How much would it cost to port AmigaOS to x64?

[Digiman]

So, since I'm hoping beyond hope to win the 640 Million Mega Million Jackpot tonight, does anyone out there have a good idea of what it would cost to port/recode AmigaOS 4.x to run on x64 processors? I'd really love to see my beloved AmigaOS running on completely modern hardware.

On top of that how much would it take to fund a driver initiative to keep support for modern video cards, sound chipset, network chipsets, printers, scanners, etc.

Will Amiga Inc or Hyperion allow you to?

I have highlighted the most expensive part, actually there is no single edition of Windows supported everything AND it is what makes it partly so useless and bloated.

Solution? Simple, lock the hardware for x86 Amiga to just 3 specifications initially. Low/medium/high spec of CPU/MOTHERBOARD CHIPSET/GPU/SPU/NETWORK/IO Controller.

eg i7+most powerful GPU+most popular 7.1 digital audio, gigabit ethernet, best motherboard.

This will result in a very tightly coded responsive OS. Job done. You could do it via an Amithlon type HAL that natively runs OS4.2 PPC code via emulation  coded for 602/603 CPU

So there you have it

1 lock the spec to 3 machines (about 15 drivers required)
2 write a PPC emulator to run OS4 initially
3 give free upgrade to x86 native version later
4 get blitz basic 3D, chrome/opera/firefox, VLC and open office ported to it Asap

Simple

[Digiman]

The reality is to sell 100,000 units on x86 even OS4 (or even a successor) would need someone with the brand appeal to the general public. This can realistically only be Google or IBM (NOT Lenovo).


Also without some bespoke elegant cases and unique design keyboard and mouse as an exclusive package would it even sell then? Has anyone done it without an identifiable unique brand/style of physical items? (case, keyboard or mouse?)

Apple - they refuse to sell just OS X for general use. Possibly because the OS alone is not enough. Apple are the smartest at marketing.

Microsoft - Mostly 'free' copies of Windows on every new PC/Laptop sold. And most people who upgrade (well downgrade since XP IMO) are conned into thinking their copy of XP is the problem and "need" Win7 when the reality is they just need a clean install of ANY version of Windows every 36 months or less. All it was is Virus/Trojan/Registry bloat or bloated apps NOT XP. Microsoft dominate by default due to attained market share in the 90s via dirty/illegal tactics. They have critical mass, nobody will replace them until silicon computing is obsolete.

Google - Chrome OS vs M$ is going as well as Google+ vs Facebook (dead duck). Partly because the whole internet browser as an OS GUI is a totally retarded fukup but some of it is because Joe public buy machines (with Windows installed and they don't care enough to uninstall it) or a design philosophy (exclusive design shiny white curvy computer with odd keyboard and mouse not just NOT Windows as host OS) and not just an OS.

I guess this is what MOS/Hyperion know and explains lack of x86 projects. Even the A1 X1000 doesn't have a unique keyboard and mouse and looks exactly like a £400 i7 PC housed in a CoolerMaster Silencio 550 case.

[Digiman]

I recently read an article that said it was going to be an all AMD kit. Though any info at this point is not much more than rumor.

dreamcast270mhz, et. All,
   Most people don't need anything more than a computer that can run a web browser. Then next largest computer user group needs a web browser, office software, and streaming ability. Those two groups should cover 85-90% of computer users.
Any major OS can do this, making basically all the same. So why use anything other than Windows. Apple's marketing can't be so good that it garners 15% of the market just on that. Linux isn't for those kind of people. Unless you want to include Android. Then we should include BSD as Mac OS is certified as a BSD.  
Yeah, Amiga OS need some work. Lots of it just to get to that very basic user level. I just don't see it as filling that market. I see it as an some what specialty OS existing somewhere between Mac OS and Linux. Well, it should.
As to the desire for custom chips, we have them already. It that emergence of them on other platforms that helped kill the Amiga marketshare. Sound cards, Graphic Cards, various I/O bus cards. They have just been badly utilized on other platforms for well over a decade. We are just seeing now in the last few years GUIs using the graphics card. Which for the longest time was regulated to games or video decoding. An Amiga OS should, as it always has, utilized these kind of system resources at the system level and not as an addon for specialty uses.

1. Every new user, even spotty little teens, "need" 1080p streaming flash video via Youtube. And given most PCs are sold with 19" monitors 1080p off-line video (AVI, MKV etc) playback also required. Even X1000 class CPU will struggle at decoding 720p and decoding to 1080p desktop rez in VLC. Forget 720p flash video even on x1000 CPU. Therefore PPC is dead without MOS/OS4 port to 3.2ghz IBM Xenon CPU (as sold to M$ for Xbox 360) OR custom HD video playback hardware.

2. Custom chips of note are all on the graphics cards today, but Windows designs and generalizations of DirectX duct tape solution since the days of VoodoFX vs Open GL vs PCVR 3D card drivers hides this. Even AMD's Zacate E-450 CPU is custom hardware (2 Athlon 64 cores and ATI 6300 GPU combined on ONE chip).

3. Not essential to go all Apple and use standard PC motherboard design. Xbox 360 and PS3 use PC GPU + RAM + I/O chipset BUT achieve a 100% performance increase due to better (for the purpose) OS and a non PC superior motherboard compared to 2006 top end Wintel PC for 60fps 1080p gaming using a Nvidia 6800GT based GPU.

Just porting OS4 to a general PC market will mean it is slower than potential speed on a handful of locked down spec of machines IMO and why OS alone = small potatoes IMO.

[Digiman]

I don't think OS4 has any viability on most X64 hardware, but I do think if we put it on something like Genesi's ARM boards, then it would be very viable as it would then be on low cost hardware which is powerful enough for most work.

By the time they port it 2.8ghz i7 CPUs+mobo will cost the same as ARM so waste of time.

[Digiman]

That's right, if they choose a reference hardware platform it would make it less expensive for sure.

The problem of course, is that reference platforms get out of date pretty quickly so it would take more cash to keep getting it ported to new reference platforms.  And if the port to a reference platform that was up-to-date when the work started but then took a couple of years to get out of BETA it would also be a bit silly.

There's also the question of what is considered a successful port, just the OS with no app support, the OS + PPC support, WARP support, Open GL support, x68k support etc etc.

Would need to be as complete a conversion as Apple's PPC-->x86 product if they want €100 for it ideally.

Supporting an i7 and a future i7 is no problem, forget bus/RAM speed or north/south bridge uniqueness. PCI-E is here to stay, as is basic i7 architecture. GPU is only possible exception.

The issue is (total potential sales x RRP)/cost of development up front.

If 10,000 copies sold at €100 that's €1,000,000. If they even sold 10000.

The real issue is nobody would invest in that business. If IBM bought it to turn it into a true virus resistant OS after massive improvements that is the only real world mass market scenario I could see for X86 OS4 IMO.