Do you consider either the PegososPPCs or AmigaOne to be true Amigas?

[takemehomegrandma]

Samuar wrote:

But, do people consider one or the other, or neither; to be true Amigas?

Well, I can't use my TV as a monitor and I can't exactly write copperlists on any of them, can I? ;-) Well, CPU modules is not that usual in x86, but hardware wise these new "Amigas" is pretty darn close to every standard PC out there. It has the same common CPU/NorthBridge/SouthBridge design. But remember how we allways have looked with great envy on all those cheap PC components, like Network Cards, Graphic Cards, Memory Modules, etc, some of which hardly were available at all to the Amiga computers (and when they were available, it had a 400% price tag compared to the PC). Now when we are finally there, now when we have pretty much everything we want integrated directly on the motherboard, is this the when we turn around and look back and say "it was better before"? No! Of course it would be nice to have a modern version of the Amiga custom hardware, but with regular PCI/AGP implemented as well. I wrote some comments on this on the A5000 thread. But that will never happen, because how does that make sense from a business point of view? What could a 2004 version of the AGA offer that standard PC components couldn't, and how will it justify the enourmous development costs?

Do you think whether it has AmigaOS 4 running on it would affect your opinion on the above question?

Not at all. OS4, AROS and MorphOS are all reimplementations of the classic AmigaOS 3.1 API, with some unique extensions of their own. The main difference between OS4 and MorphOS is the name, which is totally unimportant to me, and frankly I like the MorphOS design better! :-)

[takemehomegrandma]

Hammer wrote:

What operating system it runs doesn't matter.

It does matter. What happens if the OS includes a virtual Amiga chipset functions?

HW emulated in the OS? UAE is not an OS, but it emulates Hardware - is that a "real Amiga"? Perhaps, it's for sure the only Amiga a lot of people uses ...

[takemehomegrandma]

DaveP wrote:
@Lando

Can you tone down your flamebait a bit. Some of us are trying to have a civilised discussion in here.

I have put my "real" Amiga in the closet a long time ago. I use my Pegasos with MorphOS as my Amiga now and I can do pretty much everything with that setup like I could with my A1200. In fact, I can do much more thanks to it network capabilities, truecolor display, more horse power etc. For a user like me it is quite annoying when people like "lempkee" and "Step" suggests that my primary Amiga (the Pegasos) has nothing to do with Amiga, since it doesn't run OS4 and lacks the Amiga sticker on the front. You realize that posts like that is equally flamebait to a great deal of people in this community? But let's try not to bite the bates and accept that we have different views of things, OK? :-)

[takemehomegrandma]

Desolator wrote:
I can't see the new motherboards as a new Amiga. Sorry. Maybe (just maybe) if they compiled it into one of those "computer inside a keyboard" solutions might I call it an Amiga. But not a true Amiga... not Jay Miners vision.

why? Because with just another Tower on my desk its the same as having a PC or Mac or whatever.

bring forth the custom chips and we can have this discussion again. (not that custom chips are neccessary in these times it seems.)

Perhaps the definition of "what is Amiga" is more about if you can use the system as you have allways used the "Amiga"? If you can run the software you ran on your Amiga, if it is lean and clean like the Amiga should be, if it has the same look and feel as the Amiga, etc, etc, etc?