User wants (from "Call for Amiga Developers from A-EON Technology")

[Kremlar]

But lets not bash on Aeon and Amigakit for really and honestly pushing Amiga into the future with OS 4. They are doing so in a strategic way that most would have thought impossible. But their honest passion and enthusiasm and (lets not forget) folks like Trevor fronting the capitol to take a shot at this to make it possible. Most of us have the struggle of deciding if we are going to support Amigakit with the latest card for our classic machine, or if we should fork out the money for a new OS4 machine but those financial risks pale in comparison to the financial risks Trevor, Aeon, and Amigakit have taken because they believe in the Amiga. Heck, they are even trying to continue support for OS3 through apps. Who else in the world would take the risks they have been taking for the Amiga? Who else in the world would put the time and energy into the Amiga with the honest intention of trying to make it a viable platform again? What these folks have undertaken may be later in the game then we could of hoped for, and there is *always* room for improvement. Anyone can criticize how they could have done this better or that better, and I'm not saying we shouldn't bring constructive criticism to the table (bring it), but let us please give proper respect where respect is due.

Right.  Although I don't agree with the direction they are pushing in, the effort they are  giving is remarkable.  Unfortunately in the Amiga world it seems everyone has a different opinion on which way Amiga should grow.  I believe the largest group is the classic/68K group, but even that group is so fragmented.

If A-eon wants to support 68k amiga, why dont they produce some new hardware (computers). ?

Right.  I'm surprised no one has backed a project like FPGA Arcade / NATAMI / MiST / etc. yet.

What market? Hardware to OS3.x does not in any way, shape or form, compete with OS4.

Of course it does.  OS4 hardware's best potential for growth is convincing others in the Amiga community (classic users being the largest group) that the cost of entry is reasonable and that OS4 is the way of the future for their Amigas.  New classic hardware, such as the FPGA Arcade, MiST, etc. makes OS4 hardware less attractive for these people - especially as FPGA capabilities continue to increase.  If they see a future in their current platform, and little advantage to the OS4 platform, there's little reason to switch.

I think most classic users want to see the Amiga grow into what COULD have been, like the NATAMI promised.  Many will say that Commodore was going the direction of PowerPC/OS4 anyway, but I don't think that's what classic users want.  They want to see things improved along the lines of the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond.  That's what I want too.  For everything else I'll just use a PC!

[Kremlar]

From what Dave Haynie says, Commodore was going to move to a RISC platform.
And perpetual backwards compatibility rarely occurs.
Most X64 systems have trouble running legacy programs.
What makes you think that if the Amiga had survived it wouldn't be a vastly different system by now?

I agree, it would be vastly different and I also believe that many users would have moved on because of it.  I think most people still interested in the platform today got into the Amiga because of the core product that Jay Miner and his team created.  Incredible graphics & sound, and a great multitasking OS.  

Commodore advanced the product but not the core.  Sure they slapped on faster processors, more RAM and more expandability, but that wasn't core to the Amiga - it's not what made the Amiga different.  They made marginal improvements to the core (ECS, AGA, etc.) but it was way too little and way too late.

You do realize the the AAA chipset was not meant to be an upgrade, rather it was a replacement.

Understood, but if AAA was released early enough and a substantial enough jump over AGA it may not have mattered to many.  Lack of compatibility did not stop most people from moving from C64s to Amigas because the jump was significant.  Back then compatibility between significant platform jumps was not as important.  I do believe that when AAA was canned and development of Hombre started they were planning on implementing AGA compatibility in some shape or form.

Today compatibility is critical because new software development is virtually non-existant.  The Amiga is a retro platform.  People like me are interested in it because it's what we grew up with, we loved the software, and loved how the system worked.  If you kill compatibility, if you kill the core, you kill the nostalgia.

Your position is not particularly attractive to me.
FPGAs CAN'T approach ASICs in performance.
The only reason that they perform better than a real 68K is that that processor is SO dated.

Right, and from a retro point of view that's all that's needed.  If people are happy with a 68020/30/60 when they use their Amigas today they should be ecstatic about something that might exceed the 68060 performance.

Right now, the primary problem I have with OS4 is that it struggles too hard to retain the look, feel, and basic structures of previous versions of Amiga OS.

...

So if I were to follow your logic, I would find myself waiting for the fulfillment of fantasy projects that, even if they are produced, would not be competitive.

Personally, I can't see our market expanding without drawing in new users. And legacy hardware has limited appeal to anyone not already familiar with the Amiga.

So the real challenge is not to cater to community members like you, but to make the NG OS' powerful enough to be reasonable substitutes for more mainline hardware.

That's where we're different, and I think many Amiga users differ.  Expanding the Amiga to replace the PC is not interesting to me because it is so far behind.  For every step the AmigaOne takes everything else takes 20 steps.  AmigaOS never had a reasonable implementation of Java or Flash and those technologies are already dated.  Modern day computing is a moving target that a small development team working part time cannot keep up with.  I can understand the motivation, but for me I'd rather just use a PC than struggle with every day tasks on an Amiga.

I'd rather use my Amiga to play some games, tune my workbench, play with some applications that I never used before - things that I did back in the day.  If I want to browse the web, create a PDF, read email, or work on a spreadsheet there are much better tools for the job.

I would never want to replace my PC with a Nintendo Wii U, and I would never want to replace it with my Amiga.

Back in the 80s/90s the draw to using the Amiga instead of the PC was because it was different and BETTER.  Nowadays it's just different and way WORSE - different is not sufficient to me to replace my PC.

[Kremlar]

An FPGA A1200 would be nice, but I don't know if that's possible, not knowing much about the limitations of FPGA. I assume that it is slower than conventional ICs, but maybe that doesn't matter when you are implementing a 14 MHz system.

It's very real now.  I haven't been following MiST much, but my FPGA Arcade exceeds the performance of an Amiga 1200.  I've just started really using it the past few days but love it so far.

I understand your position, I just don't agree with it.
I'm enjoying a reasonably modern platform with MorphOS.
And while neither MorphOS and OS4 support Flash (which is also a problem with Linux), we do have html5 (which is a much more efficient package).

This is the main problem with what's left of the Amiga market I think - too fragmented because everyone has different ideas of what an "Amiga" is and what they want out of it.  Sad but true.  

But, should a legacy emulation system be produced (in HARDWARE not UAE), I too would be interested in the nostalgia exploring such a system would bring.

I love my FPGA Arcade, but I could see why others want more performance if they are used to high-end classic systems.  Hopefully performance will improve.

I'm just not sure that that course offers much of a future.
After all, I can buy a Sega genesis emulation system, but that does make Genesis games any more appealing.

True, the market I enjoy is limited to retro/nostalgia, but honestly I don't believe the NG market has much of a future either.

And that is just one thing that NG can support that is a nice improvement (and trust me, games dedicated to an NG platform generally look better than legacy Amiga), browsers and other practical apps run better on more powerful hardware.

Right, but for me there's my PC and other platforms for modern applications.

Perhaps I would understand the attraction better if I spent more time with MorphOS/OS4.x/AROS, but my free time is limited and nothing jumps out to attract me to those platforms...

[Kremlar]

Matthey gives the impression sometimes that he actually believes that - he has previously stated that if only we have a m68k based cheap Strawberry Pi, tens if not hundreds of thousands of people would buy it to run AmigaOS.

I could see thousands, maybe 10 thousand.  Commodore Amiga Group on Facebook has 10,952 members today.  I'd say a large percentage of those people would drop $50-$100 on something cheap and retro.  Who knows?

And he keeps referring to Apple, Microsoft, Linux etc as "the competition" - I don't know what to say about that other than "delusional" and over time it is very... tedious.  

Yes, I don't think competing with Microsoft or Apple or Linux is realistic at this stage.  

[Kremlar]

The "no invented here" syndrome. Also - what kind of backing could that be? Money? Maybe the people who do FPGA projects are not interested in being backed by entities who may want them to sign contracts and meet deadlines. Maybe people value their freedom to do things in their own timely matter.

Yeah, I'd like to think that with all the money being thrown around designing these NG boards that a salary could be paid for someone capable of designing (or locating an already made board) and implementing a classic system on FPGA.

Would they want to work for A-Eon or whoever on a project like this full time?  Maybe not, but maybe.  Many people dream of working on hobbies full time.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I never missed "the original Amiga chipset, maybe what AAA would have been and beyond". A PCI busboard with off-the-shelf graphics card, soundcard and a network interface card had far more to offer for the money...

No disappointment.  That's why I said most - clearly everyone has different opinions/needs/wants.  Your needs seemed very application driven, like most of the people using Toasters in their Amigas.  Once the Amiga was no longer meeting their needs, and better tools became available, they moved on.  

So, if 3D/CAD was the main application for you, why stick with the Amiga once it no longer met your needs?  Why today?  Clearly there are better tools for the job.  Do you just prefer the OS?

I had many friends that liked the games on the Amiga.  Once games got better on the PC than the Amiga, they moved on.  When a better tool is available for the job, why stick with an old one?

For me, and I think many others, the Amiga itself was the application.  I liked "playing" with the system, tuning my workbench, etc.  I liked the hardware and the OS.  I have a 4000T today with a RTG graphics card, and while Workbench seems nice it just seems less "Amiga" to me.  I too had big box Amigas long ago.  I did not expand much, but I pre-ordered both the 3000 and 4000 when they were announced.  I was also at World of Amiga both years they were released.

For me the custom hardware was the heart of the Amiga, along with the OS.  While I obviously wished the chipset would get upgraded and move forward to one up the competition, putting PC components in an Amiga wasn't attractive to me.  I wanted C= to produce a new and better chipset so I could shove it in the faces of my PC-loving friends!

I moved on when the product stopped moving forward, when I needed a PC and could not afford both.  But I always missed my Amiga, not for any particular application - I just missed using it.

Off the shelf components are cheaper and they perform better.
AND we don't have to foot the bill for design and prototyping.

But it has no heart!!  


Today, with NG AmigaOS 4.x systems I agree and see no point in using custom PowerPC boards.  If all you care about is the OS then port it to mainstream hardware.  With all the money being spent on developing custom and inferior PowerPC motherboards surely porting to x86 makes more financial sense.  I don't see the logic in continuing down the path AmigaOS 4.x is currently on.

[Kremlar]

It is difficult for individuals to create a Natami. I believe the Natami concept was close though. The Amiga PPC boards are lucky to sell a few thousand boards while the Natami bringup thread has 730792 views.

http://www.natami.net/knowledge.php?b=1¬e=33366

This makes me think that the AmigaNG PPC is the wrong computer niche. The Natami was gaining interest by developers and ex-Amiga programmers as can be seen in Natami forum posts (developers were asking instead of being asked). It was generating Amiga excitement not seen since the collapse of C=.

Exactly!!  They are lucky to sell hundreds of PPC boards.  Something like the NATAMI would be huge in comparison.

[Kremlar]

Ummm - what do you want to tell me with that? Do you want me also to move on?

Clearly you do whatever you want, I was just curious since your use for the Amiga seemed very application driven.

Here we seem to differ. For me it was an unexpensive tool and had to work the way I wanted. A stunning device back then (and in some aspects even today), but nevertheless just a tool. Nothing to found a "religion" on.

Yes, that's true.  Back then you could get so much capability for your money with the Amiga.  Not true anymore!

And despite that you nevertheless prefer the OCS over RTG? Seriously?

It's not that I preferred OCS over RTG, but I preferred the idea of Amiga-specific graphics/sound hardware, especially early on when it was so much more powerful than the competition.  So I guess it was like a religion for me.  Of course I wanted a nice, fast 256+ color workbench at a high resolution, but I wanted it done the "Amiga way" and not just by slapping in a PC graphics card.

As you "did not expand much" I guess you were happy with what these machines offered in their original state, namely their graphics?

I was to an extent, but always wanted more and hoped C= was working on new chips.  Back then I only knew what was published in magazines, the internet was not what it is today, and I had no insider information - just lots of rumors.  It's hard to say for sure, but I believe I left the Amiga scene before RTG became popular.  I don't recall many or any RTG cards being available that made me want to purchase.  I think maybe the OpalVision was announced and seemed interesting but too limited (not really RTG).

What do you mean with "custom"?

I mean the Amiga chipset, graphics & sound, things that were only found in the Amiga and made it stand out from the competition.  "Amiga custom chips".

http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/CategoryList.aspx?mid=377

And - did they do so?
No.
Instead they preferred to go belly up by pumping all their money into their overpriced and underpowered x86 line of computers instead of improving the Amiga properly.

Did they really spend a lot of money on their x86 hardware?  Here in the US it seemed like a very minor part of their business.  I do not see that as a major reason for the fall of C=.

B.T.W. - what did you use to "shove it in the faces of your PC-loving friends", once you realised C= didn't develop the things you wanted, but went bust instead?

Hah!  Nothing unfortunately.    I exited the Amiga scene before C= went out of business because I needed a PC for school and work and could not afford both.  I still remember selling my Amiga 4000 and purchasing a 486DX2/66 with Orchid Fahrenheit 1280 video card.  It was a sad day!

However, a few years prior I got great pleasure showing my PC friends and work buddies the Walker Demo on the Amiga.  It was so amazing at the time!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyMpU0nMuZo

Hardware does not have to have an heart, it just has to do for me what I want and how I want it. No heart required so far...

That's the religion part of things.  Do cars need heart?  If not, tell that to all the Mazda RX-7 fanatics out there who love their Wankel Rotary Engines.  

I mean - the decision for PPC has been made long ago and neither you, nort me, will ever change that. We should be lucky that Trevor invested money in new Amiga capable hardware and tries his best also to support software development!

Agreed.  I am not lucky, because I really have no interest in NG, but for users that do have interest I think it is amazing that development at this level is still occurring.

[Kremlar]

I recently had a kid walk up a long driveway to look at my dirty silver 1993 RX-7. He ended up coming back to look at it again when I wasn't there and asked my family if it was for sale. I get crazy emotional reactions like this while some people think it is no more than a Ford Probe .

Hah!  I had a 94 RX-7 Red Touring about 10 years back.  I live in Massachusetts, purchased it form a seller on Ohio.  I flew down and drove it back home.  Best 11 hour drive of my life!  I miss that car.

My first car love was when I was in high school, the 93 Silver Touring (with no spoiler) that was in the Mazda brochure.

Is your Silver 93 for sale???  

[Kremlar]

But the RX-8 is SO much better (even if the costs got outrageous).

Mehh.... I much preferred my 3rd gen RX-7 twin turbo to the RX-8.  But yeah, clearly superior to the original RX-7.  Original RX-7 has great styling for its time, though, and I think the RX-8 was a bit too friendly looking and bland.

[Kremlar]

and the one I use the most is my FPGA Arcade because it gives me that nostalgic experience that I have always loved, in a system that I know that is not dying from aging, as it's the case with classic hardware

Right! I always thought I'd prefer classic hardware, but man I'm really loving my FPGA Arcade.... it's making me consider the thought of selling at lease some of the other hardware I have, but I'm afraid I may regret it later...

[Kremlar]

The sequential turbo system of the RX-7 was complex and failure prone though. I simplified mine while retaining the sequential turbo operation and haven't had problems. The Wankel engines themselves are short lived under boost but I would never replace the heart, soul and unique feel of the RX-7.  

:thumbsup: