Wither Natami?

[TheDaddy]

>>Natami, CloneA and MiniMig are not real amigas...

And who says so?

[TheDaddy]

>>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.

What is a real Amiga?

Is a real Amiga anything that has an Amiga name printed on it?

Is a real Amiga anything that bears the Commodore name on it?

Is a real Amiga any portable device that says Amiga on it?

Is an Amiga a device powered by just the Amiga OS?

Would you call a pc an Amiga if it was running Amiga OS?

If Commodore were still around (not bust and etc.) and they released the Minimig or the Natami under the Amiga 550 and Amiga 7000 names and they didn't tell you these new machines were using FPGA, would we still be here discussing if they are REAL Amigas or not?

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

Nonsense.

[TheDaddy]

>>Amiga Hardware is hardware based on the designs of the Original Amiga chipset.
The FPGA projects are new circuit designs which look to software like the Original Amiga chips... In much the same way as an Emulator looks like Amiga Hardware to Amiga Software.

So what?
It's the year 2005 Commodore are still around and they are planning a small, Amiga 500/600 compatible machine with PS/2, SD-Card, VGA support and they name it the Amiga 550.

It is released using fpga technology because it makes economic sense.

So we have the Amiga 550 (Minimig) by Commodore. Is this a "real" Amiga?

[TheDaddy]

>>FPGA Amigas are workalikes, they do not behave exactly as the original chips.

I would say that they can be an improvement of the original chipset. I would even go further and say an evolution.

[TheDaddy]

This discussion takes me back to the old "Is Amithlon/Amiga OS XL/WinUAE an Amiga?" and my favourite "What makes an Amiga?"

 :-)

[TheDaddy]

>>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.

I would advise a beer after a crap day or a cold shower. :-)

>>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 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!

>>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!:-)

>>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?

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.

[TheDaddy]

>>This thread is so silly.

Agreed! :-)

>>The original Amiga boards were huge as doors before they were shrinked and fabricated.

Correct.

>>1) This shrinkage changed the speed of the original chips by laws of physics.
This equals not cycle exact.

Correct.

>>2) from OCS to AGA the design changed again, speeds changed again, design changed for 32 bit support.
This equals cycle change again.

Correct.

>>3) Every Amiga model that has different cpu is not cycle exact, this is by design.

Correct and let me add to this that if we wanted to consider the Minimig/Natami NOT REAL Amigas then becasue of the difference between the various Amiga models (500, 500+, 1200 etc...) they should also NOT be called real Amigas, this is madness! :-)

>>There is no such thing as cycle exact, its just marketing hype. IF hardware can run Amiga OS and Amiga programs the same way as Commodore Amiga then its Amiga. Simple as that.

The voice of reason! :-)

>>Software, hardware, simulation, emulation its all Amiga.

Agree. Hardware purism would be wonderful but it is not practical/economical and probably it won't happen, ever.

>>Work together and build or work against and destroy.

I also would like to say:" Thank (put your favourite god in this space) that we have people like Dennis, mikej, The Natami Team, I won't include myself I am just a designer not a hardware engineer :-) for giving us more new hardware, something to play with, a hope, keep a dream alive and most important spending/wasting your precious time on this community. Thank you guys! :-)

>>Simply put, do you actually think a normal user cares what hardware it is ?

No! No one, apart from the purists hardcore ones, gives a crap, look at the Mac users, it looked like the world was at an end when Apple switched to Intel chips, a couple of years later everyone is happier than ever!
 :-)

[TheDaddy]

>>The level of ignorance in this has become too great not to address.

I think you are getting a bit too excited about nothing. :-)

>>Think before you post. Formulate a response, try and establish the point you want to make. You need to make sure that know why you are posting.

I am finding your comments a bit offensive may I say. We are all free to express our opinion even without technical knowledge, at least not until a fascist regime comes in telling us what to do.

>>Now, just go back, edit your post appologize for wasting people's time and enjoy the learning experience.

Why? How obnoxious, please spread your infinite knowledge over us ignorant, little people. I think you might need a lesson in modesty.

>>A Hardware clone of the Amiga is inherently no better or worse than a Software clone. BUT we are in a situation where the Software clone (UAE) is MUCH more mature, and thus compatible than even the most mature of the Hardware clones, MiniMig.

I was mainly arguing the point that someone said that the Minimig/Natami are NOT an Amiga, now mature or not it's not the case, let's not try and change the discussion. I clearly, and others, proved that anything running Amiga OS and applications can be called an Amiga.

[TheDaddy]

>>Find one objection from me regarding the Hardware clones. You'll find none, in fact I would like to get one, I just wish people who don't understand anything would stop banging on that Hardware Amiga clones are inherently better than software! Also if they could stop posting tenchnical nonsense as fact that would cheer me up too.

I believe you said that Minimig/Natami are not real Amigas, that is all I am trying to defend. As for whether an hardware clone is better than software emulation I don't care but I know that I prefer having a new piece of hardware (Minimig/Natami) rather than a pc running UAE just because I like the effort put into this by Amiga developers.

[TheDaddy]

@bloodline

I am not arguing whether UAE is better or not than Minimig/Natami, I am not arguing that and I am not interested in it.

I am just defending the accusation that Minimig/Natami are not real Amigas.

A real Amiga is very hard to define, as we know, many threads have failed in this.

[TheDaddy]

>>Blimey, I never realised that there was Turing-type test for what was a 'real' Amiga and what was not, I have to thank the fanboi trolls on here for making me aware of this fact....

:-)

>>If it runs Amiga software, it's an Amiga, if it's hardware or not, the rest is just semantics.
The hardware purists need to realise that is isn't 1988 any more, you can't get the original hardware, so if you replicate it in another chip, what's the problem?

Thank you! I couldn't have put it better! :-)

>>Also, if you replicate the Amiga chipset and add "AGA with knobs on" like Natami are planning, how can you claim it's an Amiga, since you have modified it? If I mod my A1200 by adding an IDEFix and a laptop DVD/CD drive, is it still an Amiga?

Agree on everything you say. Is a pumped up A1200 with Mediator and PCI cards (from the pc world) still an Amiga?

To me the Natami/Minimigs are real Amigas.

Just be thankful that someone is sweating on these pieces of hardware for everyone to enjoy.

Thanks WotTheFook :-)

[TheDaddy]

>>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.

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

I agree with you. :-)

>>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.
 :-)

[TheDaddy]

@bloodline

Come on, we are splitting the hair now.

Millions of cars share millions of parts but they are still Fords, Fiats, Opel, BMWs, Audis and so on.

I would like to say that if the Minimig/Natami can, to a certain extent, be 90% compatible with old Amiga software then they are Amigas.

I was also thinking would you call an Amiga a real Amiga if it couldn't use hardware add-ons designed for a specific Amiga model? I would still call it an Amiga.

If someone said to me: "From tomorrow we have three new Amiga models but they are not 100% compatible with old Amigas/Amiga software", I would be enourmosly happy and thankful. It wouldn't even cross my mind to check if and why they are not 100% compatible.

 :-)

[TheDaddy]

>>For me then it would be pointless as an Amiga... One of my favourite projects is posibly the least Amiga compatible Amiga Clone project... I don't think of it as a real Amiga though... I see it as a learning tool and a hobby!


Ok let's end it like this then saying that I consider a Minimig/Natami a real Amiga and anything like the SAM with OS4.1 (hopefully) an Amiga and you don't. :-)