Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: amigakidd on March 30, 2009, 06:49:01 AM
-
It is the linux of the amiga community. I believe aros and the fork of aros called Icaros will mature in the years to come.
Anyone watch the movie called Revolution OS? The same thing is happening right now with AROS. Imagine in the far future, AROS and Icaros to sit with Windows, Mac, Linux, to be mainstream alternative os.
AROS and Icaros does not need to compete with Vista or Leopard. It is good at what it does: To serve and continue the Amiga Community.
I just hope that there are APIs to will support cloud based computing.
AROS Family has potential to bring the Amiga community foreward. I support them.
-
Well spoken. :-)
-
amigakidd wrote:
It is the linux of the amiga community. I believe aros and the fork of aros called Icaros will mature in the years to come.
Icaros is not a fork of aros, it is only a distro that is polished and includes lots of pre installed software.
-
I guess he means Anubis.
Regardless I don't exactly share his enthusiasm.
-
Piru wrote:
I guess he means Anubis.
Regardless I don't exactly share his enthusiasm.
And this is a very fine thread to explain, in a civilised manner, why. :-)
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Piru wrote:
I guess he means Anubis.
Regardless I don't exactly share his enthusiasm.
And this is a very fine thread to explain, in a civilised manner, why. :-)
I have little enthusiasm for anything Amiga these days, but AROS is still fun and Icarus is the best way to have fun with AROS.
Anubis probably won't amount to too much, but is is the only and best hope that the Amiga concept has to continue... Because of it I have spent a lot of time reading up about Unix, and you really have to see just how antiquated AmigaOS is!!
Both Anubis and AROS bring a smile to my face :-)
-
Regardless I don't exactly share his enthusiasm.
I'll bite, what does share your enthusiasm?
Dammy
-
bloodline wrote:
Anubis probably won't amount to too much, but is is the only and best hope that the Amiga concept has to continue... Because of it I have spent a lot of time reading up about Unix, and you really have to see just how antiquated AmigaOS is!!
Surely you mean just how antiquated Unix is. :-)
-
kolla wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Anubis probably won't amount to too much, but is is the only and best hope that the Amiga concept has to continue... Because of it I have spent a lot of time reading up about Unix, and you really have to see just how antiquated AmigaOS is!!
Surely you mean just how antiquated Unix is. :-)
If memory protection and security are antique practices and a task-switching utility API prohibiting those practices is the future then I must be living in wonderland ;)
-
AROS is a good thing true. It give hobbyists something more to play with, a chance to relive the Amiga experience on modern equipment, but it also locks it's developments into the late '80s/early '90s.
In the end it's all about enjoying your hobby and not worrying about justifying it, it's becoming more ad more likely that I will need to part with my old Amigas before they die, if I do it'll still be fun to have AROS around to play with, providing the Amiga experience on discarded PC hardware, or perhaps as a VMWare machine.
-
@ amigakidd
AROS Family has potential to bring the Amiga community foreward. I support them.
Let us not forget about AmigaOS and MorphOS; when some mainstream hardware gains their (either of) support, their impact will not go overlooked.
@ bloodline
Anubis probably won't amount to too much, but is is the only and best hope that the Amiga concept has to continue... Because of it I have spent a lot of time reading up about Unix, and you really have to see just how antiquated AmigaOS is!!
My idea about Anubis is like breaking AROS to pieces. Why did AROS people start another project? Do they consider AROS finished? Or they simply abandoned the project... Because of what? What for?? Lots of people to develop AROS anyway?
I think those people should rather focus on AROS drivers for notebook computers. Don't know how much % of nowadays PCs are notebooks, unsupported by AROS...
BTW I wouldn't mind that Anubis won't amount to too much. What I ask myself is WHEN will Anubis amount to anything?
-
amigakidd wrote:
It is the linux of the amiga community.
I would've thought Linux (http://www.linux-m68k.org/) was the Linux of the Amiga community... especially since (Ic)AROS won't even run on Amiga (http://aros.sourceforge.net/documentation/users/faq.php#what-hardware-architectures-is-aros-available-for).
-
Putting together the posts on this and on other boards, it appears there was an argument over the future of AROS between those who wanted to continue AROs intial goal of a modernised clone of AmigaOS 3.1 and those that wanted to update AmigaOS into what it might have become had CBM had survived.
Those who wanted to stay with the goal of a 3.1 re-implementation won and the losing side split. They started a Source Forge group called ARIX and began talking. It appears they've taken a more radical turn and now want to create an Amiga-like Linux.
Think of it as DragonFly BSD 2.
-
persia wrote:
Those who wanted to stay with the goal of a 3.1 re-implementation won and the losing side split. They started a Source Forge group called ARIX and began talking. It appears they've taken a more radical turn and now want to create an Amiga-like Linux.
Amiga-like Linux ain't Amiga-like system. It's a Linux distro.
-
:horse:
-
The point of Anubis has been stated many times. AROS has limitation on new features because of it's basic design. Some of the features would at best not be worth the effort to try to wedge into AROS, and at worst would be impossible to wedge into AROS.
As is always the case, people working for free are going to work on projects that interest them. So, the developers of Anubis, are either faced with starting a new project, or trying to force AROS into becoming something that other developers don't want it to be.
Personally, while I have no current interest in Anubis, I see the split to be a very healthy move. The fighting between what various developers was getting very noticeable. While everybody hopes to keep a happy family under the same roof. When the parents of a project have grown in different direction, and can no longer get along, sometimes it is best if one of them just moves out. Everyone will be happier. The people working on Anubis can reach for newer and cutting edge technology without being stifled, and the AROS folks can work towards it's original goals without people constantly trying to shift it's focus. On the plus side, it might just mean that we will start getting two Christmases!
For myself, I have no current interest in Anubis, but that does not mean that I won't gain an interest in the future. What I would want to see from AROS is for it to gain full AmigaOS compatibility, and specifically ported to the 68k so that we have a fully open source classic platform that can run most if not all of our old software. The goals of Anubis are in direct conflict with this. If it IS ever achieved though, then AROS will be pretty much done. That is when I would like to see a functional Anubis with many years of development all ready under it's belt.
-
Amiga+Linux??? how boring. If I wanted Linux, I would do Linux. I agree with the other post below that Amiga-like Linux is not AMIGA.
DiskDoctor wrote:
persia wrote:
Those who wanted to stay with the goal of a 3.1 re-implementation won and the losing side split. They started a Source Forge group called ARIX and began talking. It appears they've taken a more radical turn and now want to create an Amiga-like Linux.
Amiga-like Linux ain't Amiga-like system. It's a Linux distro.
-
:horse:
-
persia wrote:
AROS ... locks it's developments into the late '80s/early '90s."
Really?
People used 1280x1024 16 million color workbenches in the late 80's and early 90s?
People ran 2000 Mhz CPUs in the late 80's and early 90s?
People used 3000 MB of RAM in the late 80's and early 90s?
I didn't know any of that happened. You must know a lot more about computer history than me.
-
ChaosLord wrote:
persia wrote:
AROS ... locks it's developments into the late '80s/early '90s."
Really?
People used 1280x1024 16 million color workbenches in the late 80's and early 90s?
People ran 2000 Mhz CPUs in the late 80's and early 90s?
People used 3000 MB of RAM in the late 80's and early 90s?
I didn't know any of that happened. You must know a lot more about computer history than me.
He was referring to the absence of memory protection.
Nowadays, this'd impose a gigantic security leak for the whole system.
-
ChaosLord wrote:
persia wrote:
AROS ... locks it's developments into the late '80s/early '90s."
Really?
People used 1280x1024 16 million color workbenches in the late 80's and early 90s?
People ran 2000 Mhz CPUs in the late 80's and early 90s?
People used 3000 MB of RAM in the late 80's and early 90s?
I didn't know any of that happened. You must know a lot more about computer history than me.
these are merely hardware advancements. AmigaOS supported 32 bit color screens in 1280x1024 since the early 90's, like wise 16 (24 bit as well?) bit audio through AHI, and upto 768 MB ram ( at least?). For a system built in 1983 thats decent, even in todays hardware terms, when you consider how quickly hardware specs become obsolete.
People harp on about memory protection. Back in the day, the most tangible outcome of this lack on the Amiga was that badly written program could bring the entire system down as each programs could occupy the memory space of another one. But most programmers learned to write their software so that this didn't happen nowhere as much as you might think. The security advantages of memory protection are over-hyped as memory protection is no guarantee to a secure system anyway: Look at every incarnation of windows that has had memory protection: its THE most insecure system on the planet, always needing to be patched to cover this hole and that hole. The underlying problem is that home OS's like AmigaOS and Windows and MacOS before it became a Unix GUI is that these OS's were never meant to be used on giant multi-suer networks like the internet, and this where most of the security flaws result. Conversely as a home computer OS the Amiga has huge advantages in ease of usability ( eg you NEVER NEED to open a shell if you don't want, Linux/Unix REQUIRES you to do it at LEAST some of the time), GUI speed, wonderfully-smooth multi-tasking, fast boot up time. Why can't these things be implemented as well in a system with memory protection? Does memory protection require the sacrifice of these things? Why does a core2duo running at 2.8 ghz with 3 gig ram stutter to draw a left mouse click menu just because its loading a web page?
There's still a lot to like about AmigaOS, and computer OS's haven't come forward nowhere near as much as the hardware they run on. In fact Windows, Mac And Linux OS programmers should be ashamed.
-
Well said. Memory protection is the dead horse where Amiga is concerned. My machines make me happy without it.
-
Ok, I was not going to like this, I'd looked at AROS before and wasn't impressed ...but... this isn't just AROS and it's one nice package. Well done to the Icaros folks.
(http://www.geoffreid.com/talkswindon/Smileys/200/applause_smiley2_138.gif)(http://www.geoffreid.com/talkswindon/Smileys/200/applause_smiley2_138.gif)(http://www.geoffreid.com/talkswindon/Smileys/200/applause_smiley2_138.gif)(http://www.geoffreid.com/talkswindon/Smileys/200/applause_smiley2_138.gif)
-
Yep well done guys, looking more interesting...
-
Thanks. I just try to make the most of AROS and let you enjoy it without all the "boring" configuration work, just think about getting jewels from raw rock. But it is something every skilled Amiga/AROS user can do: what the underlying technology, AROS itself, still needs, is more addiction from people and developers. I won't ever stop asking for volounteers to port and create applications and driver, since this project has born within the Amiga community, and the best we can do is to support it.
-
Ok so I note there's a LiveCD and vmware distro.
Any recomendations as which to use.
Will it work on a PIII -450 with 128 meg ram?
-
Thanks paulone for terrific work as usual. This release was the most stable yet. It rearly freezes.
To my great joy i saw on aros exec that craf had tested icaros on a compaq d51s P4 2 ghz. These baby's sail by on the local ebays for between 40-70 euros at least ones a week. I think I will go for one.
http://www.eolonline.co.uk/compaq-d51s-sff-1489-0.html
@diskdoctor
In one of your first posts you asked if there was something useful that had to be done with programming (if i remember right), so I guess you are a dev. Port Cinnamon to aros or some other word processor. That would be great. Get hold of a used PC and install icAROS.
@stepcep2
I have seen ppl that use icaros on machines with spec like that but the uae will probably be a bit slow. If you could get hold of the one abowe its warpspeed.
-
If you want to run it native (the real thing, not a virual PC on your "other" operating system) you should go for Icaros Desktop Live (Link (http://www.icarosdesktop.com/icarosfiles/IcarosLive_1_1_0.7z.exe))
I ran the previous versions on a PIII/600Mhz and it was fine but I didn't regret installing it on a P4 2.7 GHz later. :-D
If you can boot the live CD on it then you'd probably get away installing it too.
Tell us how it goes.
-
stefcep2 wrote:
ChaosLord wrote:
persia wrote:
AROS ... locks it's developments into the late '80s/early '90s."
Really?
People used 1280x1024 16 million color workbenches in the late 80's and early 90s?
People ran 2000 Mhz CPUs in the late 80's and early 90s?
People used 3000 MB of RAM in the late 80's and early 90s?
I didn't know any of that happened. You must know a lot more about computer history than me.
these are merely hardware advancements. AmigaOS supported 32 bit color screens in 1280x1024 since the early 90's, like wise 16 (24 bit as well?) bit audio through AHI, and upto 768 MB ram ( at least?). For a system built in 1983 thats decent, even in todays hardware terms, when you consider how quickly hardware specs become obsolete.
People harp on about memory protection. Back in the day, the most tangible outcome of this lack on the Amiga was that badly written program could bring the entire system down as each programs could occupy the memory space of another one. But most programmers learned to write their software so that this didn't happen nowhere as much as you might think. The security advantages of memory protection are over-hyped as memory protection is no guarantee to a secure system anyway: Look at every incarnation of windows that has had memory protection: its THE most insecure system on the planet, always needing to be patched to cover this hole and that hole. The underlying problem is that home OS's like AmigaOS and Windows and MacOS before it became a Unix GUI is that these OS's were never meant to be used on giant multi-suer networks like the internet, and this where most of the security flaws result. Conversely as a home computer OS the Amiga has huge advantages in ease of usability ( eg you NEVER NEED to open a shell if you don't want, Linux/Unix REQUIRES you to do it at LEAST some of the time), GUI speed, wonderfully-smooth multi-tasking, fast boot up time. Why can't these things be implemented as well in a system with memory protection? Does memory protection require the sacrifice of these things? Why does a core2duo running at 2.8 ghz with 3 gig ram stutter to draw a left mouse click menu just because its loading a web page?
There's still a lot to like about AmigaOS, and computer OS's haven't come forward nowhere near as much as the hardware they run on. In fact Windows, Mac And Linux OS programmers should be ashamed.
:bow: (http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)(http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1233_hand_clapping.gif)
-
stefcep2 wrote:
Ok so I note there's a LiveCD and vmware distro.
Any recomendations as which to use.
Will it work on a PIII -450 with 128 meg ram?
Yes, Icaros will probably work on that hardware. Resource hungry stuff like OWB or video playback with Mplayer will not be very fast though. Personally, I'm running Icaros 1.1 on a P-III with 512 MB and it is fast enough for me.
But why philosophise, just give it a try. Download Icaros live DVD and check it out. ;-)
-
stefcep2 wrote:
People harp on about memory protection. Back in the day, the most tangible outcome of this lack on the Amiga was that badly written program could bring the entire system down as each programs could occupy the memory space of another one. But most programmers learned to write their software so that this didn't happen nowhere as much as you might think.
I must mysteriously have used software from a minority of programmers I take it ? that's a good one ;)
[/quote]The security advantages of memory protection are over-hyped as memory protection is no guarantee to a secure system anyway: Look at every incarnation of windows that has had memory protection: its THE most insecure system on the planet, always needing to be patched to cover this hole and that hole.[/quote]
Memory protection on its own provides no security, but stability. It's when mp is combined with resource access privilege checking that it shuts the door to malware trying to crawl in from the otherwise open memory.
Regarding windows security issues, what about linux ?
The underlying problem is that home OS's like AmigaOS and Windows and MacOS before it became a Unix GUI is that these OS's were never meant to be used on giant multi-suer networks like the internet and this where most of the security flaws result. Conversely as a home computer OS the Amiga has huge advantages in ease of usability ( eg you NEVER NEED to open a shell if you don't want, Linux/Unix REQUIRES you to do it at LEAST some of the time),
Linux is a kernel. There's nothing stopping a linux based OS from providing GUI for any functionality you'd expect.
It's just that unix geeks have traditionally preferred CLI (aka shell) commands with cryptic and often unrelated names/options etc.
GUI speed, wonderfully-smooth multi-tasking,
The amount of times I needed to set some GUI based tasks priority to -1 just to have a responsive keyboard (and other apps) is uncountable.
fast boot up time.
And faster crash down time.
Why can't these things be implemented as well in a system with memory protection? Does memory protection require the sacrifice of these things? Why does a core2duo running at 2.8 ghz with 3 gig ram stutter to draw a left mouse click menu just because its loading a web page?
Be glad it does not go down and take all your current downloads and other data with it.
Also some browsers utilize multi-threading badly, or (almost) not at all.
There's still a lot to like about AmigaOS, and computer OS's haven't come forward nowhere near as much as the hardware they run on. In fact Windows, Mac And Linux OS programmers should be ashamed.
BeOS which implements/-ed memory protection, and even more, QNX, which does that plus security haven't been accused of being unresposive (me exluded, haven't used any of them). So why should the three named mainstream OS learn from Amiga when all it does is next to nothing:
* No user mode/supervisor-mode context switch upon entering exec (exec is a library that is called like a library, but when it absolutely must it triggeres the cpu to enter supervisor mode
* Passing pointers, the IPC simply adds the message nodes to which the pointer points into the massage list (port)
* Scheduler completely discriminates and starves tasks as long as any higher priority one has an appetite for over-consumption
* No virtual memory
* And I must have forgotten (and be nonaware) of tons more.
Like I said, exec is a fancy task-switching utilty API
-
@ cicero790
cicero790 wrote:
@diskdoctor
In one of your first posts you asked if there was something useful that had to be done with programming (if i remember right), so I guess you are a dev. Port Cinnamon to aros or some other word processor. That would be great. Get hold of a used PC and install icAROS.
Well I am not a dev but I can do some dev :-).
My focus would be rather on a brand new spreadsheet application.
Encoding doc files should not be difficult since OO sources are available. It's a matter of writing say rich text-supporting application (unless there is one dumping to rtf). Then you only have to wrap the whole thing in an OLE doc bundle.
Also, word processors exist on Amiga, they should be outputting something understandable PC format.
-
you're free to pursue any project of course.
I think the spreadsheet Ignition is being worked on.
Final Writer 5 can export to rtf, acsii,html and its native format.
Problem is this does not come with icaros. It needs a word processor of it own.
If you could get icaros going and test it out, inspiration may follow. :-)
-
Einstein wrote:
I must mysteriously have used software from a minority of programmers I take it ? that's a good one ;)
It depends on what software you used. PD can give you a guru, most commercial software I used was fine. Memory protection still doesn't prevent freezes and hangs, screen corruption,they still happen eg nvidia drives with XP/Vista
Memory protection on its own provides no security, but stability. It's when mp is combined with resource access privilege checking that it shuts the door to malware trying to crawl in from the otherwise open memory.
Acknowledged this, but you gotta have it in the first place to prevent ONE form of security risk. There are many other holes in Windows that constantly need to be pluggged. So you still run an insecure system.
Regarding windows security issues, what about linux ?
Linux is said to be more secure but thats probably because its less popular (and not as hated as MS is). It doesn't attract as much malware development, doesn't necessarily mean its more secure, but it might..
Linux is a kernel. There's nothing stopping a linux based OS from providing GUI for any functionality you'd expect.
It's just that unix geeks have traditionally preferred CLI (aka shell) commands with cryptic and often unrelated names/options etc.
Heard that argument a billion times. Thats a cop out. Why? Because it hasn't happened. In 20 years. Linux needs to be assessed on what it is NOW, its had 20 years to mature, not what it COULD BE, if someone gave a rats at some indeterminate point in the future. Theoretically it *might* be possible to have an intuitive GUI for every function that a user might need to use, but NOT ONE DISTRO provides such a system. Tried all the big guns: Ubuntu, Mandriva, Fedora, SUSE, ALL REQUIRE eventually that you get your hands dirty with CLI. You CAN'T escape it. Linux is still a command line OS with GUI tacked on top of it, no matter how its dressed up. On the other hand Workbench and CLI are two sides of the one coin.
The amount of times I needed to set some GUI based tasks priority to -1 just to have a responsive keyboard (and other apps) is uncountable.
Really? What in god's name are you running? I've run ImageFX, and lightwave renders, whilst typing up an essay in Wordworth, and i couldn't out-type Wordworth on a 40 mhz '030. Oh I was IRC'ing at the time so a TCP stack was going as well and had YAM open..
And you want to improve it more? Download Executive for free and customize task scheduling to suit your needs.
fast boot up time.
And faster crash down time.
Blue screens happen at ghz speeds, GURU's at MHZ...
Also some browsers utilize multi-threading badly, or (almost) not at all.
Oh you mean the programmers haven't yet learned how to program their software in a system-friendly way so that they make way for higher-priority system tasks like responding to a command issued by the user to open a Start Menu? Why doesn't the OS over-ride this? Isn't it a PRE-EMPTIVE multi-tasking OS as opposed to a co-operative one? Why does the OS allow an application to take priority over system tasks? Also its OK when programmers program badly on Windows, thats the programers fault, but not when they do it on Amiga, thats AmigaOS's fault?
There's still a lot to like about AmigaOS, and computer OS's haven't come forward nowhere near as much as the hardware they run on. In fact Windows, Mac And Linux OS programmers should be ashamed.
BeOS which implements/-ed memory protection, and even more, QNX, which does that plus security haven't been accused of being unresposive (me exluded, haven't used any of them). So why should the three named mainstream OS learn from Amiga when all it does is next to nothing:
* No user mode/supervisor-mode context switch upon entering exec (exec is a library that is called like a library, but when it absolutely must it triggeres the cpu to enter supervisor mode
* Passing pointers, the IPC simply adds the message nodes to which the pointer points into the massage list (port)
* Scheduler completely discriminates and starves tasks as long as any higher priority one has an appetite for over-consumption
* No virtual memory
* And I must have forgotten (and be nonaware) of tons more.
Like I said, exec is a fancy task-switching utilty API[/quote] :lol:
You know nothing about Exec: its employs true pre-emptive multitasking, and its scheduler will only "starve" tasks if you prioritize something to an extreme: no programmer in his right mind would do it that way, but if you want you can try. And even then the system will still be responsive to the user as system tasks are prioritised highest anyway. Task switching is what you got in Pre-OS X days on Mac, and Win 3.11 days. Since then Windows has had pre-emptive multi-tasking but its not as responsive as AmigaOS Exec, not unless you have a factor of 1000 more ram (thats why Win and Linux NEED Virtual memory, ) and CPU cycles.
And Amiga doesn't have virtual memory because it doesn't NEED it. I've never run out of RAM and the most i had was 128 meg. But if you want it can be done, you could buy
GigaMem to do it...
I stand by my earlier conclusion Windows OS, OS X and Linux OS programmers should be ashamed at the total misuse of hardware resources in creating the worst user-experience versus computing power in the history of computing.
Sorry to bore everyone.
-
@stefcep2
I'm sorry but it's you who got it wrong, not Einstein.
AmigaOS multitasking is a bad joke, compared to linux, mac os x or even windows.
-
It might be a bad joke but it never let me hanging as much as Windows has
-
pixie wrote:
It might be a bad joke but it never let me hanging as much as Windows has
That is the Win32 Userspace... We know that's lame... The WinNT kernel isn't bad... It's pretty much VMS :-)
-
bloodline wrote:
pixie wrote:
It might be a bad joke but it never let me hanging as much as Windows has
That is the Win32 Userspace...
I agree.Especially considering the GUI part of programs. Even nowadays with .NET it's utter crap (though COM is a complete disaster), especially if multithreading is used.
-
Piru wrote:
@stefcep2
I'm sorry but it's you who got it wrong, not Einstein.
AmigaOS multitasking is a bad joke, compared to linux, mac os x or even windows.
On the other side, I could, for instance, format multiple floppies at the same time. I mean, the computer was as well designed to be able to multitask (thats also the prime reason why SCSI was the preferred hard disk controller).
I mean, hardware should be built to be dedicated for software, as well as software should be built to serve it's purposes. Amiga isn't only about what it can or can't, but about the way it is built. Amiga, or, girlfriend, got its name with a reason. The reason of developers and engineers have passion for what they're making.
-
stefcep2 wrote:
It depends on what software you used. PD can give you a guru, most commercial software I used was fine. Memory protection still doesn't prevent freezes and hangs, screen corruption,they still happen eg nvidia drives with XP/Vista
No, I almost never used PD.
Umm, it's really comical when people continue beating the dead horse over and over and over... forever... :crazy:
What's next piece of news, that no OS has memory protection because kernel code can crash the system ?
You might want to update yourself on memory protection, kernel space, user space, and processes.
Linux is said to be more secure but thats probably because its less popular (and not as hated as MS is). It doesn't attract as much malware development, doesn't necessarily mean its more secure, but it might..
You also forgot that linux is Open Source, and people wanting to stay away from malware tend to be using distributions. There you have two valid reasons why there should be far more malware for linux systems than there appears to be at the moment.
You can't infiltrate a proper implementation of a good design, but a faulty implementations by a coder you can. Now, as long as coders properly implement system components, it won't matter how bad code the application developers write.
Heard that argument a billion times. Thats a cop out. Why? Because it hasn't happened. In 20 years. Linux needs to be assessed on what it is NOW, its had 20 years to mature, not what it COULD BE, if someone gave a rats at some indeterminate point in the future. Theoretically it *might* be possible to have an intuitive GUI for every function that a user might need to use, but NOT ONE DISTRO provides such a system. Tried all the big guns: Ubuntu, Mandriva, Fedora, SUSE, ALL REQUIRE eventually that you get your hands dirty with CLI. You CAN'T escape it. Linux is still a command line OS with GUI tacked on top of it, no matter how its dressed up. On the other hand Workbench and CLI are two sides of the one coin.
You are talking about a *distribution*, realize a distribution contains tons of software packages needing to be configured with tons of configuration utilities, usually that's the shell commands on linux, nothing prevents GUIs for those, and nothing prevents rewriting any fundamental CLI command to a more amiga-like look/syntax if one must either.
Really? What in god's name are you running? I've run ImageFX, and lightwave renders, whilst typing up an essay in Wordworth, and i couldn't out-type Wordworth on a 40 mhz '030. Oh I was IRC'ing at the time so a TCP stack was going as well and had YAM open..
Good for you, not everyone could afford those luxury hw.
And you want to improve it more? Download Executive for free and customize task scheduling to suit your needs.
Like that doesn't add overhead. And still no mp, no vm.
fast boot up time.
And faster crash down time.
Blue screens happen at ghz speeds, GURU's at MHZ...
GURUs can happen by any piece of code in any part of ram at any time. "Blue Screens", which I have never personally had the pleasure to meet, are unsurprisingly only limited to "supervisor" code, those are running in the kernel, and far far away from userpace application processes.
Also some browsers utilize multi-threading badly, or (almost) not at all.
Oh you mean the programmers haven't yet learned how to program their software in a system-friendly way so that they make way for higher-priority system tasks like responding to a command issued by the user to open a Start Menu? Why doesn't the OS over-ride this? Isn't it a PRE-EMPTIVE multi-tasking OS as opposed to a co-operative one? Why does the OS allow an application to take priority over system tasks? Also its OK when programmers program badly on Windows, thats the programers fault, but not when they do it on Amiga, thats AmigaOS's fault?
Oh *start* menu huh ? You could've included the word start and not making me think you are talking about the browser one..
Since when have I defended windows way of implementing things.
Also Explorer, although a system one, is still an application process. Like I wrote earlier, I had to set a task priority to minus -1 in AmigaOS to ensure other app's (who happened to for the most part be io-bound) to get near-instant schedule, I don't remember the names after all these years, but on AROS last time I tried it (more than a year ago) at least ScummVM (set task to -1) and Lunapaint (slowed workbench menu down alot of times).
:lol:
You know nothing about Exec:
You mean I know less about exec than you know about NT kernel ? comedy !
its employs true pre-emptive multitasking
Yea, it initializes the interrupt vector table to among other things point to interrupt/exception handlers, and initializes the hardware (the timer included) to gain it's pre-emptive task-switching functionalty (that's hard man :)) and offourse initializes it's "subsystems" mm, ipc, whatever, but only to export most of it's services as library functions. Only sitched to supervisor mode upen exceptions/interrupts and when itself needs to.
, and its scheduler will only "starve" tasks if you prioritize something to an extreme: no programmer in his right mind would do it that way, but if you want you can try. And even then the system will still be responsive to the user as system tasks are prioritised highest anyway.
Thanks for the lecture, tell me something new. But it's not about prioritizing to extreme or not, but that cpu-bound tasks with piority 0+ will cause serious problems
Task switching is what you got in Pre-OS X days on Mac, and Win 3.11 days.
oO what are you talking about ?
Since then Windows has had pre-emptive multi-tasking but its not as responsive as AmigaOS Exec, not unless you have a factor of 1000 more ram (thats why Win and Linux NEED Virtual memory, ) and CPU cycles.
ok.
And Amiga doesn't have virtual memory because it doesn't NEED it. I've never run out of RAM and the most i had was 128 meg. But if you want it can be done, you could buy
GigaMem to do it...
Software provides more funcionality with time, resolutions increase, modern kernels have page tables and other contexts that need memory, they have services (many really unnecessary) that need memory, when you add all these to amigaos it won't stay as small anymore.
But sure, like I said, many services in windows as an example are unnecessary, I've turned off several with increased memory and cpu performance as results, i need to turn off a few more..
I stand by my earlier conclusion Windows OS, OS X and Linux OS programmers should be ashamed at the total misuse of hardware resources in creating the worst user-experience versus computing power in the history of computing.
But AmigaOS due to its many incapabilites cannot provide many of these experiences at all.
But, give me a free AmigaOS (say AROS fork) with full mp, even in form of segment based single address space, and I will be over it :) would be a nice simple OS on laptops. But then there is Haiku/Syllable, though i prefer C over C++ :/
-
bloodline wrote:
pixie wrote:
It might be a bad joke but it never let me hanging as much as Windows has
That is the Win32 Userspace... We know that's lame... The WinNT kernel isn't bad... It's pretty much VMS :-)
It just happens to be where I 'sit' :(
-
pixie wrote:
bloodline wrote:
pixie wrote:
It might be a bad joke but it never let me hanging as much as Windows has
That is the Win32 Userspace... We know that's lame... The WinNT kernel isn't bad... It's pretty much VMS :-)
It just happens to be where I 'sit' :(
Good point, well made :-D
-
You also forgot that linux is Open Source, and people wanting to stay away from malware tend to be using distributions. There you have two valid reasons why there should be far more malware for linux systems than there appears to be at the moment.
Wrong!! 90 % people intending to stay away form malware use Windows and buy security software. Its a fact, no matter how dumb that may be. Now consider that writers of malware must have a MOTIVATION to write malware eg to steal personal information from users for gain, and in this case 90-95% of computer users use Windows, which OS would they target for vulnerabilities? Windows ofcourse, as there is better chance of success. So not as much effort goes in to exploiting Linux potential vulnerabilities.
You can't infiltrate a proper implementation of a good design, but a faulty implementations by a coder you can. Now, as long as coders properly implement system components, it won't matter how bad code the application developers write.
No system is foolproof, forever. Given enough time and desire ANY system can be breached.
You are talking about a *distribution*, realize a distribution contains tons of software packages needing to be configured with tons of configuration utilities, usually that's the shell commands on linux, nothing prevents GUIs for those, and nothing prevents rewriting any fundamental CLI command to a more amiga-like look/syntax if one must either.
I know what a distro is. But, oh I see, users should not use a distro, but compile Linux themselves and write GUI's for all of the operating system functions, and any software that doesn't have a GUI. Real user-friendly that is. You *could* do all of this, and someone somewhere at some point time *could* make Linux a totally GUI driven system. But 20 years later NO-ONE, ANYWHERE has. The point remains: Linux is all about what it *could* be, but in reality never *will* be.
Really? What in god's name are you running? I've run ImageFX, and lightwave renders, whilst typing up an essay in Wordworth, and i couldn't out-type Wordworth on a 40 mhz '030. Oh I was IRC'ing at the time so a TCP stack was going as well and had YAM open..
Good for you, not everyone could afford those luxury hw.
Luxury? Its clear from this post and your posts about Exec that you are a relative newcomer to Amiga. Thats good, I welcome that. 68030's and 8-16 Meg RAM were commonplace in the 90's. A1200 and 68030 and ram: $500 or less, when Win95 PC was $2000. The A1200 ran rings around that. Apart from Lightwave the SW was free Mag coverdiscs.
And you want to improve it more? Download Executive for free and customize task scheduling to suit your needs.
Like that doesn't add overhead. And still no mp, no vm.
Yep all of 250k RAM and NO additional CPU overhead. See again: you don't get Amiga. You have a Win/Linux POV on things.
Oh *start* menu huh ? You could've included the word start and not making me think you are talking about the browser one..
See you miss the point again: In a good pre-emptive multitasking system the OS decides who gets what share of the CPU time, not the Apps. Pushing a mouse button to make a menu appear is a basic OS FUNCTION, not a basic Application function: the OS ought to give priority to this before rendering a fricken' web page!! A start menu ought to be an even higher priority OS function than an Application menu: the fact the Start menu stutters when downloading a web page is therefore an EVEN worse indication of a poor multi-tasking system. And this all happening on multi-core, muti-ghz cpu with gigabytes of RAM!!! Its NOT about multi-threading parts of an app to run separately in separate cores in separate memory spaces, its about good pre-emptive multi-tasking DESIGN of the OS
Since when have I defended windows way of implementing things.
Oh yes and Linux is a multi-tasking fiend?? As a server yes, as desktop? Yeah right: wasn't that long ago that playing an mp3 would stop the mouse pointer from moving. On a 1 ghz 512 Mb PC. A joke.
Also Explorer, although a system one, is still an application process.
Which in a good Pre-emptive multi-tasking design would be prioritised ahead of other apps, but isn't.
Like I wrote earlier, I had to set a task priority to minus -1 in AmigaOS to ensure other app's (who happened to for the most part be io-bound) to get near-instant schedule, I don't remember the names after all these years, but on AROS last time I tried it (more than a year ago) at least ScummVM (set task to -1) and Lunapaint (slowed workbench menu down alot of times).
Not sure what you were doing, but 3D rendering is as demanding task you can get and as I've said a 40 mhz 68030 didn't lock up the system doing a lot more besides.
You are confusing me or yourself: AROS DOES NOT RUN AMIGAOS and doesn't run Exec, except under emulation through UAE AFAIK. Scummvm is some sort of software interpreter. These things have high CPU demands. Classic Amiga was never about the CPU: thats why a presentation running a 14 mhz A1200 with 4 meg ram would bring a 200 mhz PC to a grinding halt. And AFAIK Lunapaint is not a native AmigaOS 3 application. A better test would be Brilliance, PPaint or Dpaint. Load and run them all at the same time (in 4 meg or less, mind). Workbench doesn't skip a beat..
, and its scheduler will only "starve" tasks if you prioritize something to an extreme: no programmer in his right mind would do it that way, but if you want you can try. And even then the system will still be responsive to the user as system tasks are prioritised highest anyway.
Thanks for the lecture, tell me something new.
Yes, but YOU implied that Exec was to blame for "starving" tasks of CPU time, when you NOW agree it was the programmer or user setting things that way.
Task switching is what you got in Pre-OS X days on Mac, and Win 3.11 days.
oO what are you talking about ?
i am talking about the fact that pre OS X and Win 95, MAc and Win did NOT have pre-emptive multi-tasking: they used a simple task-switching implementation.
Software provides more funcionality with time, resolutions increase, modern kernels have page tables and other contexts that need memory, they have services (many really unnecessary) that need memory, when you add all these to amigaos it won't stay as small anymore.
It will ALWAYS be smaller than the Win or Linux or OS X. AND it won't get slower the longer you use it...
I stand by my earlier conclusion Windows OS, OS X and Linux OS programmers should be ashamed at the total misuse of hardware resources in creating the worst user-experience versus computing power in the history of computing.
But AmigaOS due to its many incapabilites cannot provide many of these experiences at all.
Its all relative, innit? At the moment on a relative scale, the improvements in software functionality relative to the hardware advancements are about 1 to 100. Thats the REAL tragedy.
-
stefcep2 wrote:
Wrong!! 90 % people intending to stay away form malware use Windows and buy security software. Its a fact, no matter how dumb that may be. Now consider that writers of malware must have a MOTIVATION to write malware eg to steal personal information from users for gain, and in this case 90-95% of computer users use Windows, which OS would they target for vulnerabilities? Windows ofcourse, as there is better chance of success. So not as much effort goes in to exploiting Linux potential vulnerabilities.
It still doesn't provide a valid cause to why there's not alot more malware for linux based distros. Since users are many that switch to linux based distros for security, it means alot of these would have something "to hide", if I were to write malware I'd probably be trying to target linux at first for the reason I wrote above, I'd like to take people by surprise, if I was evil that is.
No system is foolproof, forever. Given enough time and desire ANY system can be breached.
Systems *can* be foolproof.
But the issue is how much obstacle you put in the way of malicious coders. In the case of AmigaOS there's no obstacle, not for malicious coders, and not for cincere coders.
I know what a distro is. But, oh I see, users should not use a distro, but compile Linux themselves and write GUI's for all of the operating system functions, and any software that doesn't have a GUI. Real user-friendly that is. You *could* do all of this, and someone somewhere at some point time *could* make Linux a totally GUI driven system. But 20 years later NO-ONE, ANYWHERE has. The point remains: Linux is all about what it *could* be, but in reality never *will* be.
*Never will* is so prophetic...
Luxury? Its clear from this post and your posts about Exec that you are a relative newcomer to Amiga.
Ok.
Yep all of 250k RAM and NO additional CPU overhead. See again: you don't get Amiga. You have a Win/Linux POV on things.
Apparently you don't get code than if you think adding "smart" behaviour to a completely dumb scheduler like original exec (or any other software) adds no overhead.
Oh *start* menu huh ? You could've included the word start and not making me think you are talking about the browser one..
See you miss the point again: In a good pre-emptive multitasking system the OS decides who gets what share of the CPU time, not the Apps.
[/quote]
You know what multithreading is pal ? you don't think multithreading is automatic right ?
If your problem would be about the private browser menu and that caused responsiveness problems when the browser loaded a page you don't think the scheduler is to blame do you ?
Pushing a mouse button to make a menu appear is a basic OS FUNCTION, not a basic Application function:
You are saying applications cannot provide their *own* menus ? you think apps cannot provide whatever kind of widget/menu they want in their own client areas (as they are known in windows) ?
the OS ought to give priority to this before rendering a fricken' web page!!
Not if theres nothing to prioritze since in the above (my) scenario the OS would not *know* of any app private menus
A start menu ought to be an even higher priority OS function than an Application menu: the fact the Start menu stutters when downloading a web page is therefore an EVEN worse indication of a poor multi-tasking system. And this all happening on multi-core, muti-ghz cpu with gigabytes of RAM!!! Its NOT about multi-threading parts of an app to run separately in separate cores in separate memory spaces, its about good pre-emptive multi-tasking DESIGN of the OS
Pal, multithreading is not about core utilization only, it's about strict and simplified scheduling of different parts of an application code (and software that create threads within a process's schedule for the functionailty they provide), (the scheduling) provided by the OS.
Oh yes and Linux is a multi-tasking fiend?? As a server yes, as desktop? Yeah right: wasn't that long ago that playing an mp3 would stop the mouse pointer from moving. On a 1 ghz 512 Mb PC. A joke.
You mean the mouse pointer isn't handled by the sprite hardware like the amiga, ok..
But generally (AFAIK) the linux schedulers were optimizes for throughput rather than responsiveness.
Which in a good Pre-emptive multi-tasking design would be prioritised ahead of other apps, but isn't.
Now I have no idea what major problems it is for you, but despite my 512mb 2.4 ghz system i don't have problems opening the start menu when loading a page.
I just loaded a big flash riddled page, and opened multiple times while loading, I see no probs.
Not sure what you were doing, but 3D rendering is as demanding task you can get and as I've said a 40 mhz 68030 didn't lock up the system doing a lot more besides.
3d ? no 3d
You are confusing me or yourself: AROS DOES NOT RUN AMIGAOS and doesn't run Exec, except under emulation through UAE AFAIK....
I must be confusing you, unless AROS' Exec together with ScummVM and Luna ran under WinUAE at that time..
, and its scheduler will only "starve" tasks if you prioritize something to an extreme: no programmer in his right mind would do it that way, but if you want you can try. And even then the system will still be responsive to the user as system tasks are prioritised highest anyway.
Yes, but YOU implied that Exec was to blame for "starving" tasks of CPU time, when you NOW agree it was the programmer or user setting things that way.
I made an edit, read the edited paragraph.
Task switching is what you got in Pre-OS X days on Mac, and Win 3.11 days.
oO what are you talking about ?
i am talking about the fact that pre OS X and Win 95, MAc and Win did NOT have pre-emptive multi-tasking: they used a simple task-switching implementation.
What do you think task-switching is ? switching tasks offcourse, who talked about MacOS, Win 95, and preemptivness or absense of it ?
It will ALWAYS be smaller than the Win or Linux or OS X. AND it won't get slower the longer you use it...
Ok.
But AmigaOS due to its many incapabilites cannot provide many of these experiences at all.
Its all relative, innit? At the moment on a relative scale, the improvements in software functionality relative to the hardware advancements are about 1 to 100. Thats the REAL tragedy.[/quote]
Ok. despite my now old system I'm not remotely experiencing these problems your screaming about, save for the swapfile which I should be doing something about if I had a spare partition.
-
cicero790 wrote:
you're free to pursue any project of course.
I think the spreadsheet Ignition is being worked on.
Gotta check it out sure, but doesn't look good from screenshots :-)
I want to make something new, extremely useful and easy to use. Something I was planning (and actually started) on MacOSX until infamous Apple outnumbered me with their new iWork 08 Numbers :-(
Final Writer 5 can export to rtf, acsii,html and its native format.
Problem is this does not come with icaros. It needs a word processor of it own.
??? What's the problem to include one? The license? I don't get it. Is this one free or what?
If you could get icaros going and test it out, inspiration may follow. :-)
OK but for the time being I got only VMWare hosted AROS... OK.
-
That project sounds extremely exiting. How much more good it would do on icaros than on macosx that already have so much.
About final writer, I think its license related.
VMWare is a ideal start. I was running it in vmware for months and occasionally got more and more acquainted with it, and then I finally wanted it on real hardware.
Good luck with the project idea. It would make many ppl very happy I think to have it materializing. :-)