Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: brostenen on March 06, 2019, 08:36:00 AM

Title: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: brostenen on March 06, 2019, 08:36:00 AM
...and I will throw out the claim here, and see how deep the rabbit's hole goes.

Vampire V4 (and V2 to an extend) with AGA core, AmigaONE-x1000/x5000, AmigaONE-500 and so on are not real Amiga's he claimed. The dude said that they can not be Amiga's because they were not released and or invented by Commodore. I say they are real Amiga's, now it is up to all of you to tell me that they are not.

Ball rolling. Let's me see how deep the rabbit's hole goes on that claim, here on an Amiga community.  ;D
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: mingle on March 06, 2019, 09:11:19 AM
Okay, I'll chuck in my two cents (despite this issue being done to death many times already...)…

In my opinion, the real Amiga died with Commodore, just as the real Mini died with Morris Motors/British Leyland...

Everything that came later is 'Amiga' by label only..

Mike.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: pyrre on March 06, 2019, 09:34:06 AM
If it looks like a duck, if it cuacks like a duck and if it walks like a duck. it probably is a .......
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: BozzerBigD on March 06, 2019, 09:36:50 AM
Commodore did not design the Amiga they just brought the A1000 prototypes to a stage of being able to be mass produced. The A500 was a product of C='s ability to cost reduce and squeeze a profit margin due to vertical integration. That was their strength. They NEVER successfully upgraded the core Amiga technology in line with Moore's Law or even gave the green light to Ranger with Jay's graphics and graphics memory upgrades. Since there is no road map as to how Amigas SHOULD be upgraded from C= the remaining companies are within their rights to design and develop their vision especially if they are building on AmigaOS (AmigaONE) or the custom chips or 68k CPU (Vampire).

Your friend probably thinks the A500 IS the Amiga and would judge an A4000T or A3000 on how compatible they are with his old A500 games! Are Video Toasters Amigas? Are Phase5 eqipped machines Amigas? Should ALL Amigas be crippled little stock 0.5 MB A500s from the 80s? Is even the Workbench 1.3 upgrade allowed or should you stick with the one C= deemed you should have on purchase?
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: goldfish on March 06, 2019, 09:47:10 AM
In my eyes its an Amiga as long as it is not hosted on another platform like windows and uae. If it runs amiga OS native then I don't see why it cant have the Amiga name. Vampire / Amigaone / Mist all fit into this group.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: brostenen on March 06, 2019, 11:46:14 AM
Yeah... My point is. That an modern AmigaOS 4.x machine, like the x5000 is still an Amiga. Things have evolved.

Compared to calssic Amiga's and PC's. Then we do not have such things as BIOS, Kickstart-Rom-Chips, USB and thunderbolt and nearly all original ports have been replaced with modern stuff like HDMI, USB and Thunderbolt-whatever. Does not run AmigaOS-M68k and do not run Dos. AmigaOS is rewritten and Windows are based on NT. So yeah.... If anyone say that modern Amiga's are not Amiga's, then it is the same as saying that modern PC's are not PC's.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: F1Lupo on March 06, 2019, 09:06:42 PM
if it runs AmigaOS natively it’s an AMIGA ! Also if you love and cherish it more than any other electronic device and you put an Amiga Checkmark or Boing Ball sticker on it that’s also an AMIGA !

oh almost forgot if you hate Apple you are an Amigan!

mic drop ;)
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: BozzerBigD on March 06, 2019, 11:24:04 PM
@klx300r

Quote
oh almost forgot if you hate Apple you are an Amigan!

How about if you like the Apple Mac but hate what Apple have done to it? i.e. Morphing the MacBook into an iOS laptop and making their 'Pro' line into Starbucks machines for the hipsters rather than power creators / developers!

Hell they've turned openly aggressive towards gamers by binning OpenGL & OpenCL support and by shortly confining 32-bit apps and iDVD to the bin have destroyed their last killer app (I used iDVD with iMovie but I'll use Premiere and Encore now). I don't like Apple, I hate the iPhone but the Mac WAS the best mainstream desktop / laptop left standing.

"Think Different" = "Think about spending more for less from the company that thinks you're lucky to own a piece of their electronic jewellery with 25% less features, ports and air cooling solutions than last year!"
P.S. At least you get 500% more thermal throttling on your CPUs than their nearest competitor!
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: slaapliedje on March 06, 2019, 11:34:16 PM
I would say a real Amiga is anything that uses Amiga libraries to run Amiga software in hardware. 
So an AmigaOne x5000 would count, because it's running Amiga (OS4) libraries to run Amiga software directly on the hardware.

Though by this definition, AROS would also be an Amiga, since the libraries are reverse engineered to run on different architectures.

If you wanted to be more stingy on the definition, make it require Kickstart in chip form (that would exclude the NG systems I think, and any FPGA one).  Meh, an Amiga is whatever one wants to define it as.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: JimS on March 07, 2019, 12:01:19 AM
I'm of the "walks like a duck" school. If it runs like an Amiga it is one. Even my old laptop with UAE and a clone of my old real A2000's hard drive.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: gertsy on March 07, 2019, 07:06:21 AM
A goose with a sore throat, could look, walk and sound like a duck.  I think that's the challenge.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: wawrzon on March 07, 2019, 08:08:08 AM
Though by this definition, AROS would also be an Amiga, since the libraries are reverse engineered to run on different architectures.

on an amiga aros can use amiga libraries, classes and run amiga executables all the way, without even any emulation layer. but it doesnt make it amiga. aros is still simply aros, an amiga compatible system, same as os4 or morphos. and the hardware these systems run on are respectively what they are, whether they are pcs, old ppc macs or custom ppc boards, it doesnt make them more or less amigas, beyond what they really are.. i dont understand this forthcoming identity dispute,as if people had to constantly justify their interests to themselves..
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: AdvancedFollower on March 07, 2019, 09:20:47 AM
I think the real question here is, does it matter anymore?
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: Gulliver on March 07, 2019, 12:34:33 PM
I kind of agree with what both wawrzon and AdvancedFollower said, in that it does not really matter, and why is it even important.

In the strict sense of the meaning everything not made by either the original Amiga team or Commodore, is not an Amiga. It maybe amiga-ish, but it certainly is not an Amiga.

And as example, I can tell you that I have a DraCo that I dearly love and enjoy. It was only designed to run AmigaOS, but it is not an Amiga, and I am okay with that.

The same can be said about my rasberry pi running Amibian, and my notebook running WinUAE.

I believe we are doing a disfavour in not calling things by their proper name because of the feelings we have involved in that particular platform.

Just enjoy the Amiga hobby in whatever flavor you prefer, but please call things by their name. :)
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: paul1981 on March 07, 2019, 02:12:14 PM
...and I will throw out the claim here, and see how deep the rabbit's hole goes.

Vampire V4 (and V2 to an extend) with AGA core, AmigaONE-x1000/x5000, AmigaONE-500 and so on are not real Amiga's he claimed. The dude said that they can not be Amiga's because they were not released and or invented by Commodore. I say they are real Amiga's, now it is up to all of you to tell me that they are not.

Ball rolling. Let's me see how deep the rabbit's hole goes on that claim, here on an Amiga community.  ;D

They are Amiga, but they're not Commodore-Amiga. You'll get those that enjoy one, the other or both. I'm sure we can all be friends though. Workbench/AmigaOS is what we all have in common.
Title: Re: These are NOT Amiga's a fellow vintage computer enthutiast claims...
Post by: psxphill on March 08, 2019, 12:23:37 AM
They NEVER successfully upgraded the core Amiga technology in line with Moore's Law or even gave the green light to Ranger with Jay's graphics and graphics memory upgrades.

Ranger graphics is a myth, the ranger prototype that was revealed a couple of years ago bears an uncanny resemblance to the byte by byte Pal (it's a zorro 1 backplane with c00000 ranger ram).

AGA was a reasonable upgrade, although I would agree it was a couple of years too late and was missing chunky pixels.

It even supported VRAM according to the documentation, using the otherwise unused UHRES registers. No idea if they actually work in practise, or whether its like the 8 mb chip ram jumper.

I haven't found evidence, but there is a suggestion online UHRES is also supported by ECS. In which case it might be that this is exactly what Jay was talking about. It's unclear how vram would work in practise.

I don't really get Jay's attitude, he was against doing the fat agnus which seems to be why the group got shut down but the original design was supposed to be for a games console. There is no way that would have survived at the price point that would have been necessary with the A1000 chipset design, I'm not sure it would have made it at the A500 price point either. After the VCS and Atari 8 bit then I would have thought he would have realised what was required in terms of cost reduction.