ECS, AGA, Workbench? No I don't hate them.

[Iggy]

But let's face facts guys. Amiga video is out of date. 256 color modes are garish, distorted and not photo realistic. Workbench is old, later versions are bloated, and it is not being updated.

Frankly, I have to conclude that your self justifying arguements to your reasoning for clinging to this outdated tech is soley based on your desire to retain certain games (and maybe a few other pieces of poorly written software that bangs hardware directly).

After considering AROS68K, I'm wondering if a simple PCI based 68K system would make a good project. Dump Paula and include a better audio system. Scrap ECS, AGA, etc. and rely soley on RTG.

Forget FPGAs and just use a 68k processor (020, 030, or 060).

Modern memory, usb, harddrive controllers.

Then build a verion of AROS that will outperform any legacy Amiga.

No it won't be compatible with AGA (it might be powerful enough to emulate ecs).

And Workbench? Has anyone here investigated Scalos? Why are we working so hard to recreate dated obsolete software that hasn't been updated in over a decade when there are better substitutes.

If we're going to reimplement elements of the Amiga, by eliminating some backward compatibility we could have a much more powerful, up to date system.

If anyone else is intewrested in this, let me know. It would be just as compatible as an Amiga 4000 using RTG, and we could consider options that aren't available with legacy hardware.

[Iggy]

Isn't that what AROS for ARM is for?  There really isn't anything left for saving in the original hardware except for the ability to run the original software.  Besides, if you run AROS x86 with the Janus UAE integration, all of that hardware banging software isn't banging hardware anymore.

Yes, I'm a big fan of ARM too. Unlike the X86 (and like the PPC) it has the same endian structure as the 68K.
As to questions of why I would want a system that is only partially compatible, I think RTG owners would understand. I'd settle for an Amiga derivitive that was only RTG compatible because I wouldn't be locked into a specific video structure.

And Franko, don't presume a moral high ground because your willing to stubbornly stick with outdated hardware. Again, we're both using a Mac.
Only I'm using it the way it ought to be used. If you want to be negative, feel free not to post on this particular thread.
I think a system with no more compatibility than a Draco (but with modern expansion capabilities) would be cool. You don't have to contribute in any way.
Oh, and btw, your attack on emulation? I remember you positively responding on the Natami. Hate too disappoint you (or ciontradict Thomas) but FPGAs ARE emulating hardware (so its no more a real Amiga than Amiga forever).

Now, why would we want to do this? Because and RTG equipped A4000 is damned expensive. We could build a better system that was just as compatible that would cost less. I can get 68060/50s for about $40. I can flesh out the details of this prosal pretty quickly, but I'm not going to waste my time argueing with others about their narrow view of what an Amiga should be.

If anyone has a positive comment or practical idea, I'm open to your posts.
Anyone else can go back to playing with their toys.

[Iggy]

@ Iggy

Gawd... you don't half make me laugh...

If you think I'm taking the moral high ground your sadly mistaken, If I ever do you'll be the first to know...

The point about the Natami and why I like this Idea so much is that is supposed to be 100% backward compatible, how it achieves this is of no consequence to me. If it's not 100% backwards compatible then I wont be buying it.

Negative !!! you haven't had a good thing to say about the Amiga in any the threads you been currently posting in, so don't talk to me about being negative.

You go on telling folk to go play with their toys, any respect I had for your opinions and what you have to say (and I did respect a lot of the thing you have said previously) has now gone straight out the window and went splat all over the concrete below.

PS:I feel free to post wherever I want and don't need advice on where to post, thank you very much

Franko, feel free to go trolling whereever you feel you must. I just hope you don't divert too many of the post with a point (like the one before yours).

And its yor opinion that my posts haven't been positive. My posts only reflect my disappointment at the failure of our community to evolve and expand.

As mentioned in the post before yours, I guess I'm on the side of new evolving systems.

And btw, if you're hoping for 100% compatibility with the Natami you're bound to be disappointed since there isn't 100% compatibility amongst all Amigas.

I'm logging off for the night. We can take this up tomorrow. Take care old man.

[Iggy]

No they are not. They are a re-implementation of the hardware, rather than software emulating the hardware running on an underlying OS and hardware that can't allow perfect emulation. Many people are interested by FPGAArcade and Natami, not because they think they will be up-to-date computers but because they will allow them to continue their Amiga hobby.

This thread is just set up because Franko actually responded to you in the other thread, and you didn't like it and you're having a stroppy hissy fit.

Sorry. I'll try to ignore Franko's squirrely wrath. And no, this thread was created because more than one person's posts made me think about Franko's question and other things that have troubled me.

BTW - An FPGA is a programmable gate array. everytime you start it you have to re-load the software that allows it to emulate the target hardware. So, no, the Natami is not a reimplementation of the Amiga (unless your willing to concede that that can be done via software). A true reimplementation of the Amiga (in dedicated silicon) would be much more expensive to develop than the Natami. It would also be faster, wouldn't require loading an FPGA on boot, and in volume it would be cheaper to produce. But, that's never going to happen since, as was pointed out, at this point Amiga's are mainly a hobby to the majority of you.

OK, let me thank those of you who have made some supportive statements. It is absolutely true that I am at the other end of the Amiga spectrum from Frankp.*What I'd dearly wish to get across to him is that our differences of opinion in no way diminish the regard and fondness I hold for the guy. But i do believe Amiga's can continue to evolve. AGA was not the end, RTG is an improvement in display quality. Workbench was fine when it was current, but there are replacements for it. And to the post on AOS4, in what way do you think I don't agree with you. I LOVE AOS4 (even though I'm a MorphOS user). NG systems prove the Amiga can continue to develop and flourish.

As NG systems become more advanced, I do expect to see them become competent daily use systems. Will they be competitive with PCs and MACs? Well without the resources of a large backer that would be difficult. But look how good they look now. Its not impossible, it could happen.

I'm leaving the house right now to take my wife to work. When I get back, I'll post my initial 68K proposal. Take care all.

Jim

[Iggy]

The 'software' is hardware description language. It deals with electrical signals and circuits - "on a rising signal, do XYZ", etc.

It compiles to a logic circuit (or how to configure the FPGA's circuitry to behave - in hardware - as the logic circuits described). You can compile the VHDL into silicon itself, use that to create an ASIC, and there you have your native hardware. The FPGA doesn't RUN the compiled VHDL, it becomes it.

It isn't emulation. It's a re-implementation. There is a world of difference.

That is strictly a matter of opinion, as the hardware requires reconfiguration each time it is restarted, its still relying on a software program that configures it.Whether the hardware "becomes" what the code tells it to or is programmed it emulate it is a matter of interpretation.

And using VHDL to develop silicon would not be the optimal way to design an ASIC.

Now I'm going to drop this unproductive topic a move to the post I promised.

[Iggy]

OK, why would I want to build a system that runs AOS with a 68K processor without the Amiga chipset?
This relates directly to my objections on the AGA design and Amiga evolution in general.
The original Lorraine concept is very elegant. It takes a very powerful microprocessor and combines it with a group of custom chips the off load some of the work that other systems would leave to the processor. This does not mean that the 68K couldn't handle those tasks.
The Atari ST managed with a far less competent chipset using the power of the 68K (and if it had a flaw, it was limited colors and screen resolution).
Brute force can work when a processor has enough power to handle these task adquately.

My own experience with that concept, running the day to day operations of Delmar Company in Middletown Delaware in the late 80's and early 90's. We worked with Peripheral Technologies in Marietta Georgia to produce a line of 68000 and 68020 computer that used an ISA bus (allowing us to use standard PC cards). There were 6809 and V20 coprocessor cards available and toward the end of it development and 68030 system and a revamped 6809 card (with a Tandy Color Computer 3 ASIC on it) were underdevelopment.
Like the Amiga, our systems were multi-tasking, but they were also multi-user. The base system (our 'terminal' system) has four RS-232 ports to support VT100 or VT52 terminal and was primarily marketed asfor use in applications like Point of sales systems.
However, we also offered an alternative system (that could still support additional terminals) that had a Tseng Labs ET4000 based video card, a PC keyboard and a mouse. we also contracted with a developer who had developed Windowing software for Gespac (another early Motorola based system builder) to port his Windowing package to our systerm.

What do any of this have to do with the topic? Well our brute force systems support five concurrent users, one of which had access to a GUI based interface that offered the same number of colors as an Amiga and the same display modes as a VGA PC.
I can't compare the two systems as their target markets were different (and the Amiga was definately a superior multimedia platform), but I'm proud of what our small group of companies managed to create.

And in on area, I think we had an edge over the Amiga. All our dsoftware access to our hardware ran through device drivers, meaning we weren't tied to specific hardware (as the Amiga is so firmly wedded to AGA).

Now, why is the Amiga chipset (which in the original Amiga was such an asset) a liability in later Amigas?
Because while the processors in later Amigas became faster and much more powerful, the chipset remained essentially the same. What was fast enough to assist a standard 68000, became a liability to an 020, 030, or 060 because it was SLOW inrelation to those processors. By the time you've reached the 68060 you would have been better off with the chipset and simply rewriting the OS to use retargetable drivers for alternate hardware. You guys don't get it, the chipset slows down later Amigas. And AGA made that WORSE.

So, that, in a nutshell would be my arguement for scrapping the chipset. Natami sounds good and 100% cpmpatibility sounds great until you realize that no other system has bothered to do this because it carries liabilities as well.

So what would I like as an final 68K based Amigiod system? Well 68060 50Mhz chips are still plentiful and cheap. An ISA bus would be another liability, but a PCI bus at 33Mhz would be a definate improvement over the sppeds the the Amiga chipset communicates at. A PCI graphics card for RG graphics (doesn't even have to be that modern a Voodoo3 or a Radeon 9000 would be fine, a modern stereo Audio codec would be useful (but might be cheaper as a PCI add on card) and other accesories (drive controllers, usb cards, etc) also might make more sense as cheap add on cards.

Now I appologize for the length of the post. I've edited it once so I've already read Toneoo7's comment after this. Who would buy it? Good question. I can buy a complete ARM system for $200 (which would be about the target price for what I'm thinking of) and the ARM system would be much more powerful and just as capable of run Amiga software.
But I like the idea of a low cost 68K system that relies on a real 68K processor I'm certain that it would be faster than any legacy Amiga (and yes its only compatible with OS friendly RTG compatible software).

After the negative posts, I've decided to pursue a proof of concept prototype. The only thing I ask is that you don't judge my ideas until I've had a chance to prove myself (or through my actions, disprove myself).

Jim

[Iggy]

i have to ask why some of the people are here, if you really want a true next generation Amiga OS that hold on to nothing of its past and works differently and modern then go and join BeOS or QNX community's both OS have been compared to what a modern AmigaOS should perhaps be, but that's the point if you change so much of the OS is it really Amiga any more and I know where going into a topic that has been covered 100's of times what makes an Amiga, an Amiga?

But to me the reason I'm still here is because of way the OS is layout and works, its just simple, I like the drag screen affects, I like access to my ram disk and I like a lot of other little touch here and their that make it an Amiga experiences, some of the legacy apps like deluxe paint and scalos I still love using and yes the classic games as well.

All I want is a OS that works the same way my current Amiga works but it can not only play the classic stuff but can do some more modern things like play DVDs, handle the new media formats, surf the net, and bring back some of the fun I use to have with computers that sadly disappeared the day I had to move to windows. (saying that however windows7 I must admit to it being the best thing I have ever used from Microsoft so far, why it took them so long to deliverer something that just works I will never know. ie still crap however   thank god for firefox!) . To me AmigaOS4 offers the closest thing to my dream, I still would like to see a bit more work put in making it more backwards compatible maybe we will in a future update.

 Interesting, I don't think the poster after you got your point, but I did and let me say I glad to see at least one poster has whatn I consider the valid alternative to the "we gotta keep the same hardware" line of thought.
You are absolutely right! AOS4 is a legitimate sucessor to the Amiga legacy (and I think AROS and MorphOS are valid too).
The platforms different, but its BETTER. And the OS has all the system call and design features to make an Amiga programmer feeel right at home.

And it looks great. Anyone the pretends that eye candy isn't appealing isn't being honest.
And yes, we've had to give up some of the legacy software, but its amazing how much of it we can run and in the future that compatibility is only likely to improve.

Hey, there may be a day when all legacy apps run seemlessly under AROS like native X86 apps.

Heres a prediction, no matter how strong your personal attachment to your legacy hardware is and no matter how deeply your feelings run, soon we will be fully capable of running all your software and a host of BETTER software on modern platforms that are truly competitive.  Then your arguements for Amiga forever will look as valid as Apple II fiorever. Life evolves. Get with the program.

Jim

[Iggy]

@ Iggy



It's ok just fed the squiggles for today and had me breakfast (nice greasy fry up, even though it is 3:30pm here) so everyone this end is happy and content right now...

Me and you shall just have to agree to differ on this subject and call a truce here, best for us both (and the other members who have to read this stuff) to withdraw graciously from the field of battle and settle for a draw...

Keep on with you idea/project and don't let me or anyone else discourage you are after all trying to actively do something in a manner that you think is best and for that I salute you sir...

(just try please and get you idea across without dissing AGA so much and telling folk to go play with their toys... )

Best Regards...

Franko

Yes Franko, it must just be the Irish in me looking for a fight where there isn't one. What do you expect from people chronically malnourished for centuries under the 'kindly" rule of the British?

I I DO so much enjoy your posts and perspective (although I ain't eating the hagis - what the heck were you Scots thinking - ugh!)

[Iggy]

I think AmigaNG nailed it in that it all comes down to the "what makes an Amiga an Amiga" question. Personally, I fall closer to the opposite end of the spectrum: to me, the Amiga is about an elegant hardware architecture that was designed alongside and tightly integrated with an elegant system-software architecture, running on a very nice, assembler-friendly CPU. While I don't disagree that AmigaOS is a fine piece of software (though I haven't used 4+ and can't really speak for that,) it's just one of the components - removing any of them significantly diminishes the appeal for me. That's why Linux/Amix on the Amiga is more of a "oh, look at that" novelty, PPC accelerators hold no interest for me, and stuff like AROS on a PC is kind of boring.

That's not to say that I begrudge devotees of any of the above their own little triumphs, but it does make me wonder, if the software is so plainly what matters, why bother retaining any hardware compatibility, especially going to all the bother of designing a new system around an old processor?


And this is what I really don't understand. If you feel like this about legacy hardware, why are you essentially proposing to build what amounts to a different kind of legacy hardware? The oldschool 68k processors are out of production, stop at 32-bit data bus width, and don't go above 100MHz. If your attitude towards legacy hardware is "get over it and move on," why go to all this trouble? Why not just go with an existing board for a modern architecture and save yourself time, money, and trouble?

(And no, I won't "get with the program," thanks. Some of us value the full Amiga architecture more than being "truly competitive.")

I agree with you on all points and have no intention of giving up my PPC hardware (even though X86 is tempting and the future might be in ARM).

And I don't begrudge the diehard Amiga loyalists their attachment to their legacy hardware. The fact that it can still be used productively is a testament to the integrity of the original concept.
Lord knows I would NOT want to have to suffer with an old PC, but an Amiga would still retain its appeal.

I do get frustrated at times with the negative take so many of you have on NG systems. Not your cup of tea? Hey, that's cool, but it is mine. I've the fact that I've got a fair level of legacy compatibility (which is constantly increasing) and I can play games like QuakeIII.

Doom on an Amiga was cool for its time, but fragging someone online with more mordern graphics just makes me smile.

And I appologize for posting the Ambient screen shot on Franko's thread. Its not fair to compare hardware that is seperated by that many years of development. I mean, yeah, it looks cools, but when I look at the workbench screens you guys are posting all I can think is "Windows didn't look this good for several generation and Mac was Black & White - Damn that still looks modern".

[Iggy]

But if I make an Altera Hardcopy version of the design it magically tranform into  'real' hardware just because it does not need a Flash to get started ? And the same if I would use some of the Flash based FPGAs or a one time programmable FPGA ?

greets,
Staf.

OK Staf, its hardware, especially if its a permant flash. But its still not as fast as silicon designed the painful way.

FPGAs and other programmable logic are great tools and they serve great as glue logic. I'm just not impressed with the idea of emulating processors with them.

[Iggy]

@ Iggy

I should have guessed you were Irish with ideas like that... :lol:

We Scots only eat haggis before going into battle against the sassenachs, it give you the runs so when we bend over and raise out kilts in battle we can fire a nice juicy, lumpy brown sticky keech at them, that sends them back over the border...

(stinks like hell and is a bugger to wash off...

Cheers :drink:

@ Hattig

I'm just gonna wait and see when and if the Natami appears just what it can do, still seems to me like one of the better things around at the moment, only time will tell...

Yes, if they can pull it off it will be an impressive system.

[Iggy]

Just thinking about what goes into haggis is about as unappetizing as seeing the food preperation areas of a Chinese resturant.

[Iggy]

Properly prepared, I'd eat human.

Correctly seasoned, it would probably beat haggis.

[Iggy]

I agree with Rune wholeheartedly.  I bought an Amiga to enjoy what I once had but if Amiga is to have a future, it has to be making an OS for the future; not tied to any hardware (a.k.a. MAC OS) and can be installed on many different types of hardware (Linux, AROS, etc...).  The OS needs to be efficient, not bloated like Windoze.

Considering these post, I am quick to admit that my proposal is not a good idea.
I'll leave the legacy users to their dreams of the Natami and wish them well.
For now, I'm sticking with PPCs (and keeping an eye on the X86 and ARM developments).

We all have our preferences, and I got about all I'm likely to get from 68Ks. Why revisit something that could have been that still causes me great anguish? Hey, the platforms were so good that they linger on via the dedicated self abuse of we fanatics.

Take care all.

Jim

[Iggy]

What a charmer.

Yep, I'm feeling more than little guilty of being a bit too aggressive myself. I mean frankly I think of FPGAs as a form of emulation myself. But there's programable logic available right now that I would hesitate to add to a design because it would simply it.We are all getting a little too hostile.

Amiga.org the Palestine of computer websites.