Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?

[dmac721]

   Just thought I would ask "WHY" did they not just port Amiga OS to readily available architecture??? Wouldn't it have been much easier to sell software than thousand dollar hardware?

[KennyR]

They did, it's called AROS.

[Effy]

You mean to PC´s Like Linux tries to do

[Argo]

Which architecture? X86?

This has been gone over and over. Should be in the FAQ...
Well, from the base 68K Amigas we got faster 68K accelerators/CPU upgrades, then PPC accelerators. Then,well, PPC only software. To me, alot of the PPC accelerators being sold and in the works around 2000 seemed like almost complete motherboards in themselves. When you are seeing PPC accelerators that have their own memory slots and that can have a PCI board added. Put a video card and sound card in a setup like that and you've basically have two computers in one case. It seemed like a natural progression to just make a PPC board to replace that whole upgrade kludge mess. Not to mention on X86 you have to compete to some degree with Windows. I'm sure there are other issues.

[x56h34]

Well I guess because the whole Amiga concept wouldn't be "different" enough to to warrant any sales, if it were to use x86 hardware.

[dbalaski]

Kinda agree (to a point) --

It would be great to see another operating system on X86 based platforms --
I have no love of MS -- and am tired of seeing everything feel  that  there is a Binary Choice (MS vs Unix/Linux)

Q is, the 68xxx codebase would still need emulation to run the  other classic base of software and the development effort would still need to be there for applications.   Sigh-- in a perfect world ....


BTW:   Anyone else catch this --
Sun Microsystems is planning on Making Solaris 10  Open Source  --  wahoo  (can't wait to see if we can port a UAE to x86 running Solaris 10)


dB

[bloodline]

KennyR on 2004/11/19 18:42:08

They did, it's called AROS.

Hey! that's my line :-D


I would like to point out that regardless of what CPU you OS runs on, you are always competing with windows. But by choosing the x86, you reduce the burden of cost on  the user and allow them more options.

The choice of PPC was to lock the user into a specific and very expensive platform.

[Turambar]

Don't listen to what anyone else tries to tell you, the real reason they didnt port it is so we could have threads like this. It's a global conspiracy.

[blobrana]

Hum,
And here is the AROS Webpage

@bloodline
are you having problems with your server?

[x56h34]

On a positive note, OS4.0 will be available to Classic Amiga owners (A1200 and A3000/A4000) with Blizzard/Cyberstorm PPC cards. I wonder how well is this end going to be supported, as far as drivers for all available classic hardware go? E.g. Elbox products, Zorro cards, etc...

[bloodline]

Hum,
And here is the AROS Webpage

@bloodline
are you having problems with your server?

No, it seems to be fine for me... but I am actually sitting in Starbucks reading (and writing) this on my pda :crazy:

-Edit- I would note that by going PPC one, in theory at least, can support the PPC cards fron Phase5 for the classic amigas... but only Karlos gets to enjoy that ;-)

[KennyR]

bloodline wrote:
The choice of PPC was to lock the user into a specific and very expensive platform.

But also to avoid endian problems, the same problems that make it nigh impossible for AROS as it is to have integrated 68k emulation. Phase5's and so later Amiga's decision to use PPC wasn't just based on greed for a hardware market or anti-x86 religion.

[DonnyEMU]

That's just it, being a programmer I know that endian issues aren't really a justification. The next generation Amiga from Commodore was to be based on an a HP PA RISC chip. My biggest guess here is that it was done to keep us locked in to a motorola architecture and a lot of the hardware people involved were trying to stay competitive with Mac and following Apple's lead..

Anyone who believes the choice to stay away from intel was an endian issue obviously wasn't aware of the hardware politics at the time. The PC at the time wasn't advanced enough to give me Amiga competition, it's competition was the Mac.. This is not the case today..

The Amiga OS needs procesor independence to survive and thrive today.. Especially with 64 bit processors out their now (LOL okay the powerPC is 64 bit, but is the OS that supports it on the Amiga??)

KennyR wrote:

bloodline wrote:
The choice of PPC was to lock the user into a specific and very expensive platform.

But also to avoid endian problems, the same problems that make it nigh impossible for AROS as it is to have integrated 68k emulation. Phase5's and so later Amiga's decision to use PPC wasn't just based on greed for a hardware market or anti-x86 religion.

[KennyR]

DonnyEMU wrote:
That's just it, being a programmer I know that endian issues aren't really a justification.

They're not a problem until you try to integrate legacy support with your new OS, like loading 68k shared libraries and using them with x86 applications.

[BigBenAussie]

Didn't the AROS guys say they were going to integrate UAE for running classic software?

If they can get far enough, be somewhat compatable with OS4s new APIs, and add enough presentation polish, they could potentially give OS4 a run for its money. Without costing anything.

I want OS4 to succeed, but its a LOT of money. The fastest PC running AROS could kick an A1s ass at the moment, and you know it.

Ok. Scampering back to my happy place now.