PC still playing Amiga catchup

[amigaksi]

Yeah, the reason for backward compatibility is to provide a bridge so that software manufacturers can catch up with the new system.  You provide it for a reasonable amount of time and then you move on.  The only reason anyone is interested in running 15+ year old software for the Amiga is because the company that produced the Amiga *DIED* 15 years ago.  If they had survived *nobody* would care if the current Amiga OS was compatible with with the old stuff.

I couldn't do 10% of what I do now on 15 year old software.  Life moves on.  That's the way in the computer world.  In the Mac world Carbon is finally being put to bed, it's junk but it had to be there initially, now it's just a waste of good electrons...  This is what happens in living systems.  You evolve and progress or you die.

Believe it or not some software is more efficiently done in real-mode.  You get to take over the system and write software that works almost exactly as you want it (not as good as Amiga) but as close as you can get it.  Win98SE, Win 3.x, DOS, and some others still support real mode.  I still use MS-Word 2.0-- it's fast and loads almost instantly and the OS to use it fits on a floppy drive.

[amigaksi]

Aparently I understand enough about the differences to know that as each model was produced, more and more emulation had to be put in place to cover. The situation by the time we get to the 040 and the 060 those differences are so great that AmigaOS will not boot without having patches in place. Something you are trying to squirm around that now by citing the 68020 only. Bt

...

Looks like you corrected yourself here.  Also, your "great" word is questionable.  All of my 68000 software runs fine on various AGA/ECS machines with various 680x0 accelerators and no libraries are involved.

>Oh no you don't, you accused me of being:

In post #1169, you stated there are incompatibilities and you also claimed they are "great".  If the incompatibilities are great, that sums up to saying the processors are incompatible.  If they are minor and involve some rarely used instruction, the processors are still considered compatible.

>So again, citation please. I think you'll find no such post where I say these two models are "incompatable".

It sums up to that w/post #1169 and word "great."

>LOL! You call that evidence? So we have Karlos who has the actual Motorola manuals, which explain the various difficulties and potential coding pitfalls with regard the 68k. ..

I also have many manuals stating they are opcode compatible.  I wanted to give a link on web since I don't want to go through all my manuals.

>You have the rest of the Amiga using world knowing full well that if you yank the 040 library from an 040 Amiga system it won't boot (same for the 060) and you have what amounts to a magazine brochure... Come back when you get a clue.

Looks like you corrected yourself here.  So you needed to get a clue.  I use boot disk-based applications that don't involve installing any libraries.

[juan_fine]

Believe it or not some software is more efficiently done in real-mode.  You get to take over the system and write software that works almost exactly as you want it (not as good as Amiga) but as close as you can get it.  Win98SE, Win 3.x, DOS, and some others still support real mode.  I still use MS-Word 2.0-- it's fast and loads almost instantly and the OS to use it fits on a floppy drive.

What is this "floppy disk" of which you speak? I don't think I've seen one on a modern computer?

[amigaksi]

Seems like Amiga people chosed neither... They definitely don't want to progress or evolve, neither want to die. Or at least admit they are dead.

Guess this whole thread shows that clearly. Amiga is dead but its gameport is still the best... and so on.

You need to go on with "and so on" and state the other reasons why Amiga is still useful.  If PC is playing catch-up in some areas, PC needs to evolve in those areas so you have no argument.

And why does one have to update to 3Ghz if the work can easily be done with a sub 100Mhz machine with a superior direct to hardware compatibility where you know exactly what is happening in the system from software perspective and don't have to play guessing games.

[amigaksi]

What is this "floppy disk" of which you speak? I don't think I've seen one on a modern computer?

Because you live in a world of illusion where bloated applications and inexact OSes rule and overrun by spyware/viruses and require gigabytes of data to keep your OSes functioning.

[amigaksi]

I stand corrected.

My system had any number of patches that necessitated the need for the MMU's presence. Having to loose most of the performance both in terms of software patches and hobbling the cpu would imho be as bad as it simply not booting - the result would be much the same as I wouldn't be able to use half of the software I owned at the time. Also having to pray that none of the software I could still use called one of those unsupported instructions does not inspire confidence.

Get a clue.  I am talking 680x0.  There is NO "great" difference to need a library.  You want to exaggerate and distort the truth and claim there's a great difference then that's as good as saying they are incompatible.  Biased.

[amigaksi]

Because that'd blow his argument up! Don't you follow this thread? He's being "objective" - which apparently means you have to dismiss any information that is contrary to your position and call anyone who points this out biased.

:laughing:

You are the one correcting yourself and you're the one who is baised exaggerating minor differences and dare speak of "objectivity."  You have first BE OBJECTIVE before you can accuse others; hyprocrite.

[Karlos]

Get a clue.  I am talking 680x0.  There is NO "great" difference to need a library.  You want to exaggerate and distort the truth and claim there's a great difference then that's as good as saying they are incompatible.  Biased.

See my earlier post. Any software needing 68881/2 instructions not directly implemented in the 040 FPU will fail on 68040 without the 68040.library loaded. You will just get a fatal F line exception based guru instead. Beyond that, all software will run significantly slower without the 68040.library since the data cache cannot be readily enabled without the library.

The situation is even worse on the 060 where any 32x32->64 bit integer multiplication will fail without the proper 060 support code installed.

They are not minor differences.

[amigaksi]

See my earlier post. Any software needing 68881/2 instructions not directly implemented in the 040 FPU will fail on 68040 without the 68040.library loaded. You will just get a fatal F line exception based guru instead. Beyond that, all software will run significantly slower without the 68040.library since the data cache cannot be readily enabled without the library.

The situation is even worse on the 060 where any 32x32->64 bit integer multiplication will fail without the proper 060 support code installed.

They are not minor differences.

But we are talking compatibility; to use the enhanced features, you can use a library or enable them directly with some MOVEC or whatever.  It's better that they don't enable the enhanced features by default.  68881 is not a standard feature of 68000 machines.

[Karlos]

The 68881 is the official motorola FPU for use with 68000, 68010 and even low speed 68020. 68882 is the official motorola FPU for use with higer speed 68020 and 68030. If you have an FPU for a 68000 machine it will almost certainly be a 68881.

MOVE to/from CCR is indeed better but it only exists with 68010 and above. You can't use it in 68000 object code.

[bloodline]

You need to go on with "and so on" and state the other reasons why Amiga is still useful.  If PC is playing catch-up in some areas, PC needs to evolve in those areas so you have no argument.

The crux of the matter... There is no area where the PC is playing catch up to the Amiga. The PC learned from the Amiga, equaled the Amiga and then surpassed the Amiga by the mid 90s.

You claim that it is in several areas... Why not bullet point these areas?

And why does one have to update to 3Ghz if the work can easily be done with a sub 100Mhz machine with a superior direct to hardware compatibility where you know exactly what is happening in the system from software perspective and don't have to play guessing games.

Um... The work I do, music production, simply can't be done on older machines, they are just too slow and have no support for the high definition audio interfaces that I use.

What, a few years ago, used to require several rooms of equipment and a large mixing console, can now be done on a £2000 MacBook Pro, a 24bit firewire multichannel audio interface and Logic Studio (plus and other software of your choice)...

[ElPolloDiabl]

Deja Vu. I think amigaksi is a die hard strategist. He will hold onto his bad play until you a) Flinch b) Make a mistake.

[juan_fine]

Because you live in a world of illusion where bloated applications and inexact OSes rule and overrun by spyware/viruses and require gigabytes of data to keep your OSes functioning.

Great sense of humor you have there, Askii. Have you heard the saying 'if the only tool you have is a hammer evyerthing ooks like a nail"?

[Karlos]

Um... The work I do, music production, simply can't be done on older machines, they are just too slow and have no support for the high definition audio interfaces that I use.

What, a few years ago, used to require several rooms of equipment and a large mixing console, can now be done on a £2000 MacBook Pro, a 24bit firewire multichannel audio interface and Logic Studio (plus and other software of your choice)...

Tut, what's wrong with good old ProTracker on a 512K A500? The timing is perfect and has no latency bullcrap like you get with your tragically inferior generic PC rubbish. Macbook Pro indeed :rolleyes:

[ElPolloDiabl]

Because you live in a world of illusion where bloated applications and inexact OSes rule and overrun by spyware/viruses and require gigabytes of data to keep your OSes functioning.

So use Linux. When people cotton on to the fact that they don't have to pay for it (I can't underestimate the Sadomasochistic nature of ppl), the games and apps will come pouring in. It's no wonder M$ is so desperate to get a foothold on the internet, they know the OS war is lost. In this day and age any 2 bit hack can put together an operating system. The future lies in services.
Anything else?

[ElPolloDiabl]

Tut, what's wrong with good old ProTracker on a 512K A500? The timing is perfect and has no latency bullcrap like you get with your tragically inferior generic PC rubbish. Macbook Pro indeed :rolleyes:

You can have my Emu10k DSP when you pry it out of my cold dead hand. nuf said.