@OlafS25

Quote:

here is a sad tradition in the amiga world to ignore/negate the other OSs/Variants. Look at the new amigaos.net page f.e. (the same certainly on other pages). To build a common marketing and technical platform would be better (for all) but that is propably just a dream. Everyone creating his own standards, thus not only wasting resources but also making support difficult (Warp3D, CybergraphX, different MUI-Implementations, different standards for USB, PCI to name a few). If there would be common standards and cooperation, it would be easier to create drivers-support, have more applications and speed up development etc. and to make marketing and win new users and developers. But again as long everyone just look at his own small isle that will not happen.

Well, yes, it started as soon 3rd party companies started to play major role in developing important add ons to the OS like gfx cards, CPU cards, GUI.
But even then there are common elements like MUI / Zune and there is much Amiga legacy in them. My belief is that, at least for PPC version, a "joint OS 5.0" could be possible:
a) Porting nVIDIA AROS drivers, 3D implementation, Zune as another GUI option
b) Taking Ambient as also possible GUI similar to Linux options, MUI 4, Reggae, file system and other advanced MOS components
c) Taking name, updated workbench and other mature or new OS 4.1/4.2 components
And that one could possibly run all 3 flavors software, have integrated E-UAE with JIT beneath, maybe even taking AEROS/AmiCygnux approach and have some ability to run PPC Linux apps
Off course having it CPU code independent like original OS 5.0 was promised or x86 would be much harder. Having all 3 teams and all 3 small camps and bounties working as one would accelerate the progress. Sadly, no one is willing to give up a bit of souvereignity for a common progress.

For a brief moment, everyone hold the breath, hoping that e.g. CUSA will be the player that will have THE NAME and THE RESOURCES to buy all small players and unify them towards some AmigaOS 5.0 (real WB 5.0) that would include best of all 3 flavours. This was soon crashed by simple desire "NOT to develop", "NOT to invest".

All 3 flavors were dismissed by CUSA as obsolete as any Linux distro offers more out of box. Even A-EROS which maxes mixture of AROS and Linux was dismissed and mocked recently. Seems like "Amigans" that dislike the Amiga heritage (being not so developed, taking time to catch up).

At the other hand, with recent AROS updates (A-EROS going alpha and beta, mature nVIDIA drivers, Wi-Fi), MOS 3.x advancements and OS 4.2 need to be developed for X1000 to be utilized, all flavours are taking major steps to become very much usable and only some more push towards full usable browser and office is needed to make them equaly usable in day to day work, while keeping Amiga heritage.

Eyes of the past and current Amigans should really go for that, not for some Amiga Forever integrations and history abuses to milk money from general retro mania.

Only thing that CUSA has better to offer is sound name (of both VIC/Commodore 64 and Commodore Amigas 1000,2000,3000 ...) and more outreach to the common ex user that simply didn`t follow what happened to AmigaOS probably switching to 486DX2 in 1995, Mac or Pentium after ... it sounds like a fairytale that Commodore resurrected in 2011

And that would be it. Everyone is hoping for progress. Even most of CUSA supporters at same time support AROS, OS4 or MorphOS, which partially shows they are not the rulers of Amiga world, no matter of their "outreach" campaigns. So mostly the name and retro look of their computers is appealing, not the OS experience. And that is where COS jumps in, however without ability to be more then it is: Linux as we can run already, can have it with AmigaForever or AmiKit.

At the same time, its very likely most of CUSA supporters (big numbers of likes on Facebook) would support WinUAE / AmigaForever / AROS / MOS / OS4 if they knew more about them, or were able to run last two on their x86 hardware. Here they instantly recognize the name and believe that is it. Oh, how wrong they are ...
So their popularity is not as much based on current products, but on name,

Maybe we need Commodore Europe with similar Commodore and Amiga Inc licences and some more Amiga developmentalism )))) Commodore Europe Amiga 2000
Or that in fact are Hyperion, Varisys, MOS team ...

Only 0 days left and 0 public COS 1.x downloads?

Last edited by vox on 11-Nov-2011 at 02:31 PM.
Last edited by vox on 11-Nov-2011 at 02:30 PM.
Last edited by vox on 11-Nov-2011 at 02:28 PM.

_________________
Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way!

@Hammer

Quote:

Please note that the real Commodore sold Wintel PCs.

You know what's also funny...

The computer that Commodore licensed the IBM compatibles was called.... wait for it.... Hyperion

_________________

@vox
Quote:

Only 0 days left and 0 public COS 1.x downloads?

Counting is not their strongest ability... As far as I remember they celebrated the Amiga's 25th anniversary one year too late, so maybe they mean 2012-11-11...

Last edited by Daytona675x on 11-Nov-2011 at 03:05 PM.

_________________
AmigaOS 4.1 FE (sam460ex Radeon 9200 / RadeonHD), MorphOS 3.8 (PowerMac G4 733MHz Radeon 9000), AROS (x86), A1200 (060 80MHz Indivision MK2), A500, A600, CDTV
Wings Remastered Development Diary

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

You know what's also funny... The computer that Commodore licensed the IBM compatibles was called.... wait for it.... Hyperion

Seems Hyperion (no Entertaiment) was XT Dynalogic computer CBM wanted to do something alike.

CBM PC series were PC 1 to PC 60 and sounds quite prophetical to CUSA series

Wiki quote (as usual general ref.)
Quote:

Incompatible with Commodore's prior PET and Commodore 64 series, they were generally regarded as good, serviceable workhorse PCs with nothing spectacular about them. In 1987 the PC-10, which was the first model released, sold for $559 without monitor ($1058 in 2010 dollars).[1] They were sold alongside Commodore's Amiga line of home and graphics computers and the Commodore 128.

Quote:

C= Amiga goes x86

Again, no such device exists, existed, will exist.
Only "Commodore USA" "Amiga`s 1000, 2000, 3000 ... will be x86 boards in HTTC cases" (not to be confused with original Commodore Amiga 1000,2000,3000)

Sad thing when you depend on abusing other products name to increase sales.

Last edited by vox on 11-Nov-2011 at 03:16 PM.
Last edited by vox on 11-Nov-2011 at 03:15 PM.

_________________
Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way!

@vox

Quote:

Seems Hyperion (no Entertaiment) was XT Dynalogic computer CBM wanted to do something alike.

I quote Michael Tomcyzk and his book "The home computer wars - an insider's view on Commodore and Jack Tramiel"

Quote:

A licensin g agreement with Zilog gave us the 16-bit Z-8000 microprocessor chip , and a Z- 8000 computer was being developed to help get us back into the business market. Another computer called the Hyperion was licensed, to give us IBM-compatible technology

Too bad about the Commodore 900 project. I never understood why they canned it. And Zilog Z-80000, the 32 bit successor to the 16-bit Z-8000 that came out in 87', was a very advanced CPU(fully pipelined) and ahead of its time. Would be a kickass UNIX based machine and probably make NeXT market position very thin.

_________________

For sure any of the current amiga incarnation have nothing to do with
Commodore original brand and team. Ok OS4 is based on original source code. For me what a mistake to base a OS for modern computer using 1985 kernel technology. Why do you think SMP or memory protection is so hard to achieve on OS4? MorphOS team understand that when creating the qbox but they stop development.

I like COS because it is what could have been a sort of "AmigaOSX" if Commodore have survived.
And why it would be heretic to base a new Amiga spirit OS on Linux?

@Seblam

Quote:

Passion is very subjective, people could argue x86 Mac are PC as they can run Windows

According to Walter Isaacson's book "Steve Jobs", it came close to Mac actually running a modified Windows NT as it's OS. Also, Sun's Solaris was a candidate for some time, as well as BeOS and NeXT(but those 2 are well known to have been considered).

As we all know, Commodore was also thinking about going NT for their computers, including Amigas(there was a PPC port of NT at the time)

Quote:

Probably the original Commodore would have gone for custom motherboard and more in-deep modification of the Unix based OS like Apple but anyway it would have end up in x86 hardware, with ATI/NVidia GPU and a modernized OS based on Unix.

Gateway had that idea, QNX(and later Linux) as a base. Too bad it never materialized, at that time there was still enough users and a viable market.

Last edited by WolfToTheMoon on 11-Nov-2011 at 03:53 PM.

_________________

Sorry for double post before, problem with my phone

@WolfToTheMoon
Exactly and thats why forgetting this outdated thing that is AmigaOS today for a
new Amiga would not be a bad thing.
And from the historical fact you said from original Commodore, all indicates that Amiga would have gone this path.
Of course, i loved the different approach from the classic Amiga but it's no more viable in the current market. Os4, Mos, Aros are all condemned to stay obscure OS for a very small community of die hard fans, always trying to catch with modern technology without success
COS offer à fresh and modern restart of the platform that can again appeal to the mass

Last edited by Seblam on 11-Nov-2011 at 04:06 PM.

@Seblam

Quote:

Exactly and thats why forgetting this outdated thing that is AmigaOS today for a new Amiga would not be a bad thing. And from the historical fact you said from original Commodore, all indicates that Amiga would have gone this path.

Yes, the original Commodore was thinking about a new OS for the Amiga in the early 90s. Several options were considered, from Windows NT to, later, BeOS(this was under Amiga Technologies, after C= went bankrupt), QNX and Linux(under Gateway). They all very well knew that the classic Amiga OS(Workench, DOS....) wasn't very suitable for further development. Then again, there were those who favoured a rewrite of the original OS for the PPC(PA-RISC) back in the early 90s(this was considered during the final days of C=), but we don't know what exactly a rewrite meant for those in C= at the time.

_________________

@Seblam

Quote:

Seblam wrote: For sure any of the current amiga incarnation have nothing to do with Commodore original brand and team.

Correct, but I don't care because the original Amiga incarnation had nothing to do with
Commodore original brand and team.

Amiga had more to do with Atari.

_________________
AmigaONE. Haha. Just because you can put label on it does not make it Amiga.

I borrowed this comments from here (#27 & #28):
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=38873&forum=2&start=20&order=0

[/quote]
So are the PowerPC based "neo-Amigas".

Both camps has the "Amiga" names.

1. One camp has the official 68K AmigaOS source code and "AmigaOne" name.

2. One camp has "Commodore-Amiga" name.

Please note that the real Commodore sold Wintel PCs.

[quote]

No one camp has the Amiga name, the other one has not.

Both camps have access to official 68k AmigaOS, Hyperion doesn't sell e product with this OS, CUSA may sell such a product but any development based on the structures might be not allowed.

---

If Cusa sells a product with the name Amiga, for the right price and meets the expectation of their customers, no one will doubt they are Amiga.

_________________
AmigaONE. Haha. Just because you can put label on it does not make it Amiga.

I borrowed this comments from here (#27 & #28):
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=38873&forum=2&start=20&order=0

@Arko

I sometimes think that C= was maybe better off without buying Amiga Inc(the original).

I think Commodore 900/Unix platform showed more promise in the future and that C= could have built a machine similar to A500 with inhouse technology(notably, 65816). I always felt that one of C= biggest mistakes was that they made C= and Amiga computers incompatible because to me, a logical step up after C64 was A500, not C128, but A500 wasn't compatible. In a hypothetical world of a 65816 A500-like computer, they would have had a much better start than what Amiga 1000 achieved at the beginning(AFAIR they sold around 50 000 in the first year -it got great press, but not that many sales), because there was no software for the Amiga. A C64 compatible done right(that is, not C128) would certainly sell more.

Last edited by WolfToTheMoon on 11-Nov-2011 at 04:33 PM.

_________________

By the way i find quite funny when AmigaOS fans complain about COS being only a skin on Linux when nearly all of today OS4 softwares are ports from Linux and open source world

Last edited by Seblam on 11-Nov-2011 at 05:10 PM.
Last edited by Seblam on 11-Nov-2011 at 05:10 PM.

Quote:

As we all know, Commodore was also thinking about going NT for their computers, including Amigas(there was a PPC port of NT at the time)

Seeing PPC support came with NT 3.51 in May 1995 I don't see how Commodore could have been thinking about NT since they were bankrupt before it came to life...

_________________
http://www.warpdesign.fr/

@Seblam

What do you want to proof with that? Amiga is a certain combination of hardware and OS (libraries, devices, concepts). The NG-fans reduce it more or less to the OS, but Linux with some retro-skins is certainly not Amiga. What has this in common with f.e. 3.1-3.9?

@OlafS25

Quote:

What has this in common with f.e. 3.1-3.9?

nothing, but should it have? I mean, OS 3.x was great on 199x hardware, but it's 2011.

Last edited by WolfToTheMoon on 11-Nov-2011 at 05:28 PM.

_________________

@Seblam
Quote:

By the way i find quite funny when AmigaOS fans complain about COS being only a skin on Linux when nearly all of today OS4 softwares are ports from Linux and open source world

I find it quite funny when CUSA fans find AmigaOS fans funny, who complain about COS being just a skinned Linux, and the reason for said CUSA fans for finding them funny are OS4 software ports from Linuxs and the open source world, 2 things that have nothing to do with each other besides the word "Linux"

_________________
AmigaOS 4.1 FE (sam460ex Radeon 9200 / RadeonHD), MorphOS 3.8 (PowerMac G4 733MHz Radeon 9000), AROS (x86), A1200 (060 80MHz Indivision MK2), A500, A600, CDTV
Wings Remastered Development Diary

That was a good sleep. What I miss?

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

@WolfToTheMoon
Quote:

WolfToTheMoon wrote: @OlafS25 Quote: What has this in common with f.e. 3.1-3.9? nothing, but should it have? I mean, OS 3.x was great on 199x hardware, but it's 2011.

Finally a C=USA fan who admits that C=USA has nothing in common with Amigas!

@Daytona675x

Now it is my part I find it quite funny that you find it quiet funny when ...