Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: asian1 on September 17, 2003, 02:18:57 AM
-
Hello
On today BBC Business Report, Steve Jobs said:
"Once Motorola PowerPC G4 is faster than
Intel X86 CPU, but now Intel had leapfrogged
Motorola. Therefore we had a joint project with
IBM to develop G5 and regain the leadership".
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?
Also from News.com.com:
While Intel and AMD had increased its prediction
on 3rd Quarter result, IBM Microelectronic
(who manufacture PowerPC and G5) was forced
to fire 600 employees.
Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
products are faster and better than Intel CPUs?
-
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?
Cause ibm has sold every chip to apple.. Eyetech/genesi would have to order ALOT of them to get any of them yet.
Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
Good products, does not mean they will do well, just look at Microsoft... They do VERY WELL even though competitors had much better products. Amiga was great, still they died :-(
-
Look here:
HERE (http://www.marvell.com/press/pressNewsDisplay.do;jsessionid=1nzFM9jRwjl1jWxfvFyK1k7nmCKUT92aiF58RN23y1l8X8Xh8CZc!-745258046?releaseID=382)
"Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?"
I don't know if anyone has the answer except for MAI Logic. Of course Apple seemed to have gobbled the early production G5's.
"Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
products are faster and better than Intel CPUs?"
Large corporations tend to do that. Departments that aren't profitable are usually shut down and the staff let go. Of course Large companies have job posting in other departments that are profitable, where those employees can go apply for.
Even if one company makes better products, that doesn't change that fact that many more people like to buy junky cheaper built product from other companies to save money :-D
:
-
And of course, the tendancy these days is to fire in-house people and outsource/subcontract.
Which is what I'm learning near the end of me M-EE degree, that there are next to zero full time employment options as an Micro-EE at a decent company in Brisbane or even Australia as a whole.. . most are 1 to three person companies, who take on contract jobs, apparently. Bugger.
-
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?
That's a start. :-)
(I would prefer the pegII or III myself)
Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
products are faster and better than Intel CPUs?
If fewer people buy the CPU's they can't go employing a #### load of people. Intel can probably employ more because their CPU's are more popular.
Just logic, really.
-
what the world needs is education becouse people are like stupid sheep and these giant corps are the herders.
-
DIABLO_NEGRO wrote:
what the world needs is education becouse people are like stupid sheep and these giant corps are the herders.
So, let me just ask you:
Is "DIABLO_NEGRO" like a stupid sheep?
-
Because single or dual/quad G4s is the limit of what ArticiaS(Peg1/AmigaONE) and Marvell Discovery (Peg2) are designed to cater for ( in fact Marvell Discovery is only designed for G3s, that it works with G4s is in incidence of compatibility ).
To use a G5 requires a new northbridge, which requires getting one from the same place Apple does or waiting for a supplier of northbridges to come out with their own. Oh, and that is just the start of your design issues.
That G4 became outclassed was mostly down to Motorola and Apple, that IBM favoured its higher end POWER series was entirely down to Apple sticking with Morotola against the evidence.
We KNOW that the A1 and Pegasos range is behind the curve technically for even personal computing, it is a start, this time next year if we are still all stuck with G4, then is the time to whinge.
If you want to look at the outside reasons why IBM shaved off parts of its 320,000 strong workforce I suggest you look at last years and the year befores published 4th quarter report.
Trying to say that the G5 should have saved that workforce is tacit admission of ignorance of corporate politics and shortsightedness - not least no G5s had gone on sale.
Me? I don't know what you are moaning about. :-)
-
@ iamaboringperson
Is "DIABLO_NEGRO" like a stupid sheep?
no, it only means "Black devil"...
I guess you were thinking in "Black sheep"/"oveja negra" but the meaning in spanish is not to refer to somebody stupid but somebody who is different or doesn't do the same as others
-
Crumb wrote:
@ iamaboringperson
Is "DIABLO_NEGRO" like a stupid sheep?
no, it only means "Black devil"...
I guess you were thinking in "Black sheep"/"oveja negra" but the meaning in spanish is not to refer to somebody stupid but somebody who is different or doesn't do the same as others
:lol: I had a fair idea of what it ment ;-)
I was actually refering to the poster(an amiga.org member) ;-)
-
"Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
products are faster and better than Intel CPUs?"
IBM is a big company, they do a lot more than just processors. IBM manufactures embedded CPUs, desktop CPUs, server CPUs, servers, desktops, laptops and offer a lot of different kind of services.
So, from what department did they fire employees?
An example: Nokia (as whole) continue to make profit and they gain more and more market share on cell phone business and at still they fire people (from the cell phone networks division which is not as profitable business).
btw. here might be some relevant reading (about CPU performance): http://www.barefeats.com/pentium4.html (http://www.barefeats.com/pentium4.html)
-
DaveP: To use a G5 requires a new northbridge, which requires getting one from the same place Apple does or waiting for a supplier of northbridges to come out with their own. Oh, and that is just the start of your design issues.
Why, oh why, couldn't people see that earlier? Even if the CPU was faster than any X86 chip, you still have to deal with the motherboard. I don't care what hardware I use so long as it's a good value. PowerPC systems, on the whole, are not.
The big reason I'm so harsh on PowerPC is because I really hate proprietary hardware, in general. With so few choices in that market, you just have to take what's there. Hardware is only a means to an end. Software is what matters. Why people absolutely kill themselves just so they have the novelty of using "non Intel" hardware is beyond me.
Recently, Kodak offered us an "upgrade" to our DLS photo minilab workstation. They told us that after working with IBM for a while, they couldn't get any systems with newer motherboards to work, because they aren't compatible with their proprietary SCSI film scanner. Yes, regular SCSI wasn't good enough for them, so they made their *own* SCSI card, that just happens to work in only one IBM motherboard. So, they are offering us the "only thing they can": A CPU upgrade. For $5,000, we'll get a refurbished machine, exactly the same as we already have, but instead of having dual 450 Mhz processors, it will have 800Mhz processors. Nothing else will change.
Hmm... 800Mhz, same hard drive models, same memory, same SCSI config (3 controllers and five hard drives), all squeezed into a minitower... and it's *USED*, all for an amazing bargain of $5,000! Wow! Where do I sign up?!
Of course, my boss DID sign up, because, "It's the only upgrade they offer." I told him that buying it is a very bad idea, because the DLS system is very hard-drive crazy, and new CPUs won't noticably improve performance without newer hard drives, and for $5,000 the system is a complete ripoff. I told him, point blank, that the upgrade is near worthless and we should go without.
To that, my boss said... quote, "You need to get into the 21st century."
Oh yeah, and they hard-code their software by CPU serial number and an exact model of SCSI card, so if you try to upgrade the CPUs or HD controllers on your own, your license is rendered invalid and the software won't boot... plus, your service warantee is void.
I think I'm in the wrong business.
-
DaveP: Making unjustified rumours ain't polite.. Especially as they
are (apparently once again) coming from 'well trusted sources' of
belgian origin :-)
You don't etiher know (or care) that Marvell Discovery is *THE*
chipset used on Motorolas own Dual G4 evaluation boards? Do you really
belive they'd used those cause they 'just happen to work'?
In the end, I think you never had even readed (not even assuming
understanding) full techical docs for Marvell Discovery series nor Mai
Articia-S. Besides.. There are multitude of Discovery geenrations, I
hope you'll been followed them all before commenting what they can and
can't do :-)
Concerning G5 .. For Amiga-market only there is no point on making
such board. There are no user base nor software to make it worth
effort (not to mention even gettign even economically). Only way to
make it happen is to make system that has makes strong sales on other
markets. Linux, BSD, QNX etc.. With those, there is hope on getting
even, not on Amigas..
But before G5 can happen, there is need to available Bridge chip
(Apple uses their own, not for sale), now first such chip has been
announced by Marvell and it's bound to become reality in next half a
years time. We'll see then what happens... If there is any company
willing to take a risk (and find funding) to make such computer.
-
Why, why, why, why??????
eg:
Why is Morphos much faster on 600 Mhz PPC cpu than WindowsXP on 3000 Mhz intel cpu?
Because you can not just look at the CPU power, you must count the whole system together to get a good speed.
Motherboard,cpu, harddrive and Operating system all this together can give you a system that is good enought for you!
Thats why I Bought AmigaOne
-
>in fact Marvell Discovery is only designed for G3s,
>that it works with G4s is in incidence of
>compatibility
This is nonsense. The Discovery is being promoted
by Motorola as prefered system controller for the G4
and Motorola uses the Discovery on their own
evaluation boards.
-
plexus wrote:
Why, why, why, why??????
eg:
Why is Morphos much faster on 600 Mhz PPC cpu than WindowsXP on 3000 Mhz intel cpu?
Because you can not just look at the CPU power, you must count the whole system together to get a good speed.
Motherboard,cpu, harddrive and Operating system all this together can give you a system that is good enought for you!
Thats why I Bought AmigaOne
While I agree that a nice responsive operating system is good, and certainly one of my main reasons for advocating the Amigoid OS's. But you raelly can't just look at the responsivness of the OS as an indication of the "power" of the machine...
If you want to run software synthesizers (for example), then a 2Ghz CPU (G5, Athlon, P4, whatever) is going to work much better than a 600Mhz CPU.
I will put up with a bloated unresponsive OS, if it means that I have the number crunching power of a 2000 number crunching horses... :-)
-
The Amiga market and Apple.....hmmm well we are all on the same planet, so there's a beginning to some similarities.
of course it will be an advantage to Genesi and Amiga to be competitive at some point.
Buying a top of the line AmigaONE is sad compared to a top of the line Dual 2ghz apple G5.
If you are going for cheap, then you won't get the fastest, buts thats when paying 800 dollars for a 933 mhz machine becomes a bit sad, when for that price, you could have gotten one heck of a fast and fully loaded athlon system.
-
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?
Do you have any idea about the pricepoint of a 970?
Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
products are faster and better than Intel CPUs?
SuSE Germany also had to lay off some employees. Why does a Linux company need to fire people when everyone knows that Linux is better than windows?
IBM is a big company, and doing much more than just CPU's.
-
Folks, lets be rational. Neither OS4 or MOS can even utilize the full power of the 32bit G4 yet. As far as I know or have heard, there are no code op's for SIMD in *either* OS. Neither OS's are mature yet, and while utilizing a G5 would make certain app's run faster, the price simply cannot be justified yet.
My avatar is simply wishful thinking.
It's kind of like putting perfume on a pig: pointless.
Personally, I'm waiting for the A1 Lite. According to the OS4 roadmap, there won't be much of a reason to buy a G4 until OS4.2 (go hyperion! :-D ) , so I'll wait until then to invest a large chunk of change into an Amiga power system.
-
asian1 wrote:
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4? [instead of the PPC970]
It could perhaps have something to do with the non-existence of the G5 in 2001 when the ArticiaS and the Teron debuted, and thus the Terons simply cannot support such a beast... But that's just my speculation. ;)
Why IBM had to fire the employees, if their
products are faster and better than Intel CPUs?
If you're talking about the G5, it's slower than what Intel offers. If it's "better" on the whole is of course a question of the intended application of the CPU, among whatever other factors you may want to consider.
Did IBM fire people because of the PPC970's relative slowness and high price compared to x86? Remember that they do offer other products and services too.
-
Hi Dudes
Ok, so, the G4 i slow.
Well, I want mine NOW! :hammer:
Stop this crazyness. AmigaOS (or MorphOS) running on G4 CPU have to FLY -literally-
Our OSes are better than theirs, so in this subject, less is more.
-
People want a G5 to be as fast / faster than x86 but have no application to take advantage of it ...
What apps are you using on a regular basis taking advantage of the speed of a G5 over a G3/G4 ?
First we need to get such applications in native PPC.
-
asian1 wrote:
Hello
On today BBC Business Report, Steve Jobs said:
"Once Motorola PowerPC G4 is faster than
Intel X86 CPU, but now Intel had leapfrogged
Motorola. {/quote]
I love statements like G4 is faster than X86....which G4 and which X86???? :-D
-
Loosing common sense...G4 slow???...
Is it slow for running the OS or what?
And how do we measure the speed of a computer
system anyway?
-
The big reason I'm so harsh on PowerPC is because I really hate proprietary hardware, in general. With so few choices in that market, you just have to take what's there. Hardware is only a means to an end.
What do you mean PowerPC is so proprietary? I guess you can go down to your Local Radio Shack, but some silicon wafers and a few transistors and make your own homegrown x86 CPU? How absurd!
Software is what matters. Why people absolutely kill themselves just so they have the novelty of using "non Intel" hardware is beyond me.
Everything matters, not just software. And people don't go out of their way to buy 'non Intel' based hardware. Some people actually do give a rats arse about the hardware as much as the software. I personally think PowerPC is technically better than x86 (though that's my own opinion on the subject).
Some people prefer commodity over quality... and vice versa! The same goes for some people driving Chevys and Fords, while others are driving Hondas and Toyotas. Preferences differ on what that particular individual requires.
You're short-sighted reasoning above almost contradicts what Amigans have been fighting for all this time. It would be like me asking why are all these Amiga freaks so hell bent on using 'non-Microsoft' software? Because they have a preference on what they believe is a better solution for their own wants and/or needs, PERIOD!
-
by cdfr on 2003/9/17 12:19:35
People want a G5 to be as fast / faster than x86 but have no application to take advantage of it ...
Problem is the difference between desktop CPU and server CPU is blurring quickly. 970 maybe able to keep in the general power level of the x86-64, but I can't see how it's going to achieve and maintain any type of relative lead over the x86-64 family's bang:buck ratio. Even Opteron 840 pricing levels are dropping back down to earth (now $745 when it was over $2,200 a few weeks ago). Opteron 240s are ~$253.
Why do I have the feeling that is Apple's sudden boasting of speed will revert within a year, back to "speed doesn't matter" once again?
Dammy
-
Slower or not, lets just see OS4 and MOS running on 933MHz G4 systems and sit them side by side with XP or 2003 on the fastest x86 you can find...
Obviously for processor intensive work there's no contest but I've seen my OS3.5 on my 040 be more responsive than my friends AlthonXP 2800 many occasions :-)
-
"You're short-sighted reasoning above almost contradicts what Amigans have been fighting for all this time."
What Amigans have been fighting for? Do you mean to say that all Amigans wanted the PPC over the x86? I for one did not and still to this day loath the fact the Ainc decided to go that route instead of just using what was readily available and cheaper when considering price/performance. Also I am obviously not alone otherwise a project like AROS would never have gotten off the ground, to not only bring an Amiga like OS to the x86 but many other platforms as well.
Choosing to support the x86 for OS4 would have ticked off a lot of people out there who have PPC's in their classics, but the vast majority of Amigas never were and never will be equipped with a PPC and having to buy a new proprietary PPC motherboard is not what I consider progress over what was already available for classic Amiga's. Amiga WAS a hardware/software combination...but that died a long time ago and I wish they would have let it be and just moved it on as a Software only concept instead of wasting resources chasing the dream of another "Amiga" as a machine. A wonderfully crafted OS like AmigaOS can make up for the x86's shortcomings as I have seen with AROS which is who I choose to support.
-
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?
In general I'd have to say these companies (Genesi & MAI/Eyetech/Hyperion) have to take incremental steps. Even the G3 600 in my Pegasos running MOS is countless times faster than my old A3000/060! you have to look at it that way.
if you start looking at it any other way you won't justify the purchase. Aren't we here because we want just that? A faster Amiga-ish experience?
-
@jetfiredx:
AROS is and should be separate from AmigaOS, shouldn't you be content that there are so many alternatives? There are many benefits to both approaches, which I won't go into now, but I happen to put more emphasis on the PPC side of things.
-
Karlos wrote:
Slower or not, lets just see OS4 and MOS running on 933MHz G4 systems and sit them side by side with XP or 2003 on the fastest x86 you can find...
Obviously for processor intensive work there's no contest but I've seen my OS3.5 on my 040 be more responsive than my friends AlthonXP 2800 many occasions :-)
Overall (WindowsXP/2003) speed is dependant on surrounding installed components i.e.
1. The amount of installed ram (important for XP/2k3).
2. Installed video card (and drivers).
3. Motherboard chipset.
4. Windows’s available free physical memory.
5. Boot'vis application.
6. the type of hard disk installed.
I run, Athlon XP @ 2.2Ghz/Geforce 4600 TI/nForce II 400 Ultra/1Gb PC3200 DDR SDRAM (dual channel)/2x 80Gb 7200RPM UDMA IDE RAID (boot drive). It’s faster than my old A3000/040@25Mhz (no gfx card).
Such a hardware setup should fly with AROS i.e. PC world’s brute force method with near Amiga like OS efficiencies.
With ‘1Gb PC3200 DDR SDRAM’, it reduces the WindowXP’s use of the slower virtual memory. RAID IDE setup accelerates disk access.
PS; I do have lesser AthlonXP/512Mb/VIA KT class machine…
-
Slower or not, lets just see OS4 and MOS running on 933MHz G4 systems and sit them side by side with XP or 2003 on the fastest x86 you can find...
And then someone comes along and throws BeOS into the mix and all of a sudden the x86 looks utterly renewed.. Windows is utterly pathetic as far as platforms go, slow, bloated and everything else. You put a lightwieght OS onto x86 hardware and watch it fly. Hell, even linux can utterly outperform Win2k3 on the same system doing the same sorts of jobs (UT in morphix is in order of magnitude faster than on Win2k).
Obviously for processor intensive work there's no contest but I've seen my OS3.5 on my 040 be more responsive than my friends AlthonXP 2800 many occasions
As have I, I have not however been able to say the same regarding BSD, linux or BeOS.
-
JetfireDX,
My comment:
"You're short-sighted reasoning above almost contradicts what Amigans have been fighting for all this time."
Had nothing to do with PPC versus x86. It had to do with the very fact that Amiga (as a whole) is a viable solution.
As for your comments:
I could care less what Amiga Inc. puts inside the case. If they offer both PPC and x86, then we all win as consumers. I'll have the choice of PPC, while you have the choice of x86.
Diversity and choice is key :-D
-
I whole heartedly have to agree diversity and choice is the key. The Amiga's merits (and it's children/variants) have always come from it's unique features.
However points should be made and folks I own Macs, PCs, and Amigas.. Hell I even have ran AROS on x86 from time to time..
Everyone knows that MacOS X is really a flavor of Unix underneath just like Linux is a flavor of unix, and runs on different cpus..
The truth of the matter is the Amiga is not unique anymore for it's multi-tasking, graphics, etc. Through Linux, OS X, and yes even Windows XP, the world now has multi-tasking operating systems and great graphics.
There is nothing special now about the Amiga except it's unique library of software (most of which you can't get anymore unless you are pirating software from company's that aren't around anymore)..
The Amiga was my 4th computer ever, however it was the one I most loved, it brought me into the world of painting, animation, and later desktop video production. I will always love it for what it is. I just think it was a great idea, that has been very copied by everyone and I love the OS for what it is.
Who cares if the G4 is slower than intel machines (Apple doesn't seem to care) because the Mac platform is more than the sum of it's parts, and to that effect so is the Amiga.
The Amiga community is full of very astute smart people who are very supportive and friendly. The community is the best thing the Amiga has going for it.
-
@DonnyEMU
You nearly brought a tear to my eye there!
I completely agree the community of Amiga is the best thing we can offer. (Along with some games/utilities that haven't been surpass anywhere else (IMHO) I'm thinking Speedball 2, SWOS, DPaint/PPaint, etc. etc. etc.)
That is why I'm worried about the way the community is being (potentially) fractured by all this MOS is this and AOS is that. While I know competition could drive prices down and performance up we need to survive the early stages. Can't we all get together and think about the good old times, and then imagine what it will be like when the terrible two's are over!
What I don't neccessarily agree with is the diversity issue (look at consoles for example) ...yes, they are slightly limited towards the end of there lifecycle, but you know you have a platform which will (hopefully) be supported for a set period of time. Why not release a standard minimum spec every six months/a year, that way the consumer knows that they are buying a '03 class computer and the '04 will be released in april (and they can upgrade then, i.e. buy a new M/B or CPU or GFX Card whatever). It also means developers know exactly what spec. systems are (again look at what consoles/classic Amigas can achieve when the developer knows the exact limitations of their system)
{Edit: Just realised that maybe you were talking about diversity between WinXP, MacOS, Amiga, etc. Still my above point still stands just doesn't necessarily apply! ;-)}
Anyway that's my grand idea.
-
In the beginning, windows sucked, it still does.
amiga was great, it is still great.
Amiga is great because of how it works and feels.
Now we have MOS/PEG on G3-600, about 10
times the speed of 060 units and it kicks windows
ass for feel of speed and smoothness.
Some people are still using old amigas and are
getting along on them.
If people believe whats available for amiga users is
sad, why not go buy a mac hog G5 or intel power
horse and be happy?
People want new Amiga experiences because
it is a superior experience and other computers
are lame, admit it. Thats why your here. :-D
-
Hammer wrote:
Karlos wrote:
Slower or not, lets just see OS4 and MOS running on 933MHz G4 systems and sit them side by side with XP or 2003 on the fastest x86 you can find...
Obviously for processor intensive work there's no contest but I've seen my OS3.5 on my 040 be more responsive than my friends AlthonXP 2800 many occasions :-)
Overall (WindowsXP/2003) speed is dependant on surrounding installed components i.e.
1. The amount of installed ram (important for XP/2k3).
2. Installed video card (and drivers).
3. Motherboard chipset.
4. Windows’s available free physical memory.
5. Boot'vis application.
6. the type of hard disk installed.
I run, Athlon XP @ 2.2Ghz/Geforce 4600 TI/nForce II 400 Ultra/1Gb PC3200 DDR SDRAM (dual channel)/2x 80Gb 7200RPM UDMA IDE RAID (boot drive). It’s faster than my old A3000/040@25Mhz (no gfx card).
Such a hardware setup should fly with AROS i.e. PC world’s brute force method with near Amiga like OS efficiencies.
With ‘1Gb PC3200 DDR SDRAM’, it reduces the WindowXP’s use of the slower virtual memory. RAID IDE setup accelerates disk access.
So you need all that hardware acceleration to make your windows box snappier than an 040 powered no-graphics-card amiga 3000 eh?
My point was, a friend has a 'half decent' AthlonXP 2800 400MHz FSB, Asus A7V8X-X mobo, 768M DDR400, 128M Radeon 9800 and ATA133 120G drive. It's a nice setup.
However, running Win2K, XP or 2003 (uninstalled after virtually nothing worked :lol: ) there were times when simply bringing up a popup menu caused a delay of a couple of seconds. For the power and acceleration available I'd expect a lot better.
My 64M BlizzPPC 040 with BVision gfx card, a combination with a tiny fraction of the raw hardware power he has at his disposal never behaves like this, the worst I get is being able to physically notice the draw sometimes ie an area full of icons is noticable when closing a window that had been over them...
This quite nicely demonstrates that even with hardware acceleration to crutch it up, windows is just too far gone - I don't care how fast PC hardware gets, youll never feel the benefit in the windows UI (unless they completely re write it from scratch).
If an ageing 68K system with a third rate graphics card (the hardware features of which are totally under utilized by the RTG software as it is) can have a more responsive UI, what does that say for MOS, OS4 and as you point out, AROS?
-
@Karlos
Quote:
"I don't care how fast PC hardware gets, youll never feel the benefit in the windows UI (unless they completely re write it from scratch)."
my point exactly, windows is not improving with
all the acclaimed speed increases.
Amiga improves measurably with faster hardware.
-
Druideck wrote:
@Karlos
Quote:
Amiga improves measurably with faster hardware.
Amen! The switch from 1200 020@14MHz 2Mb to 040@25MHz with 16Mb fast ram (my first accelerator) was a real eye opener.
Moving to the BlizzPPC later, with the same power 040 was no big deal, although PPC datatypes and PPC optimised apps gave a similar kick. Man, I do regret not saving up more and going for the 060 combo but it was insanely expensive back then (I have the 603e+ 240Mhz with SCSI)...
Getting the graphics card to replace the native chipset was to everyday workbench use what the first 040 I got was to applications...
Conversely, my experience of windows usage is that it itself (not applications in particular) always feels lazy and sluggish no matter what you stick under the bonnet.
-
Why AmigaOne still use the old slow G4?
If you would rather use your old 68k, noone is forcing you to upgrade. But it IS actually an UPGRADE for Amiga. It's impossible for someone like Amiga/Genesi to expect to be market leaders when it comes to new technology right now. Just won't happen. So either settle for a G4, or buy a PC/Mac. Don't expect a small company to be able to fight Apple etc when it comes to getting the latest chips from people like IBM and Intel.
Note that the AmigaOne was in production by the time the PPC970 was announced...
We shall see what the future brings. For now I'm ok with my 1 1/2 year old 600MHz G3, but I'll upgrade again some time next year. It won't be an Intel, but it might be an Apple. Or an Amiga. Depends on how much trouble the early Apple-adopters have with Linux on the G5 :-)
-
This is the bit I don't get. Just because the G4 has been outpaced by x86, some people seem to be complaining and making out like it's crap all of a sudden :roll:
Hell, I wouldn't mind a G4 A1XE as an upgrade :-)
-
So you need all that hardware acceleration to make your windows box snappier than an 040 powered no-graphics-card amiga 3000 eh?
I don’t have access to Zorro based Gfx card anymore. The issue in regards to Windows GUI’s speed is an operating issue NOT a hardware issue.
If one is bias for relatively lightweight OS one could purchase QNX X86 (or download AROS, or even install Amithlon).
There are some things that the AmigaOS is unsuited at this time due to lack of ‘middleware’ infrastructure. This area is related to RAD development for revenue/income generation.
My point was, a friend has a 'half decent' AthlonXP 2800 400MHz FSB, Asus A7V8X-X mobo, 768M DDR400, 128M Radeon 9800 and ATA133 120G drive. It's a nice setup.
Ok. The hardware is fine (except for VIA KT600 class motherboard). Configuration is another matter.….
However, running Win2K, XP or 2003 (uninstalled after virtually nothing worked ) there were times when simply bringing up a popup menu caused a delay of a couple of seconds. For the power and acceleration available I'd expect a lot better.
I yet to encounter that 'issue' on my system due to different chipset/RAID-HD/memory/Gfx/driver setup (relative to your friend's setup). Secondly, there are the issues of deadlocks** and some issues with certain MS auto up-date patches.
**broken applications/utilities that plug itself in popup menus.
PS; I have set my WinXP-SP1's popup menu with fade-in/fade-out effect.
running Win2K, XP or 2003 (uninstalled after virtually nothing worked )
MS Windows Server 2003 should have worked with
ASUS A7V8X-X (VIA KT600 based) class motherboard...
If an ageing 68K system with a third rate graphics card (the hardware features of which are totally under utilized by the RTG software as it is) can have a more responsive UI, what does that say for MOS, OS4 and as you point out, AROS?
The issue you pointed out is an operating system issue NOT a hardware issue…
-
The 80x86 command set is an old, outdated, and (by modern standards) flawed set. Intel is trying to replace it with their IA series of processor (slowly, but probably surely while they attempt to pry the backwards compatibility nuts off of the old set with a crobar).
I understand 80x86 is readily and cheaply available, but all it will do is throw the Amiga market into the "every month I need to upgrade "group, which is a place where it will surely be overwhelmed.
I don't care what CPU is used for the AmigaOne as long as it is a modern CPU, with a modern command set, and something that has an architecture that will easily enable moving on to the future whatever that may be (64-bit computing probably). The G4 is an excellent processor for such usage. The 80x86 chipsets are being phased out, and being slowly replaced by incompatible CPU's (yes AMD's still planning on true backward compatibility, but even they've mentioned plans to eventually phase it out)
So G4 isn't "brand new top of the line" as of what 4 months ago or something? It's an excellent CPU, that is going to go down in price due to the new processor line, and puts the AmigaOne on track for relatively painless upgrading.
-
I agree with Wain.
Even Intel know that the x86 is soon dead.
I would prefer a platform that is using a modern RISC CPU(the PPC is only 10 years old).
You will either upgrade your computer platform now, or wait 5-10 years when Intel and AMD say "Nope! That's enough! We're going on with another architecture.
If you're worrying about these machines not using the old x86 hardware then you're not thinking about the long term future enough.
-
Okay well I agree with a lot of what is being said here all except the stuff when people start trashing windows. I have had my share of problems with windows over the years, but I have never had as many problems or hardware incompatibilities as the folks here have. It amazes me to get on here and here someone say their 040/060 is more responsive than Windows XP.
Maybe I am a developer and I live in the USA but I just really see most of this stuff as just people's "inexperience" with intel hardware and software..
I always research anything I do and for the majority of smart Amiga folks the PC platform is hardly rocket science.. The only thing that gets to me on here is the anti-intel microsoft bias that exists here. I don't see pc folks ever trashing the Amiga for it's os or capabilities.
This is a world of "choice" and I really don't understand the negativity. The PC really didn't destroy or delete the Amiga market place. The Amiga caved in on itself due to problems with the company running the show at the time..
Most people who use PCs daily wouldn't agree with the sentiment about how difficult the PC is to use. Most folks on the PC platform stay with mainstream pc hardware and software don't have half the problems people talk about on here.
I think the community would attract a lot more people to the Amiga if the users weren't talking about "how much better the machine is vs this other machine" it would be nice to hear "Why" and what they actually use this machine for. It can't be just that the PC is so problematic.
I wanna hear what "Cool" stuff people are doing with their Amigas..
-
Even Intel know that the x86 is soon dead.
Not according to the Intel's road map. Note that they just announced 'Pentium 4 Extreme Edition'(refer IDF 2003)....
Other Pentium 4 cores;
1. Prescott (Q4 2003)
2. Nocona
3. Potomac
4. Tejas (2004/2005)
Backwards compatibility is key aspect for continuing dominance of Intel, AMD, MS, X86 Linux and X86 BSD.
Note that Motorola 68k was once the ‘Pentium’ during early 80s…
I would prefer a platform that is using a modern RISC CPU(the PPC is only 10 years old).
Note that modern X86 CPUs has a post-RISC like cores (i.e. they have a fancy HW translators/emulators to make them run X86 legacy).
Transmeta processor's (VLIW concepts)decoder/translator is combination software and hardware.
You will either upgrade your computer platform now, or wait 5-10 years when Intel and AMD say "Nope! That's enough! We're going on with another architecture.
With AMD K6/AthlonXP(K7)/Opteron/AthlonFX/Athlon64(K8) processors they decodes/translates X86 Instructions into RISC like instructions before they execute in their post-RISC pipelines.
The PowerPC 970 (Power Series based core) has similar process for PowerPC ISA e.g. decode/crush stage.
The current IA-64 (VLIW/EPIC concepts) does have X86 ISA compatibility on HW, but it's only poorly implemented…
If you're worrying about these machines not using the old x86 hardware then you're not thinking about the long term future enough.
With AMD's case, they will just replace K's series post-RISC core with another RISC core and redesign the front-end translator/decoder.
Note that AMD's K9 is under development just for 6 months...
-
AmigaMac: "What do you mean PowerPC is so proprietary? I guess you can go down to your Local Radio Shack, but some silicon wafers and a few transistors and make your own homegrown x86 CPU? How absurd!"
Have you ever built a PC before, or more importantly, RE-built a PC?
"Everything matters, not just software. And people don't go out of their way to buy 'non Intel' based hardware. Some people actually do give a rats arse about the hardware as much as the software. I personally think PowerPC is technically better than x86 (though that's my own opinion on the subject)."
Technically better, yes. But slower, more expensive, fewer development tools, low availabilty, contract restrictions with Apple...
Yes, everything matters, including the ability to serve its purpose. x86 is less efficient, but performs the job better overall. That may change eventually, but that is not the case now.
Please note the largest orders for PowerPC chips are for embedded applications, hence the reason PowerPC was not an evolution of 68K, and provided virtually no backwards compatibility. Apple gets the desktop versions under contract, so Amiga is left to fight for either the embeddable chips (unsuitable for desktops), or last year's model (which is slow). Yeah, that's what I want in my PC, and I'll pay $800 for it, too!
"Some people prefer commodity over quality... and vice versa!"
So, what commodity does PowerPC offer? The only one I can think of is power consumption, which means almost nothing to desktop users. As for noise, I dare you to listen to my new P4 system. I replaced my Athlon with a P4 and an Antec case strictly to reduce noise, and I can assure you that it is VERY hard to beat. Improvements in cooling are very impressive with the new P4 CPUs.
If you're using Athlon as your reference for x86 cooling, no wonder you're not impressed! My Athlon was a good performer, but, man, did the noise and cooling SUCK. This P4 is amazing.
"You're short-sighted reasoning above almost contradicts what Amigans have been fighting for all this time."
Don't make me laugh. Most Amigans have given up and gone to other platforms -- usually x86. The only people left are a very tiny hardcore audience, and those people hardly provide any "long-sighted" business potential. I think most people would have supported the switch to x86, but we'll never find out now, will we?
"It would be like me asking why are all these Amiga freaks so hell bent on using 'non-Microsoft' software?
...Which has nothing to do with PowerPC. Technically, you can run your non-Microsoft software on any platform, provided the developers make the call.
"...Because they have a preference on what they believe is a better solution for their own wants and/or needs, PERIOD!"
...Which apparently involves paying a lot of money for slower hardware that follows standards several years old. Would you pay $50,000 for an electric car with 50HP, no A/C, and a cramped interior? Some people will, but not enough to matter in the marketplace. Eventually, we'll all drive electric cars, but it's not a realistic option, today.
"I could care less what Amiga Inc. puts inside the case. If they offer both PPC and x86, then we all win as consumers"
I agree with this, but that assumes that their fabled "DE" technology fulfills the promise of running on any hardware. So far, nothing has been demonstrated beyond OS4, which only runs on PowerPC. If they want to offer PowerPC as an option, for those who want more technically advanced hardware, that's fine. But for the majority of us who want the best value, PowerPC doesn't deliver, and that's the only choice Amigans have because that's what Hyperion wanted.
I don't care what they offer, either, so long as it's competitive. G4's are not. I completely lost interest in Amiga when they said OS4 would only work on PowerPC. I just want to see if DE is alive and might be released, and then I'm out of here.
I'll wait for another new company to deliver an Amiga-like OS for x86. AROS is definately interesting, though I still can't get it to work on my PC because I don't have a serial mouse, anymore.
ACE: "What I don't neccessarily agree with is the diversity issue (look at consoles for example) ...yes, they are slightly limited towards the end of there lifecycle, but you know you have a platform which will (hopefully) be supported for a set period of time."
That's because consoles are not about hardware, they are about software, and the companies that make consoles specialize in making and licensing games. A powerful, cheap console with lousy games and bad management won't sell. Even the GameBoy would not have been a success without a powerful library of great games, despite its awesome battery life and compact size. I have a PS2, and I think the hardware is pretty flakey and unreliable, but I can't deny that games like Sly Cooper, GT3, and Rachet and Clank made my purchase a good one.
BTW, I'm a big Dreamcast fan, and that wasn't based on big, powerful hardware, either. I bought that long before the PS2, even though I knew it would die next to the hype of the PS2. It was the games, not the hardware, that sold me.
Wain: "I understand 80x86 is readily and cheaply available, but all it will do is throw the Amiga market into the "every month I need to upgrade "group, which is a place where it will surely be overwhelmed."
Limited availability of drivers will prevent that just fine. :-)
"The 80x86 chipsets are being phased out, and being slowly replaced by incompatible CPU's"
And you see the Amiga incapable of adapting? What of the hundreds of millions of Windows machines out there? Will they all go belly-up? It all depends how programmers write their code and if they can re-compile it easily. Well-written code can be translated to other CPUs. Old code runs under IA32 emulation, which isn't all THAT slow. The only peope who lose out big time are those poor assembly hackers, and I could care less about those people. The programming language, not the hardware, is the barrier. x86 is as irrelivent as PowerPC in this respect. Again, it all boils down to value and development procedure, not an exact CPU.
"So G4 isn't "brand new top of the line" as of what 4 months ago or something? It's an excellent CPU, that is going to go down in price due to the new processor line, and puts the AmigaOne on track for relatively painless upgrading."
Well, it would be nice if things like SerialATA and Gigabit ethernet were available on the AmigaOne, which is not the case, and won't be for a while. AmigaOne is OK for hobyists who like their old hardware, but it can hardly be considered competitive.
I should note that I use my PC for work and play. I suppose if all I did was e-mail and browse the web all day, a G3 would be fine. But then, I wouldn't need an Amiga, would I? I'd be perfectly happy with a Mac, since it can browse the web just fine. A five year old Mac, at that...
iamaboringperson: "If you're worrying about these machines not using the old x86 hardware then you're not thinking about the long term future enough."
See above. x86 is the most popular architecture in the world, and the most widely supported. There are ways to convert software to new CPUs with a minimal performance hit. The whole world isn't going to drop x86 overnight, and IA64 has PLENTY of time to overtake the market (and possibly lose it, too).
In 5-10 years, I doubt Intel and AMD will be the star players, anymore. I also doubt that Amiga Inc will be alive then, the way things are going (but, hey, we all knew that, right?)
I still have faith in AROS, QNX, Linux, and other x86 contenders, so long as they continue to grow and collect a community of talented people who can turn these OS's into real desktop operating systems, and not just embedded or hobby projects. GUI design and intuition is my biggest complaint, as QNX and Linux, in particular, still drive me insane (can you say, "By Programmers, For Programmers?")
Oh yeah, and if it runs on x86, I can try before I buy, which is the ONLY way I'll consider buying a new OS. Of course, you could always go to the store to see the latest Macs, but they are usually the ones running MPEG movies all day, or have their hard drives renamed to obscenities. Yeah, that'll convince me to buy it! :-D
-
Something that should be really clear to most people that I am not hearing people noticing on here is how Microsoft is shifting to a non processor specific architecture.
If you are following microsoft's .NET architecture (which is being implemented as MONO by the open source folks) you know that code now compiles down to a java style bytecode type system known as IL code (intermediate language code). I would not be suprised if they like the unix world might head towards multiple processor targets (like they have done in the past with windows NT)..
I think this shift will ultimately lead to the "x86" processor or emulation of it not be as important as people are suggesting here that it is. We all know how well UAE works, I am sure cpu's are fast enough what opcodes the processor is actually using will be insignificant to compatibility.
-Don
PS I remember a small mac g4 cube that had real heating problems so bad that we could cook an egg on it's heat vent. It was so bad that it cracked all the cases of that particular Mac. So the PC exhaust problems are not anywhere near as bad as some of the earlier Mac PPCs..
-
PS I remember a small mac g4 cube that had real heating problems so bad that we could cook an egg on it's heat vent. It was so bad that it cracked all the cases of that particular Mac. So the PC exhaust problems are not anywhere near as bad as some of the earlier Mac PPCs..
Whoever designed the cube was *ON* crack. It uses only passive cooling, and was so packed on the inside it's amazing it gets any airflow at all. I don't know for certain, but I believe most of the heat is from the hard drive and GFX chip, not the PPC. I would have understood the cube more if they had used a notebook hard drive and a slow-spinning 60mm fan on the bottom.
As for cracked cases, is that really true? I thought the infamouse "cracks" were simply moulding edges because they didn't put enough thought into manufacturing. Seems typical, though, that a company would spend all that time developing a computer simply for athetics, and then resort to cheap, badly moulded plastic.
Oop... sorry, off topic again...
-
Wain wrote:
The 80x86 command set is an old, outdated, and (by modern standards) flawed set. Intel is trying to replace it with their IA series of processor (slowly, but probably surely while they attempt to pry the backwards compatibility nuts off of the old set with a crobar).
Note that Intel refers X86-32 as "IA-32". IA-64 (VLIW) is just the inefficient version of Transmeta’s CPU.
"IA-32" refers to X86 ISA period of 80386 and later.
Note that Intel's 'Pentium Pro' has a very poor implementation X86-16, but it was fine on X86-32 (e.g. Windows NT code base). This is somewhat related to AMD's decision to delete the V86 during X86-64 mode.
The 80x86 chipsets are being phased out,
Post-RISC core of an Athlon processor is substantially different to 8086 e.g. 8086 doesn't decode/translate X86 ISA into smaller RISC like instructions. AMD Athlon K7’s chipsets is based on DEC Alpha’s EV6 architecture i.e. non-X86 architecture.
and being slowly replaced by incompatible CPU's
Where did they state this?
Did AMD state that they will replace AMD64 ISA?
They’ll just delete particular compatibility modes (e.g. V86 while in X86-64 mode).
(yes AMD's still planning on true backward compatibility, but even they've mentioned plans to eventually phase it out)
AMD64 ISA(X86 ISA without V86 nasties) will be here for a long time.
So G4 isn't "brand new top of the line" as of what 4 months ago or something?
Note that PowerPC 970 decodes/crush PowerPC ISA into smaller RISC like instructions i.e. a process should be similar to a certain X86 processor.
-
Something that should be really clear to most people that I am not hearing people noticing on here is how Microsoft is shifting to a non processor specific architecture.
We probably see yet another WOW(Windows on Windows). Note that MS Window Longhorn (e.g. Build 40xx)runs fine on X86...
If you are following microsoft's .NET architecture
Software investment protection is one of the critical factors why X86 dominates the desktop markets...
-
edit - removed by me.
This is a stupid argument because it is already done.
AOne is out, and AOS4 supports PPC.
Now, what's going to happen to Amiga Inc. and AOS 5? That's another story...
-
Note that Intel refers X86-32 as "IA-32". IA-64 (VLIW) is just the inefficient version of Transmeta’s CPU.
"IA-32" refers to X86 ISA period of 80386 and later.
You're right, sorry, I keep remembering the original press releases(years ago) when IA-32 was going to be a new chipset along with IA-64 developed in conjunction with HP. I keep forgetting Intel changed that down the line.
-
While searching the net trying to find out the year of introduction of all the Motorola 68k series chips(68000, 68010, 68020, 68030, 68040, 68060), I came upon this site. (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.11/es_apple_pr.html) It looks at the history of why Apple lost out to Microsoft and Intel for computer dominance. I think there are a lot of parallels there as to why Commodore and the Amiga never took off the same way.
P.S. I never did find out the years of introduction, except that the 68000 was used in the Apple Lisa in 1983, the 68020 came out in 1984, and I believe the 68060 came out in 1994.
:-?
-
@aardvark
I believe the MC68000 came out in 1979