@CodeSmith

Quote:

I have to disagree with you here. You're basically saying that amiga's not allowed to be anything but what it was in the early 90s when CBM died. In the meantime, Apple went from 68K to PPC and then on to x86. Are you seriously saying that a MacBook Pro is not a real Mac because it's not running System 6 on a 68000?

I haven't owned an Apple since my Apple ][+ so I can't tell you squat about the hardware:OS integration of System 6 till OS9. I will state yes there is a huge difference between BSD and none BSD based Mac OSs. I often read in the Amiga forums how aweful MacOS really was prior to it going BSD so I'm basing a few things on that. So MacBook Pro is not a true Mac because it's not running a aweful OS on a poorly designed hardware which is a good thing .

Going x86 and BSD was the smartest thing Jobs has ever done and second only to deciding to team up with Woz. Pity Fleecy screwed up the QNX deal, we were so close in getting a OS worthy of the Amiga name.

Dammy

_________________
Dammy

@CodeSmith

Quote:

Actually, those who were saying that AmigaOS on x86 would just get pirated have been proved to be on the right track by the popularity of the OSX86 project, and the number of copies of "fixed" OSX that I've seen on BitTorrent and eMule.

doesn't seem to have hurt Apple's stock too much though, does it?

There's also a good chance that next time these people come to purchase a computer, they will decide on buying a Mac. Maybe only 2 or 3 percent... but 2 or 3 percent of however many thousands of downloads are being performed is a fair bite into the market.

Lets face it... Microsoft didn't make DOS and Windows become the de-facto OS by selling them. Earlier versions of the said operating systems had no copy protection, and I'm guessing that's not because a naive Mr Gates trusted people to NOT pirate his software...

@Manu

Quote:

And the only people who want OS4 to stay on PPC is those that want to keep it for them selves among a chosen group of followers. See I can generalize too.

then how about AROS on Coldfire, that might be fun

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@wegster

Quote:

Play nice, lest we discuss other non-delivering products. Seriously, that wasn't really called for.

That was nice, or would you rather see posts from my dark side?

Just couldn’t handle a bunch of new threads like Grandma has done in the past, for some mythical beastie.

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@damocles

Quote:

Going x86 and BSD was the smartest thing Jobs has ever done and second only to deciding to team up with Woz. Pity Fleecy screwed up the QNX deal, we were so close in getting a OS worthy of the Amiga name.

It would have been awesome if the QNX deal would have been a success and then all you'd have to do is replace Photon with a new and improved Workbench with the Amiga Classic API framework as well as a new API framework for forward thinking software development.

_________________

I consider it a very good basis the minimig. From a processor and FPGA like that, what is available, that a little bit the average at a user smarter amateur together let him be top notch to claim, let none be made to serve none time for a firm's business interests.

According to me not trouble, if he is one single component, not so strong, let him take little, let him be small, and relatively cheap.

(10 x EFIKA) < 1000$ < 100W ( One EFIKA too everything runs under MorphOS very nice ),

but

(1 x Win PC) > 1000$ > 500W ( His performance never burns, always slow, always little for him something! I not like! )

Last edited by AliveMOon on 26-Jan-2008 at 06:09 PM.

_________________
My first prototype game.
Current work on this!

Things I want to buy:
An accelerator card for my A2000

@damocles

Quote:

I haven't owned an Apple since my Apple ][+ so I can't tell you squat about the hardware:OS integration of System 6 till OS9. I will state yes there is a huge difference between BSD and none BSD based Mac OSs. I often read in the Amiga forums how aweful MacOS really was prior to it going BSD so I'm basing a few things on that. So MacBook Pro is not a true Mac because it's not running a aweful OS on a poorly designed hardware which is a good thing . Going x86 and BSD was the smartest thing Jobs has ever done and second only to deciding to team up with Woz. Pity Fleecy screwed up the QNX deal, we were so close in getting a OS worthy of the Amiga name. Dammy

I'm confused. oh, crap, never mind...read 'MBP isn't a true Mac because it IS running an aweful OS on poorly designed hardware' etc..duh.

Completely agree- original MacOS classic was simply painful. OS X is _still_ irritating in some ways (preference of Mac/Apple to cater to non power users, over-simplify things), but it's finally nice enough since 10.4 that I've 'given in' and own a MBP as my primary work laptop now.

And yeah, I think QNX would have been interesting

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@takemehomegrandma

Freescale MPC8610

Availability
• Samples and evaluation boards now
• Production mid 2008

_________________
My first prototype game.
Current work on this!

Things I want to buy:
An accelerator card for my A2000

@Pleng

Quote:

doesn't seem to have hurt Apple's stock too much though, does it?

Right, because Apple's stock price has nothing to do with the iPod or the iPhone.

Quote:

Lets face it... Microsoft didn't make DOS and Windows become the de-facto OS by selling them. Earlier versions of the said operating systems had no copy protection, and I'm guessing that's not because a naive Mr Gates trusted people to NOT pirate his software...

It's well known that the reason why DOS and Windows became the standard was because Microsoft pretty much forced PC manufacturers to bundle a copy with every system sold. DOS and Windows were not copy protected because MS didn't care - unless you were in the extreme minority that builds a PC from scratch, if you had a computer you already had DOS or Windows. You'll notice that WGA and other piracy prevention measures only were introduced *after* MS were forced by the courts to stop coercing OEMs.

Last edited by CodeSmith on 26-Jan-2008 at 08:51 PM.
Last edited by CodeSmith on 26-Jan-2008 at 08:49 PM.

Removed - my friend will get mad at me if he finds out

Last edited by CodeSmith on 26-Jan-2008 at 09:45 PM.

@CodeSmith

Quote:

CodeSmith wrote: It's well known that the reason why DOS and Windows became the standard was because Microsoft pretty much forced PC manufacturers to bundle a copy with every system sold.

They weren't forced, but there were strong economic incentives.

I worked for a PC manufacture in the early 90's, and we got DOS so cheap that it was nearly free. It cost a consumer a lot more to buy DOS retail and install it themselves, so there really wasn't a market for non-OS PCs. A few people installed DR-DOS or Coherent, but that was about it.

We used to put DOS on the hard drive, and throw in a box of Windows, but hardly anyone would install it. At least we hardly ever got tech support calls for it, and it wasn't because Windows 3.0 was stable or easy to use! People didn't start calling on Windows until we preinstalled it on the hard drive. So on this point I agree -- preinstalled software is the key to market share.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote: @takemehomegrandma Also, I don't get why he's talking about the 8313e? I thought the limepc would be using the 5121e?

Indeed you are right, and *I never even mentioned the 5121e* (which is a chip *I would worship* BTW, if it would only arrive with fully functional memory coherency), what I was talking about was the MPC8610 and nothing else!

@AliveMOon

Quote:

AliveMOon wrote: @takemehomegrandma Freescale MPC8610 Availability • Samples and evaluation boards now • Production mid 2008

And an optimistic time quote for any kid of end user products would probably be towards Christmas 2008...?

@bison

The reason you got DOS so cheap was because your company had signed an exclusive deal with Microsoft; if you had offered any other OSs as well, DOS would have cost your company a lot closer to the retail price. Any PC retailer that didn't offer only DOS would have been at a severe disadvantage relative to his competitors: since DOS was the standard (thanks to IBM), that retailer would have been pretty screwed. That's what I was referring to - BillG didn't "send the boys around" if you didn't sell DOS, he just made it hard for you to sell anything else.

Last edited by CodeSmith on 27-Jan-2008 at 12:51 AM.

@CodeSmith

Quote:

CodeSmith wrote: @bison The reason you got DOS so cheap was because your company had signed an exclusive deal with Microsoft; if you had offered any other OSs as well, DOS would have cost your company a lot closer to the retail price. Any PC retailer that didn't offer only DOS would have been at a severe disadvantage relative to his competitors: since DOS was the standard (thanks to IBM), that retailer would have been pretty screwed. That's what I was referring to - BillG didn't "send the boys around" if you didn't sell DOS, he just made it hard for you to sell anything else.

Yeah you're right, we did have an agreement with MSFT, and it would have cost more for MS-DOS if we hadn't. But at the time there wasn't any significant demand for anything other than MS-DOS, so it wasn't too big of an issue.

MSFT is still up to this sort of thing. Dell's Ubuntu Linux configuration page carries the notice, "Dell recommends Windows Vista Home Premium."

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&kc=6V440&l=en&oc=DNCWJL1&s=dhs

Intel was a different situation. We carried a line of computers with Cyrix processors for a few months, and it's interesting that our supply of Intel processors dried up during this period. I mean we could sell the systems, but we had trouble getting the processors. This problem seemed to lessen after we dropped the Cyrix line of computers. Was this just a coincidence? I guess it could have been.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@takemehomegrandma

Quote:

takemehomegrandma wrote: @olegil Quote: olegil wrote: @takemehomegrandma Also, I don't get why he's talking about the 8313e? I thought the limepc would be using the 5121e? Indeed you are right, and *I never even mentioned the 5121e* (which is a chip *I would worship* BTW, if it would only arrive with fully functional memory coherency), what I was talking about was the MPC8610 and nothing else!

The MPC5200 (Efika) was a start. More is to come, and more is already coming!

OK, from *2006* already:

http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2006/10/wanting-what-you-have.html

"We will start with this!!!"


[Didn't this turned out to be the 5121e, kind of?]

[then...]



[So is this next?]

They say: "It is 4U2!!!"

I say: "This is Amiga! On a chip! At least what the Amiga was professionally used for in a video context, and maybe a foundation for a commercial future?"

@CodeSmith

Quote:

Actually, those who were saying that AmigaOS on x86 would just get pirated have been proved to be on the right track by the popularity of the OSX86 project, and the number of copies of "fixed" OSX that I've seen on BitTorrent and eMule

Considering that Apple sold more than 2 million computers in the Christmas quarter, all of them with some version of OS-X, the fact that a few thousand, or maybe even tens of thousands of people loaded a pirated version on their non-Apple hardware during that same period hardly constitutes "just gets pirated".

Or view it the other way around --- OS4 has reportedly been distributed on those networks, too. So considering Apple sold as many copies of their OS each hour during that quarter as Hyperion has sold in the lifetime of OS4, there would have to be literally thousands of distinct copies of OS-X available on the networs to constitute a level of piracy comparable to that of the oh-so-protected-on-PPC OS4.

Third view --- the popularity of the OSX86 project, relative to the actual market size of OS-X, is nothing compared to the popularity of the Project Moana files relative to the OS4 market size.



In fact, the one thing the popularity of the OSX86 project *does* show is that Hyperions inane chanting about the "temptation of Windows" was just an admission of not being able to compete on the merits.

Last edited by umisef on 27-Jan-2008 at 03:50 AM.

@umisef

You're ignoring the vast numbers of hardcore Apple fans, who will buy the latest and greatest as fast as Apple can build them. Those guys are the "true believers" who would never do anything that could hurt Apple.

What I'm referring to are those who want to run OSX and already have a PC (kinda like those that want to run OS4 and already have a PC). I just did a quick search on a popular BitTorrent search engine, and altogether there are several thosand seeds and peers for variants on "APPLE.mac.osx.LEOPARD.V10.5.ISO-osx".

Quote:

In fact, the one thing the popularity of the OSX86 project *does* show is that Hyperions inane chanting about the "temptation of Windows" was just an admission of not being able to compete on the merits.

No, what Hyperion's been worried about all this time is selling just a handful of copies of OS4. Of course, that could end up happening anyway...

Last edited by CodeSmith on 27-Jan-2008 at 05:34 AM.

@CodeSmith

Quote:

You're ignoring the vast numbers of hardcore Apple fans, who will buy the latest and greatest as fast as Apple can build them. Those guys are the "true believers" who would never do anything that could hurt Apple.

And how is that different from the Amiga situation (other than the "vast numbers" part, that is)?

Quote:

What I'm referring to are those who want to run OSX and already have a PC (kinda like those that want to run OS4 and already have a PC). I just did a quick search on a popular BitTorrent search engine, and altogether there are several thosand seeds and peers for variants on "APPLE.mac.osx.LEOPARD.V10.5.ISO-osx".

Several thousand. Compared to 2.2 million in the last quarter alone. A drop in the ocean...

Those several thousand are to the 2.2 million as are the one-or-two of OS4 to the one-thousand-or-so of OS4.


Of course, most of the "several thousand" are probably people who have never heard of the OSX86 project, but rather want to update their OS-X 10.4 to OS-X 10.5 without paying Apple. The exact same problem Hyperion would face in their nice, safe niche if they ever actually released a to-be-paid-for OS4.1.

@umisef

Quote:

And how is that different from the Amiga situation (other than the "vast numbers" part, that is)?

I dunno, maybe it's possible that several million hardcore fans are probably enough to fund development of an OS, and several hundred are not?

Quote:

Several thousand. Compared to 2.2 million in the last quarter alone. A drop in the ocean...

That's one search, and it got me a couple thousand seeders. In case you don't understand how BitTorrent works, a seeder is someone who's already downloaded a file and is explicitly sharing it. Typically for every seeder there will be anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand leeches (people who just download and quit). Even if we assume the best case, there are probably a few hundred thousand copies of OSX out there that Apple hasn't gotten a penny for.

Quote:

The exact same problem Hyperion would face in their nice, safe niche if they ever actually released a to-be-paid-for OS4.1.

So you agree with me then - Hyperion is completely justifed in locking down OS4 to specific hardware (much like Apple is doing, the difference being that Hyperion's using obscure hardware and Apple is using DRM).