New improved intuition.library version from the Kickstart 3.1

[wawrzon]

yes, do not forget os4 is extensively funded and even morphos does cost some money.
in comparison people still expect aros to present them just every imaginable feature on a tablet for free and be up to concurrent solutions (which it even mostly is) without them even to lift a finger.

[OlafS3]

What I really like with OS3.5/3.9 (dont remember when it came) is AREXX support in Workbench - finally, and the "resize window to fit" menu entry I also like shell improvements and fixes, the H protection flag working again and various other minor things. Regarding preferencs, I could do without the Reaction toolkit, and I really do not see the point in 020+ requirement. From my experience with trying to get as much of OS3.9 as possible to work on (a mighty fast) 68000, it is largely just the preferences programs that require 020+ - that is, resource.library is 020+.

I use Magellan as desktop and Magellan has extensive AREXX support. Most of what is included in 3.5 or 3.9 can be added from aminet because available freely or there are similar replacements available (I tried that as much as possible in my distribution). That not means that I want to downtalk what people did with 3.5 or 3.9, it was certainly a big effort but from todays view I would say it is replaceable and not unique like some here claim.

[NorthWay]

I don't see what's so special about OS3.1.

It is the most obvious choice to me, and I applauded AROS when they finally dropped all their pie-in-the-sky ideas and went for a down to earth choice which you could actually measure and compare with the yardstick.

3.1 is the last official C= release, and the last combined ROM+disk release. The more recent releases have no big API updates anyway, and a whole lot less status among the congregation (no offence Olsen and the rest).

(Oh, and I liked ClassAct, but that is another discussion.)

[warpdesign]

I'm wondering: if we exclude the fact that it's opened (that's already huge, yes), can be fixed and improved by anyone, and is portable, what are the benefits of running AROS instead of original AOS on 68k hardware? It seems most AROS developers don't seem to be that interested in seeing it run correctly (ie: at least on par with original AOS on 68k hardware) but why would they? What's the motivation? What would it bring?

[wawrzon]

I'm wondering: if we exclude the fact that it's opened (that's already huge, yes), can be fixed and improved by anyone, and is portable, what are the benefits of running AROS instead of original AOS on 68k hardware? It seems most AROS developers don't seem to be that interested in seeing it run correctly (ie: at least on par with original AOS on 68k hardware) but why would they? What's the motivation? What would it bring?

for amiga userrs aros brings additional functionalities, like built in usb stack, network stack, rtg support, gallium/mesa, css capable browser, ability to move windows off screen, a number of contributions, apps and games, capable of running on 68k. aros basically runs on every system without patching and reconfiguration, which allows to have centralized effort in improvement, everybody may contribute to according to his abilities, instead wasting time on multiple concurrent and uncoordinated projects. the goal is that you can download aros and just run in on whatever amiga hardware you own or under uae without spending weeks to set up the system to your satisfaction. i know for many this is a pleasure itself to fiddle with it, but it may be redirected to common effort that results in amiga characteristic easiness of use and plug and play abilities that have been long lost unfortunately. also aros kickstart aims at mutual compatibility with the 1.x - 3.x range as far as it can be done, so genuinely incompatible amiga applications can be run side by side. as far as i know it provides also improved posix compliance, that allows easier porting without ixemul library, which still remains an option though.

aros devs are taking aos compatibility serious as i said, but it is not their priority to have perfectly working hardware drivers for each and every amiga system out there. except perhaps for toni. but without testing, cooperation on the part of the (potential) users and educated bug reports they certainly are left with nothing. im sorry, if you want to see aros as upgrade alternative to aos, its your move now.

[itix]

I'm wondering: if we exclude the fact that it's opened (that's already huge, yes), can be fixed and improved by anyone, and is portable, what are the benefits of running AROS instead of original AOS on 68k hardware? It seems most AROS developers don't seem to be that interested in seeing it run correctly (ie: at least on par with original AOS on 68k hardware) but why would they? What's the motivation? What would it bring?

for amiga userrs aros brings additional functionalities, like built in usb stack, network stack, rtg support, gallium/mesa, css capable browser, ability to move windows off screen, a number of contributions, apps and games, capable of running on 68k.

I think AROS on Amiga HW is having sort of same problem than OS 3.5/3.9 had. If you had USB/network/gfx board or other expansion HW you already had required drivers and programs installed. Probably bunch of WB enhancers too which allow most of those candy features and given that Amiga hardware is quite limited it is difficult to build new enhancements.

If there was new/old 68k hardware supported only by AROS 68k then it could be different game. I guess it is too late to support old 68k Macs now ;-)

[wawrzon]

I think AROS on Amiga HW is having sort of same problem than OS 3.5/3.9 had. If you had USB/network/gfx board or other expansion HW you already had required drivers and programs installed. Probably bunch of WB enhancers too which allow most of those candy features and given that Amiga hardware is quite limited it is difficult to build new enhancements.

If there was new/old 68k hardware supported only by AROS 68k then it could be different game. I guess it is too late to support old 68k Macs now ;-)

in fact someoneseems to attempt just that;)

otherwise i think you are right, though i have a well tuned 3.x setup myself all aling with custom kick and set of libs in flash, still ive seen the opportunity in aros. as for new hardware, who knows.. perhaps gallium supported rtg cards could be used on pci extended systems one day.

[biggun]

If there was new/old 68k hardware supported only by AROS 68k then it could be different game.

I think this is a good idea ...

[warpdesign]

If there was new/old 68k hardware supported only by AROS 68k then it could be different game. I guess it is too late to support old 68k Macs now ;-)

Or maybe if AROS brought something really new and better (memory protection? etc...) ?

[itix]

Or maybe if AROS brought something really new and better (memory protection? etc...) ?

If you break binary compatibility why bother with 68k?

[Terminills]

I think AROS on Amiga HW is having sort of same problem than OS 3.5/3.9 had. If you had USB/network/gfx board or other expansion HW you already had required drivers and programs installed. Probably bunch of WB enhancers too which allow most of those candy features and given that Amiga hardware is quite limited it is difficult to build new enhancements.

If there was new/old 68k hardware supported only by AROS 68k then it could be different game. I guess it is too late to support old 68k Macs now ;-)

http://www.mirari.fr/ZkeU

The PX60 is the stand alone of this board.  Perfect home for Aros 68K if you ask me.

[Minuous]

>OS 3.5 introduced GlowIcons (which I already had in NewIcons format)

NewIcons is just an unofficial "hack and patch" based on tooltypes, whereas GlowIcons is a proper upgrade to the icon system, the two are not at all equivalent.

>3.1 is the last official C= release, and the last combined ROM+disk release.

Actually 3.1 was released by Village Tronic, not Commodore. Not that there is anything sacred about Commodore. I don't see the relevance of whether the ROM upgrade is performed in firmware or software.

>The more recent releases have no big API updates anyway

Yes they do, obviously you haven't read the autodocs.

>Most of what is included in 3.5 or 3.9 can be added from aminet

That's incorrect.

>OS 3.5/3.9 had almost no improvements (scsi.device with large hd support was only major improvement there) but just 3rd party software you can download from Aminet for free.

Maybe if you had actually bought and used the product, or even bothered to read the changelog and/or autodocs, you would know this to be wrong.

>I am only a little nerved because people seem to search for any reason not to do anything or invest time (even testing would be something).

Open source status isn't really a reason for an ordinary user to want to use something. They will make that assessment based on other factors such as as features, speed, etc. which AROS lacks.

[kamelito]

http://www.mirari.fr/ZkeU

The PX60 is the stand alone of this board.  Perfect home for Aros 68K if you ask me.

Well why not but can you buy it? for now it seems more vaporware than anything else no?

Kamelito

[psxphill]

>Actually 3.1 was released by Village Tronic, not Commodore.
 
 It was distributed by Village Tronic. The content came from commodore.
 
 > Not that there is anything sacred about Commodore.
 
 In terms of Provenance there is.
 
 If I converted the Ship of Theseus to fibre glass then would it be the same ship? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
 
 Some people want to maintain classic cars in their original form, others want to strip them down and rebuild them with different engine, suspension and lower the roof etc. The later only appeals to a minority, like OS3.5/3.9/4.x
 
 It's a shame that AROS hasn't been more focused on 68k in the past, I think that had the most potential for bridging the gap between old and new hardware.
 
 > I don't see the relevance of whether the ROM upgrade is performed in
 > firmware or software.

 If it's not in ROM then it's taking up RAM.

[wawrzon]

Open source status isn't really a reason for an ordinary user to want to use something. They will make that assessment based on other factors such as as features, speed, etc. which AROS lacks.

you are talking about regular customers, such as those buying regular products on regular therms such as warranty or comparable prices and so on. there is no users/customers in the amiga community by this definition. judging by features such as speed amiga nor its offshots are an option anyway. putting people that only fire up their 500 now and then to play a game aside, people like you, me, olaf, terminills, itix and others are obviously interested in what is going on with amiga, beyond that regular usage (whatever it would be), otherwise they would not be taking part in the discussion.

im not so much advocating to attract regular customers to aros 68k at this point, but people who care, and are able to contribute in some way. but in the end we cannot enforce it.

[wawrzon]

It's a shame that AROS hasn't been more focused on 68k in the past, I think that had the most potential for bridging the gap between old and new hardware.

yes, perhaps its too late.