(RFD) Amiga.org's future

[whoosh777]

As most of you have heard, the site's software will -- by necessity -- need to change shortly to accommodate the mandatory upgrades to PHP.

To recap, keeping the current (7 year old) version of Xoops that we run for compatibility is no longer possible. There are core changes within PHP that would require us to minimally upgrade to a later version of Xoops which isn't HTML 3.x compatible (which is pretty much all the classic Amiga will handle).

While it's possible to go through the entire code base and change every line of code to be PHP 5 compatible, the amount of work involved is staggering compared to the returns realized (we'd still be running seven year old, unsupported software).

this is probably an ignorant suggestion,

but if the problem is the dependency on PHP 4,

couldnt you just change the host? :-D

namecheap.com is very cheap hosting, about

$6 a month for modest hosting,

by default they are PHP 5, but they support
both PHP 4 and PHP 5. You can select which from
the php configuration in the controls

But maybe I misunderstood the full problem and
there are other dependency problems.

 :crazy:

the current graphics of the forum are fine
and more sophisticated than the few
non Amiga forums I have used.

you never see stuff like this elsewhere:

:flame: :destroy: :roflmao:

and that guys avatar with the fly flying around
in this discussion, a bit morbid but impressive!
there isnt that level of graphics outside of the Amiga scene.

the version of Xoops may be legacy but the usage is
STILL ahead of what PC users :madashell: use

its not what you have, but what you do with what you
have that matters. PCs today are more powerful than
my uni mainframe, but the performance is worse than
the Amiga 500. eg XP can only have at most 26 partitions
as they label these A, B, C, ... Z AND you can only
have a maximum of 4 bootable partitions per drive, as even
2009 mobos dont support booting from logical partitions.

if you go beyond 26 partitions on Windows eg insert
an extra flash drive then it cannot be used until
you relabel from another labelled partition.


But the earliest Amiga HD's had an UNLIMITED number of
partitions and an UNLIMITED number of boot partitions.

On the Amiga you can do accent symbols eg é

as alt-f e  but try googling for how you do that with
XP, its very complicated

(alt 0233 for é)


Alternatively if you set up your own server you
could install the necessary legacy dependencies,

but I know nothing about rolling your own server!

[whoosh777]

the_leander wrote:

whoosh777 wrote:


this is probably an ignorant suggestion,

but if the problem is the dependency on PHP 4,

couldnt you just change the host? :-D

The problem is that support for PHP 4 is ending, meaning any security issues that crop up from this point foward will not be addressed by the maintainers as they have in the past.

Do you remember what happened to this place when it was running on PHP nuke prior to the great shutdown? Do you?

I dont remember as I wasnt there!

maybe you are inventing the event!

I would prefer to have had an answer from Wayne
as he was fielding the question!


when the prime minister takes questions from the
press, the other journalists dont answer the questions
for him! as they would then clearly push their
own agenda.

I spend most of my time programming and the main
websurfing I do is for non computing things eg
following financial news.

Your argument then is not about compatibility but
about security?

the only alternative options to what has been said
then are eg to port Firefox to 68k-AmigaOS

or I dont know if CSS can be done via an IBrowse plugin
which would then need to be coded or ported.

whoosh777 wrote:
the version of Xoops may be legacy but the usage is
STILL ahead of what PC users :madashell: use

Care to supply a citation for that?

yes:

typical x86 forum thread:

http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=10108

which has more impressive graphics?

this thread or that thread,
and you can select out any other thread from
that forum

I think Amiga users often are fighting an imaginary
enemy, they imagine that Windows users are
in some sort of computer paradise.

in fact they are in a computer hell!

And they imagine that Microsoft are out to
get all competitor systems,


[/quote]

whoosh777 wrote:
its not what you have, but what you do with what you
have that matters. PCs today are more powerful than
my uni mainframe, but the performance is worse than
the Amiga 500. eg XP can only have at most 26 partitions
as they label these A, B, C, ... Z AND you can only
have a maximum of 4 bootable partitions per drive, as even
2009 mobos dont support booting from logical partitions.

if you go beyond 26 partitions on Windows eg insert
an extra flash drive then it cannot be used until
you relabel from another labelled partition.


But the earliest Amiga HD's had an UNLIMITED number of
partitions and an UNLIMITED number of boot partitions.

All very interesting and utterly pointless in this discussion. And quite frankly, I'll take 3 or 4 partitions on a one Terabyte drive over 50 on a 4Gb drive or whatever the limitation is now.

None of this changes the fact that the site must move on. :roll:

AHA, FALSE ARGUMENT,

because you can have an unlimited number of boot partitions
with a Terabyte on AmigaOS.

Also SATA allows lots of your terabyte drives, but
4 partitions on 6 SATA drives and you will run out
of volume labels!

(as the optical drive will be another label,
which then leaves just one label left)

The Windows scheme isnt scalable, the Amiga 1000 scheme
IS scalable.

Actually todays mobos allow much more hardware than
Windows can cope with.

but the AmigaOS 3.9 architecture can cope with it,

whoosh777 wrote:
On the Amiga you can do accent symbols eg é

as alt-f e  but try googling for how you do that with
XP, its very complicated

é is Alt-Gr E. (right hand alt key.) Very complicated indeed!

NOPE, disinformation,

I tried just now on XP with Firefox, Internet Explorer AND Qedit,

and in all 3 cases Alt-Gr E causes the Edit menu to open,
doesnt cause any char to appear!

and I tried Alt-Gr E with capslock, with shift,
and just the lower case, in all cases it causes the
edit menu of the respective program.

Trust me that I have Googled various sites and the ONLY
XP way to do e with the accent is Alt-[number-code]

but on AmigaOS it is just Alt-f e

the only way to get more useful shortcuts to create the
char on XP is by buying commercial products.

whoosh777 wrote:
Alternatively if you set up your own server you
could install the necessary legacy dependencies,

but I know nothing about rolling your own server!

It's a ball ache, it's expensive, but most of all, it doesn't solve the fundamental issue that the site would as time went on become more and more vulnerable to hacking and or other mischief.

Also, and let's be clear here. Wayne has run this site for the better part of a decade now, he could have pulled the plug long ago and there were times in this little soap operas history where he could have done so justifiably. But he didn't. He catered to a tiny, fractious and in some cases downright nasty community far beyond what most people would have done, he held the line whilst most others dropped by the wayside.

Technology moves on. So suck it up.

well as you know all the answers maybe you should
run the site!

You say its expensive but I bet you dont know!

you could only know for sure if you have set up your
own server, please tell what the URL is for your
own server!

there was a guy on I think the Windows gcc mailing list
who had set up his own server from home.

I have done some PHP coding and it looks pretty safe to me,

if a forum is text only (including some text interpreted as smileys) I dont see what can go wrong.

all that malware could do is enter a huge amount of text
but you can counter that by using a time based quota system
of how much can be uploaded.

now if you can upload an avatar, then you could smuggle in
a virus, but that could be dealt with by avatars being
manually approved of.

hosting companies either disallow or manually verify
anything at all risky. they use an opt-in principle
rather than an opt-out. If you allow everything
and then opt-out things found to be risky then
you will continue getting security problems.

But if you disallow EVERYTHING and just opt-in
things which cannot cause problems then it is
pretty safe.

that is why Windows has hundreds of viruses and malware
as the default design is an active system (opt out),
whereas AmigaOS is by default a passive system (opt in)


on *nix it must be less of a problem, by limiting what
files can be uploaded, confining uploads to a specific
server directory, and limiting the filenames and their
protection flags.

I am very curious to know how you get past php
on a *nix server hosting account.

you could login by chance, but servers usually
will block your ip number if your login fails
a few times, but say some malware logged in,
then what?


surely you are limited to what the forum buttons allow,
eg replying,

you just have to limit how much malice can be done
with the forum features (buttons, text, uploads)

NOW if your server was Windows then yes, all hell could
break loose. But you should be using *nix for your servers,
dont even think about using Windows!

BTW using Windows FUD wont work on me as I have
3 PCs all with XP, one I built myself,

and I have installed 32 and 64 bit Linuxes,
Fedora Core and Ubuntu, and built a brand new
tower system with XP SP3 a few weeks ago for
some relatives.

thus if you make any assertions I will test them out
directly, your tricks may work on others

[whoosh777]

Well I think the question is all academic

as www.amiga.org CRASHES IBrowse on WinUAE here

ALREADY! :griping: :destroy:
the only way to visit this thread for me is using either Firefox or IE on XP, or Firefox on Linux.

I think today anyone interested in 68k-AmigaOS should
use it via either WinUAE or Amiga Forever on
Windows.

as its quite a good way to control a PC

IN STARK CONTRAST the PC forum I mentioned can
be accessed just fine from IBrowse here,

http://board.flatassembler.net/index.php

maybe you should have some of what they are having?

:pint: :crazy:

[whoosh777]

I can't beliveve I'm weighing in on this, since it's irrelevant, but NTFS supports mounting drives without a drive letter just fine.

unfortunately the drive then vanishes from the list
of drives, eg when you click Start My-computer

and it is inaccessible from WinUAE

Now you could mount it as a folder in a different drive
with a letter, but I have 3 PCs and 3 USB2 drives,

which I move between machines, as well as 4 internal
HDs

if I start mounting drives as folders the drives will
vanish.

thus it is STILL deficient compared to a 68k-Amiga

where ALL drives APPEAR on the Workbench and there
is no nonsense of drive letters and the

RIDICULOUS idea of mounting an unlettered drive as a folder
of a lettered drive.


the way the Amiga does this is PERFECT, just right
and CANNOT be bettered

the way Windows does it is just idiotic

[whoosh777]

Wayne wrote:
c'mon guys, please.  Let's stay on topic?

I'm really getting torn here between investing dozens of hours to learn Drupal, or the exciting prospect of "rolling our own" by way of simply writing a new site up around the existing data.

The problem is, drupal is far advanced and could be ready to go in a couple of weeks.  Writing one specifically for Amiga.org sounds exciting but could potentially take months, if not years to get to where the current system is now.

Wayne

well the answer is probably to go both ways,

learn an existing product right now and then when

that is up and running attempt to write your own forum

code as a background project.


as you point out the thing is to achieve data compatiblity,
a bit like using a different email client:

same emails, different email interpreter



learning ANY existing system will be guaranteed to

succeed whereas writing your own system will usually

take longer than you anticipate.


and as you point out, learning an existing product

is "dozens" of hours, whereas rolling your own forum

will be months.




but creating your own code in the long term is always

preferable and if done correctly evades

gratuitous dependency problems.

eg you could try writing your own forum

with php in a php-portable way: where you can port the

php code to future forms of php.


php is syntactically IDENTICAL to C, so portable php

code is an IDENTICAL problem to writing portable C code.


with php things like text boxes are achieved AUTOMAGICALLY by simply delegating the problem to HTML.

if you visit my website, the email box at the top

and the picture display options at the top are all

done in php. You can try sending me an email from

the email box to see php in action. or try selecting

different picture display options.



the URL is:

www.whoosh777.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk



php is server side so AmigaOS doesnt need any compatibility,

just ensure that the output html is compatible with

the AmigaOS browsers.


the server simply interprets the php and outputs

ascii which is the webpage the visiting browser

sees.


when I reply here, the webpage is

....../reply.php?forum=22&post_id=580111&...

the php script is reply.php

and the args are forum post_id ....

arg "forum" has value "22"
arg "post_id" has value "580111"
etc

the arg values are separated by &'s

because text input is usually large, they use
a more efficient way to send the args

after replying the URL is:
..../viewtopic.php?topic_id=50302&post_id=580225&order=0&viewmode=flat&pid=0&forum=22#forumpost580225

that is also a php script viewtopic.php

and the args are topic_id post_id order viewmode pid
forum

eg arg "viewmode" has value "flat"
and arg "order" has value 0

php is truly cool, and the only scripting language
to consider IMHO, eg this forum is ultimately php

the visitor CANNOT view the php script which is
reply.php or viewtopic.php
all they see is the html output when the server
executes reply.php

one other thing, dont trust anyone who says
one or another system has bugs as that is likely
to be FUD.

ask them to give the URL for the alleged bugs
before you believe such.

I can show you php I have done which is the
above URL.

the brilliant thing about php is you can synthesize
web content on the fly, whether it be an html page
or a jpeg or anything.

that is why most forums and intelligent web pages
are done with php

[whoosh777]

EyeAm wrote:
Wayne, I may be speaking of something still in its infancy, premature, or 'not there yet', BUT...Have you investigated using Carl Sassenrath's REBOL as a basis for all of the forums and its features?

Over on Carl's blog, not too long ago, they were talking about REBOL-based forums (I think the particular one was in France). Someone had written it all in REBOL.

If it's just not there yet, then it might be far more trouble than it's worth--what with the necessity of graphics creations and other unseen-by-user mechanics. But if not, it might be interesting.

I think this is the post I saw:
http://www.rebol.com/article/0384.html

 :shrug:  :-D

Sassenrath created the basis of AmigaOS,
namely exec. brilliant at OS's, yes,
he is one of my main influences, but just
on OS's not on languages.


but looking at that forum you could create something
vastly better with even just a few lines of php

the guys who wrote that forum havent heard of
recursive rectangles, they also dont seem to
know about the concept of borders. Their
text is right up against the margin.

the reason php is so good is that it is syntactically
NOT a script language but is C. it has the
syntactic power of C, FURTHERMORE
THERE IS NO LEARNING CURVE
if you know C you AUTOMAGICALLY know php
with REBOL you will have to learn
an entirely new language which is a risk.

whereas REBOL looks like a script language,
and the proof of the pudding is to look at this
forum and look at that forum.

C so far is the only proven language for creating
really complicated things. IMHO it would be
an ujustified risk to go for REBOL

(I am developing my own language to challenge C on this,
and so far am succeeding,
but right now C is THE ONLY proven language,
even C++ isnt proven)

Wayne would be better off writing his own php forum code
from scratch.


to be brutally frank you could do something a lot
better with a SMALLER php script instead
of depending on rebol

cut to the chase

[whoosh777]

@leander:

you should follow the thread and to keep on topic

You took some days to reply which suggests you went
to research the questions AFTER my post!

whoosh777 wrote:
the only alternative options to what has been said
then are eg to port Firefox to 68k-AmigaOS

Or, you know, use a computer that's standards compliant online and keep the Amiga for things it was actually good at.

that is certainly true, at the same time in order to
do that the main way is via the internet,

thus one may have to keep the Amiga up to date for
the internet at least.

whoosh777 wrote:
yes:

typical x86 forum thread:

http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=10108

which has more impressive graphics?

this thread or that thread,
and you can select out any other thread from
that forum

Good lord. That is the sum total of your argument?
I won't even dignify that.

the claim was that the forum was out of date,
well we need some examples to PROVE that,

its all very well if there are newer versions
of everything, but if the end result is less
effective SO WHAT if the underlying software is
out of date?

NOPE, disinformation,

I tried just now on XP with Firefox, Internet Explorer AND Qedit,

and in all 3 cases Alt-Gr E causes the Edit menu to open,
doesnt cause any char to appear!

Tried on Vista, Xandros, Elive and Zeta 1.2. (with the default en-uk keymap out of win2k pro) ALL OF THEM produce é.

Come back when you get a clue, or an unstuffed computer.

this is off topic, but it is you who are
INCOMPATIBLE using a UK keyboard.

THE STANDARD is the US keyboard, and unfortunately for you
what I said is TRUE for THE STANDARD, THE US KEYBOARD.

You dont seriously expect the 5.4 billion people who
dont live in the UK to use a UK keyboard???

from someone arguing about compatibility I find that
astonishing!


apologies Wayne for going off topic here,
but this guy isnt paying attention and I reference
this point in an on-topic way later, namely
that he is just researching the UK scene which
isnt the mainstream.

whoosh777 wrote:
You say its expensive but I bet you dont know!

Oooh, you want to play do you?

you took a really long time to reply,

been desperately researching the question? :lol:

Ok... Run your own server. Initial outlay for a decent server... Lets say a nice little 2 way x86 system, and to save costs a linux distro. You're still looking at around £1000 including spares, ups etc.

if the server is JUST for hosting amiga.org then
you can use a standard PC, I'm not asking to run
an entire ISP, just to run ONE website.

Then the line... Even for 2Mbit SDSL you're looking at £100 a month (Eclipse business broadband) and I seriously doubt that would be even close to the needs of this site during peek hours.

Oh and of course, this assumes you live in an area where you could get a decent line in.

If you go with your own server plugged into a datacentre you are then stuck where you are now - at the mercy of the inevitable march of the upgrades.

all that proves is there are expensive ways to do it,
and it appears you live in the UK otherwise why use
a uk-keyboard? but Wayne probably
is in the US where it is likely to be a lot cheaper,
eg all the cheap hosting tends to be in the US.

you see if you found a cheap way to do it you wouldnt
tell us as you are a no-can-do person!

whoosh777 wrote:
you could only know for sure if you have set up your
own server, please tell what the URL is for your
own server!

Wrong. I could only know if I actually researched it myself. I don't have to BUY it to know the costs involved!

not necessarily, as your research may be deficient!

these things are COMPLETELY different for each country,
I doubt you have researched the entire planet,

whoosh777 wrote:
BTW using Windows FUD wont work on me as I have
3 PCs all with XP, one I built myself,

and I have installed 32 and 64 bit Linuxes,
Fedora Core and Ubuntu, and built a brand new
tower system with XP SP3 a few weeks ago for
some relatives.

I used to build PCs for a living, most recently I helped setup a winXP system with SP3 for Gadgetmaster by way of a thankyou for a nice meal, but building them on my own I was still installing XP mostly (a few win2k boxen as well). My knowledge includes Windows (1.0 - Vista), Solaris (on sparc), linux (32 and 64bit) Freebsd, openbsd, netbsd, BeOS, Zeta.

And by knowledge, I mean at least 2 years day to day usage of all of those OS's in either a desktop or server environment (with the exception of Vista, which I've had access to only for the last 12 months).

Currently I run Xandros, Elive, Zeta and Vista.

you have installed quite a lot of junk as well! :lol:

also this is the internet and you can say anything at all!
:-D

you could have googled for "installed a lot of PCs"
and just cut and paste what someone else said!

the main rule I follow is NEVER believe a naysayer!

and you, my friend are a naysayer


as far as compatibility goes I would say the only
systems that count are XP, Vista and Ubuntu

the other stuff you mentioned may be very interesting
but its all niche stuff as far as users go.

whoosh777 wrote:
thus if you make any assertions I will test them out
directly, your tricks may work on others

I tend to take the view that people generally judge others on the basis of how they themselves behave. :lol:

no idea what that is supposed to mean.

[whoosh777]

Wayne wrote:

So far, the front runner ideas are to spend a hundred or so hours learning the basics of Drupal, which isn't guaranteed to be able to import everything.

(Important note, we haven't the space available on the current server to attempt it as a test)

or...  a very strong and sensible second is to move to VBulletin, which would be fast, and expedient as well as almost guaranteed to be able to import everything.  It would also most assuredly be about 99% classic Amiga compatible.

Of the two, Drupal shows the most promise but also the most headaches and work.  VBulletin is the easy way out but would require lots of work by way of the "blank pages mod" to create the missing parts such as the unique pages we have here on the site as well as to build a new module for news posts, etc.

As a web developer, I'm strictly torn, but due to the time constraints I face on a personal level (and the fact that I CANNOT let AO interfere with realjob[tm]) I'm leaning towards vBulletin.

Wayne

well you could get a rudimentary forum up and running
directly in php in not too much time.

I would say that is a good option

php outputting html

and then gradually implement the further features.

eg to begin with just get a text only version,

PROBABLY to do the graphics you just need to reprocess
the text by replacing eg : lol : by the appropriate
html pointing to the animation.

you write some php to scan for : and then to see
if its one of the standard emoticon codes,

if it is you then substitute that with the html

otherwise you leave the : unchanged,


and you can study the Xoops source for tricks eg
study

modules/newbb/reply.php

on your server.

out of interest:

HOW MUCH CODE IS reply.php

?

I bet its not a huge amount as the donkey work
is done by the browser,

[whoosh777]

EyeAm wrote:

@whoosh777:
I knew most of that. I wasn't necessarily advocating REBOL outside of the fact Carl created Amiga OS and, only then, "IF" REBOL would be sufficient. I think I put enough "IFs" in my post about it. :-)

my criticism is more of the example usage of REBOL.

we need new ideas, but to evaluate an idea one needs to be shown an impressive example achieved with the idea.

eg Unix and its software were completely created in C which PROVES that C is impressive.

and because php is a rewiring of C, php automagically is impressive.

@both: I tried REBOL once, myself, and did not find it intuitive; and wondered where the genius being the Amiga OS was (I know, probably blasphemy--but still the truth).

its the same reason that a top tennis player may be no good at say badminton.

I specialised in OS's AND languages at uni, and can tell you that Sassenrath's OS work is ahead of the mainstream. (except for things like security and safety)

languages are a COMPLETELY different form of subject, and in fact languages are MORE DIFFICULT than OS's

expertise and insights in the one DONT transfer to the other!

eg if you are fluent at english you wont necessarily be fluent at french!

it is like comparing poetry to political speeches.

the former is about aesthetics, the latter about persuasion.

aesthetics can be combined with persuasion, but you need to be proficient at each to be proficient at combining.


also there are much more (in quantity) competent people in languages than in OS's. which means you can only innovate in languages with a lot of major new ideas. As there is a whole crowd of people with the same intention.


most people within languages will be implementing C, but they will be as competent as can be at that.

but there have been a lot of people over the decades working on the theoretical basis of languages, and a lot of the ideas cannot be improved on as they are theoretically perfect.

furthermore server script languages is not the way to make your mark, as scripting is always a relatively superficial phenomenon.

the really difficult stuff is application programming languages, the most successful of which is C.

eg most languages, scripting or otherwise will be written in C.

usually Modula, BASIC etc are all written in C. HiSoft BASIC for instance AFAIK is written in C!

script languages tend to be dealing with text and files, whereas app programming languages deal with memory and text + files are represented as memory entities.

script languages delegate the more difficult things to app programming binaries, eg php delegates the graphics to the browser as html.


script languages are basically special purpose languages, whereas app programming languages are general purpose and deal with the hardware directly.

you can do anything at all with C, but it isnt feasible to say create an OS with a script language. Maybe it can be done but its a bit futile!

this is why php is such a winner, as it uses an app programming syntax but rewired as a script language.

ie it is a rewiring of much more powerful and proven technology.

this forum is an example of what you can do with php

also no matter how good REBOL is, it is unlikely to outdo php by more than a narrow margin.



OS's are about asynchronicity, parallel efficiency, etc, that is where Sassenrath has very deep insights which Windows is completely ignorant of.


the AmigaOS kernel is designed around very deep insights. Windows has no insights at all and is merely work at quite a superficial level.

Windows does contain innovations but they are all on the surface eg it has good cut and paste, but that is just Desktop structure.

the Desktop is very interesting to the user but has nothing to do with the kernel!

you could implement the Windows desktop above AmigaOS if you chose to.

someone created an interesting alternative desktop for AmigaOS called Scalos supplied with AIAB.


Basically someone has created a fairly banale but standard kernel for Microsoft and MS are just dabbling above something they dont understand.

their kernel has the standard features but is HUGELY inefficient.

Windows NT, XP, Vista are all derived from the same underlying work.

Apparently Bill Gates hired the guy in charge of creating VMS and said: do the same for me, and that lead to Windows NT. And all the other Windows versions are just different
customisations of the same albatros.

Just as all versions of AmigaOS are all derived from Sassenrath's work.


and all versions of Linux are just rearranging the same 1978 Unix architecture, invented at a time when they still used punched cards!

Linux is a bit like 68k-AmigaOS 3.9, a very refined enhancement of something from long ago.

but all the versions of Windows I think are derived from the same source, whereas Linux, AROS and Morphos are reimplementations.


all the different versions of Linux are just tampering on the surface of a UFO.

they repainted the UFO, and gave it a snazzy name, and they put a good doormat.

languages couldnt be more different and are a completely serial problem, and speed is irrelevant AFA the compiler goes. (unless you use an interpreter but its difficult to achieve semantic power and speed with an interpreter except by partial compilation) Any asynchronicity and parallelism is above the language. eg double buffering is parallelism which you can do with C, but it has nothing to do with C.

and asm is a serial language, but say the CPU gets an interrupt, that is asynchronous but is ABOVE the asm.

"language" is just one level of abstraction, and a typical php script is a language pastiche of html and C.

the fragments are "language" but the totality is above the languages.

you want fast binaries, but the compiler itself could take some minutes to compile a file.

to do anything interesting with languages requires a lot of very abstract subsystems which process the semantics.

 I still somewhat anticipate REBOL 3, to see if things change--and to see what it really is (scripting language, messaging language, CGI-like, Java-like, etc.), because I'm not convinced the creators of it really even know what it is or can adequately describe it.

if he has any true innovations they should be in the first version,

just as his true OS innovations were in the Amiga1000 and are innovative till today.

later versions of anything are just fine tuning and tidying up or god forbid they are globbing other peoples ideas.

eg all versions of PHP are the brilliant innovation of just reusing the C syntax.

the changes are going to be with the library calls and maybe the implementation.

I havent done any php coding for months, but IIRC later versions of php have a unified way of processing args

eg args can be sent in the URL but things like text are sent by a different arg mechanism,

with later versions of php you can deal with both arg mechanisms by the same code.

truly groundbreaking innovations would require a brand new product,

[whoosh777]

Oh, and another Adhominim.  
.....
Adhominim.
...

can you please stick to english!

I went and looked up what adhominim is,

if you are going to use Latin try and spell it correctly :pissed:

it is:

ad hominem

from your error I know you either didnt do Latin or you flunked it!

you can tell a lot about a person from their errors!

and apparently it means:

dealing with an opponent by attacking his character instead of answering his argument

I should point out to you that the romans have no reputation for philosophy, just for governance.

well I am not attacking your character as such but am expressing valid DOUBTS about what your motives and reliability COULD be. Not what your character IS but what it COULD be.

I guess there arent latin idioms for that level of subtlety, you need real time english!

those DOUBTS are fully valid for a forum thread as there is so much FUD.

and that guy vouching for you, could just be one of your aliases!

such doubts are necessary eg to avoid being SCAMMED.


you see if you give me an example for how to create your own server for 100/month then that PROVES it can be done for at LEAST 100/month, which I dont dispute!

but logically it DOESNT prove that there arent cheaper options.

this is just a TRUTH PRINCIPLE, and has nothing to do with attacking your character but is merely a pragmatic way of filtering out misinformation.

there are various scamsters on the internet who try to sell $40 web hosting as some kind of bargain, when in fact you can host a website for $4/month.

and they have an armful of achievements just like you. That isnt an ATTACK on what you are but a DEFENCE against what you could be.


it is off topic but if you can tell me a good way to do accent symbols on a US keyboard then I will accept. But with Google there is even a US french teacher who says it is via alt-number_code

http://ms.loganhocking.k12.oh.us/~madame/french/accents.htm

I think a US french teacher may be qualified to speak on the matter!

and US keyboard IS the default because that is the default when you install XP.

on topic:

There are cheeper options, but none of them offer anything over what Wayne has now for hosting. You suggested running it as a standalone from home. I pointed out the costs involved in that for a site this popular.

so you keep telling us, but WHY should anyone believe you?

that is a VALID DOUBT, your report may be completely truthful and integral, but as I say to every scamster:

YOU KNOW YOUR PRODUCT IS GOOD, BUT HOW DO I KNOW THAT?

all you can prove is there IS an expensive way or there IS a cheap way

it is very difficult to prove there ISNT an expensive way or there ISNT a cheap way.

that is a subtlety of TRUTH, and is the basis of a lot of scams.

and that subtlety is AT THE HEART of internet discussions because agenda laden people try to sabotage good decisions by asserting that an idea wont work. when all you can prove is that an idea CAN work by doing it.

Many people thought emulating or reimplementing AmigaOS was impossible, but UAE and AROS PROVED it was possible by doing it.

This isn't some little text only pet project.

but all the fancy graphics can be done with a
text only server!

the graphics is done by your browser not the server

the server doesnt need any graphics at all for
a forum to have really fantastic graphics

all a server does essentially IS text and files.

[whoosh777]

buzz wrote:
Whoosh. What I think Wayne doesn't need is a tutorial on how to code. Although I'm sure both he and everyone else here appeciate your endless wisdom in these matters! Cheers!

and there is no wisdom in your posts?

interesting confession :lol:

what use is wisdom if you say nothing?

(answer: no use to anyone else, but could give you a competitive advantage!)

PROBABLY to do the graphics you just need to reprocess
the text by replacing eg : lol : by the appropriate
html pointing to the animation.

Masterful!

yes it is masterful, as it is the essence of implementing forum graphics!

forum graphics = { a href="graphics_file"}{/a}

(substitute {} for angle brackets)

ie just translate the question into html, dont answer the question! progress by delegating.


I said "probably" to sound less arrogant!

and my much earlier post said "this could be ignorant" that was just an insurance policy in case there was a good argument against it! I was just presenting an idea as the question was highly unclear.

some words arent meant but are there to counteract,
they are time release words.

I hope you didnt think I actually meant "probably" ??

remove the word "probably" for what I really meant,

to be quite honest it doesnt really matter which solution is used, I visit a forum for the text info. the graphical look is just icing on the cake, you shouldnt get too obsessed with it. Also archiving everything isnt necessarily a good idea as conditions change and the old answers usually arent eternal.

I often progress with coding when I recode something IGNORING the earlier code. That is also why reimplementation tends to outdo the original.

people who only use 68k can always go to an internet cafe and view the forums there! I got some Amiga info before I got an internet account from internet cafes.

I would say anyway that today 68k is all emulated-68k, real 68k is quite obsolete. If anything, making the website 68k-incompatible will FORCE people to get WinUAE or Amiga Forever which will reinvigorate their interests!


Also forums arent the only way to do things, you could also have mailing lists. eg when I need info on Ubuntu I temporarily join their mailing list, the advantage of mailing lists is you get a transect of viewers. with a forum, most people dont view most things, with a mailing list everyone views everything and you skip the emails not relevant.

the Ubuntu mailing list is an extremely efficient way to get info on any Ubuntu problem. The Amiga Community as it dwindles perhaps could be served by a mailing list.

mailing lists are more of the moment, you have to respond promptly if you have anything to say. You cannot wait 5 days and then respond. And you arent burdened by
what was said last week. Some questions will keep recurring but there is always someone who enjoys answering the same question again and again and again.

also the recurring answers to the recurring questions start to evolve.

both paradigms have advantages and disadvantages.

experts point out that some product has to be configured to be a forum, seeing that as a problem. not realising that the product is going beyond the forum concept to the concept of community, where "forum" is just one paradigm.

perhaps you should look at widening the scope beyond "forum" and study the non forum options of some of the products.

instead of trying to shoehorn some product into the current Xoops paradigm, try widening your horizons beyond the forum paradigm. Perhaps we could discuss in this thread what the other paradigms are. eg mailing list is clearly one, blog is another, tutorials another, FAQs etc.

ie it is not the product which needs shoehorning but it is YOU who need shoehorning to the product.

sometimes the problem is with the question,

the answers are problematic because you are asking the wrong questions!

[whoosh777]

Wayne wrote:

buzz wrote:
php4 offical support is being dropped (or is already), so that might be one reason.

As mentioned on page 1 of this thread, yes.  PHP4 was retired about 2 years ago.  The support cycle for it just ended (much like Microsoft does for old Windows versions).  

This means;

-- no new security patches
-- no web host worth their salt will run 4.x any longer except maybe on dedicated machines which we can't afford.

what is the reason that the current Xoops code wont run on say php 5?

php is just C, EXCEPT for maybe the php library

the non library stuff should run on any version of php

or are the problems at Xoops?


whats to stop you reimplementing the current Xoops from

the inside: eg reimplement reply.php to run with the

current Xoops, then reimplement viewtopic.php etc

eventually you will have your own reimplementation of

the current Xoops which will run on any version of php

(if you go about it sensibly)

[whoosh777]

buzz wrote:
Your operating system and compiler is also pretty impressive. I printed out your website (all 50000 lines), but then my dog ate it. Can you provide it in a hardback version?

I was trying not to talk about my projects, but considering that I am right at the lattermost stages of the compiler project and virtually every other thing said relates to one or another language it is inevitable that I say things from that frame of reference.

talking about REBOL to me is like throwing a lit match at kerosene!

As both those projects are done completely from scratch you can see my perspective is that of rolling my own stuff.

the moment you use ready made things you get caught up in the dependency trap. Most of the dependency problems are pointless because if people just made everything forwards comatible then your earlier version of Xoops would run with a later version of php etc.

thankfully C and x86 are TOTALLY forwards compatible,
why cant everyone else be?

at least at the recompilation level.

offtopic from here onwards:

Ironically the Ghostscript project page shouldnt be printed out but you should navigate using the links starting at the contents table near the top. Dont even think about trying to read it from start to finish as that isnt the idea!

I continue maintaining that project for two reasons:

first I use the code myself and secondly there is a lot of interest in the project. Also I have created some really useful extensions to the project which arent in the mainstream Ghostscript.

If you are interested in the other 2 projects, email me.

The general idea of those 2 projects is to return to 1986 for the Amiga and 1978 for Unix, and create a brand new system like they did but with the hardware of today and the insights of the last 2 or 3 decades respectively.

ie instead of reimplementing, evolve.

basically return in a space ship and say nah! look and learn!

eg some fundamental changes today are that the hardware is multiprocessor and 64 bit. 64 bit memory, 64 bit registers,
64 bit drives. And that today x86 hardware is standardised and cheap. In the early days hardware was COMPLETELY UNSTANDARDISED, they even had computers which used 9-bit bytes which is why C uses octal escape codes.

when Unix was created, punched cards were cutting edge data storage, and when AmigaOS was created its floppy disks were regarded as fast and 1MB was big for a PC.

in fact Bill Gates famously said nobody would ever need more than 640K (IIRC). My god have times changed.

AmigaOS was designed to some extent around the technology of the time.

both Unix and AmigaOS are astonishing and visionary systems, both are still ahead of their time, and are COMPULSORY for anyone who wants to understand computers. (Unix in the form of Linux) Anyone who hasnt used BOTH is computer illiterate! If you have to choose between the two then choose AmigaOS as its a much richer structuring of a computer. Unix is generally structureless in some sense.

if you use both you will then realise that the Amiga shell is an evolution (towards usability) of the Unix shell.

68k itself was an evolution of x86, learning from the errors of x86. But x86 has won by globbing evolution.

Unix was created by creating a brand new language C, then coding the OS with C.

I am redoing that by creating my own brand new language and creating a brand new OS with that. and my brand new language is an evolution of C, so I am evolving at multiple levels.

my kernel however is entirely written in asm, but I will gradually migrate it to the language.