@Arko

Quote:

performance per price ratio. Something ACube missed to do.

I think we both know that conditions changed since the time of PIOS. ACube has relatively successful business - third motherboard model on the market and good name in the Amiga community. One can say their marketing strategy works better than those of PIOS.

@thread

"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated"

Here - LINK - is something most interesting. Especially
due to some of the comments made regarding ppc.

It's a good read, no matter which side of the fence you're on.

@Mechanic

Quote:

Magic

Best post so far.

Wow! My account is still active after 2.5 years away!

@polka.

Quote:

"The timeline for development will extend from the initial release, in 'Summer 2001' to the release of OS5 'late next year' (Winter 2002)." Source Further, in a development update (dated 21 January 2002), Hyperion stated that "As we have taken on more work (Intuition etc.) and folded some of the functionality originally planned for OS 4.2 into OS 4.0, this inevitably means the original February release-date might slip somewhat but all in all we believe that the end-result will be technologically

pfft

_________________
Power Mac G4 "Quicksilver 2002"
800Mhz, 1.5GB RAM, Radeon 8500
MorphOS 2.7 (Registered)
$225 total spent!

@redrumloa

Welcome back!

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@KingKong

Quote:

KingKong wrote: @damocles The Amiga rights (patents, ...) may be quite cheap because there is (except for the name) no need to buy them exclusivly.

As for Amiga related patents, ACER (via Gateway 2000) says Hi.

PS; I own ACER Iconia W500 tablet PC/netbook convertible...

Quote:

AmigaOS is no dead end - Intel and MSwindows more likely are. Admittedly someone must convince Germany (or the EU) that AmigaOS can be a better choice than Linux and I can't do this because I don't know enough of these operating systems. The question is not: could it be? The question is: why hasn't it already happen?

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/20803
Intel posts record revenue.

Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 03:39 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 03:33 AM.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, this thread was about something Dave Haynie said about Natami and the X1000. Just sayin'

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

@DAX

Quote:

DAX wrote: @Hammer great stuff. However we were more like talking about 50 (64) sandy bridge cores. CPUs with "that many" won't be out very soon

Intel is already shipping 10 core Xeon E7 (32 nm process tech based).

Larrabee has 512bit wide SIMD which is better than SandyBridge's 256bit wide AVX SIMD.

Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 03:49 AM.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@-pekr-

Quote:

Power efficient and Cortex A15 generation being powerfull enough. Heck, even some recent phones can do 3D FullHD video playback with ARM related GPUs.

AMD C-50 APU can also do HDMI 1.4 1080p Blu-Ray 3D (H.264/VC1).

PS; I'm aware of Samsung Orion (AMD Cortex A9 based) which includes video acceleration hardware.

Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:20 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:16 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:14 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:03 AM.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @Kremlar Quote: Sounds like a single core 3.46 P4 released in 2004 would blow it out of the water, especially since AmigaOS does not support dual core processors. 3.4E GHz Pentium 4 (single core) 1484 SpecInt2000 1492 SpecFp2000 TDP: above 100W (not counting needed chipset on motherboard of course) Next try?

Current Intel Xeon E7-8870 (10 SB core) @ 2.4Ghz has 130 watts TDP i.e. ~13 watts for each SB core.

Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:09 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:08 AM.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@jingof

Quote:

jingof wrote: @Forcie-NatamiTeam Quote: For one, you can claim real Amiga cred there -- doing things the Amiga way. You're not just a PC with a PowerPC CPU and some VGA chip trying to make the claim of being an Amiga. This logic is just plain wrong - and surprising coming from a Sage of Amiga lore. I've heard this many times before. That "next generation" Amiga's aren't really Amiga's simply because they are so different from the classics. Or because it shares components with 'evil' PCs. If that logic holds, then today's Macs are not TRUELY Macs because they are so different from classic Macs. Heck, if Dave Haynie and the original Amiga team were still producing new Amigas, they would likely be unrecognizably different by now. Distance from the classics cannot be the measure of "Amiganess." Otherwise, a "modern" future for this platform (or any other) is an impossibility. Evolve or Die.

At last something worth reading... exactly! Exactly!

And these very same people who go on about an Amiga not being an Amiga because it hasn't got custom chips turn around and go, who needs to use floppy disks anymore? Yes, I'm pointing at you! LOL

The Amigas custom chips were just a design you know and each chip did something cool for the system. Eventually all the chips would have been phased out just like RTG as the years went by...

I believe most people who truely believe this notion are simply finding a justification to create there own closure on the Amiga... it suits them for whatever reason not to pursue it any longer and that's fine but FFS don't run the modern movement down... It ain't your ride anymore so bow our gracefully eh?

Like I've preached for many years now, I have never left the Amiga, I have masses of old Amiga models and have 3 newer systems soon to be 4 and then 5 actually since I need to get a 460 for my collection too...

I've never stopped enjoying computing, you don't see me post day after day rising issues do you? When I get my X1000 I'll start the new road of programming and I tell you, that's very exciting Instead of just mucking around compiling I'm going to actually be able to understand what things are doing and directly change...!

Take a leaf out of my book, accept what you are and be happy and leave others alone.

@Jingof well done! I was beginning to worry I was one of the few with this kind of insight left on these boards... as you see, I don't post very often anymore...

_________________
~Yes I am a Kiwi, No, I did not appear as an extra in 'Lord of the Rings'~
1x AmigaOne X5000 2.0GHz 2gM RadeonR9280X AOS4.x
3x AmigaOne X1000 1.8GHz 2gM RadeonHD7970 AOS4.x

Deleted - duplicate post

Last edited by gregthecanuck on 21-Apr-2011 at 04:44 AM.

Quote:

@Hammer Current Intel Xeon E7-8870 (10 SB core) @ 2.4Ghz has 130 watts TDP i.e. ~13 watts for each SB core.

That E7-8870 on Intel's current price list will set you back a cool $4,616.00.

Also of note is that Intel has barely changed their pricing for ages. With AMD not really competing in the mid-to-high-end segments like they once did the Intel pricing has remained stagnant. No surprise Intel's profits are up lately, even with PC shipments down.

@gregthecanuck

Quote:

gregthecanuck wrote: Quote: @Hammer Current Intel Xeon E7-8870 (10 SB core) @ 2.4Ghz has 130 watts TDP i.e. ~13 watts for each SB core. That E7-8870 on Intel's current price list will set you back a cool $4,616.00. Also of note is that Intel has barely changed their pricing for ages. With AMD not really competing in the mid-to-high-end segments like they once did the Intel pricing has remained stagnant. No surprise Intel's profits are up lately, even with PC shipments down.

E7-8870 was launched in the month April i.e. in Q2 2011 not Q1 2011 results.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

Quote:

More importantly, the MorphOS guys have always vehemently denied that they stole any code.

The MorphOS project came from Phase V... after Phase V ended, former employees started up BPlan (eg, "Plan B"), who eventually merged with a couple folks from Thendic France to form Genesi.

Now, I do not have direct personal knowledge of all MorphOS sources. But back when Phase 5 was working on their "C Exec" and other things, starting to re-create AmigaOS themselves in the mid-1990s, I was working with Andy Finkel at Amiga Technologies. The Phase 5 guys were really after AT to use tome of their stuff (and pay them, natch). Andy did a code review of the C Kernel, and found it was copied from AmigaOS source code. In fact, even the comments were copied, assembler to C.

Maybe MorphOS is clean, maybe not. Maybe no one actually knows. But that's such a transgression, I wouldn't trust anyone involved in Phase 5, or any code that can be traced back to Phase 5.

@itix
They still don't understand clean room development. If you have seen the Amiga source code, you cannot produce a legally separate work-alike. So any copied comments are absolute proof that the code is dirty. And they're not rejecting my claim, if you go back into those linked documents, that the comments were copied.

Point in fact -- I just don't care about MorphOS. It's not AmigaOS, it might as well be Windows for all I care. If you like it, I'm pretty certain at this point no new legal entanglements are going to happen. If the MorphOS people would like to swear in public that not a line of code or comment is copied from the AmigaOS sources or derived from the Phase 5 code (fruits of a poisonous tree, in legal terms), I will not mention MorphOS again.

Quote:

COBRA wrote: @WolfToTheMoon Quote: x86 on commodity hardware would bring in more hobbyists and more devs Would it? Why would someone even remotely consider using and developing for an OS on their x86 hardware that has no memory protection, supports only a handful of old gfx cards with limited or no 3D support with old outdated APIs and hardly any software of interest and it even costs quite a bit of money around 100 EUR, when there are plenty of alternatives with far more capability, many of which are free?

It would, simply because anyone who wanted to run AmigaOS could do so on a $200 piece of hardware. And perhaps, it AmigaOS was actually selling to anyone in non-trivial numbers, TPTB might have a little money for updating it to work on actual 1990s-vintage hardware.

In short, precisely the same reasons exist to run AmigaOS on x86 or ARM as any other platform, but the barrier to entry is significantly less.

Quote:

AROS is available for x86 and it doesn't look like it's winning over the PC developer community.

Nothing like this happens overnight. And the very fact there have been so many different Amiga and Amiga-like projects means that many efforts have been repeatedly duplicated. Sure, this happens... BSD vs. Linux, for example.

The fact is, people do run alternative OSs on x86 hardware all the time. There was a time when Linux was smaller than AmigaOS, as a community. Now it's on more machines than Windows. So it is possible for these things to grow. As it stands todays, the AmigaOS community is shrinking... people give up and quit every year. New ones rarely if ever join in and take their place.

MacOS is a religion. That's actually a pretty good thing for Apple.

There is no cheap Mac hardware, it's all overpriced. Ok, maybe if you buy something used and ancient... PPC Macs haven't been made in 6-7 years. And what you get for that expense is MacOS. If you're not interested in MacOS, you don't buy a Mac. If you're doing serious code development, you don't use an ancient computer, either.

@itix

Oh... and by-the-way, comments ARE part of the copyright of a code. If you copy the comments, you have infringed on the copyright.

@Hammer

Quote:

Current Intel Xeon E7-8870 (10 SB core) @ 2.4Ghz has 130 watts TDP i.e. ~13 watts for each SB core.

Our discussion with Kremlar was about year 2004 technology... I don´t think Xeon E7-8870 was available in 2004.

Quote:

This CPU was only used in aerospace and military applications

Many of which typically use very underpowered CPUs that have some other figure of merit (rad hardened, for example).

Quote:

we have a few benchmarks VS G5, made by an aerospace company using optimized code which resulted in the PA6T outperforming the G5 by several orders of magnitude (and by extension also x86 CPUs younger than 2004) but I don't mention it because it tells us nothing at all.

I for one would be quite interested in seeing the PA6T performance 100x or more the speed of a PPC970. THAT would be something to brag about. I'm pretty sure an i7 can't claim such performance.