Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?  (Read 45174 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« on: January 21, 2005, 04:12:10 PM »
@Leirbag

So by your reasoning, an integrated motherboard for PC, complete with graphics and sound processors would count?

Ok, you need drivers still. That said, the amiga does use and require drivers for all of its onbooard hardware. What do you think .device and .library files are for?

It so happens that for the critical stuff (for IO, graphics etc) these files are in kickstart, so you don't need to load them from disk. That's not such an advantage anymore. Hell, if you are using OS3.5 or higher, and you have the rom updates installed, you already are using disk based replacements for many of these resources.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2005, 04:22:51 PM »
Quote

The problem REALLY is...........that the AmigaONE is NOT a REAL Amiga!....


And a PC running OS4 is?

Quote

It should have been Amiga like (new custom chips and all) otherwise it would have beem better off ported to x86.............thats too late now.


OMG, sure yeah. A new chipset that would be a cinch. One that is a rival to modern sound/gfx/io chipsets :lol:

How long would that take, and how much would it cost? And by the time you did make a new chipset to rival even a mid range modern graphics/sound/io chipset, how far would they have moved on?

Furthermore, why would anybody do that when you can let them install the 'custom chips' of their choice? Why do you think PC hardware has become so advanced anyway? One word. Competition.

You need to realise that sound cards, graphics cards etc. *are* the custom chips of our age. The original amiga custom chips were fantastic in their day and even now are in many respects more flexible than their descendants. However, now in 2005, they are simply quaint. If you can't or won't accept this, then be prepared to be left further and further behind.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2005, 04:27:47 PM »
Quote

leirbag28 wrote:
@Karlos

No not an integrated PC (they suck too)

An I DO NOT agree with SOFTWARE based ROM updates.I prefer HArdware Kickstart!



So, do you use an MMU to remap the Kickstart into RAM, or do you, preferring your hardware Kickstart allow the CPU to sit around twiddling it's thumbs when it needs to call a ROM based routine?

If you do use a remapper then you are a fraud - there is no difference at all between a RAM based rom code loaded from a chip or from disk :-P

Quote
For instance in Next Gen Amiga...they can put a simple small trapdoor to change the ROM


Bad move. My early Apollo1240 card has a 'replacable' ROM. And what a total nightmare it is. I have never had such a problematic expansion in my entire life.

Quote
....This actually proves part of my Point.........I have had more trouble with this OS3.5/3.9 ROM update than any other Amiga ROM


3.5 works an absolute charm on my 1200T, as does 3.9 and 4.0. So ya boo sucks to you :lol:
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2005, 04:53:50 PM »
Quote

leirbag28 wrote:
@Karlos

How long would that take, and how much would it cost?
-------------------------------------------------------

it take alot less time than it took for this A1 to be released
and the mysterious OS4......thats for Sure!


:lol: Whatever you say :-)

Quote
It would survive alot longer than an A1 G3.......look at the PS2 and Xbox.....how long has PS2 been out and still kicking? hahahaha th New iMac that was just released will kill any AmigaONE anyway.


Consoles are targeted at a single purpose, their hardware and firmware reflect this. Real computers have different requrirements.

If you want a fair comparison. run linux on your PS2 for a while and then try it on a modern PC to see the difference.

You also should use a Mac for a while to see what is wrong with your above statement :-) Trust me, I work with them all day long and I want to vomit by the end of it.

Quote
"Furthermore, why would anybody do that when you can let them install the 'custom chips' of their choice?"
--------------------------------------------------------

then get a PC for that..thats what those trashy machines are for. and thats why they are trash..............cant even run anything correctly....always always always freezing and causing headaches.


One could say the same with your console fixation. If you want a non-crashing computer that needs no drivers etc etc, buy a playstation.

Quote

"One word. Competition."
------------------------------------

Amiga will never have Competition with a PC.especially now


I was talking about the competition between rival chipset manufacturers. Without it, you'd not have your GeForceFX, nForce chipset, Radeon etc. And nothing a company with revenue to spare like Amiga could hope to produce a chipset that would even be seen in the dust trail from these ones.

Quote
Whos talking about OLD custom chips? I certainly aint....im speaking of an entirely New Genration custom chipset as standard....................socketed so that they can be upgraded by the parent comapny Amiga Inc................just like the Enhanced Chipset and AGA................except they would be much more advanced................and you saving tons of cash cuz your just changing the chips......you can channel that extra cash in your pocket for the Chips................and Amiga Inc pumping more money into the 2nd set of More SUPER powered Custom Chips would justify it...............cuz every Amigan has the same machine!!!!


You clearly havent read or understood a single word I have said about this issue. If you stick to a single chipset provider you are not going to get the benefit of the advancements that competition drives other manufacturers to produce. Hence it will always end up underpowered compared to rival platforms where this competition exists, so you're stuffed. It will cost more, since there are no rivals providing alternatives, so you're stuffed again. Then your hardware manufacturer goes bust and you get no more chipset upgrades period. So you're stuffed yet again.

Sound familiar? It should as it already happened.

Also, apart from swapping denise and stuff, how many 'AGA' drop ins for OCS/ECS systems have you ever seen? AGA required a completely different system layout. If the magical AGA II Pro Turbo chipset appeared needing a 64-bit bus, DDR support etc. etc., you'd need a replacement motherboard again, just like OCS/ECS systems were not able to be retrofitted with AGA.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2005, 05:12:30 PM »
@leirbag

Beat them how? Hardware peformance wise, no, likely not. But still, we haven't done that for over a decade. Still, moving from 50MHz 060 to 800MHz G4 is a considerable step in the right direction.

As for status, that depends on what your regard as being amiga-like. My first machine was an A600, soon replaced with an A1200. Then CPU cards etc and finally a gfx card.

Having used my A1200T/PPC/BVision combo since 2000 or so, I'm completely used to RTG, AGA is simple 'retrogaming/demo fodder'...

I also had the loan of an A1XE (G4, 800MHz) for a while. It feels totally amiga like to me - far more so than UAE does, for instance, which I know is a subjective thing. Like UAE, it runs all the 680x0-RTG stuff, but naturally doesn't do AGA.

The biggest feeling of 'connection' is that the same OS4 runs on my A1200, and in the process does support AGA etc. This made the A1 simply seem like a beefier model than the classic, just as an A4K feels like a beefier A1200.

I imagine other A1200/A4000 PPC users that have moved to A1 or Pegasos, or those that have gone to AROS feel the same degree of 'natural progression'.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2005, 05:14:58 PM »
@Red

Athlon64 != x86, one of the main reasons I like it :-)

I'd quite like to see a version for that beast too :-D
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2005, 01:21:54 AM »
Quote

Hammer wrote:
AMD64 and 970FX are about the same in terms of general performance e.g Cinebench 2003.


All this willy waving is well and good, but is there an existing amiga application, or any in development that can even tax the existing G4 sytems?

Don't get me wrong, faster hardware is better, but it seems to me that our existing developer base has yet to catch up with what existing PPC amiga/amiga-like systems are theoretically capable of.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2005, 01:45:52 AM »
Quote

Hammer wrote:
Quote
All this willy waving is well and good, but is there an existing amiga application, or any in development that can even tax the existing G4 sytems?

Any 3D rendering applications would tax any MPUs e.g. AOS's Cinema 4D R4.2.


Raytracers are not typical applications. They are compute bound a lot of the time, most applications are not. But of course, this is why you chose it as an example. I'm thinking of the typical "Why doens't my new 16GHz AMD x128 run word any faster?" experience ;-)

For C4D, an altivec optimised version would be a better first step. I'm sure users used to using a 680x0 raytracer (those that still do, that is) would be more than happy with the increase :-)

But then again, I'm sure most Cinema4D users moved to PC ages ago ;-)

Quote
PS; I don’t if AOS4’s primary media player can play Microsoft’s WMV-HD 1080p formats.


I don't know if sources for the required codec are available to even test it.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2005, 12:51:35 PM »
Quote

mdwh2 wrote:

So what's a "typical" Windows application that taxes the latest CPUs? I guess there's games, but I can't really think of applications (at least, ones that couldn't be similarly discounted as "not typical").


Well, this is my point. This quest for faster and faster is driven mostly by a few types of application (eg games, or to be fair, raytracers etc) whilst the vast majority of software barely makes use of a fraction of the available power.

Which is why I find it amusing that people are complaining about amiga systems running on PPC's that are literally hundreds of times faster than their 680x0 predecessors and are still complaining that they aren't as fast as the latest x86 / x64.

When we have software capable of making full use of the existing systems, with any luck faster (G5, AMD64 whatever) amiga clones will be available for those with manhood insecurities :-)
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2005, 02:47:42 AM »
@leirbag

I'd like to wish you the best of luck with that buisness plan.


However, as a responsible adult, I feel I should instead warn you (as I believe Bloodline already has), to keep a safe distance from the microwave whilst it is operational.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2005, 04:02:18 AM »
:lol:

I never tried their "Cream of Magic Mushroom" variety before. What's it like?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #11 on: January 26, 2005, 10:59:19 PM »
What are people's reasons for buying / using Amiga anyway?

I mean, until you can define that, what the computer's niche or attaction is, how can you begin to define what is best hardware wise?

For me personally I use the amiga simply because I enjoy it. I get far more fun out of it than windows, linux and macos put together. They have their unique strengths, but to me, the rest are monolithic, dull, souless and uninteresting. OK, linux is probably the best of a bad bunch there.

I have to work with these systems. When I come home, if I want to have some fun with a computer, I will fire up my amiga. It is that simple. I guess that makes it an enthusiast machine in my case. If it has gone PPC, so be it. I'm not complaining - I get a fat kick out of it already and  have already paid a lot for the pleasure over the years. This is true of any "vice" if you think about it. If I need to upgrade to a PPC machine to continue my indulgence and that costs me more, then for the sake of my personal enjoyment I will do so. If it had gone x86, then great, I would have saved money too. Still, who can put a price on enjoyment?

If I want cheap and fast for work, I'll buy the bits and make a PC.

I appreciate that this is not a sentiment shared by everybody, so what about you lot?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2005, 02:30:44 AM »
Quote

Hammer wrote:
Quote
Wow. Any idea what those compatibility issues are?

Recall in AW.net threads about 750FX Vs 750GX and AOS4-Pre issues. There are *minor* different between the two PPC32, but sufficiently enough to cause some issues to AOS4-pre.

“POWER everywhere” is nice IF they freeze ISA standard i.e. none of this 68K style ISA cut&paste. The *minor* incompatibility between PowerPC chips simply sucks from mainstream programmer’s view point.



I'm not disagreeing (somehow disagreeing with Hammer about anything CPU related seems about as sensible as jamming one's tongue in a breville), but what level of incompatibility are we talking about here? I mean almost every member of the 680x0 series had minor differences with those before it - quite majorly so in the 68040 / 68060, but  I don't recall it ever being a major problem.

Is it the fact that existing instructions with the same opcode values have changed implementation or what, exactly?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2005, 12:01:59 PM »
Quote

dammy wrote:
by Karlos on 2005/1/26 17:59:19


Quote
f it had gone x86, then great, I would have saved money too.


Then what do you call AROS, chop liver?

Dammy
TeamAROS


I have downloaded AROS periodically and taken it for a spin on the old PC. And I have to confess, it's about as much fun as one can have with x86 :-)

However, and don't take it personally but for me, AROS is not AmigaOS. It is source compatible and I do intend to code on it at some point but I prefer to wait until it has matured further. Also, I want to see where the OS is going as opposed to just where it has been. In this regard, I feel AROS and AmigaOS will diverge considerably. So, which route to follow? For me, that depends on which of the two is presently the most compatible.

It's probably not a good quantifiable reason, but one of the reasons I feel more of a connection with OS4 is that it already runs on my classic PPC, which has several bootable versions of AmigaOS. It runs the old 3.x applications (well the 680x0 ones), even the hardware banging ones, without UAE , as well as the newer OS4 native ones. I appreciate that the A1 does not have this level of compatibility, but it will always be more compatible with existing software than AROS (that is, until, AROS develops some kind of internal 680x0 emulation).
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Why not AmigaOS4 for x86 Platforms?
« Reply #14 on: January 27, 2005, 07:53:06 PM »
@Bloodline

When that fateful day arrives, I will be forced to reconsider my options. However, it is quite likely that I will have already bought a more powerful PPC system by then, the migration from classic to A1 will be even less painful than it is now.

An interesting future project, in many ways a variation of one of my existing ones would be a Unified Amiga Layer, a nice standard library, classes etc that make the future diversification of the platforms easier to deal with from a developer perspective.
int p; // A