@samface

Quote:

samface wrote: @jorkany The consistency in what they said back then about the idea of a sandbox for backwards compatibility and what they are saying today is still there, isn't it?

Yeah - and the consistency in what they deliver is still there as well, isn't it?

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Troika

I've turn so many Amiga corners that I live in a dodecahedron.

@takemehomegrandma

What we have been criticize MoprhOS for is that QBox is not developed and that Quark is alien design that no one know any thing about.

It has been commented they might need to write some kind API wrapper or emulator some time in the future, remember this from ANN.LU way back in time.

Hyperion is not trying to Copy MorphOS, but what has happened is that we have all this advanced features in AmigaOS4, but they are unused in most parts of the OS, and this can not be change whit doing some thing dramatic whit all OS components, well this will break whit all programs (ExecSG is mostly feature complete now).

Forbid() , permit() is out the door, AmigaOS4 has SMP friendly Semaphores (Mutex) this is the replacement or cure, but the cure is poison for old OS4.0 software.

2en thing Hyperion wont’s to do is hide more of the OS structures, implementing full memory protection, but they can’t whit OS4.0 / OS3.0 programs snooping around.

What I don’t get, is way keep OS4.0 capability because I think most developer will just recompile there programs after doing the necessary changes, (well it most be because of AmigaOS3.x software.)

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 15-Aug-2007 at 05:21 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 15-Aug-2007 at 05:20 PM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@Dandy

I don’t think you understand, we need this to get SMP and full memory protection, are you sating that do not wont that?

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@umisef

Nevertheless, there is nothing to support the claim that Hyperion would have been mocking the idea of a sandbox back then and that they would now be copying the idea of a sandbox from the MorphOS design. Again, the MorphOS team didn't invent the idea of a sandbox design for backwards compatibility and when was Hyperion mocking the idea of a sandbox design for backwards compatibility?

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

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

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

@Dandy

Quote:

Are you saying that MacOS X already existed when MOS development started some 10 years+ ago?

I think so but not in the form it is now, read in the readme for MacOS7.5 5 that they did some changes for comparability whit MacOS X server, don’t know what that was about but, think MacOS7.5.5 came out in 1995.

Off topic:

The first power mac’s did run some kind of 68k emulator in the POWER MAC ROM, that’s how MacOS7.x.x worked in first place, that might explain way Amiga computers whit 68060 out preformed PowerPC 601 benchmarks on MacOS.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 15-Aug-2007 at 05:45 PM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@NutsAboutAmiga
Quote:

@Dandy Quote: Are you saying that MacOS X already existed when MOS development started some 10 years+ ago? I think so but not in the form it is now, read in the readme for MacOS7.5 5 that they did some changes for comparability whit MacOS X server, don’t know what that was about but, think MacOS7.5.5 came out in 1995.

Would be more accurate to say, NeXT existed prior to MorphOS.

_________________
Here for the whimpering end

@jorkany

Mac OS X 10.0 was released on March 24th, 2001

If NeXT existed in 1995, and MacOS came out in 2001, then it most have been developed for about 6 years, whit parallel development of MacOS8 and MacOS9.

Pretty much the same Microsoft did whit WindowNT, it came out as server, and later it become the home edition as Windows2000, XP.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@samface

Quote:

when was Hyperion mocking the idea of a sandbox design for backwards compatibility?

When they chose not to use one.

Come on, Hyperion had the chance to write a completely new OS, and all the backwards compatibility they needed was with programs that had to be run through a CPU emulator, anyway. But instead of putting those old programs in a sand box, and presenting a thoroughly thought-out API to new (OS4-PPC) programs, an API that should have been SMP-capable, MP-capable, endian-agnostic and have full resource tracking(1), as a minimum --- instead they decided to just go and create a brand new OS which presents the very same old and tired API that was considerd a millstone around the Amiga's neck for at least half a decade before they even started.

Which could have been semi-acceptable if they had (a) done it in half a year, not half a decade, (b) had provided a thorough SDK, with very explicit rules on what is and is not allowed for the future, and with accessor functions for anything that is not allowed, and (c) had indeed then moved on, rapidly, to releasing updated versions where those rules were enforced.

None of these things happened. OS4's API is just like OS3.x's; If one pays close attention to Rogue's posts hidden deeply in long threads, one might get some idea that "SetFunction" is evil, and that "StackSwap" should be avoided (although neither of these warnings came with any detail as to what to use instead, nor how things will break in the future).

In 1984, Apple released the original Mac. And while it may be remarkable for its use of a GUI, and a mouse, or its small footprint, or its access to more than 64k of linear RAM, the decision which still impresses me most is that Apple categorically stated "Here is the API. Use it, or suffer! Things will change!" --- at a time when every other computer system considered its hardware specs part of the API, Apple did not. And then Apple went and *did* change the hardware. And the non-exposed parts of the OS. Over and over and over again. They made good on the threat of breaking things, which meant that very quickly, Mac programmers learned the lesson of go-through-the-API-or-else.
During the same perion, Amigas had to slavishly maintain backward compatibility in hardware. OCS, ECS, AGA are all supersets of each other, and are worse for it. AmigaOS was often seen as something that just gets in the way, and any dirty trick giving a cool effect (but messing with or bypassing the OS) was admired, not abhorred.

17 years after the original Mac, Hyperion started writing OS4. And yet, they did not apply any of the lessons that 17 years of Mac clearly should have tought anyone interested in writiing an OS.


(1) Note --- when I say "XXX capable", that does not mean implementing XXX right there and then. It just means that implementing XXX should be possible. For example, allowing Forbid() and Disable() into the OS4 API (and also, even more so actually, not saying "the scheduler may be anything we can think of, and interrupt any process for any other process at any time, no matter what the priorities. Do not rely on any particular scheduler behaviour. We mean it!") has pretty much prevented the current OS4 API ever being useful on SMP machines. Carrying message passing without requiring message tags describing the structure of the passed message to the OS means that MP is no longer possible.
Making something "XXX capable" just means not doing things which will break under XXX.

Last edited by umisef on 16-Aug-2007 at 02:20 AM.

@umisef

Quote:

Come on, Hyperion had the chance to write a completely new OS, and all the backwards compatibility they needed was with programs that had to be run through a CPU emulator, anyway.

I thought the contract was to develop 3.x to run on ppc and to gradualy improve it. This sounds like a whole new (OS5?) shebang to me. I thought that development such as this was reserved for AInc.

@stew

Quote:

I thought the contract was to develop 3.x to run on ppc and to gradualy improve it.

Yeah, but teh contract was also for delivery by Q1/02. So *that* idea obviously went out the window early on.

As I said, it would have been OK if they had just done that, and then quickly moved on to "the real thing". Spending half a decade mucking around with something which was considered broken-as-designed half a decade before they started is just a monumental waste of effort and opportunity.

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @Dandy I don’t think you understand, we need this to get SMP and full memory protection, are you sating that do not wont that?

No.
I just wanted to state that I don't believe anything AInc say anymore...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@umisef

Quote:

umisef wrote: @stew Quote: I thought the contract was to develop 3.x to run on ppc and to gradualy improve it. Yeah, but teh contract was also for delivery by Q1/02. So *that* idea obviously went out the window early on. As I said, it would have been OK if they had just done that, and then quickly moved on to "the real thing". Spending half a decade mucking around with something which was considered broken-as-designed half a decade before they started is just a monumental waste of effort and opportunity.

I understand but would "the real thing" have been within the scope of the original license? Was the contract for an entirley new OS that breaks compatability?

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @NutsAboutAmiga Quote: NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @Dandy I don’t think you understand, we need this to get SMP and full memory protection, are you sating that do not wont that? No. I just wanted to state that I don't believe anything AInc say anymore...

I have not believed AInc since the office fiasco.

@Dandy

Quote:

I just wanted to state that I don't believe anything AInc say anymore...

Fine. It's just hilarious that it took you so long to arrive at that point.

_________________
This signature is in the middle of a much needed facelift!

@Troika

Quote:

Good things will come to he who waits

Put up or shut up.

@d0c


Very funny

@dan.hutch

Quote:

Put up or shut up.

You do realize when this thread was started?

"20-Mar-2006"

_________________
This signature is in the middle of a much needed facelift!

@stew
Which office fiasco?!? The one where all their office equipment was sold at auction, or the more recent "empty office with a few boxes & McEwan"?

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

@ChrisH

Quote:

ChrisH wrote: @stew Which office fiasco?!? The one where all their office equipment was sold at auction, or the more recent "empty office with a few boxes & McEwan"?

He means the original office fiasco when they were locked out of there offices and Tbone and I had pizzas delivered to prove they were closed. Ben and MikeB however told everyone they were moving to new bigger offices, which was a huge lie, but it kept people buying those coupons.
-Tig

_________________
We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world.