MorphOS on Power Mac G5

[Karlos]

Granted, as Karlos likes to point out, most of those apps that we can run on MorphOS (AmigaOS4 is in the same boat) exist on other platforms that run orders of magnitude faster than any MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x machine at a fraction of the price, but I fail to see the logic of why any MorphOS or AmigaOS4 user would want to keep using underpowered hardware that limits the kinds of things we can do on the OS we prefer to use, not are forced to use because the software we want to run is only available on other OSes that we do not enjoy using as much as an Amiga-Like OS. Does Karlos use either MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x? I know he uses AmigaOS3.x as he uses his A1200 for music

Actually, a MorphOS 2 machine is the only "amigoid" system missing from my collection. They're not all listed in my signature, you know

Regarding the application situation, I can only reiterate what I said in #153:

As to your other question about what do we need the G5 power for, and there are no Amiga apps that need that kind of power, you are obviously right for 99% of the apps, but with the old 68k apps needing to be run through a JIT engine and not natively, any demanding Classic Amiga app, such as 3D rendering, will benefit from the extra power. But more important in my minds eye is that the extra computing power will open a few programming opportunities that everyone thought could not be accomplished on any Amiga computer in the past. With G5, or PA6T power and if/when better graphics cards are supported, it will be possible to create better Amiga applications in the future than might be possible with only the current power of a 1.5GHz G4 MacMini, or in AmigaOS4.x's case, a 1GHz G4 Pegasos2, or AmigaOne.

I have to admit, I'd love to see that, for to me that would be a sign of genuine progress. I honestly think that OS4 and MOS are operating systems without software more than they are operating systems without hardware. Sure they run a large slice of legacy applications, but tiny minority of those actually benefit from the step up in performance, which has been my point of contention throughout.

Aside from apps and codecs ported from other systems where the required performance to run is considered minimal at best, neither OS4 or MOS presently seem to have applications that would appear to have been made possible solely by the improved performance they have over classic machines. And in my book, that's a real pity.

[Karlos]

IOf course AROS would be the bigger threat as it is closer to appearance, and function and it is free.  Have you ever considered that fact might be a big contributing factor for why MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x have resisted moving to x86 so far?  Why would they want to compete with not just one free OS, but probably dozens, when both teams of developers are just tiny groups of programmers that could never compete with other OS choices that might have ten to a hundred times the man-power to work on an x86 alternate OS?

It has occurred to me many times and I'm sure I've said as much in the past. However, the key functionality required of any MOS x86 / OS4 x86 implementation would be PPC emulation, something which I doubt AROS developers are really interested in. You have to admit, the prospect of moving to x86 and sacrificing all compatibility with your existing software base is not an appealing one.

I hate to say this but if OS4 and MOS plan to stay tied to PPC forever, then enjoy it now, since with the G5 mac, you have reached the pinnacle of what the architecture had to offer for desktop systems. It's been 4 years since the line was discontinued. I admit, we're still using m68k amigas 25 years later, but do you expect to be using a PPC machine for as long?

[Karlos]

Hardly, the Apple G5s were not really up for discussion at the time when X1000 was announced. Do you suggest that takemetograndma never put down the X1000?.

Actually, I'm rather hoping TMHG has learned a valuable lesson in this thread.

He's popped up in several OS4 related threads to shoot down OS4 and promote MOS. That, in itself wouldn't have really registered on my radar but there was one thread in particular that stands out. It was created by a poster that was asking specifically what the deal with OS4 was, what was fun and what was cool. He'd already created one for MOS asking the same.

Regardless of this, TMHG jumped into the thread in full fanboy mode to try and persuade the OP what he really wanted to talk about in that thread was MOS. The OP didn't and went as far asking that he desist. And, after some complaints, so did I.

Unfortunately, being in full fanboy mode, it seems he just was incapable of stopping and the thread got derailed further and further.

In the end, the OP was thoroughly put off both options.

Now, in the course of that thread, TMHG was pretty scathing towards the OS4 option.

Which is why, in this thread, after I tried to get him to explain why MOS on a G5 would be a better choice than say linux on an x86 for any compute intensive task, the following response made me laugh out loud:

I think it's funny that an Amiga enthusiast has to defend his preferred choice of OS and HW for his Amiga hobby here on Amiga.org. This is something I would expect over at slashdot, i.e. "Linux on x86 is cheaper, faster and better". Well it might be, but it won't be MorphOS.

Well, perhaps next time he'll remember that before he trashes some other amiga user's preferred choice of OS/HW.

[Karlos]

At least propylene glycol is fairly non-conductive. As is pure deionised water, come to think of it. However, the former is far less likely to dissolve things that will increase it's conductivity once it has seeped out...

[Karlos]

BTW - Karlos, thanks for the 64bit flash package!

No problem, but just remember it's unfinished software. That said, it has been far more stable for me than the the 32-bit version in npviewer...

[Karlos]

@takemehomegrandma

And please provide a link to the thread(s) where you think I have been out of line, so I can have a chance of publicly defending myself after this post of yours!

Knock yourself out:


Here is the user's "How is MOS?" thread: http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=50993

Three pages of perfectly matter-of-fact information about MOS, without any red trolls diving in and making a mess,

Here is the same user's "How is OS4?" thread: http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=53268

Notice the difference? 16 pages, most of which are off topic arguments about the superiority of MOS, contributed heartily to by your good self. I concede, however, you weren't alone in doing so.

As for bashing, this not ring a bell?

OS4 is merely a sub-standard substitute for MorphOS (that was here long before OS4 development was even started), with quite poor Amiga compatibility in comparison, so it always puzzles me how anyone *really interested in Amiga* would even consider OS4. The only reason I can think of is some strange brand following (which is the only thing you are interested in as shown by your posts here), which is kind of sad, especially considering it was kind of "robbed" from the IP-owner under miserable circumstances.

There is a word that springs to mind after your epic butthurt and complaining about the meany mod making you "defend your platform of choice" after the above thread.

[Karlos]

So much butthurt. Where to begin?

Your quantity of posts in the thread is not the point; it isn't about quantity, it's about quality.

How about *actually reading* them this time? And I mean, reading them all, not just mine! Especially read the posts and the discussion threads to which I'm responding to! Watch how the thread evolves. Look how people contributes. What they are saying. It takes many people to move a discussion forward, not just one, not just "TMHG" (with his massive 18 posts).

I have done, very carefully. Anybody that has been on this forum any length of time knows it's very rare for me to single people out, the fact that you are an exception to this should actually make you stop for a moment and wonder why. Of course you can't, because you're too busy feeling exasperated at it to realise.

You can't even take responsibility for your "contribution" without pointing out how many other people were doing it. And yet, you overlook one blindingly obvious point.

Anyone not completely blind will see that *my* contribution to those threads were *very minor* in comparison to other people's posts. Yet I'm getting 100% of the blame, for some problem that *I'm not even sure exists* outside a few peoples brains?

It is true that in that thread, other people got stuck in just as excitedly, but the point is that the thread was fine until you started going on about why the OP should use MorphOS instead, totally ignoring the polite request by the original poster not to. Which, ultimately, invited all the other trolls to come out of the woodwork and start a fight. You can't even claim you weren't aware of his older MOS thread as you posted in that one too, before posting in his OS4 thread.

Cause and consequence. I think you'll find most people understand the concept.

And as for your 18 posts, well, anybody reading that thread can judge for themselves, and if they are bored enough, perhaps they will. Except for the first few, they don't make pleasent reading. For all your protestation about red trolls, the huge irony here that in this thread you've basically behaved in exactly the same fashion you accuse said red trolls of. Complaining about having to defend your choice of OS from the nasty linux trolls that you expect to find only on slashdot having done exactly the same thing to fellow amiga enthusiasts right here on this very forum for simply preferring an alternative OS. And a final irony, here you are complaining at the unfair singling out, and what do you do in your defence? Single out someone else.

And what's even more disturbing, is the fact that you obviously has *spent time* and *quite a few posts* here in this very thread, with the only purpose of "retaliating", "teaching a lesson" etc. Are you trying to "get even"? On *ME*? A vindictive behavior I would have expected from some of the users on AW.net or amigans.net, not from an official moderator of Amiga.org. Why? Disturbed indeed

I didn't spend any time, I just remembered that particular thread from before. Again, an irony being that I might not have, had you not have started the e-pine rubbing over G5 in this one

Did someone tell you to do this? Who?

Paranoid, much? No. What, I can't have my own opinions?

I happen to think you behaved hypocritcally, having bashed OS4 and it's users in a thread opened regarding OS4, to the point of goading "cry foul! moderators! make the arguments go away!" (or some such nonsense) and then cry like a toddler in a tantrum when it is pointed out to you that MOS on G5 offers nothing that it doesn't offer on G4 and that the few things that will run better on G5 will run far better on an x86 with linux, since invariably, that's where the software was ported from anyway. Boo hoo, somebody presented an argument that wouldn't go away. For shame.

Had you not have played the "I can't believe an amiga enthusiast has to defent his choice of OS here on amiga.org" card, this exchange probably would not have happened.

So, really, nobody to blame but yourself.

I can't say I had expected an apology. But that comment, rubbing salt in the wounds, made my regards for you vanish completely!

Gone!

I'm sorry to say it, but frankly I don't much care. I'm not going to lose any sleep whatsoever over it, I suggest you shouldn't either.

The original poster in that thread got put off OS4 and MOS thanks to the debacle you helped to create. I can't say I blame him one bit, the whole red v blue thing almost put me off the entire Amiga scene for good too.

Luckily, having to read your posts hasn't put me off the MOS2 option yet. Carry on though, you never know your luck.

Now, I'd rather not continue this conversation since it's not really doing anything for the thread. In fact, I should probably split it out.

[Karlos]

@All

I'd just like to apologise for the off-topic argument yesterday. I still stand by my points completely but in retrospect the entire exchange itself was, well, pretty pointless.

[Karlos]

If you'd added the butthurt report form however it would have made it truly epic

I did See #150

[Karlos]

I hope I won't trigger an infinite loop by writing this.

But yes, there is current software that would greatly benefit from it (media players, encoders, web browsing / flash, emulators, ...). They are current, and often used, at least when you use MorphOS as your main system.

This doesn't mean the other points "against" Powermac G5 don't stand of course (consumption, noise, only a single core would be used on MorphOS and so on...).

I just strongly protest against this statement that no software would make use of it.

Well, all of those apps/codecs are generally ports from linux and the like, so you could just use a cheap x86 box... wait... damnit! :roflmao:

Seriously though, these are the only apps that would probably benefit in that they aren't necessarily "fast enough" on a lower CPU. Of course, if one were to leverage GPU acceleration (even if only basic block decoding), the G4 is easily fast enough.

That makes the eMac perfect for MorphOS. Why would you wait for G5 support? Karlos is right. There isn't any current software that would greatly benefit from the extra processing power.

I know I made that point, but it's still cool to have the fastest kit you can run your OS on, even if most apps (save the x264 codecs) don't really benefit.

[Karlos]

"web browsing / flash, emulators" could use GPU acceleration? How?

I was referring to media players / video codecs, not web browsing :confused:

Re: emulators, well, OpenGL is used to accelerate display emulation (even if only to resize the funny aspect ratio screens) in various UAE implementations, is it not? Never mind emulation of various 3D consoles of old.

[Karlos]

Right. Well your comment didn't indicate that clearly.

Fair do's. TBH, I pretty much saw the media player / codec part and hit reply

Overlay is fully supported already. GPU won't make it any faster.

Well, the overlay is provided by the graphics hardware, so by definition it already is. It's not acceleration in the most obvious sense but a hardware feature of the GPU is freeing the CPU from having to do any display format conversion/scaling, so it still counts in my book. FWIW, some GPUs (may not apply here) only provide overlay services through video texture operations too.

That could work in theory, but I'd think in many (most) cases the 3d acceleration in emulation cannot be offloaded to the real GPU.

I was under the impression that several emulators already did this? I'm pretty sure FPSE, for example uses, or is able to use it.

[Karlos]

Edit:  It is hard for me to believe that this argument about MorphOS on a G5 PowerMac being a waste of time because that much power is not needed for anything we do while running MorphOS.  I can't think of a single post in any forum thread anywhere that I have seen that talks about the X1000 being a waste of time because more power than a 1GHz G4 A1 is all that is needed to do anything on AmigaOS4.x.  Would we be having this discussion if it were AmigaOS4.x being ported to the G5 PowerMac instead of MorphOS2.x??

If you look back, you'll see that I also mention the PA6T in many of the posts that make this point.

[Karlos]

Ironically though, GPUs pretty much suck at video acceleration. That's why they have separate hardware blocks for it...

Well, certain aspects of video decoding do not lend themselves readily to massively parallel processing and overall you end up limited by the slowest step that operates serially. It's not a total loss though, the GPU comes in handy for post processing. In the CUDA SDK, there's a demo of real-time image de-noising that, if the static demo is anything to go by, looks like it might be nice for cleaning up compression artefacts.

[Karlos]

Usable open source flash doesn't. At least not yet.

Also, I am well aware what CUDA stuff can do. None of the MorphOS boxes is likely ever going to even support hardware which has programmable GPUs, nor would we ever be able to add software support for it.

So really, any acceleration there might be would be limited to 3D pretty much. And this limits the things you can do.

CUDA won't be a prospect for MOS or OS4, since it's utterly dependent on nVidia writing drivers for it.  AMD have been pretty open with the ATI documentation though. Not sure if they've been open enough to expose stream processing details but it may be that OpenCL can work on free ATI drivers - as long as the hardware supports it, of course. AFAIK, this is possible with R700 at least (could be limited programmability for older ones too).

[Karlos]

Yes, I should have qualified my comment as I was thinking outside of this thread, which for me anyway, is a thread only about MorphOS on the G5 PowerMac, so I have pretty much tried to forget any references about the X1000 and PA6T running AmigaOS4.1.2 (even though I did make a few comments where I stated that the X1000 and PA6T w/AmigaOS4.x, is in the same, or similar situation as MorphOS2.x on the G5 PowerMacs).  I was thinking that I had not seen a similar reaction toward the X1000 being announced.  Yes, many people, from both camps, have made comments that the X1000 may not be a good idea, but for the most part every one of those dissenters have used the price as the number one reason that they are not interested in the X1000, not the argument that the X1000 is not needed because there is no AmigaOS4.x software that needs the power that will come with the production of the X1000.  Maybe I have just missed such threads and there really several such threads and complaints out there, just like the complaints made in this thread.

Actually, most of the posts I made about the PA6T being underutilised by software were in this thread, side by side with the G5.

However, I must reiterate that I'm not actually against G5/PA6T, I actually think it's pretty cool that they are options. The whole issue came up as a consequence of earlier posts in the thread that were attempting to start another red v blue fight on the point of the G5 2GHz outperforming PA6T. As I said, so what? It isn't as if you can actually leverage the full potential of either with current amiga software.