Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: ikir on July 17, 2003, 12:11:54 PM
-
Any news on OS4 release date? I know that Ben Hermans speak about OS4 in the AmigaOS4 On Tour.... any news?
Someone know the "To Do List"?
-
No.
To do list:
- Finish off coding OS4 and test!
-
mmmmmmm :-(
i listen some bad non official news..... Please someone tell me that OS4 isn't far away
-
@ikir
I sincerely wish we could tell you when AmigaOS4 would be released. Unfortunately the only person who can even guess that would be Ben Hermans, and he's not saying (right Ben?).
My most optimistic guess would be that we will see OS4 for the accellerated Classic Amiga around late September, maybe October, maybe even November timeframe, and OS4 for the AmigaOne some time about 3 to 6 months after that.
Please keep in mind that's simply my guess however. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
-
Thanks Wayne, i only wanted to know a prevision like yours.
I found an interviw on mp3 with Ben Hermens, but i don't understand it. I think it doesn't contains any great news right?
ok thanks :)
-
The release for OS4 - CSPPC has been hinted towards the end of summer (again :-) and the A1 version some time after that... hmmm... unless... unforseen... christmas ?
-
If you look at the presentation from the French demonstration, then you can see what's done. The feature list is complete, apart from some Exec stuff (nonessensial), a PPC native media player, native browser, 3D API and some localisation. The rest is either in 68k or PPC. It's not too far off :-)
-
alx wrote:
If you look at the presentation from the French demonstration, then you can see what's done. The feature list is complete, apart from some Exec stuff (nonessensial), a PPC native media player, native browser, 3D API and some localisation. The rest is either in 68k or PPC. It's not too far off :-)
plus the porting of the SNAP drivers...
yeah it is taking awhile but hang in there :-) .
-
@Step
"end of summer" is very vague. Giving Ben the benefit of doubt, I said September (since they're still beta testing) which is only two months.
Despite his idea that porting it to the AmigaOne will be simple, I simply cannot agree with Ben's notion that AmigaOS for the A1 will be 100% complete and shipped less than 3 months after the accellerated Classic version.
There's all sorts of room for "playing with words" there, but I'm hoping that someone will finally be able to be honest about when it will be ready and shipped.
-
Cyberstorm version @ the end of summer? It would be nice. I plan to buy my A1 in september-october.
If the Blizzard PPC version will be released, i think it will be the last, with the Shark version (if it is Blizzard compatible).
-
plus the porting of the SNAP drivers...
AFAIK they will only be on the A1 version. Does anyone know how hard it would be to integrate them?
-
AFAIK they will only be on the A1 version. Does anyone know how hard it would be to integrate them?
IIRC it was said they would not be in OS4 first release but maybe OS4.1.
-
On the bright side, I guess it gives me more time to save some money.
-
@alx
Complete ???
Why did they show mostly 68k on static emu, instead
of PPC-native plus JIT ?
And anybody can only guess how long that will take to
finish (including those who are doing it ;-) ).
I'm also quite sure that there was WOS-support on that
list sometime ago, but somehow the list has seemed to
get a bit shorter ....
I think Wayne is somewhere between realistic and
"a bit" optimistic here.
-
@Kronos
When I said "Complete", I was quoting from the slides:
Missing functions of OS4 to date compared to the "OS4 feature list 1.0"
Some non-essential functions of ExecSG (further detailed with § « ExecSG » )
Modern native PPC media player (L. Torok is working on MooVid OS4)
Native browser
New API 3D (An OpenGL orientated NOVA specification is being worked at, possibility of a Warp3D wrapper is being studied)
Localization of all parts of the system (ATO; approx. 50% complete)
All of the other announced functions are complete, and in the course of being betatested on 68k or PPC
That, of course, does not mean that the entire OS is complete, and I'd probably agree with the more optimistic end of Wayne's estimation.
-
@ Kronos
Maybe you're right, maybe not. I'm quite sure that OS4 for Cyberstorm will be out at least bofore november.
What i want is a official report form Hyperion or Amiga Inc to know if the things are going right or not.
-
You wont get an official answer on this i think .. They always said that it will be released when its ready ..
Maybe Amiwest will bring some news ...
-
>You wont get an official answer on this i think
The dates given at the OnTour event were official ones IMHO.
-
@redrumloa:
AFAIK they will only be on the A1 version. Does anyone know how hard it would be to integrate them?
IIRC it was said they would not be in OS4 first release but maybe OS4.1.
No, Ben Hermans said they will be included with OS4.0, but only the A1-Version (due to the fact that SNAP drivers require the gfx card to be initialised properly - there's no BIOS initialising gfx cards on a classic Amiga).
@Kronos:
I'm also quite sure that there was WOS-support on that list sometime ago, but somehow the list has seemed to get a bit shorter ....
Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS supported will be part of OS4 - and I know that you read these statements.
@ikir:
What i want is a official report form Hyperion or Amiga Inc to know if the things are going right or not.
You won't get that.
-
zacman wrote:
>You wont get an official answer on this i think
The dates given at the OnTour event were official ones IMHO.
Sure? Can you post this dates please?
-
cgutjahr wrote:
Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS supported will be part of OS4 - and I know that you read these statements.
..... and it also clear that OS4 had NO WOS-support
on the tour, and I know you where there (not really,
just trying to put a pun in).
And now go back to what I was replying to .....
-
on the tour i asked specifically about wos ,
and it will be in there for sure, but wasnt at the time the tour was (3 weeks ago) , it will be a type of "starter" function and not direct one, but that means nothing for normal usage anyway.
the date that was set (IKIR) was END Of summer/early quarter 4 (start of september maybe)
amiwest will tell you more about this as hyperion will be there no matter how much fud u guys want to read or supply, and thats a FACT!.
cheers
-
>Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS
>supported will be part of OS4
Sure he said this from the beginning.
That's why you should even more wonder why it
hasn't been implemented yet.
-
Thx lempkee :-)
-
Schtop, Schtop!!! You can't rush these things, they take time.
Where's this guys moustache? Why has she still got her clothes on?
It's ready when it's ready :lol:
-
Wos or not Wos ?
Please don't (and never) forget that the OS4 people are trying to make all of you happy.
I mean that they are evaluating if a WarpOS support is possible and at what cost.
What I mean is:
- WarpOS is not strictly needed. It means that OS4 will live without it. Why ? Because coders will be able to do an OS4 native program easily. So why do you want those old Wos programs whereas you can have better ?
- Why should they add code to the OS to support an old format we will all forget in a few months ? (for the same reason above) We all don't want "dirty" patches in the OS, don't we ?
- WarpOS binary format is tricky. Both 68k and Wos code are "merged". It is not easy to distinguish what is what for Dos.
- Adding support for Wos will take time. And this time can be used for more important things.
Now, what can be done ?
Even if Wos can't be loaded directly (i.e. recognized) when you run it, a limited support could be added through a loader. Do you remember the "runelf" program ? The same should be possible with Wos.
As a conclusion, we don't need Wos support but if it can be done, it will be done !!!
My personal thought is that I prefer spending time on working on something usefull than on things from the past !
Thanks.
-
Elwood wrote:
Wos or not Wos ?
What I mean is:
- WarpOS is not strictly needed. It means that OS4 will live without it. Why ? Because coders will be able to do an OS4 native program easily. So why do you want those old Wos programs whereas you can have better ?
With that reasoning 68K emulation is not strictly needed as well.
- Why should they add code to the OS to support an old format we will all forget in a few months ? (for the same reason above) We all don't want "dirty" patches in the OS, don't we ?
I beg to differ. When WarpOS support was announced and represented in the feature list, no one claimed "it's a dirty patch" and "why should we support an old format". It has only recently morphed into an unnecessary format, when support in OS4 was questioned.
- WarpOS binary format is tricky. Both 68k and Wos code are "merged". It is not easy to distinguish what is what for Dos.
If there were not a working implementation of WarpOS emulation in another OS solution, I'd readily believe these claims...
- Adding support for Wos will take time. And this time can be used for more important things.
That's for sure. But I don't understand the need to make excuses, and claim that WarpOS support is unnecessary and a dirty hack. (The 68K emulator is way dirtier)
As a conclusion, we don't need Wos support but if it can be done, it will be done !!!
Mumblemumble
My personal thought is that I prefer spending time on working on something usefull than on things from the past !
Why do you stick to AmigaOS then...?
Sorry for the rant...
-
If it was not for the few crappy cybervision owners we could have had it sooner why support dyeing hardware over the expensive modern sloution . :-o :-?
-
With all due repect, Don't you think WOS is a bit of a pointless thing to support.
It was a nasty hack to allow PPC code to execute on a 68K based platform.
I know there is the argument of "more software", but any WOS software worth having would be better supported by being nativly ported to AmigaOS. (often AmigaOS versions existed anyway, and these could be ported to OS4)
-
WarpOS binary format is tricky.
Just bad design.
Do you remember the "runelf" program ? The same should be possible with Wos.
Adding WOS support is not that simple really.
My personal thought is that I prefer spending time on working on something usefull than on things from the past !
But OS4 got PUP emulation, right? If so, better ditch WOS apps now and go for PUP versions.
-
>With all due repect, Don't you think WOS is a bit of a pointless thing to support.
>It was a nasty hack to allow PPC code to execute on a 68K based platform.
>
>I know there is the argument of "more software", but any WOS software worth having would be better supported by being
>nativly ported to AmigaOS. (often AmigaOS versions existed anyway, and these could be ported to OS4)
Well, some software just ain't going to be ported to OS4 native. Are the Wipeout guys still around to give us an OS4-native version of this game? Some might point to FusionPPC as something not likely to get ported, but in the state I bought it at I'd rather see a better quality product in this case, but I'm not sure the company that bought FusionPPC is still around anyway. And I;m sure there are a couple other examples of things people still want to use that simply will not be able to be ported to OS4-native.
Is the number of these programs large? No. But if it can be done, it would be nice. Especialy with Hyperion's own games it would be convenient if the curent WarpOS versions would run while they are working on OS4 stuff, rather than we all wait for them to eventually get around to OS4-native updates of their games.
Without this support, we'll basically ONLY have 68K software usable to us at day one. If we have both 68K and WarpOS software usable on day one, that's a better situation for the users in general. Maybe not you in particular, but surely the larger number of happy persons is better than just you alone, from the vendor's point of view...
-
I still think they should have waited with AmigaONE until os4 was ready to run on it. By the time OS4 is ready, the current AmigaONEs will be pretty much outdated.. If they waited, there would probably be better chipsets, faster cpus and such avaliable...
-
@Tomas
Then they'd have been at a severe disadvantage against the Pegasos. Heck, they still are.
-
"end of summer" is very vague. Giving Ben the benefit of doubt, I said September (since they're still beta testing) which is only two months.
__________________________________________ There is a wild card in all this. AI may go under taking OS4 with it. Hopefully this is not the case and Hyperion can complete the OS with them but that is far from certain.
Stew
-
Let's face it.
They need to get it out sooner rather than later BUT, it HAS to be working very solidly, when it is released. So, we must wait.
AmigaOne!
-
Yeah it's comeing along right after the second comeing.
You'll have better luck waiting on Jesus. Maybe he'll bring OS 4 with him.
:-D :-? :-D
-
downix wrote:
@Tomas
Then they'd have been at a severe disadvantage against the Pegasos. Heck, they still are.
Well, let's revisit this statement once OS4 is out... I think you will have a different answer then.
-
I only hope that i can play my version original version of Shogo on Amiga1 or SharkG4. I buy it last christams as a present for myself :-)
-
For me WOS support in OS4 is VERY important!
As I am mostly using my Amiga for scene/demo related things and there are a lot of WOS demos out (around 60?) and most of them will nót get ported to OS4, as the authors will not have an AmigaOne or has left the Amiga scene already.
Most released WOS software will not get an OS4 port. :cry: WOS support is important!
(The small utils might though, unrar, zip etc...)
-
You'll have better luck waiting on Jesus.
Nah, you missed him 2000 years ago.
Maybe he'll bring OS 4 with him.
Again, no.
It was NT he brought with him. ;-)
-
Well, some software just ain't going to be ported to OS4 native. Are the Wipeout guys still around to give us an OS4-native version of this game? Some might point to FusionPPC as something not likely to get ported, but in the state I bought it at I'd rather see a better quality product in this case, but I'm not sure the company that bought FusionPPC is still around anyway.
FusionPPC is a "not that good expample". It is buggy, not to mention that it's extremely hardware dependant, it's unlikely to run on anything else than CyberStormPPC regardless of any WarpOS emulation. AFAIK
-
WOS support in not essential, but IMPORTANT. Not all WOS will have a patch to run under OS4 natively.
-
by cgutjahr on 2003/7/17 10:15:43
Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS supported will be part of OS4 - and I know that you read these statements.
If Ben said there would be, there is. He's plainly stated he does not make empty promises. ;)
Dammy
-
dammy wrote:
He's plainly stated he does not make empty promises. ;)
Dammy
Did he promise that? :lol:
-
Seriously, there's no need to "integrate" SNAP.
You write a driver for SNAP, then you configure SNAP for your card, and off you go. SNAP doesn't get integrated, it just gets called.
-
Ben has said WOS is probably not worth it as a wrapper (due to the mixed binary model not being too nice with the new "ppc code in one part of mem, flagged as exec, and m68k code in non-exec memory" way of using exec + emulator.
What he said will be provided is a WOS-loader that scans the binary and puts ppc code in executable memory and m68k code in non-executable memory (and for all I know it might also patch something) before jumping to the start address. This could possibly work with PUP binaries as well.
-
olegil wrote:
Ben has said WOS is probably not worth it as a wrapper (due to the mixed binary model not being too nice with the new "ppc code in one part of mem, flagged as exec, and m68k code in non-exec memory" way of using exec + emulator.
What he said will be provided is a WOS-loader that scans the binary and puts ppc code in executable memory and m68k code in non-executable memory (and for all I know it might also patch something) before jumping to the start address. This could possibly work with PUP binaries as well.
Um... and what about the WOS and PUP function calls? At the very least you would need a wrapper for those.