Amiga OS 5 prediction

[downix]

Tron2k2 wrote:
Bill McEwen hated QNX, especially after Haage and Partner released their AmigaOS XL atop QNX-remember that?  It was their answer to Amithlon, so to speak.

Hey wait a second.  What if that is exactly what they're doing, taking OS 3.1 (or OS 4.0?) and AmigaOS XL'ing it on top of QNX?  Development time would be ludicrusly short for a new OS.  Performance would be solid enough to be competitive.  *and* it could migrate to other embeddable CPU's rapidly.  They would, actually, have Amiga "Anywhere".

[downix]

amigadave wrote:
Even though I dislike downix for his condescending remarks to me and others in the past, I totally agree with him on his statement above.  

I could try and argue with you about it, but you're right on the money here.  I'm smug, arrogant and full of myself.  I'll attack you one minute, and defend you the next.  But like me or not, I refuse to let us go quietly into the night.

If this is, infact, AInc's move, then perhaps there is a fighting chance.  Longshot, yes, but a chance.

[downix]

ne_one wrote:
@DonnyEMU

I see QNX as technically compelling but more of a long shot because it has traditionally been directed towards a specialized market. It also has limited mainstream application support.

Ironically that is something the AmigaOS riding on top of it would bring.  While not huge support, it does bring enough which, when combined with what QNX already has, does make a viable, even if limited, platform.

[downix]

amigadave wrote:
@downix,

Keep it up, this is the direction Amiga should be going, and now that QNX is open source, I don't see why the Amiga community couldn't push this idea forward, with, or without Amiga Inc.

There is no law that says the community can't create an Amiga compatible new OS based on the open source QNX kernel, is there?

Quite right, now we just need open source hardware to run it on....

[downix]

BooBoo1200 wrote:
Now that Amigas will not have any custom chip the Os is the only thing that remains Amiga and a Os based around the source code of Workbench - Os 4 -I would argue that is Amiga But an Os based around QNX,Linux or any other Os this is not Amiga
A simple Loop Hole to call a Linux Distro Amiga Because they own the Amiga name a real insult to the Amiga name.

We shall see what they do when the time comes.  

Curious, have you ever looked at Amithlon?

[downix]

jarroyo wrote:

Amiga was built at a time when custom chipsets where required to have the platform do what it became famous for. Those days are long gone and the economic landscape does not support this model any longer.

My 2 cents....

Actually, you'd be wrong here.  While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance.  Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs.  Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.  

And since then we've had the rise of FPGA's, CPLD's and rapid low-cost fabrication of silicon chips, making custom solutions more viable than at any point previous.

The Amiga was a system, not just an OS, and not just fun graphics.

[downix]

dammy wrote:

The Amiga was a system, not just an OS, and not just fun graphics.

That was 20+ years ago when hardware-OS had to be tight because of the lack of hardware resources for consumer priced devices.  Compare what we have now today to back then, it's a titalwave of devices and for the most part, at unbelievably cheap prices.  Cost what, $1K for A500 unexpanded plus a 1024s monitor?  In a few weeks, I can buy four ASUS mini laptops for $1K who's capabilities will just shame an A500.

I finally got my freedom from hardware, I'm not going back to that plantation ever again.  Hardware will always be a commodity from now on.  It's the OS that counts.

Dammy

To produce it today, that same A500 w/ monitor would run you, brand new around $100 (and that's with retail markup).  The market for integrated components is exploding, and growing, faster than the desktop PC market.  

And what freedom from hardware?  Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD?  You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.

[downix]

dammy wrote:

And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.

I tend to buy from NewEgg.com but I could buy elsewhere:

Genesi EFIKA(2) (Mot)
VIA line of mobo/cpus (VIA)
ARM based mobo        (ARM)
Do they still sell Sparcs? (Sun)  
Athlon64              (AMD)
Core 2 Duo             (Intel)

That's enough for my plate. YMMV

Dammy

ARM's are produced by a wide variety of vendors.  Infact, ARM itself produces no processors, it just sells the design to other vendors.  You want an ARM motherboard, you have a wide variety of options, including making your own.
SPARC's are produced by 9 vendors, but like ARM, SPARC Intetnational does not produce any CPU's itself, and only licenses the technology to other vendors, who produce their own CPU's.  While Sun is the most visible vendor, the largest producer of SPARCs is actually Fujitsu followed by the European Space Agency.  Unlike ARM, SPARC is available as an open-sourced design as well, with both Geisler and Sun releasing their CPU's under open-source licenses.

You confuse vendors with suppliers.  One chip available from multiple suppliers is still one chip.  I can't go out and get a Motorola Athlon, can I?  But I can take ARM or SPARC to Freescale and have them fabricate one to my specifications. (infact, Freescale produces a large variety of SPARC's and ARM's under contract)

Intel/AMD domination, no thank you.

[downix]

dammy wrote:

Downix, you just proved my entire point about alternative hardware OEMs.  Today, hardware is just a commodity, whatever suits your needs.  

Dammy

I see your point, but can you see mine, that we should keep our options open beyond just AMD/Intel?

[downix]

jarroyo wrote:
___________________________________________________________
downix wrote:

Actually, you'd be wrong here. While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance. Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs. Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.
__________________________________________________________

I guess from your perspective I was both wrong and right..:-)

While we agree on graphics, I think that the reason why there has not been much improvement in the audio area, and this is my opinion, is because audio has peaked / been commodotized as a technology. It is very good by default, and the majority of manipulation which audio requires for "effects" are easily executed in software with todays processors.

In PC category I call "The Balanced Platform," technology has been significantly stagnant; barring high end equipment. Interestingly enough, the PA Semi chip goes a long way into introducing a "Balanced Architeture" to the PC market. It takes into account many of the symbiotic elements of a PC, and tailors a solution based on lower latency than any other product in the consumer market.

This is largely the reason why I feel that the platform of choice for the future is somewhat "Amigest" in pedigree.

I am a little confused here.  The x86 PC architecture is one of the worst for latency out there.  Also, utilizing the CPU for sound and video decoding (which graphics chips do not offer mind you) can eat up a huge fraction of the available processor time.  There is an area where a customized solution can be viable and profitable on the desktop, and here it is I feel.

[downix]

jarroyo wrote:

I was speaking about the PA Semi architecture being a low latancy platform, much more efficient / balanced than the X86 architecture. This chip is acually being targetted for use in places like enteprise routers, a low latency high throughput application.

PA Semi is still PowerPC, correct?  While PPC is better than x86, it is still not even in the top 5 for latency

It is true what you say about CPU's being bogged down by effects processing in software, but consider these factors:
1. CPU's are standardizing on a dual core design. the power will be there to spare.
2. The 128 bit matrix math units built into the chips are made to handle these kinds of transformations.
3. Its cheaper to do it in software, and with the video, and soon to be physics off loaded from the CPU; your processor will be sitting idler than in times past; at least for games.

Just my thoughts......
3.

1) And vendors are eager to put more onto the CPU, offsetting the gains.
2) Again, vendors are eager to put more onto these units, resulting in a net loss.
3) In software, sure, but software != CPU-bound.  GPU's do their work in software, but off of the CPU, for example.  You can retain the softwatre flexibility without bogging down the CPU, especially now with the advent of the new Torrenza format for co-processing off of the main CPU bus, giving you the best of both worlds.

[downix]

Zac67 wrote:
PA-RISC != PowerPC

Who mentioned PA RISC?  PA Semi is a new fabless PowerPC vendor.