Bloodline: With modern PDAs and Phones being introduced with 3D chips, the whole idea of AmigaDE's cheesy game packs seem less and less relevant to a modern market.
Right. Older PDAs were built like ancient PCs, with one CPU that did everything. Newer PDAs are using dedicated graphics chips and require more modern OS design to take full advantage of the hardware. What seems insane today won't be five years from now.
Chances are, many PDA OSes will start coming with all the tools needed for great graphics, like the new embedded version of OpenGL 2.0. What use is AA then?
MskoDestny: Are you saying that OS4 is obsolete compared to other operating systems or that natively compiled programs running on natively compiled operating systems are obsolete and we should all just move to Java or .NET?
Both. Seeing how much of OS3 had to be rewritten and replaced, I would classify the OS as obsolete. OS4 is less obsolete, but there's still a lot that needs to be replaced to make it fully modern, such as the security system. You just can't add security and expect huge numbers of things not to break, even if you use a fairly simple and widespread security system like the traditional UNIX model (I could fill a book with all the stupid file ownership problems I've run into as a web developer). I was very disappointed to see Hyperion didn't think about security at all with OS4, and publicly touted "security through obscurity". That might work just well for them with only a couple thousand machines out there, but not setting down ground rules now makes things a lot harder in the long run. Lots of things will have to be replaced in OS4 to make it OS5.
Besides, anything can be dragged into the modern era. It's a question of how much work it will take, compared to starting with a truly modern system and modifying it to run OS3 applications. Apple might have been able to make OS9 into a modern system, but they saw it easier to start with UNIX and work their way forward from there. Whether OS9 was bad is irrelevant. It's how much work it takes to make it modern.
I can't say Java is a lifesaver, though, as Sun has had more than its share of screw-ups, including the fact they replaced the entire UI toolkit at one point. .NET is hardly any better, though it at least it doesn't restrict you to just one language.
MskoDestny: As for device independent stuff like Java and .NET, natively compiled programs will never go away.
Not 100%, and definately not at the OS level, but a lot more than most people think. You also have to consider the application of most languages. Interpreted code is useless for a tool to search a database, but what about a chat program? The complexity of the two programs isn't all that much different, but the usage is. The server and workstation world may demand native code, but home computers do not. Performance isn't everything to an end user, as is quite obvious given how many PC users allow anti-virus software to suck up 50%+ of their CPU time, rather than learn how viruses get on computers in the first place and just use common sense.
Native code is also a liability when it comes to security. I feel more comfortable downloading a Java application than I do having to "install" an application, especially since many programs won't install unless you have admin priviledges. System security is irrelevant if you have to login as root to install anything.
Notice that almost all web programming languages are interpreted. People have been bashing interpreted and just-in-time compiled programs for years, but they just keep getting more popular, especially as they get closer to the performance of native code.
It's foolish to think that you only have to use one language (like C++) to write an entire application, and that interpreted languages are supposed to work universally on all platforms. The future of programming is to use a Java-like platform to write the application framework (largely because development is quicker and it's easier to debug), and maybe dip into low-level languages for performance. Use the right tool for the job. Why spend six months writing it in C when you can get it done in a month with a higher-level language? Development time and debugging is rarely considered among people who bash interpreted languages.
Also, applications are portable because developers want them to be, not becauase the language just works that way. If a Mac person sees a Java application, he or she may be upset that the Java program doesn't follow Mac interface rules. Sometimes, you have to fine-tune a program for a platform even if the language promises (and delivers) true architecture independence. It boils down to what you need to do, rather than how the language forces you (or doesn't force you) to do it.
But then, performance-critical tools don't have to be compiled with the application, either. There's nothing to stop you from using a natively compiled library with an interpreted framework. Tao's "tools" work like that. Tao's VP isn't about the universal compatibility offered by Java or another full-blown virtual machine. It's a shame people think all virtual processing languages work the same way and are basically clones of Java. Java is a step in the right direction, but is still heavily flawed.
I was hoping tha alliance between Tao and Amiga Inc. would give us the answer, but six years later, all we've gotten are games. Game packs don't show us anything that hasn't been done before.
Such a shame.
SHADES: I guess that's fair enough Waccoon, the thing is you just don't know what AIs 10 year plan is. It may well be OS4 or intergration of AA into AOS or a completly new way of thinking for desktop/handheld enviroments.
I don't care what their 10-year plan is. I want to know what's good about the work they're doing now. I want something that tells me they know what they are doing, and they don't have to tell me what they will make 10 years from now or make empty promises to do that.
There were many 10-years plans 10 years ago. Where did it get us today? Lots of plans, lots of promises, and absolutely nothing to prove they had any clue what they were doing and that buying their products was a good thing.
Keeping their mouthes shut doesn't solve the core of the problem, which is that they haven't released or demonstrated anything impressive.
SHADES: My thoughts on this whole bit are that AI are still working on AA, maybe it's bigger than what we have seen so far. Maybe you only saw the cheezy bit.
Maybe, but most companies don't take this long to make something so cheezy.
SHADES: The thing is, if it's critical to the companies success, they are not going to say much. You could also see this as a positive! That they(AI) are kind of banking on it??
10+ years is a long time without any new products. Constant trading of hands and a lot of silence will do that. Seeing how little Garry says I don't think he has much power in the company and the investors are the same as they were with Bill. What is it about their situation that has you so confident, especially after such a lackluster release as another game pack?
SirLancelotDuLac: I would much rather they spend their resources producing something than talking about producing something.
I agree, but there's nothing wrong with being loud and proud over what you've done. The release of AA version 1.5 was pretty much just a whimper.
Hey, at least it forced them to unify their website design. :-)
