ARM based Amiga?

[Thorham]

@Thorham
While the 68020 is capable of better OS functionality, I doubt that it's going to help.  Most of the extended addressing modes are slow on the '020 and '030.  The '040 and '060 fixed that at the expense of some hardware compatibility particularly for floating point.

If Amigas are going to go anywhere, then a new OS+software is needed.

Also, memory protection would slow the real Classic Amigas to a crawl.

Depends on how it's implemented ('030 MMUs can do some neat things), and whether or not it's used for everything (it would be great to turn it on just for programming).

A better solution would be to build software on top of the PNaCl (Portable Native Client) sandbox that is going into the latest Chrome web browsers.

Two problems: 1) This doesn't run on Amigas, 2) What fun is it to write for a browser?

@Thorham: all your objection seems to come from the way you define "Amiga".  You've defined it dead. Other people define it differently.

My definition of Amiga is hardware, namely chipset+680x0, and sadly this is dead until someone buys or licenses Amiga hardware and starts building the things, and that's most likely not going to happen

I'd love to see a new Amiga personally because I think of Amiga not as a thing so much as an ideology.  Although it's also because I feel quite strongly that "the wrong side won", maybe it's just loyalty, but I can't accept that Amiga is dead and the prospect of a new market in ARM powered desktop/laptop/HTPCs makes me think that it has a real chance to get back on its feet again.  If you don't want a new Amiga then, well, just don't buy one, fair enough.

My problem is this: Take the C64 and it's OS, now the Amiga comes along, and they put a C64 like OS on it. This is what's happening with the new alternative machines that superseded Amiga hardware. Those alternative machines are stuck in the past if they stick to the Amiga legacy, instead of just running an emulator.

Want an Amiga? Use/get one. Want newer hardware? Then move on, and do better (because there's room for a lot of improvement that won't happen by sticking to AOS).

And yes, I want a new Amiga, but no one will make one I'll probably get an alternative machine after Amigas die physically (hopefully that won't be for another 10+ years...).

[Fats]

Why would you want to run AOS (or derivatives) on newer hardware anyway?

The two major reasons I am developing AROS are from the amiga architecture:
- The Amiga shared libraries that does not need load time linking (reason also why I don't like OS4' .so objects)
- Message passing by pointer passing. Contrary to what most people think this should not make memory protection impossible. See SASOS.

I don't mind if I am using such an OS not running on m68k.

greets,
Staf.

[Fats]

@commodorejohn:
In fact this should be possible even under Linux with a modified UAE, by which I mean, rewrite the functionality of AmigaOS in C and compile natively instead of emulating it, library calls could easily be trapped and Intuition windows and widgets mapped to X windows.  I might look into doing this in fact.

This was one way of how early AROS versions worked, so you can probably save a lot of work by looking at AROS. Only don't think it will be easy

I don't see why SMP should be a problem.

- global SysBase and access to it's members like SysBase->ThisTask
- Forbid()/Enable() & Disable()/Enable(). Did you ever hear about the BKL (big kernel lock) of linux ? Amiga's counterparts are much worse for scalability as they are used throughout the whole user land code. E.g. SMP won't be a problem as such but will likely run slower than the on a single core.

greets,
Staf.

[dammy]

Just throwing an idea into the wind here, but with NVidia's Project Denver desktop ARM based CPU threatening to mop the floor with Intel (yeah believe it when you see it), perhaps an ARM implementation of AmigaOS would be a prudent move.  I've waited for so long for x86 to bite the dust, it's kind of amazing how they've managed to keep the 680x0's arch enemy propped up for so long. Plus a surprise victory from the good old Acorn Archimedes, or to my mind the "British Amiga"!

Any thoughts?

I think ARM would be well suited for mobile Amiga.  Who knows, perhaps 2013 might be the year of the Commodore Amiga, or not.  It seems so long ago I was bending BBRV's ear about using ARM instead of PPC prior to them actually going with ARM in their EFIKA-MX series.

[Mrs Beanbag]

And yes, I want a new Amiga, but no one will make one I'll probably get an alternative machine after Amigas die physically (hopefully that won't be for another 10+ years...).

Ahh... ahhhhh... I think maybe you and I aren't quite so different afterall.  The difference is that I never did live in the real world; it's what gives me my edge.

When I have an idea, my thinking tends to progress something like this:
1. WHAT it should be, and WHY
2. HOW it could be done
3. IF it will ever happen... I've never yet got this far.  But the aim is not to back the winning horse.  If the idea is good and possible, "it won't happen" is no reason to refuse to support it, because that is self-defeating.  If nobody else will do it, maybe I should do it.

WHAT in this case is an ARM powered HTPC/console with OS, because I think there is a market for it, and because I think it fits well with the Amiga's original ethos.  (The CDTV and CD32 were blatantly aiming in the HTPC direction, ahead of their time maybe.)

Now we can ask HOW it could actually be an Amiga as well.  Or in the first instance at least, how it could be an "Amiga alternative" or "Advanced Amiga Substitute" if you will;  I don't think we're at the stage of worrying about licensing the name just yet.

[nicholas]

Ahh... ahhhhh... I think maybe you and I aren't quite so different afterall.  The difference is that I never did live in the real world; it's what gives me my edge.

When I have an idea, my thinking tends to progress something like this:
1. WHAT it should be, and WHY
2. HOW it could be done
3. IF it will ever happen... I've never yet got this far.  But the aim is not to back the winning horse.  If the idea is good and possible, "it won't happen" is no reason to refuse to support it, because that is self-defeating.  If nobody else will do it, maybe I should do it.

WHAT in this case is an ARM powered HTPC/console with OS, because I think there is a market for it, and because I think it fits well with the Amiga's original ethos.  (The CDTV and CD32 were blatantly aiming in the HTPC direction, ahead of their time maybe.)

Now we can ask HOW it could actually be an Amiga as well.  Or in the first instance at least, how it could be an "Amiga alternative" or "Advanced Amiga Substitute" if you will;  I don't think we're at the stage of worrying about licensing the name just yet.

No need to worry about the name, I own both trademarks and I offer very favourable licensing terms for them.

[SamuraiCrow]

Two problems: 1) This doesn't run on Amigas, 2) What fun is it to write for a browser?

1)  It will run on AROS.  2) It can be hotwired.  

My definition of Amiga is hardware, namely chipset+680x0, and sadly this is dead until someone buys or licenses Amiga hardware and starts building the things, and that's most likely not going to happen

Perhaps you've never heard of the NatAmi nor the MiniMig?  There are some flaws/shortcomings in the Amiga chipset that need to be addressed and so a total backward-compatible rewrite of the chipset design would actually be preferred.  Case in point:  The DMA scheduler doesn't take advantage of sequential memory bursts so it's going to need to be changed in future hardware.  Fortunately, the NatAmi is being redesigned to use DDR2 memory instead of fast-page and does exactly that.

And yes, I want a new Amiga, but no one will make one I'll probably get an alternative machine after Amigas die physically (hopefully that won't be for another 10+ years...).

http://www.natami.net

[michel3105]

WHAT in this case is an ARM powered HTPC/console with OS

I honestly don't care for the ARM aspect of this debate, but pholosphically speaking, I agree with you.

The AMIGA 500 was cool because it was, basically, a console, but with the following perks: a keyboard, an OS, cool software for graphics and music, developing toolas and, for the daring ones, an hardware manual.

I think that this was what set the AMIGA apart, made it such a special machine and formed the condiiton for the rising of the "amiga scene", or whatever we want to call it.

I also think that, when Commodore was dying, it would have been very interesting if the Sony (or Sega or whatever) had launched its console with a keyboard, OS, RAM expansion, hardware manual, etc... most of us would have jumped on this hypotetical product in a second!...

(Eventually, Sony launched the "Yaroze" kit, but it was a costly joke, in my opinion...)

As for the birth of a new Amiga, I think Natami is the only hope.

[Khephren]

I think there was always space for a console like computer, or a computer like console, and I think there still is.

Consoles have slowly taken on more computer like functions, and the pc's have now become small enough, and with windows8, have an OS that is quite console like.

I think that middle ground would always have existed, and commodore could have kept living there, I mean, consoles still can't run proper apps, and PC still don't have co-op

[eb15]

Amigas ended with AGA, the other systems are alternative systems that users insist on holding back with AOS derivatives and dated software.

I'm amused by this statement, if your "amiga" is only the old hardware then you've had the option to run netbsd, linux, minix, or whatever experimental open source with whatever features you've wanted to port to it for all these years, or to just ignore it completely like the game or demo developers who just followed the Amiga hardware reference manual to make a bootable floppy and ignored the whole multi-tasking Amiga operating system user experience for their area of interest.   One wonders what "m a g i c" you think could/should be developed now for m68k aga or ecs machines?

Its the user experience, that other non-amiga-like OSes (even with their faster than m68k-CPUs, memory protection, multi-core, hardware accelerated 3D, office and adobe software support) commercial or open sourced, which has driven people to pursue the "AOS derivatives" for an alternative that seems more Amiga-like to them.   Its the lack of funding for full time development staffs, that has held back development of these alternatives, not the demanding an Amiga experience like one is familiar with.

[commodorejohn]

I think there was always space for a console like computer, or a computer like console, and I think there still is.

Consoles have slowly taken on more computer like functions, and the pc's have now become small enough, and with windows8, have an OS that is quite console like.

I half-agree. I definitely think there is room for a console-like computer; PCs have always had trouble because the PC standard completely neglects A/V hardware and everybody mostly follows industry standards and consensus but varies just enough to cause problems, and consoles have been edging towards being computers since the Dreamcast but none of the manufacturers have ever had the nerve to actually make the jump because they're worried about the loss of licensing fees. A truly integrated hardware platform with consistent multimedia capabilities but lax software restrictions would be the best of both worlds, like the Amiga or the MSX, and I could see that being a good solution for a lot of people.

However! I hope to God that "console-like OS" is not a design goal here. Console software is a glorified control panel at best. The Amiga didn't settle for anything like that, it had a real, full-fledged desktop operating system but booted game disks transparently, so that gamers didn't have to bother and anybody who got tired of gaming and wanted to use their computer for productivity purposes wouldn't find themselves hampered by a simpleton OS designed more to not scare console gamers away than to provide a quality user experience. Any platform that attempts to follow in its footsteps should settle for no less than that.

[Khephren]

well, I don't want it for us of course but it's definitely the way OS vendors seem to want to head. All this talk of 'the post PC age'...i've been living that dream since 1988 ;P

They are trying to turn windows and my Xbox into a glorified phone OS

[Mrs Beanbag]

A truly integrated hardware platform with consistent multimedia capabilities but lax software restrictions would be the best of both worlds, like the Amiga or the MSX, and I could see that being a good solution for a lot of people.

However! I hope to God that "console-like OS" is not a design goal here. Console software is a glorified control panel at best. The Amiga didn't settle for anything like that, it had a real, full-fledged desktop operating system but booted game disks transparently

I'm thinking more of a sort of "two-tier" OS, a small OS instead of the PC's BIOS that's enough to boot a game straight from disk instead of having to install everything (i.e. Kickstart) and perform basic multimedia functions like playing DVDs and audio CDs.  The real OS (i.e. Workbench) would boot from HDD of course.  Or a live CD.

[SamuraiCrow]

@Mrs. Beanbag

Would a conventional Kickstart with ROM switcher built-in do the trick for you?  The NatAmi has that already.

DVD playing is a problem due to region-locks on the copy-protection.  Also there are licensing issues on the copy-protection as well.

[persia]

With SSDs becoming relatively cheap, what's the point?  Booting a full OS from SSD is pretty darn quick, my office MacBook Air boots in 15 seconds to a full Lion experience.

I'm thinking more of a sort of "two-tier" OS, a small OS instead of the PC's BIOS that's enough to boot a game straight from disk instead of having to install everything (i.e. Kickstart) and perform basic multimedia functions like playing DVDs and audio CDs.  The real OS (i.e. Workbench) would boot from HDD of course.  Or a live CD.

[commodorejohn]

I'm thinking more of a sort of "two-tier" OS, a small OS instead of the PC's BIOS that's enough to boot a game straight from disk instead of having to install everything (i.e. Kickstart) and perform basic multimedia functions like playing DVDs and audio CDs.  The real OS (i.e. Workbench) would boot from HDD of course.  Or a live CD.

There is absolutely no reason to have a standard OS install boot from a live CD in the era of dirt-cheap mass storage, let me say that. It'd cost all of $10-30 to include some kind of built-in boot volume (less in quantity,) whether that be a 128MB flash device or a small hard drive. (It'd be useful to have it on a separate volume than the user's hard drive, anyway, as you could set it to write-protect by default and keep the non-technical users from screwing things up.)

However, I think a built-in control-panel applet would certainly be useful for the DVD/game side of things; perhaps there could be a setting in the configuration NVRAM to select whether it boots into dashboard mode or computer mode by default, and easy access to either from the other. Mainly I'd just want to make sure that the OS proper isn't "hidden" for fear of scaring off users with anything that looks like it belongs on a computer.