Dominant future AmigaOS? MOS vs OS4 vs AROS

[dammy]

by DaveP on 2003/6/1 7:22:36

Id also like to know if you have used OS4 and if so, which build?

MOS is inferior in its usability to AOS3.5/9 in at the least the Ambient stakes ( based on an over the shoulder waggle or twenty with the mouse ) and from my experience of OS4 *very* inferior to that.

But maybe you mean something else?

Then again, OS4 is inferior to AROS because OS4 is *vaporware*.    Until iOS4 released to the public, it's going to remain inferior to any OS, even Windows.

Dammy

[DaveP]

Warface wrote:
Sigh. It's getting tiring.

I don't see why. However if you don't think that being tired out by substantiating bland assertions is worth it in the end because of the common understanding it can achieve then perhaps you might avoid the bland assertions in the first place or just ignore those that ask questions about "why"? You could have said "Im not going to tell you" or "none of your business" or "its subjective" or "I have no idea why" or "I made it up" if you really can't be arsed. I don't know why this has to lead to you getting irritated. Certainly was *not* my intent.

Then MorphOS has high usability. What do you want to achieve with all this?

I want to know why, in *your* eyes why you think that MOS1.x is more usable than AOS4. I don't know how else to restate this to make you understand.

Are you missing OS3.5/3.9 features? That makes MOS inferior in your eyes?

From what I used it is missing AOS4 and AOS3.5 and AOS3.9 functionality that I find convenient. But we are talking about what YOU think because it is YOU that made the claim.

MOS offers you to resize/move windows by borders,

Which is neat. Haven't seen this on AOS3.5 and AOS3.9.

select screens/windows from lists, even with small pictures,

Really, so you have never used a taskbar, storm screen select or any other screen select utility?

use all existing icons and widely spread RGBA png icons in additions, stunning ways of navigation in window contents, either by holding down the middle button or pressing it twice, when a special navigational image appears, and a whole lot

Someone is going to have to show this off at a demo, it is nothing *I* saw with my mouse waggle test.

 - which OS3.5/3.9 does not have and cannot provide. Despite that I haven't said OS3.5/3.9 is inferior.

No, you said that AOS4 is inferior in terms of usability which is odd because it incorporates, fixes and extends AOS3.5 and AOS3.9 functionality ( which is according to you not inferior in terms of usability )....

The interface is NOT inferior/superior but DIFFERENT, and to say: pretty modern. And new features are added continuously.

Right, OK I can accept that maybe true for versions I haven't sampled yet ( although AmiGR seems to disagree with you ) but you were the one that claimed AOS4 had inferior usability which is contradictory with your statement about OS3.9/3.5. If OS4 is inferior in terms of usability ergo so is OS3.9/3.5.

Not to mention, we're discussing OS4, MOS and AROS - 3.5/3.9 is pretty off topic.

No it isn't off topic. AOS4 incorporates and extends OS3.5 and OS3.9 Workbench functionality, you brought up MOS0.4 which lead to me pointing out that MOS0.4 was evaluated on my machine with Workbench 3.9. MOS originally, if you recall, was to use Workbench and did not have ambient.

Now you have answered why you think that MOS is superior in usability to AOS3.9/3.5 ( although to do a proper analysis it would have to be UCD tested but thats out of the bounds of this discussion ) can you explain now why you think it is superior in usability to AOS4 ( your original claim )?

And then can you answer the second question I had.

[bloodline]

dammy wrote:
by DaveP on 2003/6/1 7:22:36

Id also like to know if you have used OS4 and if so, which build?

MOS is inferior in its usability to AOS3.5/9 in at the least the Ambient stakes ( based on an over the shoulder waggle or twenty with the mouse ) and from my experience of OS4 *very* inferior to that.

But maybe you mean something else?

Then again, OS4 is inferior to AROS because OS4 is *vaporware*.    Until iOS4 released to the public, it's going to remain inferior to any OS, even Windows.

Dammy

With all due respect to Hyperion, I must say it would be nice to see some real evidence of AOS4.
So far I've only seen some screen shots of something that looks like AmigaOS... but nothing that can't already be done with AmigaOS 3.1 (or AROS for that matter) or easily faked.

-Edit- What I'd like is a downloadable (time/feature/whatever) limited demo, that I can put on my A1200 (with it's Blizz PPC) and run and see for myself.

[Warface]

I don't see why

Because you render my OPINION into a pointless flamewar of yours. You asked when the 1.4 MOS will be presented so you can try it out - I ask the same from you then. When can I try out OS4, except that you state that it's superior? (which contradicts to what I hear from people involved in OS4 development)

[DaveP]

@Warface

What flameware? How do you classify me asking you questions and trying to understand your claims from a logical point of view a flamewar?

From what I can see the only person getting emotional in this is you.

I wanted to know what you base your OPINION on.

(which contradicts to what I hear from people involved in OS4 development)

Names please. So I can ask them independantly.

I claimed that OS3.5 and OS3.9 is superior to what I had tried in terms of "usability". I admitted that I haven't tried MOS1.4 and frankly Im not budging from that opinion until I have. AOS4 is suprior to OS3.9/OS3.5 ergo also in my view it is superior to what I had tried. And I even admitted that I only had a few moments on it ( mouse waggle test ).

You made the claim that MOS is superior in terms of usability as well as a few other claims you have yet failed to substantiate. Lets have some meat on the bone please.

This is not about flames, this is about trying to find out the reason for why *you* have come to the conclusion you have given you know MOS in much greater depth than I so not only can I understand it ( and even may be persauded that what you claim is so ) but so can everyone else who reads this thread.

You are not known for BS so there must be something in it. Hence I want to know what.

[DaveP]

I have to conceed that what Dammy sayes is right, until the "availability" of AOS4 for people to use/try out ( and maybe the roadshow will go some way to sorting this out ) then this will remain the case as harsh as the classification may be.

Once availability is sorted out, maybe then we can get onto an objective analysis of usability.

[ple3003]

 :griping:

[mahen]

DaveP:

I think we can't really say that OS4 is better in usability than OS3.9. It's too early to say:

because it'll depend on the stability of OS4 (many crucial new parts on new hardware); on the compatibility (emulation)...

This is really a very different product.

Right now MOS lacks a few details, but has new feature and is very compatible and stable.

But of course time will tell and we must all remain open and cheerful

[DaveP]

@mahen

This is indeed the truth. At the moment you only have my entirely subjective ( and plus Im used to it ) evaluation of a usability improvement.

But of course time will tell and we must all remain open and cheerful

Yep. Best not to draw any conclusions about usability of one over the other until we can do a head to head test.

[mahen]

DaveP: yep To answer the subject, I'm sure OS4 would be dominant if it was released now, even if it was less good than MOS. So as always, I'll say that if the MOS & AOS team had cooperated we would have something great right now and no wars

[melott]

I'd like to offer my 'UNINFORMED' opinion.
I belong to the largest group of Amiga users ..
The 'UNINFORMED' .  I know little about MOS or
Linex or A1 or OS4.  Actually it doesn't matter
since IMHO AROS is already the clear cut successor
to the 'Clasic Amiga' . No computer to buy.. No card
to buy .. just plug AROS into my PC and I have the
look and feel of my clasic Amiga.
AROS is going to grow all it needs is a good Basic
language for the masses.   I can even see many of
the X-Amigans coming back. It will be easy and
painless for them. I don't discont the merits of the
other systems, I'm sure they have their good points.
But an objective look at our options tells us that
AROS is the one.
And thats fine by me.

Mel Ott

[wonea]

Melott:  You hit the nail on the head!

I would love to buy a PPC motherboard (pegasos or A1), but frankly there aimed at the old propiertory die hards.  I hope Amiga Inc go bust,  I really do.  Then Hyperion can have a chance at reaching A market.  Then market the OS as it should be marketed for the complete PPC crowd.  Not at the moment in a niche inside a niche inside a niche.

Open source is the best option, because it means the community controls the OS.  No moaning,  because if you do it will be like your lazy, because you could make a difference.

As soon as AROS gets 68k emulation its gonna be like a steamroller!

[Dan]

Now:            MorphOS
In 2 years:   AmigaOS 4.0
In 19 years: AROS!!!!!

And the losers is Amiga DE Inc os 5.0, which will never ever exist!

[Hammer]

mahen wrote:

Right now MOS lacks a few details, but has new feature and is very compatible and stable.

Relative to what (e.g. AmigaOS 3.9 or AmigaOS 4.0)?
IF your reference is AmigaOS 4.0, how did you obtain a copy of this operating system?

"Very compatible and stable" doesn't quite jive with OSnew’s reviews regarding Pegasos and MorphOS (i.e. Eugenia Loli-Queru’s review(2003-05-19)?

PS; My point of reference in regards to AmigaOS usability and stability is a Birdie/VisualPref/AmiStart/StackAttack/Executive enhanced AmigaOS 3.9**.

**Running on WinUAE-JIT .8.22.R7, Athlon 1800+ (Tbread core) @1.9Ghz(o/c), ASUS nForce II 400 (with MCP-T Southbridge), 512Mb PC3200 DDR SDRAM, nVidia Geforce 4 TI VIVO.

[Madgun68]

"Very compatible and stable" doesn't quite jive with OSnew's reviews regarding Pegasos and MorphOS (i.e. Eugenia Loli-Queru's review(2003-05-19)?

Understandable. You can't go on a aminet downloading spree and expect to find everything compatible. People might even need to refine their definition of system friendly.

There's plenty of software out there that appears to be system friendly and some of it varies on just how system friendly it is. The CIA's aren't there and as such neither are the resources. There is no audio device redirector either. Anything that relies on either of those will most likely fail to operate or do so poorly. (This applies to MOS 1.3... Don't know what's been implemented in AOS4.)

A perfect example is one of my favorite  wb games on my Amiga machines.. Soliton. Technically, it works under MOS.. But it is unable to generate random numbers due to the method it uses. As such, the game is the same every time you start the program.

My uptime isn't terribly great right now.. I reset the machine a couple of days ago after I installed the poseidon update. Before that, I was at 5 days. YMMV.

PS; My point of reference in regards to AmigaOS usability and stability is a Birdie/VisualPref/AmiStart/StackAttack/Executive enhanced AmigaOS 3.9**.

MOS has something similar to Birdie/Visual Prefs. Last time I tried, AmiStart failed to work. StackAttack isn't needed.

Can't really think of anything I miss from 3.9.

[Hammer]

There's plenty of software out there that appears to be system friendly and some of it varies on just how system friendly it is.

Of course.

The CIA's aren't there and as such neither are the resources.

Can they create a virtual device emulator (e.g. nallepuh) ?

There is no audio device redirector either.

What about nallepuh?