new os3.x software ?

[Gulliver]

It would be an excellent idea to have OS3.x bounties. I am 100% with this.
Anyway, as a sidenote, MorphOS, AROS and OS4 users could benefit from this too, as all of them have some sort of OS3.x emulation enviroment

[Gulliver]

So, of course we are speaking of OS3.x apps, no RTG only 68k apps, so then:
-Port Zune (MUI Aros clone to 68k w/ native chipset support)
-Netsurf/OWB (68k w/ native chipset support)
-CGX and Warp3d both have a way to be run on AGA (what about a P96 driver for native gfx chipset? It would be slow, but it could allow native chipset gfx users to use P96 programs)
-I allways find it would be great to have a wordprocessor with user customized spelling check dictionaries and a direct support for the .DOC format from the MAC/PC.
-A centralized system preferences program much like Morphos 1.4 and p.O.S. had. This way it is much more comfortable, and avoids having to deal through a crammed Prefs drawer.
-An application that mixes both DevHandler and Wbstartup+ programs functionality
-A good and easy to master "Partition Magic" clone

And a few more that just cant seem to remember

[Gulliver]

Go for it Cammy! It sounds great. You should be definately releasing your theme pack in some ClassicWB way, and yes, ModernWB sounds good enough.

I will be waiting ansiously!

[Gulliver]

That one looks cool too!

[Gulliver]

The problem with Netsurf is that the current Amiga port is really bloated, it requires 128Mb of ram and may work with 64MB. The original, still being developed RiscOS version only requires 16MB. So either RiscOS is much better than AmigaOS, or the port simply sucks.
Bottomline, I would choose another browser to work on. I have said it sometime ago, there is an excellent candidate that will work with 68000 and a few MB of fastmem. It is opensource, and is working with CSS. It has a small group of developers coding on it.
It is called HighWire, and is an Atari application.


http://highwire.atari-users.net/

[Gulliver]

Gulliver: SDL sucks it works nice with 64mb memory. I ques that 128mb is for UEA users whom want to watch videos etc from youtube

It doesnt work nice with 64MB, and i am not even thinking on Youtube videos. I have an Amiga 68040 @50 mhz + 64MB and an RTG card + a fast ethernet card, and let me tell you that if I simply use Netsurf and go to http://www.yahoo.com Then my memory simply evaporates to about 10 MB! So 64MB is barely enough for that browser, and keep in my mind that I am using only one open browser window, and that when you try to switch to another website, during the slow process load, you arent even able to move your mouse pointer (Goodbye multitasking).
If you dont believe me, try it under WinUAE, and you will experience the same thing!
Bottomline: Netsurf is better than nothing on Amiga 68k, but it is not really usefull, unless you have a 060, 128MB and a GFX card. So I wouldnt loose time on it.

IBrowse on the other hand, is A LOT faster, and uses very little fastmem. The sad part as you all know, is that it doesnt support CSS and that development and commercial availability have been non existant for a while

[Gulliver]

Yes, I'm aware of differences, and as you say, going from 68000 to 68020+ is much easier that the other way around, that's one of the reasons I dont quite like the trend of dumping 68000 for marginal gains. If at some point in the future you might want/need 68000 compatibility again, it's just so much more work.

And why code for 68000 instead of 68020? Well, first of all Freescale still offers a whole range of cheap 68000 chips that might be used in various minimig incarnations. This is not the case for 68020+ chips, they are mostly out of production, or very expencive.

Secondly there are several 68000 softcore options for FPGA, and as of yet, no 68020 one that I am aware or. The 68000 softcores are already faster than any 68020 was, I dont know how much of a speed gain a 68020 softcore will have over a 68000 softcore or a real 68000 chip. Anyone?

Sure, keep on optimizing for 020+, but please just don't leave 68000 code behind, and please pretty please mark the binaries with what the CPU requirements are, so that "version full" shows it clearly, I have wasted quite a bit of time with programs and libraries that just crashed out of the blue when updating from one version to the next, without any mention of any 020+ optimization in the changelogs.



You are absolutely correct, I should engage myself more in this.  I have played around with various asm sources I've found, changed and compiled, tested, crashed, changed more, compiled again, tested, crashed again etc... :laughing:

What I never managed to wrap my head around though, is disassembling, so any tool and help in that regard is most welcome

Really interesting...

And following that concept:
Do any of you know of an assembler & dissasembler that can work nicely together and that that its compiler/linker can generate optimized binaries for 020/30/40/60 FPU and non FPU?

[Gulliver]

@matthey
Thank you for your answer, that was really what i was looking for. I am waiting for a little vacation and will tinker with those a bit

I will ansiously wait for your datatypes.library and diskfont.library optimized versions.

[Gulliver]

@utri007
Now surf to http://www.yahoo.com and tell me how much free ram you have. Memory consumption is site dependant. Some web layouts require more ram than others. So check

[Gulliver]

If that's so then I'd be up for contributing to a bounty for a MUI version of NetSurf.

Weed

+1