Which OS Would Be The Best Amiga Way Forward...

[Kesa]

@ Wawrzon & Hardwired

I thought so, it gets a wee bit confusing though when folk start talking of AROS & UAE together (I have to keep in mind that my main/only interest in AROS is on the 68k side of things)...

Having disassembled the real 3.1 ROMS years ago and modifying them for my own use it became clear to me that although the code in them was pretty efficient there was still quite a bit of scope left in them to be optimised a touch further...

For example there a couple of hundred lines of code in the 3.1 ROMS like these...

$f8e00 bra.l $f8e04
$f8e04 rts

or

$f8e00 bra.s $f8e02
$f8e02 rts

Now by simply changing all of these bra.l & bra.s to rts, then the cumulative effect (all be it in milliseconds) produces a very slight speed increase in the day to day execution of the ROMS routines (as SysInfo verifies) but just changing these also leave the the ROM 100% backward compatible...

There are other things I've changed in the ROMS I use including some patched with BlizzKick modules which all lead to an overall system speed increase when using ROM images and every bit of extra speed you can squeeze out of any Amiga system can only be a good thing...

But I believe AROS 68k is more aimed at producing a copyright free ROM image and adding/updating extra features into the ROM image that although this might not make it 100% compatible with all old programs/ games that make direct calls to specific ROM addresses the simple fact that it will be copyright free and may include improved/new features make it a very worthwhile way forward indeed especially for the like of the NatAmi which I really hope make it into production...

Whinge, Whinge, Whinge.

If your so smart Franko maybe you could make your own and show them how to do it properly?

[Piru]

For example there a couple of hundred lines of code in the 3.1 ROMS like these...

$f8e00 bra.l $f8e04
$f8e04 rts

bra.l is 020+ so I find this rather unlikely. You possibly meant bra.w or jmp ?

$f8e00 bra.s $f8e02
$f8e02 rts

Just nitpicking, but bra.s *+2 instruction doesn't exist. ;-)

[Franko]

@ Bloodline

They're all the original Commodore A1200's, tried everything I could think of but all with no luck I'm afraid...

PS: Which language are the sources written in, if it's C then the sources are not for me, Assembly Language only for me when it comes to writing Amiga progs... (Course I could just disassemble the AROS 68K ROM image myself into assembler source and start from there...)


@ Kesa

No whinging here mate, what you call whinging, I call me being happy...

PS: how did you get on with "ginger"...


@ Smerf

Hi Smerf....

Nah... today's youth (well most of em) are best not to be spoken too, much better just to slap em round the head with a wet fish, doesn't make them any more wiser but it sure is fun...

To be honest I never told anyone with PC back in the old 8 & 3 days to do anything, for the simple fact I never spoke to anybods that was dumb enough to own a PC back then...

Cheers

Franko

[Franko]

bra.l is 020+ so I find this rather unlikely. You possibly meant bra.w or jmp ?


Just nitpicking, but bra.s *+2 instruction doesn't exist. ;-)

@ Piru

Sorry, I had just woke up and was still half asleep when I made that post...

Strictly speaking it was probably not accurate but on the other hand...

DevPAC which I use does allow you to enter the syntax "bsr.s" and most of the monitors & debuggers I use will display disassembled code as bsr.s $xxxxxx, I've yet to see a bit of disassembled code using monitors/debuggers that use "bsr.w" they always show up as "bsr.l" or bsr.s"...

However now I am wide awake then here's a better explantion of what I was talking about...

As far as I recall of the top of my head there were over 160 pieces of code in the 3.1 ROMS that I changed to give this miniscule speed increase and they covered things like.... (the addresses used are just for show here)

$f80000 jsr $xxxxxx
$f80006 rts

which I changed to
$f80000 jmp $xxxxxx
$f80006 rts

and

$f80000 jsr $1e(a6)
$f80004 rts

Which I changed to
$f80000 jmp $1e(a6)
$f80004 rts

and

$f80000 bsr $xxxxxx
$f80004 rts

Which I changed to
$f80000 bra $xxxxxx
$f80004 rts

As I say there were well over 160 such occurrences in the ROM and changing all of these like I did produced (all be it a very small) speed increase in the ROMS performance. It was only done as a test many years ago but as it worked perfectly without causing any incompatibilities or errors I have stuck with them over the years...

PS: I would have replied sooner but the site seems to be having a hairy fit at the moment...

[Iggy]

Isn't it odd that these polling results show AROS in the lead, but when you ask people what they're currently using AROS usually places last?
Does this reflect a general faith in what AROS could become?

[runequester]

Isn't it odd that these polling results show AROS in the lead, but when you ask people what they're currently using AROS usually places last?
Does this reflect a general faith in what AROS could become?

Given the wording of the poll, I imagine so. AROS has a clearer path forward than the alternatives, hence I can see people (myself included) feeling it is going to be the way to go.

[gizz72]

Greetings,

I choose AROS... Hardware wise.
I eat pancakes and coffee for breakfast! :drink:

Cheers

[Rodomoc]

Isn't it odd that these polling results show AROS in the lead, but when you ask people what they're currently using AROS usually places last? Does this reflect a general faith in what AROS could become?

Iggy, Speaking for my own Aros vote, this is the case 'what it could become'. As far as what I actually use, it is 68K (divided between a3000 + winuae). Practically speaking, MorphOS is my immediate preferred direction.

[Franko]

@ Iggy

That's the way I see it myself, I'm not an AROS user but I do see it as the best way forward for future developments of things like the NatAmi and that's what I based my answer upon...

[smerf]

Hi,

@all Amiga Enthusiasts,

Well I received my OS4.1 in the mail and I am reviewing it now.

OS 4.1 Total cost with shipping $149.00
AROS  Total cost -- about 30 minutes download time  $0.00
MorphOS --  about 30 minutes download time  $ not analyzed.

OS 4.1 For the money you pay I would say not worth it, this software is worse than Windows, why do I say that, first after reading the book, my OS 3.9 which worked perfectly with IDEFIX (Thanks for the help Franko, I really appreciated it), bit when installing OS 4.1 on a clean HD, wouldn't work, the reason was I am running a 4 way IDE adapter with IDEFix97. After reading the book I found out you had to have your CD-ROM and Hard Drive on the 1st or main bank. At first I thought it was my Compact Flash drive, but after installing one of my old Hard Drives, I found out differently.

Now when I pay $149 for an OS I expect it to function without 6 hours of playing around to get it to work. Even Mr. Bill McEwen who supervised the OS 3.9 project did a better job then Hyperion. Look most Amiga users have the 4 way ide adapter in their computers, so why wasn't this programmed for in the making of OS 4.1,  even windows tries to answer weird setups in their OS and the cost for their home edition is $49.00 cheaper. Will play with it some more today now that I found out how to get my ide interfaces to recognize my hard drives, (automatic on most OS's today, did not have this problem with either MorphOS, or AROS).

AROS -- loaded this on my Toshiba satellite -- loaded right in, I gave it bad points because I could not get the interned working because AROS doesn't see my NIC card. Well have to upgrade it because Windows XP doesn't see it either without the special drivers from their board, same thing with the sound, but one good note AROS did see the 1024 by 768 display where windows XP didn not without the drivers. AROS so far is my best choice ( it plays my favorite games Soliton and Mega ball without a glitch).

MorphOS -- Loaded up on my Amiga 1200 PPC, but I had no graphics, just a black screen, only reason I knew it loaded up is because I hit something with a mouse click and my hard drive light began to blink. Clicked around in different areas and hard drive would blink randomly. Sits in my last place because now I have to consider buying a G4 mini MAC to evaluate this OS. It could be good, it could be bad. Will leave it up to other Amiga nuts to evaluate and give me info.

OK some of you guys are going to scream smerf don't you read the Manuals or look at the specs. The answer is no, I base it on OS's that I use, Ubuntu and Windows, both of these I load with out any info, I put in the CD and follow the prompts, this is the true test of an easy to use OS, my theory is KISS (keep it simple stupid) if you can't follow this lead, then I don't want or need your software. OS's should be transparent to the buyer and user, if I need a college degree on how to load an OS then I don't want it.

So far as I am concerned OS 3.5 and OS 3.9 should be the main OS's for the Amiga community, OS 4.1 has wasted 6 hours of my time so far trying to get it to work, I have basically had to tear my A1200 apart and rebuild it just to get it to recognize my Hard Drive. At the cost of $149 with shipping this is not satisfactory.

smerf

[Iggy]

That's a great picture.
Thanks everybody for confirming my suspicions about the reason everyone was voting for AROS.
You know, I'm amazed and a little baffled by how optimistic Amiga users are.
But then, we're still here and we've got multiple derivatives (of AOS) to choose from.
Pretty remarkable for such a small community.

[desiv]

Good reviews...
Thanx..

Not sure I agree with this statement:

Look most Amiga users have the 4 way ide adapter in their computers

But enough people probably have them that they should have been able to test it...

desiv

[runequester]

That's a great picture.
Thanks everybody for confirming my suspicions about the reason everyone was voting for AROS.
You know, I'm amazed and a little baffled by how optimistic Amiga users are.
But then, we're still here and we've got multiple derivatives (of AOS) to choose from.
Pretty remarkable for such a small community.

If we weren't optimistic, we wouldn't still be around

[Franko]

Hi Smerf...

Very interesting to read a report from someone who has checked out all 3... have to say your conclusion at the end seems to be pretty reasonable for now with regard to OS3.5 & 3.9, although I still think AROS will solve a lot of problems in the future (if it ever gets completed and stable) for things like the NatAmi...

Cheers

Franko


@Iggy

Could you clarify what suspicions you have had confirmed please...

[Iggy]

Could you clarify what suspicions you have had confirmed please...

Just that people have high expectations for AROS (especially the 68K variant).
The X86 isn't at V1.0 yet (although it is advancing), so I'm not sure that your ideas (on modifying 3.1) aren't just as valid (as waiting for AROS68K to attain a similar level of functionality).

[Rodomoc]

Hi Smerf... Very interesting to read a report from someone who has checked out all 3... have to say your conclusion at the end seems to be pretty reasonable for now with regard to OS3.5 & 3.9, although I still think AROS will solve a lot of problems in the future (if it ever gets completed and stable) for things like the NatAmi... .....

I have checked 2 of the 3.

Icaros very recently. I confirm simplicity in getting things downloaded, burned to dvd, and immediately booting up on my Dell Precision M65 laptop. I have not installed onto a hard drive yet so my view is limited to live cd operations. But.. it was free and it was simple to get running. I think it is coming along. And the fact that it will exist on multiple hardware platforms is good. Problem with multiple platform ultimately becomes hardware support. So to a degree, Aros is a bit like Amithlon in finding the perfect hardware. I see this getting better in the future though.

MorphOS 2.0 on an Efika. Again, totally simple to install and get running. For this installation, I did it via their network method, a first for me. If I recall correctly, this is done by starting a boot image from a USB thumb drive. I plugged in a network cable, and got the full OS via network in completely automated fashion. Everything went without a hitch and I was soon greeted with a very polished OS. The only glitch to report was no sound. This was not an OS problem though, it turned out my Efika was the issue. I still am interested in Morph and am merely shopping the ideal Mac hardware for it. As for the tragic little Efika, I plan on using it to run a small Linux and hopefully link up to the Morph system via a VNC connection. Just to fill in software missing pieces for now.

I was a fan of Amithlon, still am I suppose. I was almost always an RTG video person so not having chipset compatibility not a deal breaker for me. I have located my Amithlon CD and am really wanting to put it on a new system as my former is long dead. In reading about kernel upgrades, etc... I see Amithlon still has a following since the last time I was in the game. I have a nice Xeon dual core cpu that runs natively at 3ghz. Perfect I'd say. I believe I have a compatible motherboard according to kernel4 author Mirlanca. I need to get this thing built. I used to be enamored with the preconfigured OS packages. But am no longer. I will hand build/upgrade the 3.9OS manually. As much as I like the new stuff, it is 68K that gets most of my time still.

I do play with UAE / 68K but am becoming disenchanted with it all. This includes setting everything up myself (better) or running AF2011 (worse). I run the A3000 but sparingly because it is getting so old anymore. I too look forward to Natami hardware. So many things become solved in this scenerio and it is new. How could I not want to trade my creaky a3000 in for a nice new natami?