Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 1st Nov 2005 20:02 UTC, submitted by fylfot
RISC OS "Comparing AmigaOS and RISC OS is an interesting exercise, especially when it provides inspiration for things like scripting languages, friendly internationalisation configuration, and transparent file format handling. However it also shows areas where RISC OS is grossly under-selling features we take for granted every day, but are seen as almost revolutionary elsewhere: For instance, being efficient on a sub-1GHz RISC CPU, anti-aliased fonts, supporting virtual disc labels, using a RAM-based temporary disc, and providing an iconbar."
Order by: Score:
Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 20:35 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"The [Amiga] OS also has an interesting system for allowing third-party software to interpret different file formats: An individual application does not have to understand how a particular file is structured, as it instead consults a separate program called a 'datatype' that operates on the file on the application's behalf."

Why aren't more OSs doing this?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 20:53 UTC in reply to "Why?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Look at BeOS with Translator support. Yes, more OS's need to do that, or at least have the infrastructure to make it standardized.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 20:55 UTC in reply to "Why?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

maybe because:
1.- if the format is open you don't need such thing.
2.- if the format is closed, you can only rely in your own formats.

many projects have offered centralised ways to do some things but without enough man power those thing will only last for few time.

and man power means money for marketing or influence.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 21:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Hogwash.

1: Even though the format is open, implimenting, testing, and debugging an application's handling of that format still takes time. Instead of writing support for BMP, JPEG, PNG, GIF, etc. A developer could just write support for the Image datatype and automatically support all current formats and future ones as well.

2: If I understand the concept correctly, it works sort of like how video codecs work. Simply install a proprietary extention to the Image datatype and voila! All programs that support the Image dataytpe now support the proprietary format.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 21:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

exactly. BeOS puts this to good use..

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

yap, there are many projects like that but the hard part is to convince th whole world to use them.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Why?
by JLF65 on Tue 1st Nov 2005 22:59 UTC in reply to "Why?"
JLF65 Member since:
2005-07-06

Why aren't more OSs doing this?

OSX has something similar called coredata.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Why?
by Anonymous on Tue 1st Nov 2005 23:01 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Only from 10.4+, Amiga has had this since - well someone tell me. Although this doesn't downplay the fact that having it in OSX is of course - awesome.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Why?
by John Nilsson on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 00:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
John Nilsson Member since:
2005-07-06

Thay also invented what thay call UTI[1] (Uniform Type Identifier). Think next generation mime types. A very interesting concept.

[1]http://developer.apple.com/macosx/uniformtypeidentifiers.html

Reply Score: 1

AmigaOS features
by jaygade on Tue 1st Nov 2005 22:37 UTC
jaygade
Member since:
2005-06-29

I always thought that the datatype system in AmigaOS was an awesome idea and I don't know why it hasn't caught on better. Is there a patent on it?

I notice on the linked site they talk a bit about RAMdisks. On the Amiga, vs. more primitive machines, the RAMdisk was a dynamic RAMdisk. That is, the disk was always the same size as whatever was in it (until you ran out of RAM). In DOS you had to set the size of the RAMdisk and it always took up that much memory whether it was empty or full. I don't know about other OSes but I think they were similar to DOS.

Nowadays most OSes use RAM as a dynamic HD cache which is kind of similar to the way AmigaOS used the RAMdisk anyway -- to speed up access to commonly used commands/data or as a point for temporary files.

I don't know if RiscOS's RAMdisk acted similarly or not.

Reply Score: 2

RE: AmigaOS features
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 01:45 UTC in reply to "AmigaOS features"
Anonymous Member since:
---

it was a fixed size, although you could resize it on the fly yourself, along with assigned memory available for other tasks by dragging bars on the screen.

Reply Score: 0

RISC OS, AmigaOS and BeOS
by Ronald Vos on Tue 1st Nov 2005 23:39 UTC
Ronald Vos
Member since:
2005-07-06

The links in the article points to a list of touted advantages of AmigaOS 4, and suddenly I realised how much good ideas BeOS took from Amiga. In a way it's amazing to see several niche OSes implement a great idea like file-handlers (or whatchamacallem), yet frustrating to see the bigger OSes completely missing out on this.

On the other hand, it means there's hope, and a place for these OSes.

Reply Score: 2

RAM/RAD
by JLF65 on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 02:36 UTC
JLF65
Member since:
2005-07-06

Amiga had TWO different RAM disks - RAM: which was volatile and variable-sized, and RAD: which was recoverable and fixed-size. Back before computers had harddrives, I made my boot floppy so it copied the key system files to RAD:. I could then remove the floppy and the system could be rebooted from RAD: almost instantly (until you turned the power off).

Reply Score: 1

RE: RAM/RAD
by jaygade on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 04:38 UTC in reply to "RAM/RAD"
jaygade Member since:
2005-06-29

Amiga had TWO different RAM disks - RAM: which was volatile and variable-sized, and RAD: which was recoverable and fixed-size. Back before computers had harddrives, I made my boot floppy so it copied the key system files to RAD:. I could then remove the floppy and the system could be rebooted from RAD: almost instantly (until you turned the power off).

Yeah... I remember that. I didn't use RAD: very much (except to test it once or twice).

Reply Score: 1

Differences, differences
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 07:15 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Please, stay in topic.

Differences and similarities must be compared in this discussion between AmigaOS and RiscOS, and not with other systems like BeOS and MacOSX.

Well, first things that I can remember of two OSes (And amongst the most important ones):

1R) RiscOS is Posix (is it???) compatible, so almost any application from other OSes can be ported on it.

If I remember well, Firefox (for example) is already avaliable for Risc-OS.

1A) AmigaOS is not Posix compatible. It deals with fixed libraries and applications invoke these libraries at their wish.

For example Workbench GUI deals with Workbench.library.

Amiga still lacks of a Mozill/Firefox porting due to the fact that the functions of gecko engine, must FIRST be ported (or translated with similar funtions) on existing graphical engines of Amiga, and transformed into libraries objects (a library called gecko.library).

But, when such a translation work is completed, almost any Amiga application (even if not a browser, if it is well written) could invoke gecko.library and use its functions, gadgets and features.

For example Multiview, the all-purpose datatype based viewer of Amiga, with an available gecko.library, it could load and run any html page supported by gecko engine.

More similarities and differencies, as long as I remember them.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Differences, differences
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 07:31 UTC in reply to "Differences, differences"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Other things I remember about these two Oses:

2A) Amiga is not multiuser. It is only single user.

2R) Riscos is now single user too
(RiscOS 5 lacks of multiuser feature hat was present in its predecessors)


3A) Amiga is fully preemptive multitasking

3R) RiscOS is still cooperative multitasking

Reply Score: 0

RE: Differences, differences
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 08:24 UTC in reply to "Differences, differences"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Differences and similarities must be compared in this discussion between AmigaOS and RiscOS, and not with other systems like BeOS and MacOSX.

Considering that you have to pay for both of these operating systems (until recently for Zeta, but that isn't BeOS the real thing) what do you expect us to do.

If someone wants to pay me to buy a whole amiga machine and a BeBox then they're welcome to an informed comment.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Differences, differences
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 15:36 UTC in reply to "Differences, differences"
Anonymous Member since:
---

risc os is NOT posix compliant. it has some unix libs to help make it that way a little bit, but its not, out of the box, posix compliant at all. And the guy that did the firefox port has a lot of trouble with it iirc and it was very slow going.

Reply Score: 1

What is the cost of it?
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 08:44 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Anon ymous people wrote:

>>>
Considering that you have to pay for both of these operating systems (until recently for Zeta, but that isn't BeOS the real thing) what do you expect us to do.

If someone wants to pay me to buy a whole amiga machine and a BeBox then they're welcome to an informed comment.
>>>

Well, if you assemble a computer nowadays, then you have to buy WindowsXP installation CD to let the computer functioning in any ways...

Or in alternative you must download a cheap price-less Linux.

BUT if you want support in Linux then you have TO BUY a Distro...

MacOSX, AmigaOS, MorphOS, RiscOS came bundled with respective platforms.

If you wanna try AmigaOS for free and better aimed at X86, try AROS (Amiga Research OS open source).

You can download also LIVECD which works without installation on your HD.

http://www.aros.org

Reply Score: 0

Shutdown
by Mike Bouma on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 09:05 UTC
Mike Bouma
Member since:
2005-07-06

As I haven't extensively used recent versions of RiscOS, so I am not able at add anything of value to compare the two OSes...

> AmigaOS 4.0 claims to boot up in seconds and shutdown
> just as rapidly

Actually the shutdown is instant just like turning off a TV set. IMO ideally bootup should be near instant as well like some early homecomputers could.

Reply Score: 1

Re: What is the cost of it?
by Mike Bouma on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 09:14 UTC
Mike Bouma
Member since:
2005-07-06

> If you wanna try AmigaOS for free and better aimed at
> X86, try AROS (Amiga Research OS open source).

AROS is a nice effort, but IMO isn't ready for a comparison with AmigaOS3.1 (The OS which it originally tried to clone, but still an incomplete implemetation in this regard). AmigaOS3.1 is certainly at this point a lot more useful as it has far more software available. So IMO trying AmigaForever (Amiga OS3.9 emulation) or an enhanced OS3.1 emulation would give a more complete impression of what AmigaOS is actually like.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=4&rev_...

However AmigaOS4 is a lot more advanced than AmigaOS 3.9, IMO the differences are as large as comparing Win98 with the latest versions of Windows XP.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Re: What is the cost of it?
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 11:24 UTC in reply to " Re: What is the cost of it?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

> AROS is a nice effort, but IMO isn't ready for a
> comparison with AmigaOS3.1

Unlike real AmigaOS you can run AROS on any 68k equipped machine and run most of original AmigaOS programs. AROS includes a TCP/IP stack and many more features not available in Amiga 3.1.

Reply Score: 0

Mike Bouma Member since:
2005-07-06

> Unlike real AmigaOS you can run AROS on any 68k equipped machine

Not yet.

> AROS includes a TCP/IP stack

There a TCP/IP stack for AmigaOS 3.1. AmigaOS 3.5+ comes with a TCP/IP stack by default.

Reply Score: 1

Datatpyes vs. KIOSlaves
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 10:12 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Just a thought:
I think KDEs KIOSlaves are a datatype-like concept. Of course they are not about supporting different file formats but they're doing the same thing for general I/O. Write an IOSlave for any protocol and magically all KIO aware applications can read and write files using that protcol.

Reply Score: 0

Re: What is the cost of it?
by Anonymous on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 14:14 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

AROS is open sourced and used to run on genuine Amiga computers and I am sure it is ported to other genuine Motorola 68k based systems as well. In addition AROS is ported to various PPC and x86 systems and x86-64 port is in progress.

Reply Score: 0

Re: What is the cost of it?
by Mike Bouma on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 16:59 UTC
Mike Bouma
Member since:
2005-07-06

Even if so, it's not available for 68k hardware currently to run any classic Amiga software. If it was people could use WinUAE/E-UAE/UAE in combination with AROS and wouldn't need to install classic 68k AmigaOS for that and I would add this information to my WinUAE tutorial.

Reply Score: 1

Various
by JLF65 on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 18:51 UTC
JLF65
Member since:
2005-07-06

The Amiga had a widely distributed free library called ixemul.library for posix support. It allowed most posix programs to be ported to the Amiga easily. What held back ports was not posix, but X Windows. There were only a couple X11 drivers for the Amiga, and they weren't very good or widely distributed.

Amiga had a third party multiuser library, but it wasn't used much as most Amigas were just used by one person. In fact, virtually all computers are still set up as single user. In more than 20 years, I've never set up a single computer to have more than one user, and never seen a single computer set for more than one user.

AROS does support the 68K processor, but almost no 68K systems. The only real 68K system currently in AROS is the old 68K PalmOS, and that hasn't been checked in quite some time and may no longer work right. It is thought 68K linux may work, but no one has tried it. There is a bounty for doing AROS in UAE as a replacement for an actual Amiga KS ROM.

AROS currently works in linux on PPC. I have Fedora Core 4 installed on my iMac, and AROS works on it nicely. There was work on a native PPC AROS on the Peg1 board, but that has since stopped.

Reply Score: 2