Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: halvliter'n on April 08, 2010, 09:32:36 AM
-
Since there are so many who do not care about the Amiga here, I think that i have to say something about it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF3m2soiSdY
=http://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?platform[]=Amiga+AGA&order=&x=27&y=10&page=1&order
-
Thread moved. Posting new threads in News/Events is subject to moderation.
-
Since there are so many who do not care about the Amiga here, I think that i have to say something about it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF3m2soiSdY
=http://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?platform[]=Amiga+AGA&order=&x=27&y=10&page=1&order
Not even watched it, youtube blocked in work. But would a be correct in, illinformed rant about pcs and macs, and over the tope zealous defence of the Amiga?????
Whatever Yawn
-
Ironically, the page has links to many farbrausch demos. All of which are superb ;)
-
What was the point of this thread? Why would anyone hang around here if they do not care about Amiga?
Just a simple YT clip of breakpoint 10? Big deal Ive been to alot of demo parties trough the years (including breakpoint).
And a Link to puet.net, but why? We all know about puet.
-
I have seen some amazing demos on the amiga. especially some of the ppc demos that are so small you cant but marvel at the obvious coding prownes.
I have also seen amazing things on PCs and amstrads and snes etc etc etc.
I love amiga, but I have not used one for quite some time now. I thinks IBM clones have their place. Macs not used. Love my Xbox and my PSP as well.
Really don't see the point in all these recent and over the years. Amiga rulez. windows sucks etc etc on infintium.
All Hardware and software has its place somewhere and everyone has different prefences.
No one is wrong, no one is right. Its all down to personal taste.
Same goes for music
-
I second JJ.
anyway, the loonies 4k intro is a top class...
-
A third for JJ here.
I have to admit to being guilty of critisising various machines and music in my time but I realise now that it is all simply preference.
-
SWEET! Another worthless "My platform will beatup your platform" rant...
What a waste of forum space and time...
ZZZZzzzzzzzz
-
Are we honestly taking the thread seriously? It has four exclamation marks in the title.
-
Are we honestly taking the thread seriously? It has four exclamation marks in the title.
If we are not taking this thread seriously, is it ok if I advertise the fact that my iPhone game has recently received an update which includes 2 new games modes (time trial and "protect the queen")...
-
Keep an eye on DataStorm nex year, then I will present my Atari 2600 demo, I am done with all assembler 6502 coding but I need to get my hands on a new EPROM burner and just put the bugger on a 2732 ROM then its just a minor modification on a A2600 cart PCB board and im set for DataStorm 2011!
-
I have seen some amazing demos on the amiga. especially some of the ppc demos that are so small you cant but marvel at the obvious coding prownes.
I have also seen amazing things on PCs and amstrads and snes etc etc etc.
I love amiga, but I have not used one for quite some time now. I thinks IBM clones have their place. Macs not used. Love my Xbox and my PSP as well.
Really don't see the point in all these recent and over the years. Amiga rulez. windows sucks etc etc on infintium.
All Hardware and software has its place somewhere and everyone has different prefences.
No one is wrong, no one is right. Its all down to personal taste.
Same goes for music
Well if you think needing 1500mhz and 2gb of RAM for a simple GUI to launch tasks is OK then you are welcome to post XP Microsoft shite inflicted on poor saps.
A PC is a tool, and not a very good one but at least they're not overprice (Apple I'm looking at you!) but it is far from elegant.....put it this way....if you have a blunt chainsaw.....and attach a 2000bhp turbo charged engine to it...it will eventually cut a tree down....get my drift ;)
The Amiga was elegant in every way, THIS is why people lament its demise and still have affection for it to this day. There's a difference between being a fanboy and understanding what should be sufficient to run a reasonable OS/what is bloatware plain and simple :)
-
Is it OK if I rant about all the things I don't like about the iPhone here?
-
So long as you make note of OS 4.0s new features before you do so.
-
A PC is a tool, and not a very good one but at least they're not overprice (Apple I'm looking at you!)
You're paying for engineering costs and materials, for the iMac and the Air mostly, but the others are pretty well made too. Getting a full i7 rig plus monitor to fit in a case less than half the thickness of your everyday LCD, and having it not overheat constantly is HARD.
-
I'm not a mac fan in any stretch of the imagination but I do have to agree with you. Macs are well made, and well supported. I'd never buy one, but I don't think they are overpriced.
-
A little too much beer on me. cheers!
-
A little too much beer on me. cheers!
Cheers ;)
-
You're paying for engineering costs and materials, for the iMac and the Air mostly, but the others are pretty well made too. Getting a full i7 rig plus monitor to fit in a case less than half the thickness of your everyday LCD, and having it not overheat constantly is HARD.
Too much price for that engineers and materials, if not, see any hackintosh specs and prices.
An i7 on a airmac... are you sure?
-
Really don't see the point in all these recent and over the years. Amiga rulez. windows sucks etc etc on infintium.
All Hardware and software has its place somewhere and everyone has different prefences.
No one is wrong, no one is right. Its all down to personal taste.
Same goes for music
I totally agree:)
cough..Amiga still RuLeZ:razz:
-
Well if you think needing 1500mhz and 2gb of RAM for a simple GUI to launch tasks is OK then you are welcome to post XP Microsoft shite inflicted on poor saps.
A PC is a tool, and not a very good one but at least they're not overprice (Apple I'm looking at you!) but it is far from elegant.....put it this way....if you have a blunt chainsaw.....and attach a 2000bhp turbo charged engine to it...it will eventually cut a tree down....get my drift ;)
The Amiga was elegant in every way, THIS is why people lament its demise and still have affection for it to this day. There's a difference between being a fanboy and understanding what should be sufficient to run a reasonable OS/what is bloatware plain and simple :)
Not defending Xp, even though lets be honest, it pisses all over amigsoS and if you take the blinkers off is a very good OS. I aminly use ubuntu these days so ....
PC hardware is a million miles supperior to our beloved amigas, if you cant see that , then sorry but you are being mad
-
Yes but Windows should be a lot lot better than it is. Because of the monopoly your stuck with whatever they see fit to give you.
-
Why should it be better. Nobody codes with storage/speed/ram in mind, because hardware is so cheap. If you dont like windows use something else. There are choices , but it all runs on the same hardware
-
Too much price for that engineers and materials, if not, see any hackintosh specs and prices.
An i7 on a airmac... are you sure?
I was actually on about the iMac. The air will have been hard to design too. My point is that it takes $$$$$ to make that case design work, let alone at the level of build quality it has.
-
Since there are so many who do not care about the Amiga here, I think that i have to say something about it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF3m2soiSdY
=http://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?platform[]=Amiga+AGA&order=&x=27&y=10&page=1&order
As someone once pointed out to me they are all PCs. Others can comment on brands, makes, types etc but as to the Amiga, well, [ deep sigh ] I recall those famous words ' A thing of beauty is a joy for ever '. You never have to convince a true Amiga person the truth in that statement, so I wouldn't worry.
There was only ever really one Personal Computer.....
' The Amiga '.... The rest are just so impersonal
scuzz
-
Yes but Windows should be a lot lot better than it is. Because of the monopoly your stuck with whatever they see fit to give you.
what do you mean by that? how could windows "be a lot lot better than it is"? m$ no longer has a monopoly that is why they came out with windows 7 and are advertizing it as they are. they realize they needed a better product to stop thier losses to mac and linux. and 7 is a fantastic os. as efficient and quick as xp and as pretty as vista.
i do like (perfer) an all up os3.9 or aros install to windows of any vintage but if you want 3d games, real 3d games, COD, bioshock2, batman arkham asylam, etc. etc. etc. you need windows, not mac, not linux, not amiga :(
-
Wine will play modern warfare 1 , though not tried it, but there is an installer on the play on linux program.
To be honest got fed up of spending hundreds upgrading my pc all the time to have the best looking games. Xbox 360 so much easier andd wuicker to switch on :)
-
what do you mean by that? how could windows "be a lot lot better than it is"? m$ no longer has a monopoly that is why they came out with windows 7 and are advertizing it as they are. they realize they needed a better product to stop thier losses to mac and linux. and 7 is a fantastic os. as efficient and quick as xp and as pretty as vista.
i do like (perfer) an all up os3.9 or aros install to windows of any vintage but if you want 3d games, real 3d games, COD, bioshock2, batman arkham asylam, etc. etc. etc. you need windows, not mac, not linux, not amiga :(
Quake 4 and Quakewars runs great on linux. Maybe those are fake 3D games?
And why spend 800 dollars on a gaming PC plus cost of OS when a 360 elite is 299 and has more games for it?
Heck, for the cost of an amped up gaming PC, you can get a PS3 AND a wii on top.
-
We've got a Wii downstairs and have done since christmas. It got turned on once to make sure it works and that was it. There's nothing interesting out there for it. We considered the PS3 too, but we already have a megadrive stand and didn't need another.
-
@ runequester: So 2 nice 3D games run well on Linux, big deal. I use Linux as my primary OS, but there's just no question that if you're a hardcore gamer the only OS for you is Win.
It's the same story with consoles - cheap and easy, they just work - I like them and prefer them to PC gaming, but show me one serious FPS gamer who competes online with a gamepad...
-
OpenGL got updated recently to match Direct X. Hopefully that will mean ports to Linux. The only way I'm going to run Windows 7 is on virtual machine under Linux and I'll probably just download a pirated version so I'm not rewarding Microsoft for sub par effort.
-
@ runequester: So 2 nice 3D games run well on Linux, big deal. I use Linux as my primary OS, but there's just no question that if you're a hardcore gamer the only OS for you is Win.
It's the same story with consoles - cheap and easy, they just work - I like them and prefer them to PC gaming, but show me one serious FPS gamer who competes online with a gamepad...
Given how much Modern warfare 2 for the consoles and the halo stuff has sold, I'd say the majority of FPS gamers play with a gamepad these days.
Gaming changes constantly
-
This is a new world to me. Which gamepad would be considered the best for a serious gamer?
Given how much Modern warfare 2 for the consoles and the halo stuff has sold, I'd say the majority of FPS gamers play with a gamepad these days.
Gaming changes constantly
-
I hacked an original xbox controller to work with my pc but it is possible to use a 360 controller too. There are also lots of generic controllers from madkatz and others too.
-
You're paying for engineering costs and materials, for the iMac and the Air mostly, but the others are pretty well made too. Getting a full i7 rig plus monitor to fit in a case less than half the thickness of your everyday LCD, and having it not overheat constantly is HARD.
I really don't like the iMac concept...you would think Jobs would have learned from Alan Sugar's (Amstrad) mistakes in the 80s...when your LCD/Motherboard goes kaput you need a spare iMac...when your PC fails you only need another PC not monitor x2 and vice versa. And Toshiba make superior ultra lightweight machines (and have done, being the inventor of libretto and portege models) to Apple since the 90s.
Those rubbish flat keyboards for their desktop are horrible to use also, I've used better laptop keyboards on a daily basis!
People will buy Apple despite the cost and convince themselves it's the best....just like BMW Z4 drivers who read the bullshit in the manual that it is the fastest production electric roof ;)
Best looking PC I ever owned was from those idiots @ Packard Bell....however just once they managed to produce a computer with touch sensitive case for DVD drives (concealed) in a gorgeous white shell that would look at home in the movie set of the film 2001. Everyone has personal tastes of their own but still....price is price....and OSX is no better than Linux with a different GUI.
-
All-in-ones have their place, I just bought two Dell Vostros to fit in a cramped test lab environment, $500 apiece. If they last a couple of years, guess what, ROI!
..and no, laptops weren't an option.
-
I really don't like the iMac concept...you would think Jobs would have learned from Alan Sugar's (Amstrad) mistakes in the 80s...
Amstrad sold typewriters with monitors attached, and a few 8-Bits, pretty much UK exclusive as far as I know. How is this relevent to apple?
when your LCD/Motherboard goes kaput you need a spare iMac...when your PC fails you only need another PC not monitor x2 and vice versa.
Luckily they don't go "kaput" very often. Mine still hasn't, and it's 11 Years old. I've tried. It's fell off desks and everything.
And Toshiba make superior ultra lightweight machines (and have done, being the inventor of libretto and portege models) to Apple since the 90s.
It's funny you mention Toshiba, i've got a 310cds laptop here, and you could probably beat someone to death with it, lcd first, and it'd be unharmed. It weighs about half a stone even with the battery removed though.
Those rubbish flat keyboards for their desktop are horrible to use also, I've used better laptop keyboards on a daily basis!
Once you get used to them they are unquestionably superior. Easier to type on, almost silent, and... Pop a few keys off your keyboard with a pen or something. You won't break it, unless it's a laptop. They'll go back on fine. See all the bits of crisps, dust, fluff, a few pubes? That stuff can't end up in the current mac keyboard.
They feel really weird before you get used to them though, and I've not got one because I refue to pay thirty odd quid for a keyboard. £7 Argos jobby for me thanks.
People will buy Apple despite the cost and convince themselves it's the best....just like BMW Z4 drivers who read the bullshit in the manual that it is the fastest production electric roof ;)
That's kind of daft. The price of a BMW/Apple is reflected in the build quality very clearly. The main difference though is that a new BMW is hideous. It's like they style all the cars by getting a 90's one, and covering it in dents.
At any rate, I've never actually bought an iMac brand new, and have only ever had this one, single apple product. The current iMac is great, and the form factor is exactly what I want. But I cant afford it, so I settle for a a Hackintosh taking up legroom under my desk.
Best looking PC I ever owned was from those idiots @ Packard Bell....however just once they managed to produce a computer with touch sensitive case for DVD drives (concealed) in a gorgeous white shell that would look at home in the movie set of the film 2001.
Which one? My sister had one (cant remember the model) that looked okay. Comedy PB moments were: She couldn't figure out how to play a dvd, refused to beleve the CD burner could also read CDs (whaaa?) and got angry if you proved her wrong, she installed a sound card without looking at the instructions or installing drivers ("what would I want to drive my computer for? it's not a car") then was surprised when it didn't work, destroying her CRT by spraying the insides with furnature polish (WHHHY), and blowing up the PSU doing the same.
But I digress.
Everyone has personal tastes of their own but still....price is price....and OSX is no better than Linux with a different GUI.
Which is one hell of a difference. Every desktop enviroment, toolkit and even the X Window system itself is universally shite.
(http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8369/savedialogxb0.png)
Ugh. I think the only system to do it worse was windows 3.x.
-
Which is one hell of a difference. Every desktop enviroment, toolkit and even the X Window system itself is universally shite
Yeah, whatever. This, from the guy that complained about editing startup sequence files.
Granted the X server is the least robust part of any linux install, but there are a huge number of window managers, widgetsets etc. To insist that every single one of them is shite is the sort of drivel I'd expect from a complete moron that has barely used any of them for more than 10 minutes.
At least I used OSX for almost 2 years solidly before deciding it wasn't for me.
-
@Karlos
Muwhaha, I saw your posting before you pulled it ;)
For what it's worth, I've been on X11 since 1993 or so, and I tend to agree with Hell Labs on this. The file requesters in the various X11 toolkits have always been utterly lame and annoying to use. To this day, the best file requesters I have used are the ASL ones in AmigaOS. The "improved" ones in MorphOS just pisses me off, so I dumped in AmigaOS asl.library to get rid of them.
-
Funnily enough, I tend to agree about the file requester layout in most X based desktops. I don't agree that everything about X and every window manager ever written for it are "shite" though. That's just not a sensible statement.
-
The thing that annoys me the most, is that for every single thing you need to build a gui, there's a million and one crap choices instead of one or two good ones. They even seem to refue to standardise on a clipboard, it's moronic. Linux guis are all crap, except fluxbox and it's more out of not having anything there to be crap in the first place.
Behold, ubuntu 10!
(http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/17/2010/03/500x_ubuntu_1004_beta.jpg)
Don't forget Amarok! (http://amarok.kde.org/files/amarok_2.1_1.png)
This is terrible. If they hadn't pointlessly changed how you set up different resolution framebuffers (now it doesn't work on my machine), I'd NEVER go near linux guis. None of them know the first thing about UI design. I suppose the "Judean People's Front" method of software deveopment doesn't really help much.
-
OpenGL got updated recently to match Direct X. Hopefully that will mean ports to Linux. The only way I'm going to run Windows 7 is on virtual machine under Linux and I'll probably just download a pirated version so I'm not rewarding Microsoft for sub par effort.
Enjoy your malware.
-
Personally I don't think the problem these days is anything to do with what you guys are talking about... nice insight there though Amiga Nut btw... LOL
But most if not all so called Amiga boards that exist today are basically so bastardised you don't know whos wearing what colours...
I'd just like Forums to sort there act out and decide what they want to identify with and that would be cool... ie English Amiga Board could rename itself English Emulation Board... Amigaworld, cpu world etc...
I just don't think the boards reflect the true nature of there members anymore and it shouldnt carry a specific Amiga tag... Now I'm sure some clever dick is waiting in the wind to demonstrate why this wouldn't work in the business world... hell, I could give some good examples myself...
but look at it from this point of view... you should be able to come to an Amiga Board and post very pro and optimistic posts as you like... people can jump onboard and feel good about there platform and there little world... without having to worry about some user spurting out some kind of realistic comparison... Everyone that uses an Amiga knows what it's capable of...
This is what SHOULD be moderated on a PRO Amiga Forum... instead, we have heaps of members who have outgrown the Amiga and are hell bent on pissing on the Amiga ideal time and time again...
Although in saying all this... I'm sure the way things are going, new forum boards will come and all these existing ones are going to be referred to as retro hippie or something... LOL
-
Enjoy your malware.
Have you ever used a torrent site? The comments section alone is always a huge warning if anything is up, and why would a cracking group intentionally ship malware? That's a wonderful mental image, I mean could you imagine someone in TRSI going "hey guys, just for a laugh, you wanna put a virus in?"
-
Have you ever used a torrent site? The comments section alone is always a huge warning if anything is up, and why would a cracking group intentionally ship malware? That's a wonderful mental image, I mean could you imagine someone in TRSI going "hey guys, just for a laugh, you wanna put a virus in?"
So... umm... You are saying...
Cracked software wouldn't contain anything bad, because the cracking group wouldn't want to do that to people? So it's safe to DL a cracked piece of software from a torrent?
Hmmm..
Really? You're really saying that? :confused:
What I mean is.. um..er. and I have used torrents.. still do from time to time, but.. um..
Well.. I'm not sure what to say to that actually.. ;)
TTYL
desiv
-
Hi,
@kolla,
I would like to rant about rotten core machines and iphone here myself. If you want to brag about apple there are plenty of apple sites around there go hang with those nerds. If you like Amiga this is the site to hang with, if you like winbloze there are millions of sites for them, get a hint and go there, if you like the win emulator for Amiga I will buy that so you can hang here.
I don't know if apple junk is powerful enough to run an Amiga emulator, but if they are, and you run an Amiga emulator you can hang here just don't mention rotten core.
If you are an i-fanboy, well sometimes we have hope for the you know, the special people.
smerf
-
Hi,
@kolla,
I would like to rant about rotten core machines and iphone here myself. If you want to brag about apple there are plenty of apple sites around there go hang with those nerds. If you like Amiga this is the site to hang with, if you like winbloze there are millions of sites for them, get a hint and go there, if you like the win emulator for Amiga I will buy that so you can hang here.
I don't know if apple junk is powerful enough to run an Amiga emulator, but if they are, and you run an Amiga emulator you can hang here just don't mention rotten core.
If you are an i-fanboy, well sometimes we have hope for the you know, the special people.
smerf
Just preserving this post so you can't try to take it back. This is the sort of thing that gets screenshots taken and saved into my "the human race is fucked" folder.
-
Love this thread! :D
-
@ desiv: his post I kinda agree with, yours is the one I don't get...
@ Hell Labs: LOL nice :D
-
@ desiv: his post I kinda agree with, yours is the one I don't get...
That's what makes our world such a wonderful place...
:)
desiv
-
I have recently converted from PC hell to Apples macbook. Just because as a soft, noncore user, it reminds me most of the amiga OS. It´s not too complicated, looks great and functions flawlessly so far (not really amiga like though, the last). I know a lot of those of you who like to get on the inside of things and build stuff hate the thing, but for people who want shit to work (and not worry about crashes, constant upgrades, virus, firewalls etc) it´s both easy and pretty. And cost I don´t care about.
Now, If a portable machine, capable of running amiga/c64 stuff without emulation shows up, I´d gladly switch.
Having said all that. PCs suck. Macs suck. Amiga rules!! (real Amigas, made by Commodore before the busto and comedy started)
-
Yep, this board and the community in general is about a bunch of old farts complaining that the young ones just don't know how good things were back then....
Whippersnappers......
Love this thread! :D
(http://www.new1.com/jkohl/images/Mr%20Old%20Fart_350.jpg)
-
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksunfuzXHp1qzpab7.jpg)
-
Hey, I'm 27 and consider myself young! :D or at least not old yet...
-
(http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/9412/ipadvsstonetable.jpg)
-
Yep, this board and the community in general is about a bunch of old farts complaining that the young ones just don't know how good things were back then....
But...
Well, I'm a ..er. bit .. older than 27.... but...
You don't know how good things were then...
and ... and...
OMG it's TRUE!!!
:laughing:
desiv
-
:D rofl
-
(http://www.dba-oracle.com/images/motivational_mediocrity.jpg)
-
PC- This server controlling A.org would crash with everything I have to say
Mac- Loved the PPC line, the new intel ones all look pretty ghey except the Powerbook Pro and PowerMac Intel (I refuse to say Macbook and Mac Pro). Now, I'm an A-EON and PPC mac fan, I'll stick with PPC till the last Quad G5 is corroded to hell by its coolant
-
(http://files.artlung.com.s3.amazonaws.com/artlung.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/guru-meditation.gif)
(http://www.frn.net/qsl/radio%20airplane%20no%20cat%20farts.jpg)
-
Amstrad sold typewriters with monitors attached, and a few 8-Bits, pretty much UK exclusive as far as I know. How is this relevent to apple?
Ahh Amstrad had a habit of building all-in-one 8 and 16bit machines...when the tape deck/diskdrive broke the computer was useless...and on their CPC 8bit machines if the monitor died...so did your computer's PSU. All in one is a bad design in my opinion, you need to account for twice the potential replacement units if only half the unit fails (say the backlight on the LCD)
Luckily they don't go "kaput" very often. Mine still hasn't, and it's 11 Years old. I've tried. It's fell off desks and everything.
If you run a business then bllind faith is not enough...you need contingency...which was my point.
It's funny you mention Toshiba, i've got a 310cds laptop here, and you could probably beat someone to death with it, lcd first, and it'd be unharmed. It weighs about half a stone even with the battery removed though.
The 310CDS is comparable with those rubbish black plastic era Macintosh notebooks from the mid-late 90s with the trackball in the middle of the palm rest. Funny thing is in 1996/98 Toshiba was making full featured Pentium and Pentium MMX tiny ultra portable laptops with SVGA 6.1" TFT screens the size of two DVD cases stacked ontop of each other, and performance wise (including battery performance!) they were identical to a full sized laptop. So yes Toshiba does know more about laptops than any other company all thing considered, and their Portege is superior to the Air from a hardware point of view (OS is not my problem....Toshiba don't write bloatware7).
Here is a Toshiba Libretto 233MMX Laptop
(http://www.squit.co.uk/computers/photos/libretto.jpg)
Hardly bigger than todays USB 3.5" 1/3 height floppy drives.
Once you get used to them they are unquestionably superior. Easier to type on, almost silent, and... Pop a few keys off your keyboard with a pen or something. You won't break it, unless it's a laptop. They'll go back on fine. See all the bits of crisps, dust, fluff, a few pubes? That stuff can't end up in the current mac keyboard.
It's yet another case of style over function I feel, I have nothing against laptop keyboards, use them 24/7 myself...but on a desktop.....come on. Anyway the Dell Inspiron 9400/XPS 1720 laptops have superior keyboards to everyone...and also these Apple 'desktop' keyboards.
They feel really weird before you get used to them though, and I've not got one because I refue to pay thirty odd quid for a keyboard. £7 Argos jobby for me thanks.
I'm fussy about my keyboards, it's worth spending a little extra when you use them all day as I have to for my business.
That's kind of daft. The price of a BMW/Apple is reflected in the build quality very clearly. The main difference though is that a new BMW is hideous. It's like they style all the cars by getting a 90's one, and covering it in dents.
Bit of an in-joke from the UK TV show Top Gear....when Richard Hammond proclaims to have the fastest electric convertible roof (because BMW told him it was...in techno-bullshit Z4's manual) but Clarkson proceeded to show him his review car (cheaper Honda S2000) was quicker...and the tag line is "don't believe what you read in your glossy manuals son"
At any rate, I've never actually bought an iMac brand new, and have only ever had this one, single apple product. The current iMac is great, and the form factor is exactly what I want. But I cant afford it, so I settle for a a Hackintosh taking up legroom under my desk.
The only machine I use OS X on is a Dell Latitude D810...it is an awesome PC laptop...despite being half a decade old it still runs games that 'new' laptop technology shafted by integrated graphics do not.
Which one? My sister had one (cant remember the model) that looked okay. Comedy PB moments were: She couldn't figure out how to play a dvd, refused to beleve the CD burner could also read CDs (whaaa?) and got angry if you proved her wrong, she installed a sound card without looking at the instructions or installing drivers ("what would I want to drive my computer for? it's not a car") then was surprised when it didn't work, destroying her CRT by spraying the insides with furnature polish (WHHHY), and blowing up the PSU doing the same.
But I digress.
(http://images.vnunet.com/v7_images/hardware/large/bg_packardbell22.jpg)
That one....only the machine though....monitor is usual pap, and keyboard about 5 quid quality.
Which is one hell of a difference. Every desktop enviroment, toolkit and even the X Window system itself is universally shite.
(http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8369/savedialogxb0.png)
Ugh. I think the only system to do it worse was windows 3.x.
GUI is just graphics though, whilst XP may look like a Fischer Price 'My first GUI' with orange and blue it is the best OS Microshits have ever made...hell you can even manage DVD playback in 266mhz same as the previous 2 versions of Windows back....unlike today where the bloat continues unabated AND...Windows 7 looks the most pathetic of all GUIs since Windows Millenium IMO.
YMMV ;)
-
The X11 windowing system is definitely a Marmite effect, I personally find it MUCH BETTER than any windows GUI. And BTW, use fluxbox and the latest GNOME and not some outdated version of it. At least Linux offers different enviroment options, back in '96 me and my uncle tried to install PB Explorer, he had to literally rewrite the installer to avoid calling a Win 3.1 library version which is what MS used in '95 to encourage MS BOB (Bloated, Outdated and Balless). On the contrary, in Ubuntu all I have to do is
"# apt-get install (enviroment package here)"
Then logout and change the enviroment
"# apt-get remove ubuntu-desktop"
-
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksunfuzXHp1qzpab7.jpg)
[ ] Guess I´m super gay.
-
Personally I don't need a desktop, I have a suitably beefy laptop for most games I bother to play on PC....and a PS3 and 360 for the rest....so I have reclaimed my desk space (and lost the living room to gaming/home cinema tech! lol)
Then again, I can't stand huge hulking great boxes making a racket and taking up miles of space....but neither does the styling of the iMac do anything for me too.
-
Personally I don't need a desktop, I have a suitably beefy laptop for most games I bother to play on PC....and a PS3 and 360 for the rest....so I have reclaimed my desk space (and lost the living room to gaming/home cinema tech! lol)
Then again, I can't stand huge hulking great boxes making a racket and taking up miles of space....but neither does the styling of the iMac do anything for me too.
yeah, I'd love a commodore style "laptop without monitor" PC rather than these big boxes
-
The X11 windowing system is definitely a Marmite effect, I personally find it MUCH BETTER than any windows GUI. And BTW, use fluxbox and the latest GNOME and not some outdated version of it. At least Linux offers different enviroment options, back in '96 me and my uncle tried to install PB Explorer, he had to literally rewrite the installer to avoid calling a Win 3.1 library version which is what MS used in '95 to encourage MS BOB (Bloated, Outdated and Balless). On the contrary, in Ubuntu all I have to do is
"# apt-get install (enviroment package here)"
Then logout and change the enviroment
"# apt-get remove ubuntu-desktop"
And I find it retarded that everything has to be compared against microsoft windows, as if windows is a neutral measure for everything that is good or bad - I dont give a rats ass if something is "way better than windows" if it still sucks donkeyballs.
And for the record, I'm no huge fan of Ubuntu either, and btw - you're not supposed to use atp-get :laughing:
-
I would just say the "gay test" and gay slurs here need to end.. It's disrespectful and wrong and the type of sentiment needs to end.. What you think by what system a gay person might choose here is completely stereotyping people including gay people..
This is highly OFFENSIVE.. I hope someone removes it..
-
@ Amiga_Nut: "...hulking great boxes making a racket and taking up miles of space..." - I agree that desktops certainly take up more space than laptops, but the noise issue is exactly opposite IMO - I haven't encountered a laptop yet that would be as quiet as I want it to be. OTOH building a near silent desktop is very easy if you know how to do it. Plus - having the machine under your desk instead of on top of it helps a lot in this regard.
-
That's true: I have a low spec graphics card with no fan. 120mm PSU fan. CPU fan 80mm. New 500GB is completely silent. Only thing that makes noise is the optical drive. The front USB ports are handy too.
-
I would just say the "gay test" and gay slurs here need to end.. It's disrespectful and wrong and the type of sentiment needs to end.. What you think by what system a gay person might choose here is completely stereotyping people including gay people..
This is highly OFFENSIVE.. I hope someone removes it..
Actually, given the fact that it suggests the gay person would choose the Mac over the cheap hulking mess of a Dell, to me would be a compliment to the gay person...
-
I would be more offended by people who obviously think gays are too fragile to take a harmless joke. Talking about stereotypes...
-
I would just say the "gay test" and gay slurs here need to end.. It's disrespectful and wrong and the type of sentiment needs to end.. What you think by what system a gay person might choose here is completely stereotyping people including gay people..
This is highly OFFENSIVE.. I hope someone removes it..
Gays automatically have good aesthetic tastes? Damn I wish someone had told me!
See, this is what you get for never reading the newsletters :p
@bloodline lol
Seriously though, if someone who is gay finds it offensive, then let them complain, doing so on another groups behalf is why this country is in such a mess. We'll speak for ourselves, kthxbai.
-
We'll speak for ourselves, kthxbai.
Would this be a bad time to pearoast the butthurt form?
-
Would this be a bad time to pearoast the butthurt form?
I'm good ta. But have at it if you want :lol:
On a serious note, it's not slurs or even stereotypes that bug me (hell the now deleted thread should have stood as testament to that), it's folk getting offended on other groups behalf.
Hmm, well at least I've found material for my next blog post. :D
-
Hmm, well at least I've found material for my next blog post. :D
All part of the service :lol:
-
Actually, given the fact that it suggests the gay person would choose the Mac over the cheap hulking mess of a Dell, to me would be a compliment to the gay person...
This. And also: My response to the post with the two pictures and gay remarks was not in support. Just clarifying. Totally cool with it being deleted though.
Edit: Kind of. But whatever.
-
yeah, I'd love a commodore style "laptop without monitor" PC rather than these big boxes
A laptop without a monitor is like a supercar on 13" inch wheels and tractor tyres!
Technically you should be able to get a whole PC in the spaces left by a normal keyboard, but the compromises are too great in CPU and GPU really so I stick with an ATI/Nvidia based notebook with a 17" screen. Adequate for most tasks (except web page testing/design) for me.
-
@ Amiga_Nut: "...hulking great boxes making a racket and taking up miles of space..." - I agree that desktops certainly take up more space than laptops, but the noise issue is exactly opposite IMO - I haven't encountered a laptop yet that would be as quiet as I want it to be. OTOH building a near silent desktop is very easy if you know how to do it. Plus - having the machine under your desk instead of on top of it helps a lot in this regard.
I have 3 laptops (although 1 is for the home cinema stuff) and between them they're excellent choices. The Dell 9400 serves me well for whatever I would do on a desktop, although this obviously depends exactly what you do with your computer ie HD Movie file transcoding etc, and my silent but efficient IBM X40 which runs Windows7 well (although I choose to only use XP....those extra gigs are useful for my work).
A desktop will never be as silent as a laptop and a laptop never as powerful as a desktop. It's all compromise anyway.
-
That's not true.
Apple Mac Mini (2009): Desktop & always totally silent.
-
@ Amiga_Nut: If you consider X40 silent, you've never heard a well put together quiet desktop. I found X40's fan distracting at night when I had it - under my desk it would be fine, under my hands not so - the principal advantage of desktop.
-
And for the record, I'm no huge fan of Ubuntu either, and btw - you're not supposed to use atp-get :laughing:
@Kolla
I could always use synaptic, but considering that many webpages tell you to use apt-get. In Linux, you have a choice, I prefer using a CLI and building from source for many programs because I get a better optimization than builds provided. That doesn't make me a dumbass, because the package managers for Ubuntu call apt-get, you just insulted an entire distro. You may not like Linux compared to Windows, but Ubuntu and many others are shooting for just that, because the average consumer IS stupid, they're like a fish w/ bait: Oh, I see a flashy desktop with all these useless effects that slow down the hardware, I'm not going to get a clean, simple desktop that will last years.
@Thread,
Lets face it, OS 3.1 and below is outdated and useless, 3.9 is our most useful modern Classic AmigaOS. Therefore, we need to look to the X1000 to conquer the low quality Intel garbage, so when it comes out I'm gonna get one, even if I have to sell a kidney or part of my liver (alcohol free) to fund it. More likely, I'll just have to save up a few month's pay for it.
-
Therefore, we need to look to the X1000 to conquer the low quality Intel garbage
Given that the chip likely to be in the X1000 is the Titan (what with Apple having recently bought out PA semi), even a current Netbook would give it a hard time in terms of performance...
A mid range VIA Nano would likely level peg it.
Any of the current AMD or Intel desktop part would leave it for dust, including low voltage/mobility versions.
Add in a lightweight distro like Elive or crunchbang and you've got a system that is every bit as responsive and scalable as OS4.
-
Look at the PPC macs, they are of better quality than the intel macs
-
Look at the PPC macs, they are of better quality than the intel macs
Citation needed.
-
Look at the PPC macs, they are of better quality than the intel macs
HI,
Wish I could get some of those drugs that you are using!!
smerf
-
no "joke" like that is harmless. There is an implication there that is inappropriate..
-
no "joke" like that is harmless. There is an implication there that is inappropriate..
I'm full up at the moment.
-
Therefore, we need to look to the X1000 to conquer the low quality Intel garbage, so when it comes out I'm gonna get one, even if I have to sell a kidney or part of my liver (alcohol free) to fund it. More likely, I'll just have to save up a few month's pay for it.
Meanwhile, here in the 21st century, I'm finding that the "intel garbage" is actually pretty good. I still have 68K and PPC based amiga machines, which are fun too. But by no stretch of the imagination is the processor in my main machine "garbage".
Must be some weird parallel universe you inhabit where x86 didn't go 64-bit / SSE3 / multicore and PPC is still relevant outside of hobbyist platforms, embedded systems and old routers.
-
Meanwhile, here in the 21st century, I'm finding that the "intel garbage" is actually pretty good. I still have 68K and PPC based amiga machines, which are fun too. But by no stretch of the imagination is the processor in my main machine "garbage".
Must be some weird parallel universe you inhabit where x86 didn't go 64-bit / SSE3 / multicore and PPC is still relevant outside of hobbyist platforms, embedded systems and old routers.
A modern PC, even a proper laptop (ie DELL XPS 17" range not Intel integrated graphics rubbish btw) is a fantastic bit of kit technically speaking but...
1. Windows is utter crap...is it 25 years worth of computer development in hardware comparable ahead of KS/Wb on the A1000? No!
2. The PC is so fast only because it needed to run ever more bloated and useless OS releases from Microdorks ;)
So you can't have one without the other really.
-
@ Amiga_Nut: If you consider X40 silent, you've never heard a well put together quiet desktop. I found X40's fan distracting at night when I had it - under my desk it would be fine, under my hands not so - the principal advantage of desktop.
Depends....on my laptops I make sure I have silent HDs and have the max RAM and only run XP. All those combined mean my X40s fan is hardly ever on so for me it is pretty much silent yup. Also make sure the fan is WD40'd up if 2nd hand ;)
-
1. Windows is utter crap...is it 25 years worth of computer development in hardware comparable ahead of KS/Wb on the A1000? No!
Karlos primarily uses Linux. Further, the post he was replying to was discussing hardware only. No one mentioned software at all.
2. The PC is so fast only because it needed to run ever more bloated and useless OS releases from Microdorks ;)
The Windows might well have encouraged higher speeds to a degree, but applications have come on just as much. As people come up with new and inventive ways of using computers, the requirements go up.
-
Today's computers be they Macs or PCs are able to do video, image and sound editing that one could not even dream about on the Amiga. Operating systems have become more complex because there's more complex activities for them to do.
Amiga boards live in a sort of alternate reality world where Macs, PCs and Linux boxes have not changed in two decades. Where people seem to attach almost magical characteristics to IBM's Power architecture. Where a small cabal of maybe a thousand Amiga Illuminati know more than the billions of other people who use computers, especially than the computer scientists, engineers, academics, et al, who instead of worrying about measuring the bounce of a joystick are wasting their time developing complex solution to world problems. Don't they know that they could just write that app in Amiga Basic?
-
Today's computers be they Macs or PCs are able to do video, image and sound editing that one could not even dream about on the Amiga. Operating systems have become more complex because there's more complex activities for them to do.
Amiga boards live in a sort of alternate reality world where Macs, PCs and Linux boxes have not changed in two decades. Where people seem to attach almost magical characteristics to IBM's Power architecture. Where a small cabal of maybe a thousand Amiga Illuminati know more than the billions of other people who use computers, especially than the computer scientists, engineers, academics, et al, who instead of worrying about measuring the bounce of a joystick are wasting their time developing complex solution to world problems. Don't they know that they could just write that app in Amiga Basic?
well, there's nothing wrong with wishing for a better option than what the corporations are deciding to offer up for rental.
I dont think anyone is genuinely saying that OS 3.1 on an Amiga 1200 is more capable than "insert operation system of choice that is not windows ME". They are saying that they miss the concepts and ideals of that sort of computing.
-
@Kolla
I could always use synaptic, but considering that many webpages tell you to use apt-get, I'd say you're the dumbass. In Linux, you have a choice, I prefer using a CLI and building from source for many programs because I get a better optimization than builds provided. That doesn't make me a dumbass, because the package managers for Ubuntu call apt-get, you just insulted an entire distro. You may not like Linux compared to Windows, but Ubuntu and many others are shooting for just that, because the average consumer IS stupid, they're like a fish w/ bait: Oh, I see a flashy desktop with all these useless effects that slow down the hardware, I'm not going to get a clean, simple desktop that will last years.
Heard of aptitude? That's the thing the debiansque elite wants you to use, they've been trying to move people over from apt-get/apt-cache etc. to aptitude for years without much success, hence my "LOL" at the end. No, the package managers for Ubuntu don't use apt-get, if you don't trust me, try renaming /usr/bin/apt-get to whatever, you will notice that aptitude etc still works. As for me insulting Ubuntu - oh no... evil me. I never liked Ubuntu much, just like I never liked Debian much. Part of it is the often zealot userbase (and even developers), that can't take critics and bash other distros for no reason other than not being Debian.
Thank you for illustrating my point so nicely! :laughing:
-
Heard of aptitude? That's the thing the debiansque elite wants you to use, they've been trying to move people over from apt-get/apt-cache etc. to aptitude for years without much success, hence my "LOL" at the end. No, the package managers for Ubuntu don't use apt-get, if you don't trust me, try renaming /usr/bin/apt-get to whatever, you will notice that aptitude etc still works. As for me insulting Ubuntu - oh no... evil me. I never liked Ubuntu much, just like I never liked Debian much. Part of it is the often zealot userbase (and even developers), that can't take critics and bash other distros for no reason other than not being Debian.
Thank you for illustrating my point so nicely! :laughing:
Some of the Debian people can be kinda rabid but we need a few people like that holding on to prevent everything from being corporatized.
In the end though, picking an OS based on the userbase seems sort of weird to me, but hey, its a free world out there :)
-
The more often disagreements here on A.org's forums escalate to insults, petty jealousies, ego trips, name calling, defaming the family members of anyone with a different opinion, etc................ , the less I want to visit here and contribute anything to these forums, or help other members with answers to their questions. I used to lurk here many years ago, but even that is not an appealing option anymore.
I know that Amiga.org and most of it's members are still far better than most other sites, but I see this site getting more and more like other hostile sites every week.
Why can't we disagree without making personal attacks or trying to make the person(s) with opposing view points, or opinions feel attacked or humiliated?
I am not referring specifically to this thread, although I do see parts of this one that have degraded, which just made me not even want to bother reading any further to see if there is anything useful in the thread.
I have almost completely stopped posting at AW.net and only browse their forum topics about one-fourth as often as I used to. I see myself going in the same direction here at A.org (which maybe many members here will say is no great loss) and I just wish that there were more good discussions with varying views here and less attacks and B.S., like I remember it being here back in 2000-2005.
Can't we all just learn how to express differences in a more adult way and enjoy our common interests?
-
@amigadave
I agree that personal attacks and insulting others is bad for everyone. If you find a problem please let one of the moderators know. We all work hard to keep Amiga.org a friendly site where members can exchange great ideas and knowledge.
-
I agree with the above post.
Some of the petty insults, although funny to the poster, are not that funny to us and usually very childish.
I'm very tolerant however, I realise there are all types that like Amiga and just being on any net forum requires you to have a thick skin. Apologies to those who only come here for news and help.
-
Today's computers be they Macs or PCs are able to do video, image and sound editing that one could not even dream about on the Amiga. Operating systems have become more complex because there's more complex activities for them to do.
Amiga boards live in a sort of alternate reality world where Macs, PCs and Linux boxes have not changed in two decades. Where people seem to attach almost magical characteristics to IBM's Power architecture. Where a small cabal of maybe a thousand Amiga Illuminati know more than the billions of other people who use computers, especially than the computer scientists, engineers, academics, et al, who instead of worrying about measuring the bounce of a joystick are wasting their time developing complex solution to world problems. Don't they know that they could just write that app in Amiga Basic?
@persia,
I enjoy good sarcasm as much as almost anybody, and I agree that there are more than a few Amiga zealots around that have totally unrealistic views of current Amiga abilities and chances of a serious comeback, but your apparent point of view that just because a billion people are doing something a particular way, or using a particular OS for most of their important work, doesn't impress me, or automatically make me believe that they are right.
Amiga users better than any other group know that many factors make certain technologies successful, or dominant and being the "BEST" technology is not always the most important determining factor, for if it was, most of the computer users on this planet would now be using AmigaOS12.4, because version 1.3, or 2.1 would have won the OS battle with it's competitors, Windows 3.x and MacOS6.x. (some might even say that Commodore did such a bad job that the Amiga never really even got to compete against Windows or MacOS)
I think that almost every member of this site would agree that the original Amiga hardware and the AmigaOS once it had reached version 1.2 to 1.3.3, was the absolute finest combination for personal computing at that point in time. Commodore is to blame for not capitalizing on what they had and for not showing the whole World the Amiga was the best, and keeping it in a position of leadership, of being the best available combination of hardware and software for personal computing.
As for Mac's and PC's doing video/audio editing that could not be dreamed of on an Amiga, I would say only that the rendering speed, video resolution and audio frequency limits that the Amiga had, have been exceeded on modern Mac's and PC's. Anything else that could be thought of, dreamed of, could be done on the Amiga's audio and video editing hardware and software many years before people could even dream of doing it on a Mac or PC. I know a full time video editor who still prefers to do some edit jobs on his Video Toaster/Flyer system and says that it can still do some things that his PC system cannot. Many have said that their Amiga Toaster/Flyer systems were only limited by the users imagination and I believe them, it is not just a marketing line from a advertising tape.
Of course now everything will be switching to High Definition, so it's usefulness will fade away in time. An OS does not have to be more complex to run complex applications. I prefer simplicity where the OS is concerned, as long as it is able to run the applications I need to use. The OS should be as simple, lightweight and transparent to the user as possible. The power should reside in the applications and hardware to run them. Give the user the option to choose which features they need and want and install them on top of a minimal, lightning fast OS with only the most basic needed functions.
-
picking an OS based on the userbase seems sort of weird to me
Which part of "part of" did you not understand? And to be picky, it wasn't about "picking an OS", it was about "picking a distro" - there are plenty out there, hardly any of them are "corporatized".
-
Which part of "part of" did you not understand? And to be picky, it wasn't about "picking an OS", it was about "picking a distro" - there are plenty out there, hardly any of them are "corporatized".
Hey mate, grab a beer, relax :)
-
A modern PC, even a proper laptop (ie DELL XPS 17" range not Intel integrated graphics rubbish btw) is a fantastic bit of kit technically speaking but...
1. Windows is utter crap...is it 25 years worth of computer development in hardware comparable ahead of KS/Wb on the A1000? No!
2. The PC is so fast only because it needed to run ever more bloated and useless OS releases from Microdorks ;)
So you can't have one without the other really.
As the_leander says, I mostly use linux day to day. And it runs very nicely indeed. I recently tried haiku and even with VESA driver support only, flew like the proverbial muck off a shovel.
In the end, who said anything about Windows? In any event, bloated as it is, the proof is in the usage. Last time I booted into Windows, it ran all my games at their highest detail settings, full antialiasing and with all sorts of 3rd party "HD" mods for even larger, more detailed textures etc. at decent frame rates. Since the install isn't full of miscellaneous of crap that so many windows users feel the need to pollute their systems with, even windows itself runs fine.
Considering that's all I ask of windows on that machine, I can't really complain.
-
As the_leander says, I mostly use linux day to day. And it runs very nicely indeed. I recently tried haiku and even with VESA driver support only, flew like the proverbial muck off a shovel.
In the end, who said anything about Windows? In any event, bloated as it is, the proof is in the usage. Last time I booted into Windows, it ran all my games at their highest detail settings, full antialiasing and with all sorts of 3rd party "HD" mods for even larger, more detailed textures etc. at decent frame rates. Since the install isn't full of miscellaneous of crap that so many windows users feel the need to pollute their systems with, even windows itself runs fine.
Considering that's all I ask of windows on that machine, I can't really complain.
Thats all simply a function of the lightning fast hardware that even a low end x86 machine has these days.
A simple thing like pulling down a menu in my multi-core, multi Ghz, mult Gb ram Ubuntu system, and the menu contents are drawn more slowly than a 14 mhz 2 meg A1200. Its "sticks" as i go across the menu bar and the next men u is drawn and populated and the old one erased Move your pointer down the menu bar a little faster, and the selection jumps over the menu items as the OS can't keep up with the pointer. FFS it just FEELS shit.
-
Thats all simply a function of the lightning fast hardware that even a low end x86 machine has these days.
A simple thing like pulling down a menu in my multi-core, multi Ghz, mult Gb ram Ubuntu system, and the menu contents are drawn more slowly than a 14 mhz 2 meg A1200. Its "sticks" as i go across the menu bar and the next men u is drawn and populated and the old one erased Move your pointer down the menu bar a little faster, and the selection jumps over the menu items as the OS can't keep up with the pointer. FFS it just FEELS shit.
In that case you need a Mac...
... I'll get me coat ;)
-
no "joke" like that is harmless. There is an implication there that is inappropriate..
Seriously. I am not defending the remarks. But when was it that it became law that a) you are not allowed to offend anyone and b) nobody should ever be offened by anyone or anything ever.
-
Today's computers be they Macs or PCs are able to do video, image and sound editing that one could not even dream about on the Amiga. Operating systems have become more complex because there's more complex activities for them to do.
Amiga boards live in a sort of alternate reality world where Macs, PCs and Linux boxes have not changed in two decades. Where people seem to attach almost magical characteristics to IBM's Power architecture. Where a small cabal of maybe a thousand Amiga Illuminati know more than the billions of other people who use computers, especially than the computer scientists, engineers, academics, et al, who instead of worrying about measuring the bounce of a joystick are wasting their time developing complex solution to world problems. Don't they know that they could just write that app in Amiga Basic?
Very well said
-
Thats all simply a function of the lightning fast hardware that even a low end x86 machine has these days.
A simple thing like pulling down a menu in my multi-core, multi Ghz, mult Gb ram Ubuntu system, and the menu contents are drawn more slowly than a 14 mhz 2 meg A1200. Its "sticks" as i go across the menu bar and the next men u is drawn and populated and the old one erased Move your pointer down the menu bar a little faster, and the selection jumps over the menu items as the OS can't keep up with the pointer. FFS it just FEELS shit.
Something wrong with your install then mate.
-
Something wrong with your install then mate.
Ha. Yeah. That hoary old chestnut. NOTHING wrong with the install. Its just Linux, a CLI OS with a GUI sitting on top to make it LOOK like i have a mouse and GUI system, but not FEEL like it.
-
I had a problem with a sticky pointer on XP pro. It was probably caused by programs leaving bits in after they were supposedly uninstalled. :(
Ideally Windows should load the most important parts of the OS into RAM and keep it untouchable. If someone wants to move the mouse then drop everything and move the mouse. You can't tell me that background tasks are too finicky to be suspended quickly.
Windows is badly patched together, they need an A-team that does all the GUI work. If it breaks something in file indexing then the file indexing guy should go back and change all his work.
If people are noticing a speed up in Windows 7, part of it is because they added hardware acceleration to the GUI. They're still patching over bad design. If they want any respect from me they should do what they once did and design an OS from the ground up.
-
Ha. Yeah. That hoary old chestnut. NOTHING wrong with the install. Its just Linux, a CLI OS with a GUI sitting on top to make it LOOK like i have a mouse and GUI system, but not FEEL like it.
Well I must admit ubuntu 10.4 on my 2gig amd 64x2 4200+ , the GUI is the most responsive GUI I have used.
-
Thats all simply a function of the lightning fast hardware that even a low end x86 machine has these days.
And that's bad because?
A simple thing like pulling down a menu in my multi-core, multi Ghz, mult Gb ram Ubuntu system, and the menu contents are drawn more slowly than a 14 mhz 2 meg A1200.
LOL. Really? I can't say I've noticed the same problem. Quite the reverse, actually On my 040, with 256MB ram and 8MB Permedia 2 graphics card, I notice that a simple thing like closing a window demonstrates how slow the old hardware is. I can see the workbench background image redrawing to fill the area where the window was. The only way not to see it is to use the default grey background.
Its "sticks" as i go across the menu bar and the next men u is drawn and populated and the old one erased Move your pointer down the menu bar a little faster, and the selection jumps over the menu items as the OS can't keep up with the pointer. FFS it just FEELS shit.
Nope, I don't even get that on my single-core P4 work machine with just 1GB, which is running fedora 10 with gnome. That's a lot less horespower than my home machine.
Perhaps there is some small persistence, there's no way really to be sure on this monitor. However, even if there were, unlike the default OS 3.x install, opening a menu does not lock the entire screen until the menu is released. Overall, a fair trade off, if you as me.
-
Amiga boards live in a sort of alternate reality world where Macs, PCs and Linux boxes have not changed in two decades. Where people seem to attach almost magical characteristics to IBM's Power architecture. Where a small cabal of maybe a thousand Amiga Illuminati know more than the billions of other people who use computers, especially than the computer scientists, engineers, academics, et al, who instead of worrying about measuring the bounce of a joystick are wasting their time developing complex solution to world problems. Don't they know that they could just write that app in Amiga Basic?
Hi, we're all retro computer enthusiasts. Have we met?
go peddle your Amiga hate somewhere else, doofy. Let the rest of us be enthusiastic hobbyists about a 25 year old computer.
@Hell Labs (even though hes banned, :laughing:)
You can totally get stuff in the new mac keyboards. Been there, done that.
It helps if you actually HAVE one! :D
You can also totally spill Pepsi in the new Macbook's and destroy them on accident.
Nothing beats a 1300$ can of pepsi man.
-
@Arkhan
I wasn't speaking about the retro enthusiasts, rather I was thinking of those who seem to think that the world is awaiting an Amiga saviour to rise from the grave. I still play with my 3000 or a UAE emulator, they're reminders of the past, of where I came from. It's a bit like tinkering with old cars, it's fun. It's a hobby. That's great, I have friends who spend a fortune to set up amateur radio stations to contact people that would be easier and cheaper contacted by mobile phone. THat's great too, but none of them really think the mobile phone network will be replaced with a 2 metre handheld any time soon.
-
... It's a bit like tinkering with old cars, it's fun. It's a hobby. That's great...
That's a good metaphor...
What gets me are the people who say, "Yeah, it might be fun, but it's useless nowadays!".. When that's not true.
It depends on what you want to do with it.
An old car is great. It will still get you from point A to point B.
It won't win any speed or mileage competitions, but it can still do certain things, so I wouldn't call it useless.
Same with the Amiga to me...
desiv
-
So AROS is just a hobby then? I would think that it has as much potential as Linux to become a popular desktop OS.
I don't think Windows is ever going to get replaced as the mainstream, but if you can have a small niche (which could be up to a million people nowadays) and your OS is free. Why shouldn't people get passionate about it?
-
So AROS is just a hobby then? I would think that it has as much potential as Linux to become a popular desktop OS.
As much as I like AROS so far, I don't think that's realistic without some major changes.
It would require proper memory protection before that can realistically happen. These days people do not expect the machine to be brought down by an application bug. Unfortunately, robust memory protection and the AmigaOS IPC mechanism don't sit particularly well together.
Secondly, nobody that's paid good money for a multicore processor is going to want to use a primary OS that isn't capable of SMP.
-
These days people do not expect the machine to be brought down by an application bug.
You don't use Windows much then? :roflmao:
Kidding.. I kid..
(as I reset my Windows machine because there's an app I can't kill with Task manager taking so much CPU the system is crawling.. No, I'm kidding of course. That NEVER happens in Windows.. )
Seriously tho, I remember "back in the day", we were all involved in this one particular fidonet chat stream. There were 2 chains of thought going on as to how get memory protection working for the Amiga.
I was on the Matt Dillon side of the argument. I can't remember who was the "force" behind the other side. They both knew their stuff. (I was much more an observer, but I had more faith in Matt; got my D.I.C.E. from him directly).
Commodore actually hired the other person (not sure to do what tho), and the argument fizzled. Matt moved on to BSD fame (infamy). :-) No Amiga memory protection..
Fun times.. :-)
-
Ah Butterfly BSD, I haven't really kept up on the BSD scene, how's Matt doing with his distro? ANything new and exciting in it?
-
Ah Butterfly BSD, I haven't really kept up on the BSD scene, how's Matt doing with his distro? ANything new and exciting in it?
Dragonfly.. Close. :-)
I thought it was funny that he got "removed" from BSD kernel stuff because he disagreed with them on memory issues. (and so started Dragonfly)
It just sounded SO familiar.. :-)
I do have a BSD zealot co-worker and he's impressed with DragonFly although he prefers NetBSD I believe. I've only dabbled in the BSD arena myself..
desiv
-
Dragonfly has some seriously nifty sounding features like internal clustering support within the kernel in order to help fully utilise mulicore systems.
With AMD releasing magnycore processors any day now, something like that may well come into its own.
-
This thread makes me sad.
Gertsy
-
I have seen some amazing demos on the amiga. especially some of the ppc demos that are so small you cant but marvel at the obvious coding prownes.
I have also seen amazing things on PCs and amstrads and snes etc etc etc.
I love amiga, but I have not used one for quite some time now. I thinks IBM clones have their place. Macs not used. Love my Xbox and my PSP as well.
Really don't see the point in all these recent and over the years. Amiga rulez. windows sucks etc etc on infintium.
All Hardware and software has its place somewhere and everyone has different prefences.
No one is wrong, no one is right. Its all down to personal taste.
Same goes for music
No I agree, as a demo platform the PC coders have hardware light years ahead of anything an Amiga can plug into even a Zorro-III slot, and always will. The PC hardware hasn't been the problem for a decade, very powerful silicon in the box, bar none.
However Windows 7/Vista has no place anywhere. You specifically say Windows sucks sarcastically meaning we shouldn't say that. well only a fool would ever champion Windows today, it is pathetic bloatware beyond belief. 15Gb of space and requiring gigahertz of CPU power and gigabytes of memory just to show a mouse cursor on the screen to run even more bloatware CPU hogging applications, or routines like Flash video, is a joke....which microsoft laugh all the way to the bank about obviously. Windows IS pathetic and you'd have to be a bit of a n00b to think it is either efficient or elegant, what is worse than windows? Nothing. The only time Windows was superior to Linux was in Windows 95 days as far as machine requirements go. I can totally understand why people stopped at XP, you don't actually need anything more and microsoft artificially forcing DX10 off XP and making it Vista was just due to poor sales figures. Crysis was developed on XP-64bit and EA developers had a working DX setup for XP-64bit too, you can even see it in some old videos where they demo the DX10 features after launching the game code from XP 64.
OS X is too close to Linux + fancy windowing environment for me personally, not worth the premium Apple place on their computers...however that to some degree may be personal preference. After all some people genuinely prefer Linux to other operating systems so fair do's. And there are too many expensive paid for updates with OS X, forget that!
But as far as demos go, even 4kb ones, the PC has it's fair share of stunning demos simply because they have oodles of CPU power to play with thanks to having to run winblow bloatware.
Sure as hell though in the past there was some excellent coding, like the SID player and C64 Demo by Per Hakan Sundell for OCS Amigas, yes he of C64S emulator for DOS, who managed to get some amazingly accurate C64 SID tunes converted very closely with just Paula and a 7mhz 68000, show me all you want from later years but this in itself shows a time when extremely efficient coding was in evidence, and there is not a single 8mhz 8086 + 16bit Soundblaster equivalent of the C64 Music Demo as produced for Amiga. Those are the facts and combined with just what a terrible OS Windows is in terms of efficiency you can see why people are right to say Windows IS a pile of crap AND at the time (80s to early 90s) Amiga was king of the demo scene end of story. Sorry if that upsets anyone but those are historical facts on a like for like basis.
However things change, ironically thanks to such pathetic coding by microsoft for each successive OS, so that doesn't mean you shouldn't go looking for post 90s PC demo's or MOD tunes...my favourite on PC has to be from Quazar of Sanxion called Funky Stars. At the same time don't discount Amiga either, Silk Cut by Black Lotus is one hell of a demo, with superb art and music regardless of host machine's limitations. Pixel art and music are universal to all 16/32bit machines, and to some extent the host machine does not matter. If I owned a Falcon I would download Silk Cut for that too, simple.
-
@Amiga_Nut
However Windows 7/Vista has no place anywhere.
Regardless if you believe this, Windows 7 is really really good.
That you somehow think that Microsoft does pathetic coding tells us more about you than Microsoft.
-
@Amiga_Nut
Regardless if you believe this, Windows 7 is really really good.
That you somehow think that Microsoft does pathetic coding tells us more about you than Microsoft.
Seconded here, as I have done in other threads as well. One thing I have not been able to test yet, does 7 eliminate the 255 character limit on file names? Of all things Microsoft does wrong versus right, IMNHO this limitation is absolutely unforgivable in 2010.
And, nine pages to this thread?
-
Seconded here, as I have done in other threads as well. One thing I have not been able to test yet, does 7 eliminate the 255 character limit on file names? Of all things Microsoft does wrong versus right, IMNHO this limitation is absolutely unforgivable in 2010.
And, nine pages to this thread?
Really? :confused: Besides Reiser most other modern file systems have the same "limitation" (ie. EXT4, HFS+, JFS, ZFS, etc.). Not sure why anyone would want 4000+ character filenames anyway.
-
What's wrong with 4000+ character file names? So long as you have space on the drive why should the OS care? Some people like to include a fair bit of a description in the file name, what's wrong with that?
-
What's wrong with 4000+ character file names? So long as you have space on the drive why should the OS care? Some people like to include a fair bit of a description in the file name, what's wrong with that?
Nothing wrong about that but I think that it would be better to put that description in a "comment" field like it's done on AmigaOS files :-)
-
Nothing wrong about that but I think that it would be better to put that description in a "comment" field like it's done on AmigaOS files :-)
Or use meta tags/information to store more information. I've never gotten close to the 255 limitation on my PC or Mac so I guess I don't understand what the big deal is.
-
@Amiga_Nut
Regardless if you believe this, Windows 7 is really really good.
That you somehow think that Microsoft does pathetic coding tells us more about you than Microsoft.
Im sure the superior microsoft coding is why windows servers have uptimes measured in years compared to the unix server that has to be rebooted with every patch.
Wait...
I got that backwards again. Silly me.
-
Im sure the superior microsoft coding is why windows servers have uptimes measured in years compared to the unix server that has to be rebooted with every patch.
Wait...
I got that backwards again. Silly me.
I'm sure inferior Microsoft coding is why windows servers run years with vulnerable kernels and that most exploited systems are windows servers.
Wait...
I got that backwards again. Silly me.
-
Here is some hard truth for everyone...
Windows and Unix/Linux servers are only reliable as their adminstrators.
I worked with a Telcom and the Unix/Red Hat Linux servers always having issues, etc. But the Windows Servers had 99% up time and ran like champs. We even moved all our Java apps to windows cause dealing with the Unix admins wasn't worth it - they where so uptight about everything to the point you couldn't do your job.
Then when I left the Telcom to work with a Waste Management company - the opposite was going on - Unix/Linux boxes ran the databases great - but the servers running MS Exchange, IIS, applications, etc always had issues and forget keeping citrix up with out schedule reboots!
So I am sure given the right idiot admin and any Server OS can suck...
From my experience , the only server OS I have never seen issues out of was OpenVMS. You set that damn thing and could forget about it for years!
-
Hey, do we all get to play the "I'm going to state things as facts with no impartial statistics to back them up" game?
Wow! Sounds like fun...
:roflmao:
There's lies, damn lies, statistics and then OS statistics...
They will all tell you what you want to hear depending on who's talking.
A bad admin can ruin any OS.
A good admin can fairly well secure any OS.
If someone really wants into your server and they are good enough, they will get in.
desiv
-
So AROS is just a hobby then? I would think that it has as much potential as Linux to become a popular desktop OS.
Hmmm ?!
-
Really? :confused:
Yes.
-
Sure as hell though in the past there was some excellent coding, like the SID player and C64 Demo by Per Hakan Sundell for OCS Amigas, yes he of C64S emulator for DOS, who managed to get some amazingly accurate C64 SID tunes converted very closely with just Paula and a 7mhz 68000
To be honest, even if the sidplayer is pretty cool, and I've used it a fair bit, it's not "amazingly accurate", the tunes sound nothing like they should :)
show me all you want from later years but this in itself shows a time when extremely efficient coding was in evidence, and there is not a single 8mhz 8086 + 16bit Soundblaster equivalent of the C64 Music Demo as produced for Amiga.
Why a 16bit soundblaster? And have you actually tried searching for anything made for the 8086?
at the time (80s to early 90s) Amiga was king of the demo scene end of story.
And still the best effects were made on the C64 ;)
If I owned a Falcon I would download Silk Cut for that too, simple.
Indeed, it runs way better on the Falcon, and is actually a pleasure to watch on it :)
-
show me all you want from later years but this in itself shows a time when extremely efficient coding was in evidence, and there is not a single 8mhz 8086 + 16bit Soundblaster equivalent of the C64 Music Demo as produced for Amiga.
If we're talking about sound playback, it's pretty much a no-brainer no-cpu task on the Amiga compared to PC's with sound blaster cards, thanks to the Paula. I don't think that it's a fair comparison when it comes to "efficient coding."
Now, filling the VGA frame buffer without blitters, hardware sprite engines, coppers etc. and playing back sound having to fill a sound buffer with new samples every few milliseconds -- as it was typically done in the early PC demoscene -- that requires efficient coding!
Of course, there are some effects that are easier to do on a PC just because of these differences (and PC's generally have a lot faster processors), so I wouldn't be to quick about making a "coding efficiency" comparison.
As for today, I think "coding efficiency" is a small trade-off considering the advantages abstract API-based high level programming has. Portability, compatibility, readability, maintainability, integrability, standards compliance etc. (not to mention things like, say, memory protection...) are all instrumental qualities for the development of bug free and complex software.
We wouldn't have things like Firefox today if it was written in hand-optimized and unstructured assembler by a single developer whose ultimate goal instantaneous start-up time and full frame rate on an 80's computer.
-
Here is some hard truth for everyone...!
90% of all stats regarding OS uptimes in computer forums are made up on the spot.
@Linde : Imagine what we could have if people were both creative and economic in their coding: Faster smaller programs. (Lazy is as what lazy does)
Gertsy
-
I have to quote this old posting again, which I think is noteworthy:
but look at it from this point of view... you should be able to come to an Amiga Board and post very pro and optimistic posts as you like... people can jump onboard and feel good about there platform and there little world... without having to worry about some user spurting out some kind of realistic comparison... Everyone that uses an Amiga knows what it's capable of...
This is what SHOULD be moderated on a PRO Amiga Forum... instead, we have heaps of members who have outgrown the Amiga and are hell bent on pissing on the Amiga ideal time and time again...
I can only second this! There are enough forums on the net to talk about different things, but I wished there would be a real Amiga forum where you can live your hobby without having to read troll postings (even if they are realistic and true). Though, this can only be achieved with strict moderation and banning.
The only forum I know which comes near to it is the german http://www.a1k.org.
-
I can only second this! There are enough forums on the net to talk about different things, but I wished there would be a real Amiga forum where you can live your hobby without having to read troll postings (even if they are realistic and true).
There should also be some sort of fantasy dreamland where everything is made out of puppies and candy, because I can't cope with reality, even when it's the topic of discussion. Am I "pissing" on the Amiga by being realistic?
EDIT: To clarify, I LOVE the Amiga. I just don't think that its software/hardware model is realistic in modern applications.
-
@Linde
I think it's hard for people to accept that AmigaOS is really out of step with the current century and that there aren't millions of people waiting for it. They need to chill out and just enjoy their hobby instead of being so fundamentalist.
The Amiga is a great toy, I enjoy playing with it, but it isn't ever going to replace my MacPro as a production machine. Nor would I want it too. When I'm on my Amiga it's impossible to do serious work, that's a plus in my book!
-
@Linde
I think it's hard for people to accept that AmigaOS is really out of step with the current century and that there aren't millions of people waiting for it. They need to chill out and just enjoy their hobby instead of being so fundamentalist.
The Amiga is a great toy, I enjoy playing with it, but it isn't ever going to replace my MacPro as a production machine. Nor would I want it too. When I'm on my Amiga it's impossible to do serious work, that's a plus in my book!
You wanna talk out of step with the current century?
Macs blow a few at gaming.
Amigas do not.
What now.
-
You wanna talk out of step with the current century?
Macs blow a few ********** at gaming.
Amigas do not.
What now.
Install a few video game emulators. Now the mac is superior to the Amiga again.
-
Install a few video game emulators. Now the mac is superior to the Amiga again.
Don't forget non-emulated games: http://www.apple.com/games/
PS:
I dislike Apple.
-
Portal!!!!!
Now we can all sing along with Eric Swartz's Portal video!!!!
-
@Amiga_Nut
Regardless if you believe this, Windows 7 is really really good.
That you somehow think that Microsoft does pathetic coding tells us more about you than Microsoft.
Yeah it tells people I'm not a Microsoft fanboy lapping up their pathetic offerings ;)
I think you are confusing modern paradigms with Winblows specific code. Microsoft didn't invent all the cool add-ons to basic HTML, in fact they tried to monopolise it and failed. They didn't invent FLAC or MP3, nope they tried to monopolise that area with DRMd WMA format. WAV is no different to IFF samples, they certainly didn't invent the 16bit DACs on sound cards used to play 16bit sounds instead of 8bit. Divx and Mpeg 1/2/4 were not invented by Microsoft, nor were the codecs, they just utilise it all in the bloatware media player and invented DRMd crap WMV formats of their own. You need 2x-3x the CPU speed to play a DVD in Vista than XP, and that's if you are allowed to use your XP driver if there isn't a new Vista one, otherwise you need 2ghz to play a DVD via the standard Win7/Vista driver....two bloody gigahertz!
Here's a classic, did Workbench ever fry your blitter/copper just sitting there displaying a desktop with some icons you can click on? Nope don't think that happened. Funny then that those losers at Microsoft decided that the Vista GUI desktop should permanently engage your 3D GPU on the desktop screen displaying some icons and windows and a task bar...great idea....until it fries your laptop GPU on idle just displaying the desktop.Classic! Totally clueless company, they really have no brains there. And all the 'new' stuff to move windows around now makes Windows unusable on a netbook and extremely annoying. They make billions and they probably didn't even test it on the average netbook despite promising it would be designed for netbook users after the trainwreck that was Vista running on Intel Atom 1.6ghz ha!
So what is Windows good for today, what is actually left?
Maybe as a platform for executing 1080+ HD gaming...erm PS3/360 clearly show that the core kernal need only be a handful of megabytes even to get 5.1 sound and 1080p DX10 graphics. The 360s OS is something like 64kb, so while running a game why do I need 2x the CPU and a billion times the memory? Even worse comparing Xbox1 and Win XP on 2ghz CPU for running Colin McRae 3 on PC...which is still inferior even with identical GPU. I'm pretty sure there is no $300 PC that will play a game as audio visually stunning as the nine level rendered realtime game on PS3 called Killzone II. Ditto for a $150 PC that plays Gears of War on Vista as good as X360 ;)
General use like Facebook/MSN (also now bloatware)/internet surfing? Nope because all these are fully possible on a 256mb average speed P3 with XP...hmmm.
As an OS Win 7/Vista IS pathetic! What is it that Windows is doing that is so great?
The fact you can't play Divx files on an A1200/4000 stock machine again is nothing to do with M$ coding really, they didn't invent the CPU, they didn't write the amazing codecs, they didn't invent the fast IDE hard drives. Nope they just did the rubbish bloatware bit that lets you double click on the icons and run a media player (their's being the worst as usual...all that glitz and the twats who coded WMP10/11 forgot to add an aspect ratio control for videos...losers). Whoopee dooo how amazing! The fact you can't do XYZ on Amiga OS1/2/3/4 or AROS and can on Windows is 99.99999% nothing to do with Microsoft. And in fact I run the lowest form of Windows needed so I don't waste my time with useless crap. XP does everything you need, sod making M$ richer by downgrading to 7/Vista. In fact this machine with some tweaks to the OS and 3rd party codecs/media players happily plays 1080p video without dropping a frame, on Win 7/Vista with up to date Nvidia drivers it's like a fast slideshow...yeah that's progress isn't it ;) The media player alone is 3x more efficient at frame rates than anything Microsoft ship today.
So what's it good at? Starting to sound like Neo asking "what is the Matrix" lol
Sure as hell isn't multitasking because a few months into 7 and Flash was already hogging things and causing noticeable delays just launching things...Kickstart kernal is what 40kb anway? So what is the other 1.9999995Gb being loaded up with? Sure as hell isn't gaming because the 360 OS is 64kb and is just as glitzy, as is the PS3 which even plays Blu-Rays without crippling the output like Vista to appease the copyright gods*, maybe .0001% of the population worldwide runs Maya or other 3D rendering software so the multithreading helps...but OS/2 had multithreading decades before. You can play DVDs/700mb Divx rips with a 300mhz P2 CPU even up to XP with just 128mb of RAM. Audio is a no brainer, a 486 will play music. Surfing the internet? Hell no, why would I need such ludicrous amounts of CPU to run Internet Explorer or Firefox. Flash is also bloatware rubbish, if anything Microsoft's crappy OS coding and profit making encourages that kind of rubbish from Adobe to be acceptable! It isn't Streaming Divx was superior to Flash half a decade ago...let alone now.
I have explained that just to click on icons and attempt multitasking on a GUI environment 2ghz and 2gb IS pathetic. Perhaps you could explain technically WHY 'Windows', not things done by other talented coders, is great.
Plenty of morons choose to pay for Vista/Win7 annually with that moronic grin on their face as they clutch their shiny boxes in the queues at PC World, I hope you have an ace up your sleeve to get yourself out of this group of people now ;)
Bloat bloat motherbloating bloat. That's all that ever came out of Bill Gate's a-hole sorry. Windows 7 was meant to be running a tiny tightly coded kernal loading only what it needs to do the job after all the bad press Vista got, I think it was called Vienna? Anyway they changed their minds and 7 is just Vista SP3 + inferior GUI skin ;)
Enjoy :)
re: C64 Demo comments by others
The programmer is the same for C64S emulator in DOS, which is the only PC example of SID accuracy I can find, as the Amiga SID player so I don't know if he did a stand alone SID player or not. Given just how much extra CPU time any C64 emulator takes with sound enabled even in the DOS days I find it impressive that the demo/player even exists. I am not going to sit here and say Doom should be possible on an A500 but this is a bit different.
Oh and I said SB16 because I thought the older Soundblaster cards were OPL/FM based things like the Adlib cards etc. Ancient PC stuff by name is not me forte sorry :)
re:server OS comments
I have no reference point for an ingenious, light years ahead of the competition, OS and hardware package....only for desktop machines. All I know is we had a reliable and elegant GUI multitasking desktop OS in 1985 with multimedia capability as the time allowed (movies on an 880kb floppy? behave!)...so how did things become so bloated now from our 256kb 7mhz roots!
In essence Windows sucks, PC's have amazing innards, and well there isn't much of an alternative is there lol
-
Enjoy :)
I did. Not for the reasons you'd like but I did.
-
I know its easy to bash the big bad corporations for being, well, big and bad... but without a steady profit stream there is no innovation and next greatest thing. Right now its all windows and intel, sure, with a smattering of linux here and there (and mac too, yes yes). Progression is not always clean and happy. Yes windows is bloatware, but then again so is Ubuntu and MacOS. At some point the keyboard and mouse will be relegated to the trash heap and we can name our computer AI's and carry them around in little crystal storage units. The explosion of the computer market out of the hands of geeks and people willing to tinker into the hands of soccer moms stalking their children on facebook is sadly progression of a sort.
-
Yeah it tells people I'm not a Microsoft fanboy lapping up their pathetic offerings ;)
And your point is?
-
Assertion 1: Correct, MS did not create the majority of the codecs in use. But you can thank a large part of the decrease in performance in DVD viewing (in particular) to industry morons who require encryption at every stage of viewing, from the DVD to drive to memory to video to monitor, to prevent any user from capturing their product in the clear at any point. That puts a rather large amount of stress on a system.
Assertion 2: Microsoft's use of a GPU for its visual elements is actually a very good idea. In fact, most Amigans should like this "new found" usage, and maybe even start shouting "we did it first, with our blitters and what-not, whipper-snappers!" But if a GPU cannot handle the load put on it to render fancy display objects, then do not blame the software writer, blame the company which made the cheap video card, and the rube who bought a $40 3D card. Or a $200 video card made with $40 card parts and a hellacious cooling system.
Assertion 3: Windows 7 runs very well on an Atom-based Netbook. Get your head off Vista.
Assertion 4: Windows is actually very useful, depending upon your uses.
Assertion 5: From Windows XP x64,
03/04/2010 10:58 PM 4,588,544 ntoskrnl.exe
Again, your point? Think about the Amiga in relation: the original operating system for Amiga only had to deal with a very small set of known hardware. With the availability of additional hardware such as sound cards and RTG video, things had to be added on. IIRC, AHI is a 6MB package by itself. So, in parallel, as complexity increases, so does the required support software.
Assertion 6: For that matter, why do we need such a bloated system like the Amiga, when a Commodore 64 can do all that?
Assertion 7: Go read some of Mark Russinovich's (of the late System Internals fame, now a part of Microsoft) articles on the changes in the Vista core. I have not read anything from him on 7, admittedly, but I can say Vista had some really damn neat stuff in it, though the performance left QUITE a lot to be desired.
Assertion 8: See my response to one, re: digital rights management.
Assertion 9: Seriously?
Assertion 10: Flash? You are going to bash an operating system because of Flash?! You got some of it down in here, but try rendering today on decades old hardware and call me every day when one more frame is rendered. And if you keep comparing specialized hardware (consoles) to general use hardware (PCs.) Please stop -- you are comparing a sports car to a station wagon. And sure, 700MB DivX is "good enough," but you will not get the quality for the performance exchange: 300MHz PII plays DivX just fine, yes, I know this, but play a Blu-Ray or your favorite movie "The Matrix" on that same machine.
Assertion 11: *sigh* I grow tired of your "older is better" crap. Put your money where your mouth is, please. Take some of these old, great machines and do what you think you can do with them which makes them oh-so-much-better than modern machines. YouTube it. Just stop with the inane drivel. And, yes, Adobe writes crap software which is bloated and slow -- but again, please tell me what this has to do with Microsoft?
Assertion 12: If you truly believe 7 is a service pack to Vista, then you have lost all credibility, along with the 9-11 Truthers and Moon Hoaxers. Read a little, research a little, and quit trying to run software on a $150 machine which is best suited for UAE than a modern operating system, anyway, and you will have to replace in a year when it dies. Me, I will stick with my 2.93GHz Quad-Core, 12GB of RAM with 64-bit Windows with my plethora of well-working software and OS emulations allowing me to run Solaris 10, Windows XP, and whatever the hell else I want. Stick with outdated, antiquated hardware -- no one will care, and I am sure you will be much happier.
Assertion 13: Not all PCs are amazing inside, though they mostly have the potential. I would be happy to invest in your movie-on-a-floppy idea -- when you have compressed a movie which will be watchable and practical onto a floppy disk, we will be rich. In the mean time, I think I will stick with these fangled DVD and Blu-Ray thingies, they seem to hold longer video, deeper colors, better quality, and better sound.
Assertion 14: No alternatives? Shirley, you must be joking.
:afro:
-
It's all horses for courses.
I have 64-bit linux for my day to day use. It does everything I need to do and is pretty robust too. However, it doesn't do everything I want to do. Despite having nvidia's proprietary drivers, it's a crap gaming platform. Not because it isn't capable, but nobody really writes any decent games for it. And no, Doom3 and Quake4 don't really cut it. There's Wine, and related spin-offs, of course, but they don't really give bang up to date support.
No matter, people say. Get a console here. Never mind that the box I am running linux on has a quad core and what was a high end gfx card (now obsoleted by newer devices, but ho hum) and that I don't really want to fill my place with consoles.
So, I dual boot a 64-bit Windows. Vista, in fact (not purchased a copy of 7 yet). Does it give me any hassle? No. Does it play up to date games properly? Yes.
Considering that from a technical perspective, modern games are the most demanding desktop applications you are likely to run, stressing CPU, GPU and IO alike, it seems strange that an OS considered so darned awful would make such a good job of it, running titles for hours on end without any issues.
-
Install a few video game emulators. Now the mac is superior to the Amiga again.
Still doesn't help you play modern PC games on the Mac. :)
Amiga_Nut: Your long winded Anti M$ post is too long to fully address, so I will just say:
If M$ is so stupid, why is it that they are everywhere? Why is it that *my* vista laptop hasnt died, and that my 3 machines running Win7 have been on for at least a month without incident?
:)
-
Still doesn't help you play modern PC games on the Mac. :)
Amiga_Nut: Your long winded Anti M$ post is too long to fully address, so I will just say:
If M$ is so stupid, why is it that they are everywhere? Why is it that *my* vista laptop hasnt died, and that my 3 machines running Win7 have been on for at least a month without incident?
:)
If you don't read my post how do you know it is anti-M$. They were examples of what is it Microsoft specifically doesn't produce and questions and comparisons with similar ways using earlier/different OS. You missed the point entirely. I didn't say it crashes instantly or it is unreliable blue screen of death comments no. I said why do you need gigahertz of CPU and gigabytes of memory just to smoohly display a mouse cursor and some icons in order to execute other peoples programs via a responsive UI. IF Win 7 was all they said it would be then it would only need 266mhz and 64mb to boot up to a blank desktop (ie if it was Windows Vienna as demonstrated when sales of Vista were well below par and M$ shit their pants). n00bs callng themselves experts repeatedly claimed Win 7 is as efficient as XP? They lied, idiots forgot, cue millions of sales surprise surprise.
Also most of it is inherited from the DOS days and continued. Microsoft's dirty laundry about how they kept their monopoly with decidedly suspect business tactics have been aired for the last 10 years. And this is why in the EU the EU Commission is riding them hard and making demands the limp wristed US Supreme Court are too scared to do, don't want to lose all those tax dollars from MS profits worldwide now do we ;)
My point about Win 7 on netbooks with awkward resolutions like 1024x600 was the lunacy of functions like the snap to screen/auto full screen as soon as you touch the edges is just an instant fail. Win 7 on those machines is unusable, and clearly a billion dollar company trumpeting on about how it was designed with netbooks in mind is telling porkies. Anyway using it seriously on a 1.6ghz Atom is like running XP on a Pentium 1, Sure it runs, but you will kill someone soon enough if you're forced to use said machine with Win7 for any real work (as opposed to pissing about on Facebook all day like a teenage twat)
My comment about Flash was regarding multitasking efficiency, task load control and prevention of resource hogging. If Windows can't keep Flash (which isn't even a full blown executing program just a resident routine) under control and not hog resources just because it is resident on minimized browser windows that may want to use it then well...explain to me again how Win 7/Vista multitasking is actually any good? Isn't this basically all your OS needs to get right at the core? Isn't this why even in AGA era of KS3 Windows was still inferior despite having 10-20x the CPU speed? Is it only me that remember the jerky multitasking demos of the mid 90s. Nothing changes, the hour glass is still here, even IBM sorted out the hour glass/spinny circle 'wait!' aspect of an OS in the mid 90s. 15 years on a spec of dust on your DVD-R whilst Nero is running can lock the machine requiring hard power down. Hmmm progress huh?
DVD playback was actually using the same program on XP and Vista, and the DVD in question is from 2003 etc. So that's the theory of other people being to blame for that issue. It stands to reason if you can't run the OS on a 333mhz P2 how the hell can you watch a DVD on that OS using the same hardware that happily does it using XP/2000. Anything else is just going off on a tangent and no relevance to the simple fact you get less from more/the same CPU.
The issue of activating the GPU and KEEPING IT 100% ACTIVATED just to display a 2D desktop with a mouse cursor and a few icons is just a stupid idea, you activate on the fly or you don't keep it active at all. Leaving a machine idle, doing nothing, resulting in GPUs getting fried on a new OS. Let's see shall we blame Nvidia or the people who come up with the dumb idea of having your entire GPU active all the time even when a 2D screen saver is showing hmmmm. This little feature of Vista had Nvidia's lawyers sharpening their claws trust me when M$ attempted to pass the buck. Nobody else built an OS that fries your 3D super hot GPU whilst doing nothing except running the actual OS. Clever NOT. What I definitely did NOT say was off-loading some of the work to the actual GPU to run natively is a bad idea, as and when required and certainly not for an idle machine executing no actual programs just displaying a desktop or screen saver. OS X doesn't blow up the even more fragile GPUs in their 17" powerbooks.....wondered why?
Talking about games sure games are the most demanding thing to run on most PCs and I never said there was anything wrong with PC hardware, but that's understandable and the hardware is not designed and built by them and is not the issue. 3Ghz for CPU geometry setup for your high end GPU costing more than a PS3 to run max settings on Crysis? sure I suppose that's justifiable, after all Amiga cost 200% the price of a Sega 16bit console with similar games. But 2ghz to smoothly display a responsive mouse cursor so you can double click on some icons to execute other programs...erm no that's just lunacy. And I can bet you that your super duper games running on your $1000 populated motherboard look the same as a $250 PS3 or $150 360 via 1080p, they certainly don't need virtual memory or 2Gb of ram to launch the games. And if Win 7 is the second coming why isn't there a game mode where the OS shuts down everything except the same handful of megabytes of code used by the 360 just to run the games? After all there is nothing a PC game does that a 360 game cannot do like XBL etc, so why have bloatware executing games, which are indeed the most demanding and resource hungry software application most people will run. Hmmm?
Design fail.
My point stands, my question unanswered, what is it specifically that windows does, AND specifically coded by MS, that is fantastic (and efficiently which is what the argument has always been). Excluding all the great things other poeple have written for Windows and other operating systems the answer is a big fat zilch my friends. Transcoding x264 and h264 doesn't require anything in Win7, speed and ability to do such things feasibly is all down to Intel/AMD's hardware.
What I never said was WB3 is all powerful and totally adequate, if I was ranting I would make silly fanboy comments. But you don't 15Gb of space to implement TCP/IP stacks or anything else essential that is missing from stock A1200HDs ;) Topic title says Windows sucks. have yet to see an argument that proves it doesn't suck from an coding efficiency point of view.
Sure some things have improved compared to Vista, even a couple of things you can't tweek Vista to improve easily via a few mouse click. But Win 7 isn't really any better than Vista, marketing is obviously better though, with artificially fast boot times due to excessive disk thrashing after the mouse cursor comes up on real world machines. And it still suffers from 'Windows rot' just like every other version.
:)
-
I can tell this issue sits poorly with you so I'll attempt to be fair and unantagonistic. The one thing windows does bang up well is run mostly decent on 90% of the hardware manufactured out there. Mac? Closed. Amiga? It was also a closed hardware system for the most part. The clones won the hardware war. Doesn't make them right or better, It just is. And MS does an awesome job at running mostly stable on all of it.
-
@Amiga_Nut
1989 is calling, they want your view of information technology back....
-
@Linde
I think it's hard for people to accept that AmigaOS is really out of step with the current century and that there aren't millions of people waiting for it. They need to chill out and just enjoy their hobby instead of being so fundamentalist.
For some it might be. Others may just look at their PC (with Winblows or some half arsed Linux variant) or their style over substance Mac and wonder why with all these hardware resources the same SIMPLE things take longer than they did in 1989. Why all these little delays, little stutters, why when I click a button there is a delay in that registering on screen, or why a window waits to close after I have clicked its close gadget, and then is drawn half corrupted as it closes, why can a 14 mz 68020 with 2 meg ram brings up a simple one line text file in ed faster than a 2400 mhz 4096 meg ram with uber-fast hard drive using "text editor" in Ubuntu. To you that might not matter, beacsue you can still do your "work" that an amiga simply cannot, and if that makes your computing experience a happy one, then good for you. To me it just FEELS shit.
-
The programmer is the same for C64S emulator in DOS, which is the only PC example of SID accuracy I can find
Well, you apparently haven't even tried looking for anything.
Given just how much extra CPU time any C64 emulator takes with sound enabled even in the DOS days I find it impressive that the demo/player even exists.
Having seen a sid-player on the vic-20, the amiga sid-player doesn't seem THAT impressive anymore ;)
-
Another TL;DR from Amiga_Nut
I know you're anti M$ing it up if you have things like Winblows in there plain as day, and complaining about problems with an OS that are petty and whiney.
Welcome to 2010. A place where alot of computing/OS stuff requires a powerful machine for maximum performance. All that eye candy, and behind the scenes multitasking stuff requires power! You keep dogging on the "experts", which implies you are an expert, so you should understand this, right?
also, welcome to, "its been like that since the get go". Back in the day, Amiga was top-notch. It wasn't decade old hardware trying to pump out the current needs.
Stop trying to get todays performance out of last decades hardware, lol.
Also, you dont *need* a omgexpensive computer.
two of my Windows 7 machines are like, 6 years old and they run perfectly fine.
maybe the problem isn't the OS. PEBKAC.
-
why can a 14 mz 68020 with 2 meg ram brings up a simple one line text file in ed faster than a 2400 mhz 4096 meg ram with uber-fast hard drive using "text editor" in Ubuntu. To you that might not matter, beacsue you can still do your "work" that an amiga simply cannot, and if that makes your computing experience a happy one, then good for you. To me it just FEELS shit.
Running Windows is like trying to push shit uphill. At least Linux and Amiga breaks the first time something is incompatible, they don't leave you guessing.
-
Another TL;DR from Amiga_Nut
I know you're anti M$ing it up if you have things like Winblows in there plain as day, and complaining about problems with an OS that are petty and whiney.
We should be beyond that now. We have 1000z CPU power, x1000 RAM, etc, etc. Usability, responsiveness ie putting the user in charge in real time is not petty. Simple things that by now we shouldn't even be talking about.
Welcome to 2010. A place where alot of computing/OS stuff requires a powerful machine for maximum performance. All that eye candy, and behind the scenes multitasking stuff requires power! You keep dogging on the "experts", which implies you are an expert, so you should understand this, right?
Amikit's eye candy looks as good as anything out there, and runs on 50 mhz cpu with an ancient 24 bit display board. Sure its not Aero, but then there isn't a blinding fast 3d video card with 1 gig of video RAM running the display either. With that grunt power behind it, I shouldn't even know that I'm running any eye candy by seeing my performance suffer. And yet I do.
Also, you dont *need* a omgexpensive computer.
two of my Windows 7 machines are like, 6 years old and they run perfectly fine.
maybe the problem isn't the OS. PEBKAC.
yep thats MS double speak: Blame the user.
-
We should be beyond that now. We have 1000z CPU power, x1000 RAM, etc, etc. Usability, responsiveness ie putting the user in charge in real time is not petty. Simple things that by now we shouldn't even be talking about.
The new GUI does put responsiveness ahead of everything else.... Priority has been given back to the GUI so things like changing the volume during music/video playback don't lag.
etc.
etc.
The things im calling petty are "oh, my laptop overheated, its clearly Vista's fault". Prove it.
Show me all of these unresponsive issues. I've got 4 machines here that say everyone complaining is full of it.
Amikit's eye candy looks as good as anything out there, and runs on 50 mhz cpu with an ancient 24 bit display board. Sure its not Aero, but then there isn't a blinding fast 3d video card with 1 gig of video RAM running the display either. With that grunt power behind it, I shouldn't even know that I'm running any eye candy by seeing my performance suffer. And yet I do.
Amikit is also less user friendly than Windows, no offense. It's nice and all, but there are too many steps involved to get things done. Sure does look nice though.
What performance stuttering are we talking about anyways? I can run games + movies + other stuff at the same time and don't see a performance problem. This is while running windows 7 on 6-10 year old hardware too.
yep thats MS double speak: Blame the user.
What, should the OS automatically compensate for morons? :roflmao:
You call it double speak, I call it herpaderp.
-
Frankly I've never experienced speed issues. Now granted I have 8 cores running at 3.2 GHz each, but even my wife's computer, a basic i5, is snappy. Perhaps you don't have enough RAM. Nowadays I wouldn't recommend less than 4 GB and 8 or 16 GB on a serious machine. It's pretty cheap nowadays anyway.
I have Linux servers that have been running continuously for over a year and still as snappy as the day I installed them. I'm not a big fan of Linux GUIs but KDE is pretty feature rich. But again RAM is the key, KDE is slow as paint drying if you have only a gig or so of RAM.
Windows 7 has done a lot to restore the public's trust in Microsoft. It's stable and just runs. But again you need 4 gigs and a multicore machine.
If you have old machines like P4s, I'd recommend puppy linux or XP.
My main concern has always been apps, an OS is nothing more than a program loader, 4 gigs and a decent multicore will let you run Adobe's magic quite nicely. CS5, at least on a modern Mac, is downright snappy. Much faster than CS4. Computers are means to an end, they aren't an end in themselves. You wouldn't but a Tat Nano to start a moving business, why would you buy an underpowered computer to do video editing and 3D rendering?
For some it might be. Others may just look at their PC (with Winblows or some half arsed Linux variant) or their style over substance Mac and wonder why with all these hardware resources the same SIMPLE things take longer than they did in 1989. Why all these little delays, little stutters, why when I click a button there is a delay in that registering on screen, or why a window waits to close after I have clicked its close gadget, and then is drawn half corrupted as it closes, why can a 14 mz 68020 with 2 meg ram brings up a simple one line text file in ed faster than a 2400 mhz 4096 meg ram with uber-fast hard drive using "text editor" in Ubuntu. To you that might not matter, beacsue you can still do your "work" that an amiga simply cannot, and if that makes your computing experience a happy one, then good for you. To me it just FEELS shit.
-
One thing that slows me down is my Asus wireless networking card. It causes stuttering randomly, slowing down everything. I looked around for newer drivers, but no luck. I'll have to swap it.
Just because your system is fine, doesn't change the fact that some people are having problems and it is not because their system is old or cheap, some things just aren't supported by Windows.
I have nothing but trouble with itunes installed. Someone is not doing their job.
-
You know nothing ever changes... From the first day I ran more than four pages of animation in DPaint and realised I needed a more RAM, to playing SIMCity 2000 and realising I needed a faster processor to running Photoshop and buying a P120, to faster internet access and Win98 to today there will always be a need to upgrade. I seem always to be chasing the new thing to optimise something that worked perfectly well with my old system. Or so it appears. We are all trapped in the creators net of upgrade and be saved.... or stand still and stagnate. Nothing changes. To be honest my Amiga 1200 opens folders and applications ten times as fast as this XP machine. The A1200 can perform all basic operations faster than this XP machine. Trouble is the A1200 will not permit me and 25 other guys to take on the Lich King in Northrend. WoW is a masterpiece and I need a machine of today to play. Just like we all need the next best thing at some time. I hate MS with a vengence, and I dislike the way Mac looks and runs. I have always struggled with Linux and can`t be bothered with it to be honest. Security is totally an issue with the user and you can avoid problems. And so Windows I guess for ease of use, simplicity of utilising all my software, and ability without a blink of an eye to set up the torrent for WoW is my only valid choice. I play on my PS3, heck I even have an XBOX Elite ... and all the time I customise my activities so I get the best out of my computing. Nothing changes. And so with Star Trek Online I need a new machine.... It will be a 64 Bit Windows based machine. I can see no reason to change. I don`t like it but it really is as someone else pointed out a means to an end. One day there will be greater and better system, a more friendly interface, a more responsive OS... Today is where I live and so I use the tool I know best.... And when I am up for driving in the slow lane just for the joy of real computing I switch on my Amigas. All the time cus I love computers. Always will.
scuzz
-
I almost immediately wanted the C= 8kb upgrade with extended BASIC for my VIC20. When I got my C64, all I could think about was that great day when I'd have the scratch for a floppy drive. When the 128 hit, oh man, I was so excited about upgrading to that.
When I got my A500 and I found out there was a faster processor available (in this case, with my budget back in '89, an ICD AdSpeed), I bought it. I bought a SupraRam sidecar to get more RAM. I upgraded to a 2mb Agnus. I put in a new Denise (?) to go from OCS to ECS. I think.
When I could afford an A1200, I upgraded there. I lusted after an 030 card - and I was given one by a guy who was getting out of the Amiga game. I got the biggest HD I could afford at the time ($189 for a 60mb 2.5"!) and 4mb RAM (another $200 or so). Hated using a little color TV so I plunked down for a (used) 1084S.
The point is, I never said "Oh this is perfectly OK, it's OK that I run out of RAM or that a given app (Vista or VistaPro) crawls, that I get told I don't have enough Chip memory, or that I have to swap floppy after floppy just to do desktop operations". The Amiga wasn't/isn't some magical beast that is immune from Moore's Law. If it had been the entire computing world would still be motoring around on a 256k A1000. I always wanted something better, faster and stronger. It's a pity that couldn't be the Amiga, forever. The stagnation of the early 90's meant in key areas - and we all know what they are - other systems leapt to an unreachable lead.
-
The constant upgrade thing used to bug me about pcs, until I got myself into a bit of a groove. I got an AM2+ motherboard with the cheapest athlon64 cpu I could get and basic stuff for everything else. Now every few months I get something new, usually for around 100 bucks or less. Eventually the entire system will have been replaced but I did it in cheap little steps.
I keep my windows install very clean and it is fast. I take care of freinds and family members computers, and I can tell you there is a lot of crap that can slow your computer down. I don't blame the user, some of the toolbars and stuff sound really good, but they really aren't. Toolbars, adware, malware, viruses, all that stuff steals memory and cpu time.
Check your computer often or have it checked. Windows XP and 7 really are very fast, responsive Os's. If they aren't there is something wrong. And complaining doesn't fix it. Don't use a Pc that isn't working properly get it taken care of.
-
Windows 7 has done a lot to restore the public's trust in Microsoft. It's stable and just runs. But again you need 4 gigs and a multicore machine.
Nah. I got it running mint on 2gig machines. :D
Playing games on full blown settings no less :D
win7 is made of WIN!!!!
-
I just got to chime in...
Why is Windows useful?
Windows is usefull for me cause I get PAID to write software for it! So long live Windows platform.
-
If you have old machines like P4s, I'd recommend puppy linux or XP.
My "ancient" P4 board runs any DE or WM just fine in Linux. Currently I'm running Xubuntu (which really isn't that much less bloated than Ubuntu proper) and would be running Arch if I didn't have a crappy Marvell wireless card that makes me want to smash my head in trying to set it up with ndiswrapper. This is even with the Intel issue (feature) of taking 1.2G of ram of 4G away from me for "system needs" :madashell: Would I run Crysis 2 on this? No. But it plays 1080p vids no sweat while I surf faceyspace or play flash games. Heck, I'm still running a 7 series Nvidia card! :lol:
-
My first computer was a home build Z-80 CP/M machine, it ran an OS, Word Processor (Word Star) and held the documents on a single sided 5.25 inch floppy. But it cost me more dollars than a quadcore PC homebrew with a TB HD would cost today....
-
I was testing some parts a while ago and accidently tossed a 512m ddr2 module in and started win 7 with it. I was testing the motherboard and cpu and noticed that it started booted, and ran perfectly in a half-gig. This included running some diagnostic software including pc wizard, and getiing info on files through dxdiag.
I ran a bunch of windows included programs but nothing major. Windows task manager showed the system was stable and not running out of ram.
-
I just got to chime in...
Why is Windows useful?
Windows is usefull for me cause I get PAID to write software for it! So long live Windows platform.
True dat.
:D
-
Frankly I've never experienced speed issues. Now granted I have 8 cores running at 3.2 GHz each, but even my wife's computer, a basic i5, is snappy. Perhaps you don't have enough RAM. Nowadays I wouldn't recommend less than 4 GB and 8 or 16 GB on a serious machine. It's pretty cheap nowadays anyway.
BUT THIS IS THE POINT. F'en 8 CORES!!!!!!!! RUNNING AT 3,200 MHZ. 16,000 MB OF RAM!!!! AN i5 IS NOW "BASIC". TO DO WHAT? RUN A FRICKEN GUI? Play a movie. That plays better on a $149 Bluray player from China. Play some same old same old FPS. That works better on a $199 XBOX?
Sorry when I read post like yours, and I've read many over the years, and each year the specs get higher and higher, I am convinced that people have lost perspective and have no idea what those specs actually mean. Here's a little help: you can get the entire text plus pictures of the 32 volume Encyclopedia on ONE 0.6 GB ie 650 MB CD.
Windows 7 has done a lot to restore the public's trust in Microsoft. It's stable and just runs. But again you need 4 gigs and a multicore machine.
And you are OK with this? Its just an OS, FFS.
My main concern has always been apps, an OS is nothing more than a program loader, 4 gigs and a decent multicore will let you run Adobe's magic quite nicely. CS5, at least on a modern Mac, is downright snappy. Much faster than CS4. Computers are means to an end, they aren't an end in themselves. You wouldn't but a Tat Nano to start a moving business, why would you buy an underpowered computer to do video editing and 3D rendering?
The PC platform was always about: "If it ain't running fast enough, buy something faster." Here's a novel idea: "Write decent code"
-
BUT THIS IS THE POINT. F'en 8 CORES!!!!!!!! RUNNING AT 3,200 MHZ. 16,000 MB OF RAM!!!! AN i5 IS NOW "BASIC". TO DO WHAT? RUN A FRICKEN GUI? Play a movie. That plays better on a $149 Bluray player from China. Play some same old same old FPS. That works better on a $199 XBOX?
Windows 7 runs comfortably on an Atom based netbook. Computationally that's probably about 1/30th of the power of the above spec. It'll work happily on 1Gb of ram doing day to day things.
Sorry when I read post like yours, and I've read many over the years, and each year the specs get higher and higher, I am convinced that people have lost perspective and have no idea what those specs actually mean. Here's a little help: you can get the entire text plus pictures of the 32 volume Encyclopedia on ONE 0.6 GB ie 650 MB CD.
And you could probably get just the text on a single 64Mb flash stick, what's your point?
You suggest others need to get perspective, perhaps you aught to look in a mirror.
The PC platform was always about: "If it ain't running fast enough, buy something faster." Here's a novel idea: "Write decent code"
Right, because there is absolutely no possibility that these large apps contain decent code. You do realise that with the example of Photoshop as was given, using layers on massive images will quite quickly run into Gbs of memory in use, right? :rolleyes:
Every time computers get to the stage where they can do just about everything reasonably quickly, someone will come along and add a new piece of software that does something that needs more, take digital video editing as a good recent example. 5 years ago only pros and geeks were editing much video on the PC, now everyone who uploads to youtube will likely chop and paste things together.
-
And you could probably get just the text on a single 64Mb flash stick, what's your point?
What? Its not obvious to you?
Have you actually looked at the content in the 32 volume encyclopedia? Its A LOT. You think its OK that some POS OS requires more than double that memory space-more likely at least 4 times- just let you make the computer do something?
You suggest others need to get perspective, perhaps you aught to look in a mirror.
Right back at ya
You really don't see why its Not A Good Thing that you have 10x hardware resources to do things 3 or 4 x as well, if you are lucky. Actually don't feel so bad, find coders to be the worst offenders. They have an intimate knowledge of what is going under the hood. Which blinkers from seeing what's happening with the driver. They'll tell the driver, but it does this and that to make this and that work. And the driver nods and believes, "I'm sure you are right, but why does it feel like i'm driving a corolla when I was promised a Ferrari"
Right, because there is absolutely no possibility that these large apps contain decent code.
There might be, somewhere. But I doubt it. Windows is programmed by large committees. Big apps are probably the same. Anything done by committee processes is guaranteed to be inefficient.
You do realise that with the example of Photoshop as was given, using layers on massive images will quite quickly run into Gbs of memory in use, right? :rolleyes:
No becacuse you're the only person thats ever opened more than on layer in photoshop. Layers, are one of the least efficeint ways to image process, but its The Industry Standard, so it must be good, right?
Professional magazine photographers have been opening up images in photoshop for more than 10 years with a fraction of the RAM. I'm convinced that most shots are taken at higher resolutions than needed, just beascsue they can. I have a digital publishing and design graphics magazine from 2000. 3 Megapixels cameras were the next big thing. Now they'll shoot the same photo at 12 megapixels, and complain they don't have enough ram in Photoshop to open it .
Every time computers get to the stage where they can do just about everything reasonably quickly, someone will come along and add a new piece of software that does something that needs more, take digital video editing as a good recent example. 5 years ago only pros and geeks were editing much video on the PC, now everyone who uploads to youtube will likely chop and paste things together.
In 1998, my school was using G3 imac with firewire to do all that shit-with about a tenth of the hardware specs. You only think we've come a long way..
-
What? Its not obvious to you?
No becacuse you're the only person thats ever opened more than on layer in photoshop. Layers, are one of the least efficeint ways to image process, but its The Industry Standard, so it must be good, right?
Eh, what? Really, have you ever had to do much work on any photographs in Photoshop? Non-destructive editing of images is vital when you're fine-tuning a photograph, and layers allows that. Yes, it's the industry standard with all that implies, but that doesn't exactly make it a bad thing either. It's industry standard to provide USB sockets on motherboards - is that a bad thing? Besides, many many years ago, TV Paint was the first application I ever used with layers in it. It was limited to 3 layers, but I found it was amazingly flexible, and quickly got frustrated with having to merge layers to free up another one, only to wish I hadn't because I want to edit something on one of the merged layers.
Professional magazine photographers have been opening up images in photoshop for more than 10 years with a fraction of the RAM. I'm convinced that most shots are taken at higher resolutions than needed, just beascsue they can. I have a digital publishing and design graphics magazine from 2000. 3 Megapixels cameras were the next big thing. Now they'll shoot the same photo at 12 megapixels, and complain they don't have enough ram in Photoshop to open it .
It really depends on what you want the image for. High-quality prints need 300dpi at least, so all you have to do is multiply this up to what size you want and that's the amount of pixels you need. It's not rocket science, but why not deal in the highest number of pixels you can, in case you do end up wanting to print it poster sized? And why not have several layers so you can adjust your curves and go back later on if you feel after you've printed it that you've lost some detail, and readjust? It's unfortunate, but layers are just that - layers, including however many million pixels of information. It's a large amount of information which is incomparable to an encyclopaedia, and there's no way to get away from it. Pure, raw information.
In 1998, my school was using G3 imac with firewire to do all that shit-with about a tenth of the hardware specs. You only think we've come a long way..
Have you tried watching a youtube video on a G3 Mac recently? Yes, I'm not defending the programmers of these things who are producing massively inefficient code, but some things in the modern world do actually need more CPU power and memory, like it or not.
-
I tried watching Youtube on my ZX81 once but I couldn't get it out from under the door.
-
Well, when I run Windows 7, which is rare nowadays, I usually turn everything on. You can run it on an atom, that's true. Before my wife became a Mac person we tried to get it to run on her elderly P4 machine and it just spun the disk drive an inordinate amount of time, haven't a clue why, but it did manage to sell her on OS X, so why question providence?
The same thing with cars, we bought a new Tarago not too long ago, it's full of electronics and other bits that I haven't a clue what they do. it's all just part of modern life.
I fly on jets when I travel, now the the Wright Brother's aircraft was far easier to understand, you can identify individual parts, no bloat there. but at 100 m a flight it would take a heck of a long time to hit the tourist beaches in Vietnam or Indonesia...
-
@stefcep2
I think you are making some huge assuptions in most of your points, for example:
"There might be, somewhere. But I doubt it. Windows is programmed by large committees. Big apps are probably the same. Anything done by committee processes is guaranteed to be inefficient."
You apparently have no idea how large apps are written, or what efficient code is. Do you have any examples of this supposed ineffieciency? Or any proof of it.
Should we all ignore new cpu's and ram just because you say so? and what level should we be at? should we all be running g3's or g4's? If so why not 603e's? Is ddr ram ok or should we be using sdram? and how much? we all have different needs but it 64megs ok? or should I only have 2megs?
What I am asking is this: what are you saying here? what hardware do you think is sufficient you everyone, and what os? And why?
-
Code is not as efficent as when it was written for one piece of hardware. This is true. That is not to say its inefficient. Even if it is. It doesn't matter with todays hardware.
ITs not, on the whole, windows and apps that push ram, cpus etc fwd. Its games.
Get over it.
Windows 7 is actually a decent OS. Does it matter how big it is. And what the fook has an enclypedia got to do with anything. Nothing. Its apples and oranges.
Are you being purposfully retarded. Because somethign contains lots of information but fits on cd rom, then windows should be smaller that a cd-rom .
Is that your argument ?
-
What I am asking is this: what are you saying here? what hardware do you think is sufficient you everyone, and what os? And why?
There's no pleasing a malcontent!
-
BUT THIS IS THE POINT. F'en 8 CORES!!!!!!!! RUNNING AT 3,200 MHZ. 16,000 MB OF RAM!!!! AN i5 IS NOW "BASIC". TO DO WHAT? RUN A FRICKEN GUI? Play a movie. That plays better on a $149 Bluray player from China. Play some same old same old FPS. That works better on a $199 XBOX?
:roflmao: The cores aren't to "run a fricken gui". There is more to a computer than a "fricken gui". I'd like to see an Amiga run an SLI rig and pump out jabillions of polygons a second.
Yes it seems trivial to have a beefed up computer to run simple things, but if you notice when you are running simple things.... the CPU usage doesn't even move?
"The same old FPS". Maybe to you, mr angry at the modern computer man. To the rest of the gaming world, we are enjoying our state of the art mobos with tricked out video cards, tons of ram, and lightning fast games.
I think you are being very ignorant.
Sorry when I read post like yours, and I've read many over the years, and each year the specs get higher and higher, I am convinced that people have lost perspective and have no idea what those specs actually mean. Here's a little help: you can get the entire text plus pictures of the 32 volume Encyclopedia on ONE 0.6 GB ie 650 MB CD.
What is your point? You can fit encyclopedias on a CD! Cool! You can also fit things like games, movies, music, other books. They're great stuff man.
Specs are supposed to get higher and higher. Duh. If they never got any better, technology wouldn't progress. We'd be walking around listening to vinyl records, and going MAN I WISH WE HAD BETTER TECHNOLOGY.
And you are OK with this? Its just an OS, FFS.
I do more with my computer than study the OS. Dunno about you. Sounds like all you do is turn it on, stare at the fricken GUI, and then complain that your Amiga does the same thing.
The PC platform was always about: "If it ain't running fast enough, buy something faster." Here's a novel idea: "Write decent code"
No amount of decent code will get Crysis to run on a PC-XT w/ an EGA card.
-
I think (hope) we scared him off :)
No not really, I'd like to let him play a modern game on one of my pcs. Maybe something like Bioshock or Bioshock 2 on my current rig, then setup one of my P4's and run the same game.
-
EDIT: nevermind
-
No amount of decent code will get Crysis to run on a PC-XT w/ an EGA card.
Nor a P4 3ghz with a 7 series Nvidia. Oh wait-itll run good as long as I keep it to 1024x768 and no antialiasing :(
I think (hope) we scared him off :)
No not really, I'd like to let him play a modern game on one of my pcs. Maybe something like Bioshock or Bioshock 2 on my current rig, then setup one of my P4's and run the same game.
Yeah. This is kind of why I went console. I find the price point to obsolescense is much better. I mean, sure, with an awesome monitor and screming PC Fallout 3 would look that much denser, etc. On my 360 at 1080p on a big LCD it looks plenty amazing. I've had my 360 since 2006 and it still plays modern games. I've had my P4 only slightly longer, and it is relegated to the occasional game of Civ 4 or Nexuiz :lol:.
Not knocking it, just knocking that I cant throw down a grand or two on a 12 core SLI screamer ATM :(
-
"Ikadalawampu by Loonies" captured
[youtube]FublQwmMYVk[/youtube]
-
Exactly an OS is not an end in itself. The OS loads programs and provides the resources those programs need and do it efficiently enough to provide a satisfactory user experience.
Windows does that in the gaming world. It also provides a relatively inexpensive platform to do production work on, video, sound, image manipulation, 3D rendering, etc all work just fine in Windows.
Nobody gives a f### how many times you can read the bounce of a joystick or how many icons you can fit on your screen. You have a computer to accomplish certain tasks and to a large extent the OS is irrelevant. I sometimes use a PC to do photoshop and it really isn't all that different an experience to my Mac.
If PCs were so bad and Amigas so good why are there a billion or more PC users and a few hundred Amiga users???? I work in a university, do you know what sits on the desks of Computer Science faculty here? About 50% Macs and 50% PCs, not one uses a Linux box as their primary machine. Not one. And you want to get a chuckle from them? Suggest that they put an Amiga on their desk. No powerpoint, no word, no photoshop, no .....
Computers are about getting things done.
-
If PCs were so bad and Amigas so good why are there a billion or more PC users and a few hundred Amiga users????
I'd say that was Commodore's business practices..
Funny thing is tho is that if CBM had been successful, there'd probably be a win.org forum where retro-windows users would be posting about the complete waste of resources that AmigaOS 2010 is; and that they could do huge spreadsheets with only 1M back in the day!!!!!
..or not... :roflmao:
desiv
-
Except Powerpoint can go die in a fire. I recently went back to college and lectures these days are ppt plus a printed handout of the slideshow outline :madashell:.
I despise the overuse of powerpoint. Now excel... I couldn't have done any of my previous jobs without it. Pivot Tables, graphs...IMHO the best thing MS has ever done is Excel. I've tried OO's version, just isn't the same.
-
You always find a use for more power.
I used my mere 4-core system once to run four separate instances of E-UAE, all of which were able to run flat out in JIT mode, each individually outperforming any of my "real" amigas by a breathtaking margin.
-
Except Powerpoint can go die in a fire. I recently went back to college and lectures these days are ppt plus a printed handout of the slideshow outline :madashell:.
I despise the overuse of powerpoint. Now excel... I couldn't have done any of my previous jobs without it. Pivot Tables, graphs...IMHO the best thing MS has ever done is Excel. I've tried OO's version, just isn't the same.
yeah man, my algorithms class this past semester was taught using the slideshows that came with the book.
then everyone whined AW THERES NOTES BUT NO PRINTOUT? CMON.
and he printed the slideshows out.
I tossed them in the trash, realized we were just being read to, rather than taught, and stopped going except for test days.
Got me a nice A. :D
Powerpoint makes teachers lazy, and students even lazier.
Good for presentations, dumb for notes.
-
Iv'e seen powerpoint done well, and poorly. A good professor will use technology, any technology to aid learning, a poor professor will try to use it to teach for them. My Computers and their applications Professor is a mix of the two. Not a very good teacher but great with the tech. He used it to fill in some rather significant gaps, but we learned quite a bit anyway.
Plus he was the bassist in the band Scapegoat (local band) man could he rock!
-
I prefer hand written notes all over the chalkboard, that you have to manually write down. no handouts.
It weeds out the lazy bastards in classes.
-
Macs and pcs
a mac has always been a pc let no one tell you different.
on the note the amiga has always been a pc too, but the best of its kind.
-
@stefcep2
I think you are making some huge assuptions in most of your points, for example:
"There might be, somewhere. But I doubt it. Windows is programmed by large committees. Big apps are probably the same. Anything done by committee processes is guaranteed to be inefficient."
You apparently have no idea how large apps are written, or what efficient code is. Do you have any examples of this supposed ineffieciency? Or any proof of it.
With MS there are different and numerous departments that deal each deal with sections of the OS. That inevitably leads to inefficiencies.
Proof? No I don't have the source code for Windows. Do you have it and have you checked how tight it is? I'd say no. So how do you know one way or the other? So lets judge it on the end user experience. Here's a few examples.
Click on a close gadget, delay before it its re-drawn to give you feedback that you have clicked it, delay and a feel of "stickyness" before the window closes.
Every now and then the window closes half corrupted as if there aren't enough resources, but there are.
Does this always happen? No. Does it happen predictably, as when under high CPU load? No. So whats going on?
Other annoyances do happen all the fricken' time.
Click on start->All programs, delay before the menu is populated, delay as each program icon is redrawn, run your pointer up or down and the menu can't keep up to redraw. Everytime after a cold boot. (BTW i know WHAT is happening, but how hard its is to write a bit of code that keeps an index of installed programs and corresponding icons that takes a microsecond to load at boot times A shitty menu added with tools prefs on a crappy 4 meg 14 mhz machine does it faster.)
Why does Win 7 reload the drivers EVERY TIME I plug my mobile modem in? Why doe sit make me wait 2 minutes later before it recognises the modem, an exceedingly common one that has the latest firmware? It does the same thing on 5 PC's all less than 2 years old, all updated, some running XP Pro, some Vista Business, some Win 7. But why never in Ubuntu? (which has its own different issues).
Or what about all the PC's that won't shut down because they wait for some program to exit, but it never does until you end it. The user has said "SHUT DOWN", why is the OS ignoring that command.
This is all in the realm of the OS, software related ie coding. Why after all these years with all the resources do lags like this happen?
You might not care, more power to you. But operating system designers should care. And if they don't then that doesn't negate the argument. It just proves another well worn one: "if it aint fast enough buy faster hardware"
Should we all ignore new cpu's and ram just because you say so? and what level should we be at? should we all be running g3's or g4's? If so why not 603e's? Is ddr ram ok or should we be using sdram? and how much? we all have different needs but it 64megs ok? or should I only have 2megs?
What I am asking is this: what are you saying here? what hardware do you think is sufficient you everyone, and what os? And why?
Like a few others here, you have totally missed the point: THE OVERALL PERFORMANCE LAGS SIGNIFICANTLY BEHIND THE HARDWARE ADVANCEMENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED. Read the hardware spec sheets. Absurdly quick and massive numbers. And remember, this "hobbling" of the hardware is cumulative over generations. If getting the FULL POTENTIAL out of your hardware doesn't matter to you and you are happy with that, then good for you.
Amiga was always about efficiency, simplicity, elegance and pushing the hardware to its limits with tight, often ingenius code. The closest I've experienced on a PC was with BeOS. IMO it was AmigaOS for x86. On the same PC hardware, it made your Windows and MacOS look pedestrian. Proof positive that PC hardware could do more than Windows would have you believe.
-
Exactly an OS is not an end in itself. The OS loads programs and provides the resources those programs need and do it efficiently enough to provide a satisfactory user experience.
Windows does that in the gaming world. It also provides a relatively inexpensive platform to do production work on, video, sound, image manipulation, 3D rendering, etc all work just fine in Windows.
Nobody gives a f### how many times you can read the bounce of a joystick or how many icons you can fit on your screen. You have a computer to accomplish certain tasks and to a large extent the OS is irrelevant. I sometimes use a PC to do photoshop and it really isn't all that different an experience to my Mac.
It depends on what is "efficiently enough" and what is a "satisfactory experience". Your example about number of icons fitting on screen is plain wrong. It matters from a user's point of view in a couple of ways: Firstly more icons on screen can mean faster access to being able to launch programs, as you don't have to look under layers of folders. In terms of a programs GUI, more icons means more functions of a program can be accessed faster. This all has an impact on the efficiency with which a user can communicate with the computer to what they need to do
If PCs were so bad and Amigas so good why are there a billion or more PC users and a few hundred Amiga users????
Lots and lots of reasons, we know them all here, and none of which take away from what Amiga was great at. Put AmigOS aside, and if you can, try seeing BeOS running on comparable hardware. It really shows you how much of a boat anchor an OS like Windows can be to the hardware. Or what might have been..
I work in a university, do you know what sits on the desks of Computer Science faculty here? About 50% Macs and 50% PCs, not one uses a Linux box as their primary machine. Not one. And you want to get a chuckle from them? Suggest that they put an Amiga on their desk. No powerpoint, no word, no photoshop, no .....
So what you are saying is that a computer built in 1992, can't run MS Office 2010 and Photoshop CSS? Radical concept, man.
-
Stefcep, I think your whining about Win7 being laggy is probably delusional. It is also in the minority.
I run win7 on a single core 2GB machine and do not experience the lag you are whining about. That is like the ass minimum to get the thing running...
Theres like 25 icons on the desktop and a buncha quick launch stuff pinned to the start menu.
It runs WoW full blown, all of my music and programming apps run snappy as balls, and it hasnt been rebooted since the power went out 3 weeks ago.
Also, I have experienced some lag/herpderping on Amiga computers, so it isnt like they are without fault, so you can stop waiving around the "AMIGA DID IT BACK IN THE DAY" flag.
Also, until you have worked for M$, don't comment on how they code. You don't have any idea, so making claims about it makes you look dense.
-
I think (hope) we scared him off :)
Nah , went to sleep, like you are now differnt time zones.
No not really, I'd like to let him play a modern game on one of my pcs. Maybe something like Bioshock or Bioshock 2 on my current rig, then setup one of my P4's and run the same game.
Nah, I'll be up and playing it faster than you on my $199 XBOX on a 50 inch 1920x1080 plasma.
But if someone offered you say a 20% speed improvment without hardware change, would you take it?
S
-
Stefcep, Nah , went to sleep, like you are now differnt time zones.. It is also in the minority.
The lags are there, minority or not. Less than than Vista, but still there.
I run win7 on a single core 2GB machine and do not experience the lag you are whining about. That is like the ass minimum to get the thing running...
There's a message in the second sentence ..
Theres like 25 icons on the desktop and a buncha quick launch stuff pinned to the start menu.
So what? Evry now and then the icons need to be re-read in and re-drawn on the desktop, and the start menu always needs to be populated when you boot up. No BIG deal, but why should it happen AT ALL?
It runs WoW full blown, all of my music and programming apps run snappy as balls, and it hasnt been rebooted since the power went out 3 weeks ago.
What's your point? That a 1992 14 mhz machine can't?
Also, I have experienced some lag/herpderping on Amiga computers, so it isnt like they are without fault, so you can stop waiving around the "AMIGA DID IT BACK IN THE DAY" flag.
Should it still be happening today?
Also, until you have worked for M$, don't comment on how they code. You don't have any idea, so making claims about it makes you look dense.
I don't need to work for MS to know that they use committee coding.
-
WTH happened to this thread?!:roflmao:
This can be achieved with AGA, sentence final.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_2P31K9mRs)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_2P31K9mRs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbFndrip_KM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoiybaNn43Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zm77Fzr8mQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhP_Cczg3zU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNfgu-1_-18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwsaj2PkdT4
And AMIGA RULES!:afro:
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_2P31K9mRs)
-
Windows 7 now has a Dock, like OS X, so you put your frequently used programs there. My only bad experience with Windows 7 was with my wife's PC, and I think that's largely because it was an ancient chip (P4).
The reason I brought up the IT department here on campus is because they teach operating system design, and by and at large Microsoft and Apple are pretty much on the right track, design wise. Sure the registry was a mistake, but not a fatal one. How many windows users see a BSOD nowadays? The guru is my friend and companion in AmigaOS, and he makes frequent visits. I don't consider myself having properly played with one of my Amigas if the guru doesn't show up at least once.
There is no blanket dissatisfaction in the Windows world, even Vista, which was a mistake, still left Mac with only 8% of the US market and a far smaller percentage here. There's no rush to Linux, AROS or Haiku, even though they run on industry standard platforms.
The Amiga is single user, without adequate security, without memory protection, without broad hardware support. The Gui looks almost cartoon like compared to modern GUIs.
There is no application for the Amiga like MS Office, Photoshop, Premiere, Final Cut, or InDesign or even a decent email client (yes I still use an email client). The version of Lightwave for the Amiga is so old you can't do more than 1/3 of the stuff you can on a modern version.
And that's it, you buy a computer to run programs, if it doesn't have any programs then what's the point?
-
@persia
It is your problem, not ours.:)
-
Windows 7 now has a Dock, like OS X, so you put your frequently used programs there. My only bad experience with Windows 7 was with my wife's PC, and I think that's largely because it was an ancient chip (P4).
The reason I brought up the IT department here on campus is because they teach operating system design, and by and at large Microsoft and Apple are pretty much on the right track, design wise. Sure the registry was a mistake, but not a fatal one. How many windows users see a BSOD nowadays? The guru is my friend and companion in AmigaOS, and he makes frequent visits. I don't consider myself having properly played with one of my Amigas if the guru doesn't show up at least once.
There is no blanket dissatisfaction in the Windows world, even Vista, which was a mistake, still left Mac with only 8% of the US market and a far smaller percentage here. There's no rush to Linux, AROS or Haiku, even though they run on industry standard platforms.
The Amiga is single user, without adequate security, without memory protection, without broad hardware support. The Gui looks almost cartoon like compared to modern GUIs.
There is no application for the Amiga like MS Office, Photoshop, Premiere, Final Cut, or InDesign or even a decent email client (yes I still use an email client). The version of Lightwave for the Amiga is so old you can't do more than 1/3 of the stuff you can on a modern version.
And that's it, you buy a computer to run programs, if it doesn't have any programs then what's the point?
What you say is correct. Windows is now entrenched as the most popular platform and has the most support from third party hardware and software developers. And clearly an Amiga doesn't have the hardware or software to compete. Thats not what interests me.
What interests me is the fact that the software platforms do not do the current hardware justice. When I took a semester in programming, my first program was to write a simple database. A major task was to see how fast we could complete a search for a file. Over 2 weeks, just by re-writing our code we got it down better than half the time.
Now in the modern world, if it doesn't run fast enough, you get faster/bigger capacity/extra CPU/GPU cores. And this works, and as its so cheap, who cares. But it also means your hardware isn't being used to its full potential. And then your once-new hardware will soon enough feel slower, so its replaced. And this second lot is also not being used to its full potential After several generations of this cycle, how much has the software hobbled the hardware? What more *could* your hardware be doing?
After seeing BeOS run on a p2 350 mhz with a 8 Mb MAtrox TV-Tuner VGA card, multitasking several work spaces in different resolutions without any hint of slow down I was convinced that the hardware could do so much more than Windows was allowing it too. Its successor Haiku, by all accounts continues that tradition. Ofcourse it will never be popular enough to compete with Windows, but it shows just how good the hardware is and how Windows isn't.
-
Have you tried watching a youtube video on a G3 Mac recently?
No, but I remember editing raw full screen PAL overscan video, which has 4 times the amount of pixels per frame than your average 320x200 youtube rubbish. If I can't watch a youtube video with that same G3 then that just proves the point about how aerated the youtube/flash code is, not how incapable the hardware is.
Yes, I'm not defending the programmers of these things who are producing massively inefficient code, but some things in the modern world do actually need more CPU power and memory, like it or not.
For a minute there i thought you "just didn't get it", but seems thats only partially true.
-
There's a message in the second sentence ..
Yes, the message is that even at the bare minimum requirements, it still provides a good experience for computing.
So what? Evry now and then the icons need to be re-read in and re-drawn on the desktop, and the start menu always needs to be populated when you boot up. No BIG deal, but why should it happen AT ALL?
Redrawing is normal. If it didn't happen then GUIs would be worthless. It would draw once and you'd never see movement again.
Your start menu needs to be populated because.... the computer has to know what is there? It doesnt automagically just know stuff upon booting. It has to process these things. with the processor. mainly the central unit like one known as the CPU.
What's your point? That a 1992 14 mhz machine can't?
No, my point is that the rest of the Win7 world seems to be rockin' it no problems doing tons of great stuff, and you are whining cause one time you clicked the X to close a window and it took too long.
Should it still be happening today?
Yes. If computers were perfect, there would be no such thing as tech support or debuggers.
What interests me is the fact that the software platforms do not do the current hardware justice. When I took a semester in programming, my first program was to write a simple database. A major task was to see how fast we could complete a search for a file. Over 2 weeks, just by re-writing our code we got it down better than half the time.
So you took a semester in programming and are suddenly the expert on how OS's should function and what goes on with them?
Now in the modern world, if it doesn't run fast enough, you get faster/bigger capacity/extra CPU/GPU cores. And this works, and as its so cheap, who cares. But it also means your hardware isn't being used to its full potential. And then your once-new hardware will soon enough feel slower, so its replaced. And this second lot is also not being used to its full potential After several generations of this cycle, how much has the software hobbled the hardware? What more *could* your hardware be doing?
.
Its been like this since computers were made. Its not like it just happened a year or two ago.
Pushing the technology to the limit is what brings about the need and desire for new technology.
-
Redrawing is normal. If it didn't happen then GUIs would be worthless. It would draw once and you'd never see movement again.
WTF? This is the desktop we are talking about here. How about just drawing an icon when the program is added and deleting it when the program is removed? Other OS's seem to do fine without re-drawing the whole fricken thing even when nothing is added or removed. In XP, the World's most used OS this can even results in generic icons replacing the originals
Your start menu needs to be populated because.... the computer has to know what is there? It doesnt automagically just know stuff upon booting. It has to process these things. with the processor. mainly the central unit like one known as the CPU.
Right. How about indexing that as you go along, storing that in 500 byte file at the last shutdown, and all being ready to go when you next boot up,taking a microsecond to load at the next boot? And for all the Win 7 talk, XP is still by far the most used OS on the planet. Try launching from the start menu in a fully populated PC and see how long XP takes to draw its menus and icons
So you took a semester in programming and are suddenly the expert on how OS's should function and what goes on with them?
No, the point thats eluded you is I only NEEDED ONE SEMESTER to know that your computer could be made to do things twice as fast if you did your job as a programmer right. There is a discrepancy between the hardware capability and the end product.
Pushing the technology to the limit is what brings about the need and desire for new technology.
Yep, your modern day OS is pushing your hardware to the limit, but too much of that is not doing anything useful.
-
No, but I remember editing raw full screen PAL overscan video, which has 4 times the amount of pixels per frame than your average 320x200 youtube rubbish. If I can't watch a youtube video with that same G3 then that just proves the point about how aerated the youtube/flash code is, not how incapable the hardware is.
Yes, I've edited full-screen video on a G3 to, and still routinely do it on my G4. My point is that mainstream things like Flash video are bloated massively, but they're also a staple of modern communications and need the raw horsepower to overcome the bloat. That's unfortunate but that's the way it is, and that's why my G3 and G4 Macs, while still suited to video editing, aren't suited to casual web browsing., whereas a Core 2 Duo Mac is.
For a minute there i thought you "just didn't get it", but seems thats only partially true.
Don't patronise me just because I don't fully agree with you. There's nothing you've said that I "didn't get" but some of what you say doesn't make sense. If you have x amount of information you want to process, of course you need >x memory to process it. No amount of efficient, assembly programming is going to change that.
-
I really hate these "trash windows" fests... XP draws the desktop completely differently than Windows Vista and Windows 7. There is a new compositing engine that XP and before doesn't have. That's why Windows XP desktop refreshes are so badly done.. AERO is a completely different animal. As far as the 100 byte or so file that you are talking about how about fetch and superfetch which caches up files.. I swear if you guys really knew more about Windows internals this topic could at least be a fair comparison. Windows actually builds on many of the things that made the Amiga so popular initially.
The last time I used XP it was 2006.. Do you realize how ridiculous it is to compare something like Windows 7 to the Amiga and believe me folks I know the classic AmigaOS and Workbench and Intuition backwards and forwards and learned it back in 1985-86. It hasn't changed ALL that MUCH..
Windows is a very different beast in many ways and is doing so much stuff behind the scenes that if the AmigaOS did all that it's doing, it would probably be performing similarly as well..
XP is dead and has been dead for two revs of Windows already.. get over it..
I love the Amiga, I own Macs and Windows boxes love them too.. I don't have performance issues with Windows or Mac anymore it really just doesn't exist if you have a relatively new machine and you are up-to-date with your OS..
I can do UI development, animation, etc. anything I want really twice as fast as i could with the Amiga because of all of the tools today like Expression Blend..
Y'all need to get CURRENT if you want this to be a more interesting argument..
Oh and as for the G3 G4 Mac and intel Mac Video editing comments.. None of the Mac's video is hardware accelerated by the GPU. Apple just finally released an SDK to support GPU accelerated video on macs (the CPU did it all up until now and Apple finally admits this) this came in the update for OS X 10.6.3 and isn't even support all video cards yet on apple products. It also only works on the intel ONLY snow leopard release..
So when you go to talk about how slow and bloated Flash is on the Mac, remember Apple uses your CPU for all it's worth to display video. That's why it's slow it's not that Flash is badly programmed. All other platforms that flash has access to are fully GPU accelerated. The mac version up until now has been doing something people refer to as GPUCPU acceleration (not using the NVIDIA or ATI processors)..
So the comments you guys are talking about really don't hold water..
-
No, the point thats eluded you is I only NEEDED ONE SEMESTER to know that your computer could be made to do things twice as fast if you did your job as a programmer right.
If that's your conclusion then you didn't really learn anything at all.
EDIT: I mean, have you seen the sourcecode for any OS, and how do you know that they haven't already gone through the step of "making it do things twice as fast"? Just because you got your own(?) program to work twice as fast as before doesn't even mean that you did your job right.
-
I really hate these "trash windows" fests... XP draws the desktop completely differently than Windows Vista and Windows 7. There is a new compositing engine that XP and before doesn't have. That's why Windows XP desktop refreshes are so badly done.. AERO is a completely different animal.
Love the pace of progress: 20 years later and they got the desktop to refresh decently. Mind you they needed multiple CPU's, GPU's and several gigabytes of ram to do it. Great, Pat On The Back MS.
As far as the 100 byte or so file that you are talking about how about fetch and superfetch which caches up files..
And yet it still has to visibly populate its start menu one program at a time.
I swear if you guys really knew more about Windows internals this topic could at least be a fair comparison. Windows actually builds on many of the things that made the Amiga so popular initially.
The last time I used XP it was 2006.. . Do you realize how ridiculous it is to compare something like Windows 7 to the Amiga and believe me folks I know the classic AmigaOS and Workbench and Intuition backwards and forwards and learned it back in 1985-86. It hasn't changed ALL that MUCH..
Windows is a very different beast in many ways and is doing so much stuff behind the scenes that if the AmigaOS did all that it's doing, it would probably be performing similarly as well..
XP is dead and has been dead for two revs of Windows already.. get over it..
Umm XP is what most of the world uses.
I love the Amiga, I own Macs and Windows boxes love them too.. I don't have performance issues with Windows or Mac anymore it really just doesn't exist if you have a relatively new machine and you are up-to-date with your OS..
I can do UI development, animation, etc. anything I want really twice as fast as i could with the Amiga because of all of the tools today like Expression Blend..
Hmmmm, TWICE is fast. With um, what factor increase in CPU power, RAM, etc, etc?
Is the penny dropping?
Y'all need to get CURRENT if you want this to be a more interesting argument..
Oh and as for the G3 G4 Mac and intel Mac Video editing comments.. None of the Mac's video is hardware accelerated by the GPU. Apple just finally released an SDK to support GPU accelerated video on macs (the CPU did it all up until now and Apple finally admits this) this came in the update for OS X 10.6.3 and isn't even support all video cards yet on apple products. It also only works on the intel ONLY snow leopard release..
So when you go to talk about how slow and bloated Flash is on the Mac, remember Apple uses your CPU for all it's worth to display video. That's why it's slow it's not that Flash is badly programmed. All other platforms that flash has access to are fully GPU accelerated. The mac version up until now has been doing something people refer to as GPUCPU acceleration (not using the NVIDIA or ATI processors)..
So the comments you guys are talking about really don't hold water..
Umm the G3 video argument was begun by me when someone said that video editing was something that became mainstream for the past 5 years. Well, we were editing digital video in 1998 with G3 over firwire, playing back full screen PAL overscan. So if the G3 can do that why can't it play youtube's shitty 320x200 flash video? Beacsue flash is a bloated POS, so bloated as you said, it needs GPU accleration to run. Hell multicore multighz, multigig ram aint enough to stream a 320x200 video without maxing the CPU out. And you folks are OK with that? Unbelievable. But thats where we've ended up now, keep re-inventing the wheel, and marvel at what you can do with it
-
This redraw argument is total b*llocks.
I have 2 RTG equipped 68040 amigas. Both machines have a visible redraw of the background whenever a layer is closed. Whilst it is true that only the area that was obscured is redrawn, the fact is that it is highly conspicuous. The only time you don't notice it is if you have the default "colour index zero" as your background.
-
This redraw argument is total b*llocks.
I have 2 RTG equipped 68040 amigas. Both machines have a visible redraw of the background whenever a layer is closed. Whilst it is true that only the area that was obscured is redrawn, the fact is that it is highly conspicuous. The only time you don't notice it is if you have the default "colour index zero" as your background.
i don't have my CV64 68060 A4000 to check it up and running, but I don't remember any re-draw delays. At least AmigaOS doesn't feel the need to re-draw every icon on the desktop just for the hell of it.
-
If that's your conclusion then you didn't really learn anything at all.
EDIT: I mean, have you seen the sourcecode for any OS, and how do you know that they haven't already gone through the step of "making it do things twice as fast"? Just because you got your own(?) program to work twice as fast as before doesn't even mean that you did your job right.
Only what I can see: Look at Vista and then Win 7. Why such a difference, if they got "things running twice as fast" with Vista. Clearly they didn't. Why should you beleive that they did with Win 7?
-
i don't have my CV64 68060 A4000 to check it up and running, but I don't remember any re-draw delays. At least AmigaOS doesn't feel the need to re-draw every icon on the desktop just for the hell of it.
Well open a drawer on the amiga with a lot of icons in it and see how long that takes to draw compared to a Windows.
And at the end of the day when hardware is so cheap and getting fasteqr why bother making na tight OS there relly is no need. So I still fail to see what your agument is ?
-
Only what I can see: Look at Vista and then Win 7. Why such a difference, if they got "things running twice as fast" with Vista. Clearly they didn't. Why should you beleive that they did with Win 7?
Because there's really no such thing as "things running twice as fast", that's something you made up. There's always room for improvement, but YOU certainly don't know where things can be improved and where not.
And following you own example, maybe Vista was like your(?) program before you rewrote it and Win 7 is the program after it was rewritten.
-
i don't have my CV64 68060 A4000 to check it up and running, but I don't remember any re-draw delays. At least AmigaOS doesn't feel the need to re-draw every icon on the desktop just for the hell of it.
Well, on both my 8MB Permedia2/CGX 4 and 32MB Voodoo3000/P96 I see it in OS3.1, 3.5 and 3.9. I think I even noticed it in OS4.0 on the Permedia, though it was less conspicuous.
Just stick a nice workbench background image, open a few windows, move them, resize them, close them. I even notice it when using a fill colour (in wbpattern prefs) other than the default grey.
If you don't get a similar visible redraw, let me know what your settings are and I'll try them. The smart/simple refresh only seems to apply to window contents (GUI gadgets) on my machines.
-
Im not following this thread... but wow it seems popular :P
-
WTF? This is the desktop we are talking about here. How about just drawing an icon when the program is added and deleting it when the program is removed? Other OS's seem to do fine without re-drawing the whole fricken thing even when nothing is added or removed. In XP, the World's most used OS this can even results in generic icons replacing the originals
You know every time you do something the screen redraws stuff?
You just don't see it because it happens mighty fast? Unless you think the GUI has 2049204980 layers and thats how you can open hundreds of windows and still be able to see what's behind them.
Look up clipping. Maybe a semester of things like that will make you the master of GUIs also.
Right. How about indexing that as you go along, storing that in 500 byte file at the last shutdown, and all being ready to go when you next boot up,taking a microsecond to load at the next boot? And for all the Win 7 talk, XP is still by far the most used OS on the planet. Try launching from the start menu in a fully populated PC and see how long XP takes to draw its menus and icons
Lol, I think you're the only person whose 7 box can't handle the start menu. Like I said, 4 fully loaded Win7 machines over here don't exhibit these issues. They're just as snappy, if not snappier than XP.
And, XP is still the most widely used because it's been in use for what a decade now? Windows 7 hasn't been commercially out for a year yet really...
Give it some time and it will replace XP on all fronts.
No, the point thats eluded you is I only NEEDED ONE SEMESTER to know that your computer could be made to do things twice as fast if you did your job as a programmer right. There is a discrepancy between the hardware capability and the end product.
The point didn't elude me, because it doesn't exist. I like how you keep saying you are saying things that elude the rest of us, and that we don't get things.
Sorry, one semester of programming is not going to make you an expert on anything. People like you are the people I laugh at in school. "I GOT MY PROJECTS TO WORK THEREFORE I AM AN EXPERT.". Putsy university assignments teach you the bare ass basics of everything. If you think you could now walk into M$, sit down and optimize all of their OS stuff, then you are a complete goon.
I took two semesters of operating systems courses. I have a CS degree, and soon to be a masters. Still, I'm not going to pretend I know enough quite yet to make judgements on an a company with an OS that has been around since I was still wearing diapers. There is crap going on in Windows that would make me pee my pants trying to work with it.
It takes way more than a semester of jerking off to actually know/understand these complex/advanced/intricate/massive projects like full blown commercial OS's.
Yep, your modern day OS is pushing your hardware to the limit, but too much of that is not doing anything useful.
My level 80 warrior is pretty useful. He likes Windows 7 quite alot.
-
I like JJ's avatar !
As for icons and start menus, I'm hungry !
-
@Karlos
I just noticed the redraw in AmigaOS on one of my machines, I guess I had been ignoring it until you mentioned it! Funny how one's mind adjusts to things...
-
@Karlos
I just noticed the redraw in AmigaOS on one of my machines, I guess I had been ignoring it until you mentioned it! Funny how one's mind adjusts to things...
Once you've used a compositing GUI, the old "redraw on expose" methods suddenly look a bit dated. This applies to most user systems, not just OS3.x.
-
Right. How about indexing that as you go along, storing that in 500 byte file at the last shutdown, and all being ready to go when you next boot up,taking a microsecond to load at the next boot? And for all the Win 7 talk, XP is still by far the most used OS on the planet. Try launching from the start menu in a fully populated PC and see how long XP takes to draw its menus and icons
Really, do you honestly think the delay when you first access the start menu is caused by having to search a directory tree to see what to populate the menu with? I don't really think that's the killer. Somehow I suspect that physically loading all the icon images and producing their scaled versions for the menu takes longer than that. Then it's all cached for the remainder of your session.
-
requires more than double that memory space-more likely at least 4 times- just let you make the computer do something?
(http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q285/the_leander/Webcomic_xkcd_-_Wikipedian_prote-1.png)
Right back at ya
You really don't see why its Not A Good Thing that you have 10x hardware resources to do things 3 or 4 x as well, if you are lucky.
(http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q285/the_leander/Webcomic_xkcd_-_Wikipedian_prote-1.png)
There might be, somewhere. But I doubt it. Windows is programmed by large committees. Big apps are probably the same. Anything done by committee processes is guaranteed to be inefficient.
(http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q285/the_leander/Webcomic_xkcd_-_Wikipedian_prote-1.png)
No becacuse you're the only person thats ever opened more than on layer in photoshop. Layers, are one of the least efficeint ways to image process, but its The Industry Standard, so it must be good, right?
If you can provide a more "resource efficient" way of doing non-destructive image editing that is at least as quick as the current method, be my guest. Right now whilst it is the industry standard, it doesn't make it a bad thing either.
Professional magazine photographers have been opening up images in photoshop for more than 10 years with a fraction of the RAM.
And having to go slow whenever they hit a very large scale image and/or falling back to analogue methods for truly huge images.
I'm convinced that most shots are taken at higher resolutions than needed, just beascsue they can.
Yeah because hazy out of focus looking billboards look fantastic when you've paid tens of millions of dollars in advertising.
I have a digital publishing and design graphics magazine from 2000. 3 Megapixels cameras were the next big thing. Now they'll shoot the same photo at 12 megapixels, and complain they don't have enough ram in Photoshop to open it .
Well not updating your computer for 10 years will bring up these sorts of issues. Then again I'd expect that from someone determined to harangue anyone daring to step outside of their 80's timewarp.
In 1998, my school was using G3 imac with firewire to do all that shit-with about a tenth of the hardware specs.
ITT: stefcep2 pulls more numbers out of his backside.
You only think we've come a long way..
And patronises anyone who dares to disagree with him.
Also LOL@ your single semester of programming experience.
-
Well not updating your computer for 10 years will bring up these sorts of issues. Then again I'd expect that from someone determined to harangue anyone daring to step outside of their 80's timewarp.
It's just a jump to the left!
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/a8-T0ZvXLYQ/0.jpg)
AND THEN A STEP TO THE RIGHT!
Also LOL@ your single semester of programming experience.
His textbook of choice:
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1338/534996407_fc243bdd39_o.jpg)
-
It's just a jump to the left!
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/a8-T0ZvXLYQ/0.jpg)
AND THEN A STEP TO THE RIGHT!
Damn you sir, damn you straight to hell - I can't get that damn song out of my head now! :lol:
His textbook of choice:
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1338/534996407_fc243bdd39_o.jpg)
:laughing:
-
Isn't it pretty easy to calculate the amount of memory needed for an image? I think 1024x768x24 = 2.5MB. So therefore 4096x3072 x 24 = 100MB. It should give you plenty of room in a lowly 1GB system.
-
Isn't it pretty easy to calculate the amount of memory needed for an image? I think 1024x768x24 = 2.5MB. So therefore 4096x3072 x 24 = 100MB. It should give you plenty of room in a lowly 1GB system.
It's 24 bits per pixel, which is 3 bytes. This means it's 1024x768x3 and 4096x3072x3.
-
It's 24 bits per pixel, which is 3 bytes. This means it's 1024x768x3 and 4096x3072x3.
Most 24-bit displays are actually 32-bit, since 3 byte alignment is the devil's work. When an 24-bit image is loaded for display purposes it is often converted to a 32-bit representation in which one byte (normally used for alpha channel) is ignored.
Packed pixel modes, where 3 bytes are used to represent a pixel on screen are generally the preserve of old display cards.
-
Hey, don't knock lolcode :lol:
-
I am banned from amiga.org many years ago. Hehe....
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia9DDJF4Kk8
I did not make this.
I did however, laugh at it.
-
On a serious note, regarding the "slow" speed of UI response, I think stefcep2 has totally overlooked the important point that a lot of it is deliberate.
He might want menus and the like to instantly flicker in and out of view as he's skimming his mouse through them but most ordinary users are disturbed by it. Consequently, delays are built into a lot of UI systems for the benefit of the end user.
As a worked example, gnome is no different. When you access the menus, there is a delay before each sub menu opens. Is this because the design is "sh*t", badly coded and in desperate need of optimization? No.
If you don't believe me, try editing (or creating if it doesn't already exist) your ~/.gtkrc-2.0 configuration file and changing/adding as appropriate the following:
gtk-menu-popup-delay = 0
Then restart gnome...
-
yes.
Kind of like "tool tip delay"
if that crap was just instantly blasting into view every time you mouse over stuff, people would develop epilepsy
-
I am banned from amiga.org many years ago. Hehe....
Cool ! Some desperately need a tutorial ! :razz:
-
Most 24-bit displays are actually 32-bit, since 3 byte alignment is the devil's work. When an 24-bit image is loaded for display purposes it is often converted to a 32-bit representation in which one byte (normally used for alpha channel) is ignored.
Packed pixel modes, where 3 bytes are used to represent a pixel on screen are generally the preserve of old display cards.
Of course they are, I know that, but he was talking about 24 bits, not 32 ;)