Classic VS NG

[wawrzon]

>classic

there is no "classic", just "amiga"

>Well after modding the hell out of my A1200, I'm thinking it might be time to sell up

isnt it fun enough just using it?

>Also getting any information/response from Elbox is impossible.

is it these days? they were actually rather helpful every time i called them, but maybe its just me and its anyway a miracle they still exist at all.

> The most annoying part is getting RTG/AGA switching working with WHDLoad, which wouldn't really be a problem with an NG. I've given up on this and run in AGA most of the time, although I don't get the pretty 1920x1080 with AFA OS/Zune desktop.

problem solved because an ng wouldnt have aga at all? i suppose from the perspective of emulation winuae would be even more comfortable a solution, and a free one. personally ive never cared so much for aga rtg switch as i dont see it as so much hassle to switch inputs on the screen.

>Flash, even with the Ibrowse plugin is a no go. Java stuff

flash will stay no go anyway also on ng, same for java i guess and javascript may today be too heavy fro whatever amigalike except maybe aros x86

all in all i advise against getting ppc accel for amiga. you may check aros distributions with built in emulation. thats probably the simplest thing, but i cant tell as i am not using it. getting a ppc machine mos is probably least risky and still cheap, but thats common knowledge.

[wawrzon]

It's not that there is no link at all between an Amiga 4000/040 from Commodore and AmigaONE x1000 and other Next Gen Amigas in my opinion

correct me if im wrong but hardwarewise i dont see any link at all.

os4 is claimed to be derived from amiga operating system sources, which may well be the case, hard to tell for anybody except those who had seen the closed sources. user observable fact is that its ui tries to mimic 3.x workbench behaviour where it apparently scores over the morphos/ambient or other alternatives.

[wawrzon]

That's a good thing - can you imagine sticking a 1.8GHz processor on any custom chipset? It would be so much slower than the mainstream alternatives these days. What would be ideal would be a custom version of a mainstream chip like the RadeonHD chips which included AGA compatibility - but it'll never happen, partially because there's no point (nothing uses bitplanes now anyway, and it's easy to emulate the full AGA chipset these days).

i have not in any way judged it, i just said that there is no link. thats all.

It's not mimicking anything, it is Workbench. That's its greatest asset and its greatest liability at the same time (Ambient is arguably better, but it's not Workbench - whether that's a good or a bad thing is subjective).

One thing is certain, though - AmigaOS4 is AmigaOS. That is the link.

just one paragraph later you contradict your argumentation from above. custom chipset and amiga hardware standards in general cannot keep up with the current ones so drop them. on the other hand you defend keeping workbench against even a slightly more modern solution such as ambient because its the legacy in your eyes.