@Helgis

You seem to change your mind alot these days..

@Tomas

I have been worried and confused. That's why...

@EntilZha

Quote:

EntilZha wrote: @Helgis Quote: it would be much easier to get x86 hardware AND software, only ported to AmigaOS 4/5 just because it also uses x86. Why not? Sigh... Why do people always think that x86 means more software ?

The installed base on an x86 based OS has vastly greater potential than the 2000+/- Eyetech has been able to manage, and who knows how many boards Eyetech will decide to make in the future. Developers wonder, then they leave for greener pastures.

If AmigaOS were x86 based, would developers have to wonder if the installed base had a cap to it, as it seems to now?

Quote:

This notion is really absolutely beyond my comprehension.

I hope this changes before it's too late. If you, like the software developers for AmigaOS applications, had to rely on "installed base" rather than the embedded market for your potential profits, I think you'd change your mind.

Quote:

FYI, just because something runs on Windows doesn't mean it will run on any x86 platform/OS. It doesn't.

?

Quote:

And no, it's also not easier to port to x86. Sure, you don't have the typcial endian problematic, but that's only a fraction of the porting process...

The hardware's there though. Does a port being "easy" justify a port to a platform you can't buy a board for? I could be wrong, but it looks like when OS4 is released, there won't be any boards readily available for purchase to run it. The AmigaOne is still less available and harder to find than the classic Amiga's it was meant to replace.

If the boards were readily available and cheap, an x86 port might be moot, but they're not, and it's not.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@T_Bone

The installed base on an x86 based OS has vastly greater potential than the 2000+/- Eyetech has been able to manage, and who knows how many boards Eyetech will decide to make in the future. Developers wonder, then they leave for greener pastures.

I don't think the state of the installed userbase on the x86 platform (Windows or Linux) has any relevance to Amiga's success or demise in regards to PowerPC or x86.

If AmigaOS were x86 based, would developers have to wonder if the installed base had a cap to it, as it seems to now?

We'll see how successful Apple is with its transition from PowerPC to Intel. There is speculation now that there is even less reason to develop software for Mac and Windows when they both reside on the same CPU architecture. Steve Ballmer even made that statement. Again, we'll see what happens there.

The hardware's there though. Does a port being "easy" justify a port to a platform you can't buy a board for? I could be wrong, but it looks like when OS4 is released, there won't be any boards readily available for purchase to run it. The AmigaOne is still less available and harder to find than the classic Amiga's it was meant to replace.

I think it would be suicidal for Amiga (right now) to be ported to x86 because of the vast amount of different motherboards and chipsets to support. And let's face it, people expect everything to work when cobbling together an x86 box, and the Amiga (and its resources) just doesn't have the capacity to meet that requirement. Linux is just now becoming very good at plug-n-play with most hardware components and the Linux developer community far exceeds the size of the Amiga developer community and the fact that Linux has major corporate backing by the likes of IBM, HP and Intel (to name a few).

If the boards were readily available and cheap, an x86 port might be moot, but they're not, and it's not.

Well once Amiga OS4 makes its major release debut, then the interests and seriousness of those wanting to buy an Amiga will become greater and more clear. But here is the other major hurdle; increasing the amount of ISVs to the Amiga developer community. The success of any computer platform relies on its amount and availability of software and the many categories to fill with software titles. The recruiting of Amiga coders from both the inside and the outside (of the community) is a necessity as well as a major priority. Applications need to be created to fulfill the needs of many. People want plenty of choice in regards to apps and what they do (a solution to a problem). Creating simple, but useful applications is not hard. It all starts with a simple idea and then you add the complexity as the application evolves due to customer demand and feature requests/updates.

Last edited by AmigaMac on 26-Jun-2005 at 07:58 PM.

_________________

@AmigaMac

Quote:

I think it would be suicidal for Amiga (right now) to be ported to x86 because of the vast amount of different motherboards and chipsets to support. And let's face it, people expect everything to work when cobbling together an x86 box, and the Amiga (and its resources) just doesn't have the capacity to meet that requirement.

Actually, that might not be as true now as it was when it was first said. Nowadays you can buy motherboards with everything built into them, and the builtin hardware doesn't suck any more because of the HTPC phenomenon. For example look at VIA mini-ITX boards. This is the same as the uA1, a format that both Eyetech and Genesi seem to like. A port of OS4 to X86 with only enough drivers to support the VIA chips used in those boards would be exactly like what Apple is doing. A VIA epia SP (DDR 400 RAM, running at 1.3GHz) costs $230 at mini-itx.com, is the same form factor as the uA1, and comes with builtin audio, video (with TV out), network and USB 2.0. Once OS4 is done, it should be just a few months to write the necessary device drivers and HAL (assuming that OS4 is mostly C and not assembler). One could still argue that there is a PCI slot in the VIA board and so an unlimited number of drivers needs to be written, but that also applies to the uA1. Since OS4 would be written to run only on those boards, most people wouldn't be able to just get a copy off Kazaa and run it on their regular PCs - they would need to buy a board specifically for OS4. If those boards are sold in nice "Amiga" branded boxes with some bundled extras to sweeten the deal, I don't see much of a piracy problem. Yes, there would the the penny pinchers who buy bare boards to save themselves a few bucks, but then all Hyperion has to do is say they will not support OS4 unless it's run on an amiga-branded machine.

If Eyetech and Hyperion want to expand the amiga brand, they will have no choice but to do something like this. The average Joe on the street (or Mr Joe Industrialist) is going to take a look at a $800 uA1, compare it to any comparable boards on the market, and wonder why we're using hard to find hardware to run the OS on. If on the other hand the idea is to remain the last bastion of PPC purity, then I guess $800 is not that much to pay...

@CodeSmith

Wait I really think CELL could be the solution for the Amiga here. Did you see the link provided by one in the other topic "Is THIS the Mystery Device?". Yes, BIG size, but this can be resized to a smaller, acceptable size

I really think CELL can do it. The current CELL CPU demonstrated on that board tested with Linux, runs at 2.4Ghz, and i'm sure we're talking about 64-bit RISC-architecture here. This is really amazing!

@AmigaMac

Quote:

AmigaMac wrote: @T_Bone The installed base on an x86 based OS has vastly greater potential than the 2000+/- Eyetech has been able to manage, and who knows how many boards Eyetech will decide to make in the future. Developers wonder, then they leave for greener pastures. I don't think the state of the installed userbase on the x86 platform (Windows or Linux) has any relevance to Amiga's success or demise in regards to PowerPC or x86.

Non sequiter, I was replying to "Why do people always think that x86 means more software ?"

Like I said, the reason people think (including developers, who make the software) that x86 means more software is because there's no cap on the installed base. Eyetech is a bottleneck at the moment, capping the installed base to what they manufacture.

Developers are hesitant to port/make applications to a capped base, as it means less sales, and no market growth above the cap. See the current Papyrus office situation for an example, they only required preorders for the capped-base markets. The Pegasos didn't require a preorder for it's port.

Quote:

If AmigaOS were x86 based, would developers have to wonder if the installed base had a cap to it, as it seems to now? We'll see how successful Apple is with its transition from PowerPC to Intel. (snip)

You are talking about something else completely, and it's not following the thread. The point I made was a specific rebutal to a question about why software developement would be more successfull on an x86 platform as compared to the AmigaOne. this is not about the success of x86 vs PPC. I'm not blindly injecting "x86 rulezz" comments here, the point was targeted and specificly directed at a question different from the one you think I'm answering.

Quote:

There is speculation now that there is even less reason to develop software for Mac and Windows when they both reside on the same CPU architecture. Steve Ballmer even made that statement. Again, we'll see what happens there.

He also said Developers Developers Developers. To attract Developers Developers Developers, you need to have Installed Base Installed Base Installed Base. Developers are directly porportional to the installed base. Cap the installed base, you cap Developers.

Steve Balmer already has Installed Base Installed Base Installed base, so he has no need to dance around like a monkey sweating and chanting for it. He made this comment because he's afraid of losing... (wait for it...) Installed Base.

Quote:

I think it would be suicidal for Amiga (right now) to be ported to x86 because of the vast amount of different motherboards and chipsets(frustrated snip)

Does the PPC version support "vast amounts of different motherboards and chipsets?"

No?

So why are you moving the goalposts when speaking about an x86 port?

Running on x86 does not mean "running on every freaking chipset out there"

Hell, if we picked *ONE X86 MOTHERBOARD*, and it only ran on that ONE BOARD, we'd be in better shape than we are now with regards to hardware price, availability, warranty, service, performance, and peace of mind that the chipset vendors website will still be there next month.

Even DISCONTINUED x86 motherboards edge out the AmigaOne in these areas.

I *understand* their reasons for the proprietary nature of this venture, it's because they have their sights set on the embedded market, but the sacrifices and decisions being made for the embedded market venture are NOT complimentary to the desktop Amiga market.

If someone could demonstrate specifically how their current [embedded] goals are complementary to the Amiga Desktop market, I'd be interested in hearing it.

Last edited by T_Bone on 26-Jun-2005 at 09:11 PM.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@T_Bone

Non sequiter, I was replying to "Why do people always think that x86 means more software ?"

Like I said, the reason people think (including developers, who make the software) that x86 means more software is because there's no cap on the installed base. Eyetech is a bottleneck at the moment, capping the installed base to what they manufacture.

Developers are hesitant to port/make applications to a capped base, as it means less sales, and no market growth above the cap. See the current Papyrus office situation for an example, they only required preorders for the capped-base markets. The Pegasos didn't require a preorder for it's port.

Sorry if I didn't catch your sarcasm.

Does the PPC version support "vast amounts of different motherboards and chipsets?"

No?

So why are you moving the goalposts when speaking about an x86 port?

I'm moving those goal posts because I remember (like it was yesterday) how frustrating it was to try and get BeOS to work on whatever system I may have or had. Be Inc. learned the hard way, Amiga (meaning Hyperion) shouldn't go through the same motions.

Running on x86 does not mean "running on every freaking chipset out there"

Hell, if we picked *ONE X86 MOTHERBOARD*, and it only ran on that ONE BOARD, we'd be in better shape than we are now with regards to hardware price, availability, warranty, service, performance, and peace of mind that the chipset vendors website will still be there next month.

Yeah, and which motherboard will get the design win for Amiga? You'll have folks arguing for weeks on which mobo/chipset should be the "chosen one"! And who is going to provide the warranty, service and support? Linux can barely get that luxury in the PC world now, much less the Amiga operating system. Okay if the hardware blows up, that's one thing, but if something doesn't work in software (including the BIOS or Open Firmware), I seriously doubt the vendor (and its support staff) is going to be Amiga support friendly, they're lucky enough to know what Linux is.

I *understand* their reasons for the proprietary nature of this venture, it's because they have their sights set on the embedded market, but the sacrifices and decisions being made for the embedded market venture are NOT complimentary to the desktop Amiga market.

Because it's PowerPC does not mean its automatically proprietary. As someone pointed out to me recently: IBM even offers an open design spec for PowerPC, of course Amiga is not built on that, but it's there anyway.

Alan Redhouse of Eyetech has already stated numerous times that since the embedded market is fruitful, the market sectors that MicroA1 can enter and ship to, the better for the overall platform, meaning that it will lower the price point for uA1 motherboards in the future (economy of scale).

I'm not against the Amiga going x86, but being that the decision has already been made and Hyperion has no interest in changing the game plan, it doesn't matter anyway. We're just here wasting our time talking about what could have been when in we should really be focusing on what we can do with what we have currently and make the best of it.

It's time to get a grip and start being optimistic for once. OS4 is near final release, which will hopefully bump up demand for MicroA1s, which will increase the Installed Base to hopefully bring on the Developers we need in order for the Amiga to thrive.

Amiga's future is in our hands!

If Harley Davidson came make a major comeback, then it's a no brainer for the Amiga platform to succeed as well.

The following quote says it best...

"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work"

Thomas Edison

Last edited by AmigaMac on 26-Jun-2005 at 09:49 PM.

_________________

@Helgis

Nowadays with computers it's no longer about technology - all CPUs are internally very similar (minimalistic RISC core with an opcode layer on top), and all peripherals are literally exactly the same. There is an OS that runs on 90% of the hardware you can buy, and another that runs on everything else. All applications that exist on one of these OSs has an equivalent (or a port) on the other. This is what people expect from computers. Given all this, the only things that matter are quality of manufacture, price and availability: buying a computer in 2005 is just like buying any other consumer electronics. Amiga computers need to be able to compete on price and -especially- availability. A motherboard that you need to order months in advance is not going to do very well against a board that you can just walk into a shop and buy, regarless of how cool its CPU is or what OS it's running.

@CodeSmith

Then it doesn't matter if Amiga uses the CELL technology Amiga could save the day, the world, the galaxy, the universe! You want to survive? Have an AmigaCell

AmigaCell - Soon to a DNA-structure near you

Last edited by Helgis on 26-Jun-2005 at 09:55 PM.

@AmigaMac

I don't see how the release of OS4 is going to significantly change the demand of uA1s - Alan has already said that the 'enthusiast' market accounts for a tiny percentage of the sales they expect from uA1s. Sure, there will be a small surge, but industrial customers will most likely be running Linux. If you've just spent a ton of money on computers for your company, would you rather run an OS that is over a decade old, is well understood and has been worked on by thousands of people, or an OS that's brand new, it's hard to find qualified programmers for, and has a dev team consisting of a couple dozen people who needed to suspend the project from time to time because they needed to work on something else to pay their bills? To us, those things make OS4 unique, and the heroic dedication of the dev team adds to the coolness factor. To someone running a business, they are an unnecessary risk.

@T_Bone

"I *understand* their reasons for the proprietary nature of this venture, it's because they have their sights set on the embedded market, but the sacrifices and decisions being made for the embedded market venture are NOT complimentary to the desktop Amiga market.

If someone could demonstrate specifically how their current [embedded] goals are complementary to the Amiga Desktop market, I'd be interested in hearing it."


I'm afraid you are somewhat misguided here. First of all, there would be nothing to discuss in terms of OS 4.0 if Hyperion hadn't taken on the task of developing it. You are presupposing that somebody would have stepped up to the plate to develop a real OS 4.0 (and not a souped up emulator running 3.9) for x86. Trust me, there were no takers.

As it stands, the Amiga "desktop" market is very small and not self-sufficient. Nobody in his right mind would invest in continued development of OS 4 for whatever CPU architecture if the only goal would be "desktop". There is no economic return there going up against Windows, MacOSX, Linux, Zeta and have a dozen other contenders.

Secondly, I'm sure you understand that whatever embedded system you are targetting, you need a development system. Enter AmigaOS "desktop".

_________________

@AmigaMac

Because it's PowerPC does not mean its automatically proprietary. As someone pointed out to me recently: IBM even offers an open design spec for PowerPC, of course Amiga is not built on that, but it's there anyway.

Erm.. Looks like "openPPC" hasn't been update since 2001...

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Hyperionmp

Is there someone who knows much about the CELL thing and what it can do for the Amiga, then it must be people like Hyperion Thanks, HyperionMP

@CodeSmith

You're talking more along the lines of the chicken and the egg factor, which came (or should come) first? Amiga is stuck in this mindset. YES, people have to make money and I'm one of them. But if all those folks making horse wagons back in the day would have had that same conventional wisdom, we'd all still be living the real Little House on the Prairie. Luckily the entrepreneur Henry Ford saw a future in the horseless carriage, even though people laughed at such an idea and said; "Get a horse"!. Sometimes it's worth taking risks. Steve Jobs sold his VW Bus to invest and take a risk on Apple Computer (with his buddy Steve Wozniak). Bill Gates dropped out of college to take a risk on Microsoft (with his buddy Paul Allen). Jamie Krueger just recently took a risk for his new company BitByBit Software (for the Amiga), and it must have been worth it for him, because he believes in taking risk and does not follow conventional wisdom of most. The only way the Amiga platform is going to sell and be successful is by what people like I mentioned above have done or are doing. There is risk with anything you do; whether it's climbing Mount Everest or starting the next small business that may become a Fortune 500 company a decade later, there is risk, but visionaries overlook risks to reap the possible rewards for their optimism, hardwork and dedication. Alan Redhouse took risk even getting Eyetech involved with the Amiga platform and its venerable future, but he has no regrets because he already knew the risks before hand.

What's going to have to happen is this; build demand around the Amiga and they will come. It doesn't take a single company with a group of 500 software engineers to do it (all software companies started out small with simple ideas). James Gosling and Java can atest to not needing 30,000 engineers to make a great idea work. It takes a few ideas along with some programming knowledge and a little bit of patience and discipline and then before you know it; a few good software applications are born. I guess the hardest part of this currently is getting your mind and attitude past the barriers of entry and just do it for once.

Last edited by AmigaMac on 26-Jun-2005 at 10:39 PM.
Last edited by AmigaMac on 26-Jun-2005 at 10:38 PM.

_________________

IMO Cell is, like Linux, just hype.

Cells type "CPUs" have been promised for a while now and they never materialized.

Let's wait for Eyetech to deliver the goods before day dreaming about Cell and running AmigaOS4 on it.

_________________
- Ronald

All beer tastes bad.

@Hyperionmp

Quote:

Hyperionmp wrote: @T_Bone "I *understand* their reasons for the proprietary nature of this venture, it's because they have their sights set on the embedded market, but the sacrifices and decisions being made for the embedded market venture are NOT complimentary to the desktop Amiga market. If someone could demonstrate specifically how their current [embedded] goals are complementary to the Amiga Desktop market, I'd be interested in hearing it." I'm afraid you are somewhat misguided here. First of all, there would be nothing to discuss in terms of OS 4.0 if Hyperion hadn't taken on the task of developing it.

We'd be discussing it, but some of the nouns would be different I imagine.

Quote:

You are presupposing that somebody would have stepped up to the plate to develop a real OS 4.0 (and not a souped up emulator running 3.9) for x86. Trust me, there were no takers.

My problem isn't *with* OS4, although Amithlon and MorphOS could just as easily been labelled OS4 in the absense of your license to it, and their funtionality compared to OS4 is debatable.

Quote:

As it stands, the Amiga "desktop" market is very small and not self-sufficient.

If that's truely the case, then why, in your response to Bernd, did you mention the need for the Amiga market to support the venture into the embedded market?

(I swear you're trying to gaslight me )

If the proceeds from sales of Amiga desktop products are being used to fund your venture into the embedded market, how does that reconcile itself with your statement that these sales haven't been self sufficient? How is it funding your venture into the embedded market then?

Quote:

Nobody in his right mind would invest in continued development of OS 4 for whatever CPU architecture if the only goal would be "desktop"

There are 2000 AW.net members here who have done EXACTLY that. They spent the price you asked to continue developement of OS4 for the Desktop. Were they not in their right mind in doing so? They all spend a considerable amount of money to continue the developement of what you just stated is a target nobody would invest in.

Quote:

There is no economic return there going up against Windows, MacOSX, Linux, Zeta and have a dozen other contenders.

Who's going against them? Most people here have Windows machines already, and invested in what you said they wouldn't above, in spite of this.

Quote:

Secondly, I'm sure you understand that whatever embedded system you are(snip)

Like I said before, I *understand*, but don't *appreciate*, ie: I don't care about the embedded market. If I did, BeIA would have been ideal, as it runs on x86, the developer systems are any PC that ran the FREE developer system OS (BeOS), and, well, even that didn't work out... yet the desktop lives on. (I've just purchased 5 myself BTW)

You've explained how the Desktop complements the embedded market, but not the other way around, other than, "well, if we wern't doing it, it wouldn't be done at all" and true as that may be, it's not an effective marketing slogan.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@T_Bone

"My problem isn't *with* OS4, although Amithlon and MorphOS could just as easily been labelled OS4 in the absense of your license to it, and their funtionality compared to OS4 is debatable."

You obviously never used OS 4 otherwise you would not compare it to Amithlon, OS 3.9 running inside an emulated environment on top of Linux. There is simply no comparison possible after 3.5 years of work by dozens of developers.

You're completely missing the point, thinking in terms of desktop, an increasingly irrelevant and artificial concept.

Even Bill Gates has admitted as much.

Hyperion also doesn't need any lectures from anybody on customer support because one of the reasons for going PPC is exactly because of all these thousands of people paying good money for PPC accelerators. Between 6000 to 10000 if you must know.

_________________

@T_Bone

Overlooked this gem of yours:

"Developers are hesitant to port/make applications to a capped base, as it means less sales, and no market growth above the cap. See the current Papyrus office situation for an example, they only required preorders for the capped-base markets. The Pegasos didn't require a preorder for it's port."

First of all, I can cite counter examples. Secondly, Titan has been a very vocal pro MorphOS company (and anti AmigaOne company) which explains their hesitation to support OS 4.

You simply don't have all the facts (indeed, you lack most of the facts as is evident from your comparison of Amithlon to AmigaOS 4).

_________________

@AmigaMac

Quote:

Sorry if I didn't catch your sarcasm.

What sarcasm?

Quote:

Quote: Does the PPC version support "vast amounts of different motherboards and chipsets?" No? So why are you moving the goalposts when speaking about an x86 port? I'm moving those goal posts because I remember (like it was yesterday) how frustrating it was to try and get BeOS to work on whatever system I

Again, WHO is talking about supporting multiple configurations? I'm certainly not, The PPC port certainly doesn't, you are the only one who mentioned supporting multiple hardware, so this man you are knocking down is a straw one.

Quote:

Yeah, and which motherboard will get the design win for Amiga?

Whichever board they decide to support obviously. Choice isn't a problem, it's a solution. Right NOW it's a problem.

Quote:

Because it's PowerPC does not mean its automatically proprietary. As someone pointed out to me recently: IBM even offers an open design spec for PowerPC, of course Amiga is not built on that, but it's there anyway.

If there were a reasonably priced PPC board, reasonable features, reasonable support, reasonable warranty, reasonable upgrade path, reasonable availability, GO FOR IT! I'm reasonable. I don't see a reasonable solution here though.

Quote:

Alan Redhouse of Eyetech has already stated numerous times that since the embedded market is fruitful

The embedded market is more cutthroat than the Desktop market. Even Microsoft are sweating their junk over the competition.

Quote:

I'm not against the Amiga going x86, but being that the decision has already been made and Hyperion has no interest in changing the game plan, it doesn't matter anyway. We're just here wasting our time talking about what could have been

Well, yea, but that's what the thread's about, might as well go with the flow

Quote:

when in we should really be focusing on what we can do with what we have currently and make the best of it.

Most of us don't have it yet.

Quote:

It's time to get a grip and start being optimistic for once. OS4 is near final release, which will hopefully bump up demand for MicroA1s, which will increase the Installed Base to hopefully bring on the Developers we need in order for the Amiga to thrive.

"One more production run" isn't going to solve the hardware availability. The Cell could, but IMHO it's a pie in the sky idea. I'm willing to be proven wrong here, but if it were up to me, I'd go with something with my feet planted firmly on the ground. Eyetechs teething problems with the PPC boards are still being resolved, an unknown, untested, unproven, brand spanking new Cell architecture is a risky proposition.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde