Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: amigakidd on June 08, 2008, 02:51:32 PM
-
In my day to day work, we use 90% Macs (in the graphics field) and 10% PCs for administrative things. In the weekend, I use the PC, Wii, and Mac for web surfing games and other fun things.
The Amiga (Well I have an emulator) on the other hand, I use it for playing Amiga Games and testing out Amiga software packages. As a result, playing on an Amiga (whether emulation or real hardware) is more fun and gives that Hobbyist feeling compared to a PC or Mac.
I mean by hobbyist is that there is more tinkering and a close knit community than the spread out markets of PC/Mac. It seems that Linux is a too geeky hobby. But the Amiga and c64 scene, seems very cool compared to linux.
Is Amiga becoming the computer platform for the hobbyist?
It is still very much alive today.
Picture this: If Amiga were in the Mac/PC Commercial
PC = PC Guy in Suit
Mac = Mac Guy Cool.
Amiga = Tattoed Skat3r Guy
-
What an awful picture. How about this:
Amiga = a pretty, intelligent girl tastefully dressed.
-
Tenacious wrote:
What an awful picture. How about this:
Amiga = a pretty, intelligent girl tastefully dressed.
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
-
Amiga = Hippie holding a lava lamp in one hand and a bong in the other
(http://www.wdisneyw.com/forums/images/smilies05/hippie4.gif)(http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/RiverIsMyGoddess/icons/smiley_signwillworkforsex.gif)(http://www.cusd.chico.k12.ca.us/~cbailey/PP/97-98/issue2/smiley1.gif) (http://www.dankspot.com/stoners/images/smilies/weedz/bong_biggrin.gif)
-
@ bloodline
Why are you here? What's the attraction? Why is it worth your time?
I've wondered for months (but I'm not loosing sleep over it, Grin).
-
lol the mac guy definitely wouldn't be cool. He'd be the kind of guy who puts pretentious literature & world music on his coffee table to impress friends.
As for the Amiga an aging lady who you can tell used to be pretty would be appropriate.
-
Tenacious wrote:
@ bloodline
Why are you here?
I like the community.
I still use my Amigas and Amiga emulation.
I am rather knowledgeable on various technical amiga topics, and I like help if I can.
What's the attraction? Why is it worth your time?
I've wondered for months (but I'm not loosing sleep over it, Grin).
I like the AROS project, it's the best way to learn how AmigaOS works, and to get a better understanding of OS design in general.
There are many people here who are knowledgeable on a wide variety of technology subjects.
If I help one person, it has been worth my time.
I don't live in a fantasy world though... :-D
-
Groucho Marx, the Amiga is definitely Groucho Marx.
(http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif)
-
@Tenacious
To insert a little reality check once in a while?
:-?
-
Amiga = way of life!
-
We're all Amiga fans, our reality checks bounced long ago!
[/quote](http://icons.iconator.com/902/ICONATOR_e14d41a6b997194fc947d0f80cdfa965.gif)
DBAlex wrote:
@Tenacious
To insert a little reality check once in a while?
:-?
-
Groucho Marx, the Amiga is definitely Groucho Marx.
(http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif) (http://forums.clanterritory.com/images/smilies/celebs/groucho.gif)
-
Amiga = the crazy guy out on the street corner holding up a sign stating the end of the world is in... "Just two more weeks!"
:crazy:
-
bloodline wrote:
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
Hey!! Skip Diving is an art. The number of gem's I've turned up through diving is amazing.
Prototype to the PSOne.
PSOne Psygnosis PsyQ Devkit.
SuperNintendo Hardware reference manuals (including SFX)
Sega Saturn Devkit.
Abandoned 3DFX based Dreamcast
StarFox II cartridge (and source code ;-))
Atari Jaguar Devkit (Alpine board + CD debug toilet)
Beta CD-Rs of Creature Shock for the Atari Jaguar
Amiga A3000
Atari StarWars upright arcade machine
Atari Badlands arcade machine
Numerous laptops who's only fault is a broken screen.
Any Sun workstation you care to mention
Silicon Graphics Indy 2
-
bloodline wrote:
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
-
bloodline wrote:
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
Could not be put better into words than that :lol:
-
persia wrote:
Amiga = Hippie holding a lava lamp in one hand and a bong in the other
(http://www.wdisneyw.com/forums/images/smilies05/hippie4.gif)(http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/RiverIsMyGoddess/icons/smiley_signwillworkforsex.gif)(http://www.cusd.chico.k12.ca.us/~cbailey/PP/97-98/issue2/smiley1.gif) (http://www.dankspot.com/stoners/images/smilies/weedz/bong_biggrin.gif)
Agreed! (http://www.auto-fan.lt/forum/images/smilies/hippie.gif)(http://www.jetsinsider.net/forums/images/smilies/hippie_dude.gif)
I miss my lava lamp :-/
-
alexh wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
Hey!! Skip Diving is an art. The number of gem's I've turned up through diving is amazing.
Prototype to the PSOne.
PSOne Psygnosis PsyQ Devkit.
SuperNintendo Hardware reference manuals (including SFX)
Sega Saturn Devkit.
Abandoned 3DFX based Dreamcast
StarFox II cartridge (and source code ;-))
Atari Jaguar Devkit (Alpine board + CD debug toilet)
Beta CD-Rs of Creature Shock for the Atari Jaguar
Amiga A3000
Atari StarWars upright arcade machine
Atari Badlands arcade machine
Numerous laptops who's only fault is a broken screen.
Any Sun workstation you care to mention
Silicon Graphics Indy 2
Live or work near a games developer by any chance? :-)
IIRC, Frontier Developments is based near Oxford. You haven't been going through David Braben's bins have you alexh? :lol:
-
Its a fun hobby and I used to do work that Amiga computers where a part of my job. Anyways why are you using my handle on here there can only be one AmigaKid :-D Well good choice anyways. I currently enjoy restoring Amigas and finding new things for them.
-
HenryCase wrote:
work near a games developer by any chance? :-)
I couldn't work much closer ;-) (At the time)
I found most of that stuff in skips outside our office in Colindale North London between 1997 and 1998.
Some was found in a skip outside an office in Wavertree, Liverpool in 1999.
Lets see if you can put 2 & 2 together?
-
@AlexH
RAGE or Psygnosis?
Ah the delicate art of skip diving (dumpster diving for the US folks :-D) haven't found anywhere in a good few years that it'd be worth doing that kind of things now but it netted me a fair few pieces of PC kit and a Sun 3/60 a few years ago!
-
@AmigaKidd
Amiga is the precursor of the Natami (http://www.natami.net/knowledge.php?b=0).
-
>by Tenacious on 2008/6/8 10:32:31
>
>@ bloodline
>
>Why are you here? What's the attraction? Why is it worth your >time?
>
>I've wondered for months (but I'm not loosing sleep over it, >Grin).
He's only speaking from his own limited experience and understanding. I have had the opposite happen to me-- new-in-box amiga products trashed by my family. It would be good if someone did pick it up. You should take gold even from a filthy place. Then again, he never claimed it was a bad thing otherwise it would be hypocritical of him to be supporting amigans if he was against people picking up "good" things from trash. I mean if you are against drinking, you don't go to a bar and help people take drinks.
Main thing is people are looking for happiness rather than have the latest technological machine. I just looked at Frogger for Atari 2600 and it's an addicting game and although the graphics are poor compared to Atari 800, it's playability is different from Atari 800 and I can see people sticking to the Atari 2600 version. We already see the trend of people going retro after being satiated with the latest computer. And the efficiency cannot be denied, it's amazing how they fit all the functionality into about 4KB. I'm sure people with experience programming amigas/ataris can learn all the bloated APIs of the modern era quite easily. They were using Atari 800s in my college in the 1980s (not Atari STs).
-
Picture this: If Amiga were in the Mac/PC Commercial
PC = PC Guy in Suit
Mac = Mac Guy Cool.
Amiga = Tattoed Skat3r Guy
No, even if Apple would admit that other platforms than Mac and PC exist/ ever existed, the Amiga guy would most probably be a corpse lying down with a wheel mark over his belly. :-D
Oh, and PC and Mac guy would be in a car, one of them asking, "did we hit him, did we hit him?". That's about it...
-
@alexh
Atari StarWars upright arcade machine
Awesome, is it working?
I've done my share of skip diving, but now I'm retired. They only things that brings me out of retirement are arcades and Amiga. :-)
Plaz
-
amigaksi wrote:
>by Tenacious on 2008/6/8 10:32:31
>
>@ bloodline
>
>Why are you here? What's the attraction? Why is it worth your >time?
>
>I've wondered for months (but I'm not loosing sleep over it, >Grin).
He's only speaking from his own limited experience and understanding.
Oh get over yourself!
I was describing the state of the Amiga, rather accurately as it happens... Sure nothing wrong with "dumpster diving", but unfortunately that is state of the art with respect to the Amiga...
-
alexh wrote
Lets see if you can put 2 & 2 together?
=4. What do I win.
AJCopland wrote:
@AlexH
RAGE or Psygnosis?
Rage? Don't be silly. I think you'll find Alexander Holland worked for Psygnosis. ;-)
bloodline wrote:
I was describing the state of the Amiga, rather accurately as it happens... Sure nothing wrong with "dumpster diving", but unfortunately that is state of the art with respect to the Amiga...
I agree bloodline. I mean what's the most powerful graphics card you can use with an Amiga? IIRC its the ATI Radeon 9800, which was released, for the PC, back in 2002. That said, I am looking forward to the opportunities the Natami brings.
-
The whole premise is silly, I love my Amiga but no way is it ever going to replace my dual quad core xeon Mac Pro. Amiga isn't and never will be an alternative to PCs and Macs, it's something you have in addition to your PC or Mac, something you can tiinker with, something that doesn't do all the sophisticated tasks for you. It's hopelessly stuck in time, forever in it's adolescence and that's it's charm. It doesn't need to become modern, it's charm in in it's retro qualities.
-
Actually I think that Amiga guy would be down on the ground and the Mac and PC guy would be kicking him for his lunch money. Then once they got the money, he'd rise up behind them and KO their heinies. 8-)
-
persia wrote:
We're all Amiga fans, our reality checks bounced long ago!
:laughing: :laughing:
How long you been holding on to that gem to use at a most appropriate moment??
Speaking of, don't see PC guy running around salvaging those truly awesome 80286/386/486s ms-dos/win95/98/SE systems. They're quite useless.
How different is our 23 year old system to the current stuff anyhow?
We've got 95% feature sets, just not current SW. We were "there" soooooo long ago!
-
Atheist wrote:
Speaking of, don't see PC guy running around salvaging those truly awesome 80286/386/486s ms-dos/win95/98/SE systems. They're quite useless.
That's simply fallacious, there are a huge number of people who collect vintage PC hw/sw. Older x86 systems can be generally as useful as Amigas (linux), in fact, some DOS games were better than their Amiga counterparts (Dune II).
How different is our 23 year old system to the current stuff anyhow?
:lol:
Anyway, I agree with persia... Amiga is fun simply because it _IS_ ridiculously outdated and cantankerous. It's a fun tinker toy... but trying to compare an A500 with RAM expansion and blown caps to modern quad core is LUDICROUS.
-
-D- wrote:
Atheist wrote:
Speaking of, don't see PC guy running around salvaging those truly awesome 80286/386/486s ms-dos/win95/98/SE systems. They're quite useless.
That's simply fallacious, there are a huge number of people who collect vintage PC hw/sw. Older x86 systems can be generally as useful as Amigas (linux), in fact, some DOS games were better than their Amiga counterparts (Dune II).
How different is our 23 year old system to the current stuff anyhow?
:lol:
Anyway, I agree with persia... Amiga is fun simply because it _IS_ ridiculously outdated and cantankerous. It's a fun tinker toy... but trying to compare an A500 with RAM expansion and blown caps to modern quad core is LUDICROUS.
I have an A4000 with 68060 cv64. still rediculous?
-
-D- wrote:
Atheist wrote:
Speaking of, don't see PC guy running around salvaging those truly awesome 80286/386/486s ms-dos/win95/98/SE systems. They're quite useless.
That's simply fallacious, there are a huge number of people who collect vintage PC hw/sw. Older x86 systems can be generally as useful as Amigas (linux), in fact, some DOS games were better than their Amiga counterparts (Dune II).
How different is our 23 year old system to the current stuff anyhow?
:lol:
Anyway, I agree with persia... Amiga is fun simply because it _IS_ ridiculously outdated and cantankerous. It's a fun tinker toy... but trying to compare an A500 with RAM expansion and blown caps to modern quad core is LUDICROUS.
I have an A4000 with 68060 cv64. still ridiculous?
-
Being a staunch Amiga advocate since forever now, even I LMAOd at Bloodline's comment.
He who cannot laugh at himself, I suppose...
-
stefcep2 wrote:
-D- wrote:
Atheist wrote:
Speaking of, don't see PC guy running around salvaging those truly awesome 80286/386/486s ms-dos/win95/98/SE systems. They're quite useless.
That's simply fallacious, there are a huge number of people who collect vintage PC hw/sw. Older x86 systems can be generally as useful as Amigas (linux), in fact, some DOS games were better than their Amiga counterparts (Dune II).
How different is our 23 year old system to the current stuff anyhow?
:lol:
Anyway, I agree with persia... Amiga is fun simply because it _IS_ ridiculously outdated and cantankerous. It's a fun tinker toy... but trying to compare an A500 with RAM expansion and blown caps to modern quad core is LUDICROUS.
I have an A4000 with 68060 cv64. still ridiculous?
Actually - yeah.
-
As for the Amiga an aging lady who you can tell used to be pretty would be appropriate.
You mean a MILF? :)
-
HenryCase wrote:
I think you'll find Alexander Holland worked for Psygnosis. ;-)
Actually... I only visited there. One of my former colleages from Colindale, North London (no one worked that out yet?) said there was a room full of Amiga's that were being thrown away. This was shortly before Psygnosis changed it's names to SCE Studios Liverpool.
When I got there... the Amiga's turned out to be Commodore x86 PC's (worthless). But I was able to find a PSOne Psyq devkit with all the cables, discs and manuals so the visit wasnt a total loss. I used it once (as a devkit) and then put in a box and stored under the bed for the last 9 years!
-
>Oh get over yourself!
The only thing about myself in that reply was that I am one of the exceptions to your statement:
"Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago..."
I am sure there are many others who are in my boat-- they got their amigas as new or via other channels like Ebay or friends so your remark:
>I was describing the state of the Amiga, rather accurately as it happens...
is wrong.
>Sure nothing wrong with "dumpster diving",
We agree on that point. To add more details to this, you should rethink that what "industry discards" does not necessarily mean it's bad or obsolete. They may have other reasons for discarding it. They never used the standard 9-pin digital joystick ports in IBM or Apples but that does not mean it's refuse; same for many other things.
>but unfortunately that is state of the art with respect to the Amiga...
That's not true-- just your opinion.
-
[/quote]
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...[/quote]
You called?
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Oh get over yourself!
The only thing about myself in that reply was that I am one of the exceptions to your statement:
Did you even read the posts before mine?
"Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago..."
I am sure there are many others who are in my boat-- they got their amigas as new or via other channels like Ebay or friends so your remark:
Yeah, all my Amigas have come via that route too...
>I was describing the state of the Amiga, rather accurately as it happens...
is wrong.
It's not wrong... The Amiga is Homeless, no parent company to look after it, it's got no job and can't be found in shops, and smelly as it's had nothing new in years.
The number of weird threads that want some old PPC chip, or desparatly clamouring after various old technologies... is perfectly sums up by "Looking in bins...etc".
>Sure nothing wrong with "dumpster diving",
We agree on that point. To add more details to this, you should rethink that what "industry discards" does not necessarily mean it's bad or obsolete.
Yeah, it does. It means both. Industry will cling on to technology long after it has reached the end of its design life if it is either good or useful.
Once it has been discarded, it's nothing more than a curiosity.
They may have other reasons for discarding it. They never used the standard 9-pin digital joystick ports in IBM or Apples but that does not mean it's refuse; same for many other things.
What advantage does a custom DE9/DB9 have over something like USB?
The DE9/DB9 is:
Bulky;
Subject to ESD/EMI noise;
Can't be hot swapped;
Prone to pin breakage;
Unable to carry hi-speed data;
Expensive (compared to USB);
Require complex attachement to motherboards, 9pins vs 4pins(for USB);
Too big for use on mobile devices... really I could go on...
Do you still want your DE9/DB9 connector?
>but unfortunately that is state of the art with respect to the Amiga...
That's not true-- just your opinion.
No, I would have stated that it was my opinion if it was my opinion.
I can't think of anything about the Amiga that isn't obsolete, but that is just my opinion, I've not done formal study :-)
-
amigakidd wrote:
PC = PC Guy in Suit
Mac = Mac Guy Cool.
Amiga = Tattoed Skat3r Guy
Actually Amiga-CHAN mascot is not tatooed, and she looks sure a pretty cute anime girl... ;-) :roll:
(http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/albums/userpics/10383/normal_miggy.jpg)
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=random&cat=10383&pos=-6807
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pid=6807&fullsize=1
-
Raffaele wrote:
amigakidd wrote:
PC = PC Guy in Suit
Mac = Mac Guy Cool.
Amiga = Tattoed Skat3r Guy
Actually Amiga-CHAN mascot is not tatooed, and she looks sure a pretty cute anime girl... ;-) :roll:
(http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/albums/userpics/10383/normal_miggy.jpg)
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=random&cat=10383&pos=-6807
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pid=6807&fullsize=1
Thank god she's not furry.
-
How can you tell with that drawing?
koaftder wrote:
Raffaele wrote:
amigakidd wrote:
PC = PC Guy in Suit
Mac = Mac Guy Cool.
Amiga = Tattoed Skat3r Guy
Actually Amiga-CHAN mascot is not tatooed, and she looks sure a pretty cute anime girl... ;-) :roll:
(http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/albums/userpics/10383/normal_miggy.jpg)
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=random&cat=10383&pos=-6807
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pid=6807&fullsize=1
Thank god she's not furry.
-
@ persia
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
But I know what koaftder means
-
koaftder wrote:
Thank god she's not furry.
:lol: so damned true :-D
-
As far as I'm concerned - place in the modern computing world. Doesn't really have one.
This is not a bad thing - Discs of Tron doesn't really have a place in the modern gaming world, but I still think it's one of the coolest arcade games of all time, so much so that my 'winter project' is building a full sized replica environmental cabinet to play it.
No place in the modern aviation world for the Sopwith Camel or the SE5a, but they're still my favorite planes of all time - and doesn't stop me enjoying my 'summer project' of building scale versions of them to fly around.
The Amiga doesn't fit into my modern world of computing at all - but it's not a bad thing. When I've had my fill of the modern world and it's modern computers in my modern job I like booting it up, tinker with it, play some old school games, write a few pages of code, and think of happier - less stressful times.
-
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
[/quote]
Ummm...
Amiga = Old man with old sunglasses driving a 57 Chevy with fluffy dice.
Old man, old stuff, old performance, but:
- He thinks he is cool
- It still looks cool
- He doesn´t give a cr** about what other people thinks about it
- The car will still be running nice in the next 20 years
- It will still be a classic in 20 years (who would care for a Corolla ?)
- Lots of people would say "I wish I had one of these..."
:-D :-D :-D
-
(http://bp2.blogger.com/_nuVaIX9i4sU/SAQqGya9jyI/AAAAAAAABuY/eDuh4j1mfvo/s200/magoo.gif)
-
bloodline wrote:
Expensive (compared to USB);
Hmmm, dont think so... wires vs USB device controller + embedded CPU + flash/ROM + software?? I think USB is more expensive (in the joystick). But everything else you mentioned more than makes up for the expense.
bloodline wrote:
I can't think of anything about the Amiga that isn't obsolete
Keyboard? Hasn't changed much in 30 years.
-
alexh wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Expensive (compared to USB);
Hmmm, dont think so... wires vs USB device controller + embedded CPU + flash/ROM + software?? I think USB is more expensive (in the joystick). But everything else you mentioned more than makes up for the expense.
I was thinking more from a physical connector POV... since the USB support architecture could easily be implemented via any Serial interface...
bloodline wrote:
I can't think of anything about the Amiga that isn't obsolete
Keyboard? Hasn't changed much in 30 years.
Hmmm, true! Also the mouse... though it's not optical so yes, it's also obsolete :-)
-
bloodline wrote:
bloodline wrote:
I can't think of anything about the Amiga that isn't obsolete
Keyboard? Hasn't changed much in 30 years.
Hmmm, true! Also the mouse... though it's not optical so yes, it's also obsolete :-)
WTF?
Mouse it is accessory. You can buy cheap optical and/or laser mouses and it works flawlessly even on Amiga...
(Mouse adapter needed on required motherboards)
-
bloodline wrote:
though it's not optical so yes, it's also obsolete :-)
The perfect example. Optical mice, first invented in the early 80's became obsolete for many years many years. You'd be amazed what can make a comeback.
-
alexh wrote:
bloodline wrote:
though it's not optical so yes, it's also obsolete :-)
The perfect example. Optical mice, first invented in the early 80's became obsolete for many years many years. You'd be amazed what can make a comeback.
Yeah, but they were a totally different technology! The 80's optical mouse needed special grid mouse mats etc... that technology is obsolete :-)
-
bloodline wrote:
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
How would you describe AROS then?
-
uncharted wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
How would you describe AROS then?
His younger brother, with a low paid job... a wife and two kids, living on a council estate... struggling to make ends meet, and surviving on benefits :-D
-
>Did you even read the posts before mine?
Yes, but looks like you missed a lot of posts where this topic of uniqueness of amiga was discussed elsewhere.
>It's not wrong... The Amiga is Homeless, no parent company to look after it, it's got no job and can't be found in shops, and smelly as it's had nothing new in years.
If you want to define it that way. But it has technology that is unique.
>The number of weird threads that want some old PPC chip, or desparatly clamouring after various old technologies... is perfectly sums up by "Looking in bins...etc".
That's not looking in the bins. If you can get away with a simpler design for the purpose at hand, there's no need to get a 4Ghz processor.
>> We agree on that point. To add more details to this, you should rethink that what "industry discards" does not necessarily mean it's bad or obsolete.
>Yeah, it does. It means both. Industry will cling on to technology long after it has reached the end of its design life if it is either good or useful.
You are not in touch with reality here. Industry makes it's decisions mainly on sales and marketing and whether it fits the target machine. In the Atari ST, they left out the blitter chip, RF modulator, stereo PCM sound, etc. until later on in their STE series.
>What advantage does a custom DE9/DB9 have over something like USB?
You are comparing a serial device with a parallel one, since the comparable would be a game port or parallel port, but let's take it up for the sake of argument:
>The DE9/DB9 is:
>Bulky;
If you need parallel lines of communication, it's not that bulky. USB requires examining a bitstream whereas a joystick port, you can read with one instruction.
>Subject to ESD/EMI noise;
I have done full throttle on the Atari joystick port without any noise. In fact, I was able to read the data on some machines even without the ground pin attached. If you target a faster machine, you can also update the circuit for the joystick port yet keep it pin-compatible like they did with PCI version of parallel ports.
>Can't be hot swapped;
MPDOS allows hot-swapping of joystick ports on Atari/Amiga. It's a software issue.
>Prone to pin breakage;
That's a lame excuse as if they stopped using pins. I have many usb cables that when bent around the connector or come under a chair lose their connectivity.
>Unable to carry hi-speed data;
I already explained that above.
>Expensive (compared to USB);
Serial port connectors are the same as DB9 connectors and cost next to nothing.
>Require complex attachement to motherboards, 9pins vs 4pins(for USB);
You don't get it. You can simulate multiple serial devices with one joystick port not the other way around without slowing down the interface.
>Too big for use on mobile devices... really I could go on...
>Do you still want your DE9/DB9 connector?
Ever heard of ISA parallel port being updated to PCI?
>No, I would have stated that it was my opinion if it was my opinion.
Since what you stated is not fact, it must be your opinion.
>I can't think of anything about the Amiga that isn't obsolete, but that is just my opinion, I've not done formal study
That's the problem, you have to know both machines before you compare them else you are just expressing your opinion. Timers was already discussed, overscan mode, simpler real-time analysis, etc. etc. I can also go on.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Did you even read the posts before mine?
Yes, but looks like you missed a lot of posts where this topic of uniqueness of amiga was discussed elsewhere.
???
>It's not wrong... The Amiga is Homeless, no parent company to look after it, it's got no job and can't be found in shops, and smelly as it's had nothing new in years.
If you want to define it that way. But it has technology that is unique.
Um... The Amiga is a unique combination of technologies that directly address the computing requirements of the 80's... computing requirements are very different now.
For me the most unique part of the system is the OS... totally unlike any other OS in use now... fundamentally flawed for modern computing needs, but but beautifully elegant design none the less.
>The number of weird threads that want some old PPC chip, or desparatly clamouring after various old technologies... is perfectly sums up by "Looking in bins...etc".
That's not looking in the bins. If you can get away with a simpler design for the purpose at hand, there's no need to get a 4Ghz processor.
Sure, my main machine is a 2.33Ghz Dual Core... that just about meets my current needs... though Logic 8 is demanding more CPU power :-(
>> We agree on that point. To add more details to this, you should rethink that what "industry discards" does not necessarily mean it's bad or obsolete.
>Yeah, it does. It means both. Industry will cling on to technology long after it has reached the end of its design life if it is either good or useful.
You are not in touch with reality here.
Are you sure of that? I suspect most people here would disagree...
Industry makes it's decisions mainly on sales and marketing and whether it fits the target machine. In the Atari ST, they left out the blitter chip, RF modulator, stereo PCM sound, etc. until later on in their STE series.
??? Is this an example of the Chewbacca Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense)
The Industry is everyone, not some old dead company 25 years ago... Look at technologies that have clung on despite being superseded... M$ have built their fortune upon it.
>What advantage does a custom DE9/DB9 have over something like USB?
You are comparing a serial device with a parallel one, since the comparable would be a game port or parallel port, but let's take it up for the sake of argument:
The physical operation of the device is irrelevant... The function is what is important. There is no functional difference between parallel and serial connections, the only difference is their operation.
>The DE9/DB9 is:
>Bulky;
If you need parallel lines of communication, it's not that bulky. USB requires examining a bitstream whereas a joystick port, you can read with one instruction.
No one needs parallel links anymore, LVDS has pushed serial links far faster than an parallel could ever operate. It's now easier and cheaper to multiplex on a serial line than deal with skew, noise and capacitance on a parallel line.
No modern interface uses parallel anymore, everything is serial.
>Subject to ESD/EMI noise;
I have done full throttle on the Atari joystick port without any noise. In fact, I was able to read the data on some machines even without the ground pin attached. If you target a faster machine, you can also update the circuit for the joystick port yet keep it pin-compatible like they did with PCI version of parallel ports.
??? I can't even parse this...
>Can't be hot swapped;
MPDOS allows hot-swapping of joystick ports on Atari/Amiga. It's a software issue.
No, hot-swapping requires that the ground lines connect before any other line... USB (for example) has this defined as part of it's standard. If any other line connects first as can happen with DE9/DB9... the potential difference could fry the support IC.
>Prone to pin breakage;
That's a lame excuse as if they stopped using pins. I have many usb cables that when bent around the connector or come under a chair lose their connectivity.
I've bent pins on DB connectors due to repeated insertions... USB (for example) was design for many many many more insertions/disconnections than any DB connector...
>Unable to carry hi-speed data;
I already explained that above.
You explained nothing... the DB connectors are not designed for hi-speed links, full stop!
>Expensive (compared to USB);
Serial port connectors are the same as DB9 connectors and cost next to nothing.
Regardless, the connectors are more expensive than USB (for example).
>Require complex attachement to motherboards, 9pins vs 4pins(for USB);
You don't get it. You can simulate multiple serial devices with one joystick port not the other way around without slowing down the interface.
??? Soldering the 9pins of the DB9 is more complex/expensive than the 4 pins of the USB (for example).
>Too big for use on mobile devices... really I could go on...
>Do you still want your DE9/DB9 connector?
Ever heard of ISA parallel port being updated to PCI?
???
>No, I would have stated that it was my opinion if it was my opinion.
Since what you stated is not fact, it must be your opinion.
Any research on the subject would suggest I'm right, and you are not.
>I can't think of anything about the Amiga that isn't obsolete, but that is just my opinion, I've not done formal study
That's the problem, you have to know both machines before you compare them else you are just expressing your opinion.
Both? What two machines? I am really quite knowledgeable on technology subjects, I am very happy for it to be put to the test.
Timers was already discussed, overscan mode, simpler real-time analysis, etc. etc. I can also go on.
Timers... The amiga timers are nothing compared to what is available on a modern PC... What on earth does overscan have to do with anything? Any GFX card can display to the edge of my displays (which are LCD).
You seem to be lacking knowledge of modern hardware.
-
>Sure, my main machine is a 2.33Ghz Dual Core... that just about meets my current needs... though Logic 8 is demanding more CPU power
>??? Is this an example of the Chewbacca Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense)
...
You did not even address the point but are being incoherent. You can't point out an advantage that USB can be used on mobile devices if your machine is 2.33Ghz dual core desktop. You have to stick to comparing one computer with another not all the modern technologies with the Amiga.
>The physical operation of the device is irrelevant... The function is what is important. There is no functional difference between parallel and serial connections, the only difference is their operation.
How many serial connections can you put on 4 parallel lines? What's faster: In AL,DX or examining a serial bus with all it's commands?
>No one needs parallel links anymore, LVDS has pushed serial links far faster than an parallel could ever operate. It's now easier and cheaper to multiplex on a serial line than deal with skew, noise and capacitance on a parallel line.
You can also run parallel lines at the same speed as serial lines.
>No modern interface uses parallel anymore, everything is serial.
You need to be sure before you make that claim.
>> MPDOS allows hot-swapping of joystick ports on Atari/Amiga. It's a software issue.
>No, hot-swapping requires that the ground lines connect before any other line... USB (for example) has this defined as part of it's standard. If any other line connects first as can happen with DE9/DB9... the potential difference could fry the support IC.
Why don't you try it out before you speak? It works without frying any ICs.
>I've bent pins on DB connectors due to repeated insertions... USB (for example) was design for many many many more insertions/disconnections than any DB connector...
I have never bent any pins when inserting a joystick -- been using for 20+ years.
>> I already explained that above.
>You explained nothing... the DB connectors are not designed for hi-speed links, full stop!
Because when your emotions override your rationality, you see nothing but negative.
>Regardless, the connectors are more expensive than USB (for example).
I disagree, but even if you are right would not using millions of DB9s drop their price? Oh, I forget, you don't think industry works that way.
>Any research on the subject would suggest I'm right, and you are not.
State your research then that shows that reading from a joystick port is slower than USB. You already stated you have not done any study so why are you making an absolute claim?
>Both? What two machines? I am really quite knowledgeable on technology subjects, I am very happy for it to be put to the test.
Okay, what two machines do you want to compare? Amiga vs pick-on and then we'll decide if it can do everything the amiga can.
>Timers... The amiga timers are nothing compared to what is available on a modern PC... What on earth does overscan have to do with anything? Any GFX card can display to the edge of my displays (which are LCD).
>You seem to be lacking knowledge of modern hardware.
That's calling "waving the hands" logic. I don't buy that. You can control what you put on overscan in NTSC output on the Amiga and Atari whereas you can't on PCs with standard hardware. You need specialized cards to do it. Timers are less accurate because modern PCs never saw the need to update them not because they are inferior technology.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Sure, my main machine is a 2.33Ghz Dual Core... that just about meets my current needs... though Logic 8 is demanding more CPU power
>??? Is this an example of the Chewbacca Defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense)
...
You did not even address the point but are being incoherent.
Well I hope so, I've been drinking heavily for the whole evening!
You can't point out an advantage that USB can be used on mobile devices if your machine is 2.33Ghz dual core desktop. You have to stick to comparing one computer with another not all the modern technologies with the Amiga.
You suggested this with your original statement, that one does not need a 4Ghz machine... Actually, I wouldn't mind one... since the software I use demands more power... fortunately, the designers of my software use parallel processing quite effectively, so my Dual Core meets my needs.
>The physical operation of the device is irrelevant... The function is what is important. There is no functional difference between parallel and serial connections, the only difference is their operation.
How many serial connections can you put on 4 parallel lines? What's faster: In AL,DX or examining a serial bus with all it's commands?
None... what you are suggesting is 4 serial lines... 4 parallel lines would be 32 wires (if each parallel link as 8bit).
I used to use DigiDesign's Protools equipment, that used DB25 connectors for 20 parallel analogue audio lines on one single connector... now everything I do is done via FireWire 400... I can send the same 20 audio signals as digital over a much longer distance and without the noise of analogue.
A single serial link has replaced 20 parallel lines.
>No one needs parallel links anymore, LVDS has pushed serial links far faster than an parallel could ever operate. It's now easier and cheaper to multiplex on a serial line than deal with skew, noise and capacitance on a parallel line.
You can also run parallel lines at the same speed as serial lines.
You can't... skew, capacitance and noise limit the maximum speed of a parallel link... Compare PCI-E (serial) vs PCI (parallel)
>No modern interface uses parallel anymore, everything is serial.
You need to be sure before you make that claim.
USB
Firewire
PCI-E
Hyper-Transport
Ethernet
SATA
ADAT
DVI
HDMI
(Even the old ADB...)
Can you think of any other modern interfaces?
Yeah, I'm pretty sure...
>> MPDOS allows hot-swapping of joystick ports on Atari/Amiga. It's a software issue.
>No, hot-swapping requires that the ground lines connect before any other line... USB (for example) has this defined as part of it's standard. If any other line connects first as can happen with DE9/DB9... the potential difference could fry the support IC.
Why don't you try it out before you speak? It works without frying any ICs.
I have been lucky... I have only ever fried one I/O port and that was a PS/2 port... I learned at that point, never to plug/unplug a connector not designed for hot-swap.
>I've bent pins on DB connectors due to repeated insertions... USB (for example) was design for many many many more insertions/disconnections than any DB connector...
I have never bent any pins when inserting a joystick -- been using for 20+ years.
Lucky you! I don't even want to think about the number of times I've bent P-ATA pins... Damn, I hate P-ATA.
>> I already explained that above.
>You explained nothing... the DB connectors are not designed for hi-speed links, full stop!
Because when your emotions override your rationality, you see nothing but negative.
I;ve never been called emotional before, many thanks... In fact my Ex-Girlfriend called me unemotional, so I'm glad you've proved her wrong :-)
>Regardless, the connectors are more expensive than USB (for example).
I disagree, but even if you are right would not using millions of DB9s drop their price? Oh, I forget, you don't think industry works that way.
Economies of scale will of course come into play, but nothing takes away from the fact that DB9 is bigger and uses more components than USB (for example)
>Any research on the subject would suggest I'm right, and you are not.
State your research then that shows that reading from a joystick port is slower than USB. You already stated you have not done any study so why are you making an absolute claim?
The burden of proof is not upon me... and I'm too drunk to care :-D
>Both? What two machines? I am really quite knowledgeable on technology subjects, I am very happy for it to be put to the test.
Okay, what two machines do you want to compare? Amiga vs pick-on and then we'll decide if it can do everything the amiga can.
Ooh! A fight...nah, you choose, I don't mind. No, ok, I choose the Sinclair ZX81!!! Damn I love that machine!!!
>Timers... The amiga timers are nothing compared to what is available on a modern PC... What on earth does overscan have to do with anything? Any GFX card can display to the edge of my displays (which are LCD).
>You seem to be lacking knowledge of modern hardware.
That's calling "waving the hands" logic. I don't buy that. You can control what you put on overscan in NTSC output on the Amiga and Atari whereas you can't on PCs with standard hardware.
You what? Overscan is an outdated concept... CRTs are well over 100 years old now... Can we please keep to the thread topic an stay in the 21st century...?
You need specialized cards to do it. Timers are less accurate because modern PCs never saw the need to update them not because they are inferior technology.
I can easily define 2.4Mhz on my MBP... I doubt I could do the same on the amiga without a serious performance hit... hmmm... I think I would probably have to do some weird polling or something on the Amiga if at all...
-
Please, no more of the "my computer can do this because it uses a dual-core CPU" la-de-da stuff ... It's rather boring :-)
IMHO, it's up to the end user what place they give their miggy in today's world. On a more personal note, my miggy gets a large chunk of quality time as does my PC (when Vista decides to behave itself).
-
>You suggested this with your original statement, that one does not need a 4Ghz machine... Actually, I wouldn't mind one... since the software I use demands more power... fortunately, the designers of my software use parallel processing quite effectively, so my Dual Core meets my needs.
There's your answer-- a modern device using parallel transfers preferred over serial. Imagine if your data bus to your CPUs was serial. I have my own uses for simultaneous parallel signal processing but you just answered your own question.
>None... what you are suggesting is 4 serial lines... 4 parallel lines would be 32 wires (if each parallel link as 8bit).
Joystick port has 4 parallel lines not 8, one trigger line, two POT lines, one +5V, and one GND.
>You can't... skew, capacitance and noise limit the maximum speed of a parallel link... Compare PCI-E (serial) vs PCI (parallel)
Look, even the USB ports are usually in pairs so you have 4 data lines so if you update the joystick port so that the 4 parallel lines can serve both purposes serial and parallel, it's a superior technology AND backward compatible.
>SATA
>ADAT
>DVI
>HDMI
>Can you think of any other modern interfaces?
Yeah what you stated in the beginning of this message. All these serial interfaces would be FASTER if they were in parallel but they are trying to save on wires.
>I have been lucky... I have only ever fried one I/O port and that was a PS/2 port... I learned at that point, never to plug/unplug a connector not designed for hot-swap.
You always hot-plug joystick ports on Amigas and Ataris unless you already had them plugged in and there's no warning that you should connect your joystick before turning on the computer.
>Lucky you! I don't even want to think about the number of times I've bent P-ATA pins... Damn, I hate P-ATA.
How about PATA where each line was at SATA speed.
>I;ve never been called emotional before, many thanks... In act my Ex-Girlfriend called me unemotional, so I'm glad you've proved her wrong
You know most of the lawsuits where each party burns money on lawyers finding fault with the other without getting to the truth. That's called emotional bias.
>The burden of proof is not upon me... and I'm too drunk to care
I have already tried reading from USB and joystick port and given current bloated APIs and device drivers, one IN AL,DX is always superior even with the faster USB port.
>You what? Overscan is an outdated concept... CRTs are well over 100 years old now... Can we please keep to the thread topic an stay in the 21st century...?
Okay NTSC monitors/TVs are outdated for you but not for me.
>I can easily define 2.4Mhz on my MBP... I doubt I could do the same on the amiga without a serious performance hit... hmmm... I think I would probably have to do some weird polling or something on the Amiga if at all...
You want to give an example where you time something counting 2.4Mhz cycles accurately?
-
Jeez! you turn your back just for 10 seconds ... :egad:
-
amigaksi wrote:
>You suggested this with your original statement, that one does not need a 4Ghz machine... Actually, I wouldn't mind one... since the software I use demands more power... fortunately, the designers of my software use parallel processing quite effectively, so my Dual Core meets my needs.
There's your answer-- a modern device using parallel transfers preferred over serial. Imagine if your data bus to your CPUs was serial. I have my own uses for simultaneous parallel signal processing but you just answered your own question.
??? Are you sure you're not high? Imagine if the data bus to my CPU was serial... like in the FB-DIMM architecture used in the VERY POWERFUL 8-core MacPros at the studio I was in a couple of weeks ago?
>None... what you are suggesting is 4 serial lines... 4 parallel lines would be 32 wires (if each parallel link as 8bit).
Joystick port has 4 parallel lines not 8, one trigger line, two POT lines, one +5V, and one GND.
Ok, then 16 wires... but it is still much easier now to multiplex on a serial line, than to send over parallel lines.
>You can't... skew, capacitance and noise limit the maximum speed of a parallel link... Compare PCI-E (serial) vs PCI (parallel)
Look, even the USB ports are usually in pairs so you have 4 data lines so if you update the joystick port so that the 4 parallel lines can serve both purposes serial and parallel, it's a superior technology AND backward compatible.
You actually don't understand basic physics of electronics... where the hell did you go to University? I went to UCL (look it up)...
>SATA
>ADAT
>DVI
>HDMI
>Can you think of any other modern interfaces?
Yeah what you stated in the beginning of this message. All these serial interfaces would be FASTER if they were in parallel but they are trying to save on wires.
They can't run in parallel... at high speeds you can't sync parallel lines... ok I realise now that your knowledge is deficient... go and Google Serial vs parallel see WHY high speed links are serial...
>I have been lucky... I have only ever fried one I/O port and that was a PS/2 port... I learned at that point, never to plug/unplug a connector not designed for hot-swap.
You always hot-plug joystick ports on Amigas and Ataris unless you already had them plugged in and there's no warning that you should connect your joystick before turning on the computer.
Good luck with that... even Commodore manuals states clearly: no hot swapping.
>Lucky you! I don't even want to think about the number of times I've bent P-ATA pins... Damn, I hate P-ATA.
How about PATA where each line was at SATA speed.
PATA can't reach SATA speeds... the technical problems are too great... you actually don't know what noise, skew and capacitance mean do you... go on tell me... I dare you!!! :-D
>I;ve never been called emotional before, many thanks... In act my Ex-Girlfriend called me unemotional, so I'm glad you've proved her wrong
You know most of the lawsuits where each party burns money on lawyers finding fault with the other without getting to the truth. That's called emotional bias.
???
>The burden of proof is not upon me... and I'm too drunk to care
I have already tried reading from USB and joystick port and given current bloated APIs and device drivers, one IN AL,DX is always superior even with the faster USB port.
Your technical inability is not the topic here. We are taking about the value of Amiga Hardware in the 21st century...
>You what? Overscan is an outdated concept... CRTs are well over 100 years old now... Can we please keep to the thread topic an stay in the 21st century...?
Okay NTSC monitors/TVs are outdated for you but not for me.
Oh... So you are the industry now... Lets forget about LCDs and all buy CRTs!!!!
>I can easily define 2.4Mhz on my MBP... I doubt I could do the same on the amiga without a serious performance hit... hmmm... I think I would probably have to do some weird polling or something on the Amiga if at all...
You want to give an example where you time something counting 2.4Mhz cycles accurately?
Err... care to give me an example of a timer as accurate at 1Mhz on the Amiga?
-
> Are you sure you're not high? Imagine if the data bus to my CPU was serial... like in the
Intel PCs use data buses for parallel transfers and your example was a PC not a MAC. Don't change your mind now. Your "???" and "!!!" already shows you did not properly read the msg.
>go and Google Serial vs parallel see WHY high speed links are serial...
I don't google around; I try it myself. You rely on people's opinions and facts and mix them up.
>> Okay NTSC monitors/TVs are outdated for you but not for me.
>Oh... So you are the industry now... Lets forget about LCDs and all buy CRTs!!!!
Read again; is that what I said? LCDs have not completely replaced NTSC/PAL monitors/tvs.
>> You want to give an example where you time something counting 2.4Mhz cycles accurately?
>Err... care to give me an example of a timer as accurate at 1Mhz on the Amiga?
You are suppose to prove that PC has a more accurate timer. You can time things using a copper to a 3.57Mhz timing accuracy. As I told you before, one EOI on a PC will drop your timing quantum to below 1 Mhz.
-
Tenacious wrote:
What an awful picture. How about this:
Amiga = a pretty, intelligent girl tastefully dressed.
Yesm well I would agree, but say that this would be the amiga in her early days... Someone said something about a MILF for her today... true with the exception, there is not a lot of action so maybe MIL is more accurate than MILF...
-
>Good luck with that... even Commodore manuals states clearly: no hot swapping.
My Atari and Amiga manuals don't mention it, but regardless I always hot swap and it never harmed any of machines.
>PATA can't reach SATA speeds... the technical problems are too great... you actually don't know what noise, skew and capacitance mean do you... go on tell me... I dare you!!!
Assuming I did not know, the logic still follows. You have 4 data lines in 2 USB ports which can exist within a joystick port.
>Your technical inability is not the topic here. We are taking about the value of Amiga Hardware in the 21st century...
Labeling someone with "inability" does not disprove the fact that one IN instruction or LDA instruction in 6502 is faster than a series of instructions to read a USB port. Simple deduction.
-
amigaksi wrote:
> Are you sure you're not high? Imagine if the data bus to my CPU was serial... like in the
Intel PCs use data buses for parallel transfers and your example was a PC not a MAC. Don't change your mind now. Your "???" and "!!!" already shows you did not properly read the msg.
It really doesn't matter if I talk about PC or a mac, the hardware is the same... My main machine is a MacBook Pro...
Ok... My Athon64 system uses Hyper-Transport... a serial link.
The MacPros where I work use FB-DIMMs which use a serial bus... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Buffered_DIMM - the use of a serial bus was due to the degradation of a parallel signal at high speeds... You are either stupid or arrogant, either way, I'm find you rather funny...
>go and Google Serial vs parallel see WHY high speed links are serial...
I don't google around; I try it myself. You rely on people's opinions and facts and mix them up.
Oh, right... University of life... gotcha... ;-) Try reading a book sometime. I prefer to read the latest research papers (my Chemistry education allows me to understand rather advanced concepts) and find out what's going on in the REAL WORLD...
>> Okay NTSC monitors/TVs are outdated for you but not for me.
>Oh... So you are the industry now... Lets forget about LCDs and all buy CRTs!!!!
Read again; is that what I said? LCDs have not completely replaced NTSC/PAL monitors/tvs.
Tell me one reason why any person would by an NTSC/PAL CRT over an LCD device now?
>> You want to give an example where you time something counting 2.4Mhz cycles accurately?
>Err... care to give me an example of a timer as accurate at 1Mhz on the Amiga?
You are suppose to prove that PC has a more accurate timer. You can time things using a copper to a 3.57Mhz timing accuracy. As I told you before, one EOI on a PC will drop your timing quantum to below 1 Mhz.
Well Stop avoiding my question, and we can talk...
-
>It really doesn't matter if I talk about PC or a mac, the hardware is the same... My main machine is a MacBook Pro...
Sure it does, perhaps the Mac has other deficiencies when compared to Amiga than when you compare your PC to amiga. But fact remains, parallel transfers are being used in the modern era.
>Try reading a book sometime. I prefer to read the latest research papers (my Chemistry education allows me to understand rather advanced concepts) and find out what's going on in the REAL WORLD...
I actually GO AND SEE it in the REAL WORLD after reading the books instead of speculating on what the paper is stating.
>Tell me one reason why any person would by an NTSC/PAL CRT over an LCD device now?
Higher contrast ratio. To match colors with broadcast signal. I remember showing a demo in outdoors and you can't see anything on the LCD but the TV looked okay.
>Well Stop avoiding my question, and we can talk...
Before I waste time writing you code that uses 3.57Mhz timing accuracy, are you claiming that the PC timer is more accurate than the Amiga timer? (just yes or no).
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Good luck with that... even Commodore manuals states clearly: no hot swapping.
My Atari and Amiga manuals don't mention it, but regardless I always hot swap and it never harmed any of machines.
By luck, not by design... Amiga/Atari joy sticks tend to be passive devices so potential difference tents to be low... anything more complex (i.e. PS/2) would cause problems.
>PATA can't reach SATA speeds... the technical problems are too great... you actually don't know what noise, skew and capacitance mean do you... go on tell me... I dare you!!!
Assuming I did not know, the logic still follows. You have 4 data lines in 2 USB ports which can exist within a joystick port.
It's totally different. Why would you use two USB lines?!?!? Simple slect USB-Highspeed if you need the bandwidth... or preferably use Firewire...
>Your technical inability is not the topic here. We are taking about the value of Amiga Hardware in the 21st century...
Labeling someone with "inability" does not disprove the fact that one IN instruction or LDA instruction in 6502 is faster than a series of instructions to read a USB port. Simple deduction.
We are talking about the 21st century!!! The topic of this thread!
And it's might be easier, but it's not faster... otherwise we would still have 6502s in every PC running old parallel links...
-
amigaksi wrote:
>It really doesn't matter if I talk about PC or a mac, the hardware is the same... My main machine is a MacBook Pro...
Sure it does, perhaps the Mac has other deficiencies when compared to Amiga than when you compare your PC to amiga. But fact remains, parallel transfers are being used in the modern era.
Name me one modern interface that is parallel? I have a long list of interfaces... your turn now.
>Try reading a book sometime. I prefer to read the latest research papers (my Chemistry education allows me to understand rather advanced concepts) and find out what's going on in the REAL WORLD...
I actually GO AND SEE it in the REAL WORLD after reading the books instead of speculating on what the paper is stating.
I don't speculate, I trust testable research. Are you 12 years old?
>Tell me one reason why any person would by an NTSC/PAL CRT over an LCD device now?
Higher contrast ratio. To match colors with broadcast signal. I remember showing a demo in outdoors and you can't see anything on the LCD but the TV looked okay.
My iPhone is LCD based yet in the summer light the display is as clear as a peice of coloured paper... amazing to see actually!
>Well Stop avoiding my question, and we can talk...
Before I waste time writing you code that uses 3.57Mhz timing accuracy, are you claiming that the PC timer is more accurate than the Amiga timer? (just yes or no).
Yes. Simple really.
-
Having reflected on this thread for a while, I think I'm going to gently shove at it to see if I can't get it to move in a different direction. So, apologies in advance for the hijacking. :)
I think the Amiga definitely has a place in the modern world: to remind us of the poor quality of modern computers. It's certainly not alone in that place, either, but it's a good example, nonetheless.
The 'modern' PC is a piece of junk. It's designed to be (partially) backwards compatible with systems that no one in their right mind would _ever_ want to actually use. Of course, the PC architecture has changed significantly from the days of AT PCs, probably to the point where very little code from that era would actually run on a brand-new PC.
However, the staying power of the x86 platform is largely based on this idea that a PC built today should work with junky old code from 5 years ago. This, imho, is also the reason why PCs are garbage. It's not the cost cutting, the commodity grade components, no! It's the fact that there hasn't been a significant break from the design flaws of PCs built to be compatible with older flawed PCs, which in turn were compatible with even older junk boxes, and so on.
We need to just toss the PC platform into the waste bin, and move on. I don't mean we should ignore what we've learned as we went along, in fact, quite the opposite. As a society we are in _desperate_ need of reliable computers that can be programmed to do their jobs without it taking man-years of time to make it happen.
I was re-reading John Backus's seminal paper (from the Communications of the ACM, August 1978) the other day, and it occurred to me that as much as we need to break away from the von Neumann style of programming to accomplish this goal, we also need to a modern computer system built from the ground up in a style that discourages things symptomatic of the root problem that causes our systems to be unreliable.
Among these I would list code bloat in general, multi-megabyte device drivers, APIs that not only include the kitchen sink but many different implementations of one, and the lack of any mechanism for actually sharing libraries that aren't part of the basic functionality of the system. [I'm not talking about the technological capacity to link to them here; I mean the ability to actually derive income from the distribution of library code in a way that protects those of use who write it. Of late, I've been dreaming about an iTunes Store-like apparatus for selling software. I don't know that that would work, but it might just be worth a try.]
Obviously, the Amiga never solved all of these problems; nor have any of the other 'cool' systems that have come and gone. But if we look back at them with nostalgia now, it's because their design, and the philosophy of design that went with them, is relevant to our every day, 'modern', experiences with technology.
It's about time some of us took the lessons that can be learned from systems like the Amiga, and made the effort to build a computer that is beautiful, functional, and not hampered by the ridiculous assumption that someone really wants to run off the shelf software from a half decade ago or more. [As far as I can tell, the only software that fits _that_ description is the AmigaOS and a few other bits of technology that have similarly painted themselves into corners.]
-
Yeah, especially wihen my machine sports a couple of quad core xeons...
(http://photoshopcontest.com/images/thumbs/3439073726efcf2a063a9ef070e5e1f1e7c0d448315554.jpg)
ZeBeeDee wrote:
Please, no more of the "my computer can do this because it uses a dual-core CPU" la-de-da stuff ... It's rather boring :-)
IMHO, it's up to the end user what place they give their miggy in today's world. On a more personal note, my miggy gets a large chunk of quality time as does my PC (when Vista decides to behave itself).
-
>By luck, not by design...
There's no such thing as luck as you already tried to use logic to explain it.
>It's totally different. Why would you use two USB lines?!?!? Simple slect USB-Highspeed if you need the bandwidth... or preferably use Firewire...
I hooked up the USB myself to my PC and there are four data lines so all I stated was someone could have incorporated that within the joystick port and maintained compatibility.
>We are talking about the 21st century!!! The topic of this thread!
Yeah, so am I. One MOVE.B, (IN AL,DX), LDA is faster than multiple of them. And if the joystick port was updated to PCI bus, it would run faster than USB even at the hardware level avoiding all bloated APIs.
-
And they shall name it "Mac"
(http://www.theiphoneblog.com/images/stories/2008/06/os-x_10-6_snow_leopard.jpg)
pkillo wrote:
It's about time some of us took the lessons that can be learned from systems like the Amiga, and made the effort to build a computer that is beautiful, functional, and not hampered by the ridiculous assumption that someone really wants to run off the shelf software from a half decade ago or more. [As far as I can tell, the only software that fits _that_ description is the AmigaOS and a few other bits of technology that have similarly painted themselves into corners.]
-
>Name me one modern interface that is parallel? I have a long list of interfaces... your turn now.
All my PCs use parallel transfers from CPU to RAM, level 1 cache to the CPU, PCI bus to RAM, etc. My own project of floppy simulation REQUIRES parallel signals being modified in real-time.
>I don't speculate, I trust testable research. Are you 12 years old?
I am going to PROVE that you are speculating and misleading others who believe you. I am not stating the research is wrong but YOUR understanding of the research is wrong because perhaps you have not yourself actually done it. see below.
>My iPhone is LCD based yet in the summer light the display is as clear as a peice of coloured paper... amazing to see actually!
Again switching between PC, Mac, and now iPhone. We are comparing your PC w/LCD w/quad core or 1000-core to an Amiga. All the LCDs I have tried in the outdoors give a poorer picture than a TV.
>> Before I waste time writing you code that uses 3.57Mhz timing accuracy, are you claiming that the PC timer is more accurate than the Amiga timer? (just yes or no).
>Yes. Simple really.
Okay, I will PROVE you are wrong here as I already have done in another thread. I will post the code-- which do you prefer 6502 (Atari) or 68000 (Amiga)? Whichever is easier for you to understand.
-
pkillo wrote:
Having reflected on this thread for a while, I think I'm going to gently shove at it to see if I can't get it to move in a different direction. So, apologies in advance for the hijacking. :)
I think the Amiga definitely has a place in the modern world: to remind us of the poor quality of modern computers. It's certainly not alone in that place, either, but it's a good example, nonetheless.
How on earth is modern hardware poor quality?
The 'modern' PC is a piece of junk. It's designed to be (partially) backwards compatible with systems that no one in their right mind would _ever_ want to actually use. Of course, the PC architecture has changed significantly from the days of AT PCs, probably to the point where very little code from that era would actually run on a brand-new PC.
First you claim that the Modern PC is backwards compatible... Then claim that it's not actually compatible...
Meh... Yes the x86 boots in "Real Mode" (8bit)... but a modern BIOS or EFI will get out of Real Mode within the first few microseconds... I have actually run visicalc on my Athlon64 :-) So the industry has clung on to the old tech way beyond it's design life, simple due to the massive software investment of yesteryear... :-)
However, the staying power of the x86 platform is largely based on this idea that a PC built today should work with junky old code from 5 years ago. This, imho, is also the reason why PCs are garbage.
Not quite... the x86 platform survived due to a massive software investment... that, but AMD and intel are not stupid, they moded out the old tech (Real Mode-8bit, Protected Mode-32bit, Long Mode-64bit) and kept the respective modes as clean as the technology of the time would allow... Long Mode is a very nice 64bit architecture!
It's not the cost cutting, the commodity grade components, no! It's the fact that there hasn't been a significant break from the design flaws of PCs built to be compatible with older flawed PCs, which in turn were compatible with even older junk boxes, and so on.
You don't actually now what design flaws you think still exist... :-)
ISA is gone, Long Mode has cleaned up the instruction set and added lot of registers... Don't forget that the x86 has a very modern SSE unit for math co-processing... and the actually hardware is totally modern... what flaws can still exist?
We need to just toss the PC platform into the waste bin, and move on. I don't mean we should ignore what we've learned as we went along, in fact, quite the opposite. As a society we are in _desperate_ need of reliable computers that can be programmed to do their jobs without it taking man-years of time to make it happen.
My MacBookPro is the most reliable machine I;eve ever had... yes even more than my Amiga... I trust my Amiga and my MacBook Pro for live music work... and my Amiga can't do even 1/100th what my MBP can do live...
I was re-reading John Backus's seminal paper (from the Communications of the ACM, August 1978) the other day, and it occurred to me that as much as we need to break away from the von Neumann style of programming to accomplish this goal, we also need to a modern computer system built from the ground up in a style that discourages things symptomatic of the root problem that causes our systems to be unreliable.
My live system isn't unreliable... it performs exactly as required in a realtime live music situation.
Among these I would list code bloat in general, multi-megabyte device drivers, APIs that not only include the kitchen sink but many different implementations of one, and the lack of any mechanism for actually sharing libraries that aren't part of the basic functionality of the system. [I'm not talking about the technological capacity to link to them here; I mean the ability to actually derive income from the distribution of library code in a way that protects those of use who write it.
The Hardware that these massive drivers support, is so much more complex than anything we had in the 80's, that's why they are so big!
Of late, I've been dreaming about an iTunes Store-like apparatus for selling software. I don't know that that would work, but it might just be worth a try.]
Apple, have just opened the AppStore... check it out... it's that very samw idea...
Obviously, the Amiga never solved all of these problems; nor have any of the other 'cool' systems that have come and gone. But if we look back at them with nostalgia now, it's because their design, and the philosophy of design that went with them, is relevant to our every day, 'modern', experiences with technology.
The Amiga perfectly (and I don;t often use that term) solved the computing issues of the 80's... I really can't think of any better system in the 80's... in fact despite having no development from Commodore, the Amiga was still relevant during the early 90s!!! That's how good it was... but the modern word has very different issues.
It's about time some of us took the lessons that can be learned from systems like the Amiga, and made the effort to build a computer that is beautiful, functional, and not hampered by the ridiculous assumption that someone really wants to run off the shelf software from a half decade ago or more. [As far as I can tell, the only software that fits _that_ description is the AmigaOS and a few other bits of technology that have similarly painted themselves into corners.]
Apple, woke up and filled that slot about 5 years ago... it took them a long time and the return of Steve Jobs... but they did it. I can't think of a better system that one could buy right now...
-
amigaksi wrote:
>By luck, not by design...
There's no such thing as luck as you already tried to use logic to explain it.
>It's totally different. Why would you use two USB lines?!?!? Simple slect USB-Highspeed if you need the bandwidth... or preferably use Firewire...
I hooked up the USB myself to my PC and there are four data lines so all I stated was someone could have incorporated that within the joystick port and maintained compatibility.
Actually 2 data lines... each line is a twisted pair + and -, this elmiates noise in the signal of the link.
The 2 data lines are :1 up stream and 1 down stream... it's a full duplex interface.
You really don't actually know anything of modern systems do you?!?!?
>We are talking about the 21st century!!! The topic of this thread!
Yeah, so am I. One MOVE.B, (IN AL,DX), LDA is faster than multiple of them. And if the joystick port was updated to PCI bus, it would run faster than USB even at the hardware level avoiding all bloated APIs.
So why are we not using your system, and instead using the horrible bloated USB?
Honestly, USB may seem bloated, but it offers so much more, it's worth it.
-
>The 'modern' PC is a piece of junk. It's designed to be (partially) backwards compatible with systems that no one in their right mind would _ever_ want to actually use. Of course, the PC architecture has changed significantly from the days of AT PCs, probably to the point where very little code from that era would actually run on a brand-new PC.
I think backward compatibility is a good thing, but they can definitely keep the backward compatibility and improve other aspects like hardware standards. Due to lack of hardware standards, people resort to programming at the API level which definitely slows down the software and then again how many people nowadays actually learn to program at the system level or even know the system they are programming. Even the USB issue being discussed would be better if there was a hardware standard for it rather than using device drivers.
-
>Actually 2 data lines... each line is a twisted pair + and -, this elmiates noise in the signal of the link.
No 4 data lines. There are two usb ports that I hooked up from a set of PINS on my motherboard to the front.
>You really don't actually know anything of modern systems do you?!?!?
Keep your speculations to yourself. If you read anything I wrote in this thread, you would not ask.
>So why are we not using your system, and instead using the horrible bloated USB?
Because of lack of hardware standard.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Name me one modern interface that is parallel? I have a long list of interfaces... your turn now.
All my PCs use parallel transfers from CPU to RAM, level 1 cache to the CPU, PCI bus to RAM, etc. My own project of floppy simulation REQUIRES parallel signals being modified in real-time.
Ok, over distances of 1um a Parallel bus make sense... you stated the DB9 connector, I don't see chip designs rushing to integrate DB9 connectors on their latest CPUs...
Ok, you have conceded that I'm right and are now just deflecting... at least I can remember what you said to start this discussion... and boy am I drunk now :-D
>I don't speculate, I trust testable research. Are you 12 years old?
I am going to PROVE that you are speculating and misleading others who believe you. I am not stating the research is wrong but YOUR understanding of the research is wrong because perhaps you have not yourself actually done it. see below.
>My iPhone is LCD based yet in the summer light the display is as clear as a peice of coloured paper... amazing to see actually!
Again switching between PC, Mac, and now iPhone. We are comparing your PC w/LCD w/quad core or 1000-core to an Amiga. All the LCDs I have tried in the outdoors give a poorer picture than a TV.
Well you talked about LCD devices... so I mentioned one that I have that works really well on an English summer day... My MacBook Pro is perfectly visible in broad day light too, but my iPhone looks the best, as it is the newest LCD I own...
>> Before I waste time writing you code that uses 3.57Mhz timing accuracy, are you claiming that the PC timer is more accurate than the Amiga timer? (just yes or no).
>Yes. Simple really.
Okay, I will PROVE you are wrong here as I already have done in another thread. I will post the code-- which do you prefer 6502 (Atari) or 68000 (Amiga)? Whichever is easier for you to understand.
I honestly don't care... the it's an irrelevant issue... I can do stuff in realtime on my MacBook Pro that I can only dream of on my Amiga... so what the F**K does it matter?
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Actually 2 data lines... each line is a twisted pair + and -, this elmiates noise in the signal of the link.
No 4 data lines. There are two usb ports that I hooked up from a set of PINS on my motherboard to the front.
That is not what you said. you said that a USB port has 4 pins. That is true, but they are not simply 4 parallel data lines, they have very specific functions... don't start changing your argument mid discussion.
>You really don't actually know anything of modern systems do you?!?!?
Keep your speculations to yourself. If you read anything I wrote in this thread, you would not ask.
You have consistently demonstrated a lack on understanding, I have had to explain very elementary hardware topics with you... I now understand your limited knowledge.
>So why are we not using your system, and instead using the horrible bloated USB?
Because of lack of hardware standard.
No, it's because of physics. Please understand that you can't defy the laws of physics...
-
amigaksi wrote:
>The 'modern' PC is a piece of junk. It's designed to be (partially) backwards compatible with systems that no one in their right mind would _ever_ want to actually use. Of course, the PC architecture has changed significantly from the days of AT PCs, probably to the point where very little code from that era would actually run on a brand-new PC.
I think backward compatibility is a good thing, but they can definitely keep the backward compatibility and improve other aspects like hardware standards.
Perhaps, but it can limit the development of a platform... see how long the A500 remained "current"...
Due to lack of hardware standards, people resort to programming at the API level which definitely slows down the software and then again how many people nowadays actually learn to program at the system level or even know the system they are programming.
Really...? So the Macintosh platform which demanded the use of system APIs is still here and the Amiga which permitted the use to Hardware hitting, is now dead... it's clear which was the best idea.
Even the USB issue being discussed would be better if there was a hardware standard for it rather than using device drivers.
There is a USB Hardware standard it's called EHCI please read up on these topic BEFORE you post... It's your statements like this that make me realise you don't understand the modern world at all.
-
>Ok, over distances of 1um a Parallel bus make sense... you stated the DB9 connector, I don't see chip designs rushing to integrate DB9 connectors on their latest CPUs...
It was regarding integrating USB into the DB9 and simulating a dual USB port as well as using 4 digital lines for joysticks not on the cpu level. That above was an answer to your erroneous claim that parallel interfaces are no longer being used.
>Well you talked about LCD devices... so I mentioned one that I have that works really well on an English summer day... My MacBook Pro is perfectly visible in broad day light too, but my iPhone looks the best, as it is the newest LCD I own...
Read the specs of 19" LCDs and TVs and see the differences for yourself.
>I honestly don't care... the it's an irrelevant issue... I can do stuff in realtime on my MacBook Pro that I can only dream of on my Amiga... so what the F**K does it matter?
Now all of a sudden it's irrelevant! Every software written that utilizes the higher accurate timing will NOT work on your PC.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>Ok, over distances of 1um a Parallel bus make sense... you stated the DB9 connector, I don't see chip designs rushing to integrate DB9 connectors on their latest CPUs...
It was regarding integrating USB into the DB9 and simulating a dual USB port as well as using 4 digital lines for joysticks not on the cpu level. That above was an answer to your erroneous claim that parallel interfaces are no longer being used.
Two serial interfaces are not the same as a single parallel interface... their mode of operation is very different. Don't be an idiot!!
>Well you talked about LCD devices... so I mentioned one that I have that works really well on an English summer day... My MacBook Pro is perfectly visible in broad day light too, but my iPhone looks the best, as it is the newest LCD I own...
Read the specs of 19" LCDs and TVs and see the differences for yourself.
I'm well aware of LCD deficiencies, but their advantages put them far ahead of CRTs... my iPhone LCD shows that.
>I honestly don't care... the it's an irrelevant issue... I can do stuff in realtime on my MacBook Pro that I can only dream of on my Amiga... so what the F**K does it matter?
Now all of a sudden it's irrelevant! Every software written that utilizes the higher accurate timing will NOT work on your PC.
Go on then, what software won't run on my Mac or my PC...?
-
persia wrote:
And they shall name it "Mac"
The Mac is nice for what it is, but it is fundamental API suffers from exactly the problem I was talking about - it's old. UNIX with or without the Apple facelift and a handful of tacked on features or Windows are the three choices available for Mac users. That's great if that's what you want, and it's certainly one more choice than PC users have, but it doesn't provide the mechanisms I wrote about. Those operating systems, and the software available for them, all require constant behind the scenes tweaking to keep them working. (Try connecting a Mac to the 'net and not running Apple Update; your system will be hosed in a couple of weeks given the rate at which the security updates alone come out.)
This isn't the way it has to be - we're just stuck with it because backwards and proprietary hardware make it next to impossible to implement an operating system without the work of hundreds of people. An open hardware platform without all the bunk baggage PCs drag around with them would allow competition in the OS realm again - something we really need. UNIX is a beast of the 60s and 70s; Windows one of the 80s and 90s. It's coming up on the time for a new paradigm.
This is not really necessary from the home user's point of view, but allow me to scare you with another perspective: my mother has worked in a hospital for 35+ years. She's a senior nurse; it's a part of her job to do things like take blood pressure readings and such, and record them. The computer system they use, a modern, Windows-based network, is so unreliable that often the measurements she is supposed to put on a patient's chart every 15 minutes will take upwards of 20 minutes just to input! Yes, it takes longer to make a chart entry than it the interval between them. There simply are no paper charts anymore - it's all in the computer. Scared yet? You should be.
The point is, our computers systems lack any mechanism for ensuring their reliability. They are so bloated and over-crowded with 'features' that they don't perform the same every time; sometimes they work, sometimes you yell at them. :) It's a fact that it is possible to design reliable software, and it's possible to prove that the software is reliable. Unless, of course, you're using a PC, where even if no one has installed unneeded software, enough came with the thing to make it a complete mess.
It's been to the advantage of the computer companies to keep programmers from being able to make reliable, reusable contributions to the pool of available software because they are in it only for the money, and once you've bought it, if it doesn't work right, they will only make MORE money from the damn tech support contracts!
Government and industry have both been complaining about this for a long time. Eventually something has to give, and I really hope that the solution to this problem is an open hardware platform that is elegant enough in design to empower programmers to do our jobs effectively, efficiently, and with a minimum of error. Computers can do much more than we imagine - the last 10 years have made that blatantly obvious. It's a pity that the one thing they can NOT do is so important.
-
>That is not what you said. you said that a USB port has 4 pins. That is true, but they are not simply 4 parallel data lines, they have very specific functions... don't start changing your argument mid discussion.
Here I'll quote myself (you can go back and re-read it yourself since I have not edited any of my posts):
"Look, even the USB ports are usually in pairs so you have 4 data lines so if you update the joystick port so that the 4 parallel lines can serve both purposes serial and parallel, it's a superior technology AND backward compatible."
I just PROVED that what people write and what you understand are two different things.
>>Because of lack of hardware standard.
>No, it's because of physics. Please understand that you can't defy the laws of physics...
I am not. Hardware standards are faster ways to access devices than software APIs.
-
>Two serial interfaces are not the same as a single parallel interface... their mode of operation is very different. Don't be an idiot!!
You know you can't understand things if you get too emotional as I already stated so. You don't know that you can program parallel ports already in different modes so that could have been another mode of operation. Q.E.D.
>Go on then, what software won't run on my Mac or my PC...?
If you are just going to call people names, you can search it on this forum yourself.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>That is not what you said. you said that a USB port has 4 pins. That is true, but they are not simply 4 parallel data lines, they have very specific functions... don't start changing your argument mid discussion.
Here I'll quote myself (you can go back and re-read it yourself since I have not edited any of my posts):
"Look, even the USB ports are usually in pairs so you have 4 data lines so if you update the joystick port so that the 4 parallel lines can serve both purposes serial and parallel, it's a superior technology AND backward compatible."
Ok, this argument just got circular... you are refusing to acknowledge what I am trying to tell you... I'll let Alexh or persia or someone else with extensive hardware knowledge explain it to you they might have better luck than me.
No one is using parallel interfaces any more, physics doesn't allow them to run fast enough.
I just PROVED that what people write and what you understand are two different things.
>>Because of lack of hardware standard.
>No, it's because of physics. Please understand that you can't defy the laws of physics...
I am not. Hardware standards are faster ways to access devices than software APIs.
EHCI The software ensure that the hardware is future compatible and used to the best possible advantages.
-
Okay, I'll wait for their reply since I don't see why you can't have a dual-USB/joystick port.
>The software ensure that the hardware is future compatible and used to the best possible advantages.
If the hardware was standardized, you don't need an intermediary layer so the best possible useage of hardware occurs then.
-
amigaksi wrote:
Okay, I'll wait for their reply since I don't see why you can't have a dual-USB/joystick port.
maybe they will have better luck
>The software ensure that the hardware is future compatible and used to the best possible advantages.
If the hardware was standardized, you don't need an intermediary layer so the best possible useage of hardware occurs then.
Because the hardware can be changed and improved and any program that used the software API will still work... But any program that hit the hardware won't work because the hardware has changed... This really is elementary stuff... :-?
-
Amiga = smelly homeless guy looking in bins for things the rest of the industy discarded years ago...
sooo funny and yet sooo true :-o
-
>>If the hardware was standardized, you don't need an intermediary layer so the best possible useage of hardware occurs then.
>Because the hardware can be changed and improved and any program that used the software API will still work... But any program that hit the hardware won't work because the hardware has changed... This really is elementary stuff...
"If the HARDWARE WAS STANDARDIZED..." Example, A000:0000 to access the VGA memory has been a long time hardware standard. I can write to A000:0000 using an ISA VGA card and PCI VGA card, the PCI version just works faster but the hardware standard remained.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>>If the hardware was standardized, you don't need an intermediary layer so the best possible useage of hardware occurs then.
>Because the hardware can be changed and improved and any program that used the software API will still work... But any program that hit the hardware won't work because the hardware has changed... This really is elementary stuff...
"If the HARDWARE WAS STANDARDIZED..." Example, A000:0000 to access the VGA memory has been a long time hardware standard. I can write to A000:0000 using an ISA VGA card and PCI VGA card, the PCI version just works faster but the hardware standard remained.
VGA is nothing more than a fall back (everything else has failed) mode now... Would you seriously write a program that hit VGA mode now? No, you you use DirectX or OpenGL which would talk to the gfx card drivers and use the hardware featuress of that card as best it can... And by using Dx3D or OpenGL you don't need to worry if the user has a ATI or NVidia gfx card... Both totally different hardware but both work perfectly under the high level APIs... I can't believe we are having this argument in 2008...
-
bloodline wrote:
How on earth is modern hardware poor quality?
I'm not talking about it failing; I'm talking about it being less than excellent to begin with. If you can't see that we could be doing better than we are by building systems that are designed to a set of open standards free of the need for legacy software compatiblity, then I don't understand where you're coming from, at all.
First you claim that the Modern PC is backwards compatible... Then claim that it's not actually compatible...
Meh... Yes the x86 boots in "Real Mode" (8bit)... but a modern BIOS or EFI will get out of Real Mode within the first few microseconds... I have actually run visicalc on my Athlon64 :-) So the industry has clung on to the old tech way beyond it's design life, simple due to the massive software investment of yesteryear... :-)
I claimed it was partially backwards compatible; that's different from claiming compatibility and incompatibility, both. Ummm ... unless they changed this in the last three years [since I last read the AMD x64 system architecture manuals], it is the operating system's responsibility to set the mode, and do other obnoxiously over complicated tasks like loading the drivers for VESA devices, RAID controllers, etc. You put a floppy in drive A: with executable code in the boot sector, and you've got just about nothing to work with that you don't build yourself.
Personally I think if you're going to build hardware at all, you ought to design it, and the firmware, to present an API that can be programmed without having to invest weeks in learning to use each revision of every type of device. I call that poor design. Of course, a lot of people disagree, and think there should be a minimal amount of handholding available.
However, I believe they are wrong, because of the unreasonable amount of code you have to write just to load a text segment into memory from a hard disk and enable it to write to the screen [not in real mode], never mind the network. The Sparc SLC is a great example of the opposite philosophy - I used to use the ROM routines on those to accomplish just about anything I ever needed - no operating system required, just a boot loader.
Not quite... the x86 platform survived due to a massive software investment... that, but AMD and intel are not stupid, they moded out the old tech (Real Mode-8bit, Protected Mode-32bit, Long Mode-64bit) and kept the respective modes as clean as the technology of the time would allow... Long Mode is a very nice 64bit architecture!
Hah! This is a popular misconception - believe me, you might not be the only one still using visicalc, but I bet we could fit everyone who does inside of a basketball court. The fact is, most end users buy the new versions of software, and are rarely more than one major release behind, and almost _never_ more than two. If Microsoft didn't find it more 'cost effective' to keep churning out the same old crap again and again, they'd have simply told everyone who bought Windows XP to buy new apps. It's not like consumers who lack training in technology really would have had a choice!
You might use MS Access 2003 or 2000, but if you're running the 98 version in a production environment, you should have a CAT scan. Same goes for any software that's sold over the counter. The only real reason for maintaining backwards compatibility with old software is the large number of custom applications that drive industries like banking, equity trading, debt collection, etc., etc.
No doubt, once upon a time, many of these systems ran on DOS because it was cheaper than UNIX. Now, most of these systems have been ported to Linux/UNIX or simply replaced by apps written to run natively under them. Very few people _need_ to run DOS/Windows apps from more than 5-8 years ago, and the great thing is that all of those UNIX apps will happily run in POSIX sandboxes and never even know it.
You don't actually now what design flaws you think still exist... :-)
ISA is gone, Long Mode has cleaned up the instruction set and added lot of registers... Don't forget that the x86 has a very modern SSE unit for math co-processing... and the actually hardware is totally modern... what flaws can still exist?
Hmm. Let's see. The 10000+ pages of documentation that apply to my laptop pretty much constitute a design flaw, in my opinion. Fast computers with lots of storage don't _have_ to be ridiculously over complicated from a software designers perspective. The Tandem midranges I used to work one are a perfect example of that! They ran an operating system called Non-Stop - a delightfully simply OS designed for reliability. Sadly, all those systems were replaced by PCs.
My MacBookPro is the most reliable machine I;eve ever had... yes even more than my Amiga... I trust my Amiga and my MacBook Pro for live music work... and my Amiga can't do even 1/100th what my MBP can do live...
My live system isn't unreliable... it performs exactly as required in a realtime live music situation.
No offense, but you're talking apples and oranges, here. You're dealing with a very narrow, specific application that happens to have been beaten into decent shape over the course of years. I don't know what software you're running, but I've used ProTools, and it happens to be relatively bug-free [at least as long as you don't try to use the system it's on as a general purpose computer].
My dictionary defines 'reliable' as yielding the same or consistently compatible results. I know a lot of people who write software for a living. I know very few programmers who would claim the applications they've worked on are completely reliable. Mostly reliable is an oxymoron.
The Hardware that these massive drivers support, is so much more complex than anything we had in the 80's, that's why they are so big!
So? Does this mean the hardware's interfaces should be harder to use? No, not at all. Part of good design is presenting to the outside world exactly those controls which are necessary to achieve the goal of the system and NO OTHERS. This is referred to as 'black box' design, and people learn it in engineering school and then go out into the job market and completely ignore it because of two factors: fools who insist on changing specifications during the design process, and their own inability to specify a design in a readable document.
Show me a piece of hardware in a modern PC that obeys that law of design, if you can, please, or even one with behavior identical to its spec.
Apple, have just opened the AppStore... check it out... it's that very samw idea...
That's not really what I meant. Software is fundamentally built out of smaller pieces, and the smaller pieces are usually similar enough to the small pieces of other software that the programmers building them are re-inventing the wheel half the time. It'd be nice if someone was selling wheels, but it just doesn't happen, not on a large enough scale.
The Amiga perfectly (and I don;t often use that term) solved the computing issues of the 80's... I really can't think of any better system in the 80's... in fact despite having no development from Commodore, the Amiga was still relevant during the early 90s!!! That's how good it was... but the modern word has very different issues.
Not really. The modern world's issues are the same - messaging, information storage and retrieval, book-keeping, etc. - it's just how we look at them that has changed. If anything has changed in the last 15 years, it's only that people have become much lazier than they used to be. The 'Web' is not a new idea - we had gopher before it. Granted, it was uglier, but making things look nice is no substitute for progress.
Apple, woke up and filled that slot about 5 years ago... it took them a long time and the return of Steve Jobs... but they did it. I can't think of a better system that one could buy right now...
Of course you can't buy a better system - they've made absolutely certain of that by manipulating the market into accepting products that are less inferior than their competition's offerings, and by working with their competition to prevent real competition from actually occurring. To me, less inferior does not mean 'good', and the fact that I can't buy a computer that I'm really happy with annoys me.
-
From the RKM introduction:
Never assume that programs can access hardware resources directly. Most hardware is controlled by system software that will not respond well to interference from other programs. Shared hardware requires programs to use the proper sharing protocols. Use the defined interface; it is the best way to ensure that your software will continue to operate on future models of the Amiga.
Just sayin'
-
@amigaksi
What the heck is wrong with you?! :-?
-
I use my A1200 for making minimalist electronica and midi sequencing :-)
-
SamOS39 wrote:
I use my A1200 for making minimalist electronica and midi sequencing :-)
I like to use my Amigas for crunchy 8bit sampling and building loops in OctaMED (less so now, I tend to use Logic 8). I have run OctaMED in UAE quite a bit, again for building loops and a bit of bitcrushing...
I don't really use MIDI anymore most of my external hardware uses USB or FireWire... I have a small M-Box USB<->MIDI convertor for my really old stuff. :-)
-
I use OSS on the pc to make stuff for my dj'ing but i often (when using film samples etc) sample onto my amiga and then record of my amiga ;-) i just love the sound
-
How pityful and pathetic are those people saying my ACTUAL PC/Macintosh could do more than I ever made with my Amiga...
Piss off!
It is obvious that actual hardware surpasses many times a 20 years old hardware, and actual software is handy and useful, and recent OSs are full of EYE-CANDY graphical GUIs...
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based]) to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
Give Amiga enough Horse-Powered CPUs and modern hardware with decent BUS DMA passthru band, and Amiga will kick'em all in the ass! ;-) :roll: :-P :lol:
-
Raffaele wrote:
It is obvious that actual hardware surpasses many times a 20 years old hardware, and actual software is handy and useful, and recent OSs are full of EYE-CANDY graphical GUIs...
Eye candy is the reason why a new PC or Mac will not be as responsive as you'd expect from several billion clock cycles per second. these machines would be fast, but it's not to the advantage of the manufacturers to design their software to be responsible in its resource usage. It's also not to their advantage to make the hardware designs and documentation accessible enough that someone else can. The lack of choice in operating systems stifles competition and creativity in application design, artificially inflates software prices, and raises the cost of doing business. Bah.
-
Raffaele wrote:
It is obvious that actual hardware surpasses many times a 20 years old hardware, and actual software is handy and useful, and recent OSs are full of EYE-CANDY graphical GUIs...
Yes, because ugly GUIs are the only ones worth using.
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based]) to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
I've got a closet full of Mac systems from about 1989 onward that would like to disagree with you.
-
pkillo wrote:
The lack of choice in operating systems stifles competition and creativity in application design, artificially inflates software prices, and raises the cost of doing business. Bah.
Lack of choices in OS?
I've got a PC here that will run:
Linux
Windows of any vintage
Unix
MacOS
BeOS
AROS
OS/2
...
How many can I run on a bog standard Amiga? m68k linux and AOS you say?
Now talk to me about lack of choices in operating systems.
-
It is obvious that actual hardware surpasses many times a 20 years old hardware, and actual software is handy and useful, and recent OSs are full of EYE-CANDY graphical GUIs...
.....and manage to emulate the Amiga on top of all that...
Personally I think WB3.9 was mostly eye candy - so the Ami aint exactly innocent in that dept either.
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based])
But after you've added all that stuff - it's not really all 20 year old hardware - is it? If you're going to say '20 year old hardware/software - then strip it down to that and go for it. Otherwise it's just a fallacious comment.
to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
apart from apples, acorns, atari'.......
Sorry - but the folks who just enjoy the retro look, feel, and fun of the Ami, while acknowledging it's day is pretty much done are also part of the community - love it, hate it, whatever.
Piss off yourself.
-
There is a distinct advantage to the Amiga not being a primary computer anymore. You are free to tinker. I don't do a lot of tweaking with my Mac Pro, I'll be up s**t creek without a paddle if I can't use it for a day or two, with the Amiga fixing something that you've really bollocks-up is part of the fun.
(http://planetsmilies.net/not-tagged-smiley-10785.gif)
-
B00tDisk wrote:
Lack of choices in OS?
I've got a PC here that will run:
Linux
Windows of any vintage
Unix
MacOS
BeOS
AROS
OS/2
...
Hmm. so, we've got UNIX; Windows; UNIX; UNIX; an operating system you can't get, afaik - certainly I'd love to dl beos, but my googling has been fruitless; AROS (I'll come back to this); and DOS.
UNIX: UNIX is UNIX, I really don't care whether your GUI is unique or different - the services the OS provides are consistently antiquated.
Windows: Enough said.
BeOS: Haiku is a work in progress, from what I understand. Certainly looks like it _will be_ nice, though. But it's not a real option at this point.
AROS: The website for AROS indicates that native operation is still in testing. Running it on Linux is running Linux as the OS, whatever may have control of the screen. This pretty much means that I can't use AROS on a system that I intend to do paid work on.
I just can't take the chance that there will be a software error that forces me to spend hours installing and configuring software. I'd use it for my media center, but I have AC97 audio, not a Creative 10k based soundcard, and my system doesn't have a usable open PCI slot.
DOS: Honestly, OS/2? Does it even have drivers for modern hardware, much less support for multi-core processors? AFAIK, it does not. I don't think I could even get OS/2 drivers for my video card!
So, adding up the viable operating systems, there's UNIX, and Windows. That's two choices, neither of which I'm happy with. UNIX is a multiuser server operating system, always was, always will be. You can rig it to run as a desktop operating system, but that's like buying a Mack truck and commuting in it.
-
It's interesting that Haiku and AROS are sort of in the same state, I remember Haiku was working on porting webkit at the same time as AROS and a lot of the issues were similar. I don't know if Haiku had better results than AROS or not...
(http://boards.cannabis.com/images/smilies/custom/141141st.gif)
-
bloodline wrote:
His younger brother, with a low paid job... a wife and two kids, living on a council estate... struggling to make ends meet, and surviving on benefits :-D
I have to disagree. I'd argue that AROS is a Chav.
Never worked a day in his life, will never make anything of himself. Brought into the world with much potential, but ultimately f**ked up by his parents. Thinks he's gods gift to everyone, and barks on about every insignificant non-achievement. Tries to make up for the fact that he's driving a sh**ty Vauxhall Nova by tarting it up with a cheap plastic body kit - but it still doesn't go.
He has a girlfriend, but only because she can't do any better - her last boyfriend is now a dumpster diving old man. ;-) He treats her like s**t, never listening to her or trying to fulfil her needs, he knows she has no alternative.
Question him and his lack of progress in the world, or suggest that he could do better and you'll only get abuse, especially from his parents. If they'd spent more time raising him right rather than slagging off other people (in particular the old man's younger brother) he might have been a winner.
Man, this computer-person analogy stuff if fun :-)
-
Hi,
@ bloodline,
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I honestly don't care... the it's an irrelevant issue... I can do stuff in realtime on my MacBook Pro that I can only dream of on my Amiga... so what the F**K does it matter?
==============================================================
Can you install a new video card in your macbook pro or how about a new sound card after 5 years of use. Or is it just another one of these new modern day convenience's that you throw away when apple decides to upgrade to new super macbook?
smerf
apple rotten to the core, reactivate vista the best OS in the world
-
uncharted wrote:
bloodline wrote:
His younger brother, with a low paid job... a wife and two kids, living on a council estate... struggling to make ends meet, and surviving on benefits :-D
I have to disagree. I'd argue that AROS is a Chav.
Never worked a day in his life, will never make anything of himself. Brought into the world with much potential, but ultimately f**ked up by his parents. Thinks he's gods gift to everyone, and barks on about every insignificant non-achievement. Tries to make up for the fact that he's driving a sh**ty Vauxhall Nova by tarting it up with a cheap plastic body kit - but it still doesn't go.
He has a girlfriend, but only because she can't do any better - her last boyfriend is now a dumpster diving old man. ;-) He treats her like s**t, never listening to her or trying to fulfil her needs, he knows she has no alternative.
Question him and his lack of progress in the world, or suggest that he could do better and you'll only get abuse, especially from his parents. If they'd spent more time raising him right rather than slagging off other people (in particular the old man's younger brother) he might have been a winner.
Man, this computer-person analogy stuff if fun :-)
I don't think this chav complains so much, but all else is pretty good :-)
-
The Amiga - it's
(http://webapps.prod.there.com/catalog/media/155827811.jpg)
-
smerf wrote:
Hi,
@ bloodline,
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I honestly don't care... the it's an irrelevant issue... I can do stuff in realtime on my MacBook Pro that I can only dream of on my Amiga... so what the F**K does it matter?
==============================================================
Can you install a new video card in your macbook pro or how about a new sound card after 5 years of use. Or is it just another one of these new modern day convenience's that you throw away when apple decides to upgrade to new super macbook?
Yes, I often update the video card and sound card in my PC laptop - oh wait.
:roll:
-
alexh wrote:
Prototype to the PSOne.
PSOne Psygnosis PsyQ Devkit.
SuperNintendo Hardware reference manuals (including SFX)
Sega Saturn Devkit.
Abandoned 3DFX based Dreamcast
StarFox II cartridge (and source code ;-))
Atari Jaguar Devkit (Alpine board + CD debug toilet)
Beta CD-Rs of Creature Shock for the Atari Jaguar
Amiga A3000
Atari StarWars upright arcade machine
Atari Badlands arcade machine
Numerous laptops who's only fault is a broken screen.
Any Sun workstation you care to mention
Silicon Graphics Indy 2
Except for the Jag CD's, I have to concede once again that alexh has all the best toys. :boohoo:
-
persia wrote:
The Amiga - it's
(http://webapps.prod.there.com/catalog/media/155827811.jpg)
Hmmmn, Burberry A1200 case mod anyone?
-
uncharted wrote:
persia wrote:
The Amiga - it's
(http://webapps.prod.there.com/catalog/media/155827811.jpg)
Hmmmn, Burberry A1200 case mod anyone?
:lol: that's a trick missed by A Inc. My god! A Burberry Amiga would have sold by the billion!!!! :-D
-
persia wrote:
It's interesting that Haiku and AROS are sort of in the same state, I remember Haiku was working on porting webkit at the same time as AROS and a lot of the issues were similar. I don't know if Haiku had better results than AROS or not...
(http://boards.cannabis.com/images/smilies/custom/141141st.gif)
It's a pity these people don't join up, to make a completely new OS, for todays rather complex wishes. For instance, multi-hierarchical, multi-relational files, programs and services set up in a coherent way, like a database. These kinds of things. There are many of these techniques to make clean and transparent system, towards the user and towards the developer.
Towards the user I'd say a drag 'n drop installation of programs, for instance.
POSIX and Amiga are both still much nicer than Windows, and Microsoft knows it, otherwise they wouldn't come up with Vista. But I'd say, it's time for POSIX2/Amiga2. And let it be made for one single modern computer configuration, and don't be bothered by writing countless of drivers.
-
Raffaele wrote:
How pityful and pathetic are those people saying my ACTUAL PC/Macintosh could do more than I ever made with my Amiga...
Piss off!
It is obvious that actual hardware surpasses many times a 20 years old hardware, and actual software is handy and useful, and recent OSs are full of EYE-CANDY graphical GUIs...
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based]) to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
Give Amiga enough Horse-Powered CPUs and modern hardware with decent BUS DMA passthru band, and Amiga will kick'em all in the ass! ;-) :roll: :-P :lol:
I totally agree!! :-D
Good amiga video that says a lot: link to youtube (http://youtube.com/watch?v=9mg6wrYCT9Q)
I can't say anything about mac, I have newer had the chance to use one :-?
-
>by kolla on 2008/6/9 23:24:10
>
>@amigaksi
>
>What the heck is wrong with you?!
Some guy on an Amiga forum is insulting the Amiga (and myself) with misinformation and there's something wrong with me if I speak out against him with FACTS? Perhaps, you want to answer as to what exactly you are denying: (1) digital joystick is superior to a USB-based one and USB can be implemented within a joystick port, (2) overscan area inherent to NTSC is not accessible via standard graphics cards or APIs, (3) timers are more accurate on Amiga than on PC. Perhaps, you are denying that API calls are less efficient to use than directly accessing standardized hardware. Even USB has multiple standards and even if there was only one hardware standard, you still have to go through the API since modern OSes won't allow you to access them directly anyways. And even if you can access them directly, you need more instructions to read a joystick than with a digital joystick. Or are you denying the fact the industries don't always use the latest technologies-- heck, even an Atari 800 with an LDA 54016 instruction is faster than reading a gameport which was developed years later.
Oh, one more thing, if you are going to reply leave out cursing me out or cursing the amiga out claiming I don't know modern hardware as these don't constitute rational arguments in the college that I come from.
-
The best thing about the Amiga was the fine screen modes which give it a style that modern computers dont have,
drawing with millions of pixels is much tougher than with nice 320x240 on an old monitor.
Modern computers and operating systems are on overload. so many sub routine, patches, etc..
My windows is a botch job, but in the modern world it a necessity for most things...
-
Problem with one single modern computer configuration is that in a year and a half it won't be modern anymore.
I think that would be a giant leap BACKWARDS into the bad-old days of computing.
As for the Amiga/Vista stuff - I think the only time Amiga would have been mentioned was if a spanish speaking employee was talking about his/her girlfriend.
Amiga was never a blip on MS's radar - they were busy targetting the business market, and the Amiga wasn't a business machine - it was viewed like an Atari console or C64, if as anything at all.
The first time MS took notice of games - or anything gaming - was when it came to their attention that more PC's had DOOM installed on them than Windows 95.
-
amigaksi wrote:
>by kolla on 2008/6/9 23:24:10
>
>@amigaksi
>
>What the heck is wrong with you?!
Some guy on an Amiga forum
I guess that would be me :-?
is insulting the Amiga (and myself)
Once I figured you out, I was happy to insult you. I never insulted the Amiga, it is after all my platform... I don't however, have an delusions as to what the Amiga is in the modern computing world -00s
Do you even use the Amiga any more, I mean professionally? I do...
with misinformation and there's something wrong with me if I speak out against him with FACTS?
I spoke the truth, you were essentially speaking gibberish...
Perhaps, you want to answer as to what exactly you are denying: (1) digital joystick is superior to a USB-based one and USB can be implemented within a joystick port,
You think technology from the early 80's is superior to USB... doesn't that alarm you that something is wrong in your brain?
(2) overscan area inherent to NTSC is not accessible via standard graphics cards or APIs,
Overscan is a totally alien concept in the modern world... meaningless!!! Why keep bringing it up? Perhaps we should be talking about the superiority of the Steam engine over the internal combustion engine?
(3) timers are more accurate on Amiga than on PC.
Given the fact that my PC or Mac have clocks that run at billions of Hz... means they can be far more accurate than a machine that only has a clock of 28MHz at it's fastest... And given that the CPU c]doesn't run that fast means it can't respond to anything at that frequency...
Perhaps, you are denying that API calls are less efficient to use than directly accessing standardized hardware.
The advantage of Standardised API calls over hitting the Hardware is well proven... the downfall of the Amiga was caused in part by devs hitting the hardware.
Even USB has multiple standards and even if there was only one hardware standard, you still have to go through the API since modern OSes won't allow you to access them directly anyways.
No, EHCI is the standard USB2.0 hardware interface. An OS uses APIs to ensure the best use of the Hardware and allow future compatibility... this is a proven concept... Hitting the hardware means that the Hardware is fixed function forever...
And even if you can access them directly, you need more instructions to read a joystick than with a digital joystick. Or are you denying the fact the industries don't always use the latest technologies-- heck, even an Atari 800 with an LDA 54016 instruction is faster than reading a gameport which was developed years later.
???
-Edit- go on then... run a low latency 24bit Sound card from an Atari 800 joyport... eh? not possible? Ok... how about a mass storage device bulk transfer at 20MB/s?
Oh, one more thing, if you are going to reply leave out cursing me out or cursing the amiga out claiming I don't know modern hardware as these don't constitute rational arguments in the college that I come from.
But after pages and pages of rational posts from myself... I can only conclude you are either 12 years old or retarded, heaven forbid... both...
-
As I said insults don't constitute arguments. Everything I stated was a FACT; if you can't understand, it's your problem or lack of education.
I guess one point I can TRY again to see if you can understand:
>The advantage of Standardised API calls over hitting the Hardware is well proven... the downfall of the Amiga was caused in part by devs hitting the hardware.
USB has multiple standards-- the most recent may be 2.0. Previously compaq and others had their own. If your hardware is standardized, you can access the hardware directly since the ports/Mem locations will remain the same in the future so you avoid the overhead of APIs. That is the optimal way to use the hardware. You avoid overhead, and you know EXACTLY how many instructions you used for real-time analsys. I already gave you example of VGA. You can still access 1024*768*32 in DOS with A000:0000 only thing that became nonstandard was the VGA Video window port.
-
pkillo wrote:
So, adding up the viable operating systems, there's UNIX, and Windows.
And yet the choices you arbitrarily rule out still do as much as if not more than the Amiga. Just off the top of my head, I can tell you straight up they all sport better web-browsers than the best ones for the Amiga.
-
amigaksi wrote:
As I said insults don't constitute arguments. Everything I stated was a FACT; if you can't understand, it's your problem or lack of education.
You ignore rational discourse... and thinking up insults for you is more fun :-)
My Education has never been in question, as pretty much anyone on this forum could probably attest to... though I'm not great at German :-( and this annoys me...
I guess one point I can TRY again to see if you can understand:
>The advantage of Standardised API calls over hitting the Hardware is well proven... the downfall of the Amiga was caused in part by devs hitting the hardware.
USB has multiple standards-- the most recent may be 2.0.
Err... yes, the hardware gets better... but luckily no apps hit the USB hardware interface and so work perfectly regardless of the hardware revision... score one to the software API...
Previously compaq and others had their own.
Yeah, go on look up OHCI and UHCI... but it didn't matter that USB1.0 had different hardware standards, the common software interface meant apps didn't have to know what interface was in use... Score two to the software API...
If your hardware is standardized, you can access the hardware directly since the ports/Mem locations will remain the same in the future so you avoid the overhead of APIs.
As soon as you expose the hardware... it is stuck in time, you can never make it better without breaking all the existing software...
That is the optimal way to use the hardware.
No it isn't... its the sure fire way of tying your App to one specific hardware revision... all bugs in that revision have to be carried into future revisions... Score three to the Software API...
You avoid overhead, and you know EXACTLY how many instructions you used for real-time analsys.
Who gives a crap... my nice modern CPu can execute billions of instructions every second... in fact, the device I want to access is probably a million times slower than my CPU... if I had to sit there waiting for the device I'd be wasting CPU cycles.... I'll let the OS worry about handling all that and just pull the data stream as I want it.
I already gave you example of VGA. You can still access 1024*768*32 in DOS with A000:0000 only thing that became nonstandard was the VGA Video window port.
You have exposed your ignorance... that Screen mode would be a VESA mode... not VGA... again... you would only use VGA or even VESA if you don't want any hardware acceleration... Remember the mess the PC was in in the days of DOS before standardised software APIs of Windows95... without them the PC would have gone the way of the Amiga....
-
B00tDisk wrote:
pkillo wrote:
So, adding up the viable operating systems, there's UNIX, and Windows.
And yet the choices you arbitrarily rule out still do as much as if not more than the Amiga. Just off the top of my head, I can tell you straight up they all sport better web-browsers than the best ones for the Amiga.
Just off the top of my head I can run Netscape Navigator on a stone age 68k Mac... that's better than the Amiga.. sadly... :-(
-
@sig999: Not if it's built in a modular fashion. Leave room in the specs for multiple, compatible versions of components that can be upgraded (the cpu fast slot on big box amigas is a good example) and you'll find it would take more than a year and a half for the hardware to reach obsolescence. And if the system is designed to present a clear, concise, and consistent interface to the software, only low-level functions of the operating system would need updating to run on the latest and greatest anyway.
@amigaksi: You can only use the writes to the address you're giving in real mode, at least on the x64 systems I've worked with. As far as I could tell while studying this very problem as an undergraduate, when you enter a 64-bit mode you lose that functionality. At that point you have to copy the VESA BIOS into RAM and set up an entry table for it, and then use its routines instead, iirc. So while you're right that under DOS you can do that, it's not really applicable to problems requiring the full resources of a modern PC.
@B00tDisk: I'd love to consider the two I did rule out, and believe me that I check their websites once in a while in the hopes of finding some more progress made. I would even consider spending some time helping out on one of those projects if I had the time and the right hardware to test against.
The other operating systems, except windows, are all UNIX. I'm not ruling them out, they're the same choice with a different wrapper.
@bloodline: maybe we should be talking about the steam engine! I could burn my trash and old newspapers instead of gasoline at $4.50 a gallon! :lol:
-
Wow, theres a lot of crap in this thread. Looks like some folks who don't write software or design hardware have come in to have a thing or two to say about things they don't understand.
-
@sig999: Not if it's built in a modular fashion. Leave room in the specs for multiple, compatible versions of components that can be upgraded (the cpu fast slot on big box amigas is a good example) and you'll find it would take more than a year and a half for the hardware to reach obsolescence.
So...kinda like a PC?
I'm just curious , because folks arguments have been so circular in this whole thread.
-
koaftder wrote:
Wow, theres a lot of crap in this thread. Looks like some folks who don't write software or design hardware have come in to have a thing or two to say about things they don't understand.
I'm just enjoying the show and waiting for the first 'FIHMA' (fortunately, I had my Amiga) story to bust out :)
You know the one.... 'Me and Bob here were sitting on the porch waiting for the space shuttle to cross the sky when suddenly we heard one of the dishes had gone bust... well... fortunately I had my Amiga.... So with some wires that Bob stripped from his grandmothers vibrator, and a few arexx scripts we hooked up his TV dish and managed to reestablish coms and save the day...'
Always good for a giggle.
eh there was a point in time when the tall tales, misinformation and boneheadedness used to annoy me - but now I just sit back and let the good times roll.
-
@sig999: Not like a PC. Think more like a server, just in a friendlier form factor and with the kind of devices home users want attached. My PCs annoy me - never had that happen with a sparcserver [or any other brand of unix server or midrange for that matter]. It's a matter of bringing the kind of engineering that goes into a $20k or even $200k computer to a less expensive platform. Good design doesn't have to be limited to large commercial-grade computers. I'm going to go with a car analogy here: if you've never driven a Ferrari, you don't know what you're missing. Most computer users simply have never had access to the kind of systems I've used and consider well-designed.
-
Sig999 wrote:
I'm just enjoying the show and waiting for the first 'FIHMA' (fortunately, I had my Amiga) story to bust out :)
You know the one.... 'Me and Bob here were sitting on the porch waiting for the space shuttle to cross the sky when suddenly we heard one of the dishes had gone bust... well... fortunately I had my Amiga.... So with some wires that Bob stripped from his grandmothers vibrator, and a few arexx scripts we hooked up his TV dish and managed to reestablish coms and save the day...'
Always good for a giggle.
This, FTW.
-
Sig999 wrote:
I'm just curious , because folks arguments have been so circular in this whole thread.
No, they're elliptical. :-)
I made it to page 6...something about insults over Vee-Gee As and US Bees and stuff? Did I miss anything? And the price of gas and steam engines? Sorry.
-
I kind of liken the Amiga to Dale Earnhardt. He's dead now, but at his peak he'd beat the competition even when he had clearly inferior hardware.
Even though he's gone, his fans are still extremely loyal and rabid.
-
>by pkillo on 2008/6/10 20:46:40
>...
>@amigaksi: You can only use the writes to the address you're giving in real mode, at least on the x64 systems I've worked with. As far as I could tell while studying this very problem as an undergraduate, when you enter a 64-bit mode you lose that functionality. At that point you have to copy the VESA BIOS into RAM and set up an entry table for it, and then use its routines instead, iirc. So while you're right that under DOS you can do that, it's not really applicable to problems requiring the full resources of a modern PC.
There's an exported variable in Windows 3.x/'95/'98/'98SE/ME called _A000 that you need to import and that gives you the selector which maps to physical address A000:0000 and you use offsets as normal. I did this with the multimedia Gita CDROM (shown towards the end at http://www.mpdos.com) and was able to write directly to the VGA memory in protected mode. As far as setting the mode, you can directly do the IN/OUTs to set the mode to avoid BIOS calls, but higher resolutions of SVGAs don't have standard IN/OUTs so you basically have to code for some of the popular cards or try your chances that at setting the mode via the VESA BIOS. As long as the routine does not use segments, you can call the routine in VESA BIOS directly from protected mode. The Gita CD does this as well and you can compare the frame rate speed of Windows API (SetDIBBitsToDevice) verses VESA modes.
The Gita CD uses the Windows resources normally for other things like sound, mouse, printing, etc.
-
B00tDisk wrote:
Raffaele wrote:
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based]) to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
I've got a closet full of Mac systems from about 1989 onward that would like to disagree with you.
Macintosh OS upto version 9 it is the most ugly Operating System ever written...
Upto version 7 it is full of bugs and it is heavily hacked by Apple developers to keep all the system up and running.
There is a document somewhere on internet (if the site is still up... I don't know), publishing the true witness of developers of Fusion Mac-Amiga emulator (or èerhaps was it Emplant emulator??? I vaguely remember it).
They disassembled MacOS and found it full of spaghetti code.
And regard any other machine I used at University Macintoshes with PPC 600 MHz CPU and MacOS 9...
And I never seen an OS lesser responsible than Macintosh...
Believe me... It should be a very ugly OS such an OS that makes the PPC CPU to seat down...
In comparison even a 200 MHz ancient Amiga accelerator card gives the same response feeling than a 600 MHz Macintosh...
And it is not a problem of hardware....
Hardware of Macintoshes was almost perfect... It was just all OSs previous than MacOS X hat are bad written and very low performing...
But MacOS X does not enter the competition... It is just FreeBSD (to gain stability, reliability and multitasking) hacked with macintosh interface GUI.
-
Sig999 wrote:
Raffaele wrote:
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based])
But after you've added all that stuff - it's not really all 20 year old hardware - is it? If you're going to say '20 year old hardware/software - then strip it down to that and go for it. Otherwise it's just a fallacious comment.
to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
Piss off yourself.
[/quote]
Don't make a fool of yourself...
1) Any Amiga accelerator card it is not produced after 1996...
So even the PPC acclerator cards in Amiga have 12 years on their shoulders...
2) Amiga can mount modern PCI graphic card, and sound card...
No your stupid Acurn Athari and Macinzozz built upto 1992 could mount modern PCI cards.
Only the Amiga has enough manufacturers to create such beautiful BUS extenders like Prometheus and mount modern PCI card, USB 2.0, etrcetera and still being productive with software built upto 1999...
Because Amiga software was far superior in its ages that it could still be used with profit.
Oh... and even a 68030 Amiga with 50 MHz is still productive...
And it emulates classic Macintosh better than Macintosh real hardware...
With the difference that a 68030/50 Amiga is still being usable, while ancient 68030/50 Macintoshes are so sloooooooow and so poor responsive that they seats on their ass.
-
bloodline wrote:
Just off the top of my head I can run Netscape Navigator on a stone age 68k Mac... that's better than the Amiga.. sadly... :-(
Now your statements are a bit gratuitous...
Sure you used Macintosh Machines, and it is obvious that in the age of 68K machines these Mac machines were far more expensive than any Amiga, but have also many, many RAM onboard as standard feature that let them run Netscape Navigator far better than any Amiga could run its browsers...
In that Age, Amiga abandoned its first browser, Amiga Mosaic, that was enhanced far more than original Mosaic, and switched to programs like Ibrowse, AWeb, Voyager, that were still BETA software full of bugs...
Also Netscape Navigator was supported with a robust team of developers, while Amiga browsers were maintaned by little teams.
To make you an example
I have all issues of italian magazine "Enigma Amiga"...
In these historical issues of this magazine (upto 1994/1996 there are well explained how to install Macintosh emulator on Amiga, go on Apple stores and buy the original MacOS, and then install it on the emulated Macintosh, because Office for Mac and Internet browsers for Mac were better than Amiga counterparts...
But it is still true that Amiga with enough RAM and decent CPUs could emulate the Mac, better than any real Macintosh Hardware and make these browsers run far better than real Mac.
Again then when Amiga browsers evolved, then they surpassed Netscape Navigator in many camps...
All over the internet there are testimoniances of people that could affirm that Voyager on Amiga, with enough RAM and a decent processor, it is a very pleasant and unsurpassed experience, more satisfying than any other browser on any platform...
Unfortunately Voyager development was stopped and it could manage only HTML 3.2 without CSS...
Also Netscape Navigator is officially dead...
So we could not see any actual match of performances involving these two browsers in a leal competition.
-
Raffaele wrote:
Don't make a fool of yourself...
1) Any Amiga accelerator card it is not produced after 1996...
So even the PPC acclerator cards in Amiga have 12 years on their shoulders...
2) Amiga can mount modern PCI graphic card, and sound card...
No your stupid Acurn Athari and Macinzozz built upto 1992 could mount modern PCI cards.
Only the Amiga has enough manufacturers to create such beautiful BUS extenders like Prometheus and mount modern PCI card, USB 2.0, etrcetera and still being productive with software built upto 1999...
Because Amiga software was far superior in its ages that it could still be used with profit.
Oh... and even a 68030 Amiga with 50 MHz is still productive...
And it emulates classic Macintosh better than Macintosh real hardware...
With the difference that a 68030/50 Amiga is still being usable, while ancient 68030/50 Macintoshes are so sloooooooow and so poor responsive that they seats on their ass.
Ah... so when you say 20 years - you really meant 12 years?
As for Mac's - I wouldn't know, nor really care - I don't own one - I meantioned the names of the computers that were around at the time that also did what you said.
But I do have to ask - if the PC sucks so hard and all - and the 20 year hardware is so fantastic... why do you want to mount a PCI card again? It kind of goes against the grain of your zealotry dont you think?
As for productivity.. well, I could argue that daisy chaining 6 together and using them as a boat anchor is productive.. there's productivity, and then theres productivity ya know? Exactly WHAT tasks can you do right now that can't be done better, faster, cheaper?
I'm curious.
-
Sig999 wrote:
Raffaele wrote:
Don't make a fool of yourself...
1) Any Amiga accelerator card it is not produced after 1996...
So even the PPC acclerator cards in Amiga have 12 years on their shoulders...
2) Amiga can mount modern PCI graphic card, and sound card...
No your stupid Acurn Athari and Macinzozz built upto 1992 could mount modern PCI cards.
Only the Amiga has enough manufacturers to create such beautiful BUS extenders like Prometheus and mount modern PCI card, USB 2.0, etrcetera and still being productive with software built upto 1999...
Because Amiga software was far superior in its ages that it could still be used with profit.
Oh... and even a 68030 Amiga with 50 MHz is still productive...
And it emulates classic Macintosh better than Macintosh real hardware...
With the difference that a 68030/50 Amiga is still being usable, while ancient 68030/50 Macintoshes are so sloooooooow and so poor responsive that they seats on their ass.
Ah... so when you say 20 years - you really meant 12 years?
What part of: "Classic Amiga Hardware has 20 years and even latest acclerator card made for Amiga are 12 years old!" you do not understood? :roll:
-
Raffaele wrote:
Again then when Amiga browsers evolved, then they surpassed Netscape Navigator in many camps...
crap. and I've used plenty - Amosaic, Voyager, Ibrowse, Aweb.. every one I could find from 1997 - 2002, on the real machine, on emulators, on amithlon... and I can honestly say that not a one surpassed it.
And this knowing full well that Netscape was a bloated piece of poop.
All over the internet there are testimoniances of people that could affirm that Voyager on Amiga, with enough RAM and a decent processor, it is a very pleasant and unsurpassed experience, more satisfying than any other browser on any platform...
crap. I used it, and have to say even Konqueror (same time frame) did a better job.
I think you should look up 'unsurpassed' I don't think it means what you think it does.
I'm sorry - but I'm hard pushed to find a single factual reference in your entire post - now we're just pushing into the grounds of lunacy.
The Ami was NEVER that good at using the WWW - it was on the outs even then.. there were many things it was at one time great at.... however this is getting really close to the 'FIHMA' stories.
-
Raffaele wrote:
What part of: "Classic Amiga Hardware has 20 years and even latest acclerator card made for Amiga are 12 years old!" you do not understood? :roll:
Then you should have said '20 year old hardware...oh and this 12 year old hardware..oh and a couple of PCI cards made for the machine I loathe'
*shrug*
But that's pretty typical so I see - making your argument then changing your parameters after someone says 'hey..that's bull'
lets once again see what you wrote:
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based])
it's like a fine print disclaimer on the commercials I edit (that always make me laugh)
I could say ONLY c64 (with maybe a few modern add ons made in the last 10 years)....
-
Yep, it says a lot that the game the song is about doesn't run on the Amiga...
(http://bp2.blogger.com/_XrIxN7JqDQo/RiL0BQCxpuI/AAAAAAAAABI/gD-WAiq3LFM/s320/Smiley+Laughing.gif)
taunusand wrote:
Good amiga video that says a lot: link to youtube (http://youtube.com/watch?v=9mg6wrYCT9Q)
I can't say anything about mac, I have newer had the chance to use one :-?
-
persia wrote:
Yep, it says a lot that the game the song is about doesn't run on the Amiga...
and edited on a mac.....
Not detracting from it - Eric makes some top notch animations, but in that context, yeah, I had a giggle too.
-
Raffaele wrote:
Sig999 wrote:
Ah... so when you say 20 years - you really meant 12 years?
What part of: "Classic Amiga Hardware has 20 years and even latest acclerator card made for Amiga are 12 years old!" you do not understood? :roll:
Yes, but as soon as you add that 12 year old Accelerator card and that 10 year old PCI bus board and that 8 year old PCI-GFX card and that 9 year old PCI-SoundCard and that 5 year old PCI-USB card... the machine you are talking about is not 20 years old anymore...
-
Raffaele wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Just off the top of my head I can run Netscape Navigator on a stone age 68k Mac... that's better than the Amiga.. sadly... :-(
Now your statements are a bit gratuitous...
Are they?
Sure you used Macintosh Machines, and it is obvious that in the age of 68K machines these Mac machines were far more expensive than any Amiga, but have also many, many RAM onboard as standard feature that let them run Netscape Navigator far better than any Amiga could run its browsers...
The cost of the machine wasn't part of your statement... But you could buy a highend Amiga with similar specs to a Mac for around the same price, at that time.
In that Age, Amiga abandoned its first browser, Amiga Mosaic, that was enhanced far more than original Mosaic, and switched to programs like Ibrowse, AWeb, Voyager, that were still BETA software full of bugs...
Does this paragraph support or weaken your argument? I appreaciate English may not be your first language, and I'm having difficulty understanding.
Also Netscape Navigator was supported with a robust team of developers, while Amiga browsers were maintaned by little teams.
And...? That was never in question, you asked "what 20 year old machine would be more productive than an Amiga"... we have given examples.
To make you an example
I have all issues of italian magazine "Enigma Amiga"...
In these historical issues of this magazine (upto 1994/1996 there are well explained how to install Macintosh emulator on Amiga, go on Apple stores and buy the original MacOS, and then install it on the emulated Macintosh, because Office for Mac and Internet browsers for Mac were better than Amiga counterparts...
So 20 years ago the Mac had better software than the Amiga had 20 years ago... fine...
But it is still true that Amiga with enough RAM and decent CPUs could emulate the Mac, better than any real Macintosh Hardware and make these browsers run far better than real Mac.
No they couldn't... the Amiga display hardware was awful at running Mac Apps, most of them expected 16bit displays... and if I ran my Amiga with 256 colours the SErial port couldn't handle the speed of a 33Kbps modem... or even 14.4Kbps for that matter... all the Bus time was used up by the display...
Again then when Amiga browsers evolved, then they surpassed Netscape Navigator in many camps...
No, the last Nascape that runs on a 68k Mac is still better tan any Amiga browser I have on my Amigas...
All over the internet there are testimoniances of people that could affirm that Voyager on Amiga, with enough RAM and a decent processor, it is a very pleasant and unsurpassed experience, more satisfying than any other browser on any platform...
Unfortunately Voyager development was stopped and it could manage only HTML 3.2 without CSS...
I have Voyager 3... it was pretty good, nothing compared with Netscape though...
Also Netscape Navigator is officially dead...
So is the Amiga...
So we could not see any actual match of performances involving these two browsers in a leal competition.
??? now or 12 years ago when both were in developement?
-
If I didn't have a CSPPC, I probably wouldn't still be using an Amiga. I don't really think a stock Amiga can be given a place in the modern computing world - 00s. An expanded/upgraded Amiga, though, is a different story. It may not be able to run much of anything a PC can, and it creates a challenge to find ways to get the output generated by an Amiga into the mainstream, but it's certainly possible.
Just about any time I sit down to do a project, I first try to work out how the Amiga can get it done. Most of the time I don't even involve the PC. The Amiga has just enough to make it work. On the occasions the Amiga can't cope, I start with the PC. And almost invariably, frustration sets in because the PC wants to fight the way I work. I still get work done, but without that warm fuzzy feeling, y'know?
Amiga - The Pleasure is Worth the Pain
-
bloodline wrote:
Yes, but as soon as you add that 12 year old Accelerator card and that 10 year old PCI bus board and that 8 year old PCI-GFX card and that 9 year old PCI-SoundCard and that 5 year old PCI-USB card... the machine you are talking about is not 20 years old anymore...
Excuse my poor english But in Amiga you can use ancient Picasso96 cards still 20 years old, or even add EL-CHEAPO PCI graphic card that are 5 years old...
I do not see a crime in this...
Still it is only 1992 computer that can mount internal modern PCI Cards with BUS expander...
Also do not make silly statements attempting to confusing readers...
20 years old motherboard it is still 20 years old motherboard...
You can't change this fact...
-
Raffaele wrote:
Sig999 wrote:
Raffaele wrote:
But it is still true that ONLY THE AMIGA it is the only 20 years old hardware+software system capable (with decent Accelerator, graphic card, and Audio Card [Maybe PCI-BUS based])
But after you've added all that stuff - it's not really all 20 year old hardware - is it? If you're going to say '20 year old hardware/software - then strip it down to that and go for it. Otherwise it's just a fallacious comment.
to be still productive to write documents, browse internet and get mail and FTP (without be harassed from viruses), and to listen music, and good enough for painting and image retouching too...
Piss off yourself.
I have an old PowerMac 7600, a machine introduced in 1996... it has better CPU, GFX and audio than any Amiga of the same time... plus microsoft office, photoshop, various cad programs, internet explorer and Netscape etc... it's much more useful than an Amgia of the same time... in fact the Architects firm that I got if from only stopepd using it last year... :-o
-
Raffaele wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Yes, but as soon as you add that 12 year old Accelerator card and that 10 year old PCI bus board and that 8 year old PCI-GFX card and that 9 year old PCI-SoundCard and that 5 year old PCI-USB card... the machine you are talking about is not 20 years old anymore...
Excuse my poor english
Your English is very good, but I fear you might not be able to express yourself as best/subtly you want.
But in Amiga you can use ancient Picasso96 cards still 20 years old, or even add EL-CHEAPO PCI graphic card that are 5 years old...
I do not see a crime in this...
Still it is only 1992 computer that can mount internal modern PCI Cards with BUS expander...
Also do not make silly statements attempting to confusing readers...
20 years old motherboard it is still 20 years old motherboard...
You can't change this fact...
But that motherboard is providing little more than a few timing signals from the CIAs, ROM access and power (or not if the PCI bus is powered). The real motherboard is the CPU Card + PCI board... the Amiga has been relegated to a Clock and ROM Dongle...
-
Raffaele wrote:
Excuse my poor english But in Amiga you can use ancient Picasso96 cards still 20 years old, or even add EL-CHEAPO PCI graphic card that are 5 years old...
I do not see a crime in this...
Still it is only 1992 computer that can mount internal modern PCI Cards with BUS expander...
Also do not make silly statements attempting to confusing readers...
20 years old motherboard it is still 20 years old motherboard...
You can't change this fact...
I never said I could - but it that isn't what you originally stated. You mentioned being productive and using the web and FTP and writing documents and fixing images... well all those things could be done with other computers at the same time, which means that they can STILL do these things - on their existing hardware.
So, you original statement is false... not only from a hardware standpoint - but also from a software standpoint (which you also mentioned - 20 year old hardware/software)
From a software standpoint the '20 year' (which btw would be 1988) is invention too. When did Amosaic come out? 1996ish?
Amitcp 1993ish?
Again, the Ami did some wonderful things in it's hayday that other computers COULDN'T do.. for instance when it came out the PC was using 16 colors and the Mac at the time, even though it had a gui interface was using 2.
Inventing stuff detracts from the machines very real accomplishments and makes you look foolish.
-
bloodline wrote:
Does this paragraph support or weaken your argument? I appreaciate English may not be your first language, and I'm having difficulty understanding.
No english is not my native language...
So 20 years ago the Mac had better software than the Amiga had 20 years ago... fine...
Again attempting to confuse readers?
As I said here
Raffaele wrote:
Also Netscape Navigator was supported with a robust team of developers, while Amiga browsers were maintaned by little teams.
Better software it was just a matter of better investments and big development teams made of many many people...
Amiga had decent software comparing to PCs and Macintoshes, but she never did in Office camp and in Browsers...
She was enough good in Music, painting, videoediting... she has some decent wordprocessors and some usable browsers.
So what?
Also Netscape Navigator is officially dead...
So is the Amiga...
And so is dead your poor old 68K Macintosh and so is dead your precious PPC Macintosh running dinosaur MacOS...
So please don't bother us continuing using it as they were precious evidences to improve and to enhance your babbling...
-
So...hang on....
Amiga browsers were unsurpassed and better than Netscape Navigator.....
or Amiga had not so good software in browsers compared to the Mac?
I'm confused... which is it?
Seriously.
-
Sig999 wrote:
So...hang on....
Amiga browsers were unsurpassed and better than Netscape Navigator.....
or Amiga had not so good software in browsers compared to the Mac?
I'm confused... which is it?
Seriously.
I used netscape on 486 DX2 100 MHz and on Macintosh (I think it was Mac II FX (???), and it did not seem to me such a great software...
Sure on Windows it hanged too much times...
On Mac it was far better more reliable...
It was good compared to Amiga browsers because it had many, many many options.
but this is a matter of MONEY, investments and enormous developing teams...
I used Amiga browsers only on Amiga machines that were not mine, with few RAM, and these browsers were still buggy versions so I could not say they were better or worse than Netscape Navigator.
Sure they lacked many features, but they are lightweight and performed quite good their task to make me surfing the internet.
Personally I found wintel and some Macintosh browsers ENORMOUS and hungry of RAM compared to Amiga software of the same class...
This sure makes Amiga better than these browsers on different platforms.
Recently on some Amiga forum sites (I remember it on Amigaworld.net, if I remeber it well) I read the testimoniances of people who used Voyager last version and they said that the feeling they had with Voyager it was better than any browser experience they had...
I could not testimony it by myself, because I do not own Voyager, so I can only report their comments...
Why I should not believe them?
(/seaching the internet to find these testimonies)
-
Why I should not believe them?
(/seaching the internet to find these testimonies)
Because they're delusional.
I wouldn't bother to load a browser on my amiga. The ram would probably fly out of their sockets and flames would spew forth from the processor the moment it hit a 10mb myspace page chock full of animated gifs and gobs of javascript code.
-
bloodline wrote:
Just off the top of my head I can run Netscape Navigator on a stone age 68k Mac... that's better than the Amiga.. sadly... :-(
You could use Fusion to run it on the Amiga :-D
Actually I did play with it back in the day, and it was pretty good considering. The main problem was that image loading was very slooooow. Don't know if that was an Amiga/Emulation issue (I was running in 256 colours on an AGA machine) or a general speed issue with Netscape.
-
Recently on some Amiga forum sites (i remember it on Amigaworld.net, if I remeber it well) I read the testimoniances of people who used Voyager last version and they said that the feeling they had with Voyager it was better than any browser experience they had...
I could not testimony it by myself, because I do not own Voyager, so I can only report their comments...
Why I should not believe them?
(/seaching the internet to find these testimonies)
I used Amosaic when it came out - and it wasn't that great and that was around 1996. by that stage Netscape was a far better browser - I think that was around Netscapes prime, before it's downhill slide into bloatware. I had used Netscape at work on a 486 since it came out around 1994 - thus I had great hopes for a Amosaic on my home machine (my Ami). So - I used them both reguluarly within the same 24 hour period.
As for Voyager/Netscape - you can beleive whatever you choose to read.. I'm saying 'I used them both - side by side - and it simply ain't so'
That's my testimonial - so I don't NEED others when I've actually done it myself.
When had great hopes for Amithlon and tried every browser there was at the time - including the last versions of Voyager and Ibrowse. So - I not only tried them, but tried them on the equivilent of an accelerated Amiga AND a graphics card. I tried them alongside Netscape
And to tell the truth - even if it HAD suprassed Netscape, by that stage that was no great accomplishment anymore.
Now.. to say something is 'unsurpassed' is something different again - that is to say it is the best - now being the best experience can be a subjective thing, but no matter how I slice it - I can't see using the web with Voyager as unsurpassed... not by a long shot.
That's just the way it is - here in reality.
Seriously, this whole argument is like saying I can put a CD ROM on my Sega Megadrive and outperfom a Playstation 3. It can't, it won't, and to tell the truth that doesn't bother me because if I wanted to use a playstation 3 I'd buy one. The fact that it can't is part of it's charm and appeal.
-
Warning:
I remember of Voyager and I said that was better experience than Netscape for many Amiga users, but seems that better experience in Amiga was with IBrowse AND NOT Voyager...
With a brief search in google I found twice:
First testimony is the inquirer of Interview with Bill Panagouleas asking him why to insist with Mozilla when he prefers Ibrowse far better:
http://www.discreetfx.com/AmiZillaInterview.htm
And here is some mail collected of some people discussing...
One is affirming that Mozilla sucks more than Ibrowse
http://www.mail-archive.com/voyager@vapor.com/msg11911.html
Found more when I have some time, had to leave internet connection for almost three hours...
P.S.
I actually use Opera on my laptop PC Wintel, Sputnik and AWeb on my Pegasos/MorphOS...
So I have no more problems with modern HTML 4.0 and CSS that afflicts old Amiga browsers.
-
I think you need to re-read that second one.
It's saying that he THINKS it sucks while agreeing it lacks features and is not as good.
He 'prefers' to use ibrowse...
See above anyways - I've used them both side by side - I don't LIKE mozilla - I don't LIKE netscape (as I've said before it became a big bloated pile of pooh) - that being said, it is a better browser.
It does it's task better - it displays web pages better.
And that's all it really comes down to. And as the web marches on and people use it more and more, as it adopts more and more features, ibrowse, voyager, etc. will fall further and further behind to the point (which I think we are at very close to, although others may disagree) to where the machine is no longer technically able to use the modern web productively.
The first is an interview with the head of DiscreetFX - it mentions very little about browsers other than he prefers Firefox over Internet explorer and that he uses Ibrowse on his Amiga.
In case you haven't followed this - DiscreetFX are supporting the Amizilla project - an amiga port of Mozilla (which has never happened) which is probably why it is brought up in the interview at all.
It doesn't say anything like what you've written. If it does please show me - because that certainly isn't what I walked away from reading either of these 'testimonials'.
Sorry - but try again
If anyonere were saying 'Ibrowse/Voyager are better than Mosaic' - THAT would be a statement of truth... not the fantastic slam dunk folks some folks would rally behind... but it would be a statement of truth, and something you could prove...... and right now that would be something indeed.
Right now you're saying that product X I don't use on a computer I don't use is better than product Y that I don't use.
That's not really grounds for an objective argument anyways.
-
bloodline wrote:
No, the last Nascape that runs on a 68k Mac is still better tan any Amiga browser I have on my Amigas...
68k Mac even has a fairly modern version of ICab, which (as far as compatibility) blows away Amiga browsers IMHO... and it's FREE. :D
-
>by Roj on 2008/6/11 13:11:21
>If I didn't have a CSPPC, I probably wouldn't still be using >an Amiga. I don't really think a stock Amiga can be given a >place in the modern computing world - 00s.
If you first define what you want to use the computer for, then you can make a better determination if the Amiga can be used for that purpose. Modern computing uses games so I would say Amiga can still be used for games. If you want a simple machine for just controlling external devices and stuff, I would prefer an Atari or Amiga with it's simplicity and ports than the latest PC. I used to use the Amiga for video titling stuff and they came out pretty good. Recently, I got used to using the PC as just a big server for all the files, image disks, etc. for Atari and Amiga and just upload whatever I need via a cable like this one:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320262511361
Some things just don't require complex OSes and 4Ghz processors.
-
swoslover wrote:
lol the mac guy definitely wouldn't be cool. He'd be the kind of guy who puts pretentious literature & world music on his coffee table to impress friends.
As for the Amiga an aging lady who you can tell used to be pretty would be appropriate.
Not to hijack the thread back to the beginning, but it just struck me. The person that should play the Amiga in the Mac commercials is Jane Seymour (http://www.imdb.com/find?q=Jane+Seymour).
She was really hot when she was young. She aged well, and even though she is now past her prime, we would still like to take her home and play with her for awhile. :-D