Amiga's kernel

[the_leander]

Whilst no expert on the subject, you wouldn't go far wrong in looking into things like AmigaOS's lack of memory protection to begin with.

As for kernel comparasons, you might be better off comparing Exec to L4 or QNX or Minix or even Hurd.

[the_leander]

Rubbish, Modern computing is getting better exponentially!

Shhh, don't tell them that, I mean afterall, running high end OS's on hardware way below the minimum spec is totally a valid comparason. :lol:

Yes stefcep2, that was aimed squarely at you.

Now, if you don't mind I'm going to go back to transcoding and editing some HD video.

[the_leander]

I'll just have to upgrade my c2d 2.6 ghz with 4 gig ram and 512mb nvidia card, I suppose..

Was it not you who was complaining of menu jerkiness with a Radeon 9200?

/cba to check the thread in question

[the_leander]

words

Uhuh...

You say better graphics, cheaper RAM, faster and multi-core processors.  So what?  What for?  To make a new system supported?  Bollocks!  This is not a progress anymore - it is a scale effect lobbed by vendors to stabilize their income from selling HW.

Yup, I could totally do what I do with video on an Amiga era hardware within a human lifetime and at the same quality.... (this is but one example)

Linux on Kubuntu example - nothing changed between 8 and 9 release, just most stuff is broken now since it's "just" released version.  What change might one expect from Linux anyway?  New gcc?  More Windows resemblance?  More ports, rip offs?  Drivers?  DivX codecs?

No progress you say...

OK bloodline if you mean Macs fine, I agree it makes the whole thing undoubdetly better.  But keep in mind it would be 5% population and zero % office population.  These people ought to see hardly any change for last several years, if non-mac users report any progress it means they are properly targeted by MS marketing or misled by Linux mimics.

The majority of tasks within an office have not changed - word processing, database entry etc. What has changed is how an office communicates both within a network and to the wider world. These capabilities require more powerful hardware.  

Consider the swathe of capabilities now open to a user of even a bottom end desktop PC. They can do things that 20 years ago would have been strictly the pervue of big studios, both in terms of video editing and special effects.

Also, you might want to consider that Macs now run on PC hardware and have done for a while now.

But excluding servers and desktop macs there is NO actual (by a measure of computer science) progress here.

Sorry I must be blind or completely miseducated etc.  Or at least tasteless, aren't I?

You really want me to answer that?

[the_leander]

And he got a technical explanation as well as a few hints on where to look for comparable kernel models.

That a few folk want to turn every tech question into a reason why the Amiga is "tEh OnE TrOoO CoMpUtAr!!!11oneoneone" is however unfortunate.

In fact in another thread I specifically pointed to this being a major put off for newbies.

As for this being a war, well all I can say is: Hi, you must be new here!

This is just friendly disagreement.

[the_leander]

I found an interesting old article about this (with several spelling errors). http://www.cunningham-lee.com/misc/amiga_exec.html

Ooooo, nice find!

Pardon?

Consider I'm from East Asia, I am very bitter towards the quasi-total dominance of Microsoft from servers to desktop. I just couldn't care much about the rantings here as long as I can ease my Microsoft hate a bit.

Jawsome.

Also, welcome back! :laughing:

[the_leander]

@leander: its only i become tired reading this all rants about amiga being up to date versus good for nothing like it would be of any importance. actually sorry i spoke up.

Didn't say it's good for nothing, nor did I imply it. What I said, and will continue to say is that the Amiga is a machine of it's time. It has no future outside of the retro/hobbyist scene. And finally, that in it's day it allowed a lot of developers take their first baby steps into coding.

My reasons for continuing to reitterate this whenever someone pops up trying to sell the old girl as something she's not capable of is twofold:

• That whilst it might be fun, it isn't realistic.
• That some people have taken advantage of this starry eyed dreaming and helped defraud users of thousands of pounds as a result.

Finally, don't be sorry, speak up!

[the_leander]

You completely didn't comprehend my posting and act as a defender of "whatever is around now".  Despite the fact whether such thing as "the present day" require defense per se by anybody living in that peculiar moment, please focus on ICT acronym for a while.

Or IT&T if you prefer.  Well you have to distinguish IT from communication, though it is hard nowadays but it's possible for the purpose of this very analysis.

Actually with each passing generation of hardware, that line becomes ever more blurred.

Look at any laptop you can buy today, what is a, if not the selling point(beyond the obvious - ram - hd - cpu)? Connectivity.

You have Iphones now that have effective ever present online capability. Netbooks that have the same, and cheep 3G modems that can hook up any notebook to the net in a matter of seconds from the box.

All I said was that 2009 desktop/office/mobileos/mobileapp IT sucks as the market to me.

Thing is, the basics in the office are pretty much the same as they were ten or fifteen years ago - speadsheets, database and word processor. In truth there hasn't been a whole lot of movement in these markets simply because there isn't the need - the applications are well established, stable and accessable.

As in 2009.  I would expect that to have happen in 2001.  But I stressed on OSes, didn't say a thing 'bout communication.  The internet, networking, mobile, email, SOA - great stuff but this doesn't belong to the topic being disputed.  

The problem with making this distinction is that for the most part it is a vitally important, if not central part of any companys IT planning. If you don't have the expected (nay, demanded) networking capabilities, you're done for.

If you consider computing as ICT - well, mabye I don't get something but computing was calculations to me always.  Calculations, processing, visualizing, designing.  So ICT as a whole, including communication and internet, especially mobile and wireles techs - that's fine pretty much, agree here but that is not in the scope of the discussion.

Again, dismissing such a massive part of the picture isn't helpful. Cherry picking doesn't make for useful discussion.

One thing I have to agree with is that many serious tasks back then, requiring mainframe power, now are available at home.  I mean DTP, CAD n stuff.  That's fine, too.

And it'll only get more able as time goes on.

So to say again - if I was back in 1995 and someone showed me Windows7 and said it would be in 2009, I would say "shouldn't this ship in some five years now"?  But if you say 2009 but add wifi, internet, GSM/HSxPA - now you've done it.  I confess.

If you're arguing that Windows has stagnated as an OS, then I won't disagree, but. And it's a big but, you do have to take into account all the other goodies.

But this is not just computing.  HSxPA phone in roaming isn't computing at all.  Not in 2009, not yet.

My EeePC 701 with E220 3G modem disagrees with you. (500Mhz Celeron, 512Mb ram, 6Gb storage)

I hope this sums up my thoughts pretty much.

Fair enough