Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga community support ideas => Topic started by: Kremlar on October 28, 2015, 11:19:49 AM
-
But lets not bash on Aeon and Amigakit for really and honestly pushing Amiga into the future with OS 4. They are doing so in a strategic way that most would have thought impossible. But their honest passion and enthusiasm and (lets not forget) folks like Trevor fronting the capitol to take a shot at this to make it possible. Most of us have the struggle of deciding if we are going to support Amigakit with the latest card for our classic machine, or if we should fork out the money for a new OS4 machine but those financial risks pale in comparison to the financial risks Trevor, Aeon, and Amigakit have taken because they believe in the Amiga. Heck, they are even trying to continue support for OS3 through apps. Who else in the world would take the risks they have been taking for the Amiga? Who else in the world would put the time and energy into the Amiga with the honest intention of trying to make it a viable platform again? What these folks have undertaken may be later in the game then we could of hoped for, and there is *always* room for improvement. Anyone can criticize how they could have done this better or that better, and I'm not saying we shouldn't bring constructive criticism to the table (bring it), but let us please give proper respect where respect is due.
Right. Although I don't agree with the direction they are pushing in, the effort they are giving is remarkable. Unfortunately in the Amiga world it seems everyone has a different opinion on which way Amiga should grow. I believe the largest group is the classic/68K group, but even that group is so fragmented.
If A-eon wants to support 68k amiga, why dont they produce some new hardware (computers). ?
Right. I'm surprised no one has backed a project like FPGA Arcade / NATAMI / MiST / etc. yet.
What market? Hardware to OS3.x does not in any way, shape or form, compete with OS4.
Of course it does. OS4 hardware's best potential for growth is convincing others in the Amiga community (classic users being the largest group) that the cost of entry is reasonable and that OS4 is the way of the future for their Amigas. New classic hardware, such as the FPGA Arcade, MiST, etc. makes OS4 hardware less attractive for these people - especially as FPGA capabilities continue to increase. If they see a future in their current platform, and little advantage to the OS4 platform, there's little reason to switch.
I think most classic users want to see the Amiga grow into what COULD have been, like the NATAMI promised. Many will say that Commodore was going the direction of PowerPC/OS4 anyway, but I don't think that's what classic users want. They want to see things improved along the lines of the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond. That's what I want too. For everything else I'll just use a PC!
-
...I think most classic users want to see the Amiga grow into what COULD have been, like the NATAMI promised. Many will say that Commodore was going the direction of PowerPC/OS4 anyway, but I don't think that's what classic users want. They want to see things improved along the lines of the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond. That's what I want too. For everything else I'll just use a PC!
From what Dave Haynie says, Commodore was going to move to a RISC platform.
And perpetual backwards compatibility rarely occurs.
Most X64 systems have trouble running legacy programs.
What makes you think that if the Amiga had survived it wouldn't be a vastly different system by now?
You do realize the the AAA chipset was not meant to be an upgrade, rather it was a replacement.
Right now, the primary problem I have with OS4 is that it struggles too hard to retain the look, feel, and basic structures of previous versions of Amiga OS.
Your position is not particularly attractive to me.
FPGAs CAN'T approach ASICs in performance.
The only reason that they perform better than a real 68K is that that processor is SO dated.
So if I were to follow your logic, I would find myself waiting for the fulfillment of fantasy projects that, even if they are produced, would not be competitive.
Personally, I can't see our market expanding without drawing in new users. And legacy hardware has limited appeal to anyone not already familiar with the Amiga.
So the real challenge is not to cater to community members like you, but to make the NG OS' powerful enough to be reasonable substitutes for more mainline hardware.
-
Right. I'm surprised no one has backed a project like FPGA Arcade / NATAMI / MiST / etc. yet.
!
I think it is strange the they dont also include a classic amiga built on todays standard and a system like natami / fpga amiga would be perfect for those of us who is not millionaires yet! :)
-
From what Dave Haynie says, Commodore was going to move to a RISC platform.
And perpetual backwards compatibility rarely occurs.
Most X64 systems have trouble running legacy programs.
What makes you think that if the Amiga had survived it wouldn't be a vastly different system by now?
I agree, it would be vastly different and I also believe that many users would have moved on because of it. I think most people still interested in the platform today got into the Amiga because of the core product that Jay Miner and his team created. Incredible graphics & sound, and a great multitasking OS.
Commodore advanced the product but not the core. Sure they slapped on faster processors, more RAM and more expandability, but that wasn't core to the Amiga - it's not what made the Amiga different. They made marginal improvements to the core (ECS, AGA, etc.) but it was way too little and way too late.
You do realize the the AAA chipset was not meant to be an upgrade, rather it was a replacement.
Understood, but if AAA was released early enough and a substantial enough jump over AGA it may not have mattered to many. Lack of compatibility did not stop most people from moving from C64s to Amigas because the jump was significant. Back then compatibility between significant platform jumps was not as important. I do believe that when AAA was canned and development of Hombre started they were planning on implementing AGA compatibility in some shape or form.
Today compatibility is critical because new software development is virtually non-existant. The Amiga is a retro platform. People like me are interested in it because it's what we grew up with, we loved the software, and loved how the system worked. If you kill compatibility, if you kill the core, you kill the nostalgia.
Your position is not particularly attractive to me.
FPGAs CAN'T approach ASICs in performance.
The only reason that they perform better than a real 68K is that that processor is SO dated.
Right, and from a retro point of view that's all that's needed. If people are happy with a 68020/30/60 when they use their Amigas today they should be ecstatic about something that might exceed the 68060 performance.
Right now, the primary problem I have with OS4 is that it struggles too hard to retain the look, feel, and basic structures of previous versions of Amiga OS.
...
So if I were to follow your logic, I would find myself waiting for the fulfillment of fantasy projects that, even if they are produced, would not be competitive.
Personally, I can't see our market expanding without drawing in new users. And legacy hardware has limited appeal to anyone not already familiar with the Amiga.
So the real challenge is not to cater to community members like you, but to make the NG OS' powerful enough to be reasonable substitutes for more mainline hardware.
That's where we're different, and I think many Amiga users differ. Expanding the Amiga to replace the PC is not interesting to me because it is so far behind. For every step the AmigaOne takes everything else takes 20 steps. AmigaOS never had a reasonable implementation of Java or Flash and those technologies are already dated. Modern day computing is a moving target that a small development team working part time cannot keep up with. I can understand the motivation, but for me I'd rather just use a PC than struggle with every day tasks on an Amiga.
I'd rather use my Amiga to play some games, tune my workbench, play with some applications that I never used before - things that I did back in the day. If I want to browse the web, create a PDF, read email, or work on a spreadsheet there are much better tools for the job.
I would never want to replace my PC with a Nintendo Wii U, and I would never want to replace it with my Amiga.
Back in the 80s/90s the draw to using the Amiga instead of the PC was because it was different and BETTER. Nowadays it's just different and way WORSE - different is not sufficient to me to replace my PC.
-
I think it is strange the they dont also include a classic amiga built on todays standard and a system like natami / fpga amiga would be perfect for those of us who is not millionaires yet! :)
An FPGA A1200 would be nice, but I don't know if that's possible, not knowing much about the limitations of FPGA. I assume that it is slower than conventional ICs, but maybe that doesn't matter when you are implementing a 14 MHz system.
-
@Kremlar
I understand your position, I just don't agree with it.
I'm enjoying a reasonably modern platform with MorphOS.
And while neither MorphOS and OS4 support Flash (which is also a problem with Linux), we do have html5 (which is a much more efficient package).
But, should a legacy emulation system be produced (in HARDWARE not UAE), I too would be interested in the nostalgia exploring such a system would bring.
I'm just not sure that that course offers much of a future.
After all, I can buy a Sega genesis emulation system, but that does make Genesis games any more appealing.
And that is just one thing that NG can support that is a nice improvement (and trust me, games dedicated to an NG platform generally look better than legacy Amiga), browsers and other practical apps run better on more powerful hardware.
-
An FPGA A1200 would be nice, but I don't know if that's possible, not knowing much about the limitations of FPGA. I assume that it is slower than conventional ICs, but maybe that doesn't matter when you are implementing a 14 MHz system.
It's very real now. I haven't been following MiST much, but my FPGA Arcade exceeds the performance of an Amiga 1200. I've just started really using it the past few days but love it so far.
I understand your position, I just don't agree with it.
I'm enjoying a reasonably modern platform with MorphOS.
And while neither MorphOS and OS4 support Flash (which is also a problem with Linux), we do have html5 (which is a much more efficient package).
This is the main problem with what's left of the Amiga market I think - too fragmented because everyone has different ideas of what an "Amiga" is and what they want out of it. Sad but true. :(
But, should a legacy emulation system be produced (in HARDWARE not UAE), I too would be interested in the nostalgia exploring such a system would bring.
I love my FPGA Arcade, but I could see why others want more performance if they are used to high-end classic systems. Hopefully performance will improve.
I'm just not sure that that course offers much of a future.
After all, I can buy a Sega genesis emulation system, but that does make Genesis games any more appealing.
True, the market I enjoy is limited to retro/nostalgia, but honestly I don't believe the NG market has much of a future either.
And that is just one thing that NG can support that is a nice improvement (and trust me, games dedicated to an NG platform generally look better than legacy Amiga), browsers and other practical apps run better on more powerful hardware.
Right, but for me there's my PC and other platforms for modern applications.
Perhaps I would understand the attraction better if I spent more time with MorphOS/OS4.x/AROS, but my free time is limited and nothing jumps out to attract me to those platforms...
-
@Kremlar
I understand your position, I just don't agree with it.
I'm enjoying a reasonably modern platform with MorphOS.
And while neither MorphOS and OS4 support Flash (which is also a problem with Linux), we do have html5 (which is a much more efficient package).
But, should a legacy emulation system be produced (in HARDWARE not UAE), I too would be interested in the nostalgia exploring such a system would bring.
I'm just not sure that that course offers much of a future.
After all, I can buy a Sega genesis emulation system, but that does make Genesis games any more appealing.
And that is just one thing that NG can support that is a nice improvement (and trust me, games dedicated to an NG platform generally look better than legacy Amiga), browsers and other practical apps run better on more powerful hardware.
the big advantage (next to nostalgia and retro) is the huge software base that is beating all NG platforms combined by magnitude. And Aros 68k (with my distribution) or Amikit show what you can do with 68k. Even for a dev 68k offers advantages because much more development options including lots of optimized compilers. Free Pascal f.e. also works on 68k, of course you need lots of horsepower. There is also no reason why in future even modern software should be ported to it. Of course it is not powerful enough to run the newest Ego shooter but for that I can use my modern environment like Kremlar said, trying to compete with Windows or Linux or Mac makes no sense. MorphOS is a good and fast OS without doubt and if it runs on X64 it will be even faster but it lacks the whole software base the other platforms have. Upgrading the 68k hardware makes more sense to me than trying to upgrade the hardware and hope the devs will support it. That was what NG tried and failed years ago already.
-
It's very real now. I haven't been following MiST much, but my FPGA Arcade exceeds the performance of an Amiga 1200. I've just started really using it the past few days but love it so far.
This is the main problem with what's left of the Amiga market I think - too fragmented because everyone has different ideas of what an "Amiga" is and what they want out of it. Sad but true. :(
I love my FPGA Arcade, but I could see why others want more performance if they are used to high-end classic systems. Hopefully performance will improve.
True, the market I enjoy is limited to retro/nostalgia, but honestly I don't believe the NG market has much of a future either.
Right, but for me there's my PC and other platforms for modern applications.
Perhaps I would understand the attraction better if I spent more time with MorphOS/OS4.x/AROS, but my free time is limited and nothing jumps out to attract me to those platforms...
I do not use Amiga for modern web browsing, all options like Apollo lack RAM. Even if, it would need tremendous work to port something like OWB on it (deadwood has said he would need 6 months for it, I would need 6 years then propably :)). So be it. I can live with it.
-
Even for a dev 68k offers advantages because much more development options including lots of optimized compilers. Free Pascal f.e. also works on 68k, of course you need lots of horsepower. There is also no reason why in future even modern software should be ported to it.
What 68k lacks is proper SDK. To develop for 68k you have to collect it from the pieces. Get NDK from one place, compiler from another place, then download various standard linklibs (z, png, etc.) to get started. And finally download extra header files from yet another place to get an access to bsdsocket.library and other "standard" stuff but you might still found out that there is nowhere stdint.h, there are N+1 ixemul implementations all incompatible and everything else is in abandonded state.
I'd like to port some software from MorphOS to 68k, like Snoopium, but it always takes too much time to get all pieces together and it never gets done.
-
What 68k lacks is proper SDK. To develop for 68k you have to collect it from the pieces. Get NDK from one place, compiler from another place, then download various standard linklibs (z, png, etc.) to get started. And finally download extra header files from yet another place to get an access to bsdsocket.library and other "standard" stuff but you might still found out that there is nowhere stdint.h, there are N+1 ixemul implementations all incompatible and everything else is in abandonded state.
I'd like to port some software from MorphOS to 68k, like Snoopium, but it always takes too much time to get all pieces together and it never gets done.
In my distribution I have collected both many development environments/compilers and libraries. But you are right, there is not much support for 68k left, expecially everything newer mostly was ported either to MorphOS or AmigaOS. On 68k branch of Aros there is the chance to easily port something that is already available for other Aros branches.
-
That's REALLY nice! But why dont create an AmiStore app for ALL amiga flavours or maybe a web site opened to all if not an app(maybe measy to do?)?
It exists! It has been here _all the time_ !!!
And it can need some official support by the Money Makers and Job Creators:
http://aminet.net
-
Matthey gives the impression sometimes that he actually believes that - he has previously stated that if only we have a m68k based cheap Strawberry Pi, tens if not hundreds of thousands of people would buy it to run AmigaOS.
I could see thousands, maybe 10 thousand. Commodore Amiga Group on Facebook has 10,952 members today. I'd say a large percentage of those people would drop $50-$100 on something cheap and retro. Who knows?
And he keeps referring to Apple, Microsoft, Linux etc as "the competition" - I don't know what to say about that other than "delusional" and over time it is very... tedious.
Yes, I don't think competing with Microsoft or Apple or Linux is realistic at this stage. :)
-
@matthey
Yes, yes..."We can make it right this time and it will be our salvation".
I have heard that before.
That is not how computer systems evolve, constantly trying to refine old hardware platforms.
Instead new ideas are added in that improve the product.
Look at the Mac, not 68K based, not PPC based, now X64 based.
With FreeBSD underpinnings that are totally dissimilar to the original core.
BUT, the look and feel are there.
In fact, if asked to choose, I'd always take the more evolved package.
Further, the 68K and the Amiga chipset are both so dated that no matter how much you try to supplement them they will still be somewhat archaic.
AND some of those people you have mentioned have strung the community along for years.
When is the Natami going to be released?
Probably at the same time as the SharkPPC and the new improved version of WarpOS.
Finally, do you really think that new ASICs are going to be created to carry on the legacy of...well legacy hardware?
Why not follow Apple's lead and forego custom designed chips and buy 'off the rack'?
-
I'm surprised no one has backed a project like FPGA Arcade / NATAMI / MiST / etc. yet.
The "not invented here" syndrome. Also - what kind of backing could that be? Money? Maybe the people who do FPGA projects are not interested in being backed by entities who may want them to sign contracts and meet deadlines. Maybe people value their freedom to do things in their own timely matter.
Current FPGA systems available:
* Minimig - made by someone who wanted to prove a point in confrontation with "the community", everything open source, ported to many FPGA families by individuals.
* FPGA Arcade - made by someone who never really was an Amiga person, to be open sourced when Mike finds it to be ready enough.
* MIST - made by Atari people who have a very pragmatic view on Amiga, based on Minimig, all open source.
* Chameleon - FPGA C64 extension by Jens, I am guessing Minimig target by luck.
* Vampire 600 - much like Minimig, made to prove a point by someone who at the time was not really much of an Amiga user, all open source.
Then we have the projects that are more in typical spirit of Amiga...
* Natami - proprietary, no modesty, aimed to become "the new amiga", profit! Fail!
* Apollo core - left over from Natami, smaller focus (only a CPU core), fewer people, less to disagree over. Proprietary. Visions of profit, somehow. Announce first, implement later, regards other projects as "inferior", "competition" and "the enemy".
* Minimig+ - announced again, and then again, and sort of redundant by now. If they decide to develop a board in open communication with the community of FPGA/Minimig/others developers and users, it could be awesome. Must be open source hardware to attract developers and succeed.
-
...
I think most classic users want to see the Amiga grow into what COULD have been, like the NATAMI promised. Many will say that Commodore was going the direction of PowerPC/OS4 anyway, but I don't think that's what classic users want. They want to see things improved along the lines of the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond.
...
Well, as far as I'm concerned I have to contrtadict. I started with an A500 back in 1989, expanded it heavily and then got an A1200 in 1995.
I towered the A1200 and added an 030 accelerator.
Already during my A500 days there was talk about going PPC, which promised a significant performance increase. Since those days I dreamt of an PowerPC Amiga.
As I was studying mechanical engineering I also wanted to dive into CAD/CAM/CAE.
I realised that neither the A500, nor the A1200 had sufficiant power under the hood to allow to work fluently with apps like DynaCadd, MaxonCinema, Reflections and the like.
Meanwhile it was 1997 and the PowerPC accelerators had been announced. I eagerly awaited them.
I bought an A4000 mobo, an Miconik BigTower and the one of the first CyberstormPPC accelerators with 128 mB RAM at the "World of Amiga 97" in Cologne, along with an 8 mB Cybervision (which was delivered roughly one year later), SCSI scanner, ink jet printer and the like.
Once I had the Cybervision installed and connected to a decent 19" Belinea monitor, I asked myself how I could bear the flickering Amiga graphic system all the years. I never wanted to use an Amiga without a graphics card again just with its original chipset (OCS/ECS/AGA)...
Unfortunately it turned out rather quickly that 8 mB graphics RAM were not sufficient for me and so were the 128 mB of RAM on the CyberstormPPC.
So I expanded my A4kPPC with the Mediator PCI busboard and populated it with a Voodoo4 graca, a Terratec 512 digital soundcard (with optical output) and a 10/100 mBit NIC. Later I added an Deneb USB 2.0 highspeed card. with OS 3.9/WarpOS 16.1 I can use the 100 mBit mode of the NIC and USB 2.0 (OS 4 only allows 10 mBit and USB 1.1).
THAT was what I as a classic Amiga user wanted and THAT was the way I improved my classic Amiga 4000.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I never missed "the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond". A PCI busboard with off-the-shelf graphics card, soundcard and a network interface card had far more to offer for the money...
-
@matthey
Yes, yes..."We can make it right this time and it will be our salvation".
I have heard that before.
That is not how computer systems evolve, constantly trying to refine old hardware platforms.
Instead new ideas are added in that improve the product.
Look at the Mac, not 68K based, not PPC based, now X64 based.
With FreeBSD underpinnings that are totally dissimilar to the original core.
BUT, the look and feel are there.
In fact, if asked to choose, I'd always take the more evolved package.
Further, the 68K and the Amiga chipset are both so dated that no matter how much you try to supplement them they will still be somewhat archaic.
AND some of those people you have mentioned have strung the community along for years.
When is the Natami going to be released?
Probably at the same time as the SharkPPC and the new improved version of WarpOS.
Finally, do you really think that new ASICs are going to be created to carry on the legacy of...well legacy hardware?
Why not follow Apple's lead and forego custom designed chips and buy 'off the rack'?
Like this one Jim? ;)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A9
-
...Sorry to disappoint you, but I never missed "the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond". A PCI busboard with off-the-shelf graphics card, soundcard and a network interface card had far more to offer for the money...
YES!
Off the shelf components are cheaper and they perform better.
AND we don't have to foot the bill for design and prototyping.
Even with the move to PPC, we weren't paying for the design of the chips, just the design of the boards.
And it all works well.
Place an OS4.1 or MorphOS machine next to a legacy system and you will quickly see which is more practical.
-
Aww, do not be so sad, they are online all over the Internet - just download the PDF. I have some hard copies, but that is more for sentimental reasons, for all these manuals I rather find them online than dig out the book. Bonus feature, PDFs online are typically OCRed and are to some extent searchable.
Example:
links removed (https://archive.org/details/1990-beats-steve-amiga-rom-kernel-ref-3rd)
If posting this link have me banned here, it would be the exact kind of "law mongering" I am talking about. And in the meantime everyone are happily sharing so called "commercial software" on the "zone" over at EAB and wherever, and nobody really cares, as long as we don't talk about it too much.
links removed (http://www.bombjack.org/commodore/amiga/amiga-commodore/)
Enjoy.
-
The Amiga (A-EON and Hyperion) is a niche market competitor of Apple and Microsoft.
Geehh... stop it already, you are killing me!! :laughing:
-
The "no invented here" syndrome. Also - what kind of backing could that be? Money? Maybe the people who do FPGA projects are not interested in being backed by entities who may want them to sign contracts and meet deadlines. Maybe people value their freedom to do things in their own timely matter.
Yeah, I'd like to think that with all the money being thrown around designing these NG boards that a salary could be paid for someone capable of designing (or locating an already made board) and implementing a classic system on FPGA.
Would they want to work for A-Eon or whoever on a project like this full time? Maybe not, but maybe. Many people dream of working on hobbies full time.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I never missed "the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond". A PCI busboard with off-the-shelf graphics card, soundcard and a network interface card had far more to offer for the money...
No disappointment. That's why I said most - clearly everyone has different opinions/needs/wants. Your needs seemed very application driven, like most of the people using Toasters in their Amigas. Once the Amiga was no longer meeting their needs, and better tools became available, they moved on.
So, if 3D/CAD was the main application for you, why stick with the Amiga once it no longer met your needs? Why today? Clearly there are better tools for the job. Do you just prefer the OS?
I had many friends that liked the games on the Amiga. Once games got better on the PC than the Amiga, they moved on. When a better tool is available for the job, why stick with an old one?
For me, and I think many others, the Amiga itself was the application. I liked "playing" with the system, tuning my workbench, etc. I liked the hardware and the OS. I have a 4000T today with a RTG graphics card, and while Workbench seems nice it just seems less "Amiga" to me. I too had big box Amigas long ago. I did not expand much, but I pre-ordered both the 3000 and 4000 when they were announced. I was also at World of Amiga both years they were released.
For me the custom hardware was the heart of the Amiga, along with the OS. While I obviously wished the chipset would get upgraded and move forward to one up the competition, putting PC components in an Amiga wasn't attractive to me. I wanted C= to produce a new and better chipset so I could shove it in the faces of my PC-loving friends!
I moved on when the product stopped moving forward, when I needed a PC and could not afford both. But I always missed my Amiga, not for any particular application - I just missed using it.
Off the shelf components are cheaper and they perform better.
AND we don't have to foot the bill for design and prototyping.
But it has no heart!! :)
Today, with NG AmigaOS 4.x systems I agree and see no point in using custom PowerPC boards. If all you care about is the OS then port it to mainstream hardware. With all the money being spent on developing custom and inferior PowerPC motherboards surely porting to x86 makes more financial sense. I don't see the logic in continuing down the path AmigaOS 4.x is currently on.
-
link removed
Enjoy.
Yes - share and enjoy.
My example was merely from pressing "I feel lucky" when googling the title that was mentioned, hehe ;)
-
Yes - share and enjoy.
My example was merely from pressing "I feel lucky" when googling the title that was mentioned, hehe ;)
:D
-
If all you care about is the OS then port it to mainstream hardware. With all the money being spent on developing custom and inferior PowerPC motherboards surely porting to x86 makes more financial sense.
It was rewritten in C to be... portable, right? :rolleyes:
Honestly, I believe there simply are not enough resources to do any porting, they just barely have enough resources to have any development at all. All this could of course change if they opened up much more of the code and allowed anyone to participate in development of OS components in a more professional and typical open source manner.
-
@thread
lots of good discussion was happening in the "Call for Amiga Developers from A-EON Technology" thread -- but it had little to do with the thread's purpose. so folks can continue in here.... :)
-- eliyahu
-
That is not how computer systems evolve, constantly trying to refine old hardware platforms.
Instead new ideas are added in that improve the product.
Look at the Mac, not 68K based, not PPC based, now X64 based.
PPC was not capable enough for the Mac but it is a better evolution for the Amiga? Is Mac ending up back with CISC a new idea? If the Amiga breaks enough compatibility by switching processors, will it have more development after than before? Do we have enough resources to create a whole new AmigaOS with SMP and 64 bit addressing like Mac while breaking compatibility? Is the path forward always easier than the path backward, even while leaving everything you started with behind?
Further, the 68K and the Amiga chipset are both so dated that no matter how much you try to supplement them they will still be somewhat archaic.
How old are the x86 and ARM? The 68k can evolve easier than both of these processors. The 68k support is what is dated but this is due to lack of popular new 68k hardware. The 68k is a loved processor because it is simple and unique. The Amiga custom hardware is simple and flexible which can be expanded. The new Amiga FPGA hardware already shows how fast the Amiga's simple logic can be using more modern technology. Standard integrated hardware which allows for efficient software could close some of the gap in performance with commodity hardware. Consoles are usually not as far behind in performance as would be expected by their hardware for this reason. Jay Miner created a game computer which was more expandable than the game console which the investors expected. A retro game computer is what I would target as well. The market is missing good retro hardware which is more expandable than the Raspberry Pi and more open than the modern consoles with a price in between the two.
AND some of those people you have mentioned have strung the community along for years.
When is the Natami going to be released?
Probably at the same time as the SharkPPC and the new improved version of WarpOS.
Finally, do you really think that new ASICs are going to be created to carry on the legacy of...well legacy hardware?
It is difficult for individuals to create a Natami. I believe the Natami concept was close though. The Amiga PPC boards are lucky to sell a few thousand boards while the Natami bringup thread has 730792 views.
http://www.natami.net/knowledge.php?b=1¬e=33366
This makes me think that the AmigaNG PPC is the wrong computer niche. The Natami was gaining interest by developers and ex-Amiga programmers as can be seen in Natami forum posts (developers were asking instead of being asked). It was generating Amiga excitement not seen since the collapse of C=.
Why not follow Apple's lead and forego custom designed chips and buy 'off the rack'?
Apple would be the world's 3rd largest MPU manufacturer in the world (behind Intel and Qualcomm but ahead of AMD and Freescale) although the statistics often combine Apple with Samsung who provides the foundry services. These are Apple custom designed SoC processors by the way.
-
It is difficult for individuals to create a Natami. I believe the Natami concept was close though. The Amiga PPC boards are lucky to sell a few thousand boards while the Natami bringup thread has 730792 views.
http://www.natami.net/knowledge.php?b=1¬e=33366
This makes me think that the AmigaNG PPC is the wrong computer niche. The Natami was gaining interest by developers and ex-Amiga programmers as can be seen in Natami forum posts (developers were asking instead of being asked). It was generating Amiga excitement not seen since the collapse of C=.
Exactly!! They are lucky to sell hundreds of PPC boards. Something like the NATAMI would be huge in comparison.
-
Geehh... stop it already, you are killing me!! :laughing:
Yeah, that one just keeps me in stitches too!
Even taken in totality, our various directions don't even make a blip on those projects radar.
AND, I am not anti-68K (I used to build systems based on those - when it was practical to do so), nor do I wish AROS or OS4 any harm.
Just thought I'd straighten that out since everyone does seem so polarized.
-
Place an OS4.1 or MorphOS machine next to a legacy system and you will quickly see which is more practical.
A strange question to ask. The legacy system of course. It runs all the Amiga applications I have, without emulation, exactly how I need them to run. If I want a fast modern system: That's the PC running here. That's a lot more practical for day work than anything that is remotely related to Amiga.
-
A strange question to ask. The legacy system of course. It runs all the Amiga applications I have, without emulation, exactly how I need them to run. If I want a fast modern system: That's the PC running here. That's a lot more practical for day work than anything that is remotely related to Amiga.
Interesting. I cant understand where is the fun using Workbench on tiny 640x256 screen with 16 colours. I could invest $1000 to an accelerator and gfx card but that ship sailed long time ago.
-
@itix
Some people enjoy collecting stamps, some knit, grow their garden, parachute/basejumping, fix old/new chars...and some even enjoy limited/old hardware(gasp).
Point is; fun is subjective. What makes sense to you, could be boring/unintresting to others.
I could point to one of my cousins; I and a bunch of other cousins (and friends) have LAN parties at my place every 3-4 months. He enjoys drinking with us in general, but its just something in his genome that automatically makes him reject the notion to spend a few days playing computer games, messing with hardware and generally going *nerd*.
Thats fine. Different fun for different people.
Looking at the sprawling C64 scene, Id say people still find very limited hardware intresting.
-
Interesting. I cant understand where is the fun using Workbench on tiny 640x256 screen with 16 colours. I could invest $1000 to an accelerator and gfx card but that ship sailed long time ago.
68k is much more than unexpanded A500
-
@itix
Some people enjoy collecting stamps, some knit, grow their garden, parachute/basejumping, fix old/new chars...and some even enjoy limited/old hardware(gasp).
Point is; fun is subjective. What makes sense to you, could be boring/unintresting to others.
I could point to one of my cousins; I and a bunch of other cousins (and friends) have LAN parties at my place every 3-4 months. He enjoys drinking with us in general, but its just something in his genome that automatically makes him reject the notion to spend a few days playing computer games, messing with hardware and generally going *nerd*.
Thats fine. Different fun for different people.
Looking at the sprawling C64 scene, Id say people still find very limited hardware intresting.
Sure, I have Amiga 500 and Commodore 64 and I'd like to code something for Kickstart 1.3 again. I just think A1200 with rtg+040/060 is an old generation "NG Amiga". Many games dont run on RTG, many games dont run on 040 or 060, it is just feature crippled OS4/MOS.
-
Sure, I have Amiga 500 and Commodore 64 and I'd like to code something for Kickstart 1.3 again. I just think A1200 with rtg+040/060 is an old generation "NG Amiga". Many games dont run on RTG, many games dont run on 040 or 060, it is just feature crippled OS4/MOS.
On Aros Vision I have WHDLoad and many games run on it, when adding original roms from Amigaforever almost anything runs. And that when using RTG.
-
On Aros Vision I have WHDLoad and many games run on it, when adding original roms from Amigaforever almost anything runs. And that when using RTG.
You mean when using UAE? :-) Because I only had an VGA monitor most games didnt work on my A1200. Even when I didnt have an RTG but had DblPal Workbench they failed miserably.
With WinUAE you of course are not stuck with those old hardware limitations anymore.
But you got me interested. I try to download WinUAE today and look if I can get AROS Vision booting in less than 30 mins. If not, I probably lose my interest ;)
-
You mean when using UAE? :-) Because I only had an VGA monitor most games didnt work on my A1200. Even when I didnt have an RTG but had DblPal Workbench they failed miserably.
With WinUAE you of course are not stuck with those old hardware limitations anymore.
But you got me interested. I try to download WinUAE today and look if I can get AROS Vision booting in less than 30 mins. If not, I probably lose my interest ;)
As long you do not use a 386 for it it should boot faster :-)
on http://www.aros-platform.de/ are informations. In user section I describe my config. I use plenty of RAM but it should work with less. But I have it :-)
And i would recommend last stable version of WinUAE. There are even new 64bit versions of WinUAE and FS-UAE but I have not tested that much with it. I use 3.1.0 of WinUAE mostly.
-
Interesting. I cant understand where is the fun using Workbench on tiny 640x256 screen with 16 colours. I could invest $1000 to an accelerator and gfx card but that ship sailed long time ago.
My workbench is something like 800x600 in 256 colors, but never mind that. The point is: None of the "Amiga" systems is suitable for productive work anyhow. It's a system for retrocomputing, and the 68K does exactly that. So never mind running a workbench at 640x256 because that's exactly how it is supposed to be. If you want to run productive work, there's a PC.
-
My workbench is something like 800x600 in 256 colors, but never mind that. The point is: None of the "Amiga" systems is suitable for productive work anyhow. It's a system for retrocomputing, and the 68K does exactly that. So never mind running a workbench at 640x256 because that's exactly how it is supposed to be. If you want to run productive work, there's a PC.
I dont want retrocomputing, I have Amiga 500 for that. Just a computer that is always on, can get to internet and do some coding when I feel like it. PC or Amiga, doesnt really matter to me. I have got both. And iPad that has rendered internet use on computers to minimum.
-
I dont want retrocomputing, I have Amiga 500 for that. Just a computer that is always on, can get to internet and do some coding when I feel like it. PC or Amiga, doesnt really matter to me. I have got both. And iPad that has rendered internet use on computers to minimum.
But then you have already what you need. A PC for the productive work, and an Amiga 500 for the old stuff. So where's exactly the need for AOS/PPC/Os4/Morphos/...?
-
But then you have already what you need. A PC for the productive work, and an Amiga 500 for the old stuff. So where's exactly the need for AOS/PPC/Os4/Morphos/...?
Coding. C# on PC, C on MorphOS.
In theory it could be C on/with UAE but MorphOS has spoiled me to not accept hacky patchy systems.
-
Coding. C# on PC, C on MorphOS.
In theory it could be C on/with UAE but MorphOS has spoiled me to not accept hacky patchy systems.
What hacky patchy system? :)
-
What hacky patchy system? :)
The one you get when you take Kickstart 3.1 and add tons of patches to make it usable :)
-
The one you get when you take Kickstart 3.1 and add tons of patches to make it usable :)
that one :)
I do not use it
-
...
Your needs seemed very application driven, like most of the people using Toasters in their Amigas. Once the Amiga was no longer meeting their needs, and better tools became available, they moved on.
So, if 3D/CAD was the main application for you, why stick with the Amiga once it no longer met your needs? Why today?
Ummm - what do you want to tell me with that? Do you want me also to move on?
Clearly there are better tools for the job. Do you just prefer the OS?
Of course there are better tools for the job today. And although I like the AmigaOS this is not the reason.
Back in the early ninetees I was fascinated that I could do true 3d CAD on my Amiga 500. I also had an Amiga tool to convert the 3d data of DynaCadd into an executable CNC code that could run on the CAM system at the CAD school I was visiting at the time. It was slow, but it worked.
And all this at a fraction of the costs that I would have had to pay for a comparable x86 based system. Back then e.g. DynaCadd did cost 1,500 DM, while I would have had to pay 15,000 DM for AutoCAD.
Same for the hardware:
I bought my A500 with CBM 1082 monitor and CBM MPS 1500C color matrix printer for 1,200 DM, while a brandnew, naked 386 system (just Hercules monochrome graphics card, no sound) was around 6,000 DM at that time.
Later my decision to stay with the Amiga was simply bexause I had meanwhile collected so much software that it would have costed a fortune to replace all this Amiga productivity software with x86 software.
Furthermore I did not want buy a new PC each time a new Win version came up. Do you remember? Each new Win version required new hardware...
Over the years I had no other choice than getting PCs for the serious work, but always kept my Amigas - hoping, the Amiga situation would improve again one day.
So the Amiga still is my hobby.
Back in the mid ninetees/early 2000s I engaged with a society for the preservation of the historic Wiehltalbahn (Wiehl valley railway (http://www.wiehltalbahn.de/en/)).
When we had revived the line, I got the task to plan the IT infrastructure and would have loved to use Amigas for the task, but unfortunately back then no Amiga hardware with sufficient power was available.
Had the A1X1k already existed I would have tried to use. The XENA thing seemed to be very promising for this task, but so we ended up with PCs...
I had many friends that liked the games on the Amiga. Once games got better on the PC than the Amiga, they moved on. When a better tool is available for the job, why stick with an old one?
Why not?
I paid so much money for all my Amiga stuff - why should I just give/throw it away? It can still serve me as my hobby...
For me, and I think many others, the Amiga itself was the application. I liked "playing" with the system, tuning my workbench, etc.
Here we seem to differ. For me it was an unexpensive tool and had to work the way I wanted. A stunning device back then (and in some aspects even today), but nevertheless just a tool. Nothing to found a "religion" on.
I liked the hardware and the OS. I have a 4000T today with a RTG graphics card,
And despite that you nevertheless prefer the OCS over RTG? Seriously?
and while Workbench seems nice it just seems less "Amiga" to me.
Well, to me it rather seems that the Amiga can only unleash its full potential with all the expansion stuff like RTG, PCI, USB and a decent accelerator...
An Amiga 4000 as it was delivered by C= (just with AGA) was simply not really usable for daily serious work.
I too had big box Amigas long ago. I did not expand much, but I pre-ordered both the 3000 and 4000 when they were announced. I was also at World of Amiga both years they were released.
As you "did not expand much" I guess you were happy with what these machines offered in their original state, namely their graphics?
For me the custom hardware was the heart of the Amiga, along with the OS.
What do you mean with "custom"?
"Custom hardware" for me were e.g. my sound digitiser and my prommer. I built both myself - there just were the schematics, the board layouts and and the part lists from an Amiga magazine. All self-made - optical transfer of the board layout to a blank PCB, etching, drilling, populating and soldering the boards. That's "custom made" from my POV.
While I obviously wished the chipset would get upgraded and move forward to one up the competition, putting PC components in an Amiga wasn't attractive to me.
Well, for me it actually was attractive. Both - performance- and price-wise.
Comparable Amiga parts (e.g. Zorro graphics boards) were much too expensive for what they had to offer. I always wanted to get the max out of my machines - and I only could achieve this by heavily expanding the machines. And obviously I didn't want to spend a fortune for components with Amiga label, while better and cheaper solutions from the PC world were available and could be used in an Amiga with an PCI busboard.
I wanted C= to produce a new and better chipset so I could shove it in the faces of my PC-loving friends!
And - did they do so?
No.
Instead they preferred to go belly up by pumping all their money into their overpriced and underpowered x86 line of computers instead of improving the Amiga properly.
B.T.W. - what did you use to "shove it in the faces of your PC-loving friends", once you realised C= didn't develop the things you wanted, but went bust instead?
I moved on when the product stopped moving forward, when I needed a PC and could not afford both. But I always missed my Amiga, not for any particular application - I just missed using it.
I also sort of "moved on". But I instead of seling my Amiga stuff I bought my PCs second hand and so could have both. My A4kPPC is still networked with my XP-PC via RDesktop.
Nice setup - you can easily switch between AmigaOS and Windows. If the old IBrowse doesn't display correctly - just switch over to Win and browse the web with IE, Mozilla or Chrome or the like.
But it has no heart!! :)
Pardon?
Hardware does not have to have an heart, it just has to do for me what I want and how I want it. No heart required so far...
Today, with NG AmigaOS 4.x systems I agree and see no point in using custom PowerPC boards. If all you care about is the OS then port it to mainstream hardware.
All I care about is that the hardware does for me what I want and how I want it.
With all the money being spent on developing custom and inferior PowerPC motherboards surely porting to x86 makes more financial sense. I don't see the logic in continuing down the path AmigaOS 4.x is currently on.
You might be right with "inferior PowerPC motherboards" as long as you compare them with x86 PC motherboards.
But once you compare it with classic Amiga hardware, your "inferior PowerPC motherboards" are more a "giant leap" forward, me thinks...
Even if you ported AmigaOS to x86, you still would have to make it 64 Bit and SMP, as the harware trend in x86 world goes this way.
So - if you want to make full use of modern x86 hardware with an hypothetical x86-AmigaOS, you would also have to enhance this OS with 64 Bit and SMP.
If PowerPC architecture really will end one day, we can still make the move to x86. But why not advancing the OS on the PPC platform in the meantime?
I mean - the decision for PPC has been made long ago and neither you, nort me, will ever change that. We should be lucky that Trevor invested money in new Amiga capable hardware and tries his best also to support software development!
-
Ummm - what do you want to tell me with that? Do you want me also to move on?
Of course there are better tools for the job today. And although I like the AmigaOS this is not the reason.
Back in the early ninetees I was fascinated that I could do true 3d CAD on my Amiga 500. I also had an Amiga tool to convert the 3d data of DynaCadd into an executable CNC code that could run on the CAM system at the CAD school I was visiting at the time. It was slow, but it worked.
And all this at a fraction of the costs that I would have had to pay for a comparable x86 based system. Back then e.g. DynaCadd did cost 1,500 DM, while I would have had to pay 15,000 DM for AutoCAD.
Same for the hardware:
I bought my A500 with CBM 1082 monitor and CBM MPS 1500C color matrix printer for 1,200 DM, while a brandnew, naked 386 system (just Hercules monochrome graphics card, no sound) was around 6,000 DM at that time.
Later my decision to stay with the Amiga was simply bexause I had meanwhile collected so much software that it would have costed a fortune to replace all this Amiga productivity software with x86 software.
Furthermore I did not want buy a new PC each time a new Win version came up. Do you remember? Each new Win version required new hardware...
Over the years I had no other choice than getting PCs for the serious work, but always kept my Amigas - hoping, the Amiga situation would improve again one day.
So the Amiga still is my hobby.
Back in the mid ninetees/early 2000s I engaged with a society for the preservation of the historic Wiehltalbahn (Wiehl valley railway (http://www.wiehltalbahn.de/en/)).
When we had revived the line, I got the task to plan the IT infrastructure and would have loved to use Amigas for the task, but unfortunately back then no Amiga hardware with sufficient power was available.
Had the A1X1k already existed I would have tried to use. The XENA thing seemed to be very promising for this task, but so we ended up with PCs...
Why not?
I paid so much money for all my Amiga stuff - why should I just give/throw it away? It can still serve me as my hobby...
Here we seem to differ. For me it was an unexpensive tool and had to work the way I wanted. A stunning device back then (and in some aspects even today), but nevertheless just a tool. Nothing to found a "religion" on.
And despite that you nevertheless prefer the OCS over RTG? Seriously?
Well, to me it rather seems that the Amiga can only unleash its full potential with all the expansion stuff like RTG, PCI, USB and a decent accelerator...
An Amiga 4000 as it was delivered by C= (just with AGA) was simply not really usable for daily serious work.
As you "did not expand much" I guess you were happy with what these machines offered in their original state, namely their graphics?
What do you mean with "custom"?
"Custom hardware" for me were e.g. my sound digitiser and my prommer. I built both myself - there just were the schematics, the board layouts and and the part lists from an Amiga magazine. All self-made - optical transfer of the board layout to a blank PCB, etching, drilling, populating and soldering the boards. That's "custom made" from my POV.
Well, for me it actually was attractive. Both - performance- and price-wise.
Comparable Amiga parts (e.g. Zorro graphics boards) were much too expensive for what they had to offer. I always wanted to get the max out of my machines - and I only could achieve this by heavily expanding the machines. And obviously I didn't want to spend a fortune for components with Amiga label, while better and cheaper solutions from the PC world were available and could be used in an Amiga with an PCI busboard.
And - did they do so?
No.
Instead they preferred to go belly up by pumping all their money into their overpriced and underpowered x86 line of computers instead of improving the Amiga properly.
B.T.W. - what did you use to "shove it in the faces of your PC-loving friends", once you realised C= didn't develop the things you wanted, but went bust instead?
I also sort of "moved on". But I instead of seling my Amiga stuff I bought my PCs second hand and so could have both. My A4kPPC is still networked with my XP-PC via RDesktop.
Nice setup - you can easily switch between AmigaOS and Windows. If the old IBrowse doesn't display correctly - just switch over to Win and browse the web with IE, Mozilla or Chrome or the like.
Pardon?
Hardware does not have to have an heart, it just has to do for me what I want and how I want it. No heart required so far...
All I care about is that the hardware does for me what I want and how I want it.
You might be right with "inferior PowerPC motherboards" as long as you compare them with x86 PC motherboards.
But once you compare it with classic Amiga hardware, your "inferior PowerPC motherboards" are more a "giant leap" forward, me thinks...
Even if you ported AmigaOS to x86, you still would have to make it 64 Bit and SMP, as the harware trend in x86 world goes this way.
So - if you want to make full use of modern x86 hardware with an hypothetical x86-AmigaOS, you would also have to enhance this OS with 64 Bit and SMP.
If PowerPC architecture really will end one day, we can still make the move to x86. But why not advancing the OS on the PPC platform in the meantime?
I mean - the decision for PPC has been made long ago and neither you, nort me, will ever change that. We should be lucky that Trevor invested money in new Amiga capable hardware and tries his best also to support software development!
One correction you do not buy new hardware to run a new version of Windows but you buy new hardware and get a new version of Windows. I have never bought a new PC because a new version of Windows would require it.
-
One correction you do not buy new hardware to run a new version of Windows but you buy new hardware and get a new version of Windows. I have never bought a new PC because a new version of Windows would require it.
When I wrote that I was thinking of the time when people were running "Windows for 286" on their 80286 machines. And then had to buy 386 harware when they wanted to upgrade to Win 3.1. You could install the new Windows version, but in order to use all its advantages you had to add more RAM than it was possible on the old machines.
And I remember that there was something with "real mode" and "protected mode" - one of these modes was supported in the newer Win version, but to take advantage of it you needed new hw as well.
IIRC, this went on until the Pentium/WinXP era...
-
When I wrote that I was thinking of the time when people were running "Windows for 286" on their 80286 machines. And then had to buy 386 harware when they wanted to upgrade to Win 3.1. You could install the new Windows version, but in order to use all its advantages you had to add more RAM than it was possible on the old machines.
And I remember that there was something with "real mode" and "protected mode" - one of these modes was supported in the newer Win version, but to take advantage of it you needed new hw as well.
IIRC, this went on until the Pentium/WinXP era...
Yes me too but that is long today... today companies replace hardware every couple of years and private persons buy new hardware because they want to play the newest ego shooter. Windows-Versions are the last reason to buy new hardware. The only exception was recently when XP support was dropped and many companies replaced old hardware with new one and preinstalled Windows 7 (mostly).
-
My workbench is something like 800x600 in 256 colors, but never mind that. The point is: None of the "Amiga" systems is suitable for productive work anyhow. It's a system for retrocomputing, and the 68K does exactly that. So never mind running a workbench at 640x256 because that's exactly how it is supposed to be. If you want to run productive work, there's a PC.
Right, and you have a good web browser, and applications like blender ported to your system.
Listen, I don't need complete Amiga compatibility (outside of games, the applications don't have much utility).
And you can have your stamp collection, the only use I have for stamps is more practical.
I use them.
When you get to something like Natami, let me know, because it will have added capabilities.
The current run of "a little faster than an A1200" FPGA systems don't hold much interest in me either.
Its what I can use or create that governs my decision.
And a stock AGA doesn't cut, an enhanced Amiga is to expensive and has a limited market, and an FPGA only offers slight advantages.
Wake me up when legacy has really improved graphics and sound.
-
Ummm - what do you want to tell me with that? Do you want me also to move on?
Clearly you do whatever you want, I was just curious since your use for the Amiga seemed very application driven.
Here we seem to differ. For me it was an unexpensive tool and had to work the way I wanted. A stunning device back then (and in some aspects even today), but nevertheless just a tool. Nothing to found a "religion" on.
Yes, that's true. Back then you could get so much capability for your money with the Amiga. Not true anymore!
And despite that you nevertheless prefer the OCS over RTG? Seriously?
It's not that I preferred OCS over RTG, but I preferred the idea of Amiga-specific graphics/sound hardware, especially early on when it was so much more powerful than the competition. So I guess it was like a religion for me. Of course I wanted a nice, fast 256+ color workbench at a high resolution, but I wanted it done the "Amiga way" and not just by slapping in a PC graphics card.
As you "did not expand much" I guess you were happy with what these machines offered in their original state, namely their graphics?
I was to an extent, but always wanted more and hoped C= was working on new chips. Back then I only knew what was published in magazines, the internet was not what it is today, and I had no insider information - just lots of rumors. It's hard to say for sure, but I believe I left the Amiga scene before RTG became popular. I don't recall many or any RTG cards being available that made me want to purchase. I think maybe the OpalVision was announced and seemed interesting but too limited (not really RTG).
What do you mean with "custom"?
I mean the Amiga chipset, graphics & sound, things that were only found in the Amiga and made it stand out from the competition. "Amiga custom chips".
http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/CategoryList.aspx?mid=377
And - did they do so?
No.
Instead they preferred to go belly up by pumping all their money into their overpriced and underpowered x86 line of computers instead of improving the Amiga properly.
Did they really spend a lot of money on their x86 hardware? Here in the US it seemed like a very minor part of their business. I do not see that as a major reason for the fall of C=.
B.T.W. - what did you use to "shove it in the faces of your PC-loving friends", once you realised C= didn't develop the things you wanted, but went bust instead?
Hah! Nothing unfortunately. :( I exited the Amiga scene before C= went out of business because I needed a PC for school and work and could not afford both. I still remember selling my Amiga 4000 and purchasing a 486DX2/66 with Orchid Fahrenheit 1280 video card. It was a sad day!
However, a few years prior I got great pleasure showing my PC friends and work buddies the Walker Demo on the Amiga. It was so amazing at the time!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyMpU0nMuZo
Hardware does not have to have an heart, it just has to do for me what I want and how I want it. No heart required so far...
That's the religion part of things. Do cars need heart? If not, tell that to all the Mazda RX-7 fanatics out there who love their Wankel Rotary Engines. :)
I mean - the decision for PPC has been made long ago and neither you, nort me, will ever change that. We should be lucky that Trevor invested money in new Amiga capable hardware and tries his best also to support software development!
Agreed. I am not lucky, because I really have no interest in NG, but for users that do have interest I think it is amazing that development at this level is still occurring.
-
When you get to something like Natami, let me know, because it will have added capabilities.
The current run of "a little faster than an A1200" FPGA systems don't hold much interest in me either.
Its what I can use or create that governs my decision.
And a stock AGA doesn't cut, an enhanced Amiga is to expensive and has a limited market, and an FPGA only offers slight advantages.
Wake me up when legacy has really improved graphics and sound.
The FPGA Arcade and Mist are already significantly faster than a stock 1200 in both CPU power and AGA graphics speed even though their focus is extreme compatibility. They only use the TG68 core which gives fast 68030 speeds where the Apollo core has exceeded the 68060 in many benchmarks but requires a little bigger FPGA for maximum performance. AGA performance is several times the pitiful C= AGA performance primarily due to much better memory bandwidths. The FPGA Arcade has (chunky) RTG built in. These retro hardware simulator FPGA devices use generic Amiga simulation and only give a taste of what is possible with a FPGA Amiga.
It's not that I preferred OCS over RTG, but I preferred the idea of Amiga-specific graphics/sound hardware, especially early on when it was so much more powerful than the competition. So I guess it was like a religion for me. Of course I wanted a nice, fast 256+ color workbench at a high resolution, but I wanted it done the "Amiga way" and not just by slapping in a PC graphics card.
I would choose integrated standard fast enhanced graphics rather than reverse engineering drivers for PCIe cards. These reverse engineered drivers are often less than optimal and have incomplete support. There is also increased latency going through the PCIe bus.
That's the religion part of things. Do cars need heart? If not, tell that to all the Mazda RX-7 fanatics out there who love their Wankel Rotary Engines. :)
Cars can invoke human emotions.
(http://thumbsnap.com/s/cptKpKQ0.jpg)
I recently had a kid walk up a long driveway to look at my dirty silver 1993 RX-7. He ended up coming back to look at it again when I wasn't there and asked my family if it was for sale. I get crazy emotional reactions like this while some people think it is no more than a Ford Probe :).
-
I recently had a kid walk up a long driveway to look at my dirty silver 1993 RX-7. He ended up coming back to look at it again when I wasn't there and asked my family if it was for sale. I get crazy emotional reactions like this while some people think it is no more than a Ford Probe .
Hah! I had a 94 RX-7 Red Touring about 10 years back. I live in Massachusetts, purchased it form a seller on Ohio. I flew down and drove it back home. Best 11 hour drive of my life! I miss that car.
My first car love was when I was in high school, the 93 Silver Touring (with no spoiler) that was in the Mazda brochure.
Is your Silver 93 for sale??? ;)
-
...
"Could we have everything louder than everything else?"
Ian Gillan
[off topic]
Oh yes - good old Ian.
Too sad that Jon passed away few years ago!
So I will never ever have the chance again to see my favourite band live again in its best lineup (Ritchie Blackmore, Ian Gillan, Jon Lord, Ian Paice and Roger Glover).
But noone can take my memories of their concerts away!
And best of all:
When Ritchie had his first Rainbow gig in Cologne in 1976, he smashed his guitar in the old Deep Purple fashion and threw the parts into the audience. That's where I got the neck of his guitar...
:)
[/off topic]
EDIT:
Maybe you want to add another quotation:
" 'Tradition' is not to preserve the ashes but to pass on the flame!"
(Thomas Morus, 07. 02. 1478 - 06. 07. 1535, London)
-
[off topic]
Oh yes - good old Ian.
Too sad that Jon passed away few years ago!
So I will never ever have the chance again to see my favourite band live again in its best lineup (Ritchie Blackmore, Ian Gillan, Jon Lord, Ian Paice and Roger Glover).
But noone can take my memories of their concerts away!
And best of all:
When Ritchie had his first Rainbow gig in Cologne in 1976, he smashed his guitar in the old Deep Purple fashion and threw the parts into the audience. That's where I got the neck of his guitar...
:)
[/off topic]
EDIT:
Maybe you want to add another quotation:
" 'Tradition' is not to preserve the ashes but to pass on the flame!"
(Thomas Morus, 07. 02. 1478 - 06. 07. 1535, London)
That is Great!
I will use it.
And Blackmore's Rainbow?
Funny you mentioned it.
I've been playing a lot of the Dio era stuff lately.
Its an interesting shift for Ritchie.
A band that could still play "Mistreated" but that had a somewhat different sound.
After all, "Lady of the Lake" does NOT sound like a Deep Purple song.
I'm not too keen on the post Blackmore Deep Purple stuff.
They have one of my favorite guitar players, Steve Morse, but his style doesn't mesh well.
Although "Vincent Price" isn't bad.
In honor of Halloween, y'all should check out that one.
And you have the neck of Blackmore's guitar...very cool.
Addendum - The original RX-7 (with its RX-3 underpinnings) was an interesting low priced performance car with a very different engine.
But the RX-8 is SO much better (even if the costs got outrageous).
BTW - Sorry for the off topic posts.
-
But the RX-8 is SO much better (even if the costs got outrageous).
Mehh.... I much preferred my 3rd gen RX-7 twin turbo to the RX-8. But yeah, clearly superior to the original RX-7. Original RX-7 has great styling for its time, though, and I think the RX-8 was a bit too friendly looking and bland.
-
Mehh.... I much preferred my 3rd gen RX-7 twin turbo to the RX-8. But yeah, clearly superior to the original RX-7. Original RX-7 has great styling for its time, though, and I think the RX-8 was a bit too friendly looking and bland.
Oh, I rather like the styling of the RX-8, especially the suicide passenger doors.
But its not meant to fulfill the role of the original RX-7.
And those later model RX-7s had some interesting, if failure prone, hardware like active suspension components.
To be truthful, I rather like the original RX-7 and its predecessor the RX-3.
At one time, I had the demented idea of putting an RX-7 engine and other components into a Mazda GLC (which also shares an RX-3 legacy).
These days, that would be pointless since we have decades of vehicles like the Gti with higher output motors in economy car chassis.
But back then?
It would have been cool to smoke someone who thought they had a performance advantage over you.
Rather like the looks I got from people in '85 when my dull silver Dodge Omni GLH (with all the decals removed) - through my rear view mirror.
Edit - Stop drawing me off topic guys.
" 'Tradition' is not to preserve the ashes but to pass on the flame!" - Thomas Morus, (07. 02. 1478 - 06. 07. 1535, London)
There is a good phrase to summarize the state of affairs in the Amiga community.
So would the 'stamp collectors' stop harping on their use of legacy hardware?
FPGAs, PPCs, or X64. Onward and upward.
-
Right, and from a retro point of view that's all that's needed. If people are happy with a 68020/30/60 when they use their Amigas today they should be ecstatic about something that might exceed the 68060 performance.
I'd rather use my Amiga to play some games, tune my workbench, play with some applications that I never used before - things that I did back in the day. If I want to browse the web, create a PDF, read email, or work on a spreadsheet there are much better tools for the job.
Back in the 80s/90s the draw to using the Amiga instead of the PC was because it was different and BETTER. Nowadays it's just different and way WORSE - different is not sufficient to me to replace my PC.
I agree 100% with these remarks of Kemlar. I can save one of each of the systems running classic and NG or Amiga like OS's, and the one I use the most is my FPGA Arcade because it gives me that nostalgic experience that I have always loved, in a system that I know that is not dying from aging, as it's the case with classic hardware. Finding replacement parts for classics i becoming and odyssey, and the prices that they charge for them, can lead you to but multiple PC's instead, and for the same amount of money. The same is the case with new AmigaOS hardware.
-
and the one I use the most is my FPGA Arcade because it gives me that nostalgic experience that I have always loved, in a system that I know that is not dying from aging, as it's the case with classic hardware
Right! I always thought I'd prefer classic hardware, but man I'm really loving my FPGA Arcade.... it's making me consider the thought of selling at lease some of the other hardware I have, but I'm afraid I may regret it later...
-
That is Great!
I will use it.
Fine!
On the occasion of my discussion with Kremlar about expanding or not expanding Amigas I was reminded of this pearl of wisdom and thought it might fit in your collection...
...
And you have the neck of Blackmore's guitar...very cool.
Thank you!
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/45008901/Blackmore%27s%20guitar_1.jpeg)
Neck of Ritchie Blackmore's guitar, Rainbow concert Cologne, Sporthalle, 1976
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/45008901/Blackmore%27s%20guitar_2.jpeg)
Proof of genuineness...
Addendum - The original RX-7 (with its RX-3 underpinnings) was an interesting low priced performance car with a very different engine.
But the RX-8 is SO much better (even if the costs got outrageous).
BTW - Sorry for the off topic posts.
Not exactly a "low priced performance car", but my favourite car since LeMans 1966 (I was 9 back then):
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/45008901/GT40-3.jpg)
Just returned from a test drive: Ford GT Modelyear 2005 and I
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/45008901/GT%20Modelyear%202016.JPG)
Ford GT Modelyear 2016 and I on the occasion of its presentation at Ford Development Centre in Cologne Merkenich a few weeks ago
DISCLAIMER:
Sorry - but I don't know why the GT photos are so big when linked here - on my PC all photos have the same size - namely that of the guitar photos...
-
Not a problem.
The GT40 and Blackmore's back catalog, both good reasons to remember the late '60's and early '70's fondly.
And the Ford GT?
I think they were just trying to prove that they could still kick Italian butt if they wanted to.
And thanks again for another reminder that technology moves on.
After all, the GT was SO more refined than a road worthy LeMans card would be.
-
Hah! I had a 94 RX-7 Red Touring about 10 years back. I live in Massachusetts, purchased it form a seller on Ohio. I flew down and drove it back home. Best 11 hour drive of my life! I miss that car.
My first car love was when I was in high school, the 93 Silver Touring (with no spoiler) that was in the Mazda brochure.
Is your Silver 93 for sale??? ;)
My RX-7 is a silver base model with R1 front lip, no spoiler in the back and a black Border Racing hood. The pic was a later model Spirit R but it was a good size and a very clean picture.
And those later model RX-7s had some interesting, if failure prone, hardware like active suspension components.
The 3rd gen RX-7 never had "active suspension components". It is a pure driving machine with non-adjustable shocks, linear springs and no traction control. They did all have anti-lock brakes though. Some of the other sports cars of the time like the Mitsubishi GT3000 VR-4 and Toyota Supra were getting higher tech driving aids. The sequential turbo system of the RX-7 was complex and failure prone though. I simplified mine while retaining the sequential turbo operation and haven't had problems. The Wankel engines themselves are short lived under boost but I would never replace the heart, soul and unique feel of the RX-7.
Not exactly a "low priced performance car", but my favourite car since LeMans 1966 (I was 9 back then):
I've never been a big fan of Ford sports cars but the Ford GT(40) is an exception. I like that the Ford GT look is so close to the original but I wish they had brought the price down for the masses even if the performance would have been less. The 3rd gen RX-7 was getting a little expensive for the time as well. My favorite affordable sports car concept today would be something like the Lotus Elise/Exige (a fun lightweight driving machine). There are parallels in my mind with the Amiga and sports cars as well. The original Amiga was a computer for the masses with a great driving experience which put the user in control. The new Amigas are computers for the (elite) classes which few will experience and some of the changes are not improvements.
-
The 3rd gen RX-7 never had "active suspension components".
Sorry, I must have miss heard it when a friend told me his RX-7's shocks weren't working correctly because the the control system was on the fritz.
I've never been a big fan of Ford sports cars but the Ford GT(40) is an exception. I like that the Ford GT look is so close to the original but I wish they had brought the price down for the masses even if the performance would have been less. The 3rd gen RX-7 was getting a little expensive for the time as well. My favorite affordable sports car concept today would be something like the Lotus Elise/Exige (a fun lightweight driving machine). There are parallels in my mind with the Amiga and sports cars as well. The original Amiga was a computer for the masses with a great driving experience which put the user in control. The new Amigas are computers for the (elite) classes which few will experience and some of the changes are not improvements.
Well the GT40 actually started life as a Lola design (which explain why it looks so good).
Lotuses? I spent years talking my self out of a Lotus 7 recreation.
And I share your general dislike of most Ford sports cars.
Except for the '69 fastback model, I've never understood the whole Mustang thing.
BTW - About this A-eon proposal...:laugh1:
-
The sequential turbo system of the RX-7 was complex and failure prone though. I simplified mine while retaining the sequential turbo operation and haven't had problems. The Wankel engines themselves are short lived under boost but I would never replace the heart, soul and unique feel of the RX-7.
:thumbsup:
-
A hairdresser's car! :P