Ben Hermans interview on AmigaNews.de, where he explains Olaf Barthals role in it all and of course, the court docs I linked (link 3) to previously.
The links you posted proves nothing I'm afraid. Some C parts with comments that date back to Dave Haynie days are still there, the assembly was converted to C by Bartel (aside from the clean ups). The bottom line is that no matter who cleaned up 3.x, the point is that it is in use inside OS4., that's all i said and you wanted to prove otherwise which you didn't (you also have a PM on this subject).
Hombre was AAA's final port of call. It's also questionable whether AOS would have been on a Nyx derived system since Dave himself has stated several times over the years that it was EOL even before C= collapsed.
AAA was compatible with OCS/AGA, Hombre was not. Dave said it used some amiga ideas but that a VGA chip was more compatible to OCS/AGA than Hombre go figure.
And here is the sticking point: you should understand that Chipsets != Amiga
The last Amiga C= as ever talked about was the modular mobo + AmigaOS, AAA was only an add in card that would have been scrapped either eventually, or from the get go (in the end they scrapped the whole thing).
And here is where the sticking point is. AAA was dead, it was never going to be completed and Hombre was a last ditch effort to try to salvage some value out of the chipset. More on this below.
Again, chipsets != Amiga. The fact remain that the modular concept (that in any case would have never "hosted" any GFX chipset as they were too late with dev)
was the last "Amiga" they talked about. The Mobo was the Amiga not AAA.
Hombre used some ideas from the old Amiga chipsets, but was no Amiga (chipsets != Amiga).
LOLWUT? I stated that in no uncertain terms that is precisely how the world went and how the PC was from the beginning. Do you even bother to read what you're writing?
So we agree, good.
I stated that 1, that the X1k is no more an amiga than any modern PC.
I said that the X1000 it as good as it gets for today's standard
NOT TO YOU, but to another guy who was claiming this was no amiga due to the lack of Amiga chipset . I said that the X1000 is more similar to what they talked at devcon93 than anything we will ever get, I meant that the Devcon Amiga was
the Mobo+AmigaOS, not AAA (an obsolete concept that was going the way of the dodo in
ANY possible case) chipsets != Amiga.
Moreover it is incorrect to state that the X1000 is like any PC of today, whether you like it or not today fully boxed personal computers don't come with AmigaOS, and as Pyromania ended up evidencing in the previous post they don't come with transputer like tech built in. Don't comment about how useful or useless it might be, the point is,
the X1000 it's no PC.2 that AAA was an architectural dead end which lead to hombre, which was C='s last project. (which you disputed)
oh no, I disputed it was their last "AMIGA" project. Hombre was no Amiga, their last Amiga project was the mobo described at Devcon93 and form the way they speak there, is pretty clear they were going the way everybody else was :
The AAA chips obviously function as just part of a whole Amiga system. It's certainly possible to build a machine, like the Amiga 500, where the Amiga chips essentially are the whole system. Such a system would be composed of the AAA chips, a microprocessor, memory, some CIAs, analog stuff for audio, and one gate array for “glue”. Of course, such a system is rather boring to talk about,
there's considerably more to an Amiga system than the custom chips.
The only thing that would have survived in case they did it would have been the modular mobo, all the rest was scrap.
3, that the X1k bears no resemblance to AAA on any but the most broad concept (IE modularity, beyond that sweet FA).
This is where you make the usual mistake all the time, AAA was not "amiga", but a chipset on a modular board connected to the main MOBO (the latter as a new modular entity running AmigaOS was the next Amiga they had in mind), which could be changed with any off the shelf part, thus leaving an Amiga with no AAA at all. And it is 100% sure that off the shelf part would have taken its place in case they went ahead with the project.
On your "authoritative ways: you talk about AAA as if it = "Amiga" and link documents that do not prove much, so much so for authority. I said they commented "OS3 was used for OS4" recently, not years ago, and what you posted proves nothing on so many levels it boggles the mind (even Olaf code is valid OS3 source used in OS4 in any case, and the new exec was never in question) but there is more of course, you have a PM on this one.
