"Hyperion Entertainment and ACube Systems are pleased to announce that they have entered into a strategic partnership following a recent two day meeting of representatives of both companies in Brussels, Belgium. Within the framework of the partnership ACube will act as a worldwide distributor of Hyperion's Amiga OS 4.0 operating system for a range of PPC hardware platforms including AmigaOne (MicroA1, SE/XE) and Classic Amiga. More details regarding the companies' strategic partnership will be announced shortly."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2006-09-07
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2007-03-27
Member since:2006-02-16
If the following happens:
* AmigaOS 4.0 is released on ACube's SAM440EP (http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/index.php)
* Jens Schoenfeld's Clone-A project (http://ami.ga/news/news123_e.htm) is released as an FPGA plugin
* Step 2 is plugged into Step 1
* Someone writes Clone-A drivers for OS 4
Then yes, it should! 
In fact, if you also then added a Catweasel card (http://ami.ga/products/catweasel_e.htm), then potentially you could load Cannon Fodder off of the original floppies!
Member since:2005-11-12
New Amigas run old serious software thru 68000 ->68xxx emulator built in.
They can't run games because there is no Amiga graphics and audio chipset emulation.
But if you are an addicted Amiga gamer, don't worry. There is already available a perfect solution to match your queries.
As in any modern system like Windows or Linux, the new Amigas have their own version of UAE (Ubiquitous Amiga Emulator) to run any of your ancient preferred games.
Member since:2006-02-09
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-10-02
Member since:
2006-08-15
The announcement does seem to be intentionally vague. If there really was NEW hardware for AmigaOS4, it would be plastered all over the announcement because Amiga enthusiast have literally been waiting years for it to happen. There'd also be links to the this new hardware with a means to purchase it. More smoke and mirrors....
Member since:
2005-07-11
If you check their website, they do produce a PPC based logic board for the embedded market.
It uses a PPC compatible chip by AMCC that seems to top out at 533mhz.
Whether they intend to use that board to host AmigaOS or produce another board using a higher rated CPU is speculation at this time.
Until there's a product that's available to buy and I can see specs and a price, as well as read a review of someone who has actually used it... It's all vapor for me.
There are millions of old PPC Macs out there that would be a good platform for AmigaOS or MorphOS for that matter... Why the OS developers want to be tight-fisted and only support hardware they can't supply in any great numbers at a good price is beyond me.
It's like they are going to run in a tri-athlon with both hands and feet tightly tied.
Member since:2007-02-22
There are millions of old PPC Macs out there that would be a good platform for AmigaOS or MorphOS for that matter... Why the OS developers want to be tight-fisted and only support hardware they can't supply in any great numbers at a good price is beyond me.
If Amiga's owners at the time (whomever they are) had made that possible, Amiga OS would have had an instant inroad into the market.
Wouldn't it be evil if Amiga OS4 implemented some form of Macintosh's APIs, so all the PPC Mac users could upgrade to a still-supported operating system which also ran all their Mac software -- plus the OSX software Apple decided their PowerPC customers didn't need anymore? :>
Member since:2005-07-06
Wow, I'm sorry, but you guys are living in a reality-distortion field. Amiga OS 4 was coded by just a handful of developers (primarily just 2 people). Ditto for most of the Amiga upgrades over the past 15 years or so. The developers have had a hard enough time just supporting the one platform and providing legacy support for older Amiga owners, and have brought an incredible number of improvements to bear over the old OS. Can you imagine how much longer it would have taken them, not to mention how much less time they would have to develop improvements, if they had to focus on supporting the thousands of configurations of PowerPC Macs brought out over the years? Not to mention duping the APIs???????
Jeez... some people can never be satisfied.
Member since:2006-01-04
I've hoped for something like this for a long time, and suggesed it a few times in Amiga forums. Something similar to wine, except that it provides a Mac API instead of a Windows API. MINE?? I suppose those who could do this don't want to because it might weaken the market for things they want to do OS4-native, bad for his market if everyone already uses the Mac equivalent.
But like other things, too good emulation could mean no native software. For people wanting to sell to OS4 users, it would be better to do Mac version and tell them to use MINE. Like developers in the early 1980's looking at Commodore-128 users, who had a Commodore-64 mode switch, not much software was made C128-native that could have been so they could sell the same thing to all them zillions of C64 users.
Member since:2005-07-07
I've hoped for something like this for a long time, and suggesed it a few times in Amiga forums. Something similar to wine, except that it provides a Mac API instead of a Windows API. MINE?? I suppose those who could do this don't want to because it might weaken the market for things they want to do OS4-native, bad for his market if everyone already uses the Mac equivalent.
"
More like lack of memory protection in the host OS would make such a thing next to useless.
MorphOS on the otherhand could in theory have a "X/Box" for OSX apps running on it's Quark kernel alongside the A/Box i imagine. This would make more sense.
edit:
Though AROS hosted running on OSX would be a more refined solution, not to mention easier to implement.
edit2:
Plus the fact that MorphOS and OS4 run on PPC so they'd have to add an x86 emulation layer for all new OSX apps as well as wrap the API's.
Edited 2007-03-28 11:25 UTC
Member since:
2007-02-22
... is it just me, or do the screenshots for Amiga OS4* linked to above look like just a graphical shell over some unnamed Linux distro?
* http://www.amigaos4.com/index.php%3Foption=content&task=view&id...
Member since:2006-04-21
It may not be "just you", but it's certainly not me...Operating systems are beginning to converge (ironically, I read an article recently which claimed the next version of Windows would do away with Start button, task bar, menus...).
Remember that Amigas were in 8-bit colour when Macs were still b&w/grayscale, at twice the price. Whilst Linux has yet to catch up to Windows in some areas, in others it is way ahead of Windows but still not approaching AmigaOS.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:2006-04-21
twenex, the 80s are over... multitasking is not longer state of the art.
Sarcasm, however, is, it would appear.
which terms is AmigaOS superior to linux or any other modern OS for that matter?
Oh, I dunno. Pre-emptive multitasking without an MMU? No need for mounting and unmounting volumes before ejection? Sensible names for commands like "COPY" and "LIST" and SetPriority" instead of cp and ls and nice? Pervasive scripting in GUI applications? File typing by metadata instead of filename extension? Dynamically-created virtual desktops with independent resolutions? Ability to run without a GUI? Drag-and-drop software installation? Loads in about 10 seconds from hard disk? No bloody "are you sure you want to breathe in" messages?... Nah, otoh maybe we are better off being treated like idiots. Maybe we never really could hack the concept of different virtual screens having different resoluutions. Maybe nobody could ever find any software till the Start Bar came along.
As for multitasking being old hat, you want to tell the people on those PC World "computer superstore" adverts that - I, on the other, am perfectlly aware of the fact.
Member since:2005-07-06
Embedded Linux systems, check.
Windows has that, check.
Matter of preference, you can do the same thing on UNIX with an alias.
KDE will have that with QtScript. OS X has that with AppleScript, the new automator, and other things.
Windows Terminal, Mac OS X Server (I believe), most UNIX, Linux and BSD distributions, check.
OS X can do that.
...and provides half the functionality the other operating systems you are comparing it to, so it isn't a fair benchmark. If you trim down some of the modern operating systems you can get those kind of results too.
Vista only as far as I know.
Really, most of your "superior features" of Amigs OS are already in other operating systems.
I liked the Amiga a lot too, and spent many hours on an A500, but let's not stretch the truth too far.
Member since:2007-02-22
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-10-29
Member since:2005-07-06
By choochy (2.00) on 2007-03-27 01:15:46 AEST in reply to ""
binarycrusader
in regard to just these features, all of which Amiga OS 4.0 is capable of, you had to name 5 different OS types to cover the same...
I could've probably found one that had them all, it was just easiest to pick the ones that came to mind. Not only that, it doesn't really matter in the end, as many good things as Amiga OS has, there's a lot of good things *it doesn't* have as well.
As I mentioned before, I liked the Amiga too, but let's be realistic.
Not only that, the argument was against "modern OS" not any specific one.
Member since:2005-10-29
binarycrusader
I don't necessarily agree with you that AmigaOS is not a modern OS. It might be missing a few things, like a user based file system, just to name one. However, I feel the biggest problem at the moment for our OS is lack of modern applications. An advanced web browser and a competitive Office suit, just to name some important ones.
My point is that this lack of applications seem to be clouding your minds as to wether our OS is modern. Yes, OSs need this software to be considered useful for everyday work, but this isn’t a limitation of the OS. AmigaOS is modern enough to implement all the necessary functionality and applications available in leading OSs. All we need now is some parties to do it.
Member since:2006-04-21
Really, most of your "superior features" of Amigs OS are already in other operating systems.
Yes. Exactly. "most". Not "all". And I wasn't attempting to prove that AmigaOS was superior in all ways to all operating systems. You had to name several modern operating systems to cover all the features I mentioned.
No bloody "are you sure you want to breathe in" messages?
Vista only as far as I know.
What about Windows XP? "Are you sure you want to put 'icon' in the Recycle Bin"?
KDE will have that with QtScript. OS X has that with AppleScript, the new automator, and other things.
KDE != Linux or all Unices. If there were one which worked with all X11 applications that would be something. Also note that almost nobody uses the "Windows Scripting Host", and you didn't mention it (presumably because it's not much use).
Member since:2006-03-28
binarycrusader,
please, go and read your answers once again - "already in other operating systems", "KDE will have" ..., because the thing is, that we are talking features available to miggy some 13 years before, when Windows was still what - 16bit? :-)
You have to be also kidding about "boots in 10secs with half or functionality?" Such statement alone makes your message nearly not valuable enough to reply to, sorry.
It is some 10 years I don't own Amiga anymore. But - after using some system for quite some time, you will get it under your skin and feel the difference. Not speaking of amiga particularly, it is like that with each system. I am not sure you've got any valuable OS experience with A500? No A1200, hd, os 3.x?
Other factors I liked was OS dynamic nature. I do remember, that "drivers" were stored in one directory, mounted in nice way - content of directory was dynamically generated into runnable file, which was copied to ram-disk, and just run. Drivers are user-space task - you can start them, stop them.
What I still can see as nice feature of AmigaOS of the past and present, is also locale system. I don't know other OSes much, but surely Windows is the dumbest system here. On Amiga, it was typical for an app, to come up with 10+ languages initially. Localisation was system-wide feature ...
Look, I am realistic. AmigaOS, no matter what, is simply outdated OS, missing mainly in security field, but also others. But that does not mean I don't remember claims of today's gurus like Linus, who in reaction to BeOS stated something like - "who needs multimedia". Look at what architecture Linux was initially, and what it is today and how it evolved. Well, evolved, because it never was revolutionary, whereas Amiga was - kudos to Amiga designers ...
Cheers,
Petr
Member since:2006-04-07
"Loads in about 10 seconds from hard disk?
...and provides half the functionality the other operating systems you are comparing it to, so it isn't a fair benchmark. If you trim down some of the modern operating systems you can get those kind of results too."
The other operating systems just try to be everything for everyone. That's why they are to slow and system hungry.
I cant wait for an OS that i can use on modern hardware that has the Amiga feel to it.
Fast and responsive. Without all the bells and wistles i dont need, that are forced on my by other operating systems.
Member since:2006-02-09
Windows has that, check.
Matter of preference, you can do the same thing on UNIX with an alias.
KDE will have that with QtScript. OS X has that with AppleScript, the new automator, and other things.
Windows Terminal, Mac OS X Server (I believe), most UNIX, Linux and BSD distributions, check.
OS X can do that.
Hmm sorry, but AmigaOS has all of the above! Check.
Vista only as far as I know.
Yeah, in Vista even the requesters don't work :-)
Member since:2005-11-19
Member since:2006-04-21
Member since:2005-11-10
Again, twenex... all those "features" are implemented in plenty of modern OSs, and in most cases in a far better and more elegant fashion.
I loved the Amiga, I grew up with it, and it had its time and place. It is time to accept that was cool and forward in the late 80s, it is now commonplace, and in some instances backward.
Things that you think are features, like MMUless multitasking are a hack, HAM mode is not a feature rahter a compromise that you had to make between screen resolution and colour depth. Which hasn't been an issue for pretty much of the current decade.
I guess next we will hear about these great things called microkernel, object oriented, RISC and pipelining... yawn...
AmigaOS stopped being relevant eons ago, I can appreciate people who like it just because. For tastes there are colours. However the whole "Amiga can do things that even modern systems can only dream of..." has been so used and worn out, that is just laughable.
Member since:2006-04-21
Again, twenex... all those "features" are implemented in plenty of modern OSs, and in most cases in a far better and more elegant fashion.
Most, not all, and definitely not all in the one OS. Which was my point.
I loved the Amiga, I grew up with it, and it had its time and place. It is time to accept that was cool and forward in the late 80s, it is now commonplace, and in some instances backward.
Who said I hadn't accepted it, you jumped up patronising little squit?
Member since:2005-11-10
Twenex, by the same token DOS can do things that no other OS can. However, I fail to see how some of the horrible limitations and hack of DOS are a "feature" simply because they are not present in other systems.
Same with the Amiga, having a hacked up multiprocess virtual system is not a feature, neither is having to compromise resolution for colour depth. Every modern desktop CPU includes an MMU and it is coupled with a video board with more than 8MB (that is if you just discovered the 90s). For the other "features" I can easily reproduce the same functionality in both Linux and OSX.
Member since:2005-08-09
For the other "features" I can easily reproduce the same functionality in both Linux and OSX.
With 10x memory requirement and 1/10 of speed?
It is hardly an achievement.
How about datatypes everyone supports?
Can you issue a command from console/script to the already running application?
Member since:2005-11-12
@ javiercero1
Again, twenex... all those "features" are implemented in plenty of modern OSs, and in most cases in a far better and more elegant fashion.
And on these OSes these features have been implemented in a far better huge requirement of system resources that is simply laughable and outrageous...
There is nothing to apprecciate in such those features which require enormous amount of RAM, and tons of Gigabytes of Hard Disk space...
This fact let all us to understand that programmers of others OSes are uncapable to manage their code, and they let it increase its growth and became huuuuuuge...
This lead to software solutions that perform unpredictable results
(see Windows for example that it is full of bugs).
And homungus huge OSes are nothing than just an excuse to let customers to buy more RAM and larger Hard Disks.
How much million of unuseful lines of code are in Windows Vista? 75 millions? 80 mllions of lines out of its final lenght of 105 millions of lines of code?
And at Microsoft they cliam they entered the Guinness of Records award because they surpassed any other record of length of lines of code...
Outrageous!
There is no real evolution. Operating Systems are falling to Baroque.
They are full of graphical trick to let the user say:
"COOL!", or "WOW!"
"Incredible... multiple trasparencies obtained using 3D acclerated hardware... FANTASTIC!"
But only I can say, it is: "HOW PITY!"
Baroque it is the age of 1630-1700 in which the works of arts were fullfilled with graphical tinsels and overloaded by unuseful objects (angels, curtains, still-live fruits, multiple shadows, gorgeous dresses), so the eye was catched, but these objects have no other purpose.
They just catch the eye to not let see that the artist did a very poor job on the main subject of the work of art.
Unfortunately for us all users worldwide the computer world with Windows Vista and Mac OS X has entered its "baroque period".
What a shame!
The manufacturers could had evolved the world of computers, while they are just sloooowing its evolution.
So where is the elegancy in all this crap from other OSes?
Things that you think are features, like MMUless multitasking are a hack, HAM mode is not a feature rahter a compromise that you had to make between screen resolution and colour depth. Which hasn't been an issue for pretty much of the current decade.
Please I respect the fact you are an ancient Amiga user, but you already stay at Amiga Jurassic period.
You are totally unaware of modern amiga systems.
HAM graphic mode it is no longer used by new Amigas as they use plain 24 or 32 colour depth thru a system of libraries (ONLY TWO LIBRARIES NEEDED) called Picasso96.
And perhaps Amiga made no HACKS to obtain multitasking, so stay puff because you are a total ignorant.
I believe you used Amiga only for games and you fill your mouth with words like "Multitasking Hacks" because you really never understood how it works a multitasking environment.
I guess next we will hear about these great things called microkernel, object oriented, RISC and pipelining... yawn...
Yawn? Snicker... :-D
Edited 2007-03-27 11:51
Member since:2005-10-29
javiercero1
What’s your point? MacOS become irrelevant at one point, but that didn't stop them... until people stop fighting for AmigaOS, there is always a chance that we can make it into the OS market again, even if it’s not the desktop market. Why are so many people fighting against that? Why can't they just let AmigaOS try?
I love the AmigaOS, but I primarily use Windows XP running on an iMac
. I would love to see a good variety of OS's in the market, not anyone of them leading the market too much. This type of level competition is what leads to innovation!!
Member since:2005-07-07
I which terms is AmigaOS superior to linux or any other modern OS for that matter?
Some here.
http://www.amigaos4.com/index.php%3Foption=content&task=view&id...
Member since:2005-08-18
Member since:2006-05-14
Member since:2006-02-09
@racs
Exactly, and with a graphical environment and even less RAM.
40 MB is the absolute minimum here. And it still multitasks!
Member since:2006-09-03
Member since:2005-10-02
Windows, OS/2. Unless you consider the extremely poor locale support in those systems for locale support. I don't consider it locale support. It's just as bad as in Win2K3 as it was in DOS 3.3.
The unique about AmigaOS is that noother OS has all these things at the same time. The combination is quite unique. Syllable, AROS and MorphOS are close though.
Member since:2005-07-07
Seriously, it's not 1985 anymore.
RAM Disks? Icons? Customizable GUI? Locale support?
Save/Use/Cancel settings? Docklets?
Is there a single OS that *doesn't* have these things?
I'm not saying AmigaOS isn't great but these aren't exactly unique features.
Multiple screens with different resolution and bit-depth simultaneously displayed, and as someone has already said. All these things are together in one OS, and have been since 1984.
Member since:2005-07-07
Seriously, it's not 1985 anymore.
RAM Disks? Icons? Customizable GUI? Locale support?
Save/Use/Cancel settings? Docklets?
Is there a single OS that *doesn't* have these things?
I'm not saying AmigaOS isn't great but these aren't exactly unique features.
Multiple screens with different resolution and bit-depth simultaneously displayed, and as someone has already said. All these things are together in one OS, and have been since 1984. "
Not forgetting datatypes. Only the BeOS has ever had these other than Amiga/MorphOS/AROS.
Member since:2005-07-06
Multiple screens with different resolution and bit-depth simultaneously displayed, and as someone has already said.
Displaying different resolution on the screen was a cute gimmick that was possible with the way the hardware worked at the time, but it's not possible on current hardware - amigaos or not. And this is hardly a relevant feature.
Not forgetting datatypes. Only the BeOS has ever had these other than Amiga/MorphOS/AROS.
I'll point you toward KDE's KParts for a direct equivalent. Or to any number of libraries like DevIL that can load multiple image formats with a single API (which is the most common use case for a datatype like system anyway)
Edited 2007-03-27 09:04
Member since:2005-07-06
But it is vastly superior to Linux:
It doesn't have memory protection! Wait, that can't be it...
It has shared libraries! Wait no, not this either, and their shared library implementation is outdated and cumbersome anyway...
It has arexx. You can use a crappy scripting language to script applications by sending them command strings following any syntax they please! Wait, DBUS... So not that either.
It is closed source! You are dependent on a handful of guys working almost for free for some obscure company to get updates! Wait, this is not a positive point...
It works on proprietary hardware! You need to buy some expensive, difficult to obtain and underpowered hardware to run it!
Someone helps me? There has to be a point to this thing.
Edited 2007-03-27 08:35
Member since:2005-08-09
It doesn't have memory protection! Wait, that can't be it...
It is aimed for modern languages =)
Superior because MMUless is faster.
It has shared libraries!
...A decade before linux. And it is not "cumbersome".
IMO it is very clever implementation. Simple and fast. No need to patch/relocate. Also, unlike c++ interfaces (like DirectX), it is branch predictor-friendly.
crappy scripting language to script applications by sending them command strings following any syntax they please! Wait, DBUS... So not that either.
ARexx is system-wide application control language and a huge advantage of Amiga OS.
I don't know any linux GUI/console application what can be controlled _externally_. Last year i migrated to linux at home and i always wondered how terribly that OS designed. To be fair it is not that bad for a student 
It is closed source! You are dependent on a handful of guys working almost for free for some obscure company to get updates!
In the OSS world you're _mostly_ dependent on hobbists working for free who did something in their spare time because they have nothing to do. Yeah, it is very reliable.
---
Well, i realize what AmigaOS is obviously dated.
It is too low level and has nothing of security features (because it was not required back than).
I don't like the idea to mess with OS "C" structures anymore.
A like the idea of OS written in a very high level language (a middle ground between a modelling language and Java), so language runtime will work at lowest-level possible, directly on hardware.
Edited 2007-03-27 11:03
Member since:2005-11-12
@Morb replying to Viton on about Amiga static Libraries
And it is not "cumbersome".
IMO it is very clever implementation. Simple and fast. No need to patch/relocate.
It is not simple because it differs too much from the way a static library works. The solutions (using dynamic linkage) used by every other OSes make it almost possible to swap a static library with a shared one with a few compilation switches.
They also make it easy to export c++ symbols as dynamically linked symbols, for instance. Heck, ask the guy who ported python on morphos how much fun it was to make it use amiga style shared libraries.
I don't know if the guy who ported Python to MorphOS encountered problems with Amiga static libraries, but I can say to you that people who ported Python on Amiga are happy of Amiga system, and consider some different solutions very inelegant...
Read carefully here various passages as stated on old Amiga Python porting site:
http://www.monkeyhouse.eclipse.co.uk/amiga/python/
Python is developed mainly for the Unix platform. Because the full source code is available, ports to many other platforms exist nowadays. These include Macintosh, Windows and AmigaOS of course! AmigaPython is the Python version for AmigaOS. Not only is it largely compatible with the 'mainstream' Unix Python version, but it is also a real Amiga program by adding some exciting Amiga features to it:-
Workbench support - you can launch the interpreter, the scripts, and data files linked to Python scripts from Workbench (not currently working in alpha release of 2.3.3)
ARexx support - connect to your favorite ARexx enabled Amiga application. Script them with Python instead of ARexx.
AmigaOS extensions - write powerful Python scripts able to perform many Amiga-specific tricks with the system and your files[7q]
and again
[q]
Python isn't very Amiga like in the way it integrates with it's host system. It's basically one huge executable and each Python program needs it's own instance of the interpreter. Most of that 1MB file size is taken up by the builtin function modules which are statically linked. On Unix systems, they can be dynamically loaded using the dlopen() which is a very inelegant way of using MMUs to have a virtual contiguous address space. Apparently this might be available in OS4, but it's not very efficient. A much better approach would be one that allows Python to be a resource shared across the system, like ARexx, but I don't know how possible that will be. Ideally I would like the following:
Make Python a system server, like RexxMast
Add support for threads
Dynamic loading of modules written in C
Implement TclTk GUI to support Python Tkinter GUIs
I have also had requests to support pygame and pyone.
RE[7]: Amiga OS4 (Static Libraries)
Member since:2005-08-09
And of course, no memory protection is awful when it comes to reliability and security
Yes, in case of asm/C-based Amiga software it is true,
but new, managed languages are secure by itself.
It is not simple because it differs too much from the way a static library works
It is a problem of the programming language. The language is too low-level.
Also, unlike c++ interfaces (like DirectX), it is branch predictor-friendly.
--
This sentence makes no sense whatsoever.
What i mean is:
[in case you care about several wasted bytes/cycles]
amiga-style invocation (68k)
| jsr -36(a6) => bra func
compact and don't need any relocations
c++ style invocation
| move.l func_vtable_offset(a0), a1
| jsr a1
register indirection can cause pipeline stall
| jsr func
the long instruction, relocation required
The same is valid for x86 and especially for most of RISC CPUs.
Additionally, in case of AMD64, we have double memory bloat for pointers.
Try to read up on KDE's DCOP. Or the new standardized solution, DBUS.
I don't use KDE. What if i don't use graphical desktop at all? I'll check DBUS, thanks.
Now you're mixing up desktop and OS again
OS is not the kernel only. It is entire environment.
Including GUI, services, drivers, tools.
And I don't think that someone not seeing the value of memory protection has much credential to judge an OS design
I didn't said "memory protection is bad".
I mean there are solutions where memory protection is not required at all.
Of course it could help a lot in case of AmigaOS.
Member since:2005-07-06
but new, managed languages are secure by itself.
So, in order to avoid the horrible overhead of using the MMU, let's run everything on a virtual machine instead? This makes a lot of sense.
What i mean is:
[in case you care about several wasted bytes/cycles]
jsr -36(a6) => bra func
compact and don't need any relocations
It has poor locality of reference because the execution flow has to jump to some random place in memory, and then to the intended destination. In other words, it's not cache friendly.
move.l func_vtable_offset(a0), a1
| jsr a1
register indirection can cause pipeline stall
Who cares about the pipeline stalls on 68k? Plus this particular example is a virtual function call, which serves a different purpose than a plain function call.
jsr func
the long instruction, relocation required
So what? The relocation is a one time event, performed when loading the binary (although in the case of dynamic linking, the shared libraries themselves will usually be compiled as position independent code, so one library calling another will be similar to the virtual function call above)
Finally, I'm not pedant to the point of arguing whether the term OS encompasses the desktop or not, but:
I don't use KDE. What if i don't use graphical desktop at all? I'll check DBUS, thanks.
OS is not the kernel only. It is entire environment.
Including GUI, services, drivers, tools.
Make up your mind.
Member since:2006-01-02
> amiga-style invocation (68k)
> | jsr -36(a6) => bra func
Jump to a "function" (Library's function table) which jumps to a function (Library's implementation of the function).
> c++ style invocation
> | move.l func_vtable_offset(a0), a1
> | jsr a1
Perhaps on m68k. Virtual function call on x86 looks like this example (2nd virtual function in vtable, class base in %edx):
call *4(%edx)
or in general: call *offset(%edx)
> | jsr func
And? I do prefer single cost of one relocation (relocation is done *ONCE* on programm start) than double jump to the m68k function's table.
> Additionally, in case of AMD64, we have double
> memory bloat for pointers.
In case of AMD64 we have +/- 2GB EIP-relative addressing mode.
PPS. How about my beloved question... How many instructions do you need to load a 64-bit immediate value into 64-bit register of 64-bit PowerPC?
Member since:2005-07-07
I won't even mention 64bit architectures, because this is not something that will be on the radar of the amiga community for at least a couple years.
http://msaros.blogspot.com/2006/06/x8664-status-update.html
Member since:2005-11-12
@ viton:
It is aimed for modern languages =)
No... it is not a superior or inferior solution. JUST DIFFERENT...
MMU protects memory from program faults, so the programmer could just focus on main code of his software, but you pay a price lowering performances.
Without MMU you could run faster and faster, but programmers of software should be responsible and take care of a deep debug of their software to avoid it overwrite unwanted memory areas and cause a crash of the system...
Unfortunately there are lesser and lesser responsible programmers who take care of their work.
Member since:2005-07-06
Without MMU you could run faster and faster, but programmers of software should be responsible and take care of a deep debug of their software to avoid it overwrite unwanted memory areas and cause a crash of the system...
Unfortunately there are lesser and lesser responsible programmers who take care of their work.
This is downright laughable. First, you can't have bug-free code. And any potentially bugged program is a potential risk for your data (not to mention the issue of malicious code that would want to alter or peek at your data intentionally).
Second, you definitely CAN'T have bug free code with a lot of the programming standards popular on amiga, like assembly, C, juggling with pointers all the time etc.
And third, you are a community that advocate closed source development. How are you supposed to trust all those closed source applications to have reached this bugless utopia and not to shit up your data in memory?
And anyway, there is still no point whatsoever in saving a little bit of performance by not having memory protection while at the time insisting that amigaos must exclusively run on some overpriced, underpowered and generally outdated junk.
You guys just don't make sense.
Member since:2005-11-12
@ Morb
This is downright laughable. First, you can't have bug-free code. And any potentially bugged program is a potential risk for your data (not to mention the issue of malicious code that would want to alter or peek at your data intentionally).
Classic Amigas had Enforcer and MEMMungwall utilities who monitorized if a program had had caused any crash and so the programmer could rapidly change the program code avoiding any further problem overwriting unwanted memory.
It was a current behaviour use these programs when beta-testing AmigaOS software, and hence there were only a few number of famous Amiga programs which caused memory problems due to bad beta testing.
Vaste majority of Amiga programs cause no memory leaks even in absence of MMU.
This is a matter of FACTS.
And third, you are a community that advocate closed source development. How are you supposed to trust all those closed source applications to have reached this bugless utopia and not to shit up your data in memory?
/ME does not advocate any kind of development...
Open or closed source development makes no sense for me.
I just hope that programmers of software (open or closed) made a good work...
A little example to match all:
Wiondows it is a closed source OS but it is full of unwanted bugs...
The GIMP it is a beautiful enormous all featured graphics program but it is full of bugs, and many were never solved.
Open Office it is a very beautiful piece of open software and its bugs if known, were corrected almot immediately by development crew.
Without MMU you could run faster and faster, but programmers of software should be responsible and take care of a deep debug of their software to avoid it overwrite unwanted memory areas and cause a crash of the system...
Unfortunately there are lesser and lesser responsible programmers who take care of their work.
This is downright laughable. First, you can't have bug-free code. And any potentially bugged program is a potential risk for your data (not to mention the issue of malicious code that would want to alter or peek at your data intentionally).
Second, you definitely CAN'T have bug free code with a lot of the programming standards popular on amiga, like assembly, C, juggling with pointers all the time etc.
And third, you are a community that advocate closed source development. How are you supposed to trust all those closed source applications to have reached this bugless utopia and not to shit up your data in memory?
And anyway, there is still no point whatsoever in saving a little bit of performance by not having memory protection while at the time insisting that amigaos must exclusively run on some overpriced, underpowered and generally outdated junk.
Often to obtain freedom we must pay overpriced, underpowered and generally outdated junk.
Thanks to God we are free from schizophrenic behaviour of Windows...
We don't need to deal with crazy developers as in Linux. Developers who always decided to follow the hardest path, just because it is funny and GEEK ONLY...
We are a small community and we could even pilot the development of the AmigaOS to match OUR desires, because we users have a great influence on OS developers (even if it is a closed source code OS)
We can deal with a very smart OS which performs our desires and it is totally at our command, and it is not a system totally HIDDEN to final users as it happens in MacOS, that is an OS built for users who want always to be as babies in a kindergarten, controlled by Apple manufacturer firm, as a BIG MAMA.
You guys just don't make sense.
To control the OS and not being controlled by Microsoft it has enough sense even with underpowered hardware...
To control the OS and not being subdued to girl-less geeks madness as in Linux it is worth the outdated software...
To control the OS and not being closed in a Kindergarten Asylum as in MacOS... PRICELESS!
:-D
Member since:2005-07-07
http://moobunny.dreamhosters.com/cgi/mbthread.pl/amiga/expand/10941...
http://aros.sourceforge.net/download.php#nightly-builds
http://aros.sourceforge.net/introduction/
Member since:2005-07-06
If you look a couple parents post from mine, someone claimed that "Whilst Linux has yet to catch up to Windows in some areas, in others it is way ahead of Windows but still not approaching AmigaOS."
My post was an indirect response to this.
You're still far from establishing that "Linux is still not approaching AmigaOS" with the couple points you refuted.
Member since:2005-07-07
My post was an indirect response to this.
...and my post was in direct response to yours.
Why should I have to refute someone elses views?
Member since:2007-03-27
Member since:2005-11-12
http://www.amigaos4.com/index.php%3Foption=content&task=view&id...
Don't worry Alfameta.
It is just you.
There is no crappy Linux underneath AmigaOS screens you saw.
Just AmigaOS unique design microkernel EXEC New Technology that runs on PPC processors and have its own MMU Memory Management.
Old Amiga programs which do not have MMU specs biult in, can run only in the first 284 MB of memory to avoid they could cause problems to new programs, and later they will be closed anyone in its own sandbox, to avoid any problem of crash.
Graphical system is based on Amiga GUI (Workbench) which runs on top of a modern Object Oriented engine system called ReAction.
Thanks to God Amiga it is not complicated as Linux which is crappy beacuse it is: "FOR GEEK USE ONLY".
AmigaOS directory structure it is plain and simple. Anything has its place, NO LIKE WINDOWS...
And on Amiga its you "JOE USER" who control the OS, and it is not the OS controlling you...
...neither AmigaOS requires a degree in Information Technology as it is required to master the crappy Linux.
Member since:2006-01-04
If that was so, there'd be a lot mroe software for OS4. Why then can't it run Firefox, and why is there a $9000 bounty for the "AmiZilla" project? Why can't we use OpenOffice? etc...
Though someone has recently got a few somewhat interesting apps ported using an Xwindows implementation, sortof like what Cygwin does for Windows and X does for OSX. But I'm not aware that Firefox/Mozilla or OpenOffice work on this OS4-X system either.
Sorry, no, it's not Linux with an Amiga-like skin on X. You can do something like that with AROS, but not AmigaOS4.
Member since:
2006-04-21
Member since:2005-07-07
Yes, the continuation of the illegal practice of not honoring warranties, ignoring emails, letters, faxes and phone calls from paying customers.
What a shame we'll miss such service when we get hardware from other manufacturers.
Member since:2006-04-21
Member since:
2007-03-26
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-07
So this agreement doesn't bring us any closer to hardware for the OS i'm afraid.
Hope i'm wrong!
If the boxed copy of OS4 for Phase5 PPC accelerators just so happens to run on other hardware* by "coincidence", then I say great! ;-)
*Say SAM440, Pegasos I & II, EFIKA, Powermac's etc. :-)
Member since:
2006-12-28
Check out the following at the bottom of this page
http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/hardware.php
ACube Systems started a replacement service for broken CPU on AmigaOne XE/Teron PX and MicroA1/Teron Mini motherboards processor modules.
The broken CPU will be removed and replaced with one of the following CPUs:
- 7455 @ 1 Ghz - 256 Kb 2nd level cache
- 7457 @ 1 Ghz - 512 Kb 2nd level cache
- 7457 @ 1.267 Ghz - 512 Kb 2nd level cache
Nice!
Edited 2007-03-26 22:43 UTC
Member since:
2006-06-11
Member since:2006-01-04
I don't know about other OS4 developers, but I don't expect to get much if any money out of my tiny contribution to it. But that's not why I got involved either. Lots of Linux contributors go uncompensated, but they do it anyway...
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-07
http://aros.sourceforge.net/download.php#nightly-builds
Member since:2005-11-12
@ "Nicholas" answering to "dhardison":
http://aros.sourceforge.net/download.php#nightly-builds
No Nicholas...
AROS is a replementation of AmigaOS 3.1 and not AOS 4.0...
As long as it is enough to show people using X86 machines how it is good AmigaOS architecture, you can't use it as example of AmigaOS 4.0.
You could consider it as a modern evolution of ancient AmigaOS 3.1, all with 16bit audio and 24 bit graphics card libraries already installed.
AROS also offers some features that were unknown to ancient AmigaOS 3.1, and have been implemented in a different way on AmigaOS 4.0.
So AROS it is evolving on a different path, just of its own.
And also you are not aware of the fact that Nightly Builds of AROS will be no longer available...
Persons who want to test AROS on their INTEL X86 machines could use WINAROS which will run AROS hosted into a Windows environment...
(I am not quite sure if the correct name of the release is WinAROS)
...or as a second chance they could use LIVE autostart CD which needs no installation called AROS-MAX LiveCD.
As it runs from CD, it is safe and makes no harm to any existing WINTEL/LINUX existing installation.
Enjoy AROS on your WINTEL machine...
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-11-12
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-07-07
As it runs from CD, it is safe and makes no harm to any existing WINTEL/LINUX existing installation.
AROS-Max was a community members won "distro" of AROS that hasn't been updated for years.
All nightly builds of AROS x86 are available as a LiveCD or Linux hosted.
Enjoy AROS on your WINTEL machine...
Since I neither have Windows, nor an Intel processor it will be difficult.
On the otherhand, I'll continue to enjoy MorphOS on my Pegasos, AROS and Debian on my Athlon64, and OS4 on my Blizzard PPC. :-P
Member since:
2005-11-17
Moochman,
It's the Amiga distortion field. While there are a good many people who are appreciative of what AmigaOS did and still does in the industry at high levels, it's just not up to par with the services that Windows, MacOS, Linux, or Solaris provide. If they managed to get a team of developers like they had at Commodore, it may have a chance, but that's not going to happen.
It's an OS from a different time, and while Hyperion has done an incredible job modernizing the OS, it's just not going to be as competitive for doing work as other OSes are.
I am sure that if Gateway/Amiga Inc. had worked to port classic AmigaOS to a different processor platform, such as ARM, it would have stood a much better chance.
AmigaOS would make an excellent Smartphone/PDA/MP3 player OS if it wasn't tied to PowerPC. Also, this is where the choice of applications is limited by the OEM/vendor if they want.
I'd be quite surprised if OS4 already wasn't ported to it, at least as a proof of concept to show vendors. Considering it's small enough to be "rommable", it would be a good choice, especially since there's already enough decent MP3 players for it .
The PowerPC is IBM's processor. Freescale has their own set of issues, and Apple is now tied to x86.
OS4 is quite a nice OS, and is an incredible improvement over 3.1, however it's still not as refined as OS X.
Member since:2005-11-19
@mbpark
The AmigaDE virtual machine ran on the ARM platform without difficulty yet it never caught on nearly as well as AmigaOS. Besides, isn't ARM little-endian? You'd never be able to run any classic Amiga software on the ARM unless you ran it in an emulator anyway. (Not a bad idea but kind of pointless from an OS perspective.)
Member since:2005-11-17
SamuraiCrow,
The ARM is either big-endian or little-endian .
AmigaDE had some draconian licensing terms from what I remember. However, that was a very nice platform that I wish would have gone farther than it did.
The difference between the two was that AmigaOS could do what the original Symbian OS, EPOC, did, which was take underpowered hardware and provide a good environment for building graphical multitasking applications.
Considering the loads of crap that vendors such as Palm foisted on their customers, I'm surprised that nobody ever thought of running AmigaOS in that capacity 
.
Member since:
2007-02-22
(What have I walked into...)
I'll admit it is kinda hard to pinpoint "this makes it great" about AmigaOS. The biggest forte is that it does not make me want to scream at it.
Thing are _connected_. That happens when a single entity builds the whole thing. Other OSes are making good efforts to best it.
I guess the devil is in the details, like the file selector which is system-wide and can be replaced with your favourite new version. Applications that actually use DataTypes. The ability to replace them too, or just chuck in a new library and suddenly all your apps get more functionality.
A cut&paste system that works ok.
New filesystems don't need a kernel recompile (or new release).
Removable media will let you eject them without "knowing better".
All of which I'm sure someone somewhere has done their own implementation of.
The sad thing is that we are discussing this at all, not having leapfrogged the experience in all these years.
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-07-10
Yes, this is an often overlooked point about AmigaOS, at least for the 1-3.x iterations of it. I don't know about OS4.
Most people talk about the kernel or skinning, how the UI works or when Firefox will be ported.
The fact is that AmigaOS is so simple and logically built that many users who know how to get around in a filesystem will within the first couple of weeks of usage, be able to get entirely to the outer corners of the OS. In that sense, the OS does not have much depth and it certainly has very little weirdness.
Imagine knowing in your head where every single file in Ubuntu Linux is on your harddrive and know what it does. That's what AmigaOS gives you.
Please don't confuse this simplicity with restrictions or inflexibility, because it's just the opposite. It's the opposite, because the structure is a damn good design that removes the need for self checking and self monitoring and just lets you add libraries, devices, handlers, monitor drivers and whatnot until your disk is full.
Also in case of a complete screwup of your system disk for AmigaOS1-3.x, all your system files are destroyed, etc. you can STILL boot into a shell from the Kickstart ROM to do salvage work.
You can build an AmigaOS installation from scratch yourself. By hand. I've done that many times, when I need a custom AmigaOS desktop that uses very specific programs and simply does not load anything else, but what I tell it to.
This simplicity removes much of the need for various tools to monitor and maintain the sanity of the OS, because it's just as easy to fix a problem, by checking the version of a library and replacing it with a newer one from Aminet or wherever.
You can do that, because you know where the libraries are, namely SYS:Library and the libraries are usually named in clear plain English.
The only tool I ever really used was SnoopDOS, which checks what libraries are loaded by a program and gives a warning when a requested library is non-existant or out of date.
There is also a built in installer, but it's mostly useful for speed and convenience, when you need to dump a lot of files in specific locations.
Not needing maintenance tools just makes the OS hardware and diskspace requirements even smaller.
Member since:
2007-03-29
First try and use AMIGA OS 4.0 and then speak.. we all use a Linux distro. but have you ever seen and touched by hand AMIGA OS 4.0 ?..
I think not.. reading your posts i think that you never seen this operatyng system and you believe that Amiga today is still the Amiga 500 with Cannon Fodder and other games like Shadow of the Beast..
So please try it...
Member since:2005-11-15
