[A-EON updates] The "Golden" Child - Nemo revision 2.1

[Kesa]

Well, it was exactly that during longer than a decade, and the fact is that this very CPU was designed for potential use in year 2007 level Apple laptops, so you are wrong. But in a way you are right; the PPC doesn't even qualify to neither "PC" nor "Desktop" anymore, that era ended half a decade ago (today PPC is used for routers, printers, cars, etc). And if this is your criteria for "being Amiga", then there is something fundamentally wrong. I don't say that standard PC components would be bad in any way, rather the opposite actually, it's the only way to go. But don't pretend that the x1000 would be something it isn't; IT IS a motherboard with BOG-STANDARD PC CONTROLLERS, offering very little (anything at all?) over a 2007 level PC (which probably even used the very same controllers). So when some people are claiming that the C64X is "bad" because of it being "just an overpriced PC", but the x1000 isn't, then there is some serious confusion in the air, especially if you look at the very cool and nicely done C64 case vs. the x1000 bog-standard PC case, and especially if you think the "overpriced"  part over one more time.

If you want new, exiting *Amiga* hardware, you should take a look at the "Natami" project...

I would have to say there is something fundamentally wrong WITH YOU if you think a crappy Chinese made c64x is classier than a X1000. Next you are going to start praising iconatain's range of 'Amiga' tablets. Do you have any class whatsoever?

Also there is nothing 'bog-standard' about the x1000. How many other custom designed ppc boards are out there with a Xena chip on board? The Sams are pretty crappy in my opinion as i think they are just a makeshift motherboard without much care or thought going into them. But the X1000 is different as it was designed from scratch upwards.

The case is also custom. Sure it is based on another already existing case but it has been modified so it is no longer 'bog-standard'. It is custom.    

I also think the X1000 will be worth more than the Sams in resale value because they are different to the Sams (see above). I think it is perfectly possible for the Nemo boards to increase in value. Some of the most desirable collectors items were financial failures that later became cult icons. Thus increasing in value. An example of this is the Walker.

[koaftder]

Second rate? Maybe at the end but the G4s always outclassed Pentium 4s running at twice the clock rate. More expensive? Definitely, but the new ones are just as expensive and are nowhere near the quality of the PPC macs, but they are definitely better than you average crap x86/64.

Saying Intel is better than PPC is like saying an M16 is better than the AK47, sure the M16 has modern, but useless features, but the AK47 is robust, effective and simple in design, like PowerPC. The designer of the AK, quoted:

I don't see a drop in build quality with Apples x86 machines. They seem to be putting just as much attention to detail now as they did in the PPC era. It's not like they pulled a Packard Bell and started using recycled parts or lowered their standards for rolling out PCBs.

The biggest problem with PPC macs is probably the software. You have to admit when Apple was shoveling out G3 and G4 macs and advertising that they were the fastest thing ever seen, they ran like dogs compared to midrange PCs running win XP. At the end of the day, that's all that matters. For whatever reason their software stack did not do it any justice. Compare two identical PPC Macs, one running linux and one running OS X. OS X trundles along while linux flies.

Now compare two Intel macs, one with OS X and one with Linux. The performance is similar. If PPC was so great, why was Apple never able to truly take advantage of it?

[koaftder]

How many other custom designed ppc boards are out there with a Xena chip on board?

None, because that would be ridiculous.

[commodorejohn]

The biggest problem with PPC macs is probably the software. You have to admit when Apple was shoveling out G3 and G4 macs and advertising that they were the fastest thing ever seen, they ran like dogs compared to midrange PCs running win XP. At the end of the day, that's all that matters. For whatever reason their software stack did not do it any justice. Compare two identical PPC Macs, one running linux and one running OS X. OS X trundles along while linux flies.

Now compare two Intel macs, one with OS X and one with Linux. The performance is similar. If PPC was so great, why was Apple never able to truly take advantage of it?

Yes and no. Apple's rush to OS X was definitely a problem, as even their early G5 machines weren't all that well-suited to it - and they were putting it on mid-range G4s running at half or less the speed of even the low-end Power Mac G5! But if you put OS9 on the same machine (assuming it's early enough in the G4 cycle that they hadn't dropped support entirely,) there's a marked performance increase.

The Power Mac G4 I rescued from the recycle center (single-CPU 533MHz,) for example, is the most responsive thing I've run classic Mac OS on yet, and that includes modern computers running SheepShaver. With the exception of large webpage rendering (which would probably see a marked improvement if I had something better than the piddly 16MB video card they shipped it with,) it comes in only somewhat under my old 1.2GHz P4 laptop running XP, and absolutely thrashes my old 800MHz Celeron WinMe box.

I think the problem is less that Apple's software is bad and more that they always insist on everyone using their latest and greatest, hardware suitability be damned. They even staged a "funeral" for OS9 when it's a perfectly workable OS (for its time) and far better suited to the hardware they were shipping when they introduced OSX.

[itix]

Next you are going to start praising iconatain's range of 'Amiga' tablets.

Btw I think Amiga tablets look nice.

Also there is nothing 'bog-standard' about the x1000. How many other custom designed ppc boards are out there with a Xena chip on board?

There are Xena add-ons available on Varisys website. You can order one and have Xena (XMOS) on Amiga 4000, PC, Macs, anything.

I also think the X1000 will be worth more than the Sams in resale value because they are different to the Sams (see above). I think it is perfectly possible for the Nemo boards to increase in value. Some of the most desirable collectors items were financial failures that later became cult icons. Thus increasing in value. An example of this is the Walker.

The original price for the Walker was much more than its current price at eBay.

[itix]

I don't want to support Intel because the stuff out there is not anywhere near as good of quality as a PowerPC G4 Powerbook. Have had it for two years, its the nicest, prettiest and most inexpensive computer I have ever paid for (300) and it runs jsut fine. As long as good quality hardware remains, PowerPC is not dead.

The CPU architecture have nothing to do with the hardware quality.

If we could bring down the price of PPC Hardware by reaching into another market, somehow and some way, then I see a good future.

From the whole PPC market Amigas are only small fraction. Even Apple could not sell machines in volumes that actually paid it off.

If we go X86, we go the way of BeOS.

BeBox sold about 1800 units. That makes it more succesful than AmigaOne but less succesful than Pegasos. Pegasos could not change the world.

[Lurch]

/shakes head at thread.

[Franko]

/shakes head at thread.

/shakes big stick at thread...

[raddude9]

This thread is the reason why I don't pop up on this site very often. People are fiddling while Rome burns.
Instead of just being happy that there might be some new Amiga hardware and a new version of AmigaOS people are bickering.
I'm going back to lurking now, maybe I'll say something again when the bickering stops.

[commodorejohn]

The CPU architecture have nothing to do with the hardware quality.

True. But it is pretty grody, being a 64-bit expansion to a 32-bit update to a 16-bit remake of an 8-bit CPU that frankly wasn't all that great to begin with. I'm not going to claim that all hardware should be chosen based on design prettiness, but it's like what they say about knowing what goes into sausage; having tinkered around under the hood of x86 systems, I'll never look at one the same way again.

[Franko]

This thread is the reason why I don't pop up on this site very often. People are fiddling while Rome burns.
Instead of just being happy that there might be some new Amiga hardware and a new version of AmigaOS people are bickering.
I'm going back to lurking now, maybe I'll say something again when the bickering stops.

I'd better not hold me breath then and hope to live till I'm at least 200... eh...

[TheDaddy]

(I'm quoting myself now, to see if you will see it yourself...)

Nah, all I can see is a bitter and twisted attitude. Sugar with your serving of sour grapes sir?

[Daedalus]

I don't see a drop in build quality with Apples x86 machines. They seem to be putting just as much attention to detail now as they did in the PPC era. It's not like they pulled a Packard Bell and started using recycled parts or lowered their standards for rolling out PCBs.

For a time there was a massive, obvious drop in quality with their MacBook hardware. The first Intel MacBook, which took over from the iBook, had all sorts of issues. I personally know of 3 which suffer from cracked plastic around the keyboard cover and failure of the trackpad button, two of these which have had failed wireless cards, two have also had battery failures, and one has had an optical drive failure. None of these had what I would consider atypical use, and my previous-gen G4 iBook is rock solid and outlasting them all in every department (except ability to use Flash, but that's another story). They're not alone either, the internet's full of these stories, far more than the usual volume of complaints you would find on another machine.

Now, those issues were fixed for the newer MacBook with the all-in-one plastic body, and the Pros never had those issues, but at the time it gave the distinct impression of a major drop in quality.

[hairy]

How many other custom designed ppc boards are out there with a Xena chip on board?

:roflmao:

If the "Xena" chip is that important, you can get 32x, less the PPC fluff, and for MUCH lower price:

https://www.xmos.com/products/development-kits/xmp-64

Or, since you guys seem to like DIY, and keep pushing and recomending the pratice to others, go ahead! The chip is only $17.40 (q.ty 1):

http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=880-1020-ND

So... "north of £1500", but not even the top range XMOS chip included. :confused:

pffft

[Fairdinkem]

@ thread

Wow it only took four posts into this thread for the "out of date hardware" argument to crop up and the same amount of posts from the same person to pull out the dreaded CUSA!

Then it only took two pages of this thread for the "Hyperion should have ported to x86 and x86 hardware is cheaper, and the X1000 is a overpriced redundant PC hardware argument."

Can we just be happy for Trevor, Ben and the Varysis teams achievement whether you agree with it or not.

I want to congratulate the guys on there achievement I must admit I was already doubting it would ever eventuate, the Amiga community needs more Trevors, and companies like Varysis.

[koaftder]

@ thread

Can we just be happy for Trevor, Ben and the Varysis teams achievement whether you agree with it or not.

No, I hope it blows up in their faces. All the BS about "xena" and "xorro" and endless other absurd hype was enough for me.