Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga community support ideas => Topic started by: amigadave on July 14, 2008, 07:48:33 PM
-
With the court case dragging on interminably and the outcome seeming to not favor Hyperion, perhaps it is time for the AmigaOS4 team to consider another alternative.
I know there is a lot of bad blood between some of the users of AmigaOS4.x and MorphOS2.x, but I am not up to speed on any details of developer disputes between the AmigaOS4.x team and the MorphOS2.x team. I am sure there must be some animosity between the two teams, but it is a shame that they cannot resolve their differences and work on a common goal and project. Take all that talent and knowledge from both OSes and create a new Amiga compatible and "Amiga like" OS that is a step into the future for everyone. Stop fighting each other and work together and maybe something worth attracting the buying dollars/pounds/euros of the few remaining Amiga fans and maybe a few curious Linux users, or dissatisfied Windows users.
I personally am leaning toward getting and using MorphOS2.x, but would much rather see a combined effort which results in something bigger and better than both AmigaOS4.x and MorphOS2.x.
Let's bring the two split parts of the Amiga community back together.
I know that this is all just wishful thinking, but what can it hurt to express it? Please no "Red" or "Blue" trolls here.
-
Hopefully without much arguing.
-
Take all that talent and knowledge from both OSes and create a new Amiga compatible and "Amiga like" OS that is a step into the future for everyone.
I see a small problem here, assuming Amiga Inc wins (and I can't see how they could lose really), it means that they would pursue any attempt to re-use the knowledge gained from working with the AmigaOS 4.0 (it is based on the original sources after all), meaning anyone in the team would be tainted forever.
So assuming such project would ever be started (note: this is speculation, I am not signing up to any such project here), it'd be quite impossible to include anyone from the OS4 team, just alone because of this.
BTW I don't find this funny, only slightly ironic.
-
Piru wrote:
Take all that talent and knowledge from both OSes and create a new Amiga compatible and "Amiga like" OS that is a step into the future for everyone.
I see a small problem here, assuming Amiga Inc wins (and I can't see how they could lose really), it means that they would pursue any attempt to re-use the knowledge gained from working with the AmigaOS 4.0 (it is based on the original sources after all), meaning anyone in the team would be tainted forever.
So assuming such project would ever be started (note: this is speculation, I am not signing up to any such project here), it'd be quite impossible to include anyone from the OS4 team, just alone because of this.
BTW I don't find this funny, only slightly ironic.
If Ainc. had 4.x in their hands and severed ties with Hyperion - what would they do with it. It would be like giving it to a tech-ed class learning logo circa 1988.
-
What about OS5? When McBill first announced it back in Sept. 2006 he said the AmigaDev team had already been working on it for two years - so now they've got four years in on it, it should be pretty close to release, right?
-
It's pretty safe to say there is no OS5 outside of Taos Intent (AKA Amiga Anywhere) . AmigaDev works in dotNet, although they seem to have picked up some Linux skills as well. They aren't OS developers. Amiga Inc's website has been devoid of even fake announcements since February.
Amiga Inc are liars, they bid US$20 million to name a stadium when they had no cash on hand, they announced new machines with an individual who doesn't have the facilities to make good on the deal, they send a letter stating that they turned down deals bigger than iPhone because of the court case, a profoundly idiotic thing to say since a) OS4 doesn't work on pocket size devices and b) the amount of money that they and Hyperion are talking about is a relatively small number compared to iPhone and c) nobody who had that kind of money would want to deal with KMOS/Amiga Inc.
If KMOS (AKA Amiga Inc) win the court case, which is not a forgone conclusion, they will take AmigaDos and bury it and that will be the end. If Hyperion win they'll develop it, but for PPC only, which is a dead end path with little or no choice of hardware.
Any future that AmigaDos or an AmigaDos-like OS has is with us.
-
persia wrote:
It's pretty safe to say there is no OS5 outside of Taos Intent (AKA Amiga Anywhere).......
Any future that AmigaDos or an AmigaDos-like OS has is with us.
That is the truth!!!
@jorkany,
Are you joking! If you think there is a mystery OS5 out there somewhere in AInc's hands, you just have not kept up with what is really happening.
@piru,
I think that the AOS4.x team would need to be careful about what they create in the future, but doubt that AInc. will waste their slim resources going after a hobby OS if the AOS4.x team were to join up with the MorphOS2.x team and create something new, but similar to MorphOS2.x that would retain its backward compatibility with Classic Amiga software. The AOS4.x team can't be tainted forever to never work on anything close to an "Amiga-Like" OS. What would AInc. have to gain to start another lawsuit against the team if they start work on something new, but are using their knowledge and talent toward a similar, but different result? AInc. has not gone after the MorphOS2.x team lately.
Also, I did not intend this thread to be funny, or to be a reason to renew old hostilities between users or team members of either side. It just makes sense that if we could somehow put both sides back together working on one solution instead of two, it would get done twice as fast and might lead to something better than either alone has achieved.
Again, I know that this is highly unlikely as there is too much pride and resistance toward working together and who on either side would offer to heal past wounds first?
Just a hopeless wish that I think many Amiga enthusiasts share.
-
@amigadave
What would AInc. have to gain to start another lawsuit against the team if they start work on something new, but are using their knowledge and talent toward a similar, but different result?
Full ownership to a nice OS without actually paying anything for it?
AInc. has not gone after the MorphOS2.x team lately.
They never had a case anyway, and they know it.
-
I see a small problem here, assuming Amiga Inc wins (and I can't see how they could lose really), it means that they would pursue any attempt to re-use the knowledge gained from working with the AmigaOS 4.0 (it is based on the original sources after all), meaning anyone in the team would be tainted forever.
Much like anyone that worked on MorphOS.
-
Piru wrote:
@amigadave
AInc. has not gone after the MorphOS2.x team lately.
They never had a case anyway, and they know it.
Exactly my point! I don't think they would have a case against a new OS coded by the AOS4.x and MorphOS2.x teams either, unless both teams really screwed up and tried to copy parts of AOS4.x too closely.
-
@weirdami
Much like anyone that worked on MorphOS.
Except that MorphOS is not based on AmigaOS source code, and as such is clearly not derivative work. Many claims have been made that this would be the case (by some pretty high up people), even claims of 1:1 disassembly of amigaos 3.x being found from inside MorphOS (which is quite funny considering MorphOS is PPC).
While it could be argued that any new amigoid code written by the OS4 team members would be free of any such influences, it would give pretty strong argument for A Inc to claim otherwise (since clearly these people have had access to the source code for years, and have used it as base for earlier derivative work).
-
amigadave wrote:
Piru wrote:
@amigadave
AInc. has not gone after the MorphOS2.x team lately.
They never had a case anyway, and they know it.
Exactly my point! I don't think they would have a case against a new OS coded by the AOS4.x and MorphOS2.x teams either, unless both teams really screwed up and tried to copy parts of AOS4.x too closely.
Why would either teams bother? They don't need each other of each other's incompatible technology. The only real way to do what you are saying is to dump OS4 and get the last few guys who work on it working on MOS... Since MOS is safe from A Inc... But why should OS4 devs abandon their work? You see the problem has nothing to do with the OSs or the developers, but instead is down to the users. This is a free market, if all the users decided to go with one solution then that would naturally for the developers to work on that one solution.
But as soon as you start advocating one solution over another you'll just run into the people who want the other solution. In a market this small there can be no clear winners.
I see what you are trying to do, but it's too late.
-
@amigadave
I don't think they would have a case against a new OS coded by the AOS4.x and MorphOS2.x teams either, unless both teams really screwed up and tried to copy parts of AOS4.x too closely.
No MorphOS team member have had any access to OS4 source code, ever, so it would be impossible for anyone outside the OS4 team to know if some random code is clean or not. At least I wouldn't be ready to take the risk of getting the whole project tainted by any OS4 code.
And even if it was clean, A Inc could drag the new project to court for years, just because of a possibility of such a thing. No, I wouldn't include any OS4 team members to such project.
-
And there is precedence out there which covers derivative work like what is suggested. In particular, in the original days of coding PC BIOS, anyone who understood the workings of a PC BIOS but had never ever seen, touched, or slept with someone who had seen or touched any disassembled PC BIOS code was preferred. Doings so meant that the work done on the clone BIOS would not be tainted by the IP of the original.
This abstract also illustrates why Windows NT could be considered a derivative work of Vax/VMS, since the guy who designed the NT Kernel also wrote VMS, though he went in a completely different direction with NT than he was allowed with VMS.
OS4 devs have seen the original Amiga source code, which is AI's IP. Were any of them to jump on-board with MOS, they would bring with them the experience and knowledge of AI's IP, and the temptation to incorporate that into MOS would be too great to ignore in maybe the dev sense and definitely the legal sense.
This is the exact basis of the SCO lawsuit claiming Linux is a derivative work from System V Unix. Not so much that Linus Torvalds had used System V code, but that developers had contributed source based upon their knowledge of the System V core. SCO lost for other reasons (mainly that they don't own the rights to System V, anyway, as it still remains in the hands of Novell.)
Which makes me wonder how the licensing for OpenSolaris works since Solaris is a direct descendant of System V. (Or is it System IV?)
For a project as proposed be able to work, AI would have to release the current OS4 developers from liability for developing an a-like work of AmigaOS, agreeing that the devs can only take with them the knowledge of the deep inner workings of AmigaOS, but not any copies of the original source or internal documentation. Which we know simply will not happen.
It proves to me that AI has no intention of doing anything useful with AmigaOS. Hyperion could push OS4 into new territories which would not only please its current fan- and user-base, but also possibly open a new market for embedded devices, with AI's blessings. Instead, AI binds their hands and limits them to only developing for sanctioned hardware which is either way out of date, unreasonably expensive, or non-existent.
Were AI to take OS4 away from Hyperion, AmigaOS would be consigned to atrophy under the tight-fist of AI (worse than it is now) and ultimately die a permanent and painful death. Well, until AI sinks and someone else purchases the IP.
-
Piru wrote:
Take all that talent and knowledge from both OSes and create a new Amiga compatible and "Amiga like" OS that is a step into the future for everyone.
I see a small problem here, assuming Amiga Inc wins (and I can't see how they could lose really), it means that they would pursue any attempt to re-use the knowledge gained from working with the AmigaOS 4.0 (it is based on the original sources after all), meaning anyone in the team would be tainted forever.
So assuming such project would ever be started (note: this is speculation, I am not signing up to any such project here), it'd be quite impossible to include anyone from the OS4 team, just alone because of this.
BTW I don't find this funny, only slightly ironic.
Indeed, any OS4 developer will be like infected with the plague in this regard; they are forever polluted by Amiga IP and all other "AmigoidOS" developers should make sure to never even go near them.
-
This is starting to sound too much like you guys want to exclude the AOS4.x team members no matter what and I am wondering if the motives are more than just objective.
This thread was probably a bad idea anyway.
Seems that our best hope for a unified future is for AInc. to go under, just like every other Amiga owner has. They sure aren't going to do us any good.
-
amigadave wrote:
I think that the AOS4.x team would need to be careful about what they create in the future,
Indeed, like *anything* "AmigoidOS"! Anything they will do in this regard in the future will be legally polluted with Amiga Inc IP.
but doubt that AInc. will waste their slim resources going after a hobby OS
The owners/investors of Amiga Inc has paid good money for the Amiga IP (millions of dollars) and if what you claim would have been true we wouldn't have seen this current lawsuit. Amiga Inc is *all about IP*, and its owners are obviously prepared to protect it.
if the AOS4.x team were to join up with the MorphOS2.x team and create something new, but similar to MorphOS2.x that would retain its backward compatibility with Classic Amiga software.
But WHY? MorphOS 2.0 is *already here*, why do something new?
The AOS4.x team can't be tainted forever to never work on anything close to an "Amiga-Like" OS.
Yes they can. They have seen the AmigaOS sources, they have worked with them. Few people on this planet has *as detailed and in-depth knowledge* about that part of Amiga's IP as those people. I have seen posts on online forum suggesting that all the OS4 team would have to do would be "removing the Amiga Inc IP", and then continue as usual (with a different name perhaps), and similar wishful thoughts. But from a legal point of view, that is *impossible*, you can't separate the IP once you have mixed them, and you can't "unlearn" the Immaterial Property from your brain, which will forever mean that anything they do in the future that is related to anything similar would be a big no-no, and would be like asking for trouble.
What would AInc. have to gain to start another lawsuit against the team if they start work on something new, but are using their knowledge and talent toward a similar, but different result?
If it's different (i.e something like Windows Vista, Linux, i.e. anything not related to AmigaOS) then *maybe* they would loosen the leash a bit (although it would naturally be in their best interest to keep an eye on them to spot any traces of Amiga IP that may have sneaked into the new OS, and they probably would do this). But if it's not Amiga related, why would anyone here be interested?
AInc. has not gone after the MorphOS2.x team lately.
They can't. They never could.
It just makes sense that if we could somehow put both sides back together working on one solution instead of two,
Oh I understand your point. And it's a nice thought!
In the year 2000 the entire community of users and developers could have gathered up around MorphOS. That would have made a difference back then. However, things played out differently. A *second* Next Generation "AmigoidOS" effort was launched instead.
You ask for *one* solution, and that one is already here, has been here all along, and will be here in the future as well. All users and application developers are completely free to jump on the MorphOS ship. Maybe some will when that other ship sinks? Who knows. But the OS4 developers can't be taken on board however (meaning: *as crew*; if they are mere "passengers" (users or third party application developers) it wouldn't be a problem, but they can't work on the OS itself). It would put the only remaining viable NG option at risk, as it would be a valid reason for Amiga Inc to open fire. And they aren't really needed either, there are already a clever bunch developing MorphOS. ;-)
it would get done twice as fast and might lead to something better than either alone has achieved.
I think at this point it's more about finding a commercial purpose for the OS...
-
amigadave wrote:
This is starting to sound too much like you guys want to exclude the AOS4.x team members no matter what and I am wondering if the motives are more than just objective.
This thread was probably a bad idea anyway.
Seems that our best hope for a unified future is for AInc. to go under, just like every other Amiga owner has. They sure aren't going to do us any good.
A Inc going under can only be a good thing... But hey why don't we forget about tainted code and propriatory operating systems and start a community based open source AmigaOS, that the community could then "own" free of any dodgy companies, legal issues and expensive hardware... Woe, woe and thrice woe, if only such a project existed... If only something like that had been started 10 years ago... Sigh... If only...
-
amigadave wrote:
This is starting to sound too much like you guys want to exclude the AOS4.x team members no matter what and I am wondering if the motives are more than just objective.
It's simply about realism. Sorry to break your nice dream, but it can't happen, not even if the MorphOS team would have wanted it to. No other motives than that.
This thread was probably a bad idea anyway.
Nah, maybe this needed to be straightened out once and for all? ;-)
Seems that our best hope for a unified future is for AInc. to go under, just like every other Amiga owner has. They sure aren't going to do us any good.
Amiga Inc won't "go under".
Amiga Inc is a bunch of Intellectual Property, that's all it is. If anything, it will be sold. But that only means that the IP changes owners.
-
...AROS?
-
Let's be straight here, we are talking about CBM IP, much of it beyond the 17 year threshold/shelf life.
There are four questions here
1) None of the original CBM the Original CBM IP related to the Amiga is still legally binding. There have been derivative works, 3.5 and 3.9 that would protect some of the IP, but exactly how much?
2) What was the deal that Amino (Amiga Inc Washington) had with Gateway? Did they get the IP or just use of the IP and name?
3) When Amino (Amiga Inc Washington) ran away from it's creditors and former employees, it bailed some of the IP it had control over to Hyperion and the majority to KMOS (Amiga Inc Delaware). What did they bail to Hyperion and what to KMOS? And, if they didn't actually own the IP but simply had an exclusive lease on it, did they have the right to transfer it at all?
4) What agreements did Hyperion have with KMOS (Amiga Inc Deleware) after the noble escape from the debt accrued by Amino?
It's a tangled web of deceit and lies that may take years to untangle. We're dealing with three bankruptcies and dozens of different contracts. We don't have a consistent IP holder over any period of time. In the end Hyperion could argue that Amiga Inc is nothing but a name badge, much like Packard Bell was, and that if Amino didn't have the right to transfer the agreement with Gateway the whole Amiga name and AmigaOS are abandon ware because Acer and it's subsidiary Gateway have not enforced their agreement with Amino, have not pursued KMOS and generally ignored the Amiga IP and name.
-
If anybody was atually interestested any more... then it could probably be sorted out really quite easily... Ihe sad part is that no one is interesting in some worthless prehistoric IP and a brand that died in the early 90s...
In a world of iPhones and Xboxes, PS3s and Wiis, A landscape of Vistas and Leopards... the Amiga is nothing more than a footnote in an old history book somewhere.
-
amigadave,
Are you joking! If you think there is a mystery OS5 out there somewhere in AInc's hands, you just have not kept up with what is really happening.
OS5 is real and will be delivered by the Easter Bunny when it's released!
j/k of course. Personally I don't see a point in a "next step for Amiga(like)OS", though I accept that some feel differently. From my perspective AROS is your best shot, MorphOS a close second. OS4 is just a joke waiting on a punchline.
-
Piru wrote:
@amigadave
I don't think they would have a case against a new OS coded by the AOS4.x and MorphOS2.x teams either, unless both teams really screwed up and tried to copy parts of AOS4.x too closely.
No MorphOS team member have had any access to OS4 source code, ever, so it would be impossible for anyone outside the OS4 team to know if some random code is clean or not. At least I wouldn't be ready to take the risk of getting the whole project tainted by any OS4 code.
And even if it was clean, A Inc could drag the new project to court for years, just because of a possibility of such a thing. No, I wouldn't include any OS4 team members to such project.
The problem is, there is the legitmate question of whether or not Ralph Schmidt ever had access to the OS3.x code. It is an entirely plausible scenario, whether people like it or not.
Until this question is definitively answered (and probably the only way to do that is in a court of law), then there will be a shadow over MorphOS, that Amiga Inc. could use to make a nuisance of themselves. They only need something small to initiate a nuisance lawsuit, that could effectively kill off the project and cause its contributors no end of headaches.
It doesn't help that whenever I've seen Ralph publicly confronted with the allegation, I've not seen him deny it outright, only reply with some bull-shit about the source from OS1.x being published in some C= book or that duff German court ruling. (If anyone can point me somewhere where he has, then great - I don't claim be the definitive source on this :-))
If it does transpire that Ralph did have access, then MorphOS is just as {bleep}ed as AmigaOS 4. Worse, it could also have bad knock-on effects for AROS. :-(
-
bloodline wrote:
A Inc going under can only be a good thing... But hey why don't we forget about tainted code and propriatory operating systems and start a community based open source AmigaOS, that the community could then "own" free of any dodgy companies, legal issues and expensive hardware... Woe, woe and thrice woe, if only such a project existed... If only something like that had been started 10 years ago... Sigh... If only...
I don't see the MorphOS team as a dodgy company, but I know that they must have their own skeletons in the closet.
I take your sarcasm is pointed at the slow to materialize AROS project that has not gained more support.
Edit: I don't think the actual AOS4.x programmers are dodgy either, but have my doubts about Hyperion.
All in all I think greed and stupid decisions have ruined the next generation Amiga.
-
Wouldn't it be nice if AROS could get under the Novel umbrella? Novel would have no trouble swatting an insignificant insect like Amiga Inc/KMOS. And it would give AROS a credibility amongst developers that it doesn't currently have.
(http://gopher65.com/images/drwho/FaceofBoegrn.gif)
-
bloodline wrote:
If anybody was atually interestested any more... then it could probably be sorted out really quite easily... Ihe sad part is that no one is interesting in some worthless prehistoric IP and a brand that died in the early 90s...
In a world of iPhones and Xboxes, PS3s and Wiis, A landscape of Vistas and Leopards... the Amiga is nothing more than a footnote in an old history book somewhere.
You are right, not even AInc. was interested in AmigaOS4 until it was close to being finished and they thought they could steal a few bucks from the developers working on it.
But many of the members here and elsewhere around the world on other sites like this one, there are a few hundreds of people still interested in what is going to happen to AmigaOS4.x and a similar number that are interested in MorphOS2.x. Those are the people that matter to me and the reason I am here.
From all the negative comments you repeatedly make (I know you will only say they are realistic, not negative, but that is just your excuse), I wonder why you are a member here and spend so much time and effort putting down almost every Amiga development and new idea. This is not meant as an attack on you, just an observation of your many recent messages on many different topics. Such as the comment above. To most of the members here the Amiga brand did not die in the early 1990's and if asked, I would bet many do not care as much about the world of iPhones, XBoxes, PS3's, Wii's, LeopardOS and VistaOS, as they do about their Amiga(s). That is why they are here every day and night and not somewhere else, like MS.com, or Apple.com. :-D
-
bloodline wrote:
A Inc going under can only be a good thing... But hey why don't we forget about tainted code and propriatory operating systems and start a community based open source AmigaOS, that the community could then "own" free of any dodgy companies, legal issues and expensive hardware... Woe, woe and thrice woe, if only such a project existed... If only something like that had been started 10 years ago... Sigh... If only...
...AROS had anything remotely resembling a direction or plan, perhaps something may of happened.
Curse those to idiots who screwed things up for wanting to actually run Amiga software on their new operating systems. (if I was feeling evil, I'd say any software)
MorphOS and AmigaOS 4 stole all the mindshare, because they had a plan for the future, and most importantly, they worked.
-
This question of MorphOS legality seems to pop up from time to time. Here's some interesting Amiga Inc interview:
29 July, 2002
I would start this interview, by asking if you see at MorphOS as a
illegal product?
Amiga INC. writes:
Our position is that the elements of MorphOS which allow it to
provide AmigaOS compatability have been illegally derived. These
either need to be removed or a licence obtained for them. I am afraid
I cannot say more than that due to advice from our lawyers.
Monday, April 29, 2002, 11:10:22 PM, I asked:
And finally...
But you should stop doing this.. Why cant Amiga go for the future,
show that you are strong? I know this is a marked {sic. perhaps he
meant to type "market". Brad} strategy to somewhat push MorphOS out.
Its like Lindows for the PC marked. Its a competitor to Windows, but
also RUN's Windows programs. You should start to think like an Amiga
user Bill. If you have full believe in your work, then drop the case
and go further. We all know you should have the right to use Amiga,
but MorphOS aint using Amigas name. I want both products on the
marked, it will be a colourfull marked and thats what we want, not
another Commodore keeping all secret and kinda forget what the
userbase want. Please clear things out for me?
Amiga INC. writes:
You do not understand the legal implications of what you say.
Whatever the merits or otherwise of MorphOS, they used illegally
obtained AmigaOS source code to develop their product. If Amiga Inc
does not defend that code, then we can lose all rights to it. We have
no choice BUT to prosecute anyone who dares to make use of Amiga code.
The MorphOS team knows this and has spent the last six months or so
trying to remove any code they have which was derived from AmigaOS.
However, our attorneys already have a copy of a MorphOS release where
via disassembly, you can prove that they did use the same source
routines as were in the AmigaOS source code that they had.
(from http://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2002-09-00005-EN.html (http://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2002-09-00005-EN.html))
MorphOS Team never heard a beep from Amiga Inc. I can only assume their lawyers gave them more good advice, this time about idle threats.
(And lets not even get into the fact that Amiga Inc would rather sue their own partner than the competition...)
-
@Piru
That still does not answer the question does it?
-
amigadave wrote:
bloodline wrote:
A Inc going under can only be a good thing... But hey why don't we forget about tainted code and propriatory operating systems and start a community based open source AmigaOS, that the community could then "own" free of any dodgy companies, legal issues and expensive hardware... Woe, woe and thrice woe, if only such a project existed... If only something like that had been started 10 years ago... Sigh... If only...
I don't see the MorphOS team as a dodgy company, but I know that they must have their own skeletons in the closet.
No MOS is not a dodgy company, the AROS team and the MOS team have worked closely... This is what I would like to see more of and what I was alluding to... Is that not what you wanted to see?
I take your sarcasm is pointed at the slow to materialize AROS project that has not gained more support.
No, I could not care less about how much support AROS has... it suits my needs, sod the rest off you ;-)
I was trying to point out that complaining about some company is pointless...
Edit: I don't think the actual AOS4.x programmers are dodgy either, but have my doubts about Hyperion.
All in all I think greed and stupid decisions have ruined the next generation Amiga.
Well yes... but that is stating the obvious... :-)
-
amigadave wrote:
bloodline wrote:
If anybody was atually interestested any more... then it could probably be sorted out really quite easily... Ihe sad part is that no one is interesting in some worthless prehistoric IP and a brand that died in the early 90s...
In a world of iPhones and Xboxes, PS3s and Wiis, A landscape of Vistas and Leopards... the Amiga is nothing more than a footnote in an old history book somewhere.
You are right, not even AInc. was interested in AmigaOS4 until it was close to being finished and they thought they could steal a few bucks from the developers working on it.
True!
But many of the members here and elsewhere around the world on other sites like this one, there are a few hundreds of people still interested in what is going to happen to AmigaOS4.x and a similar number that are interested in MorphOS2.x. Those are the people that matter to me and the reason I am here.
I'm not interested in any specific flavour of AmigaOS... I just want to play with AmigaOS on cheap, powerful hardware... If I don't have to pay for it much the better.
From all the negative comments you repeatedly make (I know you will only say they are realistic, not negative, but that is just your excuse), I wonder why you are a member here and spend so much time and effort putting down almost every Amiga development and new idea.
I have answered your question already. Please search though the threads to find the answer.
This is not meant as an attack on you, just an observation of your many recent messages on many different topics. Such as the comment above.
As is your want. Feel free to attack me if you wish, I feel confident I will be able to defend myself.
To most of the members here the Amiga brand did not die in the early 1990's and if asked, I would bet many do not care as much about the world of iPhones, XBoxes, PS3's, Wii's, LeopardOS and VistaOS, as they do about their Amiga(s). That is why they are here every day and night and not somewhere else, like MS.com, or Apple.com. :-D
No you misunderstand the concept of Brand. I'm sorry to say the Amiga brand is worthless. Think of a brands like Kellogg's Corn Flakes or Coca cola...
-
uncharted wrote:
bloodline wrote:
A Inc going under can only be a good thing... But hey why don't we forget about tainted code and propriatory operating systems and start a community based open source AmigaOS, that the community could then "own" free of any dodgy companies, legal issues and expensive hardware... Woe, woe and thrice woe, if only such a project existed... If only something like that had been started 10 years ago... Sigh... If only...
...AROS had anything remotely resembling a direction or plan, perhaps something may of happened.
What might have happened?
Curse those to idiots who screwed things up for wanting to actually run Amiga software on their new operating systems. (if I was feeling evil, I'd say any software)
Curse those idiots for not bothering to port AROS to the hardware of their choice... and then whinging...
MorphOS and AmigaOS 4 stole all the mindshare, because they had a plan for the future, and most importantly, they worked.
MOS and AROS worked together... I don't get your point, except you erroneously assume that I actually care about the people who whinge that they can't run OS4... AROS is there, the source code is open and free... do with it what you will.
-
uncharted wrote:
@Piru
That still does not answer the question does it?
If AInc. had any proof they would have used it and not backed off.
-
Piru wrote:
Monday, April 29, 2002, 11:10:22 PM, I asked:
Amiga INC. writes:
The MorphOS team knows this and has spent the last six months or so
trying to remove any code they have which was derived from AmigaOS.
However, our attorneys already have a copy of a MorphOS release where
via disassembly, you can prove that they did use the same source
routines as were in the AmigaOS source code that they had.
And that's absolute crap. Disassembly can only at best show similarities.
-
Remeber Maui X-Stream VX-30? They produced CherryOS which when diassembled showed direct lines from PearPC.. They're princple product also shows directly stolen code.
-
And that's absolute crap. Disassembly can only at best show similarities.
Of course it's absolute crap. It was part of the FUD campaign against MorphOS that Amiga Inc and Hyperion jointly fired off as part of their "OS4 marketing efforts" as soon as they teamed up to build their own OS4 (you see originally, it was MorphOS that was supposed to become OS4 since that was quite far progressed and complete at the time already, but that didn't happen (thanks to the influence of Ben Hermans of Hyperion)). Nothing more, nothing less.
MorphOS was years ahead and had a tremendous momentum in the community at the time. It had to be stopped, and FUD was supposed to be the way. The campaign was intensive and some people really believed it. Still today we see people calling MorphOS illegal, and using those same old arguments in discussions. :roll: Well, it turned out that MorphOS wasn't stopped, but a community rift was created instead.
Here is a *small* collection of examples from the past:
http://www.biclodon.com/misc/amigafarm/benhermans/
Note that you can easily replace "MorphOS" with "OS4" in almost every single one of these quotes, and it will reflect the situation of *today* with lawsuits and all (against *Hyperion* of course, *not* the MorphOS team). Do this when you for example read this (and this is a favorite of mine):
Ben Hermans of Hyperion: "The failure of Amiga Inc and the MorphOS team to come to terms is in part due to the fact that Amiga wants to assert their ownership and intellectual property rights over the Amiga OS (for which they paid 4.5 M USD) whilst the MorphOS team happily continues to refute those claims"
Ironic, huh? ;-)
(Here (http://www.biclodon.com/misc/amigafarm/magicsn/) and here (http://www.biclodon.com/misc/amigafarm/crisot/) are some more)
FUD, FUD, FUD, nothing more, nothing less.
There has *never* been a case against MorphOS.
-
persia wrote:
It's pretty safe to say there is no OS5 outside of Taos Intent (AKA Amiga Anywhere) . AmigaDev works in dotNet, although they seem to have picked up some Linux skills as well. They aren't OS developers. Amiga Inc's website has been devoid of even fake announcements since February.
...
Any future that AmigaDos or an AmigaDos-like OS has is with us.
There has been some interest on AROS-Exec about porting an LLVM-based compiler to AROS so it can become somewhat more platform independent in its software. AROS has already been developed on the x86 and ported to the PowerPC and x86-64. My main concern is the lack of 68k support both in AROS and LLVM.
An AmigaOS that has support for multiple instruction sets will need a good intermediate code so that all of the apps will be able to install to each hardware platform. LLVM fits that bill rather nicely. (Not to mention it is used by Mesa to emulate shaders on systems that don't have them.)
If you're interested in LLVM the website for it is at LLVM.org (http://www.llvm.org/). Sidewinder and I'll probably be using it in the Mattathias BASIC compiler since it generates good code so quickly. I might be willing to even take a bounty to port LLVM to AROS if one were offered.
-
@SamuriCrow,
Not being an AROS fan, I would rather see you spend your time on Mattathias for MorphOS than a port of LLVM to AROS, but that is just my tilt on the subject.
-
With the court case dragging on interminably and the outcome seeming to not favor Hyperion, perhaps it is time for the AmigaOS4 team to consider another alternative.
I know there is a lot of bad blood between some of the users of AmigaOS4.x and MorphOS2.x, but I am not up to speed on any details of developer disputes between the AmigaOS4.x team and the MorphOS2.x team. I am sure there must be some animosity between the two teams, but it is a shame that they cannot resolve their differences and work on a common goal and project. Take all that talent and knowledge from both OSes and create a new Amiga compatible and "Amiga like" OS that is a step into the future for everyone. Stop fighting each other and work together and maybe something worth attracting the buying dollars/pounds/euros of the few remaining Amiga fans and maybe a few curious Linux users, or dissatisfied Windows users.
I personally am leaning toward getting and using MorphOS2.x, but would much rather see a combined effort which results in something bigger and better than both AmigaOS4.x and MorphOS2.x.
Let's bring the two split parts of the Amiga community back together.
I know that this is all just wishful thinking, but what can it hurt to express it? Please no "Red" or "Blue" trolls here.
IMO MOS 2.0 is allready the OS that we as an Amiga community should be leaning towards. It currently has readily available hardware to run on + it is a very finished OS. Ofcourse there are still bugs to be get rid off.
I have MOS 2.0 currently installed on my PEG II and I haven't had this good "Amiga" experience in years. The system is responsive, it support modern USB devices out of the box etc. AOS is far behind and it has little to none hardware to run on etc. There isn't a single good program to run on AOS that wouldn't have been ported to MOS or have a better alternative at MOS.
MorphOS-Team really delivered this time, just hope you guys can solve Efika problems and port it to mac mini soon.
-
One thing came up to my mind when reading this thread: the original Amiga was a revolutionary machine. It was a combination of a hardware concept which was ahead of it's time, and a OS that was unseen on a personal computer back then.
Then, we can take a look at our options:
OS4 - Runs on A1 or PPC accelerator. (out of production - no hope for new machines)
MOS - Peg (out of production) or Efika (hobby board)
AROS - Commom PC (choose your maker)
We have two options which have either no new hardware to run or just a base board to do it. The last one runs on common PCs and have to compete against Win/Mac/Linux as an alternative.
So, we have OS' which are "upgrades" for the old Amiga OS to run on hardware with no advantages over commom PCs. OS is just half of the Amiga's formula.
The point is: Being "Amiga" wouldn't be do it with the same goals that the original team did? Having a innovative OS running on innovative hardware to be ahead ?
Maybe it would be a good idea to think about a machine free from PC specs to be better/faster/cheaper running a OS free from the needs to be compatible with the original Amiga that has the Amiga-like features we would like to have (fast boot, small footprint, etc..).
This looks like a next step to me. Do what the Amiga did. :-)
-
@Aeroman
You are right of course, an OS designed with the original ideas of the Amiga would be a good option, however the Amiga community doesn't seem to have the programmers to accomplish this. It's scarey that six months have passed and we are no closer to getting OS4 running on a MacMini than before.
Maybe the only road ahead is to port MOS to Intel...
-
AROS on any x86 board..
I tried AROS and at the time I figured since MOS was a flash in the pan, AROS was the next best thing once UAE integration was built in (whatever they called it). Now that MOS2 is here, its very polished. Yea it has bugs and yea, they'll be fixed.
To combine OS4 coders (I think you mean the brothers from Hyperion?) + MOS, to put it mildly, is a absurd idea. OS4, its features, software, design has nothing new or good to offer MOS. MOS Devel is a rag-tag group of hardcore coders. I may call them elitists because they dont speak up in public w/news regarding MOS but I respect them highly for what they've designed. They do not need any design help or ideas for MOS.
OS4 had its chance and AINC got greedy and is burying it in the deep waters of the legal ocean, unfortunately.
Anyway, come on over and check out MOS if you havent, it freakin rocks. It will make you feel like the first day you bought your Amiga. :)
As for MOS having Amiga IP in it.. if they knew for a fact they would win the case or had a chance, they would of buried MOS.
-
amigadave wrote:
@SamuriCrow,
Not being an AROS fan, I would rather see you spend your time on Mattathias for MorphOS than a port of LLVM to AROS, but that is just my tilt on the subject.
Well that's much more interesting! For all your talk about cooperation and unity in the Amiga scene, and now you claim not to like AROS... Now why would that be?
And you call me negative... The ironing is delcious!
-
bloodline wrote:
amigadave wrote:
@SamuriCrow,
Not being an AROS fan, I would rather see you spend your time on Mattathias for MorphOS than a port of LLVM to AROS, but that is just my tilt on the subject.
Well that's much more interesting! For all your talk about cooperation and unity in the Amiga scene, and now you claim not to like AROS... Now why would that be?
And you call me negative... The ironing is delcious!
How childish. You mean "irony" not something you do to straighten out the wrinkles in your shirts.
I sort of knew it was a waste of time to start this thread, but I am not the only one who has voiced a desire to see the Amiga community reunited under one common direction. Be that AmigaOS4.x, AROS, MorphOS2.x, or my preference, as I stated in the first message of this thread, which is none of the above, but instead to have everyone working on a new project OS that is better than all the above. That not being reality, now or in the near future, my first choice of the available "Amiga-Like" alternatives would be MorphOS2.x.
I will not waste any more of my time replying to messages like yours above. Write whatever you want about me, I know that I very seldom write anything negative about actual or potential Amiga projects, and make a conscious effort to keep it that way.
Pointing out that, in my opinion, many of your messages tend to be in opposition to one Amiga related project or another was just stating the obvious and was not constructive to this thread. Have a nice day! :-P
-
amigadave wrote:
bloodline wrote:
amigadave wrote:
@SamuriCrow,
Not being an AROS fan, I would rather see you spend your time on Mattathias for MorphOS than a port of LLVM to AROS, but that is just my tilt on the subject.
Well that's much more interesting! For all your talk about cooperation and unity in the Amiga scene, and now you claim not to like AROS... Now why would that be?
And you call me negative... The ironing is delcious!
Where is there a negative comment in anything I have written about AROS? Simply stating that it is not interesting to me, or that "I am not a fan of AROS", is not putting it down or saying that people should not waste their time with it.
I don't care if you like AROS or not, but everything you have suggested publicly is emboddied by AROS... so why don't you like it?
The Mattathias project is more interesting to me than AROS at the moment. That may change some day when AROS has more to offer.
More to offer than hardware independence, commnity control and free use for anyone who wants to use it?
All I asked in my post was, why don't you like AROS, you haven't answered that.
If you really want to know more about why I am not an AROS fan, I will gladly let you know via PMail, but don't want to put "real" negative remarks about another part of the Amiga community here on the forums.
So what you are saying is that you have "real" negative feelings about AROS... AROS is EVIL...
But then I doubt you really want to know anyway, this is just your childish retort to my remarks.
Childish? Because I have identified a logical inconsistancy in your argument?
P.S. You mean "irony" not something you do to straighten out your shirts.
So you don't watch the Simpsons then... I guess this explains a lot.
-
Painkiller wrote:
IMO MOS 2.0 is allready the OS that we as an Amiga community should be leaning towards. It currently has readily available hardware to run on + it is a very finished OS. Ofcourse there are still bugs to be get rid off.
I have MOS 2.0 currently installed on my PEG II and I haven't had this good "Amiga" experience in years. The system is responsive, it support modern USB devices out of the box etc. AOS is far behind and it has little to none hardware to run on etc. There isn't a single good program to run on AOS that wouldn't have been ported to MOS or have a better alternative at MOS.
MorphOS-Team really delivered this time, just hope you guys can solve Efika problems and port it to mac mini soon.
Given the reality of the current situation, I agree and I am leaning toward MorphOS2.x as being the best "Amiga-Like" solution that is available now.
As for porting it to the Mac Mini, don't stop there, port it to every PPC Mac ever manufactured and then after that is done, port it to everything else.
I take it from your message above that MorphOS2.0 is much more stable on your Peg than some of the reports we have been seeing of it running with difficulty on the Efika, is that correct?
-
I take it from your message above that MorphOS2.0 is much more stable on your Peg than some of the reports we have been seeing of it running with difficulty on the Efika, is that correct?
Yes MOS 2 is very stable on PEG II tough I haven't yet used much of it features. But it has been on 24/7 for two days now. Only program that I have had crash on me is Sputnik. From what I have been reading on Morphzone, MOS 2 is currently quite unusable on Efika, so I really really hope they fix the remaining issues soon so that Efika owners can really see what MOS 2.0 is about.
-
Mmmmhhh... not sure about posting my thoughts on this thread, but here I am.
Personally after my thread "Amiga OS 4.0 for 68k" that lead to the conclusion this is NOT AN OPTION ANYMORE, ANYWAY, I'd like just to say the thing we need is to concentrate in one way, one commond way or we'll go towards the end as "just retrocomputing platform" (we already are somehow).
For this purpose I support the idea of AROS because for its (open) nature could run on any platform (Amiga also - see AFA Project), especially on the most widely available hardware x86 based.
MorphOS is here, Amiga-like OS, probably good and sufficiently stable and mature (I admit I didn't test it personally - just seen), but there's one thing I don't like in it: THE IDEA OF CUTTING COMPLETELY with the rest of the Amiga community and platform, creating a big split.
This is something very bad I think, even if in these times of Amiga Inc. legal problems, cutting bridges with the "official way" is something should be done (but not with the community).
...and being just PPC is not a good insurance for long living.
Regarding AmigaOS 4.1, from the announcement, it seems they want to create another split, changing filing system, adding memory protection, etc; much probably for "technically proving" they are not working on the original sources anymore: but using the Amiga name, logo and so on, will lead them to loose the legal battle with Amiga Inc., so no future here.
Apart for all of these words, let the correspondent developers work for the best option.
Regards,
Luca "OgniX". \8^)
-
Painkiller wrote:
I have MOS 2.0 currently installed on my PEG II and I haven't had this good "Amiga" experience in years. The system is responsive, it support modern USB devices out of the box etc. AOS is far behind and it has little to none hardware to run on etc. There isn't a single good program to run on AOS that wouldn't have been ported to MOS or have a better alternative at MOS.
Far behind? I think not. Comparing the MOS 2.0 and AOS 4.1 feature lists, I think that they're in a pretty similar state actually.
Hans
-
BTW, combining the coding teams from MOS, AOS4 and/or AROS would hit one fatal snag: deciding which bits from which OS to keep. No-one wants to see their hard work discarded, and, for the most part, each OS has its own version of many features. Some have said that AOS4 has nothing to offer the MOS team. Likewise, MOS has nothing to offer the AOS4 team.
I think that it's funny how most seem to assume that cooperation would mean the AOS4 team joining MOS. If something like that were to happen, they'd probably start a new OS effort with a new name, which would just happen to include components from both OSes.
What could have been neat is if all Amiga-like OSes used the same driver model for all devices. That way, a graphics driver for one, would work on the other; ditto for USB, audio, etc. But, we'd be stuck with the same problem. All sides would say "great idea, my standard is the best, use mine."
Hans
-
amigadave wrote:
@SamuriCrow,
Not being an AROS fan, I would rather see you spend your time on Mattathias for MorphOS than a port of LLVM to AROS, but that is just my tilt on the subject.
Mattathias will use LLVM as its optimizer and code generator (unless you have some better documentation on how to make a GCC frontend) so we'll need LLVM ported to all platforms that Mattathias will support. AROS is just the first stepping stone.
-
Hans_ wrote:
BTW, combining the coding teams from MOS, AOS4 and/or AROS would hit one fatal snag: deciding which bits from which OS to keep. No-one wants to see their hard work discarded, and, for the most part, each OS has its own version of many features. Some have said that AOS4 has nothing to offer the MOS team. Likewise, MOS has nothing to offer the AOS4 team.
I think that it's funny how most seem to assume that cooperation would mean the AOS4 team joining MOS. If something like that were to happen, they'd probably start a new OS effort with a new name, which would just happen to include components from both OSes.
What could have been neat is if all Amiga-like OSes used the same driver model for all devices. That way, a graphics driver for one, would work on the other; ditto for USB, audio, etc. But, we'd be stuck with the same problem. All sides would say "great idea, my standard is the best, use mine."
Hans
One team joining the other is not what I had in mind when I started this thread. I was just wondering what it would be like if all Amiga(like) developers joined together to create a "NEW" OS that is better than everything any of them has done separately, and yes, I agree that there would be many disagreements as to which standards to use, or which way to do certain things. That is why it will never happen. Developers have large egos that are not easily set aside and who would manage such an effort and control all those egos to make progress on such a large project (my vote goes to Carl Sassenrath :-o ).
I also agree that there is not much of a difference in the features and functionality between AOS4.x and MOS2.x, but there are two very large differences between the two OSes, 1) MOS2.x is not tied up in a court battle (at this time, and hopefully never in the future) and 2) there is at least one mobo in current production that it runs on.
I think the first to release their OS to run on the many versions of the PPC Macs that are both in good supply and are more powerful than any other hardware that either AOS4.x or MOS2.x have run on to date, will have a large advantage over the other (except for the legal entanglements that such a move would create, especially for AOS4.x), but that is another topic.
-
SamuraiCrow wrote:
amigadave wrote:
@SamuriCrow,
Not being an AROS fan, I would rather see you spend your time on Mattathias for MorphOS than a port of LLVM to AROS, but that is just my tilt on the subject.
Mattathias will use LLVM as its optimizer and code generator (unless you have some better documentation on how to make a GCC frontend) so we'll need LLVM ported to all platforms that Mattathias will support. AROS is just the first stepping stone.
I am not against AROS development. The only point I was trying to make in regards to that message was that MorphOS2.x is far ahead of AROS in many ways and I would rather have Mattathias completed for MOS2.x than have you working on LLVM for AROS. If the AROS work must be done first, it won't make a big difference to me, I am just looking forward to the completion of Mattathias, so thank you for working on it.
-
amigadave wrote:
I also agree that there is not much of a difference in the features and functionality between AOS4.x and MOS2.x, but there are two very large differences between the two OSes, 1) MOS2.x is not tied up in a court battle (at this time, and hopefully never in the future) and 2) there is at least one mobo in current production that it runs on.
Not quite true. According to Genesi (http://www.genesi-usa.com/press.php?date=20070910) the Efika production ceased in September 2007. There is some existing stock, but no more are being produced. I'm assuming that the MOS team will have access to the Efika 2 when it's available, but the Efika is not actually in production.
Hans
-
Hans_ wrote:
... but the Efika is not actually in production.
Hans
Well, another dead end. I believe MOS people probably have support from Genesi to develop for their products, but wouldn´t it be a good idea to port it to PS3 ?
Some people raised the idea of Power Macs (as we always do) but they are out of production also.
PS3 is a powerful platform, it is in production and there are lots of reasons to buy it other than running a OS. There is also a nice installed base.
AROS or MOS in PS3 would rock :bow:
-
@AeroMan
AeroMan wrote:
Hans_ wrote:
... but the Efika is not actually in production.
Hans
Well, another dead end. I believe MOS people probably have support from Genesi to develop for their products, but wouldn´t it be a good idea to port it to PS3 ?
Some people raised the idea of Power Macs (as we always do) but they are out of production also.
PS3 is a powerful platform, it is in production and there are lots of reasons to buy it other than running a OS. There is also a nice installed base.
At least there are millions of Power Macs in existence. My vote would be for a PowerBook/iBook (the PowerPC version), as I would like an Amiga laptop. Both Amiga OS 4, and MorphOS (IIRC) have been shown with beta ports to PowerPC Mac hardware. So it's likely to happen.
AROS or MOS in PS3 would rock :bow:
Any AOS4 on PS3 wouldn't? :-P
Hans
-
How do Amigans feel about Syllable?
How Amiga like is it really?
-
amigadave wrote:
I am not against AROS development. The only point I was trying to make in regards to that message was that MorphOS2.x is far ahead of AROS in many ways and I would rather have Mattathias completed for MOS2.x than have you working on LLVM for AROS. If the AROS work must be done first, it won't make a big difference to me, I am just looking forward to the completion of Mattathias, so thank you for working on it.
I can run AROS hosted on my Linux box and run the test executables from there. I can't do that type of cross-development with MorphOS since I don't own an Efika or a Pegasos series.
-
amigadave wrote:
If AInc. had any proof they would have used it and not backed off.
The mistake I believe you and many other people have made here is equating Amiga Inc's actions with logic. Nothing that has happened, especially lawsuit-wise has made much sense so far.
The question still remains. The fact that question has been dodged once again, does not inspire confidence.
Just because nothing has happened yet doesn't mean that it couldn't in the future. I for one sincerely hope it never happens.
-
bloodline wrote:
What might have happened?
Something. Anything. People might actually be using AROS today.
Curse those to idiots who screwed things up for wanting to actually run Amiga software on their new operating systems. (if I was feeling evil, I'd say any software)
Curse those idiots for not bothering to port AROS to the hardware of their choice... and then whinging...
Being open source is not an excuse for being crap. You can't simply try to direct blame back to the users, when there is something wrong and you don't want to do anything about it.
You have been evangelising AROS here for 6 years now. Clearly you want people to use it, you want the community to embrace it. But whenever anyone explains why the community has embraced MOS and AOS4 rather than AROS, and why no-one outside the little AROS circle of friends uses it, you hide behind the APL rather than engage.
MorphOS and AmigaOS 4 stole all the mindshare, because they had a plan for the future, and most importantly, they worked.
MOS and AROS worked together... I don't get your point, except you erroneously assume that I actually care about the people who whinge that they can't run OS4... AROS is there, the source code is open and free... do with it what you will.
What does the limited co-operation between MOS Team and AROS have to do with anything? OS4 and MOS both work, they both :-o :-o :-o run software :-o :-o :-o and they do this without the need for the user to have to code half the damn thing first.
-
Hans_ wrote:
Painkiller wrote:
I have MOS 2.0 currently installed on my PEG II and I haven't had this good "Amiga" experience in years. The system is responsive, it support modern USB devices out of the box etc. AOS is far behind and it has little to none hardware to run on etc. There isn't a single good program to run on AOS that wouldn't have been ported to MOS or have a better alternative at MOS.
Far behind? I think not. Comparing the MOS 2.0 and AOS 4.1 feature lists, I think that they're in a pretty similar state actually.
Hans
The latest OS4.1 announcement doesn't mean a thing when the entire OS4 effort is as dead as a beaten horse!
(http://i37.tinypic.com/10sgcpv.gif)
As I just posted on moobunny (as *part* of a post): "The only way this can be prevented is by some serious make up sex and renewed marriage vows. And the odds for that happening at this point are pretty slim IMHO. Amiga Inc (whatever that means, if anything, doesn't matter) are going forward with AmigaOS 5 (whatever that means, if anything, doesn't matter). They have fought since 2003 or so to get OS4 back in house. Over time they have realized that this won't happen. Now they just want to get it out of the way, get their money back, and perhaps kick some ass in the process."
The difference between Hyperion's OS 4.1 and MorphOS is the "alive" status and "does have a chance of a future".
I would actually be *happy* to be proved wrong on this (really!), and if that happens, I'll eat the same virtual hat that "ironfist" had to eat (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=9&topic_id=5337&sortname=&sortorder=&sortdays=&viewmode=flat&order=0&start=370) when MorphOS 2.0 was released within the announced time frame! :-)
Call me on this when it happens! :-)
-
Hans_ wrote:
BTW, combining the coding teams from MOS, AOS4 and/or AROS would hit one fatal snag: deciding which bits from which OS to keep.
Yeah, MorphOS got MUI4, Cybergraphics, Poseidon and Ambient. Tough call! ;-)
-
@takemehomegrandma
AFAICT, Painkiller's post was talking about the technical aspects of the OS.
This whole "OS4 is as dead as a beaten horse" routine is getting really old and boring. Some people have been saying that for years. The fact that OS 4.1 even exists suggests strongly that it isn't dead.
Hans
-
takemehomegrandma wrote:
Hans_ wrote:
BTW, combining the coding teams from MOS, AOS4 and/or AROS would hit one fatal snag: deciding which bits from which OS to keep.
Yeah, MorphOS got MUI4, Cybergraphics, Poseidon and Ambient. Tough call! ;-)
Ah yes, takemehomegrandma, the "MOS is superior in every way" guy. I don't see Cybergraphics as superior to Picasso96, nor am I all that impressed with what little I've seen of Ambient. Then there are all the other OS components. Factor in the egos, and, BOOM!
Hans
-
Hans_ wrote:
Not quite true. According to Genesi the Efika production ceased in September 2007.
This kind of "production ceased in..." statements purposely projects the erroneous image of a *continuous* production that *suddenly terminates*. That has never been the case, be it Pegasos, Efika or AmigaOne. Production was always run in limited one time *batches*. However, no more batch of 5200B Efika's will be produced (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5871&forum=11), that's correct. :-)
Genesi will in a more or less close future want to negotiate MorphOS support for *new* things like this (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5820&forum=11#56934), this (http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2008/06/connecting-buyers-and-sellers.html) (it's based on Freescale MPC8610), these 5 (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5638&forum=2), and perhaps even this (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5822&forum=11).
While waiting for tangible hardware to decide upon, the MorphOS team has been investigating this path (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5641&forum=11) (be sure to look at that video).
All in all, MorphOS *will* have options post Efika! :-)
-
Hans_ wrote:
@takemehomegrandma
AFAICT, Painkiller's post was talking about the technical aspects of the OS.
This whole "OS4 is as dead as a beaten horse" routine is getting really old and boring.
Maybe it's about time to get used to it?
Some people have been saying that for years. The fact that OS 4.1 even exists suggests strongly that it isn't dead.
Sorry to say this, but it suggests *nothing* else than that development has been continued *despite* the poor legal situation.
-
takemehomegrandma wrote:
Hans_ wrote:
@takemehomegrandma
AFAICT, Painkiller's post was talking about the technical aspects of the OS.
This whole "OS4 is as dead as a beaten horse" routine is getting really old and boring.
Maybe it's about time to get used to it?
You can be used to it, and still find it old and boring.
Some people have been saying that for years. The fact that OS 4.1 even exists suggests strongly that it isn't dead.
Sorry to say this, but it suggests *nothing* else than that development has been continued *despite* the poor legal situation.
Sorry to say this, but continued development is contrary to the "dead" status that you claim.
Hans
-
Sorry to say this, but continued development is contrary to the "dead" status that you claim.
Maybe Bernie continued Amithlon development as well? For some limited audience, including himself and his family? Who knows?
-
Far behind? I think not. Comparing the MOS 2.0 and AOS 4.1 feature lists, I think that they're in a pretty similar state actually.
Quite true... And seeing you just need a simple (well.. "simple") wrapper to use the apps of one in the other one you can mesure how close both are... And especially how much ressources are being *wasted* reinventing the wheel.
Simply because everyone wanted to control and own his "baby"...
How many apps could we have if all ressources put in OS4 were put into MorphOS apps instead ? (and same for the other way around.. I don't want to enter into some pathetic "they are the legal ones", "this os is the only real one because xx"...)
-
Hans_ wrote:
At least there are millions of Power Macs in existence. My vote would be for a PowerBook/iBook (the PowerPC version), as I would like an Amiga laptop. Both Amiga OS 4, and MorphOS (IIRC) have been shown with beta ports to PowerPC Mac hardware. So it's likely to happen.
Yes, but they are out of production. Don't take me bad, I would love to have an Apple "AmigaBook", but I think this development time would be better spent doing something to a machine we can buy new
Any AOS4 on PS3 wouldn't? :-P
Hans
Yes !!! :-D :-D But OS4 will not go further than A1, I believe. Unfortunately....
-
The dream is to move to intel so that we finally have all the choices in hardware...
(http://www.adiumxtras.com/images/thumbs/iphonable_1_12686_4619_thumb.gif)
-
Amiga Inc. and Hyperion are holding all the cards in this game and they are unlikely to make any progress. Amiga Inc. is pushing AmigaAnywhere (or trying to). Hyperion is pushing OS 4/4.1 for a platform that is out of production for over 10 years. MorphOS is still unstable on hardware it is supposed to run on. The only Amiga platform which can deliver Amiga is still 68K. And MiniMig. And Natami, once it enters production.
amigadave wrote:
With the court case dragging on interminably and the outcome seeming to not favor Hyperion, perhaps it is time for the AmigaOS4 team to consider another alternative.
I know there is a lot of bad blood between some of the users of AmigaOS4.x and MorphOS2.x, but I am not up to speed on any details of developer disputes between the AmigaOS4.x team and the MorphOS2.x team. I am sure there must be some animosity between the two teams, but it is a shame that they cannot resolve their differences and work on a common goal and project. Take all that talent and knowledge from both OSes and create a new Amiga compatible and "Amiga like" OS that is a step into the future for everyone. Stop fighting each other and work together and maybe something worth attracting the buying dollars/pounds/euros of the few remaining Amiga fans and maybe a few curious Linux users, or dissatisfied Windows users.
I personally am leaning toward getting and using MorphOS2.x, but would much rather see a combined effort which results in something bigger and better than both AmigaOS4.x and MorphOS2.x.
Let's bring the two split parts of the Amiga community back together.
I know that this is all just wishful thinking, but what can it hurt to express it? Please no "Red" or "Blue" trolls here.
-
I almost got the Efika board to run MorphOS but then I read a review and learned how unstable MorphOS actually is. Is there a hardware platform that MorphOS runs *reliably* on? (more or less)
-
codenetfx:
uuuhhh.. have you heard of "bug fixes" ? yea, they're working on it.
-
codenetfx wrote:
I almost got the Efika board to run MorphOS but then I read a review and learned how unstable MorphOS actually is. Is there a hardware platform that MorphOS runs *reliably* on? (more or less)
Yes, it is reported to run much more stable on the Pegasos I & II machines than it does on the Efika. Probably just a matter of releasing it a bit too early for the Efika and the team should soon have the bugs squashed, not unlike most other software releases from small teams of developers.
-
There is no next step. AmigaOS is a dead end. People forget that AmigaOS was a series of compromises. By design it provided a lot of features present on the high end machines of the day by compromising on security and stability while being able to deliver on affordable hardware at the time. It made for a damn nice system during its reign.
The folks who wrote AmigaOS knew from the very beginning that it wouldn't carry on for decades. If Commodore hadn't gone tits up and became a dominant player in the computing world, AmigaOS today would be something completely different than the OS we all love and are familiar with and all those legacy apps would be running in sandboxes, well not really, we would have dropped them long ago just like the mac people don't give a damn about pre OSX apps.
We move forward by writing something better, not by hanging on to obsolete technology.
There was nothing OS wise that was particularly original or ground breaking on AmigaOS. Almost all of the ground breaking stuff was the hardware, which by todays standards is completely irrelevant.
-
I agree with koaftder, and I am pretty sure if Commodore
had survived they would have been forced to start to use
"common" hardware just like all other in the business.
To me both MorphOS and AmigaOS is dead end because they
are still living in their own sandbox. Amiga can't extend
it's userbase enough with just sticking to home-made hardware.
Just look at the current situation, new versions and only
crap hardware to run them on, not even a laptop..and we are
living in 2008 for **** sake. :crazy: There's not a even
a tiny chance userbase could grow beoynd 5000 with what they
are doing today.
I'm not looking back, I gladly use what's out there Win, Linux, Macs. If AROS one day can handle my web needs I have
a spare laptop for it.
-
Uhh I hate the so called modern OSs... Software developers just don't care anymore what they make, instead its quanity at the cost of usability. Many programs are way too heavy than what they should be and new hardware are used to make up for that... Back in the days of Amiga, software were created for the hardware not the other way around.
People just don't seem to care nowadays they just think that hey this is the way it should work when many things could be done a hundred times better...
-
Painkiller wrote:
Uhh I hate the so called modern OSs... Software developers just don't care anymore what they make, instead its quanity at the cost of usability. Many programs are way too heavy than what they should be and new hardware are used to make up for that... Back in the days of Amiga, software were created for the hardware not the other way around.
People just don't seem to care nowadays they just think that hey this is the way it should work when many things could be done a hundred times better...
I´m not a big fan of "modern" OS also. They cost 10 times more disk space than they should, and there are no reasons for that. And how I hate ctrl+alt+del and those blue screens.
Unfortunately, I´ve never tried Mac OS X, so I can´t have an oppinion about it. My Mac died before OS X release
@persia:
Moving to Intel would put the OS side by side with Linux, Win, OS X and all the obscure alternative OSs. It would be just another flavor of PC.
Besides this, there would be the nightmare of writing drivers for tons of different hardware. Linux guys have it, and there are tons of programmers writing stuff for it...
-
AeroMan wrote:
Painkiller wrote:
Uhh I hate the so called modern OSs... Software developers just don't care anymore what they make, instead its quanity at the cost of usability. Many programs are way too heavy than what they should be and new hardware are used to make up for that... Back in the days of Amiga, software were created for the hardware not the other way around.
People just don't seem to care nowadays they just think that hey this is the way it should work when many things could be done a hundred times better...
I´m not a big fan of "modern" OS also. They cost 10 times more disk space than they should, and there are no reasons for that. And how I hate ctrl+alt+del and those blue screens.
Unfortunately, I´ve never tried Mac OS X, so I can´t have an oppinion about it. My Mac died before OS X release
A "Modern" OS has to do a huge amount... the size of the source code can probably be measured in the Billions!
They might be using more space than they should, but that is a side effect of the evolutionary nature of features added to the system. Apple have recently released a beta of OSX 10.6 "Snow Leopard"... the aim of which is to slim the codebase down to just what is needed. But it will still be gigabytes in size, it will use a massive amount of disk space, because it has to do so much!
@persia:
Moving to Intel would put the OS side by side with Linux, Win, OS X and all the obscure alternative OSs. It would be just another flavor of PC.
As opposed to now, where it is just another flavour of PC with a technologically dead CPU...
Besides this, there would be the nightmare of writing drivers for tons of different hardware.
Nightmare? Why not do as AROS and use generic drivers, most hardware will work... then if you have a specific driver you get better functionality... that's how all OSs deal with this problem.
Linux guys have it, and there are tons of programmers writing stuff for it...
It's relativly easy to build a machine for running Linux, do a quick search on the net, find out which hardware you can get a linux driver for and then buy that bit of hardware... simple.
And if you think about it that's like searching on the net to see which Motherboard you need to run MOS or OS4... and then if you want to run one of those OSs you buy the compaible board... simple... :idea:
-
@persia
Moving to Intel would put the OS side by side with Linux, Win, OS X and all the obscure alternative OSs. It would be just another flavor of PC.
Besides this, there would be the nightmare of writing drivers for tons of different hardware. Linux guys have it, and there are tons of programmers writing stuff for it...
Eh? The OS is side by side all others already, it only
makes it 100 times worse to have it on an obscure platform.
Drivers is made today also aren't they ? It's better to develop drivers for hardware that EXISTS than first have
to find a harware manufacturer and THEN wait XX months for
their board to get ready and which anyway will cost many many times more and is much slower.
-
bloodline wrote:
A "Modern" OS has to do a huge amount... the size of the source code can probably be measured in the Billions!
They might be using more space than they should, but that is a side effect of the evolutionary nature of features added to the system. Apple have recently released a beta of OSX 10.6 "Snow Leopard"... the aim of which is to slim the codebase down to just what is needed. But it will still be gigabytes in size, it will use a massive amount of disk space, because it has to do so much!
I still can´t see this huge amount to justify gigabytes of code. AROS itself is just some megs. Many Linux distros with a nice GUI and everything are also some Megs. Sure those gigs are not just filling disk space, but it seems that some people can do the same amount of work without the same burden.
As opposed to now, where it is just another flavour of PC with a technologically dead CPU...
Now you are comparing a technology of the 90´s with today´s PCs. Would you say the same about PS3 or XBox ?
I´m not stating that keep with a 68K is better, but competing in the same hardware means it would need to be so much better than the other OS to have a real advantage. A hardware/software solution could provide some advantage
Nightmare? Why not do as AROS and use generic drivers, most hardware will work... then if you have a specific driver you get better functionality... that's how all OSs deal with this problem.
Unfortunately, PC peripherals are not that generic. Old versions of AROS worked nice with my PC, bu the last ones do not recognize my graphics card. Ubuntu 7 stretches the image in my monitor (I need to try 8...). Win 98 works nice, XP too.
Not to mention generic chinese hardware that comes with an install CD
It's relativly easy to build a machine for running Linux, do a quick search on the net, find out which hardware you can get a linux driver for and then buy that bit of hardware... simple.
And if you think about it that's like searching on the net to see which Motherboard you need to run MOS or OS4... and then if you want to run one of those OSs you buy the compaible board... simple... :idea:
Now, I agree with you. Find the hardware for the software you need is the solution.
I´ve never said MOS or OS4 have compatible hardware in each corner. I´ve just stated that hardware different than common PCs might be an advantage, considering that it might be more efficient.
Think about a race with common people running against Schumacher driving the same ordinary cars. They do not have a chance, but give a Viper to someone, and he would be king
-
Manu wrote:
Eh? The OS is side by side all others already, it only
makes it 100 times worse to have it on an obscure platform.
Drivers is made today also aren't they ? It's better to develop drivers for hardware that EXISTS than first have
to find a harware manufacturer and THEN wait XX months for
their board to get ready and which anyway will cost many many times more and is much slower.
There are still some stuff that needs to be done to reach the others, and I know that it will be done at some point in time.
Slower means that you designed it slower. Efika is based in a SOC, for example. It is not state of the art, and wasn´t designed to be. You can´t ensure it will cost more. Perfomance and cost are design compromises that needs to be balanced. An EEE PC will not perform the same as a Quad Core, but it will not cost the same also
-
[rant]
As far as I'm concerned AROS is a fully functioning ready to use OS. It installs, it runs programs, it's fast and works on anything I would use it on.
The ONLY reason I don't use it is the lack of applications. Primarilly a good web browser with JAVA capabilities (preferably a Firefox port). Seconded by some kind of IM client FULLY compatible with Yahoo Messenger (every clone I've seen seems to lack stealth capabilities).
I have been here for the highs and lows of Amiga Inc., and the projects that have come and gone. The ray of hope crushed by people who seem to only want to screw us Amiga fans out of money and sue their contractors... or anyone else who tries to come up with something new (Amithlon anyone?)
I like my classic Amigas, but I have lost ALL faith in a next generation Amiga product. The Hyperion suit is the final nail in the coffin of Amiga IMHO.
AROS is the only thing we have left. If we as a community have any interest in the future, EVERYONE should stand behind it.
[/rant]
-
I really don't get this race idea. there is no race, there is no competition, that took place a decade and a half ago and Amiga lost. Amiga now is in a place of being something that you use in addition to a PC or Mac, it's not and never will be a replacement.
Now since this isn't a race it makes sense to have the Amiga run on the same hardware as Macs and PCs. Especially in this day of virtualisation. You can have a PC with a virtual Amiga, an Amiga with a virtual PC or Mac. The hardware should be the same to make this easier.
This whole idea that I even need a computer for each OS is just plain silly. Why? Because that's how they did things back in the 20th Century?
I have a Mac, I run OS X, XP, Gentoo Linux, one box, one screen, on keyboard. Intel/AMD equipment is cheap, can you say that about Amiga equipment? Stuff that you would throw out if it we're Amiga, and you pay 100s of dollarsfor it, where's the sense?
(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h243/xx-sharly-xx/shower-smiley.gif)
-
Uh well we are now in an era where you have to constantly upgrade your computer to use the same freaking features and for what? For nothing. I think modern computers should be more consolised, so that you wouldn't have to upgrade every 2 to 3 years. Maybe a 5 year life span would be nice. That way it would be quaranteed that the software would be made for the specific hardware in mind and most likely a lot more effort would used to optimize it. It would be even easier for the devs, because they wouldn't have to be worrying about wide range of different hardware setups and will their code run on it.
It is really a sad state where modern day computing is, we have so much horse power on these machines yet even half of its potential isn't even used due sloppy coding and differences in hardware. Consoles are a perfect exsample how much platforms can actually be pushed once it matures and people learn to code for it, but that isn't going to happen in PC world ever.
That being said I think it would make perfect sense to port MOS 2 to PS3 as it is going to be around for many years to come and its succesor most likely will also support other OSs.
So please MOS team let us have it on PS3 :) Other hardware that you are planning on using it are pretty much dead.
-
@Painkiller
You don't want technology, you want a flower garden...
-
Not everyone's demands are that sofisticated, my 10 year old son does fine on a 700 MHz G4, that's pretty old technology. My wife have a single core AMD 3200. Not too sophisticated. But they don't push the machine, my wife does email, surfs the web, does a little word processing. My son does similar plus itunes and some games.
I on the other hand do animation, video editing, photo editing, 3D modelling, so I have 8 cores all running at 3.2 GHz. Having to update is the price I pay for staying on the edge.
You could always borrow spare computer power from other machines in your house, look up the Condor Project or use X Grid if you just have Macs.
(http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg121/descalzar/HippieSmiley.gif)
-
@bloodline
No I want a computer that actually works and is not bug ridden I don't see how that is possible when there is so much variety in hardware.
People have different opinions you know...
Surely MOS is quite full of bugs, but a small team is working on it and I would think it is a lot easier for them to get rid of the bugs with one hardware in mind than thousands of different combinations.
-
@bloodline
Why avoid legitimate criticisms of AROS and avoid engaging in discussion about it, in preference to making back-handed comments to people (The Simpsons, flower gardens)?
-
Painkiller wrote:
@bloodline
No I want a computer that actually works and is not bug ridden I don't see how that is possible when there is so much variety in hardware.
People have different opinions you know...
Surely MOS is quite full of bugs, but a small team is working on it and I would think it is a lot easier for them to get rid of the bugs with one hardware in mind than thousands of different combinations.
Just buy an iMac and be happy...
-
persia wrote:
I have a Mac, I run OS X, XP, Gentoo Linux, one box, one screen, on keyboard. Intel/AMD equipment is cheap, can you say that about Amiga equipment? Stuff that you would throw out if it we're Amiga, and you pay 100s of dollarsfor it, where's the sense?
PCs gets old too, as Painkiller said. I´m replacing mine, as it is 4 years old, and still uses DDR1 memories. It is better to buy a new mobo and keep my system up to date than pay more for old memory.
My mother still uses an old PC for internet, email, Office and basic stuff. It works, but is a throw away old hardware just like the Amiga, as you said. No hope for upgrade, she will have to spend money in a new machine.
I can´t say anything about new Amiga hardware being cheap or not, as it does not exists. But I can compare with Apple, for example. Here I can buy a really nice PC for the price of a normal Mac, and without some hacking, you need a Mac to run OS X
The race condition exists, of course. We want to see a new Amiga OS (AROS/MOS or OS4) because we are Amiga fans, and computer freaks. How would you convince a normal user to use AROS instead of Windows, for example, even supposing all everyday app is available for it ?
It is hard to convince normal people to use even Linux. Apple has all the sex appeal and marketing, and Windows is almost a second name for computer today. Linux is free, and some new computers come with it to drop the price, and this is helping to gather more users.
So, why not PS3? If the main opposition to my "different hardware for advantage" is the "expensive and not available" point, why ignore a US$500 supercomputer which still is a Blue Ray and have nice games?
-
There is no next step. AmigaOS is a dead end. People forget that AmigaOS was a series of compromises. By design it provided a lot of features present on the high end machines of the day by compromising on security and stability while being able to deliver on affordable hardware at the time. It made for a damn nice system during its reign.
The folks who wrote AmigaOS knew from the very beginning that it wouldn't carry on for decades. If Commodore hadn't gone tits up and became a dominant player in the computing world, AmigaOS today would be something completely different than the OS we all love and are familiar with and all those legacy apps would be running in sandboxes, well not really, we would have dropped them long ago just like the mac people don't give a damn about pre OSX apps.
We move forward by writing something better, not by hanging on to obsolete technology.
There was nothing OS wise that was particularly original or ground breaking on AmigaOS. Almost all of the ground breaking stuff was the hardware, which by todays standards is completely irrelevant.
I totally agree... Unfortunately all people that wanted to move forward left the Amiga "boat". When reading everyone talking here, the most important thing is to be able to run their 10 years (and older...) applications. Not to have a new, modern OS. So development is headed toward compatibility, and not innovation... And a lot of time is spent ensuring compatibility more than having new clean (and not compatible, but who cares ?) API...
-
I am using Macs (G4s and Intels). I also use Windows machines daily (for work). I have Amigas for games and tweaking. I wish I could buy a modern machine with a modern CPU and coprocessors for graphics, sound, networking, media DSPs...something like a real supercomputer :) not this consumer-oriented garbage with flashy stickers and a gutload of branding messages.
One can argue that modern graphics cards act as "coprocessors" and this is true but they are not standard equipment. Also, no OS/hardware out there supports coprocessors for the killer application of today (networking and media, such as MP3).
Promise of multicore design is to provide the same coolness of co-processor designs (provided you have software that supports it); you would get a very responsive system (orders of magnitude more responsive than the fastest machine today), but the trouble is that it will take years for software to support multicore designs. Windows (XP and Server) allegedly support multicore *and* dual CPU hardware, but I am yet to "feel" the difference beyond perf. improvement with more RAM added.
Mac is probably the closest to that goal but still does not have dedicated hardware for networking and will have an OS that supports multicore natively some time next year (Snow Leopard).
Multicore support is significant because old-fashioned software is wasting a lot of hardware you paid for in a new machine. When you push a lot of data through your wireless (or wired) LAN, you are using too many (single) CPU cycles *and* you are keeping the data bus very crowded and that chokes up the overall performance while other cores are idling. This is why even the GHz machines do not feel as fast as they should be.
A CPU/mobo designs which are 100 times faster on paper than CPU/mobo designs from 20 years ago, *should* feel at least several orders of magnitude faster than "old software" And yet it does not.
Intel's now obsolete supercomputer on a chip called i860 (64-bit RISC processor from 1992 or 1993, can't remember now) was a technology that could deliver Amiga-like graphics. i860 Graphics/DSP boards for 486DX-33MHz could deliver video quality of today back in 1993. i860 failed to capture marketshare because it did not have a lot of software written for it. Expansion boards were very expensive and that did not help either (this should sound familiar).
As of future Amiga design, it would have to include MC68K (likely a copy of MiniMig design) for compatibility.
The coolest thing that happened to Amiga (relatively) recently is the MiniMig - a proof that a legacy coprocessor design can be implemented in FPGA and "teamed" with a low-voltage MC68K to deliver a low-cost compatibility package. Natami is likely the next wave, when it becomes available.
Amiga as a platform does not have a bright future as long as software platform (OS) remains in limbo.
My hunch is that both Amiga Inc and Hyperion will go bankrupt within a short period of time. Their business models are not sustainable and their business style is not entrepreneurial but rather confrontational. Whoever wins that ridiculous battle, Amiga as a platform will lose. Delete Amiga Inc. and Hyperion from your bookmarks. It is a waste of time. And for God's sake, stop bidding up those PPC cards to ridiculous amounts on ebay. They are worth 200-300 bucks tops. 14 year old hardware.
Amiga's future is outside of the corporate world. MiniMig and AROS (both open source) prove that. A multicore design that includes powerful graphics card, sound card with an powerful DSP, network card with a dedicated CPU :), built-in SCSI and SATA interfaces would be worthy of an Amiga - especially if it ran AROS.
Until then, grab a Mac and a Minimig (or a vintage Mig :)
-
Amiga's future is as a retro machine, the people it will attract are the retro hobbyists. It's like amateur radio or antique cars. Speed and power mean nothing in that world. There will never be a modern Amiga because there is no market for one.
(http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o49/SKULL_ANDRE/ANIMATIE-IMAGE/EMOTICONES/smiley_emoticons_joint.gif)
-
its pretty sad that Amiga users stick to old hardware, new hardware comes out and is available now (EFIKA) but dont buy it.
Some people complain "well its discontinued and ..." so is your Amiga and look how long its lived and its probably still ticking.
Otherwise you'll just be the same old boring person..waiting for X operating system to be released for X motherboard and just being disappointed all the time. On top of that we'll have to read your posts of frustration and disappointment.
Hey its cool playing w/an old Amiga..I have ALOT of them but am slowly ebaying them. I actually put them all in storage after taking the software off that I wanted. If I want to run something Amiga, it'll have to run on my EFIKA or under EUAE.
Anyway, carry on. :-)
-
TheMagicM wrote:
.... If I want to run something Amiga, it'll have to run on my EFIKA or under EUAE.
Anyway, carry on. :-)
Those are two viable options to use.
persia wrote:
Amiga's future is as a retro machine, the people it will attract are the retro hobbyists. It's like amateur radio or antique cars. Speed and power mean nothing in that world. There will never be a modern Amiga because there is no market for one.
Another valid opinion of the current and possible future of the Amiga platform.
codenetfx wrote:
I wish I could buy a modern machine with a modern CPU and coprocessors for graphics, sound, networking, media DSPs...something like a real supercomputer :) not this consumer-oriented garbage with flashy stickers and a gutload of branding messages.
A wish that many of us have, but few feel is a possible reality for an Amiga. That will take many years, if it happens at all.
codenetfx also wrote:
Promise of multicore design is to provide the same coolness of co-processor designs (provided you have software that supports it); you would get a very responsive system (orders of magnitude more responsive than the fastest machine today), but the trouble is that it will take years for software to support multicore designs. Windows (XP and Server) allegedly support multicore *and* dual CPU hardware, but I am yet to "feel" the difference beyond perf. improvement with more RAM added.
AND
Multicore support is significant because old-fashioned software is wasting a lot of hardware you paid for in a new machine. When you push a lot of data through your wireless (or wired) LAN, you are using too many (single) CPU cycles *and* you are keeping the data bus very crowded and that chokes up the overall performance while other cores are idling. This is why even the GHz machines do not feel as fast as they should be.
A CPU/mobo designs which are 100 times faster on paper than CPU/mobo designs from 20 years ago, *should* feel at least several orders of magnitude faster than "old software" And yet it does not.
I wholeheartedly agree that new computers and their OSes do not feel as fast as 15+ year old Amigas, which is very disappointing. We should be light years ahead of where we currently are. For some Amiga users, this "feeling" is what keeps them going and hoping for a rebirth of a commercially viable Amiga. My personal hopes are not that high (unrealistic).
codenetfx also wrote:
i860 failed to capture marketshare because it did not have a lot of software written for it. Expansion boards were very expensive and that did not help either (this should sound familiar).
And
warpdesign wrote:
Unfortunately all people that wanted to move forward left the Amiga "boat". When reading everyone talking here, the most important thing is to be able to run their 10 years (and older...) applications. Not to have a new, modern OS. So development is headed toward compatibility, and not innovation... And a lot of time is spent ensuring compatibility more than having new clean (and not compatible, but who cares ?) API...
@codenetfx,
Yes, sounds very familiar and is a big reason that next generation Amiga OSes have not been very successful. Not enough good new programs for them.
@warpdesign,
A new Amiga(Like)OS is worthless if it is just a similar API that runs faster and on newer hardware. You have to have useful and/or entertaining software for it.
This is why some of us want the backward compatibility to be kept and improved upon. We want the ability to run some of that 78,000 software titles currently on Aminet, as well as the commercial Amiga software on which we have spent good money, to run on our new Amigas until more new PPC Amiga software can be written.
Sort of goes hand-in-hand with the idea that many of us want to see AOS4.x and MOS2.x ported to all the used PPC Macs out there as a short term solution to the hardware shortage until newer Amiga hardware can be invented and produced in mass quantities (a few thousand anyway). Yes, I know that the Efika is available right now, but for some of us, it is just not fast enough, or have all the features we would want in a new Amiga computer. That being said, if I had the extra cash, I would very likely go buy one and pay the MOS2.x team their price for the latest version of their OS.
Just because we want these less than ideal, short term fixes, it does not mean that we do not want the longer term, better solutions to happen. You might argue that if time is spent completing the short term projects that it will take away time for the long term projects. That is true, but if the Amiga community is forced to wait another 4 to 6 years for the long term projects to be completed, there won't be hardly any of us left to care. Many already say that there are not enough that care right now, and they may be right.
-
You have to have useful and/or entertaining software for it
By developing something real "new", we could have way more "fun" than running 10 years old apps... Look at MacOSX: who's running OS9 apps today (and I believe there are a lot more than 78 000 apps for pre-OSX...)
OSX added a lot more...
Yes, it will take time. But the sooner we start, the sooner we'll have fun again... And the sooner we'll get rid of this old, old, old API, which was designed for old hardware, without portability in mind,...
-
warpdesign:
yea I agree. This legacy compatability stuff is far too overrated.
-
warpdesign wrote:
You have to have useful and/or entertaining software for it
By developing something real "new", we could have way more "fun" than running 10 years old apps... Look at MacOSX: who's running OS9 apps today (and I believe there are a lot more than 78 000 apps for pre-OSX...)
OSX added a lot more...
Yes, it will take time. But the sooner we start, the sooner we'll have fun again... And the sooner we'll get rid of this old, old, old API, which was designed for old hardware, without portability in mind,...
Comparing anything Amiga to OSX is like comparing the Model T Ford to today's Shelby Mustang GT. They have almost nothing in common other than they both roll on wheels and carry people.
Yes, there are still many old time Mac users that are running OS9 apps on their new OSX machines and Apple saw the value of building in that compatibility to make the transition from the old to the new. What do you think would have happened to Apple's already small market share if they had not had any backward compatibility? New sales of the OSX Macs probably would have been half or less of what they have been.
Go ahead and follow the same path that OS4 and AmigaInc. have already been down and see how successful you will be. I can just about guarantee it will be about half of what it could be if backward compatibility had been available to your potential buyers.
On the other hand if all you are thinking of developing is a hobby OS and hardware for a few hardcore coders that don't mind the lack of software or are satisfied in dual booting into Linux to have something to run on their new OS and hardware, that is fine (for the few of you).
All I am trying to say is that backward compatibility is better for a transition to anything new. Then after established with hundreds of new software applications and entertainment provided, then drop the old 80's and 90's compatibility.
-
amigadave wrote:
All I am trying to say is that backward compatibility is better for a transition to anything new. Then after established with hundreds of new software applications and entertainment provided, then drop the old 80's and 90's compatibility.
I agree with you on that (BTW, I really liked your previous post :-) ) .
Apple has shown the way: do a brand new system, and sandbox old stuff. The difference is that we have a 15 year technology gap from OS3.1, and I believe this might be an advantage.
Do a new system with E-UAE and everybody is happy (I hope...) :-D
-
AeroMan wrote:
Do a new system with E-UAE and everybody is happy (I hope...) :-D
If that was the case then I'm sure that AROS would be more popular than it is. If the only need for an Amiga compatible machine is EUAE then MacOS X, Linux and Windows already fulfil that.
There needs to be a tighter integration than just having *UAE for it to really work. If you took a look at how OS 9 compatibility was implemented you'd see that while there was a sand-boxed copy of OS9 launched in a window when it was needed, the actual software itself ran fully integrated with OS X. It looked different, and had a different menubar at the top, but otherwise, it was another app. There was no need to switch between OSes to use it.
-
amigadave wrote:
warpdesign wrote:
You have to have useful and/or entertaining software for it
By developing something real "new", we could have way more "fun" than running 10 years old apps... Look at MacOSX: who's running OS9 apps today (and I believe there are a lot more than 78 000 apps for pre-OSX...)
OSX added a lot more...
Yes, it will take time. But the sooner we start, the sooner we'll have fun again... And the sooner we'll get rid of this old, old, old API, which was designed for old hardware, without portability in mind,...
Comparing anything Amiga to OSX is like comparing the Model T Ford to today's Shelby Mustang GT. They have almost nothing in common other than they both roll on wheels and carry people.
Yes, there are still many old time Mac users that are running OS9 apps on their new OSX machines and Apple saw the value of building in that compatibility to make the transition from the old to the new. What do you think would have happened to Apple's already small market share if they had not had any backward compatibility? New sales of the OSX Macs probably would have been half or less of what they have been.
This is why Steve Jobs is the boss of Apple and you are not (this is not an insult upon you BTW).
When Apple brought out OSX, they did sandbox the old apps... very clever, but that did not drive sales, that just ensured that existing users who wanted to upgrade could. But that did not drive sales of OSX, that just keep existing users happy... that is not a market.
What drove OSX was Apple buying up all the best productivity software for OS9 and then porting it themselves to OSX, most of the best OSX productivity software is actually from apple. They were able to afford this by having a second source income... The iPod and iTunes... That pretty much funded the OS9 to OSX transition.
Steve Jobs is a genius... and his trick has been done. Amiga can't do that anymore. The Amiga has nothing.
-
uncharted wrote:
There needs to be a tighter integration than just having *UAE for it to really work. If you took a look at how OS 9 compatibility was implemented you'd see that while there was a sand-boxed copy of OS9 launched in a window when it was needed, the actual software itself ran fully integrated with OS X. It looked different, and had a different menubar at the top, but otherwise, it was another app. There was no need to switch between OSes to use it.
Maybe I couldn't express myself the right way. What I was thinking about is do the same way Apple did
If it is an OS 3 program, the system could launch an emulator to run it without the user notice. Pretty much like
Apple did when they moved from 68K to PPC.
The advantage is that modern processors are capable of emulating a fast Amiga. If you tried 68K apps on the early PPC Macs, you probably noticed they were not as fast as native 68K
Regarding AROS, I'm a big fan of it, and think it is such a great idea. I don't think Win/Linux with UAE are a good solution for a modern Amiga, because Windows and Linux are not what I expect from an OS to work with.
-
Mac provided a bridge to allow new software to develop. Classic can't run on any Mac made in the last 2 years, and no Motorola based software runs on anything made in this century. The trouble with Amiga is that it's living in a time warp, 20 year old software is still desirable. This is a problem, the Amiga can't make the jump in one step and in trying to take multiple steps you will use the handful of users that still exist.
Maybe we're just deluding ourselve anyway. If someone really produced a modern Amiga OS there's still no software, nobody will care.
-
:-o
-
codenetfx wrote:
@amigadave
MiniMig project shows that it is possible to implement a complex hardware design (custom chipset) on a single chip.
OCS ain't a "complex hardware design" by today's standard, not even at a stretch.....
-
@Kronos: Your "7 point program" (in your signature) confirms that you cannot be serious with that claim about complexity of the ECS chipset.
Kronos wrote:
codenetfx wrote:
@amigadave
MiniMig project shows that it is possible to implement a complex hardware design (custom chipset) on a single chip.
OCS ain't a "complex hardware design" by today's standard, not even at a stretch.....
-
@codenetfx,
You completely misunderstood the meaning of my message. Your response has nothing to do with what I was pointing out.
-
IMO, Amiga Technologies ought to catch up with..well, err, technology and then implement a useful operating sysyem which is based on simple parameters, like the old days.
Then it could compete with the other O.S's. But who would programme such an O.S and its a catch 22 at the moment, until the hardware is updated in an 'Amiga' way, we would have to wait a while until the O.S gets updated.
-
Just making a modern OS isn't the only problem. If there were a modern Amiga OS it still would lake applications to run on it. There's nobody to write the OS, nobody to write the killer apps. Face it, if you had an idea for a killer app you'd develop it to run on MS Windows and OS X too.
I can get 512 MB graphics cards from NVIDEA, you can put multiple cards and combine the processing power of the cards. I can run dual quad core Xeons in the machine itself. Who's going to write the OS that can handle all these processors? And then write an app better than current sate of the art by a mile. Even then there's no office suite unless you port OpenOffice. The whole thing is just daunting in the extreme.
(http://files.myopera.com/lilacfairy/files/apple%20and%20worrm.gif)
-
Late jumping in on this thread, but here goes my 2 cents:
bloodline wrote:
amigadave wrote:
This is starting to sound too much like you guys want to exclude the AOS4.x team members no matter what and I am wondering if the motives are more than just objective.
This thread was probably a bad idea anyway.
Seems that our best hope for a unified future is for AInc. to go under, just like every other Amiga owner has. They sure aren't going to do us any good.
A Inc going under can only be a good thing... But hey why don't we forget about tainted code and propriatory operating systems and start a community based open source AmigaOS, that the community could then "own" free of any dodgy companies, legal issues and expensive hardware... Woe, woe and thrice woe, if only such a project existed... If only something like that had been started 10 years ago... Sigh... If only...
Open Source OS? Great idea. But what about Open Source Hardware? And are we talking classic Amiga hardware, Intel/AMD based hardware, Apple Hardware, or something entirely new altogether?
I for one wouldn't mind seeing something entirely new and revolutionary as the original Amiga was. A new era of hardware and software. Something more advanced than anything else out there and ahead of its time! I'll even volunteer to Beta test it all! :-D