MorphOS on Power Mac G5

[Iggy]

I doubt we'll see OpenCL support under MorphOS because of the GPU requirements. Even once G5 support is released, the majority of Powermac G5s have an AGP video slot.
That is one advantage the X1000 running AmigaOS4 will have over a G5 Mac running MorphOS.
I understand that a driver for the R700 is already under development for AmigaOS. So, you might stand a chance of getting OpenCL support.
It likely that when the G5 is supported a lot of users are going to choose a Radeon 9600 video card. Their cheap, faster than current cards supported by MorphOS and a 9600 was shown at Essen running in a G4 Powermac.
While that GPU is somewhat dated, it still should provide a nice boost compared to something like my current Radeon 9250 (especially when paired with a much more powerful processor).

So, while we've spent so much time focusing on the relative merits of each others future top processors, each sysyem will differ in other areas and each system will offer specific advantages..

I believe MorphOS on a G5 Mac will offer good value in a powerful Amiga like PPC computer. In fact with up to four cores and 8gigs of memory, its got more power than MorphOS can use. Also, while AmigaOS user hate to hear us repeat this, MorphOS as a slightly more mature product performs many operations quicker than AmigaOS. It will give our diehard fanatic MorphOS users (the people who wouldn't use anything else) a product that won't leave them with X1000 envy.

The X1000 is completely new. While MorphOS focuses on supporting hardware that is primarily second hand, in the future the majority of
the platforms available to buy to run AmigaOS4 will be brand new. Also, featuring a more modern expansion bus the X1000 will be able to utilize expansion cards that won't be available to MorphOS users as well as more modern video cards. For people willing to pay the premium, this system will offer features unavailable elsewhere.

Its going to be interesting, but I'd be willing to bet that when these systems become available to the users we're going to find that they perform somewhat on par with each other and are more similar than they are dissimilar.

If there some contention between both camp, so be it. One thing I think we can all agree on is that its nice to see so many new developments in our market. Especially the new high power systems. Whether you're blue or red, these new introductions are bound to be good news (even if you're of the opinion, as many of us are, that it still makes more sense to move to a mainstream system).
Hey Amigans are stubborn, opinionated and a little bit fanatical. Even if you're sure that we'll never climb out of our current hobby machine status (something I myself am unsure about) ain't it cool that our community is still here and new products are being introduced?

And, you know, the thing that amazes me most is that virtually everything that has survived and continues to advance was developed by and for the people who have supported and maintained our community after long years of failures and broken promises by multiple companies.

Hey! Pat yourself on the back Amiga mutant. In the long run, even without a major backer, current developments prove your faith in your beliefs was not misplaced.

Finally, as has been pointed out, we are now poised to move from hardware that is entirely adequate to new systems that have more power than we need.

If my past experience with other systems over more than 30 years is any indication, once we have this hardware we'll find applications for the extra power.

[the_leander]

The X1000 is completely new. While MorphOS focuses on supporting hardware that is primarily second hand, in the future the majority of
the platforms available to buy to run AmigaOS4 will be brand new.

The PPC in the X1000 represents the last gasp of the arch outside of seriously niche markets PPC currently resides in. The only other general purpose PPC chip that even has the potential to level peg it will likely be the e5500 and that won't be available for a while.

I also have to say this: It assumes that the X1000 will be a commercial success, or at least pay for itself and in this I have I to say I'd be more than a little concerned.

If the X1000 flops, it is likely that it will spell the end of the line for OS4.

Also, featuring a more modern expansion bus the X1000 will be able to utilize expansion cards that won't be available to MorphOS users as well as more modern video cards. For people willing to pay the premium, this system will offer features unavailable elsewhere.

Two words: Driver support.

Without it, all the "potential" is just talk.

This of course assumes that the board don't turn out to be another A1 or early model Sam.

Finally, as has been pointed out, we are now poised to move from hardware that is entirely adequate to new systems that have more power than we need.

I've seen very little evidence to show a need in terms of hardware that requires more than what the Sam can deliver when equipped with a graphics card. Certainly there isn't much software that demands more.

If my past experience with other systems over more than 30 years is any indication, once we have this hardware we'll find applications for the extra power.

That assumes a lot. Has there really been much of anything released for either MorphOS or OS4 that really take full advantage of the extra resources available? I don't think so. Thanks to all the fighting, the vast majority of developers left the scene a long, long time ago.

[kolla]

If the X1000 flops, it is likely that it will spell the end of the line for OS4.

I suppose this is why A-eon is a seperate comany, so that Hyperion can live on after A-eon has folded, but for the sake of argument - what will happen to OS3.x and OS4 sources when Hyperion folds?

Two words: Driver support.
Without it, all the "potential" is just talk.

Driver development can keep the few developers busy for years and years. For these small developer groups it only makes sense to support a very limited set of cards. I remember when QSSL was trying to push neutrino to the "geekhood", they failed for several reasons:

* lack of drivers
* closed developing model, "anyone" could not just develop drivers
* way too few developers internally at QSSL to deal with above problem
* way too little hardware internally at QSSL to deal with above problem (I helped the pcmcia ethernet card developer, appearantly I myself had more cards availably than he did)
* some clever person ported gtk to photon and everyone got busy bringing gtk apps to neutrino instead of creating native apps, with very mediocre results. Users quickly realized that there are better platforms for running gtk apps and left.

Thanks to all the fighting, the vast majority of developers left the scene a long, long time ago.

That, and some other reasons
* limitations in the OSes that makes development painful
* limitations in the OSes that makes alot of software irrelevant to implement
* closed source OS with all that brings (for development of subsystems, drivers etc)
* the license model, you cannot do proper testing of your software on different hardware without paying new licenses (30 minutes is not enough)
* the "social contract" developing for these systems implies

[Karlos]

I doubt we'll see OpenCL support under MorphOS because of the GPU requirements. Even once G5 support is released, the majority of Powermac G5s have an AGP video slot.

Actually, I'm pretty sure there are AGP versions of SM based Radeon cards.

[krashan]

* the "social contract" developing for these systems implies

What is this "social contract"?

[kolla]

What is this "social contract"?

You have to be "socially compatible" with the other people developing the system you're developing for, and be able to merge into the existing group. For application developers this is not such a big issue, but if you want to develop OS components and bring the system further, it very much is.

For MorphOS this means you have to suck up to Laire, play alot of Quake online, laugh at OS4 "progress", maintain a list of people that are uncapable, praise MUI, ridicul Reaction and anything from OS3.5+ (yet support it, just for kicks), sort me under "trolls" and much more. :lol:

On Linux and BSD this is much easier, as there are so many camps to join and if none fits already, nothing prevents you from starting your own.

[Iggy]

The most advanced ATI GPUs available on a video card with an AGP interface are the Radeon 4650 and 4670. There are no 48XX cards and nothing is available with the current 5000 series. Also, the older Radeon 3850 (also available in AGP) is usually able to keep up with these cards and often bests them while maintaining a smoother fps rate in many titles.

While the X1000 will not be able to support many older GPUs that are currently supported under AOS4 (because the older GPUs are not PCIe compatible) the advantages of having a new design with a more modern expansion bus are easily apparent. The X1000 could potentially support any recent video card, while the later GPU available on AGP cards that could work in the G5 are limited and the top tier GPUs are simply not available.

Another further problem may appear in the complete lack of BIOS support for Apple computers for anything more recent than the X850XT.
While the Pegasos was designed to accept PC video cards and has a feature that can emulated an X86 to allow those cards to be used, Apple hardware has always been designed with modifications that prevent video cards from working in both PCs and Apple computers. There have only been a handful of ATI fielded cards that would work on both platforms and the prices they command are even higher than the Apple specific cards (which are invariably higher than the equivalent PC video cards).

Keep in mind that I present this information as a MorphOS user and advocate and I am not trying to present a biased point of view. It's just a fact that while MorphOS users will face a lower entry cost with the G5 than AmigaOS users will with the X1000 and that we believe that these proven fairly well built computers offer an advantage (as does our OS), that there are some advantages in the products offered by our competition (if you must think of it that way, I don't).

As I've said before, I personally think that each system is equally valid. And, both systems are actually so similar that it sometimes becomes quite amusing hearing proponents of one system over another argue with each other. Its a little like a two headed mutant arguing with itself as to which side won the nuclear war. Who the heck are you guys trying to convince and does anyone outside of our small community even know or care?

While it is unfortunate that some people will stubbornly insist on using one system over the other , I hope that most of us will weigh each systems advantages and disadvantages fairly and make their choices based on their needs, budgets, and how their system of choice will satisfy those needs.

Frankly, as a Radeon 9600XT on a G5 would provide me with a significant boost in performance and I'm not sure that the inherent complexity of today video cards is going to allow us to easily extract the performance that will be present on Mac or PC platforms (which ATI will provide proprietary drivers for), I don't feel impelled to great concern over this matter yet. I can obtain a 9600 at a low cost. Having owned one a few years ago, I'm familiar with its level of performance (which is better than my current 9250 but lower than my former 9500Pro) Frankly, I think this GPU is well matched to the capabilities of our OS and as we are apparently going to get support for a system that is more powerful than we really need (that we all asked for but douted we might get) I can accept this situation.

Finally, there may, in the future, be a work around that would allow us to install PC video cards that are only modified to mask over the pins on the card edge connector that are not Apple compatible. Consider this, if you were to have an existing MorphOS instillation on a Powermac with a supported video card and you installed the drivers for a new video card (that did not have an Apple BIOS), once you shut down and swapped your old video card with a suitably modified new card why would the prescense of a video card that the Apple would not recognise at all prevent MorphOS if the system were somehow to proceed with booting from loading a driver that would allow the card to function? Keep this in mind, the X86 emulation in the Pegasos only faciliates booting, from what I've been able to tell MorphOS completely disregards the video card BIOS after start up.

Now, I'd like to address a trend in these recent postings which, while the posters may be technically correct in making, are actually total irrelevant. Anyone who continues to use Amiga hardware and software or systems that have been designed to continue and improve our use of these ideas does so fully aware of the compromises that decision presents. Why, when Karlos, Amigadave and so many others with vastly differing systems can come to an accord about the irrelevance of our differing approaches can't some of the rest of you understand why we can still treat each other politely without feeling the need to constantly present our own choices as the real superior choice? Guys, this argument is silly and pointless. Yes we fully recognize that X86 has advanced light years beyond us and has finally overcome almost all the major faults present at its introduction.
Further as I consider this a hobby and regularly use PCs, the Powermac I purchased for MorphOS under OSX, and even recognize the value presented by Linux I don't need to be reminded that a system I'm still supporting is not likely to ever be competitive with the mainstream market again.
I accepted losing this battle to inferior systems years ago and fully understand why market forces often allow a second rate product to become dominant.
I don't blame Bill Gates or Steve Jobs for having the business prowess to adopt good ideas when they see them and slowly improve their products either. If you think what Microsoft and Apple offer today bears any resemblance to the products you used to hold in such disdain then you haven't been keeping up with how much development has been pored into this market to overcome the inherent disadvantages it had originally.
As to whether or not the people who have been successful in the computer industry stole their ideas from others, don't be naive. Everyone stole from each other and if your not aware of how all current operating systems at their core are almost identical (and remind me that we really owe a lot to Bell Labs and our nations universities for developing UNIX) then your not as knowledgeable as you think you are.
Why are so many of you willing to point to current mainstream systems as a more logical choice when we already know this?
Can't you just be happy that while we lost the battle, that our competition had to invest huge sums to become more like what we had originally? If you haven't noticed there is no other legacy system that today's personal computers resemble more than the Amiga.

And please, stop trying to convince me that PPCs are a dead issue in the personal computer market. I know this. Since Apple switched there is no longer anyone using these processors in systems designed for the general public. This does not mean that PPCs are dead. The 68060 died because it was introduced after a similar switch by Apple years ago. But there are several manufactures of PPC processors and new products are being introduced all the time. All the three major game console manufacturers use a PPC related processor. The military industrial complex, with a large investment in hardware that uses PPCs, continues to buy these processors in order to avoid the complexity of having to redesign systems for radically differ processor lines. Today, Freescale the offshoot of Motorola that inherited their processor legacy has continued to design new PPCs tailored to specific markets like communications and has just released their first 64bit processor which although it no longer supports Altivec may turn out to be the most powerful PPC processor ever designed (yes more powerful than the PA6T and the G5). So, the PPC uis not dead, it just isn't marketed for PC use and new designs favor features that are useful in other applications.

So, stop trying to convince me that my interests are futile and that all our endeavors are doomed to fail. If you think that way you have totally missed the point. Those of us left in the Amiga community continue to do this to further our own interests and build the hardware we'd like to have. None of us are stupid, its not that we don't know of the inherent advantages presented by the developments in well funded mainstream systems.

Guys, get this through your intensely thick skulls, we aren't doing this because we intend to hold up the creations we can accomplish with our limited resources and marketplace for comparison to mainstream systems. We do it because, after years of hype about products that were in reality, never going to be produced we've finally realized that with the current advances in electronics we don't need to wait for the fulfillment of promises that were never going realized. Even if it only satisfies ourselves, things have advanced enough to allow us to continue development of this without those who have for years disappointed us. Its a hobby, do you get it?

[amigadave]

@Iggy,

the last generation of the G5 PowerMacs did have PCIe and no AGP slots, up to 4 cores @2.5GHz, and they have a maximum RAM capability of 16gb, not 8gb, so if that model is ever supported by the MorphOS Team, there is the same potential for PCIe video cards to be supported on MorphOS2.x as there will be on AmigaOS4.x with the X1000.

And IMHO, most developers stopped writing code for the Amiga community because Commodore stopped doing any meaningful engineering to advance the Amiga hardware long before they went bankrupt, and most of the developers could see the writing on the wall and knew the Amiga was not going to be able to compete with the PC's and Mac's in the near future.  The subsequent owners of the Amiga IP never did anything to revive, or advance the Amiga and the Amiga user base was shrinking so fast developers were forced to move onward to other more mainstream OSes to make a living, or give up on writing apps, or games for profit and get into another occupation to pay the bills.  The only developers we have left in the Amiga community are ones that do it for fun, not for profit, even if they do charge a small amount to pay for their beer and pizza's, you can't really call their work profitable, or compare it to commercial software development.

Edit:  I wonder if the MorphOS Dev. Team is regretting releasing that screen shot of MorphOS2.x booting on the G5 PowerMac so early?  No one outside of the Team can know how much work is needed to complete the support for any of the G5 PowerMac models, but several Team members have stated that the next release will focus on support for the G4 PowerMac.  Since there have been more YouTube video's showing demonstrations of MorphOS2.x on the G4 PowerBook, and there was a demonstration of MorphOS2.x running on the G4 PowerBook at the Essen show recently, it is very likely that the G4 PowerBook will be the next target platform after the G4 PowerMac and before the G5 PowerMac, so it may be quite a long time before a release of MorphOS supports any of the G5 PowerMac models.

[Iggy]

I'm sure you're right about the developers wishing that they hadn't made the mistake of reveling yet another one  their projects that wasn't ready for release yet.
Since they managed to get MorphOS to work well enough on the Mac Mini to release to the public, they've obviously spent quite a lot of time experimenting with other Mac models.
Quite awhile ago they made statements about future support for Powermacs and Powerbooks and recently they showed these works in progress at the show in Essen.
But they must be tired of hearing people ask them when the software will be ready for release. After all, they can't release it till its ready, till it works.
Since Mac Mini support was introduced, the only other model that has been added is one specific model from the eMac line that didn't require as much work as these other projects because of the many similaities in internal components.
I think when they let the word slip out about future Powermac support, they were confident that they could resolve any issues the port presented and release it fairly quickly. Obviously there were some problems that have taken longer to resolve than they anticipated.
One thing I am certain of is that even if they release these plans early, that unlike some many other endeavors in the Amiga community in the past, they will eventually complete it and the public will get what they promised.
The project shown at Essen definitely look like their close to ready.
That G5 screenshot? That was just the start of the OS initialization process. I'm sure that what they didn't show us is where the process failed right after that and the developers had to struggle to figure out what issues they had to overcome to proceed further.

You have made what I think may be one of the most important points of this thread. Most of the time, the MorphOS development team can keep all of the projects they're working on that aren't ready from being disclosed to the public. But these guys are doing this work primarily because its something the want to do, not as a normal business enterprise. Occasionally someone gets a little too enthusiastic about something and they let information about what they're working on slip out.

I can understand why these little leaks occur, but I can't imagine what it must be like to constantly be badgered about the future release date of a project that isn't complete yet. When is it going to be done? When its ready. That's got to be a tiring thing to have to constantly go back and forth over.

That's why I've repeatedly stressed the fact that people shouldn't get too excited about the premature release of information about hardware that the developers are working to port MorphOS to.
If you want to wait for one of these platforms to be supported, by all means go ahead, but you better realize that the wait is probably going to be longer than you or the developers anticipate.

As Karlos has pointed out, as I have pointed out, and as your question would again clearly indicate focusing on the hardware that isn't supported yet when the hardware that is supported is entirely adequate to run the software is silly.
Hey, I want to run MorphOS on IBMs latest supercomputer with x# of processors! When can you have it ready?
Come on Guys. This OS was developed to carry forward a platform that at best ran on a 50Mhz 68060. For the time being, until that next great leap forward is ready, can't you be satisfied with running on a system that is up to 30 times faster? How much power does Amiga software require that a 3000% improvement in CPU clock speed isn't enough?

While all this discussion stirred up by that one screenshot has been fun, when its all over, I'll go back to using what I have and patiently wait for the releases to come in the future. Yeah, they'd be neat, but they're not necessary yet.

[krashan]

For MorphOS this means you have to suck up to Laire, play alot of Quake online, laugh at OS4 "progress", maintain a list of people that are uncapable, praise MUI, ridicul Reaction and anything from OS3.5+ (yet support it, just for kicks), sort me under "trolls" and much more.

It is simply not true. Maybe except sorting you under "trolls" ;-).

[amigadave]

It is simply not true. Maybe except sorting you under "trolls" ;-).

It is a waste of your time and effort to respond to anything that Troll writes.  It only makes him more active here.

[jj]

The most advanced ATI GPUs available on a video card with an AGP interface are the Radeon 4650 and 4670. There are no 48XX cards and nothing is available with the current 5000 series. Also, the older Radeon 3850 (also available in AGP) is usually able to keep up with these cards and often bests them while maintaining a smoother fps rate in many titles.
 
While the X1000 will not be able to support many older GPUs that are currently supported under AOS4 (because the older GPUs are not PCIe compatible) the advantages of having a new design with a more modern expansion bus are easily apparent. The X1000 could potentially support any recent video card, while the later GPU available on AGP cards that could work in the G5 are limited and the top tier GPUs are simply not available.
 
Another further problem may appear in the complete lack of BIOS support for Apple computers for anything more recent than the X850XT.
While the Pegasos was designed to accept PC video cards and has a feature that can emulated an X86 to allow those cards to be used, Apple hardware has always been designed with modifications that prevent video cards from working in both PCs and Apple computers. There have only been a handful of ATI fielded cards that would work on both platforms and the prices they command are even higher than the Apple specific cards (which are invariably higher than the equivalent PC video cards).
 
Keep in mind that I present this information as a MorphOS user and advocate and I am not trying to present a biased point of view. It's just a fact that while MorphOS users will face a lower entry cost with the G5 than AmigaOS users will with the X1000 and that we believe that these proven fairly well built computers offer an advantage (as does our OS), that there are some advantages in the products offered by our competition (if you must think of it that way, I don't).
 
As I've said before, I personally think that each system is equally valid. And, both systems are actually so similar that it sometimes becomes quite amusing hearing proponents of one system over another argue with each other. Its a little like a two headed mutant arguing with itself as to which side won the nuclear war. Who the heck are you guys trying to convince and does anyone outside of our small community even know or care?
 
While it is unfortunate that some people will stubbornly insist on using one system over the other , I hope that most of us will weigh each systems advantages and disadvantages fairly and make their choices based on their needs, budgets, and how their system of choice will satisfy those needs.
 
Frankly, as a Radeon 9600XT on a G5 would provide me with a significant boost in performance and I'm not sure that the inherent complexity of today video cards is going to allow us to easily extract the performance that will be present on Mac or PC platforms (which ATI will provide proprietary drivers for), I don't feel impelled to great concern over this matter yet. I can obtain a 9600 at a low cost. Having owned one a few years ago, I'm familiar with its level of performance (which is better than my current 9250 but lower than my former 9500Pro) Frankly, I think this GPU is well matched to the capabilities of our OS and as we are apparently going to get support for a system that is more powerful than we really need (that we all asked for but douted we might get) I can accept this situation.
 
Finally, there may, in the future, be a work around that would allow us to install PC video cards that are only modified to mask over the pins on the card edge connector that are not Apple compatible. Consider this, if you were to have an existing MorphOS instillation on a Powermac with a supported video card and you installed the drivers for a new video card (that did not have an Apple BIOS), once you shut down and swapped your old video card with a suitably modified new card why would the prescense of a video card that the Apple would not recognise at all prevent MorphOS if the system were somehow to proceed with booting from loading a driver that would allow the card to function? Keep this in mind, the X86 emulation in the Pegasos only faciliates booting, from what I've been able to tell MorphOS completely disregards the video card BIOS after start up.
 
Now, I'd like to address a trend in these recent postings which, while the posters may be technically correct in making, are actually total irrelevant. Anyone who continues to use Amiga hardware and software or systems that have been designed to continue and improve our use of these ideas does so fully aware of the compromises that decision presents. Why, when Karlos, Amigadave and so many others with vastly differing systems can come to an accord about the irrelevance of our differing approaches can't some of the rest of you understand why we can still treat each other politely without feeling the need to constantly present our own choices as the real superior choice? Guys, this argument is silly and pointless. Yes we fully recognize that X86 has advanced light years beyond us and has finally overcome almost all the major faults present at its introduction.
Further as I consider this a hobby and regularly use PCs, the Powermac I purchased for MorphOS under OSX, and even recognize the value presented by Linux I don't need to be reminded that a system I'm still supporting is not likely to ever be competitive with the mainstream market again.
I accepted losing this battle to inferior systems years ago and fully understand why market forces often allow a second rate product to become dominant.
I don't blame Bill Gates or Steve Jobs for having the business prowess to adopt good ideas when they see them and slowly improve their products either. If you think what Microsoft and Apple offer today bears any resemblance to the products you used to hold in such disdain then you haven't been keeping up with how much development has been pored into this market to overcome the inherent disadvantages it had originally.
As to whether or not the people who have been successful in the computer industry stole their ideas from others, don't be naive. Everyone stole from each other and if your not aware of how all current operating systems at their core are almost identical (and remind me that we really owe a lot to Bell Labs and our nations universities for developing UNIX) then your not as knowledgeable as you think you are.
Why are so many of you willing to point to current mainstream systems as a more logical choice when we already know this?
Can't you just be happy that while we lost the battle, that our competition had to invest huge sums to become more like what we had originally? If you haven't noticed there is no other legacy system that today's personal computers resemble more than the Amiga.
 
And please, stop trying to convince me that PPCs are a dead issue in the personal computer market. I know this. Since Apple switched there is no longer anyone using these processors in systems designed for the general public. This does not mean that PPCs are dead. The 68060 died because it was introduced after a similar switch by Apple years ago. But there are several manufactures of PPC processors and new products are being introduced all the time. All the three major game console manufacturers use a PPC related processor. The military industrial complex, with a large investment in hardware that uses PPCs, continues to buy these processors in order to avoid the complexity of having to redesign systems for radically differ processor lines. Today, Freescale the offshoot of Motorola that inherited their processor legacy has continued to design new PPCs tailored to specific markets like communications and has just released their first 64bit processor which although it no longer supports Altivec may turn out to be the most powerful PPC processor ever designed (yes more powerful than the PA6T and the G5). So, the PPC uis not dead, it just isn't marketed for PC use and new designs favor features that are useful in other applications.
 
So, stop trying to convince me that my interests are futile and that all our endeavors are doomed to fail. If you think that way you have totally missed the point. Those of us left in the Amiga community continue to do this to further our own interests and build the hardware we'd like to have. None of us are stupid, its not that we don't know of the inherent advantages presented by the developments in well funded mainstream systems.
 
Guys, get this through your intensely thick skulls, we aren't doing this because we intend to hold up the creations we can accomplish with our limited resources and marketplace for comparison to mainstream systems. We do it because, after years of hype about products that were in reality, never going to be produced we've finally realized that with the current advances in electronics we don't need to wait for the fulfillment of promises that were never going realized. Even if it only satisfies ourselves, things have advanced enough to allow us to continue development of this without those who have for years disappointed us. Its a hobby, do you get it?

 
I agree.  No more needed than that.

[Iggy]

@Iggy,
 
the last generation of the G5 PowerMacs did have PCIe and no AGP slots, up to 4 cores @2.5GHz, and they have a maximum RAM capability of 16gb, not 8gb, so if that model is ever supported by the MorphOS Team, there is the same potential for PCIe video cards to be supported on MorphOS2.x as there will be on AmigaOS4.x with the X1000.
 

Yes, I am aware of these G5s, but from what I've seen the development team seems to be working with a G5 model 2,3. Total speculatiion on my part, but from that I would guess that their working on the AGP models first.
As support for Apple computers has only come to specific models within the G4 lineup that seemed a reasonable assumption.
However, until recently, it was assumed that Powermac support would initially only cover the MDD. Since the computer at Esssen was one of those models that could be seen as proof of that. But we've recently learned that all AGP G4 Powermacs are to be supported at the same time.
 
What G5 models will be supported initially is anybody's guess until some more informastion is released. Thats why I based most of my hardware statements arounf the 2,3.
 
That model, since it accepts video cards that they either already have drivers for (or have beta drivers for) should require a little less work than the later PCIe models.
 
However, you do have a point. If they support the AGP G5s, supporting the PCIe G5s would allow us to use some of those cards.
 
I'm still not sure how they're going to address the issue of BIOS avaliabilty for PCIe G5 video cards (or even some AGP cards). The number of cards that are compatible is pretty limited (unless some way can be found to use PC cards).

[Colani1200]

And as always, questions about availability and offers for beta testing will likely be quite pointless at this time.

When will it be available?
Oh, and I can beta test it on M9031LL/A and M9032LL/A if you like.

[persia]

I have a G5 power mac in the garage along with my G4 iBook.  I'll be happy with Morphos for either....

[jj]

There have been no details released as to a possible release date for support of G5s