Any news on OS4 release date?

[alx]

@Kronos

When I said "Complete", I was quoting from the slides:

Missing functions of OS4 to date compared to the "OS4 feature list 1.0"
Some non-essential functions of ExecSG (further detailed with § «  ExecSG » )
Modern native PPC media player (L. Torok is working on MooVid OS4)
Native browser
New API 3D (An OpenGL orientated NOVA specification is being worked at, possibility of a Warp3D wrapper is being studied)
Localization of all parts of the system (ATO; approx. 50% complete)

All of the other announced functions are complete, and in the course of being betatested on 68k or PPC

That, of course, does not mean that the entire OS is complete, and I'd probably agree with the more optimistic end of Wayne's estimation.

[ikir]

@ Kronos

Maybe you're right, maybe not. I'm quite sure that OS4 for Cyberstorm will be out at least bofore november.

What i want is a official report form Hyperion or Amiga Inc to know if the things are going right or not.

[Kees]

You wont get an official answer on this i think .. They always said that it will be released when its ready ..

Maybe Amiwest will bring some news ...

[zacman]

>You wont get an official answer on this i think

The dates given at the OnTour event were official ones IMHO.

[cgutjahr]

@redrumloa:

AFAIK they will only be on the A1 version. Does anyone know how hard it would be to integrate them?

IIRC it was said they would not be in OS4 first release but maybe OS4.1.

No, Ben Hermans said they will be included with OS4.0, but only the A1-Version (due to the fact that SNAP drivers require the gfx card to be initialised properly - there's no BIOS initialising gfx cards on a classic Amiga).

@Kronos:

I'm also quite sure that there was WOS-support on that list sometime ago, but somehow the list has seemed to get a bit shorter ....

Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS supported will be part of OS4 - and I know that you read these statements.

@ikir:

What i want is a official report form Hyperion or Amiga Inc to know if the things are going right or not.

You won't get that.

[ikir]

zacman wrote:
>You wont get an official answer on this i think

The dates given at the OnTour event were official ones IMHO.

Sure? Can you post this dates please?

[Kronos]

cgutjahr wrote:

Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS supported will be part of OS4 - and I know that you read these statements.

..... and it also clear that OS4 had NO WOS-support
on the tour, and I know you where there (not really,
just trying to put a pun in).

And now go back to what I was replying to .....

[lempkee]

on the tour i asked specifically about wos ,
and it will be in there for sure, but wasnt at the time the tour was (3 weeks ago) , it will be a type of "starter" function and not direct one, but that means nothing for normal usage anyway.

the date that was set (IKIR) was END Of summer/early quarter 4 (start of september maybe)
amiwest will tell you more about this as hyperion will be there no matter how much fud u guys want to read or supply, and thats a FACT!.

cheers

[zacman]

>Ben Hermans stated several times that WOS
>supported will be part of OS4

Sure he said this from the beginning.
That's why you should even more wonder why it
hasn't been implemented yet.

[ikir]

Thx lempkee :-)

[bloodline]

Schtop, Schtop!!! You can't rush these things, they take time.

Where's this guys moustache? Why has she still got her clothes on?

It's ready when it's ready :lol:

[Elwood]

Wos or not Wos ?

Please don't (and never) forget that the OS4 people are trying to make all of you happy.
I mean that they are evaluating if a WarpOS support is possible and at what cost.
What I mean is:
- WarpOS is not strictly needed. It means that OS4 will live without it. Why ? Because coders will be able to do an OS4 native program easily. So why do you want those old Wos programs whereas you can have better ?
- Why should they add code to the OS to support an old format we will all forget in a few months ? (for the same reason above) We all don't want "dirty" patches in the OS, don't we ?
- WarpOS binary format is tricky. Both 68k and Wos code are "merged". It is not easy to distinguish what is what for Dos.
- Adding support for Wos will take time. And this time can be used for more important things.

Now, what can be done ?
Even if Wos can't be loaded directly (i.e. recognized) when you run it, a limited support could be added through a loader. Do you remember the "runelf" program ? The same should be possible with Wos.

As a conclusion, we don't need Wos support but if it can be done, it will be done !!!

My personal thought is that I prefer spending time on working on something usefull than on things from the past !

Thanks.

[Warface]

Elwood wrote:
Wos or not Wos ?

What I mean is:
- WarpOS is not strictly needed. It means that OS4 will live without it. Why ? Because coders will be able to do an OS4 native program easily. So why do you want those old Wos programs whereas you can have better ?

With that reasoning 68K emulation is not strictly needed as well.

- Why should they add code to the OS to support an old format we will all forget in a few months ? (for the same reason above) We all don't want "dirty" patches in the OS, don't we ?

I beg to differ. When WarpOS support was announced and represented in the feature list, no one claimed "it's a dirty patch" and "why should we support an old format". It has only recently morphed into an unnecessary format, when support in OS4 was questioned.

- WarpOS binary format is tricky. Both 68k and Wos code are "merged". It is not easy to distinguish what is what for Dos.

If there were not a working implementation of WarpOS emulation in another OS solution, I'd readily believe these claims...

- Adding support for Wos will take time. And this time can be used for more important things.

That's for sure. But I don't understand the need to make excuses, and claim that WarpOS support is unnecessary and a dirty hack. (The 68K emulator is way dirtier)

As a conclusion, we don't need Wos support but if it can be done, it will be done !!!

Mumblemumble

My personal thought is that I prefer spending time on working on something usefull than on things from the past !

Why do you stick to AmigaOS then...?

Sorry for the rant...

[amigamad]

If it was not for the few crappy cybervision owners we could have had it sooner why support dyeing hardware over the expensive modern sloution . :-o  :-?

[bloodline]

With all due repect, Don't you think WOS is a bit of a pointless thing to support.
It was a nasty hack to allow PPC code to execute on a 68K based platform.

I know there is the argument of "more software", but any WOS software worth having would be better supported by being nativly ported to AmigaOS. (often AmigaOS versions existed anyway, and these could be ported to OS4)

[itix]

WarpOS binary format is tricky.

Just bad design.

Do you remember the "runelf" program ? The same should be possible with Wos.

Adding WOS support is not that simple really.

My personal thought is that I prefer spending time on working on something usefull than on things from the past !

But OS4 got PUP emulation, right? If so, better ditch WOS apps now and go for PUP versions.