Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: Astral on May 09, 2009, 06:06:47 AM
-
I occasionally trade items via eBay.
It is very surprising to me, that when a buyer comes to pickup their "classic Amiga" item, and we get to having a little bit of a chat, there seems to be one very common similarity. The similarity is when I mention that I have recently purchased and am enjoying the latest Amiga, the SAM440, EVERY single person so far has not even heard of it. I am not talking 2 people, and am talking of at least half a dozen people.
This doesn't really surpise me though. I suppose the more advertising, word of mouth, and so on that occurs, the more people learn about new things, including Amiga's.
Whilst I believe the steps that have been taken recently by Hyperion/ACube have been in the forward direction, I am not for a minute going to suggest how they should promote the Amiga, if at all. I am sure they have a goal, they have made a plan, and are taking steps to achieve this. Whether this includes promoting the Amiga through advertising, using methods they seem fit, is purely their choice.
In regards to having the Amiga *GROW* as a whole, company, user base, practical uses and so on, maybe it is best that the software base is improved before getting the word out there? Maybe it is best to improve the hardware before getting the word out there?
What steps do you think should be taken, including advertising, and at what point?
-
I can't say I'm surprised people don't know about those--I barely know of them, myself (like, where to get one, etc.). I understand enough that not one of those things mentioned is a full-fledged computer, but instead is either a motherboard or a card that goes into some slot; and that all are 'classic' (if that) in nature, and not a piece of it with a CPU that is AMD or Intel.
As far as steps to be taken, including advertising, etc., I won't offer any until I see on the Amiga Inc. website a press release that "Amiga will now be put on x86-64 CPUs" and run on CPUs by AMD and Intel. Til then, what's the point? (beyond this, I have extremely hostile words) :-D
-
@eyeam
Other people share you opinion. It will be interesting to see if this is the next step that is taken. I suppose it all depends on the ultimate goal that Hyperion/ACube have.
With consideration to the fact we do not know Hyperion/ACube's ultimate goal, why do you suggest that AmigaOS on x86 hardware should be the next step to be taken? Price value? Pre-existing hardware base?
-
I haven't offered any next steps. Been there, done that. I said in the previous post I'd wait til I see such an announcement on the Amiga website. :-)
So what happened to the Amiga-Hyperion court case? The last thing on the docket (Amiga-Hyperion case) (http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-wawdce/case_no-2:2007cv00631/case_id-143245/) was posted January 5th, 2009, but regards a deadline stemming back to December 19th, 2008.
-
Hmm Amiga is a hobby os, i dont think it will change, i myself aint looked back since win 95 or 98, people remember how good amiga was for games not for os, dont get me wrong i love AOS but it cant replace any modern mainstream os ever.
-
The SAMM440 is not an Amiga to most "Classic" Amiga users, it is just another "flash in the pan" like the BEOS, Amigaone, minimig, etc. It will never have the market penetration to be considered even remotely an Amiga. I am surprised that people even consider it part of the Amiga heritage. Way too expensive for the hobbies, in a year it will be just another Amiga memory,a part for people with too much money. I am not trying to start a flame war, but it is just another limited run thing.
-
Hi,
I agree with quarkx...
To me the Amiga was (and always will) be the true 'classic' Amigas (A1000-A4000 and everything in between). The essence of Amiga evaporated when CBM went to the wall...
I personally have little interest in SAM, Amiga Ones, etc. If I want to try an alternative OS, I have an Ubuntu box to muck around with.
If I want to enjoy an Amiga I'll boot up WB1.3 or 3.1 - admittedly in WinUAE these days - and relive those great days in the late 1980s when the Amiga ruled!
Cheers,
Mike.
-
Please, whilst I appreciate this is a forum, and hence a place of public opinion, the aim of this thread isn't to debate what is, and what isn't "Amiga".
The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present.
-
Tell these same people that these "modern Amigas" don't run any of their old games, are provided as little more than an old Motherboard, but costs more than a modern Laptop... and they lose interest.
-
from mingle:
I personally have little interest in SAM, Amiga Ones, etc. If I want to try an alternative OS, I have an Ubuntu box to muck around with.
You know, I liked the name "Amiga One" (and always thought the KISS song "We Are One" could have been the perfect campaign song for it in commercials that showed all the Amigans at the Amiga shows that would have demonstrate such a thing).
But they never manifested what I thought the "Amiga One" should have been. It should have been done as another big box Amiga, right down to the case. The original Multimedia Convergence Computer (MCC) prototype that Jim Collas commissioned was a nice step toward this--but that was really more 'set top' than anything else, and save for that being a set top, the computer version (also black) should have had a bigger case. Could have even been a Commodore-Amiga venture. Could still be.
Inside, it should have had the latest ATX Intel- or AMD-based motherboards, with the latest industry standards. At one time, that could have included the BoXeR, which was a step in the right direction. Keep the casing for a number of years, just change out the ATX motherboard and specs, and monitor tube (for better monitors), save money 'recycling' and embed a consistent image in the minds of the public.
The world doesn't know about "Amiga One". Even now. The name was a good one, to reboot the whole thing. But what manifested was wrong, in my opinion.
-
bloodline wrote:
Tell these same people that these "modern Amigas" don't run any of their old games, are provided as little more than an old Motherboard, but costs more than a modern Laptop... and they lose interest.
Lose interest? Maybe yes, but this is not gauranteeed. This is where marketing may help.
Anything can be sold with the right marketing. Check Nintedo technology out - is that up to date technology? Gameboy's? Wii? Are they/were they worth their asking price with respect to production costs? Probably not - a large percentage of users probably have never given a thought to the underlying technology, and don't care a bit. The end result is what matters - sales, a user base, and hence potential growth for the future. Something doesn't have to be ground breaking to be successful.
Can you come up with anything you could tell old Amiga users, and potential new Amiga users, that would get them interested in "new Amiga's", that would contribute to the growth of the "Amiga"?
-
from bloodline:
Tell these same people that these "modern Amigas" don't run any of their old games, are provided as little more than an old Motherboard, but costs more than a modern Laptop... and they lose interest.
With good reason, they lose interest. :-)
An Amiga OS atop a rewritten Exec (exokernel!) can facilitate 100% backward compatibility with every single Amiga software program there ever was. You'd need either a CPU library, if you were going to emulate the custom chips, or a hardware card like Jens Schoenfeld's Clone-A, I guess, present in a PCI slot--with the OS routing the calls to what's appropriate.
-
Astral wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Tell these same people that these "modern Amigas" don't run any of their old games, are provided as little more than an old Motherboard, but costs more than a modern Laptop... and they lose interest.
Lose interest? Maybe yes, but this is not gauranteeed. This is where marketing may help.
Anything can be sold with the right marketing. Check Nintedo technology out - is that up to date technology? Gameboy's? Wii? Are they/were they worth their asking price with respect to production costs? Probably not - a large percentage of users probably have never given a thought to the underlying technology, and don't care a bit. The end result is what matters - sales, a user base, and hence potential growth for the future. Something doesn't have to be ground breaking to be successful.
Can you come up with anything you could tell old Amiga users, and potential new Amiga users, that would get them interested in "new Amiga's", that would contribute to the growth of the "Amiga"?
The purpose of any platform is to run software... When a new platform arrives it needs to offer more, much more, than the existing platforms... If it doesn't, it is illogical to move to it.
The Amiga platform offers antiquated technology when compared with a wintel box running Win Vista or an OSX mac or any of the games consoles...
The Amiga platform does have a software legacy, but this is either games on floppy (a very dead format) that require special hardware and better run on Emulators or producivity software that is 15years behind the free software I can get on modern systems.
-
EyeAm wrote:
from bloodline:
Tell these same people that these "modern Amigas" don't run any of their old games, are provided as little more than an old Motherboard, but costs more than a modern Laptop... and they lose interest.
With good reason, they lose interest. :-)
An Amiga OS atop a rewritten Exec (exokernel!) can facilitate 100% backward compatibility with every single Amiga software program there ever was. You'd need either a CPU library, if you were going to emulate the custom chips, or a hardware card like Jens Schoenfeld's Clone-A, I guess, present in a PCI slot--with the OS routing the calls to what's appropriate.
With this paragraph, you have shown your ignorance of Operating system design!
Think for a second, why is the complex mess you propose, better than UAE running on Linux?
-
There is no such thing as a "modern Amiga" unless you count WinUAE.
Classic compatibility is everything. Running an obscure OS slowly is nothing.
-
from bloodline:
With this paragraph, you have shown your ignorance of Operating system design!
Think for a second, why is the complex mess you propose, better than UAE running on Linux?
Because Linux sucks. :-) And so does UAE. Both too complex for their own good.
There's too much in the Amiga OS's kernel that simply does not need to be there--move it to user level, leave the kernel as small as possible. Write the kernel in asm for speed, and leave the abstraction for everything above it, in C. Porting to different hardware, you'd only need to rewrite the kernel then.
But, why bother? All the Amiga programmers are doing it all right and correct--that is why Amiga flies high and is a stellar success, right? :-D It's not going ANYwhere the way they're doing it. And too many egos and stand-offs are in the way for REAL creativity and innovation. It's going to take an ugly revolution to shake that loose. :lol:
-
EyeAm wrote:
from bloodline:
With this paragraph, you have shown your ignorance of Operating system design!
Think for a second, why is the complex mess you propose, better than UAE running on Linux?
Because Linux sucks. :-) And so does UAE. Both too complex for their own good.
Both are perfect at their respective jobs!
There's too much in the Amiga OS's kernel that simply does not need to be there--move it to user level, leave the kernel as small as possible. Write the kernel in asm for speed, and leave the abstraction for everything above it, in C. Porting to different hardware, you'd only need to rewrite the kernel then.
AmigaOS doesn't really have a Kernel... Almost everything runs in UserMode and there is no Operating system Application separation... everything lives together.
Learn about how AmigaOS works before you comment on it!
But, why bother? All the Amiga programmers are doing it all right and correct--that is why Amiga flies high and is a stellar success, right? :-D It's not going ANYwhere the way they're doing it. And too many egos and stand-offs are in the way for REAL creativity and innovation. It's going to take an ugly revolution to shake that loose. :lol:
The Amiga has passed from relevance... enjoy it for its strengths...
-
from bloodline:
Both are perfect at their respective jobs!
If it's Linux's job to ruin data, I agree. But, no, I'll stick with what I said about them. Linux definitely sucks. I'm run it; it ruined some of my data; it sucks.
from bloodline:
AmigaOS doesn't really have a Kernel... Almost everything runs in UserMode and there is no Operating system Application separation... everything lives together.
Amiga OS does have a kernel. In the strictest sense, it most certainly does. It still leaves modules tied to it from the System. You very well cannot change those on-the-fly now, can you? No.
However, among the most notable OSes--Amiga, MAC, Linux, Unix, Windows--Amiga is the *closest* to an exokernel design than any of them. Which gives it the greatest potential in these times when monolithic and microkernel forms need to evolve. It's one of the reasons it is still relevant and 'venture capital' worthy. Just that some things have to change to shape it up before it ships out.
from bloodline:
Learn about how AmigaOS works before you comment on it!
Don't make this personal. And don't assume; you know what they say about assuming. :lol:
from bloodline:
The Amiga has passed from relevance... enjoy it for its strengths...
Yeah, currently. Like I said in the poll thread, it's DEAD. :-)
-
EyeAm wrote:
from bloodline:
Both are perfect at their respective jobs!
If it's Linux's job to ruin data, I agree. But, no, I'll stick with what I said about them. Linux definitely sucks. I'm run it; it ruined some of my data; it sucks.
That is a problem with the user not the software.
from bloodline:
AmigaOS doesn't really have a Kernel... Almost everything runs in UserMode and there is no Operating system Application separation... everything lives together.
Amiga OS does have a kernel. In the strictest sense, it most certainly does. It still leaves modules tied to it from the System. You very well cannot change those on-the-fly now, can you? No.
??? I have no idea what you mean... I can swap out libraries if I want... I can even patch libraries that are still in use with SetFunction()
However, among the most notable OSes--Amiga, MAC, Linux, Unix, Windows--Amiga is the *closest* to an exokernel design than any of them. Which gives it the greatest potential in these times when monolithic and microkernel forms need to evolve. It's one of the reasons it is still relevant and 'venture capital' worthy. Just that some things have to change to shape it up before it ships out.
If the design had any merit it would be in widespread use now. It has been proven that Hybrid Monolithic/Microkernel designs are the more efficient.
AmigaOS is sort of a microkernel... but not really in the strictest sense... it's a weird beast, and one that due to security requirements (and the need for SMP) of modern systems can't exist in a modern world.
from bloodline:
Learn about how AmigaOS works before you comment on it!
Don't make this personal. And don't assume; you know what they say about assuming. :lol:
If we were talking about fitting a new gearbox to a 1991 mazda MX-5... and then I started talking about calibrating the flux capacitor and adjusting the dilithium injector coils... you'd have a pretty good idea I didn't know what I was talking about.
From your comments I can see this is true of your understanding of AmigaOS.
from bloodline:
The Amiga has passed from relevance... enjoy it for its strengths...
Yeah, currently. Like I said in the poll thread, it's DEAD. :-)
Agreed.
-
Like stated previously...
"The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere.
-
@EyeAm
I've been using linux now for several years. It's highly robust. If it corrupted your data it's more likely down to faulty hardware or a faulty user. My machine at work, for example, was up for over 1 year.
This wasn't a server, this was a desktop machine. That's 1 full year, running an X server (the least stable part of any linux distro), disk and network IO, sound playback. All without crashes, without lockups. I haven't had that level of stability from any other system. It rebooted it after a year because our office had a power outage, so I took the opportunity to upgrade it too.
Linux has, however, become rather bloated.
Amiga OS does have a kernel. In the strictest sense, it most certainly does. It still leaves modules tied to it from the System. You very well cannot change those on-the-fly now, can you? No.
Yes you can. Check the Includes&Autodocs for exec.library/SetFunction(). Disk based libraries can easily be replaced at runtime. Simply replace the .library file. If they aren't currently open by any process, an avail flush call will purge any resident version from memory. The next time it is opened, the new version will be loaded.
-
Okay, Astral. :-)
EDIT: just can't leave without the Linux reply (to two above posts by others): It was definitely LINUX's fault, an upgrade of their software (and their upgrader sucks, more specifically). :lol: There, I'm done.
-
Astral wrote:
Like stated previously...
"The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere.
It is a public forum, if you don't agree with my views, then provide a clear argument against me. I refuse to take part in an ego stroking contest...
-
Astral wrote:
Like stated previously...
"The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere.
I reverse the equation:
If you DO believe the "Amiga" can go forward, post this thread to Amigaworld.net; over there u'll find PLENTY of fanatics ready to back u up!
PEACE!
-
EyeAm wrote:
Okay, Astral. :-)
EDIT: just can't leave without the Linux reply (to two above posts by others): It was definitely LINUX's fault, an upgrade of their software (and their upgrader sucks, more specifically). :lol: There, I'm done.
Which one? rpm? yum? apt-get? You obviously haven't a clue what you are talking about with regards to linux. What did you do, pull out a pen drive without properly unmounting it? User error. Maybe you should have set it up not to write cache removable media.
Was it your hard disk that went wonky? You don't know how to use fsck or replay the journal? Well, the OS can't really help that, other than by giving you extensive documentation on how to deal with such issues. How many other OS will let you unmount a drive at runtime, check it and even manually edit the disk's inodes if the disk has truly become damaged? Not many.
-
bloodline wrote:
Astral wrote:
Like stated previously...
"The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere.
It is a public forum, if you don't agree with my views, then provide a clear argument against me. I refuse to take part in an ego stroking contest...
As I stated..."The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere."
-
Astral wrote:
bloodline wrote:
Astral wrote:
Like stated previously...
"The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere.
It is a public forum, if you don't agree with my views, then provide a clear argument against me. I refuse to take part in an ego stroking contest...
As I stated..."The aim of this thread is to get an idea of the steps people believe need to be taken to go forward, not stay in the past, or stay in the present."
If you don't believe the "Amiga" can go forward, or want to discuss other specifics, please take it elsewhere."
If an argument can't be put forward to counter my comments, then your thread is dead in the water... and of little value.
This is not a criticism but a fact.
-
bloodline wrote:
I refuse to take part in an ego stroking contest...
And so do I. So let's take this thread in a forward direction, hey?
-
Karlos wrote:
EyeAm wrote:
Okay, Astral. :-)
EDIT: just can't leave without the Linux reply (to two above posts by others): It was definitely LINUX's fault, an upgrade of their software (and their upgrader sucks, more specifically). :lol: There, I'm done.
Which one? rpm? yum? apt-get? You obviously haven't a clue what you are talking about with regards to linux. What did you do, pull out a pen drive without properly unmounting it? User error. Maybe you should have set it up not to write cache removable media.
IMHO all that bunch of redundant programs that do the same are a problem because it shows lack of a properly accepted standard.
In the example of the pen drive the write cache should be disabled as default and advanced users should activate it to get extra speed. Most of users prefer to plug and unplug their pendrives when they want... if many users don't expect having to unmount anything it shows that certain Linux distros may lack user friendliness.
Was it your hard disk that went wonky? You don't know how to use fsck or replay the journal? Well, the OS can't really help that, other than by giving you extensive documentation on how to deal with such issues. How many other OS will let you unmount a drive at runtime, check it and even manually edit the disk's inodes if the disk has truly become damaged? Not many.
I guess any unix clone like linux will allow that. I think AmigaOS/MorphOS allows unmounting drives in a more or less legal way (at least with 3rd party commands) and you could edit any part of the disk (no memory protection, you know).
I'm not sure about QNX or BeOS but they'll probably allow it too. I guess the only one that may not allow it is Windows
-
@astral, you know forums don't work like that. You don't set a topic and then get to control how people talk about the subject.
-
Crumb wrote:
IMHO all that bunch of redundant programs that do the same are a problem because it shows lack of a properly accepted standard.
It's an open platform. You can't have it both ways: If a standard existed and someone didn't like it, they'd just create an alternative. Which is exactly what happened. My point is that EyeAm obviously doesn't know what he's talking about with respect to linux package managers. Whichever one you use, they all work reasonably well. How difficult is it to install software under linux with a repository based package manager? For example:
sudo apt-get install
Or if the shell is too scary, there are many graphical interfaces.
It's mindnumbingly easy. It's the easiest software install ever conceived. You don't have to do anything. It goes away, downloads the package, sorts out any dependencies, installs it, configures it and unless it is something very low level, your package is immediately ready to use.
One could make the same argument against the Amiga UI system. MUI/Zune, ClassAct/Reaction, Triton, et al. They all came about because people weren't entirely satisfied with the stock gadtools interface. Yet, we all recognise that each has something to offer and as amiga users we generally don't complain about having so many interface sets installed.
In the example of the pen drive the write cache should be disabled as default and advanced users should activate it to get extra speed. Most of users prefer to plug and unplug their pendrives when they want... if many users don't expect having to unmount anything it shows that certain Linux distros may lack user friendliness.
Again, it is all fully documented. Not reading the documentation is user error, IMNSHO. I never claimed linux was particularly user-friendly, I claimed it was robust.
I guess any unix clone like linux will allow that. I think AmigaOS/MorphOS allows unmounting drives in a more or less legal way (at least with 3rd party commands) and you could edit any part of the disk (no memory protection, you know).
Actually, not that many I've seen. MacOSX claims to be unix based, but many moons ago when my then employers OSX server based filesystem failed, it was just impossible to do anything with it. That story is on this very site in an old thread somewhere. It was a complete disaster.
I'm not sure about QNX or BeOS but they'll probably allow it too. I guess the only one that may not allow it is Windows
Other than a few third party binary level disk editors, I'm not aware of any such tools for AmigaOS. Back in the day, I recovered a corrupted RDB, by hand, with AZap. It worked but it was very time consuming and a lot of guesswork was involved.
By comparison, the inode editing facilities for linux are built-in and have a degree of sanity checking that stop you from making any data corruption much worse since you are editing the fields in the inode structure, not simply editing a hex representation of a sector as I had to do with AZap.
-
Astral wrote:
In regards to having the Amiga *GROW* as a whole, company, user base, practical uses and so on, maybe it is best that the software base is improved before getting the word out there? Maybe it is best to improve the hardware before getting the word out there?
What steps do you think should be taken, including advertising, and at what point?
I think marketing is the only way to hit any numbers easily.
Personally I think that when MorphOS (Or AmigaOS) is released on Macs Minis, that's a big chance to attack the huge potential user base - for the very first time.
Of course 98,9% would screw it at a first contact but please recount the numbers. Mac people are far better group to a new OS proposition than any other. Linux people hate AmigaOS because it ain't come for free, face it. Besides it's too easy to administer it so ain't worth bothering since they might not be called such EXPERTS then (this is pretty much a joke...). Windows people like to have decent install shields and MS Office 120% compliance.
EDIT* AROS is free and x86 already which only mean x86 Amiga-like OS didn't succeed much off the Amigan shore. Consider Minis again.
I don't mean paid ads or something - that's pretty much silly. I mean forums mostly, that's all.
One more about Linux hostility since this is a part of the thread already - I'm always happy to be able to share my opinion... Robust? Perhaps. Does great work where employed? Perhaps. But it is definitely NOT a desktop system by all means of definition of a desktop system. Linux ruined or ate my data many times and I blamed myself, right. I am now a programmer, kind of, I have to use Kubuntu. So I don't question that, do not like it == change your job! But when the time hits five call it, I want to rest, not play helpdesk or a workstation administrator! While lying on a couch, had my ax buried for a while, I want to chill out and fulfill my silly home routines with peace of mind. I feel kindda anxious when I have to watch what I touch because if I do much enough, Linux will kill my data and all my family. I don't wanna feel like playing minesweeper on some bank main DB server. So I use Mac or Xp for sake of mental security. And remember that Desktop is not a system for several thousands of prophessionals, it's for anybody in question not being a retard. So those all moaning like "my grandma uses kubuntu", "my dog uses kubuntu", "kubuntu with openoffice is a best business solution ever", "why does ms office still exist" make me nearly throw up. Hence my statement.
-
Linux people hate AmigaOS because it ain't come for free, face it. Besides it's too easy to administer it so ain't worth bothering since they might not be called such EXPERTS then (this is pretty much a joke...)
Rubbish. I use linux at work and at home and there is no OS I like better than AmigaOS. My point is that linux is used professionally in places where any existing version of AmigaOS would never be considered because it is robust.
One more about Linux hostility since this is a part of the thread already - I'm always happy to be able to share my opinion... Robust? Perhaps. Does great work where employed? Perhaps. But it is definitely NOT a desktop system by all means of definition of a desktop system. Linux ruined or ate my data many times and I blamed myself, right.
If you are using a KDE4 based window manager you should blame yourself for any loss of data caused by X going down. You have the choice to use a robust window manager such as fvwm, but you opted for KDE. Even gnome is more stable. If you are using KDE4/plasma with all the desktop effects and other gubbins then you are probably using proprietry drivers which taint the kernel also, introducing instabilities.
Since all of these are your choice, then you can't blame the kernel for failing as a result of choosing to use an immature and buggy desktop.
Now, I'm not a kernel puritan, my machine at home is using proprietry nvidia drivers but I understand that by doing so, I may have compromised the stability of my kernel. That said, it has never crashed or locked up, even under very heavy load.
-
Now, I'm not a kernel puritan, my machine at home is using proprietry nvidia drivers but I understand that by doing so, I may have compromised the stability of my kernel. That said, it has never crashed or locked up, even under very heavy load.
That is new to me: why would open-source drivers be more stable than closed source ones ?
I mean: they may or may not be better... but what would make them better everytime.
Look: if I decide to develop a driver, releasing the sources won't make it any better...
-
warpdesign wrote:
Now, I'm not a kernel puritan, my machine at home is using proprietry nvidia drivers but I understand that by doing so, I may have compromised the stability of my kernel. That said, it has never crashed or locked up, even under very heavy load.
That is new to me: why would open-source drivers be more stable than closed source ones ?
I mean: they may or may not be better... but what would make them better everytime.
Look: if I decide to develop a driver, releasing the sources won't make it any better...
Open source improves code stability because there are more people involved who are able to track down and fix bugs.
-
warpdesign wrote:
Now, I'm not a kernel puritan, my machine at home is using proprietry nvidia drivers but I understand that by doing so, I may have compromised the stability of my kernel. That said, it has never crashed or locked up, even under very heavy load.
That is new to me: why would open-source drivers be more stable than closed source ones ?
I mean: they may or may not be better... but what would make them better everytime.
Look: if I decide to develop a driver, releasing the sources won't make it any better...
Simple. Proprietry drivers may well be written by people that know the specific hardware inside out but don't really know the host's graphics system too well. The bugfix listings that come up for nvidia's drivers alone demonstrate that. Windows drivers come first and are ported to linux.
There's no real reason why graphics drivers need to be kernel modules and most well written open source ones aren't. Those offered by nvidia and AMD, however, are.
-
Open source improves code stability because there are more people involved who are able to track down and fix bugs.
It also invites a lot of half baked code that causes more problems than what its worth. Any "Nut" can add code whether it works or not. There are no strict guidelines to go by, no quality control.
-But I am off topic.
Just my 2 cents
-
Karlos wrote:
Linux people hate AmigaOS because it ain't come for free, face it. Besides it's too easy to administer it so ain't worth bothering since they might not be called such EXPERTS then (this is pretty much a joke...)
Rubbish. I use linux at work and at home and there is no OS I like better than AmigaOS. My point is that linux is used professionally in places where any existing version of AmigaOS would never be considered because it is robust.
Look if you want to deny my statement, do it point blank or at least stick to the merit, though this requires guts I know. That kind of comments, they're just nasty, you're sure you can't do more? It doesn't prove you're intelligent, it only proves you have a problem with anti-/non- Linux people. That's a typical example of posting that is in spite of discussing the issue, cutting out some ambiguous and pretty off-topic phrases to make fun of the author. You're here to talk about Amiga or to pull legs of people not liking to have Linux on their hardware, cellphone, wife, you know what I mean? Ask yourself this question please.
Now to reply, try to do this with Linux - try to read through some legal statement in acrobat reader, then paste it to the oo document. Also, get to a company sales, receive a request from your customer and respond with a oo-made doc rich offer. Would you? Many "programmers" think all business is about c programming and vi. I do not understand.
Also when you show off so keen in Linux - do you expect an ambiguous user (1 000 000 000 people we're talking roughly) to configure ANYTHING after system out of box install in order to use it without fear? You only show how much full of themselves Linux people are, considering themselves "the propher" Desktop users, while others still remain ***sholes, morons, MS conspiracy part-ofs, lamers, non-having-anything-todo-with-THE-ITs etc. This is sad and embarassing.
Where's a room for Amiga in such a mentality??
One more about Linux hostility since this is a part of the thread already - I'm always happy to be able to share my opinion... Robust? Perhaps. Does great work where employed? Perhaps. But it is definitely NOT a desktop system by all means of definition of a desktop system. Linux ruined or ate my data many times and I blamed myself, right.
If you are using a KDE4 based window manager you should blame yourself for any loss of data caused by X going down. You have the choice to use a robust window manager such as fvwm, but you opted for KDE. Even gnome is more stable. If you are using KDE4/plasma with all the desktop effects and other gubbins then you are probably using proprietry drivers which taint the kernel also, introducing instabilities.
Since all of these are your choice, then you can't blame the kernel for failing as a result of choosing to use an immature and buggy desktop.
Now, I'm not a kernel puritan, my machine at home is using proprietry nvidia drivers but I understand that by doing so, I may have compromised the stability of my kernel. That said, it has never crashed or locked up, even under very heavy load.
It's KDE but I like it as it is (though I can re-log into Gnome UI). Thanks much for advice but I'm not gonna use it. I like stuff as is, ain't touching any admin matters unless mandatory or critical. Now I use Linux for my work only and since it's programming mostly, instead of taking care for my data I subversion it. Backup is a better way than proper sophisticated maintenance. Economically.
The conclusion. I for the Lord's sake never ever mentioned AmigaOS IS better than Linux. I only mentioned Linux people aren't a good group to be talked about Amiga at all. If you exchange some delusional and fun-to-be AmigaOS and Linux comparisons, either in work or home, it only means you among many people, see and read things you're supposed to encounter. Don't want to be rude here but this kind of mental twist requires attention. I mean as long as one wants to be more happy.
One more - if you want to discuss, let us go PM. You feel insulted perhaps. Well you should now I'm pretty sensitive and I have my rights. You put my words upside down and make laugh at it, I don't like that so I responded, as simple as that.
-
quarkx wrote:
Open source improves code stability because there are more people involved who are able to track down and fix bugs.
It also invites a lot of half baked code that causes more problems than what its worth. Any "Nut" can add code whether it works or not. There are no strict guidelines to go by, no quality control.
-But I am off topic.
Just my 2 cents
You're all wrong, however. :-)
There are guide lines, and the quality control is buildt in, as anyone can read your code and critisize it, improve it etc.
-
Open source improves code stability because there are more people involved who are able to track down and fix bugs.
[/quote}
I don't agree. Open source do not improve anything, nor does it mean they are more people working on it.
They are good developers in open and closed source projects. There are good guidlines in both closed and opened source projects. And the other way around.
Some open source project doesn't mean there are magically lots of people working on it... Often, the original authors are themeselves working on it because no one else knows it and can correctly work on it anyway.
-
warpdesign wrote:
Open source improves code stability because there are more people involved who are able to track down and fix bugs.
I don't agree. Open source do not improve anything, nor does it mean they are more people working on it.
They are good developers in open and closed source projects. There are good guidlines in both closed and opened source projects. And the other way around.
I'll just say one sentence here that many, many people can barely comprehend, I have not the faintest idea why.
The best and only bug-tracking system is THE CUSTOMER that might cancel multi-milion dollar agreement, or just leave the "successful clients" list, also moaning about it all over.
Sometimes I wonder what's the name of my delusional world I live in. Must... be... delusional... has to...
I mean if Your customer merely is able to pay the invoice, call your company as it is - a grocery, not IT or business especially.
Some open source project doesn't mean there are magically lots of people working on it... Often, the original authors are themeselves working on it because no one else knows it and can correctly work on it anyway.
Really???? Impossible! You lie!
-
closed source = evil
open source = good quality
Apple = good guys
MS = bad guys
...
So many myths...
-
That's a typical example of posting that is in spite of discussing the issue, cutting out some ambiguous and pretty off-topic phrases to make fun of the author. You're here to talk about Amiga or to pull legs of people not liking to have Linux on their hardware, cellphone, wife, you know what I mean? Ask yourself this question please.
Jeesh, don't take it so personally. I am simply addressing a few falsehoods put about by some people here:
1) That "linux people" hate AmigaOS. It's complete rubbish, I know more people with Amiga backgrounds that prefer to use linux on their x86 boxes than any other x86 OS. Despite obvious differences, the two OS have a great deal in common in the way they are organised and thought out.
2) That linux is "crap" based on the mishaps of people that haven't used it properly and have managed to lose data. The fact is, data is safer under linux than most other mainstream operating systems. It's one reason why it is so popular as a server OS (economically, being free is an even bigger incentive, of course). Even using a desktop distribution, I've never lost data on linux yet. In contrast, I've lost data on my Amiga more than once.
At no point whatsoever did I say or imply that linux is "user friendly" or that it is the OS everybody should use.
It's fine not to like linux, at times it can be a complete pig, but the criticisms that were levelled against it weren't accurate. Operating Systems are, by and large, tools. For serious work, you use what gets the job done. For some its Windows, for others MacOS, for others its linux.
AmigaOS's principal attraction IMO, is that it's actually fun to use and fun to write code for.
-
bloodline wrote:
AmigaOS doesn't really have a Kernel... Almost everything runs in UserMode and there is no Operating system Application separation... everything lives together.
Learn about how AmigaOS works before you comment on it!
The word "Kernel" originated on the Amiga. It most certainly DOES have one...but it might not be the SAME as your idea of what it means..
-
Karlos wrote:
It's mindnumbingly easy. It's the easiest software install ever conceived. You don't have to do anything. It goes away, downloads the package, sorts out any dependencies, installs it, configures it and unless it is something very low level, your package is immediately ready to use.
In theory. How well the "dependencies are sorted" depends on the person writing the package. That is not 100% reliable. A 100k dependency ( within a total of 10 MB of dependencies) that wasn't updated when installing a 700k SNES emulator meant that I could no longer boot. So much for "robustness". I then dual-booted into XP, logged on the forums and found the solution eventually..how would an average user with one PC and only Linux at home do this? In contrast my XPPro system has not blue-screened once in 3 years, and never failed to boot and I've installed and removed all sorts of rubbish.
The concept of installing from a repo is flawed because it depends on the writer, of the particular package you want to install, knowing exactly what the writers of the dependencies have done. Thats impossible to be 100% certain when 1000's of little dependencies exist. But thats what happens beacsue Linux is a collaboration of thousands of independent programmers in all parts of the world, each with their own area of expertise. Its ridiculous that a 700k emulator needs an additional 10 MB of additional Operating system dependencies-written by various authors, at various times, just to work!!! 10x more code in the dependencies than in the actual program: OFCOURSE there is a high probability of soemthing going wrong. Most Amiga software installs from commercial software were self contained: you might need a 3rd party library but that was rare. Hell in many cases you just drag the folder onto the hard drive..
If you have the time and inclination to maintain your Linux OS by forever logging into forums, often to cut and paste text commands that you have no idea what they do and will never remember, then Linux is for you. For the rest of us we just want things to work, and i'll gladly pay $120 for a commercial operating system upgrade for that.
-
DiskDoctor wrote:
I think marketing is the only way to hit any numbers easily.
Personally I think that when MorphOS (Or AmigaOS) is released on Macs Minis, that's a big chance to attack the huge potential user base - for the very first time.
I don't mean paid ads or something - that's pretty much silly. I mean forums mostly, that's all.
I agree in principal with the marketing. Without exposure, people don't recieve knowledge of anything.
The exact method of the marketing and the timing is hopefully part of Hyperion/ACube's plan. Premature marketing, with consideration to the companies' economics, hardware base, software base, user base, and so on, may lead to failure to go forward.
I agree with your suggestion that MorphOS or AmigaOS being released for the MacMini will provide a "big chance to attack the huge potential user base". Whether this path is taken, I am sure we will see.
I also agree that forums are a good place to market new Amiga items to Amiga enthusiasts - it is cost effective, and you are marketing directly to an already established user base. Currently, this seems to be the main marketing avenue by Hyperion and ACube, and also supporting companies such as AmigaKit and Vesalia. But if the Amiga is to grow, there will be a point where different methods of marketing will probably need to be used so that growth doesn't stagnate.
It will be interesting to see the next move by Hyperion and ACube is, and at what point this is done.
-
EyeAm/DiskDoctor, Linux work may be to ruin data. But I run FreeBSD and it has never ruined data for me ;), and is quite trimmed for being unix.
AmigaOS still wins the compact code contest ;) There's one advantage too with AmigaOS exokernel model. You can access low-level hardware directly for a real speed boost. MMU can eat 3x speed.
Karlos, I wouldn't trust Mac OS X with any central filesystem. Mac is a desktop machine and probably excel at that, not as a server.
Also there's an security integrity advantage to separate central filesystem service and desktop and multimedia use onto different machines. In essence bad code have less chance blow things up.
Karlos, Nasty thought.. maybe one could design a "kernel sandbox" for 3vil NVidia/ATI drivers? ;), ie fake that they are in kernel land when they are infact not :-D
On the feature of AmigaOS. One modern application for AmigaOS can be to run heavilty trimmed portables. To kick Asus eee but ;) 4 MB RAM demand rather than 512 MB to start with.
stefcep2, Rarely had that problem on FreeBSD. Other than having to watch install text for 30 different dependencies etc.
-
The main reason Amiga's don't sell because of their outrageously high prices, their lack of real world software and the lack of an niche apps. An OS is a program loader, people want to exchange songs with their iPod, update the schedule and contacts on their phone, open the .docx they were sent from work or friends. The can't edit their personal videos or photos.
No amount of advertising will overcome these problems...
-
@Astral
As you can see clearly now, there are many opinions available and a topic like this will always go way off on many tangents.
---
redfox
-
{ snip ... }
-
@ Karlos
Well I highly exaggerated on the first point. That was a part of the sentence yielding Mac userbase is pretty good for AmigaOS introduction. Being disputing this ambiguous and pretty casual sentence, it ended up with quarrel. I also said if someone uses Linux and loses data, in 99% it's his/her fault. To conclude - Linux is good for expert users, programmers mostly, been unlike Win users or even Mac users. It's not much reachable Desktop system so I do not consider it a Desktop system. Same argument like Win Server 2003 might serve as desktop but it's against its purpose. Sorry for my language but I'm anxious on twisting my statements, especially those pretty casual and off the merit. The only reason I quoted Linux is because many people did it here already.
I generally agree with all you said (now clearly enough and conscienciously) and try to stay more cool hereafter.
@ Astral
Just to go beyond Mac forums posting. I am an advocate to sacrifice several licenses in some big fish forums - e.g. for the most comprehensive review (MOS or AOS for Mini, I keep talking about Minis).
@ persia
This is not anymore since this expensive Sam dongle is no longer needed for Minis. Also the system's price might drop which is really a key turning point here as they say.
There's more. System's distribution throughout Apple downloads only (if this is legally possible to put it out there, unfortunately I don't think so). No? Well Hyperion or MOS devs should make some free Amiga demo / presentation with some usable features for macs (on top of E-UAE I suppose). And then go for Apple/downloads with it. More. Some alliance with some popular Apple software vendor is needed to sell a packet. Also some printed magazines maybe, i.e. limited-time demo CD (a demo OS is a must, again).
And so on. Forums is just a cliche, not so difficult to expand, also economically.
-
@DiskDoctor
Well Hyperion or MOS devs should make some free Amiga demo / presentation with some usable features for macs (on top of E-UAE I suppose). ... Also some printed magazines maybe, i.e. limited-time demo CD (a demo OS is a must, again).
MorphOS is a bootable livecd since forever, and it will be the same on Mac Mini (why would you need UAE?) You can install it and test freely, for limited time per session. To continue testing you just need to reboot.
If you feel that MorphOS is worth your money then you can buy license online. The license keyfile will unlock the MorphOS for unlimited use on that particular hardware.
-
freqmax wrote:
Karlos, Nasty thought.. maybe one could design a "kernel sandbox" for 3vil NVidia/ATI drivers? ;), ie fake that they are in kernel land when they are infact not :-D
It's an interesting idea. I strongly suspect that the drivers don't need to be in kernel space - after all most of the open-source one's don't. It would seem more likely that the drivers are ported from windows, where root access may be required to implement a particular feature that might not be supported under linux and tus they inherit this dependency. Of course being closed source there's just no way of knowing.
On the whole, I've not had any major problems with the nvidia drivers (currently using 180.44), but there's no way of knowing how robust they are. Running in kernel space, if they crash, they could bring down the whole OS. How's that for Amiga like? :-D
-
In theory. How well the "dependencies are sorted" depends on the person writing the package. That is not 100% reliable. A 100k dependency ( within a total of 10 MB of dependencies) that wasn't updated when installing a 700k SNES emulator meant that I could no longer boot. So much for "robustness"
Again, this isn't really a criticism of the package manager, though is it?
I could write a bad install script for AmigaOS that could format your hard disk without even asking you. Is that the fault of the installer mechanism?
Most Amiga software installs from commercial software were self contained: you might need a 3rd party library but that was rare. Hell in many cases you just drag the folder onto the hard drive..
This is shifting the goalpost. Now you are comparing commercial and free software, not the mechanism of installation.
-
quarkx wrote:
Open source improves code stability because there are more people involved who are able to track down and fix bugs.
It also invites a lot of half baked code that causes more problems than what its worth. Any "Nut" can add code whether it works or not. There are no strict guidelines to go by, no quality control.
-But I am off topic.
Just my 2 cents
You clearly have no idea about how open source projects are commonly organised. Access to the source repository is limited to those who have earned a certain level of respect/trust. That trust is often earned by submitting patches, which would be reviewed before being implemented. Often case there are coding style guidelines too to keep the code readable.
stefcep2 wrote:
Its ridiculous that a 700k emulator needs an additional 10 MB of additional Operating system dependencies-written by various authors, at various times, just to work!!! 10x more code in the dependencies than in the actual program: OFCOURSE there is a high probability of soemthing going wrong. Most Amiga software installs from commercial software were self contained: you might need a 3rd party library but that was rare. Hell in many cases you just drag the folder onto the hard drive..
Actually what you're talking about is one of the strengths of Linux, the libraries/dependancies are shared so HDD space is saved and work doesn't need to be duplicated as much. Libraries are a good thing, just because your emulator author chose to use them rather than bloat their own code doesn't make them bad.
-
Piru wrote:
@DiskDoctor
Well Hyperion or MOS devs should make some free Amiga demo / presentation with some usable features for macs (on top of E-UAE I suppose). ... Also some printed magazines maybe, i.e. limited-time demo CD (a demo OS is a must, again).
MorphOS is a bootable livecd since forever, and it will be the same on Mac Mini (why would you need UAE?) You can install it and test freely, for limited time per session. To continue testing you just need to reboot.
If you feel that MorphOS is worth your money then you can buy license online. The license keyfile will unlock the MorphOS for unlimited use on that particular hardware.
I know. And what I was referring to in my broader expression was:
System's distribution throughout Apple downloads only (if this is legally possible to put it out there, unfortunately I don't think so). No? Well Hyperion or MOS devs should make some free Amiga demo / presentation with some usable features for macs (on top of E-UAE I suppose). And then go for Apple/downloads with it. More. Some alliance with some popular Apple software vendor is needed to sell a packet. Also some printed magazines maybe, i.e. limited-time demo CD (a demo OS is a must, again).
So when I said E-UAE distribution, sort of, I meant to unlock the Apple/downloads channel. When I said demo CD, I wasn't considering MorphOS only.
-
EyeAm wrote:
I can't say I'm surprised people don't know about those--I barely know of them, myself (like, where to get one, etc.). I understand enough that not one of those things mentioned is a full-fledged computer, but instead is either a motherboard or a card that goes into some slot; and that all are 'classic' (if that) in nature, and not a piece of it with a CPU that is AMD or Intel.
As far as steps to be taken, including advertising, etc., I won't offer any until I see on the Amiga Inc. website a press release that "Amiga will now be put on x86-64 CPUs" and run on CPUs by AMD and Intel. Til then, what's the point? (beyond this, I have extremely hostile words) :-D
Why do you want to go for the SECOND most popular 32-bit processor group? I say, go ARM, the single most popular CPU family on the planet (over 10 billion so far). I'll always prefer MIPS, but got to face the world as it is now. x86 is a monopoly, and unless your initials are MSFT or you have millions of man-hours to dedicate to OS development, you don't have access to the party. ARM has dozens of chip vendors, dozens of OS's, lots of options, lot more flexibility. Most importantly, opens up the future on our own terms, not those of Mighty Redmond.