{Emerging from the lurking shadows.}
@MarkTime
All could have been the direction a new AmigaOS could have taken. We could have done a QNX based solution, with initially the os running in emulation but with native extensions. Amithlon did the same thing with Linux, and many native extensions were developed.
From ANN thread.
Amiga, Inc had many directions they *could* have gone. Remember QNX? They could have stuck with that....remember Linux? The could have stuck with that....remember MorphOS? It was an option, even at the time Hyperion was selected.
First a couple questions.
When you speak of QNX and Linux, are you referring to the Gateway era plans? Or are you talking about AmigaOS XL and Amithlon/Umilator? I'm asking because depending on your answer, you, MarkTime, can ignore half my response.
If you are talking about the Gateway era plans, you might want to consider this... While Gateway is not Amiga Inc. anymore, Gateway may have burned that bridge for Amiga Inc. when Gateway set its sites on Linux.
Or if the bridge is still there, Amiga Inc. does not have what it take to support the weight of QNX/QSSL. After all, Gateway is a 'big' player in the 'PC' world. They had the resources to insure such a deal. Amiga Inc. on the other hand is a dwarf looking to be a giant (I've been playing too many RPGs lately). Arguably, Amiga Inc. is no where near achieving such a monumental transformation.
As for Gateway's Linux plan... Well, I don't think they were looking to do anything other than offer a Linux Distro named Amiga. I suppose it's possible that Gateway might have tried what Apple did with Mac OS X. But I Personally doubt it. After all, wouldn't Amiga Inc. just continued with what Gateway started instead of looking to Tao for another solution?
Besides, even if Gatway had been working toward a Mac OS X like solution. Gateway either didn't get anywhere, was frightened off the idea by Microsoft, or have retained much of that strategy for their potential future benefit.
So put simply, to blame Amiga Inc. for what Gateway did not do is unfair. If you want to criticize Amiga Inc., then stick to the promise and promises they have not made manifest (damn those RPGs).
As to AmigaOS XL and Amithlon/Umilator (and AmigaForever for that matter)... These were never intended to succeed AmigaOS. They were(/are) all bridging solutions for AmigaOS user who no longer use 'classic' Amiga hardware but still wish to use Amiga software. The idea being that once new Amiga hardware (A1) and OS (AmigaOS 4) were released, it would entice those users to adopt the new platform. Otherwise they could continue using their 'legacy' solutions in an emulated environment.
Now of course all three solutions (incl. AmigaForever) could be developed into a next generation Amiga OS. But as far as I can recall, both AmigaOS XL and Amithlon/Umilator were introduced after Amiga Inc. and Hyperion had negotiated an Amiga OS 4 deal. So this part of the argument would be predicated on Amiga Inc. and Hyperion having broken ranks for whatever reason(s).
[If I'm wrong about the exact chronology of the Amiga Inc./Hyperion deal and the release of AmigaOS XL & Amithlon/Umilator. That would obviously makes the following argument much weaker.]
Amithlon/Umilator, being the most likely candidate, has been shelved due to a dispute between Bernd Meyer and H&P. This situation was further exacerbated by Amiga Inc.'s inaction on two fronts (The whole H&P violating AI IP, forcing Bernie to pull the plug on Amithlon. And not giving Bernie clear indication that AI would back him if he went up against H&P).
AmigaForever could eventually be morphed into an Amithlon/Umilator like solution. After all, Amithlon/Umilator was born from the UAE code base (!IIRC!). Of course, there's the issue of Amiga Inc.'s desire to protect its IP and the open source nature of UAE. Some how both would have to be reconciled. Plus, how long would it take to get something equivalent to Amithlon/Umilator up and running.
As for AmigaOS XL... Again there's this whole IP dispute hanging in the air between Amiga Inc. and H&P. Then there's the question of exactly how QSSL figures into the mix. Would Amiga Inc. (or relevant third party) continue using QNX as is and snapping in an emulation layer (whether it be a true emulation engine or API translator) to QNX? Would Amiga Inc. license QNX as a kernel? Would QSSL agree to either? If all these were answered in the affirmative, how long would all this take? And then what becomes of AmigaDE/Anywhere?
[Whether you like it or not, AmigaDE/Anywhere (aka Tao int
ent) has been the 'big' thing since Amiga Inc. began its current incarnation. I doubt that Amiga Inc. is in any position to dump Tao
if QSSL demanded it. On the other hand QSSL does appear to have a 'friendly' relationship with Tao. So QSSL and Tao might be willing to cooperate with Amiga Inc. But to what extent?]
This all assumes that 'AmigaOS Forever Umilate XL 4' would target the x86 as its primary CPU platform. We still have to answer, how long it would take to include PowerUP and/or WarpUP compatability to an x86 based solution?
If we assume that PPC were the primary CPU platform. Well, then how much more time would it take to get any of the above alternatives running on PPC?
The only other 'viable' alternative to AmigaOS 4 is MorphOS. But we all already know that MorphOS could never be an official AmigaOS successor... Not unless Amiga Inc. bought Genesi or Genesi bought Amiga Inc. At no point was there ever enough water under that bridge to put out the fire burning it.
In my estimation, all the (remotely possible) solutions above would have likely taken just as long as the current AmigaOS 4 project has (if not longer). Especailly if they were required to operate on PPC processors.
Feel free to argue this anyway you like. As for me, I think I'll...
{Retreat to the lurking shadows.}
