Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: peterwiehe on January 04, 2004, 12:11:25 AM
-
Which OS.s (operating systems) do You consider a smootly-runnning, good-looking OS to develop artpieces (images, movies, music, games) on it?
(And it wouldn't hurt if it can be easily handled.)
[And yes, it is a matter of personal opinion!]
Kind regards
Peter Wiehe
-
AROS
-
I am quite a Mac OS X fan. And a fan of its father, NeXTSTEP.
blakespot
-
Hmm, tough one.
I currently use Windows 2000 Pro, for lack of a better option.
There just isn't any other OS with support for the stuff I use for my music (HD-recording, midi sequencing, *good* virtual instruments), except maybe OSX, but I can't afford a proper Mac. Also, I play a few FPS games that just don't exist on other OS's.
I did run Mandrake Linux as my main OS for a few months, but I didn't make any music during that time, because of the crappy sound implementation.
Been meaning to dig into some BeOS music apps, just haven't really got around to it, because of some other apps I'm missing with that OS.
-
slap me all you want... XP works for me.
And .. it runs Startrek Armada :-)
-
Star Trek Armada rocks! :)
-
hard one. Hmmmm...
Currently I use Workbench3.9, in lack of a better choise.
There just are no other operating system with support for the stuff I use for my music (recording, midi, multiformat playback, tracking, etc), except maybe Linux. Also, I play a few FPS, RTS, TBS, RPG, PFG, and other games that just don't exist on other inferior OSes.
-
besides miggy os i prefer solaris, with gnome2.
very nice one ;-) imho it´ s the most stable os running on silicon.
[And yes, it is a matter of personal opinion!]
yes sir, very personal :)
-
In my laymans opinion I would say AROS....
Right now AROS is in its infancy .. and the more
support it gets now the more it will get later.
I'm only guessing but I would think there is
enough of the OS written to work with and those
that are doing the writting would give any help
needed to get over the rough spots.
I personally want to see AROS go.
-
"Resistance if futile, You will be assimilated"
I feel like playing it now. later.
-
I'm not a big fan these days but, BEOS was the smoothest OS that I ever used on x86 hardware. for multimedia stuff it was really nice. I ran it on my pentium 3 and it just flew!!. It was dual booting with win98 on the same machine. It was just amazing how much better BEOS ran on the same hardware as WIn98. Once again superior technology was destroyed by M$ :-x :-x :-x :-x :-x :-x :-x
-
Which OS.s (operating systems) do You consider a smootly-runnning, good-looking OS to develop artpieces (images, movies, music, games) on it?
Any operating system should be able to meet those requirements with the help of the right hardware vendor. I like Photoshop, After Effects, and Sound Forge running on an Intel motherboard and processor with Windows XP Professional. I also use AVISynth, which is only available for Windows (hence the AVI-ness of the name). Matrox makes nice video hardware, and of course, there's the NewTek VT[3].
Trev
-
Workbench 3.5 is zippy yes.
I use Windows 2000 Pro mostly now. Pretty stable and faily fast.
I just installed Mandrake 9.0 Linux and man is it slow.
My turbo linux 6.0 installation was very fast compaired to this junk.
My mandrake 8.2 installation was mostly faster compaired to it..
what's the deal??
The worst operating system I ever used was probabbly Windows ME, followed closly by Geos on my Commadore 128.
Also, MS-DOS 4.0 was pretty horrible
-
For picture creation... BeOS/Zeta - Refraction is a very nice smooth package in the style of Photogenics
For Multimedia playback I stick with BeOS/Zeta, But I would say that its creation tools suck big time, even the Amiga has a greater range of pro tools. That said though, it does offer some pretty fine development tools in the form of CodeLiege as well as other tools.
If you're going to go into music/video creation a lot I'd say go with Windows 2000pro or get a mac as they are really the only choices that are cost effective. And games... Sorry folks but I'd have to say Windows if you're after the latest and greatest....
Ease of use... BeOS/Zeta simply the slickest OS on X86 bar none.
-
Windows XP is my primary machine which is most unfortunate but it has all my software on it including games that are not available on anything but Windblows. Besides, it makes me so happy when it tells me how I need to use it better with all it's helpful prompts and wizards. I had no idea I was using computers so incorrectly until XP came along and told me. :-o
I use AmigaOS3.9 for whatever I can instead of using the "most helpful" XP. I also use Gentoo Linux and Windows 2003 server for server side activities. btw 2003 Server is also very helpful at identifying all the things I've been doing with servers incorrectly for all these years as well. I like Gentoo because emerge is your friend and makes dependencies and such a snap. Amiga is what I would call my "most fun" OS/computing platform and my true reason for loving computing. If Microsoft was all I had, I'd be living in a hut on an island and would never touch the things.
I believe I've stated that professionaly and personally Microsoft has removed all of the fun from computing for me. This explains why I'm here. :-D
I suppose I should add that I support Windows/Linux servers for a living. :oops:
-
Does writing code count as artwork? :-)
If so then Debian GNU/Linux all the way!!
But seriously, although I never used it properly for any decent length of time - BeOS impressed me at the time almost as much as AmigaOS did.
I still wonder to this day what BeOS would have been like if it hadn't been smothered by Microsoft (although to be realistic: BeOS's future still may not have been certain even if Microsoft had played fair, business-strategy-wise).
Smooth running? That's BeOS. Good looking? BeOS did a fair job at that too. Technically brilliant, designed from the ground up as a multimedia OS.
I'm naming my small microcontroller OS after it: BeeOS :-) [it's small, like a bee ;-)]
AmigaOS of course will always be my favourite...
- Paul
-
Im>bE wrote:
hard one. Hmmmm...
Currently I use Workbench3.9, in lack of a better choise.
There just are no other operating system with support for the stuff I use for my music (recording, midi, multiformat playback, tracking, etc), except maybe Linux. Also, I play a few FPS, RTS, TBS, RPG, PFG, and other games that just don't exist on other inferior OSes.
:roll:
-
Morphos.
-
:idea: ... ¡¡¡ MorphOS !!!
:pint:
-
My personal opinion is AROS, Mac OS X, NextStep, BeOS (and of course AmigaOS). As many of You think.
I personally would disagree that the following run smooth und look good (and of course not easy to handle):
- Windows, Gnome and Unix Workstations in general
- any Os, provided with the right hardware
(Okay, mostly Windows and Workstations are easy to handle)
I still have to take a closer look at MorphOS.
About Windows for the latest and greatest games:
When it comes to the taste of many gamers, yes. But on the other side, there must be many gamers, too, that don't consider all this idea-less, ugly-looking game clones for many bucks the greatest games!
About Win and amiga fun: Yes, exactly my experience. I was doing system-programming (unsuccesfully) on Linux PC several years, when I remembered Amiga and thought "Oh, I forgot that computers don't have to be boring, buggy and ugly, and that they can make programming easy and not a nightmare."
I didn't mean code as artwork. (If we would count that in, I would consider free POSIX an art (but Debian not my cup of tea). It's no surprise, that the most advanced port of AROS is ontop of GNU/Linux.)
I will give a personal scala of elegance:
0% meaning totally clumsy, 100% meaning totally elegant:
AmigaOS classic 80%
Win32 70% (if You don't get the crash)
Linux/Solaris/etc with X 40-60% (depending how easy and stable the X and desktop is. But X is always unelegant except on Mac OS X)
BeOS 72%? (Not all around elegant)
Macintosh 85% (More than Amiga classic!? I probably will change my mind about that!)
Next Step 75% (I clicked around on it a few minutes on a computer fair, when it came out. Feeling like a Macintosh, not as multimedia-able and powerful as I expected)
Mac OS X 98%!? (consistent and easy user interfae, colour)
Kind regards
Peter Wiehe
-
Dalamar wrote:
I believe I've stated that professionaly and personally Microsoft has removed all of the fun from computing for me. This explains why I'm here. :-D
True but I'm forced to use Win 2k at work, so it just aids work, when at home to use XP.
As mentioned on this site before, the new Amiga OS will have to offer something special to tempt people away from the OS they use most at present (usually MS) at work.
This will probably be the area OS4 falls down on, as most people don't want to use 2 different OS's at home & work however good that 2nd OS may be. :-(
-
Here's a site that is half-ontopic when we talk elegant GUIs. It'is about some un-intuitive GUI designs:
"Interface Hall of Shame - Misplaced Metaphors -"
http://www.umlchina.com/GUI/Misplaced.htm
Probably mostly interesting for someone who is going to write a GUI. But sometimes the text is funny.
Kind regards
Peter wiehe
-
@AccyD
This is true. Apps for an OS make it appealing. Linux is just now coming around to become a more appealing client platform. I support MS products for the most part, though recent events are making me find alternative OS's for work related solutions and I'm fortunate to be in a position to make those kinds of decisions. For the standard office user, MS has the market, no question. It stinks, but it's true. This is also why my MS PC has most of my productivity apps. My alternative solutions at work revolve around Linux at this point for lack of anything better to choose from. End user training is the big hitch when it comes to changing out the client OS, and ease of deployment is the second major issue. Because of both of these issues, it would be difficult for Amiga to get to that point (productivity application issue aside). :-( Right now I use my Amiga for fun and as a hobby because it has restored some of that passion that originally got me into all of this to begin with.
Who knows what the future will hold.
-
BeOS was a fantastic operating system but due to it tnot being developed for years it has kinda lost its ground.
I think the best OS I can use in 2004 has to be MacOS X (10.2 and upwards of course)
and dont forget good ole Workbench 3.1 and Mac System 6!
They were FAST!
-
Blomberg wrote:
Im>bE wrote:
hard one. Hmmmm...
Currently I use Workbench3.9, in lack of a better choise.
There just are no other operating system with support for the stuff I use for my music (recording, midi, multiformat playback, tracking, etc), except maybe Linux. Also, I play a few FPS, RTS, TBS, RPG, PFG, and other games that just don't exist on other inferior OSes.
:roll:
Right,
FPS=First Person Shooter
RTS=Real Time Strategy
TBS=Turn Based Strategy
RPG=Role-Playing Game
PFG=Pasty Faced Geek? Pig-Faced Gorilla? :-?
-
Mac OS X 10.2 and higher. Excellent combination of hardware and software with all the apps most creative professionals and home users require.
Apple is innovative, up-to-date, and makes cool stuff.
-
I like my G4 Mac and OS X, works great.
-
Cyberus wrote:
Right,
FPS=First Person Shooter
RTS=Real Time Strategy
TBS=Turn Based Strategy
RPG=Role-Playing Game
PFG=Pasty Faced Geek? Pig-Faced Gorilla? :-?
:lol:
I was wondering about that one myself ..
-
Though I use XP & Solaris at work and Mac OS9.2 at home I would have to say...
MAC OS 10.2 and above, hands down, but...
BeOS WAS the best and I would still run it if my wifes laptop was supported fully (though I might receive a beating).
I haven't been fortunate enough to be able to build (for a resonable price :( ) an Amiga capable of AOS 3.5/3.9 :( and I don't have access to Morph (and it's killin me)
Yeah (sighs)... BeOS (sighs again)
-
Windows2000 is pretty good, but ONLY if you have decent drivers. Lots of companies have a hard time writing decent audio and video capture drivers for Windows, which is where all the infamouse cracking audio problems come from. I've used three systems with Win2K, and only one of them had audio that worked properly (nForce2 chipset). SB Audigy still seems to have problems.
It was dual booting with win98 on the same machine. It was just amazing how much better BEOS ran on the same hardware as WIn98. Once again superior technology was destroyed by M$
I don't want to get off topic, here, but I was not impressed with Be, and it's little surprise to me why Be got smashed in the market. It was fast, but had no substance, the interface was insufficient, and the web browser was so bad it made me cry. Be also no longer boots since I switched my IDE cables around. Now that I can safely say I tried it, I think I'll ditch it and try Mandrake Linux.
I just installed Mandrake 9.0 Linux and man is it slow.
Well, I just tried Gentoo, and that was a bust. :-)
I just want a platform to learn how to write GUI code. I tried that under Windows, and the GUI toolkits over there are either too expensive, or simply horrible.
BeOS's future still may not have been certain even if Microsoft had played fair, business-strategy-wise
Be relied too heavily on Apple clones. When those disappeared, they adapted poorly to the PC way of doing things.
"Interface Hall of Shame - Misplaced Metaphors -"
http://www.umlchina.com/GUI/Misplaced.htm
That's nothing! If you want to even *start* understanding how horrible today's GUIs are, buy this book. The "war stories" alone are worth the book price:
GUI Bloopers, by Jeff Johnson (http://www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=30581510&sp=1&loc=106)
I'm not a big fan of the Interface Hall of Shame, either. They rarely offer any slack for artistic impression, and the fact that people can learn such quirks very quickly. Functional doesn't mean you have to be boring.
-
Video editing - Windows 2000 Pro
-
Why not use XP for video editing instead for win2k? It's the same.. except that XP is NT v5.1 instead of 5.0... ok, more bugs on XP but overall better performance when used as workstation only.
-
Why is XP called XP? OS X is just using the Roman numeral X and it meant to be pronounced 10 as in Mac OS 10, but people all over the shop are calling it Mac OS EX 10.2 Jaguar or 10.3 Panther. The second of which being the cheekiest move by Apple so far, asking for another £100 for what is essentially an upgrade from OS 10 to OS 10 with hardly anything done to it. :-x If it was OS 10 - 11 I'd understand but this really gets my goat.
-
True Mike but there are hell of a lot of changes in 10.3 i would never go bak to 10.2 :-D
-
PFG = Platform games?
By the way, all the meantioned games are exactly the games that the mainstream considers the best, but I consider them a little bit idea-less, unpretty, boring game-clones. Like 3D shooters, yet another battle or civilization game, and so on.
For that kind of Games Windows is the dominant platform.
Pasty-Faced-Geek? Pig-faced-gorilla? Hey, that could be my second names ;)
-----
I think BeOS was extremely fine in some aspects, but not great at all in other aspects. Especially when they intentionally made it not runnable on 99.9% of PCs. Everything older than half a year was fully intentional not able to run BeOS. So You had to a buy a computer which costs as much as an old car. That did break NeXT the neck, so it did to BeOS.
> I just want a platform to learn how to write GUI
> code. I tried that under Windows, and the GUI
> toolkits over there are either too expensive,
> or simply horrible.
Yes, nothing to learn fast and then write fast UI code, for Your own application. So when Win programmers are finally used to their IDE or to WinAPI, they have (as a natural process) adapted their way of thinking (as You do on Mac/Unix/Amiga, too). So all Win applications have this sort of complicated look, that is special for Windows apps. Even when it would be possible to make it simpler. Look at a small utiilitiy (for example a mail client or a decompress tool), and You can clearly see a pattern. So the OS has impact on Your style of software designing!
------------
Thanks for the book tip, investigating it further.
> I'm not a big fan of the Interface Hall of
> Shame, either. They rarely offer any slack for
> artistic impression, and the fact that people
> can learn such quirks very quickly. Functional
> doesn't mean you have to be boring.
He's talking especially the intrusiveness (can't be turned off, interrupts Your menu actions, bubbles over the loudspeaker etc). We don't need _that_ kind of entertainment.
But this principal can be applied more radical IMHO: "Boring" minimalism can be better than too "loud" art, not only for science and business work, but for creative work, too! _You_ want to create art, you don't want the OS to create art!
What I appreciate is a general environment that is aesthetical: good-looking, consistent, easy to comprehend/oversee/handle.
Artitistic impression is another issue [edit: another aspect of GUIs that is beyond the scope of Isys' Hall of Shame], Isys is already doing a good job with his site. Let's leave the artitistic impression issue to the many other GUI sites. Could be an incentive for You, to write Your opinions about this and put them on a website!
----
> [...] ok, more bugs on XP but overall better performance [...)
Bah , Desolator.
That exactly was what I were hinting at when I started the question. Smoothly runnning (besides good loook and easy handling) is important for me, when the system doesn't run smooth, I even can't _start_trying_ to produce some art that takes more than a few minutes. Maybe other people can.
--------
Mac OS X has a double meaing AFAIK: The obvious Roman number 10, but X, too. (X= X Windowing System)
MS officially says XP stands for Experience, and that it means the improvements made possible through learning a lot from the development work at the previous versions. (This can lead to endless sarcastic comments, including "The sold only beta crap until now". Maybe it'S good if we restrain a little bit about that or we drift in the well known "MS sucks"-cascade.)
Since WinXP was one of the aerliest OSs to take advantage of the AMD XP, it might have relation to that, too.
-
Mike_Amiga wrote:
Why is XP called XP?
M$ meant it to be an abbreviation for the word "Experience". Hence, Microsoft Windows "Experience". Personally, I think it stands for "eXtra Problems".
-
Mike_Amiga wrote:
Why is XP called XP? OS X is just using the Roman numeral X and it meant to be pronounced 10 as in Mac OS 10, but people all over the shop are calling it Mac OS EX 10.2 Jaguar or 10.3 Panther. The second of which being the cheekiest move by Apple so far, asking for another £100 for what is essentially an upgrade from OS 10 to OS 10 with hardly anything done to it. :-x If it was OS 10 - 11 I'd understand but this really gets my goat.
you'll find quite big improvements in each update actually, unlike certain M$ products :roll:
this is where i think OS X has a big oppurtunity to take the lead of Longhorn
-
Well, unless I update my Mac to a G5 or later model some time in the future I won't be upgrading my OS any further for the time being.
-
Amiga OS4 :-D
-
@mike-amiga
XP stands for Xeroderma Pigmentosum. Windows has a skin disease.... I mean... just look at the default GUI skin... Yuck! :)
Most XP installations experience problems in the daylight, maybe this is due to the XP disease.
Kev
-
LCARS