AmigaONE or Pegasos, which one will it be sir?

[strobe]

Amiga Inc. isn't delaying anything, they're just way, way behind.

The only public demonstration of their developments was AmigaOS3.x with some AOS4 technologies running on a A4000. You can simulate the experience by running your Amiga in 320 mode then pouring iron filings on the motherboard.

The AmigaOne has ONLY been demonstrated in two forms:

1) Dead on arrival

2) Running Linux/PPC

I would be tempted to buy an AmigaOne IF it was running AmigaOS and not before. I'm extremely wary of the Amiga partnership and their tactics and I expect them to say something like "Buy the AmigaOne and support AmigaOS 4 development". I'm not going to fall for that!

Furthermore the AmigaOne has the G3 processor soldered on the board.

Pegasos isn't much more impressive hardware-wise except that:

1) It's been working for a lot longer. AmigaOne only recently got a working bootloader.

2) It has a processor slot so you can get a dual G4 afterwards if you want.

3) It has built-in firewire ports. Given the benchmarks from the Mac universe, built-in firewire ports outperform firewire interface PCi cards.

My dream is still running MorphOS on something better like a Titanium Powerbook, but I might buy the Pegasos anyway.

The AmigaOne doesn't interest me in the least. Amiga Inc. isn't anywhere close to running a new OS on new hardware.

[strobe]

Only the SE will be available December. At the Finnish Amiga demo the XE wouldn't work and no explanation was given (like the ROM wasn't updated or something). No timeline has been given for the XE so I'm not even considering buying one.

As for the AOS4 timeline, I don't have superior knowledge, merely superior ability to use logic. The only thing AOS4-related which was demonstrated was a really buggy 3.x/4 hybrid which ran on a friggin A4000. Assuming Hyperion is sane, if they had something better to demonstrate at the time they would have. Furthermore none of the Amiga partners have claimed to find a silver bullet to bypass the long and tedious process of porting an OS to a completely new platform which has a new interrupt controller, north bridge, sough bridge, memory controller, ISA/ABI, etc. The only thing they have done lately is brag that they finished exec. Well woop de do!

AOS4 isn't finished now, and even if it was it will take a long time before it's stable on new hardware, say 2004.

I don't have special knowledge, I can see the bloody forrest from the trees!

[strobe]

Why are people so convinced that AOS4 exists? It is with this premise that they decide what hardware to buy?

I will bet anybody here $1000 USD that AOS4 will not even be DEMONSTRATED in any form on the A1 this year!!! It's a friggin impossibility!

Hyperion would have demonstrated AOS4 running on a A4000 by now if they could have. They only recently bragged about completing exec like they were parting the Red Sea!.

One thing I know for sure: BetatesterII does NOT require an NDA so anybody who gets it will be able to review it and talk openly about developing apps for it.

Meanwhile at the AmigaOne display I see tumbleweeds...

[strobe]

There is no reason to fear that AOS4 doesn't run on the AmigaOne. Furthermore there is no uncertainty that AOS4 doesn't run on the AmigaOne. Not now, not when the A1 is sold, and not any time next year.

The only thing I have is DOUBT!

[strobe]

The reason I mentioned that the pre-alpha AmigaOS 3.x/4 hybrid was demonstrated was not to criticize the effort or what was demonstrated but to point out what stage in development they were at. My only point here is if they had something better to show us they would have and that given all the facts concerning OS development there is little chance of seeing AOS4 stable on new hardware in a very long time.

I'm not reveling in this fact, I'm merely pointing it out.

I'm also pointing out how impressive bPlan's progress has been. They have a completely new OS running on new hardware which you can actually get your hands on if you so choose.

I don't like either the Pegasus or the AmigaOne on a purely hardware standpoint. I would much rather use a Titanium Powerbook.

Also allow me to say that I don't trust either of these companies, however I do trust my own eyes. What do you see with your eyes? I see a TODO list from Amiga Inc. and a working OS from bPlan. Unless I'm short on TP my decision is obvious.

[strobe]

FYI the Teron CX and PX now run MorphOS.

http://www.morphos-news.de/

Still waiting for the Titanium Powerbook |-)

[strobe]

MorphOS is not open source. It is closed source and commercial. I would rather have a semi-open source commercial OS (like Apple's current strategy) but oh well.

In order to run MorphOS on a Mac, they (bPlan) would have to port it themselves. I believe they would like to do this but they obviously have to concentrate on making a stable consumer release first.

They also plan to run MorphOS on some kind of PDA-like device called the eclipsis. Personally I would rather run it on a Titanium Powerbook (in case bPlan is reading this).

[strobe]

Answer: to run your Amiga software faster |-)

It wouldn't take that long to reboot anyhow.

Mac OS X is a nice OS (provided you only use Carbon apps, I hate Cocoa apps still) but it also has some quirks. Apple still isn't getting the most out of the hardware. There are ABI issues, and the kernel could still be more responsive (consider that some drivers are still running in kernel space when they ought to be running in user space, this is due to the kernel not passing messages and moving memory fast enough).

Mac OS X actually runs rather well on a 250mhz 604e provided you have gobs of RAM. :-p

[strobe]

I don't mind developing with Cocoa. I love Objective-C. However I do not like the behavior of Cocoa apps. Furthermore a lot of former NeXT-heads don't seem to have a clue when it comes to human interface design. I think one mistake NeXT made was thinking that high-level API abstraction meant it isn't necessary to have human interface guidelines which obviously isn't the case.

Not that this has anything to do with Amiga.

[strobe]

It's about damn time for a first release, and it would not be surprising if it happened, or at least a demo, at WoASE.

I for one would be flabbergasted if they demontrated AOS4 running on new hardware. Heck, I would be surprised if they ran it on a A4000 and then let people play with it. If anything is to be demontrated it'll be behind the velvet rope.

Not that I wouldn't be pleasantly flabbergasted.

[strobe]

1) If MOS is an excellent product why would you wait? Sure, they may say "wait one month" but we all know how long an Amiga month is (usually ends up being infinity).

2) I think most people will buy whichever product is stable first. Anyway the APIs will be similar or identical for the most part so I doubt this will be a problem, software developers want to sell the most titles.

3) BETATESTERII isn't "secret". You don't have to sign an NDA or any other such restriction. Is I understand it, it's just like buying the end product, only earlier. You buy the product from a distributor and you can do whatever you want with it.

[strobe]

The situation is not the same. The AmigaOS beta test is closed, BETATESTERII is more like a pre-release.

Basically you don't sign any papers. You just walk to your local dealer and buy it. It's the same as buying the full product except it isn't the 'release version' yet.

So in spite of you using a lot of exclamation marks, your claim that the situation is analogous is dead wrong.

[strobe]

The reason why you can talk about the product like that is because it isn't "secret", which was my point. I'm not telling you to to buy the thing, sheesh!

Did I say it was "FINAL"? Then don't fúcking quote "FINAL". You seem to have some pent up rage with somebody OTHER than me.

PS: I don't give a flying fúck what your buying habits are, so you can save your "Also, before I buy a product..." for your mother or spouse. Did I ask for your life history? Good grief.

[strobe]

It sounds like MorphOS has yet to implement a means of communication across the A-Box border. After all, why else would their user space apps run in A-Box?

IIRC Hyperion has already said AOS4 doesn't have a sandbox for legacy. They defend this position by saying nearly all software will be legacy to begin with, but I don't fancy this trade-off. I remember all too well the hell of 68k compatibility in MacOS versus the joy of Classic (which is a virtual machine). With the former solution 68k and PPC apps could use the same libraries, there is less overhead, and it was easier to implement but old apps can still crash your system. With the latter solution all legacy apps run on a virtual machine running a complete OS then communicate to new apps (clipboard, drag+drop, IPC, networking, etc.) by patching the legacy OS. The disadvantages are the opposite of the former advantages.

I much prefer the sandbox solution even if it takes longer to implement.

[strobe]

PS: I should have referred to the 68k solution as "mixed mode" or mixed mode manager (in case you're looking for a reference).