MorphOS on Power Mac G5

[kolla]

Really?  You will just have to show me how a PC running UAE can run MorphOS.  (before you get all riled up, I know you were responding to the ImageFX running on MorphOS being faster on the G5 posting)

Yes, I was responding to the issue of ImageFx - your comment above makes no sense.

If ImageFX and other Classic Amiga programs were the only apps us MorphOS users were running on our MorphOS computers, I would agree that there is almost no reason except the OS experience itself, which is good in my opinion, to use MorphOS at all.  But that is not the case, there are MorphOS native apps that can only be run on a MorphOS capable computer.

Like what exactly? I have yet to see any native MorphOS app that justifies the hassle over running equivalent m68k software under UAE or native app under host OS.

Granted, as Karlos likes to point out, most of those apps that we can run on MorphOS (AmigaOS4 is in the same boat) exist on other platforms that run orders of magnitude faster than any MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x machine at a fraction of the price, but I fail to see the logic of why any MorphOS or AmigaOS4 user would want to keep using underpowered hardware that limits the kinds of things we can do on the OS we prefer to use, not are forced to use because the software we want to run is only available on other OSes that we do not enjoy using as much as an Amiga-Like OS.

The hardware is not the problem - the OSes themselves are, it's the OSes that are underpowered, and lacking just about any modern features I can think of - providing kick ass hardware is rather pointless when the OS you want to run on it is a relic of 20 years ago with some 3D fluff and nice icons thrown ontop of it. Glorified emulators are what they are, with a handfull of native apps each.

Does Karlos use either MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x?

I have both, but I rarely use them since they lacking so much behind that I dont really see the point - I get more done with UAE and old m68k apps than with any of OS4 and MorphOS, since the host systems I run UAE on can transparently give UAE and the m68k apps access to data over modern protocols, something none of the so called NG systems are capable of. And as a bonus I also get much faster amiga systems, that can be live migrated, backed up and have hardware upgrades whenever it fits _me_, without having to jump through burning hoops and whatnot.

MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x need the power to enable the few remaining programmers we have to write more power hungry applications and games.

Nonsense. Programmers flee MorphOS and AmigaOS4.x mostly due to lack of modern features in the OSes, features that core developers see no point in adressing for whatever reasons.

It is kind of a chicken or egg situation.

No it's not, it's a "too many old hens laying rotten eggs" situation.

Does the software that requires more power and graphics capability come first and run crappy on what we have today, or do we port our OSes to more powerful machines so that more power hungry software can be written?  I think it is the latter.

You are wrong. There is no need for more CPU power, there is a desperate need for updating the core functionality of the OSes, providing modern features to them so that it becomes even slightly interesting for developers to provide software for it.

Why not just use the more capable OSes and hardware in the first place?  Because we are MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x users that wish to use those OSes and computers, that is why we are here discussing this.

Not really - MorphOS and OS4 were originally meant to be quite different beasts than what they are today - both went from being systems with promising roadmaps to glorified emulators with nice icons. Do you remember what OS4 looked like on the paper back in 1996? Or how abox in MorphOS was just meant to be a temporary stopgap? Today they are just short of being cought up by AROS - I find that highly ironic, sad and hilarious at the same time.

I don't see many PC and Mac users here that are not at least in some way interested in MorphOS2.x and/or AmigaOS4.x.

OS4 and MorphOS are not that much more interesting than OS3.x, really.

Doesn't that make sense to everyone?

Nope

[amigadave]

Big surprise that it doesn't make sense to someone that "rarely use them since they lacking so much behind that I dont really see the point".  Other MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x users have a different opinion and attitude than you do, or there would be no MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x at all. They would have ceased to exist years ago.  Also, your statement that my joke makes no sense, doesn't make any sense!  It's a JOKE with a smiley face after it and it is even followed with the text to explain that I knew what you were referring to.  Jeesh! Grow a sense of humor.

As for the rest, I have no problem with the reality that both OSes are unfinished, even though they are no longer labeled as beta releases.  As long as work continues on them, not just work to port them to different machines, I will continue to use them because I want to do so.  Is it rational, not really.  But I am sure my computing needs are much lower than yours, as well as my expectations of both NG PPC systems, so my enjoyment of using them is not dependent on me being rational during the time I am using a NG Amiga system.

I understand your disappointment and/or displeasure with MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x and why you don't use them except rarely.  I have no problem with you having your view and opinions regarding MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x, I do have a problem when some people (maybe not you) label people like me who like to use MorphOS2.x, or AmigaOS4.x as;  stupid, wasting their time, wasting their money, unrealistic dreamers (even if some of the fanboys are), or any other remarks that imply that we are somehow less intelligent, or less of a person because of our choices and preferences.

I don't agree with most of your comments, but I am not going to waste my time trying to rebut any of them, because you have every right to think what ever you want and it is not my job to try to convince you otherwise.  I also don't need anyone's approval to use the computer and OS of my choice, or their blessing of my reasons for those choices.

Enjoy your Amiga experience any way you want and let me enjoy mine, while also working toward improving it, hoping and wishing for others to join me in the same pursuit of a better NG Amiga system and new software, and allow me and others to praise and support what we see as efforts of the developers to provide what we are hoping for.

[amigadave]

Damn, I hate being sucked into defending myself on forums and it is always a "No Win" situation, but I just can't seem to stop myself this time.

Yes, I was responding to the issue of ImageFx - your comment above makes no sense.

That's because it's an obvious joke.

Like what exactly? I have yet to see any native MorphOS app that justifies the hassle over running equivalent m68k software under UAE or native app under host OS.

What do you mean "Like what exactly"?  I made a statement that to run native MorphOS apps you need a MorphOS compatible computer, not a PC running an emulator on a host OS and you counter that you haven't seen any native apps that justify using MorphOS.  The decision to use or not use MorphOS (or AmigaOS4) is not in question. I and many others have already made that choice, so we want as many native applications and games as we can get.  We have made a choice to use MorphOS2.x, and/or AmigaOS4.x either in addition to, or instead of another OS on other hardware.  For myself, I would rather get to a point where I never have to boot any Windows OS ever again for many reasons (but as I have said my needs and requirements are much lower than most people. I don't expect you to understand this as you appear to be caught in the wheels of the machine).

The hardware is not the problem - the OSes themselves are, it's the OSes that are underpowered, and lacking just about any modern features I can think of - providing kick ass hardware is rather pointless when the OS you want to run on it is a relic of 20 years ago with some 3D fluff and nice icons thrown ontop of it. Glorified emulators are what they are, with a handfull of native apps each.

You really missed the mark with this one.  You are trying to tell me that decoding HD video for playback can't be done on my Efika because of a fault in MorphOS?  I can't render 3D animations in real time on my G4 MacMini running MorphOS2.5 because the OS is lacking something and if they just added it to the OS my G4 MacMini would magically then be able to do that?  Speeding up the time it takes to edit photos with generated effects or writing a decent CAD program that can also render 3D drawings quickly and runs on MorphOS needs more features in the OS and no improvement in the hardware speed and new graphics drivers?  

Maybe faster hardware will help "inspire" just one MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x programmer to keep programming for those OSes AND allow one new app/game to be written that cannot be run, or run satisfactorily on the slower existing hardware that those OSes have available to them today.  Using your comment and logic above why did anyone create 68060 cards for the A2000/A3000/A4000's?  Faster hardware has allowed for new, more demanding software to be written on all OSes from the beginning, why shouldn't the users that care about continuing to use MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x want this for our OS of choice?  Maybe modern OSes are also part of the problem and all those features you keep referring to aren't really necessary as part of the OS and should be optional for people with other priorities, needs and desires from their computing experience?

I have both, but I rarely use them since they lacking so much behind that I dont really see the point - I get more done with UAE and old m68k apps than with any of OS4 and MorphOS, since the host systems I run UAE on can transparently give UAE and the m68k apps access to data over modern protocols, something none of the so called NG systems are capable of. And as a bonus I also get much faster amiga systems, that can be live migrated, backed up and have hardware upgrades whenever it fits _me_, without having to jump through burning hoops and whatnot.

Then why even keep them? Why comment in threads that are about improving the hardware for an OS that you don't use and have little or no interest in?  Just sell them to other Amiga users that can appreciate them and stay happy with your other OSes and computers.  I don't know which "modern" protocols you are referring to, but my MorphOS2.x computer is connected to my LAN and has access to all the data I need or want on my other computers or on the Internet (I stress the "I need or want" before you respond with something that "YOU" want or need).  After all, it is you that are making comments which infer that using MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x are a waste of time and money, in effect trying to convince others that your view is the only reasonable one to share and anyone that disagrees with you is an idiot.  Oh, the "burning hoops" is a very nice dramatic touch (sarcasm, in case you can't figure it out for yourself, like the joke)

Nonsense. Programmers flee MorphOS and AmigaOS4.x mostly due to lack of modern features in the OSes, features that core developers see no point in adressing for whatever reasons.

So now you are a spokesman for all the programmers that have left programming for MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x and know their reasons for leaving AND you also know what the "core developers" are working on and what they have planned to address at some time in the future?  The arrogance of that statement by you above amazes me.  My statement wasn't even about programmers who have left.  It is about those that have CHOSEN to remain and continue to use MorphOS2.x and/or AmigaOS4.x. needing more powerful hardware before they can write native apps and games that REQUIRE more powerful hardware.

No it's not, it's a "too many old hens laying rotten eggs" situation.

Why resort to insults to express YOUR opinion? You made your thoughts about the PPC NG Amiga OSes with your "I have both, but I rarely use them since they lacking so much behind that I dont really see the point" comment earlier.

You are wrong. There is no need for more CPU power, there is a desperate need for updating the core functionality of the OSes, providing modern features to them so that it becomes even slightly interesting for developers to provide software for it.

No, you are wrong.  It is clear to all MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x users and unbiased observers that we will benefit from an increase in CPU power. We also know that progress continues, albeit at a slow pace due to available resources, toward updating the core functionality of our chosen OSes and accept that fact.  Some software development continues, so these OSes are obviously interesting to at least a few programmers and users.  You just aren't one of them.

Not really - MorphOS and OS4 were originally meant to be quite different beasts than what they are today - both went from being systems with promising roadmaps to glorified emulators with nice icons. Do you remember what OS4 looked like on the paper back in 1996? Or how abox in MorphOS was just meant to be a temporary stopgap? Today they are just short of being cought up by AROS - I find that highly ironic, sad and hilarious at the same time.

My statement is about users of MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x that prefer to do some tasks on their preferred OS instead of doing the same task on another OS because that is their choice and that is why many of us are reading a thread about the possibility of porting MorphOS to the G5 PowerMac. You obviously don't fit that description so why are you commenting in this thread?  What is your agenda, or motive? What has your quote above got to do with my statement that you were replying to?  Nothing!  You are just rambling about your disappointment with the current state of either OS compared to where they were originally supposed to go.  Well guess what, ideas, people and projects change sometimes.  Some of us have gotten over it and moved on to a choice of using MorphOS2.x and/or AmigaOS4.x regardless of what was proposed when they were first thought of and development work started on them. Again, you are not one of them so why do you hold on to your computers that run those disappointing OSes you like to run down so much?

OS4 and MorphOS are not that much more interesting than OS3.x, really.

Thanks for sharing your opinion, but it is not shared by myself and probably a few hundred or more users of MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x and it doesn't add any value to this thread.

 

Nope

It wouldn't make sense to someone who is as biased and jaded toward both PPC NG Amiga OSes as you appear to be.

[Karlos]

Granted, as Karlos likes to point out, most of those apps that we can run on MorphOS (AmigaOS4 is in the same boat) exist on other platforms that run orders of magnitude faster than any MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x machine at a fraction of the price, but I fail to see the logic of why any MorphOS or AmigaOS4 user would want to keep using underpowered hardware that limits the kinds of things we can do on the OS we prefer to use, not are forced to use because the software we want to run is only available on other OSes that we do not enjoy using as much as an Amiga-Like OS. Does Karlos use either MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x? I know he uses AmigaOS3.x as he uses his A1200 for music

Actually, a MorphOS 2 machine is the only "amigoid" system missing from my collection. They're not all listed in my signature, you know

Regarding the application situation, I can only reiterate what I said in #153:

As to your other question about what do we need the G5 power for, and there are no Amiga apps that need that kind of power, you are obviously right for 99% of the apps, but with the old 68k apps needing to be run through a JIT engine and not natively, any demanding Classic Amiga app, such as 3D rendering, will benefit from the extra power. But more important in my minds eye is that the extra computing power will open a few programming opportunities that everyone thought could not be accomplished on any Amiga computer in the past. With G5, or PA6T power and if/when better graphics cards are supported, it will be possible to create better Amiga applications in the future than might be possible with only the current power of a 1.5GHz G4 MacMini, or in AmigaOS4.x's case, a 1GHz G4 Pegasos2, or AmigaOne.

I have to admit, I'd love to see that, for to me that would be a sign of genuine progress. I honestly think that OS4 and MOS are operating systems without software more than they are operating systems without hardware. Sure they run a large slice of legacy applications, but tiny minority of those actually benefit from the step up in performance, which has been my point of contention throughout.

Aside from apps and codecs ported from other systems where the required performance to run is considered minimal at best, neither OS4 or MOS presently seem to have applications that would appear to have been made possible solely by the improved performance they have over classic machines. And in my book, that's a real pity.

[amigadave]

Point taken, but both OS4 and MOS as 32-bit non SMP are moving towards hardware SMP capable 64-bit platforms regardless, so really, that boat has already sailed.

Is there a better, more cost efficient PPC choice for the MorphOS developers to use as a target platform than the Mac's they have chosen already and the ones they are considering for future ports?  In other words, given the amount of resources they have to work with, and the determination to continue to go forward with MorphOS and not just call it quits, what hardware would you have chosen?  SMP is not possible for MorphOS2.x, or AmigaOS4.x and I would imagine this applies to AROS too, but might be wrong on that point.  The fastest hardware that they can easily move to is all dual processor, dual core or quad core.  That is all they have to choose from if they want to continue to increase the speed of their OS as far as possible without breaking compatibility, or going to another architecture which would require much more time and work, which they don't have the resources for.

The same way AROS does - or rather doesn't; by appealing to an existing user base instead of taking on the world. In truth, the only competition OS4 and MOS have is each other and that isn't going to change by moving to a more popular hardware platform. Alternative OS for x86 are legion; none of them are curling up and dying just because windows, osx and linux are in town.

Only a very small number of delusional fanatics still think that MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x are going to "take on the world", or become a mainstream OS any time in the future.  I think every hobby has a few people that are out of touch with reality.  I know that the MorphOS developers are not trying to, or claiming that MorphOS will ever be ready to compete directly against Windows, MacOSX, or even Linux and I very much doubt that the AmigaOS4.x developers are either.  That does not stop them from wanting their OS to be better than it is now and also wanting more users to choose it as an entertainment, a hobby, or a part time replacement for their other OSes.

I actually think that an x86 port of MOS (or OS4) would face far more of a threat from AROS than it does any of the "big" ones.

Of course AROS would be the bigger threat as it is closer to appearance, and function and it is free.  Have you ever considered that fact might be a big contributing factor for why MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x have resisted moving to x86 so far?  Why would they want to compete with not just one free OS, but probably dozens, when both teams of developers are just tiny groups of programmers that could never compete with other OS choices that might have ten to a hundred times the man-power to work on an x86 alternate OS?

[Karlos]

IOf course AROS would be the bigger threat as it is closer to appearance, and function and it is free.  Have you ever considered that fact might be a big contributing factor for why MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x have resisted moving to x86 so far?  Why would they want to compete with not just one free OS, but probably dozens, when both teams of developers are just tiny groups of programmers that could never compete with other OS choices that might have ten to a hundred times the man-power to work on an x86 alternate OS?

It has occurred to me many times and I'm sure I've said as much in the past. However, the key functionality required of any MOS x86 / OS4 x86 implementation would be PPC emulation, something which I doubt AROS developers are really interested in. You have to admit, the prospect of moving to x86 and sacrificing all compatibility with your existing software base is not an appealing one.

I hate to say this but if OS4 and MOS plan to stay tied to PPC forever, then enjoy it now, since with the G5 mac, you have reached the pinnacle of what the architecture had to offer for desktop systems. It's been 4 years since the line was discontinued. I admit, we're still using m68k amigas 25 years later, but do you expect to be using a PPC machine for as long?

[minator]

Yes indeed this Mac will be faster. From the picture from the G5 Mac from the show:
Processor: 2700 MHz, FSB: 1350 MHz

AFAIK the PA6T processor in the "X1000": 1800 MHz, FSB: 1067 MHz.

So yes, performance wise it will kick "X1000" butt,  

You're missing some rather important details here...

The G5 uses an "elastic bus" to a north bridge (actually 2 busses running in different directions).
At 1.35 GHz that's 10.8 GB/Second
However control signals are sent down the same wires so it's theoretical max is just under 10GB/second.

OTOH the PA6T uses dual memory controllers, it can use the full bandwidth of both busses.
At 1.067GHz is 17.07 GB/second.

With the on-die memory controllers the PA6T is also likely to have considerably lower memory latency - (the G5 northbridge was known for being rather slow, though a faster one was introduced later on).

We will know for sure *how much* behind OS4 on the X1000 will be compared to MorphOS on a fast Powermac G5 when we see a complete comparison benchmark of the two, like the obligement test some time ago. But it will be behind.

The PA6T has a much better memory systems so I think the hardware is going to be much more evenly matched than anyone suspects.

at a quarter of the cost (in the worst case, probably much less).

This is one area where they are not exactly evenly matched!

As before I expect any decision will be down to the choice of OS and price.



Amigoid memory speeds:

060@66MHz  - 0.132 GB/s
Efika            - 0.5GB/s (on-die 32bit memory controller)
Peg2/A1/µA1  - 1.0 GB/s (not sure, might be 0.8GB/sec)
Sam 440       - 1.1GB/s (on-die 32bit memory controller)
G4               - 1.6GB/s (late model PowerBooks only, the rest ran slower)
Sam 460       - 3.2 GB/s  (on-die 64bit memory controller)
G5                - 10.8 GB/s.
PA6T             - 17.07 GB/s (2x on-die 64bit memory controller).

and just for comparison:
My laptop       - 8.5 GB/s (18 month old MacBook)
Cell               - 25 GB/s
Core i7           - 32 GB/s
Nvidia GTX 295 - 220 GB/s

[kolla]

A multicore PC with multiple instances of UAE beats a G5 running MorphOS easily.

                                                    

As UAE only runs 68K apps, that's hardly the point. We're talking about a PPC OS.

Nope, the comment I was responding to was not about PPC OS as such, it was about "what makes MorphOS more suited than anything else for old m68k amiga apps" - so MIDI sequencing doesn't need the CPU power and an old A1200 does it fine, and someone brought up ImageFx as an example of something MorphOS on a G5 supposedly can do so much better than anything else, and I counter that by pointing out that you can have a much faster environment for ImageFx by using UAE.

[runequester]

Nope, the comment I was responding to was not about PPC OS as such, it was about "what makes MorphOS more suited than anything else for old m68k amiga apps" - so MIDI sequencing doesn't need the CPU power and an old A1200 does it fine, and someone brought up ImageFx as an example of something MorphOS on a G5 supposedly can do so much better than anything else, and I counter that by pointing out that you can have a much faster environment for ImageFx by using UAE.

I guess Im not familiar here but what, if any unique PPC software exists for OS 4 or Morph that exists on no other platform ?

[kolla]

That's because it's an obvious joke.

OK, feel free to explain me where the funny bit is

What do you mean "Like what exactly"?

With "Like what exactly" I hoped to get a list of applications that are exclusive for MorphOS, and that really are so great that it justifies the hassle of getting a 20kg old G5 beast to keep around, and paying the MorphOS license for it too.

The decision to use or not use MorphOS (or AmigaOS4) is not in question.

It was in the comments I responded to, where Karlos pointed out that he does not need anything more than his A1200 to do MIDI sequencing, and someone brought up ImageFx as an example of something needing more CPU power - I would say it is much saner to set up UAE on a PC to run ImageFx rather than getting this old monster of a machine (G5 workstation) and pay for the extra MorphOS license for it.

I and many others have already made that choice, so we want as many native applications and games as we can get.  We have made a choice to use MorphOS2.x, and/or AmigaOS4.x either in addition to, or instead of another OS on other hardware.  For myself, I would rather get to a point where I never have to boot any Windows OS ever again for many reasons.

I never was a Windows user, and what does Windows have to do with anything in this thread?

You really missed the mark with this one.  You are trying to tell me that decoding HD video for playback can't be done on my Efika because of a fault in MorphOS?

It's the fault of MorphOS that I for example cannot watch TV online as I am used to, even if I had a G5 to run it on, it's not about applications that are lacking either, it's about that darn stuck-in-the-90ies old IP stack that comes with MorphOS and the lack of modern features in it. And the developers are more concerned about how many bytes faster it is than almost equally antiqued MiamiDx over FTP transfers.

Maybe faster hardware will help "inspire" just one MorphOS2.x or AmigaOS4.x programmer to keep programming for those OSes AND allow one new app/game to be written that cannot be run, or run satisfactorily on the slower existing hardware that those OSes have available to them today.

Ah yes - you just need some magic software that only a G5 can make use of, and all the people who would want to use that killer application would have to hunt down old G5s too. MorphOS people have themselves uses this as an argument against the X1000, well...

Using your comment and logic above why did anyone create 68060 cards for the A2000/A3000/A4000's?  Faster hardware has allowed for new, more demanding software to be written on all OSes from the beginning, why shouldn't the users that care about continuing to use MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x want this for our OS of choice?

I really don't see the relevance here, so I take it you're joking again :laughing:

Maybe modern OSes are also part of the problem and all those features you keep referring to aren't really necessary as part of the OS and should be optional for people with other priorities, needs and desires from their computing experience?

Ofcourse, that's true for any system.

But, just out of curiosity... what do you do the day your ISP fully switches to IPv6?

Then why even keep them? Why comment in threads that are about improving the hardware for an OS that you don't use and have little or no interest in? Just sell them to other Amiga users that can appreciate them and stay happy with your other OSes and computers.

Why? There are other operating systems I can run on them that do have the features I need. I have been running Linux on my old A1200 for since 1997, it does it just fine.

I don't know which "modern" protocols you are referring to, but my MorphOS2.x computer is connected to my LAN and has access to all the data I need or want on my other computers or on the Internet (I stress the "I need or want" before you respond with something that "YOU" want or need).

Right, you don't know, nor want to know my needs as long as your needs are fulfilled. That's OK, I'm used to that.

After all, it is you that are making comments which infer that using MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x are a waste of time and money, in effect trying to convince others that your view is the only reasonable one to share and anyone that disagrees with you is an idiot.  Oh, the "burning hoops" is a very nice dramatic touch.

Now who is getting all whined up here

Did I really write "idiot" anywhere? And yes, I think the license scheme of MorphOS is very much like jumping though burning hoops, no need to explain sarcasm to me, you used it alot without commenting it already.

So now you are a spokesman for all the programmers that have left programming for MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x and know their reasons for leaving AND you also know what the "core developers" are working on and what they have planned to address at some time in the future?

Yes, I'm a demi god you see, I can read people's minds, it's quite convenient I can tell you.

The arrogance of that statement by you above amazes me.

If you really want to be amazed, you should take a peek down my pants.

My statement wasn't even about programmers who have left.  It is about those that have CHOSEN to remain and continue to use MorphOS2.x and/or AmigaOS4.x. needing more powerful hardware before they can write native apps and games that REQUIRE more powerful hardware.

And we're back to "what apps, exactly?". Full circle

Why resort to insults to express YOUR opinion?

What insults? Where did I insult anyone? Or did you just chose to be insulted?

You made your thoughts about the PPC NG Amiga OSes with your "I have both, but I rarely use them since they lacking so much behind that I dont really see the point" comment earlier.

Yes, I'm sorry for that typo, I meant "lagging behind".

No, you are wrong.  It is clear to all MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x users and unbiased observers that we will benefit from an increase in CPU power.

Unbiased observers tend to wonder what the point is when the OSes can only use one of the cores available, after all, supporting multiple cores is something that BeOS did on PPC back in 1995 - and here we are, 15 years later and nothing has changed in Amiga land.

We also know that progress continues, albeit at a slow pace due to available resources, toward updating the core functionality of our chosen OSes and accept that fact.  Some software development continues, so these OSes are obviously interesting to at least a few programmers and users.  You just aren't one of them.

Correct, I'm not particularly satisfied with the pace of things.

My statement is about users of MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x that prefer to do some tasks on their preferred OS instead of doing the same task on another OS because that is their choice and that is why many of us are reading a thread about the possibility of porting MorphOS to the G5 PowerMac. You obviously don't fit that description so why are you commenting in this thread?

I was originally commenting on how to fastest run ImageFx, and you went AWN on me for no appearant reasons, so I just answered back AWN style.

What is your agenda, or motive?

A couple that are relevant here:
* Open up the development of OS4 and MorphOS to the benefit of all
* Create awareness of the shortcomings of the systems, so that they might be addressed properly, and not just ignored as they typically are today (heck, there was alot more awareness of these issues during the days of OS3.x)

What has your quote above got to do with my statement that you were replying to?  Nothing!  You are just rambling about your disappointment with the current state of either OS compared to where they were originally supposed to go.

Ofcourse I'm disappointed, am I not allowed to be? As for "what has your comment to do with my statement" - that's how our nice little discussion started, with your "joke" that as far as I can tell had nothing relevant to my comment.

Well guess what, ideas, people and projects change sometimes.  Some of us have gotten over it and moved on to a choice of using MorphOS2.x and/or AmigaOS4.x regardless of what was proposed when they were first thought of and development work started on them.

Sure, and I have no problem with that.

Again, you are not one of them so why do you hold on to your computers that run those disappointing OSes you like to run down so much?

My minimac runs linux 99% of the time, and it does it just fine, it can even play 720p quite nicely with both mplayer and VLC (which I've come to realize is the benchmark for how usable a computer is among MorphOS users). I boot MorphOS on it every now and then to check out updates or test out how some old apps work on it, but that's just about that. In addition I have this old peg1/april2 that I got for free, running Linux and MorphOS, and my old A3000 with CSPPC/CVPPC that boots into both OS4.0 and MorphOS 1.4.5, as well as OS3.9.

Thanks for sharing your opinion, but it is not shared by myself and probably a few hundred or more users of MorphOS2.x and AmigaOS4.x and it doesn't add any value to this thread.

Yes, it is a well established fact that the hundreds of MorphOS 2.x users and AmigaOS 4.x users are ignorant about the limitations of their systems. (and that, my friend, was sarcasm too)

It wouldn't make sense to someone who is as biased and jaded toward both PPC NG Amiga OSes as you appear to be.

Yes, I'm teh evil! :laughing:

[Iggy]

I'd take some quotes from past postings, but the back and forth bickering has gotten more than a little tired.

If you're a user of system 'x' and you're satisfied, fine. There's still a good chance I wouldn't find your favorite system all that satisfying.

If you're like me, and you've never found a ideal system, then you realize that all hardware/OS combinations present some compromises/flaws.
Fine, then things can only improve.

How does divergence of opinions and platforms hurt us? It doesn't. I agree to agree or disagree with any of you and still feel good about the current state of our community. Cus' there's a whole lot a shakin' going on.

[Iggy]

Kudos to all of you for still bouncing this one back and forth though.

BTW - Where did any of you get the idea that MorphOS users were down on the X1000? Is it just because we think G5 Apples are a betters solution?
Personally, I'm impressed with the Nemo design and even sent an e-mail message to a former contact at Varisys congratulating them on it.

[kolla]

Where did any of you get the idea that MorphOS users were down on the X1000?

It might have been in the numerous X1000 threads on AmigWorld.net and MorphZone.

[Iggy]

It might have been in the numerous X1000 threads on AmigWorld.net and MorphZone.

I'm on MorphZone regularly and the majority of posts I see (at least from the knowledgeable posters) are appreciative of the X1000.
In fact, we had the processor figured out before a lot of others and were suspicious that there might be a connection to Varisys several months ago.

While I don't see the MorphOS developers porting to Nemo, that market is served already by AOS4.

Perhaps what you perceive as negative  are just statements of confidence in the current direction we're headed. G5 Apples are a natural evolution in the direction MorphOS is headed.

One of the primary reasons you don't see MorphOS on Acube or other AOS platforms (beyond the fact that the manufacturers won't help pay for the port) is a continued desire to see both systems prosper. Why step on Hyperion's feet? They've helped get this rolling and the majority of us are willing to share this market segment (PPCs).

[kolla]

Hardly, the Apple G5s were not really up for discussion at the time when X1000 was announced. Do you suggest that takemetograndma never put down the X1000?

And for what it is worth, I don't even see the point of the X1000 myself - from my POV, it is indeed just a waste of money and resources. But then again, I'm not a MorphOS user, so I cannot use myself as an example of MorphOS user putting down the X1000. Or maybe I do count as a MorphOS user, having three systems with it on, of which one is registered (for free).

[Karlos]

Hardly, the Apple G5s were not really up for discussion at the time when X1000 was announced. Do you suggest that takemetograndma never put down the X1000?.

Actually, I'm rather hoping TMHG has learned a valuable lesson in this thread.

He's popped up in several OS4 related threads to shoot down OS4 and promote MOS. That, in itself wouldn't have really registered on my radar but there was one thread in particular that stands out. It was created by a poster that was asking specifically what the deal with OS4 was, what was fun and what was cool. He'd already created one for MOS asking the same.

Regardless of this, TMHG jumped into the thread in full fanboy mode to try and persuade the OP what he really wanted to talk about in that thread was MOS. The OP didn't and went as far asking that he desist. And, after some complaints, so did I.

Unfortunately, being in full fanboy mode, it seems he just was incapable of stopping and the thread got derailed further and further.

In the end, the OP was thoroughly put off both options.

Now, in the course of that thread, TMHG was pretty scathing towards the OS4 option.

Which is why, in this thread, after I tried to get him to explain why MOS on a G5 would be a better choice than say linux on an x86 for any compute intensive task, the following response made me laugh out loud:

I think it's funny that an Amiga enthusiast has to defend his preferred choice of OS and HW for his Amiga hobby here on Amiga.org. This is something I would expect over at slashdot, i.e. "Linux on x86 is cheaper, faster and better". Well it might be, but it won't be MorphOS.

Well, perhaps next time he'll remember that before he trashes some other amiga user's preferred choice of OS/HW.