Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 06:44 UTC
Amiga & AROS Bill McEwen of Amiga, Inc. writes in a public letter: "Over the last several months and in fact couple of years, Amiga has continued our software and business development and generally kept quiet. This path of quietness was chosen so that we communicated only when there was a development that culminated in a product that could be purchased. In recent weeks, our being quiet has been interpreted as weakness or an open invitation to attempt harming our business relationships and opportunities with partners and customers."
Thread beginning with comment 276106
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Why?
by makfu on Thu 4th Oct 2007 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why?"
makfu
Member since:
2005-12-18

"yet the 68020 still boots faster into a usable user interface than what you have on your 140 times higher clocked x86....."

Correction: it will boot faster into an interface that was usable in 1991. You would probably have a hell of a time launching, oh, say BioShock for example.

Here is how I roll nowadays: S3 resume - 10 seconds, launch WinUAE - 2 seconds, boot AmigaOS 3.5 10 seconds. And yes, UAE on a modern x86 is faster than any real 680x0 processor. It's also more backwards and forwards compatible than any real Amiga ever was (no using degraders to get program x to run)

But if you really want to talk boot times, a Vic20 boots to a "usable interface" in about 1 second with just 5k of RAM! WOOT! I win!

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Why?
by viton on Thu 4th Oct 2007 14:53 in reply to "RE[5]: Why?"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

>>Here is how I roll nowadays: S3 resume - 10 seconds
It took ages to boot my vista-book (C2D + 2GB) to the point until it becomes responsible.
And de-hibernation isn't much faster.
On the other hand, my OS3.1 setup can boot in 2 secs under UAE ;)
I can move icons, launch programms in both cases.
What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by Downix on Thu 4th Oct 2007 15:37 in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
Downix Member since:
2007-08-21

> What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?

I was wondering the same thing. The Amiga's "engine" seems just as modern, infact more modern in some ways than Vista and Linux. But the hardware is too slow, and no, you can't just port it to x86 and expect it to work. There are workarounds, hell Amithlon did it, what, 5 years ago?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by makfu on Thu 4th Oct 2007 15:57 in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
makfu Member since:
2005-12-18

"It took ages to boot my vista-book (C2D + 2GB) to the point until it becomes responsible.
And de-hibernation isn't much faster.
On the other hand, my OS3.1 setup can boot in 2 secs under UAE ;)
I can move icons, launch programms in both cases.
What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?"


1. I didn't say hibernate resume (S4) I said S3, aka sleep resume.

2. Did you REALLY fail to get my point or are you just trolling? If the latter, lurk moar...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Why?
by javiercero1 on Thu 4th Oct 2007 22:18 in reply to "RE[6]: Why?"
javiercero1 Member since:
2005-11-10

> What is so special in 2007 vs 1991 desktop?

This little thing called the internet happened...

also people are used to true preemtive and protected multitasking, 4-channel stereo is not really that impressive anymore, neither is 640xwhatever @ 16 colour, people are used to have full motion video, etc, etc, etc, etc....

I loved my Amiga in the context of its hey day: the late 80s. Honestly there has been a lot of water under the bridge ever since.

Reply Parent Score: 0