How about creating a Open AMIGA Consortium?

[Einstein]

persia wrote:
Ok, let's get a state of the art machine, an eight core Penryn, 1 TB hard disk, 8 GB Ram, 512 MB graphics card with a RW Blu-ray drive.  Do AmigaDos hand the multi-cores?  No.  Can it use the video card? No.  Can it access the entire hard disk?  No.  Can it burn a Blu-Ray disk? No.  

What am I going to switch my picture editing from Photoshop, Lightroom & Aperture?  Deluxe Paint? Not bloody likely!  Video Editing from Final Cut to what?  Word Processing colaberation?  Nope.  Spreadsheet with mathematical routines?  Un-un.  Host a PHP website like WordPress or a Java Exo? Sorry mate, no can do.

There's no killer app out there for the Amiga and frankly why would someone bother to write one when it would probably crash the OS, the OS lacks the basic functionality of a modern OS and they could make several orders of magnitude more money with a PC or Mac version.

This is pretty obvious isn't it ? not many would write killer apps for an OS that's technically inferior to alternatives (and with alternatives I'm not implying the overbloated trinity).

What would need to be done is that the entire OS would need to be rewritten on top of a Posix OS such as Linux, that is a GUI that approximated Workbench. Who's going to do that?

You're implying a near impossibilty for that, but you're forgetting the existence of things such as Syllable (Desktop), SkyOS, and Haiku, first two with custom kernels AFAIK, and the third using a prewritten kernel named NewOS, none relying on a #?x kernel.

[AeroMan]

So why bother about this discussion ? All the "modern" OSs have all those drivers.

You can buy a cheap PC, install your favorite Linux distro and pick the drivers and apps on the net. Then if something goes wrong (it will...) you just have to spend the entire day typing huge commands in a terminal window. Pretty modern, like my TRS-80.

You can instead install Windows and be graced with the blue screen of death from times to times, find out that some of your software does not like Vista, or just delight yourself trying to find out why your state of the art PC is as slow as my TRS-80. After some time you will find out you need an upgrade.

Or, you can spend a fortune in a Mac. It will be well spent as it is really, really different from a common PC (at least for the OS). Then you can suffer trying to find the Mac version for "that" software you need and pay another fortune for it.

I feel the need for the Amiga ! All the "modern" OSs does not satisfy my expectations for a computer as Workbench did at its time.

We just can't wait for a killer app to be written for a non existent platform. It is like a chicken-egg situation.

Some time ago, one might say the same about Linux. "Who is gonna write a driver for my XXXX video board for Linux ?? Does it have Excel? Word? Doom? At least a decent GUI?". Time proved there were people willing to do it.

We already have an open source system. Why put a rock over AROS and say nobody could never do these things?

The only way to know is trying.

[persia]

So are we agreed that it is too late to pursue the "state of the art" dream?  Had CBM survived they would have made the changes necessary over time and yes AmigaDos 2008 would have looked nothing like AmigaDos 4.  

So what we are after is a hobbyist machine, maybe a change to learn FPG programming, a chance to play the old games and maybe play with old stuff like Basic/AMOS.  Maybe a chance to learn about networking since a modern OS does so much behind the scenes.  A sort of training computer where instead of ticking a box you install three pieces of unrelated software and make them work together and have to learn what it means when that box is ticked.  How to get by with barebones programming and not letting the operating system do it all for you.

I like it, it's very much like amateur radio, except you don't need a license!

:elvis:

[persia]

Oh, and Elvis as the symbol.  A little bit fat, a little bit dated, but still the king!


:elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis: :elvis:

[Donar]

Does it make sense to create a AMIGA HW Consortium?
It think we should put the best brains together!

I think the question has to go out to Jens and Elbox and not us.

If they are not interested it would be best to ask on the big sites who is willing to help out on NatAmi HW or Software wise and see who is willing and capable to help.

[A6000]

The PC is not state of the art, it's just fast, the amiga was state of the art in 1984 and the PC is still not there yet, future amiga compatibles could set a new benchmark that will take the PC another 20 years to match.
In the beginning, users wrote their own programs, now with a developed open source model, we may do just fine without commercial developers.
The software we use in future will evolve from software available now. it will be efficient, not bloated like PC software.
Without sharks preying on the users, we may get software that does all we need at minimal cost.

[Einstein]

AeroMan wrote:
So why bother about this discussion ? All the "modern" OSs have all those drivers.

You can buy a cheap PC, install your favorite Linux distro and pick the drivers and apps on the net. Then if something goes wrong (it will...) you just have to spend the entire day typing huge commands in a terminal window. Pretty modern, like my TRS-80.

Great observed, except you are referring to the UI, I'm talking about the internals. :-(

You can instead install Windows and be graced with the blue screen of death from times to times, find out that some of your software does not like Vista, or just delight yourself trying to find out why your state of the art PC is as slow as my TRS-80. After some time you will find out you need an upgrade.

I run windows xp, and have never encountered a blue screen of death, on the other hand so many colorful and non-colorful screens of AmigaOS death that I'm wondering if all amiga users did something really really bad in a previous life.

I feel the need for the Amiga ! All the "modern" OSs does not satisfy my expectations for a computer as Workbench did at its time.

I think you are misunderstanding a few things, I'm talking about the internals and you about the (G)UI !!

We just can't wait for a killer app to be written for a non existent platform. It is like a chicken-egg situation.

Some time ago, one might say the same about Linux. "Who is gonna write a driver for my XXXX video board for Linux ?? Does it have Excel? Word? Doom? At least a decent GUI?". Time proved there were people willing to do it.

I guess we'll have to see, good luck though with the killer app writers swarming around a crashfrienly OS

[Donar]

It's going to be hard enough to get developers to write for the aros machines without expecting them to create 2 or 3 versions, 68k, PPC, PC, a common os will help, if the 68k takes longer to run a program, so be it, at least it will run.

I for one think AROS should be forked.
1. Create a 68k version that runs 3.x Software.
2. Create a "whatever" (AROS 64 with Mem protection) version which uses the 68k version for compatability inside a box or ArosUAE Integration.

=All people happy.

[Sig999]

A6000 wrote:
We are all well aware that it's not just hardware that needs to be updated, the operating system also needs to be upgraded.
BUT, we need to ensure that we end up with something recognisably amigalike, NOT PC like..

Sorry but this made me laugh.

See - I'm old enough to remember the PC when you typed commands from DOS.  What your saying is to avoid all things 'PC' just for the sake of it - when the PC liberally took things from the Mac and Ami and ran with them.

The PC you use today has more in common with your Ami than you'd want to admit.

It's funny because I remember trying to put cards into a 386 and get it to run windows 3.1 for work - and pulling my hair out as I messed with jumpers and hardware incompatability and those %^#$!ing IRQ's!  Where the Amiga was ... autoconfig.. I don't need to think about it - I turn it on and it will work.

I went through the experience again a few months ago after being away from a real Amiga in a decade.. and I was 'holy crap - I gotta get x ram and switch y jumper, cut z trace - get THIS version of software and THAT patch.... arrrrgh!'

they have changed places - the current state of Plug and Play (which when it was first introduced I called Plug and PRAY) is where Autoconfig cards would be NOW had the Amiga continued and followed its logical progression.

Cutting and pasting between apps - remember SNAP? - again - 10 years of logical progression.

They took a lot of good ideas from the Ami and Mac and built upon them - If you wanted to capture 'Amiga like' you should go back and see what the Amiga was compared to the machines around it when it came out.

Amiga wasn't about mice, windows, workbench - those were things that evolved OUT of what it was about - and that was taking the best things you could find and making something truely excellent and innovative out of them.

The first review I saw of the Ami 1000 had the phrase in it 'this is the Mac - as it should have been'

That's what you should be dwelling on.

[Sig999]

Donar wrote:

It's going to be hard enough to get developers to write for the aros machines without expecting them to create 2 or 3 versions, 68k, PPC, PC, a common os will help, if the 68k takes longer to run a program, so be it, at least it will run.

I for one think AROS should be forked.
1. Create a 68k version that runs 3.x Software.
2. Create a "whatever" (AROS 64 with Mem protection) version which uses the 68k version for compatability inside a box or ArosUAE Integration.

=All people happy.

I don't think all people will be happy - then you split whats left of the development community (which is small and shrinking) in half.

In a lot of ways I think AROS needs classic Amiga and classic Amiga needs AROS.  I'd be happier if if in some way classic Amiga were emulated. Embedded would be nice - but if it stunts the growth, then it may not be a good thing.
AROS needs a base of software - which the Amiga has. The Amiga needs to ween itself off the old technology and into the current century - which Aros could provide.

This was why Amithlon (to me anyways) was so important - it was the 'missing link' - the step between the old and new. I could run old apps while developing and cross compiling to the new. I could run more modern video, network, sound cards - and take advantage of other things.

It broke my heart when it fell in a screaming heap, and it was a setback I don't think the majority of people understood.  Right now Minimig and Natami are just as important - because they're a step in taking us away from the old failing hardware.

A lot of people seem to expect 2 things:  For it to happen overnight and for someone else to do it.

I don't think either are realistic expectations.

[AeroMan]

Einstein wrote:

Great observed, except you are referring to the UI, I'm talking about the internals. :-(

I believe it is not impossible to improve the internals. Even MS did that with 16 bit Windows up to XP, and you can still run 16 bit software.

KS 3.1 is a starting point, for sure it needs to be improved a lot.
But the key point on the thread topic is, we need to have a definition of the hardware first. I bet on AROS as a way to improve the internals gradually

I run windows xp, and have never encountered a blue screen of death,

I use XP at work and it gives me more blues than my B.B. King CDs... And it freezes from times to times also, needing to reboot (at least I don't have to see the blue screen when this happens).
My home PC still runs 98, and it works better, believe it or not (yes, of course it crashes too...)

I guess we'll have to see, good luck though with the killer app writers swarming around a crashfrienly OS

They do it with Windows. They will survive...  :-D

[Sig999]

You can buy a cheap PC, install your favorite Linux distro and pick the drivers and apps on the net. Then if something goes wrong (it will...) you just have to spend the entire day typing huge commands in a terminal window. Pretty modern, like my TRS-80.

You can instead install Windows and be graced with the blue screen of death from times to times, find out that some of your software does not like Vista, or just delight yourself trying to find out why your state of the art PC is as slow as my TRS-80. After some time you will find out you need an upgrade.
.

As much as I loved, and still love my Ami - I'm afraid your stretching here.  I know it was the Amiga Way to bag the PC back in the day - and well we could because it was superior in a LOT of ways, but if we want to make comparisons - lets do it on the current reality and not wishful thinking or with a wistfull pining for the 'good old days'.  This only turns the tables back to when the PC guys were making excuses (I'll never need more than 640k! Hrmph - pretty color playscreen - don't need that! - my fave from a ST fan :  '4096 colors? you know the human eye can only distinguish between 512!')

Lets be honest and real for a moment.  The XP machine I'm using right now hasn't crashed in over 3 months - I've yet to actually see the BSOD on it (5 years ago this may have been different).

I can't make this claim about seeing the red 'Guru' - even back in the glory days.

My Linux box - the only time I rebooted it was when I went from MANDRAKE linux to MANDRIVA linux over a year ago.  It took me through a graphic setup, detected all my hardware - including USB devices - and has had graphic configuration tools for quite some time.  Again - 4-5 years ago this wasn't always the case.

Or we can put our heads in the sand and continue to beleive old stereotypes and make excuses as our machine falls further and further behind until we're the ones making the excuses (well the Web is primarily text, and noone can afford broadband to run streaming video properly!)...

*shrug* the first step in solving a problem is admitting there is a problem, and theres such a very fine line between advocacy and zealotry.

[AeroMan]

Sig999 wrote:
*shrug* the first step in solving a problem is admitting there is a problem, and theres such a very fine line between advocacy and zealotry.

I'm not saying it is not a problem, neither comparing today's systems with my A1200, but let's face it: you can't use Linux without going to the shell. It is a matter of time.
I used Kurumin, and now moved to Ubuntu, and still have to type stuff. Most Linux enthusiasts I know prefer the shell. I don't know a Linux user that doesn't use it (there should be some).

And you can't say that Windows doesn't eats your computer's performance. It is pretty clear if you compare 98 and XP on the same machine. (yes, I have crashes with both! Surprisingly, more with XP)

Those are problems for solving too. They exist, but most people say "ok, it is the way it is". It is not a matter of zealotry, they aren't close to what I expect from a modern system.
 
I had a Mac some time ago. Unfortunately, not with OS X, and I know there are loads of differences from the old MacOS.
Mac is REALLY nice, but it is expensive, and it is difficult to find software for it. This is why I don't buy a new one

Am I the only one in the world who's not comfortable with those OSs and thinks a modern Amiga could fills my expectations?

[Donar]

In a lot of ways I think AROS needs classic Amiga and classic Amiga needs AROS. I'd be happier if if in some way classic Amiga were emulated.

To Emulate a real Amiga on "AROS 64" you would need:
A real copy of OS 3.x and/or it's kickstart or a AOS3.x compatible AROS M68k build. I do not think it's smart to rely on copyrighted material for a open source OS to function "properly". So i take it you want AROS M68k too? :-D

A lot of people seem to expect 2 things: For it to happen overnight and for someone else to do it.

People usually pay for Hardware so it's no problem to wait for someone else to do it. On the software side - if everybody (maybe 1000 people) would give 10€ to the Aros Kickstart bounty's the one we expect to do it for us would get 10.000€ for his effort...  

[abbub]

AeroMan wrote:
And you can't say that Windows doesn't eats your computer's performance.

I can.  The processor on my machine sits completely idle over 75% of the time, and the other 25% of the time it's going full bore when I'm encoding video.  I also think this is a foolish argument.  Windows XP SP2 is rock solid.  I deal with HUNDREDS of XP SP 2 machines a day.  It's hands down the best operating system Microsoft has ever produced.  If you're getting blue screens on it, you've got a hardware issue or some third party software issue.  If it's performing sluggish, you don't have the proper resources to run it (Should I complain about the performance of 3.9 on a 68020 with 5 MB?)

In my experience with Linux, OS X, and Windows, we've really reached a point where a modern computer almost has too many resources for *most* users... (Given that most users do light word processing, email, and web surfing.)

Mac is REALLY nice, but it is expensive, and it is difficult to find software for it. This is why I don't buy a new one

Mac is not really that much more expensive than other NICE PCs.  (Yeah, I'm aware that you can go down to Best Buy or your local appliance store and buy a 400 dollar machine, but you get what you pay for.)  Given that you can now run Windows software (both natively and virtualized) I'm finding the "can't find software for it" argument to be more and more a relic of the past.  What software do you need that you can't find for it?  (In my experience, the only real software gap I've encountered is decent Map/GPS software.)

If you haven't given OS X a try, you really should.  The linux zealots that go on and on about 'linux on the desktop' are missing the point that unix on the desktop is here in OS X and has been for years.

Am I the only one in the world who's not comfortable with those OSs and thinks a modern Amiga could fills my expectations?

What would a modern Amiga have that would make you feel comfortable?  Where does 'comfort' derive from in an operating system?  What do you want in a modern Amiga OS to do that one of the other solutions (Windows, Ubuntu, OS X, etc.) don't already provide?   (I don't know how you can talk about not being comfortable with what modern operating systems have to provide if you haven't used OS X.  It's by far the cream of the crop (though it does have it's own set of hassles, I'll admit).

[A6000]

Sig999 wrote:

A6000 wrote:
We are all well aware that it's not just hardware that needs to be updated, the operating system also needs to be upgraded.
BUT, we need to ensure that we end up with something recognisably amigalike, NOT PC like..

I remember trying to put cards into a 386 and get it to run windows 3.1 for work - and pulling my hair out as I messed with jumpers and hardware incompatability and those %^#$!ing IRQ's!  Where the Amiga was ... autoconfig.. I don't need to think about it - I turn it on and it will work.

I went through the experience again a few months ago after being away from a real Amiga in a decade.. and I was 'holy crap - I gotta get x ram and switch y jumper, cut z trace - get THIS version of software and THAT patch.... arrrrgh!'

they have changed places - the current state of Plug and Play (which when it was first introduced I called Plug and PRAY) is where Autoconfig cards would be NOW had the Amiga continued and followed its logical progression.

Amiga was about taking the best things you could find and making something truely excellent and innovative out of them.

As I said, the operating system needs to be modernised.

Where I said it should not become a clone of the windows, I meant it should be small and efficient, it should allow the user to do what they want, not what microsoft will allow, it should not become an instrument of extortion through DRM.
Think about the things you don't like about the PC and ensure they are not incorporated in a future amigalike OS.

Similarly the hardware should be carefully considered, one  problem with the PC is the variety of hardware and versions of drivers, an FPGA common chipset will minimise such difficulties, a PC graphics card could still be installed, if you want the hassle.