Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: tekmage on May 22, 2003, 07:57:52 PM
-
Like many others I was interested in the idea of Amiga DE, a reported true write once run all environment. Technologies like C and Java had been around but each had their own challenges to being a successful true cross platform language.
Editors note: The opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily express the opinions of Amiga.org or it's staff members..
Everyone knows C is one of the most popular and most power programming languages around, and if it had not left so much up to the OS vendors to fill in might have achieved the goal of running virtually unchanged code just recompiled for the target. Reality is, so much is platform dependant the efforts to make cross compiling apps work is in the OS platform them selves, the GNU world has been good about providing a common set of libraries and tools to allow a wide degree of portability across unix and fringe systems. The amiga is a fringe system in this case, see geek gadgets.
The problems with Java seam to have been mostly growing pains and sloppy application coding. I’ve seen some Java apps that rock and some that are bloated memory sucking productivity killers. The idea is great and platforms like J2ME really show off it’s ability. But there is a hole, Java was designed to provide a generic computing environment in a virtual machine, all things to all people. In this it has seam to failed. There is a need for a strong platform geared toward extreme portability and “Multimedia” applications (read games).
Enter Mophun (http://www.mophun.com/), err I meant AppForge (http://www.appforge.com), err I really meant AACE (http://www.amiga.com). So what the hell am I talking about? Both AppForge and Mophun provide developers with IDE’s that create content which runs on their “players”. Port the player to a new platform and the content (read games) will magically run. Currently AppForge supports Pocket PC, Palm and Symbian UIQ (Sony Ericsson (SE) P800 for now), mophun supports several SE models including Symbian based phones and Nokia Symbian phones. What’s Symbian? It’s an operating system born from Psion’s Epoc OS designed to run on devices like phones and PDA’s (http://www.symbian.com). In comparison the Amiga AACE is available for Windows, Linux and Pocket PC (In the form of “game cards” which may or may not allow other content to be played, don’t know cause no one is talking about these “game cards”). Looking at the AppForge page they have some 60 titles from home finance to Golf scorecard keepers. The Mophun people promote what looks like 30 titles on their site. Amiga has about 25 titles on their site. Both AppForge and Mophun have announced supporting new platforms in the last 3 months. In the last 3 months Amiga We’ve seen a news letter, an apology, message about AmiWest, and two articles, no new content, no updates (for over a year), no new platforms.
If Amiga plans to do anything with Amiga DE or AACE in providing leading content to the mobile market they better step up and start generating some noise. The time is perfect to release for Symbian, over two million units sold in 3 quarters and that number is going no where but up. Get off your ass Amiga Inc and do something! Oh I forgot, they are already standing since their chairs are being sold.
Bill “tekmage” Borsari
PS I’ll buy OS 4 and the Amiga One when they are available together, I will continue to support Amiga by purchasing whatever they produce. I’m still very loyal to the Amiga, just frustrated by Amiga Inc.
-
I’m still very loyal to the Amiga, just frustrated by Amiga Inc.
You're not the only one.
-
I couldn't agree more.
C- is very fast, relatively easy to learn, but relies heavy on the OS, but has the best proven track record and is stable.
Java - Much easier to learn, but heavy overhead, slow as hell, and I don't see the mass of applications using it yet.
Amiga DE - Major major distraction for Amiga that WILL go down in the history books as the major single source of failure for the currnet Amiga name holders.
I'm not part of the "told you so" crowd, but more the, "what the hell are you wasting time and money on?" crowd.
The DE represented a unique idea, but I never saw the point to the essence of Amiga.
Amiga for me is neither hardware or software. For me Amiga represents an "EXPERIENCE". The ultimate user experience regardless of whether you are a developer, casual user, or hardcore gamer, where the hardware was simple to upgrade and use, and where the OS was responsive, intuitive, powerful, yet easy to learn. Together the hardware and software seemlessly integrated to provide the ultimate, most configurable, and unique user experience possible.
What exactly about the DE represents the experience or essence?
-Alex
-
I don't think I've heard enough 'real' information to know whether AmigaDE was poorly executed or not, from the start it just seems to have been a cloud of vapour with a few buzzwords lurking inside.
-
I would disagree with you Alix...
but only about it being a "unique" idea.
I pointed out that the same business plan that Amiga persued was done
before, and by companies with tens of millions to burn on R&D costs
alone.
Don't forget the Ada companies from the 80's that promiced "this
technology will reshape the world." or the companies that hit upon
Java with the gusto of a grade school musical play. They all forgot
one fundimental problem:
TECHNOLOGY DOES NOT MAKE A COMPANY.
A business needs business-ideas and business-applications to survive.
These are transparent to whatever technology you use to win your
market share. Amiga came along with Tao's technology and went "we
wave the magic wand and poof, market will be created." So, when it
didn't... they failed.
The "service-oriented" business that they tried to model themselves on
is the TOUGHEST one out there, as any restauranteer could tell you.
The easiest businesses are the ones with physical product, the
producers and manufacturers, as there is always something physical to
see.
THey took the hardest approach to business, and trusted to the tornado
to make them succeed.
-
I think Amiga Anywhere is an integral part of Amiga Inc. strategy to revive the Amiga platform.
The single biggest thing that stops people from changing platform and\or OS's is that thier applications are likely not to be able to run.
With AA replacement applications could be written for AA so they can run on these systems and allow a change over to the AmigaOne much easier.When the time comes, they can use that same software on the A1.
When AA and OS4 integrate, AA aplications are supposed to run natively, which should in turn boost performance.
If it was not for a string of companies pulling out of contracts with AA under mysterious circumstances, we would be seeing AA on 5 different devices already.I just hope the future track record will be far better than the past.
-
@Ion
> AA aplications are supposed to run natively
Trying to be impartial as I can, (AA/DE has never held any real interest for me outside of the abstract concept) the problem is that there are NO AA programs of note which will drive any desire to migrate to another platform, Amiga or otherwise. It is not my desire to slam or upset those of you who've written really cool AA applications such as the crossword puzzle or scroller, but there is no killer application for AA as of yet.
Considering Amiga Inc's licensing scheme and demands, there is also no impetus on any major development company to create platform applications specifically for AA, as opposed to the other companies and efforts mentioned in Tekmage's article.
-
Good article, poor technical accuracy. (Not that I did particularly better in the SCO lawsuit thread, though we all know it's *going* to be a copyright case whether they directly claim or not.)
C is tough to discuss. If C had been as 'featured' as Pascal, something else would probably have come along to fit the C niche and 'ruin everything.' Maybe we wouldn't be writing business software in it, and maybe the replacement would've forgone certain bogosities of the standard library (for others), but it'd still be out there as a hacker toy. 'Worse is better' (http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html) - specifically, "Unix and C are the ultimate computer viruses." - makes more sense the longer you plod along in UNIXland. Not that it's better for the *user,* but that it's proved a very competetive 'organism.' (Please, no Creationist debates- and yes, our favorite platform was certainly the product of some Weird Science. Nobody ever said Galatea could outcompete the cockroach*, though there's no reason there can't be non-aggressive symbiosis.)
AppForge uses compiled language dependent on a set of libs so fat (http://support.appforge.com/cgi-bin/AFRightNow.cfg/php.exe/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=544) that they've started to look like a VM without being one. Application binaries are still platform-specific, but the API (via the 'Booster') is the same across platforms, allowing developers/distributors to conduct automated builds off a single source tree (same difference if you're a commercial house; bad news if you're a consumer with a SH/MIPS PocketPC and a vendor's saved time only building for XScale). The distribution model for the 'Booster' seems like the most obfuscated way to "sell" software I've seen in a while, so they're probably shooting themselves in the foot with that, but it looks like they care mostly about corporates.
Mophun, on the other hand, does seem to use a VM as part of their solution (http://mophun.com/main_developers.php). They're gaming-specific- meaning it doesn't look like they're *trying* to tackle some of the things AInc. have- but it also seems they're more limited by their own business model- very similar to the "tools *and* distribution" model AInc. have followed, but with guaranteed customers in the form of their network/phone partners- than technically. Looks like you'd have to download their kit to get any real documentation on the architecture.
Seems like Mophun and the various Java/BREW gaming engines are competition to what the 'DE' *is* (has been left at?), while Java's and AppForge's APIs are what it aspires to beat (or embrace). Each of the implementations stated is limited in its own ways, and DE has always had the potential to win on deployability (no rebuilds, as with AppForge; no reliance on your mobile provider to offer the downloads, if the Player/"Digital Environment" road stays travelled- of course, I'm sure Mophun would sell you a license to distribute a standalone app with their 'emulator' if you were crazy enough and their contracts allow it), and extensibility- you could always port the AppForge Booster and Mophun player *onto* DE, if only it actually existed [as a user-hackable system, a-la PocketCosmo], and anyone could be made to care.
I'll keep holding my breath until OS4 launches or a company (conclusively ;-)) dies trying.
Edit: @Wayne- Certainly can't argue with the second paragraph; either they're having better luck behind the scenes than they let on, or they're fighting over the last 3 hours of free AOL.
---
*Or the ant, if you'd rather ascribe that position to Microsoft.
-
Apart from microsoft who else is using amiga anywhere, can any one say they have seen this on the o2 pda phone thing that they said it would be on and sold in dixons. ?The tech tv video of bill demonstrating amiga anywhere between diffrent machines was interesting just a shame there a bit late what with java and rebol also allowin cross platform software compatability.As wayne said there are no killer aplications or games to make you cosider it. :-o
-
Well, this "article" is so bad, I'm not sure were to start.
1) It basically states that Java has failed, yet we see PDA/phone manufacturers lining up to support it, and developers seeing it as a blessing for portable and easy development, specially on embedded devices. Also "I’ve seen some Java apps that rock and some that are bloated memory sucking productivity killers" seems to be a rather generic phrase, were one can replace the "Java" word by just about any platform out there and it will still hold true...
2) The 3 environments are presented as if they were the same thing under a different name. They have the same concept, yes - it's called competition. But each surely have pros and cons against each other (which are not presented in the article)
3) The last paragraph is so ridiculous it doesn't deserve any comment.
In the end, this "article" is obviously written with the sole purpose of attacking Amiga Inc. and there is no evident research behind it.
Still, in my opinion, it is true that the intent platform has a great potential that is being misused by Amiga and Tao themselves and the original idea of replacing the classic OS by the DE still would be the way to go if the platform is to attract the average "Joe" into the platform, but that's probably not the plan anymore.
-
I’ll buy OS 4 and the Amiga One when they are available together, I will continue to support Amiga by purchasing whatever they produce. I’m still very loyal to the Amiga, just frustrated by Amiga Inc.
see as how i did post and give Bill the proof that AmgiaOne is my trademark name I know you will be waiting a long time.
ther is no reason to sue as ther will be no money after Bill buck, and the other companies including microsoft ,yep thats right microsoft,get thru suing them. Oh by the way both of the things suck one a dos shell on top of a shell the other a older pc dam sucks . :-D :-D
-
I have to agree with other saying this is a bad "article". Commentary is probably more like it.
Secondly, I have to point out that the C language virtually died when software/hardware layers became standard in OS's. There's simply no reason left for using C to create applications. Unfortunately there are no viable options to the
aging C language yet.
And don't try to tell anyone that C is fast. To reach real-time performance the name of the game is assembler. That never changes. All highlevel
languages relys on it.
Tao's intent got cutting edge technology available today. But it's no OS; just bare bones
kernel. AOS got most stuff except cutting edge
kernel technology. It makes good sense to merge
them.
But apart from that, I just see problems pile up.
It's not practical (and probably impossible) to
license Tao's stuff from now until forever. Amiga
Inc will have to point out exactly what role Tao
will have in the future, if any, in order to make
the Amiga community believe in a future beyond
AOS 4.X.
In any case, making future AOS stand and fall
with Tao's kernel support will be a fatal
mistake.
-
edited by (me) ... a bit to harsh :-D
-
And don't try to tell anyone that C is fast. To reach real-time performance the name of the game is assembler. That never changes. All highlevel
languages relys on it.
I can't imagine programming anything in assembler, anymore, except for minor optimizations. It takes too long, and assembler on newer CPUs is more complicated. A lot of amateur programmers get chewed out pretty quick for making their code too slick. Group projects in assembler sounds like a nightmare to me.
I don't understand why people insist on using one universal language. Write your scripts in Perl, your network framework in Java, your apps in C, and your optimizations in assembler. What's with the "C/C++ sux" arguments? You use what works.
Why can't C handle realtime performance? Or by "realtime", do you actually mean, "as screaming fast as possible"? Realtime work just means the code can run continuously without missing input. You certainly don't need assembler for that, just good multitasking.
It's not practical (and probably impossible) to
license Tao's stuff from now until forever.
How many people here believe that Tao owns a big piece of Amiga Inc.? I don't know what to believe, anymore, but Mr. Bill sure doesn't hold the deed.
In fact, how many people believe that the core of any OS or major application is under 100% ownership of the developers? Even Microsoft licenses (not just buys) 3rd party tools to make up major parts of their OS. You can't do everything yourself these days. Relying on 3rd party tools is a fact of life.
In business, all that matters is that you make money, and your customers have a damn good reason to give it to you. Oh yeah, and you're not stupid enough to sign the dotted line without reading the fine print. ;-)
-
Realtime work just means the code can run continuously without missing input.
Well.. actually realtime means you'll get a response within an absolutely guarantied amount of time. That time could just as well be half a day. So theoretically realtime doesn't even have to be fast.
And I think it's sad to see an article appear which is so flawed it's obvious the writer only wants to take a stab at Amiga Inc.
Amiga-Anywhere is running on multiple devices. Several PDA's and some phones already. There are some games out there which are a lot of fun to play and more are coming.
There is indeed no killer-app, but that was not really the idea behind it. We don't need to attract people to another platform, we want people to be able to play content on whatever platform they would like. The fact that Amiga-Anywhere is running underneath shouldn't even be noticable in the end.
Regards,
Onno
-
I can't imagine programming anything in assembler, anymore, except for minor optimizations. It takes too long,[...]
While I would normally agree with you, I think the situation for VP-assembly is a bit different. This is a macro-assembler with a lot of macro's provided by intent already. Those macro's allow for things like for-next loops, if-then-else, using 'normal' math (like (1+4)*5) instead of having to do it with add's and mulu's (which you _can_ still do btw). On top of that it supports oo-programming. So in the end it is a lot like C++ programming. Sure when you get started it takes you a while to build up a library of reusable objects, but that's true for any new oo-language.
Regards,
Onno
-
.and if it had not left so much up to the OS vendors to fill in might have achieved the goal of running virtually unchanged code just recompiled for the target.
That was never the goal of C. The goal of ANSI-C perhaps but then "virtually unchanged" would have been a totally unrealistic target. Why do you think POSIX stepped up to the fore and all these new abstractions libraries ( e.g. SDL )?
You can't use it as a mallet to beat the OS vendors around with. Sure, there were different parlances of C in the early days but ANSI C "solved" that.
I don't see what the rest of the problem you see with OS vendors is. They write different OSes, spice is the variety of life, just like you have different APIs between two otherwise similar products you have different APIs and SPIs into operating systems. Some operating systems even behave differently. The power of programming is, that the language gives you the power to write the logic, and the API gives you the power to use that logic to drive a particular environment.
I get concerned when I see the "write once, run everywhere" speeches come out because what you end up with is code that is totally innapropriate for its target and plays to environment weaknesses and not strengths more often than not.
PS, a clue for you about Java. Not all applications are front end user interfaces. Java is big time in the commercial data/transaction/middleware/application arena. just because you don't see JavaBustAMove22 doesn't make Java unpopular.
PPS your last sentence before your name ruins an otherwise OK article. I realise that you are beating the blue drum around here since ages ( despite your PS disclaimer - Ill believe it when I see the reciepts in my hand ) but if you are going to highlight negative aspects of the Amiga Inc product line you are going to need to be a tadge more subtle than that to not have peoples reading of your article tinged with a bit of cynicism.
If this was say Mike Bouma and he had put that in at the
bottom expect those praising you in here to be slamming you.
Strange how life works eh?
:-D
-
THEONE wrote:
I’ll buy OS 4 and the Amiga One when they are available together, I will continue to support Amiga by purchasing whatever they produce. I’m still very loyal to the Amiga, just frustrated by Amiga Inc.
I disagree with, but can understand your position. As far as OS4 on AmigaOne goes, I recommend you direct any frustrations elsewhere however as Amiga Inc would release it tomorrow if they could. The fact is that is not complete yet, and it's not Amiga Inc that's sitting at the keyboards coding.
Myself, I've got my AmigaOne and am happy to use Linux on it until the release of OS4. Patience is a virtue.
see as how i did post and give Bill the proof that AmgiaOne is my trademark name I know you will be waiting a long time.
Say what? I guess I missed that... When and where did you trademark the name "AmigaOne" and can you point me to a web reference that proves this?
ther is no reason to sue as ther will be no money after Bill buck, and the other companies including microsoft ,yep thats right microsoft,get thru suing them.
And why are Microsoft going to sue them? Please try and back up statements with fact, or at the very least, a bit of logical reasoning rather than straight out statements that make no sense.
Oh by the way both of the things suck one a dos shell on top of a shell the other a older pc dam sucks .
And here you've completely lost me... "both of the things"? What things? I can't fit anything from this thread into the descriptions you've given.
Regards,
Ben de Waal.
-
@People slagging off AmigaDE
Have you actually USED AmigaDE or not?
Ian
-
Waccoon: Your post is 100% misenterpretations. You didn't get one thing strait. Take a break will ya.
(edit)
I better straiten things out for you.
I never suggested that anyone should write applications in assembler. What I did wrote was that assembler (implied: optimizations) is a
necessity to get high (read: adequate) performance out of virtually any highlevel
language. That applies to games and demos, aswell
as kernels and applications. X86 and PPC.
Especially if we talk C language.
About realtime performance. You got more of a point than you know. To time something so it occurs exactly five seconds later you need high performance to not miss the event alltogether. C is lousy for that, unless it relys on an assembler written/optimized timing routine. But that's just one example. C does not bring performance by any defenition.
I never wrote that Tao owns Amiga. Nor anything like it. Btw, can you imagine Microsoft licensing the kernel from third party..? Nor do I, and that was my concern. Such a thing would simply be irresponsible, unless we're talking non-closed source like Linux (as in kernel), which isn't the case here. And that's about the only thing I 've got against AmigaDE.
(/edit)
-
The concept of the DE is an incredibly compelling one - and I'm not even a programmer. From a purely business standpoint (for developers), it could be the motherlode. COULD be. It has a ways to go. As Redrumloa so accurately pointed out, Amiga needs to do something with it. I can't imagine going to a developer and telling them that they could code one time and not have to worry about porting and not get at least initial interest. Their code will run everywhere. This was the promise of Java, but due to some technical issues and a not insignicant, intentional road block from Microsoft, it has never been allowed to achieve its lofty goals.
As to what this really has to do with the Amiga (the real Amiga) on the surface, not much. By itself, almost nothing. HOWEVER - If AI plays this right (and I'm by no means confident that they can do this the way it needs to be done, but I'm still willing to give them a chance (ain't I generous)), it could mean the true reemergence of our beloved platform and in the process, force Microsoft into the unenviable position that they so ruthlessly put IBM in in the 80's. You may be scratching your head, but bare with me.
If AI is able to convince some of the bigger players to code to the DE (they could hang the Windows/Mac/Linux compatibility carrot coupled with less workforce in front of them - again, it'll take some doing), over time, they could have quite a library of mainstream apps running on the DE. Doesn't do our Amiga much good now. On the other hand, when OS5 rolls out with the DE integrated, all of a sudden all of those apps that the other "platforms" have been enjoying are instantly Amiga compatible. I put platform in quotes in that last sentence for a good reason. If this comes off like it could, the current concept of a platform will be rendered moot. When Microsoft licensed DOS to Compaq in the 80's, they instantly rendered the x86 architecture a commodity. It no longer mattered where you got your hardware, it would run DOS (and later Windows). IBM went from sitting on a monopoly in the x86 market to being just another x86 vendor among many. If this goes like it could, it will no longer matter what OS you're running, the real important thing - the applications - will finally take center stage. Microsoft will simply be another OS vendor among many. Windows - all OSes - will have become commoditized. This can only be a good thing for Linux, Apple, Amiga, and the consumer. The factors taken into account when deciding on an Operating System will now be how does the OS fit the way you compute. Whatever you feel comfortable with, you know that your favorite applications will run there. Given this scenario, I become aware of two things. First, playing ball with Microsoft could end up being a very dangerous choice (like it's not usually). If and when things start to fall into place, with Amiga being so close to MS, the boys in Redmond will have early warnings that their obscene business model is in jeopardy. AI should tread VERY carefully around the MS collective. Second, the company that AI should be leaning on the hardest to push their agenda is... IBM. IBM would like nothing more than to return the favor that Microsoft inflicted on them. They would have to do so very quietly, again, to avoid tipping off Redmond. Getting DB2 and Notes running on the DE would be a major coup. Another aspect that should be appealing to IBM is that the success of the DE could enhance sales of AIX. Again, it's the applications, stupid.
So, while the DE doesn't look like much more than a wasteful diversion at the moment, if one is able to look farther down the line and at a big enough picture, the DE could very well be an absolute godsend to our favorite platform and to the computing world in general.
-----------------------------------------
Quick note on the Windows Kernel thing. Isn't the Kernel in NT/2K/XP actually based on the MACH Kernel?
-
As some people think C is the only real language for programming I'd like to point out a few things.
Ansi C was outaged a very long time ago. It get's very evident when looking at it's (lack of) support. It's suitable for command line stuff and crude graphics. Apart from that, you need to add to the language by using custom functions. 99.9% of what we see in modern OS's is unsupported. Try porting something from one OS to another and you'll have the same situation that assembler programmers was in in the early days, forcing the creation of the C language in the first place.
Object orientation (C++) was slapped onto C in a way that is simply outrageus. The syntax looks like it was made by a hacker as a pre-alpha for his own personal use, three in the morning still going strong after 24 strait hours of coding. It's simply an unbelievably crappy implementation by any meashure.
There are no viable alternatives yet, but it's important to know that C/C++ has no real future
and lives on borrowed time.
-
C- is very fast, relatively easy to learn, but relies heavy on the OS, but has the best proven track record and is stable.
... and applications developed using it are prone to bugs simply because of the language, compared to Java.
Java - Much easier to learn, but heavy overhead, slow as hell, and I don't see the mass of applications using it yet.
Yet another person basing their opinion of Java on some old early release of the language, or the Microsoft JVM. Current Java releases from Sun, IBM, etc, are pretty damned fast compared to the older releases, and compare well to C++, especially when the extra stuff that the JVM is doing like garbage collection, etc is taken into consideration.
Problems with Java are Swing - the interface to bring nightmares to people, and some other old classes such as the old I/O system, etc.
Many of the latest cell phones run J2ME, which of course will not have problems with Swing as that isn't part of J2ME :) This means a steady supply of games and other applications, because Java is simple.
----
Now regarding AmigaDE / Amiga Anywhere - I agree with the story - there is nothing happening on the platform as far as outsiders can see. IT LOOKS DEAD. It is an odd platform that requires NDAs and stuff to be signed to develop for, - that really is going to make the platform popular ... NOT. Amiga Inc need to put a lot more effort into publicising this product, and getting more applications and games developed.
-
The problem here -- and I cannot believe that I of all people are defending Amiga Inc on this one -- is yet another mistake in the core business plan of Amiga Inc. They bit off on, and based their entire plan around Tao's Intent product being able to be adapted to meet Amiga Inc's needs.
The problem is, as Bill McEwen admitted to me about a year ago (the last time we spoke), Tao's Intent was "not nearly anything resembling the level of completeness or usability that Tao had presented to us in the beginning". So in essence, Amiga Inc irrevokably backed the wrong product and doesn't have any alternatives at this point but to write what they can -- with no money -- to complete the Tao product to match their needs.
Somewhere along the lines, and this is pure speculation on my part, I'm thinking a rift most likely occurred between Amiga Inc and Tao. Probably at the point where AI's money ran out. This might account for why Tao currently has a finished product which is shipping on a few devices while Amiga DE/AA has (for all intents and real purposes) not seen the light of day except as a game pack.
-
@JetRacer
I must congratulate you for writing the biggest pile of #?@$ I've read in a long time.
Your points have everything to do with the custom and proprietary subsystems that have been the norm on most platforms, and absolutely nothing to do with the language employed to access them.
@all
AmigaDE is dead. It looks dead. It smells dead. It's a Norwegian Blue.
This is not to say the original concept was a bad one - it wasn't - or that TAO's intent is dead - it isn't.
Disclaimer: Yes, I realise there will be people saying "how would you know? You haven't seen the confidential info regarding development", and this is true. Then again, those who do have access have signed NDAs which prevent them saying how little is actually happening. Does anyone really believe that AmigaDE development is continuing at a reasonable pace, or that you can fund and resource development on fresh air?
-
@Wayne
Actually, it was very clear early on that Amiga Inc. were making completely differing claims with regard to TAO's product than TAO themselves were. I remember Francis Charig having to intervene quite early in the story to basically correct the Amiga Inc. claim that they would support 'feature X'[1] by basically saying "we don't support 'feature X' and have no plans to do so in the future".
I think it's quite clear that Bill's claim that TAO somehow misled them is a smokescreen for the fact that Amiga Inc. only understood half of what they were told, so they went ahead and made the other half up themselves. The "rift" with TAO probably started right there, long before AI ran out of funds.
[1] - 'feature X' was memory protection IIRC
-
@samdu
That's the arguement given for every time someone comes up with a
"write once, run everywhere" idea. The thing hasn't flown in the 30+
years of people pushing for it.
As for Windows NT/2k/XP kernel, it's actually based on OS/2's kernel.
If I recall, there was an article that showed an almost 80%
compatability between NT 3.1's kernel and OS/2's 2.5 kernel.
-
Hey Wayne, seen Tao's latest partner?
Midway games
Tao's Intent is at the core of Defender 2003.
-
@bhoggett
I personally considder intent to be a platform just like I considder a PC and an Amiga or Mac to be a platform.
Each of these platforms don't support memory protection, but some OS's on some of these platforms _do_ support memory protection.
Tao doesn't HAVE to support memory protection for it to become a reality. Amiga Inc. could still build their own OS on top of this virtual machine, which does support memory protection. Not that I think they are... but they COULD :)
@Wayne
This might account for why Tao currently has a finished product which is shipping on a few devices while Amiga DE/AA has (for all intents and real purposes) not seen the light of day except as a game pack.
Well.. AA going to be available on most M$-devices, which account for a LOT of devices. If you look at this (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnsmtphn/html/smartphonegames.asp) page you might notice Amiga-Anywhere being named as a game-engine for smartphone.
Regards,
Onno
-
Mercy !!! Now Java is a failure ????
Java has been one of the success stories in history of modern computing together with Linux.
-
@bhoggett
I agree with you about Bill's confusion with Tao,
but I believe this was because Amiga was already
desperate for funds. At AmiWest 2000 Bill told us
that they paid 1.5-2.0 million more than they had
anticipated because of an unexpected bidding war
with the now defunct Dan? of the Boxer fiasco.
Bill with his unbridled enthusiasm made assumptions
about Intent that weren't warranted. Additioally
almost all of his efforts had to go into finding
additional capital.
This in no way absolves Bill of responsibilty for
Amiga's problems, but seen in this light, one might
be a little less harsh in his judgement of the
situation. Panic is a mistake creating environment.
I have actually been amazed at Amiga's ability to
survive this long considering the difficulty of
the situation. It is a testament to the community,
Bill's drive to survive, Eyetech, Hyperion and many
other unnamed people.
I personally am loking forward to the release of
OS4, and I do hope that problems with the DE can be
resolved. It still could be a hell of a way to go.
But then again only TimeWillTell
-
Maybe AI should have concentrated on OS4.
That way they would have had a real product much sooner.
Instead they went for a business plan that needed a
5+ year gestation period.
So, will AI only survive if DE is a success ?
Or do AI get money from Hyperion for OS4 licences;
if Hyperion wait a bit longer AI will disappear and Hyperion
will be in the position of doing what they want with AmigaOS, at the risk of weakening their user base.
Rather than suggesting Hyperion are/would deliberately starve AI of OS4 licence fees, I'm wondering if Hyperion has a contractual agreement to start shipping OS4 by a
certain date ? And what is that date if so.
koan
-
gorsh,
I am almost tired of speculating on Amiga...
whenever I do anything in this market, I get confused.
Like I wanted to get OS 3.9 to evaluate ReAction for a project I am toying with.
Only to find out, OS 3.9 doesn't come with Amiga Forever, and on Cloanto's website, they say they cannot get a license to include 3.9 since it
would add too much to the cost.
Well, the amizilla team speculates that at least
this will help Amiga, Inc. by driving up sales of
3.9....
and then someone says, well Amiga, Inc. never
got a dime from 3.9 sales.
WTF...who knows how to help these people.
if H&P never paid them a dime, then why not
license it, (*if for nothing else, for ONE DIME*)
to Cloanto, and get wider distribution of 3.9
heck if Reaction is the way to go, how about
getting part of the market using reaction....
of course, who knows what the truth is about
their licensing schemes...but that is exactly
the point...no one can help these people,
even if they really wanted too.....
-
@Ohno
Tao doesn't HAVE to support memory protection for it to become a reality. Amiga Inc. could still build their own OS on top of this virtual machine, which does support memory protection. Not that I think they are... but they COULD :)
Well, yes, but we're getting off the beaten track here. At the time we're talking about, there was no suggestion of Amiga Inc. writing their own OS from scratch, only building features on top of TAO's existing and future base. Memory protection was just something they assumed TAO would add.
@TimeWillTell
Panic is a mistake creating environment.
I think you've just summed up Amiga Inc's entire existence from inception to present day.
I have actually been amazed at Amiga's ability to survive...
They've done it by essentially hibernating. The trouble with hibernation is that it's not a productive time (by definition) and yet it still consumes available reserves, albeit at a much reduced rate. Animals that hibernate for too long never wake up. I fear that Amiga Inc. have long since passed into a vegetative state, with recovery highly unlikely.
It's probably kinder to switch off the life support and let them pass away with whatever little dignity they have left.
-
@koan
Maybe AI should have concentrated on OS4.
They couldn't. OS4 was never going to attract any investment, so it was a non-starter as a business proposition.
It still is.
So, will AI only survive if DE is a success ?
It's hard to see any scenario in which AI would survive. Their goose is cooked, I fear.
Or do AI get money from Hyperion for OS4 licences;
Theoretically, they do, but they have probably already collected most of it in advance via the coupon/club/t-shirt silliness. It's unlikely OS4 will ever sell many more copies than the number of coupons bought. In fact, I seriously doubt AI's share per copy of OS4 comes anywhere near $50, but that's just me speculating.
(Apologies to those who read my comment before I edited it. I had spelt "t-shirt" without the 'r'. A freudian slip, I assure you.)
;-)
-
@bhoggett
They couldn't. OS4 was never going to attract any investment, so it was a non-starter as a business proposition.
If Genesi managed to make a go of it then maybe AI could have done or are you suggesting that it's a totally non viable business model and Genesi are on borrowed time too ?
It's unlikely OS4 will ever sell many more copies than the number of coupons bought
There's at least one person who would consider buying OS4 who didn't get a t-shirt (or not as it turned out).
koan
-
It's unlikely OS4 will ever sell many more copies than the number of coupons bought.
I just ordered an A1 yet did not touch the coupon. ;-)
-
@koan
If Genesi managed to make a go of it then maybe AI could have done or are you suggesting that it's a totally non viable business model and Genesi are on borrowed time too ?
That question would require a two-part answer:
(1) My opinion: both AOS4 and MOS face bleak futures as self-financing projects. If Genesi were to rely on the sales of MorphOS, I would say their future was likely to be spectacularly short.
(2) AFAIK, Genesi are nowhere near as reliant on VC for their financing. so they don't have to persuade as many people that their business model is a profitable one. I believe they are basing most of their optimism on the STB market, but in my experience that's a volatile and changeable area, where it's equally as easy to get dumped as it is to find potential partners. With STBs, not only is the equipment largely disposable, so is the software base and the partnerships involved.
There's at least one person who would consider buying OS4 who didn't get a t-shirt (or not as it turned out).
Sure, and I know there are a few who bought the coupons but have no interest in OS4. We're talking about a bigger picture than that though.
-
@koan
a)Genesi is run by BB's "private" money.
b) Lot's of people who bought a coupon allready
left for good, and some have bought both ones
(talking about the Party-Pack and "I am Yoda"
coupons here).
Roughly 3000 people.
Yes I think they will sell more than that, but
mostly for the Cyberstorm, and AInc's take on
OS4 on it's own is very small (atleast that is
what B.H. said over a year ago).
Their take on the A1 is everybodies guess, but
I would say they would need to sell atleast
5000 copies for real Amigas (only possible if
and when the BPPC-version appears) and another
5000 A1s (which I don't see to happen), just to
break even on all the collected money. Add handling
and the cost for those t-shirts to it and those
numbers rise even more.
But back to the topic:
The DE is a good, but useless idea, cos noone
wants to let his SW run ony ANY HW without any
controll, and if you do controll the HW it runs
on like it has been done with the gamepack, you
could have just used a (maybe even free) portiblity-
layer like SDL,QT or similar and compile for
every target you want to support.
Restricting an new "plattform" with a SDA is only
a good idea
a)If you got the resources to get
a basic collection from the start (like it has
been done with game-consoles).
b) Got something special about your plattform like
being a "real" RTOS (QNX for example.
c) Allready have a huge installed user-base
(again game-consoles).
AInc hasn't anthing of that, and thats why
there is so little SW really available, and
most of it just medicore games.
-
Ohno wrote:
@bhoggett
I personally considder intent to be a platform just like I considder a PC and an Amiga or Mac to be a platform.
Slight correction if I may. Intent is an OS, Elate is a platform.
AmigaDE mainly coexists and sits on top of intent at this point in time, however elements of it do not and there is no necessity to code for DE using intent if you code in pure VP-ASM (coding in Java, C++ or anything else will run on intent however).
@All slagging off DE
I find it interesting noone has answered AmiMonkey's question - who has actually used it? It seems everyone who detracts it has never used it and those of us who do use it love it. I myself use it on a daily basis on my Dell Axim and would have little interest in my Axim were it not for DE.
Regards,
Ben de Waal
AKA Yttrium Oxide
SDA DE Developer, AmigaOne Owner, strong follower of Amiga Inc - but certainly not blind.
-
@YttriumOx
I find it interesting noone has answered AmiMonkey's question - who has actually used it?
I have two copies of the SDK, one for Windows and one for Linux. I've certainly spent some time 'using' it, but found nothing to get all that excited about. It was the concept that was more interesting than the actual implementation at this stage.
However, I refused to sign either an NDA or an SDA on the principle that I was not informed these were required until after I had parted with my money, and so in consequence I have received neither updates nor support despite being a fully registered user. The result of that is that the two boxes have become doorstops, and the only copy of intent on my system comes from TAO - though I don't have much use for it anyway.
The question should not be how many of use have used it, but what do you use it for? What do you run on it? What does it do better than the alternatives? What real use is it to anyone?
-
Slight correction if I may. Intent is an OS, Elate is a platform.
I stand corrected, you are right.
-
I have two copies of the SDK, one for Windows and one for Linux. I've certainly spent some time 'using' it, but found nothing to get all that excited about. It was the concept that was more interesting than the actual implementation at this stage.
I was like that for a long time as well and I refused to sign an NDA and SDA for quite some time as well (mostly because I was to lazy to fax them over). It wasn't until I signed both the NDA and the SDA _and_ I got involved in an actual project working with VP-coding that I really started to enjoy it and see the beauty of it. Especially the way Tao implemented java into the environment is very smart and powerfull. It is just pretty cool to be able to write high performance java-classes in vp assembly :-D
To be completely honest, I too thought that I had thrown away my money (I ordered a version for Windows and a version for Linux as well). And I do think people who are not under NDA deserve to get a bit more for their money.
Even when I signed an NDA I though there was not much to it at that time, since the actual fun stuff was only accessible to people under SDA.
Everyone is free to choose wether they sign the NDA & SDA. Personally I didn't regret my choice for a second so far. But I can understand people objecting to it and I also think Amiga Inc. could have been much clearer on what their NDA/SDA-demands before people would purchase the SDK.
Regards,
Onno
-
@Ohno
Everyone is free to choose wether they sign the NDA & SDA. Personally I didn't regret my choice for a second so far. But I can understand people objecting to it and I also think Amiga Inc. could have been much clearer on what their NDA/SDA-demands before people would purchase the SDK.
My opinion of AmigaDE is not based on my beef about the NDA/SDA. It's based on my assessment of the situation, bearing in mind the information available to me.
The reason AI weren't clear about the NDA/SDA requirements is simple: they hadn't even formulated them. These were things that were made up as they went along, which is why they have given me at least four different stories about their policy at various times, pretty much all of which turned out to be BS.
However, I've noticed that everyone who says how cool AmigaDE is fails to come up with any real reason why it is cool or why it's better than any alternatives. Since I'm on the outside and will stay that way, I'd be interested to know.
-
However, I've noticed that everyone who says how cool AmigaDE is fails to come up with any real reason why it is cool or why it's better than any alternatives. Since I'm on the outside and will stay that way, I'd be interested to know.
I thought I did tell you before. I like it because I love the technology. The clever way of implementing java in it (I write a lot of java-classes in assembly). I love the fun of it.
I love it for the same reason I love to run Amithlon. I love it for the same reason I'm here at Amiga.org.
Why am I interested in Amiga OS while I get much more functionality with either Windows or Linux? It is a feeling. You either like it or you don't.
Amiga-Anywhere will not be for everyone, just like AmigaOS is not for everyone or Linux is not for everone..
I used to love programming assembly on the commodore 64. I liked C-programming on the Amiga and I hated assembly-programming on X86.
And now I love programming in the AA-environment. Why? I don't know.. sometimes you just like something. Probably a matter of taste.
I'm not trying to convince you to like it and I respect the fact that you DON't like it after trying it. I don't respect people slagging it off without even actually looking at it.
Regards,
Onno
-
I don't know doody about coding. But I do understand the tiered definitions of what real time is. QNX programmers in-house and third-party write code in a variety of languages including c to build real time applications. This requires expertise and an operating system that is designed for real time in the first place.
...There are some fields where non-real time OSes can be used to do jobs where true real time performance/exactitude/guarantees are not strictly needed, and especially responsive light-footprint OSes (such as MorphOS) can compete in those niches. But one thing is for certain: it isn't the language so much as it is the skill, experience, and expertise (and understanding) of the programmer that determines the best way to do this for any given project. That extends to choice of hardware as well.
QNX considered something along the lines of Tao's approach when they were in the pre-design phase of QNX6 (Neutrino) but decided that skilled OEMs etc would be better off with POSIX compliance, memory protection to meet the expanding sophistication that embedded/infopliance/industrial was beginning to demand, and a microkernel and OS services that were tailored especially for various platforms to have the potential to wring the best performance and real time guarantees they could for all of these.
For developers and OEMs this isn't quite write once read anywhere (but it is very close!). I'm convinced QNX made the right decision for its existing customers, and the many more they continue to garner.
<--greenboy---<<<<
coordinator & facilitator-at-large
Phoenix Developer Consortium (http://phinixi.com)
-
Wayne Hunt : The problem is, as Bill McEwen admitted to me about a year ago (the last time we spoke), Tao's Intent was "not nearly anything resembling the level of completeness or usability that Tao had presented to us in the beginning".
Once Amiga Inc (then Amino) screwed the pooch bigtime with public and in-Phoenix botched non-negotation with Dan Dodge of QNX (their intended partner), they then DID NOT DO THEIR HOMEWORK when choosing Tao. Perhaps this choice was forced by hurried desperation.
OK - even at that time any relative newbie like me could go to Tao's website and see almost immediately that Tao product design wasn't going to be able to support heavy server use or multidigitalinterenvironmentaleverywheritis (ironically everybody was oohing and aahing at St Louis Gatway2000 at renderings of donut-shaped servers that the Bold New World would be served up by) - But Tao didn't even have MP! Not only that, there was no good way to design it in, nor was there any intent {;} to ever get MP, as Francis Charig unequivocally pointed out after much BS and waffling and posturing by Amiga Inc, as people pointed this slight overlooked item out on various forums!
Whether Amiga Inc knew all along and was hiding this (those of us in Phoenix surely understood the importance of it), or whether it was another B&F blunder that any newbie user with a little research could figure out in a few hours, this made Tao's product unsuitable for a great majority of the AI-STATED plans of the time.
And as we merrily traipsed along with our leaders of cummunity watching many publicly evident 180-degree changes of gameplan, you might realize that people who were not so infatuated with the potential of Tao were not all that surprised. And Phoenix lost a lot of ground during this time in Amiga circles, and QNX lost a lot of inertia for a desktop (also due to phase5 going under as well), and many Amiga-community developer potential followed the boingless pied piper with the ever-changing tune - who was always willing to tell them whatever it took to get them signed to a ridiculous first-draft license that probably never got within a parsec of a legal consultant and which was a disaster unto itself, and then later replaced in shakey manner with a wall of NDA and SDA.
Well, history makes for strange bedfellows... Microsoft? MICROSOFT??? Hel-LO?!?! The company that everybody in Amiga Inc used to tout as the way NOT to do it, the evil enemy, the highest satan in computing??? Sheesh!
And thus history is NOT written... And so the world may deflate. Because for what was promised, Tao was not suitable. It sucked, and did not blow ; }
-
@bhoggett: I should have put in a few "for application programming" here and there. Sorry 'bout that. What I meant was: application programming with C/C++ has no future. Software/hardware layers was the final blow to a sinking ship.
Kernel/driver, etc. programming is a completely different matter. That's what C/C++ is really good at. Creating services and writing support for new hardware (with some asm sprinkled at the top).
-
We will be announcing the launch of 'intent 2' in June. I can't say too much about it here as this is a public forum so please forgive me and remain patient through the next few weeks.
A few comments....
intent is a software platform targeted at resolving fundamental commercial issues faced by network operators, OEMs, ODMs, applications developers and content creators. We have been building a series of technologies in areas such as AV, Java and various new components and tools that get announced during June. To be able to provide a solution that meets the market's expectations, we have been working on threading them together so that we have a true platform. You'll find that we've been extremely successful in achieving this. The previous ADK and SDKs weren't good enough to enhance our reputation but that should shortly change.
During the last year-and-a-half we have had strong support from the OCPA which ratified the intent core APIs as its standard last year. Membership includes Sega, Konami, Bandai, Capcom, Taito, Qualcomm, TI, Motorola, Intel, Hitachi, Sony, Fujitsu, Pioneer, Epson, Kyocera, JVC, Sharp and Toyota, and so forth. Products on the market or being developed by Philips, Sony, Kyocera and many others supporting devices (DVCs, remote controls, home servers, PVRs, phones, PDAs....) incorporating MIPS, X86, PowerPC, ARM, SH, Embedded Linux, Smartphone, Pocket PC, iTRON, Symbian, VxWorks, the native intent RTOS show the unique breadth of the product as we had promised. We're getting traction from all of the targeted markets of our business.
Comments in the thread about Java support relates to the desktop where memory constraints and other factors make those solutions inappropriate for the kind of devices we are focussed on. In our area, intent is massively outperforming the capabilities of any alternative. Consequently we have been rapidly gaining network operator support.
However, while the Java language is an important part of the platform (I cannot understand comments in this thread that indicate Java has failed or doesn't have momentum), Java cannot be the entire platform because of its many limitations and the ability to transmit to networked devices fun content written in any language including scripting languages is important if we are to talk about truly open platforms.
I don't remember having had a single cross word with Bill McEwen since we began our Amiga relationship. We still see Amiga as an important potential contributor of content and other areas of value-add and we have made introductions of Amiga to various blue chip partners or customers of ours including some in the last few weeks. However, remember that intent has not been developed to be a replacement o/s for the desktop but nor have we ever claimed that it was. We have been entirely consistent in our aims and Tao, and we're making strong progress.
All the best
Francis Charig
-
@Francis Charig
Hi there,
nice of you to drop in here. I can't tell you how much I'm looking forward to intent 2. Keep up the good work.
Regards,
Onno
-
The "Tao Top Dog" enlightened us thus:
We still see Amiga as an important potential contributor of content and other areas of value-add and we have made introductions of Amiga to various blue chip partners or customers of ours including some in the last few weeks.
Thankyou for your continued "faith" in Amiga. Our platform has been through some seriously hard times ...
Hopefully, With the release of Os4 imminent, Some much needed interest will be generated as well as some MUCH needed cash to help speed up DE development.
-
Hi Francis,
I know I`m probably "jumping the gun" here, but when AmigaOS4 is released, will their be an Intent/AmigaDE Player for it?
Best Regards,
Frank. (also called Francis BTW :-)
-
I know I`m probably "jumping the gun" here, but when AmigaOS4 is released, will their be an Intent/AmigaDE Player for it?
No. IIRC the original roadmap included a DE player for OS4.2
-
> Btw, can you imagine Microsoft licensing the kernel from third party?
For win2000 they didn't license it, but hired people from third party ("DEC/Digital" if i remember well) to rewrite completely the former NT kernel.... so it was no "intrernal" work either
-
know I`m probably "jumping the gun" here, but when AmigaOS4 is released, will their be an Intent/AmigaDE Player for it?
What has that got to do with him?
next thing people will be asking him when is AOS4 coming out or some other gem.
-
@bhoggett
I have two copies of the SDK, one for Windows and one for Linux.
If you dont want the windows one i'll buy it off you for a few quid.
-
>However, I've noticed that everyone who says how cool AmigaDE is fails to come up with any real reason why it is cool or why it's better than any alternatives. Since I'm on the outside and will stay that way, I'd be interested to know.
I, personally, didn't enjoy programming like with DE since the C64 times... I'd like to have more time left from my "real" job as a programmer to get back and finish some projects started some time ago with my "party Pack"..
-
@Derf
If you dont want the windows one i'll buy it off you for a few quid.
Do note that that version will be outdated. It was based on intent 1.1 I believe. We're currently working towards intent 1.3, which had a lot of changes. Programs written for the old SDK will probably not even work on 1.4.
If you want to develop for the Amiga-Anyhwere platform try and contact Gary Peake or Fleecy Moss at Amiga Inc. If you sign a NDA you might get access to an up to date release ;-)
Regards,
Onno
-
@Greenboy
I've been on Phoenix since it started to come together long before amino bought Amiga from Gateway. I've been lurking ever since, since my expertise wasn't in OS design, or hardware design, which was the primary topics in the beginning. (I'm sure I'm not the only lurker).
To update your stated history, if I remember correctly, Animo got VC capitol from their associations with Tao. Meaning, from what I understand, that is where they got the money to buy Amiga from Gateway in the first place. Not from Tao itself, but VC partners that Tao was associated with or did introductions to or something of that effect. Tao was probably interested in the idea of "Amiga" developers, and decided to help out. So of course Amino/Amiga Inc. was going to go with Tao. It had nothing to do with "picking" it, it had everything to do with how they got their initial money in the first place. I think they even stated all this publicly online and at shows they visited years back(Amino/Amiga Inc).
And I have a question for you...What happened to phoenix? I know I'm not privey to all the details that went on behind the scenes, which is why I'm asking. Phoenix was all about making a new Amiga-like platform because at the time of formation, Amiga was dead because Gateway was sitting on it doing nothing. Hence the name Phoenix. Most people in Phoenix, including myself, ever wanted was the current OS(3.1-3.9) to be extended to a PPC native OS on a machine that was faster than the 604s(The holy grail of AmigaOS 4.0, wherever that was going to come from. That being QNX as core, Linux as Core, even Tao as core, but what was prefered was the current core of AMIGAOS to be core, but it was said that wasn't possible in the time frame). Phoenix internally choose QNX as that way, partially because of Collas starting the ball rolling that way, and because QNX was interested in helping out (because they wanted to and to expand thier business). When Amino bought the rights to Amiga from Gateway, they had their presence on Phoenix too, and said, hey, how about checking out Tao. Since the group had already been making inroads using QNX (even if only ideas), it wasn't interesting to the members of Phoenix. I can completely understand that, Tao/Intent is no more AmigaOS than QNX was, and people were already playing with QNX, why expend resources in two directions? Unfortunately, during this time, I can only figuire is when all the bad blood happened behind the scenes between certain founders of Phoenix and Amiga, Inc. I can only come to that conclusion, because Phoenix didn't jump on the OS4 bandwagon when it was announced that finally, the old Amiga OS was being extended to PPC officially. That's all most of the developers at Phoenix ever wanted, and it was happening, and instead of embracing it, someone in phoenix decided that there was too much bad blood for them, so they made deals with the opposing side. To hell with what the original purpose of the organization was.
For business reasons, considering the bad blood that happened because Amiga didn't want to go with QNX, I can understand that road may have been closed so the only other way to go was the opposing side. Is that what happened? That is my question.
-
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
know I`m probably "jumping the gun" here, but when AmigaOS4 is released, will their be an Intent/AmigaDE Player for it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When porting intent to a specific operating system, experience has taught us that the major requirement for the port has been knowledge of the underlying platform, not of intent. Therefore, if we take AOS4, we will achieve the best results if the Amiga specialists familiar with AOS4 do the integration work. Best regards, Francis
-
@Francis
Saw the Intent logo on that new Defender game from Midway. Way to go
guys.
PS, tell JT hi for me.
-
Thank you Francis for your post. It's great to hear about the success and progress of intent, since our own success as AmigaDE developers depends so highly on it.
Like Ohno has already mentioned, I love to program for intent and VP. I'm having more fun than I've had in a long time in this industry, despite continued waiting for any financial success.
To those still wondering why this platform is special, I can offer the following:
Platform independence with no recompiling. Yes, Java already does this, but only if you program in Java. Intent provides a solution without the language restriction, and with higher performance. And I actually like most of the API. Contrary to most platforms I've worked with where one of the first steps is to write a low-level 2D library, the one in intent is already suitable for gaming with hierarchical object lists, layers, alpha blending, minimal rectangle updates, etc.
Granted, at this moment in time the benefits are hard to see because of the lack of hardware products supporting intent. The "potential" to run everywhere is only meaningful if real-world devices actually run intent products. We don't have much of that yet, but Francis' list of partners is very encouraging.
Personally, I think Amiga's game card approach to getting intent products into devices that don't have native support for it is very cleaver. Let's face it -- while theoretically possible to run content via a "player", no one in significant numbers is going to buy products this way. Amiga's game cards hide the player concept within the card, so that from the user's perspective, all they need to know is that they plug it in and it works. No separate pieces to worry about. This gives developers a viable market for the products right now, while we wait for native intent platforms to be available. (And there's no reason we can't continue to sell cards to non-intent devices).
It's all moving slower than we wanted or expected. I blame the crash of the whole tech industry for that, and almost everyone has had trouble coping with it. What I find most disturbing, is that people's frustrations are being vented and directed as personal attacks on Amiga. These guys have hung in there through all the adversity because they continue to believe in what they're doing. That, more than all the other rumors and attacks flying around tells me that they are working on something very special, that it is worth making sacrafices for, and that I feel even more compassion for what they're going through.
- John
-
@JohnHarris
The idea behind Intent is good, but blaming the crash of the tech
sector is improper. Intent is good, in it's place. There are certain
things it should not and could not do. Francis will agree with me
there that using Intent as, say a Server OS is highly risky and rather
suspect.
A good approach for Amiga, using Intent, would have been to focus more
on delivering a new platform for Intent, rather than trying to turn
Intent into a new platform. Porting Intent to a PPC-native AmigaOS,
say by working with the MorphOS crew, could have solved many issues
with Intent. Running a seperate copy of Intent in each program would
have allowed for MP while keeping VP, just produce a lower-level IPC
framework (ARexx-port replacement) for all programs to take advantage
of, and viola, you've got a virtual-processor MP situation. (I know,
it's more complex than that, but it can be done like thus)
But that didn't happen, did it? As is, Intent is still a nice
technology looking for it's chamption.
-
The idea behind Intent is good, but blaming the crash of the tech sector is improper.
Regardless of possible future plans to integrate intent or the DE into AmigaOS, you have to look at them as separate and barely related projects right now. DE/intent for mobile devices which is what it's designed for, and AmigaOS for the desktop (or server).
What I blame the crash for, is the failure of the AmigaDE to reach profitable status. There's several reasons for that, including lost deals that were previously thought to be assured, and difficulty in obtaining additional VC.
At some point, Amiga thought they had the resources to develop both the DE for mobile devices and the AmigaOne/OS4. That may have even been true had certain things not gone wrong, but looking at the current situation, both camps have clearly suffered from insufficient resources whereas either one could have fared better without the other.
Some have pointed to the DE as a distraction, while others have (IMO more correctly) pointed out that the DE was and still is the opportunity with far more potential. M$ owns the desktop market, and people are talking about sales for AmigaOne/OS4 in the "thousands". Those kinds of numbers are not enough to build or even sustain a company on, and yet Amiga forged ahead with the machine. Why did they do this? I have no idea, but suspect at least in part that they felt an obligation to do so because of the existing Amiga community.
Mobile devices and the next generation cell phones in particular are not yet dominated by anyone, and there was and still is tremendous potential here. As I see it, the choice they made to support the Amiga community (i.e. the people who now seem to be turning against them), is what may have taken away the resources needed to become a successful company. (Albeit success in a different arena than what those former Amigans would have wanted).
Back to where I started, had the crash not happened,
I think certain deals wouldn't have fallen through and both products would have been completed much earlier. Hopefully, it will all still work out.
- John
-
You're still wrong about needing to use assembly to get higher performance. The thing is, GCC creates assembly, then proceeds to _optimize_ that assembly code, before finally calling a separate program (which isn't part of GCC, it's part of the binutils package) called "as", which is an assembler. The part where assembly is needed is for things like:
direct IO access on x86 processors (need to call special instructions because it's not a memory address, it's an IO address etc)
timing loops (4 NOP instructions etc)
If it's the need for speed GCC can usually do it better. Or you can take the assembly output of GCC, go through it manually and tweak it, then save this as the basis for future compiles or work. But usually it's going to be very good.
What you should aim for is to understand how C gets translated into assembly, and avoid the pitfalls. And if you don't like to use stack much in assembly, why would you use it in C? That sort of things. I mean, a for-loop in C can be translated into a "decrease and branch on not zero" in assembly, which takes 2 instructions (one on m68k), plus a third (second) for initialising the value. Could you do a loop with less instructions if you were writing in assembly?
-
You're still wrong about needing to use assembly to get higher performance... If it's the need for speed GCC can usually do it better.
Not a chance. Maybe it can do better than some programmers who are not adept at Assembly, but an expert coder can do far better than some compiler.
Think about it -- as long as the programmer knows everything about the CPU that the compiler does, you're talking about asking a computer program to optimize code as well as a human mind. When the concepts are complex and abstract, there's no comparison between the effectiveness of a computer versus a person. Over and above that, there's almost always tricks in Assembly that can't be done from C.
What you should aim for is to understand how C gets translated into assembly...
This part is right on the money however. Especially since different compilers produce code in different ways. Studying the compiler's output can really help tune the final results, and once you learn the tricks, they can continue to be applied. I've seen some really exceptional C code that gets within half the speed of Assembly or so.
- John