Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 00:00 UTC, submitted by AlexZOP
Amiga & AROS Amiga OS4.0 for Classic Amigas is now available. "ACube Systems Srl is pleased to to announce the immediate availability of the awaited AmigaOS 4.0 for Amiga 1200, 3000(T) or 4000(T) with a PowerPC CPU, developed by Hyperion Entertainment VOF. It is now possible to benefit of all the features of this new AmigaOS release, an operating system famous for its efficiency and small footprint. AmigaOS 4.0, thanks to its power and optimization, succeeds in using at the maximum even systems running at 160Mhz, allowing the multimedia performances and the usability everyone expects from AmigaOS."
Order by: Score:
Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Lipatov Kirill on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 00:26 UTC
Lipatov Kirill
Member since:
2007-07-28

It does't looks like a new (modern) OS. IMHO.

Edited 2007-12-02 00:27

Reply Score: 4

RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by umccullough on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:11 UTC in reply to " Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

Why not? Not enough rounded corners, transparency, and 3d-effects for you?

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by superstoned on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

for example, yes ;-)

But I guess it's usable... Though I can hardly believe it truly has the functionality my KDE environment provides, I can imagine it's pretty good for basic use.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Downix on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

Well, what functionality are you looking for in an interface? Then I can tell you weither it lacks it or not.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by superstoned on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Hmmm, depends on the app of course. things like movable and configurable toolbars and shortcuts in each app, and flexible notification systems, full network transparancy etc I consider basics. So for applications, I'd say I like good tabbed browsing in my browser. Not retarded like IE 7 or Firefox, but GOOD. So drag'n'drop between windows and such. A nice, usable filedialog (I currently consider the KDE one the best I know, though the KDE 4 one might be better. But I don't know Amiga's one).

What else... Well, the desktop stuff: good medianotifications, configurable panels, multiple desktops, good and configurable window management... Lots of stuff, you see ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by miksuh on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 00:48 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
miksuh Member since:
2006-08-13

"I'd say I like good tabbed browsing in my browser."

Amiga IBrowse was one of the first web-browsers which had tabbed browsing ;) IBrowse had tabs something like 10 years ago ;)

"multiple desktops"

The wery first released AmigaOS version had screens. already in the 1985 ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by superstoned on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 09:43 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

It's lovely it had it first, but that doesn't mean it does it best - firefox had tabbed browsing before Konqueror, but konqi does it better. EG scrollwheel scrolls through tabs, you can dragn'ndrop tabs between windows or detach them, I want 'undo close tab', etcetera.

Of course, I want tabbed filebrowsing as well. And splitscreen functionality as well.

Same goes for the multiple desktops - I just use 4 of them, so the ability to have 100 I don't care about. But I do care about being able to drag windows from one desktop to another, both using the window itself and via the widget which shows the desktops. And of course with a 'send to desktop' right mouse menu.

Stuff like that ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Fransexy on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 10:38 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
Fransexy Member since:
2005-07-29

On AmigaOS the desktop is another app, you can have various diferent desktops at the same time (there are various desktop replacements and workbench it´s the official that comes with the OS).Every app can be opened in their own screen or can be opened in every avaliable screen, and can be changed to another screen.An every screen can have their own resolution and color depth

Edited 2007-12-03 10:40

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by miles on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

Funny... You seem to have had no contact with WB at all, and you don't realize that all the things you're enumerating were already done years ago on Amiga.

I think there's a culture shock here, which might explain why you can live your little dream without noticing the big world around.

To help you understand, to us you look like a Windows-user would be like for you when he would candidly explain how superior Windows XP is to any other OS because it has a mouse - and you can even put icons on the desktop!

I stopped using Amigas in 96, when I got my first PC and went straight to Debian+Wmaker (and even though it's old, Wmaker still does think more efficiently than KDE, especially usability-wise). However, I still have a memory, and I know the world didn't appear suddenly round the year 2000.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by aliquis on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

It probably has as much if not more functionality but lacks in apps ;D..

Or well, lacks in new modern versions of apps, there are plenty of old apps for all sorts of usage of course.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Almafeta on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 05:14 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

It probably has as much if not more functionality but lacks in apps ;D.. Or well, lacks in new modern versions of apps, there are plenty of old apps for all sorts of usage of course.


That'll be the real killer. For all intents and purposes, this is a brand new OS. It's gotta develop a software market from scratch.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by aliquis on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 12:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Why? In any case wont happen.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by sbergman27 on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 13:32 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
That'll be the real killer. For all intents and purposes, this is a brand new OS. It's gotta develop a software market from scratch.
"""

Yeah. But it has the "Amiga" name behind it. And when that name comes into play, everything else always just falls into place. ;-)

Edited 2007-12-02 13:33

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by superstoned on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 14:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Hmmm. So I can put a CPU (or whatever) monitor on the panels, configure the windec buttons (I want an always-on-top button), have window snapping there too of course, and fully configurable actions (eg I want doubleclick on the windec to maximize the window, don't like shade at all).

who am I kiddin', NO DE has half the functionality in the panels alone KDE has. Even KDE 4 is gonna be a step backwards from kicker in KDE 3.5.x, gonna take a while to get back at that ;)
So I think I can forget about what KWin can do, even 'neh neh you can't find any config option cuz I have so many of them layed out horribly' compiz can get close. I'm not going to get used to a DE without proper focus stealing prevention - XP makes me grind my teeth...

And I don't believe ANY OS/DE has anything comparable to Konqueror - again a showstopper for me.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by miles on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 14:22 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

It seems your experience of DE has been limited to Windows, Gnome and KDE.

If they were the only DE that ever existed, I would understand you opinion. However, please understand that it's not the case. ATM, you're just trying to convince us that KDE is the only one you could use because it's the only one that has mouse-support.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by superstoned on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 20:25 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Besides MS XP and Vista, I've tried BeOS and Mac OS X as well, and some smaller things like SkyOS and syllable rather extensively. But I'm repelled by their inflexible windowmanagement alone, and the lack of things like Klipper (clipboard history), middle-click-paste and good filemanagement did the rest. I won't be touching any of them anytime soon, unless I feel assured those things are fixed.


I can hardly imagine anyone going back to another OS/DE after using KDE extensively. OK, maybe Gnome, if you add and install some extension-like stuff for things like the broken windowmanagement and use some KDE apps, it's doable. But take going back to Windows. No middle-click paste, no focus stealing prevention, no always-on-top button, I'm sorry, but why torture oneself? The hit you take in terms of efficiency when going back to any other thing than KDE must range between 5 and 50%, depending on what you're doing and where your going. And I don't like to have to work 5 to 50% longer on the same task, sorry...

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by -ujb- on Tue 4th Dec 2007 02:19 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
-ujb- Member since:
2005-10-21

@ superstoned

Well, in the end it is a matter of taste and familiarization. You like KDE, good for you. But - just for example - I do not like KDE too much. For my taste it is blown and suffers on featureitis and is too slow. Note the important words *my taste*.
Or take OS X - many love OS X for good reasons, but I personally do not like it that much, nevertheless I recomend it very frequently to other ppl.
And I - I like MorphOS most. I know how it works and I am fast on doing things with it.
Hint: It may be due to the fact that I use Amiga since 1988(well, since 2002 MorphOS).
-
I guess neither MorphOS nor AmigaOS (nor Be or skyOS to name a few others) will get significant market shares, but there ae ppl who have their reasons to use those systems. And whatever their reasons are, as long as they have them, everything's fine, I'd assume.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by dylansmrjones on Tue 4th Dec 2007 04:57 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

I cannot imagine anyone using something as broken as KDE3.x - migrating to KDE4 from Gnome however... that I could understand, but KDE isn't the end of software development, nor particularly better than other Desktop Environments.

Try OS'es like OS X, Mac OS Classic, AmigaOS, OS/2 (eComStation), GNUstep+Étoilé and so on - that'll give you a reference frame, so you don't look stupid in debates ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Lipatov Kirill on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
Lipatov Kirill Member since:
2007-07-28

I think only programmers made AgimaOS's design. Noone real designer works on it.
P.S. If I'm wrong please excuse me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by miles on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 14:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

Actually, Amiga is one of the only OS that was designed by users for users. Which is why it was so good usability-wise.

For the design, the Amiga world had the best designers in its time (design won the demo competitions, which is why the PC never fared well against amiga-ones), with custom icon sets and custom DE that were the envy of most people.

However, you have to take in account that design evolves - and you're looking at what is essentially an 80's design, made (at the time) for 16 color screens (to save memory). Maybe they kept it in OS4 to mark the filliation with Amiga.

PS: I don't know why you got modded down. Not knowing your history well is not a crime ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Oliver on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

No the whole style is back from the 90ies. Even Workbench 3.1 looks better.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by zhulien on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 13:30 UTC in reply to " Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
zhulien Member since:
2006-12-06

are you looking at it's design or the appearance of the GUI? if the design, it's been a very modern OS from day 1! and that's the important part. Obviously every modern OS has features missing in every other - just because a particular feature may be missing in one modern OS doesn't make it any less modern.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by miles on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 14:44 UTC in reply to " Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

Even though I use Linux everyday, I still don't consider it like a modern OS. The fact the version I use has been released only a few month ago doesn't make it any modern either.

Amiga OS4 doesn't bring anything new, but, put in perspective, mainstream OS aren't groundbreaking either. Give a Ford-T a new paint as much as you want, it's still a Ford-T.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by dylansmrjones on Tue 4th Dec 2007 04:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

True, AmigaOS 4 doesn't bring anything new. That's because the mainstream OS'es haven't caught up with AmigaOS yet ;) (in regard to Desktop functionality, that is).

Reply Score: 2

hmm
by poundsmack on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 00:34 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

does it come with a free copy of Duke Nuken Forever? ;)

but in all seriousness i am glad that this is finally seeing the light of day. though I am more eagerly awaiting MorphOS 2.0 at this point...

Reply Score: 1

Pfff
by DevL on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:09 UTC
DevL
Member since:
2005-07-06

If this had been 2001-2002 I would have gone "Yay!", ow all you get from me is a "pff, who cares?". Too little, way too late. As usual in Amigaland.

Sad, but true.

Reply Score: 9

RE: Pfff
by gfx1 on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 17:57 UTC in reply to "Pfff"
gfx1 Member since:
2006-01-20

2001-2002? I think that 1995 was a better year for it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Pfff
by dimosd on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 21:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Pfff"
dimosd Member since:
2006-02-10

2001-2002? I think that 1995 was a better year for it.


I knew a guy who I thought was "the" Amiga enthousiast, and he gave up around 1997.

Reply Score: 3

Answers
by aliquis on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 01:35 UTC
aliquis
Member since:
2005-07-23

Moveable toolbars? No.
Configurable toolbars? Maybe with MUI.
Shortcuts? What do you mean? Keyboard shortcuts?
Same for notification system, maybe Arexx can be used for this.
Drag'n'drop between windows? Basic one, eventually.
AmigaOS file dialog are quite nice.
You can put most stuff in the dock, so I guess that counts as configurable panels.
You don't need multiple deskops since each app can open their own screen in case they need it (think MDI.)
There are some basic configurability options for windows, such as focus-follows-mouse, and it's probably hackable to do anything you want if it's not there already.

Reply Score: 3

IronWolve
Member since:
2006-01-17

Hell YA, Cant wait to put this on my A500!!

Oh wait, Classic is really a lie? Only PPC enabled machines? Liars.

Reply Score: 2

miksuh Member since:
2006-08-13

"Oh wait, Classic is really a lie? Only PPC enabled machines? Liars."

No it means that you need to have A1200, A3000 or A4000 with PPC turbo-card. if you have A1200 you ned also Blizzard PPC, if you A3000 or A4000 then you ned Cyberstorm PPC too.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Amiga OS4.0 Classic
by Lipatov Kirill on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 02:45 UTC
Lipatov Kirill
Member since:
2007-07-28

People can make a very nice OS without transparency and 3d-effects. I never use, but I really like QNX and BeOS skreenshoots.
Vista is nice, but XP is much more convenient in work.

Reply Score: 3

XP is nice?
by gdanko on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 03:11 UTC
gdanko
Member since:
2005-07-15

What universe are you in? XP is a monolithic heap of junk!

Reply Score: 0

RE: XP is nice?
by umccullough on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 03:32 UTC in reply to "XP is nice?"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

XP is a monolithic heap of junk!

I don't think you mean monolithic as in kernel architecture... and so I suspect you're using the term incorrectly.

Furthermore, I guess you're insinuating that Windows Vista is so much better than XP? I'm pretty certain that people will be using Windows XP for many years yet, so you should maybe get used to the idea that people consider it extremely usable as opposed to whatever you're suggesting is so much better.

Now on the other hand, you sort of sound like you're just Windows bashing, so I'll leave you alone now so you can continue having fun.

edit: grammar corrections.

Edited 2007-12-02 03:33

Reply Score: 6

Raffaele
Member since:
2005-11-12

AmigaOS it is so lightweight that there are people who are even capable to run DVDs on their PPC processors clocked at just only 240 MHz and DVDs run almost flawlessly...

Here is a testimony:

http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=14&...

[quote]


I can confirm that OS4.0 on a classic Amiga equipped with a CS PPC & CV PPC g/fx card appears to run OK. IMHO it feels a little smoother in operation than 1.4.5 PowerUp for classic Amigas which I have setup on another Amiga 4000D. As a test I played a commercial DVD through DvPlayer (DVD attached to the CS SCSI i/f) and it was almost watchable (some sound skipping).

TrevorDick

[/quote]

(the "1.4.5 PowerUp" mentioned here it is intended to be MorphOS 1.4.5)

-----

Now they who bought this OS could give new younghood even to their ancient 160MHz machines!

Just simply imagine what AmigaOS it is capable to do with more powerful processors as those equipping AmigaONE...

Forgot rendering 3D on a 160MHz...

You can do that, but you will wait 10 or 20 minutes for an 800x600x24bit scene...

But just think the fact that even a 160MHz Amiga could be usable for any day work (writing with wodprocessors, navigate internet, listening MP3 and so on)...

This due to the fact that it is not only the OS to be lightweight, but also the software it is lightweight and no resource consuming.

Think for example AmigaWriter Processor...

(here are reviews of it in various languages)

http://www.relec.ch/Bureautique.html

http://obligement.free.fr/articles/amigawriter2.php

http://amigareview.amiga.sk/amiga-review-42/amigawriter-42

Reply Score: 6

The Long March of AmigaOS continues
by Raffaele on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 08:21 UTC
Raffaele
Member since:
2005-11-12

it is a slow but steady march for Amiga, but continues... Just think of the Epic Long March of chinese partisans lead by leader Mao Tse tung...

Hyperion seems decided to make AmigaOS 4.0 to being available on any machines and devices as widely possible.

- Yesterday it was available only for AmigaONEs

- Today it is available also for ancient Amigas equipped with PPC accelerator cards

- Tomorrow perhaps it could run on ACK Boards by Amiga Inc...

- Again tomorrow it couuld run on Sam440 EP boards by italian firm ACube Systems
(the board it is already available for being purchased... It awaits only a license for the OS)

- And again tomorrow it could run on any Apple Macintosh equipped with PPC G3 or G4 processor

(There was a loader "MOANA" which development was stopped when almost complete, due to the court trial opposing Amiga Inc. to Hyperion VOF)

And there are plenty of various platforms and handeld devices worldwide on which AmigaOS could be adapted and run...

Who knows the future?

But sure nowadays more than 3000 users of ancient Classic Amigas accelerated with PPC boards have the possibility to re-juvenate their machines, and experience the benefits of a modern OS...

Then, if they will apprecciate it, they will be free to buy New Amigas... when new machines will be available...

And so they could enhance their experience buying modern hardware equipped with modern processors.

AmigaOS is not an OS which spies you and runs hidden services as it does Windows...

Neither it is an OS which requires a degree in computer science to be used as it does Linux...

And sure it is not an OS threating you as a baby bimbo uncapable to evolve as it does MacOS which hides all its power under an interface made to be stupid-proof, and all full by gorgeous effects and eye-candies to enchant the users!

AmigaOS it is the OS that you learn to use in half an hour, that you master within one week, and the OS that you could tweak by yourself in within one single month.

AmigaOS it is the OS that serve you and obey you!

Enjoy Amiga!

Edited 2007-12-02 08:27

Reply Score: 5

Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

Are you on drugs?

Reply Score: 11

tonyyeb Member since:
2007-12-02

@Raffaele

You must be on another planet! As much as I want my old Amiga's back and to be the dominant platform showing people what can be done on minimal ram and cpu.... you are living in a dream land!

Reply Score: 3

tweakedenigma Member since:
2006-12-27

As much as I would love to see the Amiga make a come back I don't think we are gonna see it happen. The market is hard enough to break into and between Windows, Mac and Linux you would need to bring something amazing to the table.

Also I gotta call you on that needing a computer science degree to use Linux, I know it is an exaggeration but I know a great number of people with little computer skills that use Linux on their home desktops and have no issues doing so.

Reply Score: 1

Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

Would help if the Amiga OS was something special, but what made the Amiga special was the merging of OS with hardware to the point that the two were indistinguishable.

Reply Score: 1

Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 12:05 UTC
biffuz
Member since:
2006-03-27

Multimedia performances? At 160 MHz? When are those guys realizing that we're in 2007? Nearly 2008, actually.
And "a modern OS"? If they put "modern things" like memory protection, they would have done a step ahead in the '60s.

This stuff is good only for those who have an old Amiga and love it. There isn't any serious use for such a system.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Multimedia performances?
by Downix on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 12:10 UTC in reply to "Multimedia performances?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

Funny, at 160Mhz my old PPC amiga running OS 3.5 had a smoother media playback than my 1.5Ghz Athlon. Maybe the bottleneck in media isn't the CPU in the end?

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Multimedia performances?
by BlackJack75 on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 13:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Multimedia performances?"
BlackJack75 Member since:
2005-08-29

Hum, what were you running on your athlon? An amiga emulator?

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Multimedia performances?
by Downix on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 14:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Multimedia performances?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

"Hum, what were you running on your athlon? An amiga emulator?"
Actually the Athlon with the Amithlon amiga emulator was pretty snappy. I was comparing it to Windows, which I know is not very media-friendly.

Man I miss BeOS sometimes...

Reply Score: 5

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"Windows, which I know is not very media-friendly. "

WTF????

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Multimedia performances?
by miles on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 14:39 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Multimedia performances?"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

"WTF????"

Exactly that, I think. If you compare Windows only to Linux, you might not understand, but if you compare it to media-friendly OS like BeOS and others, you will see why calling Windows "media-friendly" is stretching the truth a bit too much. You can make a truck fly, but you can't expect it to fly gracefully.

Reply Score: 1

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"Exactly that, I think. If you compare Windows only to Linux, you might not understand, but if you compare it to media-friendly OS like BeOS and others, you will see why calling Windows "media-friendly" is stretching the truth a bit too much. You can make a truck fly, but you can't expect it to fly gracefully."

I disagree with you entirely. I use Linux, I use FreeBSD, I use Windows, and Windows is no more multimedia-unfriendly than Linux. Compared to FreeBSD, Windows is a virtual Hollywood of multimedia.

With both Linux and Windows, you have to install codecs, and considering that most copies of Windows come preconfigured on the PC with those codecs already installed, then in most peoples expereince, Windows is pretty good at multimedia.

Comparing Windows XP or Vista to BeOS is just silly. The thing is dead, let it die.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Multimedia performances?
by miles on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 18:30 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Multimedia performances?"
miles Member since:
2006-06-15

If being good at multimedia is only being able to play multimedia files, then you are right.

I don't think we come from the same generation of computer users. For me, being good at multimedia means being able to handle audio/video with no shutter *ever*, and manipulating these flux in real time, with the OS always responsive. Not just playing a divx file.

Of course, as processor power gets better, you are now able to handle on Windows the same loads you could handle with BeOS 10 years ago. But in my book, that's hardly efficient.

Of course we have to cope with Windows and Linux for now. However, in which way are we harming you by still hoping for a multimedia-oriented OS? It doesn't have to be BeOS, that was just an example. Satisfying yourself with the average doesn't help improving things either.

Comparing Windows XP or Vista to BeOS is just silly. The thing is dead, let it die.


Why take it so personally? Does saying that makes you feel better?

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Multimedia performances?
by reflect on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 19:51 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Multimedia performances?"
reflect Member since:
2007-07-10

I've been using Amigas on and off for nearly 20 years. For the past ten years, I've tried quite alot of other OSes (like qnx, plan9, fbsd, nbsd, obsd..), for years living entirely without windows.

Some 15+ years ago, the Amiga had this thing called DataTypes. If your program supported DTs, it meant that whenever a file was encountered it checked the datatype system, and found a decoder. So today, you can have a 15 year old program, which supports png and alpha blending. Once datatypes was invented, just about all programs made use of it. Let's take Internet Explorer for instance.. when did it get PNG support?

Datatypes can handle anything from sound, video to office files.. whatever you can imagine. The closest thing to this today, I believe, is the KDE "kioslaves" but they're fairly recent. In AmigaOS, once the OS supports a format of any kind, just about every application supports every kind of format it is designed to handle. And no, it's not just a filetype extension recognision, it uses magic numbers and ignores the file name and extension more or less completely.

Media isn't just the ability to play a certain sound file, or play a movie, or having the right codec. It's how the OS and programs interact with the various types of formats out there.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 13:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Multimedia performances?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

No, the bottleneck in media playback smoothness is not always the CPU. But media is not only playback, try your Amiga with a cheap 8 MP camera. Or try your Athlon with BeOS :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Multimedia performances?
by aliquis on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 12:48 UTC in reply to "Multimedia performances?"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

I think 4.0 got memory protection, probably not for old apps thought.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 13:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Multimedia performances?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

Yes, I see it says "memory protection". I'm not an Amiga expert, I don't know what it could do with old apps. However, it's a bit too late to call it "modern".

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Multimedia performances?
by zhulien on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Multimedia performances?"
zhulien Member since:
2006-12-06

it most likely can protect the OS from old apps, or stop old apps from accessing memory that has NOT been allocated by anything. there may be other things too.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Multimedia performances?
by miksuh on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 02:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Multimedia performances?"
miksuh Member since:
2006-08-13

"Yes, I see it says "memory protection". I'm not an Amiga expert, I don't know what it could do with old apps. However, it's a bit too late to call it "modern"."


I really don't understand your logic. memory prot3ctuion sure is modern feature which can be found in modern operating systems. it really does not matter when first memory protection system was invented.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 15:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Multimedia performances?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

memory prot3ctuion sure is modern feature which can be found in modern operating systems.


Let's say, you can't call a piece of software "operating system" without memory protection nowadays. It's no longer a "feature", it's a requirement.

Note: I'm speaking of operating systems for personal computers, of course.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Multimedia performances?
by helf on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 02:37 UTC in reply to "Multimedia performances?"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

well, I believe CTSS had a form of memory protection, back in the 60s and the PDP had memory protection... ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Multimedia performances?
by gdanko on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 18:35 UTC in reply to "Multimedia performances?"
gdanko Member since:
2005-07-15

This stuff is good only for those who have an old Amiga and love it. There isn't any serious use for such a system.

I find it amusing that people insist this machine is not usable for day to day stuff. I got through high school on a C64 and SpeedScript (which I typed in using MLX). Sure there are nice things in modern computers but if someone needs to type a letter or maintain addresses, the C64 or Amiga is still usable. While most people are addicted to the internet with MySpace and other rubbish, there are a number of people who just want to use the basics in a very simple manner.

I am no proponent of hindering the forward march of technology, but you have to realize that not everyone has the same computing needs of yourself and that usefulness is relative.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 20:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Multimedia performances?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

I was very happy with my 286, no doubt. I learned programming on it (QBasic, Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++). I used Word and Excel and several games. All this was funny and interesting.
But since then, someone invented the DVD, the digital camera, the MP3, the DivX, Internet, Bluetooth cellphones, 24 inches HD monitors, new programming languages, 3D games, and so on. Now I can't call funny and interesting a computer who cannot do these things.

If you do, good for you. But if your computing needs are so little, are you going to pay 90 € for that OS?

Edited 2007-12-03 20:36

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Multimedia performances?
by gdanko on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 23:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Multimedia performances?"
gdanko Member since:
2005-07-15

If you do, good for you. But if your computing needs are so little, are you going to pay 90 € for that OS?

Because it is their choice. I could do everything I need to do on an Amiga so long as it had an SSH client and a browser. Vista and OS X are bloated beyond reason. Linux is getting there, too.

Some people want a small lightweight OS with low system requirements. Computing has gotten out of hand on the workstation level.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Tue 4th Dec 2007 13:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Multimedia performances?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

Because it is their choice. I could do everything I need to do on an Amiga so long as it had an SSH client and a browser. Vista and OS X are bloated beyond reason. Linux is getting there, too.

Some people want a small lightweight OS with low system requirements. Computing has gotten out of hand on the workstation level.


No, it's not this the real reason. They pay that much for passion. You can almost get a whole second hand computer with that money, some orders of magnitude faster than an Amiga, and including a Windows license.

With a bit of luck you can get an old computer for free, and run some free OS.

No, you pay 90 euro because you love the Amiga brand.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Multimedia performances?
by Downix on Tue 4th Dec 2007 18:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Multimedia performances?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

"I was very happy with my 286, no doubt. I learned programming on it (QBasic, Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++). I used Word and Excel and several games. All this was funny and interesting.
But since then, someone invented the DVD, the digital camera, the MP3, the DivX, Internet, Bluetooth cellphones, 24 inches HD monitors, new programming languages, 3D games, and so on. Now I can't call funny and interesting a computer who cannot do these things."
You see, normally I would agree with you... except your 286 can't do those things, but an Amiga built at the same time *can* with the proper upgrades. People run them on Amiga 3000's with PPC cards all day long. (save maybe the bluetooth, haven't seen that yet) That is one of the reasons for their passion.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Multimedia performances?
by biffuz on Tue 4th Dec 2007 22:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Multimedia performances?"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

You see, normally I would agree with you... except your 286 can't do those things, but an Amiga built at the same time *can* with the proper upgrades. People run them on Amiga 3000's with PPC cards all day long. (save maybe the bluetooth, haven't seen that yet) That is one of the reasons for their passion.


All those upgrades are in fact almost a whole computer, and their price was nearly that of a whole computer. Isn't it smarter to have two distinct computers then? As you said, that's passion.

Anyway, that's not an exclusive of the Amiga. There are PCI board-sized computers out there. And there were ISA, too, that works inside a 286, I've seen them working.
Also Apple used to make x86 boards for their early PowerMacs, to run Windows.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Multimedia performances?
by Downix on Wed 5th Dec 2007 03:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Multimedia performances?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

"All those upgrades are in fact almost a whole computer, and their price was nearly that of a whole computer. Isn't it smarter to have two distinct computers then? As you said, that's passion.

Anyway, that's not an exclusive of the Amiga. There are PCI board-sized computers out there. And there were ISA, too, that works inside a 286, I've seen them working.
Also Apple used to make x86 boards for their early PowerMacs, to run Windows."
Adding a DVD drive, a CPU and a video card is almost a whole computer? Then I've had an almost new computer once a year for the last 4 years with my PC.

The advantage to this capability of upgrade is that this is not adding a new computer inside of another, it is just basic upgrades. It is akin to a CPU swap on my Athlon here, and going from my onboard gfx to an external card. Hardly "new computer" level.

Reply Score: 1

Sam440
by johkra on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 13:20 UTC
johkra
Member since:
2007-09-12

I really hope it will be released for the Sam440 - then all the Amiga fans will go and buy one and hopefully the price falls and *I* will be able to afford one. ;)

I believe the AmigaOS is better suited for multimedia than Linux is, but given the driver support for the hardware I would probably prefer QNX on such a machine.

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Sam440
by hackus on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 22:59 UTC in reply to "Sam440"
RE[2]: Sam440
by johkra on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 09:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Sam440"
johkra Member since:
2007-09-12

To answer your second question first: Before, I don't have enough money for after and prefer to drug myself with cheap alcohol instead.

As you've noted well, I said believe, as in "I have not tested it, but by reading about this topic I got the impression, that..."

When I talk about Linux, I talk about a complete system including the userland and a xserver. I myself use Arch with plain OpenBox, so I've one of the more lightweight setups already.

But I'm convinced that Linux (although better than major competing operating systems) is not the best choice for a low-power computer, simply because it is not as light-weight and desktop/multimedia optimized (tighter integration of multimedia capatibilites) as some alternatives. I have only experience with Syllable, which was more fun to use on a 650MHz/256MB and 466/128 machine than Linux (with XFCE), but I *believe* the same applies for AmigaOS as well.

Reply Score: 2

I have Os 4
by Yogi32 on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 16:32 UTC
Yogi32
Member since:
2007-12-02

I have Os 4 running on two AmigaOnes, and I love it. The screenshots on that site are the default look and you can customize everything. Having used a lot of different computers, I like OS 4 because you are in complete control of the OS.

Reply Score: 3

Port to iMac?
by kjn9 on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 18:32 UTC
kjn9
Member since:
2006-01-17

Most Amiga ehthusiasts do not have a PPC accelerator. However, second-hand G3 iMacs are available very cheaply, and are more powerful than the popular early accelerators. If AmigaOS 4 were available for old Mac hardware, sales would be much greater.

Reply Score: 7

long time ago
by tikru on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 21:18 UTC
tikru
Member since:
2006-08-09

Amiga was never really know from it's operating system. It was mainly known from it's hardware those custom ships Fat Agnus, Denise, Paula... are what made Amiga the multimedia monster of it's time.

Just an OS on a (P)PC hardware dosen't quite cut it. But maybe i can make my childhood dreams come true and buy myself used Amiga 4000T whit new AOS4 ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: long time ago
by miksuh on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 02:15 UTC in reply to "long time ago"
miksuh Member since:
2006-08-13

"Amiga was never really know from it's operating system. It was mainly known from it's hardware those custom ships Fat Agnus, Denise, Paula... are what made Amiga the multimedia monster of it's time."

That's not true. AmigaOS was as much ahead of it's time as the hardware was. All who have really used Amiga and not just played games know that. AmigaOS was much more modern OS than any other OS of it's time. Even Apple's MacOS was far behind. It's the operating system which made Amiga so great.

Don't forget that even Classic Amigas can be expanded using eg. PCI-busboard and PCI gfx-card, ethernet card etc. My Amiga 1200T has PCI-busboard, PCI Voodoo3 3000, PCI tv-tuner card, PCI-ethernet card. PCI soundcard etc. chips on the motherboard are rarely used, because PCI-cards replace those.

I and many other do think that it's the AmigaOS operating system which really made Amiga so great, not just the hardware.

Reply Score: 3

Think of it this way...
by Luposian on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 21:45 UTC
Luposian
Member since:
2005-07-27

for those saying "too little too late', which is better... to see NOTHING of AmigaOS 4 or to at least have the version for Classic Amigas with PPC cards? At least some of you can finally bask in the "reality" of AmigaOS 4 release.

And the reason the "other" version wasn't released? Because there is NO hardware widely available! The AmigaOne and whatever else was made, are so few and far between, releasing AmigaOS 4 for those/that platform(s) would sell maybe a dozen copies. The classic Amiga platform is a larger operating base, no matter how you look at it. Just hope there are enough PPC upgrade cards in/for 'em.

This would be a good time for Amiga upgrade manufacturers to restart making more of those PPC cards! Finally... years after the first true hope (Amiga Inc.'s big T-shirt/discount offer), you finally GET it! Betcha thought this day would NEVER come, huh?

Didn't we all...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Think of it this way...
by PJBonoVox on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:47 UTC in reply to "Think of it this way..."
PJBonoVox Member since:
2006-08-14

"which is better... to see NOTHING of AmigaOS 4 or to at least have the version for Classic Amigas with PPC cards?"

Both situations are equally disappointing and useless.

Reply Score: 1

OS4 on old PPC-Macs
by asr4096 on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 11:30 UTC
asr4096
Member since:
2007-09-18

I agree that running Amiga OS4 on obsolete PPC Macs would be really cool. I have 3 PPC Macs, but only use one with OS X. The old ones are too slow for OS X (Or OSX is such a resource-hog), but OS4 would fly on them. Nice g3 600hmz Amiga Notebook, sweet.

Reply Score: 1

robertojdohnert
Member since:
2005-07-12

This release isnt for you, its for the people that do care. The people that like their amigas and want a more updated codebase. Amiga knows it wont take over the world but good luck in prying someones Amiga out of their hands. Instead of complaining and saying "too little too late" Obviously the Amiga fans dont think its too little, too late

Reply Score: 3

Crazy talk
by timefortea on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 18:10 UTC
timefortea
Member since:
2006-10-11

This place is full of nutcases!

Reply Score: 1

why amiga os was good at multimedia
by defdog99 on Mon 3rd Dec 2007 19:44 UTC
defdog99
Member since:
2006-09-06

The reason the amiga was great at multimedia is _because_ it had no memory protection...

Every app could access every other apps memory...

Thus you could think of the amiga as a giant multithreaded app.

As a result of this (and with the help of the custom chips) context switching was insanely fast. 1ms I believe. Thus zero jittes.

Those are times that linux kernels fiddle with scheduler policies endlessly trying to obtain.

(and on top of this, the custom gfx chips sent vertical refresh interrupts, so graphics were smooth and things like the Video Toaster possible).

Reply Score: 1

New Amigas
by Luposian on Wed 5th Dec 2007 03:49 UTC
Luposian
Member since:
2005-07-27

Here's a question... with the (finally!) arrival of AmigaOS 4 for Classic Amigas (w/ PPC upgrades), is it likely anyone could design a "Classic Amiga" (3000, 4000, or 1200) on an Lattice FPGA chip or something, and add on 603e (or greater) coprocessor hardware, based on PPC boards that used to be made for the Classic Amigas?

Or maybe code all the special chips (AGA, etc.) onto FPGAs or whatever, and start making new Amigas. You know something like "The Amiga Classic 1" (TAC1, Amiga C1, etc.), which you could then run AOS4 on, without having to scrounge around for an Amiga 3000 or greater and then have to dig even harder for a PPC card for the thing!

Anyone think there could be a market for such a thing? Being as no one seems capable of making a true PPC Amiga that is marketable for more than a few units (if ever), why not just make a lot of what we have an OS available for? Start making *new* Classic Amigas!

Assuming Amiga Inc. is the owner of such hardware rights (IP or whatever), I can't imagine them denying such a request, especially if they stand to make money at it, as well (licensing fees or whatnot).

Reply Score: 0

RE: New Amigas
by Downix on Wed 5th Dec 2007 04:12 UTC in reply to "New Amigas"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

"Here's a question... with the (finally!) arrival of AmigaOS 4 for Classic Amigas (w/ PPC upgrades), is it likely anyone could design a "Classic Amiga" (3000, 4000, or 1200) on an Lattice FPGA chip or something, and add on 603e (or greater) coprocessor hardware, based on PPC boards that used to be made for the Classic Amigas? "

Look at the MiniMig. It's an open-source chipset clone in an FPGA (OCS atm) and from there, you could work to other options, including trying to make it compatible with the CPU slot of the A1200 or A3000/4000(same slot IIRC).

Reply Score: 1

RE: New Amigas
by tonestone57 on Wed 5th Dec 2007 05:22 UTC in reply to "New Amigas"
tonestone57 Member since:
2005-12-31

The New ( unofficial? ) Amigas are SAM440ep
http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/hardware.php

Supposed to be able to run AmigaOS 4. But seem to be on the pricey side.
http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&...

Or the alternative is to buy low cost Efika board/system & run MorphOS. Which may be even better idea?!

Reply Score: 1