Dave Haynie (lead engineer of C= Amiga) opinion on Amiga Successors

[Dr_Righteous]

...and in 10 years Linux is still unusable by anyone but patient geeks and network admins.

Kernels alone don't make an operating system. BIOS and GUI/CLI are just as vital. AROS is concentrating on the interface first... Top-down design at its finest.

x86 has been obsolete for a long long time... It's been emulated by RISC processors since the late 90's. Even that hasn't managed to kill the instruction set... Expanding it to 64 bits won't kill it either. I suppose I should have said RISC86 instead.

If that's not what you meant, I'd like to know what you think will replace RISC86/x86.

"Support AROS will never have?" We'll see... I meerly suggest it is possible.

[Sparky]

Hey leirbag28!

I completely support you in your Amiga promoting and it's good the platform has some people who feel so strongly for it, however ...

I will swim up to the US and forcibly remove your fingers if you don't stop abusing the poor "." key!  My brain pauses for long intervals when I read your posts!

 :-D

[countzero]

Dr_Righteous wrote:

If that's not what you meant, I'd like to know what you think will replace RISC86/x86.

I mean 64 bit x86 architecture and cell/new generation PPC architectures (xenon in xbox360, etc).

"Support AROS will never have?" We'll see... I meerly suggest it is possible.

nothing is impossible, I just wanted to say you underestimate linux and how much work put into it and overlook the fact that it's the kernel which is the most time consuming to code and critically important for OS' robustness and usability.

[Dingo_aus]

Maybe AmigaOS should focus on the ARM cored platform. Intel will be dominated by Windows, with Linux making strides every day.

Something like AmigaOS with a really flexible GUI that can cope with really small / unusual screens and other output devices. Something along the lines of Contiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contiki )

That would avoid the need for solving the memory management code and would capitalise on the strength of Amiga, keeping it simple.

[bloodline]

leirbag28 wrote:
@cv643D

 (ie a 486 is about the same speed as a 040).

-------------------------------------------------------

I know what you are trying to say.....but just a sidenote.

a 486 is NOT the same speed as an 040...........though they were in competition with each other at the time and existed around the same time............an 040 will destroy a 486...........an 040 plugged into an Amiga is more like a Pentium II in my experience.

Mathematically calculating...........Yes a 486 will render about the same or faster.  But in actual use..a 486 is super unusable...........heck........my CD32/SX32 pro is 030 50 Mhz and its faster and smoother than any Pentium II.

Just amore satisfying experience is what I really mean.

an 030 cant play Quicktme or edit Video like a Pentium II, but when it comes to responsiveness..........Ah man! Amiga kills in this area.

I cant use a Pentium II today....too slow!.......  but my CD32  however, is my main machine and even use it over my Pentium 4!

Actually, when I used to run AROS on an old 25Mhz 486 it ran exactly as my 040 Amiga does... similar response times etc.

[bloodline]

countzero wrote:

@ Dr_Righteous wrote:
Ahem what? Linux is being used to aid in development. So what? I still say done right, and with enough community support, AROS has a chance to unseat Linux as the number 2 x86 OS.

AROS cannot qualify as an operating system until they have their own kernel. I would like to remind you that it has taken nearly 10 years for linux to become what it is today (with a support AROS will never have). Also being the number 2 x86 OS does not mean anything anymore because x86 will be obsolete in a few years time. Right now it's too late to design an OS for this architecture.

Oops, perhaps we should get rid of those old documents :-(

AROS has be a stand-alone operating system for over 6 years... It does have the ability to run on top of Linux (or FreeBSD) to allow easy development (though some developers use VMware to get similar functionality without the need for Linux). Aros can and does run without any other OS required.

If you want to see AROS running all by itself, just try out the AROS-MAX distribution.

[CHR_ZD]

am not triggering anyone. What is it? You can't post arguments?

You posted a article that does not put the Amiga in a positive light. If it is not pro Amiga, you will be shot down in flames (see how f/cked up this thread has turned  on aw.net, all thanks to a moderator)

Coincidence that thread has vanished, supposedly due to a forum reshuffle.[/quote]

That's the problem. If Amiga supporter can't see how the world around is changing to learn from it and instead stick to the past Amiga is dead already. Yesterday Mcintosh launched Intel based machines and they also have their OS running on it. This was done in 1 year. Amiga development is running at less than 7Mhz!

[Cymric]

leirbag28 wrote:
Amiga wins in Responsiveness and better overall system.

Absolutely not. Any system where one app behaving badly through unintentional error causes the entire machine to freeze is BAD. Any system which doesn't offer built-in security to prevent unauthorised access to crucial system components is BAD.

I also saw something about sticking a VLAB and a Picasso IV in an Amiga and then compare it to a Pentium II. My dear Leirbag, let's be fair, then, and stick a GeForce2 MX (better yet, a Riva TNT) in the Pentium. The Amiga will be gently blown away, like a feather in a light breeze. And please note that Pentium II's are museum pieces, although the P2 @ 366 MHz in my Thinkpad laptop performed to full satisfaction until the screen gave out. I compiled, I drew, I wrote Java, I played Diablo II and Civilization III, I listened to MP3s---it was a wonderful machine. (And that was with a crippled video card.)

I can sum up a great deal of numbers, all of which point to the same thing: the P2 has more bandwidth, performs computations much faster, and is therefore, given the same algorithms embedded in software, the better machine. Period.

The truth is hard and painful sometimes.

[lempkee]

chd: no arguments? , i posted a long post just with arguments and you just ignored it like usual.

[CHR_ZD]

I probably didn't find that post any smart.

[_ThEcRoW]

@nitro
What? a 1ghz amd having problems playing divx?.Even my p2 266 plays divx at decent rate. Definitely you have wrong setuped codecs or a dying os. Try finding the problem out or if you can't, reinstall it. It's incredible how people blame hardware when the problem really is in the bad configured software.

[Tigger]

leirbag28 wrote:
I think most would choose an Amiga with 040 VLAB and picasso set up correctly over a Pentium II any day.

Heck.....I personally would choose an AGA 030 Amiga over the fastest Pentium III

First of all you are going to be hardpressed to find a P3 these days much less a P2.  My pentium 4 plays back 4 simultaneous uncompressed streams of D1 video while mixing them, thats something you cant do with your 040 VLAB system or even a much better Toaster/Flyer.    (though it will do 2 streams of D2 at a time).   The Laptop that Apple released yesterday edits uncompressed HD video, it costs $2K and it comes with software to edit HD, for $500 more you can upgrade to one of the best HD editors on the planet and edit in your hammock in the backyard and then stream it wireless to your customer for approval.  This is what we need to overcome if we are going to become a "graphics" computer again.   And I just don't see Hyperion/Eyetech getting us there.
     -Tig  

[Nitro]

@ThEcRow
Yes well it is one of my old machines.  I started making DivX movies in 2000, with Vidomi.  They are very compressed.  The machine I`m setting on right now is An Athlon XP2600+, 512MB Ram, Radeon 9200, doesn`t have these problems.  Please guys start ragging my hardware I`m just a poor Department of Defence employee-Disabled Vet.  It`s not like I`m rich or something.  Besides that BSplayer works better for DivX.  I haven`t messed with DivX in about 4 years since I got a DVD burner.  Anyway the point I was trying to get across is Windows waste alot of resorces.  If AmigaOS was port to x86, sure it will be faster, but nothing you have amiga will run on it.  Everything would have to be rewritten.  Like Dave said "make the best of it" is true.  But we users are too busy fighting over Red team, Blue team, to unite under a common goal.  Apple can afford to take the chance to change.  You can nail apples to a telephone pole, but that don`t make it an apple tree.  True the A1 and Pegasos are not true custom hardware Amigas.  Dave would know that`s for sure, but at least the programs still run on PPC.  x86 there`s Aros.

[dammy]

AROS cannot qualify as an operating system until they have their own kernel.

Then AROS has been a Operating System for five plus years.  Your not under the misunderstanding that it's all hosted, are you?

BTW, AROS should be AMD64 native in the coming months. See this bounty.

Dammy

[jkirk]

Yesterday Mcintosh launched Intel based machines and they also have their OS running on it. This was done in 1 year. Amiga development is running at less than 7Mhz!

what? i was under the impression that macintosh x86 was under development along side macintosh ppc development for many years. they have been planning this for more than just 1 year.

[koaftder]

jkirk wrote:

Yesterday Mcintosh launched Intel based machines and they also have their OS running on it. This was done in 1 year. Amiga development is running at less than 7Mhz!

what? i was under the impression that macintosh x86 was under development along side macintosh ppc development for many years. they have been planning this for more than just 1 year.

OSX ran on ia32 from day one.