Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: runequester on June 16, 2010, 08:11:49 AM
-
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
-
Take a look at this wideo from 2009. there have been two more updates after this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx3q2wFIn6k
-
I quite like it actually! It's basically OS3.9 on steroids. 4.0 was fine, but the compositing in 4.1 is excellent, and even though it's quite superficial, it makes it feel that bit more modern. AmigaInput lets you use USB controllers for games, including older games which use lowlevel.library. Pretty much any older software I've wanted to run has worked just fine, and the version of E-UAE is there for those apps which hit the hardware or do illegal things. These, and various other small things like them make it overall a nice experience.
-
I quite like it actually! It's basically OS3.9 on steroids. 4.0 was fine, but the compositing in 4.1 is excellent, and even though it's quite superficial, it makes it feel that bit more modern. AmigaInput lets you use USB controllers for games, including older games which use lowlevel.library. Pretty much any older software I've wanted to run has worked just fine, and the version of E-UAE is there for those apps which hit the hardware or do illegal things. These, and various other small things like them make it overall a nice experience.
what machine are you running it on ?
-
It's the machine I use most, I think that speaks for itself... I also have a moderately beefy PC, a Classic Amiga (towered 4000 w/CSPPC), an iMica running AROS (which is also much improved as of late) and others, but the AmigaOne is the machine I use the most by far.
Very impressed with OS 4 here, it's very fast and does exactly what I want it to do when I want it to do it - that's what I ask of my OSes.
-
I use it on an AmigaOne XE and love it. Your own experience will of course depend on what you'd like to do with it and what are your expectations.
Varthall
-
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
It's fine although it's slower and more primitive than MorphOS*(it's quite noticeable if you compare MorphOS1.4.5 and OS4 on Classics, it's slower in almost every way: 2d graphics, 3d graphics, hd access, worst access to other filesystems, slower/worse usb support...). Lack of cheap hardware doesn't make it funnier. OS4 alpha-beta software (even SDL ports) are usually announced like they had discovered sliced bread even thought it's usually released 4-5 years later than stable MorphOS ports. Commercial software like DvPlayer is worse than free MorphOS software like MPlayer. They had to do bounties to bring Apache+MySQL+PHP to OS4 while MorphOS users enjoyed it since the beginning. USB2.0 has been publicly available on MorphOS for years.
OS4 hardware is usually both slower and more expensive. When they released Sam440 5 years later than Peg2/G4 they did that at the same price despiting it was much slower. Today Peg2 is still faster than the machines released 5 years later (Sam440).
I switched to MorphOS on a G4/1.5Ghz Mac Mini and I'm happy now. Most of my friends who are still active amiga users have jumped to MorphOS too. We can enjoy a decent computer right now without waiting for vapourware. Try to watch HD video on those Sam440. Try to watch youtube directly in your browser on a Sam440. With Fab's OWB even on an old Peg1 with g3/600 youtube videos are played smoothly fullscreen without the need of 3rd party apps like getvideo/tubexx.
If you are interested on OS4 get a second hand Peg2.
-
I enjoy using OS4 on my SAM, but admittedly I view said SAM 440 and OS4 as strictly a hobby/nostalgia machine. It simply won't do the things I'd expect out of a primary computer.
-
It's fine although it's slower and more primitive than MorphOS*(it's quite noticeable if you compare MorphOS1.4.5 and OS4 on Classics, it's slower in almost every way: 2d graphics, 3d graphics, hd access, worst access to other filesystems, slower/worse usb support...). Lack of cheap hardware doesn't make it funnier. OS4 alpha-beta software (even SDL ports) are usually announced like they had discovered sliced bread even thought it's usually released 4-5 years later than stable MorphOS ports.
I don't know much software for OS4 which is labelled as alpha/beta, most of the software released there are stable versions, and not all of the software for OS4 has a MOS version.
Commercial software like DvPlayer is worse than free MorphOS software like MPlayer.
Not a problem since MPlayer exists for OS4 too, and it's free as well. From my experience, DVPlayer handle DVDs better than MPlayer.
They had to do bounties to bring Apache+MySQL+PHP to OS4 while MorphOS users enjoyed it since the beginning.
Who cares how a software has been ported, what's important is that the software exists :-)
OS4 hardware is usually both slower and more expensive.
You cannot really compare prices since all the hardware available for MOS is second-hand only.
When they released Sam440 5 years later than Peg2/G4 they did that at the same price despiting it was much slower. Today Peg2 is still faster than the machines released 5 years later (Sam440).
We'll see how will the Sam460 compare with the Peg2, the new Sam should be shipping in September I have read.
I switched to MorphOS on a G4/1.5Ghz Mac Mini and I'm happy now. Most of my friends who are still active amiga users have jumped to MorphOS too. We can enjoy a decent computer right now without waiting for vapourware. Try to watch HD video on those Sam440. Try to watch youtube directly in your browser on a Sam440. With Fab's OWB even on an old Peg1 with g3/600 youtube videos are played smoothly fullscreen without the need of 3rd party apps like getvideo/tubexx.
That will be probably fixed with a future Timberwolf release with support for HTML5 videos. BTW MOS currently lacks a Firefox port.
Ok, now you have listed all the negative aspects of OS4, now you are missing the positive one :-)
Varthall
-
@Crumb
MorphOS blows.
-
4.1 is great. If you are used to Workbench you will like what you get definitely. Its like the jump between 3.1 and 3.9 instead its a lot smoother than any 060 will ever be with transparant windows, opaque window movement etc...
-
I switched to MorphOS on a G4/1.5Ghz Mac Mini and I'm happy now. Most of my friends who are still active amiga users have jumped to MorphOS too. We can enjoy a decent computer right now without waiting for vapourware. Try to watch HD video on those Sam440. Try to watch youtube directly in your browser on a Sam440. With Fab's OWB even on an old Peg1 with g3/600 youtube videos are played smoothly fullscreen without the need of 3rd party apps like getvideo/tubexx.
If you are interested on OS4 get a second hand Peg2.
Shouldn't you be comparing the Sam440 with the Efika, rather than the Peg1? Bit of an unfair contest otherwise, I would have thought.
-
@Crumb
MorphOS blows.
That comment is as constructive as this comment. Surley you could go a bit deeper than using "Blows" as an statement of a OS? But what do I know...
-
I don't know much software for OS4 which is labelled as alpha/beta, most of the software released there are stable versions, and not all of the software for OS4 has a MOS version.
Not a problem since MPlayer exists for OS4 too, and it's free as well. From my experience, DVPlayer handle DVDs better than MPlayer.
Erm, MPlayer has more complete and faster support for DVD than DVPlayer (and don't blame the DVPlayer author, it's really quite some work to support it fully, even when reusing ffmpeg), and it even supports DVD menus (experimental, though). Whether the OS4 MPlayer port supports all this correctly is another matter. :)
That will be probably fixed with a future Timberwolf release with support for HTML5 videos. BTW MOS currently lacks a Firefox port.
Timberwolf already has HTML5 video support, but only for Theora, not H264, which is used in Youtube, Dailymotion, Vimeo and a couple others. However, google is pushing its VP8 codec. So, if FireFox 3.7 is ported to OS4, you'll get VP8 support, and only then, you'll have a chance to play youtube in timberwolf (except if you get flash first, but i seriously doubt it).
-
Erm, MPlayer has more complete and faster support for DVD than DVPlayer (and don't blame the DVPlayer author, it's really quite some work to support it fully, even when reusing ffmpeg), and it even supports DVD menus (experimental, though). Whether the OS4 MPlayer port supports all this correctly is another matter. :)
My comparison was in fact with the OS4 version of MPlayer, since runequester was asking only about OS4 on its own.
Timberwolf already has HTML5 video support, but only for Theora, not H264, which is used in Youtube, Dailymotion, Vimeo and a couple others. However, google is pushing its VP8 codec. So, if FireFox 3.7 is ported to OS4, you'll get VP8 support, and only then, you'll have a chance to play youtube in timberwolf (except if you get flash first, but i seriously doubt it).
The Friedens are working on the Firefox 3.7 codebase now:
http://os4depot.net/index.php?function=showfile&file=network/browser/timberwolf_install.lha
Varthall
-
Shouldn't you be comparing the Sam440 with the Efika, rather than the Peg1? Bit of an unfair contest otherwise, I would have thought.
You have a point there Karlos, since both builds on "G2" class CPU's, and of course Sam should win in performance there (the Efika is only 400MHz, while the Sam's CPU is clocked above 600 MHz AFAIK). The Efika is quite limited, it's biggest limitation compared to the Sam is perhaps the 128MB RAM (and slower IDE, only 2 USB 1.1, etc).
The strongest and most prominent feature of the Efika is without doubt its price:
Efika motherboard: $99.00 USD
18 Gauge Steel Vented EFIKA Case Kit: $99.99 USD
Motherboard + Case combo: $169.99 USD (add a HDD and GFX card if you want to, and then you have a complete computer)
http://search.directron.us/newsearch.php?find=efika
But since nobody who wants a good performing *desktop* machine would never buy a "G2" class machine anyway, comparisons from a *desktop* point of view are a little skew. If you have a cool little HW project going, like building a small LAN connected music player or whatever ideas your creativity has put in your mind, then the "G2" Efika is an interesting option. But if what you are looking for is a machine capable of taking on the role of a *desktop* machine, like playing modern media files, browsing heavy websites with rich media content, run emulation, compiling big projects, etc, then you would definitely want a computer with L2 cache at the least (a "G3") and preferably Altivec as well ("G4") and a clock frequency above 1GHz. Especially if you want to do several of those things at the same time.
So from a desktop POV it would be more relevant to compare it to eMac's and Mac Mini's instead. MorphOS on a Mac Mini 1.42GHz plays HD 720p x264 video streams smoothly, while (AFAIK) the "G2" Sam frameskips on DVD/MPEG2.
You can get eMac's with G4 @ 1.25GHz for about $50-$100 USD.
You can get Mac Mini's G4 @ 1.42 GHz for about $150-$250 USD. (The 1.5GHz/64MB VRAM version can be slightly more expensive)
(EDIT: Here is for example a Mac Mini 1.5GHz/64MB VRAM (http://cgi.ebay.com/APPLE-MAC-MINI-1-5-G4-COMBO-AP-BT-DVI-OUT-GREAT-SHAPE-/230487559982?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Apple_Desktops&hash=item35aa210f2e#ht_1109wt_1137) on e-bay whose auction is about to end. Current bid: US $177.50, Buy Now: US $300.00)
-
@tmhg
I thought the slowest Sam ran at ~400MHz ish?
-
I don't know much software for OS4 which is labelled as alpha/beta, most of the software released there are stable versions, and not all of the software for OS4 has a MOS version.
I can't think of much OS4 software without better MorphOS equivalent. Most software news for OS4 consist in SDL ports compiled with "make" with almost 0 changes. When the port is slightly difficult it usually comes from MorphOS ports that were done years ago.
Not a problem since MPlayer exists for OS4 too, and it's free as well. From my experience, DVPlayer handle DVDs better than MPlayer.
Perhaps with OS4 Mplayer version, that always has lagged behind MorphOS one (MorphOS*version was the original port that made possible AROS/OS4/OS3 ports and it's the one better maintained and most stable).
Who cares how a software has been ported, what's important is that the software exists :-)
well, my point is that a lot of software already exists in MorphOS right now without spamming amiga webs with newsitems about quick ports.
You cannot really compare prices since all the hardware available for MOS is second-hand only.
Of course I can.*Efikas are new and cost 99$. OS4 owners don't have problems in using second hand hardware either (just look at the amount of betatesters that sold their uA1s when Pegasos2 port was announced).
I can buy various*Mac Minis for the price of a full Sam440.
We'll see how will the Sam460 compare with the Peg2, the new Sam should be shipping in September I have read.
Well, I would expect that any hardware released 5 years later and sold at a similar price should be both faster and better. That Sam460 is a hackish board with some strange incompatibilities that block SATA if you want to fit a proper gfx card so users are forced to fit a PCI*SATA card in the PCI slot. Anyway that embedded cpu only has a few KB of L2 cache (so it really needs DDR ram) and lacks Altivec instrutions*(something not wise for a Multimedia computer). For OS4 users Peg2 is still much better option that L2-Cache less Sam440
That will be probably fixed with a future Timberwolf release with support for HTML5 videos. BTW MOS currently lacks a Firefox port.
It's not about quantity but quality: MorphOS OWB is way better than Timberwolf, I can already watch youtube videos fullscreen on an old Peg1/600 directly. BTW, MorphOS OWB is way ahead than Strohmayer's OWB*port too.
If we take into account the quality of past Frieden ports:*Quake3, Blender... there's nothing that makes us think that they are going to be able to release a finished, polished version in a reasonable timeframe.
-
Shouldn't you be comparing the Sam440 with the Efika, rather than the Peg1? Bit of an unfair contest otherwise, I would have thought.
since Peg2 is already cheaper than Sam440 and both run OS4 I think it's fair. Efika can be bought new but doesn't run OS4. With Peg2 the user can run both OS4 and MorphOS. I would get a G4 Mac Mini anyway.
I would get a G4 Mac Mini and enjoy it instead of waiting for vapourware and vague promises.
-
since Peg2 is already cheaper than Sam440 and both run OS4 I think it's fair. Efika can be bought new but doesn't run OS4. With Peg2 the user can run both OS4 and MorphOS.
No, this comparison is not fair. Your comparison was on performance. You said:
Try to watch HD video on those Sam440. Try to watch youtube directly in your browser on a Sam440. With Fab's OWB even on an old Peg1 with g3/600 youtube videos are played smoothly fullscreen without the need of 3rd party apps like getvideo/tubexx.
You were thus comparing the performance of an OS running on a 400MHz class G2 system with a rival OS running on a 600MHz G3 class machine.
Any way you look at it, that is a stilted comparison.
-
@Karlos
there are >800Mhz Sam440 (and Sam440 range begins at 533Mhz). But it will always be an "unfair" comparison because releasing that stuff (no altivec, no L2cache, low clockspeed) 5 years later than peg2/G4 was a very bad idea.
We may also add that it's unfair to compare hardware released with 5 years of difference but it's ACube's fault.
Nowadays for something around 500Euros we may expect at least some dualcore altivec powered cpu running at more than 1,5Ghz. Something like MPC8641D. That would be the minimum after Pegasos2 was released 5 years ago.
-
It's fine although it's slower and more primitive than MorphOS*(it's quite noticeable if you compare MorphOS1.4.5 and OS4 on Classics, it's slower in almost every way: 2d graphics, 3d graphics, hd access, worst access to other filesystems, slower/worse usb support...).
sorry Crumb but i don't agree!
In everyday use on my CSPPC, AOS4 is much responsive than Morphos 1.4.5 (with MUI4 and a recent Ambient). If you are speaking about the barebone 1.4.5 with MUI 3.9 the comparision is not fair, because most of the recent apps, requires MUI4 :-)
-
sorry Crumb but i don't agree!
In everyday use on my CSPPC, AOS4 is much responsive than Morphos 1.4.5 (with MUI4 and a recent Ambient). If you are speaking about the barebone 1.4.5 with MUI 3.9 the comparision is not fair, because most of the recent apps, requires MUI4 :-)
Stop using a mui/intuition skin that abuses alpha blending, then (the default one does).
-
how do you know what skin i'm using?
Its slower, period :-) more advanced/bloated but slower.
-
how do you know what skin i'm using?
Its slower, period :-) more advanced/bloated but slower.
People tend to use default configuration and skins, and i repeat, that config was way too heavy for a classic configuration (antialiased truetype fonts, blending, ...). Maybe you also use serial debug, which wouldn't be a good idea, considering that MUI4 build was some debug version.
But with a suited skin/fonts, it can't be slower than OS4, no. :)
-
People tend to use default configuration and skins, and i repeat, that config was way too heavy for a classic configuration (antialiased truetype fonts, blending, ...). Maybe you also use serial debug, which wouldn't be a good idea, considering that MUI4 build was some debug version.
But with a suited skin/fonts, it can't be slower than OS4, no. :)
i have to insist .... it is :-)
-
sorry Crumb but i don't agree!
In everyday use on my CSPPC, AOS4 is much responsive than Morphos 1.4.5 (with MUI4 and a recent Ambient). If you are speaking about the barebone 1.4.5 with MUI 3.9 the comparision is not fair, because most of the recent apps, requires MUI4 :-)
You must have some configuration problem with your setup then because MorphOS gfx are way faster and is much more responsive than OS4 (e.g. moving solid windows is way smoother in MorphOS), don't get me started on HD access speed. BTW, you can install both MUI4 and a more recent build of Ambient on 1.4.5 (just like you install boinbags on OS4). That's the way I use it and OWB and MPlayer work quite better than their OS4 counterpads too. IIRC*I stripped debuginfo from my Ambient&MUI4 files.
MorphOS team activated some delays in the menus, go to MUI prefs and reduce them to 0. My CSPPC with Picasso4/CV64/CV3D is way faster with MorphOS than it is with OS4.x (even if I use Prometheus/Mediator4000 with Voodoo3 on OS4 side). There was also some problem with the fonts as default settings try to use some fonts that are not there.
PS:*It's not just my hardware as I tested OS4/MOS with different hardware (computers, ppc boards, gfx cards... many comments in ACube compatibility list are mine in fact). On A1200 with OS4 for example is almost mandatory to switch off OS4 skin and go back to an OS3-like skin if you want to avoid turtle-like performance. With MorphOS it's not so slow even with the most basic BlizzardPPC. I tested 4 different CSPPC (180-233Mhz) with different computers A3000, A4000, A4000T... also a pair of BlizzardPPC*(240Mhz and 160Mhz models) and various gfx cards like RetinaZ3, PicassoII, GVP*Spectrum, CV64/3D, CV64, PicassoIV, Permedia2, Voodoo3...
-
I can't think of much OS4 software without better MorphOS equivalent.
Some of them are quite important, though: Abiword and Gnumeric, or Timberwolf.
Most software news for OS4 consist in SDL ports compiled with "make" with almost 0 changes. When the port is slightly difficult it usually comes from MorphOS ports that were done years ago.
Where did you get this information?
Perhaps with OS4 Mplayer version, that always has lagged behind MorphOS one (MorphOS*version was the original port that made possible AROS/OS4/OS3 ports and it's the one better maintained and most stable).
And it's only with the Os4 version that you should do the comparison, since the original poster has asked opinion on OS4 itself, not a comparison with MOS or other OSes. The fact that OS4's version of Mplayer lags behind MOS' one doesn't make it less useful.
well, my point is that a lot of software already exists in MorphOS right now without spamming amiga webs with newsitems about quick ports.
Which is not the topic of this thread.
Of course I can.*Efikas are new and cost 99$.
AFAIK Efikas are still sold as new, but they are not produced anymore. Anyway, Efikas are more limited in specs and expandibility than Sams.
OS4 owners don't have problems in using second hand hardware either (just look at the amount of betatesters that sold their uA1s when Pegasos2 port was announced).
Ok, but then compare second hand OS4 machines with second hand ones for MOS.
I can buy various*Mac Minis for the price of a full Sam440.
You can buy various USED Mac Minis for the price of an USED Sam440, perhaps.
Well, I would expect that any hardware released 5 years later and sold at a similar price should be both faster and better.
I hoped that too, but it seems that ACube's financial possibilities at the time were too limited to allow it.
That Sam460 is a hackish board
Define hackish.
with some strange incompatibilities that block SATA if you want to fit a proper gfx card so users are forced to fit a PCI*SATA card in the PCI slot.
Why? Are gfx cards incompatible with 4x slots, and work only in 1x ones?
Anyway that embedded cpu only has a few KB of L2 cache (so it really needs DDR ram) and lacks Altivec instrutions*(something not wise for a Multimedia computer).
But how much will these two missing features affect the overall performance of the board?
For OS4 users Peg2 is still much better option that L2-Cache less Sam440
Unless the buyer isn't more interested in new hardware.
It's not about quantity but quality: MorphOS OWB is way better than Timberwolf, I can already watch youtube videos fullscreen on an old Peg1/600 directly. BTW, MorphOS OWB is way ahead than Strohmayer's OWB*port too.
How many plugins are available for OWB, compared to Firefox?
If we take into account the quality of past Frieden ports:*Quake3, Blender... there's nothing that makes us think that they are going to be able to release a finished, polished version in a reasonable timeframe.
What you don't like about theirs Quake3 port?
Varthall
-
You must have some configuration problem with your setup then because MorphOS gfx are way faster and is much more responsive than OS4, don't get me started on HD access speed. BTW, you can install both MUI4 and a more recent build of Ambient on 1.4.5 (just like you install boinbags on OS4)
MorphOS team activated some delays in the menus, go to MUI prefs and reduce them to 0. My CSPPC with Picasso4/CV64 is way faster with MorphOS than it is with OS4.x (even if I use Prometheus/Mediator4000 with Voodoo3 on OS4 side).
Crumb ... i have used Morphos 1.4.5 for Classic since the very first release and it is slower than AOS4. Threr's nothing you or me can do to change this. On some "more powerful" (lol) machines you won't notice all this slowness but on a classic 200 Mhz machine, you will (above all with a BPPC). as i said is more advanced but too bloated for classic.
-
How many plugins are available for OWB, compared to Firefox?
MorphOS OWB: 1 * (http://fabportnawak.free.fr/owb/plugins/)
OS4 Timberwolf: 0
We are talking about plugins here, the ones you can check with about:plugins right?
-
@framiga
I*used MorphOS since the first release and also OS4 (years before it was released and years after it was released) and you must have some configuration problem in you MorphOS install because it's faster than OS4 in almost everything. I have used it with Permedia2, G-Rex+Voodoo3, PicassoIV, CV3D and CV64 and gfx were always faster in MorphOS. You can install more recent Ambient builds and also WB, but MorphOS always works faster. No just in my machine but also in my friends ones. Gfx, 68k emulation, I/O, response speed... all is faster with MorphOS. The only missing stuff from 1.4.5 is the tcp/ip stack but you can install mosnet/miamidx/Genesis... even some OS4 beta components like Roadshow 68k ;-)
-
Some of them are quite important, though: Abiword and Gnumeric, or Timberwolf.
X11 ports? no thanks. Any x11 thing on Amiga is an example of quick'n'dirty port that should have never been published.
Timberwolf port is primitive and not really useable compared to any real browser. It's funny you present a pre-alpha crashy thing as a flagship.
Where did you get this information?
go to os4depot. If you take away quick SDL ports and unix cli command apps there's nothing much left that worths to be listed.
And it's only with the Os4 version that you should do the comparison, since the original poster has asked opinion on OS4 itself, not a comparison with MOS or other OSes. The fact that OS4's version of Mplayer lags behind MOS' one doesn't make it less useful.
Since he has the chance of running a better MPlayer version in a Peg2 thanks to MorphOS I think it's quite related.
AFAIK Efikas are still sold as new, but they are not produced anymore. Anyway, Efikas are more limited in specs and expandibility than Sams.
I could say that any ACube hardware is not produced anymore since the produce just a few dozens of boards from time to time. Efikas may be limited but still only cost a fraction of the price of Sam440 and you can try out MorphOS on them for free (just like in any other hardware like Peg2/Mac Mini/PPC*Classics) while you have to pay around 500Euros to try out OS4 on Sam440. I bet the limited Efikas will run Quake2 faster than a 50% faster Sam440. And USB file transfer also works faster on Efikas despiting its limitations.
Ok, but then compare second hand OS4 machines with second hand ones for MOS.
No problem, take any eMac/Mac Mini and enjoy the power of altivec now.
You can buy various USED Mac Minis for the price of an USED Sam440, perhaps.
Sure.
I hoped that too, but it seems that ACube's financial possibilities at the time were too limited to allow it.
The same story Eyetech and others told us: buy this thing you don't really want so we get more money to produce the thing you want. We would be in a far better situation if Moana had been released.*3rd party hardware producers could still release new hardware for those who think having new prototypes sold to endusers is important.
Define hackish.
Sam460.After plugging a decent gfx card and a SATA*PCI card you will have 0 free slots, nothing brilliant.
But how much will these two missing features affect the overall performance of the board?
small cache will make that emulators runs slowly and lack of Altivec will hit multimedia performance and even old Pegasos2/G4 performance may be higher.
Unless the buyer isn't more interested in new hardware.
If buying new prototypes hardly tested, hard to replace and with G2s cpus from decades ago is your idea of "new"... I prefer hardware well tested produced in hundreds of thousands of units, easy to replace, faster and cheaper.
How many plugins are available for OWB, compared to Firefox?
Does any of those Timberwolf plugins allow you to watch youtube videos fullscreen?*no? too bad.
What you don't like about theirs Quake3 port?
It's slow and buggy and even they aknowledged it when it was released "as is".
-
what a silly argument! I can tell you a setup that smokes all of them-my 5 year old P4 with 4G of DDR (not even DDR2!) ram and an Nvidia 7000 series card running E-UAE and OS 3.1 under Linux. Hmm....my browser is the latest firefox...has the latest mplayer...runs WinXP under virtualbox...in other words, there is little to nothing this computer can't handle. For the price of a macmini and morph or the price of OS4 and an X1000 I can build a modern 8-12Gb DDR3 12 core ape-raper that can run everything and anything I could care to. The OP wanted some reasons why OS4 is fun. He evidently doesn't want to buy a mac and morphOS. Cut him some slack and save your "My blue e-penis is bigger than your red e-penis" for IRC.
-
@TheBilgeRat
On a Mac Mini G4 I can run OSX, OS4 alpha, Linux and on MorphOS I also run latest MPlayer and my 68k software probably runs faster than it does in your old P4, just like graphics on MorphOS are faster than UAE*P96 output. BTW, nowadays I*do all my web browsing with OWB.
If a pc suits your amiga needs good for you :-)
-
MorphOS OWB: 1 * (http://fabportnawak.free.fr/owb/plugins/)
OS4 Timberwolf: 0
We are talking about plugins here, the ones you can check with about:plugins right?
Check the generic meaning of plug-in, then see the context of my question to find out what I was referring to.
Varthall
-
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
The Positive users!!!
They dont use EVERY opertunety to downtalk other Operating System....
-
Check the generic meaning of plug-in, then see the context of my question to find out what I was referring to.
Varthall
In a generic meaning OS4 still can't play youtube in a browser.
-
X11 ports? no thanks. Any x11 thing on Amiga is an example of quick'n'dirty port that should have never been published.
What make you say that's quick and dirty? By how stable it is, by its number of feature?
Timberwolf port is primitive and not really useable compared to any real browser. It's funny you present a pre-alpha crashy thing as a flagship.
And yet it's so far the best software on OS4 to e.g. download videos and mp3s from many sites. I find it funny that you imply that it's not usable at all.
go to os4depot. If you take away quick SDL ports and unix cli command apps there's nothing much left that worths to be listed.
And by taking away all the SDL and Unix ports I should realise that every SDL port made for OS4 needed no change to the makefile, or it was derived from MOS? How do you make that connection?
Since he has the chance of running a better MPlayer version in a Peg2 thanks to MorphOS I think it's quite related.
What I see from his question is just "how is OS4", I don't read it as a "please tell me what's the best Amiga environment out there".
I could say that any ACube hardware is not produced anymore since the produce just a few dozens of boards from time to time.
Well, it's just a matter of reference. I could also say that x86 PCs are not produced since they are being produced since only around 30 years which is nothing compared to 2000 years of no PC being produced. But if you choose a reference which is different you really can't continue a discussion.
Efikas may be limited but still only cost a fraction of the price of Sam440 and you can try out MorphOS on them for free (just like in any other hardware like Peg2/Mac Mini/PPC*Classics) while you have to pay around 500Euros to try out OS4 on Sam440.
But Sams are more powerful than Efikas, so the increase in price can be justified. And besides, MOS is anyway OT here.
I bet the limited Efikas will run Quake2 faster than a 50% faster Sam440. And USB file transfer also works faster on Efikas despiting its limitations.
This doesn't help much since OS4 doesn't run on Efika.
No problem, take any eMac/Mac Mini and enjoy the power of altivec now.
Well, you proposed a comparation between OS4 and MOS machines, I guess it's your turn to compare them too.
The same story Eyetech and others told us: buy this thing you don't really want so we get more money to produce the thing you want.
Wow, so you're implying I didn't want to get my AmigaOne?
We would be in a far better situation if Moana had been released.*3rd party hardware producers could still release new hardware for those who think having new prototypes sold to endusers is important.
What is the problem with these?
Sam460.After plugging a decent gfx card and a SATA*PCI card you will have 0 free slots, nothing brilliant.
So, "hackish" = "you don't like".
small cache will make that emulators runs slowly and lack of Altivec will hit multimedia performance and even old Pegasos2/G4 performance may be higher.
Ok, so now you're saying that a Sam460 might not be worse that a Pegasos2 G4. I agree with that.
If buying new prototypes hardly tested, hard to replace and with G2s cpus from decades ago is your idea of "new"...
No, my idea of new is something that hasn't been produced years ago and that has no valid warranty. BTW where did you read that Sams are "prototypes" and "hardly tested"?
I prefer hardware well tested produced in hundreds of thousands of units, easy to replace, faster and cheaper.
That's the point... *you* prefer. That's different that saying that for OS4 users Peg2 are a better choice than Sams.
Does any of those Timberwolf plugins allow you to watch youtube videos fullscreen?*no? too bad.
So the only use for a plugin is to support Flash? I use a plugin to download videos from various sites, but judging from your above sentence it shouldn't be considered useful.
It's slow and buggy and even they aknowledged it when it was released "as is".
And yet me and other people find it to be useful even if it's alpha.
Varthall
-
In a generic meaning OS4 still can't play youtube in a browser.
I don't think this changes the number of plug-ins available for Firefox.
Varthall
-
I don't think this changes the number of plug-ins available for Firefox.
Varthall
I just installed the web developer extension for giggles...
Probably not a great idea since it's toolbar menus don't use keyboard shortcuts for initial activation.
-
I don't think this changes the number of plug-ins available for Firefox.
Varthall
The number of plug-ins for certain platform has nothing to do with Firefox. NSAPI plug-ins are generic and either they're available for certain platform or they're not. These plug-ins commonly include flash, java and various media players. Porting Firefox for your platform doesn't give you these plug-ins.
As far as I can tell OS4 has 0 NSAPI plug-ins. Please educate me if I'm wrong.
-
For the price of a macmini and morph ... I can build a modern 8-12Gb DDR3 12 core ape-raper that can run everything and anything I could care to.
Maybe for the price of OS4 and an X1000 you can, but don't mix that up with MorphOS total system cost. With a little luck you can get a complete MorphOS G4 system (including the OS registration fee) for 200-300 EUR, depending on your HW preferences. I spent more money on *RAM alone* in the last PC I built for myself.
The OP wanted some reasons why OS4 is fun.
And someone told him that no matter how fun OS4 might be, MorphOS will be *ahelluvalot more* fun, since it's essentially the same thing only a lot better and more competent, and you know what - He was absolutely right! ;)
-
I'd just say that bashing the firefox port at this stage is a bit silly. It's still in the alpha stage. When it's at least beta, then let's see how it stacks up.
As it stands, I expected it to be a lot worse than it is. I've not actually had it crash yet. The main issues on my machine seem to be based around the user interface, rather than anything else.
-
The number of plug-ins for certain platform has nothing to do with Firefox. NSAPI plug-ins are generic and either they're available for certain platform or they're not. These plug-ins commonly include flash, java and various media players. Porting Firefox for your platform doesn't give you these plug-ins.
As far as I can tell OS4 has 0 NSAPI plug-ins. Please educate me if I'm wrong.
Check again the context where I have used the word "plug-in", and see if its meaning was meant to be about "NSAPI plugins" or a more generic use of "plug-in" as in "software add-on".
Varthall
-
And someone told him that no matter how fun OS4 might be, MorphOS will be *ahelluvalot more* fun, since it's essentially the same thing only a lot better and more competent, and you know what - He was absolutely right! ;)
And possibly he didn't wanted a detailed description of only the negative parts of OS4 compared to MOS, but just to know "how fun OS4 is".
Varthall
-
I'd just say that bashing the firefox port at this stage is a bit silly. It's still in the alpha stage. When it's at least beta, then let's see how it stacks up.
As it stands, I expected it to be a lot worse than it is. I've not actually had it crash yet. The main issues on my machine seem to be based around the user interface, rather than anything else.
Bashing, downtalking = Mos users
-
Check again the context where I have used the word "plug-in", and see if its meaning was meant to be about "NSAPI plugins" or a more generic use of "plug-in" as in "software add-on".
It helps to use the correct terms.
But yeah OWB for MorphOS does offer some extensions such as "userscript manager". It's greasemonkey-like (javascript to modify webpages on the fly). Very useful stuff, it can be used to perform all kind of useful tricks, such as fixing the ever changing youtube full screen mode.
OWB also has a Web Inspector extension functionality which is very useful when writing your own web pages.
Adblock extension functionality is built-in as well.
Which leaves exactly one extension that I'd like to have, but which isn't really essential: Tamper Data.
As for downloading stuff: OWB does just fine with the Download manager (built-in). I understand OS4 users though, download manager must seem very advanced technology considering OS4 OWB still doesn't include one (?).
-
Thanks for all the information.
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
-
I'd just say that bashing the firefox port at this stage is a bit silly. It's still in the alpha stage.
And so is praising it at this early alpha stage...
When it's at least beta, then let's see how it stacks up.
Indeed! :)
-
Thanks for all the information.
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
There's only one way to answer your question of "How is OS4?", and that's try it.
Opinions are like anuses, everyone's got one and they all stink!
-
Thanks for all the information.
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
Fine by me. :)
You should buy some OS4 enabled hardware and then buy OS4 and try it out yourself, it's the only way to really find out how fun it is all in all.
Good luck! :)
-
It helps to use the correct terms.
Not in this case, since it was easy to understand what that term was referring to, so it was unnecessary to suggest an interpretation which was in contrast with the context.
But yeah OWB for MorphOS does offer some extensions such as "userscript manager". It's greasemonkey-like (javascript to modify webpages on the fly). Very useful stuff, it can be used to perform all kind of useful tricks, such as fixing the ever changing youtube full screen mode.
OWB also has a Web Inspector extension functionality which is very useful when writing your own web pages.
Adblock extension functionality is built-in as well.
Still I don't think that it reaches the number, and the immediate availability of useful add-ons for Firefox to make a port of firefox not worth.
Which leaves exactly one extension that I'd like to have, but which isn't really essential: Tamper Data.
Many other users have many wishes, e.g. OWB for MOS doesn't have the plug-in I use on Timberwolf.
As for downloading stuff: OWB does just fine with the Download manager (built-in). I understand OS4 users though, download manager must seem very advanced technology considering OS4 OWB still doesn't include one (?).
Does that mean that OWB has all the functions available on DownloadHelper integrated, i.e. supporting the download of video and audio from the same number of supported sites, and optional on the fly video-video or video-audio conversion?
Varthall
-
And so is praising it at this early alpha stage...
Well, thanks to it I can do one thing now that previously I couldn't on OS4... why shouldn't I praise it?
Varthall
-
Thanks for all the information.
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
I wonder what Crumb will say now, after implying all the time that runequester's question justified an OS4 - MOS comparison choosing only the negative aspects of OS4.
Varthall
-
Well, thanks to it I can do one thing now that previously I couldn't on OS4... why shouldn't I praise it?
Varthall
Out of interest, what is it? :-)
-
Does that mean that OWB has all the functions available on DownloadHelper integrated, i.e. supporting the download of video and audio from the same number of supported sites, and optional on the fly video-video or video-audio conversion?
That's basically what something like getvideo does. And getvideo can be integrated very easily to OWB in contextmenus.
I had a look at that downloadhelper extension for firefox, and I can't help but noticing the large proportion of supported adult sites .... :)
-
Out of interest, what is it? :-)
Use a gecko based browser, I assume.
-
Still I don't think that it reaches the number, and the immediate availability of useful add-ons for Firefox to make a port of firefox not worth.
I use Iceweasel on Debian GNU/Linux and Firefox on Mac OS X daily. There are no extensions that I'd need for the OWB. The most important extensions (adblock, web inspector, greasemonkey) are already covered. Obviously this is personal taste and need, there's no denying that Firefox has an extensive add-on library. I just can't think of any of them I'd need desperately.
Many other users have many wishes, e.g. OWB for MOS doesn't have the plug-in I use on Timberwolf.
Quite possibly. My imagination is too narrow though ;-)
Does that mean that OWB has all the functions available on DownloadHelper integrated, i.e. supporting the download of video and audio from the same number of supported sites, and optional on the fly video-video or video-audio conversion?
Not that I know of. [EDIT] But as Fab says getvideo could easily be added to context menu [/EDIT]
Then again OS4 Timberwolf requires some work to be actually useful as the daily browser. And even if it does reach maturity at some point it still lacks basic features such as flash.
Meanwhile MorphOS users can enjoy full experience with a mature OWB browser, with flash and well working html5. So in that sense MorphOS still reigns, regardless of the Timberwolf alpha.
-
Well, thanks to it I can do one thing now that previously I couldn't on OS4... why shouldn't I praise it?
Varthall
If you're ready to discuss pro's, then you should also be ready to discuss con's.
But perhaps it's best to not make any comparisons at this point and wait with highlighting benefits and disadvantages until the software is here in a *release version*, when we *can actually see* what's *really* on the table?
What you really are doing isn't praising Timberwolf, you are voicing frustration about the extremely poor web browser situation you had to live with for so long on OS4. Fact is there is nothing special about Timberwolf alpha worth praising, it merely aims to come close to what everyone only takes for granted in 2010, nothing more, nothing less.
-
Out of interest, what is it? :-)
Downloading videos and MP3s from various sites which weren't supported by ClipDown, which uses GetVideo. I hope to make also the on-fly conversion to mp3 via mencoder/ffmpeg work, which would be VERY handy, although I could probably do the latter via an arexx script.
Another useful plugin is DownThemAll, which automatically downloads all the links available in a page with the possibility to select a filter on the type of the linked files. I got this add-on almost working in Timberwolf, too.
Varthall
-
That's basically what something like getvideo does. And getvideo can be integrated very easily to OWB in contextmenus.
Only that getvideo doesn't support the sites I need. And no, I'm not talking about porn sites, btw there's also an option to filter them out, activated by default :)
Varthall
-
I use Iceweasel on Debian GNU/Linux and Firefox on Mac OS X daily. There are no extensions that I'd need for the OWB. The most important extensions (adblock, web inspector, greasemonkey) are already covered. Obviously this is personal taste and need, there's no denying that Firefox has an extensive add-on library. I just can't think of any of them I'd need desperately.
I agree with that. What Crumb said is that no-one would ever find the actual version of Timberwolf to be usable, and I wanted to correct him.
Then again OS4 Timberwolf requires some work to be actually useful as the daily browser. And even if it does reach maturity at some point it still lacks basic features such as flash.
Meanwhile MorphOS users can enjoy full experience with a mature OWB browser, with flash and well working html5. So in that sense MorphOS still reigns, regardless of the Timberwolf alpha.
That is of course true. The point was that Timberwolf can be already seen as an advantage to OWB by some, and the number will probably grow the more it will mature.
Varthall
-
In the final analysis, it's always nice to have a choice. People prefer one browser over another for all kinds of reasons, so having more browsers to choose from can't be a bad thing.
-
If you're ready to discuss pro's, then you should also be ready to discuss con's.
And that's different to what Crumb has done. He has been discussing only the con's regarding OS4, avoiding any mention of any pro. Regardless of how many pro's or con's a system has, you should always provide both to a person who'd like info about it, and leave to him to decide whetever they fit his needs or not.
But perhaps it's best to not make any comparisons at this point and wait with highlighting benefits and disadvantages until the software is here in a *release version*, when we *can actually see* what's *really* on the table?
I have already something useful on the table, so I don't understand why I should not talk about this.
What you really are doing isn't praising Timberwolf, you are voicing frustration about the extremely poor web browser situation you had to live with for so long on OS4.
That do you imply that I'm really that frustrated by the browser situation? If for instance there would have been no browser available for OS4, I'd use my PC to do it, not an ideal solution but certainly not a reason to not use my AmigaOne for coding, which is my main use.
Fact is there is nothing special about Timberwolf alpha worth praising, it merely aims to come close to what everyone only takes for granted in 2010, nothing more, nothing less.
Fact is that I don't take granted for anything on the OS4, knowing well how small is its userbase, so every new stuff that enables me to do stuff which was previously impossible on OS4 is worth praising. Unless you think that since my needs and views are too different from the mass I should not have the right to write how I appreciate every thing that I find to be useful.
Varthall
-
@tmhg
I thought the slowest Sam ran at ~400MHz ish?
@Karlos
No they just feel like it ;)
-
That comment is as constructive as this comment. Surley you could go a bit deeper than using "Blows" as an statement of a OS? But what do I know...
My comment was as constructive as the rest - that was my point. Every time OS4 is mentioned, some jackass just has to bring up MorphOS, and tada... yet another silly OS4 vs. MorphOS thread. For that MorphOS blows. If you want I can also list up techical reasons, but why bother.
-
@Karlos
No they just feel like it ;)
No, seriously. I'm sure some of the first machines were 400MHz. I could be wrong.
-
My comment was as constructive as the rest - that was my point. Every time OS4 is mentioned, some jackass just has to bring up MorphOS, and tada... yet another silly OS4 vs. MorphOS thread. For that MorphOS blows. If you want I can also list up techical reasons, but why bother.
I would actually like some technical reasons :)
But I do now understand your point.
Peace
-
No, seriously. I'm sure some of the first machines were 400MHz. I could be wrong.
Yes there where 400MHz 440ep's :) So your right!
-
@Crumb
What you did here was shameless spam. And the thread starter post that clarify he has no interest in MOS underline that even more.
What you fail to understand is that most new users coming back (like myself) do it for passion not for Price/Features/ ratios, we all have a PC or MAC and are willing to wait for advanced feature to be added to AmigaOS now that is finally free to run.
People like me (back-comers from the commodore days) think of Amiga as the one and only Official Amiga Operative System running on custom computers specifically made for it, not as an unofficial hermit crab that fits inside dead shells, the latter might be interesting only to old timers that followed its development, to me (and other new comers) it means nothing.
I'm not the guy that goes spamming inside MOS threads, and nowadays no AmigaOS supporter does that (I repeat, nowadays) I wonder when you (and a couple of others) are gonna return the favor...
-
@runequester
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
Now back on topic: we have almost the same classic gear (I have and expanded A2000 and to play AGA games I got a CD32 :)) but let me tell you after I got my SamFlex I never switched on my A2000 (upgraded to OS3.9BB2) ever again.
Last year I was pondering about getting a 060 accelerator as GVP was about to put some back in production (they got them out a couple of weeks ago though...) but then I visited PianetaAmiga2009 (an Amiga exlusive computer fair, 14th edition if I recall correctly) and saw a preview of AmigaOS4.1 Update 1 + Blender and Gnash. For the latter AFX group was present, i sat with him (very nice guy) and he showed me a ton of Flash content he had downloaded (and some streaming videos), running pretty nicely on his G4 AmigaOne, you can check some screen shots here (http://www.amigasoft.net/pages/gnash/screenshots.asp).
Fast forward to November and instead of a 060 accelerator i bought a SamFlex system, here is how my desktop looks:
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/6856/dax411.jpg
My classic graphics software such as Lightwave 5 and TV paint 3.6, all work (directly) way faster than they did on my classic machine (although I now use Blender for 3D), and thanks to a utility called "RunInUae" I get OCS integration inside Workbench.
The latter is totally seamless and you can bring all your classic content in, even WHDLoads or standard hard drive installations, you double click the icons, and they start full screen (or windowed depends on your settings), and if you follow my tips HERE (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30645&forum=32) you can also get native Amiga video output (just add a competition pro and you are ready to go).
The thing that excites me the most though is that this is just the beginning, Amiga is re-starting after the Ainc-Hyperion settlement, new HW, OS Updates, new software are just the norm these days, if you are anything like me (Amiga background I mean) you're gonna love your new AmigaOS system, no doubts about it.
-
What you fail to understand is that most new users coming back (like myself) do it for passion not for Price/Features/ ratios
People like me (back-comers from the commodore days) think of Amiga as the one and only Official Amiga Operative System running on custom computers specifically made for it
Speak for yourself. I very much doubt you're the template of most back-comers. With attitude like that there would be no OS4 today at all.
I'd say most potential newcomes/back-comers have an open mind and are willing to look beyond the narrow scope of The Official Solution(TM). Amiga.org is a forum where all platforms are given equal chance.
I do think that this thread has gone a bit off topic though, but IMHO incorrect or inaccurate statements need to be corrected regardless of the original topic.
-
@DAX
Spam?
Are you kidding? A SAM and OS4 has nothing to do with an Amiga except the OS trademark name, but only that. OS4 is like a bad song remake, it may sound similar, but it is not the original.
The Amiga has long been dead since 1994, get over it!
If you have been brainwashed by some marketing gimmick about the SAM and OS4 being an Amiga dont blame others. At least MorphOS people have the decency not to pretend being something they are not, and they moved forward by providing a better OS in many aspects than the Amiga had ever had. I respect them for that.
And speaking about dead shells, let me quote this from Scala's CEO who was once the V.P. of Engineering at Commodore.
..."I was a manufacturing engineer at Commodore--I have personally had
phyical contact with every single A4000T Commodore ever built! [and worked
as a Consultant to Escom for their A1200/A4000T production run...]
[]
The Amiga is over. What is currently calling it self and Amiga is
nothing but a releatively standard PowerPC Reference Platform and some
software written by some old fans of the Amiga and being marketed by five
former Amiga Dealers/Commodore Sales-Marketing guys. There is nothing
there that would justify the name--excepting that they are the holders of
the trademarks."...
And then lets also quote Dave Haynie himself:
..."Certainly, Amiga, Inc. can release any AmigaOS they like and call it 4.0 or 15.7690 or "Theodore" if they want to. But there was nothing approaching what a real 4.0 would have been; no work even started on it (it would have been the OS released for AAA support, but AAA was cancelled before this started, and most of the critical people left within six months of that as well)."...
So please get real:
OS4+SAM is as Amiga as MorphOS+Pegasos or AROS+x86 or Amithlon+x86 or UAE+whatever_platform_that_supports_it is.
-
@Piru
Don't get me wrong, who knows me, knows quite well I post ONLY in OS4 threads (this IS one), and I don't go "convincing" people around MOS or AROS ones (like I see happening here).
If Crumb would have avoided his biased spamming I wouldn't have ever wrote those lines and you would see only my genuine reply to the topic starter.
As for the "speak for yourself" part, try to understand that it is the impression I got from EVERY back comer I met personally or on forums(I only limit myself to those from the Commodore days and that don't know even what MOS or AROS are, like me, they weren't there when they appeared, and they mean nothing to them) and even the thread starter has no interest in MOS.
Generally they are just surprised that Amiga is still going on and want to know about OS4 and new HW.
I might be wrong, and in case you want to introduce me to recent back comers from the Commodore days that don't think of Amiga as something similar to my description, I will be glad to meet them, I just never met them that's all.
-
@Gulliver
Man you are allucinating, can't you see this guy asked about PPC OS4 (nothing else)? What does it have to do with anything you wrote? (and by the way i look at my Sam as an officially supported mobo, but I think of Amiga only as fully boxed Computers specifically tailored for the Amiga Operative System, such as the X1000).
P.S.
As for what the guy had to say it is basically an outraged brainfart.
Ips change owners, technology has evolved to GP-GPU and many Commodore engineers said AAA was pure cr*ap, too little too late, and about to be changed for off the shelf Accelerators, by the way the same suggestion was given by J.Miner himself in a famous 1992 interview.
There was a paper from commodore engineers describing a new architecture after AAA which is basically what the X1000 is.
Sour grapes that speaks because they no longer count zilch in a project development count less than zero in my book, no matter what position they occupied when the world was flat.
-
Another damn Thread destroyed by MorphOS try hard recruiters...
dudes, your war is over, you went in another direction... like I've said for many many years actual AmigaOS the real deal doesn't need any others... so be men about it be happy with your path and go to Pro MorphOS grounds where you can hang out and be merry
I can't for the life of me figure you guys out...
I know for a fact I'll be one of the first Admins who runs a pro Amiga Forum to ban this kind of shit... PERIOD and believe me I'll take great pleasure in dictating that...
@Gulliver, very nice try but what exactly do you really think an A4000 was eventually going to change into? btw, an imitation OS is not a legitimate version, it'll only ever be a copy... that is why they don't market it as such... who wants a copy?
You guys whether you're MorphOS or AROS or any other damn thing are as far removed from the original Amiga Spirit as I can even try and ponder... AmigaOS individuals who have stayed with the platform, there are some of us, are not unlike we always have been... We feel about our machine... you lot belong in the PC world where cpus are chips and an os is a means to an end... bloody well enjoy it and leave us dreamers (if you like) alone...
You float around in uncontrolled Amiga Forums just adding your 2 cents... Times are going to change and eventually you'll be excluded, thank Amiga for That!
Then we can get back to discussing our cpu and going to each others houses for dinner and playing soft music and sipping wine and recounting the days when. . . LOL, yes, there will be a special section for that kind of humor...
@Varthall
Very nice posts Varthall, as you can see though they do not want to see what they are doing is wrong, they just want to share there opinion and spread there word... do we ever talk like that about MorphOS?
-
Another damn Thread destroyed by MorphOS try hard recruiters
Destroyed? It seemed like a honest discussion to me. It seems to me as if some wouldn't want that to happen, and try their best to drag the discussion down the the gutter.
So how is OS4? OS4 does have it's merits and problems. The best measuring stick happens to be... MorphOS. I only see it as natural that such threads as this would include discussion about how OS4 compares to MorphOS.
-
@Piru
Destroyed? It seemed like honest discussion to me. It seems to me as if some wouldn't want that to happen, and try their best to drag the discussion down the the gutter.
Not actually, the guy only wants to know about OS4 (and he specified that) moreover if this comparison it's so dear to you why don't you start a new thread with that topic?
That's what Fairlanefastback (Mod) suggests at AW when this happens.
-
@Piru
Not actually, the guy only wants to know about OS4 (and he specified that) moreover if this comparison it's so dear to you why don't you start a new thread with that topic?
That would have been a good idea probably. Search finds such threads, too:
Comparative between AmigaOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.3 on Pegasos II (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=48867)
In fact the earlier thread about MorphOS (by runequest himself) expicitly asked for such comparison against OS4:
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?p=563660
So why not comparison against MorphOS when he asks about OS4? (My guess is that he knew it would trigger certain people who think that posting about MorphOS to any thread about OS4 is sacrilege and that they'd go bonkers, dragging the thread to the gutter. Oh, wasn't that exactly what happened here?)
That's what Fairlanefastback (Mod) suggests at AW when this happens.
Sure, except that this isn't aw.net.
-
I find it a bit sad (and funny tbh) that today we still have this schism, really.
How is OS4? It's like OS3.x only a lot faster and with improved features.
How is MorphOS? It's like OS3.x only a lot faster and with improved features.
How is AROS? It's like OS3.x only a lot faster and with improved features.
Which one you use is entirely down to personal preferences at the end of the day. If you prefer PPC, stick to OS4/MorphOS. If you want to go x86, go for AROS.
AROS is free and open, OS4 and MorphOS are not. If you are all about open-source, there is only one choice. Otherwise, there is thus the cost of ownership to consider. MorphOS has targeted the second hand Mac market, so hardware can be obtained cheaply. In the end, OS4 will cost you the most (unless you get a 2nd hand system), hardware to run it is still on sale as new.
-
not as an unofficial hermit crab that fits inside dead shells
I love it!
(http://jungle.net/tone/morphos.jpg)
Never did like the butterflies myself.
-
Another damn Thread destroyed by MorphOS try hard recruiters...
+1
Leave us alone, go back to morphzone
-
@tone007
:roflmao:
-
Leave us alone, go back to morphzone
You're trying to prove my point really hard, aren't you? ;)
-
Destroyed? It seemed like a honest discussion to me. It seems to me as if some wouldn't want that to happen, and try their best to drag the discussion down the the gutter.
So how is OS4? OS4 does have it's merits and problems. The best measuring stick happens to be... MorphOS. I only see it as natural that such threads as this would include discussion about how OS4 compares to MorphOS.
I agree with Piru, comparing OS4 with MorphOS is a good way to get both OSes pros and cons. Having a civilized discussion abouth both OSes is good and shows even more about both systems.
I would not say anyone destroyed this thread, I got alot of good reading out of it and anyone interested in either AmigaOS 4.x and MorphOS got diffrent peoples views on them. I found it quite a good read about classic PPC Amiga and both OSes. So ill say thanks to all who contributed to this thread.
Over and out.
-
Probably even better compare each against OS3.9, since that's what they are supposed to be upgrades from.
-
@Tone007
:)
@Som99
Instead I think it's Lazy. look at my reply (the one to runequester I mean) I actually take the time to describe my OS4 experience to him, comparisons are lazy shortcuts.
Moreover to make unbiased comparisons of that kind you would need an impartial multi-platform developer (such as DiscreetFX for example) not OS4 and MOS users.
What the latter should do is give detailed descriptions with screenshots if possible in order to help the asking person without any Bias.
@Piru
Maybe he didn't like that thread and wanted to just hear about OS4, ok take out that maybe:
From runequester post:
Thanks for all the information.
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
-
Maybe he didn't like that thread and wanted to just hear about OS4
Could be, but reading that thread doesn't give me that impression.
I welcome any conversation about OS4 in this thread, of course. This is after all the main topic.
-
Probably even better compare each against OS3.9, since that's what they are supposed to be upgrades from.
Well I do not fully agree since you cant run OS3.9 nativly on either AmigaOS 4.x and MorphOS "modern" hardware.
Then it would not realy be fair, since the original poster dident ask about Classic Amigas with PPC.
But yes some reflections with OS3.9 would be nice to see.
-
You guys whether you're MorphOS or AROS or any other damn thing are as far removed from the original Amiga Spirit as I can even try and ponder... AmigaOS individuals who have stayed with the platform, there are some of us, are not unlike we always have been... We feel about our machine... you lot belong in the PC world where cpus are chips and an os is a means to an end... bloody well enjoy it and leave us dreamers (if you like) alone...
That's just narrowminded, I don't mind OS4 MOS many AROS users feel the same.
We hope there could be more co-operation though. We all have the same roots, it's a win win situation if we'd start to co-operate more.
-
@Tone007
:)
@Som99
Instead I think it's Lazy. look at my reply (the one to runequester I mean) I actually take the time to describe my OS4 experience to him, comparisons are lazy shortcuts.
Moreover to make unbiased comparisons of that kind you would need an impartial multi-platform developer (such as DiscreetFX for example) not OS4 and MOS users.
What the latter should do is give detailed descriptions with screenshots if possible in order to help the asking person without any Bias.
@Piru
Maybe he didn't like that thread and wanted to just hear about OS4, ok take out that maybe:
From runequester post:
Well I agree your reply with your OS4 experiance was nice, tho comparisons would atleast be intresting for me and a good way to see both OSes weaknesses and strenghts.
Tho I do not agree that comparisons are lazy, but quite constructive.
-
Well I do not fully agree since you cant run OS3.9 nativly on either AmigaOS 4.x and MorphOS "modern" hardware.
If you take that position, then it's almost as irrelevant to compare MOS and OS4 then, given that the only non-classic system that will run both is the Peg 2 and they aren't new or that easy to find if you are a new user. In that case, you are probably going to be looking at a Sam to run OS4 or a Mac to run MOS. MOS doesn't run on the SAM and OS4 doesn't run on the Mac (well, you can just about boot it if you know what you are doing).
Then it would not realy be fair, since the original poster dident ask about Classic Amigas with PPC.
No, he asked about OS4, period. He didn't ask about alternatives and he didn't ask about hardware either (he opened a separate thread for that).
But yes some reflections with OS3.9 would be nice to see.
I think it's the most logical comparison to make. You need to know what benefits your next OS (plus whatever hardware it needs to run) is going to give you over your existing one.
-
@som99
I also agree that comparisons "CAN" be constructive but as you probably know by now, they often and up not being so (hence the need for impartial people, but where do we find such people in Amiga land? :lol:).
-
If you take that position, then it's almost as irrelevant to compare MOS and OS4 then, given that the only non-classic system that will run both is the Peg 2 and they aren't new or that easy to find if you are a new user. In that case, you are probably going to be looking at a Sam to run OS4 or a Mac to run MOS. MOS doesn't run on the SAM and OS4 doesn't run on the Mac (well, you can just about boot it if you know what you are doing).
Well I ment more powerfull hardware then the classic Amigas, not any specific hardware in mind, but feels a bit unfair to compare OS9.3 on a PPC Amiga with a faster OS on much faster hardware.
No, he asked about OS4, period. He didn't ask about alternatives and he didn't ask about hardware either (he opened a separate thread for that).
Then my bad, but still its a good way to compare 2 OSes with eachother as I said before.
I think it's the most logical comparison to make. You need to know what benefits your next OS (plus whatever hardware it needs to run) is going to give you over your existing one.
Thats true, but still comparison between MorphOS and OS4 is important to, as I have written in previous posts.
-
@som99
I also agree that comparisons "CAN" be constructive but as you probably know by now, they often and up not being so (hence the need for impartial people, but where do we find such people in Amiga land? :lol:).
Well I for one got some good information about both OSes in this thread, since im soon a MorphOS user and later on in the future will give OS4 a try I felt some of the information here was constructive :)
-
The best measuring stick happens to be... MorphOS. I only see it as natural that such threads as this would include discussion about how OS4 compares to MorphOS.
I agree with Piru, comparing OS4 with MorphOS is a good way to get both OSes pros and cons.
+1
And as it turns out, OS4 nothing more than a MorphOS wannabe that in just about any point of measurement is inferior to MorphOS; OS4 has been struggling in its footsteps, far, far behind since its very beginning, and since it doesn't offer much (anything at all?) beyond MorphOS, I actually fail to see a rational reason for it to exist at all. But everyone is entitled to his own opinion.
So if someone asks a question about what merits OS4 have, then it's only natural that the better alternative is mentioned as well. MorphOS is the best measuring stick to OS4's capabilities. And MorphOS is everything OS4 is, but has a *much* lower system cost, better performance, better features, better Amiga compatibility and faster hardware that is *mainstream* and easily obtainable from everywhere, and you can download the full MorphOS 2.5 OS for free and try it out yourself on the closest Mac Mini or eMac and see for yourself before you buy. My advice to runequester was that if he really wants to know the "fun" stuff about OS4 he should buy some compatible HW and OS4 and try it out for himself. That's the only way. Maybe he likes it, maybe he don't. But since we are talking about an investment of €800+, it would be *close to criminal* to withhold the information that there is another option that is actually faster, better, cheaper than that, yet so much more capable.
Anyone interested in a "NG" option deserves to get info on all relevant options.
-
http://obligement.free.fr/articles/amigaos41_vs_morphos23.php is pretty good comparison I'd say. Running on the same HW and all.
-
@all
From runequester post:
Thanks for all the information.
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
Varthall
-
Well I ment more powerfull hardware then the classic Amigas, not any specific hardware in mind, but feels a bit unfair to compare OS9.3 on a PPC Amiga with a faster OS on much faster hardware.
You mean compare OS3.9 on a classic Amiga (which may or may not have a PPC) with OS4/MOS on more powerful hardware, surely?
One of the main factors in getting MOS or OS4 in the first place is that it runs on faster hardware and allows your old applications (at least the system friendly ones) to take advantage of that performance increase.
I don't think anybody ever bought either solely because they thought the icons looked better than they do in 3.9 or that solid window dragging is smoother. And if they did, well frankly, they're a bit silly.
-
@tmhg
You seem to be unaware (which is odd, since you posted in it too) of the fact that the original poster already opened a very similar thread not too long ago, asking specifically about MorphOS on the mac mini. The benefits of the combination were discussed there: http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=50993 (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=50993)
Since he's now asking about OS4, does he need to hear them all again?
-edit-
Also notice how the "pro OS4" crowd didn't wade in and derail the thread. The only time it came up is when the OP asked what MorphOS does that OS4 doesn't. Bit of a shame that some of the "pro MOS" crowd didn't extend the same basic courtesy here really.
Even when the OP states he doesn't want to discuss it here, some still can't drop it.
-
@all
From runequester post:
I have no interest in Morph at this time though, so can we please return the conversation to OS 4 ?
Varthall
It would seem it's hard to get...
Anyone interested in a "NG" option deserves to get info on all relevant options.
yes specially after runequester post quoted above...
-
MorphOS users are just as the aggressive sellers running along the streets and selling fake or stolen goods. :D
-
You mean compare OS3.9 on a classic Amiga (which may or may not have a PPC) with OS4/MOS on more powerful hardware, surely?
One of the main factors in getting MOS or OS4 in the first place is that it runs on faster hardware and allows your old applications (at least the system friendly ones) to take advantage of that performance increase.
I don't think anybody ever bought either solely because they thought the icons looked better than they do in 3.9 or that solid window dragging is smoother. And if they did, well frankly, they're a bit silly.
Now you got me wrong again. There is so much more new stuff you can do with the faster hardware and OS4 and MorphOS and that is something worth pointing out, then ofc we should not forget compability with the older OSes.
But im not talking about the apperance of any of the OSes, thats worth nothing for me in overall but of course its nice to look at, but not a selling point for me atleast.
-
It would seem it's hard to get...
What's worse is that, for some unknown reason, some people interpret that as "the OS4 crowd does not want to hear any negative opinion about their system", which is NOT the case here. Pro's and con's *must* be discussed about any system to get a balanced view on a platform, but the point is that OP isn't interested to hear them in *this* thread. And, in my opinion, generally if you want to make an overview about a system, you should describe both pro's and con's about it, not to carefully choose only the con's as Crumb did. Which, I repeat, does not mean that someone would not want to hear negative opinions.
Varthall
-
I would probably be running MorphOS before now along side my other Amigas, but this constant hijacking of threads and the negitive and nasty sales tactics from some of it's supporters means it's doubtful I would touch it.
-
To counter the rose-tinted view of OS4 submited here, here is a link to a post I made about my opinions of Sam ownership, It was made some time ago but from what i can see is very little has changed except the available cpu's are slightly faster.
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=521419&postcount=17
I still haven't bought OS4 for my Peg and really can't see the point. I've tried very hard to like OS4, not only did i by the Sam, I previously bought (and subsequently sold) it for classic. I'd much rather use 3.9 or Morphos (at least I can use USB2 on those).
Gaz
-
I would probably be running MorphOS before now along side my other Amigas, but this constant hijacking of threads and the negitive and nasty sales tactics from some of it's supporters means it's doubtful I would touch it.
You should always judge a system on it's own merits. There are cheerleaders in pretty much every OS camp. If you paid any attention to any of them, you'd end up not wanting to use any of them.
-
You should always judge a system on it's own merits. There are cheerleaders in pretty much every OS camp. If you paid any attention to any of them, you'd end up not wanting to use any of them.
Nail, Head, Hit :)
-
You should always judge a system on it's own merits. There are cheerleaders in pretty much every OS camp. If you paid any attention to any of them, you'd end up not wanting to use any of them.
1+
Well spoken!
-
@framiga
I*used MorphOS since the first release and also OS4 (years before it was released and years after it was released) and you must have some configuration problem in you MorphOS install because it's faster than OS4 in almost everything. I have used it with Permedia2, G-Rex+Voodoo3, PicassoIV, CV3D and CV64 and gfx were always faster in MorphOS. You can install more recent Ambient builds and also WB, but MorphOS always works faster. No just in my machine but also in my friends ones. Gfx, 68k emulation, I/O, response speed... all is faster with MorphOS. The only missing stuff from 1.4.5 is the tcp/ip stack but you can install mosnet/miamidx/Genesis... even some OS4 beta components like Roadshow 68k ;-)
you are too much biased (and probably short in memory) to understand that i already tryed everything to make Morphos 1.4.5 "useable" on classic (FYI i'm one of the few who got up and running AmigaOS3.9-Morphos 1.4.5 and AmigaOS4 on my CSPPC-CVPPC and helped others users to fix variuos issues when 1.4.5 was released).
Your not speaking with a newbie, so please refrain to insist with that "you must have some configuration problem in you MorphOS instal" because it is simply not true. Thanks!
-
@gazgod
Well I bought a SamFlex (1GB ram/128Mb Radeon 9250) when you wrote that piece, and comparing the experience I had of that Beta version of 4.1 and today's Update 2 it is more or less night and day.
OWB was slower, less featured and crashed a lot (3.28 is Rock Solid and faster) UAE before a serious settings analysis and before a Sam specific version (and RunInUae), seemed unusable, now I run the big majority of A500 games 1:1 (read here (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30645&forum=32)), DVDs play better, usability and stability, graphical appeal, all has improved a ton.
Consider also that 533 and 667Mhz are no longer available and very soon the only Sam you will be able to buy will be the 460EX with L2 cache and 1.0Ghz clockspeed (as usual A-cube will factory overclock the best samples worry not, probably to 1.2Ghz as they mentioned they had a sample with that clock in the past).
-
+1
Leave us alone, go back to morphzone
You are not the site owner, please do not try to run off our visitors.
-
I would probably be running MorphOS before now along side my other Amigas, but this constant hijacking of threads and the negitive and nasty sales tactics from some of it's supporters means it's doubtful I would touch it.
You should use what you want to use and it should not be based on what some end user is posting in some open discussion forum. Every platform has it's rabid advocates. Would you not use any Apple products just because some Mac users are the some of the most rabid platform fans in the world?
-
MorphOS users are just as the aggressive sellers running along the streets and selling fake or stolen goods. :D
+1 Its sad to see so desperate people.
-
You should use what you want to use and it should not be based on what some end user is posting in some open discussion forum. Every platform has it's rabid advocates. Would you not use any Apple products just because some Mac users are the some of the most rabid platform fans in the world?
People's behavior can change someone's mind.
Varthall
-
"The sun was high in Death Valley. Too high for that cursed midday...
The black pill kicked the saloon door, looked the litigant red pill and blue one, put his shotgun high, blew one shot to the ceiling, and screamed: "QUE VIVA AROS!!""
:D:D:D:D
Stop.The day we'll remember we're all amiga loving and the only true amiga has gone dead even before blizzard ppc we'll realize that red, blue and black no one of them is the true amiga.
ADRIANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
edit: hi to all!this is my first post. i've read you all for about one year. hi!!
-
like I've said for many many years actual AmigaOS the real deal doesn't need any others...
I agree completely, OS3.x running on a real Amiga is still the best!
-
...take all three pills and call me in the morning!
-
What make you say that's quick and dirty? By how stable it is, by its number of feature?
I would say that quick'n'dirty ports feel alien (like running X11 apps through cygwin on Windows), are more unstable that native ports, feel unfinished and integrate badly with the host OS (like Cygnix X11 stuff)
And yet it's so far the best software on OS4 to e.g. download videos and mp3s from many sites. I find it funny that you imply that it's not usable at all.
Do you really call "useable" and "polished" having to use windows keyboard shortcuts to select menu options because GUI doesn't respond to mouse events...
And by taking away all the SDL and Unix ports I should realise that every SDL port made for OS4 needed no change to the makefile, or it was derived from MOS? How do you make that connection?
You should realise that most PPC software is just a collection of SDL/CLI unix ports that usually run better in posix platforms. In case port is not easy to do it's common practice to take MorphOS code: MPlayer, BasiliskII, Freespace2 and others...
What I see from his question is just "how is OS4", I don't read it as a "please tell me what's the best Amiga environment out there".
It's normal, just like if you ask me if Dunlop tires are good and I reply you that I prefer pirelli ones
Well, it's just a matter of reference. I could also say that x86 PCs are not produced since they are being produced since only around 30 years which is nothing compared to 2000 years of no PC being produced. But if you choose a reference which is different you really can't continue a discussion.
Since Efikas are being sold new with its 2 years of warranty and Sam440 has just been produced in small batches and is not produced continuously (I doubt they produce any now that Sam460 is planned) they have the same status now: sold new with warranty but not produced actively.
But Sams are more powerful than Efikas, so the increase in price can be justified. And besides, MOS is anyway OT here.
Price increase can not be justified because a machine produced for the same small market 5 years ago costed the same and it's named Pegasos2/G4. Both run OS4 and The old 5 years-old machine is faster. Quite sad if you ask me.
Sam's advantages are shaded by OS4 (lack of) features: USB works slower than Efika and 3D is probably slower too despiting higher clockrate. It has more ram and faster HD access but I'm not sure I want to pay 450Euros to get a system marginally better.
Sam G2 cpu technology is obsolete and not many customers would expect having to pay 500Euros for it.
This doesn't help much since OS4 doesn't run on Efika.
But MorphOS does and it runs classic software probably better than 533-600Mhz Sams.
Well, you proposed a comparation between OS4 and MOS machines, I guess it's your turn to compare them too.
Obligement.free.fr has some nice benchmarks.
Wow, so you're implying I didn't want to get my AmigaOne?
I'm implying most of people paid large sums of money for A1 and specially Sam440 because it ran OS4, otherwise the hardware would have been rejected and they would have bought better hardware like Pegasos2 or Mac Mini.
What is the problem with these?
There's no problem with wanting new hardware, the problem is releasing hardware both more expensive and slower than the hardware released 5 years ago for your own market.
So, "hackish" = "you don't like".
hackish means using an embedded cpu and selling it in a desktop motherboard with limitations you would never expect in a motherbaord like having just ONE SATA that gets disabled if you fit a PCI-e card.
Ok, so now you're saying that a Sam460 might not be worse that a Pegasos2 G4. I agree with that.
I'm saying that it will probably be worse in many aspects.
No, my idea of new is something that hasn't been produced years ago and that has no valid warranty. BTW where did you read that Sams are "prototypes" and "hardly tested"?
All A1s are Teron prototypes hardly tested. Sams hardware looks better although it's obvious that it has not been tested as deeply as big companies like Apple test its hardware.
That's the point... *you* prefer. That's different that saying that for OS4 users Peg2 are a better choice than Sams.
Other betatesters and users who sold their (u)A1s to buy Peg2/G4 instead of Sam440 may not agree with you.
And yet me and other people find it to be useful even if it's alpha.
I guess it's the same people who's happy using alien x11 ports on their "Amigas"
@tone007
lovely crab! :-D
-
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
Well, if you have experience with AmigaOS 3.x, here are some of the features that I love in AmigaOS 4 and reasons for not looking back at the classic Amigas:
AmigaOS 4 advantages
1. No boot partition size limit. No more 4GB partition Hard Disk limit crap. I know this was fixed with some patches in AmigaOS 3.5 and 3.9, but if you needed to boot without Startup-Sequence, it can destroy your boot partition if it is bigger than 4GB. I know a friend who had 24 partitions in a 100GB hard drive. Painful to sort.
2. No more FastFileSystem crap. You can use SFS for boot partition on AmigaOS 4. AmigaOS 4.1 have the nice JXFilesystem. I never ever lost a file with JXFilesystem. I lost some files with the SFS, but I easily recovered them. With FastFileSystem, I lost lots of files during the years. Validation gives me headaches, because I don't know what file is truncated after it.
3. Virtual Memory. No more usage of simple and dangerous to the system MMU hacks. Virtual Memory is presented and built-in and I use it a lot, since my Amiga is only 256 MB RAM. But even if I had 10GB of RAM I still would write movies to RAM: and watch them from there and if I forget about them in the RAM. Having SWAP: is a nice feature.
4. No more need for third party software to connect to the Internet. With AmigaOS 3.1 you need something like Miami, which you can not register anymore. Good luck with the limited demo for 30 minutes. NetConnect was not working good with me on my Amiga 4000.
5. ASL requester with the possibility to sort with a single click. I open many files very often. With big directories, the old ASL was a pain for finding files. Now with a single click I sort by Name, Size, Date. Selecting files now is much easier and fun.
6. No more need for second monitor if you are with graphics card and want to play old games or something goes wrong at bootup. The RTG system is built-in, you don't need to search for patches for specific graphics card.
7. GrimReaper - if a program is not stripped, the Grim tells a lot about the reasons for the message to appear. This is very handy for developers. On AmigaOS 3.9 I used MMULib/MuTools and MuForce (Enforcer alike program), but the GRIM is much much better.
8. Very good SDK. I used a lot VBCC on AmigaOS 3.9. I still use it on AmigaOS 4, now compiling for AmigaOS 3 and 4. But the AmigaOS 4.x have many more libraries included, which were pain to install with AmigaOS 3.9.
9. AmigaInput - now I can play games with wide variety of joysticks. I can configure the buttons to my liking, I can set the threshold for the analog paddles. In AmigaOS 3.9, the support for Joysticks with several buttons is limited.
10. No more need to put commodities and programs in WBStartup and manage AmigaOS startup with hacks like WBStartup/Enabled and WBStartup/Disabled or similar. The new startup modules management is very nice.
11. Notification system. Not much talked about and discussed feature of AmigaOS 4, but I like when tunes names popup when listening to online radio. It can have many other uses like notification for downloaded files, new e-mail etc...
12. SObjects - shared objects. Some programs use them. Additional plus of AmigaOS 4.
13. AmiUpdate. No more need for manual search for updates. Many programs are already in AmiUpdate.
14. System RollBack - part of AmiUpdate, where you can roll back to old system.
15. AHI is a standart. No more need to mix the Paula out and the audio card out if you want to use a single audio output.
The list can go on and on. But I will leave it to other AmigaOS 4 users to add more features they love of AmigaOS 4 over AmigaOS 3.
Hope this helps. If you are familiar with AmigaOS, you will love AmigaOS 4.
Regards
-
@Crumb @Varthal
Since you are beyond OT here (ain't there a TOS here?) and it would seem never-ending, why don't you happily continue elsewhere? PM? Dedicated thread?
-
1. No boot partition size limit. No more 4GB partition Hard Disk limit crap. I know this was fixed with some patches in AmigaOS 3.5 and 3.9, but if you needed to boot without Startup-Sequence, it can destroy your boot partition if it is bigger than 4GB. I know a friend who had 24 partitions in a 100GB hard drive. Painful to sort.
For instance Phase5 products all support 64bit directly, so there are no such issues. Works even with KS 3.0.
2. No more FastFileSystem crap. You can use SFS for boot partition on AmigaOS 4.
You can use SFS boot partition with AmigaOS 3.x as well. Actually you really should use PFS3 with AmigaOS 3.x though (it's becoming freeware, too) :-)
3. Virtual Memory. No more usage of simple and dangerous to the system MMU hacks.
Whether virtual memory is dangerous or not depends on the applications you run. VMM worked just fine even with KS 3.0 and 68030 already.
4. No more need for third party software to connect to the Internet.
AmigaOS 3.9 includes AmiTCP/IP, but admittedly with a questionable license.
7. GrimReaper - if a program is not stripped, the Grim tells a lot about the reasons for the message to appear. This is very handy for developers. On AmigaOS 3.9 I used MMULib/MuTools and MuForce (Enforcer alike program), but the GRIM is much much better.
SmartCrash provided the functionality years ago already for AmigaOS 3.x. Okay it wasn't included with the OS, I admit. But there's nothing special about Grim Reaper itself.
10. No more need to put commodities and programs in WBStartup and manage AmigaOS startup with hacks like WBStartup/Enabled and WBStartup/Disabled or similar. The new startup modules management is very nice.
I remember reading some stark criticism about this new system, too.
12. SObjects - shared objects. Some programs use them. Additional plus of AmigaOS 4.
It's easy to create normal amiga shared libraries with per caller data. bsdsocket.library is a common example, every AmigaOS 3.x installation with a networking installed has such library installed. The added bonus is that you don't need to load the code in memory for every caller, like you have to with AmigaOS 4 SObjects.
-
ain't there a TOS here?
Huh you didn't read it?
http://www.amiga.org/index.php?pageid=posting_guidelines
-
@Piru
And maybe you forgot it ;)
-
@Piru
And maybe you forgot it ;)
If you're accusing me of something, come up with direct claims without these games. Thanks in advance.
-
(ain't there a TOS here?)
Hehe, that comment really made my day, thanks! :)
It's always the same though, as soon as OS4 advocates run out of rational pro-OS4 arguments compared to MorphOS (which happens rather instantly), they start whining and moaning about behavior and whatever and calls for censoring by moderators. It's seems to be the only way to sell OS4; to control and dictate the information flow by force. Quite sad if you ask me. There are already sites where only allow pro-OS4 talk, go there if you want to escape reality for a moment...
-
For instance Phase5 products all support 64bit directly, so there are no such issues. Works even with KS 3.0.
And what happens if you need to press 2 and disable the accelerator for some old game? I wouldn't take the risk of having over 4GB partition in this case.
You can use SFS boot partition with AmigaOS 3.x as well. Actually you really should use PFS3 with AmigaOS 3.x though (it's becoming freeware, too) :-)
And what happens if you need to boot from some other partion for some reason and it does not have SFS? I want to be able to access the old boot partition as well.
Whether virtual memory is dangerous or not depends on the applications you run. VMM worked just fine even with KS 3.0 and 68030 already.
I assume it was part of the OS? All the VMM applications I used on AmigaOS 3 sucked badly. There is a reason almost noone used VMM on AmigaOS 3. On AmigaOS 4, VMM is part of the OS. It's transparent. I hardy see anyone turning it off. Its a nice plus. I prefer to have it, and it works.
AmigaOS 3.9 includes AmiTCP/IP, but admittedly with a questionable license.
Not as good as Miami. The AmigaOS 4 TCP/IP stack is even better than Miami in my experience.
SmartCrash provided the functionality years ago already for AmigaOS 3.x. Okay it wasn't included with the OS, I admit. But there's nothing special about Grim Reaper itself.
GrimReaper helps the developers by being included in the OS. Every user who have problems with some software can very easily generate a log and send it to the developer. SmartCrash is not built-in and requires extra effort from the user to install it. I prefer to have it. It's built-in. Its established standard already.
I remember reading some stark criticism about this new system, too.
People who used the old systems for decades, surely had a hard time with the new system, but to me it seems they fixed it fast and now they are used to the more elegant and transparent new system.
It's easy to create normal amiga shared libraries with per caller data. bsdsocket.library is a common example, every AmigaOS 3.x installation with a networking installed has such library installed. The added bonus is that you don't need to load the code in memory for every caller, like you have to with AmigaOS 4 SObjects.
It's easy for AmigaOS 3.0 to run Windows binaries, but this is only in theory. In practice this was posted from AmigaOS 4, which is a nice system and I like it over AmigaOS 3.
-
@Piru
I don't think that keep on doing heavy OT even after a moderator politely asked to quit it is part of the TOS
@TMHM
Don't get too exited, i hate OTs and if you check my post count (VS registration date) at AW, you might realize I don't skimp on replies ;)
-
@Piru
You should have been an AmigaOS developer, it was you who made Blizkick if I remember right. I use Blizkick every time I turn on the Amiga. :)
-
And what happens if you need to press 2 and disable the accelerator for some old game? I wouldn't take the risk of having over 4GB partition in this case.
Well, on OS4 (and MOS) you don't even have the option of running the old game ;) (and no, uae doesn't count)
-
@gazgod
Well I bought a SamFlex (1GB ram/128Mb Radeon 9250) when you wrote that piece, and comparing the experience I had of that Beta version of 4.1 and today's Update 2 it is more or less night and day.
OWB was slower, less featured and crashed a lot (3.28 is Rock Solid and faster) UAE before a serious settings analysis and before a Sam specific version (and RunInUae), seemed unusable, now I run the big majority of A500 games 1:1 (read here (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30645&forum=32)), DVDs play better, usability and stability, graphical appeal, all has improved a ton.
Consider also that 533 and 667Mhz are no longer available and very soon the only Sam you will be able to buy will be the 460EX with L2 cache and 1.0Ghz clockspeed (as usual A-cube will factory overclock the best samples worry not, probably to 1.2Ghz as they mentioned they had a sample with that clock in the past).
@DAX
I rarely surf on any Amiga platform except for them aminet and occasional forum visits so OWB was not an issue with me. Neither was UAE, I have several real Amigas for my gaming fix.
A faster CPU with no cache just wastes more clock cycles waiting, If the other speeds are the same it still has to wait the same time.
I still have contact with my ex sam (it went to another member of my user group), And it now has all the updates on it, the most generous thing I can say about it is it slightly improved. But all the points in my post from 2009 are still valid IMHO.
Gaz
-
And what happens if you need to press 2 and disable the accelerator for some old game?
Nothing?
And what happens if you need to boot from some other partion for some reason and it does not have SFS? I want to be able to access the old boot partition as well.
Nothing? Why wouldn't you able to access the old boot partition? Do you know how RDB works?
I assume it was part of the OS?
It wasn't.
All the VMM applications I used on AmigaOS 3 sucked badly.
VMM worked just fine, although I disabled since I had all the RAM I could ever dream of anyway. It was a nice toy though, over 1GB ram... yay.
There is a reason almost noone used VMM on AmigaOS 3.
Yes. The lack of applications actually needing huge amounts of RAM.
On AmigaOS 4, VMM is part of the OS. It's transparent. I hardy see anyone turning it off. Its a nice plus. I prefer to have it, and it works.
Whatever suits you. I prefer having enough physical memory instead.
Not as good as Miami.
Debatable. AmiTCP/IP is way faster than Miami for instance (upto 30%). Miami(Dx) also crashes in some unexpected and random ways, while AmiTCP/IP is just rock solid.
GrimReaper helps the developers by being included in the OS.
Sure. I did't claim SmartCrash was included, I just pointed out that the functionality is nothing new, and AmigaOS 3.x has had it for ages.
It's easy for AmigaOS 3.0 to run Windows binaries, but this is only in theory.
Err? What has running x86 binaries have to do with creating a normal amiga shared library? There is nothing theoretic about it. Numerous libraries use this method and they work just fine. In practice.
-
@Britelite
i'll have to disagree there, thanks to RunInUae a new app, we get seamless OCS/AGA integration in AOS4, this include disks, HD installations and WHDLoads.
You just double click on any content brought over from your classic and it will be running full screen in no time (check my tips HERE (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30645&forum=32) for natural looking video output, that has nothing to envy to a classic A500).
Add a competition pro, turn off the lights and get ready to blast off the evil Bydo empire.
Actually I am able to run games that due to kick 3.1 and other stuff, do not run any longer on my expanded A2000, go figure...
-
@Piru
I don't think that keep on doing heavy OT even after a moderator politely asked to quit it is part of the TOS
Where am I OT exactly?
-
@Piru
You should have been an AmigaOS developer
I was asked actually, I declined. No, I am not going to go into details.
Oh, and I am a MorphOS developer btw, for almost 10 years now.
-
@DAX
I rarely surf on any Amiga platform except for them aminet and occasional forum visits so OWB was not an issue with me. Neither was UAE, I have several real Amigas for my gaming fix.
A faster CPU with no cache just wastes more clock cycles waiting, If the other speeds are the same it still has to wait the same time.
I still have contact with my ex sam (it went to another member of my user group), And it now has all the updates on it, the most generous thing I can say about it is it slightly improved. But all the points in my post from 2009 are still valid IMHO.
Gaz
From reports everywhere Sam's 800Mhz version run faster than the 667Mhz EP even with no cache at all, but you might be happy to know that the faster CPU in the 460EX DOES have L1+L2 cache (all the better).
-
@Britelite
i'll have to disagree there, thanks to RunInUae a new app, we get seamless OCS/AGA integration in AOS4, this include disks, HD installations and WHDLoads.
Is that included with the OS? If not, why not? Doesn't Hyperion have all the rights to do that now?
And since we agreed that comparisons are okay, yes, MorphOS does have that same functionality (obviously 3rd party product, and you need to provide the Kickstart ROM by yourself). You can easily run amiga games by just doubleclicking the adf.
-
From reports everywhere Sam's 800Mhz version run faster than the 667Mhz EP even with no cache at all, but you might be happy to know that the faster CPU in the 460EX DOES have L1+L2 cache (all the better).
Unfortunately even the 460 won't include the Altivec unit. Altivec is essential for things such as multimedia acceleration.
-
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
Cool thing is that it runs natively on faster and more recent hardware than previous versions and thus is much snappier on everything. And it's easy to install and it contains basic stuff to get started. There's also bit facelifting here and there over OS3.9. Warm reboot speed makes you smile ;)
But it feels still very immature and work is still needed here and there. There's lots of compatibility issues with "classic" software and Workbench itself would need a major rewrite as its functionality is still pretty much on the 3.9's level (which was even itself aged when it was released). Whole feeling is that it's just OS3.9 ported to PPC with lots of 3rd party programs patched up without proper consistency.
If you like later times on classic Amiga (H&P era with Reaction and patches added to OS) and are willing to do some compromises with compatibility and original features against speed and some new features, then you'd probably be happy with it. But if you have been using Workbench replacements like Magellan2 or want some more modern functions in usability and design, then you will be disappointed.
-
Is that included with the OS? If not, why not? Doesn't Hyperion have all the rights to do that now?
And since we agreed that comparisons are okay, yes, MorphOS does have that same functionality (obviously 3rd party product, and you need to provide the Kickstart ROM by yourself). You can easily run amiga games by just doubleclicking the adf.
I'm afraid we didn't agree on anything in particular, but alas, AmigaOS utilities do far more than doubleclicks on ADFs.
And Yes they do have rights, we'll see if they do it, it was developed recently and might as well be included in the next major release who knows (Update 2, only updated system files and changed stuff under the hood).
-
AmigaOS utilities do far more than doubleclicks on ADFs
Such as?
-
Unfortunately even the 460 won't include the Altivec unit. Altivec is essential for things such as multimedia acceleration.
Considering that any Amiga app runs quite fast on my SamFlex (including Timberwolf) I can only imagine it will run faster on the 460EX and it might be very good for many, others might choose the X1000 instead.
And before you start with price issues, i will get mine with small monthly fees, a testament that even with little money you can afford a thing you desire (just finished paying for by big Pioneer Kuro plasma, let me tell you, it costed Way more than an X1000 and i am not rich).
-
@Britelite
i'll have to disagree there, thanks to RunInUae a new app, we get seamless OCS/AGA integration in AOS4, this include disks, HD installations and WHDLoads.
I'm very aware of this, but as I said, emulation doesn't count as nothing beats the real thing ;)
-
Considering that any Amiga app runs quite fast on my SamFlex (including Timberwolf) I can only imagine it will run faster on the 460EX and it might be very good for many
Could be, but with the altivec unit it would get a nice boost and thus much more value for the buck. It's a shame really.
There are some other peculiar design choices in this Sam HW which I don't quite understand (for instance the sharing of some PCI-E lanes), but I suppose the demands of the embedded customers set some rules. It's very hard if not impossible to make a profit by creating and selling HW to the amiga market alone, so I guess ACube has to do it to just keep afloat.
-
I'm very aware of this, but as I said, emulation doesn't count as nothing beats the real thing ;)
If we lived near I would show you my settings as described in the link i posted, I've done my fare share of side by side comparisons demonstrations (Sam+my trusty A2000 underneath) you would be surprised...(Chuck Rock, R-Type, Xenon 2 and more no difference whatsoever running side by side and played with the same joystick, a competition pro standard + USB version).
-
Such as?
Opening classic apps and let it access AOS volume for data sharing, double click on WHDLoads and HD installations "transported" directly from classic (an A2000 in my case) no further action required, packing of multy disk games in a single file so that you just double click on it, and other amenities.
I don't know if MOS has utilities to do the same, but since you only mentioned double click on ADFs, I listed some different possible operations.
-
Opening classic apps and let it access AOS volume for data sharing, double click on WHDLoads and HD installations "transported" directly from classic (an A2000 in my case) no further action required, packing of multy disk games in a single file so that you just double click on it, and other amenities.
I don't know if MOS has utilities to do the same, but since you only mentioned double click on ADFs, I listed some different possible operations.
I think all of those work with the MorphOS solution, with the exception of the single archive multidisk thing (but maybe that has been added as well, I haven't kept track of that thing lately).
That being said, the overwhelmingly most common use case is clicking the adf file. That's why I only mentioned it.
-
Doh.. I tried to keep on topic, but I'll still reply on couple of things... sorry.
And what happens if you need to boot from some other partion for some reason and it does not have SFS? I want to be able to access the old boot partition as well.
What do you mean? There can be many partitions on HD and they can be in whatever filesystem you want. No problem to have FFS, SFS and PFS partitions mixed. Or just have them all SFS for that matter. And any or even all of them can be bootable. I have had SFS and PFS3 partitions on my system for ages.. can't even remember when I had FFS.
All the VMM applications I used on AmigaOS 3 sucked badly. There is a reason almost noone used VMM on AmigaOS 3.
Gigamem worked somehow as expected when I used it for some time. But I tried to have always enough real memory.. Amiga programs didn't need it that much.
On AmigaOS 4, VMM is part of the OS. It's transparent. I hardy see anyone turning it off. Its a nice plus. I prefer to have it, and it works.
On my system it slowed down ramdisk access.. and caused some crashes in low memory situation. I don't like and I definitely don't recommend to use it (why OS4 users are now so in love with it, when they used to hate it on other operating systems? ;)). OS4 systems usually have at least 512M of ram, so where would you need virtual memory normally? I haven't ran it out ever. Not to talk about 1GB systems I have now.
Not as good as Miami. The AmigaOS 4 TCP/IP stack is even better than Miami in my experience.
In my opinion AmiTCP/IP Genesis is much better than Miami, IF you don't happen to need DHCP or PPPoE. I only used Miami on dialups, but Genesis with network cards.
-
Nothing?
Okay, good answers to the questions. Probably you don't have experience with these, but I have and I know there are problems.
You gave good reasons for using AmigaOS 4. Because on AmigaOS 3, nothing will happen when you try to do some of the tasks. So you will not do the work, where on AmigaOS 4 it will work impeccable.
On AmigaOS 4 everything is more elegant and transparent than on AmigaOS 3. It is more up to date with the current requirements for Operating System. That is why every AmigaOS 3 user will love AmigaOS 4.
Piru, it seems when your OS of choise don't have VMM, nobody shall use it, even with that machine with only 128MB of RAM? My machine have only 256 MB RAM. VMM came in handly when I compiled the SAM Coupe emulator. For image processing VMM is even more handy.
Also, you deliberately skipped some of my points, but seeing that your OS of choise lacks them, it is quite understandable. Good move actually.
-
For almost a year i've read all of you.
About a year ago I was considering to buy something "amigish", a sam, a peg or somethin'similar.
Naturally, as most of you, i come from the classic era, and as someone of you, never tried ppcs because amiga died, to me, with classic machines.
But my passion never died, so i followed on the internet amiga facts, forum and here we are.
With three (or perhaps four (beos-haiku), maybe five (anubi)?) amiga sons.
The black, the red, the blue.
Everyone of them is "amiga" in the eyes of their user.
Btw i'm an aros enthusiast, but i understand those who love the red, the blue, the yellow and the submarine.
These "os wars" are simply useless.
Simply because whazz amiga? A feeling?
Well, a feeling is something of individual, personal and there's no rational, logical reasons to be better or worse than others. To my eyes amiga is aros. Someone else would prefer aos4, someone else morphos, someone else uae. "This is feeling".
Amiga is an os? Well. If it is a brand, the only amiga os "eventually" is aos. No way to the others.
Amiga is hw? Well, the only hw amiga is that dead so long ago. The amiga one specs belong to a group who betrayed amigans expectations more and more and more.
The original amiga was feeling, os and hw.
Nothing else can tell the same of itself
Noone of them can say to be 20 years beyond their time
edit: i've forgotten "to me"
-
Okay, good answers to the questions. Probably you don't have experience with these, but I have and I know there are problems.
I didn't have any problems myself. Well maybe they've made it more user friendly? If they have that's certainly a good thing.
Piru, it seems when your OS of choise don't have VMM, nobody shall use it, even with that machine with only 128MB of RAM?
MorphOS had a virtual memory solution at some point, but it proved way too slow, complex and problem prone to be worth it. If you get an EFIKA you obviously have to live with the limited amount of memory. Even if you'd add a virtual memory solution it'd be really slow on EFIKA due to limited I/O performance. Latest MorphOS release does include some changes to make more memory available for the applications, however.
My machine have only 256 MB RAM.
Why's that? All my systems have minimum 1GB.
VMM came in handly when I compiled the SAM Coupe emulator.
Hmm? AmigaOS4 would run out of 256MB memory when compiling? That's odd. Is it because of the memory fragmentation or what?
For image processing VMM is even more handy.
Most certainly with such low amount of memory. Personally I'd just rather upgrade the memory than suffer the speed penalty of the swapping.
Also, you deliberately skipped some of my points, but seeing that your OS of choise lacks them, it is quite understandable
Weren't we comparing against AmigaOS 3.x? I skipped the entries where AmigaOS 4 obviously has an edge.
If we go for MorphOS comparison there's very little OS4 does better, while MorphOS beats OS4 most of the time, as proven by impartial 3rd party benchmarks.
-
Okay, good answers to the questions. Probably you don't have experience with these, but I have and I know there are problems.
You gave good reasons for using AmigaOS 4. Because on AmigaOS 3, nothing will happen when you try to do some of the tasks. So you will not do the work, where on AmigaOS 4 it will work impeccable.
On AmigaOS 4 everything is more elegant and transparent than on AmigaOS 3. It is more up to date with the current requirements for Operating System. That is why every AmigaOS 3 user will love AmigaOS 4.
Piru, it seems when your OS of choise don't have VMM, nobody shall use it, even with that machine with only 128MB of RAM? My machine have only 256 MB RAM. VMM came in handly when I compiled the SAM Coupe emulator. For image processing VMM is even more handy.
Also, you deliberately skipped some of my points, but seeing that your OS of choise lacks them, it is quite understandable. Good move actually.
If all 3.9 users cared for was the latest feature they would just stick with Win7 or Snow leopard I'm afraid, but incidentally I believe all they demonstrated here is how AmigaOS4 is actually what passionate 3.9 users want when they upgrade, that being...AmigaOS of course, something they are already familiar with but that thanks to many updates (and the fact that it runs on faster PPC CPU), allows them to run modern apps such as Blender and Firefox along with their favorite software (being it with petunia or with other integration utilities) and that most of all, is still being developed and enhanced as we speak.
-
I didn't have any problems myself. Well maybe they've made it more user friendly? If they have that's certainly a good thing.
Of course it is. Upgrading the OS is about making it more user friendly too. It is all that small advantages that make AmigaOS 4 easier to use over AmigaOS 3 and many other operating systems. If it wasn't for all the small parts that make the OS, I would happily use ProDOS on Apple II and still do some work. Of coure with much more effort.
MorphOS had a virtual memory solution at some point, but it proved way too slow, complex and problem prone to be worth it. If you get an EFIKA you obviously have to live with the limited amount of memory. Even if you'd add a virtual memory solution it'd be really slow on EFIKA due to limited I/O performance. Latest MorphOS release does include some changes to make more memory available for the applications, however.
Good to know. Sometime I want to test application if it will suit me. If it requires too much memory, for a certain task, I still will be able to test it, thanks to VMM, without the need to close all other opened applications. Later I can decide if I need more RAM for this exact application. Without VMM on Efika, it will not simply slow down. It will not run, making the machine usage limited.
Why's that? All my systems have minimum 1GB.
Good for you. I have 256MB, because with the VMM, I did not had a reason to upgrade. In some rare situations VMM comes to the rescue, despite the slowdown, but after that, I continue to use my Amiga without problems. Of course the more memory, the better. I don't know what are your reasons for RAM upgrade, but if it was because your OS was not running something, the lack of feature is a limitation of the OS, not the hardware.
Hmm? AmigaOS4 would run out of 256MB memory when compiling? That's odd. Is it because of the memory fragmentation or what?
No, it's because of all the possible optimizations turned On. Plus all the test files saved in RAM:, plus some applications running in the background. You can easily run out of RAM in many situations.
Most certainly with such low amount of memory. Personally I'd just rather upgrade the memory than suffer the speed penalty of the swapping.
As I said, the penalty of swapping is very rare, to justify purchasing RAM upgrade.
Weren't we comparing against AmigaOS 3.x? I skipped the entries where AmigaOS 4 obviously has an edge.
Yes, we are. But you missed to admit that AmigaOS 4 have obvious advantage in these areas.
If we go for MorphOS comparison there's very little OS4 does better.
MorphOS is off-topic! (irrelevant)
-
But you missed to admit that AmigaOS 4 have obvious advantage in these areas.
I assumed that if I didn't give any counterargument it'd be kind of implicit.
MorphOS is off-topic!
MorphOS is OS of my choice, not AmigaOS 3.x. Misunderstanding there I guess.
-
If we lived near I would show you my settings as described in the link i posted, I've done my fare share of side by side comparisons demonstrations (Sam+my trusty A2000 underneath) you would be surprised...(Chuck Rock, R-Type, Xenon 2 and more no difference whatsoever running side by side and played with the same joystick, a competition pro standard + USB version).
I've used UAE quite some bit (I use it for development), so I'm aware that's it's pretty ok. But still, nothing beats the real thing. And emulation (UAE and launchers) in itself is nothing AOS4-specific, so all the benefits are also available on other platforms (and especially on Windows with it's superior WinUAE).
-
I assumed that if I didn't give any counterargument it'd be kind of implicit.
I assumed not.
MorphOS is OS of my choice, not AmigaOS 3.x. Misunderstanding there I guess.
[/quote]
No. My initial comparasion was against AmigaOS 3.x. Then you said that nobody shall need VMM, and I pointed situations, when it will come handy. I assumed why you said that VMM is in no use - because your OS of choice lacks it. You confirmed it and confirmed the OS of your choice. I don't see misunderstading here.
-
I've used UAE quite some bit (I use it for development), so I'm aware that's it's pretty ok. But still, nothing beats the real thing. And emulation (UAE and launchers) in itself is nothing AOS4-specific, so all the benefits are also available on other platforms (and especially on Windows with it's superior WinUAE).
No wonder then on why you think so and i respect that. Still consider that all ex-amigans I invite here don't share your knowledge of cycle exact stuff (and similar details) and when they see a game running perfectly side by side, they just love it as they love the original. (their reactions are pretty amusing most of the time).
unless you were talking about that kind of satisfaction you get on actually owning/touching the phisical thing and owning/collecting original games, on which i agree even more (I'm a collector myself)
-
@drHirudo
No. My initial comparasion was against AmigaOS 3.x. Then you said that nobody shall need VMM, and I pointed situations, when it will come handy. I assumed why you said that VMM is in no use - because your OS of choice lacks it. You confirmed it and confirmed the OS of your choice. I don't see misunderstading here.
But earlier:
Also, you deliberately skipped some of my points, but seeing that your OS of choise lacks them
So applying double standards is a normal argument tool for you. Well it isn't for me. I find this method intellectually dishonest.
-
...either I'm really drunk, or this thread is flying by at a mile a minute.
-
...either I'm really drunk, or this thread is flying by at a mile a minute.
It is the butterfly effect..
-
Amigaaaa rulesssss!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I propose that because OP chose to ask how "cool" and "fun" something is (which is ENTIRELY based on opinion), that everyones opinion is on-topic.
Including all the opinions that OS4.1 is inferior to MorphOS.
This entire thread is a predictable result. (and an enjoyable one IMHO).
-
I propose that because OP chose to ask how "cool" and "fun" something is (which is ENTIRELY based on opinion), that everyones opinion is on-topic.
Including all the opinions that OS4.1 is inferior to MOS.
This entire thread is a predictable result. (and an enjoyable one IMHO).
is MorphOS not MOS .... do you wanna get other 10 pages of complaints? :rolleyes:
-
It's easy to create normal amiga shared libraries with per caller data. bsdsocket.library is a common example, every AmigaOS 3.x installation with a networking installed has such library installed. The added bonus is that you don't need to load the code in memory for every caller, like you have to with AmigaOS 4 SObjects.
Not every shared library can be implemented using old style shared libraries. Consider libstdc++.so, for example.
-
From reports everywhere Sam's 800Mhz version run faster than the 667Mhz EP even with no cache at all, but you might be happy to know that the faster CPU in the 460EX DOES have L1+L2 cache (all the better).
@DAX
I fail to see your point.
Of coarse the 800 is faster than 667. Its simple maths. But a slightly faster slow cpu is still a slow cpu.
The 460 isn't for sale yet so its performance is just speculation.
Maybe I've been spoilt but to me its all about the feeling I get when I use an OS. When you own multiple machines running similar OS's Its difficult not to compare them, but ultimately I found I would rather use 3.9 on my classics than OS4 on the Sam (granted my 2 main classics both have 060's) and Morphos on my 1 gig Peg 2 is way out in front as my machine of choice.
I not someone who goes for cpu speed at all costs, I have here a 1.5 Gig G4 mini which I bought new when the Intel version was released, I keep considering putting Morphos on it but my peg is great for my needs.
I wonder if you tried any of the alternatives before putting your cross and sizeable AWN post count behind Sam and OS4?
Gaz
-
@DAX
I wonder if you tried any of the alternatives before putting your cross and sizeable AWN post count behind Sam and OS4?
Obviously not!
-
@Piru
I don't think that keep on doing heavy OT even after a moderator politely asked to quit it is part of the TOS
@TMHM
Don't get too exited, i hate OTs and if you check my post count (VS registration date) at AW, you might realize I don't skimp on replies ;)
Moderating for going OT is that area where a moderator can never win. Personally it seems going OT is inevitable and moderating due to it would simply make the moderator get labeled "Hitler" as I have been labeled in the past.
If another moderator feels this thread should be moderated, I would support it. So far I don't see enough to moderate it, without pissing everyone off.
-
@takemehomegrandma @gazgod
I like my Sam, I got it in place of a 060 accelerator board for the A2000 and I'm quite happy I did, BUT it is a "meantime" step I took because i wanted to re-acquaint myself with a world i left so many years ago.
That said, I went to a fair and all flavors were shown there (Guruman showed me MOS and Paolone showed me Icaros) but you seem to forget that I don't come from the desert, I do own a powerful Dell XPS, but I also remembered fondly my Amiga times.
Since I own(complete set of disks, manuals, and kick rom) AmigaOS 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, I found my home/familiarity immediately in AmigaOS4.1 and asked myself if there was a future for it.
Then there was the settlement, than the X1000 announcement the rest is history.
I see the chance of getting back at having Amiga (as in "fully boxed computer tailored around the Amiga operating System") as my home computer again and I am willing to support its growth.
As I said, I come from the Commodore days and when I came back last year, I didn't even know MOS or AROS existed, and since my favorite OS is still alive and kicking I don't feel the need for any substitute, nor the need for running away from it, searching for "features".
As i said I don't come from the desert, and I use both my Amiga (a lot) and my PC (bleeding edge stuff) it's all fun :)
-
@takemehomegrandma @gazgod
As I said, I come from the commodore days and when i came back I didn't even know MOS or AROS existed, since my favorite OS is still alive and kicking I don't need substitutes,nor running away from it searching for features (or lack thereof compared to my PC) until AmigaOS adds them one by one, I have plenty of them on my powerful Win7 beast.
So you just got behind the flag of the ONE TRUE AMIGA then, I figured as much.
You do realise that the only thing that OS4 has over the other alternatives is the name? They are all an interpretation and reimplementation of Commodores Amiga OS, nothing more.
While its refreshing to see some people coming back to the hobby, a hobby is all the Amiga is in any of its incarnations or clones. Telling every one that OS4 is the best when you have no real experience of the alternatives make my blood boil. I am a believer that you cannot know ANY OS until you've lived with it, fought it, sworn at it and maybe forgiven it.
-
So you just got behind the flag of the ONE TRUE AMIGA then, I figured as much.
You do realise that the only thing that OS4 has over the other alternatives is the name? They are all an interpretation and reimplementation of Commodores Amiga OS, nothing more.
While its refreshing to see some people coming back to the hobby, a hobby is all the Amiga is in any of its incarnations or clones. Telling every one that OS4 is the best when you have no real experience of the alternatives make my blood boil. I am a believer that you cannot know ANY OS until you've lived with it, fought it, sworn at it and maybe forgiven it.
Actually I feel familiarity with AmigaOS4 something i felt a little with Icaros (I have it here) and very little with Mos (shown to me by a very kind and capable person mind you).
But please don't talk as if I am the only one feeling like this, you know there are many that simply like to think of Amiga as fully boxed home computer tailored around AmigaOS, and if it's not "all Commodorish" as you say, well, it still way closer to that definition than anything else in both feel and practicality (X1000) ;)
-
I am a believer that you cannot know ANY OS until you've lived with it, fought it, sworn at it and maybe forgiven it.
You are a woss if you have not installed or upgrader MorphOS manually file by file, or at least fixed MOSSYS:s/startup-sequence so it looks less like a rip-off of OS3.1 startup-sequence, removed all the redundant >NIL: occurances etc. And screw that "though shalt not touch MOSSYS:" mantra - seriously, anyone who follows that might just as well use windows or macos instead.
Oh, and I almost forgot: MorpOS blows. ;)
-
What's a "woss"? :p
-
What's a "woss"? :p
(http://www.ganeshaspeaks.com/blogImages/JonathanRoss02_05112008.jpg)
-
Actually I feel familiarity with AmigaOS4 something i felt a little with Icaros (I have it here) and very little with Mos (shown to me by a very kind and capable person mind you).
This kind of statement looks really amazing to me. I know you said "feel", but could you give any argument to explain that feeling? :)
(all the more amazing when it's actually OS4 that introduces all kind of non amiga-like and unsuited concepts)
-
you are too much biased (and probably short in memory) to understand that i already tryed everything to make Morphos 1.4.5 "useable" on classic (FYI i'm one of the few who got up and running AmigaOS3.9-Morphos 1.4.5 and AmigaOS4 on my CSPPC-CVPPC and helped others users to fix variuos issues when 1.4.5 was released).
Sure, I remember old threads but there's nothing that requires special skills in making OS39/OS4/MOS work in the same hardware. I made the first MorphOS1.4.5 version work on a G-Rex 4000 and some time before OS4 Classic was released I convinced the Friedens to add an option so G-Rex would be ignored (so the user had the chance to use a ZorroIII gfx card -including Mediator or Prometheus- in addition to the G-Rex). Later Frank Mariak listened to the users like me that asked CV64/CV3D/PicassoIV support and he added it so I could test more hardware.
I also helped users to install both MorphOS and AmigaOS4 and even did a small install guide txt to install MorphOS powerup.
In addition to that I installed both OS4 & MorphOS on a pair of A1200 with Permedia2
When you boot OOTB MorphOS or OS4 just drag a window. On MorphOS it's silky smooth and on OS4 it's not (I'm talking about Permedia2, CV64, CV3D, PicassoIV and Voodoo3). If you adjust MUI skins and disable delays MorphOS flies (even if you compare it to OS4.x with basic OS3.x skin)
As a disadvantage you have to add that A1200 OS4 version doesn't have scsi support.
I also tested OS4 with RetinaZ3, Algor, Highway, Norway, Prometheus, Toccata, ConciertoIV, X-Surf...
Your not speaking with a newbie, so please refrain to insist with that "you must have some configuration problem in you MorphOS instal" because it is simply not true. Thanks!
You haven't stated which Ambient/MUI versions you are using or if your binaries are stripped. You haven't stated your settings either. I'll repeat: you must have some configuration problem because using modern Ambient and MUI4 it should go faster (at least all systems I have configured run faster than the same system with OS4).
-
If another moderator feels this thread should be moderated, I would support it. So far I don't see enough to moderate it, without pissing everyone off.
I sincerely thought the days of red v blue penis measuring on the site were a thing of the past, gone with those that went away and created their own niche forums.
-
Alright, alright, get your red and blue prophylactics...
(http://comps.fotosearch.com/comp/corbis/DGT069/red-blue-condoms_~CB026437.jpg)
-
I sincerely thought the days of red v blue penis measuring on the site were a thing of the past, gone with those that went away and created their own niche forums.
Kids eh? !
-
from those who use it, or have in the past, how is amiga OS4 ?
Whats cool and fun ?
Alot better than classic AmigaOS in my experience.
It is still as responsive, but looks alot more modern, has more features and is much more stable in my experience. OS4.1 pre update 2 was a different story in my experience though.
-
@runequester
I am responding to your original post in this thread.
I have an A2000HD with AmigaOS 3.1 and a MicroA1 with AmigaOS 4.1 Update 2.
My Amiga 2000HD is almost 20 years old. It has a 68000 CPU (no accelerator card), 5 megs of RAM, 40 MB SCSI hard drive, a second smaller SCSI hard drive, a SCSI CD-ROM drive, and a MicroWay flickerfixer card. Running AmigaOS 3.1 with very little eye candy.
My MicroA1-C has an IBM PowerPC 750 GX CPU, 256 MB of RAM, Radeon 7000 with 32 MB video RAM, hard drive, DVD-ROM combo drive, ethernet port, and USB ports. Currently running AmigaOS 4.1 Update 2.
Back in 2004, I upgraded from my A2000HD with AmigaOS 3.1 directly to my MicroA1 with AmigaOS4. I had never used OS 3.5 or OS 3.9 or any of the associated eye candy. Even in those early days of OS4, I was quite impressed by the variety of options available. OS4 was familiar and yet way more colourful than my OS 3.1 installation. I was also able to use many 68K programs that I had never been able to use on my A2000HD, as well as the PPC programs that were available for OS4.
I am currently running AmigaOS 4.1 Update 2 on my MicroA1. I use OWB, NetSurf, Timberwolf, Final Writer 97, PPaint, TVPaint, DvPlayer, AmiPDF reader, NotePad, AmigaAMP, TuneNet, WarpView, KingCON. I also have Real3D and CinnamonWriter. I used IBrowse and AWeb until recently. I have E-UAE for some really old programs that require OS 3.1 or the classic chipset.
I like OS4. I have not tried the other available flavours, so I don't know how they contrast or compare.
---
redfox
-
many thanks to the people actually answering my question, I appreciate it :)
-
@takemehomegrandma
Since I own(complete set of disks, manuals, and kick rom) AmigaOS 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, I found my home/familiarity immediately in AmigaOS4.1
Since I own(complete set of disks, manuals, and kick rom) AmigaOS 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, I found my home/familiarity immediately in MorphOS!
OS4 is merely a sub-standard substitute for MorphOS (that was here long before OS4 development was even started), with quite poor Amiga compatibility in comparison, so it always puzzles me how anyone *really interested in Amiga* would even consider OS4. The only reason I can think of is some strange brand following (which is the only thing you are interested in as shown by your posts here), which is kind of sad, especially considering it was kind of "robbed" from the IP-owner under miserable circumstances. The most prominent part of Hyperion's product is a printed CD-cover with a boing-ball. They even highlighted this as a feature once.
Actually I feel familiarity with AmigaOS4 something i felt a little with Icaros (I have it here) and very little with Mos (shown to me by a very kind and capable person mind you).
This kind of statement looks really amazing to me. I know you said "feel", but could you give any argument to explain that feeling? :)
(all the more amazing when it's actually OS4 that introduces all kind of non amiga-like and unsuited concepts)
+1
We are many who is very thankful to your (the MorphOS team) ambitions and struggle to uphold the strongest possible Amiga compatibility, while still developing the Amiga environment further! The result is a more modern OS that still operates in the true Amiga way. Worth more than CD-covers with boing balls, if you ask me! :)
-
many thanks to the people actually answering my question, I appreciate it :)
I'm glad that you got your answers from the on-topic posts! Mission accomplished! ;)
Now everyone can officially *quit* posting comments about the thread drifting off-topic! :)
-
All due credit to the Morph OS guys. Im sure the software is great and someday, I'll propably try it out.
My main reasons for not being interested at this moment is:
Only runs on efika and used, second hand mac's.
License limited to a single install. If the machine croaks, I am assured I can get it transferred to another machine, but I dont want to deal with the hassle.
I realize its overall far cheaper than a sam or similar running os 4, but then, AROS is free, has no limitations and runs on hardware I can get cheap AND new.
So again.. I am not looking to disparage your hard work. Im just not interested in it at this moment.
-
Just won an eMac off Ebay for about $86 after shipping. Can't wait to check out this MorphOS business at long last!
In the mean time, I still dream of an affordable means to play with OS 4.x too!
-
I'm glad that you got your answers from the on-topic posts! Mission accomplished! ;)
Now everyone can officially *quit* posting comments about the thread drifting off-topic! :)
I don't think it's up to you to decide a change in the topic of this thread.
Varthall
-
@runequester
I'm glad you got answers, I did start in this thread by giving my genuine experience, as someone who's tried to ignore all the camps.
As for the Morphos hardware lock, I agree it is a pain, but if you buy a OS4 machine and it dies outside warranty, as you can't buy a replacement without also buying OS4 you are kind of hardware locked with that too.
-
@runequester
I'm glad you got answers, I did start in this thread by giving my genuine experience, as someone who's tried to ignore all the camps.
As for the Morphos hardware lock, I agree it is a pain, but if you buy a OS4 machine and it dies outside warranty, as you can't buy a replacement without also buying OS4 you are kind of hardware locked with that too.
this is true, but at least you got a 2 year warranty, and I can (presumably) send it to someone for repairs.
-
this is true, but at least you got a 2 year warranty, and I can (presumably) send it to someone for repairs.
Not to mention Acube DOES repair out of warranty Sams for a small fee...
-
@ runerequester
If you are willing to pay twice the price for a Mac mini so you get a warranty contract that says you will get a replacement in the unlikely case it breaks within two years, I am sure that can be arranged :-)
-
I would say that quick'n'dirty ports feel alien (like running X11 apps through cygwin on Windows), are more unstable that native ports, feel unfinished and integrate badly with the host OS (like Cygnix X11 stuff)
That's not a definition of a quick'n'dirty port. A quick and dirty port refers to a port done in a limited time, without a good quality check of the port and leaving bugs mostly untouched. You cannot judge poor an X11 port, since by its nature it will feel alien compared to its host window manager. In this case the port has a good integration with Workbench within its limits, just check the work that has been done to get the gadget graphics as similar as possible with OS4's one. Regarding unstability I can only speak of my own experience, at least AbiWord and Gnumeric run pretty stable on my system. And still, being a port you can't really judge on stability, unless you pretend that a port in order to be a good one must have fixed all the stability bugs of the original code. And for the last part, what part of these ports make you feel them unfinished?
Do you really call "useable" and "polished" having to use windows keyboard shortcuts to select menu options because GUI doesn't respond to mouse events...
We talking here about how "useful" it can be, not about "useability" and "polishness". And yes, having to use keyboard to select menus doesn't make it less useful, since the plugin I'm using does the job well.
You should realise that most PPC software is just a collection of SDL/CLI unix ports that usually run better in posix platforms. In case port is not easy to do it's common practice to take MorphOS code: MPlayer, BasiliskII, Freespace2 and others...
I'm still interested to know how have you found the information that all the SDL ports have been made by just typing "make". The part that they usually run better on other platform is IMHO not true: it is true for those programs that require more CPU power than the available one on current OS4 machines. But at the moment I can't recall a single SDL application that runs sluggish on my system. There have been some ports that ran badly under OS4, but those ports AFAIK haven't been released. For the use of MOS code, I wouldn't call 3 uses out of some hundreds ports "common practice".
It's normal, just like if you ask me if Dunlop tires are good and I reply you that I prefer pirelli ones
No, for that I would have asked you "how are Dunlop tires compared to other ones", while in this case it's a case of "I want to try Dunlop tires, how are they?" OP has even explicitely stated that he's not interested in a MOS comparison.
Since Efikas are being sold new with its 2 years of warranty and Sam440 has just been produced in small batches and is not produced continuously (I doubt they produce any now that Sam460 is planned) they have the same status now: sold new with warranty but not produced actively.
Efikas will never be again produced. Sam440 are still produced (and that has been confirmed by ACube, even if the 460 will enter production). I see a difference here.
Price increase can not be justified because a machine produced for the same small market 5 years ago costed the same and it's named Pegasos2/G4. Both run OS4 and The old 5 years-old machine is faster. Quite sad if you ask me.
Have you thought about how's the PowerPC CPUs market today in respect to 5 years ago, and have you taken in account that the major CPU buyer that existed 5 years ago isn't anymore a buyer these days?
Sam's advantages are shaded by OS4 (lack of) features: USB works slower than Efika and 3D is probably slower too despiting higher clockrate. It has more ram and faster HD access but I'm not sure I want to pay 450Euros to get a system marginally better.
I guess that everyone have its own opinion whetever that is marginal or not.
Sam G2 cpu technology is obsolete and not many customers would expect having to pay 500Euros for it.
They are enough to justify the release of a new platform, though.
But MorphOS does and it runs classic software probably better than 533-600Mhz Sams.
But OP isn't interested on MOS.
I'm implying most of people paid large sums of money for A1 and specially Sam440 because it ran OS4, otherwise the hardware would have been rejected and they would have bought better hardware like Pegasos2 or Mac Mini.
They had their right to choose. At the time they had the choice to not buy A1 and OS4 if they felt that the hardware was too pricey.
hackish means using an embedded cpu and selling it in a desktop motherboard with limitations you would never expect in a motherbaord like having just ONE SATA that gets disabled if you fit a PCI-e card.
And I'll repeat my question: are PCI Express gfx cards incompatible with 4x lanes slots, and work only in 1x ones, to make you force to plug it in Sam460's 1x lanes slot?
All A1s are Teron prototypes hardly tested. Sams hardware looks better although it's obvious that it has not been tested as deeply as big companies like Apple test its hardware.
What has ACube to do with MAI? Regarding the tests, the question is if they have done enough tests for a releseable product, which neither you nor me can know. So you can't really say that SAMs are "prototypes" and "hardly tested".
Other betatesters and users who sold their (u)A1s to buy Peg2/G4 instead of Sam440 may not agree with you.
That still doesn't make your opinion as a general rule.
I guess it's the same people who's happy using alien x11 ports on their "Amigas"
And what's wrong with that?
Varthall
-
@Fab @TMHM
Guys, you cannot spend hours decribing how OS4 is basically the same as OS3.x and then complaint when a 3.x user tells you that they feel familiarity with OS4. Any user of OS3.x will notice AmigaOS4 IS what they are used to, running on PPC (I talk as an end user).
It is now also integrating modernizations that allow to run modern software like Firefox, but quite frankly there is no need to argue on the above point.
Moreover familiarity doesn't end there, to many Amiga is a boxed commercial home computer running the Amiga Operating System, and we will finally get that with the AmigaOne X1000.
Yeah, Yeah it's not "za Commodorish sh*t" but it comes close enough while your hermit crab paradigm isn't even remotely close.
-
Hehe, that comment really made my day, thanks! :)
It's always the same though, as soon as OS4 advocates run out of rational pro-OS4 arguments compared to MorphOS (which happens rather instantly), they start whining and moaning about behavior and whatever and calls for censoring by moderators. It's seems to be the only way to sell OS4; to control and dictate the information flow by force. Quite sad if you ask me. There are already sites where only allow pro-OS4 talk, go there if you want to escape reality for a moment...
Have you actually read Dax' post? He was referring to my and Crumb's posts, not to his own ones!
Varthall
-
this is true, but at least you got a 2 year warranty
Provided that the company you bought it from actually still exists in two years, and they have the resources and will to actually honor the warranty. The companies you put your trust in aren't exactly Apple or Sony.
Acube does indeed seem to be very honest, and apparently they have really good customer care, possibly even as good as Genesi offered the Pegasos customers, at least when it comes to warranty issues. But as a micro-company selling very odd and specialized hardware in relatively small volumes, they can as well be gone in a year.
Eyetech is an example of how it can go wrong. They were purely a marketing company with no in-house HW engineering competence of their own. They never acknowledged most of the flaws of their products (either they didn't know due to lack of competence, or they had no financial capability (since the problems were so *massive*), or simply no will), and after a while, they simply left the scene.
"A-EON" is another HW marketing company. New, unknown, untried. They will sell a new, unknown, untried product. Nothing is known about their long term financial strength to deal with warranty claims in 1 year and 10 months (what if they will encounter the same massive problems with their HW that Eyetech did?), but they are asking for *pre-payments* to get going. Yet you say "but I will get a two year warranty".
I find that amusing (and please continue reading).
and I can (presumably) send it to someone for repairs.
Well, I don't think Apple is going anywhere, do you? ;) And even if they would run out of spare parts, you would still be better off financially by simply buying another Mac if your first one breaks down, then you would be buying *a single* Sam.
And the "X1000"? Well, many people here on this very forum reports how they are getting eMac's for $50-$100 a piece. That is complete 1.25 GHz G4 *systems* (including a built-in monitor). If the hinted prices of the "X1000" is correct, you can at least get 15-20 (or more) MorphOS capable systems (yes FIFTEEN TO TWENTY) for the price of *one* "X1000". That's the absurd price difference we are talking about! And I'd be damned if 20 computer dies on you within two years! ;)
-
@ runerequester
If you are willing to pay twice the price for a Mac mini so you get a warranty contract that says you will get a replacement in the unlikely case it breaks within two years, I am sure that can be arranged :-)
Hey, that sounds like a fool proof business idea! (provided there are enough "fools" ;))
You sell *one* Mac computer *at the price of 2*, you provide the anxious customer with a two year warranty slip, and as long as 100% of the sold Mac's doesn't break down within two years, you will make a profit! :)
And *it would still* be cheaper than OS4 hardware (and *run circles* around any Sam)! :)
-
OS4 is merely a sub-standard substitute for MorphOS (that was here long before OS4 development was even started), with quite poor Amiga compatibility in comparison, so it always puzzles me how anyone *really interested in Amiga* would even consider OS4. The only reason I can think of is some strange brand following (which is the only thing you are interested in as shown by your posts here), which is kind of sad, especially considering it was kind of "robbed" from the IP-owner under miserable circumstances.
My god, this post is no different in tone than the worst BAF posts of old :roflmao:
The most reasonable "pro MorphOS" poster in this thread by far has been Piru, who thankfully, as one of the MorphOS core developers speaks with authority when discussing MorphOS. Anybody that actually wants to know more about it should really talk to him.
Unlike the few "cheerleaders" whose only comments about MorphOS are how it's "teh besterest amigaos evar" and "OS4 is teh suxx0r wannabe and worserer in every way!"
Really guys, I honestly thought we'd grown up in the last few years. You're a disappointment.
-
Provided that the company you bought it from actually still exists in two years, and they have the resources and will to actually honor the warranty. The companies you put your trust in aren't exactly Apple or Sony.
Apple is not producing PPC boards anymore. No AmigaOS runs on Sony hardware.
Acube does indeed seem to be very honest, and apparently they have really good customer care, possibly even as good as Genesi offered the Pegasos customers, at least when it comes to warranty issues. But as a micro-company selling very odd and specialized hardware in relatively small volumes, they can as well be gone in a year.
Most of the defects of electronics appear in the first several months. Many people took the risk and Acube is still there. Genesi is not going to produce PPC boards anymore.
Eyetech is an example of how it can go wrong. They were purely a marketing company with no in-house HW engineering competence of their own. They never acknowledged most of the flaws of their products (either they didn't know due to lack of competence, or they had no financial capability (since the problems were so *massive*), or simply no will), and after a while, they simply left the scene.
Eyetech produced AmigaOne boards. My microA1 works fine. Too bad they did not succeed with their risk.
"A-EON" is another HW marketing company. New, unknown, untried. They will sell a new, unknown, untried product. Nothing is known about their long term financial strength to deal with warranty claims in 1 year and 10 months (what if they will encounter the same massive problems with their HW that Eyetech did?), but they are asking for *pre-payments* to get going. Yet you say "but I will get a two year warranty".
A-EON have very reputable partners - AmigaKit, Hyperion, Varisys. If you don't trust A-EON, at least you can ask their partners, about A-EON. Other information you provide is just a wild guess, coming from nowhere, with agenda towards another hardware.
I find that amusing (and please continue reading).
Well, I don't think Apple is going anywhere, do you? ;) And even if they would run out of spare parts, you would still be better off financially by simply buying another Mac if your first one breaks down, then you would be buying *a single* Sam.
Apple is not going to produce PPC computers anymore.
And the "X1000"? Well, many people here on this very forum reports how they are getting eMac's for $50-$100 a piece. That is complete 1.25 GHz G4 *systems* (including a built-in monitor). If the hinted prices of the "X1000" is correct, you can at least get 15-20 (or more) MorphOS capable systems (yes FIFTEEN TO TWENTY) for the price of *one* "X1000". That's the absurd price difference we are talking about! And I'd be damned if 20 computer dies on you within two years! ;)
You can buy 20 E-Mac computers, and pray their capacitors don't leak on the motherboards. Apple will not respect this failure and will not repair it for free, because your E-Mac is older than 3 years. I would prefer the X1000, because I will put it on my 21 inch TFT monitor and enjoy AmigaOS. I can afford the extra price. I can not afford the extra space for storage of 20 E-Mac computers. Imagine the faces of people who see that you store 20 E-Mac computers as backup. As a plus, the X1000 is faster and better specced than E-Mac.
-
Hey, that sounds like a fool proof business idea! (provided there are enough "fools" ;))
You sell *one* Mac computer *at the price of 2*, you provide the anxious customer with a two year warranty slip, and as long as 100% of the sold Mac's doesn't break down within two years, you will make a profit! :)
And *it would still* be cheaper than OS4 hardware (and *run circles* around any Sam)! :)
Indeed and you can even get more if you compare the price with the used car I wanted to buy.
I remember my father once came home with a "bargain" he got at a local market, my mother said to him, "why did you get that for? We don't need it!" and him :" it was cheap"! and My mother with what you consider cheap we could have had 3 dinners at a restaurant and they would have been money spent way better!
You see it all boils down at what you want, what you desire, if you want to fork 250 eur for a MOS system (including the OS) that when you decide you want to upgrade to a new machine forces you to spend another 150 eur (and so on for all your HW upgrades), just to live your life scavenging Apple scraps more power to you.
For however slow performing the first Sams were, it was a beginning not an end (as a matter of fact the first slowest models are no longer available) and new faster ones will be out in the future, to a point where the slowest Sam will be faster than any Apple scrap, far better strategy in my opinion.
On the other hand there is the X1000, which the newly announced partnership with Varisys (who made the Nemo board) is clearly not even the last one they'll make (they hint at that in their press release).
So, while AmigaOS keeps on evolving on new HW, you get your cheap Apple scraps that leads nowhere, but then again if that makes you happy, forking 250 eur for that honor, is a very good thing, why not.
-
My god this thread is awful. I thought we'd grown up more than this by now...
FWIW, I prefer OS4 to MorphOS, but MorphOS is very good too.
-
@TMHM
OS4 is basically the same as OS3.x and then complaint when a 3.x user tells you that they feel familiarity with OS4. Any user of OS3.x will notice AmigaOS4 IS what they are used to, running on PPC (I talk as an end user).
MorphOS is basically the same as OS3.x and 3.x users tells you that they feel familiarity with MorphOS. Any user of OS3.x will notice MorphOS IS what they are used to, running on PPC (I talk as an end user).
There are many testimonies from numerous sources over the last couple of years, by people installing MorphOS on a new partition of their Amiga's, boot it, and simply use the same applications (only the system friendly ones of course), files, etc. They didn't have to change much, they simply dual boot their Amiga's into *the very same* environment, no matter if they boots OS 3.1 or MorphOS! Other new MorphOS users simply pulled their HDD's out of their Amiga, inserted it in a Pegasos, and started use it just the same. It just works! Including dopus, Hyperion games (which is quite funny! :)), etc. At the same time OS4 users has to install specially recompiled OS4 versions of many programs, because the Amiga versions simply won't work. So don't come here talking about Amiga compatibility! :)
Moreover familiarity doesn't end there, to many Amiga is a boxed commercial home computer running the Amiga Operating System, and we will finally get that with the AmigaOne X1000.
I get it.
One can get about 10 (TEN) *complete* MorphOS systems, with OS registration fee *paid*, for the price of a single "X1000" mounted in some standard PC server case, running an OS that is slower than MorphOS, has less features than MorphOS, has worse Amiga compatibility than MorphOS, etc, all in all is *quite inferior* to MorphOS. And you actually advocate the latter, with the only reason that it will be called "AmigaONE" (not even "Amiga") and run an OS that is called "AmigaOS" (not even "Amiga OS").
What can I say? All rationality has left the building!
Boing! Boing!
-
Have you actually read Dax' post? He was referring to my and Crumb's posts, not to his own ones!
I have read them all, as well as those from those people crying "foul" when they simply don't like the arguments(!) presented. My reply was directed to them all, not one post in particular.
-
Indeed and you can even get more if you compare the price with the used car I wanted to buy.
Don't start talking about cars now, please...
You see it all boils down at what you want, what you desire
Of course, and that's my point. I'm just trying to figure out how anyone can desire something 1/2 as good at 10x the cost. The answer so far boils down to: A boing ball!
-
@ xeron, karlos, etc
Hehe, "Foul! Foul! Can't some referee do something? These kind of discussions shouldn't be allowed! Take away those arguments! Do something!"...
-
Don't start talking about cars now, please...
Of course, and that's my point. I'm just trying to figure out how anyone can desire something 1/2 as good at 10x the cost. The answer so far boils down to: A boing ball!
Nahh, in my case is perspective, you see, as I said already people does not live under a rock and we all have our SnowLeopards and Win7 beasts.
Since I re-discovered Amiga was still alive I immediately imagined a future where a small but healthy niche of computer maniacs (ex-amigans) would enjoy new personal computers made for AmigaOS.
Might start with a 400Mhz Sam, but that crescendo leads to branded fully boxed machines running AmigaOS 5 on several cores on PCI-E3.0 mobos in 2015 (right now we are getting a Dual Core 64Bit cpu with PCI-E 16x, mid point, I might say).
Small steps at a time mind you, but I'm not in a hurry, as long as the road is the right one, I'll gladly enjoy the ride.
-
@ xeron, karlos, etc
Hehe, "Foul! Foul! Can't some referee do something? These kind of discussions shouldn't be allowed! Take away those arguments! Do something!"...
Oh, do grow up. How old are you? This is not about MorphOS etc, it's about your behaviour on this thread.
Try to remember who you are talking to. We are all enthusiasts. Who actually gives a rats arse if one person prefers something over another? Being enthusiastic about something does not mean you have to trash everything else like some damned schoolkid.
We all understand that you find MorphOS better than OS4. Most of us also understand that MorphOS is a mature and well-realized evolution of AmigaOS. Who do you see disputing that? That's right, nobody. At least nobody that isn't just reacting directly you your continuous OS4 bashing.
The original poster was asking a question specifically about OS4. He's already asked about MorphOS previously. You posted on that thread too. Where were all the BAF trolls in that thread? Nowhere, because they've either all left or grown up. I'm not for people storming off of forums in a fit, but you might just try the latter.
Even when the OP thanked people for their responses but made it clear that he just wanted some info from OS4 users about what was "fun and cool" about it, you simply couldn't respect his wishes.
And now that you are being called out, you are crying the old "you just can't take the fact that MorphOS is better! boo! ban the discussion" persecution line. You really are no different to the BAF's of old.
You need to learn that some people, for whatever reason, prefer OS4 (as well as OS3.x, AROS etc) and not get an apoplectic fit over the fact that some do prefer OS4 and resorting to insulting them as irrational name followers and the like. After all, if someone decides to blow a huge wad on an X1000, it isn't your money they are spending, is it?
-
This thread reminds me of the old PowerUp vs WarpOS thread some years ago. :)
-
... If the machine croaks,...
What I am always wondering with this kind of statement is whether I am very lucky or many other ppl are treating their hw badly.
I have computers now for more than 20 years. And I never ever got a hardware failure.
Not entirely true, to be precise I never ever got a *serious* hardware failure.
My most serious trouble in the last 20 years:
- Once I wrongly flashed a BlizzardPPC card, which needed fixing
- one hdd which became a bit unreliable (and got substituted)
- my 1997 SCSI CDR became unlielable after 8-10 years and got retired
- an usb pen drive failed
- an ide udma cable broke
- many floppy disks went bust in the later eighties and early nineties
With this track record I am not very afraid of hardware failures.
-
With this track record I am not very afraid of hardware failures.
It really depends on the components that were used. It was alleged that in the late 90's, an employee of Rubycon (The Japanese component manufacturer, nothing to do with the exotic soft drinks company ;)) left and took the formulation of their capacitor electrolyte with him.
He subsequently sold the formulation to various Chinese companies but was unaware of the fact that the formulation he had was missing a few essential components that weren't documented (presumably to mitigate espionage) anywhere he had access to. Among these were anti corrosion compounds and the like. The result is that the electrolyte is not stable long term and results in internal corrosion and the build up of gases, that eventually pop the casing and leak.
Consequently, said Chinese firms started shipping cheap electrolytic capacitors that were bought up by electronics companies across the globe.
I've seen quite a few such dead caps in all kinds of hardware released from about 1998 onwards.
-edit-
As some of those bad caps were also Rubycon, it's possible the allegations above are not entirely correct and that that particular formulation was complete but bad regardless. It's not easy to say with certainty.
-
This thread reminds me of the old PowerUp vs WarpOS thread some years ago. :)
Yeah, but those at least had the marginal benefit of being fresh and original. Not turgid rehashes of feted nonsense spewed over and over again by people who haven't yet worked out that the war is long over and that everyone lost.
-
It's worth noting that some eMacs were among the machines affected by the "capacitor plague"
http://macosx.com/topics/emac-capacitors.html (http://macosx.com/topics/emac-capacitors.html)
-
That's not a definition of a quick'n'dirty port. A quick and dirty port refers to a port done in a limited time, without a good quality check of the port and leaving bugs mostly untouched.
The time invested depends on coder's skills and OS knowledge. e.g.: Itix could port software X in one week and it would take me two months to do the same. Despiting time factor the rest applies to x11 ports: no good quality checks, most of original bugs remain untouched (even new ones are added) and no use of host OS functions.
You cannot judge poor an X11 port, since by its nature it will feel alien compared to its host window manager.
we are not just talking about window managers, gaim would feel alien even if you used amiga window frames. Using an Amiga skin doesn't suddenly turn your x11 software into amiga software
In this case the port has a good integration with Workbench within its limits, just check the work that has been done to get the gadget graphics as similar as possible with OS4's one.
Then just use any random OS (e.g. Windows with WindowBlinds) with some Workbench skin and be happy. AtheOS had Amiga-like gadgets and there were some x11 window managers that mimicked WB but that won't turn gtk into mui.
Regarding unstability I can only speak of my own experience, at least AbiWord and Gnumeric run pretty stable on my system.
"ls" also runs pretty stable on all amigas yet it doesn't feel native because it doesn't use amiga arguments.
And still, being a port you can't really judge on stability,
what?!
unless you pretend that a port in order to be a good one must have fixed all the stability bugs of the original code.
I assume coder won't be silly and will avoid bleeding edge unstable versions. If code runs stable in other platform it should do so if the port is properly done.
And for the last part, what part of these ports make you feel them unfinished?
X11
We talking here about how "useful" it can be, not about "useability" and "polishness". And yes, having to use keyboard to select menus doesn't make it less useful, since the plugin I'm using does the job well.
Lynx is also perfectly "useful" too.
I'm still interested to know how have you found the information that all the SDL ports have been made by just typing "make". The part that they usually run better on other platform is IMHO not true: it is true for those programs that require more CPU power than the available one on current OS4 machines. But at the moment I can't recall a single SDL application that runs sluggish on my system.
SDL/X11 ports always run better in the original platform.
No, for that I would have asked you "how are Dunlop tires compared to other ones", while in this case it's a case of "I want to try Dunlop tires, how are they?" OP has even explicitely stated that he's not interested in a MOS comparison.
I disagree. And I think it's polite to reply you instead of ignoring you.
Efikas will never be again produced. Sam440 are still produced (and that has been confirmed by ACube, even if the 460 will enter production). I see a difference here.
BBRV always says that if you have an order for Genesi to build certain number of 512MB Efikas they will build them. Both products have warranty and Efikas can be built on demand I don't see much difference. In addition to that I think there are more chances of ACube going broke than Directron
Have you thought about how's the PowerPC CPUs market today in respect to 5 years ago, and have you taken in account that the major CPU buyer that existed 5 years ago isn't anymore a buyer these days?
I think ACube choosed wrong cpus, added unneeded stuff to motherboard like that fpga you can't program with freedom and added the mobility Radeon unneeded for embedded stuff. The choices they have made for 460 model look slightly better for embedded customers but are odd for desktop users.
Most Amiga users I know were waiting some fast G4 machine many years ago. Now it's funny because Hyperion partners avoided the use of Altivec (with the honorable exception of A1-XE G4), something that pissed almost all users I know. The situation looked brighter when Moana appeared but unfortunately Hyperion management decided to recover developing costs selling us expensive hardware instead of trying to sell many OS4 units and leaving users the choice of using 2nd hand hardware like Mac Mini/Powerbook or new hardware (like Sam440 or whatever thing they wanted to build)
They are enough to justify the release of a new platform, though.
Since some users are desperate to run OS4 they will buy almost everything you put on sale. But mind you, if you could buy Moana and run it on a 2nd hand Mac Mini many users would have been able to try out OS4. Now the number of users spending more than 500 Euros to get a substandard board that runs slower than 5-year old boards are pretty slim compared to the number of users they would have got if they also had released Moana.
They had their right to choose. At the time they had the choice to not buy A1 and OS4 if they felt that the hardware was too pricey.
Sure customers have right to choose, no one questions that. The problem is that customers who wanted to run OS4 had NO choice.
And I'll repeat my question: are PCI Express gfx cards incompatible with 4x lanes slots, and work only in 1x ones, to make you force to plug it in Sam460's 1x lanes slot?
AGPx1 speed would be sad.
What has ACube to do with MAI?
both are OS4 hardware producers Hyperion forces us to buy hardware from if we have some interest in OS4.
Regarding the tests, the question is if they have done enough tests for a releseable product, which neither you nor me can know. So you can't really say that SAMs are "prototypes" and "hardly tested".
But I can claim it hasn't gone through all the tests mainstream hardware goes through.
That still doesn't make your opinion as a general rule.
Well, most (u)A1 users I knew sold them to buy Peg2/G4. Also the ones I don't know in person. Even one of the Friedens used Peg2 as main machine one year before OS4.1 Peg2 release because it was better hardware than MAI/ACube.
-
It's worth noting that some eMacs were among the machines affected by the "capacitor plague"
If you feel brave you could of course attempt to repair it yourself, the capacitors are cheap enough (do get some decent quality replacements) and if you have the soldering skills it might just work ;)
-
@Crumb
maybe you do need a Peg2 if you are developing an OS for it...
And I also see you enjoy 2004/2007 a lot, negating all progress AmigaOS HW and SW has made since your early alphas (what progress? everything is still 1000% identical to OS-0.5, and Aos4.5 will be more or less on par with 1.0, if that!!! ;)) but as I said many times, your blabbering is irrelevant to end-users. Get over it, and most of all, the time Aos slept are finished, you will see upgrade upon upgrades from now on both software and HW side, you better start getting acquainted to this new situation...
-
If you feel brave you could of course attempt to repair it yourself, the capacitors are cheap enough (do get some decent quality replacements) and if you have the soldering skills it might just work ;)
Sure, but I would advise any normal end user to get someone with the requisite experience to do it for them.
Replacing SMD electrolytic capacitors in particular can be tricky. You either need the right tools or a pair of soldering irons and a steady hand. Even then, it's easy to lift the pads and traces off the board.
-
@Crumb
Even one of the Friedens used Peg2 as main machine one year before OS4.1 Peg2 release because it was better hardware than MAI/ACube.
:lol:
I'm sorry, but the above reasoning is just very silly. Better hardware or not, I'm pretty sure it wasn't the reason he had a Pegasos 2.
Call me old-fashioned, but if I was developing software for some target hardware, I'd pretty much want to have that hardware available to test it on during development.
-
Sure, but I would advise any normal end user to get someone with the requisite experience to do it for them.
Of course.
Replacing SMD electrolytic capacitors in particular can be tricky. You either need the right tools or a pair of soldering irons and a steady hand. Even then, it's easy to lift the pads and traces off the board.
Found this link (http://www.edugeek.net/forums/general-chat/42009-arrg-emacs.html) with some images, looks doable.
-
Of course.
Found this link (http://www.edugeek.net/forums/general-chat/42009-arrg-emacs.html) with some images, looks doable.
I know old macs may be cheap second-hand but do you really want to have practise runs?
-
I know old macs may be cheap second-hand but do you really want to have practise runs?
Maybe find something else to pracise on first then :) That's what I did when my Samsung TFT suffered from leaky caps.
-
Sure, I remember old threads but there's nothing that requires special skills in making OS39/OS4/MOS work in the same hardware. I made the first MorphOS1.4.5 version work on a G-Rex 4000 and some time before OS4 Classic was released I convinced the Friedens to add an option so G-Rex would be ignored (so the user had the chance to use a ZorroIII gfx card -including Mediator or Prometheus- in addition to the G-Rex). Later Frank Mariak listened to the users like me that asked CV64/CV3D/PicassoIV support and he added it so I could test more hardware.
I also helped users to install both MorphOS and AmigaOS4 and even did a small install guide txt to install MorphOS powerup.
In addition to that I installed both OS4 & MorphOS on a pair of A1200 with Permedia2
When you boot OOTB MorphOS or OS4 just drag a window. On MorphOS it's silky smooth and on OS4 it's not (I'm talking about Permedia2, CV64, CV3D, PicassoIV and Voodoo3). If you adjust MUI skins and disable delays MorphOS flies (even if you compare it to OS4.x with basic OS3.x skin)
As a disadvantage you have to add that A1200 OS4 version doesn't have scsi support.
I also tested OS4 with RetinaZ3, Algor, Highway, Norway, Prometheus, Toccata, ConciertoIV, X-Surf...
You haven't stated which Ambient/MUI versions you are using or if your binaries are stripped. You haven't stated your settings either. I'll repeat: you must have some configuration problem because using modern Ambient and MUI4 it should go faster (at least all systems I have configured run faster than the same system with OS4).
if you had done the same tweaks on AOS4 too, you would get that AmigaOS4 for classic is way smoother than Morphos 1.4.5 ... but obviously you didn't! anyway is a moot point, beeing AmigaOS4 and morphos 1.4.5 for classic both dead.
-
Even in the old days when I actually did some OS4 for classic beta-testing, I can't say it was sluggish, even running on AGA, let alone RTG: See here (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/index.php?n=3136).
-
My god this thread is awful. I thought we'd grown up more than this by now...
FWIW, I prefer OS4 to MorphOS, but MorphOS is very good too.
Mud slinging from both sides... Then again it is no where near as personal as it was almost a decade ago. It was downright nasty back in 02-05ish.
-
It's worth noting that some eMacs were among the machines affected by the "capacitor plague"
http://macosx.com/topics/emac-capacitors.html
Meh, I've recapped a few machines in my life. I can recap this $40 eMac if need be.:)
-
I know old macs may be cheap second-hand but do you really want to have practise runs?
If they haven't failed by now, they are probably fine for another 15-20 years.
-
If they haven't failed by now, they are probably fine for another 15-20 years.
That kind of depends on what role a given cap has and how the machine has been used overall. Caps that just decouple audio aren't subject to the same stresses as those that are used in power stepping/regulation.
If the previous owner hasn't used the machine since he got his juiced up Xeon based Mac, the chances are suspect caps haven't yet reached failure. The second hand owner, if making this their main machine might end up having to bite on that one.
-
Moderators!! please move this thread to Ann.lu circa 2003 or so.....
-
That kind of depends on what role a given cap has and how the machine has been used overall. Caps that just decouple audio aren't subject to the same stresses as those that are used in power stepping/regulation.
If the previous owner hasn't used the machine since he got his juiced up Xeon based Mac, the chances are suspect caps haven't yet reached failure. The second hand owner, if making this their main machine might end up having to bite on that one.
Most eMacs were sold to schools afaik, "e" standing for education. Mine certainly came from a school, it has plenty of miles on it. Still, if it fails the next one will probably even be cheaper than the $40 I paid.
-
I'm sorry, but the above reasoning is just very silly. Better hardware or not, I'm pretty sure it wasn't the reason he had a Pegasos 2.
Call me old-fashioned, but if I was developing software for some target hardware, I'd pretty much want to have that hardware available to test it on during development.
That was around one year before it was decided if OS4 would see the light on Peg2.
-
Even in the old days when I actually did some OS4 for classic beta-testing, I can't say it was sluggish, even running on AGA, let alone RTG: See here (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/index.php?n=3136).
MorphOS is smoother than OS4 (with RTG obviously since AGA is not supported on MorphOS powerup). OS4 default settings are unfortunately too slow for AGA... solid window dragging is pathethic on AGA and should have been disabled as default. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DHpRYQj1hg
@framiga
I explained you that switching to OS3.x skin speeds up OS4 but whatever, MorphOS still works smoother on Classic hardware.
-
That was around one year before it was decided if OS4 would see the light on Peg2.
What, and you suppose absolutely no experimentation into the feasibility of a version for Peg2 was done before it was announced? Come on.
OS4 default settings are unfortunately too slow for AGA... solid window dragging is pathethic on AGA and should have been disabled as default.
Using 256 colour highres/laced/scandoubled modes on AGA under any supported version of AmigaOS is painfully slow. period. You can't actually blame OS4 for that. It takes all of 2 seconds to disable solid window sizing/dragging. After which it's actually OK.
Or at least as OK as AGA is on 3.x.
-
@Crumb
maybe you do need a Peg2 if you are developing an OS for it...
You fail to notice that the broken A1 was replaced by an unsupported machine instead of a Sam440. One year before the decission of porting to that platform was taken core os4 developer prefered using a non supported platform with unfinished drivers instead of Sam440. The testing lasted 3 months as maximum.
And I also see you enjoy 2004/2007 a lot, negating all progress AmigaOS HW and SW has made since your early alphas (what progress? everything is still 1000% identical to OS-0.5,
OS4.1 is an early alpha? OS4 HW hasn't progressed much in 5 years, in fact Sam440 has been a step back compared to Peg2. Software wise there are many cosmetic changes but little deep changes (swap memory is one of the most noticeable although it was possible with 3rd party apps on OS3.x, we are still waiting auto stack enlargement and gfx core rewrite)
and Aos4.5 will be more or less on par with 1.0, if that!!! ;)) but as I said many times, your blabbering is irrelevant to end-users.
I wonder if you have ever done any constructive post in any thread at amiga.org. It looks like you just have joined amiga.org to spread your blabbering and red troll propaganda.
Get over it, and most of all, the time Aos slept are finished, you will see upgrade upon upgrades from now on both software and HW side, you better start getting acquainted to this new situation...
It seems you live in a candy coloured parallel reality. HW and SW side OS4 is 10 years in the past. Hyperion had the chance to design new APIs or at least port their OS to mainstream hardware so userbase would not shrink to a few users. They failed.
-
MorphOS is smoother than OS4 (with RTG obviously since AGA is not supported on MorphOS powerup). OS4 default settings are unfortunately too slow for AGA... solid window dragging is pathethic on AGA and should have been disabled as default. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DHpRYQj1hg
@framiga
I explained you that switching to OS3.x skin speeds up OS4 but whatever, MorphOS still works smoother on Classic hardware.
if this make you feel better, ok then ...
-
MorphOS is smoother than OS4 (with RTG obviously since AGA is not supported on MorphOS powerup). OS4 default settings are unfortunately too slow for AGA... solid window dragging is pathethic on AGA and should have been disabled as default. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DHpRYQj1hg
LOL ... unbelievable! your posting a test with a BPPC @160 Mhz with 64 megs of ram on AGA ... what a delusion!, i thought you were a much more correct person/user! whatsup lately mos guys? the Timberwolf thing is hard to swallow? wasn't "pratically impossible to port"? are you all a bit "nervous"?
ah, btw .... since you are going so "low" ... mos OWB 1.8 port IS un-useable under Classic, much more advanced than the OS4 one (thats perfectly useable on classic btw) but NOT useable (3 pages and you are out of mem!)
Nobodys' perfect .... face it
-
@Framiga
The AGA demo was in response to my claim that OS4 classic wasn't that bad even on AGA. On my 240MHz BPPC with a sensible 16-colour PAL interlace (externally FF'd) display, it wasn't. At least no worse than the same display on OS3.x.
-
@Framiga
The AGA demo was in response to my claim that OS4 classic wasn't that bad even on AGA. On my 240MHz BPPC with a sensible 16-colour PAL interlace (externally FF'd) display, it wasn't. At least no worse than the same display on OS3.x.
yes i know ... i've messed up a bit with quoting :-)
-
LOL ... unbelievable! your posting a test with a BPPC @160 Mhz with 64 megs of ram on AGA ... what a delusion!, i thought you were a much more correct person/user! whatsup lately mos guys? the Timberwolf thing is hard to swallow? wasn't "pratically impossible to port"? are you all a bit "nervous"?
ah, btw .... since you are going so "low" ... mos OWB 1.8 port IS un-useable under Classic, much more advanced than the OS4 one (thats perfectly useable on classic btw) but NOT useable (3 pages and you are out of mem!)
Nobodys' perfect .... face it
I got very different reports from other mos pup and os4 users, by the way. And it doesn't use more memory than OS4 OWB at runtime, for your information (probably even less, in fact, since i fixed some leaks, but there are so many in webkit, anyway). But in the end, i'd rather say both are unusable on classic, because of speed and memory usage.
And regarding timberwolf, there's nothing to swallow, really. An half-assed port of something that should only have required one month to port has nothing really appealing. OWB (even for OS4) probably required much more work, since the GUI had to be written from scratch, in addition to the usual layers like memory/thread/file/events/network/graphics... In timberwolf case, the whole UI is based on the graphics layer, which means it's just much less work to port.
-
And regarding timberwolf, there's nothing to swallow, really. An half-assed port of something that should only have required one month to port has nothing really appealing.
If that really were the case, how come nobody else has actually bothered in all the years the bounty was up?
OWB (even for OS4) probably required much more work, since the GUI had to be written from scratch, in addition to the usual layers like memory/thread/file/events/network/graphics... In timberwolf case, the whole UI is based on the graphics layer, which means it's just much less work to port.
It seems that the GUI is the most problematic part of the current alpha version. At present, I'm inclined to believe that WebKit might be easier to manage since it's no doubt a lot cleaner code wise than gecko is.
-
If that really were the case, how come nobody else has actually bothered in all the years the bounty was up?
It's not really a relevant question. The persons who tried either did it before the cairo switch, or were just incompetent. :)
It seems that the GUI is the most problematic part of the current alpha version. At present, I'm inclined to believe that WebKit might be easier to manage since it's no doubt a lot cleaner code wise than gecko is.
I've tried it. From what i can see, the most problematic part seems to reside in events propagation and subwindows in particular, which gives all kind of funny bugs in dropdown menus, lists and so on. But the pure graphic (draw) part shouldn't be a problem at all, at least when the cairo implementation works properly, which is probably not the case when using the new os4 hardware-accelerated surfaces (cf. glitches when scrolling, black areas, overlapping/bad clipping and so on).
And i had a look at FireFox 3.5 sources. It looked separated enough for a clean port, at least. Most layers implementations looked fairly straightforward (just as webkit). The only thing that scared me a bit was the network layer, because of bsdsocket limitations that could easily complicate the implementation.
-
If that really were the case, how come nobody else has actually bothered in all the years the bounty was up?
Mozilla has certainly evolved since Amizilla had been initiated all those years ago. These changes most likely affected how easy it is to port the software.
One issue with the bounty effort was that the requirements were simply unrealistic and sometimes misguided. As has been mentioned previously, the Firefox user interface is entirely separate from the native OS GUI. This also means it is rather odd to suggest in the bounty requirements that developers should focus on OS3.x and MUI. Obviously, MUI could only be used if you tried to replace the native Firefox UI which sounds like a ton of work for little gain...
-
in a nutshell it's still fun to use and thats why I love using it daily! Os4.1 Update 2 is very stable and has come a long way from when I bought the beta release that came with my Samflex. along with the next update
I am tickled silly that i run my favourite 68k games by just clicking on the icon using glUAE:)..I do some serious spreadsheet work with GNumeric under AmiCygnix, while listening to tunes on TuneNet, check all my emails via SimpleMail,do all my internet stuff with OWB and now (YAY) TimberWolf...with OpenOffice and new games showing up weekly now it's great and I can only imagine AmigaOS getting stronger with the release of the X1000:afro:
-
I allways find irritating how MorpOS guys allways attack every OS4 thread, even when it is purely OS4 here in amiga.org
OS4 hobbyits doesn't do that for MorphOS threads, I think that is safe to say that OS4 guys have generally betters manners.
It is allso safe to say, that generally that OS4 users aren't intrested about MorphOS , when MorphS boys and girls seems to be quite intersted about OS4 and I think that tells quite lot about MorphOS.
Interested because they read every single thread about OS4
-
I allways find irritating how MorpOS guys allways attack every OS4 thread, even when it is purely OS4 here in amiga.org
Since when has it been purely OS4 on Amiga.org? That is not in the TOS, not Wayne's intention and AFAIK not the new owner's intention.
-
Not every shared library can be implemented using old style shared libraries. Consider libstdc++.so, for example.
Why not ? C++ function names are mangled and after that can be handled as C functions are handled now in amiga shared library. It's true that no compiler or other tool support exist ATM to do it.
Virtual methods are handled by a vtable and by the class constructor(s). The constructor with mangled name can be part of the shared library.
greets,
Staf.
-
I allways find irritating how MorpOS guys allways attack every OS4 thread, even when it is purely OS4 here in amiga.org
OS4 hobbyits doesn't do that for MorphOS threads, I think that is safe to say that OS4 guys have generally betters manners.
It is allso safe to say, that generally that OS4 users aren't intrested about MorphOS , when MorphS boys and girls seems to be quite intersted and I think that tells quite lot about MorphOS
If good manners of these OS4 users consist in answering that there's only OS4 as successor of the Amiga to the nostalgic people who come back to the scene, and happily forgetting any mention to AROS or MorphOS, then, yes, they have very good manners.
When a "newcomer" asks me the state of the amiga world today, i always give the 3 alternatives. Ignoring blindly the other solutions is just narrow-minded.
-
I allways find irritating how MorpOS guys allways attack every OS4 thread, even when it is purely OS4 here in amiga.org
As Red says: Since (http://www.amiga.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=20) when (http://www.amiga.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=49), exactly (http://www.amiga.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=54)?
The rest is covered quite nicely by Fab I think.
-
Why not ? C++ function names are mangled and after that can be handled as C functions are handled now in amiga shared library.
There's slightly more to C++ linkage than name mangling...
How, using nothing but a jsr style jump table library vector do you propose to enforce exception specifiers, for example? If a virtual function in your application throws an exception from within a library call (perfectly possible under the current libstdc++), is the amigaos shared library implementation expected to unwind the stack and properly invoke destructors for everything?
I'm not saying it's impossible to achieve but in the end, your library would likely end up deviating from amigaos shared library norms in order to offer the required features expected of the C++ standard library. And if you are going to deviate from the norm, then why bother? Static linking has no such problem. And really, that's all .so files do, except actual linking is deferred until runtime.
It's true that no compiler or other tool support exist ATM to do it.
This answers your own question and it's unlikely to change as long as gcc remains the compiler of choice.
Virtual methods are handled by a vtable and by the class constructor(s). The constructor with mangled name can be part of the shared library.
greets,
Staf.
There's more than just the vtables and even the stuff above to worry about. Templating and RTTI present other interesting problems as does thread concurrency. The latter isn't a problem for amiga libraries but remember the STL was not designed with concurrency in mind. GCC has gotten around this on platforms like linux by using a posix thread model in the compiler. In the end, you wouldn't just be creating the shared library, you'd have to reimplement the entire entire STL it provides as well.
So, for your suggestion to work, you need to first build a new compiler and then implement your own complete runtime and STL for it. It isn't exactly a cakewalk. Who is going to bother?
On the other hand, you can take an already tried and tested C++ standard library and statically link it to your application. Which is fine. However, with .so files you can defer that until runtime.
-
@utri007
Or maybe OS4 users are shy and comment only OS4 threads?
-
As Red says: Since (http://www.amiga.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=20) when (http://www.amiga.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=49), exactly (http://www.amiga.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=54)?
The rest is covered quite nicely by Fab I think.
I think he meant when a thread is solely about OS4, not the forum.
-
@karlos
On the other hand, you can take an already tried and tested C++ standard library and statically link it to your application. Which is fine. However, with .so files you can defer that until runtime.
Which saves disk space (precious resource these days ;-)) but apparently on Amiga it is not possible make shared objects shared.
Concurrency obviously is not problem on Amiga. Exceptions could probably work with some stub code. After all C++ libraries are always more or less compiler specific.
But tools to extract manged C++ names are missing indeed. Maybe I should look into it some day...
-
I think he meant when a thread is solely about OS4, not the forum.
If he cannot say what he means, how can he mean what he says?
-
@karlos
Which saves disk space (precious resource these days ;-))
I was thinking more of the benefits of being able to change .so files independently of the applications that use them.
Before anybody starts, the current implementation has been designed to allow linkage against different versions of a .so provided all of the symbols that the originally linked version provided still exist (older gcc implementations didn't do this very well and the whole shebang was reworked).
So, other than saving disk space, you also get to be able to replace your regular libvorbis.so with an altivec tuned one perhaps. Or at least that's the theory.
but apparently on Amiga it is not possible make shared objects shared.
The current OS4 shared object implementation limitation is that .so files are not opened and shared in memory the way .library files are. Whether that remains the case in future versions remains to be seen. From a memory usage perspective, you've lost nothing compared to static linking in that regard.
Concurrency obviously is not problem on Amiga. Exceptions could probably work with some stub code. After all C++ libraries are always more or less compiler specific.
What I meant was that the C++ standard library is not designed with concurrency in mind because threading is not part of the C++ standard (yet). Of course, C++ is used in multithreaded systems so platform specific implementation of the library are are designed to be thread safe. The norm for GCC is to assume posix compliant threads.
But tools to extract manged C++ names are missing indeed. Maybe I should look into it some day...
-
If he cannot say what he means, how can he mean what he says?
English might not be his first language? *shrug* As a quasi-geordie, I can almost sympathise.
-
I allways find irritating how MorpOS guys allways attack every OS4 thread, even when it is purely OS4 here in amiga.org
OS4 hobbyits doesn't do that for MorphOS threads, I think that is safe to say that OS4 guys have generally betters manners.
It is allso safe to say, that generally that OS4 users aren't intrested about MorphOS , when MorphS boys and girls seems to be quite intersted about OS4 and I think that tells quite lot about MorphOS.
Interested because they read every single thread about OS4
I guess you mean thread? Because this forum has been for all amiga and alternative amiga platforms for ages now.
But yeah i find it irritating as well, but i guess people who cheer for the "underdog" often act like that.
I have yet to see OS4 users posting in MOS threads just to spread FUD about the platform.
-
"Arch is great! It will install on any 64 bit architecture based on the highly dominant and superoir Intel/AMD processor lines, and also supports the 32 bit Intel processors back to 486. It supports many wireless cards as well as having a proper TCP/IP stack. The best thing about Arch is that it runs all your classic Amiga applications blazingly fast with e-uae or winUAE under wine or virtualbox. It also has the latest and greatest everything the linux world has to offer as well as being supported by a community larger than all the classic, morphOS, and OS4, Aros, Haiku people put together. You can put it on any name brand pc computer."
The sad thing is that I post this with sarcasm in mind, but the simple truth is that Arch or any flavor of Linux is a bazillion times better than any proprietary operating system hands down with the exception of Windows. Linux is better than MorphOS and OS4. ANd it's free. FREE. I state this because I am absolutely amazed by the stupidity spit out by both camps screaming about their Toy OS. Hey, I love minidiscs. They are DEAD TECH. Do I wish they had won? Yes. Do I think they'll make a comeback? No. Is it cool that MorphOS runs on unsupported used Mac computers? Yes! Is it cool that OS4 runs on custom build small run hobbyist computers? Yes! Would I buy ANY of them thinking "This is it! My favorite '80s era computer is back!"? Hell no. Hands down. As far as the hardware? Look at HP:
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF06a/12454-12454-296719-307907-4050865-3718645.html
I spent 2400 dollars on a Dell XPS laptop a few years ago. It was a great laptop at the time. Now with the same money I can buy an HP that has direct coupling of the 12 DDR3 memory slots to the processor with the potential of 192GB of DDR3 memory. 192GB! You can run every OS ever made in virtualspaces...twice if you're bored; house every piece of software ever written for any of them, and run them faster, better and more stable than they ever ran on their original computers.
We do Amigas as a hobby, and as a love for something intangible from our youth. They are our "Rosebuds". So please. STFU. We get that you like flavor X over flavor Y. But iof someone is going to lay down money on a machine they want to hear the cool stuff they can do with that machine, not take the pepsi challenge.
-
Guys, this whole Red VS. Blue VS. Grey really needs to stop. Seriously. It's giving me a headache.
Here, let me offer this as a peace offering:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WR6y71x3tSY
-
We do Amigas as a hobby, and as a love for something intangible from our youth. They are our "Rosebuds". So please. STFU. We get that you like flavor X over flavor Y. But iof someone is going to lay down money on a machine they want to hear the cool stuff they can do with that machine, not take the pepsi challenge.
+1 Absolutely agree
@Methuselas: nice video! Thanks!!
-
@karlos
I was thinking more of the benefits of being able to change .so files independently of the applications that use them.
You can have this with libraries, too. Of course they have to used different name always.
Before anybody starts, the current implementation has been designed to allow linkage against different versions of a .so provided all of the symbols that the originally linked version provided still exist (older gcc implementations didn't do this very well and the whole shebang was reworked).
So, other than saving disk space, you also get to be able to replace your regular libvorbis.so with an altivec tuned one perhaps. Or at least that's the theory.
But is this different to libraries...? I am developing SDL for MorphOS and when I am trying new AltiVec optimization I only replace old powersdl.library in LIBS: and try different SDL games with it.
The current OS4 shared object implementation limitation is that .so files are not opened and shared in memory the way .library files are. Whether that remains the case in future versions remains to be seen.
I havent investigated this topic very much but to my understanding to .so object sharing can not work in a shared address space model. The problem is, as I see it, relocating data sections.
-
@karlos
You can have this with libraries, too. Of course they have to used different name always.
The accepted practise for .so files on other OS is to use version-based names and symlinks.
supposing you had a library "mystuff" which was version 1, revision 0, you'd generally call it:
libmystuff.so.1.0
Applications which absolutely must have this version/revision (and depending on a specific revision is bad practise anyway) would link against it directly. Thanks to the naming convention, you can have other versions/revisions installed concurrently. Applications which only depend on the major version would use
libmystuff.so.1
where this is usually a symlink to the actual file which could be any revision number. A library is considered a revision change when none of it's originally exported symbols change. Any changes to the originally exported symbols (or major changes to the behaviour of them) count as a version change.
Applications that actually don't require any specific library version would link against
libmystuff.so
which again is usually a symlink to a specific version/revision (most often the latest one).
But is this different to libraries...? I am developing SDL for MorphOS and when I am trying new AltiVec optimization I only replace old powersdl.library in LIBS: and try different SDL games with it.
It's different to libraries in that you can have multiple concurrent versions/revisions of the library. The AmigaOS method of opening libraries is based on passing the name and a version, where the version is stored in the library itself. You'll always get at least the version asked for (or failure to open otherwise), but possibly a newer one. You can't have V30 and V40 graphics.library available concurrently, for example. OTOH, with .so libraries, I can have libmystuff.2 and libmystuff.1 and applications that depend on each major version can happily coexist. Applications that don't depend on the specific version can all use the newest or oldest version at my choosing - it all depends on which particular specific version I point libmystuff.so at.
Now, you may say (and FWIW, I'd generally agree) that in reality, no newer version of a library should break what an older version does and thus being able to support concurrent versions shouldn't be needed. However, you know as well as I do, that in practise, that often isn't how it pans out.
I havent investigated this topic very much but to my understanding to .so object sharing can not work in a shared address space model. The problem is, as I see it, relocating data sections.
Depends on the OS environment. Shared objects are ELF files at the end of the day and primarily coming from GNU, were designed with unix-like operating systems in mind. A lazy implementation of the linker/loader doesn't need to consider sharing the memory representation between processes because the OS almost certainly gives each process an entirely different address space. However, this does not mean the text (code) segment and data segments cannot be loaded separately by a not so lazy implementation. If the OS allows different processes to share read-only executable memory, it is possible to share that memory region between processes. Their individual memory maps may show that region at different places but the physical address will be the same. Only the writeable data segment of the file will exist in different physical locations, one per process.
Now, for OS4, we have the problem you allude to. How do we create separate instances of the data section? Well, that remains to be seen. It may be that it's never implemented. Or it may be that it is possible if the data segment is always loaded in MEMF_VIRTUAL and some mmu trickery is used.
-
Personally I think the biggest objection to .so files in OS4 are mostly aesthetic in the "Not Invented Here" sense. They are seen as an alien system that has been incorporated into the OS. I actually think that's rather silly seeing as we all decided long ago that ELF was a sensible format and gcc was to be our preferred compiler system. Shared objects are simply something useful that you can readily use from that combination, so why not?
-
@Crumb
OS4.1 is an early alpha? OS4 HW hasn't progressed much in 5 years, in fact Sam440 has been a step back compared to Peg2. Software wise there are many cosmetic changes but little deep changes (swap memory is one of the most noticeable although it was possible with 3rd party apps on OS3.x, we are still waiting auto stack enlargement and gfx core rewrite)
And you keep doing it again, neglecting any progress, of course you can improve every part of the OS but if you don't add auto-stack enlargement there was no progress!
But really, OS4.1Up2 has a ton of under the hood improvements and nothing went untouched from the early alphas you helped beta test.
As for Sam, it was a beginning and mostly aimed at people spending thousands on towerized 1200/4000 only to get clunky systems very prone at breaking. It did a great job and the intended audience is happy, those that were searching for a performance beast were not.
I told you many times at AW that support for such initiatives would make newer HW possible, and now they will make the 460EX which is more capable and aimed at a certain OS4 population. Power-users will get an X1000 (I will get it with tiny monthly payments, no need to be rich if you want it. I made them for my plasma, why not making them for something I really want, and costs far less?).
But please Crumb, say there won't be any new HW again (as you did last November) "it doesn't make commercial sense!" You bring luck! ;)
I wonder if you have ever done any constructive post in any thread at amiga.org. It looks like you just have joined amiga.org to spread your blabbering and red troll propaganda.
It seems you live in a candy colored parallel reality. HW and SW side OS4 is 10 years in the past. Hyperion had the chance to design new APIs or at least port their OS to mainstream hardware so user base would not shrink to a few users. They failed.
Actually I live in a world where there is no Amiga or Amiga-like OS that justifies preaching about how cool and modern we are (as you seem to do with morphOS a marginally more mature OS that is still ridiculously obsolete), talk about living in candy worlds...
I see potential in AmigaOS as they are now free to form commercial partnerships and things are starting to move, while I believe the hermit crumb idea first announced to me at Pianeta Amiga by Guruman (in the sense that he told me there would be the MacMini port) didn't seem that hot to me.
But make no mistake, what I saw were 3 OS very far from todays standard, all have a long road to travel making those differences, quite frankly, highly laughable (and that is what I think every time I see you so adamantly writing about them, get real Crumb).
As for your clinging to the past read my lips: from the end of September 2009 (the day they signed the settlement) things have changed, you had a glimpse in the past 6 months, you will notice it even more in the next 12, and if that won't be enough, it will slap you in the face a little further down.
-
Edit.
-
Maybe this dicussion needs to be moved to a dev related forum.
As I'm one of the contributors to the AROS build system I am very interested in it though.
There's slightly more to C++ linkage than name mangling...
How, using nothing but a jsr style jump table library vector do you propose to enforce exception specifiers, for example? If a virtual function in your application throws an exception from within a library call (perfectly possible under the current libstdc++), is the amigaos shared library implementation expected to unwind the stack and properly invoke destructors for everything?
Isn't this problem orthogonal to linking ? Isn't it compile time and C++ ABI related ?
Of course you need to define a C++ ABI and you can't mix different ABIs in one program be they in static link libs, .so or .library files.
I'm not saying it's impossible to achieve but in the end, your library would likely end up deviating from amigaos shared library norms in order to offer the required features expected of the C++ standard library.
What is your definition of the norm. To me a .library has to following norm.
It has a Resident structure that points to the lib init code.
The init code adds the lib to the system list of libs.
The member of this list has a pointer to an LVO table.
3 slots have predefined meaning (OpenLib, CloseLib, ExpungeLib) and have to obey a certain calling convention.
And if you are going to deviate from the norm, then why bother? Static linking has no such problem. And really, that's all .so files do, except actual linking is deferred until runtime.
That the linking is not deferred to runtime is the reason I am a big proponent of amiga style shared libraries.
It's true that no compiler or other tool support exist ATM to do it.
This answers your own question and it's unlikely to change as long as gcc remains the compiler of choice.
It eventually will change (if I live long enough :) )
There's more than just the vtables and even the stuff above to worry about. Templating and RTTI present other interesting problems.
Again are these not part of the C++ ABI and orthogonal to the linking step. I have to admit that the intimate knowledge of the inside of C++ compilers is when the STL was still developed by SGI. I haven't seen anything at that time with templating that would make it incompatible with amiga shared libraries. I don't know how RTTI is implemented internally so I can't comment on that.
What I in the end envision is that for each shared library you would get two files; for example for libstdc++: libstdc++.a and libstdc++.library. Only the .a file would not contain any real code but stub code to call the right LVO in the .library but for the compiler/linker it would obey all ABI conventions.
So, for your suggestion to work, you need to first build a new compiler and then implement your own complete runtime and STL for it.
It isn't exactly a cakewalk. Who is going to bother?
I'm already doing the C library in the ABI V1 branch of AROS. So C++ and the STL will be a minor things once I come to it ;)
greets,
Staf.
-
It's different to libraries in that you can have multiple concurrent versions/revisions of the library. The AmigaOS method of opening libraries is based on passing the name and a version, where the version is stored in the library itself. You'll always get at least the version asked for (or failure to open otherwise), but possibly a newer one. You can't have V30 and V40 graphics.library available concurrently, for example. OTOH, with .so libraries, I can have libmystuff.2 and libmystuff.1 and applications that depend on each major version can happily coexist.
With amiga shared libraries you can also achieve these things in the same .library. You can move a function that is incompatible to a new LVO number and keep an old compatible function at the old location. Programs compiled for the old version will get the right behaviour. Programs compiled with the new version will use the new function.
Another trick, that deviates more from the current norm is that you could return a different library base when the lib is opened with version 3 than opened with version 2 or 1.
Now, you may say (and FWIW, I'd generally agree) that in reality, no newer version of a library should break what an older version does and thus being able to support concurrent versions shouldn't be needed. However, you know as well as I do, that in practise, that often isn't how it pans out.
Yes, and that problem is not solved with the numbering, it is only helpful when people realise they make a backwards incompatible change. All the .2 versions of a library still has to be backwards compatible with the previous ones; some programs may even depend on some undocumented behavior. This is what oftentimes causes dependency hell.
Personally I think the biggest objection to .so files in OS4 are mostly aesthetic in the "Not Invented Here" sense. They are seen as an alien system that has been incorporated into the OS. I actually think that's rather silly seeing as we all decided long ago that ELF was a sensible format and gcc was to be our preferred compiler system. Shared objects are simply something useful that you can readily use from that combination, so why not?
Not for me. The fact that there is no runtime linking needed for amiga shared libraries is the reason for me to like it.
One of the comments on current AROS is that it is so responsive even on old hardware. One of the reasons for that is that you don't need runtime linking or virtual memory tricks like copy-on-write to be able to support shared libraries.
Side remark: ELF is used in AROS for .library files. There was a time I was also opposed to the ELF format until it was shown to me that you could keep binary executable files still relocatable and it doesn't force you to use virtual memory.
greets,
Staf.
-
Yes, and that problem is not solved with the numbering, it is only helpful when people realise they make a backwards incompatible change. All the .2 versions of a library still has to be backwards compatible with the previous ones; some programs may even depend on some undocumented behavior. This is what oftentimes causes dependency hell.
Actually, no. It shouldn't break compatibility but there's no guarantee made that a major library version will be totally compatible with a previous major version, that's the part of the point. Look at some common linux shared libraries and you'll see version 1 or 0 but with fairly high revision numbers. These are libraries that have undergone various changes over time but (at least claim to) retain compatibility with much earlier revisions. Anything that doesn't change the library in a major way is just considered to be a revision, even if it adds many new functions. If any major documented component of the library is changed in a way that makes compatibility with the previous version questionable (or just non existent), a new major version number should be used.
There's no better example of totally borking compatibility between major versions than libkde* between KDE 3.5 and KDE4 ;)
-edit-
Not for me. The fact that there is no runtime linking needed for amiga shared libraries is the reason for me to like it.
One of the comments on current AROS is that it is so responsive even on old hardware. One of the reasons for that is that you don't need runtime linking or virtual memory tricks like copy-on-write to be able to support shared libraries.
Yes, there is latency but it is not really much of a problem. In my experience, on faster processors (read anything less than a decade old), linking a library takes significantly less time than loading the library from your physical disk.
And don't get me wrong, for procedural libraries, I always liked the classic amigaos shared library concept (I also rather like the OS4 interface concept too) as it's a simple and efficient mechanism.
However, when it comes to OOP stuff in C++, I prefer a shared object over static linking and that isn't going to change unless a viable alternative appears. It's all very well to discuss the feasibility of a C++ standard library as a .library, but it doesn't exist and so is somewhat academic for the time being.
-
There's no better example of totally borking compatibility between major versions than libkde* between KDE 3.5 and KDE4 ;)
*shudder*
-
*shudder*
I take it you like KDE 4 as much as I do :lol:
-
I take it you like KDE 4 as much as I do :lol:
:D
My WM in order would be:
Gnome
XFCE
OpenBox
Ratpoison
Cuneiform tablet
KDE 4:lol:
-
:D
My WM in order would be:
Gnome
XFCE
OpenBox
Ratpoison
Cuneiform tablet
KDE 4:lol:
Urhg.. take Gnome to second last above KDE and then it's much better ;)
-
I don't mind gnome at all. Used to hate it, but, like a pestilent fungal infection, it grows on you.
-
I guess you mean thread? Because this forum has been for all amiga and alternative amiga platforms for ages now.
But yeah i find it irritating as well, but i guess people who cheer for the "underdog" often act like that.
I have yet to see OS4 users posting in MOS threads just to spread FUD about the platform.
You surely dont read ANN (when it was alive) or amiga-news.de ;-)
-
Personally I think the biggest objection to .so files in OS4 are mostly aesthetic in the "Not Invented Here" sense. They are seen as an alien system that has been incorporated into the OS. I actually think that's rather silly seeing as we all decided long ago that ELF was a sensible format and gcc was to be our preferred compiler system. Shared objects are simply something useful that you can readily use from that combination, so why not?
#?.so fits nicely with my GeekGadgets development environment but I dont see use on Amiga side.
-
Urhg.. take Gnome to second last above KDE and then it's much better ;)
Yeah, in this day and age, tho, it's about all that's left out of the decent DE's. KDE is crap anymore.
I don't mind gnome at all. Used to hate it, but, like a pestilent fungal infection, it grows on you.
:lol: that sums it up nicely!
-
Anyway, to summarise regarding .so ...
Not all shared libraries can be readily implemented as .library files, at least without someone actually working out how to implement the required features and going on to produce a compiler that can produce the required output and at least porting the most obvious examples (libstdc++ et al) to that target.
So, OS4 decided to meet the problem halfway by supporting runtime linking of .so files as per the linux example (albeit without sharing code in memory at this time). We were already using the ELF specification that defines them as our preferred executable format so to me it seems quite a reasonable way to get started.
I'd like to see an improved .library system that could obviate the need for .so, but seeing as nobody has done it, it seems a pragmatic choice for the time being. It's better than static linking at least.
-
Anyway, to summarise regarding .so ...
Not all shared libraries can be readily implemented as .library files, at least without someone actually working out how to implement the required features and going on to produce a compiler that can produce the required output and at least porting the most obvious examples (libstdc++ et al) to that target.
So, OS4 decided to meet the problem halfway by supporting runtime linking of .so files as per the linux example (albeit without sharing code in memory at this time). We were already using the ELF specification that defines them as our preferred executable format so to me it seems quite a reasonable way to get started.
I'd like to see an improved .library system that could obviate the need for .so, but seeing as nobody has done it, it seems a pragmatic choice for the time being. It's better than static linking at least.
So, everyone agrees that AmigaOS 4 have advantage here, over all the other AmigaOS alikes.
To answer the original poster - how is OS4? - Better than AmigaOS 3.
More:
16. Better preview functions for files in Workbench. Opening drawers and selecting Show->All files and View by->Name shows a resized icons on the left of the list for the different files. There is also the new Type, showing the type of file or drawer - Ascii, Project, Tool, Drawer, Zip, Lharc, Patch and many more.
17. Automatic refresh of drawers. If you download a file to RAM: or anywhere else, no need to go Window->Update to see the new file.
18. Screen Edges resistance - I find it very useful when placing windows near the edges of the screen. I still can put them outside, but it is harder, saves my lots of time.
19. Transpararency effects - for the people who prefer candy effects, they are there, highly customizable.
20. Icons rescaling - built in and supported by Workbench. No need to rely on third party software for this simple task.
21. Better shell - no need to remember exact names. Press the first letter or several letters of the file name you are looking for and then press Tab until you find it.
22. Execute Command from Workbench gives the possibility to search for the file with ASL requester - no more need to remember exact names, paths for the file you want to execute.
23. Detect settings of monitor automatically. No need to search the monitor manual and see what's the max supported modes. AmigaOS 4 will ask the monitor about this. You still can try higher resolutions with different refresh rates, at your own risk.
24. High resolution mouse pointer with dropshadow effect.
25. CDRW support built-in the OS. No more need to rely on third party software for backup to CDRW.
26. DiskImage handler. Click on CD image to mount it like a real CD. No more need to rely on third party software for this ordinary task.
27. Themes - don't like the ordinary AmigaOS 4 look? Click on the present themes or download some of the Internet. Don't like the new look? Double click on the Revert to Last Saved icon to restore your old theme.
28. Boot jingle - done by respected japanese musician.
29. URL handler.
Of course the list can go on and on. For the last nine and half years, since AmigOS 3.9 was released there are lots of improvements in AmigaOS. They are part of AmigaOS 4. It will take a bigger thread than this to list, comment and discuss all of them.
-
@drHirudo
I dont think OS4 is only Amiga API compatible with .so support, thank you very much :)
-
So, everyone agrees that AmigaOS 4 have advantage here, over all the other AmigaOS alikes.
No, not really. It would appear that a significant portion of the posters believe MorphOS has significant advantages over AmigaOS4.
Frankly, since they're both very similar and MorphOS is more mature (and faster), I see no point in being argumentative.
AmigaOS is nice. Buy it if you have the funds for the hardware and the OS.
I'm sticking with MorphOS because of its obvious advantages and the fact that the investment needed in hardware and software is less.
And, in the long road, any company devoting the time to creating PPC based software is unlikely not to support both OS'.
-
No, not really. It would appear that a significant portion of the posters believe MorphOS has significant advantages over AmigaOS4.
Frankly, since they're both very similar and MorphOS is more mature (and faster), I see no point in being argumentative.
Unfortunatelly, not much people who are interested in AmigaOS, care about MorphOS. If this was not the case, most of the discussion would be on MorphZone or similar forum and all the MOSers, who spam every AmigaOS 4 thread with their unwanted, unnecessary and irrelevant solution, would be gone long time ago.
AmigaOS is nice. Buy it if you have the funds for the hardware and the OS.
I do.
I'm sticking with MorphOS because of its obvious advantages and the fact that the investment needed in hardware and software is less.
Whatever suits you best. I prefer AmigaOS 4 and gave my reasons in previous posts. No need to repeat myself.
And, in the long road, any company devoting the time to creating PPC based software is unlikely not to support both OS'.
Amiga is in the hobby niche for more than a decade now. There are no companies.
-
Some software doesn't come from mos port.
Owb,timberwolf,ctorrent to name a few. ;-)
I can't think of much OS4 software without better MorphOS equivalent. Most software news for OS4 consist in SDL ports compiled with "make" with almost 0 changes. When the port is slightly difficult it usually comes from MorphOS ports that were done years ago.
-
So, everyone agrees that AmigaOS 4 have advantage here, over all the other AmigaOS alikes.
To answer the original poster - how is OS4? - Better than AmigaOS 3.
More:
16. Better preview functions for files in Workbench. Opening drawers and selecting Show->All files and View by->Name shows a resized icons on the left of the list for the different files. There is also the new Type, showing the type of file or drawer - Ascii, Project, Tool, Drawer, Zip, Lharc, Patch and many more.
17. Automatic refresh of drawers. If you download a file to RAM: or anywhere else, no need to go Window->Update to see the new file.
18. Screen Edges resistance - I find it very useful when placing windows near the edges of the screen. I still can put them outside, but it is harder, saves my lots of time.
19. Transpararency effects - for the people who prefer candy effects, they are there, highly customizable.
20. Icons rescaling - built in and supported by Workbench. No need to rely on third party software for this simple task.
21. Better shell - no need to remember exact names. Press the first letter or several letters of the file name you are looking for and then press Tab until you find it.
22. Execute Command from Workbench gives the possibility to search for the file with ASL requester - no more need to remember exact names, paths for the file you want to execute.
23. Detect settings of monitor automatically. No need to search the monitor manual and see what's the max supported modes. AmigaOS 4 will ask the monitor about this. You still can try higher resolutions with different refresh rates, at your own risk.
24. High resolution mouse pointer with dropshadow effect.
25. CDRW support built-in the OS. No more need to rely on third party software for backup to CDRW.
26. DiskImage handler. Click on CD image to mount it like a real CD. No more need to rely on third party software for this ordinary task.
27. Themes - don't like the ordinary AmigaOS 4 look? Click on the present themes or download some of the Internet. Don't like the new look? Double click on the Revert to Last Saved icon to restore your old theme.
28. Boot jingle - done by respected japanese musician.
29. URL handler.
Of course the list can go on and on. For the last nine and half years, since AmigOS 3.9 was released there are lots of improvements in AmigaOS. They are part of AmigaOS 4. It will take a bigger thread than this to list, comment and discuss all of them.
Not trying to say that any of those would be bad in any way, but you can get many of those for 3.x aswell. 3rd party or not, doesn't make much difference to me. In some cases, it's the very same "3rd party program", just bundled with the OS (I guess you mean openurl.library with URL handler, for example?)
But thanks for excluding screen dragging from the list :-)
-
@Crumb
But really, OS4.1Up2 has a ton of under the hood improvements and nothing went untouched from the early alphas you helped beta test.
OS4.1 final is an early alpha?
As for Sam, it was a beginning and mostly aimed at people spending thousands on towerized 1200/4000 only to get clunky systems very prone at breaking. It did a great job and the intended audience is happy, those that were searching for a performance beast were not.
I think it failed since there's still more people interested in spending thousands on classic hardware than buying Sams.
I told you many times at AW that support for such initiatives would make newer HW possible, and now they will make the 460EX which is more capable and aimed at a certain
So what? Sam460 specs would have been ok-ish 5 years ago but now it's just obsolete before being released. I don't see many reasons to be happy about a machine with amiga-market specs from 5 years ago... last 10 years all amiga market has lagged behind x86 market but now it's getting ridiculous since hardware manofacturers seem unable to produce anything that is capable of performing significantly better than 5 year old (cheaper) hardware.
OS4 population. Power-users will get an X1000
ATM they have failed to deliver the machine for the summer as they promised and you blindly believed.
But please Crumb, say there won't be any new HW again (as you did last November) "it doesn't make commercial sense!" You bring luck! ;)
ATM there's just vapourware (we'll see when x1000 is released... perhaps we'll have to wait until 2011). ACube hardware still doesn't make commercial sense anyway. Otherwise ACube would produce 1000 boards and we wouldn't see spamming-news each time they produce 20 boards.
Actually I live in a world where there is no Amiga or Amiga-like OS that justifies preaching about how cool and modern we are (as you seem to do with morphOS a marginally more mature OS that is still ridiculously obsolete), talk about living in candy worlds...
I don't think I ever claimed that anything amiga-ish has any chance to take the world. Reading your claims about your vapourware x1000 taking over the world is funny. Reading your comparisons of vapourware hardware with real tangible solutions is hilarious.
The bad choices of hardware partners are ruining OS4 chances to be moderately successful in the hobby-OS market. The bad management choices like not releasing OS4.x for existing ppc hardware kill the chances of increasing user base (with the honorable exception of Peg2, although Moana would have made more sense)
The "other OSes" amiga-like have an obvious advantage: if you feel nostalgic or are a little curious about amiga things you can try them out easily (without making big investments) and become an user. And that's the biggest problem for OS4, and the detail some OS4 users try to justify with strange arguments. It's not just about technical disadvantages, my point is that it's too expensive. If they had released Moana at least that problem wouldn't exist for people willing to use 2nd hand hardware. And please note that Moana wouldn't prevent the release of sams, x1000 or whatever vapourware thingie is announced because some people want new hardware.
I see potential in AmigaOS as they are now free to form commercial partnerships
The only potential of AmigaOS is disappearing and giving it's name to a modern OS. If Hyperion ever wanted to sell a modern OS they would need to get rid of almost all amigaos API to make it evolve and put a "compatibility box" like OSX guys did. You may claim OSX is MacOS but well... it's just a label and it has little in common
The long term clear public goal of OS4.x should be jumping to x86. PPC is dead on desktop.
and things are starting to move,
I've heard the same magic mantra last 8 years in the OS4 camp. Since you were not in the community 5 years ago you probably won't understand the frustration of seeing announcements with dancing bananas about an unimpressive hardware that is both slower and more expensive than what we had 5 years ago
while I believe the hermit crumb idea first announced to me at Pianeta Amiga by Guruman (in the sense that he told me there would be the MacMini port) didn't seem that hot to me.
A Mac Mini/Peg2 release and the release of new hardware are not mutually exclusive.
But make no mistake, what I saw were 3 OS very far from todays standard, all
Sure, trying to take over the world with AmigaOS API would be ridiculous and won't work. Claiming it's progressing a lot doesn't make much sense since the API limits all the future evolvement of the OS.
have a long road to travel making those differences, quite frankly, highly laughable (and that is what I think every time I see you so adamantly writing about them, get real Crumb).
Then it's strange you don't notice that spending 1000Euros to be able to try out a limited toy OS and claiming that it's evolving a lot, that it's "the real one", that it's based on some unimportant old sources of an 80s OS no one knows and getting nervous when another hobby OS beats it in all benchmarks is no less laughable.
As for your clinging to the past read my lips: from the end of September 2009 (the day they signed the settlement) things have changed, you had a glimpse in the past 6 months, you will notice it even more in the next 12, and if that won't be enough, it will slap you in the face a little further down.
Yeah, I just have noticed how they promised to release a board this summer and they failed. I have also noticed that they released 2 updates for OS4.1 but they are still unable to get USB2.0 working. I have noticed an evaluation motherboard running a FPS at 4fps (wohooo!). I have noticed some cosmetic changes like startup managers and some eyecandy but little deep changes in the core of the OS. In the meanwhile I had to read claims made by people like you praising a vapourware motherboard with unknown specs and praising "new hardware" that is five years late. BTW, the idea of anouncing x1000 using a web-mistery is highly unprofessional and sad. The owners of amigaos think that they have the golden goose, don't realise that the world has evolved last years and try to milk the users.
-
Unfortunatelly, not much people who are interested in AmigaOS, care about MorphOS.
Wrong, but perhaps you meant to say "not much people who are interested in OS4, care about MorphOS"? Then it would probably be a correct assumption.
But every single MorphOS user is an Amigan, and MorphOS is way more Amiga compatible than OS4 so it definitely gives you a superior Amiga experience, which is partly why we made the choice we did...
If this was not the case, most of the discussion would be on MorphZone or similar forum and all the MOSers, who spam every AmigaOS 4 thread with their unwanted, unnecessary and irrelevant solution, would be gone long time ago.
Wrong again, the red trolls are all over, but they simply lack competitive arguments, they have nothing to put on the table in a comparison or discussion about various alternatives. But that doesn't mean they sit quiet, their way to go is to say "but it isn't TEH REEEL!!11!" as soon as they can. This basically boils down to some blind brand following.
And about your claim that no red trolls spam MorphZone.org; "Ssolie" had some spasmodic outbreak there some time ago, his fixation at the time seemed to be the fact that the MorphOS team even asked for money for the key file, but he was soon put right.
I have many times asked myself (and I asked user "DAX" in another thread here), why would anyone even consider something 1/2 as good at 10x the cost? The answer: A boing ball!
-
OS4.1 final is an early alpha?
last time we talked all you had was OS4 alpha experience since when you became a 4.1 final user?
I think it failed since there's still more people interested in spending thousands on classic hardware than buying Sams.
And you think wrong, as all Sam533, Sam667 and Sam800 are sold out with a few remaining 733. Much more than towered 4000 system on ebay (very sporadic and selling around 2 pieces per year).
So what? Sam460 specs would have been ok-ish 5 years ago but now it's just obsolete before being released. I don't see many reasons to be happy about a machine with amiga-market specs from 5 years ago... last 10 years all amiga market has lagged behind x86 market but now it's getting ridiculous since hardware manofacturers seem unable to produce anything that is capable of performing significantly better than 5 year old (cheaper) hardware.
You seem to forget that having a system with no expandable GFX card is way more limiting than the lack of VMX, I would take a powerful PCI-E card over that any day (much more potential, as in INFINITE more potential).
ATM they have failed to deliver the machine for the summer as they promised and you blindly believed.
I didn't blindly believed anything (ho and summer anyway, finishes September 20th, some 3 months from now).
ATM there's just vapourware (we'll see when x1000 is released... perhaps we'll have to wait until 2011). ACube hardware still doesn't make commercial sense anyway. Otherwise ACube would produce 1000 boards and we wouldn't see spamming-news each time they produce 20 boards.
Tell me where you did get the 20 number, I'm curious...
I don't think I ever claimed that anything amiga-ish has any chance to take the world. Reading your claims about your vapourware x1000 taking over the world is funny. Reading your comparisons of vapourware hardware with real tangible solutions is hilarious.
Glad to amuse you (as I hope you are glad you amuse me)
The bad choices of hardware partners are ruining OS4 chances to be moderately successful in the hobby-OS market. The bad management choices like not releasing OS4.x for existing ppc hardware kill the chances of increasing user base (with the honorable exception of Peg2, although Moana would have made more sense)
Keep your love for dead ends for yourself ;)
The "other OSes" amiga-like have an obvious advantage: if you feel nostalgic or are a little curious about amiga things you can try them out easily (without making big investments) and become an user. And that's the biggest problem for OS4, and the detail some OS4 users try to justify with strange arguments. It's not just about technical disadvantages, my point is that it's too expensive. If they had released Moana at least that problem wouldn't exist for people willing to use 2nd hand hardware. And please note that Moana wouldn't prevent the release of sams, x1000 or whatever vapourware thingie is announced because some people want new hardware.
We'll see about that, 2 of my friends I'm trying to convince to come back tryed Icaros desktop and found it of very little use, while they are interested in AmigaOS, you see "free" not interested at all (maybe not everyone runs his life on 3rd world country budgets as to be that concerned about money).
The only potential of AmigaOS is disappearing and giving it's name to a modern OS. If Hyperion ever wanted to sell a modern OS they would need to get rid of almost all amigaos API to make it evolve and put a "compatibility box" like OSX guys did. You may claim OSX is MacOS but well... it's just a label and it has little in common
The long term clear public goal of OS4.x should be jumping to x86. PPC is dead on desktop.
You should talk with Vidarh about this, he is not convinced it is the only solution, not one bit.
Sure, trying to take over the world with AmigaOS API would be ridiculous and won't work. Claiming it's progressing a lot doesn't make much sense since the API limits all the future evolvement of the OS.
Amiga back comers don't care about that, i run Blender a modern software that needs a modern API and it is ROCK SOLID. Never crashes even after an 8 hour render I can pick it up and continue. Guess that many other modern app will work the same without any mystical api change (just what's needed is the motto :))
Then it's strange you don't notice that spending 1000Euros to be able to try out a limited toy OS and claiming that it's evolving a lot, that it's "the real one", that it's based on some unimportant old sources of an 80s OS no one knows and getting nervous when another hobby OS beats it in all benchmarks is no less laughable.
I do not reply to your comparisons because of that, but because it wouldn't be the first time I see you hijacking a thread.
Both OSs have along way to go, when one will claim it can do anything the "others" can, we'll talk about it. I believe AOS will get there first now that it is free to run and commercial partnerships can be formed, we'll see about this down the line...
Yeah, I just have noticed how they promised to release a board this summer and they failed. I have also noticed that they released 2 updates for OS4.1 but they are still unable to get USB2.0 working. I have noticed an evaluation motherboard running a FPS at 4fps (wohooo!). I have noticed some cosmetic changes like startup managers and some eyecandy but little deep changes in the core of the OS. In the meanwhile I had to read claims made by people like you praising a vapourware motherboard with unknown specs and praising "new hardware" that is five years late. BTW, the idea of anouncing x1000 using a web-mistery is highly unprofessional and sad. The owners of amigaos think that they have the golden goose, don't realise that the world has evolved last years and try to milk the users.
Crumb, can you just stop being antagonistic? You know the graphics subsystem isn't there, they were using a 33Mhz PCI bus (radeon 9200) on debug.
You know it and keep attacking the X1000, give these guys a break.
The only way for MOS and AOS to get along is to progress on their own and for users to stop being antagonistic. i do that unless an AOS4 thread gets hi-jacked, all AOS4 users do, why don't you return the favor?
-
Wrong, but perhaps you meant to say "not much people who are interested in OS4, care about MorphOS"? Then it would probably be a correct assumption.
But every single MorphOS user is an Amigan, and MorphOS is way more Amiga compatible than OS4 so it definitely gives you a superior Amiga experience, which is partly why we made the choice we did...
Wrong again, the red trolls are all over, but they simply lack competitive arguments, they have nothing to put on the table in a comparison or discussion about various alternatives. But that doesn't mean they sit quiet, their way to go is to say "but it isn't TEH REEEL!!11!" as soon as they can. This basically boils down to some blind brand following.
And about your claim that no red trolls spam MorphZone.org; "Ssolie" had some spasmodic outbreak there some time ago, his fixation at the time seemed to be the fact that the MorphOS team even asked for money for the key file, but he was soon put right.
I have many times asked myself (and I asked user "DAX" in another thread here), why would anyone even consider something 1/2 as good at 10x the cost? The answer: A boing ball!
The problem at amiga.org is that there are some MOS "professionals" spamming every AOS4 thread and deliberately changing the topic, while AmigaOS expert don't visit here since forever (just a very few, maybe because it is becoming similar to moo bunny every day that passes).
Oh and the reason why people prefer AmigaOS over MOS is the same I told Crumb, they all have a modern system, so they are not as desperate as you think for a feature or two, don't be surprised if they don't care for an unofficial project that runs on Apple scraps.
What they care is for Amiga to have dignified future made of front page news items (see if you can get that with your emac port) and dedicated machines.
The features will come and i bet that now that AOS is free to run and form commercial partnerships, will reach a "decent point" far earlier than any other Amiga-like option.it's inevitable.
-
And you think wrong, as all Sam533, Sam667 and Sam800 are sold out with a few remaining 733.
What, all 30 of them?
-
Oh and the reason why people prefer AmigaOS over MOS is the same I told Crumb, they all have a modern system, so they are not as desperate as you think for a feature or two, don't be surprised if they don't care for an unofficial project that runs on Apple scraps.
Just for the record, the x1000 is also based on Apple scrap CPU. How do you feel about that? I wouldn't care, but you certainly should. :)
-
You seem to forget that having a system with no expandable GFX card is way more limiting than the lack of VMX, I would take a powerful PCI-E card over that any day (much more potential, as in INFINITE more potential).
I disagree. It's all well and good having "INFINITE" potential (which actually isn't), but what value is it if you've neither the software nor the drivers to make use of it?
I didn't blindly believed anything (ho and summer anyway, finishes September 20th, some 3 months from now).
If you seriously think that you will get a final, shipping X1000 in 3 months from now you should think about stopping whatever it is you're huffing.
Keep your love for dead ends for yourself ;)
Because the X1000, with it's PA6T cpu totally isn't a dead end...
You should talk with Vidarh about this, he is not convinced it is the only solution, not one bit.
There are some people who truly believe that anything more advanced than 8bit was a bad idea. Doesn't make it true however.
Amiga back comers don't care about that, i run Blender a modern software that needs a modern API and it is ROCK SOLID. Never crashes even after an 8 hour render I can pick it up and continue. Guess that many other modern app will work the same without any mystical api change (just what's needed is the motto :))
Which is fine up until you get an application that haemorages memory... Like Firefox or WebKit. Firing up either of these on a system with little effective memory protection is just asking for trouble.
Crumb, can you just stop being antagonistic? You know the graphics subsystem isn't there, they were using a 33Mhz radeon 9200 on debug.
The 9200 came in 250 and 300Mhz flavours. If yours is running at 33Mhz you have serious issues over and above the fact that you were running your OS with full debugging enabled on it's public debut.
The only way for MOS and AOS to get along is to progress on their own and for users to stop being antagonistic.
Aparently pointing out the truth is considered antagonistic these days.
-
These endless wars tend to get little boring. Everybody knows MorphOS is better than AOS4, but it is fruitless to argue with these fanatics. Maybe we all should use our precious time to something more usefull than flamewars?
-
Just for the record, the x1000 is also based on Apple scrap CPU. How do you feel about that? I wouldn't care, but you certainly should. :)
You are wrong on this one, the CPU was developed before the buy out and Apple even had to concede on any sale of this CPU to third parties. Moreover it is produced elsewhere.
So you have
1) Designed when there was no Apple
2) Made elsewhere certainly not by Apple
3) Sold without Apple having decided anything.
So much so for an Apple CPU...
-
Leander, I'm tired, I can reply 12 times to anything you wrote (usual BS) but i'm out to dinner, just let Crumb reply for himself next time, I know he can...
-
You are wrong on this one, the CPU was developed before the buy out and Apple even had to concede on any sale of this CPU to third parties.
It should also be noted that there is no requirement for PA Semi to continue to develop the design beyond this chip. In fact from what I've seen they've been concentrating on ARM parts ever since Apple took them over.
So the chip is as EOL as the 68060 was for the 68k line.
Nice how history repeats itself, eh? Apparently though the Amiga community didn't learn the lessons inherent in the A1 the first time around.
1) Designed when there was no Apple
The PA6T was designed before 1976? Holy crap why didn't PA Semi sell it back then?! :lol:
2) Made elsewhere certainly not by Apple
Texas Instruments are the likely manufacturer according to wikipedia.
So much so for an Apple CPU...
They own the company and the IP, so it is now in effect an Apple CPU.
I can reply 12 times to anything you wrote (usual BS)
You can reply any number of times, but repeating half truths and outright falsehoods doesn't make them true.
You know, it was the impending clusterf^ck that was the launch of the A1 that caused me to decommission my Amigas and move onto BeOS and then later Linux. I watched with fascination from the outside as zealots (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Retard) like yourself made many of the justifications for the high price of the A1 nearly 6 years ago. Those justifications weren't true then and they aren't now. The software that they claimed would magically appear never really did and thanks to the gross mismanagement of Hyperion and the staggering incompetence of Amiga.inc, the vast majority of development talent that existed 10 years ago will never again write a single line of code for the Amiga.
So we're now looking at an even greater foulup with the X1000, 3 times the cost of the A1 its replacing and with only a scant handful of applications ever written for its primary OS (seriously, Zeta had more apps written for and ported to it in it's short life than OS4 has had ever.) and an OS itself that seems to have serious issues with things like USB2.0, years after these issues were supposedly fixed.
-
I disagree. It's all well and good having "INFINITE" potential (which actually isn't), but what value is it if you've neither the software nor the drivers to make use of it?
And the solution is to resign ourselves to the idea that we will never ever get good 3D drivers right?
Anyway Rogue said their gonna work on expanding OS4 after the X1000 port and he said he knows Graphics are top priority.
We'll see about that...
If you seriously think that you will get a final, shipping X1000 in 3 months from now you should think about stopping whatever it is you're huffing.
:lol:
I don't actually (but who knows? :)) Seriously though, I will be glad to buy it for Christmas.
Because the X1000, with it's PA6T cpu totally isn't a dead end.
The whole WILL to design new HW it's not a dead end, PAsemi CPU might come and go, but if there is the "will" they will find new solutions.
When there is no will (or possibility as in MOS case) there can't be solutions.
There are some people who truly believe that anything more advanced than 8bit was a bad idea. Doesn't make it true however.
Vidarh is a top programmer.
Which is fine up until you get an application that haemorages memory... Like Firefox or WebKit. Firing up either of these on a system with little effective memory protection is just asking for trouble.
When I will get the final version I will let you know how it fares ;)
The 9200 came in 250 and 300Mhz flavours. If yours is running at 33Mhz you have serious issues over and above the fact that you were running your OS with full debugging enabled on it's public debut.
typo there, what I meant is it was running on a 33Mhz standard PCI bus with a ton of debug code running, the final version will have a PCI-E 16X R700 card and no debug code.
Aparently pointing out the truth is considered antagonistic these days.
you wish ;)
Antagonistic is when a very smart individual as Crumb (I know he is) start pointing out troubles he knows exactly the reason why. Antagonistic is when a guy asks ONLY for OS4 information AFTER he already asked about MOS in another thread (and where the MOS crowd happily participated) and someone hijacks said OS4 thread even after being told by the starter he isn't interested, and after being politely asked by a moderator to quit it (I don't mean Crumb here).
You know, it was the impending clusterf^ck that was the launch of the A1 that caused me to decommission my Amigas and move onto BeOS and then later Linux. I watched with fascination from the outside as zealots (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Retard) like yourself made many of the justifications for the high price of the A1 nearly 6 years ago. Those justifications weren't true then and they aren't now. The software that they claimed would magically appear never really did and thanks to the gross mismanagement of Hyperion and the staggering incompetence of Amiga.inc, the vast majority of development talent that existed 10 years ago will never again write a single line of code for the Amiga.
So we're now looking at an even greater foulup with the X1000, 3 times the cost of the A1 its replacing and with only a scant handful of applications ever written for its primary OS (seriously, Zeta had more apps written for and ported to it in it's short life than OS4 has had ever.) and an OS itself that seems to have serious issues with things like USB2.0, years after these issues were supposedly fixed.
The X1000 it's not the original AmigaOne, those making it know the market they're getting into, they know is broken into "factions", they know it's small.
OS4 development was spotty at best during the last several years, everything was frozen and the developers found themselves in a situation where if they worked hard, they could've lost it (for nothing) so they probably worked at Amiga unrelated stuff for a large part of that time period, giving Amiga some spare time.
Now they own what they are working on, and they are heavy at work on the X1000 port and the Friedens are also doing Timberwolf. It's a whole different commitment and I believe it will bring its fruits. Time will tell.
-
last time we talked all you had was OS4 alpha experience since when you became a 4.1 final user?
I have explained it in various posts but it seems you missed it.
And you think wrong, as all Sam533, Sam667 and Sam800 are sold out with a few remaining 733. Much more than towered 4000 system on ebay (very sporadic and selling around 2 pieces per year).
Selling all units isn't difficult when you only produce a handful of boards.
You seem to forget that having a system with no expandable GFX card is way more limiting than the lack of VMX, I would take a powerful PCI-E card over that any day (much more potential, as in INFINITE more potential).
Peg2 has a nice AGP slot (it's the model that was released 5 years before Sam). Mac Mini has AGPx4. FYI PCI-express with 4 lanes has more or less same bandwitch as AGPx4. I'm using a 64MB Radeon on my Mac Mini G4 and never ran out of gfx ram.
I didn't blindly believed anything (ho and summer anyway, finishes September 20th, some 3 months from now).
In case you have missed it, it has been confirmed that x1000 will be for sale around/earlier than christmas
Tell me where you did get the 20 number, I'm curious...
There was an announcement about requiring a low number of people like that (could be 30 perhaps) to produce certain Sam model, otherwise ACube wouldn't do it. Check out old news.
Keep your love for dead ends for yourself ;)
PPC is a dead end and AmigaOS API is a dead end
We'll see about that, 2 of my friends I'm trying to convince to come back tryed Icaros desktop and found it of very little use, while they are interested in AmigaOS, you see "free" not interested at all (maybe not everyone runs his life on 3rd world country budgets as to be that concerned about money).
I don't try to "convince" friends, I just show them the options, tell them the problems they'll find, the cool positive things about the system and let them choose. If you go out on holidays let them have your machine one week to see if that fits their needs. It's more fair than "convincing" them. Most of friends may think AmigaOS3.x+AmiKit/MorphOS/AROS/OS4 is cool but just for a short time... when they get used to the fast response they start to request their usual wintel apps.
You should talk with Vidarh about this, he is not convinced it is the only solution, not one bit.
So PPC is not a dead end? Yeah sure.
Amiga back comers don't care about that, i run Blender a modern software that needs a modern API and it is ROCK SOLID. Never crashes even after an 8 hour render I can pick it up and continue. Guess that many other modern app will work the same without any mystical api change (just what's needed is the motto :))
It seems you don't understand that any program can overwrite the memory of each other. The API is flawed. It doesn't matter if you port MS Office using MS original sources, AmigaOS API will still be flawed. You can produce decent software for AmigaOS but that won't prevent that any app can overwrite your data.
Both OSs have along way to go, when one will claim it can do anything the "others" can, we'll talk about it. I believe AOS will get there first now that it is free to run and commercial partnerships can be formed, we'll see about this down the line...
Leaving apart that nonsense (in order to modernize AmigaOS core you would need to get rid of AmigaOS API and make an entire new OS that almost doesn't share a line of code)... there's little that indicates that Hyperion is up the task of designing a new modern API for AmigaOS. They seriously lack resources. The gfx system is primitive, audio is the same, WB is slightly updated but these changes are mostly cosmetical, there's still the old reaction... these things are points that Friedens want to update since the beginning but they lack the human resources to do it
Crumb, can you just stop being antagonistic? You know the graphics subsystem isn't there, they were using a 33Mhz radeon 9200 on debug.
A Radeon9200 flies with q3 even if you use a 33Mhz pci slot. It shows that management doesn't know very well what they are doing (or amiga software quality standards are becoming very low).
You know it and keep attacking the X1000, give these guys a break.
Since most os4 users drag that non-existing boards to any conversation and dare to compare its fantasy performance to existing hardware I don't see why not talking about x1000 and discussing its availability and real performance too.
-
The problem at amiga.org is that there are some MOS "professionals" spamming every AOS4 thread and deliberately changing the topic, while AmigaOS expert don't visit here since forever (just a very few, maybe because it is becoming similar to moo bunny every day that passes).
There has never been any problem at amiga.org. It's funny because when os4 fanatics find any objection to price/features/performance of OS4 software/hardware they get angry and start to claim the site has a problem.
It seems you just have joined amiga.org to practice some red trolling.
Oh and the reason why people prefer AmigaOS over MOS
It's funny because most of Amiga users I know prefer MorphOS to OS4.
is the same I told Crumb, they all have a modern system,
A G2 cpu five years later than peg2/g4 is "modern"? yeah right.
so they are not as desperate as you think for a feature or two
MorphOS2.0 is more complete featurewise, faster and smoother. Any part of it. It's not just "one feature or two". From Ambient to preferences, from I/O support to bundled tools.
, don't be surprised if they don't care for an unofficial project that runs on Apple scraps.
Running in various hardware platforms and also on Apple hardware is an advantage. I bet you'll never ever use an AmigaOS4.x laptop. Well, AROS users can enjoy that right now. OS3.x users too through emulation. And MorphOS users are probably next.
What they care is for Amiga to have dignified future made of front page news items (see if you can get that with your emac port) and dedicated machines.
They remember Amiga and think about a computer with great price performance ratio that had killer apps and great games. They care (like most people do) about the software they run and its stability. They probably don't care about announcements of announcements, web mistery games, old ppc technology at premium prices and png icons. And you can bet they like to pay for the product they are going to use right now and they are not interested in buying overpriced obsolete hardware to fund future decent hardware
The features will come and i bet that now that AOS is free to run and form commercial partnerships, will reach a "decent point" far earlier than any other Amiga-like option.it's inevitable.
Your vision of amiga market and community is seriously distorted.
What commercial partnerships? Do you honestly think OS4.x has anything commercially interesting? that's naive at best. Any company will prefer to invest on a Linux/BSD distro that can be tuned to do what OS4 does but better instead of being at mercy of a small company that lacks hardware to run on.
What features are you talking about? There are limitations with AmigaOS API that can't be surpassed unless they get rid of compatibility with ALL previous versions and leave that stuff on a "compatibility box".
It's easier that AROS surpasses both OS4 and MorphOS in the future since it runs on x86 (as well as other cpus), the development&user numbers increase... and given it's opensource nature it's possible to test what may never be done on OS4 (or MorphOS) due to lack of resources.
-
It's funny because most of Amiga users I know prefer MorphOS to OS4.
And I know a lot more people who are interested in minimig/aga (fpgaarcade) and natami than morphos and os4 all together - myself included.
-
It's funny because most of Amiga users I know prefer MorphOS to OS4.
Isn't that a completely subjective view? Most Amiga users I know aren't bothered about the "next gen" even one tiny bit. I'm somewhat the odd one out in even having an interest.
-
I have explained it in various posts but it seems you missed it.
indeed, refresh my memory
Selling all units isn't difficult when you only produce a handful of boards.
Considering that the last U-boot for sam I got, was downloaded by 600+people and that I know of many that did not (I didn't too for the last up) it would seem that your 20 estimate is a little far fetched, try somewhere near 1000 next time you'll be far closer.
Ah and by the way, even at 20 it would still be far more than classic Amiga system off ebay, which would mean they succeeded just the same.
Peg2 has a nice AGP slot (it's the model that was released 5 years before Sam). Mac Mini has AGPx4. FYI PCI-express with 4 lanes has more or less same bandwitch as AGPx4. I'm using a 64MB Radeon on my Mac Mini G4 and never ran out of gfx ram.
I was talking about emac and mac mini that doesn't support any full lengh modern card.
Lack of Vram is the least of the problem those machine have and will have in the future. and the reason MOS isn't going anywhere.
In case you have missed it, it has been confirmed that x1000 will be for sale around/earlier than christmas
And?
There was an announcement about requiring a low number of people like that (could be 30 perhaps) to produce certain Sam model, otherwise ACube wouldn't do it. Check out old news.
This will win as the most detailed and backed up post of the century :lol:
PPC is a dead end and AmigaOS API is a dead end
PPC has so much life in it you cannot even begin to understand. Not only IBM is developing ne CPus for next generation consoles as we speak (both MS and Nintendo) but they are also developing new ones such as Power7.
And there are more in the pipe-line at AMCC as well, next up is a quad core Titan with 2MB cache.
just to name a few...
I don't try to "convince" friends, I just show them the options, tell them the problems they'll find, the cool positive things about the system and let them choose. If you go out on holidays let them have your machine one week to see if that fits their needs. It's more fair than "convincing" them. Most of friends may think AmigaOS3.x+AmiKit/MorphOS/AROS/OS4 is cool but just for a short time... when they get used to the fast response they start to request their usual wintel apps.
You got me wrong there, I am glad if they come back using ANY flavor (MOS included, but I don't have one) and I suggest to them to try Icaros pointing them to its website.
My cousin is using it a little (he was with me at Pianeta and spoke with Paolone too), others are not interested but are now following the Amiga scene on italian sites (Amiganews in particular).
So PPC is not a dead end? Yeah sure.
No, actually it's not (see above).
It seems you don't understand that any program can overwrite the memory of each other. The API is flawed. It doesn't matter if you port MS Office using MS original sources, AmigaOS API will still be flawed. You can produce decent software for AmigaOS but that won't prevent that any app can overwrite your data.
I understand very well, the problem is, well written application don't do that, I invited you several times to go over at natami forums and talk about this with Gunnar.
Anyway talk with Vidarh about implementing MP without re-writing the whole OS, he will enlighten you.
Leaving apart that nonsense (in order to modernize AmigaOS core you would need to get rid of AmigaOS API and make an entire new OS that almost doesn't share a line of code)... there's little that indicates that Hyperion is up the task of designing a new modern API for AmigaOS. They seriously lack resources. The gfx system is primitive, audio is the same, WB is slightly updated but these changes are mostly cosmetical, there's still the old reaction... these things are points that Friedens want to update since the beginning but they lack the human resources to do it
replied above to the same, i won't repeat myself.
A Radeon9200 flies with q3 even if you use a 33Mhz pci slot. It shows that management doesn't know very well what they are doing (or amiga software quality standards are becoming very low).
Look, let's cut the cr*ap, I get much more than that on my system, don't doubt one bit it will play great on the X1000
Since most os4 users drag that non-existing boards to any conversation and dare to compare its fantasy performance to existing hardware I don't see why not talking about x1000 and discussing its availability and real performance too.
Maybe you don't seem to notice that OS4 users talk about that in friendship among them and they might mention the same products to you (or others) only AFTER you hijack the thread.
Try not doing it for a change, see what happens...
-
PPC is not "dead end" overall, it's jut not used much in desktop machines.
As an embedded CPU, you'll find it in network hardware, signal processing and control systems all over the place.
-
[
There has never been any problem at amiga.org. It's funny because when os4 fanatics find any objection to price/features/performance of OS4 software/hardware they get angry and start to claim the site has a problem.
It seems you just have joined amiga.org to practice some red trolling..
Ever heard the phrase of "The pot calling the kettle black" ?
-
And the solution is to resign ourselves to the idea that we will never ever get good 3D drivers right?
due to the inability to produce any working 3d driver for anything faster than a Radeon9000PRO there's no much that invites us to believe that there will be great 3D support for more complex modern cards. Existing 3D drivers aren't exactly optimized so expect one half or one third of normal gfx card performance.
Anyway Rogue said their gonna work on expanding OS4 after the X1000 port and he said he knows Graphics are top priority.
And also WB. He has repeated that since A1 times.
I don't actually (but who knows? :)) Seriously though, I will be glad to buy it for Christmas.
And I hope you can buy it. The hardware manofacturer seems serious but there's little time and I'm unsure about motherboard support. I guess we'll see a plain standard OS4.1.x version without 64bit&SMP support but I would be happy to be wrong.
The whole WILL to design new HW it's not a dead end, PAsemi CPU might come and go, but if there is the "will" they will find new solutions.
As much as I like PPC, it's dead end for desktop. It forces us to use slower and more expensive cpus. My personal favourite when Peg2 was discontinued was MPC8641D or a tetra-g5 but oh well.
When there is no will (or possibility as in MOS case) there can't be solutions.
It seems you don't understand MorphOS Team is not a hardware company. They produce software. The problem for OS4 is that Hyperion Management decided to earn money with hardware and that affected their view, Ben Hermans thought he could get extra money killing Moana and now they are losing users who would never spend more than 500 Euros on a board.
Vidarh is a top programmer.
AFAIK he has not created an AmigaOS compatible OS and it has been explained to him why his ideas wouldn't work. He can be a good programmer but intelligent people also makes mistakes and can take wrong choices.
Antagonistic is when a very smart individual as Crumb (I know he is) start pointing out troubles he knows exactly the reason why.
Nothing wrong with that. The problem is when some people try to convince others these problems don't exist.
Antagonistic is when a guy asks ONLY for OS4 information AFTER he already asked about MOS in another thread (and where the MOS crowd happily participated) and someone hijacks said OS4 thread even after being told by the starter he isn't interested, and after being politely asked by a moderator to quit it (I don't mean Crumb here).
Well, It's normal to reply other users (like Varthal), since the topic is interesting and it's related to the original question (even if some people don't agree) I think it would be odd to stop the conversation suddenly.
The X1000 it's not the original AmigaOne, those making it know the market they're getting into, they know is broken into "factions", they know it's small.
Eyetech also did. They had bad luck with "Escena" and later when the idea of a big motherboard/cpu accelerator that could be attached to an A1200 they used MAI motherboards instead of asking DCE to design and build it. They would have had problems with ArticiaS anyway so it doesn't matter much.
OS4 development was spotty at best during the last several years, everything was frozen and the developers found themselves in a situation where if they worked hard, they could've lost it (for nothing)
wrong. Your part of the development being "frozen" is highly innacurate. It was quite active with new components released *every* day.
so they probably worked at Amiga unrelated stuff for a large part of that time period, giving Amiga some spare time.
AFAIK that's still true for most of them.
Now they own what they are working on,
They always acted like they owned it, releasing it for uA1, Sam and Peg2 even thought they were not exactly allowed to do that... but their management never cared :-)
-
Isn't that a completely subjective view? Most Amiga users I know aren't bothered about the "next gen" even one tiny bit. I'm somewhat the odd one out in even having an interest.
Sure it's subjetive, that's why I used "most amigans I know" instead of "most amigans". And yes, there's probably more amigans interested on classics than on any ppc hardware.
@kolla
sure, but even those without MorphOS machines that are more interested on AGA usually agree prefering MorphOS to OS4.
-
sure, but even those without MorphOS machines that are more interested on AGA usually agree prefering MorphOS to OS4.
No, they usually dont know of either, and when informed, they find them both pointless.
-
There has never been any problem at amiga.org. It's funny because when os4 fanatics find any objection to price/features/performance of OS4 software/hardware they get angry and start to claim the site has a problem.
Doesn't seem so to me, a lot of people have been complaining here...(not a problem? you say? well that shows the respect you have for the others).
It seems you just have joined amiga.org to practice some red trolling.
I just saw you (and a couple of MOS friends) hijacking an OS4 ONLY. The guy already opened a thread about MOS VS AmigaOS and all MOS people participated. Now he asked only about AmigaOS and you and a couple of friends hijacked the thread ignoring both the user and the moderator.
And i am the troll?
It's funny because most of Amiga users I know prefer MorphOS to OS4.
I only see like 6 mos supporters here (with you, Piru and TMHM being the most adamant of the bunch) this mostly a classic lovers site where NG flavors aren't as popular.
At AW.net every AOS thread receives massive participation while the others range from mild reaction to totally ignored. Incredible popularity I see....
A G2 cpu five years later than peg2/g4 is "modern"? yeah right.
I meant Windows7 or SnowLeopard geez...
MorphOS2.0 is more complete featurewise, faster and smoother. Any part of it. It's not just "one feature or two". From Ambient to preferences, from I/O support to bundled tools.
That's your opinion Crumb, what you call more advanced in most cases only looks different and derailed to me. I only like MOS 3D performance (very good) otherwise it has nothing in particular. What it has its either different or the few things that are really good , will be in the next iteration of AmigaOS and then some.
Running in various hardware platforms and also on Apple hardware is an advantage. I bet you'll never ever use an AmigaOS4.x laptop. Well, AROS users can enjoy that right now. OS3.x users too through emulation. And MorphOS users are probably next.
I don't like laptop myself but you'll never know...
They remember Amiga and think about a computer with great price performance ratio that had killer apps and great games. They care (like most people do) about the software they run and its stability. They probably don't care about announcements of announcements, web mistery games, old ppc technology at premium prices and png icons. And you can bet they like to pay for the product they are going to use right now and they are not interested in buying overpriced obsolete hardware to fund future decent hardware
All in due time, nobody is asking them to fund anything. Right now we already know who are X1000 buyers, as for more mainstream amigans, we'll see when the OS will be mature and new more mainstream HW will be out (2 years from now probably).
Then you will se some ex Amigan interested, right now those are just a "potential" as i bet they would not be interested in either MOS/AROS or AmigaOS (as i said too early for main streamers).
Your vision of amiga market and community is seriously distorted.
What commercial partnerships? Do you honestly think OS4.x has anything commercially interesting? that's naive at best. Any company will prefer to invest on a Linux/BSD distro that can be tuned to do what OS4 does but better instead of being at mercy of a small company that lacks hardware to run on.
You seem to compare with mainstream market i was comparing to MOS. As a strter A-EON is putting a couple of millions on the table (Rogue confirmed X1000 order is in the thousands), due to this they got Varisys interested and now they are getting press coverage (yes even the BBC asked for footage its on AW).
Good stuff.
What features are you talking about? There are limitations with AmigaOS API that can't be surpassed unless they get rid of compatibility with ALL previous versions and leave that stuff on a "compatibility box".
Again, speak with Vidarh.
It's easier that AROS surpasses both OS4 and MorphOS in the future since it runs on x86 (as well as other cpus), the development&user numbers increase... and given it's opensource nature it's possible to test what may never be done on OS4 (or MorphOS) due to lack of resources.
Well we both have a nice back plan then don't we?
-
due to the inability to produce any working 3d driver for anything faster than a Radeon9000PRO there's no much that invites us to believe that there will be great 3D support for more complex modern cards. Existing 3D drivers aren't exactly optimized so expect one half or one third of normal gfx card performance.
Due to no one working on it Crumb, things have changed and you fear this, which is a shame.
And I hope you can buy it. The hardware manofacturer seems serious but there's little time and I'm unsure about motherboard support. I guess we'll see a plain standard OS4.1.x version without 64bit&SMP support but I would be happy to be wrong.
That's better :lol:
As much as I like PPC, it's dead end for desktop. It forces us to use slower and more expensive cpus. My personal favourite when Peg2 was discontinued was MPC8641D or a tetra-g5 but oh well.
They never made a quad G5 (correct me if i'm wrong) but the PA6T is a better than G5 Cpu that has several cores implementation ready (more than 4), who knows if we will see them.
It seems you don't understand MorphOS Team is not a hardware company. They produce software. The problem for OS4 is that Hyperion Management decided to earn money with hardware and that affected their view, Ben Hermans thought he could get extra money killing Moana and now they are losing users who would never spend more than 500 Euros on a board.
I know they are not, but commodore was and Apple is, i like it that way.
AFAIK he has not created an AmigaOS compatible OS and it has been explained to him why his ideas wouldn't work. He can be a good programmer but intelligent people also makes mistakes and can take wrong choices.
he countered EVERY "explanation".
Nothing wrong with that. The problem is when some people try to convince others these problems don't exist.
And who was hiding the performance? Who mentioned them knowing theiy do not represent ANYTHING?
Well, It's normal to reply other users (like Varthal), since the topic is interesting and it's related to the original question (even if some people don't agree) I think it would be odd to stop the conversation suddenly.
You were asked to continue privetely as in PM or dedicated thread.
Eyetech also did. They had bad luck with "Escena" and later when the idea of a big motherboard/cpu accelerator that could be attached to an A1200 they used MAI motherboards instead of asking DCE to design and build it. They would have had problems with ArticiaS anyway so it doesn't matter much.
And so its the same now? :lol:
wrong. Your part of the development being "frozen" is highly innacurate. It was quite active with new components released *every* day.
no actually there were the times you describe (yeas when you beta tested) and times where I am 100% right.
AFAIK that's still true for most of them.
They always acted like they owned it, releasing it for uA1, Sam and Peg2 even thought they were not exactly allowed to do that... but their management never cared :-)
No crumb, one thing is to act and do a thing or two, one thing is to legally own something.
-
And the solution is to resign ourselves to the idea that we will never ever get good 3D drivers right?
Anyway Rogue said their gonna work on expanding OS4 after the X1000 port and he said he knows Graphics are top priority.
We'll see about that...
Ah Rouge...
:lol:
I don't actually (but who knows? :)) Seriously though, I will be glad to buy it for Christmas.
Of what year though? And by that I mean that have a version of OS4 that actually works at least as well as it does on current hardware. Look how long it's taken to get it working (kinda) on the A1 and Sam...
The whole WILL to design new HW it's not a dead end, PAsemi CPU might come and go, but if there is the "will" they will find new solutions.
When there is no will (or possibility as in MOS case) there can't be solutions.
Of course there will be solutions, MiniMig, Natami and AROS on x86. But as far as PPC goes? Don't kid yourself.
Vidarh is a top programmer.
So are Piru and Karlos and maybe a handful of others on this board. You know what though? His opinion, like theirs matters not one iota. The markets have spoken and they have moved to x86 on the desktop. PPC now only exists in niches like telecoms and games consoles. Sure, IBM still develop POWER for big iron, but POWER and PPC are two very different beasts. Likewise the chips being brewed up for consoles are also likely to be quite specialised pieces of kit that wouldn't necessarily lend themselves well to the consumer desktop market.
When I will get the final version I will let you know how it fares ;)
If you like.
typo there, what I meant is it was running on a 33Mhz standard PCI bus with a ton of debug code running, the final version will have a PCI-E 16X R700 card and no debug code.
I figured as much re the typo. But really, for a public showing there really was no excuse to have it running in full debug, in fact the whole showing felt very last minute.
You get to make a first impression once. From a PR point of view, seeing a £1500 piece of hardware being touted as "next gen" whilst at the same time running Q3 at 4fps... Didn't exactly make a good one.
The X1000 it's not the original AmigaOne,
Lets face it DAX, the situation isn't much different. Sure some of the minor details may be different (the PR side of things seemed much more professional with the A1, at least until the truth got out) but its the same story.
those making it know the market they're getting into
Now this I really do wonder about.
they know is broken into "factions", they know it's small.
OS4 development was spotty at best during the last several years, everything was frozen and the developers found themselves in a situation where if they worked hard, they could've lost it (for nothing) so they probably worked at Amiga unrelated stuff for a large part of that time period, giving Amiga some spare time.
And this is kind of the point: Amiga, even on the development side cannot be operated as a business. It is a hobby only and in that context the X1000 simply doesn't make any sense.
It's a whole different commitment and I believe it will bring its fruits. Time will tell.
I heard the same around the time of the A1 launch, it rang hollow then, it rings hollow now.
-
indeed, refresh my memory
See my previous posts at the profile.
Considering that the last U-boot for sam I got, was downloaded by 600+people and that I know of many that did not (I didn't too for the last up) it would seem that your 20 estimate is a little far fetched, try somewhere near 1000 next time you'll be far closer.
Ah and by the way, even at 20 it would still be far more than classic Amiga system off ebay, which would mean they succeeded just the same.
In case you forgot it we were talking about the number of Sam boards produced on each batch. downloads are not good indicative: I downloaded timberwolf a pair of times, do I count as 2 timberwolf users?
I was talking about emac and mac mini that doesn't support any full lengh modern card.
We were talking about Sam440 being worse than 5 year older hardware. Mac Minis and eMacs are quite cheap and MorphOS manages well gfx memory. Powermac will probably be supported in the next release. If next years I found that I need more gfx ram I could get a cheap powermac or powerbook.
Lack of Vram is the least of the problem those machine have and will have in the future. and the reason MOS isn't going anywhere.
MorphOS/AROS/OS4/OS3 don't have to go anywhere because they are hobby OSes that can't compete with mainstream OSes and AmigaOS API is obsolete.
In the future it will still be easy to find replacement machines to run MorphOS because there are hundreds of thousands out there. If you add powermacs it will be a never ending source of MorphOS hardware.
I expect to run MorphOS on a powerbook G4 in the future. Perhaps Ralph finds a QuadG5 in his attic and decides to add support for it, who knows. Don't worry, if x1000 sold hundreds of thousands they may port MorphOS to it.
BTW, MorphOS has the most efficient AmigaOS gfx system and 32/64MB are enough for it.
And?
Don't you remember what you write? I said x1000 was delayed and that it wouldn't be for sale in summer and you replied that summer finished on september.
This will win as the most detailed and backed up post of the century :lol:
I don't have time to search URLs sorry, you already waste quite a lot of my time.
PPC has so much life in it you cannot even begin to understand.
It's completely dead on desktop.
Not only IBM is developing ne CPus for next generation consoles as we speak (both MS and Nintendo) but they are also developing new ones such as Power7.
And do you think you'll buy desktop computers with Power7? hilarious. The only interest of ppc is that IBM builds custom cores for big customers like console
And there are more in the pipe-line at AMCC as well, next up is a quad core Titan with 2MB cache.
just to name a few...
These are very primitive compared to modern desktop cpus. The PPCs of AMCC are designed for embedded market.
QuadG5s released by Apple are still fastest desktop ppc computers. And when Apple dropped PPC, it died for desktop.
You got me wrong there, I am glad if they come back using ANY flavor (MOS included, but I don't have one) and I suggest to them to try Icaros pointing them to its website.
My cousin is using it a little (he was with me at Pianeta and spoke with Paolone too), others are not interested but are now following the Amiga scene on italian sites (Amiganews in particular).
nice then.
I understand very well, the problem is, well written application don't do that, I invited you several times to go over at natami forums and talk about this with Gunnar.
Anyway talk with Vidarh about implementing MP without re-writing the whole OS, he will enlighten you.
I missed your invitations. All apps would fail with exception of simple command line ones like "ls" or "dir".
I already read Vidarh comments but it doesn't convince me. I already talked with Gunnar long in the past about his fantasy coldfires running existing 68k core (he always ommited that all code had to be rewritten). Both of these coders have been pointed by long time amiga coders that have designed entire OSes that their theories are flawed.
-
See my previous posts at the profile.
Must be late, i don't get what priìofile you are talking about and when did you purchase a legal copy of AmigaOS4.1, show me some proof...
In case you forgot it we were talking about the number of Sam boards produced on each batch. downloads are not good indicative: I downloaded timberwolf a pair of times, do I count as 2 timberwolf users?
No it is you who forgot: I said that Sams were primarly aimed at Amiga afficionado who wanted to get AmigaOS new HW instead of clunky a4000s and you replied that people still prefers to buy classics and they failed at that attempt.
I said to you that since they sell like 6 a4000 a year on ebay and Acube manage to sell lots of Sams (several hundreds) I believe they actually done good compared to a4000 and towerized 1200.
We were talking about Sam440 being worse than 5 year older hardware. Mac Minis and eMacs are quite cheap and MorphOS manages well gfx memory. Powermac will probably be supported in the next release. If next years I found that I need more gfx ram I could get a cheap powermac or powerbook.
No you said that the 460EX was not good compared to macMini/emac and i told you i prefer a modern GFX card on PCI-E instead.
Yeah keep on adding old macs, you might have to sleep outside sooner or later :lol:
MorphOS/AROS/OS4/OS3 don't have to go anywhere because they are hobby OSes that can't compete with mainstream OSes and AmigaOS API is obsolete.
really? we are in luck then it is not you running the show then :rolleyes:
In the future it will still be easy to find replacement machines to run MorphOS because there are hundreds of thousands out there. If you add powermacs it will be a never ending source of MorphOS hardware.
I expect to run MorphOS on a powerbook G4 in the future. Perhaps Ralph finds a QuadG5 in his attic and decides to add support for it, who knows.
Don't delude yourself on the G5 do i have to remind you Mark olsen interview:
[SIZE=+1]For now, the Mac mini G4 is the machine compatible MorphOS fastest but is not yet supported 100%.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Do you plan to add Wi-Fi or management of the Airport for example, and also make a patch for the keyboards that are not recognized?[/SIZE]
The Airport is the name Apple gives to its wireless network cards. The wireless network is a complex subject, taking into account a lot of work, and for now, nobody has enough time to address the problem, and therefore, support the access is not to the agenda.
Regarding Apple keyboards do not work, especially the models A1242 and 1243, the problem is related to the fact that they have an integrated hub. We plan to solve this problem on version 2.5 of MorphOS.
(http://obligement.free.fr/gfx/ob-star.png) [SIZE=+1]We have also seen a beta version of MorphOS on PowerBook and eMac recently.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Can you explain what is the hardest work in these ports?[/SIZE]
Porting eMac version was directed by Frank Mariak, and from what I understand, with the sources of the Mac mini, this port is not a lot of work. I think it is only the sound recording that does not work. The support of the eMac will be released with version 2.5 of MorphOS.
With regard to notebooks, there is still much work to do to make them usable, this work includes support for graphics chips that were usually found in these machines (R300) bus support Apple Desktop keyboards and trackpads, Ethernet cards, sound processors, trackpads USB, battery management, management of the backlight, and power management. And probably other things that escape me at this level.:)
(http://obligement.free.fr/gfx/ob-star.png) [SIZE=+1]Some people like to run MorphOS on the most powerful PowerPC Macintosh: PowerMac G5.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Are they dreaming or is this kind of machine that could run MorphOS in the future?[/SIZE]
These machines are even more problems. They use 64-bit processors, which require modifications of Quark (the core of MorphOS) to work. On top of that, they no longer have much to do with the previous generation of a material point of view, and thus we fall again on the eternal problem of pilots.
Don't hold your breath ;)
Don't worry, if x1000 sold hundreds of thousands they may port MorphOS to it.
That's more like it, I might actually buy it (I am not kidding).
BTW, MorphOS has the most efficient AmigaOS gfx system and 32/64MB are enough for it.
That's all it gets from now to eternity?
Don't you remember what you write? I said x1000 was delayed and that it wouldn't be for sale in summer and you replied that summer finished on september.
Just pointing it out, but i do know it will be Summer just for Beta testers.
I don't have time to search URLs sorry, you already waste quite a lot of my time.
I could say the same...
It's completely dead on desktop.
And do you think you'll buy desktop computers with Power7? hilarious. The only interest of ppc is that IBM builds custom cores for big customers like console
These are very primitive compared to modern desktop cpus. The PPCs of AMCC are designed for embedded market.
QadG5s released by Apple are still fastest desktop ppc computers. And when Apple dropped PPC, it died for desktop.
Actually the PA6T is a better than G5 design and there are several cores designs ready. as for Power7 it is for the future, Verisys might get them in due time.
I missed your invitations. All apps would fail with exception of simple command line ones like "ls" or "dir".
I already read Vidarh comments but it doesn't convince me. I already talked with Gunnar long in the past about his fantasy coldfires running existing 68k core (he always ommited that all code had to be rewritten). Both of these coders have been pointed by long time amiga coders that have designed entire OSes that their theories are flawed.
i understand that Amigacoders say a lot of things, but even every point by Umisef was countered by Vidarh so the debate is still open, talk with them i say, exchanging PMs or messages "they don't read" doesn't count as "they have been dismissed" .
-
@The_Leander
you are more reasonable than Crumb i actually agree with you on a lot of stuff.
Have to dismiss the points i don't however as we are having a double conversation (you replied to a reply I sent for Crumb and he did too, that's really to much ;P) here is very late and I am tired,
Good night :)
-
Must be late, i don't get what priìofile you are talking about and when did you purchase a legal copy of AmigaOS4.1, show me some proof...
FYI betatesters have free copies for their machines Peg2/Peg1/Classic in my case.
Don't delude yourself on the G5 do i have to remind you Mark olsen interview
FYI there weren't plans for Mac Mini in the past but plans changed. I am not waiting for G5, I'm quite happy with my current hardware, I would be glad to run MorphOS on a laptop thought.
Don't hold your breath ;)
I wasn't holding my breath. In contrast with other OSes it's fairly easy to find decent hardware for MorphOS. Even more easier with AROS. And OS3.x emulation is the easiest choice.
Actually the PA6T is a better than G5 design and there are several cores designs ready.
PA6T design is based on G5. G5 has a 1.35Ghz bus and smaller instruction L1 cache but G5 frequency is higher (2.7Ghz).
as for Power7 it is for the future, Verisys might get them in due time.
Power7 in desktops? yeah... sure :-D
Due to no one working on it Crumb, things have changed and you fear this, which is a shame.
I don't fear technology, sorry. But since you started your "Hans de Ruiter is about to release best 2d/3d/video drivers ever" propaganda nothing interesting has happened, we haven't seen much improvements apart from 2d support. Even AROS guys are much more advanced in this aspect right now even if their 3D drivers need to be polished to integrate better with the OS.
I only see like 6 mos supporters here
When I said I know more MorphOS users I mean in person. E.g. in spain MorphOS is quite more popular than OS4.x and the european users I know personally are also pro-MorphOS. In fact most amiga/aros/morphos users I know don't write in forums.
no actually there were the times you describe (yeas when you beta tested) and times where I am 100% right.
I betatested OS4 for 5 years until 2009 (some time after final OS4.1 was released for Peg2) and new versions of components poped up every day. Since you were not betatester and you were using a PC I think you hardly can claim anything about what happened that years.
-
Ok Crumb, by this time i believe we both get we can argument (a lot :-)) but for how much I have all the time and replies of the world we should end this pis*ing contest.
I will speak honestly with you, I like MOS. End of story.
I wrote this in the this (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=53347&page=7) thread:
My suggestion (from the start, read my very first posts) is to get along, avoid depicting other flavors in bad light since they can do the same with you (as i did above on purpose) and even defend any Amiga flavor from others attacking it from the outside.
Let's make this a friendly competition where we salute what the other group is trying to accomplish. Aos is trying the old fashioned computer+os package, it's early, let's see where they land, MOS is rejuvenating mac HW that goes slow with OSX but fly with MorphOS (and can get back a lot of ex amigans gone mac), Aros is our Amiga flag when it comes to battling it out in the world of open source OSs, and so on.
I repeat, those that thinking to have" this" or "that" advantage believe it's the best way to show how their system is "za sh*it" will only make it ugly, hurt their very own camp and the community.
I am ready to play it like this. Are you?
To which i was also reminded that in the past it was ugly and that red trolls were all over the place.
To which I responded the following:
I understand that asking for this feud to end completely is unrealistic, there will always be uncontrollable individuals, but the rest of us can avoid jumping in enforcing this guys, how old are we anyway?
If in the future AOS gets a full Mesa port and new 3D drivers, i won't come here saying "look MOSSERS, shove that 64MB vram c*ap up your a*se now". I will just be happy and will also do anything in my power to shut any red troll that would do something like that (I certainly hope there won't be any, we are old for crying out loud).
The MOS community is a good one, and the Aos one is also a good one in 2010 no matter what happened back then.
We can at least improve things ten folds IMHO.
i hope you will join. I know you say you just make comparisons, but remember that if a guy asks about the Amiga situation then you're entitled to talk about MOS to this guy, if he however already asked about it in another thread and begs just for AOS information, forcing the thread in certain directions is considered antagonistic and things will turn ugly, with endless discussions.
-
i hope you will join. I know you say you just make comparisons, but remember that if a guy asks about the Amiga situation then you're entitled to talk about MOS to this guy, if he however already asked about it in another thread and begs just for AOS information, forcing the thread in certain directions is considered antagonistic and things will turn ugly, with endless discussions.
Well, I have looked at the profile of the starter of the thread. It seems he opened a thread about MorphOS in January and this thread has been opened at the middle of June. I guess that if I said I don't check old threads from 6 months ago and didn't remember he had asked any question about MorphOS some people won't believe me, but it's the truth.
I'm used to long threads with various replies so replying to Varthal was the most normal thing to do. BTW, in our amiga meetings there are a pair of friends who like OS4 and despiting what you may think I don't burn them in a pyre... I help them to solve their issues and talk about amiga stuff while we drink some beers/cider.
-
Well, I have looked at the profile of the starter of the thread. It seems he opened a thread about MorphOS in January and this thread has been opened at the middle of June. I guess that if I said I don't check old threads from 6 months ago and didn't remember he had asked any question about MorphOS some people won't believe me, but it's the truth.
I'm used to long threads with various replies so replying to Varthal was the most normal thing to do. BTW, in our amiga meetings there are a pair of friends who like OS4 and despiting what you may think I don't burn them in a pyre... I help them to solve their issues and talk about amiga stuff while we drink some beers/cider.
it is actually very possible, if "that old" I would have not recalled it myself :) (Karlos mentioned it so promptly showing he sure has a large memory :lol:).
-
BTW, MorphOS has the most efficient AmigaOS gfx system and 32/64MB are enough for it.
You won't be saying that when the Doom 3 engine goes open source. Everybody will be wanting full OpenGL2 drivers and plenty of VRAM for textures, specular maps, normal maps etc.
-
You won't be saying that when the Doom 3 engine goes open source. Everybody will be wanting full OpenGL2 drivers and plenty of VRAM for textures, specular maps, normal maps etc.
I don't need to wait until Doom3 is opensourced, I want full OpenGL2.0 support right now :-D
I was also afraid of Radeon 9200 with 64MB of gfx memory but I never ran out of gfx ram. Simpler 3D games like Quake3 run quite smoothly (around 70fps). There's still room for optimization as Bigfoot showed in a presentation faster drivers are possible
If in the future drivers were available, took advantage of new cores and I needed it I would switch to a 2Ghz powermac with a not so older AGP Radeon like 9800 for example, but I don't think I'm doing that anytime soon.
We still don't take full advantage of older cores like RV280 so I highly doubt we see short term support for more recent models like HD4670 even if you could use it. I expect support for R9600/R9800/... in the next updates
-
The time invested depends on coder's skills and OS knowledge. e.g.: Itix could port software X in one week and it would take me two months to do the same. Despiting time factor the rest applies to x11 ports: no good quality checks, most of original bugs remain untouched (even new ones are added) and no use of host OS functions.
So, taking in account Edvard Schwan's skills, do you think that he has done the work too quickly?
And, are you saying that he has not done quality checks, or are you speaking in general of X11 ports on any platform?
we are not just talking about window managers, gaim would feel alien even if you used amiga window frames. Using an Amiga skin doesn't suddenly turn your x11 software into amiga software
We are talking about how good is the port of the X11 environment to OS4. The fact that X11 apps feel alien to the Amiga doesn't change in any way the quality of the port, because of the intrinsic limits of the X11 environment when running on a different platform. Within these limits, I said that the port is a good one, as the author has tried as much as possible to make the environment more Amiga-friendly, by using OS4's windows frames.
Then just use any random OS (e.g. Windows with WindowBlinds) with some Workbench skin and be happy. AtheOS had Amiga-like gadgets and there were some x11 window managers that mimicked WB but that won't turn gtk into mui.
Then we would be outside the scope of our discussion. We are talking about OS4 programs that MOS lacks.
"ls" also runs pretty stable on all amigas yet it doesn't feel native because it doesn't use amiga arguments.
If MOS lacked the ls command (and if it ls wasn't just a plain "dir" command :), it could have been a positive point of OS4 over MOS, regardless if it uses Amiga arguments or not.
I assume coder won't be silly and will avoid bleeding edge unstable versions. If code runs stable in other platform it should do so if the port is properly done.
For some applications there are no unstable versions, you have only one unstable version of the code, and this can happen especially with larger projects. You cannot also judge the quality of the original's author basing solely on how his code runs on the platform he works on. For example, you can write code with a low level of portability, or in a way that it is compilable only with a specific version tree of the compiler, or assuming that the primitive data types will have the same size on all the platforms, which is not true.
X11
Then the port's author is not to blame.
Lynx is also perfectly "useful" too.
Yes, in some defined contexts it is, as is Timberwolf, also in some contexts.
SDL/X11 ports always run better in the original platform.
For example?
I disagree. And I think it's polite to reply you instead of ignoring you.
You can of course disagree on my first opinion. But do you also disagree on the fact that OP has
asked not to talk about MOS? His statement has even confirmed that my interpretation of his first post was correct.
BBRV always says that if you have an order for Genesi to build certain number of 512MB Efikas they will build them. Both products have warranty and Efikas can be built on demand I don't see much difference.
"To be built on demand" doesn't mean that something is available on the market. I don't think that a single customer can order the production of a single Efika, they have probably set a minimum number of orders, and payment of all the shipped motherboards.
In addition to that I think there are more chances of ACube going broke than Directron
ACube isn't directly producing the motherboards.
I think ACube choosed wrong cpus, added unneeded stuff to motherboard like that fpga you can't program with freedom and added the mobility Radeon unneeded for embedded stuff. The choices they have made for 460 model look slightly better for embedded customers but are odd for desktop users.
We were comparing Pegasos2 with the 440, I think that all these factors you have mentioned don't fit with the discussion.
Most Amiga users I know were waiting some fast G4 machine many years ago. Now it's funny because Hyperion partners avoided the use of Altivec (with the honorable exception of A1-XE G4), something that pissed almost all users I know. The situation looked brighter when Moana appeared but unfortunately Hyperion management decided to recover developing costs selling us expensive hardware instead of trying to sell many OS4 units and leaving users the choice of using 2nd hand hardware like Mac Mini/Powerbook or new hardware (like Sam440 or whatever thing they wanted to build)
IMHO it was a good choice for Hyperion, making OS4 focus on its strenght. i.e. a few hardware supported with limited possibilities of problems derived by the use of hardware only partially-compatible with the available drivers.
Since some users are desperate to run OS4 they will buy almost everything you put on sale.
You cannot know if those users are the majority of the ones that have bought a Sam.
But mind you, if you could buy Moana and run it on a 2nd hand Mac Mini many users would have been able to try out OS4. Now the number of users spending more than 500 Euros to get a substandard board that runs slower than 5-year old boards are pretty slim compared to the number of users they would have got if they also had released Moana.
My point was that you can't say that OS4 hardware is more expensive than MOS' one. There's no new hardware produced for MOS, and Efikas can't be regarded as "in production", since AFAIK a single buyer can't request the production of a single board. If Moana was officially released then we could make a comparison between the hardware supported by both Moana and MOS. Since it wasn't, there are really no points in common.
Sure customers have right to choose, no one questions that. The problem is that customers who wanted to run OS4 had NO choice.
But that in my opinion didn't imply that most of the people bought A1s only because they were forced to do so in order to run OS4. I believe instead that most people know how to spend their money.
AGPx1 speed would be sad.
What has AGP to do with Sam 460?
both are OS4 hardware producers Hyperion forces us to buy hardware from if we have some interest in OS4.
But previously you were just talking about Sams being "prototypes" and "hardly tested". I hardly see how Sam's quality has anything to do with MAI's product.
But I can claim it hasn't gone through all the tests mainstream hardware goes through.
This provides 0 hints on how stable and tested are Sams.
Well, most (u)A1 users I knew sold them to buy Peg2/G4. Also the ones I don't know in person. Even one of the Friedens used Peg2 as main machine one year before OS4.1 Peg2 release because it was better hardware than MAI/ACube.
Actually your quote was that Peg2 are in general a better choice than Sams, and you mentioned that the reason was that you "prefer hardware well tested produced in hundreds of thousands of units, easy to replace, faster and cheaper." That can't still be a general rule, since other people may not care how many units of some hardware have been produced, while they might prefer to buy new hardware instead of old one, to lower the possibilities that the HW breaks down too early.
Varthall
-
I have read them all, as well as those from those people crying "foul" when they simply don't like the arguments(!) presented. My reply was directed to them all, not one post in particular.
Then it seems that Dax' one is an exception to your rule.
Hehe, "Foul! Foul! Can't some referee do something? These kind of discussions shouldn't be allowed! Take away those arguments! Do something!"...
You have missed the meaning of both Karlos' and Xeron's posts. They have both invited the people in this thread to be more adult and reasonable in their posts, exactly the opposite of what you have interpreted. Other two exceptions to your rule.
Varthall
-
this thread has pretty much convinced me that:
A: Amiga is doomed.
B: I don't really want to have anything to do with either OS4 or Morph at this time.
C: The smaller the tribe, the more entrenched the factions.
D: NOTHING is "amiga" anymore. At this point, I wouldn't surprised if someone claimed that an A500 is not a "real amiga".
-
this thread has pretty much convinced me that:
A: Amiga is doomed.
B: I don't really want to have anything to do with either OS4 or Morph at this time.
C: The smaller the tribe, the more entrenched the factions.
D: NOTHING is "amiga" anymore. At this point, I wouldn't surprised if someone claimed that an A500 is not a "real amiga".
If I may:
A) If you are thinking of amiga as a major platform, then it was doomed back in the late '90s. However, it will continue as a hobbyist platform for a long time.
B) Can't say I blame you. If you think this thread is bad, you should have seen things back in 2003.
C) QFT
D) You'll always get some numpty telling you that. Best ignored, IMHO.
-
this thread has pretty much convinced me that:
A: Amiga is doomed.
Hehe.. They have beaten each other to death.
-
If I may:
However, it will continue as a hobbyist platform for a long time.
Agree with you there.