MorphOS ahead of AROS?

[Digiman]

Indeed it is. Far less crashes, a much better method at backwards compatability, MUI just works, USB works (including writing to NTFS), the GUI (Ambient) is AMAZING!!!

I think the only thing AROS has that is fully worth mention is the 3DCard Support, but even most of the drivers have bugs and the screen flakes out.

But hey, AROS is free, if you are interested, download it, install it, and submit bug reports.

Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs but MOS will not run on a G5 Mac so if we compare progress of Aros Intel i7 vs Powermac G5 Mos config clearly the truth is Mos is still on a tiny scale compared to Aros's ambitious PC  configurations supported. When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:

For me the issue is the PPC requirement, Commodore never made a PPC Amiga, Native OS for PPC or even A4000 upgrade card so Mos + UAE running on smelly old 90s Macs from a dumpster is no more "Amiga" than Aros + WinUAE running on a brand new dodgy brand of PC.

Mos is a hobby OS which costs more than Win7 and needs the inferior [to WinUAE] UAE emulator to run 90% of Amiga software.

Each to their own, but OS4/Mos are a waste of money IMO (just like Clownto's Amiga [shaft you] Forever is)

[Iggy]

2)Shaders....
 

Oh yes that would be useful.
It could be implemented in later versions of MorphOS.

[Lando]

Here's a question, could some sort of FPGA based USB 3 or PCI expansion board be created to substitute for the lack of the classic chip set on future MorphOS hardware (in theory).

If possible, AROS and OS 4 could benefit from this as well.

This was discussed back in 2000'ish.  I seem to remember the original Escena AmigaOne design included a connection to the A1200 motherboard for just this purpose - access to the custom chips.

I can't see any benefit it would hold now, emulation is so much easier and probably more compatible.

[Tripitaka]

This was discussed back in 2000'ish.  I seem to remember the original Escena AmigaOne design included a connection to the A1200 motherboard for just this purpose - access to the custom chips.

I can't see any benefit it would hold now, emulation is so much easier and probably more compatible.

http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/prototypes/amigaone1.html

Added a linky to Lando's post, he remembers correctly.

I would rather see a Natami-on-a board add-on for OS4 and MOS machines than a standard AGA add-on to be honest. That would be interesting.

[XDelusion]

http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/prototypes/amigaone1.html

added a linky to lando's post, he remembers correctly.

I would rather see a natami-on-a board add-on for os4 and mos machines than a standard aga add-on to be honest. That would be interesting.

exactly!!!

[XDelusion]

Currently 133MHz, but as of next Monday 167MHz.
I'm also sitting on a couple of R400 based cards that have been modified to work in a G4 Mac.

Impressive! It's amazing how fast machines with such low Bus Speed (by today's standards) can perform with the right OS/Software!

[XDelusion]

Just my 2 cents......  I like winuae better than ether of these  

And for that you must have a love for Windows...

...which again it is that lack of that love that many of us chose Amiga over Windows and Mac OS so many years ago.

Mind you, I do have a Windows machine for Video/Audio Editing, and Gaming, but I don't use WinUAE except as a means to read and write to my Amiga Hard Drives (SD/CF cards). It just feels wrong to use it for anything else when my machines are perfectly capable of playing all the games and running all the apps on their own, but alas, to each their own. Glad you are enjoying your self....

TRAITOR!!! He he he.

[XDelusion]

This doesn't bother me (yet). There are no apps or games for MorphOS that I was not able to run and run well even on my meager piece of crap eMachine.

What I expect from an OS is a fluid and flexible GUI, a stable environment, and for it to be friendly with the resources, not to mention to have a nice collection of practical software.

MorphOS delivers in that arena RIGHT NOW. AROS on the other hand is still catching up, despite it's ability to run on faster more modern processors.

Speaking of which, I have a 2.6Ghz machine at home that I've been able to over clock to 3.4Ghz. I use it to run Haiku and AROS, just as I run both on my Eee PC 900. So don't get me wrong, I am an AROS user, I do donate to the Magellan bounty, but I'm more impressed by MorphOS in the long run.

Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs but MOS will not run on a G5 Mac so if we compare progress of Aros Intel i7 vs Powermac G5 Mos config clearly the truth is Mos is still on a tiny scale compared to Aros's ambitious PC  configurations supported. When MOS is running on every Mac desktop and laptop from G3 to G5 and Intel x86 Macs let me know :roflmao:

For me the issue is the PPC requirement, Commodore never made a PPC Amiga, Native OS for PPC or even A4000 upgrade card so Mos + UAE running on smelly old 90s Macs from a dumpster is no more "Amiga" than Aros + WinUAE running on a brand new dodgy brand of PC.

Mos is a hobby OS which costs more than Win7 and needs the inferior [to WinUAE] UAE emulator to run 90% of Amiga software.

Each to their own, but OS4/Mos are a waste of money IMO (just like Clownto's Amiga [shaft you] Forever is)

[Iggy]

Impressive! It's amazing how fast machines with such low Bus Speed (by today's standards) can perform with the right OS/Software!

Actually, I'm amazed at how long we held on to such crappy expansion standards.
 
33MHz PCI slots? Argh!
If you calculate out the additional bandwidth, PCIe is a Godsend.
PCIe 2.0 even better, and PCIe 3.0 incredible.
 
Think about it, I've got a 1.53GHz processor operating on a 133MHz bus.
That's a rediculous I/O bottleneck.

[Iggy]

"Originally Posted by Digiman
Aros runs on all x86 CPUs from Pentium 3 to i7 PCs"
 
Yeah, if you want to run on one quarter of the processor, AROS will run on an i7.
Its a pointless misuse of a multicore processor, but it can be done.
 
"Commodore never made a PPC Amiga"
 
Who the f*ck cares? You guys act like Commodore was something special.
They didn't design the Amiga, they bought it.
And when it came time to enhance and develop it, they flubbed it up.
 
WE dictate the direction(s) that our community develop into now.
I, for one, am proud of that.

[Iggy]

Mind you, I do have a Windows machine for Video/Audio Editing, and Gaming, but I don't use WinUAE except as a means to read and write to my Amiga Hard Drives (SD/CF cards). It just feels wrong to use it for anything else when my machines are perfectly capable of playing all the games and running all the apps on their own, but alas, to each their own. Glad you are enjoying your self....
 
TRAITOR!!! He he he.

He he he.
I've got three.
And I don't use WinUAE either.

[spookyx]

And for that you must have a love for Windows...

...which again it is that lack of that love that many of us chose Amiga over Windows and Mac OS so many years ago.

in truth i run E-UAE since i have only used fedora for many years.   I only boot up windows when I have too,  which thankfully is not much.   However it must be said,  if  good reasonably priced hardware came out that ran some real amiga OS or something close,  I would use it.

[Fats]

Yeah, if you want to run on one quarter of the processor, AROS will run on an i7.
Its a pointless misuse of a multicore processor, but it can be done.

Don't think Morphos or any other amiga-like OS is doing better in that regard; only their CPUs are a little slower.
Nothing is stopping you from starting 4 AROS hosted versions under Linux though

greets,
Staf.

[XDelusion]

Don't think Morphos or any other amiga-like OS is doing better in that regard; only their CPUs are a little slower.
Nothing is stopping you from starting 4 AROS hosted versions under Linux though

greets,
Staf.

But...

I would rather avoid using Linux...


Though I still wanna see that AROS/Linux distro see the light of day.

[Iggy]

Don't think Morphos or any other amiga-like OS is doing better in that regard; only their CPUs are a little slower.
Nothing is stopping you from starting 4 AROS hosted versions under Linux though

greets,
Staf.

Actually Staf,
You have a point. And I have an AROS box with a single core Athlon64 running at 2.7 GHz that I can overclock to over 3.0GHz (so basically twice the speed of my G4). But I'd still rather run MorphOS, and I'd really like to run it on a 2.5GHz G5 (I'm purchasing one soon).
And its not really the ISA that matters to me, its the API and how well its implemented.
Currently we have three NG OS' that attempt to re-implement the OS3.1 API, each with its own enhancements. Mine isn't perfect, but I prefer it. The other two aren't bad either.
I don't understand the argument.
All three OS' are, at their core, quite similar. I may even opt for a third machine to run OS4 soon.
But I'm still going to have a favorite.
And its not AROS.
Especially when its not finished (maybe not even when it finally reaches 1.0 status).
And certainly not when its crash prone with un-impplemented features.

In a way, the AROS development team is lucky.
Since neither OS4 or MorphOS runs on X86 equipment, they have that segment to themselves.
You'll notice that you don't see much drive to carry on the PPC AROS variant.

[OlafS3]

I do not want to destroy your illusions. The reasons why there is not much drive regarding PPC because anyone fears MorphOS or AOS but because there is not much need. The world outside speaks X86 (and in parts ARM) but noone is interested in PPC. That is the reality. There is a nightly build for PPC but that is not enough. You must build a distribution and you need a lot of software to be compiled for PPC. Noone is interested to do that for such a small number of potential users.