Wither Natami?

[the_leander]

TheDaddy wrote:
>>Natami, CloneA and MiniMig are not real amigas...

And who says so?

In the case of both MiniMig and Natami, their creators do (I've never heard of CloneA).

Quite frankly, the creators of these devices are in the best position to state whether or not they are "real" amigas I would think.

MiniMig is a hardware emulation, for all intents and purposes (and please, I mean no disrespect to the chap who created it) it is UAE on a chip.

Natami as I understand it is basically the same principle as the minimig, but with support for AGA coded into it, as well as a AAA style update for the chipset.

By no definition I know of (given their respective creators words on the matter if nothing else), could these two projects be called "real" amigas, since everything is being done by an emulator coded into an fpga.

[the_leander]

Ya know, I was going to let this one slide and leave it to bloodline, but ya know, I've had a crap day and you're it.

TheDaddy wrote:
>>In the case of both MiniMig and Natami, their creators do (I've never heard of CloneA).

That doesn't mean it can not be considered a real Amiga.

Which part of, it's an emulation done in hardware was not clear?

TheDaddy wrote:
What is a real Amiga?

From Wikipedia:

The Amiga is a family of personal computers originally developed by Amiga Corporation. Development on the Amiga began in 1982 with Jay Miner as the principal hardware designer. Commodore International bought Amiga Corporation and introduced the machine to the market in 1985. The name Amiga was chosen by the developers specifically from the Spanish and Portuguese word for a female friend,[1] and because it occurred before Apple and Atari alphabetically.

TheDaddy wrote:
If Commodore were still around

They're not so the rest of your point is moot. The Commodore name lives on, and produces a very nice set of PCs. End of.

TheDaddy wrote:
If Amiga Inc. had licensed the name to the Minimig and Natami creators what would you call them?

An idea so fundamentally above the capacity of the current name holders that it too is a moot point since it'll never happen.

TheDaddy wrote:
Nonsense.

Funny, I was thinking just the same.

[the_leander]

JimS wrote:

You need to understand what an FPGA is before you say something like that.

I know full well what an FPGA is, I also know full well what an emulator is and how the Amiga chipset is handled by the code in the two projects I have knowledge of.

I see you've got your "talk down to the prole" routine down pat, it won't work.

JimS wrote:

Nothing is "emulated" unless you build a cpu on the FPGA and do emulation with it.

Now you're getting into a pretty petty semantic arguement that you yourself just blew away..., because by your previous explanation of "how an FPGA works" it's doing exactly the same in both examples cited, only the target chip is different, so, if one is emulation, they both are because the same thing is being done.

Game, set, match.

For future reference: To emulate.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This   em·u·late     Audio Help   [v. em-yuh-leyt; adj. em-yuh-lit] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -lat·ed, -lat·ing, adjective   –verb (used with object)
1.   to try to equal or excel; imitate with effort to equal or surpass: to emulate one's father as a concert violinist.  
2.   to rival with some degree of success: Some smaller cities now emulate the major capitals in their cultural offerings.  
3.   Computers.    

a.   to imitate (a particular computer system) by using a software system, often including a microprogram or another computer that enables it to do the same work, run the same programs, etc., as the first.  
b.   to replace (software) with hardware to perform the same task.

[the_leander]

TheDaddy wrote:
>>Which part of, it's an emulation done in hardware was not clear?

I leave that to be explained by someone more technical than me. To me the Minimig and Natami are real Amigas, just because the timings aren't "perfect" means little. The Minimig isn't a perfect clone, I see it as an improved A500.

The end result might well be an improved A500, but that doesn't change the fact that it is essentially still a hardware based emulation. At best you could call it a clone, which is in no way a bad thing, as it happens.

TheDaddy wrote:
>>The Amiga is a family of personal computers originally developed by Amiga Corporation. Development on the Amiga began in 1982 with Jay Miner as the principal hardware designer. Commodore International bought Amiga Corporation and introduced the machine to the market in 1985. The name Amiga was chosen by the developers specifically from the Spanish and Portuguese word for a female friend,[1] and because it occurred before Apple and Atari alphabetically.

So anything that isn't within that definition is not an Amiga? So Amiga Inc. release a new motherboard (made with fpga bits or new custom chips) with OS4.1 and stick an Amiga logo on it and according to your explanation this would not be an Amiga?
LOL!

I wouldn't call an AmigaOne an amiga, no. As for OS4.1, never used it, so couldn't say. OS4 looked pretty, but seemed very unstable on all the different hardware types I tried it on.

I wouldn't call a PC running Amithlon running an Amiga either, yet the net result would be the same - seemless operation of the AmigaOS and its software library running at stupidly fast speeds.

TheDaddy wrote:
>>Commodore are not around so the rest of your point is moot. The Commodore name lives on, and produces a very nice set of PCs. End of.

So everything ended with Commodore? So following your argument Amiga ended when Commodore went bust. Amiga is dead. LOL!:-)

The Amiga line of computers did yes, there were however many clone attempts, a few of which actually made it out of the door, but most never left the paper they were drawn up on.

TheDaddy wrote:
>>An idea so fundamentally above the capacity of the current name holders that it too is a moot point since it'll never happen.

How do you know? Also let's assume Amiga Inc. DID licence the Amiga name to Dennis and the Natami team, would you still say they are NOT REAL Amigas?

I know because I've watched them since the beginning, I've watched them lie, steal and beg, I've watched them burn through venture capital like it was going out of fashion and not a single worthwhile product get released.

As for your point, I'd say it is far closer to the original Amiga both in intent and execution (hell, having gone over the site again recently I'd argue it was more of a Nyx clone on acid then anything we mere mortals ever got our mitts on, but there you go), but no more a real Amiga then Amithlon was. That said, it would however be completely impossible to tell the difference beyond the rather obvious speed bump such a system would provide.

TheDaddy wrote:
So basically what you are telling us is: "A real Amiga can only be called such if it has custom chipsets designed by either Jay Miner (he is not with us anymore unfortunately) or by any ex-Commodore engineers running Amiga OS", which version I can't say because I am not sure if you consider anything after OS3.0 being REAL Amiga OS.

Sorry to brings this up but those times have long gone, there is no research facility anymore, no more huge sums of money to play with, it's all gone, the only dedicated hardware engineers left are right here on this forum, and they have my full respect.

Actually Amiga.Inc had stacks of cash, they frittered it away and produced.... nothing.

The original Amiga was both a revolution to the computer industry and a revelation to those who used them, those days are gone. NatAmi it has to be said is imho what the AmigaOne should have been from the beginning. That they aren't originals is by no means meant as an insult, as Bloodline said wrt Amithlon - you would never tell the difference, I suspect the same would likely be true of a NatAmi, they're both brilliant ideas and Amithlon was outstanding in its execution.

[the_leander]

TheDaddy wrote:
>>The end result might well be an improved A500, but that doesn't change the fact that it is essentially still a hardware based emulation. At best you could call it a clone, which is in no way a bad thing, as it happens.

I can't comment on that, I don't really know how the Minimig works, the fact remains that I can run my favourite games on it, Workbench and it was made from scratch by an Amigan, this is enough for me to call it a real Amiga.

>>I wouldn't call an AmigaOne an amiga, no.

?! :-?

So what is an Amiga? Give me your definition please.

Already given earlier in this thread. See the wikipedia link for details.

To be clear, imho, the NatAmi and minimig should be classed as compatibles or similar, in the same way the Drako was, or the C=One is for the C=64.

As for the AmigaOne, that should be classed as an abortion, in all its different models.

TheDaddy wrote:
>>The original Amiga was both a revolution to the computer industry and a revelation to those who used them, those days are gone. NatAmi it has to be said is imho what the AmigaOne should have been from the beginning. That they aren't originals is by no means meant as an insult, as Bloodline said wrt Amithlon - you would never tell the difference, I suspect the same would likely be true of a NatAmi, they're both brilliant ideas and Amithlon was outstanding in its execution.

Let's hope it gets released, a new piece of hardware wouldn't hurt since Amiga Inc. don't seem interested anymore.
 :-)

I too would like to see it released, then again I'd like to see the issues with regard to Amithlon resolved so as to allow for a much greater market, I for one would love to see AmigaOS 3.9 running on my EeePC.

[the_leander]

Hans_ wrote:


The different visions are exactly why people are tearing at each other. I wish that everyone would move to Amiga OS 4 (ignore the hardware availability issues for a second please)

No, that's at best disingenous. The reason OS4 is dead is that the hardware it was designed to run on was a pile of cack even when it was available.

Yes, it was faster, but it has an attrition rate higher then that of the original Amigas it was trying to replace!

In evolutionary terms, it's a dead end. Time to move on.

Hans_ wrote:
there's also a group that want Amiga to remain a retro machine.

There is a good reason for this too, those of us who wish this realise the gap between what the Amiga in it's heyday was able to offer, and what is out there now is too great a gap to bridge, you may as well start from scratch at this point.

Hans_ wrote:
What would be neat is if a next-gen API could be collectively agreed upon, and then implemented on all the next-gen Amiga systems. That is, however, unlikely to happen.

It's also unfeasable to push a single user, non memory protected, non smp capable OS into a new device without starting from scratch, simply adding an new API won't cut it.

The best you could possibly hope for is some heavily patched beast running on something like an EeePC or mini itx board, because anything else would litterally be wasted on AmigaOS - it simply isn't capable of utilising anything more complex or capable.

[the_leander]

wawrzon wrote:
ur posts are too long to read. but i havnt accuse u of nothing. i just wanted to point out something that might interest u as aros supporter, remembering that u were critical about natami.

Bad spelling, grammar, coupled with an unwillingness to listen. How very efficient of you.

And again, for the hard of learning: Bloodline was not critical of NatAmi, he stated that there was nothing intrinsically better or worse about NatAmi verses a software solution like Amithlon.

Not the same thing.

[the_leander]

wawrzon wrote:
@jj: tell me where did i in my last post comment on anything.

You might want to re read your own stuff as well as others.

wawrzon wrote:
@the_leander: so what? are we going for insults? i reffered to another thread that bloodline maybe will recall.

If you cannot be bothered to read other peoples comments, then you deserve to be stomped on. Whether it is this thread or any other.

[the_leander]

Hans_ wrote:

Disingenuous? In what way is anything that I said disingenuous? I simply stated my personal preference. The comment in brackets is because I know that it's kind of hard to get OS4 if you don't already have a PowerPC classic Amiga or an Amigaone.

You misspelled pointless.

I do however apologise, it wasn't clear from your original post that it would simply be personal preference.

Hans_ wrote:
BTW, I have one of those "piles of cack" (sic) that you speak of, and for a "pile of cack," it works pretty darn well. You clearly have no idea what state OS4 is in, or the hardware.

"clearly not knowing what state OS4 is in", HA!

It's more stable then it was, but still less stable then 3.9 on classic hardware, though better on an A1, however, the number of working A1's continues to decline at a fairly steady (read, ludicrous) rate.

It's not as stable as MorphOS from my own testing, has nothing on even BeOS, which ceased development in 2001, and certainly not Zeta (the BeOS derived OS that was killed off last year).

Consider yourself lucky, having been to several amiga shows and in constant contact with a great many people who bought A1's of all different types, I can tell you that their failure rate is obscene, no product that poorly produced should ever have left the shop floor, power regulator issues, fouled IO, borked sound.. The list goes on.

My all time personal favourite though was the constantly resetting Uboot issue many microA1's had, every time you boot, you have to re-edit uboot, even after replacing battery after battery, nice.

I could probably quote you a couple of snippets I've gleaned about the snafu that is OS4's revised memory model from Karlos, but I seriously doubt you want to hear it.

Hans_ wrote:
there's also a group that want Amiga to remain a retro machine.

Hans_ wrote:
What would be neat is if a next-gen API could be collectively agreed upon, and then implemented on all the next-gen Amiga systems. That is, however, unlikely to happen.

It's also unfeasable to push a single user, non memory protected, non smp capable OS into a new device without starting from scratch, simply adding an new API won't cut it.

Wrong. It's not adding an API, it's creating/using a new API. The new API would be incompatible with the old one, so old software would run in a legacy environment. Apple did it with Mac OS X, so it can be done. Except, with Amiga OS, the difference between the two APIs needn't be so drastic. Just because you don't know how to do it doesn't make it unfeasible.[/quote]

It was called BeOS.

Worked a damn sight better then OS4 ever did too. But going back, it is unfeasable, because simply "creating a new API" with the sorts of fundamental changes you would need, with the current limitations means you would basically have to re-write the thing from scratch, whilst at the same time breaking compatability with all previous software, at which point, why bother? There are off the shelf solutions out there that would probably be better suited, hell, Haiku - the opensource BeOS clone with a UAE sandbox integrated would probably give you everything you needed and give it to you in an identifiably AmigaOS like way. Aros is another potential way forward...

Hans_ wrote:

The best you could possibly hope for is some heavily patched beast running on something like an EeePC or mini itx board, because anything else would litterally be wasted on AmigaOS - it simply isn't capable of utilising anything more complex or capable.

That's the best that you could hope for, not everyone else. There is no technical reason why Amiga OS could not utilise something more complex or capable.

I don't deal in false hope, it always ends in bitter dissapointment. Reality is my prefered choice, and the reality is that the best you really could hope for is something like an Amithlon/Aros hybrid running on X86, or maybe NatAmi if you want something really cool.

Hans_ wrote:
BTW, no, I do not expect Amiga OS to suddenly catch up to the rest of the computing world; I just happen to enjoy pushing it forward beyond what it was originally designed for. That's pretty similar to the Natami guys, who are pushing the original hardware design forward, instead of the OS. I think that the Natami project is pretty neat.

Hans

I happen to agree with that, in the same way I thought the C=One project was an outstanding piece of ingenuity, indeed my first thoughts when I saw it was, the Amiga community would have been better served with a beefed up one of these over the A1.

[the_leander]

--deleted--

Was uncalled for. - AF

[the_leander]

cicero790 wrote:
I totally agree with Amigadaves last post.

It ridiculous! You are a whole bunch of geniuses and all you all have to do is turning your efforts at a common goal.  Can’t you come together under the flag of the greater good and create the best OS the world have ever seen? With transparent UAE support of curse.

We had that, it was called Amithlon.

Worked great.

[the_leander]

Hans_ wrote:

It was called BeOS.

Worked a damn sight better then OS4 ever did too. But going back, it is unfeasable, because simply "creating a new API" with the sorts of fundamental changes you would need, with the current limitations means you would basically have to re-write the thing from scratch, whilst at the same time breaking compatability with all previous software, at which point, why bother? There are off the shelf solutions out there that would probably be better suited, hell, Haiku - the opensource BeOS clone with a UAE sandbox integrated would probably give you everything you needed and give it to you in an identifiably AmigaOS like way. Aros is another potential way forward...

It's not as insurmountable a problem as you make it out to be. Obviously it'll take effort and would take time. The new API could of-course draw from existing solutions. In fact, I'd expect them to use industry/de-facto standards wherever possible.

Do you have any concept of how difficult it is to produce a modern operating system that meets todays standards?

Do you?

Now, I was once an Editor for Zetanews and as such had access to developers in a way most people don't, I talked with them in detail discussing both Zeta and later Haiku as they built up from a far better starting position then AmigaOS offers.

Haiku is probably the best place to start in terms of just how complex the task of reimplimenting a modern OS from scratch, they had some truly brilliant people working for them full time and it's still taken them 7 years to get to the point they are now, and what they have still isn't complete or as capable as BeOS R5.03, released back in 2000!

AmigaOS reimplimented in a modern fashion would be and is a pipe dream, one lacking in both resource and a framework. To take the AmigaOS and make it a truly modern OS, with all the things that are expected from a modern OS (SMP, multi user, memory protection etc etc etc) would be a staggaringly complex proposition, far greater then "simply" reimplimenting what came before (such as AROS or Haiku), requiring far more developer numbers then even both communities combined could offer.

And that's ignoring the complete lack of a roadmap to work towards... And no, I would seriously not want to be the one to open that particular can of worms.

Hans_ wrote:

Why do it? To push the system forward. We all know that breaking compatibility is required so why not just go ahead and do it?

Yes, great, but at that point, why bother? Seriously, if you are going to drop support for old applications, why not simply move to a new OS and have done with it?

You might as well take a snapshot of AROS and Haiku code, shake em together and slap an Amiga sticker on it, it'll save you time and effort and the net result would have about as much to do with the Amiga as any from scratch OS you came up with.

Hans_ wrote:

Why make the NatAmi? It's never going to compete with mainstream computers; it's graphics features are never going to compete with the latest graphics cards. No existing software will make use of its advanced features.

I'd say in both cases it should be done because people enjoy it. If I were involved, I'd probably get a kick out of simply proving people like you wrong. The Natami team are doing stuff that other people say are unfeasible.

There is nothing unfeasible about NatAmi, it's an FPGA board thats been told it's an amiga-alike. Now the cool factor there is the same as the C=One, it also offers the potential for developers to cut their teeth on relatively simple and elegant solutions on which to build better things, the ultimate bedroom coders board. Truthfully I feel that something like this or Amithlon *should* have been chosen as the way forward for the Amiga.

The NatAmi project holds the potential to be of interest to far more people then any number of AmigaOne models simply because of the nature of FPGAs.

Getting bored with your "Amiga", select the AtariST/Falcon rom image and hey presto! Instant Atari, or whatever.

As I said, the scope for Natami in this regard is great, and not just by this community.

Hans_ wrote:

That's the best that you could hope for, not everyone else. There is no technical reason why Amiga OS could not utilise something more complex or capable.

I don't deal in false hope, it always ends in bitter dissapointment. Reality is my prefered choice, and the reality is that the best you really could hope for is something like an Amithlon/Aros hybrid running on X86, or maybe NatAmi if you want something really cool.

Your perception of reality is somewhat different from mine.

Hans

I know it is, I have some idea of the monumental difficulties involved in doing what you're suggesting with regard to the AmigaOS.

[the_leander]

Hans_ wrote:

Do you have any concept of how difficult it is to produce a modern operating system that meets todays standards?

Do you?

It's not my area of expertise, but I'm not exactly ignorant on the subject either. Judging by what you've said, you've never actually been involved as an OS developer either, you just spoke to the developers.

No, you're right, I'm not a coder, but I know enough coders and have known them long enough to have a firm grasp of just how big a job reimplimenting an OS is. Yes, what you're saying with regard likemindedness is not a bad thing, but as Piru pointed out, the amount of work required to bring up to scratch the OS and drag it into the modern age would be so great that the existing code would be all but useless for the task and probably be quicker and cleaner to simply move to a fresh sheet of paper.

Hans_ wrote:

AmigaOS reimplimented in a modern fashion would be and is a pipe dream, one lacking in both resource and a framework. To take the AmigaOS and make it a truly modern OS, with all the things that are expected from a modern OS (SMP, multi user, memory protection etc etc etc) would be a staggaringly complex proposition, far greater then "simply" reimplimenting what came before (such as AROS or Haiku), requiring far more developer numbers then even both communities combined could offer.

You keep on insisting that it has to be a "from-scratch" implementation. It does not. There is no need to dump all the source-code.

Piru answered this better then I could. Short answer, yes, it really would.

Hans_ wrote:

Hans_ wrote:

Why do it? To push the system forward. We all know that breaking compatibility is required so why not just go ahead and do it?

Yes, great, but at that point, why bother? Seriously, if you are going to drop support for old applications, why not simply move to a new OS and have done with it?

A sand-box for old apps would be part of such a system so the old apps would still run (and yes, I know that this will take more time than dumping the old application support).

And this would be better then say AROS or Haiku with an intergrated Jit-UAE system, how?

I really want to understand why you feel something like you're suggesting is a prefered option over an AROS or Haiku based Hybrid. Please, explain.

Hans_ wrote:

There is nothing unfeasible about NatAmi, it's an FPGA board thats been told it's an amiga-alike. Now the cool factor there is the same as the C=One, it also offers the potential for developers to cut their teeth on relatively simple and elegant solutions on which to build better things, the ultimate bedroom coders board. Truthfully I feel that something like this or Amithlon *should* have been chosen as the way forward for the Amiga.

That's easy to say now that the concept has been proven. Were you around when Dennis van Weeren announced the Minimig? People were yelling "Hoax! It's impossible! It can't be done!" till they were blue in the face.

In fairness to the people who have cried hoax, how many major vapourware projects have we all seen come and go?

I lost count at around the 20 mark back in 2003.

I must admit, I wasn't around (was a bit busy being homeless and all that), so no, I didn't see the initial reaction, but it doesn't invalidate the above point.

Personally I say good luck to Dennis, it's a damn fine bit of work, same goes for this NatAmi project.

Hans_ wrote:

I know it is, I have some idea of the monumental difficulties involved in doing what you're suggesting with regard to the AmigaOS.

Ah, and by implication then, I have "no idea." Whatever.

No idea? I never said that. Don't put words into my mouth sunshine.

Yes, I can be abrasive at times, but I've seen far too many "lets port the AmigaOS to and add SMP, MP, 64bit etc etc, lets release it tomorrow, and do it for a quid!!!!111oneoneone", you aren't one of those, not by a long shot, but at the same time there are issues that need explanation as to why it's unlikely to happen with what you're asking. Know nothing? I've seen far too many of your posts to consider that for a second.

As for the linus torvalds crack, I should point out I'm using an EeePC with Xandros running on it to post this...

[the_leander]

Hans_ wrote:

And this would be better then say AROS or Haiku with an integrated Jit-UAE system, how?

I really want to understand why you feel something like you're suggesting is a preferred option over an AROS or Haiku based Hybrid. Please, explain.

You probably wouldn't care too much about this one, but I have OS4 software that won't run on UAE. Also, UAE is rather slow so apps that don't bang the hardware directly would run much faster in a sandboxed environment.


Hans

Ok, but how would breaking compatibility with your current software (as you have conceded as a necessity toward making the OS serviceable in a modern context) going to help you over porting it to such a hybrid, or getting it running under UAE?

Further, If you find UAE slow, try Amithlon, seriously, the difference is night and day and even on a system such as a 901 or 1001 EeePC, likely faster and more responsive then any Amiga or AmigaOne ever built.

[the_leander]

Hans_ wrote:

Ok, but how would breaking compatibility with your current software (as you have conceded as a necessity toward making the OS serviceable in a modern context) going to help you over porting it to such a hybrid, or getting it running under UAE?

Having a similar API would ease the porting process.

But no moreso then using the hypothetical Haiku/AROS hybrid from what I can see.