potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP

[Waccoon]

Is it just me, or are people getting really, really desperate?  :-)

Well considering the internet is at 10Mb/s...

Most broadband modems don't come close to even filling the capacity of 10-Base-T Ethernet.  The absolute best I've ever seen on a cable modem was about 520 kilobytes per second, and I usually get between 240-300.

Keep in mind that with the lack of true ATA, you'd likely have to do lots of storage access over Ethernet.  I can't imagine hacking the GameCube's CD port being all that easy.

[Waccoon]

@lou_dias:

If you think it's so damned easy to run an OS on GameCube, do it yourself.

OS4 is nowhere near as modern and portable as Linux.

[Waccoon]

lou dias:  Wayne can close this thread as far as I am concerned.

I second that.

[Waccoon]

You're STILL going on about this thread?

The Xbox is neither PPC nor as inexpensive.

But, it does have something that benefits most personal computers:  a hard drive.  Try adding storage to a Gamecube and you'll likely have to put in some more money.  Given the volume of interest, your "less expensive" machine will climb to the cost of an XBox very quickly.

What's the the Celeron in the XBox's FPU Arithmetic Capability? Let's compare apples to apples here.

CPUs and GPUs can both calculate float math, so comparing numbers about GFLOP performance can get sticky.

The speed vs accuracy ratio is quite different between CPUs and GPUs.  I believe Radeon-class GPUs are limited to 24-bit floats.  It's easy to get lots of GFLOPS when you cut back on accuracy.

Isn't "hitting the metal" what API's do?

No, that's what drivers do.  APIs are totally different.  An API can talk to specific parts of a driver to get better performance, but the driver still does all the hard work and a true API does not offer direct hardware access.  Drivers run in kernel mode, while most APIs run in user mode.  There are good reasons for that.

Also, the GC has no BIOS. So that is one less layer of R&D that is needed. Everything is in the Dev kit and loaded from the game disc.

So, what tells the hardware how to use the drive so it can load firmware off the drive?  You can hard-wire a BIOS into the hardware instead of putting it on a seperate ROM, but that just makes things a hell of a lot more difficult for your "cheap Amiga" project.

The GC's drive has a really low average seek time and that's why alot of software loads quickly on the system versus the others

What really affects speed is the quality of the filesystem, which minimizes the number of seeks in the first place.  Consoles load data quickly because there is no fragmentation on the discs, except for things like streaming audio for background music.  Games with long load times are the ones with very poorly organized discs.

Hard drives have much lower seek times.  So do memory cards.  Your idea of a cheap Amiga is to save yourself $50 and retard performance by a huge magnitude?

The Amiga may have a lot in common with game consoles, but it is certainly not a set-top box.

[Waccoon]

The fact that Revolution is backwards compatible, will include a hard drive and will have a familiar API makes the issue current and revelant.

"Compatible" isn't quite accurate.  The PS2 is "compatible" with PSX games, but you can't take advantage of any of the PS2's new features.  You also can't run old-gen and new-gen software at the same time.  That's fine for games, but not for a PC.

Xbox talk is quite off-topic not only for this site but for this thread The XBOX is a PC in game machine's clothing

Um, aren't you talking about turning a console into a PC?  The XBox is architectually better suited for the job.  But, you just don't like that puny little Celeron.

You quoted a floating point performance value of the G3 in the GC and compared it to a value in the XBOX's GPU

Sorry, wrong Amiga.org member.  Re-read your own thread.

Give me the XBOX's Celeron's Gflop measure or give me nothing.

My point is that the Celeron isn't the only chip in the XBox that does floating point math, and each chip in the system does math differently.  You seem to be obsessed about the Celeron and completely overlook nVidia's chipset, though.

For game machines, the developer kit includes drivers and an API that get loaded in with the final game disc, it always hits the metal. That's why game machine are so efficient at playing games...shocker!

And so totally poor at anything but games.  Yeah, you can write an API to run in kernel mode because anything can run in kernel mode.  However, the APIs still give instructions to the drivers, and the drivers do the work.  Abstraction isn't just about performance.  Sometimes they, you know, might actually make a programmer's life easier, or make the system a hell of a lot more stable.

The machine is a hacker's dream...unfortunately I am not a teenager with endless time on my hands. Again, I'm just exploring the idea and getting hit on the head for it.

So, you're talking about a hacker's dream, but you're not a hacker?

I thought the whole reason the AmigaOne was developed is because people don't want to hack anymore, and want a modern system?

I don't see any GC title having poor boot time.

Ah, so obviously the hardware is responsible for that.  Every console has its share of games that will either boot up in 5 seconds, or 2 minutes, though I'm only familiar with PS2 titles.  To me, the boot times for Ratchet and Clank are amazingly fast, while Burnout3 is unbearable.  I suppose the PS2's DVD drive just works slower when running Burnout3?

Also, I just explained how the GC can read SD memory cards so not performance hit there.

Not all SD cards are the same performance, and it also depends on the quality of your reader.  I know, because I work in a photography store and use memory cards all the time.  Each reader in the store has different performance, even though they can all read SD cards.

You're also not factoring in CPU utilization and other grunt work.

I'm just showing how people on this board can get what they have been asking for at a lower cost.

You mean the "hacker's dream," instead of a real computer?

Like I said, add on all that other hardware, and the cost advantage to the Gamecube itself dwindles.  What were you just saying about PS/2 keyboard adapters and card readers?

Commodore and every would-be owner since then had always tried to license the technology for set-top boxes of one form or another.

PCs are designed to be flexible.  It's a lot easier to take a "real" computer and turn it into a set-top box, than to go the other way around.  If you actually tried to make an OS for Gamecube yourself, you might realize that.

But, you're not into development.  You're into ideas.

I guess people want a single-bus system that offers the same inefficiencies of the WINTEL platform they are deathly trying to avoid.

Single bus?  Would you care to elaborate on that, especially compared to a highly-optimized closed architecture designed only to play games, like Gamecube?

Remember, it's the Gamecube's "custom chips" that makes it more efficient. Does that sound familiar?

Yes.  I'm running an Abit IS7 motherboard with a Radeon 9800 Pro, an Audigy2, integrated networking and joystick, USB, 1394, a flexible memory architecture that can take up to 4 memory modules, and a flashable BIOS.  Plus more, but I can't be bothered to dig up my manual and look up all the features.

Would you care to list how many custom chips are in my machine?

And before you start complaining about the cost of all that stuff, it's worth noting that you can get fully-integrated PC motherboards that are cheaper than my setup, which, after all, is the whole reason for getting a PC instead of a closed architecture like a game console.

Commodity is more important than raw performance.  The entire PC industry depends on that principle.

If the API is the same (but expanded) then software compatibility can easily be maintained. Isn't that how 'OS-compliant' software for the A500 runs on the A1200?

Technically, yes, if the APIs were designed to work that way.  The problem is, the Amiga's APIs where designed for mutitasking, the Gamecube APIs are not.  The OS would have to have all of its own user-mode APIs to abstract the Gamecube APIs (in other words, wrappers, which are anything but efficient).

Finally, please don't respond

Oh, I forgot... this is your thread.

Revolution is coming, it has a poop-load more power than even the A1G4 and it has a hard drive and it will support HD displays.

Everything is more powerful than AmigaOne (and less buggy, too).  Saying you're better than the lowest-common-denominator says little.

It overcomes all your complaints.

Except for the fact you were hyping Gamecube.  Now that Revolution has been announced, that's all you care about, despite that fact it's architecture is more closely related to that cheezy, Celeron-powered Wintel... thing.

Of course, XBox was "off topic" because it wasn't PPC.  Now that Revolution has been announced, will you make Gamecube off topic, too?

Why not AMIGA OS? For DS? For Revolution?

Because:

1) This thread was about Gamecube, not Revolution or DS.
2) DS is a joke except for PDA-type tasks, in which case, use a regular PDA or one of those new, mutifunction cell phones which are actually designed to do that stuff.
3) Hyperion is not interested in anything but "their" platform, AmigaOne, so the Amiga Revolution isn't going to happen.

Of course, don't let that stop you from trying to get OS4 working on it.  Have fun.

[Waccoon]

The PS2 is backwards compatible with the PS1 because Sony included all the PS1's chips into the PS2. That's publicly known. It's not a "software emulation".

I'll say this again... "The PS2 is "compatible" with PSX games, but you can't take advantage of any of the PS2's new features. You also can't run old-gen and new-gen software at the same time"

To do those things, you NEED some sort of emulation.  Games don't need to do those things.  PCs do.

I suppose if you only play games on your Amiga all day, that's fine, but then, there's always WinUAE.

I'm talking about Amigas not PC's

"PC" means Personal Computer.  If you look at the Amiga as a console, no wonder you think Gamecube is adaquate.

you or whomever ignored that and compared an XBOX GPU's math processing the math processing power of the G3 in the 'Cube.

Well, which is it?  Me, or "whomever?"

You are being silly. You just stated that you are only familiar with the PS2. The PS2 has the longest load times of the 3 systems.

So?  You're focusing too much on the hardware itself and not on usage.  Even the best hardware in the world is crap if you use it incorrectly.  The Gamecube's CD drive is really no different than any other mini-disc drive, and saying it would get blazing performance due to low seek times is myopic, especially with the unit's very, very small memory cache.  The unit was designed to stream data, not work with a filesystem.

Please quote me some REAL numbers here. You make it sound like reading an SD memory card is a slow as a C=64 floppy

It can be if it's not done right.  It depends how flexible the controller bus is on the Gamecube, and I'd have to look at the Gamecube hardware docs to know that.  Since you're the expert on the hardware, what's the throughput of the controller bus, are the busses independent?

used Gamecube at Electronics Boutique $60

Oh, so now you're basing your prices on used and Ebay'd hardware?

for the low low price of $1044 you get:

Crap, but that's what you need to run OS4, legally.  I could build a comparable system on the PC for less than $275 -- a lot less if it's used.  That would blow away the Gamecube and be a "real" computer to boot, with PCI expansion, no hacks to add hardware, and the ability to do things that many modern PCs should do, like... burn CDs.

I was under the impression that this thread was about Amiga in general, and not just OS4.

Also note that the AmigaOne includes OS4, and it's hard to tell how much OS4 costs by itself since they don't sell it seperately... at least not yet.

The Flipper outperforms the Radeon 7000.

Again, you're droning about the performance of the hardware, not the usage.  Also, OS drivers are very different from console drivers, but I already discussed that.

I know one of you has a 'business' to maintain and justify.

What would that be?

All I see is constant bugs and patches and delays and outdated technology being sold for over-inflated prices.

How would Gamecube fix that?  Bugs and pathces are the result of development practices and flawed software design.  The limited flexibility of Gamecube's architecture wouldn't make running "AmigaCube" software any easier on Revolution without a lot of emulation.

If Eyetech, Amiga and Hyperion got together and went to Nintendo and got a license.

I wish them luck, especially seeing how Nintendo bleeds lots of money on those machines and would want a hefty licensce fee.  You're not taking that into account when you spew prices, of course.

Don't hate me for stating the obvious faults with the road being travelled.

Lots of people see faults in the road, but Amigans are famous for hair-brained ideas that aren't future-proof.  Also, you're overlooking a lot of hidden costs.  The Mac Mini is quite comparable to a game console.  Gee, there must be a reason it costs a minimum of $500 without a monitor, keyboard, or mouse.

LOL, it's been 4 days and no bashing.

While I'm passionate about computers, I don't live here, you know.

(On Revolution):  ...it will all still cost well under $1000.

So?  How many other platforms are less than $1000?  This isn't the 1980's, anymore, though Hyperion seems to think so.

One of the big criticisms I got was "we want to get away from custom hardware..." So I guess the A1 is not considered "custom hardware"...

I'll give you that one.  But note that there's little "custom" about the AmigaOne other than the CPU.  It's all based on PC standards.  It's just that the standards are several years old and horribly overpriced.  Many Amiga.org members got upset when the AmigaOne was announced, especially after the promise of running Amiga software on any platform.

It's direct hardware banging on the APPLICATION-level that we need to get away from. That's what an API is for.

Is this why you roasted me many posts ago that Gamecube are designed to hit the metal, and that was a good thing that made them so damned efficient?

Name me one desktop application that really needs 100% cpu utilization in order to run at all on today's modern hardware?

Process management is what the OS is for.  But, process management only works if the hardware *and* APIs are designed to run in user mode.  They are not, so Amiga would have to write their own APIs that use GC APIs like drivers, and that would be a real mess.

Yes yes, I know Amiga Anywhere isn't OS4... The point is: It seems the new owners want to spread the brand.

Hmm... if the brand means distributing cheezy games that can easily be done with Java, I think many people would pass.  I'm sure most people agree that "Amiga" is the PC made in the 80's through 90's.  Amiga Anywhere is essentially a brand new platform that most Amigans know little about.

Plus, Amiga Anywhere cannot run old Amiga applications without an emulator.

Oh yeah, and Amiga Anywhere is not an OS.  If you want AA on Gamecube or whatever, you still need a host OS.  So, back to square one.

I'll bet there are more Gamecube owners here than A1 owners.

I don't suppose "good software" and "huge marketting budget" has anything to do with that.  Also note that only 10% of the non-mobile game colsole market belongs to Nintendo.  You've said very, very little of Nintendo's competitors, especially seeing how XBox already has much of what Revolution will have.

I'm curious? Who am I hurting by suggesting this?

Part of the trick of pusing an "idea" is Proof of Concept.  All you've been talking about is prices and hacks.  You're not taking into consideration any of the technical issues related to getting a "real" OS working on a console, including development budget or licensing.

That's why people aren't taking your idea seriously.  I love the idea of a portable sub $200 computer.  In fact, I'm still debating whether to buy a Mac mini.  However, I know enough about OS development to know it's not techically feasable to get a multitasking OS working on console hardware, and I also know there's a lot of hidden costs you're not mentioning.

The DE line is not a product I am interested in...I was just emphasizing a point of putting the Amiga brand name on more platforms.

Oh.  Just the brand name.  That makes sense.

Do you have a sudden urge to buy a Commodore MP3 player?

Linux generated a buzz with the techie population. OS4 on a console (and other hardware) could do the same thing.

Note that Linux was designed to be a low-cost UNIX clone for college students, and was x86 exclusive, to boot.  It was the development of GNU, the porting of X11, and a huge rewrite with Kernel 2.0 that made Linux a real contender.  The only way AmigaOS could hope to have the same following is if it went open source.  Otherwise, it would take more money than you could imagine to get the "Linux Buzz" for the Amiga.

If OS4 was released for cheap hardware (wasn't that one of the goals of the A1?), I would buy it.

I don't think "cheap" had anything to do with it.  Piracy?  Locked firmware?  Politics?  That's more like it.

Besides, Gamecube is cheap because it is nearing the end of its life and didn't live up to expectations (assuming it hasn't already been taken out of manufacture).  When Revolution shipps, it will be powerful, but won't quite fit the tab as a cheap platform, anymore, especialy with the mandatory development licenses attached.

I'm just not going to shell out $1000+ for an overpriced outdated hardware platform. I'd get an IMac first if I wanted to get a non-MS platform at that 'entry-level' price. A $49.99 price on hardware I already own has 'mass market' potential. The A1 is not a mass market platform. I can build a Linux box for $200.

I believe that's what x86 Amigan have been saying all along.  Amiga Inc. and Hyperion had plenty of time and arguments to render their decision, and they chose an expensive, buggy, outdated, expensive PPC platform.

Maybe the problem is that the people in charge don't give a damn?  Your Gamecube arguments are similar to x86 arguments.  Amiga and Hyperion turned them down, and show little interest in changing their minds, especially now that they are stuck with PPC whether they like it or not.

From hereon, only Amiga Anywhere actually matters.  OS4 is lost.  And, personally, I see very little "Amiga" in Amiga Anywhere, other than the fact it's a cheezy gaming platform which can be done with Java and done even better with Flash (people really don't see the sheer genius of Flash as a compact, efficient platform at all).

adolescent:  Had you called the thread "OS4 on Gamecube" things would probably be different.

Yeah, but then he couldn't have changed his focus to Revolution.

Wasn't it forums like this where the noise was made?

It's also a forum like this where you told me not to reply to your posts, anymore.

[Waccoon]

What do you find misleading about a PPC hardware platform that could run Amiga OS and only costs $155?

The fact is can't cost $155 with all the software and license fees included?

The SX-1 and and SX32 were add-ons that filled in the missing pieces.

The CD32 was a full computer that had been stripped into a console.  The Gamecube is the opposite.  Plus, the CD32 existed in a time where memory protection was a non-issue (Win98, anyone?), and people still hit the metal when programming.

Yes, it can be done, but not with existing console hardware.  Especially not Gamecube.

I think most are crying at the plain truths I have stated.

A serious question:  have you ever worked on an OS before?

Do you own an A1? Are you simply justifying your foolhardy purchase by bashing me like a heretic? If not, do you even plan on buying one?

Nope.  I'm here to follow new ideas in the high-level parts of OS design, as well as other neat things I can do with my A1200, which I still use on occasion.  I have little but a macabre interest in what happens to OS4, as I feel it has no future at all.

Amiga as a PC platform (meaning Personal Computer, and not a purpose-built workhorse), is very much dead.  That's a plain truth.

[Waccoon]

I know I should stay clear of this, but...

I worked on a lexican analyzer in college back in '91 when I was a computer engineering student at UMass-Amherst. It essential is a dos-like command line interpreter. Wrote it in ADA as well as the 'dos' functions it was designed to respond to. This was for a VAX VMS system. I do have a stong computer programming background and some engineering background on the hardware side too.

Well, I'm genuinly surprised.  The trouble is, that was '91,
and you were dealing with application-level stuff, not OS-level stuff.  Your little DOS/shell thing works just fine with no real OS underneath.

If you don't want multitasking, memory protection, virtual memory, and the ability to run applications without recompiling them for each hardware platform, then Gamecube is fine.

OS4 is designed to bring the Amiga world out of those dark days, even if it isn't designed all that well.

mdma:  The dreamcast ran WindowsCE, NetBSD, and Linux 7 years ago.

Were they stripped down versions?  To say a console can run a modern OS implies that the OS retains all its original functionality.

You can run Linux on a cell phone.  It just can't do a fraction of what it can do on properly built PC hardware.

I've been on this site long enough to know that when someone says 'PC' they mean a Wintel box.

Things have changed a lot since the "IBM Compatible" days, buddy.

The Mac is a PC too, you know.

Hell, the machine is based on all the same standards, too.  :-)

http://www.gc-linux.org

How does the functionality of that OS compare to a "real" Linux?  How many lines of code did they have to rewrite to get it to work?  Are they using Nintendo's APIs or are they writing their own drivers?

You can get Linux running on anything.  You just have to strip it down to a toothpick to do it.

It's also worth pointing out that Linux is a kernel, and full builds of Linux are actually GNU/Linux.  There's a lot more to an OS than just the kernel.

The 81MB/second transfer rate of the GC's high speed parrallel port is no joke.

What's the buffer on that?  Is it DMA?

Come on now. You don't think that an ATI chip designed for a game console doesn't have optimized drivers? How is using an API for graphics on a game different from using is in another application such as a gui for an OS?

Very.

Does the Flipper support overlays?

I don't believe Apple will be handing out a license to run another OS on there machine. So the Mac-mini is not a legal option.

*Snort*

Getting legal permission from Nintendo is looking easier by the second, eh?

I believe it's these API's that will let Revolution be backwards compatible with GC.

Maybe, but only the usage may be similar.  You'll still have to re-compile all your software for the new hardware.

This is all part of the HAL that they had to write for the A1.

A modern HAL makes a lot of assumptions about the underlying hardware, and is built around a lowest common denominator.  HALs are easy to port to other PCs.  Rewriting the HAL for a console machine that doesn't follow most PC standards is a HELL of a lot of work.  You'd also have to write a new BIOS for each machine on which the HAL has to run to do it "properly."  If you're not sure why a BIOS has to be written from scratch for each system, think about what "BIOS" stands for.

XBOX is not PPC based so it would be a major rewrite of OS4 and as I've stated before is off-topic.

Only if Hyperion didn't do it properly (and likely, they didn't).

I think you're a little confused over the fact that Gecko != PPC.  The core is similar, but not the same.  If you have to completely recompile everything compared to AmigaOne, then why should the CPU architecture matter at all?  You're definately not going to be able to run software compiled for AmigaOne or AmigaPPC on Gamecube directly, and vice-verca.

Non-PPC machines are most certainly not off topic.  You just don't want to expand your options beyond Nintendo.

My key point is that OS4 is ALREADY a PPC OS so porting it to the GC should only require a rewrite of the HAL

My key point is that there is more to a hardware platform than just the CPU.  A modern OS can't run with the capabilites you'd expect from a modern OS (or even OS4), running on console hardware.

The heart of the Amiga is a games machine.

Oh.  Well, you obviously don't want a modern OS with all the things that made the Amiga special, like multitasking and multimedia.  You want a game machine.

If all you want is games, then porting OS4 (with all the "OS" parts ripped out) is certainly feasable.

But... why bother with an OS at all?

The A1 is a PC design and has the same inefficencies as a PC (x86)...it's single shared system bus architeture.

Name it.  Then tell me the difference between PCI and ISA (for starters).  What you know about IRQs and DMA is a thing of the past on the PC (excuse me, I mean IBM Compatible).

What's really damned ironic is that most consoles are really single bus machines, here.  A unified memory architecture means all the chips share the same memory and must work in perfect syncronization.  PC's are asyncronous machines tied together with multiple busses.  There's many good reasons for that, but I don't think you care, seeing how you keep saying, over and over, that the PC has a single bus, when it certainly does not.

Much of the Amiga's multi-tasking capabilities came from the fact that the custom chips could access memory on there own while the cpu was doing other things.

I don't suppose "GPU" means anything to you?  Oh, look, my Radeon has its own 256MB block of memory.

adolescent:  OS4 will not run on 24Mb of RAM. It's simply not possible.

That's arguable.

Revolution to use same API as Gamecube...

That's "compatible"...  not "same."  You still have to recompile everything.

[Waccoon]

And you are a bigger idiot because the A1 has none of those features except the fact that a video card has it's own ram but that only gets filled through the main system bus so when that is happening, the CPU is probably already processed all it can in it's cache and is just waiting...

The "main" system bus is the memory controller.  It's a hell of a lot faster than PCI/AGP/PCIX, and does allow more than one chip to access main memory at a time (limited only by the speed of the memory).  The whole reason why this controller exists is to make sure that each sub-bus (including the CPU itself) gets a fair share of the memory.

You make it sound like the CPU has to spend 90% of its time at idle waiting for something to do.

It's the kernel that give you multitasking, why would that change with a GC port?

Because the hardware looks different to the kernel.  If Nintendo's APIs aren't designed to run in user space, you can't really use them to write an OS better than OS3.

Also note that there's many kinds of multitasking.  Which one you can use depends on your kernel design and drivers.  Again, Nintendo's APIs may be more harm than help.

Why does most software written for an A500 run on an A1200 without a recompile?

Because AGA is almsost fully binary compatible with OCS.  The AAA chipset was supposed to be a departure from OCS compatibility, but we'll never know by how much.

These are all good questions and you can direct that to that website. The amazing thing is that it was all done through reverse-engineering. Never the less a point has been proven. The GC can be a 'PC'.

No, the point proven is that you can force Linux to run on GC, albiet in a heavily stripped form.  How stripped it has to be is the real question that you keep dismissing.

Why do you want the specific details? Are you going to code something on the GC? Either way, I'm sure the details can be found on the Linux-on-GC site and definitely in an official Gamcube developer's kit.

More questions you don't want to answer.

You never did give me the name of the "single" bus in the PC (sorry, I mean, "Wintel").

Wow, you would think overlays are some secret feature of the OCS/ECS/AGA and can never be done again by any other GPU...

I'm not asking you if overlays are a rare feature.  I'm asking if you're aware that Flipper != Radeon.

Oh yeah, and overlays are not a feature of OCS/ECS/AGA.  The Amiga used playfields, instead.

It didn't seem to be much effort for them [Hyperion] to write the A1 bios and even threw in an x86 emulator to boot.

You are aware that UBoot is an open-source project and was not written by Hyperion, right?

I swear, with every post it seems your IQ goes down.

Thank you.

Gekko is a PPC cpu.

No, it's based on a PPC core.

There are pluses and minuses to syncronizized operation as well as asyncronous. We need not discuss them.

Why not?  One of the biggest tasks of an OS is to make sure than multiple processes don't stomp all over each other.  Is this also off topic in a thread about porting an OS?

I am about a low cost alternative to the A1 PPC platform.

You get what you pay for.

He went on to reveal that the Revolution had received more positive response from developers than expected, partially due to Nintendo's intention to do everything possible to keep development costs low. As part of these plans, the Revolution will use the GameCube's software libraries and application program interfaces.

So?  A kernel needs to run below libraries and APIs for them to work with each other corerctly.  Otherwise, the programmer has to do everything manually, and you are programming for Nintendo's APIs, not the OS.

An OS is supposed to make things portable and make a programmer's life easier, you know.

[Waccoon]

In applications that constantly wait for user interaction such as dtp software and wordprocessors, that is what's happening...

Actually, CPUs have dedicated instructions to handle idle processes to tell the memory controller that they don't need data.

Do you know what the "idle" process in a modern kernel does?

Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) - remember? OS4 has one.

The HAL relies heavily on a BIOS and lots of kernel-mode drivers.  The Gamecube doesn't have them, remember?

Why can't you just admit it's the games that use OS system libraries that are the compatible ones.

In the same way that ancient 3D games were hard-coded for the Glide library?  How many of them work without an emulator or wrapper, like GlideOS?

Look I don't study Linux.

Which, of course, makes you an expert on gc-Linux, and thus the "proof" that Gamecube is really a PC.

I also don't believe it's a stripped down version just because Linux itself in not big. It's when you want to run Apache, PHP, MySQL and a whole bunch of other stuff one one machine that memory requirements go up. 40MB is more than enought to run a gui and browser and a word processor...Linux is a memory whore like Windows.

The Linux kernel can be forced to use 4MB of memory if required.  I hope you're aware that the reason why OSes use so much memory is because of performance optimizers like filesystem caching.  The size of the kernel itself has nothing to do with features or compatibility.  Some kernels can be written in 35K of flat memory, but that doesn't mean they do much.

Compare an OS for a cell phone to BSD UNIX.  Notice any differences?

So I don't know why you want to keep asking me questions about hardware I have no interest in. You just seem bent to prove me wrong on any ridiculous point.

Because you are an idiot who is spreading false information.  Your marketting points may still be valid no matter what other people say, but at some point you'll have to conceed that nobody is agreeing with you on the technical front.

and that's great, it's obviously not a problem for them and they have experience doing it already.

You still lied.

Are you on drugs?

Aspirin.  I need it for threads like this.

Actually, that's a lie.  I enjoy it.  :-)

The implimentation is not my issue but Hyperion's. I'm saying "Hey, wouldn't it be great if OS4 was ported to the Gamecube." Why can't you understand that?

Yes, it would be.  But it can't, unless they reprogram OS4 to retrograde it into OS3 again.

If you wanted OS3 on Gamecube, I wouldn't complain.  That's definately possible.

Yes and I paid for a gamecube and love it.

Why don't you give gc-Linux a spin, then?

Then look at the source code.

If OS4's graphics.library just called the cube's API then it should still work fine on Revolution just like I've mentioned before with A500->A1200 os compliant software.

Ah, yes, it's all so simple on paper, isn't it?

Also, let's go back to the HAL here. Hyperion has stated before that they designed the OS so that rewriting the HAL for another hardware platform (like a Pegasus) is all that would be required for getting it to run on something other than the A1.

So long as it follows PC standards.  Throw a proprietary bus into the works and your HAL has to be rewritten from scratch for each platform.

You're also under the false pretense that all hardware abstraction is done with the HAL.

So you really don't need to argue with me about technical details.

Why?  Isn't that the primary fault with your idea?

Right, so you could never throw Amiga graphics over live video...mmmm k.

Sure you can.  You just need extra hardware to do it.  :-)

Gee wizz, the Gamecube has support for bongoes, too!

And if you knew anything about the GC, you would know it has 2 completely different and separate memory banks.

The memory is clocked at different speeds but is mapped continously.  They work like "chip" and "fast" RAM on the Amiga, except the speed differential is caused by the memory clocking, not which chip can access it.

Quite advanced, but technically, this is still a unified memory architecture.

Yes, by luck, some non-OS compliant games ran fine, most didn't.

When talking about hardware compatibility, luck has nothing to do with it.  :-)

So what you are saying is that OS4 which is targetted at the G3FX chip would have to be completely re-written to run on a G4 equipped A1?

Effectively, yes, because the total hardware is different, not just the CPU, and even if the system architecture is the same, the two cores are not binary compatible, which is why you'd have to recompile all your apps, too.

Recompiling apps for each hardware platform isn't a viable option.  Linux people deal with it, but that's another of the million reason why Linux can't gain any desktop market share.

Ofcourse not. Just like 68000 assembly can be run on a 68060 (yes I know some instructions are missing). Now if you wanted a graphics library to take advantage of the Altivec instruction in the G4 or Gamecube Gekko, then you could rewrite that library to do so.

What about stuff other than Altivec?  Altivec is a set of accelerators, not mandatory instructions, so it's easy to write libraries for that, just like you can for MMX.

Writing libraries to deal with different registers and alignments... er, that's not so easy.  You end up having to use an emulator or virtual machine (a euphemism for "really fast emulator").

Remember, all I'm asking for is a licensed port of OS4 to a cheaper (and in some ways more modern) hardware platform.

It's modern only by gaming standards.  It's a purpose-built machine.

Revolution could be different architecutally, but it's still purpose built for gaming.  So is XBox 360 and PS3, but those are off-topic, of course.

Gekko is a PPC just like a 1997 Pontiac Firebird is like a 1998 Firebird.

Well... well... a 1949 Volkswagen Beetle and a 2006 Honda Accord both used the same gas and oil!  So there!

Hey, do you think you can branch this topic some more, and maybe bump it a few more times every day by posting more than one response consecutively?

[Waccoon]

Other than the setup screen to set the time and play with the memory cards, it just looks to boot from disc. I believe it's all of 32k...

You yourself said there's no BIOS.  I suppose this "32K" just magically appeared?

another silly comment...

Another silly retort to bypass having to support your arguments.

I will reiterate that 40MB is more than enough to run the OS4 kernal and some apps. I believe Hyperion has commented on the kernal size on this site quite some time ago incase someone wants to look it up.

I will reiterate that kernel size has nothing to do with memory consumption.

If you concede my marketing points are valid, why must you knit-pick me to death on hardware comments I've made?

Hardware != marketting.  That's why.  Dreamers tend to forget that.

Also, I didn't say your marketting points are valid.  You should also learn the meaning of the word "may."

I have been a business applications and database developer for 4 1/2 years. Sometimes on paper things look simple and coding them ends up being a pain in the arse...and sometimes things look difficult on paper and they end up easy. That's just how it is with coding. You don't know until you do it. Why not try?

I'm a database programmer, myself.  I do other programming, too, but you wouldn't be interested.

Ofcourse it needs to be rewritten from scratch for another platform. You have a HAL and that's all you rewrite and then you can recompile with the rest of the OS and voila - OS4 on another platform.

You don't rewrite a HAL, you modify it.  If each platform doesn't have a common set of features (as PCs and consoles do not), porting the HAL eventually boils down to emulation.

Do enlighten me then...not that it will really matter to me...

I guess not.  :-)

The primary fault of my idea is that one(or some) of the OS4 partners only want to see OS4 on the A1. What you think is possible or impossible means nothing.

Even hardware compatibility?

[Waccoon]

lou_dias:  I also heard they had officially given up PPC NT support.

That was a long time ago.  Now that more and more devices are using PPC, Microsoft has Windows running on PPC again.  They just haven't released it, of course.

spirantho:  And AmigaOS 4 _is_ possible on the Gamecube.

It's also completely pointless.

Anything is possible if you don't intend to port it 100%.

Then again, OS4 hasn't been released, so there really isn't a 100% reference point, yet.  Who knows what evils still lurk in there.  :-)

ottomobiehl:  Do they still make the linux kit for the PS2?

It's been officially discontinued for a while.

lou_dias:  The point of using the Mac specific version is that it's a G5 and that's about the performance they can expect from the X360. So I don't believe they are running WinXP on the Mac at all.

Well, I suppose you could always just ask.

Question:  if the consoles are so powerful, why are console development systems always conventional PCs and workstations?

SEGA was first to market and their technology was perceived as inferior to what was coming next (even though it was right on par with the PS2).

SEGA just didn't drive enough hype for the platform.  SEGA's dev kit was one of the best in the industry and the hardware itself was very clean.  Early PS2 titles looked like crap next to Dreamcast titles, and even newer titles still suffer from shakey textures and other artifacts.  I was very disappointed how easily the magazines wrote-off Dreamcast.

The fact that Sonic Adventure was the buggiest damn game I've ever seen on a console didn't help Dreamcast, either.  I mean, Sonic regularly fell through floors.  Oops.

It seems like Nintendo learns from it's mistakes and competitors quickly.

N64 struggled a lot and Gamecube didn't really improve on that.  Nintendo had better have a very convincing lineup when the system is officially unveiled, or it will get burried under the unsurmountable hype machine that prevented people from buying Dreamcast.

Of course, this has nothing to do with the Amiga.

[Waccoon]

lou_dias:  It's not a question of power but a question of software. Development tools exist on PC's so why reinvent the wheel. Afterall, compilers aren't just limited to compiling for the cpu they are currently running on anymore...

If consoles are just as powerful as PCs, as you contantly uphold, then there should be no re-inventing of the wheel.

lou, aimed at adolscent:  It's obvious you are just a Nintendo-hater. That's fine, I'm an admitted MS-hater but I can still look at things objectively.

Objectivity requires research, not heralding a system that has yet to be officially displayed.  Really, I think people should stop yakking about the next gen systems until al least after E3.

Also, it doesn't really help to hate any given platform.  Linux and Amiga people regularly fall into this pit, believing that Microsoft can do nothing right.

I mean, Linux people despise Microsoft, but almost every Linux GUI system looks just like Windows.  Red Hat 6 was a per-pixel copy of Win95, which really should have been a major embarrasment to geeks everywhere.

Oh lest not we forget Zelda. This coming holiday season will see Link in all his glory and only on the Gamecube.

And yes, Mario 128 will be a launch title and it will kick ass and break ground like Mario 64 did.

That's nice, especially since nobody knows anything about these games.  May we get back on topic?

adolscent:  They have never had a backwards compatible home console system, FACT!

I'm rather surprised that it took this long for any of the consoles to have any form of backwards compatibility.

I'd like to see when older titles will actually run better on new hardware.  This is still where all forms of PCs excell.  Software techniques on consoles are just not advanced enough these days.

The specs are hardly finalized enough to have any idea of how good the system and/or games will be and how it will stack up against other consoles in development.

Everything is blind hype in my opinion.  I'm more interested in what the machines will look like than what's on the inside.  I'll worry about specs when I can see one in the store.

If I hear any more about how Cell is "revolutionary", I'm going to puke.  The PS3 is still going to have a seperate GPU to do most of the work -- just like any other console.

I wonder how many people realize the overhead involved when working with so many cores?  I don't expect performance to be anything special.

But, Nintendo tends to take it's licensed characters and make bad sequels to games. SFA is a perfect example. It was originally a N64 game (or DD, I can't remember) that was cancelled, needing GCN games, Nintendo repackaged it with Starfox characters and the result was just not that special.

Doesn't everyone?

Still, at least Nintendo has a solid mascot.

Insanity:  If I recall correctly, the dreacast featured a ~200 mhz PPC, and a Power-VR2 graphics chip.

Dreamcast was based on Hitachi SH-4, the same architecture family as Saturn.

[Waccoon]

Every opinion I've had, I've given my reasoning behind it. I've even referenced articles when possible.

You never did give the name of that single, inefficient bus in the Wintel PC.  Can you provide a reference for that?

I've asked you this multiple times.  If you say nothing else, please answer this.

If consoles are just as powerful as PCs, as you contantly uphold, then there should be no re-inventing of the wheel.

So Nintendo should be using an original NES to create Gamecube software then?

What?

You'll know more at E3.

Which is why you're going to keep wetting your pants and telling us all about these machines before E3.

Since Revolution will use the same API as the GC, any work that could have been done on the GC port of AOS4 could have simply carried-on and continued for Revolution with less of the complaints about hardware capabilities

I believe it's been established that OS architecture is more complex than that.  But, you're not listening, anyway.

and you'd really have a system with modern hardware for way less than $1000.

Has it occured to you why AmigaOne is so expensive?  It is more sophiticated than Gamecube, but mostly it's becuase the guys in charge want it to cost a lot of money.  This has been established, too, but you're not listening.

The improvements would be ideal, but I'm not sure how far they can push it. Maybe faster CD access (like PS2) and some polygon smoothing (like PS2) or AA.

You can do a lot if your architecture is sound.  It never ceases to amaze me how ePSXe absolutely blows away the compatibility mode supported by the PS2.  You haven't seen real power until you've seen a Playstation game running in 1280x1024 in 32-bit color with full AA and modern texture filtering.  All that, and it runs without a hickup, too.

Maybe they figured they shouldn't make old games run too much better on the new systems so people would buy new games (which is bologna.  People buy new machines to play new games, not old ones).

It's also likely that Sony ignored the very thing that made PSX popular and made PS2 difficult to program on purpose.  Maybe the fear of easy emulation was a factor, too.  Who knows what goes on in the minds of their marketting department.

Well there aren't too many 'Nintendo-made' games that don't kick ass for the genre they are inteded for.

Not according to the demos I've played in the store.  It's a matter of taste.  Lots of people have also expressed their enormous disappointment with the new Starfox game on the fansites to which I'm subscribed.  I don't own a Gamecube (yet) but I've certainly seen it in action.

I have a PS2, and I can assure you that there are plenty of titles directly published by Sony that kick ass.  What does that have to do with Amiga?

Your stats are from the week before mine...

Wait... you follow things by the week?

Yeah then they continue to sell over 1.3 million total by Dec 31st in the US alone. Yeah, a real sales disappointment - NOT.

Didn't SEGA sell 5 million Saturns in Japan, and that was considered a miserable failure?

Kinda makes you feel better about a few thousand Amigas, doesn't it?  Especially since Hyperion wanted it that way.

How anyone can hate a company is really beyond me.

Ditto.

Dare I ask what Lou thinks about XNA?  (Before you answer, keep in mind E3 hasn't happened, yet)  :-)

From the article about Microsoft vs nVidia:  "Perhaps most telling of all is the story we've heard from many, many Xbox developers over the past few months - that low-level documentation for the NV2X chipset in the Xbox is not being made available to them, because NVIDIA refuses to release it to Microsoft developer support. The explanation for this offered by developers we spoke to is that NVIDIA is afraid that additional information handed to Microsoft now would be passed straight on to ATI, who would use it to emulate the NV2X in their Xbox 2 chipset."

This sounds pretty typical.  When you run with the big dogs, you'll not likely find much kindness from any company.

It's a bit ironic that Amigans hate Microsoft so much, given all the bulls**t Commodore pulled.  I don't like Microsoft, either, but you have to admit they are the easy whipping boy of the industry.

Consider how many system crashes are due to bad drivers and not Windows.  I just updated my ATI drivers and on top of all the garbase like context menus I don't want, Java is now broken and many GUI components are showing up as blank.  I'm really, really upset with ATI right now.  Microsoft isn't alone when it comes to pulling lots of idiotic stunts that screw end-users.

I agree that the GC idea would be impractical/virtually impossibl but at least consider the idea rather than dismissing it out of hand.

The real problem is that it would require Nintendo's blessing, and might even require hardware modifications.  Why Nintendo would be interested in AmigaOS when they can make a mod of Linux on the cheap is beyond me.

Hell, I was kind of hoping Amiga would do something like Apple and write a new Workbench to run on a modified BSD/Linux, with some new stuff thrown in.  OS4 as a whole, on any hardware, is pretty much a lost cause, and suggesting a stripped, purpose-built console with no binary compatibility with "real" Amigas (and in some cases, PPC), could run OS4 without any form of emulation is downright silly.  Ask anyone who works on OSes for a living.

#1 it would require the least amount of development time to do so and
#2 I don't want to throw money at MS to run on their hardware. MS hardware also breaks rule #1
#3 The A1 is under-powered and over-priced. A GC system can be had for peanuts and has comparable cpu power.

As for not Apple/Mac, they are a closed system.
As for not Sony PS2/3, it breaks my reason #1

#1 - Not using console hardware would take the least time and money, and have lots more posibilites.  Even if Nintendo's APIs were to allow a multitasking memory protected OS, you'd be programming for Nintendo's tools and not the hardware, so portability is near impossible.
#2 - And you yell at other people as being Nintendo haters?  Do you expect everyone to herald your anti-MS antics just because this is an Amiga forum?
#3 - Blame Hyperion for that, not the hardware itself.  AmigaOne is a horrible mis-match on all levels, and Hyperion had a lot of time to make that decision.  Even if Gamecube could run OS4, it's obvious the powers in charge don't want anything even close to that.

You don't like closed systems and want to use consoles?  WTF?  PCs are built on the most open hardware standards in the world -- and they are nowhere near as expensive as AmigaOne.

I can understand you don't like PS2 because it just sucks.  Really.  But, your verdict on PS3 is very pre-mature.  I suppose you've actually used the hardware?

Also, I'm disappointed you're only looking at console hardware.  Don't you think PC vendors would love to use cheap hardware, too?  Why don't they?  There's no law that a PC (open standards, not Wintel), must run Windows.  Why is it so tough to make alternative systems?  Do you think there might be, oh... technical reasons for it?  Why are Linux PPC boards intended for servers built like PCs instead of game consoles if all they do is direct Internet traffic and run architecture independent scripting languages and databases?

Could it possibly be that the robustness of the OS required might actually influence hardware design?  Say t'ain't so!

I believe OS4 with some bundled software (some Hyperion games, a browser, email client and maybe a retro pak) could be an interesting piece of software on a console.

OS4 isn't modern enough to run a real browser, and Hyperion specializes in porting old games, not making new ones.

Imagine Amiga Anywhere games on Gamecube.  That'd be good for a laugh.  I wonder what Nintendo Power would say about that.  :-)

Wasn't OS4 supposed to be ported to Cyberstorm'd Amigas? So obviously it was written with portability to other platforms in mind.

Lots of things are/were planned for OS4.  What matters is what's released.

Wasn't Amiga supposed to make a new OS altogether that would work anywhere?

While we're at it, why not throw around more speculation about the Dragon board, too?

adonay:  its quite silly not to think about all the modding with CF cards(not reliable) all hacks and writing drivers ..kernel bla bla bla for something that would be a so expensive uppgrade nobody would finance it ever

I don't think the Gamecube's hardware supports the low-level architecture for a decent OS, but even if it did, so many parts would have to be written from scratch that it would cost millions just to get it up and running.

Of course, we could always take a few years and depend on reverse-engineering and volunteers to get things done, like with gc-Linux, which can't do anything useful.  :-)

[Waccoon]

Who would have thought that people might want there game console to also surf the web and check email and stream video? Darn, why didn't I think of that...oh wait! I did! I did!

Sega did, too.  No matter how many times console manufacturers try to make mutifunction devices, only the games sell the systems.

Something has to change. It seems that it's the A1 that has to change.

I agree, which is why I've hated the AmigaOne since DayOne.  Using proporitary hardwarewhich is several years old and built for running games is hardly the answer.

Eyetech can design the "GBA Player"-like addon that will give you IDE ports and the like... One without a 'DMA bug'.

How much will that cost to design, test, certify, and manufacture?  Even a simple PCB for an A1200 may cost several hundred to materialize.  Are you considering this when you spew prices?

There's a reason why the console is so cheap.  After so many years of plastering boards together with spit and chewing gum, I'm not sure Amigans really want to hack together lots of extra hardware.

All I can say is if you don't support this topic then why bother posting in it?

Because we're all tired of your fanboy B.S. and the fact you keep bumping your own thread just to keep yourself in our faces.  This thread isn't long because lots of people are interested -- it's because it's friggin' old.

Hyperion doesn't want cheap hardware, or else the buggy MIA board would never have been chosen in the first place, and they would have used off-the-shelf hardware which is far better suited for expansion.  Nintendo would never agree to sell themselves cheap to support a dead computer with no real plan for the future.  Amiga doesn't care about OS4.  Developers would have to pay for their tools if Nintendo was officially involved.  Code written for Gecko would not run on other PPC devices without porting or re-compilation.

You're also basing your prices on hardware that's either bought used on E-Bay, or several years old.  That's not a good way to build a profitable market.  Nintendo would see that right away if Amiga proposed the idea.

OS4 on GameCube will not happen.  Let it go.

I am on my way to having a GC-Linux setup.

I thought you said you had no interest in Linux.  Shouldn't you give Linux a test-drive on your own computer before gearing up to run a raw kernel with limited functionality on your 'Cube?

How can you release a product where using the ethernet port and IDE at the same time can randomly cause data corruption? It's Russian Roulette. And it looks like it's the hardware that needs changing. Change it.

Well, a second option is to not use IDE devices at all.  That would make the AmigaOne work very much like a GameCube.  :-)