Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => Topic started by: TrevorDick on June 24, 2012, 12:31:46 PM
-
Over the Rainbow
Cardiff, 25th June 2012
A-EON Technology secures graphic card support for AmigaOS 4
A-EON Technology is pleased to announce that it has signed a new development agreement with premier AmigaOS graphics specialist Hans de Ruiter which ensures the future compatibility of AmigaOS 4 with the latest RadeonHD graphics cards. In addition to the HD4000 (R700) graphics drivers released with the AmigaONE X1000 “First Contact” system, we have now contracted Hans to create a series of drivers for the RadeonHD family. This also includes support for Evergreen, Northern Islands and the recently released Southern Islands HD7000 series. These new drivers, which are exclusively licensed to A-EON Technology, will support the X1300-1950, 5000, 6000 & 7000 series RadeonHD graphics cards and provide AmigaOS 4 with access to the latest in graphic card technology.
Trevor Dickinson commented, “This is a major boost for the AmigaOS and is the first time that these modern graphics cards have been supported on non x86 systems. Hans has already released several updates to his RadeonHD driver and support for Evergreen and Northern Islands cards is already up to the standard of the R700 drivers released with the AmigaONE X1000. He has also made excellent progress with drivers for AMD's Southern Islands cards. Hans de Ruiter replied, "I was initially disappointed when supply of Radeon HD 4000 series became scarce but now I'm proud of what has been achieved. The RadeonHD driver once again supports some of the latest cards available." His comments were echoed by a long time AmigaOS 4 developer and A1-X1000 beta tester who stated, "Looks like OS4 won't have to worry about availability of compatible graphics cards anytime soon". We can only agree.
The AMD RadeonHD series to be supported include:-
- X1300-1950 - R520 chipset
- HD5000 - Evergreen series – first released in September 2009
- HD6000 - Northern Island series – first released in October 2010
- HD7000 - Southern Island series – latest RadeonHD cards released in January 2012
Although the RadeonHD driver is exclusively licensed to A-EON Technology for AmigaOS 4, owners of ACube's "Next Generation Amiga" systems need not despair. They will be able to purchase RadeonHD driver updates via the A-EON Technology website for their Sam460 and AmigaOne 500 systems. AmigaKit will also be offering RadeonHD graphics cards and driver bundles. Please visit the AmigaKit website for more details. Customers who purchase the new driver will qualify for free upgrades, up to and including version 1.0 of the RadeonHD driver. Registered AmigaONE X1000 "First Contact" customers will be able download driver updates free of charge from the A-EON Technology website.
About Hans de Ruiter & HDRLab: Hans de Ruiter is an electrical & electronic engineer and leading AmigaOS developer and Amiga enthusiast. His website - HDRLab - details various projects, many of which are AmigaOS related. The biggest of these is the RadeonHD driver for AmigaOS, an ambitious project that aims to deliver modern graphics capabilities for the AmigaOS platform.
About AmigaOS: The AmigaOS dates back to 1985 with the introduction of the landmark Amiga 1000. Today, under the guidance and control of Hyperion Entertainment, AmigaOS has evolved into a modern operating system without losing that intrinsic "Amiga" look and feel.
About the AmigaONE X1000: The AmigaONE X1000 is not like other computers. It is a culmination of efforts by real Amiga enthusiasts and developers to create powerful, modern desktop hardware for the AmigaOS. It is the natural evolution of the Amiga's PowerPC lineage and is based on the PA-Semi Dual-core PA6T-1682M CPU and includes Xena, a "Software Defined Silicon" co-processor. Above all it runs the latest version of the AmigaOS.
AboutAmigaKit: AmigaKit is a trading division of Leaman Computing Ltd based in Cardiff, UK. It acquired the stock of Eyetech Group Ltd in 2006 and quickly established itself as a world-wide market leader in the retail and distribution of Amiga hardware and software. A-EON Technology appointed AmigaKit as its primary distributor for all its AmigaONE products.
Web links:
HDR Labs - http://hdrlab.org.nz/
A-EON Technology - http://www.a-eon.com (http://www.a-eon.com/)
AmigaKit - http://ww.amigakit.com/
AmigaOS - http://www.amigaos.net/
AMD RadeonHD - http://www.amd.com/ (http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/Pages/desktop-graphics.aspx/)
-
@TrevorDick
You should be complimented for trying to advance the OS4 platform on your own this way, but isn't graphic drivers really one of those fundamental things that should be handled by the OS really, and not depending on external, third party entities? AFAIK both "available" OS4 systems have PCI-e graphics, and if I understood this correctly, the graphic driver part of OS4 (at least for the "newish", PCI-e enabled HW that is "available" today) is all handled by *you* in practice, and not by those who is presumably developing the OS? And you will be *selling* upgrades for those OS4 users that have Sam 460's and wanting to enjoy the benefits of more modern graphic cards?
-
@TrevorDick
You should be complimented for trying to advance the OS4 platform on your own this way, but isn't graphic drivers really one of those fundamental things that should be handled by the OS really, and not depending on external, third party entities? AFAIK both "available" OS4 systems have PCI-e graphics, and if I understood this correctly, the graphic driver part of OS4 (at least for the "newish", PCI-e enabled HW that is "available" today) is all handled by *you* in practice, and not by those who is presumably developing the OS? And you will be *selling* upgrades for those OS4 users that have Sam 460's and wanting to enjoy the benefits of more modern graphic cards?
The driver for SAM460ex was developed by Ross through Acube.
Anyway we are happy to inform you that Ross Vumbaca in association with ACube Systems, has released an initial version of the SAM460 audio driver to the OS4 beta testing team.
Submitted back to OS4 team for beta testing. I don't understand what you're trying to illustrate. Private contractor either way.
#6
-
@TakeMeHomeGrandma
Sometimes it is better to get the job done quickly so as not to hold up any other projects in the pipeline.
-
@tmhgm
In fact, I just recall that other Radeon drivers were also outsourced to some other subcontractor. A company called Forefront technologies or something like that. Apparently Hyperion was not willing to pay what Hans asked and they are released separately.
It is not really surprising because Picasso96 was licensed from another company.
-
@tmhgm
In fact, I just recall that other Radeon drivers were also outsourced to some other subcontractor. A company called Forefront technologies or something like that.
Exactly. From 2003:
Forefront Technologies is pleased to announce today a dedicated beta tester (Jurgen Schober) has successfully booted an Eyetech AmigaOne XE G4 on AmigaOS 4.0 by Hyperion Entertainment using Forefront's ATI Radeon driver and a Radeon 7000.
It clearly says Forefront's ATI Radeon driver, not Hyperion's driver.
#6
-
Although the RadeonHD driver is exclusively licensed to A-EON Technology for AmigaOS 4, owners of ACube's "Next Generation Amiga" systems need not despair. They will be able to purchase RadeonHD driver updates via the A-EON Technology website for their Sam460 and AmigaOne 500 systems.
Purchase driver updates, you've got to be kidding me. One shouldn't have to pay for drivers.
Insanity, of course there will be people doing it.
I'll be giving Amiga NG a wide berth.
-
@ itix
That was not my point really. Surely graphics drivers was part of OS4 before, i.e. not distributed or sold separately? At least that's what I recall personally. But more importantly - *shouldn't* they be part of the OS? Isn't one of the main tasks of an OS to provide a bridge between the HW and SW apps? Sure, I guess it's like Amigakit says, "sometimes it's better to get the job done quickly", and obviously the OS4 team doesn't consider things like graphics drivers to be important enough for them to care, but if so, what is...?
-
@lurch
The driver development took many hundreds of man hours. Programmers need to be paid and the cost needs to be accounted for.
-
I know what you mean but it depends how you want to see it. A-eon is a 3rd party manufacturer so they provide drivers for their hardware. Or in other words, Hyperion wasnt interested. Who cares. Certainly I dont.
-
I know what you mean but it depends how you want to see it. A-eon is a 3rd party manufacturer so they provide drivers for their hardware. Or in other words, Hyperion wasnt interested. Who cares. Certainly I dont.
Sure I get that, but both OS4 systems have PCI-e graphics, which obviously isn't (and won't be) a feature supported by OS4 itself. I definitely think this is worth noticing, since graphics is a fundamental component in a desktop system. Not that I personally care either, it's not like I'm going to buy into OS4 anytime soon... ;)
-
Drivers are free from the manufacturers of peripherals because they want you to use their hardware. Radeon doesn't make Amiga drivers.
Purchase driver updates, you've got to be kidding me. One shouldn't have to pay for drivers.
Insanity, of course there will be people doing it.
I'll be giving Amiga NG a wide berth.
-
Purchase driver updates, you've got to be kidding me. One shouldn't have to pay for drivers.
Insanity, of course there will be people doing it.
I'll be giving Amiga NG a wide berth.
if the guy doing the work wants paid for his effort then deal with it. if you don't like his price then do without. we don't have the advantage of building this cost into the hardware purchase price like amd and nvidia do. also realize that ms does not write drivers, amd and nvidia do. if we have someone willing to do it all for free then lucky us.
have they even given a price yet?
the forefront driver was not a charity project either. you'd have to ask Joshua how much we got overall, but i certainly don't feel rich for it. Joshua did more of the programming so deserves more of the $$. i personally got a dinner and reimbursed for a prometheus card, full stop. i bought my xe. i bought my collection of radeons. i bought my csppc card. i wouldn't expect to pay a lot for a graphics driver (and never bought cybergraphics for my picassoiv as it was too expensive for a driver) but it's nice to get a little help toward all that hardware to buy.
-
I think it's £29, which given the sheer amount of work Hans has done, is a very fair price.
What I don't understand is why people are saying the drivers should be part of the OS, as though they are in other OS!? Microsoft do not write graphics card drivers - of course not, the manufacturers do. Are drivers free on the PC? Again, of course not - they're included in the price of the hardware so it's invisible. Yet somehow some people think Hyperion should write drivers for all the graphics card - yet they can't possibly do that at the same time as develop the OS, given the size of the company.
What an OS maker should do isn't write the driver, but they should provide the API, which is what Hyperion do. Writing the API allows the graphics card manufacturer - or in this case, A-Eon, because AMD aren't going to do it - to support the cards.
In this case, if you don't want the latest graphics support, you don't need these drivers, you can stick with the current ones. And new systems from A-Eon come with the new drivers included anyway. So it's not costing anyone anything unless they happen to want the latest card support.
The alternative is simple - no support for later graphics cards at all. I think I prefer this option somehow. :)
-
Communications about this whole matter could have been handled better, preferably as a joint statement from all involved parties, and with detailed and unambiguous explanations for all paths users might take.
Now it's just extremely confusing, and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretations.
-
Communications about this whole matter could have been handled better, preferably as a joint statement from all involved parties, and with detailed and unambiguous explanations for all paths users might take.
Now it's just extremely confusing, and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretations.
The developer has just made a new blog entry.
http://hdrlab.org.nz/projects/amiga-os-4-projects/radeonhd-driver/radeonhd-development-log/new-blogentry/
-
Communications about this whole matter could have been handled better, preferably as a joint statement from all involved parties, and with detailed and unambiguous explanations for all paths users might take.
Now it's just extremely confusing, and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretations.
I agree..........
-
Communications about this whole matter could have been handled better, preferably as a joint statement from all involved parties, and with detailed and unambiguous explanations for all paths users might take.
Now it's just extremely confusing, and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretations.
It seems pretty clear to me. :)
-
The developer has just made a new blog entry.
http://hdrlab.org.nz/projects/amiga-os-4-projects/radeonhd-driver/radeonhd-development-log/new-blogentry/
I'm not sure if I interpret this part correctly:
A-Eon Technology naturally needs to recuperate their costs, and hence the driver is available for a fee to AmigaOS 4.1 owners. Those with an AmigaOS 4.2 license (i.e., A1-X1000 owners) naturally have already paid for their updates.
Does this mean that the £28.85 will be rebated if/when you get the OS 4.2 license?
Also, does one get a coupon and a t-shirt?
-
What an OS maker should do isn't write the driver, but they should provide the API, which is what Hyperion do. Writing the API allows the graphics card manufacturer - or in this case, A-Eon, because AMD aren't going to do it - to support the cards.
....
The alternative is simple - no support for later graphics cards at all. I think I prefer this option somehow. :)
Well, you have it rather spot on.
Cheers!
Steve
-
There goes my plans to buy a 460 if I have to pay for gfx drivers.
Oh well.
-
I'm not sure if I interpret this part correctly:
Does this mean that the £28.85 will be rebated if/when you get the OS 4.2 license?
Also, does one get a coupon and a t-shirt?
No, you get driver for OS 4.1
OS 4.2 should have it bundled.
If InI get it correct.
-
There goes my plans to buy a 460 if I have to pay for gfx drivers.
Oh well.
Mine too, just because X1000 is more expandable. 10 USB 2.0, much more expandable board once PCI slots get empty ...
InI know this will be flamming to MOS users, but InI also congrat them on first laptop and new OS version with hope to have it for X1000.
All PPC Macs are cheap but all but G5 are outdated to X1000.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD5x263GTuo&list=PL99B59D587FFAEA6A&index=44&feature=plpp_video
-
Big Up A-EON for securing the future of AMIGA GRAPHICS
Love and support from Serbia
-
All PPC Macs are cheap but all but G5 are outdated to X1000.
I don't know why you decided to bring this up in this thread, but I found out that my PowerBook G4 1.67GHz is actually faster than X1000 in most tasks. I also have some benchmark results to back this up.
If being "outdated" means "faster", as well as "cheaper", where's the problem again? Support? I doubt A-Eon or Amigakit can compete with apple repair network...
-
Well done Trevor and Hans
-
I wonder how much it will cost to get those cards supported in AROS...
-
I don't know why you decided to bring this up in this thread, but I found out that my PowerBook G4 1.67GHz is actually faster than X1000 in most tasks. I also have some benchmark results to back this up.
If being "outdated" means "faster", as well as "cheaper", where's the problem again? Support? I doubt A-Eon or Amigakit can compete with apple repair network...
Currently yes, but hardware side is hardware side. On Debian Wheezy where all RAM and both cores are utilized test are more realistic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZxJ9If50Tk&feature=player_embedded
Do them.
MorphOS is way more developed and optimized, thanks to much earlier start of development and no waste of time in complete OS 3.x port to PPC.
I have nothing against MOS, contrary I am sad its not OS 4.x just because we would be closer to OS 5.x if it was and we wouldnt argue at all. When I had momey to buy PPC equipped Classic MOS 2.x ceased support, when Peg2 became cheap SAM and other new HW arrived and now I do save money for X1000 as well as PPC Macs have no battery or spare parts support at all, and are with with AGP, slow mem, EIDE ATA etc.
MOS should go X1000 and Trevor can donate a board.
Apple repair net no longer deals with anything PPC for few years, so A-EON and AmiKit are better
then 3rd party rip offs that charge $200 for laptop battery.
I recently had PPC G4 Laptop selling for 50 euros with no battery and I declined the offer when realized
how much 512MB additional RAM and battery costs + postage + import costs to non EU country
(plus 100 euros for MOS). Even I would love to have Mint 11, MacOS X and MOS on one machine,
I prefered high end workstation with OS 4.2 and Mint 11
-
High end workstation?, are you serious?. I don't know why you had to put that video in the thread, but since you brought up, why doesn't show the differences in price?. That would be more informative to the youtube audience.
-
Currently yes, but hardware side is hardware side. On Debian Wheezy where all RAM and both cores are utilized test are more realistic.
And what do we get "right now" is what matters (as I remember this was the argument for going for the payment scheme for these 2D drivers, too. To get them out "right now" instead of waiting). I can run Linux on some 6 core i7 box. Who cares about linux...
PPC Macs have no battery or spare parts support at all
Lets see maybe some parts for my PowerBook G4 15"?
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple_laptop/batteries/PowerBook_G4_15_AL
http://www.powerbookmedic.com/Powerbook-G4-Aluminum-Service-Parts---15-Models----Replacement-Parts-For-Repair-p-1-c-408.html
http://www.apfelklinik.de/catalog/index.php/cPath/49_51
http://www.ifixit.com/Mac-Parts/PowerBook-G4-Aluminum-15%22
MOS should go X1000 and Trevor can donate a board.
No we won't go for such insane HW, sorry. Insanely expensive, not providing significantly better performance and a dead end product (PA6T is dead and X1000 is likely already in the process of being replaced with something else). Thanks, but no thanks, I can think dozens of better ways to spend our resources than wasting it on this dead corpse of a computer.
Apple repair net no longer deals with anything PPC for few years
There are gazillion of repair companies still offering repairs for PPC macs. There are some many of these machines still in circulation that the support is excellent considering the age of the HW.
Try getting support for X1000 after 7 years.
, so A-EON and AmiKit are better then 3rd party rip offs that charge $200 for laptop battery.
$99 for a new battery with 1 year guarantee doesn't quite equate to "$200 rip off" in my books.
On the other hand look at the prices of the phase5 hardware for instance. They go higher than original price these days. Custom HW just doesn't make any sense.
-o--o--o--o-
This is my last OT message regarding this particular topic in this thread. You can PM me vox if you wish to discuss this further.
-
PPC Macs have no battery or spare parts support at all, and are with with AGP, slow mem, EIDE ATA etc.
MOS should go X1000 and Trevor can donate a board.
Apple repair net no longer deals with anything PPC for few years, so A-EON and AmiKit are better
then 3rd party rip offs that charge $200 for laptop battery.
I recently had PPC G4 Laptop selling for 50 euros with no battery and I declined the offer when realized
how much 512MB additional RAM and battery costs + postage + import costs to non EU country
(plus 100 euros for MOS). Even I would love to have Mint 11, MacOS X and MOS on one machine,
I prefered high end workstation with OS 4.2 and Mint 11
newegg.com has new aftermarket powerbook batteries for $60 and add $30 for ram. so for the price of the x1000 you could have what 4 spares? That includes the price of Morphos on each spare.
-
And what do we get "right now" is what matters (as I remember this was the argument for going for the payment scheme for these 2D drivers, too. To get them out "right now" instead of waiting). I can run Linux on some 6 core i7 box. Who cares about linux...
This is my last OT message regarding this particular topic in this thread. You can PM me vox if you wish to discuss this further.
I do care about MINT and that is only way to get proper and comparable tests. This ones are abused for CUSA propaganda (see Italian blog on OS 4 counter information). MOS is superior to OS 4 as software, no doubt about it, as there is no doubt X1000 is way better system then any current MOS.
I do use Mint 13 on two dual core x64 and its way faster then any Windows and CommodoreOS, and enjoy every step of it. Linux is world No2 OS and Mint is number 3 or 4.
I dont say there are no spare parts (how long is questionable) but that there is no customer care (e.g. someone that will do all the work not only sell parts) and no matter how cheap its risky cause repairs are rip off. You mentioned Apple customer care, truth is there is none. I asked Apple Serbia, they can just sell me mouse for extreme price.
No we won't go for such insane HW, sorry. Insanely expensive, not providing significantly better performance and a dead end product (PA6T is dead and X1000 is likely already in the process of being replaced with something else). Thanks, but no thanks, I can think dozens of better ways to spend our resources than wasting it on this dead corpse of a computer.
as you like it, but OS with no new hardware will also be seen as dead.
Think about that. SInce no G5 MOS, this is G5 system.
Try getting support for X1000 after 7 years.
Its 2011 system, so will speak in 2018, no prob. PA Semi CPU is tricky
but cool and efficient CPUs dont die daily.
On the other hand look at the prices of the phase5 hardware for instance. They go higher than original price these days. Custom HW just doesn't make any sense.
X1000 is right priced when compared to SAM 460. And cost less then original G5 Mac when sold new. That is only fair comparison.
Ignore facts, but X1000 is great system, and its just hurting MOS that MOS doesnt support it. Rethink it, most of X1000 users could love to have faster AmigaOS derivative, knowing it was first PPC AmigaOS ever.
-o--o--o--o-
This is my last OT message regarding this particular topic in this thread. You can PM me vox if you wish to discuss this further
.
No need for PM to you, PM if you believe this is propaganda, and please do MINT tests. You can run Mint 11 on all PPC Macs and X1000
64 bit on X1000, 32 bit on MacsPPC, just to get the right tech use.
http://www.mintppc.org/content/user-experiences
http://www.mintppc.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=14&sid=f2735d11652263bdce6ff6341813fe07
-
newegg.com has new aftermarket powerbook batteries for $60 and add $30 for ram. so for the price of the x1000 you could have what 4 spares? That includes the price of Morphos on each spare.
True, but would take 25% of my X1000 saving budget. Its not worth of it. And I already have x64 laptop, I am looking for strong PPC desktop to run MInt 11 and AmigaOS 4.2 on it, and that is X1000.
X1000 should be compared to original PPC Mac G5 class hardware PRICE WHEN IT WAS FIRST SHOWN or SAM 460, that is only fair comparison, dont you think?
-
X1000 probably shouldn't be compared to anything made in 2012, if you buy on price/performance ratios you need to stick to X86 hardware. OS4 is a hobbyist's OS, you aren't selling to the general public, you are selling to a self selected audience that is wiling to pay any amount for new AmigaOS hardware.
-
Paying for enhanced drivers is nothing new, just alien to some in this day and age. Many years ago I payed for drivers to support highend sound cards for the version of windows I was running at the time. They served me well for years and I was glad to have them.
In reality few of your extended hardware drivers are free unless they come from open sources. The cost is built in to the price of your hardware. Sell 50,000 cards and spread that cost around so each card only has and unnoticeable tick added on. Sell only 500 and your going to feel it much more.... ya know... like when you buy a hobbiest market NG Amiga. Lighten up folks.
Plaz
-
And what do we get "right now" is what matters (as I remember this was the argument for going for the payment scheme for these 2D drivers, too. To get them out "right now" instead of waiting). I can run Linux on some 6 core i7 box. Who cares about linux...
Lets see maybe some parts for my PowerBook G4 15"?
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple_laptop/batteries/PowerBook_G4_15_AL
http://www.powerbookmedic.com/Powerbook-G4-Aluminum-Service-Parts---15-Models----Replacement-Parts-For-Repair-p-1-c-408.html
http://www.apfelklinik.de/catalog/index.php/cPath/49_51
http://www.ifixit.com/Mac-Parts/PowerBook-G4-Aluminum-15%22
No we won't go for such insane HW, sorry. Insanely expensive, not providing significantly better performance and a dead end product (PA6T is dead and X1000 is likely already in the process of being replaced with something else). Thanks, but no thanks, I can think dozens of better ways to spend our resources than wasting it on this dead corpse of a computer.
There are gazillion of repair companies still offering repairs for PPC macs. There are some many of these machines still in circulation that the support is excellent considering the age of the HW.
Try getting support for X1000 after 7 years.
$99 for a new battery with 1 year guarantee doesn't quite equate to "$200 rip off" in my books.
On the other hand look at the prices of the phase5 hardware for instance. They go higher than original price these days. Custom HW just doesn't make any sense.
-o--o--o--o-
This is my last OT message regarding this particular topic in this thread. You can PM me vox if you wish to discuss this further.
Piru that's shallow even for you. This thread is about delivering news about new drivers for AOS4.x so what gives you the right to say something so horrible in a thread that isn't even relevant to MOS :sealed:
-
vox, you're buying X1000?
-
MOS is superior to OS 4 as software, no doubt about it,
...and as a system as a whole (OS with HW).
there is no doubt X1000 is way better system then any current MOS.
Way better? No doubt? :lol:
It costs $3,000+ and we could have stopped there really, since there would be no need to go further in comparisons after that nuclear bomb argument. But since you seem to have some comprehension issues - it's 2005 performance, the 1/20 priced Mac's running MorphOS beats it in tests, the X1000 could probably go into Guinness Book of Records as the worst bang for the buck ratio hardware in 2012. The X1000 is killing OS4, and it's funny that you are so blind you can't even see it. I'm glad they're not letting MorphOS get dragged down as well. Going the mainstream way was the right way to go, we know that now.
I dont say there are no spare parts (how long is questionable) but that there is no customer care (e.g. someone that will do all the work not only sell parts) and no matter how cheap its risky cause repairs are rip off. You mentioned Apple customer care, truth is there is none. I asked Apple Serbia, they can just sell me mouse for extreme price.
Risk? Well, the parties behind X1000 (Eon and Amigakit) can't even afford to make the product available in a proper way, they have pre-orders, pre-payments, and delivery times up to a half year. These are the financial "muscles" issuing your "warranty", for a system using a limited amount of left-overs of a dead-end CPU. What if if for some reason the warranty issues starts stacking up? What if something similar to MAI/Articia S arises? There is no way they could replace/fix all boards like Genesi did with the April fix, they can't even afford to make their product available in the normal way! The only way for them would be to do like the previous AmigaOne company did, make a tantrum post at AW.net, take their money, and leave forever. Afraid of your Mac breaks down? Just get spare one, and you still have paid only 2/20th of the X1000 price. That's how "risky" Mac's are. There are hordes of them, they costs virtually nothing, they perform like an X1000, and if one breaks down, get another. It's mainstream HW.
as you like it, but OS with no new hardware will also be seen as dead.
Think about that.
PPC *is* dead!
SInce no G5 MOS, this is G5 system.
The only thing about X1000 that is "G5" is that it's 64-bit (something OS4 can't utilize anyway); otherwise it performs like G4 macs.
Ignore facts, but X1000 is great system, and its just hurting MOS that MOS doesnt support it. Rethink it, most of X1000 users could love to have faster AmigaOS derivative, knowing it was first PPC AmigaOS ever.
It's not better than what MorphOS already supports at a fraction of the price, it will never have more than a hundred users or two, and all these are OS4 fanatics (the only ones who would even *consider* paying $3,000+ for something like this) who *never* would be interested in MorphOS. Anyone really interested in MorphOS can *easily* get a MorphOS system, at *change money* in comparison. X1000 is utterly redundant to MorphOS. Get over it!
No need for PM to you, PM if you believe this is propaganda
His request to take the discussion to PM instead, was in order to keep this thread on topic, which you obviously refused. OK, have it your way...
-
Way better? No doubt? :lol:
G5 CPU, DDR2, SATA2,PCI-E 16x ... most of Macs until 2006 never made it to that, and Peg2 is far behind
It costs $3,000+ and we could have stopped there really, since there would be no need to go further in comparisons after that nuclear bomb argument. But since you seem to have some comprehension issues - it's 2005 performance, the 1/20 priced Mac's running MorphOS beats it in tests, the X1000 could probably go into Guinness Book of Records as the worst bang for the buck ratio hardware in 2012.
True, but when compared to original G5 Macs its cheap, and when compared to SAM 460 its reasonably priced.
The X1000 is killing OS4, and it's funny that you are so blind you can't even see it. I'm glad they're not letting MorphOS get dragged down as well. Going the mainstream way was the right way to go, we know that now.
How can high end machine kill the OS? We just need low end machine.
MOS is not mainstream too, and good news of RadeonHD driver bring more mainstream abilities to OS4.
What if something similar to MAI/Articia S arises? There is no way they could replace/fix all boards like Genesi did with the April fix, they can't even afford to make their product available in the normal way! The only way for them would be to do like the previous AmigaOne company did, make a tantrum post at AW.net, take their money, and leave forever. Afraid of your Mac breaks down?
Yes, afraid my Mac brokes down. You are making many wild guesses here, and why is preordering of expensive hardware in batches such extraordinary thing, when all AmigaOne and SAM hardware was produced in batches?
Just get spare one, and you still have paid only 2/20th of the X1000 price. That's how "risky" Mac's are. There are hordes of them, they costs virtually nothing, they perform like an X1000, and if one breaks down, get another. It's mainstream HW.
Do tests on Mint and I will believe it performs the same, if tests show so.
PPC *is* dead!
Obviously insnt yet, its just expensive.
The only thing about X1000 that is "G5" is that it's 64-bit (something OS4 can't utilize anyway); otherwise it performs like G4 macs.
Go and read PA Semi CPU characteristics. Yes, it also opens a way for 64 bit AmigaOS.
X1000 is utterly redundant to MorphOS. Get over it!
MOS decision is not to utilize it. I say its deeply wrong because for mainstream audience no new hardware means dead OS. Therefore, AmigaOS now has better promo oportunities even being less developed then MOS.
His request to take the discussion to PM instead, was in order to keep this thread on topic, which you obviously refused. OK, have it your way...
Well this is also part of X1000 saqa: MOS users trying to prove X1000 is crap and OS4 users trying to say its best Amiga so far.
-
"MOS decision is not to utilize it. I say its deeply wrong because for mainstream audience no new hardware means dead OS. Therefore, AmigaOS now has better promo oportunities even being less developed then MOS."
Really are you serious? Both platforms stick in the same "dead end", called "PPC". As long as there is no big shift neither AOS nor MorphOS will win substantially more users and developers. Commercial developers look on numbers and a userbase in the hundreds is not attracting anyone. And most former Amigans already use modern computers (mostly based on standard hardware) and will not even consider to buy new expensive hardware that is not offering any additional value.
-
@vox
There are obviously lots of things you simply don't understand (or don't *want* to understand), and you are also outright wrong in many of your statements above. But I won't be part of taking this thread further off topic. It doesn't matter anyway. You will see yourself, in due course. It's inevitable.
-
@vox
There are obviously lots of things you simply don't understand (or don't *want* to understand), and you are also outright wrong in many of your statements above. But I won't be part of taking this thread further off topic. It doesn't matter anyway. You will see yourself, in due course. It's inevitable.
LOL. How can it go any further off topic? :confused:
-
LOL. How can it go any further off topic? :confused:
Perhaps by making pointless meta-posts about how much off topic a thread is, like you just did?
:rolleyes:
Discussions always tends to wander off at some point, but in this case, first off topic post was post #23 (by Vox, completely unnecessary IMHO), and 12 more from that (until *your* post, and my reply to your post) isn't that bad really in a 42 posts thread.
-
Absolutely zero sense in MOS supporting any of the proprietary OS4 PPC hardware. There's just not enough of it around to warrant it, and they would be wasting their resources.
Love 'em or hate 'em, MOS guys got it right going after the extremely cheap and extremely available PPC Mac hardware. I only wish OS4 would go that way too - a lot more people would get a chance to use a real fun little OS at a reasonable price.
-
Love 'em or hate 'em, MOS guys got it right going after the extremely cheap and extremely available PPC Mac hardware. I only wish OS4 would go that way too - a lot more people would get a chance to use a real fun little OS at a reasonable price.
Actually, I think they both got it right.
I'd hate to be limited to Macs to run my NG AmigaOS, and Hyperion's decision not to use Macs (which would obliterate the hardware NG scene) means I can do that. MOS team's decision to use Macs means we get the best of both worlds.
I like to use new hardware built for the purpose, and I'm willing to pay for that - AOS gives me that opportunity. Other people don't care about the hardware and just want something to run their NG OS - MOS gives them that opportunity.
Hyperion and MOS have given us choice, and that can't be a bad thing. What is a bad thing is when one side start telling the other side what they should be doing, when it's an entirely subjective argument.
-
Here watch Bear eat a grub...
[youtube]Uj9CysSSsps[/youtube]
Now please stop going off topic! Sheessh...
-
Absolutely zero sense in MOS supporting any of the proprietary OS4 PPC hardware. There's just not enough of it around to warrant it, and they would be wasting their resources.
Love 'em or hate 'em, MOS guys got it right going after the extremely cheap and extremely available PPC Mac hardware. I only wish OS4 would go that way too - a lot more people would get a chance to use a real fun little OS at a reasonable price.
OS4 wont go the same way because its always tied to some uber expensive hardware, Hyperion/Ainc/whoever always want to maximise how much money then can fleece from the brand monkeys
-
ohh.. Wow. Did you see that? He ate a grub..... How's he go'nna boot his Linux now?
BTW: Embedding disabled by request go to youtube to watch....
PS: If you want drivers for a machine that is not supported by GFX Card manufacturers you have to pay for them, surely. or get someone to write them for free. Eg; Linux.
-
Mine too, just because X1000 is more expandable. 10 USB 2.0, much more expandable board once PCI slots get empty ...
Is USB 2.0 now fully working in OS4?
InI know this will be flamming to MOS users, but InI also congrat them on first laptop and new OS version with hope to have it for X1000.
All PPC Macs are cheap but all but G5 are outdated to X1000.
Based on what?
-
@gertsy
I think you miss the point here... it is not about getting sth. for free you have not paid for, it is about customers of expensive OS4 hardware had wrong expectations regarding later support (new drivers, full support of the hardware...)
-
Piru that's shallow even for you. This thread is about delivering news about new drivers for AOS4.x so what gives you the right to say something so horrible in a thread that isn't even relevant to MOS :sealed:
About the same right for you and others to slam C=USA in the same fashion.
Back on topic, why isn't Hyperion doing this? Isn't it their responsibility to provide driver support for all supported systems since they are the OS partner that making money on OS4 sales?
-
@lurch
The driver development took many hundreds of man hours. Programmers need to be paid and the cost needs to be accounted for.
So what is Hyperion doing?
@Dammy,
Isn't it their responsibility to provide driver support for all supported systems since they are the OS partner that making money on OS4 sales?
Exactly. Hyperion has told OS4 users for years that the reason OS4 can only be allowed to run on proprietary PPC hardware is because buyers have too much freedom in the x86 market - Hyperion cannot afford to support every configuration out there like Windows, OS X, and Linux do because they are too small. So they have to concentrate only a very limited set of known hardware. If this is true then why isn't Hyperion releasing these drivers?
Sounds like OS4 development has stalled. Developers are apparently not willing to spend years of their lives working for free on an OS with no clear direction with a shrinking fanbase. I believe I read elsewhere that A-EON wanted these drivers because the availability of the already antiquated and out of production Radeon cards could no longer be guaranteed, so rather than wait around for support in OS4.2 (which may or may not ever be released) they took matters into their own hands and here is a driver for newer and more available Radeon cards.
Personally, I think A-EON made the right move and it sounds like Hans has been paid for his effort and is happy, so good on them. Non-X1000 owners can either pay for the A-EON drivers, or continue waiting for Hyperion just like they have for years for fully functional USB2, SMP, and 3D drivers.
As a whole though, the situation demands golfclap.
-
His request to take the discussion to PM instead, was in order to keep this thread on topic, which you obviously refused. OK, have it your way...
If he was hoping to have a serious discussion through PM, then his comment comparing them to Amiga Inc. somewhat defeated that notion:
Also, does one get a coupon and a t-shirt?
@Dammy
Back on topic, why isn't Hyperion doing this?
and Itix's comments (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=697806&postcount=6)
You seem to be hung up on the "title" the person carries?
A contractor submitting work back to Hyperion for testing somehow has absolutely nothing to do with Hyperion "doing this"?
#6
-
Working on the OS. In the same way as MS writes an OS, not drivers. And Apple the same. And pretty much every other OS in history...
It's not the OS writer's responsibility to write drivers, it's the OS writer's responsibility to write an API.
-
@gertsy
I think you miss the point here... it is not about getting sth. for free you have not paid for, it is about customers of expensive OS4 hardware had wrong expectations regarding later support (new drivers, full support of the hardware...)
OS4 users are used to goal post moving by now.
-
Purchase driver updates, you've got to be kidding me. One shouldn't have to pay for drivers.
Insanity, of course there will be people doing it.
I'll be giving Amiga NG a wide berth.
Except that the owners of the x1000 had to pay for them to be produced and not Hyperion so they are within their rights to charge competitor's computer owners for their paid for development work over and above Hyperion's collection of software and drivers included in the OS4 purchase.
But yes this fractured situation is off putting, even before you include ugly old PCs being used for AROS and smelly yellowed overpriced Macs being used for MOS too under the umbrella of Amiga 'Next Gen' ;)
-
Working on the OS. In the same way as MS writes an OS, not drivers. And Apple the same. And pretty much every other OS in history...
It's not the OS writer's responsibility to write drivers, it's the OS writer's responsibility to write an API.
Microsoft do sometimes write driver updates though for things like a new OS release to try and con people into *upgrading* from XP but yes generally the actual drivers are written by the company in question or die hard fanatics of unsupported OS.
-
Sorry I do not believe that. People bought expensive OS4 hardware in the believing that they will get full hardware support (at least after some time). So it would be the duty of Acube and Hyperion to clarify the situation and what support customers will have. When Trevor pays for the development it is perfectly clear that he wants money for it. The situation at Aros (opensource) and MorphOS (mostly updates free pf charge) is different to AOS with its expensive hardware bundles. If you pay premium prices you expect premium services (and in this case it means at least full hardware support by the drivers and of course no extra fees).
-
But Windows is not bundled/connected with only one or two hardware companies offering highprice computers
-
But Windows is not bundled/connected with only one or two hardware companies offering highprice computers
I'm not sure I see the relevance. OK, so Windows has 1000s of companies, and AmigaOS has two, that doesn't shift responsibility. Hyperion are still a very small company who are busily working on the core OS. They don't have the time to do drivers as well, so someone else has to do it - and that someone is Trevor.
It is not Hyperion's responsibility to write drivers, only the API.
And incidentally, many Windows machines are a lot more expensive than the X1000. The X1000 is cheap compared to a lot of systems.
-
c
-
No overlay??? In 2012? Really?
IMHO overlay is a very basic feature much more important than 3d support.
-
Now it's just extremely confusing, and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretations.
I can see how that would cause you a lot of pain.
-
Please guys... Given that all moderators have finally been driven away from a.org by the insanity and questionable behaviour of the two site admins, we all need stick with a few basic rules to keep discussion civil.
There's really no valid reason to answer a posting from takemehomegrandma. Really.
-
I'm not sure I see the relevance. OK, so Windows has 1000s of companies, and AmigaOS has two, that doesn't shift responsibility. Hyperion are still a very small company who are busily working on the core OS. They don't have the time to do drivers as well, so someone else has to do it - and that someone is Trevor.
It is not Hyperion's responsibility to write drivers, only the API.
And incidentally, many Windows machines are a lot more expensive than the X1000. The X1000 is cheap compared to a lot of systems.
And if you investigate why a lot of those Windows (or did you mean x86) systems are more expensive there's generally a good reason for it, often related to performance.
Sure the X1000 is a niche system. So are these:
http://www.ruggednotebooks.com/
...the difference is that the ruggedized laptop niche exists because there is a reason for it. The X1000 has no reason to exist, it's simply a folly niche and therefore isn't worth the $3K unless you happen to be delusional. Fortunately this pay-for-drivers debacle seems to snapping a few people out of it.
-
after long discussions seems to be clear...
the drivers are 2D drivers for newer graphiccards and will be part of 4.2. and are available before by either being a-eon customer or pay a fee. It are 2D drivers and not 3D. It would all been a little more easy when it would be clear what drivers exactly are part of AOS 4.2. (and when it will be available). And of course can Trevor expect money if he finances it....
Regarding the issue... People that buy AOS do not buy a computer, a seperate OS and 3rd party drivers they want to buy a bundle of OS (with drivers) and hardware. It is similar with MorphOS (except that there are more updates free of charge). The only exception is Aros where the OS is not directly connected to certain hardware. That do I mean by Windows is not connected to a certain hardware. If you split it in hardware, OS and drivers what is the advantage of the bundling (except higher prices)?.
-
Please guys... Given that all moderators have finally been driven away from a.org by the insanity and questionable behaviour of the two site admins, we all need stick with a few basic rules to keep discussion civil.
There's really no valid reason to answer a posting from takemehomegrandma. Really.
WTF?!
Have you been drinking heavily before posting? Or are you hearing voices in your head? You clearly see things that aren't there, yet you come bursting out like this? I mean WTF, get a hold of yourself, or at least please sober up before going near the keyboard again!
:rolleyes:
-
after long discussions seems to be clear...
the drivers are 2D drivers for newer graphiccards and will be part of 4.2. and are available before by either being a-eon customer or pay a fee. It are 2D drivers and not 3D. It would all been a little more easy when it would be clear what drivers exactly are part of AOS 4.2. (and when it will be available).
If all drivers for all these cards will be part of OS4.2, then why didn't they simply say so from the beginning? Then those Sam users and everyone else causing those 9+ pages of comments in the AW.net news item, as well as that 4 page "pay for drivers" thread, would have been calmed, and the hole issue been disarmed? Are they are making up things as they go?
:confused:
-
from my post at aw.net
'this is great news as it shows development is pushing forward. Surely many of us here have willingly donated to numerous bounties in the past and will continue to do so in the future so consider this small fee a donation to Hans for all his hard work
A good friend of mine worked for ATI here in my home town for many years and all he did was work on the install scripts for various video card drivers and he was getting paid very well indeed so we must put things into perspective here in Amiga land'
@ the usual suspects
not bad, 22 posts before the usual OS4 thread trashing is a big improvement
the king of the usual suspects wrote:
'No we won't go for such insane HW, sorry. Insanely expensive, not providing significantly better performance and a dead end product (PA6T is dead and X1000 is likely already in the process of being replaced with something else). Thanks, but no thanks, I can think dozens of better ways to spend our resources than wasting it on this dead corpse of a computer.'
tisk tisk..not like Piru to blow his load so early in a new OS4 related thread:roflmao:yes, great idea, please don't waste any more of your time on the X1000 or on every single OS4.x related threads and spend all of your time only focusing on preserving old Apple products
-
I think there is a difference between what AOS users buy and what they really buy. They think they get all drivers updated till the hardware is completely supported but that is obviously not truth. Perhaps they have read the advertisements not carefully enough, perhaps they have imagined too much and thought when buying expensive hardware full support will follow. In future they should look on the promises more carefully and ask more questions...
-
It is not Hyperion's responsibility to write drivers, only the API.
I agree. A-eon and Acube are 3rd party vendors and responsible to provide drivers for their hardware. I dont see any reason why Hyperion should support any 3rd party hardware without getting paid. For some reason ACube customers think they should have A-eon's drivers for free.
-
+1
Acube is responsible and must supply drivers, not a-eon
-
Man, how much more can they rape the shrinking user base? So after spending 10 times what os4 hardware is worth, now we're going to make you purchase drivers separately?
The argument that hyperion dosn't have to provide drivers is ridiculous. THEY are the ones who want locked down hardware/software system. If they want a closed model, THEY should be providing drivers. What are they going to do next sell you an OS without network drivers and make you purchase network card drivers separately?
And yes, people expect drivers for free, some graphics card drivers are the least you should get for spending so much money on antiquated slow as balls by todays computing standards hw.
Some of you people really just drink the cool aid. So tied up on a name that you'll buy anything, even apparently paying seperately for drivers.
I've said it before, this whole hyperion os4 plan is quite simply retarded. I know many huge amiga fans who just can not justify paying so much for such ****ty hardware and even the os itself is a piece of ****. If huge amiga fans
can't even justify buying it, what hope do they have to epand the user base? ZERO hope. They just want to rape and rob whoever is left thats stupid enough to buy their garbage hw and sloppy os.
Oh, and when is USB going to work in OS4? Are they going to farm that out to a third party developer and make you pay for usb drivers seperately too?
Hey, why not ship computers without any keyboard driver. Once the computer arrives you call them with a credit card and pay for a keyboard driver so you can type on your new os4 computer.
Ridiculous. Just ridiculous.
-
I dont see any reason why Hyperion should support any 3rd party hardware without getting paid.
However, they *are* getting paid, aren't they?
AFAIK, Hyperion set their price tags themselves, it's from them the whole OS4 business stems, it's them who grants "AmigaOne" systems rights, and "AmigaOS" systems rights, entirely according to their rules and fees, absolute power.
"3rd party hardware"? What?! It's the only two "available" OS4 computers, in direct license/partnership with Hyperion, it's simply what OS4 runs on, it is the *official OS4 platform*! It's not something alien, something unrelated, some rudimentary unofficial third party gizmo that lacks relevance; we are talking graphics for the official "AmigaOne" OS4 computers! And AFAIK, Hyperion have at least claimed to pay for development before, so what changed? Hyperion is still here? Or is it Dickinson & Leaman now?
I also think people who speaks about Microsoft, ATI and nVidia etc in this OS4 contexts is slightly confused. There are no similarities, not anywhere.
-
@haywirepc
If a customer buys an AmigaOne X1000 they get the new Radeon Graphics Drivers Free of Charge. They do not pay any fee.
-
Hyperion is still here? Or is it Dickinson & Leaman now?
Hyperion is still here and will be releasing a netbook that runs OS4 any day now. No word yet on whether that netbook includes drivers but none have been explicitly promised, so there.
-
Hyperion is still here and will be releasing a netbook that runs OS4 any day now. No word yet on whether that netbook includes drivers but none have been explicitly promised, so there.
nice to know OS4 will run any day now on the netbook, so when its found it doesnt everyone else will know youre to blame for giving wrong information
-
Oh boy so instead of buying a 200$ netbook running windows or linux you'll get to buy a netbook running os4 for probably 5 times that price.
At least if history is any predictor of price....
Does anyone know what the projected price will be for this?
-
Hyperion is still here and will be releasing a netbook that runs OS4 any day now. No word yet on whether that netbook includes drivers but none have been explicitly promised, so there.
Link?
The only quote I have is from Amiwest 2011:
"Hyperion and partners are going to introduce a netbook in the first half of next year"
How do you get from "introduced" to "released"?
Link?
#6
-
WTF?!
Have you been drinking heavily before posting? Or are you hearing voices in your head? You clearly see things that aren't there, yet you come bursting out like this? I mean WTF, get a hold of yourself, or at least please sober up before going near the keyboard again!
:rolleyes:
This response is no more proportionate.
-
Right you 'orrible lot. Calm down and carry on.
Don't make me have to do moderation work.
I've got drivers to work on...
-
However, they *are* getting paid, aren't they?
By ACube and A-eon? I doubt it. If they are, they obviously are not paying enough. I am looking this from the MorphOS developer point of view: if ACube wanted MorphOS on their hardware they pay all porting costs + premium or they develop all drivers themselves and pay less to the MorphOS team to get required support.
AFAIK, Hyperion set their price tags themselves, it's from them the whole OS4 business stems, it's them who grants "AmigaOne" systems rights, and "AmigaOS" systems rights, entirely according to their rules and fees, absolute power.
Hyperion could have paid the driver development and bundle drivers with the OS and sell OS4 at higher price. Or sell it without it and sell it at current price.
In my opinion ACube were fools to not deliver their Sams with supported Radeon cards like Radeon 9250. There is a PCI slot so why not use it. They are fast enough to do what ever you have to do with it.
"3rd party hardware"? What?! It's the only two "available" OS4 computers, in direct license/partnership with Hyperion, it's simply what OS4 runs on, it is the *official OS4 platform*! It's not something alien, something unrelated, some rudimentary unofficial third party gizmo that lacks relevance; we are talking graphics for the official "AmigaOne" OS4 computers! And AFAIK, Hyperion have at least claimed to pay for development before, so what changed? Hyperion is still here? Or is it Dickinson & Leaman now?
To be honest, it is none of my business.
I also think people who speaks about Microsoft, ATI and nVidia etc in this OS4 contexts is slightly confused. There are no similarities, not anywhere.
I agree.
-
My 2 cents on this whole issue.
1) Any OS vendor is not really responsible for driver development; their responsibility is to provide the API/documentation to allow others, usually the hardware vendor, to do so. With mainstream OSes, there's usually enough development resource to create baseline drivers for a wide selection of hardware, but last time AmigaOS was a mainstream OS was... ?
2) Given that the hardware in question is made by AMD, there's no chance they're going to create a driver. So, that leaves the task to whoever has the time and ability. I don't see that it's unreasonable for Hans to be remunerated for the effort he's put into it.
3) A-Eon are providing the (assembled) hardware and have decided to fund development of drivers for it. They didn't have to make it available to anybody else at all.
-
Chins Up Amigans!
-
I dont remember so much fuss about paying for api/drivers in the past. Cybergrpahix, piccasso etc
-
@ Karlos & JJ
amen brothers:cool::hammer:
-
Personally, I want to see how this system will compare to a Powerbook running MorphOS 3.0.
Will it have wireless drivers, will the video driver support 2D/3D acceleration, how fast is the processor, etc.
-
I dont remember so much fuss about paying for api/drivers in the past. Cybergrpahix, piccasso etc
I remember buying my BVisionPPC shortly after they first appeared. It cost me something like 200 UKP at the time (I can't recall the exact price somewhere around that price). It came with fairly basic drivers for CGX3 only, which didn't even support 24-bit pens in 8-bit mode and was a bit temperamental too.
To get proper, then up-to-date driver support for the hardware, I paid an extra 30 odd quid or so to buy CGX v4, and I certainly didn't regret that purchase.
-
Personally, I want to see how this system will compare to a Powerbook running MorphOS 3.0.
Will it have wireless drivers, will the video driver support 2D/3D acceleration, how fast is the processor, etc.
If you talk about netbook it will never reach PowerBook performance, its better compared to Efika. It would be good to have all mentioned drivers before release, and my wild guess is these are the main reasons why it is not shown (at best it would be like first public demo of OS 4 on X1000)
With much respect to MOS development and choice of hardware, why is it so hard to see X1000 superiority purely from hardware side? There is no such PPC system avail at all. And it will take much time for OS4 to catch up, from real USB 2.0 to dual core and 64-bit but hardware makes it possible.
Only damn thing is the price tag, which will make me save for quite long time to even think of that adventure.
When I say used Macs make OS look dead I mean there can be no promo of new system that will appear as news, and no such bundled promo in today capitalism driven system means no existance at all. Off course those who really want it will find the way to MorphOS, but remember how better MOS was doing when it had Genesi and Pegasos and Efika boards.
-
Oh boy so instead of buying a 200$ netbook running windows or linux you'll get to buy a netbook running os4 for probably 5 times that price.
I just paid $2000 for a PC laptop a couple days ago. And that's AFTER a student discount of about $500.
I thought we were directed to expect the netbook to be about $500... I'd happily pay that. but what's any of this have to do with Hans's drivers?
-
I dont remember so much fuss about paying for api/drivers in the past. Cybergrpahix, piccasso etc
+1
I remember buying Cybergraphix to do all kinds of cool stuff and it was worth every penny!
-
Looks like this Storm in a teacup is over. :)
http://www.acube-systems.biz/index.php?page=news
-
When I say used Macs make OS look dead I mean there can be no promo of new system that will appear as news, and no such bundled promo in today capitalism driven system means no existance at all. Off course those who really want it will find the way to MorphOS, but remember how better MOS was doing when it had Genesi and Pegasos and Efika boards.
there is something in that statement alas. this or new advertisement strategies have to be invented.
-
@vox
This is the second (or third?) confused post about MorphOS from you in this thread!
but remember how better MOS was doing when it had Genesi and Pegasos and Efika boards.
Hmm, yeah right...
(Click image)
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8011/7441232252_e41fc420e2.jpg) (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8011/7441232252_e41fc420e2_b.jpg)
So after a quick reality check: Better HW availability has been positive for MorphOS, lower price has been positive for MorphOS, better bang for the buck has been positive for MorphOS, in short: the Mainstream path was positive for MorphOS, not negative! It would have been positive for OS4 as well, but OS4 has chosen to go 180 degrees in the opposite direction: poor HW availability, ridiculous prices, and terrible bang for the buck ratio. MorphOS HW beats A1X1K in performance (or is on par), MorphOS has the ultra small yet powerful Mac Mini, the practically for free e-mac, the expandable and cheap PowerMac, and now the most powerful PPC laptops ever made. MorphOS has truly made the most out of the dying PPC platform. And throughout the last 3 years MorphOS has had almost 1 new registration *every day* on average, which simply *wouldn't have been possible* on Pegasos and Efika. So I'm honestly puzzled why you are so convinced that MorphOS is "suffering" from the Mac route, while OS4 would be "prospering" on Sam and A1X1K?
-
@takemehomegrandma
You really have too much time on your hands.
No, really! ;)
-
Looks like this Storm in a teacup is over. :)
http://www.acube-systems.biz/index.php?page=news
Indeed! :)
-
Looks like this Storm in a teacup is over. :)
http://www.acube-systems.biz/index.php?page=news
The decent thing to do! :)
This should have been done from the beginning, and Piru was right (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=697834&postcount=15) (again), this whole matter could have been handled better to avoid the unnecessary confusion.
-
I guess one has to blame CBM for creating a culture of users expect the Amiga to follow the fundamentals of the Commodore 64/128 - one version of Basic (OS) throughout the products life.
This was clearly demonstrated by the amount of users who used to complain to Amiga magazines for not being able to use coverdisks designed exclusively for KS 2.x + or programs using more than 1MB of RAM.
If you want to use Amiga 4.x software/hardware it is going to cost. Programming takes time and programmers deserve to be compensated for their effort. The alternative is to stick to your stock Amiga 500 running KS 1.2/1.3.
-
I think it's funny when people complain no one is investing in the Amiga community but when someone does they complain. Damned if you do and damned if you don't :whack:
-
Class act ACube:drink::knuddel:
-
Link?
The only quote I have is from Amiwest 2011:
How do you get from "introduced" to "released"?
Link?
#6
Oh did I forget this:
(http://coursesite.uhcl.edu/HSH/Whitec/ximages/texts/wordmessages/SarcasmService.jpg)
-
No overlay??? In 2012? Really?
IMHO overlay is a very basic feature much more important than 3d support.
It's 2012. Overlays are pretty much obsolete - the chances are the feature you are thinking of is emulated on your graphics card using 3D support anyway. Let's see why:
Overlay: separate display region with independent colour format and resolution from main framebuffer, intended for the display of video streams.
+ No software YUV <-> RGB conversion necessary
+ No software scaling/filtering necessary
These were definite boons back in the 90's, but there are drawbacks too
- Generally only one overlay available on supported hardware
- Overlay typically occludes framebuffer and can't be part of any graphics pipeline or windowing architecture. It's basically "on top" or not at all.
- Limited video processing available, usually only colour properties can be adjusted.
The alternative to this is video texturing, where a YUV video stream is applied as a texture map to a rectangle primitive.
+ No software YUV <-> RGB conversion necessary
+ No software scaling/filtering necessary
So far just as good as an overlay, but there's more:
+ As many concurrent video streams as bus bandwidth / texel fillrate allows
+ Render target is a bitmap, can be used as part of any graphics pipeline or windowing architecture. Does not float above framebuffer and is compatible with both traditional and compositing windowing methods.
+ 2D/3D transformations possible
+ Shader postprocessing possible (on hardware that has them, which in 2012 is everything), virtually limitless potential for colour correction, sharpening, deblocking, deinterlacing, wacky artistic effects etc.
On my linux box, my nvidia card can handle many video streams at once, rendering them via this method and I can still do all the silly compiz zoom, 3D rotating box and other nonsense with no loss in speed while the video continues to render smoothly in each window.
It's not even a new idea. The Permedia2 doesn't have a dedicated overlay, instead supporting YUV textures. Due to the lack of fill rate (and on the Amiga, slow buses), you are pretty much restricted to one or two streams.
I really don't think you are missing much if you don't have a genuine overlay on anything like the HD4xxx series or above but you can leverage the 3D hardware instead.
-
Hyperion is still here and will be releasing a netbook that runs OS4 any day now. No word yet on whether that netbook includes drivers but none have been explicitly promised, so there.
What flavour Kool Aid are you drinking man?
Just do it!
-
t's not even a new idea. The Permedia2 doesn't have a dedicated overlay, instead supporting YUV textures. Due to the lack of fill rate (and on the Amiga, slow buses), you are pretty much restricted to one or two streams.
I really don't think you are missing much if you don't have a genuine overlay on anything like the HD4xxx series or above but you can leverage the 3D hardware instead.
Yeah, that is how overlay is supported on BVision but it still doesnt give overlay support to current Radeon HD drivers. My car could be a UFO if it had wings.
-
Yeah, that is how overlay is supported on BVision but it still doesnt give overlay support to current Radeon HD drivers. My car could be a UFO if it had wings.
Think you are missing the point there
-
@Karlos
Sure, newer graphic cards have other (and more modern) ways to implement some "overlay" feature, and who cares how it's done, actually (more than a decade ago, cgxvideo supported "overlay" on cvppc/bvppc by using the permedia2 3d functions too). The point is that current applications use p96pip/cgxvideo API and without it, video players are really SLOW, since they have to fallback on RGB conversions and WPA blitting (which is apparently slowish on OS4).
The lack of overlay and fast PCIe/AGP transfers is the reason why AROS MPlayer is much slower than MorphOS MPlayer on a similar setup. Actually, on a recent machine, AROS spends much less time to decode a full 1080p frame than to blit it... That's really funny if you ask me ! On MorphOS, displaying a decoded 1080p frame takes something like 15ms on a mac mini, while on AROS, it used to take more 50ms (on much more powerful hardware).
Anyway, the problem with RadeonHD is it gets quite harder to have this "overlay" functionality since the whole 3d machinery has to be implemented first. ;)
-
I really don't think you are missing much if you don't have a genuine overlay on anything like the HD4xxx series or above but you can leverage the 3D hardware instead.
I'm with you Karlos, we've got our eyes on the horizon :banana:
-
Given that Hans was able to use the basic compositing system in 4.1 to implement a 3D textured demo complete with pixel shading effects for fun, are we really suggesting he won't be able to implement some form of video surface implementation?
If it's going to be video texture based (which is clearly the better solution unless you prefer the older way of doing it), then adequate 3D support has to come first.
Anyway, the problem with RadeonHD is it gets quite harder to have this "overlay" functionality since the whole 3d machinery has to be implemented first.
That's precisely my point. Please the post I was responding to.
-
@Karlos
The lack of overlay and fast PCIe/AGP transfers is the reason why AROS MPlayer is much slower than MorphOS MPlayer on a similar setup. Actually, on a recent machine, AROS spends much less time to decode a full 1080p frame than to blit it... That's really funny if you ask me ! On MorphOS, displaying a decoded 1080p frame takes something like 15ms on a mac mini, while on AROS, it used to take more 50ms (on much more powerful hardware).
+1 Aros really needs to fix this. :)
-
From reading these forums, one can conclude that all that matters in "amigaland" is video playback. Yawn already!
-
So after a quick reality check: Better HW availability has been positive for MorphOS, lower price has been positive for MorphOS, better bang for the buck has been positive for MorphOS, in short: the Mainstream path was positive for MorphOS, not negative!
from your graph, i dont think the growth is all that impressive. there were plenty of people at the time when mos became available for mac minis etc, who had old machines lying around but the price of morphos was too high for them (not to mention people questioning the licence etc). the graph could have looked significantly better imho. I think morphos could have a userbase of many times the current amount with a different model.
-
>Given that Hans .. use ... compositing system in 4.1 to implement a 3D textured demo ... he won't be able to implement some form of video surface implementation?
Using compositing for scaling/filtering/rotating a square texture (a bitmap) is easy...
The only problem is that compositing dont support YUV directly... So it will remain the YUV to RGB conversion
Alain Thellier
-
Given that Hans was able to use the basic compositing system in 4.1 to implement a 3D textured demo complete with pixel shading effects for fun, are we really suggesting he won't be able to implement some form of video surface implementation?
I doubt he implements it soon so OS4.x users with PCIe cards will suffer poor playback for a long time.
If it's going to be video texture based (which is clearly the better solution unless you prefer the older way of doing it), then adequate 3D support has to come first.
By the time that happens perhaps frogs grow hair.
Anyway, it's interesting the reaction of some users "overlay sucks, it's better to implement it as a 3D texture even thought no one knows when/if that will happen and that will curse us to have poor video playback for years"
-
you could power a raspberry pi from usb on your x1000s etc and use that for video playback ;-)
-
>Given that Hans .. use ... compositing system in 4.1 to implement a 3D textured demo ... he won't be able to implement some form of video surface implementation?
Using compositing for scaling/filtering/rotating a square texture (a bitmap) is easy...
You missed the part about using shaders in said demos ;)
The only problem is that compositing dont support YUV directly... So it will remain the YUV to RGB conversion
Alain Thellier
I wasn't implying such a feature would be made available via compositing, I was implying that he isn't lacking the necessary expertise to implement a feature such as video surfaces.
-
Looks like this Storm in a teacup is over. :)
http://www.acube-systems.biz/index.php?page=news
You're that shortsighted or just joking?
I think ACube did the right thing, but the big picture is they should not have had to do it at all. ACube could have told their customers "wait for OS4.2" That they did NOT do this shows that ACube has no faith in Hyperion getting 4.2 out the door with functional drivers.
Heck, the whole reason A-Eon paid for these drivers is because they didn't want to wait for Hyperion. The fact that these drivers exist is a no-confidence vote against Hyperion.
I think A-Eon had the resources and did what they thought they needed to do. ACube had a choice and made the right one. But these decisions had to be made because Hyperion doesn't appear to be capable of doing these things, at least not in a timely manner. Think about it - what's the last thing you heard from Hyperion? An OS4 compatible netbook announcement made at AmiWest, "coincidentally" when the X1000 preorder was announced. This "storm in a teacup" is looking more and more like just a rain band from a hurricane.
-
> I was implying that he isn't lacking the necessary expertise to implement a feature such as video surfaces.
Perhaps yes , perhaps no : only Hans knows
Perhaps compiling such an YUV to RGB altivec code may help us ??!??
http://svn.annodex.net/liboggplay/trunk/src/liboggplay/oggplay_yuv2rgb_altivec.c
then display/resize the RGB buffer (=bitmap) with Compositing
Alain Thellier
-
Think you are missing the point there
No, it is just silly. Emulating overlay using OpenGL is old story.
-
Acube did the right thing.
While it may be entirely confusing to even imagine, I've been contemplating picking up a SAM 460 board to replace my SAM 440ep. Once the announcement came out that I'd have to pay for video drivers for the more modern cards, it soured my attitude to the point I crossed the 460 purchase off the list when this news first came out. Merely a matter of principle. My 440 works fine, but obviously is the low end of the SAM mobos. I'd enjoy the 460, but by no means do I *need* the horsepower it offers
Yeah, I realize it's on'y a $30 payment, but it wasn't about the money. Just as I would not buy a commodity PC/mobo/gfx card and readily pay a gfx card manfacturer for gfx drivers, I wasn't willing to do so with the SAM. The things are expensive enough without having to shell out more money. After ACube's latest announcement, I'll likely pick a 460 up in the upcoming month or so.
-
Ok, so my question is as follows...
I have a sam460 lite system bought from amigakit. I guess that means I don't get the drivers free.
However the card I got with the machine is the 4650. Before I pay for driver support I would like to know if this card will be supported to the final version and if I will get 3d support for it without having to shell out even more money for os4.2?
-
Acube did the right thing.
While it may be entirely confusing to even imagine, I've been contemplating picking up a SAM 460 board to replace my SAM 440ep. Once the announcement came out that I'd have to pay for video drivers for the more modern cards, it soured my attitude to the point I crossed the 460 purchase off the list when this news first came out. Merely a matter of principle. My 440 works fine, but obviously is the low end of the SAM mobos. I'd enjoy the 460, but by no means do I *need* the horsepower it offers
Yeah, I realize it's on'y a $30 payment, but it wasn't about the money. Just as I would not buy a commodity PC/mobo/gfx card and readily pay a gfx card manfacturer for gfx drivers, I wasn't willing to do so with the SAM. The things are expensive enough without having to shell out more money. After ACube's latest announcement, I'll likely pick a 460 up in the upcoming month or so.
you can i are on the same page. i've also wanted to replace my SAM440 with a SAM460, but the poor software support has kept me from 'pulling the trigger' on the purchase. no 3D support, no DMA support for the on-board SATA interface, no final driver for on-board audio, no video acceleration, etc. all of which i have on my SAM440.
so i think the peg2 or even an A1-XE makes more sense, at least until OS4.2 ships -- and i certainly don't expect that anytime soon. :nervous:
-- eliyahu
-
Ok, so my question is as follows...
I have a sam460 lite system bought from amigakit. I guess that means I don't get the drivers free.
However the card I got with the machine is the 4650. Before I pay for driver support I would like to know if this card will be supported to the final version and if I will get 3d support for it without having to shell out even more money for os4.2?
you only need to buy this 'new' driver if you want to use a 5xxx or 6xxx card, or 7xxx in the future. you get the same feature for those newer cards as you do for your 4650.
3d support either way will only come with os4.2
no point buying it if you ask me
-
no point buying it if you ask me
+1.
Translation to overlay explanations by OS4-Team: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes
-
Looking forward to see your blue Prius flying. :banana:
Yeah, that is how overlay is supported on BVision but it still doesnt give overlay support to current Radeon HD drivers. My car could be a UFO if it had wings.
-
+1.
Translation to overlay explanations by OS4-Team: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes
no point 'for him' not in general
you will have to point out where this so called os4 team have said overlay wouldn't be nice to have, hans is only one person and has priorities and overlay is way down on that list
-
No, it is just silly. Emulating overlay using OpenGL is old story.
Who said anything about emulating overlay with OpenGL? It's not as if we're talking about decoding each frame as an RGB texture and passing that to OpenGL. What I am describing is video texturing, in which the GPU directly applies YUV formatted data as a texture to a primitive, doing the YUV -> RGB conversion directly. This is a hardware level feature that even the old Permedia2 supported. Many OpenGL implementations (not necessarily on Amiga) expose this functionality and, of course, are able to emulate it for those that don't.
-
Who said anything about emulating overlay with OpenGL? It's not as if we're talking about decoding each frame as an RGB texture and passing that to OpenGL. What I am describing is video texturing, in which the GPU directly applies YUV formatted data as a texture to a primitive, doing the YUV -> RGB conversion directly. This is a hardware level feature that even the old Permedia2 supported.
I was thinking that you can already achieve it on Amiga by using current OpenGL functionality. Of course it doesnt have to be exposed via OpenGL (only). BVision and CVision boards expose overlay support using standard overlay API on Amiga and users dont have to know how it works under the hood.
Btw
- Overlay typically occludes framebuffer and can't be part of any graphics pipeline or windowing architecture. It's basically "on top" or not at all.
Not really true, at least on Amiga. Overlay works with windowing and compositing just fine.
Heh, I just remember that good old never released Dragon2 even implemented overlay emulation so you could expose two mplayers with overlay simultaneously... it was only software based and quite slow but it worked :)
-
I was thinking that you can already achieve it on Amiga by using current OpenGL functionality.
Right, that would indeed be possible. I'm not sure it would be particularly fast on current MiniGL implementations though. First of all, you'd probably have to do the YUV -> RGB conversion yourself. Then, the texture you'd generate would be converted to some underlying Warp3D format, which amongst other things, will impose a 2^n width and height restraint on it, which implies further software conversion (width modulus expansion for example). The hardware 3D driver may then expect the resulting texture to be formatted in some special manner intended for faster texturing (subpatching, for example), where what you really want in this case is to render the texture with the least amount of fuss, then replace it with the next frame ad infinitum. With the sole exception of output scaling, I can actually see it being a slower than a software only implementation at this stage.
Of course it doesnt have to be exposed via OpenGL (only). BVision and CVision boards expose overlay support using standard overlay API on Amiga and users dont have to know how it works under the hood.
Precisely. As I recall, it was cgxvirgin.library that supported it, if you enabled a LAYER=DESTRUCTIVE tooltype in the monitor driver or something (I don't recall exactly). You could tell it was a textured triangle fan when you made the window large enough, occasionally you could see the leading diagonal when the video wasn't properly synced.
Not really true, at least on Amiga. Overlay works with windowing and compositing just fine.
Then you aren't using an overlay (at least not a traditional one). A hardware overlay, by definition, is not part of the current frame buffer any more than a hardware mouse cursor is. Modern overlays, however, tend to be implemented in a manner not unlike the Permedia2 did and as such can integrate nicely into a proper windowing environment.
Heh, I just remember that good old never released Dragon2 even implemented overlay emulation so you could expose two mplayers with overlay simultaneously... it was only software based and quite slow but it worked :)
Sounds fun :)
-
This is a propriatory OS running on propriatory hardware. So why are people comparing it to the Windows world with "free" drivers? A more appropriate comparison is Apple. AFAIK Apple doesn't charge extra for video drivers, but you do pay more compared to a comparably-specced Windows PC. Also AmigaOS doesn't have the economy of scale that Apple does.
Not sure why people insist on telling others how they should spend their money either.
-
Precisely. As I recall, it was cgxvirgin.library that supported it, if you enabled a LAYER=DESTRUCTIVE tooltype in the monitor driver or something (I don't recall exactly). You could tell it was a textured triangle fan when you made the window large enough, occasionally you could see the leading diagonal when the video wasn't properly synced.
Yup, VLAYER=DESTRUCTIVE.
Then you aren't using an overlay (at least not a traditional one). A hardware overlay, by definition, is not part of the current frame buffer any more than a hardware mouse cursor is. Modern overlays, however, tend to be implemented in a manner not unlike the Permedia2 did and as such can integrate nicely into a proper windowing environment.
Nope. Technically you are correct but it can also work with windowing and compositing. Remember that weird (pink?) colour you can see in screenshots from programs using an overlay? It is for colour keying that screenshot application found from a window bitmap where a hardware overlay was supposed to be. When colour keying is enabled the overlay data is only visible where this colour is found. If an overlay window is behind another window its colour key backfill is also destroyed and no overlay data is displayed there.
Similarly if you render text to an overlay backfill and have subtitles in a video application, for example.
-
Yup, VLAYER=DESTRUCTIVE.
Yep, that one, even.
Nope. Technically you are correct but it can also work with windowing and compositing. Remember that weird (pink?) colour you can see in screenshots from programs using an overlay? It is for colour keying that screenshot application found from a window bitmap where a hardware overlay was supposed to be. When colour keying is enabled the overlay data is only visible where this colour is found. If an overlay window is behind another window its colour key backfill is also destroyed and no overlay data is displayed there.
This is a slightly different use case again - not all hardware from the era where overlay was a common feature supported chromakeyed overlays (technically, it's an "underlay", the overlay pixels are rendered only where the chroma key colour is found in the framebuffer). A lot of them simply provided a rectangular overlay that was rendered directly and would appear op top and that was it. An application would position the overlay to fit within it's window border, but if you then dragged another window in front, the overlay would occlude the overlapping portion. I have several old PC graphics cards that did that :)
-
@Karlos
It's 2012. Overlays are pretty much obsolete.
...
...
...
There is talk of overlay in SO many threads, there is a current discussion on Amigaworld.net that details some valid points.
I'll paste the original posts (credit Amigaworld.net):
Crumb said:
The current problem is that current software uses overlay and current drivers for PCIe cards don´t provide it and probably won´t for a very long time. With advanced GPUs it´s even possible to develop a video player that decodes the stream without relying much in the cpu but doesn´t mean you have that kind of player and that kind of drivers.
If Hans has need years to finish basic drivers with only 2D acceleration you can guess he´ll need many more years to implement proper 3D acceleration.
The problem is not so much HOW overlay is implemented but if it IS implemented. If there´s no form of overlay API compatibility that will only lead to poor performance on video playback.
Of course having both overlay and overlay emulation using a texture is better but saying "bah! overlay is obsolete" makes me wonder why you are still using obsolete OSes that can´t even play videos properly (and that only use one core and that lack memory protection).
PS: Just in case you have not understood it: rejecting overlay means you won´t be able to watch videos properly in your Sam460 for many years because 3d support won´t come anytime soon, and after 3d support they would have to emulate overlay and even with that emulation it would be slower than real overlay.
Let´s see current situation:
-no 3d drivers for PCIe cards, years spent on developing simple 2d drivers
-no overlay emulation using textures
-no real overlay
-no compromise nor timeframe for 3d drivers
-no compromise nor timeframe for overlay emulation using 3d drivers
so It´s very funny you talk about playing DVDs and watching flash videos when current systems are totally unable to do that. I wonder if users really use the OS or just spend the day dreaming about new features.
Putting in man-hours to support overlay now just doesn't make sense.
Putting man hours developing 2d drivers for cards that won´t allow you to run 3d apps nor videos makes me wonder why would anyone want to buy something different than R9200/256MB.
Following the logic of those praising Hans words I wonder why you don´t shout "using cpu to play videos is obsolete, we´ll use GPU to play videos" and wait for years until some linux player is released.
Tomas said:
I am no developer or expert, but no overlay will afaik result in no vsync in videos as well. So I would say that it is pretty important if that is the case.
And from experience no overlay also severely reduces video quality due to not having proper scaling.
Nikosidis said:
Gallium 3D is far behind in both support and performance. I read somewhere that they are working on hardware video accelleration, but as far as I know it is not working as it supposed to yet.
Crumb said:
Overlay is obsolete
really? that´s why all OS4 players use OpenGL to output graphics? oh wait! all OS4 players (DvPlayer, MPlayer, AMP2...) use Overlay in order to play videos with decent performance. Then I´m sorry for poor OS4 PCie users who believed all the propaganda that have to use drivers so primitive that don´t even provide a way to play videos smoothly. If overlay is obsolete then all AmigaOS4 players are too. BTW, using a 3d texture is also obsolete since the video stream can be decoded by the gpu instead of the cpu. AmigaOS4 PCIe drivers don´t support any video acceleration, that´s sad as Amiga used to be a superb platform for multimedia.
the fact that new cards don't suport overlay
The fact is that OS4 drivers don´t support any video acceleration, not that newer cards don´t include overlay or any alternative way to produce the same result.
Modern OSes also support multicore and have memory protection, that should give you a clue about how ridiculous it sounds that an user of a computer that is unable to play videos smoothly claims "overlay" is obsolete.
It seems you don´t understand that the problem is not HOW overlay is implemented but that it is not supported at all and all AmigaOS4 players include overlay support but don´t output using vapourware gallium nor vaporware gpu stream decoding. OS4 players use P96 PIP api, in case you don´t know it.
Now take your FUD elsewhere.
says the one who claims overlay is obsolete and lacks a computer that can play videos smoothly but shouts that Gallium&Mesa (that are not ported and it seems obvious that they won´t do it in a reasonable time and will leave users with PCIe cards without possibility of playing videos smoothly) will help to fix that.
OSes that support Overlay (or an api compatible alternative) are playing videos smoothly.
Do you know Aesop´s fable about the fox and the grapes? We could make a new version called "the os4 fanatic and the oportunity of playing videos smoothly".
It could start like this: once upon a time, the os4 user "sundown" bought a computer and tried to play an os4 presentation video from a fellow amigan. The video jumped and jumped and couldn´t be played smoothly. He paid for some updated videos and the video still frameskipped and frameskipped. Bah! -said our dear amigan- Overlay is obsolete... who needs to play videos?
Jupp3 said:
Currently, older cards (f.ex. Radeon 9250, Radeon 9200, Radeon 9100 and Radeon 9000, in ascending performance order) offer more features (at least some have 3D support and Overlay, but not sure which ones), and I doubt 2D would be THAT much faster on newer cards, that it would make it better. The only reasons I can see for getting a new model instead:
1)The computer lacks suitable bus to which connect the older card.
2)For some reason, user cannot find suitable old card on ebay etc.
If user gets a new card:
-There's no knowing when there will be some "done-in-GPU" scaling option, be it overlay or anything else.
-I think an (emulated) overlay support should be a lot easier to implement than "full MESA based OpenGL implementation" that's the current aim (temporary solution + compatibility with old programs)
-If user wants to get the best card available for whenever proper drivers (including 3D) become available, there might be lots of better cards available at that time when it finally happens (although some of them probably would need bigger changes to drivers)
As for "other options for scaling", MPlayer already has (at least) 2 OpenGL based video drivers. Not sure if they would need a lot of changes, but assuming it's "all fixed mode OpenGL", it might work even with MiniGL without much changes. Might still have dependencies on X11 etc, never checked.
Also, this is definitely (not made any actual tests, just using common sense) a lot slower than overlay (need to do pixel format conversion (at least without shaders), probably other slowdowns aswell) - but once the frame is in OpenGL texture(s), the scaling is practically free. So if most time would be spent scaling the image, this might be faster and "less worse" than CPU-based scaling.
MorphOS version doesn't have that built in, in any case that wouldn't make ANY sense at all, since all cards that tinygl supports probably also support overlay...
Sorry about posting the quotes, but often people do not follow links and I think this issue has importance to most people here.
start of discussion in case it continues there (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=35974&forum=2&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=0#670669)
-
Oh dear, same old trolls fighting over the dung heap. No wonder I and the vast majority of Amiga users left the platform years ago.
-
Spectre660 said:
Results from A Sam440ep-Flex 800 with Radeon HD4800 via PCIE adapter [No Overlay!]
WorkBench:> Programs:Video/DvPlayer/DvPlayer verbose
Media :My Videos/DVDS/Viewed/Limitless {2011} DVDRIP.avi
Video: AVI, 720 x 304, 23.98 fps
Audio: 01 [MP3] 16-bit 44100 Hz, Stereo
Total Nr of Frames: 4358
Nr of Frames played: 1514
Nr of Frames skipped: 2844 (66%)
Total Playback Time: 181.746 seconds
Average Framerate: 23.978 fps
Displayed Framerate: 8.330 fps
Results from Same machine with Radeon 9250 and overlay.
8.WorkBench:> Programs:Video/DvPlayer/DvPlayer verbose
Media :My Videos/DVDS/Viewed/Limitless {2011} DVDRIP.avi
Video: AVI, 720 x 304, 23.98 fps
Audio: 01 [MP3] 16-bit 44100 Hz, Stereo
Total Nr of Frames: 4364
Nr of Frames played: 4364
Nr of Frames skipped: 0 (0%)
Total Playback Time: 182.037 seconds
Average Framerate: 23.973 fps
Displayed Framerate: 23.973 fps
sundown said:
Heres what I get on the x1000 with a Radeon HD 4850, no overlay.
6.Videos:> work:tools/DvPlayer/DvPlayer verbose
Videos:Red Planet.avi
Video: AVI, 720 x 304, 23.98 fps
Audio: 01 [AC3] 16-bit 48000 Hz, Stereo
Total Nr of Frames: 4294
Nr of Frames played: 4293
Nr of Frames skipped: 1 (1%)
Total Playback Time: 179.028 seconds
Average Framerate: 23.985 fps
Displayed Framerate: 23.980 fps
Conclusion:
It's obvious that not even the X1000, the fastest OS4 machine on the planet, can play DVD-resolution video without frame skipping without overlay (just forget about HD video)! While 1 skipped frame in a 3 minute clip isn't a lot, it still signals that the HW is at its very limits of what is possible! This is really an eye-brow raiser! The impact of having overlay and not having overlay is strikingly obvious when looking at the numbers above, yet they scream "obsolete" at the solution that actually works and exists - a fact which I have to agree with the other posters above - is hilarious! :lol:
As a reference: MorphOS mplayer (with proper overlay of course) does 720p HD on a $150 Mac Mini. *Today*, not in two years. Given the fact that their fastest OS4 machine struggles with DVD resolution (without overlay), this must surely feel like Pure Science Fiction to those OS4 users calling overlay obsolete.
"Obsolete"...
:lol:
-
Nr of Frames skipped: 2844 (66%)
Wow thats bad. Yes I think overlay is needed. :)
-
There is a god solution for al AmigaOS 4 users, use Radeon 9xxx card and you have Overlay and 3D suport right now.
There are many cards on eBay for next to nothing.
-
An 11 year old 9200 isn't much of an option for a modern PPC Amiga like the X1000.
I had one in my SAM 440ep and took it out cause it wasn't any better than the onboard, tbh. That being said, I don't watch videos on the machine.
-
nikosidis said:
If your native monitor res.. is 1024x768 and you play a video that is in that res.. overlay might not gain you much, but lets say a video or mame game in 320x240 that you scale to fullscreen will bring a huge difference cause with overlay you don't use cpu for scaling the image.
So again!!! What is the point saying that overlay is out and something that does not exist at least not with Gallium3D is in!!!!!!!!!
Someone is playing your minds. It is like some of you take everything written by Hyperion or whatever as the holly truth. I'm not saying that it is a lie that mothern OS don't use overlay anymore, but that is simply not a choise right now for Amiga or alternatives.
Listen up.
I'm a AROS user. We had Gallium 3D For a couple of years now. What I miss most on AROS is video overlay. Got it!!!
-
Jupp3 said:
Proves the point that you can live without overlay or the like with a fast CPU for now .
Good point right there.
I wonder why no-one noticed earier that we don't actually even need this forthcoming "full MESA-based hardware accelerated 3D", as we can just do it all in software instead. There are several working MESA versions on aminet already.
Good point. The guy's X1000 is struggling with a standard DVD resolution because of the lack of overlay, and he comes to the conclusion that overlay isn't needed because everything can be handled by the CPU, that's a big LOL. This is becoming a farce!
:crazy:
Crumb said:
720x304, full screen, thank you, with no overlay.
Impressive! Outstanding! Just like my Efika at 400Mhz with no dma access to HD! Depending on compression used even a CSPPC with Frogger may be able to achieve that.
FYI, people is watching youtube HD videos directly on OWB on MorphOS thanks to overlay, try that on your x1000.
A good point. AFAIK the Efika is using less than 90% of the CPU at full screen DVD resolution playback (mpeg2), it's a "G2" class CPU running at only 400MHz, and it has one or two severe bottlenecks. The fastest OS4 computer, the $3000 X1000, drops frames when doing the same. Probably not the same codec though, I'll give them that, but had the OS4 machine been using overlay, it would have been no problems whatsoever.
Obsolete? Yeah right...
sundown said:
720x304, full screen, thank you, with no overlay. I will admit, a 1080p vid is a different story at the moment.
andStill be nice to have overlay support, 1080p HDs would probably play without skipping.
Another big LOL there. He just showed a DVD resolution encoded video that during 3 minutes playback actually skipped a frame, and he starts talking about 1080p as it would be like "the next step" and within reach? The guy probably thinks his 720 x 304 res clip equals to 720p HD, which of course it doesn't (it's a standard DVD resolution encoding, with *quite a leap* (to say the least) up to 1280×720, and the 1920x1080 being way off the charts of course).
The X1000 has shown similar CPU performance as the upper G4 Macs. Forget 1080p. 720p should be possible though, with overlay of course! ;)
:lol:
-
I wonder how much it will cost to get those cards supported in AROS...
Took a sec. But Im there now...
-
An 11 year old 9200 isn't much of an option for a modern PPC Amiga like the X1000.
I had one in my SAM 440ep and took it out cause it wasn't any better than the onboard, tbh. That being said, I don't watch videos on the machine.
No RadeonHD is way faster in 2D, something can be done via Wazp3D and Composting and when full 3D comes it will be fastest ever on Amiga
Patience, my dear Watson (or young Padawan?)
-
Jupp3 said:
The X1000 has shown similar CPU performance as the upper G4 Macs. Forget 1080p. 720p should be possible though, with overlay of course! ;)
:lol:
Again, do tests under e.g. Mint 11 or Debian Squeeze on both G4 Mac and dual core PA Semi, and let us know of results. MOS vs OS4 isnt realistic just because MOS is way better optimized, so you cant tell it is up to the hardware.