real amiga vs winuae

[jkirk]

They found web browsing, email, Office, dvd playback, mp3 and divx playback, banking, youtube was not that different on the old machine. And Win98Se was just as responsive as Vista if not more so.

web browsing?? youtube?? email?? banking?? these are influenced more by connection speed not os performance.

dvd playback?? divx?? these are dependent on vid card drivers/codecs moreso than anything else.

mp3?? this is dependent on the efficiency of the codec.

 

Thats most of the stuff people do.

most?? i don't think so.
it is just a portion of what people use a computer for. i myself use mine as a video recording system as well as dvd playback.
i have another system for gaming, vid editing, web browsing, database operations etc.

 

I would have thought on an Amiga forum, people might question why things on the PC are still the way they are.

because they aren't in the realm of being fixed by an os. sure you can optimize some of these and make it better but there will never be a fix per se.

ie is made my microsoft they have full control over the software but not the internet.
codecs are made by third parties and are limited by the available hardware. microsoft has tweaked the interface to improve performance but the actual codec/hardware problem remains.

as for loading times windows(as i said before) has deliberate timers that slow down it's operation to give a consistant feel with previous versions of the os. also the added features in the os also slow down loading time.

aos has no timers of this sort so it feels faster despite slower hardware.

like i said before try playing the pc version of a D&D gold box game in windows if you want to see why timers were implemented in windows.
this game was dos based iirc and uses no timers either internal or in windows. tho using dosbox may slow it down enough to be playable(with animations at proper speed.

[jkirk]

For things like GUI etc then this makes sense.  Cant see how it ccould ever make sense for loading of the OS or the speed of backgroundd processes

well in the loading of an os if you loaded everything at once it would be fast however to prevent one service with a dependency from opening before another that fills the dependancy you have to have a systematic loading of each module. aka if the os opened full on you would see a plethora of crashes. as such they open then as fast as possible without causing such a conflict.

[jkirk]

Thinking of booting... I remember the startup-sequence on my Amigas.

I was always asking myself why the Amiga was booting faster with slower hardware. On the Windows PC I always felt as if very much stuff gets started at the same time. The Harddisk is more or less a sequential device, so if programs and services get started concurrently this should explain the constantly burning HDD LED on PC's. The disk is not used in a very wise manner!

The Amiga instead started everything as a sequence, the disk had not to switch back and forth between many locations of programs like it seems to happen on a PC. So... if a PC would boot in a sequencial manner, the boot time would come down a lot, just because there are so many seeks left out.

Does anyone know if my theory has the true of it? I am not completely sure if the Amiga was starting programs really as a sequence during boot time.

no i remember on my amiga that tho they were started sequentially they would load simultaneously as a result in your statup sequence if you had something that needed loading before another component you had to put that program as high in the sequence as possible or call a seperate script that put the startup on hold till the program was fully loaded.

basically the startup sequence was a list of programs to load but it did not necessarily wait till that program finished loading before going to the next on the list.

for more info on the windows startup sequence.

[jkirk]

Your behavior was that of a PC-fanatic.  Not familiar with Pegasos-- does that have amiga h/w or just all software emulation?

lol no the pegasos 1 & 2  is a next gen board as was the a1 and sam.
they ran morphos and linux, tho i think aos 4.1 is available for the pegasos 2

[jkirk]

Question was whether the Pegasos uses the custom chip set (amiga h/w) or not.

the answer is "lol NO this is a NEXT GEN motherboard"

the custom chipset idea was taken by the pc and now is a part of every motherboard made today.

you now have
cpu/southbridge/northbridge/graphics/sound
in new pc-style motherboards
as such the new amigas draw from this as creating new chipsets are so cost prohibitive that we will never see that again in our amigas.

[jkirk]

Was SGI the originator of these custom chip designs? Alas, all these brand names make me just sad. Looking back too long does not make me sleep easier.

i think all early systems had some form of multiple chipset to varying degrees. but i think the amiga was the first to to use this number of different co-processors and did it relatively inexpensively.

[jkirk]

A500/A1000 didn't have any batteries on them.

eh? you must have never put an a501 in then.

[jkirk]

I will only state one and see if you are emotional sane enough to acknowledge it. The very first point about joysticks you said my data was "utter rubbish". If that's not a biased look at the data, then I can't even argue with you anymore.

no it is not bias if there is a logical reason it is not valid. the thing is you were given instructions on how to redo the test to make the data valid. you ignored that and are still assuming that you are the only one that is right. that to me IS bias.