only Amigaos

[BADHead]

allthough i have never tried morph os and never likely too (call me narrow minded) the Amiga brand name has more clout and its still beyond me why i have stuck with the Amiga as iam getting tired of
fighting lost causes iam really tempted by a nice
Apple Mac but my order is in for A1XE

[Hammer]

The closest comparisons would be to OS/2 or Mac OS X and how they handled legacy applications (Win16/DOS for OS/2 and MacOS for Mac OS X) but that's also not completely accurate due to the nature of the AmigaOS itself.

What about Java VM sandbox model?

Does Gensisi provide press diagrams of their architecture like Microsoft’s NT Executive lectures?  

(Sorry about the mentioning Windows NT since I'm only trained in Windows NT system programming.)

Ok, where do you get your information? MorphOS is not hosted on anything. The Quark microkernel is as essential to it's operation as ExecSG is to AOS4. You seem to be implying that the ABox is an OS on it's own.

I recall there was a “A-Box kernel 68k” and “PPC Quark micro kernel”.

[gary_c]

Does Gensisi provide press diagrams of their architecture like Microsoft?s NT Executive lectures?

This is probably the most complete description around: MorphOS in Detail.

-- gary_c

[Hooligan_DCS]

>There is really only one chance for the Amga to make a comback and that is re-unite.

Sad to inform but that will never happen. Amiga will not make it big, Pegasos will not make it big, AROS will not make it big.
People today are used to Windows. And people from Linux or whatever-platforms will not jump the wagon in masses, some may do, most do not.

If AROS rises some eyebrows, AmigaOne and Pegasos2 start making profit for their producing companies, THEN it's a small achievement. Even that is behind hard work and sadly takes time.

[MikeB]

@ Downix

A re-implemented Exec kernel is hosted on top of the Quark kernel. Currently if you remove the re-implemented Exec, everything including the GUI, DOS, driver system, etc will all fail and you would end up with a very bare Quark kernel based environment. (You might refer to this bare environment as "MorphOS", but when I speak of "MorphOS", I mean the complete current environement and so in combination with the ABOX).

This has been one of my greatest concerns in the past: What will MorphOS be like in combination with its QBOX environment (directly using Quark instead of indirectly through a secondary Exec-like kernel, a la ABOX). If it would be entirely different from the ABOX environment, then what would make MorphOS stand out in comparison to other microkernel based OSes including QNX? I have had quite a bit of discussions with certain Genesi employees with regard to this. Currently MorphOS' Amiga application compatibily is its main selling point.

Some of the userbase seem to think that the ABOX will continue to be transparently available within the QBOX. But I believe this cannot be correct as Amiga applications need a complete Exec-like based Workbench-like or at the very least AmigaDOS-like environment to be run, which I believe would at best result into a solution similar of usage as for example UAE on QNX (Amiga XL) currently provides.

[gary_c]

This has been one of my greatest concerns in the past: What will MorphOS be like in combination with its QBOX environment (directly using Quark instead of indirectly through a secondary kernel a la ABOX).

This is an unknown since the details aren't worked out, but it seems like an opportunity more than a problem.

If it would be entirely different from the ABOX environment, then what would make MorphOS stand out in comparison to other microkernel based OSes including QNX?

Both MorphOS and AmigaOS have to become more than simply environments to run old Amiga apps. If they don't, they don't deserve to live. For the sake of their platform, I hope Amiga, Inc. and Hyperion are thinking beyond providing a PPC OS for running classic Amiga apps. How do they envision AOS vis-a-vis competing OSs, disregarding old app archives?

... Currently MorphOS' Amiga application compatibily is its main selling point.

Yes, that's currently. But it's just to get a foothold in the market. The current Amiga market alone is too small to support any new alternative OS project. The OS has to have modern features to stand out and to attract new users. Inevitably AOS and MOS will be compared to all other OSs currently available.

Some of the userbase seem to think that the ABOX will continue to be transparently available within the QBOX. But I believe this cannot be correct....

I don't see why the A-box would be any different from the runtime environment that MacOS provides for classic Mac programs, etc. It seems to me the MorphOS engineers are not attempting the impossible, or even doing something that hasn't been done before, for that matter.

-- gary_c

[MikeB]

@ Downix

While, yes, in theory someone could turn the ABox into a 100% native OS with some work, then you'd loose 90% of it's potency.

IMO compared to the currently provided solution, this would be preferable (Similar like PPCLinux is prefered by almost all Linux users over MkLinux usage). With hosting something like AROS or AmigaOS on top Linux or QNX the advantage of having many hardware drivers available to the host OS is obvious. However Quark does not offer these advantages.

It's an additional layer which negatively effects performance, this despite the good performance provided by solutions like MorphOS and Amithlon on modern hardware.

The only disadvantage I see is that Quark kernel features like memory protection, (features the ABOX environment itself does not really benefit from) could not be advertised anymore (marketing). But from the user point of view there wouldn't be any difference compared to the current solution. (usage)

My view regarding the benefits of a two kernel approach provided by various solutions:

- Amithlon => Many available Linux hardware drivers
- intent => Platform independence
- MorphOS => Marketing? (Could IMO backfire, if users discover that they cannot take advantage of the advertised features)

[MikeB]

@ gary_c

This is an unknown since the details aren't worked out, but it seems like an opportunity more than a problem.

Quark functions very differently as compared to the Amiga Exec kernel (else a re-implemented Exec kernel hosted on top would not be needed).

Of course this offers oppertunities, just like Zeta, BSD, Linux, QNX, AtheOS, etc, etc. do. However as an Amigan I am mostly interested in being offered an AmigaOS-like environment, for example also in terms of structure.

Both MorphOS and AmigaOS have to become more than simply environments to run old Amiga apps.

As you can read in the feature list, interviews and roadmaps you see that AmigaOS will be far more than just an Amiga compatible environment. The new ExecSG kernel has been designed to be able to *extend* AmigaOS' features, including for example memory protection.

[Hammer]

This is probably the most complete description around: MorphOS in Detail.

Thanks for the link, but I’m already aware of this particular document.

PS It has a questionable MS Windows NT kernel modelling btw (another issue)...