Last weekend at 4 different Amiga shows held across the world Amiga fans were introduced to AmigaOS4, AmigaDE and MorphOS solutions. An in depth show report by GFXBase of an earlier show in Austria, includes many interesting pictures regarding the AmigaOS4/AmigaOne and Pegasos/MorphOS (PPC AmigaOS clone) projects. Some additional pictures of this event can be found here at Elbox’ website.MorphOS has already matured to a point that some polished eye-candy is being added. MorphOS is an extremely AmigaOS-like OS, it supports all common Amiga icon formats combined with 24bit PNG icons support. It is unlikely however that MorphOS will support animated GIF icons like AmigaOS 3.9 does and AmigaOS4 will do so too.
With regard to MorphOS it is known that the boot times are very AmigaOS-like, booting up into a featureful GUI environment within around 10 seconds (including BIOS bootup!). Gigatron, an Amiga user reports (600 Mhz G3 PPC / 8MB SIS card installed): MAME with Metal Slug runs at a steady 60fps, Speed test: Mips 688 Mflops 580 and a solid fullscreen DivX movie output. (can easily play around 3 times too fast).
With regard to AmigaOS4, several components were being demonstrated running on classic hardware. The new BIOS ROM developed by Hyperion for the AmigaOne was shown. Notice: While viewing the screenshots do note that some talented Amiga graphic artists are still developing the standard GUI/icon eye-candy for AmigaOS4. Many people outside the Amiga community have judged early screenshots by the shown “eye-candy”, note however that these early screenshots are focussed on functionality instead of eye-candy, especially considering the fact that AmigaOS can be almost completely customized. To understand in what ways classic AmigaOS can be customized, have a look at these user screenshots.
Furthermore there are Amiga shows planned for almost every week until the end of the year. The two most important events however are: The World of Amiga SE 2002 Show to be held on 2nd of November 2002 in Essex, UK and the big German Amiga Fair to be held on the 7th and 8th of December 2002 at the Eurogress in Aachen. To see what last year’s main German Amiga Fair was like, watch this great video coverage.
What a machine! Made by human beings for human beings. A vivid computer for people who are vivid and vibrant themselves.
Now if someone could point me towards a nice table that sums up all the various children of the Amiga genetic tree, that would be much appreciated.
MorphOS vs. AmigaOS 3.9 vs. AmigaOS 4.0 vs. portable AmigaOSlite vs. AmiAthlon vs. etc.
Looking at everything going on… the one thing that Amiga still has after all these years…
FUN.
What an amazing idea. Instead of DRM, Amiga offers FUN.
I love it.
#p
Wow, early disclaimer there, Mike. But I wonder how would the default look of Amiga OS 4 be like?
I just hope it would look modern and beautiful, while not exccessive with the effects/ eye candy (i.e. RH Null and Windows XP with most eye candy switched off).
—
The Prophet: What an amazing idea. Instead of DRM, Amiga offers FUN.
Unless you are viewing DRM media, which would be impossible on Amiga OS anyway, I don’t see your problem with DRM. Just use DRM-less media for goodness sake!
Its a great report, and more screen shots of OS4 and MorphOS ant a bad thing! Both systems are shaping up well, and AmigaOS users will have a battle on their hands between them selfs as to which system to use.
Will have to catch up witht he amiga bandwagon next time it comes to Oz
– I wonder if any Amiga Celebs will be here? 
*keeps dreaming*
Ah, dear Rajan. It is the nature of prophecy that most do not understand it.
When you find yourself only able to get DRM content you will know what I’m talking about.
Unless the mighty ship turns its direction, in the near future the possession of a non-DRM version of any corporate content will be a felony. The possession of any tools to make non-DRM content will be a felony. The act of removing DRM is already a felony. The act of creating content without DRM (remember Mr. Hollings) may end up being a felony. As rational and fair minded people, we cannot imagine what draconian laws will be passed to support the greed of the few.
By having a non-DRM machine, the various monitoring machines on the net will identify you as having a “rogue computer” and as being a potential terrorist. In fact, every corporate website will log your machine as a rogue computer. And all this information, from your ISP to every site you visit, will be forwarded to the government and kept on file.
In this modern age, you are guilty until proven innocent.
And DRM is a great way to make what used to be good, fair, and open into a serious crime with life-breaking penalties.
#p
“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action!
“It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.” — Albert Einstein
Well, if all content would be in DRM in the future, TRUST ME, Amiga OS wouldn’t any media content 😛
DRM is and will also be protecting DRM content. Making it protect non-DRM content would only be feasible in like 20 years where computing power is good enough to index all kinds of media files…
I don’t want the topic to erode any further, email me if you still insist that DRM would stop you from distributing your baby pictures.
Ah, dear Rajan. It is the nature of prophecy that most do not understand it.
*falls off chair laughing*
Don Cox asked in earlier OSNews news item people to compare the new AmiDock with the MacOS X dock, as nobody else has replied to his requests, I gave it a go. If you can, please add your own views as well. AmigaOS is an extremely modular, constructive criticism can only help making 3rd party solutions even better:
Although I don’t use MacOS X on a daily basis myself, I will try to compare the new AmiDock with MacOS X docks.
In general I think MacOS X docks offer some of the best looking eye-candy seen in an OS today. However while using the dock and MacOS applications, the dock starts to feel really clumbsy and unflexable.
Here are the some complaints with regard to MacOS X docks and I will look if AmiDock will solve these problems:
>> The Dock is big and clumsy
As you can see in the screenshots AmiDock allows the usage of small icons and will automaticly create smaller docks accordingly. Also simple text buttons can be used.
>> Dock objects have no labels
With AmiDock you can choose to use labels or not.
>> Trashcan in the corner
With AmiDock you can choose. Personally I see no use for a trashcan and therefor I am happy AmigaOS gives me the *option* of having no trashcan at all.
>> Hiding the Dock makes things worse
The sudden pop-up of application launchers based on mouse pointer positions can be very irritating. AmiDock allows you to simply minize the Dock and maximize the Dock by clicking on a small button. IMO less irritating when working in areas where the launcher would pop-up.
>> Object annihilation
On the MacOS dock if you drag an object off the dock the related object will be destroyed. With AmiDock nothing will be deleted. This is much more elegant as it will allow far better drag and drop funtionalities with other applications without having to worry about destroying any data.
Is the Amiga system compatable with intel based hardware or PPC only?
AmigaOS4 is PPC based. More info:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1356
The AmigaDE is a platform independent technology, which will also be integrated into AmigaOS4. More info:
http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=1757
AmigaOS XL is a fast x86 based commercial and standalone classic AmigaOS emulator. More info:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=604
Then you have multi-platform legal emulation package called Amiga Forever. More info:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1561
An x86 open source AmigaOS clone called AROS: (Amiga Research OS)
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1738
Next to AmiDock offering a high degree of customization options, I think the Docky-System will offer some of the most important features, as it will allow people to add virtually unlimited features to their Dock.
I don’t use the Ami Dock but I can help out a bit with describing the Mac OS X dock since I use that all the time. Actually it might help we both gave a feature list rather than trying to compare/contrast them.
Mac OS X Dock Features:
Dynamic Labeling of Icons – Icon Name Appears on mouse over.
Dock can be resized which automatically changes the icon sizes to match the new dock size.
Optional Magnification of icons with mouse over.
Autohiding of the Dock.
Dock can placed on left bottom and right screen borders.
Dock dynamically displays the contents of application windows that are minimized to it.
Adds a small iconic tag to minimized application windows to show the parent program.
Things Missing:
Being able to drag a dock line on the desktop to become a desktop link.
Being able to change the dock background or transparency.
Being able to segregate the running applications from those that are links that are always present in the dock.
Now if someone wants to give a list for the Ami Dock that would be helpful.
>> Object annihilation
On the MacOS dock if you drag an object off the dock the related object will be destroyed. With AmiDock nothing will be deleted. This is much more elegant as it will allow far better drag and drop funtionalities with other applications without having to worry about destroying any data.
Your wrong, the Items in the OS X Dock are more like Shortcuts to the Program or file, not the Actual file.
So when you drag a file out of the dock you only remove it’s Dock Icon, the files still on youre Hard drive.
And as for Amiga OS4, it souds interisting but the only new Computer it runs it on is the Amiga one Board and who’s Going to buy a $350 board that only has a 600MHz G3 on it?
What they should user is the new IBM G3’s that run up to 1 GHz and have a 200 MHz Bus.
Or they chould use the Power 4 Chip, But after seing the Prices for IBM’s Power 4 Machines I think it whould be far out of the range of most Os news Readers Price Range (seing as they can’t seem to afford the cheapist Mac and Moan about the “Ridiculously High” caust of Macs).
But I don’t care anyway, I’m using an old Compaq With NT4.0.
While the Mac dock feels clumsy to me too, I think it’s because I haven’t taken the time to see it with new eyes. I’m too influenced by the Win startmenu.
The metaphor isn’t bad: the Dock has all the programs you can immediately control. Minimized stuff goes into the little penaltybox. Looking at open apps requires a scan of the bottom for little black rectangles.
What feels broken though is the fight between apps vs. documents. With all the windows, you’re dealing with individual documents. But the Dock has you thinking in terms of apps… and there’s another exception when you’re dealing with minimized windows. So it’s all confused.
Your wrong, the Items in the OS X Dock are more like Shortcuts to the Program or file, not the Actual file.
So when you drag a file out of the dock you only remove it’s Dock Icon, the files still on youre Hard drive.
It looks like you’re violently agreeing. He meant that the little object icon you’re holding will go poof and disappear. Not the app itself.
But newbies will go nuts, amazed that they just deleted the Internet.
Even though it wouldn’t technically be legal, I wonder if you could get one of these Amigas or even a Pegasos board to boot Mac OS X.
Even though it wouldn’t technically be legal, I wonder if you could get one of these Amigas or even a Pegasos board to boot Mac OS X. Well you chould run Linux on it and run OS X with Mac On Linux, But as for just running it on top of the Hardware that might be a bit of a challenge.
Yes Mac-On-Linux works both on Pegasos and AmigaOne motherboards, but IMO the positive part of the story is that MacOS X (with enough available RAM) runs almost as fast as a real Mac.
This works somewhat similar like the way Shapeshifter worked on 68k Amigas. It was amazing how you could run MacOS inside AmigaOS faster than on an equivalently powered Mac. In effect Amigas could be viewed as the first pre-emptive multitasking Mac compatibles, as you could boot several MacOS desktops simultaniously!
“Dynamic Labeling of Icons – Icon Name Appears on mouse over. ”
So if you have 50 icons in the dock you would have to position the
mouse over each one in turn to find out which icon represented a
program you were looking for?
That seems crazy to me.
What if you want just names and no icons? Will the Mac dock do that?
> Now if someone wants to give a list for the Ami Dock
> that would be helpful.
What is known about the new AmiDock for AmigaOS4:
– You can simply drag icons into the Dock, you can drag the icon back onto the desktop or within a directory as well.
– You can use photos and animations through the usage of an included plugin.
– Multiple Docks can be displayed anywhere on the screen. The pictures, icons, animations can be aligned in multiple horizontally or vertically aligned rows as prefered.
– Creation of SubDocks will be possible. For example by clicking an object on a horizontally configured Dock, a vertical dock could then appear attached to the original main Dock, which can also contain SubDocks and so forth.
– Instead of pictures more compact text and buttons are allowed.
– Unlike the previous version AmiDock will adapt better to usage of tiny objects.
– AmiDock can function as a taskbar, showing currently running applications.
– AmiDock also has a drag bar, so it can easily be dragged elsewhere. It also includes a minimize button, so that only the dragbar will be viewed.
– Docky-Plugins-System allows active content within docks. 3rd party plugins are allowed to take full control over AmiDock. For instance a lens plugin magnifies whatever is underneath the mousepointer in realtime, but when clickon will expand for a larger view and for instance allows mouse over effects/functionalities.
> An x86 open source AmigaOS clone called AROS: (Amiga
> Research OS)
Just a note: AROS is not x86 specific, it’s multiplatform.
“Yes Mac-On-Linux works both on Pegasos and AmigaOne motherboards, but IMO the positive part of the story is that MacOS X (with enough available RAM) runs almost as fast as a real Mac.
”
I don’t think it will be the same speed as a real mac. I don’t think it will be faster than a mac with a G3@600MHz. The “old amiga” was better designed then the “old mac”. This is no longer the case. The old amiga used special designed chips to do multi-media tasks and was therefore a better multi-tasking machine than the mac was. So shapeshifter could run macos better as the original mac. But now the machines are similar. The amiga-one uses a teron cx board. http://www.mai.com/products/teron%20cx.htm
So the systems will be similar. You have to run macos X via linux. This is like running windows in vmware. You simply lose speed. However maybe someone will make it work to run macos X native on this one. Still follow the amigaone news.
“This works somewhat similar like the way Shapeshifter worked on 68k Amigas. It was amazing how you could run MacOS inside AmigaOS faster than on an equivalently powered Mac. In effect Amigas could be viewed as the first pre-emptive multitasking Mac compatibles, as you could boot several MacOS desktops simultaniously!”
You can do the same on a mac running Linux. But now you can do it with this baby.
http://www.apple.com/powermac/
> Just a note: AROS is not x86 specific, it’s
> multiplatform.
Currently only a x86 version is available. If you mean that the OS is written in portable code then you are right, however the same counts for AmigaOS4 for instance.
> I don’t think it will be faster than a mac with a
> G3@600MHz.
No, I stated that Shapeshifter opperates somewhat similar as compared to MOL. As MacOS X runs *natively* through Linux, performance penalties are minimal. MacOS runs as fast as a real PPC powered Mac. Though not as fast as one with a 600 Mhz G3 though, as Linux is running in the background eating CPU cicles and RAM, to the contrary AmigaOS is very lightweight an efficient compared to any Linux distro suitable for running MOL.
> The old amiga used special designed chips to do multi-
> media tasks and was therefore a better multi-tasking
> machine than the mac was.
Actually this was completely due to the OS, for instance the DraCo which lacks such custom chips (but runs AmigaOS) is just as good at multitasking (Just like classic/new Amigas utilizing mainstream components.)
> The amiga-one uses a teron cx board.
The AmigaOne boards are different compared to those less advanced/expensive evalution boards, better is to say that the AmigaOne is based on the Teron CX/PX’s hardware architecture.
http://www.mai.com/news&events/PressRelease070902_2.html
> You can do the same on a mac running Linux.
I meant historicly seen Shapeshifter for AmigaOS was amazing, Linux was very unknown and bare bones at that time, Shapeshifter offered an excellent softeware-only solution for Amiga users to utilize MacOS software. Much later, the Shapeshifter author created similar pieces of software called SheepShaver/Basilisk for other platforms.
> > Just a note: AROS is not x86 specific, it’s
> > multiplatform.
>
> Currently only a x86 version is available. If you mean that
> the OS is written in portable code then you are right,
> however the same counts for AmigaOS4 for instance.
Again, that’s wrong. Please retain from doing incorrect information, PLEASE.
AROS is also available for the palm pilot, although it’s still not completely functional, and AROS is also known to have worked since the beginning on real Amiga’s, with 68k processors, although that port has not been manteined for a long while now.
And about the portability of AmigaOS: it’s just towards PPC, it would require a lot more work to make it truly machine independent.
>>And about the portability of AmigaOS: it’s just towards PPC,
>>it would require a lot more work to make it truly machine
>>independent.
Not a lot
. In AmigaOS4.2, users will get their first tast of the DE. After version 4.5 (most likly in OS5), AmigaOS will be fully integrated with the DE (Being, the DE will not run as an application[whos knows what this means, prolly API’d]).
This will allow many preference applications and non hardware hitting apps/utils to be re compiled to run in the DE. This means, much of AmigaOS code and main applications could be written once and maintained for all distributions of AmigaOS ( x86 PPC MIPS Spark etc…)
Amiga Inc are very tight liped about what the DE technology is going to be used for. They’re not giving any clues if they will create a multi platform OS, but i mean, why wouldnt you if you had the technology.
They will head this way, and if they can do it before anyone else, well, good on em!
> Again, that’s wrong. Please retain from doing incorrect
> information, PLEASE.
Fabio touchy aren’t we?
> AROS is also available for the palm pilot, although it’s
> still not completely functional, and AROS is also known
> to have worked since the beginning on real Amiga’s, with
> 68k processors, although that port has not been
> manteined for a long while now.
“still”….”although”…. I mostly use an user’s point of view, for the following reason, if I say AROS is currently available for other (non-x86) hardware platforms, users should be able to get the binaries (from i.e. aros.org) straight away. They can’t…
For example at this point I shouldn’t tell user that MacOS X is a multiplatform OS as, as they currently can’t get the x86 version from anywhere.
> And about the portability of AmigaOS: it’s just towards
> PPC, it would require a lot more work to make it truly
> machine independent.
Hardware abstartion is fundamental to the future of AmigaOS, yes has taken and will still take alot of work but this is most certainly being addressed.
If you truly want to talk about machine independent OSes, then the AmigaDE can run the same binaries across any architecture at remarkable speeds. For this AROS software requires recompilations, not something the average user would do.
> > Again, that’s wrong. Please retain from doing incorrect
> > information, PLEASE.
>
> Fabio touchy aren’t we?
No, it’s just that I don’t like your way of doing information. It’s plainly incorrect, that’s all. I did polite remark to your original statement, just to INFORM people that AROS is not just about x86, and you replied that still you were right in saying what you said. Why can’t you just say “oh, thanks for having reminded me”?
> > AROS is also available for the palm pilot, although
> > it’s
> > still not completely functional, and AROS is also known
> > to have worked since the beginning on real Amiga’s,
> > with 68k processors, although that port has not been
> > manteined for a long while now.
> “still”….”although”…. I mostly use an user’s point of
> view,
I knew you would have answered like that… so, tell me, when AROS wasn’t downoadable yet, because it wasn’t ready yet for public usage, it didn’t exist at all? That’s the conclusion one would come to if your reasoning where to be used.
You can download sources and build binaries by yourself. AROS has been ported already to different CPU’s and architectures, proving that it really is machine independent. When I say that AROS is multiplatform isn’t like saying that AmigaOS4 is, because AROS has already been ported to other platforms, AmigaOS hasn’t.
> for the following reason, if I say AROS is currently
> available for other (non-x86) hardware platforms, users
> should be able to get the binaries (from i.e. aros.org)
> straight away. They can’t…
Why, only binaries matter? There are many kind of users, and also non developers can build binaries themselves. Moreover, you seem to have completely missed my original point: I was just doing information by saying that AROS is not just about x86, you instead took it personally, as if I were saying something against you.
> For example at this point I shouldn’t tell user that
> MacOS X is a multiplatform OS as, as they currently can’t
> get the x86 version from anywhere.
Does that matter? If MacOS X runs also on x86 then it _is_ a multiplatform OS, doesn’t matter whether someone can go to a shop and buy it. Things exist before they are shipped.
> > And about the portability of AmigaOS: it’s just towards
> > PPC, it would require a lot more work to make it truly
> > machine independent.
> Hardware abstartion is fundamental to the future of
> AmigaOS, yes has taken and will still take alot of work
> but this is most certainly being addressed.
But then it’s not true that _currently_ AmigaOS is multiplatform, not in the way AROS is, at least.
> If you truly want to talk about machine independent OSes,
> then the AmigaDE can run the same binaries across any
> architecture at remarkable speeds.
That’s not about machine independent OS’s, it’s about machine independent binaries, and it doesn’t take a whole OS to have machine independent binaries.
> For this AROS software requires recompilations, not
> something the average user would do.
Styrangely enough, it depends on the “average user” of your OS, don’t you think? And, as said, machine-independent binaries can be used everywhere, not just in AmigaDE.
> did polite remark to your original statement
IMO stating things like “retain from doing incorrect information” isn’t very “polite”, as it gives the impression that I’m spreading incorrect information intentionally.
> “oh, thanks for having reminded me”
I already knew that. just like most people here know that BeOS, QNX, Linux, OpenBSD, etc, etc can all be ported to different hardware architectures. I did not say AROS is x86 based, I only provided a link where people can find more information about x86 AROS.
> so, tell me, when AROS wasn’t downoadable yet, because
> it wasn’t ready yet for public usage, it didn’t exist at
> all?
No, it just wouldn’t be *available*.
> That’s the conclusion one would come to if your
> reasoning where to be used.
That’s your conclusion then, believe me I have repeatably stated to people that neither AmigaOS4 nor AmigaDE are available yet to consumers, does that imply they don’t exist at all? I think not.
> because AROS has already been ported to other platforms,
> AmigaOS hasn’t.
Certain AmigaOS4 components currently exist in both 68k and PPC versions. IMO both AmigaOS4 and AROS are currently both “heavily work in progress projects”, as a standalone AROS in its current form (even the latest x86 version) isn’t very useful to people other than *developers*.
> Why, only binaries matter?
I did not say that. I pointed people to a link where they could get more information on the latest version of x86 AROS.
> by saying that AROS is not just about x86, you instead
> took it personally
IMO statings things like: “Note that we target multiple platforms” would be more helpful than “retain from doing incorrect information”. That sounds far more like a complaint towards me personally, instead of a general notice.
> then it _is_ a multiplatform OS
I didn’t state that AROS nor MacOS X are not multiplatform OSes. I only stated that at this point there is no use for telling users MacOS X is a multiplatform OS and that both AROS nor MacOS X are currently available to users of different CPU architectures.
> Things exist before they are shipped.
Yes and this is completely irrelevant as I didn’t imply anything else.
> currently_ AmigaOS is multiplatform
Certain parts are, you just stated it yourself, if things aren’t available yet, that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
> That’s not about machine independent OS
In AmigaDE/intent’s case the whole OS is platform independent. The kernel and other OS components are witten in Virtual Processor code.
> it depends on the “average user” of your OS, don’t you
> think?
If you want to target other people than just developers it does matter. At this point AROS, as a standalone OS, doesn’t have many users. If you want AROS to stay mainly a research project then the need for building binaries isn’t an important factor.
> > did polite remark to your original statement
>
> IMO stating things like “retain from doing incorrect
> information” isn’t very “polite”, as it gives the
> impression that I’m spreading incorrect information
> intentionally.
See? That kind of behaviour is so deeply tied into yourself that you cannot help it, you did it again: when I said “original statement” I meant _really_ your “original statement”, and the answer I was referring to was this one:
http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=1790&offset=15&rows=29#40…
> > so, tell me, when AROS wasn’t downoadable yet, because
> > it wasn’t ready yet for public usage, it didn’t exist
> > at all?
>
> No, it just wouldn’t be *available*.
Right, but when I said: “Just a note: AROS is not x86 specific, it’s multiplatform”, I was answering to your message which was referring to AROS as solely an x86 AmigaOS clone, with these words: “An x86 open source AmigaOS clone called AROS: (Amiga Research OS)”.
You didn’t take availability into consideration at all, you just made it appear as if AROS were just aboux x86, and I thought I’d made clear that that’s not the case. That’s all, and everything could have stopped there, but you evidently thought I had attacked your credibility somehow and so you had to “defend” yourself. You could have said “thanks”, instead you said “I’m right, don’t blame me”.
> > because AROS has already been ported to other
> > platforms, AmigaOS hasn’t.
>
> Certain AmigaOS4 components currently exist in both 68k
> and PPC versions.
That doesn’t mean they would compile right away on _other_ architectures than PPC and 68k, which indeed is very unlikely for what I know. But my original message wasn’t comparing AmigaOS and AROS at all, and you know that…
> IMO both AmigaOS4 and AROS are
> currently both “heavily work in progress projects”, as a
> standalone AROS in its current form (even the latest x86
> version) isn’t very useful to people other than
> *developers*.
Which doesn’t make it less portable, which is the point I made… Please, don’t lead the discussion elsewhere.
> > Why, only binaries matter?
>
> I did not say that. I pointed people to a link where they
> could get more information on the latest version of x86
> AROS.
No, you said “An x86 open source AmigaOS clone called AROS”, which, if I know how to read English, means “AROS is an x86 Open Source clone of AmigaOS”.
And the link you posted was to an OSNews article in which the availability of a WB clone for AROS was announced, which has got nothing to do with any cpu-specific version of AROS.
> > by saying that AROS is not just about x86, you instead
> > took it personally
> IMO statings things like: “Note that we target multiple
> platforms” would be more helpful than “retain from doing
> incorrect information”.
I had ALREADY done that, don’t play dumb now! I’m giving you the link to the message in which I said it again: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=1790&offset=15&rows=29#40…
> That sounds far more like a complaint towards me
> personally, instead of a general notice.
Yes, _that_ was a complaint towards you, but I _wasn’t_ referring to _that_ message, I was referring to the _previous_ one, and you know it.
> > then it _is_ a multiplatform OS
>
> I didn’t state that AROS nor MacOS X are not
> multiplatform OSes. I only stated that at this point
> there is no use for telling users MacOS X is a
> multiplatform OS and that both AROS nor MacOS X are
> currently available to users of different CPU
> architectures.
Please, let us AROS developers what we feel like the AROS users should know about AROS, will you? If I point out that AROS is not just about x86, please leave it at that and accept it, since it’s the truth. Moreover you can download the AROS sources and build the Palm Pilot version yourself, therefore it _is_ available to the public, although not in binary form.
And anyway, you didn’t say “here you can find the x86 version of AROS”, you said “here there is the x86 open source clone of AmigaOS, AROS”, which is _way_ different.
> > currently_ AmigaOS is multiplatform
>
> Certain parts are, you just stated it yourself, if things
> aren’t available yet, that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
“Certain parts” don’t make the whole, therefore AmigaOs is not multiplatform, and even if the whole OS were ported to PPC, it wouldn’t be multiplatform unless it weren’t tied just to PPC and 68k (AROS isn’t), it would only be bi-platform.
But anyway, I don’t want to compare the portability degree of AROS and AmigaOS and this wasn’t the main point.
> > That’s not about machine independent OS
> In AmigaDE/intent’s case the whole OS is platform
> independent.
Wrong. There are two parts, the CII and PII which are machine dependent and are _not_ written in VP. How could the OS boot up, otherwise?
> The kernel and other OS components are witten in Virtual
> Processor code.
If portable binaries were to be used in AROS (as it’s planned: read the web site), you could write everithing in this portable binary format for AROS too: it’s just about binary format, after all.
> > it depends on the “average user” of your OS, don’t you
> > think?
> If you want to target other people than just developers
> it does matter. At this point AROS, as a standalone OS,
> doesn’t have many users. If you want AROS to stay mainly
> a research project then the need for building binaries
> isn’t an important factor.
Of course that was only a side not of mine, and of course AROS targets also people who don’t want to recompile stuff, but as said portable binaries aren’t a prerogative of AmigaDE, and AROS will have them too, eventually.
> See?
See what? What is your point, did I write an impolite comment in reply? I only clarified some things, if people want to check out AROS they will most likely be dissapointed if they own anything else than a x86 computer.
> I was answering to your message which was referring to
> AROS as solely an x86 AmigaOS clone
I simply did *NOT* state that, I simply pointed people towards a link where they can check out x86 AROS for themselves.
> You didn’t take availability into consideration at all,
> you just made it appear as if AROS were just aboux x86
I did take availability into account, as I don’t want people to get dissapointed. Believe me, if I had stated “At the following link you can check out information about AROS, for Palm, 68k, PPC and x86”, some people would have pointed to the fact that these versions aren’t even available yet.
IMO with nitpickers around its always a loose <=> loose situation.
> You could have said “thanks”, instead you said “I’m
> right, don’t blame me”.
Your input as an AROS developer is highly appreciated. But I only wanted to clarify that AROS currently isn’t available for other platforms, other than x86. Most operating systems today are highly portable, I have the need to point that fact out to everyone (availability counts). I`m sure even a PPC Windows version can be made quite easily, maybe it even exist inhouse at Microsoft, I don’t know. That’s all I was saying, nothing more, nothing less.
> WB clone for AROS was announced, which has got nothing
> to do with any cpu-specific version of AROS.
People should better have a x86 box if they want to check it out…
> I had ALREADY done that, don’t play dumb now!
Why didn’t you just leave it at that then?
> we feel like the AROS users should know about AROS,
> will you?
OK, I will try to not bring up AROS as being an Amiga user option to check out in the future. Personally I truly dislike nitpicking. IMO there’s too much of that available already, especially within the Linux/GNU open source communities.
> If I point out that AROS is not just about x86, please
> leave it at that and accept it
I did not state that it is only about x86…
In replies to my articles, I will continue to point out to people that only a x86 version of AROS is currently available, at least if that is still correct at that point of time. The same when people state that MacOS X is multiplatform without stating that only a PPC version is available. (So don’t take this personally)
> And anyway, you didn’t say “here you can find the x86
> version of AROS”, you said “here there is the x86 open
> source clone of AmigaOS, AROS”, which is _way_
> different.
I pointed to an article about AROS, which only people with a x86 system can check out for themselves.
> Certain parts” don’t make the whole
You mean to say that everything you currently have available for x86 is also finished for those other platform you *intend* to support?
> it would only be bi-platform
So if in your opinion AROS is a tri- or quatro-platform when all currently *intended* versions are finished?
Multi relates to more than one. An OS which can only work on two tasks simultaniously is a multtasking OS, not a good one though.
> Wrong. There are two parts, the CII and PII which are
> machine dependent and are _not_ written in VP. How could
> the OS boot up, otherwise?
The whole OS is written in VP code. The translation layer is platform specific. You could run a parallel with emulators where the OS is written in other CPU target code as compared to the emulator. (i.e. AmigaOS/UAE)
> AROS will have them too, eventually
OK, If you say so.
There’s no much point in continuing this farce, as you’ll go on defending your position, even at the cost of lieing. I’m only gonna point out the incoherence of some of your answers, and then I’m gonna drop this discussion.
> > See?
> See what? What is your point,
I told you what is my point, but you snipped it. Well, people know how to read it, if they want. In short: you play with words and manipulate reality and sicussions. You always say half truths, which are not too far from the reality to call them “lies”, but are far enough to confuse people and make incorrect information.
> > I was answering to your message which was referring to
> > AROS as solely an x86 AmigaOS clone
> I simply did *NOT* state that,
Yes you did, do I have to show you again? Readlly do I?
Ok, here it goes again. You said “An x86 open source AmigaOS clone called AROS”. Now, can you tell me what does it mean? don’t worry, I’ll help you, it means “AROS is an x86 Open Source clone of AmigaOS”.
Now, since it’s clear you said it, please stop lieing, it doesn’t make any good to you, just admit the reality.
> if I had stated “At the following link you can check out
> information about AROS, for Palm, 68k, PPC and x86”, some
> people would have pointed to the fact that these versions
> aren’t even available yet.
But since you are a so good writer you would have found a better way of saying it, wouldn’t you? C’mon, even I can do that. For example: “At the following link you can check out informations about AROS, an open source and multiplatform clone of AmigaOS. Currently only the x86 port is at an advanced state of competion”.
Now, how does that sound?
Alternatively, let people just follow the link and find the information on the page themselves, since it’s all well clear what is AROS about there.
But I know that that was just an excuse of yours, there’s no reason for which you have to make incorrect information.
> IMO with nitpickers around its always a loose <=> loose
> situation.
Nitpickers? Dude, it’s not nitpicking, it’s about making correct information. It’s in the AROS interest that it has to be said that AROS is a _multiplatform_ OS, and not just an x86 one, and if you don’t say it, if you even lie about it, then you are making bad to AROS. It was my duty to point out the reality of facts, but my fault has been to let myself be drawn into this futile debate.
> > I had ALREADY done that, don’t play dumb now!
> Why didn’t you just leave it at that then?
Sorry Mike, but you cannot play like this. First you say that I have not done that, then when I show you that I did, all that you have to say is that I didn’t leave it at that?
Do you realize that you mispresented the reality by saying that I hadn’t informed you politely about the fact that AROS is multiplatform? Do you realize that proving you wrong about that makes your entire argument moot, because you took it as an excuse for having took it personally?
Do you?
> > we feel like what the AROS users should know about
> > AROS, will you?
> OK, I will try to not bring up AROS as being an Amiga
> user option to check out in the future.
Eh, of course… from one extreme to another…
> Personally I truly dislike nitpicking.
Specially when it does you some bad, I bet.
> IMO there’s too much of that available already,
> especially within the Linux/GNU open source communities.
You call “nitpicking” what I cal “making correct information”. Now it’s not even about AROS, it’s about your way of doing information. I feel like the people who read your articles and comments should know that you are biased and should see how you like to play with words, so that they can have a better understanding of what you say, and not take everything for granted.
I understand that this does bad to your credibility, but if you had played fair since the beginning it wouldn’t have happened.
Now AROS has got nothign to do with this, I’m just expressing my own disliking for your own way of making “information” and (mis)presenting the reality. Please take these last words as solely _my_ opinion and not the one of the AROS Team (although it may happen to be shared by others).
> > If I point out that AROS is not just about x86, please
> > leave it at that and accept it
> I did not state that it is only about x86…
Again: yes you did, see above. Perhaps you didn’t even notice it, and I can understand it, but if I show you the reality, please don’t close your eyes.
> In replies to my articles, I will continue to point out
> to people that only a x86 version of AROS is currently
> available,
One thing is to point _that_ out, another is to say that it’s just for x86, as you did.
> > And anyway, you didn’t say “here you can find the x86
> > version of AROS”, you said “here there is the x86 open
> > source clone of AmigaOS, AROS”, which is _way_
> > different.
> I pointed to an article about AROS, which only people
> with a x86 system can check out for themselves.
Why, other people cannot be interested in AROS too? See what I mean? If you say that AROS is just about x86, other people won’t care about it, and that’s definitely something that we, AROS Team, _don’t want_.
> > Certain parts” don’t make the whole
> You mean to say that everything you currently have
> available for x86 is also finished for those other
> platform you *intend* to support?
Of course. Everything but a bunch of functions which need to be rewritten for the architecture to which the port is being done, and of course some of the device drivers, if necessary. Look at the sources to see it by yourself. All the programs, all the libraries, almost all the devices are common to all architectures, and don’t need to be ever touched again.
In other words, things need to be _added_ in order to make it run to other platforms, but what is currently in the tree doesn’t need modifications of any sort to make it portable.
> > it would only be bi-platform
> > Wrong. There are two parts, the CII and PII which are
> > machine dependent and are _not_ written in VP. How
> > could
> > the OS boot up, otherwise?
> The whole OS is written in VP code.
Bah… it’s a lost cause, I know, but I’m trying to make you understand it again: CII and PII _do_ are part of the OS, therefore the whole OS cannot be written in VP code.
Is that clear now?
> > AROS will have them too, eventually
> OK, If you say so.
There’s nothing to laugh about. If you had cared of reading the web page you would have noticed that it’s well stated there. Ever heard of “SDE”?
Anyway, this discussion ends here for me.
> as you’ll go on defending your position, even at the
> cost of lieing.
I would never lie for this. My main concern is that readers don’t get dissapointed.
> In short: you play with words and manipulate reality
I had no sinister intentions, I can give you my word on that.
> You said “An x86 open source AmigaOS clone called AROS”.
> Now, can you tell me what does it mean?
It means that I was providing a link to an x86 open source AmigaOS clone, called AROS. Did I say the OS is was tied to x86 only, no. (However no other version is currently available). If I pointed to more information about MacOS X, I could have stated something like, PPC Mach based desktop OS. Does that imply that MacOS X is tied to PPC only by nature? I think not (However again no other version is currently available).
> But since you are a so good writer you would have found
> a better way of saying it, wouldn’t you?
Maybe, if I devoted some extra lines of text. However that message was just a quick and “dirty” summ up, without any sinister plots behind it. If you don’t believe me, I can’t do anything about that, or can I?
> Now, how does that sound?
Much longer, I only devoted one line for each project summed up in that original posting. With regard to this I did not discriminate between projects.
> It’s in the AROS interest that it has to be said that
> AROS is a _multiplatform_ OS
I would only have stated something similar if AROS would be currently available for multiple platforms. More likely I would have said: “An PPC, x86, 68k open source AmigaOS clone called AROS:”, *if* these versions were available at the time of writing.
> you are biased
I try to be as unbiased as possible, however I believe everyone is always biased to some extend. Personally I love many aspects of both AmigaOS and Amiga computers ( however despite having used virtually any alternative platform there is).
> and should see how you like to play with words
I’m not a native English speaker, so I take that as a compliment.
> First you say that I have not done that, then when I
> show you that I did, all that you have to say is that I
> didn’t leave it at that?
You didn’t, at that point it was known that the AROS team intends to target multiple platforms and it was known that it is only available for x86 at this point of time. IMO that would have been an excellent stage to drop AROS as a subject for further discussion.
> informed you politely about the fact that AROS is
> multiplatform?
You could not have informed me about the fact that AROS team *intends* to support mulitple platforms, for the simple fact that I already knew that… IMO stating AROS is multiplatform, needs a clarification that it is currently only available for x86.
> that it’s just for x86, as you did.
Did not.. “Did too”… Did not… “Did too”…….
>> I pointed to an article about AROS, which only people
>> with a x86 system can check out for themselves.
> Why, other people cannot be interested in AROS too? See
> what I mean? If you say that AROS is just about x86,
> other people won’t care about it,
Advise: If other platforms are so incredibly important to you guys, release those alternative versions, so people with alternative platforms can check them out as well.
> Everything but a bunch of functions which need to be
> rewritten
If it’s that simple why not release these alternatives?
> Is that clear now?
If the VP is build, as several manufacturers have asked Tao to allow, a translation layer wouldn’t be needed. Therefor I used the AmigaOS/UAE parallel, for you to understand this.
>> OK, If you say so.
> There’s nothing to laugh about.
That’s just a friendly smile, not one of my sinister plots…..
Mike, for what it is worth I just want to say that I understood your posting and I think Fabio is pulling things ways out of proportions!
Just a short post to clear a few things up. I *don’t* want to start another discussion, and it’s not written to upset anyone…
>> and should see how you like to play with words
>I’m not a native English speaker, so I take that as a >compliment.
Well, I’ve been reading a lot of your posts, and you ARE pretty good at twisting words. Take it as a compliment if you wish, I’m quite amazed!
>You didn’t, at that point it was known that the AROS team >intends to target multiple platforms and it was known >that it is only available for x86 at this point of time. >IMO that would have been an excellent stage to drop AROS >as a subject for further discussion.
The fact is that there *is* a port for Palm Pilot aswell. And even though it’s not finished – it’s still a port. Most of AROS’ components also run as drop-in replacements for AmigaOS on Amiga hardware.
The reason why these ports are so far behind the x86 port is simply priority and manpower. Most people own x86 hardware, so it makes sense to use it as the primary development platform. We simply don’t have enough developers to maintain all the ports at the moment.
I think this is the reason Fabio got so upset. Publicity is good. Every time a news post about AROS appears somewhere on the web, we get a couple of new developers (or at least people who are interested in contributing). When you said “x86 Open Source AmigaOS clone”, Fabio had a vision of every potential non-x86 developer losing interest. We need those developers (PPC, m68k or whatever) to finish the alternate ports.
I really don’t want to argue about what to call multiplatform, bi-platform or intended multiplatform here. It seems like this is a matter of different definitions
I hope I haven’t offended anyone. This post was only meant to clear a few things up (and try to do so in a friendly tone of voice
).
> I think this is the reason Fabio got so upset.
Strangely would I have posted a similar comment/link with regard to x86 BeOS or x86 QNX, probably nobody would have become upset.
> I hope I haven’t offended anyone. This post was only
> meant to clear a few things up
IMO, in general, feedback from AROS developers is highly appreciated.