amiga inc.'s choice, therefore there is no point saying "i think amigaos should be made open source"
who is going to do it?
no sane person would pay millions of dollars for a company, only to give(or throw)away its IP
-
there is no point saying "i think amigaos should be made open source"
its an opinon... I think it should.. I'm not saying 'obey me' or some nonsense... I just think it wouldnt hurt... I mean its useless source aside from making emulators run better from what I've heard anyway...
no sane person would pay millions of dollars for a company, only to give(or throw)away its IP
apperantly Amiga.inc would... they apperantly abandoned their own trademark name 'Amiga' ... there was a thread about...
-
by iamaboringperson on 2003/6/27 22:24:30
im not saying opensourced amigaos is such a bad idea
Question is, who would want it (well, besides you;)? AROS doesn't want it. I doubt MOS crew wants it. That leaves Hyperion and they already have it. I see no reason in the world to Open Source it, just let it die a peaceful death.
Dammy
-
Fair comment.
However, unlike x86 and MacPPC communities, the members of the Amiga community, in my opinion, (given that it is smaller and has probably kept only the most hardcore amiga users from the old days) is probably perfectly capable of doing something with that source code, whether its producing applications that work better because they work with the OS better, or its producing patches to problems, bugs and (hopefully there wont be any) security problems.
I mean, nowadays, people who still use Amigas know how to get the most from them. They arent a stupid bunch, and I think they all deserve to play a bigger role in the development if they want to.
-
Samuar wrote:
Fair comment.
However, unlike x86 and MacPPC communities, the members of the Amiga community, in my opinion, (given that it is smaller and has probably kept only the most hardcore amiga users from the old days) is probably perfectly capable of doing something with that source code, whether its producing applications that work better because they work with the OS better, or its producing patches to problems, bugs and (hopefully there wont be any) security problems.
I mean, nowadays, people who still use Amigas know how to get the most from them. They arent a stupid bunch, and I think they all deserve to play a bigger role in the development if they want to.
AROS it is then. ;-)
-
downix wrote:
From my angle (mind you, I work for Genesi) I see resistance, and fear, regarding our products. Resistance because we lack the name. Fear because, from my observation and opinion, we have the superior product.
Don't agree with this totally, while there are people out there who may be like this, I don't think it's the main bulk of people. From what I have seen of your postings you have totally dismissed AmigaOS out of hand, I don't think you have been objective about it (comments about the new amidock spring to mind). I haven't had chance to try out OS 4 yet, but I don't think from experience that MOS is the superior product (Cue 10 of the most hardcore to tell me how wrong I am)
However, I see it from the other viewpoint as well. Genesi is the upstart, the new kid on the block. It is taking away mindshare and loyalty from AInc's solutions. From their angle, this is a low-blow, and cheating ones way to the top. Add on top of it announcments that hurt your products or those of your licensees. It seems Genesi is going for an all-out war, so you retaliate in kind.
Again I think you're half right. But to be honest it it's not about Genesi's existance, but rather their attitude and public behaviour.
But this schism goes deeper than just Genesi/AInc. I saw it during the GateMiga days, with competing vendors kept pushing their own, proprietory API's on the market. Over time, these API's consolidated into 2 groups, the MorphOS and the AmigaOS4 camps. MorphOS gained the CyberGFX, MUI, PowerUP, AROS strengths while AOS4 gained the Picasso96, ReAction/ClassAct, WarpUP and AmigaOS strengths. This polarization of the community is difficult to heal, and is only a direct result of ignorance by those that have held the trademark in the past to define a STANDARD. This resulted in a splitting of the community, and the situation we have today, with 2 OS's, 2 motherboards, 2 solutions to everything.
I think this is pretty much as close to the truth as you can get, obviously it's a bit more complex than this, but that's the general gist of it. Really when you look at it it's quite pathetic. :-(
I'd point out, an attempt to correct this has begun, with the openamiga project at: http://www.openamiga.org
If you really want to see this community heal, that's where to look, in my personal opinion.
At least one other Genesi empolyee dissagrees with you there, calling it "A joke"
-
Open sourcing would have worked 5 years ago, but it's too late now. If Gateway would have released the sources (although they'd be incomplete due to licences and trademark issues) I think the community (back then) could of made it work.
The thing is I could see that we'd end up with a similar situation as today with several different vesion due to the fact that you'd still get differnt people wanting to take the OS in different directions.
Downix was right, it has been the lack of leadership since '95 that has led to the current situation (although saying that some people have always pushed to go in thier own direction anyway). TBH though I don't see anyone here who is suitable to lead the community, not Amiga Inc., not Hyperion, and not Genesi
-
uncharted wrote:
downix wrote:
From my angle (mind you, I work for Genesi) I see resistance, and fear, regarding our products. Resistance because we lack the name. Fear because, from my observation and opinion, we have the superior product.
Don't agree with this totally, while there are people out there who may be like this, I don't think it's the main bulk of people. From what I have seen of your postings you have totally dismissed AmigaOS out of hand, I don't think you have been objective about it (comments about the new amidock spring to mind). I haven't had chance to try out OS 4 yet, but I don't think from experience that MOS is the superior product (Cue 10 of the most hardcore to tell me how wrong I am)
So, have I dismissed it? Yes, I have. Not as an OS, but as a step forward, much like WinME. Even the screenshots and data given show nothing of the necessary evolution, nor even the framework *for* an evolution of the platform. It is a very tough world out there, and if AOS4 is not ready to tackle MacOS X or Windows XP, it will not survive.
This industry is brutal, it is only a matter of time before both AOS4 and MOS have to go head to head against companies with billion dollar budgets and a userbase that makes ours look like a mere speck. What gives AOS4 or MOS a chance here is their sheer stubborness and willingness to rip into each other. This guarantees that at least one, if not both, will be strong enough to at least stand a chance against the other predators out there. And possibly grow into giants themselves.
I think, in the end, AmigaOS's biggest problem is overoptimism. They misjudged timelines, they misjudged the marketplace, they misjudged their customers. All due to overoptimistic feelings and lack of business skill. This, more than anything, makes me dismiss it as the solution for the market. Unless Amiga gains some real management, this will remain so.
As for OpenAmiga, I stated my personal opinion, as well as other Genesi employees have done. I would note, the "a joke" comment was with the discussion of 68k binaries, not the idea itself.
-
Getting back to the original topic ...
Merger between AmigaOne and Pegasos dev teams
Very simply ... (http://amiga.org/images/subject/icon13.gif) ... there is not a chance.
It is simply the way things worked out.
IMHO I wish it had worked out differently, ... but that is life.
Perhaps, individual developers who are offering applications might be willing to support both products.
-------------
redfox
-
downix wrote:
So, have I dismissed it? Yes, I have. Not as an OS, but as a step forward, much like WinME. Even the screenshots and data given show nothing of the necessary evolution, nor even the framework *for* an evolution of the platform. It is a very tough world out there, and if AOS4 is not ready to tackle MacOS X or Windows XP, it will not survive.
This is where I'd disagree. From what I've read OS 4.0 is very forward looking, and with some of the things hinted at in future revisions 4.1 4.2 etc. (not counting "OS 5") it's looking very good indeed.
While I like the philosophies behind MOS, as it stands it's just an sandbox emulation, not VM no MP no other wizbang enhancements, just AmigaOS 3.1 on speed. Everything depends upon the mythical "Q box" which is apparently "years away".
I think, in the end, AmigaOS's biggest problem is overoptimism. They misjudged timelines, they misjudged the marketplace, they misjudged their customers. All due to overoptimistic feelings and lack of business skill. This, more than anything, makes me dismiss it as the solution for the market. Unless Amiga gains some real management, this will remain so.
I think the real problem is that fact that until Hyperion picked up the baton there was zero development (discounting the minor changes from 3.5 and 3.9) since '94. A PPC port of amigaOS should of happened in '97 we should be up to OS 5 or 6 by now, but Gateway/Amiga, then Amino/Amiga were too busy trying something new with the name rather than capitalising on the assests they already had.
While it would of been good for Amiga inc and MOS/bplan to hook up for OS 4 way back when (at least there wouldn't be this split to this degree), in some ways i'm glad that MOS didn't become AmigaOS 4, because I don't think I'd get the kind of AmigaOS I'd want.
Who knows perhaps the co-operation would of made something different to MOS as it stands today a halfway house between MOS and OS 4. But as it stands while I like the look of the Peg and Peg 2, I'd only ever buy one to run AOS 4.x or AROS 1.0. I simply don't like MOS.
As for OpenAmiga, I stated my personal opinion, as well as other Genesi employees have done. I would note, the "a joke" comment was with the discussion of 68k binaries, not the idea itself.
That's not what was actually said -
But because they have nothing to do. Can you imagine anyone's Amiga system NOT having the features as above? AROS is about a week away from matching most of it already, OS3.9 matches and therefore AmigaOSXL and Amithlon match, AmigaOS 4.x is based on 3.9 so automatically matches, and MorphOS has had the features of the list since the year 2000.
So what are they enforcing here? Are they expecting a new project to pop up that they can encourage to use this standard? I seriously doubt this will happen :)
Again we have another bunch of Amiga users trying to make a name for themselves by doing something in the public eye. Now, if they were offering money like DiscreetFX, then it'd be interesting, but they're not, so it's actually just redundant.
-
@uncharted
Huh? Where the heck are you getting this stuff on the OS's design? BOTH OS's are using a sandbox technique here. The only difference is that one seperates the new MP-enabled kernel from the old non-MP kernel. This way, should a non-MP app kill itself, you don't loose the entire system, just the non-MP protected section.
-EDIT-
And MOS has VM.
-
downix wrote:
@uncharted
Huh? Where the heck are you getting this stuff on the OS's design? BOTH OS's are using a sandbox technique here. The only difference is that one seperates the new MP-enabled kernel from the old non-MP kernel. This way, should a non-MP app kill itself, you don't loose the entire system, just the non-MP protected section.
The OS 4 feature list it explains that it does not use a Sandbox approach. I mean before you started slagging it off you did actually READ the information available on it didn't you?
So you are saying that I can write an application for MOS that makes use of all the advanced features of Quark including MP?
That's either great news or total rubbish.
-EDIT-
And MOS has VM.
Available to the applications written for ABox?
-
Hyperion still made an offer.
Bplan has always wanted to be the only on on the block and Amiga
is in their way. The only problem is that they are
going for Amigans and not the general computer population.
This is too small of a crowd to go for. It only hurts
the community. Amiga people are rabidly loyal.
The board you have now is no longer being made. A
new one is promised real soon. It is funny how Morph OS
crowd hang around Amiga.org so much.
-
@Russ
Hyperion made an offer ????
:roflmao: :roflmao:
When should that have happened ?
Before 11/01 when Hyperion wasn't in charge of OS4 ?
Or afterwards when it was allready decided that they would go head-on ?
There were talks between bPlan and AInc in spring 01, but looking how things evolved I can
only congratulate bPlan for refusing to sign a deal.
What ever was offered afterwards, wasn't any more honest than bPlan offering/asking
Hyperion to port games for MorphOS (which also happened at that time).
Also, it is Genesi who are cooperating with AROS,Phoenix or external developers
like Titan or e.p.i.c., they are just to smart to tie themselves to incompetent clowns
from snow-city.
Bout cooperation today:
What would AInc/Hyperion have to offer (except maybe the name) that Genesi needs ?
NOTHING !
-
am I the only one who dosent want to see cooperation?... I dont want Amiga.inc and friends involved with Pegasos/MOS... in my opinon they could only serve to bring down Peg/MOS ...the gain would be one sided only...
-
@ HMetal
#Any input or test results you have regarding AmiFTPd would be most welcome. Thank-you.
Sorry for the delay. AmiFTPd works quite well with MorphOS. It's only the gui-part that gets some 'locks' for a second or two in certains situations. The TCP-part works without problem.
Also, when talking about AmiFTPd, what I'm missing is that its not possible to create drawers. This should be very useful.
/Gunne
-
uncharted wrote:
downix wrote:
@uncharted
Huh? Where the heck are you getting this stuff on the OS's design? BOTH OS's are using a sandbox technique here. The only difference is that one seperates the new MP-enabled kernel from the old non-MP kernel. This way, should a non-MP app kill itself, you don't loose the entire system, just the non-MP protected section.
The OS 4 feature list it explains that it does not use a Sandbox approach. I mean before you started slagging it off you did actually READ the information available on it didn't you?
I read Ben Hermans latest statements on AOS4, and he said clearly that to seperate new-API from old-API they will be using a sandbox.
And, yes, I have read the AOS4 feature list. I dissected it quite completely, and it meshes with what Mr. Hermans said, a sandbox is needed for future roles.
So you are saying that I can write an application for MOS that makes use of all the advanced features of Quark including MP?
That's either great news or total rubbish.
Nope, but you can't make an application that can use all of the advanced features of ExecSG either. So no difference here.
-EDIT-
And MOS has VM.
Available to the applications written for ABox?
Yes. However, like in QNX, with MOS the VM is added using a system module, so apps can only make use of VM if they are designed to.
Having run such a system with QNX, I know very well how nice that is, not having the OS decide when to allocate VM but instead the app decide on exactly how much VM it needs. Gives me far more control over the applications that way.
-edit-
Got some clarification about MOS's VM system. It is currently in internal beta, but not a high priority for inclusion into the public release.
-
@Russ
Made an offer, when? IIRC, it was Genesi that made the offer, not Hyperion.
-
downix wrote:
I read Ben Hermans latest statements on AOS4, and he said clearly that to seperate new-API from old-API they will be using a sandbox.
And, yes, I have read the AOS4 feature list. I dissected it quite completely, and it meshes with what Mr. Hermans said, a sandbox is needed for future roles.
Can you link to this comment? I've had a look through all the recent interviews and have had a look through the some comments (it gets boring reading the same stuff over and over) and i couldn't find anything about a sandbox.
If you are refering to what was said about the OS4 sandbox for the mythical "OS 5" then that is a different story and hardly relevant to what we're talking about here.
Nope, but you can't make an application that can use all of the advanced features of ExecSG either. So no difference here.
This is where I'd disagree as some of the functions are already in place such as resource allocation and limited MP. Can MOS apps have access to *any* of quark's functions? I was told (some time ago admittedly) by Ralph that things running in the A Box *Including* PPC native apps could not see Quark at all.
You see, unlike other people, I actually did lots of research into MOS (which wasn't easy as information is rather thin on the ground), I've read nearly every interview, I've actually tried it on Pegasos.
On this point I'll just have to leave it at I agree with you on some points but not others.
Yes. However, like in QNX, with MOS the VM is added using a system module, so apps can only make use of VM if they are designed to.
Having run such a system with QNX, I know very well how nice that is, not having the OS decide when to allocate VM but instead the app decide on exactly how much VM it needs. Gives me far more control over the applications that way.
Cool. I can see the advantages of that. I note that AOS can turn off VM (on the fly in some cases) which would be good to. Personally I've never had a problem with VM and am not so paranoid about having it on or off.
-
downix wrote:
@Russ
Made an offer, when? IIRC, it was Genesi that made the offer, not Hyperion.
I still find it laughable that people actually take Bill's "offer" seriously. If it was serious surely Hyperion would have recieved thier free board by now. And how comes (as was originally offered) Ben had to go to Paris to collect it when the other boards were sent to the developers in question?
And the biggest one of all.
Why did Bill need to offer a free board anyway? Why didn't Genesi just process Hyperion's orginal order for a Pegasos? All this nonsense about Hyperion not accepting a free board when Genesi wouldn't *sell* them one in the first place!!!
-
Ehm, their original "order" was not exactly an order,
it was a registration at the MORPHOS developer
queue. Importand (for MorphOS) developers, got the
first boards.
BTW, that was before Genesi was founded. It was
actually before their team up with Thendic got public.
-
@uncharted
Well those boards were sold by bPlan (a company that didn't really exist anymore in 2002)
and clearly targeted at companies wanting to develop for MorphOS.
So it was clear that Hyperion would not get on of the very few boards produced in late 01.
It's also questionable whether that would have still be a legally binding order ~1 year later
when the board was offered.
The offer was made for one reason:
Before that ben's standard answer to OS on Peg was allways something like
"they won't give us the board we ordered", when in reality everybody knew that it was the
licence-issue that made it impossible.
This PR (or shall I say FUD) campaign was contered with offering the board, which directly
leed to statements like "sending a board is not enough" and "getting a Pegasos is easy"
from the same ben Hermans.
But somehow I don't think the board was what Nate was refering to, but when Genesi
offered to sell Pegasos bundled with OS4, just not with an licence from Ainc or a dongle.
Or maybe he was even refering to an offer made from bPlan in 01, to make Hyperion
port games to MorphOS, just like Titan or e.p.ic.
-
@Kronos
:lol: :lol: :lol:
-
@uncharted
What ??
-
@uncharted
Egads, you really don't know how OS's work, do you?
-
But somehow I don't think the board was what Nate was refering to, but when Genesi offered to sell Pegasos bundled with OS4, just not with an licence from Ainc or a dongle.
Genesi never offered such a deal, so quit spreading it so thick.
I was refering only to the times a board was offered to Hyperion, and nothing more.
-
downix wrote:
@uncharted
Egads, you really don't know how OS's work, do you?
Then explain it to me.
-Edit-
I hope that just wasn't a lame excuse to get around my statements.
-
@downix
Sorry, but bbrv did do just that right here some months ago.
Wether that was honest, or just a PR-trick to show how thin Hyperion's pro-dongle
arguments were is beyond my knowledge, but thta offer was made.
-
@uncharted
No, it's that I really am not the ideal person to explain OS design theory to anyone. While I understand it, explaining it I am not very good at. But let me try.
The fundimental problem I see here is that you're thinking too much in the AmigaOS mindset on how an OS has to run. The comments about not being able to use Quark from within the ABox demonstrated this to me. Of *COURSE* apps within the ABox can use Quark. Otherwise, as Quark is the kernel of the system, nothing would run! Can you directly access Quark, no, because it exists outside of the ABox, but you can use it. How, you might ask? Simple, you have a window into the lower-end of the system, namely the HAL and reimplimented exec.library. The new functions that can be implimented inside of the ABox without breaking the API's can be access this way, through this window. That way, since there is a barrier, you cannot kill the whole system with some dumb random crash. It is the only proven method of ensuring a stable environment without destroying compatability. It is how MacOS, OS/2, WinNT/2k/XP all do it.
In a way, AmigaOS's own multitasking strength is now it's weakness. Compare to Atari's TOS, single-tasking OS. AmigaOS, one cannot add MP, VM, etc without breaking the API's and causing apps to not run because the apps are engineered to look for other applications, libraries, modules, datatypes, etc and just fetch them out of memory directly. A full MP environment requires a program to ask the OS for these components, rather than just do it on their own. This means, if one were to add full MP, one would break this ability, thereby not allowing the application to run at all. Atari's TOS, by comparison, is little more than DOS, a single-tasking, no-library OS. WYSIWYG. This allowed some smart fellas to create the MiNT kernel, which creates a virtual-machine for each application, allowing one to run many TOS apps simultaneously, all with full MP. However, this turns into Windows, with monolithic apps, and is very ugly in the long term. None of the sharing and beauty of AmigaOS.
man, that was one long rant. But did any of that make sence to you?
-
downix wrote:
man, that was one long rant. But did any of that make sence to you?
Yes and no.
Firstly I think you misunderstood what I meant about using Quark (Likewise I'm not that great at explaining what I mean all the time) So I knew most of it anyway. I also know the problems of MP and message passing in AmigaOS, and I know that you can't just shove MP on willy nilly.
The window idea is something I hadn't heard of before (although isn't the HAL what the kernal sits on?) in MorphOS what features of Quark would this allow you to use in the ABox?
-
@uncharted
Right now not much, as Quark's QBox is not fully developed. But, the VM I mentioned is one example of how an ABox app can access a Quark feature.
But, as more and more functions get added to the QBox, more and more things the ABox gets to exploit without breaking the app.
Also, I'd point out how with Quark one will be gaining such things as transparent networking. Imagine a single ABox running on 4 or 5 computers.
So, you get a choice. Pick an OS with new functions you can't use, or one without new functions, but a way to use them as they are added.
-
downix wrote:
@uncharted
Right now not much, as Quark's QBox is not fully developed. But, the VM I mentioned is one example of how an ABox app can access a Quark feature.
But, as more and more functions get added to the QBox, more and more things the ABox gets to exploit without breaking the app.
Also, I'd point out how with Quark one will be gaining such things as transparent networking. Imagine a single ABox running on 4 or 5 computers.
So, you get a choice. Pick an OS with new functions you can't use, or one without new functions, but a way to use them as they are added.
Thanks for the answer.
Here's a question I've been trying to get answered for a while now. How will things change in structure and usage once the QBox gets introduced fully?
Will it be like OS X where everything changes, but the old stuff is kept to one side and is called upon when needed (classic) or will it all just fit together with the abox OS3.1 reimplented stuff.
-
@uncharted
From what I understand, it will be a slow migration from ABox to QBox. For a time, both will be running side-by-side. But in the end, the ABox material will be moved to one side in logic, but not in function. You don't need to have a seperate desktop or window just for ABox functions, from a user perspective it will appear to be one and the same.
Unlike the MacOS to OSX transition, MorphOS already has a next-generation desktop, Ambient, which is built using MUI and CyberGFX directly. Both MUI and CyberGFX are good canidates for moving to QBox, once the other underlying systems are finished. This means that Ambient, as well, would be migrating. So unlike OS X, where a whole new destop has to be designed, the same desktop will be present from one side of the migration to the other. As a result, we're not talking some grand-scale change, like the jump from MacOS 9 to Mac OSX here. This is a far more gradual shift, where you migrate over time from one to the other, without your apps being any the wiser.