How about creating a Open AMIGA Consortium?

[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.

[Donar]

Mac is not really that much more expensive than other NICE PCs.

The problem is they have no "prosumer" model. Either you buy a screen with an integrated computer and only one 3,5 drive (imac) or a 8 core Xeon Workstation (MacPro). I only need a tower with C2D or C2Q two Optical Drives and say 3 HD's. And no i do not like external enclosures. The only way to get this is a Hackintosh...

Ok sorry for being off topic...

[freqmax]

It might be an idea to have two different tracks for future Amiga development:

(1) A version which is Amiga classic hardware/software true. Ie if you can run it on a A500 it will run without modification.
(MC68060, FPGA chipset, etc..)

(2) A version that is brilliant in using technology. We won't compete with ATI/nVidia/Intel/AMD etc.. but we exploit existing chips in a clever and costeffective way. This version would not have any compability ties with original Amigas at all except in spirit.
(Get the most MIPS/Hz CPU, efficient GFX, FPGA subsystem, etc..)

One could exploit the SRAM feature of FPGAs by reloading it every 10^-3 second. And thus make it do many things with a small configuration.

As for a consortium. Collect data on A500/A1200/A3000/A4000 and put into a report that can be used for hw/sw developers for re-implementations.

An portable Amiga with a 7"-10" screen with super efficient use of battery/cpu/ram/periphials etc.. could be an area where it's possible to get at the competition.

A drawback we as a community have is the economy of volumes, army of optimisation engineers, budget for failed prototypes etc.. any project will have to make up for it in some other way. Once one can produce at least 1000 units. The producer is the king because you can order directly from manufacturers, not digikey/jameco/mouser and the rest.

[persia]

But what advantage does an Amiga running on state of the art hardware offer?  There's no software to take advantage of the hardware.  There's no applications to take advantage of it.  Put a 512 MB video card in a box, install AROS and you still have a cute 90's look, you might as well have only 16 MB of video ram.

We're dealing with technology that requires some real technical programmers to program for.  It's a really big ask.

Forget state of the art, this isn't 1989 anymore (the last year Amiga was state of the art).  The CLI is clunky and awkward compared to the Bash terminal on my Mac.  The Amiga file system is slow and not journaled.  

There are dozens of personal operating systems out there, what does a modern AmigaDos offer over Haiku, Syllable or SkyOS?  Why would somebody say "I'm going to load AROS on my new Quad core Penryn?"

[Sig999]

AeroMan wrote:

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).

I've used it since Slackware - before running xwindows was viable to run because of system resources and beyond into the birth of RedHat linux - from it's win95 lookalike onto the start of Mandrake with it's prefs for KDE - till today.

Yes - you can use the shell - and in cases you should use the shell, and indeed for somethings the shell is preferable.

But unfortunately this is not what you said.

You said that you can't set things up without going to the shell, that you can't use it or set things up without it.  This is false. My wife, who finds opening the software box complex when it comes to computers installed Linux on her machine unassisted and flawlessly - setting up everything from her mouse, graphics tablet, external usb drives, and scanner - from setting up the gimp to initializing her network card and getting it on the internet....

....all without typing a single shell command.

You are comparing to five or six years ago - Linux has matured - gotten smarter in it's setup, and being made more user friendly. Every year it improves.

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)

What do I compare it to on the same hardware?  Linux? I think Linux handles things better but pays a significant overhead using Xwindows - so - comparable. 95 crashed a lot - 98 crashed a fair bit.  See what I wrote above, I didn't take the time to type it for amusement.  The machine I'm typing this on hasn't crashed in quite a long time.  And I use it for a lot of video compositing and editing with Avid.  It gets QUITE a workout... Windows XP is an improvement on 95 and 98.  I think your statements are exaggerated.

I don't have as much fun on this machine as others - but as a workhorse it does its job.

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?

I think you're changing your argument.. if you were comfortable you wouldn't be making broad (and nowadays incorrect) comparisons - you'd be happy with your system.

All OS's have problems - but I find it funny that you're not pointing out the problems with the ones your using while your trying to find fault with the others.

the old Ami guru's more times that 95 hits the BSOD - but hey.. it's old and we should expect that... right?

I'm saying - for once - lets put aside the PC/MAC/LINUX wars (because lets face it - in a glass house we shouldn't throw stones) - and instead look to the things they got RIGHT and try and learn a few lessons...   OR we could just continue on the track we're all on now and wait another... hmmm.. 5 - 6 years for OS 6 and whatever lawsuits follow it...

[Sig999]

@ Freqmax

I think splitting limited people into camps isn't good for anyone really.  Too few developers in an ever dwindling community.  As people get tired of spending money to keep old machines going - going head to head with people who want to those parts to put in a glass case - driving up prices - the fun slowly wears off.

As far as hardware goes - and thats the topic of this thread - I'm not as much concerned with things made now running on 500/2000/3000/1200/4000 as I am with new hardware handling the software from these machines.  I think that's the issue.

I can get bits piecemeal for a dying 2000 - OR - I can get a new system, but it will run a lot of my old apps... it sounds more attractive to me.  Given that I'll not have to search for THIS particular brand of floppy again or THAT particular brand of memory - software can be adapted, reworked, rewritten... provided I don't have to totally find it from scratch it's all good.

State of the art tech isn't needed - CURRENT DAY is.  I'd like to see future hardware as modular as possible so I can update it as I need and as I choose.. this is the appeal the PC has for me over the Mac.  I don't have to buy a totally new system all at once - I can buy it part by part as I have the means, time, and energy.

State of the art can come later - for now I'd settle for a standard floppy drive - a usb or ps2 mouse and keyboard - a graphics card I don't need to hunt a junkyard for - and any of the current types of memory on the market that still available.  Hell - give me IDE harddrives for now if you can't get SATA going - same for CDROMs.

Someone wants to make 'superpaula' or a 'worldwidepants agnus' - fantastic! but PLEASE don't mount it directly on the motherboard - we've been there - we've done that. Put it on a card so when I want to buy your upgrade down the line I don't need to buy a whole new system - It makes it more attractive.

[biggun]

The idea of the NATAMI is not to have the most fastest hardware on earth, but to make the HW  powerful enough to be able to fulfill the everyday tasks and to really make USE the HW.

Here is an example application running on NatAmi:

[skurk]

The graphics is awesome, but how fast is it?  Any chance to upload a video of NatamiFlight to youtube or something?

BTW, the Natami project looks extremly promising.  I'm definitely going to buy one when they are ready.  If you guys need beta testers or developers, let me know ;-)

[AeroMan]

Sig999 wrote:

All OS's have problems - but I find it funny that you're not pointing out the problems with the ones your using while your trying to find fault with the others.

the old Ami guru's more times that 95 hits the BSOD - but hey.. it's old and we should expect that... right?

I've just did it. I'm using Ubuntu and Win98 at home, XP at work and Workbench 3 for fun. I don't think it is needed to list AmigaOS' problems, everybody is very familiar with all of them.
The Sam's Club down the street sells an IMac for something close to US$2000. That's expensive for me, I can buy a hell of a PC for that amount. I want to give OS X a try, but it seems Apple doesn't wants me to do it. Unless I use a hackintosh...
Apples are expensive here mainly for historical reasons I don't think it is worth to describe here. If you get into a computer shop and ask for Mac software you may find just one shelf if you are lucky. This is the Mac scenario here.

What gets me upset is that everytime somebody comes with the idea of doing an "Open Amiga" or similar, loads of people states that it should be a hobby project only, because all other systems are perfect and there is no place for a new Amiga, or something that fills its gap.

I don't think like that, and if there is an effort to do something, even if it doesn't take off, I would like to help. Otherwise, I will be just quiet.

[persia]

Cool, Natami still looks retro but has a it better resolution, put it in a cool retro box, maybe something that looks like it fits a WW1 theme.  Or maybe there's something in an old Buck Rogers show that would fit the retro-future look.

Natami - Retro for the masses?

[Sig999]

AeroMan wrote:
I've just did it. I'm using Ubuntu and Win98 at home, XP at work and Workbench 3 for fun. I don't think it is needed to list AmigaOS' problems, everybody is very familiar with all of them.
The Sam's Club down the street sells an IMac for something close to US$2000. That's expensive for me, I can buy a hell of a PC for that amount. I want to give OS X a try, but it seems Apple doesn't wants me to do it. Unless I use a hackintosh...
Apples are expensive here mainly for historical reasons I don't think it is worth to describe here. If you get into a computer shop and ask for Mac software you may find just one shelf if you are lucky. This is the Mac scenario here.

What gets me upset is that everytime somebody comes with the idea of doing an "Open Amiga" or similar, loads of people states that it should be a hobby project only, because all other systems are perfect and there is no place for a new Amiga, or something that fills its gap.

I don't think like that, and if there is an effort to do something, even if it doesn't take off, I would like to help. Otherwise, I will be just quiet.

I agree - I don't use a Mac for the same reasons - cost. I have a Mac in my cupboard - a g3 with what was at the time a  couple of grand worth of avid hardware.  It became obsolete at the same time, leaving me with the option of replacing the entire thing at once with a g4 and even MORE avid hardware - or building a PC to take on the task for less money and the ability to buy it part by part, and have a flexible upgrade path.

I think the problems that arise with new Amiga projects is that they follow this path, buying a whole new system - and when the next one comes out, buy a whole new system again.

I like idea of the Natami because it allows you to do that first essential stage of upgrading - bringing native ami apps across to more modern hardware.  I like the idea of the minimig because its a step towards getting away from the old chips.

If they can recapture the fun of the old machine, they'll have a winner. My PC doesn't keep me up till midnight flipping through old books and wading through pages of 68k assembly.  Linux doesn't make me stop mid-coffee and run to the keyboard to give something 'just one more try'...

[abbub]

Sig999 wrote:
If they can recapture the fun of the old machine, they'll have a winner. My PC doesn't keep me up till midnight flipping through old books and wading through pages of 68k assembly.  Linux doesn't make me stop mid-coffee and run to the keyboard to give something 'just one more try'...

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but part of the 'fun' of it for me is the simplicity.  When you start introducing modern hardware, the features of a modern operating system, etc., that simplicity has a tendency to vanish.

I mentioned in another thread that I was amazed and amused to find the mainboard schematics for my A2000 in the back of the user's manual.   That simply doesn't happen any more.  Maybe to a certain degree because the schematic would be useless to most consumers, but I'd argue that, to a larger degree, it's because the systems we buy today are much more complex than the classic Amiga.  The classic Amiga is to the modern computer what my 1972 VW Bus is to my 2002 Jetta TDI.  I can do limited amounts of work on my TDI, but for any serious repairs, I need tools and knowledge that are largely beyond my scope to acquire.  The '72?  I can pull that engine and rebuild it in the back room.  (Much to the girlfriend's chagrin...)

Likewise, the OS required to support this modern hardware scales up quickly in terms of complexity and needed resources.  Look at linux.  Sure, you can get a small footprint of linux that boots and runs very fast on very limited resources.  But start adding the trappings of a modern OS like Windows or OS X to your linux box and you soon find that it also starts demanding more and more resources as the complexity of the user interface and available tools goes up.  That's the nature of all operating systems.  These things don't come for free.

I'm still curious as to what the modern features people want to add to Amiga OS, and how they intend to implement these without the Amiga OS morphing into the existing operating systems they're seeking to avoid.

[Sig999]

As far as simplicity goes - I think getting away from some of the things we're locked into right now would maintain a level of that that is currently leaving the mix.

I'm not talking bleeding edge here, things that we can do right now, but take time, money, and a level of complexity to achieve - things that I think should be supported by anyone thinking of making a 'next step' Amiga:

Right now with my Ami if I want to replace, say, my keyboard - I have the option of either hunting one down on Ebay, classifieds, and doing some repairwork - or getting one from select vendors and overpaying for it, OR I can get a ps2 adaptor and get a more common conventional keyboard..

The ability to use a ps2 keyboard or mouse is something 'modern' that I should be able to do.

If I want more hardrive space - likewise I have to track down 50 pin scsi drives that I can partition to around 4 gigs - likewise for a CD rom.  I can with additional cost and complexity get an IDE solution - this already exists, so wanting it as a base feature isn't unreasonable.

As for OS complexity - I think being able to format larger partitions wouldn't be asking the world, and things that were supposed to be in the original Amiga like memory protection should be considered.

In my expectations of what a 'new amiga' should provide I try and be resonable in my expectations, and realise that any new step should be fairly small.  I think that many projects in the past try and step too big - I'm pretty glad right now I didn't buy a Peg or an AmigaOne, and I bet many who did are wary of jumping into yet another hardware solution.

[biggun]

Likewise, the OS required to support this modern hardware scales up quickly in terms of complexity and needed resources. Look at linux.

I fully agree. Linux has of course many nice things.
But some of its "modern advantages" are paid with by serious complexity and performance issues.

If on Linux a application uses a device then there is for security reasons no direct connection between the application and the device.
This means that if a user application wants to write something to this device it will write this in its user space buffer. The kernel is than called to copy this user space buffer into the kernel space device buffer. The same complex handling is done when the packets return form the device.

This way is "more secure" of course but also twice as slow as the AMIGA solution.
We are writing 10G Ethernet drivers at work and the way Linux handles this is seriously impacting performance.

The beauty of the AMIGA solution is that its more elegant, simpler and faster!

[Sig999]

To be fair to both Linux and the Amiga - Many things like this could be considered workarounds to make Linux more 'single user desktop' friendly.  If it were designed from that standpoint I'm sure many of it's systems would be different.  In the same way that doing workarounds on the Amiga would cause a similar slowdown and consumption of resources.

[persia]

The retro-future version is more do-able.  The Amiga belongs in the last century, leave it there but allow use to use modern parts, USB keybords, mice and joysticks.  Improve the graphics so they are a little less retro.  A hobby machine that you can tinker with.  Maybe one you can plug a USB camera into and play with video capture.  Part of the charm of Amiga is that it's pre-turn of the century technology.

The hobbyist really has nothing to play with these days, even Amateur radio is being overwhelmed with technology. you used to be able to build your own transceiver and throw an antenna in the tree, now it's digital controlled hi-tech stuff.

All the homebuild gee-whiz kits are gone.  Remember Heathkit?  It's a market that whilst small is wide open.  No competition.

The Amiga, the ultimate Luddite's PC!

:pint: