Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?  (Read 8952 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Holley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 888
    • Show only replies by Holley
    • http://www.Front-Runners.net
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #44 from previous page: November 21, 2004, 03:57:46 AM »
Quote
the advantage of something like AROS became pretty apparent
ok, now imagine AROS running in 64 bit, at 4GHz ...
\\"Sex, drugs and rock n\\\' roll are very good for you\\" - Ian Dury
 

Offline dmac721Topic starter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2003
  • Posts: 38
    • Show only replies by dmac721
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #45 on: November 21, 2004, 04:49:32 AM »

   10,000? Somebody lied. If they HAD sold 10,000 there would still be 10,000 in circulation. What happened to them, did they all break down or did people just throw them away? Of course they didn't throw them away, not when they could have EASILY sold them to another amigan on ebay for a couple hundred dollars.
 

Offline Waccoon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 1057
    • Show only replies by Waccoon
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #46 on: November 21, 2004, 05:19:02 AM »
Quote
Argo:  not to mention on X86 you have to compete to some degree with Windows.

You're competing with Windows if you do Windows-like things.  The hardware is irrelevant.  Microsoft makes many standards used on x86 boards, but they certainly don't own the architecture.

I've said it a million times: there really is nothing to stop Amiga from choosing a single, good x86 board, like an Abit, and using that as the official platform.  Why people keep thinking you either have to make proprietary hardware for hundreds of dollars or sell software off-the-shelf is beyond me.  Both extremist plans are doomed.

My impression is that most of the x86 Amiga fans have just left after the PPC announcement.  Once you go PPC, you're stuck with it.

Quote
Bloodline:  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.

Yeah.  What ever happened to DE and Java?  It's the 21st century... haven't we gone beyond specific hardware platforms?  I wanted x86 for flexibility (for Amiga Inc., at least), and not for technical supiriority.

Remember why the sucky PC architecture became so popular in the first place.  Choice, features, and value are more important to end-users than raw performance and tech specs, especially in a market where performance changes so rapidly.

Quote
Terminator:  So the Amiga OS didn't suffer the same fate as the BeOS?

Be made lots of critical marketing errors, and were way too dependent on Apple clones.  After Apple squashed the clones,  Be really had no choice but to go x86 OEM.  Frankly, I'm surprised they lasted as long as they did.

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

Not for data, at least.  Many graphics and audio formats require a decoder to convert the endian order.  Older formats like TIFF require you to manually set the endian order when you save files (!), but most modern formats do it automatically.

Many embedded CPUs don't care about endian order, and can work in any mode.  x86 and PPC are still trying to fight it out for some stupid reason.

PS - Is it true that 64-bit float math is easier with little endian?

Quote
Mr Capehill:  Probably a lot worse piracy problem.

At least it would *have* software to be pirated.  How anyone expected a software industry, or even a close-knit community, to blossom from a few thousand hugely expensive boards is beyond me.

Quote
The Editor:   X86 codebase ...?

How would you like to be infected today?

It's sad how Intel and AMD are actually adding new instructions to their CPUs to overcome Microsoft's terrible programming practices -- and people like yourself blame Intel for security issues.

Quote
The Editor:  If they wanna infect me .. They'll have to burn the midnight oil and re code their anal crap.

Most infections/trojans happen because people are damned stupid and *LET* that crap on their machines.  There's really no difference between installing an XPI plugin on Mozilla and ActiveX on IE if people are too dumb to realize that a pop-up that says, "Your Internet connection is not optimal!" is a scam.

I've been using Windows for years and have never had a virus, and the only "spyware" I get on my machine are cookies, which plague all web browsers and must be regularly (and easily) cleared out.  How do people end up with five viruses and two dozen spamware programs on their computers?  Stupidity, and the inability to read before they click "Yes".

I should offer computer classes for paranoid home users.  I'd bet I'd get a hefty number of students with one newspaper ad.

Anyway, I just hope, if anything else, AmigaOS doesn't go out of its way to protect people from themselves.  It makes real administration very frustrating.  If Ben's "security through obscurity" policies are true, then I guess hardcore Amiga geeks shouldn't worry.  :-)

Quote
I remember that Garry Hare(CEO of KMOS)...

You mean the Invisible Man, running an IT company without a website?

Quote
BigBenAussie:  It probably couldn't be forseen that Apple's stake in the PPC meant they get all the newest chips first, and due to the chip shortage would means a PPC Amiga would always be a generation behind Apple, and thus a generation behind x86 too.

Right.  Low-end embedded PPC chips are a dime a dozen, but if we want high-end chips, we get Apple's leftovers.  Amigans should be more worried about competition from Apple than from Microsoft.  Microsoft didn't get rich playing the hardware market -- they specifically avoided it.

Frankly, of all computers, being a generation behind *Apple* is a real embarrassment.

Quote
Games sold the Amiga. Amigans wanted kick-ass hardware to run games and we simply haven't got it.

Well, at this point, kickass games are really not possible.  It costs millions to make top-tier 3D drivers, and consoles are always hard-coded so expandability is out of the question.  I still remember those days when I didn't want to buy a CPU upgrade because all my older software (including applicaions) wouldn't work anymore.  I don't want the Amiga to be another game machine, really.  There's nothing really wrong with the current fleet of consoles, and they have little to no use for Amiga with tools like XNA over the horizon.

Now, getting rid of the GUI cruft that clogs a typical Linux system... that's what Amiga should be doing!  I really wanted a QNX powered Amiga, especially since that company put a lot of effort and money into a new Amiga before Gateway screwed them over.

Oh well.  Someone will get it right, eventually.

Quote
But I believe the true essense of the Amiga was its advanced hardware, as it was designed as an advanced games console, that could be used as a computer.

Hopefully, Sony's new "Grid" processor will be a real wake-up call to the industry.  Game machines have always been far more advanced than PC hardware in all respects except I/O and CPUs -- and even that is quickly becoming debatable these days.

It's sad how a typical GPU has more transistors and performs more calculations than a P4 (by a longshot), and yet the P4 needs a cooler capable of handling 100+ watts of dissipation.  My dad and I just put together a 3.2Ghz P4 with that damned "LGA" socket and a monsterous, fully exposed 90mm fan, and it was a sheer nightmare.  A far cry from the Northwood P4s, which were truly amazing -- super silent and very easy to install.

Quote
BigBenAussie:  The problem with the current line, like the A1s is that it is much like a PC, even coming in mobo form, and underpowered at that.

Correct.  Take away the PPC, and you have a really expensive four-year-old vanilla PC.  It pains me to see Amigans bash PC hardware so violently, because all these motherboards really just use the same standards.  You can't shun the engineering genius and value in a typical Abit, Gigabyte, or MSI board with a staight face unless you're still living in the 80's.
 

Offline Holley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2004
  • Posts: 888
    • Show only replies by Holley
    • http://www.Front-Runners.net
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #47 on: November 21, 2004, 05:20:07 AM »
9,995 are sat in a box waiting to be 'officially' fixed ;-)
\\"Sex, drugs and rock n\\\' roll are very good for you\\" - Ian Dury
 

Offline dmac721Topic starter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2003
  • Posts: 38
    • Show only replies by dmac721
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #48 on: November 21, 2004, 05:24:17 AM »
   @Waccoon

    :lol: Heheh I'm glad somebody see's the world the way I do, what's wrong with people anyway?

    @holley

     rotflmao! That's what I said too  :-P
 

Offline AmiGR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 698
    • Show only replies by AmiGR
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #49 on: November 21, 2004, 05:33:13 AM »
Nobody lied. It is a very sensible number if you keep in mind that the first boards were made in 1997.
There *were* many Amigans back then. There are boards still in circulations, many dead boards (mostly
BlizzardPPC boards, due to the complexity of the board it's "easy" to kill it). Almost all the Greek Amiga users I
know still have PPC boards. Example is one who killed his board (a wierd story... He was fixing his tower and
accidently pulled a cap with it's trace.) and managed to find another board quite quickly. Also consider that both AmigaOS4 and MorphOS started their development cycle on these boards.
- AMiGR

Evil, biased mod from hell.
 

Offline AmiGR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 698
    • Show only replies by AmiGR
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #50 on: November 21, 2004, 05:44:37 AM »
@Wacoon

Nice comment, I agree with most of it but there is a little problem in part of it. The endian issues are not that simple. The PPC *can* work in both modes, the x86 can't. On a little endian machine, you wouldn't be able to integrate native and emulated libraries the way it is done in MOS and OS4 right now, ie. you can just drop a 68k lib and it works in both 68k and PPC apps, without using endianess switching everywhere. All legacy code is big endian while native x86 code is little endian.
To everyone else: Don't start lecturing people about x86 hardware, most of us *ARE* PC users apart from Amiga users. I might only have a Pegasos here (running Linux at the moment, for Uni stuff) but I've got 3 PCs back home, all of which built by myself.
- AMiGR

Evil, biased mod from hell.
 

Offline dmac721Topic starter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2003
  • Posts: 38
    • Show only replies by dmac721
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #51 on: November 21, 2004, 05:58:19 AM »


   It's not a matter of which hardware is better. I agree PPC beats x86 in most things hands down. It's not a matter of which is better, but a matter of target audience. A Corvette is better than a Geo. If I was trying to bring back Edsels, I couldn't charge corvette prices.

    It's just a matter of costs and if you make something cost less, more people are willing to buy. I'm sorry but you can buy a 1.6 ghz dvd-rw 512mb ram 80gb e machine for $399 at office depot right down the street. thats without a keyboard mouse and monitor, but how can you keep up with that? PPC is not THAT much better.
 

Offline itix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2002
  • Posts: 2380
    • Show only replies by itix
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #52 on: November 21, 2004, 12:03:38 PM »
Quote
10,000? Somebody lied. If they HAD sold 10,000 there would still be 10,000 in circulation.

You just don't see those p5 boards circulating anywhere because users are simply gone!

Remember boards were sold 6 years ago. Many many boards are collecting dust now or died due to old age. 10000 is quite reasonable (I recall it was much more than 10000) when comparing to OS3.5/3.9 sales (3.9 sold 15000 copies in 1999 still).
My Amigas: A500, Mac Mini and PowerBook
 

Offline Kronos

  • Resident blue troll
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 4017
    • Show only replies by Kronos
    • http://www.SteamDraw.de
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #53 on: November 21, 2004, 12:26:19 PM »
@itix
I'm quite sure I once saw the official figure to be about 11k, so certainly not "much more".

3.9 sold 15000 copies ??? Someone better tells H&P ....
Just as much out of line as the numbers you see for the Amigas sold by C= from time to time (I think 17 million was the "record").
1. Make an announcment.
2. Wait a while.
3. Check if it can actually be done.
4. Wait for someone else to do it.
5. Start working on it while giving out hillarious progress-reports.
6. Deny that you have ever announced it
7. Blame someone else
 

Offline PMC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 2616
    • Show only replies by PMC
    • http://www.b3ta.com
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #54 on: November 24, 2004, 04:22:54 PM »
Porting AmigaOS to x86 architecture is a waste of time, not only would it be competing with Windows, it will also compete with BeOS, Linux etc.  

I've said it before, but what Amiga needs is it's own brand identity to set it apart with a genuine reason to chose Amiga over Mac or x86.  Twenty years ago the A1000 had clear hardware superiority over the competition, hence the selling point.  Even this wasn't enough though, it required several killer applications before it would become a viable alternative.

As we've seen with Windows, aggressive marketing beats superior architecture every time, but Amiga is fighting for survival with comparatively poor hardware and a marketing budget that wouldn't pay for a round of drinks.  

Simply put, we need something unique that no other platform has got.  It might be some absolutely stunning game that wins rave reviews, it might be an add on / application that appeals to artists / musicians but just selling a box that runs legacy Amiga software at a premium price is suicide.  Likewise, recompling Amiga to run on an x86 box will offer no advantage either.

That isn't to say that Amiga shouldn't adopt Athlon or similar as it's core CPU, as development investment is clearly in excess of that set aside for PPC.  Programming issues aside, a top end Athlon based Amiga would be cheaper to build than it's PPC counterpart.  
Cecilia for President
 

Offline bloodline

  • Master Sock Abuser
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 12113
    • Show only replies by bloodline
    • http://www.troubled-mind.com
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #55 on: November 24, 2004, 04:32:18 PM »
Quote
Porting AmigaOS to x86 architecture is a waste of time, not only would it be competing with Windows, it will also compete with BeOS, Linux etc.


You are competing with Windows no matter what CPU you use. That is a fact.

Running AmigaOS on the x86 has the advantage of a higher spec and lower costs. The only real disadvantge of the x86 is legacy app integration.

You are right about the need for a killer app... but sadly now killer apps take millions to develop... I can download a freeware program for Windows, programmed by a CS student that will out-perform any program I can get for the Amiga platform for all the tasks I need, I cannot justify nearly £1000 for an A1 system... I could justify a cheap x86 board though to run AmigaOS... Infact I did just that when I bought a Mini-ITX for £70 to run AROS :-)

Offline SamuraiCrow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 2281
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
    • Show only replies by SamuraiCrow
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #56 on: November 24, 2004, 08:29:52 PM »
The idea behind AmigaDE is that some day the AmigaOS will run on PCs and handhelds and fruit computers.  But in the meantime we need a "meeting place" to regroup and readjust our strategy.  That "meeting place" just happened to contain a CHRP motherboard.  I think it mainly had to do with having access to PowerPC technology through their existing code base and not having any x86 software available for Amiga at that time.

The AMD k6-II was the recommended platform for development of AmigaDE when it first came out.  The x86 development platform got the shaft when the Amiga community rejected AmigaDE.

Hardware DOES have something to do with the selling of AmigaOS but until there is a common software base for AROS, AmigaOS, and MorphOS there is not going to be much left to pick up the pieces of the shattered Amiga community.  AmigaDE could have done it but the only chance I see of the Amiga community pulling out of this is if AInc. and Tao Group come out with an Amiga version of AmigaDE and it catches on.  Otherwise the best we can come up with for multiplatform compatability is SDL and the Amos Basic spinoffs that are going to use it.   :-(
 

Offline Erol

Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #57 on: November 24, 2004, 09:12:16 PM »
@ALL

http://amiga.emugaming.com/tripos.html

You may find this article interesting..  

 :-o
 

Offline Hammer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 1996
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by Hammer
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #58 on: November 24, 2004, 09:26:58 PM »
Quote

SamuraiCrow wrote:
(SNIP)
The AMD k6-II was the recommended platform for development of AmigaDE when it first came out.  The x86 development platform got the shaft when the Amiga community rejected AmigaDE.

Selecting AMD K6-II would be a bad choice i.e. Super Socket 7 hardware reference is in EoL at that time.  
Amiga 1200 PiStorm32-Emu68-RPI 4B 4GB.
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB, RTX 4080 16 GB PC.
 

Offline seer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 1453
    • Show only replies by seer
Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #59 on: November 24, 2004, 09:35:12 PM »
@Erol

I'm more interested in CAOS, AOS is powerfull, but CAOS sounds even better. Doubt there is anything left of it source wise..
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you.
~