a golden age of Amiga

[Digiman]

Without a new generation of J. Miner and R.J.Mical or any of the excellent ideas from programmers like Dan Silva etc there can't ever be a new age of Amiga.

Remember 18 years of no repeat of the firsts found in A1000 to CD32 is a long time in engineering terms and software development terms.

edit:mass market/PC conquering type golden age*

[Fats]

Without a new generation of J. Miner and R.J.Mical or any of the excellent ideas from programmers like Dan Silva etc there can't ever be a new age of Amiga.

Even if J. Miner would be here now, he wouldn't be working on the next great desktop computer. Times are long passed that you can be earth changing in that product category. He would probably be working on the real first intelligent machine or something like that.

greets,
Staf.

[Digiman]

Software can be intelligent too. And yes to be honest if someone produce d an OS 25 years worth better than KS/WB 1.2 on A1000/500 it would be a game changer. Multitasking GUI desktop machine was game changing in 85/86.

Windows, Linux or OSX will never be a revolution......so we are stuck.

What I meant about Jay Miner etc was a new generation of designers who designed a machine architecture radically different and superior to current desktop PC or Mac. PC and Mac existed before the A1000 launch. You need lateral thinking geniuses before millions of dollars. And OS and user input technology must also be cutting for another revolution similar to the dawn of Amiga in 1985 IMO

[persia]

@Digiman Forward thinking isn't going to come out of the Amiga crowd, they scream if even the outdated and confusing idea of a "snapshot" is set to off by default. There'll be no innovation here.

[HenryCase]

What I meant about Jay Miner etc was a new generation of designers who designed a machine architecture radically different and superior to current desktop PC or Mac.

I have a plan that would achieve exactly that. Issue now is getting the technical skills to implement it, but that's something I'm working on. The architecture isn't exactly like the Amiga, but things I picked up from the Amiga and discussions around it have partly inspired it.

[Mrs Beanbag]

I have a plan that would achieve exactly that. Issue now is getting the technical skills to implement it, but that's something I'm working on. The architecture isn't exactly like the Amiga, but things I picked up from the Amiga and discussions around it have partly inspired it.

What's your plan?  I might be able to help.

[Tripitaka]

I have a plan that would achieve exactly that. Issue now is getting the technical skills to implement it, but that's something I'm working on. The architecture isn't exactly like the Amiga, but things I picked up from the Amiga and discussions around it have partly inspired it.

Pah! My plan was awesome, but I'll be interested to hear yours anyway.

[Fats]

What I meant about Jay Miner etc was a new generation of designers who designed a machine architecture radically different and superior to current desktop PC or Mac.

These things are happening: Arduino - PogoPlug - RepRap to name a few. All I wanted to say is that a.org is not the right place to look for that, and there is nothing wrong with that.

greets,
Staf.

[HenryCase]

@Mrs Beanbag, @Tripitaka
Thanks for your interest. My plan is a mishmash of ideas from all over the place, and I've not tried to summarise them succinctly before, but I'll try.

The plan is based around two central themes: FPGA computing and an OS that has a similar structure throughout its construction. As hinted at before, I do have Amiga-inspired ideas for this system too, but it's best to explain the core structure first.

With regards to FPGA computing, FPGAs are quickly improving in power and cost already, but I believe we're on the verge of seeing a game changer emerge. What I believe to be a game changer will be FPGAs built on memristor technology. There are a few reasons for this. Other than being fast storage devices, memristors can also be used for computation. This video is what inspired me with this particular idea, if you wish then skip to 29:10 to hear the bit about the memristor-based FPGA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKGhvKyjgLY

The implication logic section starting at around 38:37 is also worth pointing out.

Next, the OS. The main source of inspiration behind the OS came from watching this video by Ian Piumarta, who currently works for VPRI:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn7kTPbW6QQ

The video describes a programming language being developed for VPRI that basically combines the functional programming of Lisp with the object-oriented nature of Smalltalk, which appeared to be a powerful combination for approaching programming tasks (FWIW, I realise that there are Lisps with object systems in place already, but these previous object systems were afterthoughts rather than at the core of the language).

What I was particularly struck by was he was describing the way VPRI was trying to build an OS using this language, which would be compact (OS in approx 20,000 lines of code), as well as structurally similar at every level of the OS (in other words, understand the code for high level apps, and you'd also understand the code at the lower levels of the OS).

What's so good about this? There are a few things. One of the advantages touched on in the video is that this same language can be used to define the hardware. So, if you run the OS on an FPGA, learning one language doesn't just give you the ability to create programs, it also allows you to define hardware accelerators for your programs.

To further illustrate what's possible with this approach, it's worth knowing about the Bluespec language. A simple explanation of what's possible in Bluespec is that when you evaluate Bluespec code, what is produced is both an accelerator design and the code that makes use of this accelerator. Essentially, it tries to create an optimal solution utilising both hardware and software:
http://www.gizmag.com/bluespec-code-circuit-system/20827/
I'd attempt the same thing with this system I'm proposing.

Another advantage that comes along with memristor-based FPGAs is the re-programmability. One thing you're taught early when learning Lisp is to view code and data as different ways to interpret the same object, in that code can be data and data can be code. Think about what we have with a memristor-based FPGA; we have a device that can store programs, and we have a device that can perform computation. What if you made these areas of the chip interchangeable? In other words, a section of the chip could be storage one minute, and then a logic circuit the next. What this gives you is on-the-fly re-programmability of FPGAs, you program a new accelerator as 'data' then you flip the switch and its now an accelerator.

As I mentioned before, I have other ideas for this system, and if you'd like information about the Amiga-inspired parts I'd be happy to share them. So to summarise, the basic plan is for flexible FPGA computing + simple OS + architecture that scales from high level to low level. In a way this simple OS + hardware accelerators approach is a spiritual successor to the Amiga anyway, just taken to the next evolutionary level.

Why is this better than what's out there? Other than the  simplicity of the system, it has a lot of potential to speed up code execution. Not only would you have as many specialised accelerators as you could fit on your hardware, you'd be concentrating the processing on a single chip (apart from RAM, there's some engineering challenges to overcome before memristors replace RAM), which should remove a lot of processing bottlenecks.

So what do you think? :-)

@Fats

All I wanted to say is that a.org is not the right place to look for that

Are you sure? ;-)

[amigadave]

@HenryCase,

Is this something you are really working on, or just thinking about?

[Mrs Beanbag]

One thing that I have thought about FPGAs is that they're designed for "rapid prototyping" or in otherwords with the idea in mind that they are something you make with the intention of making a "proper" chip at some stage in the future... how this manifests is in the scheme where you "flash" your design to the chip, into non-volatile storage of some sort.  But if these are going to be used as reconfigurable processors, they don't need to be non-volatile at all and could be made of ordinary RAM so that they can be reconfigured much more quickly.  In fact they could be wired up in such a way that they can reconfigure themselves as they go along.

This has a lot of advantages.  If your program doesn't use some feature of a CPU, such as floating point, but does a lot of integer maths, it could reconfigure it all as integer cores when needed.  But perhaps we can go even further than an FPGA design here...

[HenryCase]

@HenryCase,

Is this something you are really working on, or just thinking about?

Working on in the sense of educating myself, but not working on in the sense of building it yet. Do you have any feedback?

[HenryCase]

One thing that I have thought about FPGAs is that they're designed for "rapid prototyping" or in otherwords with the idea in mind that they are something you make with the intention of making a "proper" chip at some stage in the future... how this manifests is in the scheme where you "flash" your design to the chip, into non-volatile storage of some sort.  But if these are going to be used as reconfigurable processors, they don't need to be non-volatile at all and could be made of ordinary RAM so that they can be reconfigured much more quickly.  In fact they could be wired up in such a way that they can reconfigure themselves as they go along.

Thank you for your ideas Mrs Beanbag.

With regards to FPGAs, you are correct that currently they are often used for rapid prototyping. However, they are occassionally used in commercial products, and again I must stress that memristors bring a number of advantages to typical FPGAs that will allow the performance to get much closer to fixed function devices. Allow me to explain...

The simple explanation for current FPGAs is that they are organised into code blocks called logic elements. You can see a diagram of one here:
http://www.eecg.toronto.edu/~pc/research/fpga/des/Logic_Element/logic_element.html

Through configuring these logic elements you change the function of FPGAs to fit your needs. However, the architecture is sub-optimal compared to ASICs as the extra bulk required to manage the re-programmability limits their logic density (in other words, ASICs allow circuitry to be simplified).

However, using memristors in FPGAs has the potential to make FPGAs a lot more efficient. There are a few ways to build FPGAs using memristors, but let's first focus on the first way described in the video I shared. The simple way to think about this is that you have two layers in the chip; on one layer you have transistors, on the other layer you have memristors. Memristors act as the wiring between the transistors. They are ideally suited to this. Memristors are electrically controlled variable resisitors that remember their resistance. Increase the resistance high enough and you have a 'blocked' connection. Reduce the resistance and you have an 'open' connection. The circuitry to manage the memristor wiring would be minimal, and the simpler connections would allow more efficient designs to be implemented on FPGAs.

As suggested, this is just one way to implement FPGAs utilising memristors. The other way hinted at in the video was to use implication logic. What has been discovered is that memristors can do logic by themselves, you don't need transistors at all, but you need to use a different form of logic. My knowledge on implication logic is sketchy at the moment, but from what was suggested in the video, the preliminary work done at HP on this indicates that when compiling C code, you end up with smaller binaries using implication logic. It's an area I need to research more, but I should learn to walk before I can run! ;-)

Use of RAM for reconfigurable computers is an interesting idea, but I'm not quite sure how it would work. Could you explain more?

This has a lot of advantages.  If your program doesn't use some feature of a CPU, such as floating point, but does a lot of integer maths, it could reconfigure it all as integer cores when needed.  But perhaps we can go even further than an FPGA design here...

Yes, I intended the CPU to be programmable in the way you suggest. When you say we could go further than an FPGA design here, what do you have in mind?

[Tripitaka]

@Henrycase

I have a very good friend who is far more technical than I am. He used to code for Amiga systems funny enough, mostly touchscreen based point of sale systems. Now he's freelance but the bulk of his work comes from a system he wrote for transferring large amounts of securely encrypted data. It's quite well known apparently.

Anyway the point is that about 11 years ago that we had a long talk about something very similar to you idea. Particularly regarding the blurring of hardware and software boundaries. It was all just theory and "this is the direction I would like to see things going" kind of chat but I've never quite looked at hardware the same way since.

I heartily agree that a true Amiga revival will not ever be an Amiga revival as such but rather a revival of innovation, the Amiga spirit if you will. Your "from the ground upwards" kind of thinking is just what we need.

The big question of course is not so much if it can be done, it is more to do with if it can be done at the right price but please, don't let that put you off trying. I guess you'll work that out as you go along.

Good luck, I hope something comes from this.

[actung_bab]

nice franko can do these also

[bloodline]

The big question is "what problem does it solve"... In engineering almost anything is possible, but few things are actually useful :-/