Lou: I think I will just ponder how much effort was wasted trolling instead of petitioning or coding.
Good idea. Go ahead and start, and show us the results. Proof of Concept is the only thing that will get your idea in motion, not complaining about how narrow-minded the rest of us are.
Lou: Here's the bottomline. You, Waccoon and adolescent all own GC's. Yet you are the biggest "critics" (being nice) here.
You're surprised? GameCube was purpose-built for a limited set of tasks. I have three games for my GameCube, not a delusion that it may one day run an OS.
I don't expect AOS on GC/Rev/360/PS3/XBOX/DC to ever replace my PC, but it sure would be cool and fun to try out. That alone could help the platform grow if done properly.
The only way to grow is to evolve. AmigaOne isn't going to cut it. Neither will GameCube.
Coldfish: I for one would be quite dissapointed if they presented us with boring, more-of-the-same-2D-windows-like interfaces.
What do you have in mind?
Lou: That's why it's going to be all about the Revolution controller. You'll be able to drag "icons" in 3d space...
How would you resolve the problems with representing 3D motion on a 2D surface (the screen)? The "dentist" promotional video released by Nintendo, in particular, leaves me shaking my head.
This is all sounds very cool, but serious interface designers shy away from 3D interfaces altogether unless true 3D feedback is possible. Zooming interfaces work much better. Note that pencil and paper is still the most frequently used medium in the world.
For games, Nintendo will make it work, even if their software may end up focused too strongly on the "experience" rather than the "game." As far as a serious GUI tool is concerned, the remote has some serious limitations, especially for people with disabilities.
I know it's been a while...I was comparing it to the A1 on a performance/price basis. It's everybody else that shot it down for not being as good as a Mac or whatever other more useful platform that isn't getting a port either.
There's also the economics of the port, how it would sell, how many people would buy stuff for a game machine they would have to hack, whether people would be comfortable buying used hardware, if a GameCube is really as good as a used Mac, if people would tolerate the lack of display options (sorry, but my GC looks like crap running off S-Video compared to my PS2. Nintendo seriously cheaped out, here).
Bottom line: you get what you pay for.
Given how many people will easily plop down $150+ for a cell phone, I don't think they're going to argue about $50+ here or there. It's been over a decade since Commodore went under. If Amiga had gone PC, we'd already have at least tens of thousands of desktop users (and developers) out there, and could
then port to game machines, cell phones, PPC-Anywhere, or whatever.
My idea came from every other Amiga user and their mother whining about not having an affordable PPC OS4 solution.
AmigaOne is not affordable because the establised business model doesn't allow it to be. The actual hardware has little to do with it. It's greed, plain and simple.
It was the strong emphasis on PPC technology that got us into the AmigaOne mess in the first place. So much for VP code.
My first question would be how much longer before their contract with Hyperion and Amiga, Inc. expires so they can rebrand the OS and dump the curse that is backward compatibility and actually get the OS in users' hands.
I think Hyperion is more interested in licensing parts of the OS to vendors than in selling the OS itself to end users. They did have to take breaks from working on OS4 to make some money.
Technologically, OS4 is still way behind the curve. If backwards compatibility isn't an issue, they should've just done what Apple did and make a new desktop on an existing, proven OS that works on multiple CPUs because, well, the OS would actually be designed properly.
I find it pretty stupid, really. Old Amiga apps are so old, even modest hardware will give a big boost in performance. Why they didn't just sandbox everything and make a fresh, modern system is beyond me. I'm sure that at this point, they really wish they had done that.
Bloodline: Ahhh yes the holy grail of PC design... lets build a better gui... so easy.
Well, it's the only thing the end-user really sees. Too bad a slick GUI doesn't show users how much stuff there is underneath and how much it costs to make it all work, and work well.
That's why I don't like all this embedded crap that's going on. It doesn't look like an Amiga because these kinds of devices basicly make the OS transparrent in the first place, and the GUI is effectively crippled by default. I don't want another seriously late Palm clone. I want a brand new desktop system that reminds me of an Amiga, and doesn't suck. I don't know why people keep making yet more Windows clones out of Linux/GNU systems. The only times we get something really different, it gets killed by poor hardware choices. Isn't there anyone in the software industry with marketting sense besides Microsoft? Didn't anyone learn anything from Be?
