How about creating a Open AMIGA Consortium?

[Sig999]

When you look at video cards, sound cards, etc. at a fundamental level all they are is custom chips on a board (as far as comparison goes).  Want better graphics... here, plug this in.... want better sound?...here plug this in. Run some drivers and away you go.

When you look at the Amiga historically, it comes at a time of transition between when a home computer was pretty much replaced at the end of its life you didn't upgrade your Vic20 into a C64.. you bought a new one.  Now you upgrade it - keeping parts you want.

The Amiga was pretty forward looking, but even so still had to take a step backwards in some regards:  Kickstart was originally loaded from disk - just like OS's today are.  Of course doing it from floppy was 'too slow' and so it went onto a ROM - good for then, not so good for now.  I think anyone developing new amiga base hardware needs to look at what isn't working for us now and address those things - look at what is working in todays world, and use that as a jump off point.

I think a consortium of sorts would be a good thing amongst the hardware developers. In a perfect world it could aid development by not having everyone reinvent the same thing... in a realistic world it opens the doors for them to share features - Super AGA takes off? No probs, you can plug this into your whatever other board..... everybody wins.

How many different Amiga emulation projects would still be here if not for opens source UAE? If everyone had to reinvent every part of the emulation for every single project I don't think you'd see many polished examples out there.

As for compatability... shoot - even different variants of the Amiga aren't 100% compatible with each other now. If folks can run native software on the new hardware, that's neat -- if not there's always emulation for the things that won't work...

Folks can rip on hardware banging, but at the time I think it was a needed evil - you wouldn't have had half the games etc. that made the system popular if they didn't - and lets face it, the paradigm at the time was 'this is the machine.. this is how it is' - you didn't see that many compatability issues spring from banging the C64 hardware.... and I can't blame games programmers at the time not seeing things like OS updates, hardware changes, etc. being in the future.

Sig.

[Sig999]

A6000 wrote:
We are all well aware that it's not just hardware that needs to be updated, the operating system also needs to be upgraded.
BUT, we need to ensure that we end up with something recognisably amigalike, NOT PC like..

Sorry but this made me laugh.

See - I'm old enough to remember the PC when you typed commands from DOS.  What your saying is to avoid all things 'PC' just for the sake of it - when the PC liberally took things from the Mac and Ami and ran with them.

The PC you use today has more in common with your Ami than you'd want to admit.

It's funny because I remember trying to put cards into a 386 and get it to run windows 3.1 for work - and pulling my hair out as I messed with jumpers and hardware incompatability and those %^#$!ing IRQ's!  Where the Amiga was ... autoconfig.. I don't need to think about it - I turn it on and it will work.

I went through the experience again a few months ago after being away from a real Amiga in a decade.. and I was 'holy crap - I gotta get x ram and switch y jumper, cut z trace - get THIS version of software and THAT patch.... arrrrgh!'

they have changed places - the current state of Plug and Play (which when it was first introduced I called Plug and PRAY) is where Autoconfig cards would be NOW had the Amiga continued and followed its logical progression.

Cutting and pasting between apps - remember SNAP? - again - 10 years of logical progression.

They took a lot of good ideas from the Ami and Mac and built upon them - If you wanted to capture 'Amiga like' you should go back and see what the Amiga was compared to the machines around it when it came out.

Amiga wasn't about mice, windows, workbench - those were things that evolved OUT of what it was about - and that was taking the best things you could find and making something truely excellent and innovative out of them.

The first review I saw of the Ami 1000 had the phrase in it 'this is the Mac - as it should have been'

That's what you should be dwelling on.

[Sig999]

Donar 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, if the 68k takes longer to run a program, so be it, at least it will run.

I for one think AROS should be forked.
1. Create a 68k version that runs 3.x Software.
2. Create a "whatever" (AROS 64 with Mem protection) version which uses the 68k version for compatability inside a box or ArosUAE Integration.

=All people happy.

I don't think all people will be happy - then you split whats left of the development community (which is small and shrinking) in half.

In a lot of ways I think AROS needs classic Amiga and classic Amiga needs AROS.  I'd be happier if if in some way classic Amiga were emulated. Embedded would be nice - but if it stunts the growth, then it may not be a good thing.
AROS needs a base of software - which the Amiga has. The Amiga needs to ween itself off the old technology and into the current century - which Aros could provide.

This was why Amithlon (to me anyways) was so important - it was the 'missing link' - the step between the old and new. I could run old apps while developing and cross compiling to the new. I could run more modern video, network, sound cards - and take advantage of other things.

It broke my heart when it fell in a screaming heap, and it was a setback I don't think the majority of people understood.  Right now Minimig and Natami are just as important - because they're a step in taking us away from the old failing hardware.

A lot of people seem to expect 2 things:  For it to happen overnight and for someone else to do it.

I don't think either are realistic expectations.

[Sig999]

You can buy a cheap PC, install your favorite Linux distro and pick the drivers and apps on the net. Then if something goes wrong (it will...) you just have to spend the entire day typing huge commands in a terminal window. Pretty modern, like my TRS-80.

You can instead install Windows and be graced with the blue screen of death from times to times, find out that some of your software does not like Vista, or just delight yourself trying to find out why your state of the art PC is as slow as my TRS-80. After some time you will find out you need an upgrade.
.

As much as I loved, and still love my Ami - I'm afraid your stretching here.  I know it was the Amiga Way to bag the PC back in the day - and well we could because it was superior in a LOT of ways, but if we want to make comparisons - lets do it on the current reality and not wishful thinking or with a wistfull pining for the 'good old days'.  This only turns the tables back to when the PC guys were making excuses (I'll never need more than 640k! Hrmph - pretty color playscreen - don't need that! - my fave from a ST fan :  '4096 colors? you know the human eye can only distinguish between 512!')

Lets be honest and real for a moment.  The XP machine I'm using right now hasn't crashed in over 3 months - I've yet to actually see the BSOD on it (5 years ago this may have been different).

I can't make this claim about seeing the red 'Guru' - even back in the glory days.

My Linux box - the only time I rebooted it was when I went from MANDRAKE linux to MANDRIVA linux over a year ago.  It took me through a graphic setup, detected all my hardware - including USB devices - and has had graphic configuration tools for quite some time.  Again - 4-5 years ago this wasn't always the case.

Or we can put our heads in the sand and continue to beleive old stereotypes and make excuses as our machine falls further and further behind until we're the ones making the excuses (well the Web is primarily text, and noone can afford broadband to run streaming video properly!)...

*shrug* the first step in solving a problem is admitting there is a problem, and theres such a very fine line between advocacy and zealotry.

[Sig999]

AeroMan wrote:

Sig999 wrote:
*shrug* the first step in solving a problem is admitting there is a problem, and theres such a very fine line between advocacy and zealotry.

I'm not saying it is not a problem, neither comparing today's systems with my A1200, but let's face it: you can't use Linux without going to the shell. It is a matter of time.
I used Kurumin, and now moved to Ubuntu, and still have to type stuff. Most Linux enthusiasts I know prefer the shell. I don't know a Linux user that doesn't use it (there should be some).

I've used it since Slackware - before running xwindows was viable to run because of system resources and beyond into the birth of RedHat linux - from it's win95 lookalike onto the start of Mandrake with it's prefs for KDE - till today.

Yes - you can use the shell - and in cases you should use the shell, and indeed for somethings the shell is preferable.

But unfortunately this is not what you said.

You said that you can't set things up without going to the shell, that you can't use it or set things up without it.  This is false. My wife, who finds opening the software box complex when it comes to computers installed Linux on her machine unassisted and flawlessly - setting up everything from her mouse, graphics tablet, external usb drives, and scanner - from setting up the gimp to initializing her network card and getting it on the internet....

....all without typing a single shell command.

You are comparing to five or six years ago - Linux has matured - gotten smarter in it's setup, and being made more user friendly. Every year it improves.

And you can't say that Windows doesn't eats your computer's performance. It is pretty clear if you compare 98 and XP on the same machine. (yes, I have crashes with both! Surprisingly, more with XP)

What do I compare it to on the same hardware?  Linux? I think Linux handles things better but pays a significant overhead using Xwindows - so - comparable. 95 crashed a lot - 98 crashed a fair bit.  See what I wrote above, I didn't take the time to type it for amusement.  The machine I'm typing this on hasn't crashed in quite a long time.  And I use it for a lot of video compositing and editing with Avid.  It gets QUITE a workout... Windows XP is an improvement on 95 and 98.  I think your statements are exaggerated.

I don't have as much fun on this machine as others - but as a workhorse it does its job.

Those are problems for solving too. They exist, but most people say "ok, it is the way it is". It is not a matter of zealotry, they aren't close to what I expect from a modern system.
 
I had a Mac some time ago. Unfortunately, not with OS X, and I know there are loads of differences from the old MacOS.
Mac is REALLY nice, but it is expensive, and it is difficult to find software for it. This is why I don't buy a new one

Am I the only one in the world who's not comfortable with those OSs and thinks a modern Amiga could fills my expectations?

I think you're changing your argument.. if you were comfortable you wouldn't be making broad (and nowadays incorrect) comparisons - you'd be happy with your system.

All OS's have problems - but I find it funny that you're not pointing out the problems with the ones your using while your trying to find fault with the others.

the old Ami guru's more times that 95 hits the BSOD - but hey.. it's old and we should expect that... right?

I'm saying - for once - lets put aside the PC/MAC/LINUX wars (because lets face it - in a glass house we shouldn't throw stones) - and instead look to the things they got RIGHT and try and learn a few lessons...   OR we could just continue on the track we're all on now and wait another... hmmm.. 5 - 6 years for OS 6 and whatever lawsuits follow it...

[Sig999]

@ Freqmax

I think splitting limited people into camps isn't good for anyone really.  Too few developers in an ever dwindling community.  As people get tired of spending money to keep old machines going - going head to head with people who want to those parts to put in a glass case - driving up prices - the fun slowly wears off.

As far as hardware goes - and thats the topic of this thread - I'm not as much concerned with things made now running on 500/2000/3000/1200/4000 as I am with new hardware handling the software from these machines.  I think that's the issue.

I can get bits piecemeal for a dying 2000 - OR - I can get a new system, but it will run a lot of my old apps... it sounds more attractive to me.  Given that I'll not have to search for THIS particular brand of floppy again or THAT particular brand of memory - software can be adapted, reworked, rewritten... provided I don't have to totally find it from scratch it's all good.

State of the art tech isn't needed - CURRENT DAY is.  I'd like to see future hardware as modular as possible so I can update it as I need and as I choose.. this is the appeal the PC has for me over the Mac.  I don't have to buy a totally new system all at once - I can buy it part by part as I have the means, time, and energy.

State of the art can come later - for now I'd settle for a standard floppy drive - a usb or ps2 mouse and keyboard - a graphics card I don't need to hunt a junkyard for - and any of the current types of memory on the market that still available.  Hell - give me IDE harddrives for now if you can't get SATA going - same for CDROMs.

Someone wants to make 'superpaula' or a 'worldwidepants agnus' - fantastic! but PLEASE don't mount it directly on the motherboard - we've been there - we've done that. Put it on a card so when I want to buy your upgrade down the line I don't need to buy a whole new system - It makes it more attractive.

[Sig999]

AeroMan wrote:
I've just did it. I'm using Ubuntu and Win98 at home, XP at work and Workbench 3 for fun. I don't think it is needed to list AmigaOS' problems, everybody is very familiar with all of them.
The Sam's Club down the street sells an IMac for something close to US$2000. That's expensive for me, I can buy a hell of a PC for that amount. I want to give OS X a try, but it seems Apple doesn't wants me to do it. Unless I use a hackintosh...
Apples are expensive here mainly for historical reasons I don't think it is worth to describe here. If you get into a computer shop and ask for Mac software you may find just one shelf if you are lucky. This is the Mac scenario here.

What gets me upset is that everytime somebody comes with the idea of doing an "Open Amiga" or similar, loads of people states that it should be a hobby project only, because all other systems are perfect and there is no place for a new Amiga, or something that fills its gap.

I don't think like that, and if there is an effort to do something, even if it doesn't take off, I would like to help. Otherwise, I will be just quiet.

I agree - I don't use a Mac for the same reasons - cost. I have a Mac in my cupboard - a g3 with what was at the time a  couple of grand worth of avid hardware.  It became obsolete at the same time, leaving me with the option of replacing the entire thing at once with a g4 and even MORE avid hardware - or building a PC to take on the task for less money and the ability to buy it part by part, and have a flexible upgrade path.

I think the problems that arise with new Amiga projects is that they follow this path, buying a whole new system - and when the next one comes out, buy a whole new system again.

I like idea of the Natami because it allows you to do that first essential stage of upgrading - bringing native ami apps across to more modern hardware.  I like the idea of the minimig because its a step towards getting away from the old chips.

If they can recapture the fun of the old machine, they'll have a winner. My PC doesn't keep me up till midnight flipping through old books and wading through pages of 68k assembly.  Linux doesn't make me stop mid-coffee and run to the keyboard to give something 'just one more try'...

[Sig999]

As far as simplicity goes - I think getting away from some of the things we're locked into right now would maintain a level of that that is currently leaving the mix.

I'm not talking bleeding edge here, things that we can do right now, but take time, money, and a level of complexity to achieve - things that I think should be supported by anyone thinking of making a 'next step' Amiga:

Right now with my Ami if I want to replace, say, my keyboard - I have the option of either hunting one down on Ebay, classifieds, and doing some repairwork - or getting one from select vendors and overpaying for it, OR I can get a ps2 adaptor and get a more common conventional keyboard..

The ability to use a ps2 keyboard or mouse is something 'modern' that I should be able to do.

If I want more hardrive space - likewise I have to track down 50 pin scsi drives that I can partition to around 4 gigs - likewise for a CD rom.  I can with additional cost and complexity get an IDE solution - this already exists, so wanting it as a base feature isn't unreasonable.

As for OS complexity - I think being able to format larger partitions wouldn't be asking the world, and things that were supposed to be in the original Amiga like memory protection should be considered.

In my expectations of what a 'new amiga' should provide I try and be resonable in my expectations, and realise that any new step should be fairly small.  I think that many projects in the past try and step too big - I'm pretty glad right now I didn't buy a Peg or an AmigaOne, and I bet many who did are wary of jumping into yet another hardware solution.

[Sig999]

To be fair to both Linux and the Amiga - Many things like this could be considered workarounds to make Linux more 'single user desktop' friendly.  If it were designed from that standpoint I'm sure many of it's systems would be different.  In the same way that doing workarounds on the Amiga would cause a similar slowdown and consumption of resources.

[Sig999]

abbub wrote:
Sig:  So, on the one hand, you have projects like Minimig making your hardware desires possible.  Modern storage medium, modern keyboard, modern mouse, etc. with A500 compatibility.  I get that, in the same sense that I get the DTV hacks.  Backwards compatibility with a smaller, more efficient, modern design.

The key being backwards compatibility with the classic Amigas.  And it strikes me that if you start tampering too much with the OS in order to modernize it, you're going to run into problems with that compatibility...forcing the software to run under constraints (or without constraints, in the case of HDD size) that it was never designed to deal with  and that it's completely untested on.

Persia: you really hit the nail on the head, with regards to the hobbyist thing.  That's what drew me back to playing with my A2000.

I think that minimig is a fantastic 'first step' - I'll wait a little bit to see what happens next before I get one though - for me programming is a big part of my Amiga experience, so minimig's not quite there for me yet, but eventually it could be.  The little project I'm working on at the moment (game) I'm trying to keep up with minimig's progress so it will be compatible with it.

As for OS upgrading etc - I understand that incompatabilities will arise, this is why I think a 'baby steps' approach is a good idea - to transition from Classic to 'something else'.  Take too big a step and you have a whole new system but nothing for it.

As for things such as HD partition size - for me it wouldn't be a huge setback to have to allow for a 4gig partition if needed because some older software expects that - so long as I would be able to also have larger partitions for software that doesn't.

It's getting harder to find older hardware - and that's across the board really, even for some older (like 5 year) PC's - sometimes it amazes me that I can still find hardware at all for the 15+ year Amiga.

[Sig999]

abbub wrote:

One person on here (Sig1999) has answered my question with regards to what he feels are modern features... >4 GB support and the ability to use PS/2 keyboards.  (Though I'd argue that PS/2 keyboards are just a stop gap, and for real future proofing you'd need USB.)  In any event, I'm not sure how you expect me to 'notice' something that very few people have commented on.

I'd say they are stop gap too! But saying 'I want hobbyists to build the next Amiga board with built in full support for USB 2, etc. etc. etc.' would be unreasonable (to me anyways).

It's what I was talking about with 'baby steps' - give me a ps2 mouse and keyboard for now - I can still buy them fairly easily.

Same for HD's and CD roms - I know SATA is where it's at now... but hey, if IDE is an easier first step - make it.. only when the only thing I can find is a 200gig drive... please don't make me format it into 50 4 gig partitions! (if such a thing were possible it would look HYSTERICAL on my wb screen.. would there even be enough space for the icons? - and god imagine Diropus!)

I'm in a strange fencesitting position I guess where I love the Amiga as a retro machine - and I think its 'new life' will be in the hobbyist realm and not back in the mainstream again.... that being said - it is an absolute and total PITA to deal with 880k floppys (well it's becoming a PITA to deal with floppies at all really) - and transferring stuff across a null modem cable from the PC...because I'm not about to spend 150 bucks on a network card for the Ami at this point........

You see where I'm coming from?

I'm not in the camp of 'The Amiga will rise and kick arse once more!' - but I'd really like to see it have some longevity via new hardware.... and if an OS eventually follows (thought I totally doubt that) - I'd like to throw some suggestions out there for what I'd like.

[Sig999]

Einstein wrote:

Sig999 wrote:

I'm not in the camp of 'The Amiga will rise and kick arse once more!'

Not me either, but I just cannot hope on something that will get its arse kicked by anything, anytime, anywhere

agreed we're kind of like agnostics at mass

[Sig999]

I wanna find a 1200 for under 300 bucks!

(never missed the 'everything in the box' - I just don't look at that as an advantage)

[Sig999]

@Sig999: Think of it this way - when the Amiga was released it had graphics equivalent of the most expensive nVidia card , sound like a 5.1 24-bit system, it plugged into a HDTV 1080 and it costed like the cheapest x86.

Actually I prefer to think of it as it actually WAS - you see I had an Amiga back then, and I'd just been forced to buy a PC because my bridgeboard wasn't going to cut it anymore.

When the Amiga was released (A1000) the PC did 16 colors and the Mac did 2... but that's not what you're talking about , you're talking about the 1200... that's around 1992 - around 93 ish when it came to Australia.

So, why don't we look at it like the 1200 was doing 256 colors in AGA, with a possible 16 million.. The PC card I bought to run Winblows 3.1 on did about the same, and with a Soundblaster 16 thrown in cost me around 300-350 bucks.

The 1200 did not cost 300 bucks - or if we say that each card cost the same as an amiga - 150 bucks.  My 500 cost 1000 when I first bought it - several years later when I got my 2000, it cost about the same.

Lets bring in some historical reference - to put it in perspective.... The PC was well on it's way to feature recovery - and the year after the 1200 was released, it started taking back the games market when DOOM was released.

The Amiga was only a blip on Billy-Boy's radar - but the thought that DOOM was installed on more PC's than Windows 95 actually phased him.

To be 100% clear though - I hated windows until XP, which I find 'ok for work' - I've never liked Doom.  But I was there for the Amiga's arrival, rise, and eventual fall. I remember the hey day when the 040 equipped Amiga could still hold it's own against the first Pentiums, and how we laughed when the first bugs in that system appeared (division by 0? Only Pentium makes it possible!).

But let's keep our advocacy based in Reality - please.

As for all-in-one solutions - I am loathe to buy a laptop because if something breaks or becomes obsolete, I pretty much have to buy a new laptop.

I won't buy any new Ami system that follows the same paradigm as the 500/600/1200 for the same reasons.

All in one Mo-bo's today, you can switch all that stuff off and go with better systems if you choose - that's the way I'd prefer to go.

[Sig999]

JetRacer wrote:
@ sig999: Well, I was actually writing about the A500 (I'm a 75'er). At the time it was technicly possible to get a PC to do what an A500 with gen-lock and sampler could do. But the economics was horrible - just like the quality of the result.

 JetRacer opens casket and howls:

Many people totally miss this very important point: the Amiga was everything-in-a-box. A user streamlined package - while the PC was and still is a production industry streamlined concept. At the time of the A1200 the PC could do it all (in one degree or another) - only each plugin card that added an Amiga feature costed as much as an Amiga.

I beg to differ.

If we're talking about the 1000/500/2000 the PC couldn't do what it was doing, and this was the 'glory day' of the Ami.
After that the PC's and Mac's started playing catchup - and C= did very little with the Ami at all. By the time AGA and the 1200 came out - it was already pretty much too little, too late.

The Amiga had many great accomplishments on it's own without needing them to be sensationalized or embellished - how many home computers were launched by someone like Andy Warhol? I think exaggerating things like that not only makes Ami enthusiasts sound an awful lot like Mac and PC followers of the early 90's, but also cheapens the actual accomplishments the machine made.

Besides - after finishing a 10 year career in TV News, I've had all the sensationalism I can stomache.