Amiga OS 5 prediction

[MarkTime]

if I had to speculate:

He means better than Mac OS X because it runs on top of Mac OS X.   So it has Mac OS X + it has whatever crap he has written.

OS X plus 1, is greater than OS X alone.

just lawyer speak....doesn't mean anything at all.

[EvilGuy]

I'd like to see an Amiga Graphical Environment for Unix.

There was the Amiga FVWM theme a few years ago which was cool.

It'd be nice to have the hardware issues sorted out by someone else (ie, the Linux guys) and then just build a nice Amiga desktop on top of Linux. Just so long as it is as responsive as the classic Amiga OS was on lowly hardware.

[Steril707]

ne_one wrote:

Steril707 wrote:
An Unix based Amiga OS is still uninteresting to the average Joe imo

I 100% agree with you on this point.

And who exactly falls into the demographic of an "Average Joe"? Most consumers don't know the difference between a computer chip and a potato chip let alone the core technology that the operating system is based on.

If by "Average Joe" you mean Amiga fanatic circa 1992 you're correct because they believe that all good operating systems and computing platforms are made by elves at the North Pole.

No, i mean ->the average Joe<- not being concerned about Amiga at all, that's what we talk about here, isn't it?..Why should they prefer an Amigafied version(if it's more than a window decoration and boing ball backgroundpic), of Linux to something thats already supported by the masses and some weird guy in the background like Ubuntu, or has a dedicated ->real<- company backing it up like SUSE.

Plus, you will just piss off the few people left who want their Amiga OS being a genuine Amiga OS (=the Amiga elves from 1992).

But why bother? In a year or two AROS will be functional enough to please what's left of the Amiga elves.

[downix]

dammy wrote:

And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.

I tend to buy from NewEgg.com but I could buy elsewhere:

Genesi EFIKA(2) (Mot)
VIA line of mobo/cpus (VIA)
ARM based mobo        (ARM)
Do they still sell Sparcs? (Sun)  
Athlon64              (AMD)
Core 2 Duo             (Intel)

That's enough for my plate. YMMV

Dammy

ARM's are produced by a wide variety of vendors.  Infact, ARM itself produces no processors, it just sells the design to other vendors.  You want an ARM motherboard, you have a wide variety of options, including making your own.
SPARC's are produced by 9 vendors, but like ARM, SPARC Intetnational does not produce any CPU's itself, and only licenses the technology to other vendors, who produce their own CPU's.  While Sun is the most visible vendor, the largest producer of SPARCs is actually Fujitsu followed by the European Space Agency.  Unlike ARM, SPARC is available as an open-sourced design as well, with both Geisler and Sun releasing their CPU's under open-source licenses.

You confuse vendors with suppliers.  One chip available from multiple suppliers is still one chip.  I can't go out and get a Motorola Athlon, can I?  But I can take ARM or SPARC to Freescale and have them fabricate one to my specifications. (infact, Freescale produces a large variety of SPARC's and ARM's under contract)

Intel/AMD domination, no thank you.

[ne_one]

@Steril707

No, i mean ->the average Joe<- not being concerned about Amiga at all, that's what we talk about here, isn't it?..

It's an important distinction.

Either way, you would be addressing a niche market, not the mainstream. Attempting to sell a user on a replacement operating system is a pointless exercise because no matter how good the technology is it would still be irrelevant.

It's difficult to say if any of this is grounded in reality but if it is, the desktop version of OS5 would be targeted first to legacy users. There are over 5 million original users out that there that may be willing to buy the software because of the branding and nostalgia. With decent bundling and good word of mouth, there is a secondary audience of curiosity seekers and first time hobbyists.

Will this lead to global domination? Hardly. Would it be a viable business? Probably.

Plus, you will just piss off the few people left who want their Amiga OS being a genuine Amiga OS

Oh well. If they have the resources to pump out proprietary hardware and software in a cost-effective manner more power to them. It's not going to happen.

In a year or two AROS will be functional enough to please what's left of the Amiga elves

Perhaps. If so, this crowd will satisfy their own needs.

[ne_one]

@downix

To produce it today, that same A500 w/ monitor would run you, brand new around $100... the market for integrated components is exploding, and growing, faster than the desktop PC market.

All well and good, but the point here is that you only have so many resources at your disposal and designing, manufacturing and supporting hardware is expensive, high risk and low margin.

Can you have it both ways? Yes, select partners and let them battle it out. If they can build a better mouse trap you expand your user base. If it tanks, you pick another dance partner.

Even better, certify existing technologies that support your solution and let people decide which is better, faster or cheaper.

And what freedom from hardware? Can you go to your local computer store and buy something other than Intel or AMD? You just traded one plantation for another, that's all.

If the software is platform-independent or multi-platform you will have options based on what the market makes available. It's not the responsibility of the operating system to promote competition and diversity -- there will always be some level of dependency.

[dammy]

ARM's are produced by a wide variety of vendors. Infact, ARM itself produces no processors, it just sells the design to other vendors. You want an ARM motherboard, you have a wide variety of options, including making your own.
SPARC's are produced by 9 vendors, but like ARM, SPARC Intetnational does not produce any CPU's itself, and only licenses the technology to other vendors, who produce their own CPU's. While Sun is the most visible vendor, the largest producer of SPARCs is actually Fujitsu followed by the European Space Agency. Unlike ARM, SPARC is available as an open-sourced design as well, with both Geisler and Sun releasing their CPU's under open-source licenses.

You confuse vendors with suppliers. One chip available from multiple suppliers is still one chip. I can't go out and get a Motorola Athlon, can I? But I can take ARM or SPARC to Freescale and have them fabricate one to my specifications. (infact, Freescale produces a large variety of SPARC's and ARM's under contract)

Intel/AMD domination, no thank you.

Downix, you just proved my entire point about alternative hardware OEMs.  Today, hardware is just a commodity, whatever suits your needs.  

Dammy

[downix]

dammy wrote:

Downix, you just proved my entire point about alternative hardware OEMs.  Today, hardware is just a commodity, whatever suits your needs.  

Dammy

I see your point, but can you see mine, that we should keep our options open beyond just AMD/Intel?

[dammy]

I see your point, but can you see mine, that we should keep our options open beyond just AMD/Intel?

Sure, that's why I supported AROS being ported to PPC and ARM as well as AMD64.  More arch's that are supported, the better it is for AROS.

Dammy

[jarroyo]

___________________________________________________________
downix wrote:

Actually, you'd be wrong here. While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance. Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs. Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.
__________________________________________________________

I guess from your perspective I was both wrong and right..:-)

While we agree on graphics, I think that the reason why there has not been much improvement in the audio area, and this is my opinion, is because audio has peaked / been commodotized as a technology. It is very good by default, and the majority of manipulation which audio requires for "effects" are easily executed in software with todays processors.

In PC category I call "The Balanced Platform," technology has been significantly stagnant; barring high end equipment. Interestingly enough, the PA Semi chip goes a long way into introducing a "Balanced Architeture" to the PC market. It takes into account many of the symbiotic elements of a PC, and tailors a solution based on lower latency than any other product in the consumer market.

This is largely the reason why I feel that the platform of choice for the future is somewhat "Amigest" in pedigree.

[downix]

jarroyo wrote:
___________________________________________________________
downix wrote:

Actually, you'd be wrong here. While yes, on the graphics end there has been dramatic improvement, other areas of the system are downright anemic in performance. Look at audio, dominated by a single vendor, there hasn't been any progress since Aureal was bought out by Creative Labs. Or I/O, cheap junk 9 times out of 10 except on overpriced server mobo's.
__________________________________________________________

I guess from your perspective I was both wrong and right..:-)

While we agree on graphics, I think that the reason why there has not been much improvement in the audio area, and this is my opinion, is because audio has peaked / been commodotized as a technology. It is very good by default, and the majority of manipulation which audio requires for "effects" are easily executed in software with todays processors.

In PC category I call "The Balanced Platform," technology has been significantly stagnant; barring high end equipment. Interestingly enough, the PA Semi chip goes a long way into introducing a "Balanced Architeture" to the PC market. It takes into account many of the symbiotic elements of a PC, and tailors a solution based on lower latency than any other product in the consumer market.

This is largely the reason why I feel that the platform of choice for the future is somewhat "Amigest" in pedigree.

I am a little confused here.  The x86 PC architecture is one of the worst for latency out there.  Also, utilizing the CPU for sound and video decoding (which graphics chips do not offer mind you) can eat up a huge fraction of the available processor time.  There is an area where a customized solution can be viable and profitable on the desktop, and here it is I feel.

[jarroyo]

__________________________________________________________
downix wrote:
I am a little confused here. The x86 PC architecture is one of the worst for latency out there. Also, utilizing the CPU for sound and video decoding (which graphics chips do not offer mind you) can eat up a huge fraction of the available processor time. There is an area where a customized solution can be viable and profitable on the desktop, and here it is I feel.
________________________________________________________

I was speaking about the PA Semi architecture being a low latancy platform, much more efficient / balanced than the X86 architecture. This chip is acually being targetted for use in places like enteprise routers, a low latency high throughput application.

It is true what you say about CPU's being bogged down by effects processing in software, but consider these factors:
1. CPU's are standardizing on a dual core design. the power will be there to spare.
2. The 128 bit matrix math units built into the chips are made to handle these kinds of transformations.
3. Its cheaper to do it in software, and with the video, and soon to be physics off loaded from the CPU; your processor will be sitting idler than in times past; at least for games.

Just my thoughts......
3.

[eniac]

I think everyone is rite in saying it needs to be different or  offer something linux and windows cant. I think the fact OS4 is so small and fast it has something the others dont. Speed in computing today is something that really aggrivates me, even with my quad core CPU my com still performs every day tasks at the same pace as a win98 P3. Number crunching gets better each year but I dont have to tell you innovation in desktop computing is almost non existant. Windows dominance cant last forever. its just not very good and their bubble will burst one day.

On top of browsers and office software, I think any OS needs lots of wizards to sell to everyday people, the mass's.
joe shmo cant install software under linux let alone all the other things wizards help com dummies for. I cant beleive linux still doesnt have real wizards. a package manager is not a wizard haha its obvious to get an OS to computer dummies you have to make it real easy.  

so im calling for user friendly-ness...the very thing linux needs to compete with windows...i think tech heads forget that the vast majority of computer owners will say "DELL" when u ask for their brand of modem...(i did tech support for awhile...) even with a wizard for a task they find it difficult, but at least its achievable...

I really really think apple is a piss weak competitor and if someone had the vision, the smarts and the capital to make it happen, they could knock apple over and take 2nd place relatively easy...their strong hold in "audio" is gone and it didnt take very long...I am a pro musician and there was a time when if you didnt have an Mac in your studio you were a bad producer...things change and markets are not as unbreakable as some narrow minded people would have you beleive...you come up with the right product WITH the right buisness plan and youll break the big boys monopoly...
unfortunately for us amiga inc hasnt come up with either and man, ive been waiting a long time....what makes bill the maggot mcewen think he can revive amiga is beyond me...give it up you loser...give it to a rattigan...

[thanos]

I predict, OS5 will:

1. Arrive late.
2. Everybody will complain.
3. ...

There is really no need to add a third prediction.

my $0.02

[Nautilus]

OS5 is a port of Amithlon/Umilator or AROS. :p

[downix]

jarroyo wrote:

I was speaking about the PA Semi architecture being a low latancy platform, much more efficient / balanced than the X86 architecture. This chip is acually being targetted for use in places like enteprise routers, a low latency high throughput application.

PA Semi is still PowerPC, correct?  While PPC is better than x86, it is still not even in the top 5 for latency

It is true what you say about CPU's being bogged down by effects processing in software, but consider these factors:
1. CPU's are standardizing on a dual core design. the power will be there to spare.
2. The 128 bit matrix math units built into the chips are made to handle these kinds of transformations.
3. Its cheaper to do it in software, and with the video, and soon to be physics off loaded from the CPU; your processor will be sitting idler than in times past; at least for games.

Just my thoughts......
3.

1) And vendors are eager to put more onto the CPU, offsetting the gains.
2) Again, vendors are eager to put more onto these units, resulting in a net loss.
3) In software, sure, but software != CPU-bound.  GPU's do their work in software, but off of the CPU, for example.  You can retain the softwatre flexibility without bogging down the CPU, especially now with the advent of the new Torrenza format for co-processing off of the main CPU bus, giving you the best of both worlds.