@cdimauro

Quote:

it's too late. There's no chance for the Amiga o.s. to become again a leading o.s.. Not even with datatypes...

You're might be very right,
but...


OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy Quote: Dandy wrote: @hotrod Reading this brings up an idea in me. The capabilities of XENA in the AmigaOne X1000 could possibly be used to support 3d-printing, as well as 3d-scanning. It should also be predestinated to build flexible production systems. But for this an updated version of DynaCadd would be required, as well as suppport for all types of CNC machines and industrial robots. Back in 1989 I could use my A 500 to design in 3d with DynaCadd and to convert the 3d data into executable CNC programs, which really run on industrial CNC machines. If the AmigaOne X1000 could be used to control such a production system, it could mean smaller costs for small production companies to set up such numerically controlled production environments and so be a market for the Amiga. There are many alternatives which costs even 1/100 of an X1000. It doesn't make sense to stick with a so much expensive product for doing automation.

An A1X1k roughly costs 2.500 €.
Are you sure you can go and buy a similar efficient system for just 25 €?
I seriously doubt that.

A tenth (250 €) might perhaps be possible (if you're lucky), but a hundredth? I think this claim is non-serious.

A price between 750 € and 1500 € for an alternative system with similar efficiency seems realistic to me, but this system would still lack the integrated xCORE.

Depending on how well the xCORE is integrated in the A1X1k and in the installed OS and how well it is supported software-wise, this integration would most likely help to save costs you would have if it was not integrated. As a mechanical engineer and CAD/CAM analyst I know what I'm talking about.

But currently it is not clear to me how well this integration actually is, as no-one seems to try to use the integrated xCORE for serious purposes (at least it is hard or impossible to find reports on the web about serious xCORE projects on the A1X1k). One could get the suspect that this is due to a lack of imagination/vision.

There are so many pointless discussions (e.g. RTOS, AOS as market leader) on Amiga websites - but why are there near to no discussions about what could be done with the xCORE addon and how?

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy XCore is an useless chip which was integrated just to fool people thinking that X1000 had "custom chips" like the Amigas, which is clearly wrong (XCore is a discrete chip which everybody can buy for $10, or with specific cards).

I dare to differ here.

From the XMos website:
"Our xCORE processor is suitable for a wide range of demanding embedded applications and is being used today by a rapidly expanding set of customers in consumer, audio, industrial and automotive applications."

If the xCORE would really be such a "useless chip", XMOS would long have gone belly-up instead of having "a rapidly expanding set of customers in consumer, audio, industrial and automotive applications".

Regarding the xCORE as "custom chip":

From the A-EON website:
"Once there were custom chips; for the AmigaOne X generation, we have customisable chips."

Only a fool would interpret this as an attempt to sell the xCORE as "custom chip".
There is a clear difference between "custom (kundenspezifisch)" and "customisable (flexibel)".

Aside from that, I have never seen the xCORE as "custom chip". I would rather compare it (in conjunction with Xorro) with the expansion slot of an old A 500.

So it seems you made another non-serious claim...

_________________
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)

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy Quote: Dandy wrote: @michalsc It seeems 32 Bit Amigas are more secure and reliable than you think. It doesn't talk about security. In fact, it's well know that the Amiga o.s. is one of the most insecure o.ses, since it has no protection at all, ...

You're right - "secure" is misleading. Just delete the words "secure and" from my original statement.

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: ...and even exposes its public structures to everyone. ...

Isn't that the meaning of "public"?

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: It doesn't mean that the Amiga o.s. is an RTOS. It also means that it was enough to handle this task properly.

That's why I wrote "AmigaOS is close to RTOS. Close enough for the NASA and their tasks."

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: An RTOS has other requirements to fulfill, like Michal has written.

I'm fully aware of that...

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Michal clearly talked about NOW. Not in 1999.

Did he?
He clearly talked about "Amiga computers" - not about "Sam computers" or "AmigaOne X1000 computers".

My understanding always was that the law suits resulted in the name "Amiga" being owned by AInc. and that it is therefor not legal to call new machines from other companies "Amiga computers".

That's why I thought he was referring to the non-availability of the old machines today. But I might be wrong here...

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: NOW post-Amiga computers are NOT cheap.

I agree. But keep in mind that "post-Amiga computers" are not "Amiga computers" in the legal sense, if I got that right.

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: I doubt that now it can be considered user-friendly, since user interfaces have change a lot.

Hmmm - the user-friendliness of the old AmigaOSses is still the same, from my POV. But I agree that the user-friendliness of other UIs has improved since 1999...
On the other hand it was said that the user-friendliness of AOS 4.x has also been improved compared to the old versions.

_________________
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)

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy Quote: Dandy wrote: @agami Nothing. It will not work. AOS does not run on Intel out of the box. AOS doesn't magically install itself on a system.

No OS does. But did I claim that?

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy Quote: Dandy wrote: @agami I would expect this to work. Not yet. And who knows when...

Hmmm - OS 4.1FE does NOT run on the AmigaOne X1000 computers yet?

Or are you aiming at the usability of both cores with the current version of the OS?
If so, I'd like to interpose that the OS at least works on one core, whilst the other is idling.

In contrary to trying to run AmigaOS 4.x on an Core i5-4690K @3,500MHz - there NO core would run the OS (out of the box - without suitable host OS and emulator).

Last edited by Dandy on 31-Jul-2015 at 11:09 AM.

_________________
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)

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy Quote: Dandy wrote: @ferrels I want my own, personal copy of the OS (personal computer - personal OS). If others also want to use it, they can buy it themself. No multi-user capability needed. Well, my family members can use Windows on the same PC, with their private accounts...

Same here. My family members can also use Windows on the same PC, with their private accounts (although they don't anymore, as they have their own laptops meanwhile). And if they really wanted to use Amigas, they could install their copy of AmigaForever on their account and so have their own personal AmigaOS single user system.

But if they wanted to use my real Amiga, I would tell them to buy their own Amiga system and mess that one up.
Amiga is not a multi-user system and my Amiga system is MY PERSONAL Amiga system. Period.

Or I could install Multi User File System "muFS v1.8" or v2 (very interesting read) (once it is finished)...

Last edited by Dandy on 31-Jul-2015 at 12:44 PM.
Last edited by Dandy on 31-Jul-2015 at 12:17 PM.
Last edited by Dandy on 31-Jul-2015 at 12:17 PM.
Last edited by Dandy on 31-Jul-2015 at 12:17 PM.
Last edited by Dandy on 31-Jul-2015 at 12:17 PM.

_________________
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)

@Thorham

Quote:

Thorham wrote: Quote: Dandy wrote: If its all dead-end and a complete waste of time, then please tell me: What are you doing here all the time? There's more to Amiga than the crusty old operating system, namely stellar retro hardware that's absolutely fabulous for retro computer enthusiasts.

Hmmm - I think I'd have no use for HW without an OS to run Programs on it...

Might be something for gaming kids - I have a weak remembrance that back in the days there were lots of games for the Amiga that were coded without following the Amiga programming guidelines, "banged the metal" and didn't need an OS to run...

_________________
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)

Quote:

it's too late. There's no chance for the Amiga o.s. to become again a leading o.s.. Not even with datatypes...

True. And even good concepts like DataTypes are limited with today's computing: they need to handle streaming, videos,... And avoid load whole file before displaying it. You need to be able to modify stream as well: filters, resizing,...

That's what MorphOS has right now with Reggae classes for example.

Lots of concepts are quite useless too: what do you need a RamDisk for ? Yes, with a small/slow hard-drive or disk drive, it was useful, but today's SSD are faster that yesterday's RAM..

And you want Amiga to lead what ?

- server ? Amiga lacks important concepts like virtualisation, memory protection, virtual memory, solid tcp/stack, ip v6,..

- desktop ? Amiga lacks support of OpenGL v3, proper gaming Audio API,...

- embed ? Amiga isn't even a realtime OS

For the three you would need to support x86/amd64 and/or ARM. Starting from scratch would help...

Last edited by Leo on 31-Jul-2015 at 01:45 PM.

_________________
http://www.warpdesign.fr/

Quote:

Dandy wrote: Hmmm - I think I'd have no use for HW without an OS to run Programs on it...

The fact that AOS is a dead end and a waste of time in terms of trying to make it relevant in today's computing world doesn't mean that I don't use it when I use my A1200

Quote:

Dandy wrote: Might be something for gaming kids

@OldFart

Quote:

OldFart wrote: @cdimauro Quote: it's too late. There's no chance for the Amiga o.s. to become again a leading o.s.. Not even with datatypes... You're might be very right, but... OldFart

Like the japanese which is defending his position even if Japan lost the war?

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: @Dandy There are many alternatives which costs even 1/100 of an X1000. It doesn't make sense to stick with a so much expensive product for doing automation, robotics, etc.. An A1X1k roughly costs 2.500 €. Are you sure you can go and buy a similar efficient system for just 25 €? I seriously doubt that.

I never talked about a similar system, but of alternatives to make some automation.

Anyway, a Raspberry Pi 2 costs around 30€, it has enough processing power, it consumes much less, it's tiny, and it's vastly superior for doing robotics.
Quote:

A tenth (250 €) might perhaps be possible (if you're lucky), but a hundredth? I think this claim is non-serious.

For around half of that you can even get an Intel NUC with GPIO.

Or a Minnowboard Max which is also dual-core, and with a bit more can have 2GB of RAM. This configuration has a processing power similar to an AmigaOne X1000.

Or one of the many quad core Bay Trail-based systems, like this, which obliterate the AmigaOneX1000 and its XCore.
Quote:

A price between 750 € and 1500 € for an alternative system

You can have more for much less: see above.
Quote:

with similar efficiency seems realistic to me,

What do you mean with "efficiency"? Do you think that the above solutions aren't "efficient"?
Quote:

but this system would still lack the integrated xCORE.

Which is not needed, if you have dedicated, and very powerful, cores to manage the GPIOs, which is quite sufficient for a broad range of robotics needs.
Quote:

Depending on how well the xCORE is integrated in the A1X1k and in the installed OS and how well it is supported software-wise, this integration would most likely help to save costs you would have if it was not integrated. As a mechanical engineer and CAD/CAM analyst I know what I'm talking about.

You ends-up having some APIs to be called for accessing/manipulating the I/O pins. It isn't rocket science, and it's a quite common scenario.
Quote:

But currently it is not clear to me how well this integration actually is, as no-one seems to try to use the integrated xCORE for serious purposes (at least it is hard or impossible to find reports on the web about serious xCORE projects on the A1X1k). One could get the suspect that this is due to a lack of imagination/vision.

Or because the XCore isn't powerful neither flexible enough? It also lack direct access to the memory, which is a big bottleneck.
Quote:

There are so many pointless discussions (e.g. RTOS, AOS as market leader) on Amiga websites - but why are there near to no discussions about what could be done with the xCORE addon and how?

There were some discussions in the past regarding the XCore.
Quote:

Quote: cdimauro wrote: @Dandy XCore is an useless chip which was integrated just to fool people thinking that X1000 had "custom chips" like the Amigas, which is clearly wrong (XCore is a discrete chip which everybody can buy for $10, or with specific cards). I dare to differ here. From the XMos website: "Our xCORE processor is suitable for a wide range of demanding embedded applications and is being used today by a rapidly expanding set of customers in consumer, audio, industrial and automotive applications." If the xCORE would really be such a "useless chip", XMOS would long have gone belly-up instead of having "a rapidly expanding set of customers in consumer, audio, industrial and automotive applications".

You're missing the context here: in which ecosystem is the XCore inserted? In this case, it's the AmigaOne X1000 motherboard, which makes some constraints to this chip.

The XMos sites reports also many examples of how the XCore can be used. Even for creating some consoles. Well, why don't you try to do something similar with the one integrate in the X1000? So you'll touch yourself how useful it is.

There weremany discussion in this, as well other "Amiga" sites, with fantasies like using such chip to help emulating the original Amigas, which is a common and sensible argument. The XCore is not even able to emulate the Amiga 1000 chipset. Only the chipset: not even the CPU...
Quote:

Regarding the xCORE as "custom chip": From the A-EON website: "Once there were custom chips; for the AmigaOne X generation, we have customisable chips." Only a fool would interpret this as an attempt to sell the xCORE as "custom chip". There is a clear difference between "custom (kundenspezifisch)" and "customisable (flexibel)".

Why haven't you reported the full paragraph? Here is it:

"Our hardware designers had a brilliant idea: "Why not add an XMOS chip?" Once there were custom chips; for the AmigaOne X generation, we have customisable chips. XMOS calls it "Software Defined Silicon", we call it 'Xena', a nod to the old custom chip names. It's the inheritor of the 'transputer' concept, and it's something we're quite excited about."

It's clear that they tried to "mimic" the old Amigas to attract the amigans.
Quote:

Aside from that, I have never seen the xCORE as "custom chip". I would rather compare it (in conjunction with Xorro) with the expansion slot of an old A 500.

It has some similarities, yes.
Quote:

So it seems you made another non-serious claim...

Well, I was and I'm quite serious. See above.

@Dandy

Quote:

Quote: Dandy wrote: @cdimauro ...and even exposes its public structures to everyone. ... Isn't that the meaning of "public"?

Sorry, it was a lapsus: it was "private", not "public", of course.
Quote:

Quote: cdimauro wrote: It doesn't mean that the Amiga o.s. is an RTOS. It also means that it was enough to handle this task properly. That's why I wrote "AmigaOS is close to RTOS. Close enough for the NASA and their tasks."

It's not even close: the Amiga o.s. cannot guarantee the constraints of an RTOS.

It was simply good enough for some NASA's tasks.
Quote:

Quote: cdimauro wrote: Michal clearly talked about NOW. Not in 1999. Did he? He clearly talked about "Amiga computers" - not about "Sam computers" or "AmigaOne X1000 computers". My understanding always was that the law suits resulted in the name "Amiga" being owned by AInc. and that it is therefor not legal to call new machines from other companies "Amiga computers". That's why I thought he was referring to the non-availability of the old machines today. But I might be wrong here...

Here are his original statements:

"32bit Amiga will not impress anyone in todays world. What advantages would it have when compared to typical desktops or game consoles?
[...]
Cheap? There are no cheap Amiga computers right now."

So, he was talking about nowadays, not the old computers. Yes, unfortunately it's a common abuse to use the same word even for some PowerPC-based machines.
Quote:

Quote: cdimauro wrote: NOW post-Amiga computers are NOT cheap. I agree. But keep in mind that "post-Amiga computers" are not "Amiga computers" in the legal sense, if I got that right.

Is "some PowerPC-based PCs" OK?
Quote:

Quote: cdimauro wrote: I doubt that now it can be considered user-friendly, since user interfaces have change a lot. Hmmm - the user-friendliness of the old AmigaOSses is still the same, from my POV. But I agree that the user-friendliness of other UIs has improved since 1999... On the other hand it was said that the user-friendliness of AOS 4.x has also been improved compared to the old versions.

Do you think that it's comparable with what Windows, OS X, Linux, offer? I don't talk about smartphone and tablets, which offer a completely different UI.

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: @Dandy AOS doesn't magically install itself on a system. No OS does. But did I claim that?

You claimed this:

"AOS does not run on Intel out of the box."

It's not a problem of an Intel system: AOS simply doesn't run out of the box, whatever is the system. You need to install it...
Quote:

Quote: cdimauro wrote: Not yet. And who knows when... Hmmm - OS 4.1FE does NOT run on the AmigaOne X1000 computers yet? Or are you aiming at the usability of both cores with the current version of the OS? If so, I'd like to interpose that the OS at least works on one core, whilst the other is idling.

Exactly: this was the point.
Quote:

In contrary to trying to run AmigaOS 4.x on an Core i5-4690K @3,500MHz - there NO core would run the OS (out of the box - without suitable host OS and emulator).

Yes. But with an updated AmigaForever it'll be fairly simple to have it running on such system.

@Dandy

Quote:

Quote: Dandy wrote: @cdimauro Well, my family members can use Windows on the same PC, with their private accounts... Same here. My family members can also use Windows on the same PC, with their private accounts (although they don't anymore, as they have their own laptops meanwhile). And if they really wanted to use Amigas, they could install their copy of AmigaForever on their account and so have their own personal AmigaOS single user system. But if they wanted to use my real Amiga, I would tell them to buy their own Amiga system and mess that one up. Amiga is not a multi-user system and my Amiga system is MY PERSONAL Amiga system. Period.

Exactly. That was the point.
Quote:

Or I could install Multi User File System "muFS v1.8" or v2 (very interesting read) (once it is finished)...

I already used it 20 years ago with my Amiga 1200. It worked quite well at the time. But it was an external tool: the Amiga o.s. isn't multiuser, like you also stated.

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: Hmmm - I think I'd have no use for HW without an OS to run Programs on it... Might be something for gaming kids - I have a weak remembrance that back in the days there were lots of games for the Amiga that were coded without following the Amiga programming guidelines, "banged the metal" and didn't need an OS to run...

That isn't correct. There were guidelines also to "bang the metal", that you can find in the famous Amiga Hardware Manual.

The problem is that many coders didn't followed them, so games had problems for newer or expanded machines, or even with a different Kickstart.

@Leo

Quote:

Leo wrote: Quote: it's too late. There's no chance for the Amiga o.s. to become again a leading o.s.. Not even with datatypes... True. And even good concepts like DataTypes are limited with today's computing: they need to handle streaming, videos,... And avoid load whole file before displaying it. You need to be able to modify stream as well: filters, resizing,...

Yes, the concept need to be updated: it's too limited.
Quote:

That's what MorphOS has right now with Reggae classes for example.

I don't know MorphOS. It seems to be interesting what you reported.
Quote:

Lots of concepts are quite useless too: what do you need a RamDisk for ? Yes, with a small/slow hard-drive or disk drive, it was useful, but today's SSD are faster that yesterday's RAM..

Honestly that's something which I really miss: an expandable ram disk where to put temporary data.

I know that SSDs are fast, but they are also expensive. Not all peoples have one.
Quote:

And you want Amiga to lead what ? - server ? Amiga lacks important concepts like virtualisation, memory protection, virtual memory, solid tcp/stack, ip v6,.. - desktop ? Amiga lacks support of OpenGL v3, proper gaming Audio API,... - embed ? Amiga isn't even a realtime OS For the three you would need to support x86/amd64 and/or ARM. Starting from scratch would help...

Absolutely.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Yes. But with an updated AmigaForever it'll be fairly simple to have it running on such system.

I don´t think Cloanto will ever get licence for CyberstormPPC ROMs.

@pavlor: why not? It's business.

@cdimauro

Quote:

why not? It's business.

Do you know who has rights?

@pavlor: no, but I think that he/she/them like/s money, and an agreement with Cloanto can satisfy both appetites.

@cdimauro

Ralph Schmidt. It is question of religion, not money.