@umisef

Quote:

I beg to differ. Any development which was only necessary due to the, uhm, "pecularities" of their chosen hardware could have been avoided, and the costs (and other resources, such as programmer time) for it saved.

How could you possibly know that another hardware alternative wouldn't have it's own fair share of, uhm, "pecularities"? If you get some statistics maybe you could do some guesswork on the probabilities, but to entirely rule out the possibility of running into such "pecularities" would be an impossibility. Knowing for certain is not something you do without hindsight.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@samface
Quote:

If you get some statistics maybe you could do some guesswork on the probabilities, but to entirely rule out the possibility of running into such "pecularities" would be an impossibility. Knowing for certain is not something you do without hindsight.

This is so funny, coming from someone who knows that it can't possibly be that someone else than Hyperion could have taken up on the job of developing AmigaOS4 and accused me of making "phylosophy".



However, let's just say that the tens of other OSs available for x86 proves that it's not the difficult job as you want to make it out to be.

And, once again, just look at AROS to see the most blatant proof that you're wrong. No, it didn't take 13 years to make AROS run natively on x86, it took what amounts to way less than one year of full time work of a single man.

Last edited by falemagn on 25-Jan-2006 at 02:08 PM.

_________________
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary
system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
~~ Henry Ford

@samface

Quote:

How could you possibly know that another hardware alternative wouldn't have it's own fair share of, uhm, "pecularities"?

You just pick up a thouroughly tested and stable x86 main board. There's plenty of people out there providing tests that are more thourough than you could imagine. When you look for x86 hw, it's really easy to just read these tests. Also, since the mainboard in question has already been bought by tens of thousand of people, you'll pick up any problem in mailing lists, blogs, linux forums, etc... You can even see if the company delivers a good documentation for its users or not, if the chipsets are well known or not, etc... On x86, even chipsets are have become a "comodity".

I'm speaking from experience (which you might like as your comments shows). Each time I'm buying any piece of hw, or making an x86 linux box for friends and family, I do this job. No problems so far, no hw failures either - x86 is only "bad quality" hw if you pick up components without looking if they're good quality or not.

I can't imagine an OS company wouldn't do that elementary research. The only case I would imagine that to be impossible is if the OS company would develop an OS for a non-yet existing hw, or for a hw that isn't mass-marketed (then of course you would be better if the hw company can lend you some help. But that's because you were taking the risk in the first place, not the other way around like you'd like us to believe. Most of your arguments are really dated, anyway - time to get some time looking at the real world)

@samface + @everyone else arguing with samface

Can you guys stop filling up the forums with your endless arguing? please? It just goes on and on.

@jahc

Quote:

Can you guys stop filling up the forums with your endless arguing? please? It just goes on and on.

Hum... isn't that what a forum is supposed to be for? :)

_________________
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary
system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
~~ Henry Ford

@t3g

Quote:

The question is, when a Cell 2 is out in 4 or 5 years (the life expectancy of the PS3) how long will we have to wait till somebody builds Amiga hw with it?

It's a bit of a pointless argument really. The facts are that the Amiga is in a 'dead 'state from the point of view of a mainstream machine and has been for a decade.

It is therefore unfair to expect the rapid development times that you might get with the PC/Mac/Binux whatever - that everything takes so long to develop - OS4 4 years - G5 still not yet and Cell very probably never.

This is a market running on vapours and we are very fortunate indeed to have OS4 in the advanced state that it is - as left to everyone else we would have had nothing. And no - I don't believe that nothing would be better than the current state.

You have to be real. I know it's frustrating but this really is the best that can be done at the current time with next-to no investment and a parent company that will not (and very probably cannot due to lack of money) help.

_________________
Sam

@falemagn

Quote:

falemagn wrote: @jahc Quote: Can you guys stop filling up the forums with your endless arguing? please? It just goes on and on. Hum... isn't that what a forum is supposed to be for? :)

maybe he should have said "pointless arguing"

samface is right from his perspective
y'all are right from your perspective
none of you are looking at it from the same viewpoint.
hence the noise to signal ratio is completely out of whack.

_________________
Win•dows: n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical shell to a sixteen-bit patch to an eight-bit operating system originally coded for a four-bit microprocessor which was written by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

@-Sam-

I wasn't trying to bash any of the efforts made to provide a few users with better hw - I was just replying to the idea that porting Amiga OS to Cell would be easier/as easy as porting it to an existing thouroughly tested and reliable hw (x86 being then the best choice). We all know why it takes long to developp custom hw, but some might tend to forget it (so the feeling the market is "running on vapours" even though every of the annouces were not meant to be vapour in the first time)

But I'll let you try to convince some here that

Quote:

Cell very probably never.

I'll be happy to get a Cell hw in a few month though, if somebody was to deliver it!

Last edited by t3g on 25-Jan-2006 at 02:55 PM.

@jkirk

From "his own perspective" anyone is right, by definition. If we were to stick to that principle, no debates would be ever held.

In any case, if you don't like this thread, just don't read it. Looks simple enough, doesn't it?

Of course you're also free to contribute to it so that another, less pointless, discussion can take place. It's up to you, really, not to me or anyone else.

_________________
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary
system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
~~ Henry Ford

@jkirk

Except for the hypothetical "what if" that has been running since samface prefer to focus on that instead of addressing his quite "brilliant" comments about the difficulty of an x86 port, I think some of the last post have still addressed a few of the myths that makes us sick because they just sound like what Irvin Gould would have said if he was still in charge. If samface were to confront these instead of running away, we might have less FUD against any idea to port OS4 on a stable x86 mainboard.

*That* would be quite an improvement

@samface

Quote:

the northbrdige problems was probably the "easiest" problem for them to solve in software thanks to their good relationship with MAI.

Oh, my god!

_________________

@t3g

Quote:

t3g wrote: @jkirk Except for the hypothetical "what if" that has been running since samface prefer to focus on that instead of addressing his quite "brilliant" comments about the difficulty of an x86 port, I think some of the last post have still addressed a few of the myths that makes us sick because they just sound like what Irvin Gould would have said if he was still in charge. If samface were to confront these instead of running away, we might have less FUD against any idea to port OS4 on a stable x86 mainboard. *That* would be quite an improvement

i would love to see os4 on x86. i also think they should be working on it. unfortunately i also think hyperion has reached a point that they have to ride the dying horse if in fact it is dying. they may not be able to push aos4 from a financial standpoint to x86. yes i know that is another "what if" statement but as i don't know all the details of their finances and contracts i cannot make any other assertion.

furthermore hyperion has stated that desktop systems are not their goal. so unless they decide on x86 embedded there is no reason for them to attempt that.

Last edited by jkirk on 25-Jan-2006 at 03:10 PM.

_________________
Win•dows: n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical shell to a sixteen-bit patch to an eight-bit operating system originally coded for a four-bit microprocessor which was written by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

@jkirk

Quote:

unfortunately i also think hyperion has reached a point that they have to ride the dying horse if in fact it is dying.

Well, either that or they can discuss with Amiga Inc (provided they haven't done that again in the past few months) the possibility to port it on x86, then open a subscription to finance it. That could earn them enough to keep them afloat. However, as long as they don't say anything about financial difficulties, I prefer to believe they're still ok about money and have enough to guarantee Amiga OS's future.

Quote:

furthermore hyperion has stated that desktop systems are not their goal. so unless they decide on x86 embedded there is no reason for them to attempt that.

I agree, and that's what I'm fearing. I thought enough good companies - and more financially robust than Hyperion - have died because they were concentrating on the embedded (Be) or set-to-box market (almost all the ones that wanted to build on AOS legacy were focusing on that market, and they lots everything on it) so they wouldn't take that path.

Embedded market is a very competitive market, and it's even more so than a few years ago when these societies failed (more OS availiable, different free and easy to port OSes with far more software than OS4 - plus Microsoft's own OS).

Going to embedded market is really a move they should clarify. As it stands now, it's like we're still living in the nineties - still can't imagine how anybody can pursue this dreams after they've been proven such a lure.

Last edited by t3g on 25-Jan-2006 at 03:23 PM.

@t3g

Quote:

running on vapours

I actually meant vapours as in 'fuel' ie. the market is only just propping itself up - I didn't actually mean vapour as in vaporware.

_________________
Sam

@t3g

Quote:

I agree, and that's what I'm fearing. I thought enough good companies - and more financially robust than Hyperion - have died because they were concentrating on the embedded (Be) or set-to-box market (almost all the ones that wanted to build on AOS legacy were focusing on that market, and they lots everything on it) so they wouldn't take that path.

the way i understand it(and i hope i am right) is that aos4 had to be rewritten from the ground up because the old code was not easily portable to ppc. i am hoping in that process they were smart enough to also make it easier to port to other processors as well. enabling them to be hired by a company to provide the os for their embedded systems and letting these companies front the cash for x86 porting(if that is their platform) and we reap the rewards with an x86 version.

_________________
Win•dows: n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical shell to a sixteen-bit patch to an eight-bit operating system originally coded for a four-bit microprocessor which was written by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

@jkirk

Quote:

were smart enough to also make it easier to port to other processors as well

I am 99% certain that Hyperion have said this before. The OS is now in a portable format in case the hardware needs to change.

Problem is - no hardware -

_________________
Sam

@-Sam-

Quote:

-Sam- wrote: @jkirk Quote: were smart enough to also make it easier to port to other processors as well I am 99% certain that Hyperion have said this before. The OS is now in a portable format in case the hardware needs to change.

sometimes i have a problem remembering things guess i need a memory upgrade.
anyway i believe you are right but it never hurts to ask.

Quote:

Problem is - no hardware -

Don't you mean no official hardware.

Last edited by jkirk on 25-Jan-2006 at 05:20 PM.

_________________
Win•dows: n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical shell to a sixteen-bit patch to an eight-bit operating system originally coded for a four-bit microprocessor which was written by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

@jahc

I agree, completely! Pointless non ending arguing is just petty!

@All

Why don't you do something constructive to the future of OS4 and the Amiga. Share your knowledge, write a useful article for the IntuitionBase competition!

Caio
GiGa

_________________
Owner of uA1-C with OS4.0

@giga

the problem is they do this all the time, especially on ann.lu.

@jahc

I know, when I released my "uA1-C review" onto IntuitionBase last year I was slated on ann.lu and probably again for the unofficial handbook.

That is the reason ann.lu is not on my visit list and AW is. Please guys, don't make me feel like this is just an arguing ground.

GiGa

_________________
Owner of uA1-C with OS4.0