I'm a huge fan of the "Amiga Forever" system. The videos, the demos, the games, the preconfigured environments.. its AWESOME!


Wouldn't it be cool if OS4 could run on a regular PC using an updated version of PearPC? The Intel i7 quad core systems are insanely powerful, compared to the PowerPC603 which is one of the most common processors used by OS4 today.

I would like to start a bounty to make this happen!

Is anyone else interested?


I would seriously consider starting the bounty at $10,000 of my own money, if the conditions were right. I consider this a financial investment and would like to see some kind of return on my investment.

Can anyone else match or beat $10,000? (There used to be several millionaires lurking around here, so $10k is like lunch money to them!)

Would asking a minimum of $1000 be too much to ask from each donator?


Thanks for reading this thread, be positive and post some intelligent comments please! No trolling!

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!

@Darth_X

x86 port will be a better option than PearPC & and again i would go PearPC than slow sam.

_________________
http://aros-exec.org/

http://serk118.blogspot.com/

@serk118

Quote:

serk118 wrote: @Darth_X x86 port will be a better option than PearPC & and again i would go PearPC than slow sam.

It would be much faster to get a product to market that runs on an updated PearPC than a complete port of OS4 to x86, which would take years (assuming Hyperion hasn't started a port at this time).

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!

@Darth_X

I can also port my 68k apps to AOS4 by PearPC ...
and also run AOS4 on my laptop...

Last edited by serk118 on 26-Aug-2009 at 05:23 PM.

_________________
http://aros-exec.org/

http://serk118.blogspot.com/

@Darth_X

I don't think that OS4 would be a good fit for Amiga Forever. The main market for AF is probably for nostalgic former enthusiasts to be able to use the games and apps they used to have on Classic hardware. While a few might be interested in OS4, I doubt they'd be willing to pay much for it. Having OS4 hosted like that also seems to devalue the experience. I'd say the best option would be a system that can be dual-booted, perhaps with the ability to run within an OS as well but not through AF.

Speed wouldn't be an issue - a modern x86 system with decent emulation would probably outpace an A1, let alone a SAM. Not entirely sure how it would work with devices such as graphics and sound cards, however: Does PearPC work like Amithlon (the OS can directly access graphics etc)? If that was the case, lots of new drivers would be needed and it wouldn't run on a lot of hardware. If graphics and sound were virtualised (kinda like UAE does for P96 and AHI) then that wouldn't be an issue though I guess there'd be a performance hit. Either way it would probably be possible technically.

Here's the big problem: you know how Google gives a drop-down with suggestions of popular searches when you start typing? Type in "amigaos4" and the top 10 includes "amiga os4 download", "amiga os4.1 torrent" "amiga os4 torrent" and "amiga os4.1 download". Release OS4 as a software-only solution and 90% of the people who use it won't pay for it.

The biggest issue with piracy would be if it ate into Hyperion's revenue. Hopefully anyone willing to by OS4 for the SAM at the moment would pay for an x86 version, although given that there are 4.1 ISO images on filesharing sites (presumably uploaded by SAM owners) this probably isn't the case. ACube would also do very badly, I suspect - while in theory people buying OS4 for x86 could decide to buy dedicated hardware, the current systems would have few advantages compared to an x86 emulated solution (providing it can be dual-booted and not just ran from within Windows). That said, even if 90% of the users were pirates, there would still be thousands more paying customers out there supporting development for the platform...

_________________

@Darth_X

Quote:

compared to the PowerPC603 which is one of the most common processors used by OS4 today.

BlizzardPPC is rare and 440EP isn´t PowerPC603...


How fast could be such emulation?
Computer of my brother (Core 2 Quad 2400 MHz) - 18.3 SpecInt2006... cca 274 SpecInt95
Emulated CPU (under QEMU, without accelerator) is as fast as Pentium MMX 200 MHz - cca 6 SpecInt95
Emulated CPU (under WinUAE, JIT, no MMU emulation) is as fast as Pentium II 400 MHz - cca 15-17 SpecInt95

Compare these numbers to SAM (440EP 666 MHz - cca 25 SpecInt95) or A1 (750FX 800 MHz - 38 SpecInt95)

@pavlor

My Bad! I should have said G2/G3 class processor instead, which is what the 603 and 440 are.

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!

PearPC is not the only solution.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickTransit


A more complete list including ones using PowerPC as a guest virtual processor.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_platform_virtual_machines

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

@alx

Quote:

Release OS4 as a software-only solution and 90% of the people who use it won't pay for it.

OK, So let's say 90% of users won't pay for it. That means 10% of the users will pay for it. Let's also then assume than 100,000 people are using it. That's 10,000 *paying* customers. How many paying customers are there with the current hard-soft solution?

@Pleng

Quote:

Pleng wrote: @alx Quote: Release OS4 as a software-only solution and 90% of the people who use it won't pay for it. OK, So let's say 90% of users won't pay for it. That means 10% of the users will pay for it. Let's also then assume than 100,000 people are using it. That's 10,000 *paying* customers. How many paying customers are there with the current hard-soft solution?

500?

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!

@Pleng

The 90% figure was only an example, not even an educated guess As I pointed out though, and as you mention, freeing OS4 from PPC hardware would probably bring in a fair few extra sales (although it won't be massive numbers at the current price). I guess you could compare it to the excessive piracy of Windows in many countries; while MS would obviously prefer them to pay, it does help maintain the Windows monopoly by keeping a high install base and blocking Linux from entering on the desktop. I have my doubts however whether Hyperion would willingly pursue a strategy that would result in rampant piracy and likely cannibalisation of the market for SAMs, effectively making OS4 an OS that can only be run via emulation on x86.

_________________

@alx

If you continue on this 'fear of piracy' track, you aren't being positive!

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!

@pavlor
Interesting numbers. Using those, it seems that OS4 under emulation would be *approximately* anywhere from 1.6 to 4.2 times SLOWER than a 667MHz Sam, using a 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad. (This of course assumes PPC emu on x86 is somewhere between the speed of QEMU & WinUAE JIT.)

@Darth_X
I think that answers your question. And the answer is "No, I don't want OS4 running so bad on x86 emu that it'd make OS4 look terrible".

Last edited by ChrisH on 26-Aug-2009 at 07:24 PM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 26-Aug-2009 at 07:23 PM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 26-Aug-2009 at 07:22 PM.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@Darth_X

I'd say it's realism, not negativity

Looking at the speeds quoted by pavlor it also seems like things wouldn't be as good as I'd hoped from a technical point of view. I've just looked at the old PearPC page (seems they haven't done any work on it for years) however they were aiming for 1/10 of host speed. On a clock-for-clock speed that's seriously bad news. Of course, a modern processor like a Phenom II can do rather more per Mhz than the SAM's CPU, but it doesn't look like you'd get much of an advantage at all even on the best x86 hardware.

Now OS4 will cope fine with low speeds - it runs on CSPPCs after all - so OS4 under emulation like that would be OK for trying it out and toying with it. However, if an emulator meant less people wanted real hardware and so there was nothing like the SAM available, everyone would be stuck with this speed.

---edit---

That's not to say that emulated OS4 wouldn't be a bad idea (I'd certainly buy it and perhaps try a bit of development), just that there are some potentially serious downsides that would need considering. Also, if dedicated hardware can be made that's much faster than the emulation, demand for it might actually increase as people get reacquainted with the platform via emulation. It's so hard to say without an idea of what the emulation experience would be like.

Last edited by alx on 26-Aug-2009 at 07:56 PM.
Last edited by alx on 26-Aug-2009 at 07:54 PM.
Last edited by alx on 26-Aug-2009 at 07:52 PM.

_________________

@ChrisH

Quote:

Interesting numbers. Using those, it seems that OS4 under emulation would be *approximately* anywhere from 1.6 to 4.2 times SLOWER than a 667MHz Sam, using a 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad. (This of course assumes PPC emu on x86 is somewhere between the speed of QEMU & WinUAE JIT.)

Some more realistic numbers from someone who actually was experimenting with this FOR OS4. This is from main channel irc (public to all) many years ago...

wegster:ackcontrols: you said something some time back about qemu emulating a1 hardware...that ever manage to boot os4?
ackcontrols:yep
wegster:how slow was it?
wegster:assuming it would ever happen, I like the idea of selling os4 to run on emulated hardware,actually, then maybe port to native a bit at a time.
wegster:but, unsure pearpc is fast enough at all.
ackcontrols:Faster than I expected, was getting around what felt like a 400Mhz PPC.
wegster:on what actual hardware?
wegster:did you do any benchmarks on it?
ackcontrols:AMD64 Athlon 3600+ or the like.
wegster:assuming didn't lose legacy and existing software base, it's all a winner.
wegster:ahh ok, fast/recent cpu.
wegster:was that pearpc, or ?
ackcontrols:QEMU

There's much more, but that should give you some idea of what was capable many years ago. Now? Who knows?

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Quote:

number6 wrote: @ChrisH Quote: Interesting numbers. Using those, it seems that OS4 under emulation would be *approximately* anywhere from 1.6 to 4.2 times SLOWER than a 667MHz Sam, using a 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad. (This of course assumes PPC emu on x86 is somewhere between the speed of QEMU & WinUAE JIT.) Some more realistic numbers from someone who actually was experimenting with this FOR OS4. This is from main channel irc (public to all) many years ago... wegster:ackcontrols: you said something some time back about qemu emulating a1 hardware...that ever manage to boot os4? ackcontrols:yep wegster:how slow was it? wegster:assuming it would ever happen, I like the idea of selling os4 to run on emulated hardware,actually, then maybe port to native a bit at a time. wegster:but, unsure pearpc is fast enough at all. ackcontrols:Faster than I expected, was getting around what felt like a 400Mhz PPC. wegster:on what actual hardware? wegster:did you do any benchmarks on it? ackcontrols:AMD64 Athlon 3600+ or the like. wegster:assuming didn't lose legacy and existing software base, it's all a winner. wegster:ahh ok, fast/recent cpu. wegster:was that pearpc, or ? ackcontrols:QEMU There's much more, but that should give you some idea of what was capable many years ago. Now? Who knows? #6

Ohh yeah!!!! ACKcontrols is a well know reliable and reputable source of information

_________________
No PowerPC, No Fun
Make Amiga Great Again

@Fransexy

Quote:

Ohh yeah!!!! ACKcontrols is a well know reliable and reputable source of information

Heh! I knew that was coming...
Nevertheless, it's the only comments from someone who actually fiddled with it.

I found one more recent post from 2 years ago from the same poster, but based on the faster hardware available at that time:

Ackcontrols:Yeah closer to 600MHz on a celeron d at 3.3GHz.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@Darth_X
#1
I'm a huge fan of the "Amiga Forever" system...
I'm a supporter of Amiga 'for real' system.
[b]Wouldn't it be cool if OS4 could run on a regular PC using an updated version of PearPC?[/pc]
No, that's not cool because that would catering to cheap Amiga users who won't go out and buy real new Amigas or should i say SAMigas- the next gen Amigas. Break down and buy a SAM or 'shutup forever'.

_________________

@Darth_X

I never got into emulation as I prefer playing with the real deal .....why pay for an expensive PPC card for a clasic machine when you can buy a brand new Sam running OS4.1

Last edited by klx300r on 27-Aug-2009 at 03:28 AM.

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

Any thoughts on running OS4 in an 'Amiga Forever' type package for G4 Macs?

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!