One unified OS for the future?

[zylesea]

If and when MorphOS starts work on SMP (have they done so already? I really don't know) they too will have to change the API somewhat, but I just wish it would be with changes that are compatible with AmigaOS's API changes. Not going to happen, though, I suspect....

SMP and other goodies breaking up compability will probably come whitn an ISA switch. While AOS4.x tries a slow transition (we'll see how well that will work out), MorphOS will do that with a hard cut.

[zylesea]

That's another question - is MorphOS with a new SMP API, a new ISA and no binary compatibility with 68k Amiga or PPC MorphOS actually MorphOS at all? Or is it another OS by the same developers?

Yes and no I'd say. If API changes that drastically that you need to rewrite all your code completely, then it's definitely a new whole OS, but if API stays rather similar (changes are of course inevitable and on a rather low lovel) then I'd say it's still the same OS. Probably somewhere in between. And i would welcome if MorphOS "NG" will still come with some compability to the old stuff, IMHO best approach in a boxed away implementation: http://via.i-networx.de/q86.htm

[zylesea]

It's really hard for me to fully admire the above motivations. In AmigaOs times, I had a system I understood completely, pretty much every corner of it, so I could exactly do what I wanted, and I had a community around it. Nowadays, Linux has taken over and replaced this, to some degree, even though the complexity is higher. Anyhow, with enough effort, one can learn the inner workings of the system and set it up exactly as one wants it - and that's not possible with Windows. Plus, there is also an active community, but its much larger, and it is harder to keep on track, but yes, there is.

Dunno why but I never got warm with Linux. Am trying it since ages from time to time, but it always sucked. Starts with the file system not being volume based. Of course I understand that system, but I just don't like it. Same for the bash. Powerful and potent, but I don't like the bash. The MorphOS shell feels more human.
Call it what you want, but Linux always was and still is geeky under the hood. there's a reason why it never really took off for end users. Yes, I can learn that, but it's not comfortable. Setting up a Linux system that works and behaves to my taste would be quite a lot of work. Why should I do that? Before I use Linux I always prefer Windows.
Ppl are different. I prefer MS Visual Studio over emacs/gcc (yes I _can_ use that, too, but I don't like it). Thing I am saying: ppl are different and while I acknowledge technical power that doesn't mean it's the best for everyday usage.
For me MorphOS fits best in. The system comes well configured already and everythimg is easily and logically configurable. I know the system quite well and teh kind it is organized fits to my habbits (which of course are also shaped by Amiga).
Why should I force myself to use another system when there is a system that fits to me?

[zylesea]

Show me an ARM that competes well with an i7. AmigaOS is not some tablet OS. If a switch away from where it is now is justified then with a significant increase of computing power. Sure, an Atom is rather crappy, but who speaks about that stuff? i5 or i7 is whats' in remotely normal computers these days. And to that level ARM scales up rather poorely.
Since years ARM is said to soonly enter/roll up the desktop and server market... Reminds me somehow to "two more weeks". x64 will stay usual and up to date for quite a couple of years (I'd say at least 15 - 20). Chances are that ARM will chime in, but it will not abandon x64 quickly (i.e. 15 - 20 years).

[zylesea]

@zylesea
Can you get an i5/i7 for 50 bucks (board included)?
Unless you can build an OS that is better, more stable and more compatible than anything else out there, people won't even bother to create another partition on their HDD.

The x86 market is simply too crowded. Everyone and his dog is pushing his distro. A hobbyist market simply doesn't stand much of a chance on there. Certainly not as much as on cheap hardware even people in developing countries can afford.

Not 50 bucks, but serious computing power for still not that much money. At least that's what *I* want. My G4 systems are okay, but I would very much welcome another performance step (like from 68k to ppc). From current available ppc to i7 that would be such a leap forward.

And it's not about ruling the world. As it is with MorphOS today this micro ecosystem is doing surprisingly well. I doubt the user number would decrease that much when more powerful hardware would be available. It's not about challenging Windows or OS X. It's not about millions of users, but a few thousand.
And it wouldn#t be just another "pushed distro" as the usually pushed distro is just another Linux which wouldn't be the case for MorphOS x64.

[zylesea]

showme amigalike os thar would take advantageof all the i7 cores.

i can only speak for MorphOS, but one of the rationals for an ISA switch (and breaking compability) would be to introduce SMP.

[zylesea]

I thought this discussion was about the (impossibility) possibility of a single OS that could unify the Amiga community, not the pros and cons of which hardware to use for any OS?  What ever, carry on........ but some of these statements are seeming fairly useless to me.  I hope we are not creeping back toward any kind of discussion that start pointing fingers and claiming which choices are the RIGHT choices, and everything else is the wrong choice.

Actually the hardware does matter. I think at least MorphOS and OS4 have a similar status quo, but a different long time strategy. AFAIU OS4 wants to stay on ppc and keep compatible to its current incarnation while bringing SMP and stuff like that to the OS. And while I doubt feasability of that approach it actually is their approch. MorphOS evolves and matures a little more in its curent incaranation on ppc but then, eventually, will do a sharp cut to a "MorphOS NG" with SMP, 64 Bit, full resource tracking, and maybe - maybe not - full MP. But this will come at the cost of direct compability. And that sharp cut will come with an ISA switch, too. Either to x64 (_my_ preference) or to ARM. AFAIK the ISA is not yet set into stone. If resources were huge, support for several ISAs for MorphOS NG would be also possible (but resorces aren't huge, hence it's only theory).
AROS (x86) kind of switched ISA (well AROS is available for many ISAs) already for the cost of binary compability while keeping API compability - with the disadvantage that SMP or MP are not present in AROS as they aren't in  OS4 or MorphOS today. Introducing SMP or MP to AROS would mess things up there as much as it messes things up in MorphOS or OS4.

[zylesea]

Would it be possible at all to develop a "modern" amiga-based OS without sacrificing not only binary but also source compatibility? If everything would have to be broken what sense would that make at all? And what software could then run on it (except 68k in UAE)?

A sandbox alone cannot overcome all shortages.

If API stays as similar as possibie recompilation should be done with rather little effort. Part of it is that I _myself_ still put MP for a next generation OS still in question. An NG (Amigaish) OS doesn't need to run nuclear power plants, hence I guess MP could still be left out. Would ease up many things (API could keep pretty similar) and staying as snappy as it is now should be easier too. On _my_ priority list for a NG OS SMP and 64 bit are pretty important, full resource tracking very welcome. MP would be nice, but only if "cost" isn't too high. Needs careful selection of trusted software though (pretty much as it is on Amiga today).

[zylesea]

"yours/Matthey's/Biggugn" have a different goal. It is a fun system, a new platform based on 68k certainly not competing with Windows or Linux or Mac. People like you are dreaming of a high-end platform in the same league as those big players. The air is thin in that league, who do you think will port the professional applications to it using that resources? I had contact to former amiga developers, mostly even Linux ports are financial failures. Applications are either on windows or for mobile platforms (expecially games). The other source of new software might be to motivate freeware/shareware developers but for those it is more important to have better dev tools. More than 4 GB is completely irrelevant there. And even more than one core is certainly only used by professional software.

Thing is, with Amiga 32 bit does not provide GB RAM aviailability. Bit 32 is taken aready, leaves two GB only and from that parts are also not available for RAM. On MorphOS teh limz is actually 1.5 GB on OS4 a bit higher (1.8???) and on AROS I currently don't know.
And less than 2 GB is an issue. My Mac mini with 1 GB runs quite often out of RAM, my Powerbook with 1.5 GB is a bit better, butsometimes I use it all. Hence, te more the merrier. Indeed I guess on Amiga 4 GB would be comfortable for  acouple of years, but that changes. 32 bit limit is annoying.