How about creating a Open AMIGA Consortium?

[A6000]

Could the community agree on an alternative name for all amiga clones which everyone will know, or come to know means, amiga compatible?
We also need a reverse engineered operating system.
Then we can forget amiga inc.

[A6000]

bloodline wrote:

A6000 wrote:
Could the community agree on an alternative name for all amiga clones which everyone will know, or come to know means, amiga compatible?

What's wrong with MiniMig, NetAmi and CloneA?

these are product names, we need a common brand name, as MSX or PC was.

We also need a reverse engineered operating system.

We already have one... AROS...

Fair enough but is there a 68k version?

[A6000]

Do I need to mention that OEM's will not be allowed to use the amiga name at any price.

Does aros offer better features than os4

[A6000]

persia wrote:
Probably would run into trouble with the latin equivalent of Amica and the latin plural Amicae, perhaps some variation of Amare "to love", of course that was tried by the evil Amino... :pissed:

I like Amicae, when people understand what it means, it will be evocative of a family of different machines which are amiga compatible.

[A6000]

AMIGOD.

[A6000]

PC was never really about 100% compatible HW design but companies just delivered x86 based hardware that could run MS-DOS.

On Amiga it would be enough that you can run Amiga software. It could be just Amithlon, Pegasos or Natami. Running real Kickstart 3.1 or MorphOS or AROS, does not matter. It is up to consumer to decide if he wants Paula audio chip (or compatible implementation), Soundblaster, x86 cpu, PPC, 68k, Radeon 7000, Voodoo 3, AGA, whatever. Natami maybe runs old demos and games while Amithlon does not but Amithlon has (had) other advantages.

Everything should go via drivers. Direct access to custom chips should be provided only for backwards compatibility.

The key goal should be 100% compatibility, in years to come it would be nice to be able to buy new software that will run on new or old hardware without any problems.
The machines will just work. no problems with driver/ hardware incompatibilities.
AROS 68k should have all the features of AROS PPC.
Programs written for AROS PPC should also run on AROS 68k without recompiling, which suggests a hardware independant code like VP code or an interpreted language.
Forget about floppy disks, people can use a classic amiga or a USB floppy if they really want one.

[A6000]

HenryCase wrote:

A6000 wrote:
AROS 68k should have all the features of AROS PPC.

NOOOOOOO! Why hold back development of features for AROS PPC that AROS 68k can't handle? There should be a base level of compatibility between the two but the systems don't need to be identical to achieve that.

A6000 wrote:
Programs written for AROS PPC should also run on AROS 68k

What about programs that need to take low level access of a machine? If it's possible to make a program easy to port then the developer should see that as a good thing anyway.

It's going to be hard enough to get developers to write for the aros machines without expecting them to create 2 or 3 versions, 68k, PPC, PC, a common os will help, if the 68k takes longer to run a program, so be it, at least it will run.
Low level access breaks compatibility with others, for example minimig uses paula but natami will use pamela, software can access both, but not at low level, in time 3d graphics will be handled by several different GPU's.
Low level access is fine for Identical hardware platforms, but we won't have Identical platforms.

[A6000]

HenryCase wrote:

A6000 wrote:
It's going to be hard enough to get developers to write for the aros machines without expecting them to create 2 or 3 versions, 68k, PPC, PC, a common os will help

There will be common functions between platforms that will make porting easier, but if a program needs assembly routines to run efficiently I don't think there should be some consortium telling the developers they can't use them. The developers are doing the hard work after all. I am sure developers will want to use common APIs where possible (to make their life easier), you don't need to set rules up for this.

A6000 wrote:
Low level access is fine for Identical hardware platforms, but we won't have Identical platforms.

What's the point of having different platforms if you can't take advantage of their unique features?

I am not saying they cannot use them, I am saying a common os will eliminate the need to write, manufacture and stock different versions for different machines.
If developers want to use unique features of one machine, they can, but they must be expected to refund the money to those who bought the software thinking it would run on their machines but didn't, and NO publisher does that.
If you write some low level code, it will be obsolete as soon as the unique piece of hardware is upgraded, I do not want to buy new software if I upgrade my machine.
Each machine must have low level drivers written by the OEM, AROS will provide a higher level API, which the developers can use, or not, it is their choice, the easiest choice is to write for windows and expect all of us to use a PC.

[A6000]

Excellent, will such programs also run on amigaos.

[A6000]

persia wrote:
Why hold back an operating system because you have to run 20 year old games that violate every good sense of programming?  

The important thing is to have a common API.

There will be:-
Classic Amiga
Amigaone
Pegasus
PowerAmiga (PPC)
MiniMig
Natami
CloneA
and hopefully others.

I would like to buy new software that will run on all these systems, even Classic amiga so those machines still have a viable future.
I do not want to run 20yr old software on a Natami, I would want to run new software that takes full advantage of it's better features whilst still being able to run in reduced fashion on classic amigas.

The Customer does not want to worry about hardware differences or driver incompatibilities, he/she just EXPECTS that new software will work FAULTLESSLY on any amiga compatible.
Unrealistic, I know but what can you do?, the Customer is always right, IF you want to stay in business.

[A6000]

persia wrote:
Custom chips in 2008 are a profoundly stupid idea.  I can go on the internet and buy high end graphics or sound and be far, far better off.

If OEM's are able to produce custom chips, then that is good, the trouble with off the shelf components is a short life cycle, meaning spares becoming difficult to obtain in a few years, we should have learnt this lesson from motorola when they cancelled further developement of the 68k family.

[A6000]

HenryCase wrote:
Upgrading an FPGA is even easier, its all done through software.
There isn't anyone seriously aiming to outdo Nvidia or ATI.
Any bad changes made to the FPGA can be undone by resetting the Natami.
I agree, sharing the workload benefits everybody.

If FPGA's can be reprogrammed 10,000 times or more then our new machines could be in a state of continuous evolution, becoming better every month or so.
Even users with no experience in VHDL could try their hand at making small improvements and if they work, submitting them to a library for others to try.
We may end up with something Nvidia would consider uneconomic to design let alone manufacture.
FPGA's mean our new machines will not become obsolete, but are FPGA's economically viable in large production runs, think big, be optimistic.

[A6000]

whilst it would be nice to allow users to tinker with their hardware as if writing a program in BASIC, we also need a manual write protection scheme to prevent hackers and viruses changing our machines for their own purposes.

[A6000]

For anyone who is happy to abandon everything that makes the amiga special, the answer is obvious, get a PC.

[A6000]

I have no real need for a computer, I don't even play games much, I use a PC ONLY to access the internet, so my a4000 is more than adequate for my needs.
I will however, get a Natami when I can afford it, with an '060 not a coldfire or ppc.