Every opinion I've had, I've given my reasoning behind it. I've even referenced articles when possible.
You never did give the name of that single, inefficient bus in the Wintel PC. Can you provide a reference for that?
I've asked you this multiple times. If you say nothing else, please answer this.
If consoles are just as powerful as PCs, as you contantly uphold, then there should be no re-inventing of the wheel.
So Nintendo should be using an original NES to create Gamecube software then?
What?
You'll know more at E3.
Which is why you're going to keep wetting your pants and telling us all about these machines before E3.
Since Revolution will use the same API as the GC, any work that could have been done on the GC port of AOS4 could have simply carried-on and continued for Revolution with less of the complaints about hardware capabilities
I believe it's been established that OS architecture is more complex than that. But, you're not listening, anyway.
and you'd really have a system with modern hardware for way less than $1000.
Has it occured to you why AmigaOne is so expensive? It is more sophiticated than Gamecube, but mostly it's becuase the guys in charge want it to cost a lot of money. This has been established, too, but you're not listening.
The improvements would be ideal, but I'm not sure how far they can push it. Maybe faster CD access (like PS2) and some polygon smoothing (like PS2) or AA.
You can do a lot if your architecture is sound. It never ceases to amaze me how ePSXe absolutely blows away the compatibility mode supported by the PS2. You haven't seen real power until you've seen a Playstation game running in 1280x1024 in 32-bit color with full AA and modern texture filtering. All that, and it runs without a hickup, too.
Maybe they figured they shouldn't make old games run too much better on the new systems so people would buy new games (which is bologna. People buy new machines to play new games, not old ones).
It's also likely that Sony ignored the very thing that made PSX popular and made PS2 difficult to program on purpose. Maybe the fear of easy emulation was a factor, too. Who knows what goes on in the minds of their marketting department.
Well there aren't too many 'Nintendo-made' games that don't kick ass for the genre they are inteded for.
Not according to the demos I've played in the store. It's a matter of taste. Lots of people have also expressed their enormous disappointment with the new Starfox game on the fansites to which I'm subscribed. I don't own a Gamecube (yet) but I've certainly seen it in action.
I have a PS2, and I can assure you that there are plenty of titles directly published by Sony that kick ass. What does that have to do with Amiga?
Your stats are from the week before mine...
Wait... you follow things by the week?
Yeah then they continue to sell over 1.3 million total by Dec 31st in the US alone. Yeah, a real sales disappointment - NOT.
Didn't SEGA sell 5 million Saturns in Japan, and that was considered a miserable failure?
Kinda makes you feel better about a few thousand Amigas, doesn't it? Especially since Hyperion wanted it that way.
How anyone can hate a company is really beyond me.
Ditto.
Dare I ask what Lou thinks about XNA? (Before you answer, keep in mind E3 hasn't happened, yet) :-)
From the article about Microsoft vs nVidia: "Perhaps most telling of all is the story we've heard from many, many Xbox developers over the past few months - that low-level documentation for the NV2X chipset in the Xbox is not being made available to them, because NVIDIA refuses to release it to Microsoft developer support. The explanation for this offered by developers we spoke to is that NVIDIA is afraid that additional information handed to Microsoft now would be passed straight on to ATI, who would use it to emulate the NV2X in their Xbox 2 chipset."
This sounds pretty typical. When you run with the big dogs, you'll not likely find much kindness from any company.
It's a bit ironic that Amigans hate Microsoft so much, given all the bulls**t Commodore pulled. I don't like Microsoft, either, but you have to admit they are the easy whipping boy of the industry.
Consider how many system crashes are due to bad drivers and not Windows. I just updated my ATI drivers and on top of all the garbase like context menus I don't want, Java is now broken and many GUI components are showing up as blank. I'm really, really upset with ATI right now. Microsoft isn't alone when it comes to pulling lots of idiotic stunts that screw end-users.
I agree that the GC idea would be impractical/virtually impossibl but at least consider the idea rather than dismissing it out of hand.
The real problem is that it would require Nintendo's blessing, and might even require hardware modifications. Why Nintendo would be interested in AmigaOS when they can make a mod of Linux on the cheap is beyond me.
Hell, I was kind of hoping Amiga would do something like Apple and write a new Workbench to run on a modified BSD/Linux, with some new stuff thrown in. OS4 as a whole, on any hardware, is pretty much a lost cause, and suggesting a stripped, purpose-built console with no binary compatibility with "real" Amigas (and in some cases, PPC), could run OS4 without any form of emulation is downright silly. Ask anyone who works on OSes for a living.
#1 it would require the least amount of development time to do so and
#2 I don't want to throw money at MS to run on their hardware. MS hardware also breaks rule #1
#3 The A1 is under-powered and over-priced. A GC system can be had for peanuts and has comparable cpu power.
As for not Apple/Mac, they are a closed system.
As for not Sony PS2/3, it breaks my reason #1
#1 - Not using console hardware would take the least time and money, and have lots more posibilites. Even if Nintendo's APIs were to allow a multitasking memory protected OS, you'd be programming for Nintendo's tools and not the hardware, so portability is near impossible.
#2 - And you yell at other people as being Nintendo haters? Do you expect everyone to herald your anti-MS antics just because this is an Amiga forum?
#3 - Blame Hyperion for that, not the hardware itself. AmigaOne is a horrible mis-match on all levels, and Hyperion had a lot of time to make that decision. Even if Gamecube could run OS4, it's obvious the powers in charge don't want anything even close to that.
You don't like closed systems and want to use consoles? WTF? PCs are built on the most open hardware standards in the world -- and they are nowhere near as expensive as AmigaOne.
I can understand you don't like PS2 because it just sucks. Really. But, your verdict on PS3 is very pre-mature. I suppose you've actually used the hardware?
Also, I'm disappointed you're only looking at console hardware. Don't you think PC vendors would love to use cheap hardware, too? Why don't they? There's no law that a PC (open standards, not Wintel), must run Windows. Why is it so tough to make alternative systems? Do you think there might be, oh... technical reasons for it? Why are Linux PPC boards intended for servers built like PCs instead of game consoles if all they do is direct Internet traffic and run architecture independent scripting languages and databases?
Could it
possibly be that the robustness of the OS required might actually influence hardware design? Say t'ain't so!
I believe OS4 with some bundled software (some Hyperion games, a browser, email client and maybe a retro pak) could be an interesting piece of software on a console.
OS4 isn't modern enough to run a real browser, and Hyperion specializes in porting old games, not making new ones.
Imagine Amiga Anywhere games on Gamecube. That'd be good for a laugh. I wonder what Nintendo Power would say about that. :-)
Wasn't OS4 supposed to be ported to Cyberstorm'd Amigas? So obviously it was written with portability to other platforms in mind.
Lots of things are/were planned for OS4. What matters is what's released.
Wasn't Amiga supposed to make a new OS altogether that would work anywhere?
While we're at it, why not throw around more speculation about the Dragon board, too?
adonay: its quite silly not to think about all the modding with CF cards(not reliable) all hacks and writing drivers ..kernel bla bla bla for something that would be a so expensive uppgrade nobody would finance it ever
I don't think the Gamecube's hardware supports the low-level architecture for a decent OS, but even if it did, so many parts would have to be written from scratch that it would cost millions just to get it up and running.
Of course, we could always take a few years and depend on reverse-engineering and volunteers to get things done, like with gc-Linux, which can't do anything useful. :-)
