One unified OS for the future?

[amigadave]

Genesi used to sponsor developers with free hardware but many just took free hardware, sold it and then quit. Some developers did develop something and then quit. Only few lasted longer so personally I dont see it viable option. Even when developers have good intentions it gets easily wasted, like with Spotify.

Bounties work better but someone must get committed to update software regularly.

Bounties are a good solution for funding some software projects, but as you pointed out, they don't guarantee that the software created will be maintained in the future.

With our needs for new software being so huge, I believe that any and all means to support and encourage new software development should be used, including bounties, sponsored commercial projects, and maybe even a few Kickstarter projects, along with donated hardware and the creation of sites like the AmiStore or other online services which make it easier for programmers to sell their work and continue programming for our platforms.  There is no single solution and I guess we will always be struggling to get more and better software for our platforms, until such time when we are large enough to make it more financially desirable to program for any of the Amiga inspired platforms (if we ever reach that point again is doubtful).

[fishy_fiz]

@amigadave

Mostly it was semantics in reply to earlier responses. If people are going to be using Linux of some description Im all for them using it with an amiga spin.

[TeamBlackFox]

One reason unification will never work is nobody will ever agree on a balance as to compatibility with legacy applications and adding modern features. Frankly, the majority of the software I as a user depend on:

Vi/Vim
Clang/PCC/GCC & binutils
Firefox and Thunderbird
ZSH/KSH93
Perl
BSD user land tools
X11/xWayland

All of these can be recompiled. For those using older, proprietary products you're obviously going to be forced to emulate or stick with older releases,but this isn't unlike Windows or OS X, where changes in ABI/API and architectural generations results in software not working. For instance, I know of a program for Windows XP that won't run on any 64-bit CPUs regardless of the OS being 32-bit, the developer used an undocumented instruction in the x86 instruction set in his code. In addition it is tied closely to the 32-bit ABI of Windows XP so it won't run under Vista or higher. So you're screwed if you want to use the program ( it is a soft microphone emulator intended for audio production ) on anything modern.

This is why I push for products to be either made with an open licence and source available state, or else well-written so they will work ten years down the line. Just the other day I built a copy of System V R4 based on the source on Archive.Org. Had a boatload of warnings but it compiled and reportedly ran on my friend's old 386 box ( he lost a bet with me and has to use System V R4 for a week. I bet him Ian Jackson would resign from Debian. Had I lost I would have had to use Yggdrasil Linux for a week ) That also being said, I wasn't able to run a binary for Windows under Wine because there is an undocumented bug in the MS version of the DLLs it needs.

[itix]

One of the main things that is a problem is that Forbid() is not SMP friendly. When a task calls Forbid() it expects no other process will run at the same time also not on another CPU. Currently this function is used a lot both in the OS libraries as well as in programs themselves.
So one of the things being done is to replace Forbid() locking in the OS functions with other means of locking. Likely this will break compatibility with some programs that expect the exact Forbid() behavior. This in turn will be enough for some forum whiners to claim the result is a not 100% compatible system but for more pragmatic persons it may be good enough as most of the programs will still run without problems and also giving you the advantage of SMP.

This still leaves the programs that themselves are heavy Forbid() users. This can likely be solved by penalizing the performance of these programs by rate limiting Forbid() calls so non-heavy Forbid() users are not much impacted and run (almost) at full speed. Probably enough material again for some people to complain loudly.

You mean users are stupid trolls, right?

I mean, if the user has bought system to run his software collection he does expect it does run his software in the future, too. If you make clean break and say, this is not going to run 68k software anymore, then it is different. But dont expect users are going to buy into this because to many Amiga is just a hobby.

[guest11527]

You mean users are stupid trolls, right?

I mean, if the user has bought system to run his software collection he does expect it does run his software in the future, too. If you make clean break and say, this is not going to run 68k software anymore, then it is different. But dont expect users are going to buy into this because to many Amiga is just a hobby.

But that's the main problem I have with all the "NG Amigas" in first place. I mean, if I need powerful computing and new programs, I already have a solution for that. I already have a PC. Thus, why exactly would I want to buy new expensive (avoing the phrase "overpriced") hardware to run incompatible software from a niche market? I'm sorry if this sounds like a stupid question, but I simply don't get the business model of all this...

I mean, 68K Amigas satisfy at least one demand, and that's retro computing and retro gaming, and apparently, there is *some* demand for it, even though it's not a big market. If you buy into this hobby, you also have a solution, and these are the old machines. Where the NGs fit into I fail to understand.

[Thorham]

Where the NGs fit into I fail to understand.

Simple, NG users want to run AOS4 and/or MorphOS.

[guest11527]

Simple, NG users want to run AOS4 and/or MorphOS.

Ok, and why that? I.e. you are explaining the answer with the question. In particular, I want to understand the motivation why people buy into that.

[Boot_WB]

Wrote reply, entirely lost due to Amiga.org's ridiculous auto-logout whilst writing it.

Again.

Edit: managed to get it restored, thankfully this browser retains form contents when back-paging. Unlike amiga.org's forum software which helpfully trashes the whole post when re-logging in.

[Boot_WB]

Ok, and why that? I.e. you are explaining the answer with the question. In particular, I want to understand the motivation why people buy into that.

When i first tried OS4 (and subsequently MorphOS) that was my reaction - frankly i couldn't see the appeal. Fewer applications, and not much patching (like i was expecting after OS3.x).
On top of that, no esoteric hardware to collect, and not much 'mystery' to exploring its capabilities - where's the 'Amiga' in plugging in a pci card, having rtg already available, and not having to sacrifice chickens or set cryptic env-vars and tooltypes?

 I went back to OS3.9 and Amiga hardware.

Eventually i realisedi was switching onthe a4000t less and less, until it didn't even get unpacked after a house move. A couple of minor issues never got resolved which made it even less fun, and i grew wary of powering up £2000+ worth of ageing equipment every time which could easily break down and be worth near-nothing.

I realised i wanted to continue using my Amigas, but without the headaches and the financial roulette wheel of ageing hardware already running near to its limit and still not-quite-achieving. With a csppc/a4000t/rtg/usb/etc...there was nothing left to upgrade.

MorphOS, released on the mac-mini, offered the ideal choice: fast OS, in active development, fast cheap hardware that is easily replaceable, no hardware mess to maintain/troubleshoot,maximum backwards compatibility (although inow use very few 68k apps anyway due to more recent, better quality, native replacements/versions), and a large overlap in the venn diagrams of user base.

One morething is that it's not just the OS and applications, but also the community that is a common between Amiga and MorphOS (and OS4.x). Most of the people who helped me get the most out of the Amiga are the same people who help get the most out of MorphOS.

[wawrzon]

Ok, and why that? I.e. you are explaining the answer with the question. In particular, I want to understand the motivation why people buy into that.

lets face it. it must be a kind of complex that dates back to actual amiga days. in particular to its decline. amiga users were accustomed to their superiority and good laugh at others, especially ibm compatible fraction. as the advantage slowly disappeared and turned to the opposite the most so called reasonable users went with the opportunity. who was left behind and still constitutes most of what is supposed to be amiga scene are the die hard people, who never reconsider. they were already in the decline of amiga always hard pushed to find a justification for their choice and prove, how much better amiga is than the alternatives, even though it actually wasnt anymore. when amiga disappeared as an actual product they were forced to substitute for this in order to continue the procedere of bashing other platforms, because after all this emotional investment this must have been a point of no return. the actual product had to be to substituted with some hardware that just wasnt obviosly a plain pc but could be used as a reference for comparisons even though then could never be as favourable anymore. i must admit, i belong there somewhere in the middle field, the only excuse i have for my behaviour is, that im somewhat aware of the nonsense.

[guest11527]

It's really hard for me to fully admire the above motivations. In AmigaOs times, I had a system I understood completely, pretty much every corner of it, so I could exactly do what I wanted, and I had a community around it. Nowadays, Linux has taken over and replaced this, to some degree, even though the complexity is higher. Anyhow, with enough effort, one can learn the inner workings of the system and set it up exactly as one wants it - and that's not possible with Windows. Plus, there is also an active community, but its much larger, and it is harder to keep on track, but yes, there is.

Nowadays, I get either a modern system with a modern Os on it which I can face and configure to my linking (Linux), or I can get an old system for the nostalgic feeling of it (Amiga), whenever I want to look into some old programs, old musics, probably some of the old pictures from DPaint, whatever, and the NG systems are not a completely adequate replacement - they offer a different "quality of experience".

I don't quite get the point why there's any room between the two for anything "more novel but still obsolete", and PPC hardware *is* obsolete, either because it is old (MOS) or because it is "obsolete by design" (AOS). If I'd like to reach out for the Amiga community (rarely these days), there are still the 68K machines, so I don't need them for that. If I want modern applications or more computing power, these machines don't offer that either due to lack of compatibility. If I need a specific application, it either runs on the 68K anyhow because it's a legacy Amiga application, or it runs on Linux on a PC, or under Windows. There's nothing "unique" about MOS or AOS software in this respect, there is no "killer application".

I also admire that there's probably some need to modernize the old hardware in a very careful, backwards compatible way to keep the software working - simply because the hardware is aging and will fail to function at some point. That's quite the same as restoring old cars. I can follow this motivation as well,  

But neither AOS nor MOS fit into this picture. Both are incompatible niche systems which do not offer an advantage for either modern demands, or demands of retro computing.  

Anyhow, we don't need to carry on the discussion, I'm probably too old, or too young, or something else got lost on the road, I don't know....

[Thorham]

Ok, and why that? I.e. you are explaining the answer with the question. In particular, I want to understand the motivation why people buy into that.

There's only one motivation for hobbies: People like it. Why do they like it? Because they just do. It's the emotional part of being human. There's no sense in asking why, it just is.

Why do I like peanut butter? Because it tastes good? Well, yes, but why do I think it tastes good? I don't know!

Same with old cars. Someone buys a bucket of rust for 3000 bucks, and then starts fixing it up, spending another 3000 bucks in the process and a lot of time. Why? Because they enjoy doing that. Why do they enjoy doing that? They just do.

Don't try to explain or understand the emotional part of being human, there's just no point.

[Boot_WB]

That was just my personal experience, others no doubt have different motivations.

There's probably also an element of laziness, and or being a bit of a luddite: after investing so long getting to know Amiga operating systems, the thought of starting again with some Linux distro just doesn't appeal.
I'm just happier spending time messing with an amigalike system than i am with a nix, windows or mac one. I still feel that sense of achievement when i get something complex working on an amigalike system, which is lacking if i do the same under windows, etc (just a sense of relief that the tedium is over).

As per your comments, i also appreciate having a system i can configure to my own needs, which seems to be the opposite of the ms/apple philosophy where everything is hidden and done for you, or likely to reconfigure itself because it 'knows best'.

For me, MorphOS hits the spot: powerful enough hardware, most software needs covered (office suite would be nice), affordable, allows me to keep my hobbies without becoming a hoarder (no space for a dozen desktops these days) and as a bonus the hardware is modern enough (albeit on a poorly supported architecture) to run nix/osx if i need it. No Windows of course, but i can live with that.

[zylesea]

It's really hard for me to fully admire the above motivations. In AmigaOs times, I had a system I understood completely, pretty much every corner of it, so I could exactly do what I wanted, and I had a community around it. Nowadays, Linux has taken over and replaced this, to some degree, even though the complexity is higher. Anyhow, with enough effort, one can learn the inner workings of the system and set it up exactly as one wants it - and that's not possible with Windows. Plus, there is also an active community, but its much larger, and it is harder to keep on track, but yes, there is.

Dunno why but I never got warm with Linux. Am trying it since ages from time to time, but it always sucked. Starts with the file system not being volume based. Of course I understand that system, but I just don't like it. Same for the bash. Powerful and potent, but I don't like the bash. The MorphOS shell feels more human.
Call it what you want, but Linux always was and still is geeky under the hood. there's a reason why it never really took off for end users. Yes, I can learn that, but it's not comfortable. Setting up a Linux system that works and behaves to my taste would be quite a lot of work. Why should I do that? Before I use Linux I always prefer Windows.
Ppl are different. I prefer MS Visual Studio over emacs/gcc (yes I _can_ use that, too, but I don't like it). Thing I am saying: ppl are different and while I acknowledge technical power that doesn't mean it's the best for everyday usage.
For me MorphOS fits best in. The system comes well configured already and everythimg is easily and logically configurable. I know the system quite well and teh kind it is organized fits to my habbits (which of course are also shaped by Amiga).
Why should I force myself to use another system when there is a system that fits to me?

[TNovosel]

It's really hard for me to fully admire the above motivations. In AmigaOs times, I had a system I understood completely, pretty much every corner of it, so I could exactly do what I wanted, and I had a community around it. Nowadays, Linux has taken over and replaced this, to some degree, even though the complexity is higher. Anyhow, with enough effort, one can learn the inner workings of the system and set it up exactly as one wants it - and that's not possible with Windows. Plus, there is also an active community, but its much larger, and it is harder to keep on track, but yes, there is.

Nowadays, I get either a modern system with a modern Os on it which I can face and configure to my linking (Linux), or I can get an old system for the nostalgic feeling of it (Amiga), whenever I want to look into some old programs, old musics, probably some of the old pictures from DPaint, whatever, and the NG systems are not a completely adequate replacement - they offer a different "quality of experience".

I don't quite get the point why there's any room between the two for anything "more novel but still obsolete", and PPC hardware *is* obsolete, either because it is old (MOS) or because it is "obsolete by design" (AOS). If I'd like to reach out for the Amiga community (rarely these days), there are still the 68K machines, so I don't need them for that. If I want modern applications or more computing power, these machines don't offer that either due to lack of compatibility. If I need a specific application, it either runs on the 68K anyhow because it's a legacy Amiga application, or it runs on Linux on a PC, or under Windows. There's nothing "unique" about MOS or AOS software in this respect, there is no "killer application".

I also admire that there's probably some need to modernize the old hardware in a very careful, backwards compatible way to keep the software working - simply because the hardware is aging and will fail to function at some point. That's quite the same as restoring old cars. I can follow this motivation as well,  

But neither AOS nor MOS fit into this picture. Both are incompatible niche systems which do not offer an advantage for either modern demands, or demands of retro computing.  

Anyhow, we don't need to carry on the discussion, I'm probably too old, or too young, or something else got lost on the road, I don't know....

When I was A1200 user only (still have few classic amigas), I learn how to use LWave, ImageFx, FXPaint, Pagestream etc.
For me MorphOs is excelent OS because I still use same software (without UAE) and speed is awesome. Before MorphOS, I was try to use Windows, MacOsX, Linux (Ubuntu, Puppy, etc.) with UAE.
Just to do same stuff with same software. I hate to boot one Os, waiting for updates of antivirus, java, browsers before I can start UAE.
Linux is nice Os, but I don't have time to learn about billions folders and files. Also I don't like when Linux wanna be smart and change something which was working perfectly. (gfx, monitor freqency, etc.).
So I found MorphOs perfect for my needs. Why? Very fast respond unlike everything on non Amiga systems, same software, and few modern applications which covers web, movies, etc.
If you count that after 10+ years I spend only 300 euros for my "new" computer and OS, and zero on X86 stuff, I found my joy as smart move.

Only minor problem is when I show my work to some people I got respone...oh nice, you know how to use Photoshop. How to answer that?

[OlafS3]

I think similar to Thomas Richter... for me it is really surprising what people managed to realize with MorphOS or Aros (X86) or AmigaOS but I do not really see the sense of NG. For all amiga-related things I have 68k (using it on emulation) and for normal work I have Windows (7 and . I do not need something between. The only exception is a reimplementation of amiga (with its chipset) in a modern FPGA. It has some geek-factor and it is different to what I normal use. A PPC-based system that is 95% identical to a standard PC-board but either a old Mac or a expensive custom PPC board is not very interesting to me.