Why revive Amiga?

[bloodline]

NewRevolution wrote:
In the last few days I have been updated on the Amiga front. I?ve found out that Amiga (as we knew it) has divided into two fractions (Amiga Inc and MorphOS), each working towards their own goals? or are they?

I loved my Amiga, and I enjoyed so much comparing Amiga with a standard PC in the early-mid 90s. A standard Amiga had better sound, better graphics, it was a window + CLI based system and it was (at that time) quite fast.

But where is it going today? Why should stakeholders invest money into Amiga? Amiga is (I believe) old technology today. Can the Amiga OS compete with today?s advanced OS?s like Linux and Windows? What dose Amiga have to offer that will make AOS more attractive than other OS?s?

Yes it would be fun to dust of some old Amiga applications (and games). But how much am I willing to pay for that? $800? I?d rather dust of my old A1200 with my 68030 accelerator card and play with that.

Can anyone out there convince me why I should invest time and money in an attempt to revive Amiga?

Well if The Community has been split by AOS4 and MOS, one could say it will be brought together by AROS...  :-D

I think the new PPC hardware is very exciting, If I had the money I would buy both. Well, AROS is being ported to the Pegasos and hopefully eventually the AmigaONE too, so I don't think buying either PPC solution will be a dead end so to speak.
It just depends on what you can afford, which probably puts favour on the Peg...
If you can't afford the current PPC solutions then AROS on a standard x86 board is your best solution, until your finanial situation improves

[bloodline]

Our desktop AOS4.0 is so small, it can run on a PDA now, without ANY programs being removed!

Can it? Have you seen it? I don't know of many PPC based PDAs....

BTW, AROS can already run on Plam devices :-D

[bloodline]

downix wrote:
@bloodline

Actually, IBM has released the spec to one, but AOS4 won't be able to run on it while MOS can.  (The spec uses the low-end 40x series of PPC's which lack the MMU so crucial to AOS4 according to the spec sheet but incidental to MOS)

Now you mention it I do remember a "mobile" version of the PPC announced by IBM.

I see no reason why MOS can and AOS4 can't other than political reasons. :-D

[bloodline]

Dagon wrote:

You can crash Linux, but it takes an effort, and to be very honest,

Not to me when I installed a couple of years slackware... after a while I just logged as a root and the x server went down... with no particular reason and it was random not always...(maybe it was something I did or it was that distro that had problem), well anyway who cares about linux? I`ve got win xp, the principle is the same, they are not AmigaOS so I`ll choose for my PC the one that has more apps that I need and more games, so win xp is the winner and linux now just doesn`t exist, it took a lot of space from my hd for nothing.

I`ve installed netBSD though in my miggy just for fun and I like it more that linux.

X Crashes non stop for me... Probably due to some dodgy GFX drivers more than X's fault... but once X goes it can take the Keyboard with it and that's it no more Linux session... Reboot time.

[bloodline]

downix wrote:
@bloodline

What political reasons?  That Hyperion announced that AmigaOS4
requires the use of an MMU hardly classifies it as political, it's
their design decision, just like their design decision to only support
32-bit addressing even tho the PPC spec allows for more (the G4, for
example, has 36-bit).  Just their design choices at work here.
MorphOS was built with the concept of being able to run it on MMU-less
systems, so I understand, so it would, unlike AmigaOS4, run on IBM's
mobile PowerPC core (which lacks an MMU).  Nothing political about it,
the design teams made design choices and it limits the end-choice of
CPU each respective OS will run on.

This does not prevent someone from building a portable based on IBM's
440 core, which does have an MMU, but it does prevent AmigaOS 4 from
running on the 40x cores that lack an MMU that is specified in IBM's
spec.

I didn't know it requires an MMU?!?!?! I assumed they would have an mmu.library in the same way AROS will.
I think that using a library to support optional hardware is a much more amiga way to do things..