@PhantomInterrogative

Quote:

In hindsight, if such a thing had happened, we would most likely still be in various camps (x86, PPC, 68k, WinUAE) arguing about the best processor, the best OS variant, the best rice pudding, etc.

In the mid-90s, Unix proponents had long appreciated the value of a hardware-agnostic OS.

20 years later, we're still rationalizing sticking with a dead architecture instead of making the hardware irrelevant.

A rewrite was justified long ago.

@ne_one

Quote:

ne_one wrote: In the mid-90s, Unix proponents had long appreciated the value of a hardware-agnostic OS. 20 years later, we're still rationalizing sticking with a dead architecture instead of making the hardware irrelevant. A rewrite was justified long ago.

'hardware-agnostic OS.'

and

'making the hardware irrelevant.'

Have you ever looked in the Linux /lib/firmware directory?

_________________
Tinkering with computers.

@Signal

I'm pretty sure that ne_one has seen it and Linux runs on more devices and architectures than any other OS, so his point is well made and you just strengthened his point. Clinging to a dead architecture such as PPC and one GPU vendor is ridiculous, but as long as there is a small fanatical user-base that is willing to pay $3000-5000 USD every few years for a hardware "upgrade", there will be those out there who are willing to take their money and laugh all the way to the bank. OS4 will continue to limp along until it becomes a wikipedia footnote.

@ferrels

Quote:

and one GPU vendor

I don´t think there are better open source NVidia drivers than AMD drivers - speaking about Linux.

It ain't Amiga OS, its an PPC Amiga emulator.

_________________
Using: One Commodore C64 - One Commodore Amiga 500 - One Commodore Amiga 1200 with BVision and Blizzard 68060 with PPC coprocessor running Amiga DOS - One Hellbillylitre Amigatwox86x64x6000x running Windows7

@pavlor

The Intel drivers are probably the best supported. But then Intel is easy to support since their GPUs so lacking in features and performance! LOL!

@ferrels

My point was: it makes sense to concentrate effort on one broad GPU family with rather good developer documentation.

@Hillbillylitre

Quote:

Hillbillylitre wrote: It ain't Amiga OS, its an PPC Amiga emulator.

You know, I really do have to agree with you after some thought. NG Amigas are about as far from the classic spirit and implementation of classic Amigas as MS-DOS is to Windows 10.

After programming on Macs for a few years and taking a stab at porting some apps to OS4, I was struck by how similar a PPC Amiga is to a PPC Mac. I believe that a lot of OSX was borrowed, at least conceptually, when OS4 was being designed. Shared objects/DLLs, etc.....OSX is obviously more robust and feature rich but OS4 is much more like OSX than most Amigans will want to admit.

My experience with OS4 was much like using a very crippled version of OSX in that most of the features available to me via the hardware simply couldn't be accessed due to unfinished or lacking features in the OS. Sadly it's still the same today and I won't even go into the lack of decent, native PPC Amiga software. So you're correct. Most OS4 Amigans are running 68K apps on their PPC systems via emulation. I believe they'd be better served by running those apps on a current Mac or Windows box. Emulation is emulation, regardless of whether it's done on a PPC Mac, PPC Amiga or x86 box. I still can't understand why the fanatics here want to pay $3000-5000 USD to emulate 68k apps on hardware that's stuck in 2003. OS4 just doesn't have anything compelling enough going for it to be anything other than a curiosity or an OS for the die-hard fanatics.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @ferrels My point was: it makes sense to concentrate effort on one broad GPU family with rather good developer documentation.

The same can be said of CPUs. Continuing to go down the PPC road is a dead-end. As for broad, well the PPC line is about as narrow as you can get without them being extinct.

@ferrels

Quote:

The same can be said of CPUs

Of course not. You can´t compare dying CPU architecture like PowerPC to recent AMD GFX cards.

@pavlor

Exactly my point! We are in total agreement!

But some people here argue that Amiga should stay with a single CPU architecture such as the PPC because it's well documented and for backward compatibility. I think Hyperion and A-Eon cling to PPC because they're lazy.....too lazy to port the OS to any other architecture and because they don't have the expertise. And they have no motivation to even investigate other architectures as long as there is a fanbase willing to pay ridiculous prices to keep going down the same road.

The backward compatibility argument is laughable because it implies there's something in the past that requires them to stick to their current direction. Like what? There's no real OS4 sofware base that merits backward compatibility. Most OS4 users are emulating 68k apps from the glory days.

BTW, I'd pay good money for an NG Amiga that ISN'T PowerPC. I tried a PPC Amiga in 2008 and was quite disappointed, not by the hardware, but by the features that were lacking in the OS, lack of software, and the nearly non-existent 3D support. Even today, OS4 only supports a SUBSET of OpenGL 1.3 at best. The OpenGL 4,3 spec has been released. Why should I even spend good money on a modern 3D GPU if I can't even access its features? I'd open my wallet for an ARM or x86/x64 Amiga with good 3D support, but I'm not holding my breath.

Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 08:25 PM.
Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 08:17 PM.

@ferrels

Sure, port to more forward-looking architecture ("x86") would be nice. Well, even QEMU can get SAM440 class performance in integer operations on 4 years old hardware.

Quote:

The backward compatibility argument is laughable because it implies there's something in the past that requires them to stick to their current direction.

Did you try OS4 (or MorphOS)? Their backward compatibility is amazing - eg. my favourite picture viewer is MysticView (68k) that uses datatypes (OS4 native) to load pictures and render libraries (OS4 native) to display them. For me, losing backward compatibility is like losing part of our common heritage, something that links us to our Amiga roots.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @ferrels Sure, port to more forward-looking architecture ("x86") would be nice. Well, even QEMU can get SAM440 class performance in integer operations on 4 years old hardware. Quote: The backward compatibility argument is laughable because it implies there's something in the past that requires them to stick to their current direction. Did you try OS4 (or MorphOS)? Their backward compatibility is amazing - eg. my favourite picture viewer is MysticView (68k) that uses datatypes (OS4 native) to load pictures and render libraries (OS4 native) to display them. For me, losing backward compatibility is like losing part of our common heritage, something that links us to our Amiga roots.

Yes, I bought one of the final production run PegII systems back in late 2007 and had a dual-boot OS4/MOS config. The hardware was awesome. But the backward compatibility you're referring to is all done in software, even on PPC Amigas. It can also be done on x86 (AROS/Icaros Desktop is a good example of 68K integration). And again, you are correct. The backward compatibility for 68k apps is amazing.

My point is that arguing to keep backward compatibility for the sake of native PPC apps is a very weak argument as there are so few useful native OS4 PPC apps to begin with.

Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 08:27 PM.
Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 08:22 PM.

@ferrels

Quote:

My point is that arguing to keep backward compatibility for the sake of native PPC apps is a very weak argument as there are so few useful native OS4 apps to begin with.

We discussed similar topic in "MorphOS port to x86" thread. Compatibility of PowerPC applications was not such great concern, but some questioned possibility of retaining current splendid 68k compatibility.

Quote:

is a good example of 68K integration

Not in comparison to Petunia/Trance.


AROS is good example - very Amiga-like, for free, working on nearly anything. Still, doesn´t seem to be primary choice for NG users. You may design best OS in the world and offer it for free, but your target user base (Amiga community) expect some basic qualities - "Amiga" compatibility is certainly one of these.

@ferrels

>Most OS4 Amigans are running 68K apps on their PPC systems via emulation.

They run ALSO 68k apps, because they can.
It does not make any difference if you doubleclick on one of those hundred native applications, 68k application or classic game. They just run.

>on hardware that's stuck in 2003.

x1000 CPU is released y2006.
Neither is radeon HD series from 2003. Or PCIe or SATA2.

>backward compatibility you're referring to is all done in software, even on PPC Amigas. It can also be done on x86

Amithlon did it, I think. AROS can not do it and is not planned to be able to do it. Amithlon simulates bigendian operation, AROS does not.

But surely, one day every NG flavor must do it with SW only (unless some FPGA wizard does some nice plugin board).

@hillbylitre

I wonder what this is related to:
>It ain't Amiga OS, its an PPC Amiga emulator.

AmigaOS4 is based on AOS3 source code and updated from there.
MorphOS reimplements AOS3 API and binary compatibility and has NG features.
AROS reimplements AOS3 API etc.

AOS3.1/WB3.1 is stuck to 1993 or so, but that perhaps is the option that suits those who cling to past.

Last edited by KimmoK on 12-Jun-2015 at 08:50 PM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 12-Jun-2015 at 08:41 PM.

_________________
- KimmoK
// For freedom, for honor, for AMIGA
//
// Thing that I should find more time for: CC64 - 64bit Community Computer?

@KimmoK

You obviously didn't read any of my posts, or at least not very well. I'm all for 68K backward compatibility thru emulation on new systems. I just don't see the point of clinging to PPC for the sake of backward compatibility for OS4 PPC apps.

Quote:

x1000 CPU is released y2006

And you do realize that this was 9 years ago don't you, or is your real name Rip Van Winkle?

The x1000 CPU was released in 2006 but it performs on par with other architectures released in 2003 and the benchmarks prove it.

Quote:

Neither is radeon HD series

So what. You may have a nice new Radeon in your PPC Amiga and you get to use a SUBSET of OpenGL 1.3.....that's a sick joke considering what you paid for it and what that card is capable of. So you get to use a subset of the latest 3D graphics from 1998. What a bargain!

Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 09:07 PM.
Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 09:06 PM.

@ferrels

Quote:

released in 2003 and the benchmarks prove it.

With same TDP?

Quote:

that's a sick joke considering what you paid for it and what that card is capable of.

I hope you don´t think this would change after port to "x86".

@pavlor

I don't use TDP when comparing desktop system benchmarks. In low-power devices such as phones and tablets it's a must though.


Quote:

I hope you don´t think this would change after port to "x86".

Well, whatever OS4 gets ported to, I can always hope! IF it ever gets ported that is! LOL!

At this point I don't think it'll ever be ported to any other architecture.

Last edited by ferrels on 12-Jun-2015 at 09:13 PM.

@ferrels:

Quote:

ferrels wrote: @pavlor The Intel drivers are probably the best supported. But then Intel is easy to support since their GPUs so lacking in features and performance! LOL!

They are integrated, not discrete GPUs. So they cannot be make big numbers.

However the performance is quite comparable to low-end cards, and similar integrated GPUs from competitors.

The situation is improving (take a look at Broadwell's new GPUs), and will be much better in the near future (with Skylake).

/OT.

@ferrels

Quote:

ferrels wrote: The x1000 CPU was released in 2006 but it performs on par with other architectures released in 2003 and the benchmarks prove it.

It's even worse: the G5 was released on 2003.