AmigaOS DevContest kicks off!

[Batman]

@Piru

Since OS4 is only available for AmigaONE, the contest is pretty much limited to existing AmigaONE users [..] Finally, I believe giving the AmigaONE system to someone who doesn't already own one would be much more sensible in promoting the AmigaONE platform.

Wrong. It's open to Classic Amiga developer with OS3.9 and NDK and cross-compiler. OS4.0 is developed with the maximum source compatibility possible with OS3.9 in mind. :-D

IMHO this contest is aimed to encourage classic developer to (re)start using their 1200/4000 and producing nice code. And, the judges all have (AFAIK) an AmigaOne or Blizzard/Cyberstorm, so they can aid developer in the OS4-porting task.

With requirement of Reaction and other OS4 components, it's close to impossible to develop the program on anything else but OS4

That's the whole purpose of the contest: pushing up the platform again on the road. About Reaction,  you should be glad it's the only tool allowed..I still remember the troubles MorphOS had with its proprietary GUI toolkit not fully owned by the core team... :-)

Having stated all this, I think all your fears are plainly unfounded. :-)

[Batman]

My main problem with MUI is that folks write code that depends on various MUI classes that you then have to hunt down and install and sometimes the ownership of those things move, the websites change, the class ceases development, etc. etc. The lack of centralized ownership makes maintenance and installing a pain in the arse.

This is another reason because MUI wasn't chosen as default GUI toolkit for OS4, dear piru. :-)

[Batman]

@lando

You develop on 3.9, then port and RELEASE on os4.0. In this way you can take part in the contest.

Then again, you forgot two simple things I stated before:

1) os3.9 and os4.0 APIs are quite similar. Os4.0 has some enhancements yes, but these doesn't broke retrocompatibility. It's somewhat like to port from linux 2.0 on i386 to linux 2.4 on i686.

2) many member of the grand jury of the contest have one (or more) A1 available and they're more than willing to help the contestants bugfixing their software before the deadline. So, the contestants do have that machine under the desk.

So, let me rephrase your statement: it is possible to work without easy access to the platform you're developing for. It's an Amiga, not your average PC.  :-D

[Batman]

Anyway, I'm a big fan of MUI and as it's in a native OS4 form now, I don't see why it should be banned.

two reasons for the ban:

1) stuntz almost screwed MOS with his greediness. Reaction (by the way, it is the sequel of ClassAct) doesn't have this problem because its creator gave all the copyrights to the AmigaOS IP owner long ago (and he still maintain it).

2) as fluffy mcdeath said before, the main problem with MUI "is that folks write code that depends on various MUI classes that you then have to hunt down and install and sometimes the ownership of those things move, the websites change, the class ceases development, etc. etc. The lack of centralized ownership makes maintenance and installing a pain in the arse."

[Batman]

You are missing the point. OS 4.0 PPC API implements OS 3.0 API (except some OldOpenLibrary(), TaggedOpenLibrary() etc.) but there are also new API calls which are not available in 3.9. That is what makes this competition problematic (IMO + standard disclaimers here).

Maybe I'm missing the point here, but I had the possibility to give a rapid look to the SDK and I found that code suited for 68k could run without any problem and using only OS3.0 API (if well coded, of course).

The only differences are the way developers have to interact with gnu compilers and the new (compulsory) method for automagically opening and closing libraries and interfaces introduced with OS4.0.

[Batman]

    Batman wrote:

    1) stuntz almost screwed MOS with his greediness.

That's a very unfair statement

I don't think that was unfair, if you view those event from a MOS user point of view...

That's not even an argument - who doesn't distribute the class with their app?

Many 68k apps still relies on two well known and freely available MUI custom classes. The developers assumed their user already installed them, and it's a very very bad of coding, IMHO.

Maintaining MUI classes isn't what it used to be, especially with MUI 3.9 (never, ever had a problem with it).

I don't have MUI 3.9, so I cannot express my opinion. Can you explain the improvement in maintaining MUI classes apart from the necessary mental re-education (in siberian camps hopefully) of developers not used to check for custom classes during install/load phase?

And what is it exactly that stops people releasing 3rd party ReAction classes you need to track down and install? Both ReAction and MUI and modular, and so have absolutely the same weaknesses in being modular.

One difference though - MUI is a lot easier for people to develop for. If you want more devs for OS4, you should be making it easy for them, not dragging them down into dogma that wouldn't have been out of place on a 1998 UseNet MUI vs. ClassAct flamewar and making it harder.

Maybe you're right. But some time ago I discussed about one of ReAction developer about improvement in the upcoming release, and I realized that what REALLY differentiates ReAction from MUI is not the easeness of use, but the documentation and support provided for it: MUI has better one.