Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: jarroyo on October 06, 2007, 07:40:32 AM
-
I have been speculating and trying to piece together how in the world Amiga Inc. can claim to have a new OS, so called “OS5” in what can be perceived to be a relatively short period of time with limited resources, and claim that it will be better than Mac OSX.
My 2 cents, and pure speculation
Amiga OS5 will be based on QNX’s Neutrino along with all the related tools, Photon GUI, IDE, etc. The development effort on behalf of Amiga Inc is probably focused on “Amigafying” that environment and bringing the Amiga look and feel, as well as some software basics to said platform.
Supporting information
In the following article dated Feb 6, certain claims are made by PA Semi, namely that:
“The Neutrino real-time operating system from QNX Software Systems and its related Momentics Development Suite have also been ported to the PA-6T platform”
http://www.itjungle.com/tlb/tlb020607-story01.html
In an article authored by Thom Holwerda back in 2004, the merits of QNX where outlined as well as its potential to be a fully featured desktop OS.
http://www.osnews.com/story.php/8911/QNX-The-Unexpected-Surprise/
While other OS’s and IDE’s are slated to run on the hardware platform, they are mostly Linux / Unix based, and similar to Mac OS X “Darwin / FreeBSD” Based microkernel.
The only way Amiga Inc. can claim to be better is to be different. A linux clone would not provide this for the company. Additionally Linux on top of a microkernel may not be a good thing. The article goes on to say..
"[...] Unix's syscalls all are synchronous. That makes them a bad target for a microkernel, and the primary reason why Mach and Minix are so bad - they want to emulate Unix on top of a microkernel. Don't do that."
In this respect AOS 5 would be better…….
Why then all the hoopla over OS4? simple, market fragmentation. Two different dev environments as well as the fact that Hyperion would market the OS as an “Amiga” brand, and A Inc would be heading towards a different direction.
Thoughts?......
-
OS5 is never going to happen.
-
Bloody hell, OS4 is not even out yet and he is talking about OS5 ?
LOLZ
-
I think he's talking about OS5 because Bill did.
Anyway, I think the QNX scenario would be great. But I'll doubt OS4 will make it to new hardware, let alone OS5.
Personally I wish Bill would stop going on about mobile devices, it's just boring now.. was ok 6/7 years ago when they first started saying it. :madashell:
-
I am talking about OS5 because Bill did. Additionally, the QNX Neutrino is already running on the PA Semi hardware. This means the "amigafying" of Neutrino/Photon GUI is all A Inc would be spending time and resources to bring to market.
In essence, OS5 already exists, and is running on the hardware.
A Inc would simply need to make sure OS4 does not ship, hence the lawsuit, because it would fragment the market.
If A Inc does have the money, giving Hyperion 25K to make it go away would be cake..
-
jarroyo wrote:
the QNX Neutrino is already running on the PA Semi hardware. This means the "amigafying" of Neutrino/Photon GUI is all A Inc would be spending time and resources to bring to market.
What would be the point of that? Might as well install Ubuntu and use an Amiga skin :roll:
--
moto
-
again, I think its a nice idea but unlikely to happen. To be honest I don't think Amiga have the sense to pull it off. QNX to me is an awesome OS, very cool and now open source?
-
It is open source....
The reason why they would not do Ubuntu is because of the similarity between what Apple did with their OS, which is essentially a flavor of Unix.
Bill's prior statement was that it would be superior to Mac OS X, hence my "prediction" that AOS 5 would be a "flavor of Neutrino"
I cannot believe Bill and company would be able to build something from scratch with limited time and resources.
-
OIC, so you're saying that OS5 will be a flavour of QNX in a similar way to how OSX is a flavour of BSD?
--
moto
-
Correct!
It is different enough from the Apple / Unix pedigre.
It is, based on my reading, better than Mac OS X.
It is, already running on the PA Semi hardware, at least since February of this year from a dev perspective.
It is something that A Inc in its current state could "handle."
Think about it, why would A Inc choose such a robust piece of hardware, and then place the existing Hyperion OS4 on it?
Is OS4:
SMP enabled, 64 Bit, etc...?
-
For those interested in how I came to this prediction
PA Semi News
http://www.itjungle.com/tlb/tlb020607-story01.html
Eval of QNX as a desktop OS. This one is a bit old.
http://www.osnews.com/story.php/8911/QNX-The-Unexpected-Surprise/
Bill calimed superior audio capabilities
http://www.qnx.com/products/middleware/multimedia.html
Superior architecture over Mac OS X
http://fusion.qnx.com/3/8483/246.07_Neutrino_bro_P5.pdf?tid=385329_bH_1006044735&ending=246.07_Neutrino_bro_P5.pdf
I can only wish.....
-
That's a very possible scenario - but it does make sense and that completely contradicts AInc... :-P
-
OS5 will be as real as the Amiga center in Kent......
-
Lets be honest, starting an OS from scratch is not an easy thing.
There is a plethora of OSes out there that are far superior and further established, but little known. A unix clone would simply not suffice, and was done already by Apple.
A company like AInc can simply re-brand one of these as their own, and focus on software / features to add value and set itself apart from the rest.
Apple did what I am predicting A Inc will do if they want to keep things afloat. Mac OS X is Jobs old Next Step OS company that he created after he left Apple. When he returned to Apple he bought is own company, dressed up the Pig and called it Tiger..:-)
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery, but we can beat them with their own tactic. Jobs probably did it to pay himself, A Inc could do it to leap frog everyone.
-
What Amiga Center...;-)
-
OS 5 ? :lol:
:-D haha
-
We have 2007, years of promisses, years of nonsens, years of nothing, years of destructive activity are gone, how the hell people can ask anything about OS5 or even think it can be true that a simple line of code of it is done.
It can´t get in my head that someone is asking this question? sorry AmigaInc. news esp. on announcments by this company should go direct to the trash not posted anymore.
-
@DariusB
100% agree, Darius.
OS5 is like the blue pill that should keep us all in wonderland. :lol:
-
I think 99.9 % doesn't belive or care anymore. But Bill
said 'Bohoo' and that's what we are questioning "what Bohoo
COULD mean" not that we really care but it keeps a thread going.
-
:horse:
-
OS5? ohhh to hell with that, its OS6 I am looking out for.
-
OS5?!? Be real people...
Those feckers at AI couldn't produce a fart after a baked-bean eating contest, let alone an OSX-beating operating system!
:roflmao:
-
Worarya trying to say... :lol:
-
QNX Neutrino would be in many ways superior to the Mac OS X provided it could be brought to the desktop world in an elegant way. It would also give A Inc the ability to scale from embedded devices all the way up to server class equipment.
The question remains however, is A Inc the kind of company to make it happen? That is another matter altogether..
Cheers
-
I think os3.1 is better than OS5 will ever be.
-
is A Inc the kind of company to make it happen?
Let me answer this one, A inc is the kind of company that could be in front of a sedated elephant with an ak-47 and not only fail to kill it, but fail to hit it even once.
-
Shut Apple, Microsoft and A. Inc in a room with a can of petrol and a match. Apple would make a really easy to use petrol fire that was ultimately very hard to alter, but did what they wanted really well. Microsoft would try and copy it but get it wrong and cause an explosion... A. Inc would probably put the match out by drowning it in the petrol, but claim they had plans for a really good fire, and they'd get it burning real soon :P
As for OS5. It's not going to happen. If it does it'll never be a patch on OS X, Vista or most frontline Linux distros, and it'll be so late it'll be out of date, just like OS 4.
-
AmiKit wrote:
OS5 is never going to happen.
Hmmmmmmmm
Let's see....
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/06/1015235
-
jarroyo,
I have been speculating and trying to piece together how in the world Amiga Inc. can claim to have a new OS, so called “OS5” in what can be perceived to be a relatively short period of time with limited resources, and claim that it will be better than Mac OSX.
I'll let you in on a little secret: Bill is full of that which comes out of a bulls a$$. Hope this helps...
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/06/1015235
"OS 5 is ahead of schedule, and we will be making public announcements concerning the product in the 4th quarter of this year."
Good thing too, since this *is* the 4th quarter of the year! Though I wouldn't put it past Bill to be dumb enough to have said they would announce stuff in the 2nd quarter of this year.
-
Let's be honest here if there really is an "OS5" it's probably a version of Linux with a new user interface, that looks Amiga-esque. That's what apple did, Un*x/Open Darwin underneath and it was portable to many different platforms.
That's an easy way for them to not have this happen, they could claim compatiblity through E-UAE, re-work the art in the gui of some windows manager, and since you can easily port amiga apps to and from Un*x platforms they will say it beats Apple's OS..
AmigaOS 5 in reality would not have any relationship to the code in OS 4 and would have a web browser, open office, and could work on intel or powerpc chips..
Gee what a plan, have someone in in India and Sri Lanka rework the art in the windows manager, and boom you have an OS that runs on multi-cores and multiple cpus. All with little investment or work thanks to the open source community and the backs of their labor and a system outside the European community and the USA.
Other advantages would be you could have Mono and the .NET framework, and it's moonlight plug-in that would give you WM9 and DRM support and VC-1 codec support.
No more hard to please Amiga developers.. Gee why didn't I think of this earlier and get Bill to go for it.. I could have made a fortune just doing art on the windows manager.
Plus I don't have to deal with patents copyrights etc..
Wow... Could this be OS5 aka LINUX?
-
I do not believe they, A Inc, could make this a Linux Distro and get away with it. That would be the final nail in the proverbial coffin for this community.
The benefits of a QNX "distro:"
OS5 on QNX would be different enough from a Linux distro.
The source code has gone open source, see the announcement below.
http://www.qnx.com/news/pr_2519_1.html
The development effort would be realistic enough for a company like A Inc to undertake in a short time span.
Its proven technology in the embedded space. Can scale to be a full desktop OS and above.
The India company already has experience in the embedded space development.
ACK Systems, the developers of the motherboard already have a presence and experience in the embedded space
Amiga Anywhere would run on this platform, very easily.
Mated to the hardware spec already published by A Inc, it would make a hell of a platform. 64 Bit OS, Dual Processor cores, low latency architecture with all IO / motherboard components in one chip, low power / quiet system, etc.....
I can dream can"t I?.....:-)
-
MaDDuck wrote:
Hmmmmmmmm
Let's see....
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/06/1015235
Please see the answer to question 4.
-
Do you really think it's about this community honestly or is it about A Inc making money.. As far as the embedded space you forget that the "embedded space" india company you are talking about makes windows mobile programs (just like A Inc. makes games for that space). So your argument really doesn't hold water in the "embedded space" they are using an embedded maker to produce the prototype and someone else to do production. They'd have to used embedded because of form factor at this point anyway. Doesn't mean it's capable of being an "industrial quality" RT OS..
I figured my prediction would cause outrage. But honestly we don't call MacOS 10 "Darwin x86" even though that's what it is with a Mac Style desktop windows manager system and some extras..
So how would an Amiga OS 5 based on linux not do the same things?
They have to make an architectural leap at sometime. Seems like it's time to me..
-
QNX would be 'ported' to PA no matter what. Both products are aimed into the same market (heavyweight 'embedded') and PA is essentially just another PowerPC.
I have no speculation on what AInc. is or isn't up to, just want to point out that that fact doesn't carry much causality.
[Also, no insult to QNX meant by 'heavyweight.' From observing that scene it's clear that some embedded engineers think using a kernel is 'heavyweight.']
-
You know, it would be cool if Amiga used QNX as the base for OS 5. There were a lot of folks who looked at QNX back in the day and went 'why are we using this TAO crap?!' and the answer is in large part that QNX' CEO and Amiga's CEO didn't get along. Bill McEwen hated QNX, especially after Haage and Partner released their AmigaOS XL atop QNX-remember that? It was their answer to Amithlon, so to speak.
Amiga and Haage and Partner also, sadly, had their own great differences-and unfortunately the contract of McEwen's Amiga asset purchase from Gateway wasn't written in such a way as to guarantee H & P royalties be paid to Amiga, so H & P didn't pay them. They weren't technically supposed to release Amiga OS XL without Bill's permission because it used Amiga's IP, but they did it anyway. And never paid Amiga any royalties from its sales :-( Or, in fact, from OS 3.9 either.
It also wasn't written in such a way as to keep Petro from doing his own back door deals and in fact Amiga had to keep him on-with pay-even though he was pretty much ganking them the whole time!
It really wasn't Bill's fault entirely that things went as they did, I think he jumped in with both feet before realizing how far the drop off was.
Maybe though, in the end, we'll get an OS authored by DKB hardware's own Dean Brown-last I heard he still worked in some way with Amiga. That would just ROCK. If Dean makes it, it won't suck. That's my best case scenario prediction.
However there's a fair chance that Amiga might market it wrong ;-)
-
It takes intuition to make a good product. Bill doesn't have that, or there would already be a profitable product on the market.
If OS5 has a decent core, but uses the same braindead shells and file requesters as Windows, OS3, and just about everything else, that's a pretty good indication that the OS is destined for failure.
Apple couldn't write their own OS (Copland), so they dumped that project and built an interface on someone else's OS. Look where it got them. If Bill is spewing the same BS that OS5 will be better than OSX, chances are Amiga is still focusing on the core, rather than that new shell and file requester.
I don't doubt that OS5 will be released eventually. It just won't be worth using.
-
"Do you really think it's about this community honestly or is it about A Inc making money"
----------------------------------------------------------
Businesses need to create a value proposition in order to be successful. An Amiga linux distro, I feel is not compelling enough in that respect to make it worth while; I would probably just get a Mac if this is the route they take.
QNX is different enough and arguably architectually superior to Mac OSX to make the kind of value proposition required for a successful platform.
Of note, Bill claimed that the India team is not developing OS 5; and while they do develop for Windows, they also do a significant amount of development in the embedded space that is not windows
http://www.amigadevindia.com/html/technology_embedded.htm
-
It sounds based on your description of the events that the bad blood was between H&P and Amiga Inc, not entirely against QNX.
Additionally, the situation internally at QNX could have changed since H&P and A Inc where going at it. It looks like from the link below that even as early as April 2007 things have changed at QNX.
http://www.qnx.com/company/qnx_harman.html
Besides, this is business, and any savvy business person knowns that grudges take a back seat to money. After all, who would have tought that McNeely at Sun and Gates at Microsoft would have ever gotten along?...:-)
Money make strange bedfellows....
-
jarroyo wrote:
Lets be honest, starting an OS from scratch is not an easy thing.
There is a plethora of OSes out there that are far superior and further established, but little known. A unix clone would simply not suffice, and was done already by Apple.
A company like AInc can simply re-brand one of these as their own, and focus on software / features to add value and set itself apart from the rest.
Apple did what I am predicting A Inc will do if they want to keep things afloat. Mac OS X is Jobs old Next Step OS company that he created after he left Apple. When he returned to Apple he bought is own company, dressed up the Pig and called it Tiger..:-)
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery, but we can beat them with their own tactic. Jobs probably did it to pay himself, A Inc could do it to leap frog everyone.
Just for the record, Jobs didn't BUY his own company when he returned. He returned because Apple, under Gil Amelio, bought NeXT and the employees to go with it. Gil being the guy with the famous quote
"Apple was a ship with the hole in the bottom, and my job was to point it in the right direction"
I think Gil was Apple's Bill! lol :whack:
-
jarroyo wrote:
A unix clone would simply not suffice, and was done already by Apple.
Why the hell not? If it's a good OS who cares who did it first, or what it's based on. The quality of the product and it's technological advantages are the key issue, not, as many Apple users would have you believe, who copied who. The entire industry spends it's whole time copying each other. Some companies still remain better.
UNIX is a robust and standardized base, and is widely trusted and respected. An OS with modern features based on that sort of reputation could propel the Amiga name back to the limelight. Good though I'm sure it is (I've never used it), QNX is niche OS with only a fraction of the reputation. If they can make a good OS based on QNX then all power to them, but writing off a UNIX variant-based Amiga OS on the basis of other companies getting there first is ridiculous.
-
Threads like these make me remember why I keep watching from the sidelines. It is so much fun to see the predictions, counters, and whatnot that people come up with relating to the Amiga! Weeee!
I always thought that if an Amiga-like OS was going to be based on another kernel and other underlying stuff I would hope it would be like this:
GoboLinux (http://www.gobolinux.org/?page=at_a_glance)
A really nice sensible way of organizing things.
Write a new Workbench for it (like Finder on top of Darwin) and change or mirror the bash commands with "Amiga-named" versions that take "Amiga-compatible" parameters and it just might be close enough to be passable as a "new" Amiga OS. Would be for me anyway.
Still hoping on AROS though.
And for good measure.... no way OS5 will see the light of day. :-P It is fun to think about. That and play Scorched Tanks on e-uae on my Mac are all I really have to do with the Amiga anymore.
-
But Apple had hardware as well to support their Unix driven OS, giving some identity to the whole thing.
An Unix based Amiga OS is still uninteresting to the average Joe imo.
I see two variants of the Future Amigas:
The classic one: Stuff like Clone-A and to a lesser extent the Minimig, blown up as hard as possible for performance and being able to connect to more modern peripherals like VGA and PS2. Imagine a monster turbo classic AGA Amiga with a proper gfx card already built in and some other goodies. I think a lot of people would like that.
The modern approach: AROS on PPC or i386. I simply don't see Amiga INC in Business a few years later, and i cannot imagine Hyperion, even if they win the court case, to go on working on something as niche as an Amiga OS by themselves one more time for OS 5. So it's open source AROS, or nothing.
-
Tron2k2 wrote:
Bill McEwen hated QNX, especially after Haage and Partner released their AmigaOS XL atop QNX-remember that? It was their answer to Amithlon, so to speak.
Hey wait a second. What if that is exactly what they're doing, taking OS 3.1 (or OS 4.0?) and AmigaOS XL'ing it on top of QNX? Development time would be ludicrusly short for a new OS. Performance would be solid enough to be competitive. *and* it could migrate to other embeddable CPU's rapidly. They would, actually, have Amiga "Anywhere".
-
Didn't anyone notice that the QNX brochure shows an iBook?
Quite ironic, if you ask me.
On topic: OS5 is NOT gonna happen.
I kind of lost faith in the new generation Amiga's.
I'll stick to my old 3k, 500 and 1200, thank you very much.
-
I find the development of the 64bit AROS more exciting and realistic than OS5.
-
Definitely - AROS rocks!
-
downix wrote:
Hey wait a second. What if that is exactly what they're doing, taking OS 3.1 (or OS 4.0?) and AmigaOS XL'ing it on top of QNX? Development time would be ludicrusly short for a new OS. Performance would be solid enough to be competitive. *and* it could migrate to other embeddable CPU's rapidly. They would, actually, have Amiga "Anywhere".
Even though I dislike downix for his condescending remarks to me and others in the past, I totally agree with him on his statement above. I like QNX and believe Dan Dodge specifically is a stand-up kind of guy who has a great track record and who was genuinely interested in seeing the Amiga OS with a QNX kernel succeed. It would be great if the next Amiga OS was done by, or with QNX!
That would be a WIN - WIN situation for all involved parties (except perhaps Hyperion and the OS4 people, which I have never bought into anyway)
-
amigadave wrote:
Even though I dislike downix for his condescending remarks to me and others in the past, I totally agree with him on his statement above.
I could try and argue with you about it, but you're right on the money here. I'm smug, arrogant and full of myself. I'll attack you one minute, and defend you the next. But like me or not, I refuse to let us go quietly into the night.
If this is, infact, AInc's move, then perhaps there is a fighting chance. Longshot, yes, but a chance.
-
JetFireDX wrote:
I always thought that if an Amiga-like OS was going to be based on another kernel and other underlying stuff I would hope it would be like this:
GoboLinux (http://www.gobolinux.org/?page=at_a_glance)
A really nice sensible way of organizing things.
Indeed it is, I've known about this distro for some time, it's remarkable how most other distro makers just don't get it :roll:
-
Wasn't there a plan based on QNX back in the GateMiga days?
-
@DonnyEMU
They have to make an architectural leap at sometime. Seems like it's time to me..
Whether it's QNX or a flavour of Unix I would also claim that it's the best strategy. It wouldn't be popular with the diehards, but it would offer the shortest time to market and the best ROI.
I see QNX as technically compelling but more of a long shot because it has traditionally been directed towards a specialized market. It also has limited mainstream application support.
A customized Unix variant would bring with it a solid application base and army of developers but it doesn't fit the scalability mandate.
-
@billt
Wasn't there a plan based on QNX back in the GateMiga days?
To some extent. It was Jim Collas who outlined a game plan based on a Linux core.
-
ne_one wrote:
@DonnyEMU
I see QNX as technically compelling but more of a long shot because it has traditionally been directed towards a specialized market. It also has limited mainstream application support.
Ironically that is something the AmigaOS riding on top of it would bring. While not huge support, it does bring enough which, when combined with what QNX already has, does make a viable, even if limited, platform.
-
@downix,
Keep it up, this is the direction Amiga should be going, and now that QNX is open source, I don't see why the Amiga community couldn't push this idea forward, with, or without Amiga Inc.
There is no law that says the community can't create an Amiga compatible new OS based on the open source QNX kernel, is there?
-
amigadave wrote:
@downix,
Keep it up, this is the direction Amiga should be going, and now that QNX is open source, I don't see why the Amiga community couldn't push this idea forward, with, or without Amiga Inc.
There is no law that says the community can't create an Amiga compatible new OS based on the open source QNX kernel, is there?
Quite right, now we just need open source hardware to run it on....
-
Now that Amigas will not have any custom chip the Os is the only thing that remains Amiga and a Os based around the source code of Workbench - Os 4 -I would argue that is Amiga But an Os based around QNX,Linux or any other Os this is not Amiga
A simple Loop Hole to call a Linux Distro Amiga Because they own the Amiga name a real insult to the Amiga name.
-
BooBoo1200 wrote:
Now that Amigas will not have any custom chip the Os is the only thing that remains Amiga and a Os based around the source code of Workbench - Os 4 -I would argue that is Amiga But an Os based around QNX,Linux or any other Os this is not Amiga
A simple Loop Hole to call a Linux Distro Amiga Because they own the Amiga name a real insult to the Amiga name.
Good point.
-
The Amiga is not all about the OS, it's very much the hardware too that makes Amiga.
My suggestion:
enhance/change the old custom chips to newer/faster/better ones, but preserve compatibility with classic-side (68k) games/apps/utils. Better soundchip, graphic chip (NO interlace), PCI-E place for new graphics cards, sata hd controller + add many of newer things (usb,bluetooth etc.). You get the picture. The "old" is still there coupled with loads of recent hardware features!. And possibly stacked in a nostalgic desktop-keyboard case like A1200 or maybe even A4000 :).
Now THAT I'd buy for a dollar ! :banana:
-
Bamiga2002 wrote:
enhance/change the old custom chips to newer/faster/better ones, but preserve compatibility with classic-side (68k) games/apps/utils. Better soundchip, graphic chip (NO interlace), PCI-E place for new graphics cards, sata hd controller + add many of newer things (usb,bluetooth etc.). You get the picture. The "old" is still there coupled with loads of recent hardware features!. And possibly stacked in a nostalgic desktop-keyboard case like A1200 or maybe even A4000 :).
The Clone A project (http://www.jschoenfeld.com/news/news124_e.htm) is already an ECS replacement made from modern technology. Being able to genlock a modern graphics and sound chipset through Clone A would probably deliver what you are looking for.
Since the SAM440ep (http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/hardware.php) from ACube includes an FPGA chip on board, then perhaps they may be able to deliver results in time.
-
@BooBoo1200 and Bamiga2002,
I must disagree. What you are describing will be no different than what I and downix are suggesting.
Amiga Inc., or the Amiga Community via Open Source, or a combination of both should build a brand new AmigaOS on top of QNX. QNX provides the glue to access at low level the graphics and sound card chips, the sata hd controller, usb, bluetooth, etc. Amiga Inc., and/or Amiga Community provide the look & feel, and compatibility to legacy Amiga programs, while making improvements to the overall OS functions where ever possible as well. Like mentioned before, QNX already runs on so many different CPUs and it can scale from cell phone size devices, all the way up to network servers and beyond.
I can't for the life of me see an advantage for Amiga Inc., or the community to start from scratch in building a new OS. Using QNX as a base starting point will speed development time by years, not just months of work.
-
BooBoo1200 wrote:
Now that Amigas will not have any custom chip the Os is the only thing that remains Amiga and a Os based around the source code of Workbench - Os 4 -I would argue that is Amiga But an Os based around QNX,Linux or any other Os this is not Amiga
A simple Loop Hole to call a Linux Distro Amiga Because they own the Amiga name a real insult to the Amiga name.
We shall see what they do when the time comes.
Curious, have you ever looked at Amithlon?
-
@downix
Ironically that is something the AmigaOS riding on top of it would bring. While not huge support, it does bring enough which, when combined with what QNX already has, does make a viable, even if limited, platform.
In this scenario, I'm not convinced that existing applications or the remaining developer base would bring much to the fold. However, there would be compelling new opportunities.
It's tough to say if a new generation platform would retain any elements of the traditional Amiga. A replacement desktop and the CLI would likely adopt some conventions but who would be driving this process? To this point we haven't even heard a rumour of any major players being involved. So who's doing the development?
-
@amigadave
QNX already runs on so many different CPUs and it can scale from cell phone size devices, all the way up to network servers and beyond.
Which does seem to fit with this scalability mandate.
However, at the same time we're hearing claims about outperforming OSX, which presumably relates more to the desktop environment. In this area QNX is obviously lacking. Thankfully, developing a user environment is much less formidable than taking on an entire OS.
I can't for the life of me see an advantage for Amiga Inc., or the community to start from scratch in building a new OS
Agreed. Which makes you wonder why they simply didn't do this in the beginning.
-
___________________________________________________________
dentunes wrote:
Just for the record, Jobs didn't BUY his own company when he returned. He returned because Apple, under Gil Amelio, bought NeXT and the employees to go with it. Gil being the guy with the famous quote
"Apple was a ship with the hole in the bottom, and my job was to point it in the right direction"
___________________________________________________________
You are correct, that last fact escaped me.
-
_________________________________________________________
iMacMiga wrote:
Why the hell not? If it's a good OS who cares who did it first, or what it's based on. The quality of the product and it's technological advantages are the key issue, not, as many Apple users would have you believe, who copied who. The entire industry spends it's whole time copying each other. Some companies still remain better.
_________________________________________________________
Why would anyone buy a what essentially amounts to a linux distro? I would get a Mac if this is what A Inc turns to.
In my opinion, A Inc as a company needs to provide a value proposition that takes them in a direction different than just another Linux distro.
___________________________________________________________
iMacMiga wrote:
UNIX is a robust and standardized base, and is widely trusted and respected. An OS with modern features based on that sort of reputation could propel the Amiga name back to the limelight. Good though I'm sure it is (I've never used it),
___________________________________________________________
I won't argue the success and robustness of Unix, but QNX is no slouch. It may not be a household name, but their software is running medical instrumentation and mission critical systems in a variety of markets. I do not know what you do for a living, but serious IT proffesions do respect and hold QNX in high regard.
__________________________________________________________
iMacMiga wrote:
QNX is niche OS with only a fraction of the reputation.
__________________________________________________________
A reputation and market penetration that is much greater and respected than what we Amigan's currently have....
__________________________________________________________
iMacMiga wrote:
writing off a UNIX variant-based Amiga OS on the basis of other companies getting there first is ridiculous.
_________________________________________________________
Why would anyone buy it? Apple got away with it because they sell "art", not computers. The crowd that follow the Apple products are generally not technologicaly savy when compared to this Amiga crowd. I believe this community cares, and would be disappointed if the Amiga turns out to be nothing more than a linux variant. I could see it now; "All these years and in the end I get a Linux distro?"
Just my 2 cents......
-
__________________________________________________________
Steril707 wrote:
But Apple had hardware as well to support their Unix driven OS, giving some identity to the whole thing.
__________________________________________________________
I encourage this crowd to look deeply into the platform A Inc has chosen to host OS 5 on. It is quite different than what is out there, extremely powerful, when you consider that a significant amount of typical PC components are integrated into this single chip solution. It is a very balanced piece of hardware with ability to scale beyond what what current PC solutions are able to achieve today.
Don't let the 2 GHZ speeds fool you. This processor was designed for low latency transactions from end to end. A significantly more efficient architecture than what the PC and Mac has out there today.
http://www.pasemi.com/downloads/PA_Semi_PA6T_1682M.pdf
_________________________________________________________
Steril707 wrote:
An Unix based Amiga OS is still uninteresting to the average Joe imo
___________________________________________________________
I 100% agree with you on this point.
-
__________________________________________________________
BooBoo1200 wrote:
Now that Amigas will not have any custom chip the Os is the only thing that remains Amiga and a Os based around the source code of Workbench - Os 4 -I would argue that is Amiga But an Os based around QNX,Linux or any other Os this is not Amiga
_________________________________________________________
QNX would represent the microkernel much the same way "Darwin / Mach?" represent the Mac kernel with OS X sitting on top. Atop QNX you could develop many of the same feature set the Amiga is known for, including the Workbench paradigm. Microkernels in fact lend themselves to this type of implementation.
As far as the custom chipset, the PA Semi processor is oddly enough a custom chipset in its own right. It has a feature called the "Conexium Interchange."
From their site you read about Conexium:
"Interconnects the two 64-bit superscalar CPUs, two DDR2 memory controllers, a dual-ported L2 cache and the ENVOI I/O subsystem to deliver on-chip symmetric multiprocessing with coherent I/O"
From a custom graphics and sound point of view, this would be nearly suicidal. Unless you are Nvidia or AMD/ATI, you would be hard pressed to come up with a comparable solution that the average joe would not think its inferior inside of an Amiga.
Amiga was built at a time when custom chipsets where required to have the platform do what it became famous for. Those days are long gone and the economic landscape does not support this model any longer.
My 2 cents....
-
@jarroyo
I encourage this crowd to look deeply into the platform A Inc has chosen to host OS 5 on...
If I remember correctly, this was targetted for OS 4. OS5 of course, is supposed to be platform agnostic.
A significantly more efficient architecture than what the PC and Mac has out there today.
Which is great, if you have applications that demand these resources and the money to invest in one.
Steril707 wrote:
An Unix based Amiga OS is still uninteresting to the average Joe imo
I 100% agree with you on this point.
And who exactly falls into the demographic of an "Average Joe"? Most consumers don't know the difference between a computer chip and a potato chip let alone the core technology that the operating system is based on.
If by "Average Joe" you mean Amiga fanatic circa 1992 you're correct because they believe that all good operating systems and computing platforms are made by elves at the North Pole.
-
@amigadave
If QNX provides support for legacy programs then you're on the right track here. Like old & new together, it's a bit like i tried to explain on my post :). But i'd suggest not to abandon development of OS 4 if this "hype" OS 5 is going to be built from scratch. It would be better to continue development from OS 4 and not start all over...or? :-?
-
There is no law that says the community can't create an Amiga compatible new OS based on the open source QNX kernel, is there?
QNX is not open source. It's shared source (http://www.qnx.com/download/feature.html?programid=16868) so please read their FAQ (http://community.qnx.com/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.community/wiki/FAQ).
Dammy
-
jarroyo wrote:
Amiga was built at a time when custom chipsets where required to have the platform do what it became famous for. Those days are long gone and the economic landscape does not support this model any longer.
My 2 cents....
Actually, you'd be wrong here. While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance. Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs. Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.
And since then we've had the rise of FPGA's, CPLD's and rapid low-cost fabrication of silicon chips, making custom solutions more viable than at any point previous.
The Amiga was a system, not just an OS, and not just fun graphics.
-
The Amiga was a system, not just an OS, and not just fun graphics.
That was 20+ years ago when hardware-OS had to be tight because of the lack of hardware resources for consumer priced devices. Compare what we have now today to back then, it's a titalwave of devices and for the most part, at unbelievably cheap prices. Cost what, $1K for A500 unexpanded plus a 1024s monitor? In a few weeks, I can buy four ASUS mini laptops for $1K who's capabilities will just shame an A500.
I finally got my freedom from hardware, I'm not going back to that plantation ever again. Hardware will always be a commodity from now on. It's the OS that counts.
Dammy
-
dammy wrote:
The Amiga was a system, not just an OS, and not just fun graphics.
That was 20+ years ago when hardware-OS had to be tight because of the lack of hardware resources for consumer priced devices. Compare what we have now today to back then, it's a titalwave of devices and for the most part, at unbelievably cheap prices. Cost what, $1K for A500 unexpanded plus a 1024s monitor? In a few weeks, I can buy four ASUS mini laptops for $1K who's capabilities will just shame an A500.
I finally got my freedom from hardware, I'm not going back to that plantation ever again. Hardware will always be a commodity from now on. It's the OS that counts.
Dammy
To produce it today, that same A500 w/ monitor would run you, brand new around $100 (and that's with retail markup). The market for integrated components is exploding, and growing, faster than the desktop PC market.
And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.
-
And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.
I tend to buy from NewEgg.com but I could buy elsewhere:
Genesi EFIKA(2) (Mot)
VIA line of mobo/cpus (VIA)
ARM based mobo (ARM)
Do they still sell Sparcs? (Sun)
Athlon64 (AMD)
Core 2 Duo (Intel)
That's enough for my plate. YMMV
Dammy
-
if I had to speculate:
He means better than Mac OS X because it runs on top of Mac OS X. So it has Mac OS X + it has whatever crap he has written.
OS X plus 1, is greater than OS X alone.
just lawyer speak....doesn't mean anything at all.
-
I'd like to see an Amiga Graphical Environment for Unix.
There was the Amiga FVWM theme a few years ago which was cool.
It'd be nice to have the hardware issues sorted out by someone else (ie, the Linux guys) and then just build a nice Amiga desktop on top of Linux. Just so long as it is as responsive as the classic Amiga OS was on lowly hardware.
-
ne_one wrote:
Steril707 wrote:
An Unix based Amiga OS is still uninteresting to the average Joe imo
I 100% agree with you on this point.
And who exactly falls into the demographic of an "Average Joe"? Most consumers don't know the difference between a computer chip and a potato chip let alone the core technology that the operating system is based on.
If by "Average Joe" you mean Amiga fanatic circa 1992 you're correct because they believe that all good operating systems and computing platforms are made by elves at the North Pole.
No, i mean ->the average Joe<- not being concerned about Amiga at all, that's what we talk about here, isn't it?..Why should they prefer an Amigafied version(if it's more than a window decoration and boing ball backgroundpic), of Linux to something thats already supported by the masses and some weird guy in the background like Ubuntu, or has a dedicated ->real<- company backing it up like SUSE.
Plus, you will just piss off the few people left who want their Amiga OS being a genuine Amiga OS (=the Amiga elves from 1992).
But why bother? In a year or two AROS will be functional enough to please what's left of the Amiga elves.
-
dammy wrote:
And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.
I tend to buy from NewEgg.com but I could buy elsewhere:
Genesi EFIKA(2) (Mot)
VIA line of mobo/cpus (VIA)
ARM based mobo (ARM)
Do they still sell Sparcs? (Sun)
Athlon64 (AMD)
Core 2 Duo (Intel)
That's enough for my plate. YMMV
Dammy
ARM's are produced by a wide variety of vendors. Infact, ARM itself produces no processors, it just sells the design to other vendors. You want an ARM motherboard, you have a wide variety of options, including making your own.
SPARC's are produced by 9 vendors, but like ARM, SPARC Intetnational does not produce any CPU's itself, and only licenses the technology to other vendors, who produce their own CPU's. While Sun is the most visible vendor, the largest producer of SPARCs is actually Fujitsu followed by the European Space Agency. Unlike ARM, SPARC is available as an open-sourced design as well, with both Geisler and Sun releasing their CPU's under open-source licenses.
You confuse vendors with suppliers. One chip available from multiple suppliers is still one chip. I can't go out and get a Motorola Athlon, can I? But I can take ARM or SPARC to Freescale and have them fabricate one to my specifications. (infact, Freescale produces a large variety of SPARC's and ARM's under contract)
Intel/AMD domination, no thank you.
-
@Steril707
No, i mean ->the average Joe<- not being concerned about Amiga at all, that's what we talk about here, isn't it?..
It's an important distinction.
Either way, you would be addressing a niche market, not the mainstream. Attempting to sell a user on a replacement operating system is a pointless exercise because no matter how good the technology is it would still be irrelevant.
It's difficult to say if any of this is grounded in reality but if it is, the desktop version of OS5 would be targeted first to legacy users. There are over 5 million original users out that there that may be willing to buy the software because of the branding and nostalgia. With decent bundling and good word of mouth, there is a secondary audience of curiosity seekers and first time hobbyists.
Will this lead to global domination? Hardly. Would it be a viable business? Probably.
Plus, you will just piss off the few people left who want their Amiga OS being a genuine Amiga OS
Oh well. If they have the resources to pump out proprietary hardware and software in a cost-effective manner more power to them. It's not going to happen.
In a year or two AROS will be functional enough to please what's left of the Amiga elves
Perhaps. If so, this crowd will satisfy their own needs.
-
@downix
To produce it today, that same A500 w/ monitor would run you, brand new around $100... the market for integrated components is exploding, and growing, faster than the desktop PC market.
All well and good, but the point here is that you only have so many resources at your disposal and designing, manufacturing and supporting hardware is expensive, high risk and low margin.
Can you have it both ways? Yes, select partners and let them battle it out. If they can build a better mouse trap you expand your user base. If it tanks, you pick another dance partner.
Even better, certify existing technologies that support your solution and let people decide which is better, faster or cheaper.
And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.
If the software is platform-independent or multi-platform you will have options based on what the market makes available. It's not the responsibility of the operating system to promote competition and diversity -- there will always be some level of dependency.
-
ARM's are produced by a wide variety of vendors. Infact, ARM itself produces no processors, it just sells the design to other vendors. You want an ARM motherboard, you have a wide variety of options, including making your own.
SPARC's are produced by 9 vendors, but like ARM, SPARC Intetnational does not produce any CPU's itself, and only licenses the technology to other vendors, who produce their own CPU's. While Sun is the most visible vendor, the largest producer of SPARCs is actually Fujitsu followed by the European Space Agency. Unlike ARM, SPARC is available as an open-sourced design as well, with both Geisler and Sun releasing their CPU's under open-source licenses.
You confuse vendors with suppliers. One chip available from multiple suppliers is still one chip. I can't go out and get a Motorola Athlon, can I? But I can take ARM or SPARC to Freescale and have them fabricate one to my specifications. (infact, Freescale produces a large variety of SPARC's and ARM's under contract)
Intel/AMD domination, no thank you.
Downix, you just proved my entire point about alternative hardware OEMs. Today, hardware is just a commodity, whatever suits your needs.
Dammy
-
dammy wrote:
Downix, you just proved my entire point about alternative hardware OEMs. Today, hardware is just a commodity, whatever suits your needs.
Dammy
I see your point, but can you see mine, that we should keep our options open beyond just AMD/Intel?
-
I see your point, but can you see mine, that we should keep our options open beyond just AMD/Intel?
Sure, that's why I supported AROS being ported to PPC and ARM as well as AMD64. More arch's that are supported, the better it is for AROS.
Dammy
-
___________________________________________________________
downix wrote:
Actually, you'd be wrong here. While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance. Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs. Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.
__________________________________________________________
I guess from your perspective I was both wrong and right..:-)
While we agree on graphics, I think that the reason why there has not been much improvement in the audio area, and this is my opinion, is because audio has peaked / been commodotized as a technology. It is very good by default, and the majority of manipulation which audio requires for "effects" are easily executed in software with todays processors.
In PC category I call "The Balanced Platform," technology has been significantly stagnant; barring high end equipment. Interestingly enough, the PA Semi chip goes a long way into introducing a "Balanced Architeture" to the PC market. It takes into account many of the symbiotic elements of a PC, and tailors a solution based on lower latency than any other product in the consumer market.
This is largely the reason why I feel that the platform of choice for the future is somewhat "Amigest" in pedigree.
-
jarroyo wrote:
___________________________________________________________
downix wrote:
Actually, you'd be wrong here. While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance. Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs. Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.
__________________________________________________________
I guess from your perspective I was both wrong and right..:-)
While we agree on graphics, I think that the reason why there has not been much improvement in the audio area, and this is my opinion, is because audio has peaked / been commodotized as a technology. It is very good by default, and the majority of manipulation which audio requires for "effects" are easily executed in software with todays processors.
In PC category I call "The Balanced Platform," technology has been significantly stagnant; barring high end equipment. Interestingly enough, the PA Semi chip goes a long way into introducing a "Balanced Architeture" to the PC market. It takes into account many of the symbiotic elements of a PC, and tailors a solution based on lower latency than any other product in the consumer market.
This is largely the reason why I feel that the platform of choice for the future is somewhat "Amigest" in pedigree.
I am a little confused here. The x86 PC architecture is one of the worst for latency out there. Also, utilizing the CPU for sound and video decoding (which graphics chips do not offer mind you) can eat up a huge fraction of the available processor time. There is an area where a customized solution can be viable and profitable on the desktop, and here it is I feel.
-
__________________________________________________________
downix wrote:
I am a little confused here. The x86 PC architecture is one of the worst for latency out there. Also, utilizing the CPU for sound and video decoding (which graphics chips do not offer mind you) can eat up a huge fraction of the available processor time. There is an area where a customized solution can be viable and profitable on the desktop, and here it is I feel.
________________________________________________________
I was speaking about the PA Semi architecture being a low latancy platform, much more efficient / balanced than the X86 architecture. This chip is acually being targetted for use in places like enteprise routers, a low latency high throughput application.
It is true what you say about CPU's being bogged down by effects processing in software, but consider these factors:
1. CPU's are standardizing on a dual core design. the power will be there to spare.
2. The 128 bit matrix math units built into the chips are made to handle these kinds of transformations.
3. Its cheaper to do it in software, and with the video, and soon to be physics off loaded from the CPU; your processor will be sitting idler than in times past; at least for games.
Just my thoughts......
3.
-
I think everyone is rite in saying it needs to be different or offer something linux and windows cant. I think the fact OS4 is so small and fast it has something the others dont. Speed in computing today is something that really aggrivates me, even with my quad core CPU my com still performs every day tasks at the same pace as a win98 P3. Number crunching gets better each year but I dont have to tell you innovation in desktop computing is almost non existant. Windows dominance cant last forever. its just not very good and their bubble will burst one day.
On top of browsers and office software, I think any OS needs lots of wizards to sell to everyday people, the mass's.
joe shmo cant install software under linux let alone all the other things wizards help com dummies for. I cant beleive linux still doesnt have real wizards. a package manager is not a wizard haha its obvious to get an OS to computer dummies you have to make it real easy.
so im calling for user friendly-ness...the very thing linux needs to compete with windows...i think tech heads forget that the vast majority of computer owners will say "DELL" when u ask for their brand of modem...(i did tech support for awhile...) even with a wizard for a task they find it difficult, but at least its achievable...
I really really think apple is a piss weak competitor and if someone had the vision, the smarts and the capital to make it happen, they could knock apple over and take 2nd place relatively easy...their strong hold in "audio" is gone and it didnt take very long...I am a pro musician and there was a time when if you didnt have an Mac in your studio you were a bad producer...things change and markets are not as unbreakable as some narrow minded people would have you beleive...you come up with the right product WITH the right buisness plan and youll break the big boys monopoly...
unfortunately for us amiga inc hasnt come up with either and man, ive been waiting a long time....what makes bill the maggot mcewen think he can revive amiga is beyond me...give it up you loser...give it to a rattigan...
-
I predict, OS5 will:
1. Arrive late.
2. Everybody will complain.
3. ...
There is really no need to add a third prediction.
my $0.02
-
OS5 is a port of Amithlon/Umilator or AROS. :p
-
jarroyo wrote:
I was speaking about the PA Semi architecture being a low latancy platform, much more efficient / balanced than the X86 architecture. This chip is acually being targetted for use in places like enteprise routers, a low latency high throughput application.
PA Semi is still PowerPC, correct? While PPC is better than x86, it is still not even in the top 5 for latency
It is true what you say about CPU's being bogged down by effects processing in software, but consider these factors:
1. CPU's are standardizing on a dual core design. the power will be there to spare.
2. The 128 bit matrix math units built into the chips are made to handle these kinds of transformations.
3. Its cheaper to do it in software, and with the video, and soon to be physics off loaded from the CPU; your processor will be sitting idler than in times past; at least for games.
Just my thoughts......
3.
1) And vendors are eager to put more onto the CPU, offsetting the gains.
2) Again, vendors are eager to put more onto these units, resulting in a net loss.
3) In software, sure, but software != CPU-bound. GPU's do their work in software, but off of the CPU, for example. You can retain the softwatre flexibility without bogging down the CPU, especially now with the advent of the new Torrenza format for co-processing off of the main CPU bus, giving you the best of both worlds.
-
PA-RISC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PA-RISC_family) != PowerPC
-
Zac67 wrote:
PA-RISC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PA-RISC_family) != PowerPC
Who mentioned PA RISC? PA Semi is a new fabless PowerPC vendor.
-
AmiKit wrote:
OS5 is never going to happen.
What do you mean, its already here, its called kxlight.
Pity its not built buy Amiga (wel at least this way they cant screw it up) :-D
-
billt wrote:
Wasn't there a plan based on QNX back in the GateMiga days?
Yes and No. They announced it, though the actual plan was to use BeOS until 3 days before the show when the worlds dumbest CEO (Jean-Louis Gassée) decided to not partner with Gateway. The virtual same story happened during the proposed Apple buyout of Be. So QNX was a quick replacement, its a nice OS, I've used it a couple of embedded systems over the years. After that the idea changed to a Linux kernal instead and then we had most of the Gateway gang being fired.
-Tig
-
eniac wrote:
I think everyone is rite in saying it needs to be different or offer something linux and windows cant....
I really really think apple is a piss weak competitor and if someone had the vision, the smarts and the capital to make it happen, they could knock apple over and take 2nd place relatively easy......
At first read I was going to fire off some real opposition to eniac's message above, but after thinking about it longer, I can't work up any concrete facts or spur my conviction to oppose the basics of what he is trying to say.
I think people in general are starting to regret that Microsoft holds such a monopoly and they are also starting to realize that it has stifled innovation and creativity. That may contribute in small part to the Mac's growing market share and popularity and increased interest in Linux and other alternatives. I happen to like the Mac and think it will be even better when Leopard is released in a few days, but I will admit that there is still a huge amount of room for improvement. Someday the mighty will fall and someone else with a truly innovative idea will be able to inspire the masses to change and move away from what Windows users have been suffering with for so many years.
It may still take a few years before a change comes, but I agree it is inevitable. I can only dream that the name associated with the change when it ultimately comes will begin and end with the letter "A". Dreams are free and everyone should follow their own. A new Amiga will have to provide a change so huge, a shift in the paradigm, on the order of several magnitudes beyond what is typical in the PC world now, even more so than the original Amiga did in comparison to the first PCs, for it to succeed.
END RANT
-
An Amiga skin still isn't an Amiga :-) AROS + integrated EUAE is the future.
-
gdanko wrote:
An Amiga skin still isn't an Amiga :-) AROS + integrated EUAE is the future.
We could argue all day and night for months about what is and is not an Amiga, or the what the next Amiga should be. For me, AROS and EUAE is not it. If it is for you, be happy and contribute to that direction. When it is perfected to the point that the integrated EUAE is completely invisible to the user and it has at least 50% of the 3rd party programmers that the original Amiga had in 1987, or 1988, then I will take another look at AROS. I am hoping for something 100 times better, something that will blow me away like the original A1000 did when I first saw it.
-
My predictions, it will be based on OS-9000 and programmed by a VMS guru in COBOL, who rather likes the way MP/M 68K does things. In response to alpha testing complaints, GEM API support will be added. Beta testers with RTC hardware find it has the millenium bug, development having presumably occurred on pre-2000 Amiga hardware with the batteries cut off due to leakage. They also complain that enabling USB seems to make the clock the default cursor. Backward compatibility is thoughtfully provided by an x86 binary of UAE on the install disk.