Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: Samuar on July 03, 2003, 01:02:34 AM
-
Serious question. Theres a bit of rivalry and competition between PegososPPCs and the AmigaOne. But, do people consider one or the other, or neither; to be true Amigas?
Do you think whether it has AmigaOS 4 running on it would affect your opinion on the above question?
Thanks for your replies in advance,
Samuar
-
Nope. Far as I'm concerned, nothing past the classic machines is a "true Amiga." Money and a sticker don't make an instant Amiga out of anything.
What operating system it runs doesn't matter. Running Linux on an Amiga still leaves you with an Amiga. Running Linux on a Mac still leaves you with a Mac. Running Windows/MacOS on other hardware doesn't turn your machine into a X86/Mac.
-
Estimated time to thread degradation into MOS v OS4 flamefest T minus....
-
Surely this is an easy enough one... it has to be about the hardware platform. Amiga started with a very advanced and interesting set up at the hardware level, which took the x86 machines about 10? years to really catch up with and then pretty much overtake. At the heart was the Motorola 680x0 series of CPUs. As far as I can follow logically, the last "real" Amiga has to be the A4000 as it was actually released by Amiga as a "successor" to the previous Amiga machine. The OS is irrelevant in as much as "Amiga" was a hardware manufacturer, or rather "Amiga" was a name for a piece of hardware. Whereas "Windows", "Linux" & "AmigaOS" etc are names of software. Albeit pretty critical software, but you could actually write your own OS or simply enter machine code.... not recommended though :¬)
edit: mispelt 'heart'
-
Madgun68 wrote:
Nope. Far as I'm concerned, nothing past the classic machines is a "true Amiga." Money and a sticker don't make an instant Amiga out of anything.
What operating system it runs doesn't matter. Running Linux on an Amiga still leaves you with an Amiga. Running Linux on a Mac still leaves you with a Mac. Running Windows/MacOS on other hardware doesn't turn your machine into a X86/Mac.
So what makes a Mac a Mac?
-
@ mdwh2
Not much these days... TG! The pretty box? :¬)
-
Only Commodore Amiga is real Amiga.
-
nope. Amiga is long gone buddy.
-
I hope neither AI and its partners nor Genesi would argue with the idea that only the original Amigas are "true Amigas." Sometimes I hear people say MorphOS has the "spirit of Amiga"or is "Amiga-like" or some such thing, which people can probably go along with if we're talking about look and feel, application compatibility, userbase and that kind of thing.
-- gary_c
-
I disagree. I think AOS and the software it runs is what counts. I probably changed opinion about this over the years though. If you'd asked me that question in mid 90's I'd would have agreed on hardware.
I think the fact that we have reached adequate performance to use full framerate 24-bit graphics everywhere (even low-end h/w) made the hardware issue quite irrelevant.
Adequate performance is btw very close to my defentition of the Amiga h/w in the '90, when the x86's struggled to run Windows & co at speeds anything but adequate, the Amiga excelled.
Today I just want AOS and the apps running on a 1GHz PPC / modern gfx board. And it's Because I think it would provide the future Amiga software with adequate performance.
And what is Linux then? Gotcha!
:-)
"-Any unix not running on an 1980's IBM mainframe..."
:-) :-) :-)
-
itix wrote:
Only Commodore Amiga is real Amiga.
Commodore? Hah! Bunch of interfering Jonny-come-lately big businessmen. If it's not Lorraine, it's not Amiga. ;-)
-
@gary_c: that's a tough one. Stuff can be Amiga in lot's of ways. But only Commodore Amiga can be Commodore Amiga. And I think that's the real issue here. As long as no-one is claiming to be Commodore Amiga I wouldn't argue against Amiga Cola not being Amiga.
(jingle)
-Only Commodore Amiga Cola is the real cola.
(pscht!)
-Ahh
-
:flame: :destroy:
-
It all depends on what you consider to be a "true" Amiga.
IMHO ...
In the day ... Amiga was a unique combination of hardware magic and software magic that allowed the artist or programmer to create using colour, sound and animation.
Today ... we call this multimedia.
In the day ... the hardware magic was created by combining specialized DMA devices, graphics chips, sound chips, glue logic and a processor to manage it all. That processor just happened to be the 680x0 CPU.
In the day ... the software was tied somewhat to the hardware. The operating system became known as AmigaOS.
Even in the day ... there was talk of RTG, retargetable graghics, and no doubt some people used sound cards as well. A well written program that did not "hit" the hardware directly, could theoretically be used with RTG, different sound cards, etc.
Today ... the necessary hardware exists in almost every x86 PC, as well as Apple MAC, Pegosos, Teron, and AmigaOne. Just add a suitable graphics card and maybe a sound card.
Today ... we can run some Amiga programs on x86 systems by running emulators such as Amithlon, UAE, Amiga Forever, AmigaXL, etc.
Today ... we can also run some Amiga programs on PegososPPCs under MorphOS.
Today ... we can see Amiga programs running on A4000/PPC systems under AmigaOS4.0
"When it is ready" ... we will be able to run Amiga programs on the AmigaOne under AmigaOS4.0.
Until the "AmigaOne" can run AmigaOS4.0, it will not be a true Amiga.
---------------
redfox
-
Until the "AmigaOne" can run AmigaOS4.0, it will not be a true Amiga.
---------------
redfox
I recall that the AmigaOne was packaged with the _licensed_ Amiga’s Kickstart ROMs for Linux PPC/UAE setup…
-
What operating system it runs doesn't matter.
It does matter. What happens if the OS includes a virtual Amiga chipset functions?
Running Linux on an Amiga still leaves you with an Amiga.
Such a set-up still requires Amiga's Kickstart functions to boot into 68K Linux.
Running Windows/MacOS on other hardware doesn't turn your machine into a X86/Mac.
Running MS Windows NT 4.0 on DEC Alpha AXP or PowerPC or MIPS will turn your box into a MS Windows NT 4.0 box.
Once upon time, Microsoft has a vision of running Windows NT everywhere. Except they forgotten the transparent recompiling concepts (e.g. dotNET framework).
Note that SoftWindows 95 (for MacOS platform) was based from the licensed MS Windows 95 source code. In a sense, it’s closest for Microsoft to release a MS Windows 95 for the PowerPC platform.
-
I consider the AmigaOne to be a true Amiga once the OS4 runs nativly on it's chips. I consider the Pegasos to be nothing more than an Amiga emulator running on PPC with it's own compatible OS.
It's a bit like asking if ppl consider PowerMac to be a true Mac, only with the difference that it's a huge step for the Amiga due to *include full Amiga history here*.
But nice of you to start yet another Ami vs Peg thread, we sure need those. :-P
-
I dont really consider either to be a real true amiga right now. But i would say the AmigaOne with AOS4 wil be more of an amiga that pegasos, only because of its official partnerships and branding. Mind you i wouldnt mind running AOS4+ on whichever is the better board based on my personal requirements in future, performance vs cost vs size. Yes smaller is better to me as i can do far cooler cases and dont need more than 1 or 2 pci slots.
I think people opinions will change when AOS4 comes out and runs on many hardware configurations, and this question will become as ambiguous as "Do you consider either the ASUS's or GIGBYTE's to be true PC's?"
Speaking of which, one thing amiga should consider in my opinion (and some others ive spoken to as well) is porting aos to x86 but only support a small group of boards and chipsets, eg certain ASUS or GIGABYTE models. This would get the prices down, the performance up, fix supply problems and solve the compatability problems with the multitude of PC hardware configs out there (as amiga would only support a few of the best and most reliable ones) They have already apparently made the OS mostly hardware independant now apart from a small group of functions... I wonder why...
-
I think its a question of heritage. Without the operating systems neither Peg or A1 retain enough of the Amiga hardware heritage ( any! ) to be called "Amigas" purely from that point of view.
AmigaONE with AOS4 will contain a significant amount of Amiga heritage - apart from ExecSG which is wholly new - in terms of source tree and re-use.
MorphOS with Pegasos will contain some Amiga heritage, that is the look and feel and the API but distinctly less.
Then finally you have the userbase, both contain users that have classic Amigas - but then so does the Windows and Linux communities so I think that one is far more nebulous.
So summary, in order of true Amiganess ( most to least ):
A1 with AOS4
Peg with MOS
A1 and Peg on their own
-
Estimated time to thread degradation into MOS v OS4 flamefest T minus....
3 minutes to reach minimum safe distance...
-
i think the answer is quite obvious here,
youhave amigaos and u have morphos , and the hardware? ... pegasos and amigaone.
beyond any reasonable doubt...amigaos is the reason why so many stayed on amiga, and pegasos aint amigaos.
anyway i think we need a vacation from this flamefest #### , i really dont see what there is to fight about or whatever......
both will continue and both will make noise, but this is only before the amigaos4 is out, i dont know what will happen after its released but i guess the world might explode?
=)))))
-
I agree.
Now lets all go down the pub
:pint: :pint: :pint:
-
-edit-
double post
-
..and pegasos aint amigaos.
That's because the pegasos is a motherboard. :roll:
-
It will be the usual, preference biased explanation for everyone. If someone decided for the AOS4/AONE then AOS4/AONE will be more Amiga, and the same is true for the opposite.
In my eyes neither the AmigaONE nor the Pegasos is an Amiga anymore. So much for remaining objective. :-)
On the subjective point, I consider the Pegasos being a turbocard for the Amiga, without the need for the classic Amiga itself. Yes, it was a long way, and call it evolution if you want: this fate was evident from the start. The ties connecting the Pegasos to the "root" are the engineers who created it, and the programmers behind it who made software for the turbocards.
On the AmigaONE side though, the ties are the Name and the Company which owns the name. The hardware have little to do with the roots apart from the sticker. Never the less, both solution is almost the same, that's the source of ppl trying to find and exaggerate the differences so desperately.
My Pegasos is not an Amiga, but I use it as an Amiga, and the transition was smooth enough for me to believe that.
It's just an opinion though. There are thousand others :-)
-
Samuar wrote:
But, do people consider one or the other, or neither; to be true Amigas?
Well, I can't use my TV as a monitor and I can't exactly write copperlists on any of them, can I? ;-) Well, CPU modules is not that usual in x86, but hardware wise these new "Amigas" is pretty darn close to every standard PC out there. It has the same common CPU/NorthBridge/SouthBridge design. But remember how we allways have looked with great envy on all those cheap PC components, like Network Cards, Graphic Cards, Memory Modules, etc, some of which hardly were available at all to the Amiga computers (and when they were available, it had a 400% price tag compared to the PC). Now when we are finally there, now when we have pretty much everything we want integrated directly on the motherboard, is this the when we turn around and look back and say "it was better before"? No! Of course it would be nice to have a modern version of the Amiga custom hardware, but with regular PCI/AGP implemented as well. I wrote some comments on this on the A5000 thread (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3076). But that will never happen, because how does that make sense from a business point of view? What could a 2004 version of the AGA offer that standard PC components couldn't, and how will it justify the enourmous development costs?
Do you think whether it has AmigaOS 4 running on it would affect your opinion on the above question?
Not at all. OS4, AROS and MorphOS are all reimplementations of the classic AmigaOS 3.1 API, with some unique extensions of their own. The main difference between OS4 and MorphOS is the name, which is totally unimportant to me, and frankly I like the MorphOS design better! :-)
-
Hammer wrote:
What operating system it runs doesn't matter.
It does matter. What happens if the OS includes a virtual Amiga chipset functions?
HW emulated in the OS? UAE is not an OS, but it emulates Hardware - is that a "real Amiga"? Perhaps, it's for sure the only Amiga a lot of people uses ...
-
Samuar wrote:
Serious question. Theres a bit of rivalry and competition between PegososPPCs and the AmigaOne. But, do people consider one or the other, or neither; to be true Amigas?
AmigaOne: No
It's a generic board, buggy, horrendously expensive and currently only runs linux. The only connection it has in with the Amiga computer is the sticker that Eyetech put on it.
Pegasos: Yes.
It is custom designed (like the real Amiga) by Amiga hardware experts (like the real Amiga), runs existing Amiga applications (both PPC and 68k) (like the real Amiga) .
Most people realise the Teron/AmigaOne is dead and it's only the real "name" fanatics who would still consider purchasing one, especially with all the problems people have been experiencing, and the far-superior (and far cheaper) Pegasos II due out very soon.
Do you think whether it has AmigaOS 4 running on it would affect your opinion on the above question?
Maybe. Since AmigaOS4 doesn't run on either of them right now we'll have to wait and see. OS4 could be a buggy piece of crap.
Thanks for your replies in advance,
You are welcome.
-
In my opinion, the AmigaOne series of computers is as much Amiga as the classic line ever was and is, the reason behind it is that it is endorsed and licensed by Amiga as the owner of the trademark, thus makes it a follower to the classic line, altough with a different approach of manufacturing. The same for the OS. The Amiga500 is no less an Amiga than the A1000 is just because Commodore began manufacturing them, right ?
As for the hardware, neither the AmigaOne nor the Pegasos (or whatever they will call it) is amigalike in the construction itself, but the AmigaOnes carry the name as they should, its just a matter of ownership.
Beos could be called Amigalike thanks to its hidden amiga mode, atheos, aros and many more aswell.
There's nothing wrong with calling MorphOS amigalike, cause it is. But it will not be more than that unless they aquire the official status of TM ownership.
-
@Lando
Can you tone down your flamebait a bit. Some of us are trying to have a civilised discussion in here.
-
I can't see the new motherboards as a new Amiga. Sorry. Maybe (just maybe) if they compiled it into one of those "computer inside a keyboard" solutions might I call it an Amiga. But not a true Amiga... not Jay Miners vision.
why? Because with just another Tower on my desk its the same as having a PC or Mac or whatever.
bring forth the custom chips and we can have this discussion again. ;) (not that custom chips are neccessary in these times it seems.)
-
Defining amiga-likeness of products is so complex issue and prone to flamewars I'm not oing to enter it at all.. There are different views on this and will be until the end of times.
For example.. Personally I consider this current 'owner' of Amiga name (actually their so called Ip-ownership is so debatable it would require own thread) a more or less waste of money (and energy) spend. So those products are and will be better without it. And sooner it'll happen the better. At the same time I see a lot people consider them to be key element of this Amiga-definition.
-
@Desolator
they compiled it into one of those "computer inside a keyboard" solutions might I call it an Amiga. But not a true Amiga... not Jay Miners vision
What an interesting point of view! I can see where you are coming from ( A500/A1200 ) but the A3000, A1000, A4000 and T variants are all Amigas too yes? And the C64, Spectrum, AtariST were all "computers inside a keyboard" and were not Amiga.
Still, I agree, a "computer inside a keyboard" variant would be VERY attractive as a purchase and immediately recognisable to the A500/A1200 fans which frankly were where all the sales went.
-
DaveP wrote:
@Lando
Can you tone down your flamebait a bit. Some of us are trying to have a civilised discussion in here.
I have put my "real" Amiga in the closet a long time ago. I use my Pegasos with MorphOS as my Amiga now and I can do pretty much everything with that setup like I could with my A1200. In fact, I can do much more thanks to it network capabilities, truecolor display, more horse power etc. For a user like me it is quite annoying when people like "lempkee" and "Step" suggests that my primary Amiga (the Pegasos) has nothing to do with Amiga, since it doesn't run OS4 and lacks the Amiga sticker on the front. You realize that posts like that is equally flamebait to a great deal of people in this community? But let's try not to bite the bates and accept that we have different views of things, OK? :-)
-
Desolator wrote:
I can't see the new motherboards as a new Amiga. Sorry. Maybe (just maybe) if they compiled it into one of those "computer inside a keyboard" solutions might I call it an Amiga. But not a true Amiga... not Jay Miners vision.
why? Because with just another Tower on my desk its the same as having a PC or Mac or whatever.
bring forth the custom chips and we can have this discussion again. ;) (not that custom chips are neccessary in these times it seems.)
Perhaps the definition of "what is Amiga" is more about if you can use the system as you have allways used the "Amiga"? If you can run the software you ran on your Amiga, if it is lean and clean like the Amiga should be, if it has the same look and feel as the Amiga, etc, etc, etc?
-
I consider any of the Amiga's produced by Commodore as the real deal. Mainly because of the hardware similarity (processor & custom chipset evolution) and backwards software compatibility (to a degree).
The A1 and Peg are a form of 'AmigaOS compatibles' that are hardware independant from the classic Amigas.
Maybe if Commodore was still around and had gone down the path of PPC (RTG) like the A1 & Peg a few years ago we wouldn't be having this discussion now.
-
@takemehomegrandma
Im sure you are not trying to be deliberately obtuse but that is not what I mean by flamebait. Deliberately posting distorted rubbish as facts is flamebait and nothing to do with opinion.
I have resisted the flamebait by not answering it in the way I ordinarily would, however I am trying to ask Lando to politely desist else we will end up in a flamewar.
This is what, in my view, constitutes flamebait:
AmigaOne: No
It's a generic board, buggy
Generic board?
Buggy?
the name fanatics purchasing one,
Calling owners "name fanatics".
especially with all the problems people have been experiencing,
What problems?
And this is what will wreck a conversation, it has little to do with opinion and everything to do with trying to stir the ####.
Regards
Dave.
-
> What operating system it runs doesn't matter.
It does matter. What happens if the OS includes a virtual Amiga chipset functions?
It doesnt. (Non-multitasking 68k software wont run on PPC OS, was there chipset emulation or not.)
-
DaveP wrote:
@Lando
Can you tone down your flamebait a bit. Some of us are trying to have a civilised discussion in here.
He asked for people's opinions. You gave yours, I gave mine. Any time someone has an opinion that differs from yours you categorise it as flamebait. Still, at least you stopped short of the personal insults on this occasion.
Problems with instability (which has forced many XE owners to underclock their boards in an attempt to reduce the lockups) on the Teron boards are well-known (even documented in this month's C.A.M.)
-
@Lando
Hardly, see response above.
Or you could continue to stick your head in the sand and carry on posting flamebait.
-
Only Commodore Amiga is real Amiga.
I agree but we have 2 new systems that are compatable well one is one just runs linux at the moment.?
-
-
-
Do you consider either the PegososPPCs or AmigaOne to be true Amigas?
Any Hardware that can run AmigaOs4 legally Is a nextgen Amiga, as you can then use the name amiga when you ship the mobo with Aos4.
I care little for the hardware as long as its Fast enough for my needs.
AmigaOne
If & when then
PegasosAmiga-II or AmigaPegasos-II.
AmigaShark or SharkAmiga
-
anyway there is nothing else to carry the amiga name on so you could say they are amiga,s they will both run amiga software a1 will when os4 comes out .
-
@Lando
I am interested in this instability issue you are reffering to, where can i find out more, wich page in the CAM are you talking of ?
-
@DaveP
So if I put my Pegasos inside of my spare A500 case, you'd consider it more of an Amiga than it is now?
-
@Downix
Quite the opposite.
How you managed to contract what I wrote in response to "Desolator" ( who said basically what you just attributed to me ) I have no idea.
I can only assume you skim read.
-
Something that is called an Amiga is an amiga simple. Something that runs the AmigaOS legally is an amiga. Something which people refer to as an "amiga" not a "pegasos" or "pc" is an amiga.
Simple.
-
@DaveP
It's how the whole thing came across. And when you're as busy as I am, you usually only have time to skim read. I save the deep reading for the weekend.
But I do have a spare A1000 case I could use....
-
Samuar wrote:
Serious question. Theres a bit of rivalry and competition between PegososPPCs and the AmigaOne. But, do people consider one or the other, or neither; to be true Amigas?
Hmmm. Tough question. After a lot of thought I'd have to go with neither.
Both offer 'Amiga look alike' solutions, each in their own way, but to me the Amiga was the sum total of it's hardware, OS, and design philosophy.
It was cutting edge technology in it's day - but I think that day is over to tell the truth.
The way I look at it is similar to this:
My neighbour is a classic car buff. He restored this beautiful old 60's hot rod (I'm not a car buff - god only knows what it is) - one of those open engine, big cab, millions of chrome exhaust pipe numbers.
Great looking car, not that great on gas milage, and you couldn't use it for the everyday commute. But it's still nice to drive around in, and none of todays cars really compare to it.
Now I could buy a Prowler, or a PT cruiser - it has the same kind of look and feel, but it's not really the same.
Do you think whether it has AmigaOS 4 running on it would affect your opinion on the above question?
Wouldn't make a lick of difference to me to tell the truth. At the end of the day I'm not going to judge the machine or the OS by the sticker on the front, but by what it can do for me.
And at the end of the day, neither solution has shown me anything that will make me open my wallet yet.
Siggy.
-
@Jetracer
And what is Linux then? Gotcha!
A kernel.
Siggy.
-
After skim reading this whole thread (you guys talk too much, threads too long... you bean counters)
Do youconsider the Commodore Colt to be a real PC? Yes, thats what it released as, that whats people call it. It definitely doesn't run all of the most hardware banging PC software, but it's a PC, with all the legacy of being a PC (crappiness, DOS). In the same way AmigaOS4 and MOS are both Amigas -which is more Amiga depends entirely upon how much legacy hardware they run, and how well they follow the style- they'll be fully Amigan when they have emulation for you bloody chipbangers.
Come a little bit closer your my kind of man...
-
@Downix
Well that is absolutely not my opinion on the matter. :-)
-
I will consider any machine running any AMIGA OS, an amiga. MorphOS will have to wait for OS4 to be considered by me. If MorphOS is compatible with OS4 I might classify it as Amiga.
It´s not about time in history and hardware. It´s about user friendly and responsive computing.
The "enemy" is bloatware.
-
Something that is called an Amiga is an amiga simple. Something that runs the AmigaOS legally is an amiga.
By this definition software makes Amiga, not hardware. But is the Amithlon Amiga?
-
Any Hardware that can run AmigaOs4 legally Is a nextgen Amiga, as you can then use the name amiga when you ship the mobo with Aos4.
:-D After some thought I'd like to inject this: The first version of AOS4 will run on hardware designed by the nice folks behind bPlan/Genesi. Again it seems that if it wasn't for them, there would be no Amiga now. :-)
Now for my opinion: A Pegasos (that can run WarpOS stuff, PowerUp stuff, AOS stuff, and Morphos native stuff is just as much an Amiga as a Phase5 empowered (thanks again to the guys behind Genesi) native Amiga running the same apps quite a bit slower. AOS4 does not and has never run on an A1 to this day. When it does, then we can call it an Amiga as well.
Remember when Amiga Technologies killed the classic Amiga??
David
:-D :-D :-D
-
Hmm...better choose my words carefully.
First, I don't believe that any modern machine can be a 'true' Amiga, any more than the new Star Wars films can match the feel of the old ones, even if they have dated badly. That Amiga is gone, and no sticker or licence will make a difference. However, the Amiga we came to know post 1997 is still around, and that is the OS. It's not as good as the genuine article, but its still better than nothing - or than other platforms.
IMO, MorphOS is more like an Amiga than a real Amiga. It even has the feel. It's *much* faster, more stable and more powerful. All the things I liked about my Amiga are there, and stronger. Most of the things I disliked are gone. All it lacks is the custom chipset (on a Pegasos, that is). I haven't felt such an improvement in usability since I upgraded from a C64 to a A600.
OS4 on A1...I won't go there since I've never tried it. But if the benefit of modern hardware is used as well by it as MOS does, then it will be a great system to use as well.
UAE doesn't feel like an Amiga. The timing is strange; its ultra-fast in some respects and bog-slow on others. When used for games its excellent; when used as a permanent Amiga system much less so. It doesn't have the feel. I still preferred to use my *extremely slow* 040/25 Amiga than UAE on a 1.3GHz Athlon. I haven't used XL, Amithlon or AROS.
There, nothing too flaimbaitish there, I hope...
-
Hands up who thinks this is a really futile discussion!
:-)
IMO, Amiga is 99.9% about AmigaOS. Perhaps judging the AmigaOne/AmigaOS4 product once it has actually been released might make this a more worthwhile discussion.
People like what they like about the Amiga, and any related offspring, if it does what they want it to do, and nicely, what does it matter? If you choose to buy any computer, regardless of name, you should be judging it on what you believe are worthwhile merits, not someone else's opinion.
-
@Gopal
At the moment the pegasos is running more amiga software than any amigaone is. so its more of an amiga . :-)
At the moment i am looking forward to getting my a4000 desktop case and keyboard from ebay and amibench so i can put my a 4000 motherboard and cyberstorm 060 in more than i am using my a1 g4 with debian linux . :-D :-D :-D and some a1.s are underclocked to 800mhz and realy have 933 ppc,s in them have not checked mine yet. :-)
-
Amiga 1200 4x4 TDI
or
Amiga 4000 GTI 16V
:-D :-D :-D
True Amiga is the combination of HW and SW
that gives every individual user personal feeling
that he uses Amiga!
:-) :-) :-)
-
Hi!
Only read the first page...
True Amiga?!
(...in Spanish, friend, girl, etc.)
Who was Amiga #1...:-D
Genesis 3: 20 Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.
Hence, the following:
From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]
Eve
n 1: (Old Testament) Adam's wife in Judeo-Christian mythology: the first woman and mother of the human race; God created Eve from Adam's rib and placed Adam and Even in the Garden of Eden [syn: {Eve}]
2: the day before; "he always arrives on the eve of her departure"
3: the period immediately before something; "on the eve of the French Revolution"
4: the latter part of the day (the period of decreasing daylight from late afternoon until nightfall); "he enjoyed the evening light across the lake" [syn: {evening}, {eventide}]
Back to the material at hand...
Later on...(after Cain and Abel)...SETH!
That is it!
We can call it "Seth"!
What are we "calling" what?
(start suspense music now...)
-
@bbrv
Is this another pegasos renaming post, saw the one over at osnews awhile back, was not sure if it was you tough.
A hint, not everyone is a christian. (step thanks the gods :-D )
-
Hey step, the Old Testament is not only Christian...
...and come to think of it that was before Abram/Abraham too!
Get it?!
(who was Hagar?!)
:-D
....and who was really bad first?! (http://ldreams.net/gallery/gallery/dzordan-kiss.png)
-
I don't know AmigaMad, A1 on Linux with UAE might be able to run more software than a MOS machine without it (UAE) ... so not every A1 runs less classic software than Every MOS machine (unless I am mistaken in thinking Unix Amiga Emulator runs on PPC *nix
-
P.S. Thanks for the image Tumash...
Now that is a collection! (http://ldreams.net/gallery/gallery/)
;-)
-
@Step
You can say that again. Blessed Be all.
-
IMO, "Amiga" is the functionality and layout of the entire system. The OS has a great deal to do with what an Amiga is. Amiga is a fast, easy to use system. It's Workbench that doesn't get in the way and is simple. It's the heavy-feeling mouse that has a low pitch click rather than mice today with a high pitch click. It's the sound of the keys of the keyboard. It's the ability to play a full game from a floppy disk by turning on the computer and the game just works (try that on ANY other computer system--only Amiga can do that--even today). It's the way the OS and hardware work together seamlessly.
This is "Amiga." Without such characteristics, it isn't Amiga regardless of who makes what.
My $0.02.
-
I don't have time to read the threads today, but the answer is yes and no.
<---glad I could help
-
@DavidF:
It is theoretically possible to buy a single disk that you boot a PC from and which runs a game, but the enormous number of hardware possibilities prevents that from happening. You *can* do such a thing on consoles, because the hardware is known and fixed.
I do not expect to be able to boot floppy or CD based games on AmigaOne or Pegasos hardware, for the same reason that you can't on PCs - hardware drivers for zillions of cards.
-
@ CodeSmith: ditto to what you said
By the way, the Adam and Eve myth is not from the OT originally, but from older Babylonian myths and does not turn up in Jewish mythology till after their 'exile'
Just thought I'd chuck that in :¬)
-
Speaking of chucking something in, there are so many levels of "Amiga experience" that I have laugh sometimes. I had lots of "stuffed big box" experience from 1987 onward (and A1000 before back to '85) and as a dealer played with a lot of grounds-breaking apps and never-before-seen hardware. Some of them defined the desktop turf right up until the internet explosion - and invented whole new categories of use.
Sadly, lots of the more interesting and unique approaches to creative software have largely been forgotten, not replicated fully either in newer stuff for us, or on other platforms. Much of what has come since those days I consider Golden, has been an attempt to catch up with what is practically taken for granted on the main desktop platform(s) - albeit more pleasurable most of the time to deal with on "Amigas".
Yep, there's been a lot of quirky stuff that set the stage for "the suits" to rush in, but like many times in the musical industry once it's become mainstream, SOMEONE seems to squeeze a lot of chutzpah out of it and turn it into formula. But the cool stuff, that isn't like what's being done elsewhere - that's a lot of what's going to make an interesting platform here again. And it doesn't happen overnight.
-
There is no new system on the market today that compares to the original Amiga system developed in the 1980s.
It could be possible..
I want a complete system where the hardware and the operating system work together. The hardware should be powerful, but energy efficient, and not require a giant tower case with lots of fans and NOISE!!!
The operating system should be responsive, and not freeze up when accessing the hard drive. The audio should play properly with no clicking. You should be able to play video in a window and move that window around while the video continues to play.
The applications should be small/compact, possibly with an IPC(?) system like AREXX, and maybe a component object model system.
When a new system like this comes on the market.. I will buy it :-D
-
by Darth_X on 2003/7/4 13:58:40
There is no new system on the market today that compares to the original Amiga system developed in the 1980s.
--------------------
You got that right, how about a little earlier than the Amiga tho ?
check out the link.
http://dunkels.com/adam/contiki/
:-o :-o :-o
-
From an outside observer's point of view, I say: no.
But with that said...
The custom chips were used because there simply was no common powerful graphics solution at the time. The tricks and twists and turns they got to make the Amiga capable of what it was were really not that different from what coin-op arcade game manufacturers were doing, in that every time they came up with a new game, they, at the same time, built a custom hardware solution to realize the game. Heck, the first few Centipede machines from Atari were all hand-built!
But the point is, Hi-Toro/Amiga didn't have a PCI or even a 16-bit ISA bus to put things on; no VGA (forget the "S"!), and so forth. The thinking at the time was to build a specific solution for a specific problem (in the Amiga's case: How do we get high-end graphics on a desktop computer? (or rather, game console)).
If there had been no "Amiga" then, there would never be an Amiga. The BeBox was the closest anyone else came to a consumer-level custom hardware + non-x86 OS solution...well, once Apple gave up on their proprietary systems, e.g. NuBus etc.
Ultimately, when confronted with "What is an Amiga", both sides are right. It IS the OS and it IS the custom hardware. As much as I hated metal-banging trackloading single-floppy "won't work with anything but a PAL A500+" games, the same custom chips made good things like the Video Toaster, DCTV, countless Genlocks, and so forth possible - but the OS was a huge part of that as well.
Consider this, all you OS only people:
The Video Toaster won major awards at the NAB conference, and was selected as the peripheral of the year at MacWorld the year it was introduced. The second one is quite hilarious since the "controller" that allowed you to use the VT with the Mac essentially lobotomized the Mac and used it as a dumb terminal for the '030 Amiga underneath!
Likewise, the "hardware all the way" folks who want a new and improved AGA chipset with 80,000,000,000,000,000,000 sprites, copperlists that would reach to the moon, a SuperDuperUltraMegaKiloGigaDenise - and backwards compatibility with OCS - need to understand that had the VT's software been tied specifically to the Amiga's chipset, LW might well have never made such an impact as it did. Likewise several other 3d packages.
But that's just me - I could be wrong...
-
mikeymike wrote:
Hands up who thinks this is a really futile discussion!
Seconded.
People like what they like about the Amiga, and any related offspring, if it does what they want it to do, and nicely, what does it matter? If you choose to buy any computer, regardless of name, you should be judging it on what you believe are worthwhile merits, not someone else's opinion.
Wise words. To me, none of the modern machines are an Amiga. I got my first one (an A500) in 1987, when I was 13. The feeling of slowly getting to understand how a complex machine works, the awe when 'Defender Of The Crown' showed its graphical and musical brilliance when all we had at that time was chunky C64 graphics and PC-speaker beeps, the jaw-dropping effect at seeing a HAM-mode picture for the very first time in a world where '16 colours' was, like, a *LOT*, typing out BASIC-listings from magazines, copying cracked games and playing them, the nervous yet exciting giggle of seeing a gorgeous woman in a risque pose on your computer screen, the thrill at having your very first hardware-hitting assembly demo run without crashing---*that* is an Amiga to me. Since I will never be in my teens again, and since I know how the system works now, or how to obtain the information if I don't, all the new Amigas are just computers. A bit special because they continue the tradition started in 1985, and because they contain a CPU different from a rather simplistic and outdated 32-bit Intel clone, but nothing more.
My PC still has plenty of undiscovered things I can learn if I want to (OpenGL, language design, network programming, proper use of threads) but it doesn't have the mystery that shrouded my trusty A500. I don't expect it to, and I'm not sure I would want it to, either.
-
Darth_X wrote:
There is no new system on the market today that compares to the original Amiga system developed in the 1980s.
It could be possible..
I want a complete system where the hardware and the operating system work together. The hardware should be powerful, but energy efficient, and not require a giant tower case with lots of fans and NOISE!!!
The operating system should be responsive, and not freeze up when accessing the hard drive. The audio should play properly with no clicking. You should be able to play video in a window and move that window around while the video continues to play.
The applications should be small/compact, possibly with an IPC(?) system like AREXX, and maybe a component object model system.
When a new system like this comes on the market.. I will buy it :-D
My advice? Get yourself a Mac and be happy.
:-D
-
Lando wrote:
My advice? Get yourself a Mac and be happy.
:-D
Did I forget to mention *price* ? :-D
I also deliberately did not mention hardware specs. The new G5 Mac is close to what I want.. but not quite exactly what I want...
-
@Hammer
I recall that the AmigaOne was packaged with the _licensed_ Amiga’s Kickstart ROMs for Linux PPC/UAE setup…
Thanks, for your reply. I completely forgot about Linux PPC/UAE.
Just out of curiousity, does anyone know how well the DraCo compared to the "classic" Amigas. Was it a true clone or something similar to the peg and A1.
---------------
redfox
-
Anything which is branded "Amiga" is an Amiga. Anything that runs AmigaOS is an Amiga compatible.
-
-
Thanks for the laugh meerschaum. You sound like a rational user... not.
-
Hey, at least *real* amigas don't look like kitchen appliances...
:-P
-
@Fot
You can identify the ones for whom this is a bit of gang warfare and not a normal experience. They get personal about the general group people that don't agree with them calling them "zealouts" and other silly names as a put down.
To be fair to meerschaum he only writes like this after excess alchohol.
-
@DaveP.
Yeah, I've noticed that it doesn't take much for some to go into overdrive mode.
-
meerschaum wrote:
whats a real amiga?... certinly not the WaffleOne with WaffleOS4 with Wafflers.inc backing it up...
[skip]
WaffleOne is a pathetic sham
Such strong words were totally uncalled for. A polite "I think it is not" and "I think it is yes" could be more nice instead.
-
Pegasos = Not Amiga
AmigaOne = Not Amiga
AmigaOne + OS4 = Amiga
-
well,
once os4 runs on my amigaone i might consider it as "amiga", up till now its a unusall linux machine..
cant say anything about the pegasos, never seen it live nor morphos.
-
If we can seperate "true Amiga" from the overloaded use of "worthy successor" then it is, unfortunately for some, anything with the brand AMiGA on it.
Some would consider the Amiga600 not to be a true Amiga for the "worthy sucessor" reason, although I quite like the A600.
-
First we have to define what makes an "Amiga".
The HW and the games was what brought most of us to the Amiga, plus maybe some
by it's use for video.
Thats all gone, and belongs to A500-A4000T.
What made us stay ? The community ?
Also allmost gone.
What we do have is systems with variying compabilty to the Amiga (UAE,Amithlon,
MorphOS and later even OS4), but none of them comes to close to being an Amiga.
For those you now want to yell "but it has the Name and the "true" OS" :
Hands up, how many of you bought their A500 because of Kick1.2/3 and the C=
badge on it ?
For those who want to yell "but why is a Mac still a Mac" :
Macs were allways bought based on image and the SW, not the HW.
Macs have changed cradually from 68k to PPC running OSX, something that just
didn't happen with the Amiga (a few 1000 PPC or PCI addons by 3rd party don't count).
-
DaveP wrote:
If we can seperate "true Amiga" from the overloaded use of "worthy successor" then it is, unfortunately for some, anything with the brand AMiGA on it.
If Microsoft buys the name and calls Windows the next day AmigaOS, call it as you like, I won't buy it, as it won't be "true" amiga. Don't get the word "true" into the debate please.
Amiga Inc is free to brand anything with the name (law applying), but the thread is about personal opinions about what is Amiga and what is not.
A washing machine for the arguments sake can be called Amiga, but won't be "true" or "that" Amiga in anyone's eye here.
-
@Kronos
Defining what brought us to the Amiga does not define the Amiga. :-)
If you were looking for the pizazz wow factor in everything then there are quite a few non Amiga products and very few Amiga products after the A500 that would be branded "Amiga". Besides thats all "worthy sucessor".
What makes Unix Unix? At least there you could give a technical answer that people would be prepared to debate.
-
@Warface
to be true Amigas?
From the subject.
Don't get the word "true" into the debate please.
From your post.
Nuff said.
-
Good luck to your washing machine then.
-
@Warface
????
-
@DaveP
Häääääääh ????
Did I ever said that something with "wow factor" has to be an Amiga ?
No, that was an Archimedes, or a BeBox, but the Amiga is and was something developed
83-85, successfull in 86-91 and updated in 92.
After that nothing really happened that would deserve a "wow", only more or less
clumsy updates and add-ons trying to close the tech-gap that has buildet up since 90 or so.
-
@Kronos
....archimedes.... first time I saw RiscOS I thought ... nice fonts ( anitaliased ) .... second time I played Zarch for hours :-)
-
Just understood and accepted your personal opinion, that everything with the badge "Amiga" is "true Amiga". :-)
-
Subject : Do you consider either the PegososPPCs or AmigaOne to be true Amigas?
No.
-
@Warface
Does not mean its an acceptable or worthy sucessor ;-)
-
"Hey, at least *real* amigas don't look like kitchen appliances..."
Tell that too my toaster equipped Amiga 4000 in a toaster oven with breadboard and 2 kitchen syncs.
:-D
Stew
-
[RANT]
Lando wrote:
Pegasos: Yes.
It is custom designed (like the real Amiga) by Amiga hardware experts (like the real Amiga), runs existing Amiga applications (both PPC and 68k) (like the real Amiga) .
Most people realise the Teron/AmigaOne is dead and it's only the real "name" fanatics who would still consider purchasing one, especially with all the problems people have been experiencing, and the far-superior (and far cheaper) Pegasos II due out very soon.
Could someone please explain how the Pegasos is anymore a "custom design" than any other micro-ATX motherboard? I mean seriously Lando, you sound just like a "real 'name' fanatic"... Just worshipping a name that beginss with a "G" or maybe "P" as opposed to one that begins with an "A".
Frankly, I'm sick of both! I spend most of my time lurking because of the hostile environment the "'Amiga' Community" has become. Makes me wonder sometimes if this really is a Community or just a bunch of gangs fighting over turf.
I am not slamming the Pegasos here or defending the AmigaOne. I'm just pointing out that this nonsense about the Pegasos being a more 'holy' design is utterly ridiculous. The Pegasos is a micro-ATX PPC motherboard, the AmigaOne is an ATX PPC motherboard. bPlan/Genesi could have designed the AmigaOne, MAI could have designed the Pegasos. They are both pretty generic ATX class designs.
Amiga hardware as we knew it (A1000/A500-A4000/A1200) is dead! We are not likey to see another 'custom' design like that of the 'Classic Amiga' ever. From here on out, 'Amiga' hardware (whether it be from Eyetech, Genesi, Abit, Apple, Asus, Epox, GigaByte, IBM etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum) is going to be 'PC' clones with maybe PPC processors.
So, the sooner we all stop these pointless 'Which is more an 'Amiga', the AmigaOne or the Pegasos?' arguments the better.
[/RANT]
-
The day AmigaONE runs OS4, then yeah.. Its a true Amiga. But if it will end up running only linux, then nah.
-
Nope. Far as I'm concerned, nothing past the classic machines is a "true Amiga." Money and a sticker don't make an instant Amiga out of anything.
So... nothing except 68k hardware would ever be an amiga in your eyes?? WOW! So i guess todays Macs is not a mac either? Cause they now use ppc? And pcs wont be pcs when they got 64bit??
-
Could someone please explain how the Pegasos is anymore a "custom design" than any other micro-ATX motherboard? I mean seriously Lando, you sound just like a "real 'name' fanatic"... Just worshipping a name that beginss with a "G" or maybe "P" as opposed to one that begins with an "A".
It's not. Happy?
Please.. Calm down and have some punch.
-
@Tomas
Nah, PC's haven't been PC's since they left 8-bit.
-
So... nothing except 68k hardware would ever be an amiga in your eyes?? WOW! So i guess todays Macs is not a mac either? Cause they now use ppc? And pcs wont be pcs when they got 128bit??
What are you guessing for? I'm an adult and perfectly able to make decisions for myself. For future reference, I don't need assistance in this area.
Also note that we're discussing "true" Amigas. Personally, I do make a distinction between an Amiga and a true Amiga. I will explain.
With Commodore and Escom, they either made the machines themselves or had them made for themselves. This is what I'd refer to as a true Amiga. The AmigaOne has almost nothing to do with Amiga Inc. The board is designed by Mai, fabricated by someone else for Eyetech. Just about the only thing Amiga Inc has to do with it is that they licensed the Amiga trademark to Eyetech for Eyetech's own product.
In other words, is it an Amiga? Sure. Is it a true Amiga? Nope. If Amiga Inc ever brings out hardware of it's own, then I'll consider it a true Amiga. (If the hardware is PPC based for use with AmigaOS. Let's not go off on some bizarre tangent, okay?)
Let us also remember that we're just discussing personal opinions, okay? For myself, all this doesn't really matter that much to me anymore. I spent several years hoping to find something even remotely Amiga-like on the PC. Having MorphOS is even better, because (to me) it feels just like an Amiga.. That's what matters most to me.
-
After a certain level of sophistication in computer hardware and moreso in software was reached, it's kind of pointless to define exactly what is or isn't an Amiga.
If 'Amiga' were to be defined exactly, that description could only point to one particular revision of one model of Amiga. So, if you wanted, you could use a set of exact definitions that cover every revision of every model or you could use a less exact, more flexible definition that allows what we know as 'Amiga' to grow and evolve.
Growing is painful but, in retrospect, a good thing. Evolution has some advantages too. :-)
-
Kronos wrote:
Macs were allways bought based on image and the SW, not the HW.
Really? I've heard all sorts of reasons given for people buying Macs, including plenty of people who like the hardware.
Macs have changed cradually from 68k to PPC running OSX, something that just
didn't happen with the Amiga (a few 1000 PPC or PCI addons by 3rd party don't count).
So "Macs have change gradually and Amigas haven't, as long as we ignore some of the gradual changes in Amiga hardware"? If the small number of them makes them not count, then unless OS4 sounds vast numbers, it won't exist either according to this.
Having said that, changing things to look at why people buy or bought the machines is a good idea - when people talk about "new Amigas" and so on, presumably they're looking for something that does what they currently use their Amiga for, but better.
But unless you've conducted extensive surveys of the Mac and Amiga communities, I don't see how you can say what you say. The only conclusion we can reach is that some people will buy the new machines as if they were new Amigas; some will stick with older machines; some will switch to an entirely new platform; and perhaps some will buy them, but consider it as a platform switch.
Yes, I first bought an Amiga because it had decent graphics and games at a low price, which won't be true of any new Amiga now - but it stopped being true *years* ago. When I stuck with the Amiga through the late 90s, it was because of the OS and the software. So if any new Amiga was to tempt me because of the OS and software, this wouldn't be some contradiction.
For those you now want to yell "but it has the Name and the "true" OS" :
Is anyone actually saying this? Perhaps a few will buy based on brand loyalty, which is not necessarily a wrong thing (not to mention that really, brand loyalty isn't about just the name).
At the end of the day, whatever people think is the answer to the question posed by this thread, AmigaOS 4, MorphOS, Amithlon, AROS, as well as things like UAE will continue to be discussed and covered on "Amiga" forums because they're viable ways to run Amiga software. And no doubt that AmigaOnes will in future, when OS4 is out, be referred to more generically as "Amigas", because that's it's name - referring to it as such doesn't mean that one is stupid and thinks it's actually an A500 in disguise.
-
So... nothing except 68k hardware would ever be an amiga in your eyes?? WOW! So i guess todays Macs is not a mac either? Cause they now use ppc? And pcs wont be pcs when they got 64bit??
Todays mac is still a mac because at the end of the day they are still crap compared to pc,s. :-?
-
Considering you can't buy OS4 yet...
-
using the same mentality of some of the people here...
probably any mac made after the mac 128K(or perhaps the 512k model, you pick)
wasnt a real mac because it was different electronically
look if apple computer inc. put a big bright colorful apple logo on the front with the word 'Macintosh' id say its a mac
-
I'd say it's a Mac cause it runs Mac software. I'll say it's Amiga cause it runs Amiga software. I'll say it's a PC cause it run PC software (le IBM PC compatible). I don't UAE cause it's a seperate program, and really slow, it's not really the OS your running, Amithlon et al are kind of Amigas, although it sounds more like Linux that boots into UAE to me. MOS and OS4 will be amiga because they both can run a decent amount of the classic amiga's software (since they emulate in a similiar manner aka no custom chip stuff but OS stuff, won't they run more or less the same software???) and, more importantly, they're built ground up to do it. The Longhorn OS microsoft is developing sounds like it probably Won't be Windows, simply non compatible, whatever they darn well call it. Amiga runs on Amigas... hehehe hardware and software are different, some people get wierd Ithink because they had hardware and osftware with the same name, woopee. two too to.
-
jeffimix,
i fail to understand your logic...
I'd say it's a Mac cause it runs Mac software.
that would make the amiga a mac, because the amiga can run mac software, so too can the pegasos, therefore according to your logic, the pegasos must also be a mac I'll say it's a PC cause it run PC software (le IBM PC compatible).
including if an emulator is used??I don't UAE cause it's a seperate program, and really slow, it's not really the OS your running,
have you never used UAE? you are running the real AmigaOS with UAE! slow?? certainly faster than my amiga(040@25MHz)if you base this on the speed, then by that logic my ibm-pc must be more of an amiga than my A 4000 T :-o Amithlon et al are kind of Amigas, although it sounds more like Linux that boots into UAE to me.
well it is just another emulator jeff...
The Longhorn OS microsoft is developing sounds like it probably Won't be Windows,
well i dont know what you are on about there...
hehehe hardware and software are different, some people get wierd Ithink because they had hardware and osftware with the same name, woopee. two too to.
:-?
-
CodeSmith wrote:
@DavidF:
It is theoretically possible to buy a single disk that you boot a PC from and which runs a game, but the enormous number of hardware possibilities prevents that from happening. You *can* do such a thing on consoles, because the hardware is known and fixed.
I do not expect to be able to boot floppy or CD based games on AmigaOne or Pegasos hardware, for the same reason that you can't on PCs - hardware drivers for zillions of cards.
Exactly my point. It can't be done on any computer accept Amiga. All Amigas had similar hardware such that the game would boot and run with any Amiga computer. The variety of hardware on the PC is good and bad. It is not theoretically posible because there is too much hardware to worry about. That's reality.
-
@mdwh2
I'll have to point you to the reply Madgun made, we are not discussing
wether
they are "Amiga" or "Amiga-like", but wether they are "true Amigas",
and to
that question only A600-A4000 will get a positive answer FROM ME.
There are alot of people telling lots of reasons why they choose what
computer
they use, some even bought a PC because of MS-DOS ...
But be honest, was the empgasis with Macs ever on the HW, so much as
it was
with the Amiga in it's early days ?
PCI and PPC were never intregrated with the mobos, never standard fpr
any
modell, and most outsiders would just look at you in an odd way were
you to
tell them that your Amiga has those.
99% of all Amigas ever sold use 68k, and only a minority of those use
Zorro.
How many Macs were sold with 68k, how many with PPC ? Or NuBus vs PCI
?
-
In all seriousness, the only alternative system that I would consider to be a "worthy" successor to the A1000 and A500 would be the c-one. It's got the "high-tech" factor (the runtime-configurable FPGAs) and I'm sure that when people start fully utilizing its strengths, it will have the "wow" factor too.
-
I think the "Truth Amiga" is Amiga one any sucesor..
Of "Amigas Clasic"... The "Truth Amiga" from A100 to A4000...
-
Even my Amiga 1200 is not a true Amiga anymore.
I'm using PPC, GRex, Voodoo3.
The Amiga chipset is out of business.
-
Not today, but the Amiga "classic", is going by that way!.. If the user not wakeup!...
AMIGA IS BACK!
-
Neither Pegasos or Amiga ONE have Amiga soul, surely Windows XP boxes are the only true Amigas :-P
Seriously though, you can have similar arguments about other platforms: i.e. Apple, is an iMac running OS X really a Mac any more?! I would say yes, others would disagree, I know someone who refuses to run OS X because he thinks it isn't really Mac enough - whatever that means.
Personally I feel A1 is the real Amiga though, Pegasos is an attempt to create a new platform with an appeal to Amiga users, running Amiga software gives an instant resource pooI and selling point. I think we will find the two platforms will go in quite different directions in the end.
-
Madgun68 wrote:
It's not. Happy?
Please.. Calm down and have some punch.
What punch? Where?!?!? :-P
Seriously though, I'm fed up and pissed off. I don't have anything against a reasoned debate... Or even a heated debate... But what's the use of a pointless debate???
-
This argument/discussion would be a lot easier if one or the other (A1 or Peg) came with three custom chips designed to enhance multimedia, or displayed a floppy disk with a big tick - when turned on.
I'm not saying that this would make it amiga, but some of the features key to the amigas we remember of old, aren't exactly noticeable/there in the new boards. Whether thats a good or bad thing is beyond the scope of this 7 page debate.
Personally, i believe that if your an "old world" amiga user and you are able to convert your use/skills/software etc to "new world" amigas (yes, I do use Macs too much, but x86s as well) - AND you still feel part of the community whilst using these two new machines, then surely they are both as amiga as we need them to be.
Its an opinion, i think its right - but u might not. fair doos. Jesus loves everyone, even wierdos without amigas. If you don't believe in Jesus, then John Lennon loves everyone, even wierdos without amigas. :-D
-
@Samuar
This argument/discussion would be a lot easier if one or the other (A1 or Peg) came with three custom chips designed to enhance multimedia, or displayed a floppy disk with a big tick - when turned on.
Hmm... Would the use of the nForce chipset on a future AmigaOne or Pegasos count as "custom chips designed to enhance multimedia"??? :-) ;-) :-P :-D
I'm just being silly... I don't want to start another AOS/MOS on x86 thread. I will deny any responsibility if one should emerge.
-
Kronos wrote:
@mdwh2
I'll have to point you to the reply Madgun made, we are not discussing
wether
they are "Amiga" or "Amiga-like", but wether they are "true Amigas",
and to
that question only A600-A4000 will get a positive answer FROM ME.
99% of all Amigas ever sold use 68k, and only a minority of those use
Zorro.
How many Macs were sold with 68k, how many with PPC ? Or NuBus vs PCI
?
So does this mean you are defining it based on the majority of models sold?
This is a reasonable definition - often when trying to classify sets of objects that aren't exactly the same, we look at what the majority possess.
But remember that this is also a definition that can change with time. If AmigaOnes with OS4 actually arrive, sell more than a small amount, and perhaps the Amiga lasts quite a few more years, then the definition will change to include these machines. On the otherhand, back in the time when the first PowerMac was only just released, one can imagine them not being considered "real" Macs (I don't know if Mac forums were full of discussions like these - but the fact that they used the seperate term PowerMacs shows that the term needed to be distinguished seperately - but a few years later, they were just Macs, and I haven't heard the term PowerMac in a long while).
Also when the AGA Amigas were released - at that time the A500 was by far the most popular Amiga, and for a while the market was split into "AGA" and "non-AGA".
This is kind of what I was getting at, in that only time will decide this. Perhaps the new machines will flop, in which case they won't really be grouped as "true" Amigas by most people. But if in ten years time PPC based Amigas are still around, and during that time they get covered and discussed in "Amiga" forums such as these, anyone who suggests that they're not "real" Amigas will probably get strange looks ;)
(Talking of the A500, was that a typo when you said "A600-A4000", or did you mean to not include it?;)