FPGA Amiga

[kolla]

The "one product" approach is what apollo team is working for, and you see how that goes, lol

[kolla]

But is it any worse than when the Amiga 1200/3000/4000s were released with new chipsets, processors and kickstarts?  No, and I'd say compatibility is actually better and getting better all the time.

No surprise, but I would say it is a heck lot worse now - simply because back there were actually _DEVELOPERS_ around, commercial, professional developers. M68K was still a commercially viable architecture, used not by just Amiga, but many parties. And the compatibility issues were documented and known.

With Apollo Core, they are a moving target and largely undocumented. The entire Apollo Core architecture is largely undocumented.

[kolla]

Yes, it's going quite well.  They've sold several thousand units with several thousand more orders waiting to be filled.  The last time any vendor was selling Amigas in those numbers was in the 1990's.

I am not talking about sales, I am talking about how it _works_.

What you are describing is a potential support problem in the future, with thousands of unhappy users. Well, their problem.

[kolla]

Yeah, it's clearly a high priority to ridicule me

Did this guy get any help yet?
http://www.apollo-core.com/knowledge.php?b=5¬e=12046

[kolla]

It works obviously for most if not all users otherwise all sites would be flooded with angry comments.

The flood gate (V1200) hasn't opened yet.


But, anyways, that is beside the point - my comment was "the one product" - the Apollo Team (well, Gunnar) has as goal that the Apollo Core shall be de-facto standard CPU architecture, "the one product", the new "base standard" for 68k Amiga.

And that is something that will not happen, too many burnt bridges, too many pissed off developers... whatever Apollo Team is trying to do, others are much more likely to come around and accomplish in better ways soon.

[kolla]

When has ANYTHING Amiga NOT been like joining a cult???  Lol :roflmao:

I suggest you join the cult, and see it from the inside for a while.

[kolla]

Demo coding is a sport, they stick with the rules and regulations of their game.

But at least they are productive. What productivity is there for Apollo Core? Where are the AMMX optimised datatypes etc? Where are the debugging tools that have been worked on (for how long now)? What "developer-centric features" will be slapped on? The team is just a handful (if even that) of people, why is that? Shouldn't the existing developers flock around the Apollo Core to support it? Why aren't they?

[kolla]

To say that the Apollo Core mimics what would have happened if Motorola had continued is just nonsense. Motorola's largest customer base for 68k was telecommunications, aerospace and embedded.

[kolla]

Why should Apollo Core do the same?

Because they want Apollo Core to be the de-facto "base line" for Amiga hardware.

[kolla]

Britelite has repeatedly given his reservations with the direction of the Apollo Core, but he isnt rejecting it in a pissed manner.

And the other way around? What does Gunnar have to say about the concerns and reservations of developers, demo coders etc. because that's what really matters.

[kolla]

groans from European users

I believe you here mean British users. Just consider where most CPU boards and other high end hardware for Amiga were made, where Amiga clones were made, where most productivity software was made etc.

[kolla]

Maybe a similar reactionpattern can be attributed to a team like Apollo, that has spent xx hours producing this product, only to have xyz people tell them its not good enough etc.

People told him way in advance that it was not the right way to go, but he chose to do it anyways.

[kolla]

Right way for who?

For everyone, hardware developers, software developers, coders, hackers, endusers, old software... but no, he had to do it his way, and alienated many initial supporters in the process.

Again; depends on what you want from the hardware.

As an end user, I just want it to run my existing software in a satisfactory manner, as of yet, it does not.

[kolla]

Brit Elite, while I find most of what you write very reasonable, I don't understand why it disturbs you that the Apollo Core has some features the 060 does not have. You can safely ignore their presence.

Who is disturbed? That is what he said he does, as do almost all coders and developers, they ignore the Apollo Core features. Nothing disturbing about that, is there? :hammer:

[kolla]

A serious company will probably get much more hardware developers interested and more software developers interested too. That in the end means more users and more people interested in what it offers, unlike the current state of the Apollo core.

Not to mention, a roadmap one can relate to, proper documentation and support in toolchains.

People have paid good money for 68k support in glibc and gcc before (not even so long ago, I think it was 7 years ago that CodeSourcery, now Mentor Graphics, owned by Siemens, updated the kernel and the GNU toolchain for Linux/m68k with threaded library support).