@Rob

Yes but people mostly do not try to use it as their main machine. I saw a example that someone bought a Sam 460 and then moaned that it is slower than the PC at job. So he compared a embedded device to a heavily equipped desktop pc and then wonders that it is slower. That would not happen at 68k user

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Good. From what I've read, the Permedia 2 had problems with 640x480@16-bit From what I've read, the Permedia 2 works fine with Warp3D games in 640x480@16-bit...

I already posted a link about such video chip, which has also some benchmarks (and technical details).
Quote:

Quote: I know it, but see also my previous comment: you need an host o.s. to run 68K software. It's Windows for WinUAE, and OS4 or MorphOS for Petunia/Trance. There is no difference between 68k and PowerPC applications.

I know it. In my case, I only run 68K apps, and I'm fine with it.
Quote:

Eg. my favourite picture viewer MysticView (68k) uses OS4 native render libraries for viewing and OS4 native datatypes for loading of images. I don´t think you can do the same in WinUAE.

You're wrong: it's possible to create libraries which do that stuff in the host/WinUAE code, like it happens with RTG, AHI, etc.

There are many things which can be offloaded to the host/native platform, and in principle you can even take benefit from hardware video acceleration, OpenCL/DirectCompute, etc..

Of course, someone has to write it, and that's the real problem.

A good starting point is AROS, which has already implemented (almost) all Amiga o.s. APIs, as well as Janus/UAE which already does a similar job of tunnelling some guest APIs to the host ones.
Quote:

Quote: So, I enjoy exactly the same 68K apps, with the same o.s., but... MUCH, MUCH better. You are runing OS3 in sandbox separated from host OS and still pretend it is the same quality as OS4 way... yes, that is insane.

It's one of the few times that I absolutely agree with you.

Yes, it's absolutely insane comparing the quality of the ultrasolid WinUAE sandbox where the Amiga o.s. and its applications run isolated, with the one offered by the non-existing sandboxing/protection of OS4/MorphOS, where even an innocent 68K application can bring down the whole system in a brief.

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @cdimauro Quote: I haven't got it: AFAIK WinUAE doesn't do memory virtualization. Can you explain a bit more? Like this stuff. https://github.com/lubomyr/uae4all2/blob/master/src/include/memory-uae.h No need for get_real_address() on AmigaOS4.1, yes AmigaOS4.1 has memory virtualization, but that is mmu thing, not few lines of code somewhere. static __inline__ uae_u8 * get_real_address(uaecptr addr) This is way Petunia was useless: when it came to UAE and Basilisk II, Petunia did not allow memory to be, relocated.

OK, now I got it. However it's not exactly memory virtualization. If you take a look at the code (especially the one which sets-up the memory layout), this is a mechanism to "entrap" the access to the chipset/hardware registers, whereas the regular memory is accessed almost immediately (the function returns the pointer to the already allocated memory).

This is the only way to emulate the machine at a decent speed in an o.s. & hardware-agnostic way.

Otherwise there are plenty of ideas which can benefit from specific o.s. APIs and/or hardware features, which can totally avoid such mechanism. My idea regarding 68K emulation, for example, is that the emulated 68K processor directly accesses the memory without such mechanism, or even an offset added to the base memory.
Quote:

Quote: That's because the host o.s. provides the tunneling of 68K o.s. APIs to the host o.s.. WinUAE provides something for it (RTG, AHI, sockets, filesystem), redirecting some API calls to the host code or o.s. (Windows). There are stubs, the stubs primary job is to map 68K register to PowerPC native functions, all legacy functions are tunneled on AmigaOS4, it's however not mandatory to write stubs, when you make a library. While on WinUAE its only (few) places, well many places but fewer then on AmigaOS4.

See my previous comment: more can be done from this point-of-view, but it needs work.

With OS4 (and MorphOS) it's much easier, because they both run on a 32-bit bigendian processor, and the o.s. also runs in the same address space of applications. But that's only a "side effect" that choice: if you go to a 64-bit PowerPC, you cannot use such trick anymore.
Quote:

Quote: Fine, but you need an host o.s., OS4, to fully run a 68K app. Yes, UBOOT or CFE can't run 680x0 programs, Petunia is started when kickstart is loaded, so you run 680x0 program in startup-sequence if you like too.

But it works after the o.s. boots.

Anyway, nothing prevents to create an emulator which immediately boots, taking the full control of the machine, with the sole purpose of running 68K apps. Only this way the host o.s. is "suppressed", because the emulator acts like / is an o.s. also.
Quote:

It possible to disable to Petunia to save memory, you don't save any CPU power, as Petunia is only ever used when there is something to translate.

Of course.

@Fransexy

Quote:

Fransexy wrote: @cdimauro Quote: you need an host o.s. to run 68K software Obviously, even on a classic Amiga unless is a game that hit the bare metal. Remember that kickstar is part of the OS. So you always need a host OS to run 68k software (or any cpu software of any os on any platform for that matter) or do you execute software directly on the hardware?

I remember, but that's a different thing.

We were talking about "host o.s." because we were talking about applications written for a specific o.s. which run on another, different, o.s. (the host one).

Of course, if you remove the "host" word, it's obvious that any application needs an o.s. to run, except if it acts as the o.s. also.

@cdimauro

Quote:

I already posted a link about such video chip, which has also some benchmarks (and technical details).

Well, Permedia2 was extensively used in WarpOS/Warp3D era games, this use is what really matters in our context.

Quote:

I know it. In my case, I only run 68K apps, and I'm fine with it.

No, you run 68k AND Windows apps - in two separated enviroments...

Quote:

You're wrong: it's possible to create libraries which do that stuff in the host/WinUAE code, like it happens with RTG, AHI, etc.

For example?

Quote:

Of course, someone has to write it, and that's the real problem.

Ah, yes, so not. What a surprise!

Quote:

where the Amiga o.s. and its applications run isolated

That is main difference of our points of view: you see isolated 68k as sign of quality, I see it as unbearable limitation.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: I already posted a link about such video chip, which has also some benchmarks (and technical details). Well, Permedia2 was extensively used in WarpOS/Warp3D era games, this use is what really matters in our context.

OK
Quote:

Quote: I know it. In my case, I only run 68K apps, and I'm fine with it. No, you run 68k AND Windows apps - in two separated enviroments...

Which is a Good Thing.

But nobody prevents you run WinUAE after that Windows boots, instead of running Explorer, so you have only 68K applications that are running in the system (inside WinUAE).

Another AmigaWorld user, resle if I remember correctly, did it.
Quote:

Quote: You're wrong: it's possible to create libraries which do that stuff in the host/WinUAE code, like it happens with RTG, AHI, etc. For example?

You talked about the native datatypes which you use on OS4, and this is very good example of what can be offloaded to the native code.

For example, you can replace the 68K JPEG datatype with one which forwards any request to the native code, so running at the maximum speed.
Quote:

Quote: Of course, someone has to write it, and that's the real problem. Ah, yes, so not. What a surprise!

You said this:

"I don´t think you can do the same in WinUAE."

and I gave you the answer: yes, it's possible. And most of the code is already available, because AROS implements most of the Amiga datatypes.
Quote:

Quote: where the Amiga o.s. and its applications run isolated That is main difference of our points of view: you see isolated 68k as sign of quality, I see it as unbearable limitation.

It's the first time that I read that someone is proud that an application can bring down his entire system.

Only Amiga makes it possible!

@cdimauro

Quote:

But nobody prevents you run WinUAE after that Windows boots, instead of running Explorer, so you have only 68K applications that are running in the system (inside WinUAE).

But this way my access to host applications would be severely limited!

Quote:

For example, you can replace the 68K JPEG datatype with one which forwards any request to the native code, so running at the maximum speed.

Quote:

and I gave you the answer: yes, it's possible. And most of the code is already available, because AROS implements most of the Amiga datatypes.

So, plain answer is NO. Thanks.

Quote:

It's the first time that I read that someone is proud that an application can bring down his entire system.

It is not first time your answer ignored what I wrote... Being able to run "host" and "guest" applications in single enviroment is much more impressive than sandbox approach of WinUAE.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: But nobody prevents you run WinUAE after that Windows boots, instead of running Explorer, so you have only 68K applications that are running in the system (inside WinUAE). But this way my access to host applications would be severely limited!

You decide: you can have only WinUAE, or you can have WinUAE and other Windows applications. Full flexibility.

BTW, my current machine has enough cores and hardware threads that can handle both scenarios without problems.
Quote:

Quote: For example, you can replace the 68K JPEG datatype with one which forwards any request to the native code, so running at the maximum speed. Quote: and I gave you the answer: yes, it's possible. And most of the code is already available, because AROS implements most of the Amiga datatypes. So, plain answer is NO. Thanks.

You haven't asked for a single word answer. You made a statement and I gave you the correct answer.

So, technically it's perfectly possible. But nobody has yet implemented it.
Quote:

Quote: It's the first time that I read that someone is proud that an application can bring down his entire system. It is not first time your answer ignored what I wrote... Being able to run "host" and "guest" applications in single enviroment is much more impressive than sandbox approach of WinUAE.

I haven't ignored you. It's you that now are stating something different, from the isolated/sandbox (sub)discussion.

Nobody prevents you to have a single environment AND separate, isolated, sandboxes.

Vamos is a clear example of that: it allows to run (some, very limited right now, since the project is quite immature) 68K applications on an host o.s. (MacOS X and Linux were the primary targets; then someone added the Windows support too) together and concurrently with all other native applications. But the strong point is that a 68K app CANNOT bring down everything for nasty some bug.

This approach can be further improved by having more 68K resources shared by the running 68K apps, but now it's premature to talk about it, since the project is still in a preliminary status.

Of course OS4 offers a single environment for PowerPC and 68K apps, but the price to pay for this is that you can kill the system very easily. That happens NOT because of the single environment used for the two different platform, but only because the o.s. was badly designed, and publicly exposes its data structure.

To be more clear, in theory OS4 could allow PowerPC and 68K apps to run in a single environment, like you are delight to have, while protecting at least itself from their dirty behavior. So, having them run on an isolated sandbox. But the problem is that this single environment is also used and shared by itself, exposing the entire platform to instability.

To recap: a single environment can have his advantages. But an o.s. which is isolated by its apps is greatly preferable.

@cdimauro

Quote:

You decide: you can have only WinUAE, or you can have WinUAE and other Windows applications. Full flexibility.

But not both together in ONE enviroment...

Quote:

but now it's premature to talk about it, since the project is still in a preliminary status.

Unlike solution of AmigaOS4 or MorphOS.

Quote:

Of course OS4 offers a single environment for PowerPC and 68K apps, but the price to pay for this is that you can kill the system very easily.

I think you give too much weight to question of (un)stability. Bad applications would crash WinUAE/OS3 with all runing tasks exactly like OS4. If your preference are Amiga applications, there is basicaly no difference.

@pavlor

You can run multiple instances of UAE, one for each task. The host OS will even distribute them over different cores.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: You decide: you can have only WinUAE, or you can have WinUAE and other Windows applications. Full flexibility. But not both together in ONE enviroment...

In the second scenario, which is the most complete, you have it: 68K apps running (inside WinUAE) with Windows applications.
Quote:

Quote: but now it's premature to talk about it, since the project is still in a preliminary status. Unlike solution of AmigaOS4 or MorphOS.

Absolutely: they are the more mature and complete. Nothing to say, for so old projects for which many developers worked.

However you haven't isolated sandboxes for o.s. and/or apps. And you cannot take advantage of multiple cores, like kolla reported. Vamos allows all this, which has some value too.
Quote:

Quote: Of course OS4 offers a single environment for PowerPC and 68K apps, but the price to pay for this is that you can kill the system very easily. I think you give too much weight to question of (un)stability.

I have to, because that's a quite common scenario with the Amiga o.s., and that's something which I don't like on 2015 for an o.s..
Quote:

Bad applications would crash WinUAE/OS3 with all runing tasks exactly like OS4. If your preference are Amiga applications, there is basicaly no difference.

Currently with WinUAE, yes, that's what happens, but as kolla reported there's also the possibility to run multiple instances of WinUAE which offer several sandbox running isolated from each other, and that take advantage of multiple cores.

But there are other tools, like Vamos (or Wanderer's project, if/when it completes it), which go further. I think that's the future of the post-Amiga computing.

Just to give an idea, imagine that, on Windows, you right click a PNG file, and select "Edit" from the context menu: Personal Paint starts on a window (which is an RTG screen for it) with the file opened, and then you edit and save it.

That's an extreme vision, but it's perfectly possible with tools like Vamos, which let to integrate 68K apps (or even PowerPC ones: the idea is the same) on the "single environment" that you like, but running on an isolated sandbox on one of the many processor cores...

@cdimauro

Quote:

but as kolla reported there's also the possibility to run multiple instances of WinUAE which offer several sandbox running isolated from each other, and that take advantage of multiple cores.

I have use for such scenario only in rare cases - eg. when I run both OS4 and OS3 enviroments for experimental purposes. However, nature of Amiga applications requires one integrated enviroment, not many isolated ones.

Quote:

That's an extreme vision

Of course. Why wait several years, when you have working solution now?

@pavlor

You can integrate them quite well if you let them share filesystems and do various fun tricks ;)

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@cdimauro

Quote:

Yes, it's absolutely insane comparing the quality of the ultrasolid WinUAE sandbox where the Amiga o.s. and its applications run isolated, with the one offered by the non-existing sandboxing/protection of OS4/MorphOS, where even an innocent 68K application can bring down the whole system in a brief.

Who says we don't have sandbox, we have (E)UAE we can sandbox all 680x0 programs, if we need to or like to. But there is trade off (E)UAE is a sandbox, (E)UAE does have tight integration with AmigaOS4.

You can have the cake and you can eat it too.

However, what we were taking about we were taking about Petunia, and It’s a complete opposite of sandbox.

I the case we talk about Sandbox's we taking DOSBOX, Basilisk II, (E)UAE, and so on.
In the case where we are not taking about Sandbok's we are taking about Petunia.

I can agree that (E)UAE is not as complete as WinUAE, having Petunia might in some ways hinder progress on (E)UAE I think.

Having a sandbox is not necessary if the software you're using is under active development, and bugs are fixed. That might not always be the case, I admit.

And I most also admit that having PowerPC sandbox might have been nice, while developing software.

Well I think you can compare it to running WindowsXP software in Windows7 or 8 or running WindowsXP software on WindowsXP on VirtualBox on top of Windows7, well the choice is yours.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 02-Aug-2015 at 12:47 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 02-Aug-2015 at 11:36 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 02-Aug-2015 at 11:35 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 02-Aug-2015 at 11:35 AM.

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

@cdimauro

im using 2 or 3 simultaneously winuae, and if one crashes all of them crashes..

and you can also run emulated workench inside os4..

_________________
nox's in the house!

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: but as kolla reported there's also the possibility to run multiple instances of WinUAE which offer several sandbox running isolated from each other, and that take advantage of multiple cores. I have use for such scenario only in rare cases - eg. when I run both OS4 and OS3 enviroments for experimental purposes.

I find a good thing to be able to run 68K applications on isolated sandboxes, and better on different cores.
Quote:

However, nature of Amiga applications requires one integrated enviroment, not many isolated ones.

As kolla stated, WinUAE already allows to share some resources with the host o.s..
Quote:

Quote: That's an extreme vision Of course. Why wait several years, when you have working solution now?

Because it's not what I expect. I use Windows on a regular base, but I also like to play with some 68K apps.

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Yes, it's absolutely insane comparing the quality of the ultrasolid WinUAE sandbox where the Amiga o.s. and its applications run isolated, with the one offered by the non-existing sandboxing/protection of OS4/MorphOS, where even an innocent 68K application can bring down the whole system in a brief. Who says we don't have sandbox, we have (E)UAE we can sandbox all 680x0 programs, if we need to or like to. But there is trade off (E)UAE is a sandbox, (E)UAE does have tight integration with AmigaOS4. You can have the cake and you can eat it too.

I know, but it isn't the argument of (this part of) the discussion.
Quote:

However, what we were taking about we were taking about Petunia, and It’s a complete opposite of sandbox. I the case we talk about Sandbox's we taking DOSBOX, Basilisk II, (E)UAE, and so on. In the case where we are not taking about Sandbok's we are taking about Petunia.

Petunia and sandboxes are two different things, not mutually-exclusive.

Petunia purpose is to run 68K apps on a OS4, converting 68K instructions in PowerPC ones. It also forwards the 68K API calls to the corresponding native ones.

A sandbox runs an application in an isolated environment, so that it cannot damage other apps, or even the o.s.. However it can allow some form of resource sharing.

In theory you can have both, if the o.s. allows it. The problem here is that OS4 doesn't offer it.
Quote:

I can agree that (E)UAE is not as complete as WinUAE, having Petunia might in some ways hinder progress on (E)UAE I think. Having a sandbox is not necessary if the software you're using is under active development, and bugs are fixed. That might not always be the case, I admit. And I most also admit that having PowerPC sandbox might have been nice, while developing software.

Even when you don't develop it, since... you don't know a bug until you find it, and it's common that it happens when the application is already released.
Quote:

Well I think you can compare it to running WindowsXP software in Windows7 or 8 or running WindowsXP software on WindowsXP on VirtualBox on top of Windows7, well the choice is yours.

Yes, using WinUAE or EUAE is similar.

@noXLar

Quote:

noXLar wrote: @cdimauro im using 2 or 3 simultaneously winuae, and if one crashes all of them crashes.. and you can also run emulated workench inside os4..

Sorry, I didn't understood. Have you used WinUAE (maybe EUAE) with OS4?

@cdimauro

Quote:

In theory you can have both, if the o.s. allows it. The problem here is that OS4 doesn't offer it.

It does... you can let applications run via interpretive 68k emulation, Petunia or RunInUAE.

@pavlor: I wrote about having (the service offered by) Petunia AND a sandbox (for the running 68K app).

You cannot have both currently.

Last edited by cdimauro on 02-Aug-2015 at 01:56 PM.