@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Exactly. For example, writing something like: "The AmigaOne X1000 is an Amiga computer based on PowerPC, bla bla bla". As I wrote in some of my previous posts in this thread, AmigaOne history is interesting also in this context. Amiga.Inc and its representatives marketed AmigaOne as "Amiga hardware" or "Amiga product", so in pre-2009 Settlemet Agreement era answer to your question would be without doubt YES. Settlement Agreement clearly defined AmigaOne as brand licensed by Amiga.Inc to Hyperion, so answer should be NO. However, Amiga.Inc may have other opinion and use AmigaOne as example of Amiga trademark usage with computer hardware (like it did with AmigaOS 4.1 on the field of operating system software in legal dispute with Cloanto).

That's normal: the owner of a property has the right to decided how and when others can make use of it.

Think about the GIF case, to cite another know one. After some years that such format was freely widespread, Unisys decided to ask royalties for any application that generates files using his own LZW algorithm.

Here is the same. So, after the agreement no one has the legal right to call Amiga what's labeled as AmigaOne. End of legitimates successors of Amigas...

EDIT: except cases reported by number6.

Last edited by cdimauro on 13-Aug-2015 at 06:16 AM.

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @Deniil715 and how do I fit in your definition? I want newest features but on 68k running on modern cheap hardware :)

Then you are closer to group 3 because 68k is not modern nor cheap :)
Group 2 accepts evolution (for better or for worse), and Amiga evolution gave us PPC machines with OS4 (and MOS, AROS, etc). I bought two. I think PPC is cool, but unfortunately lost the race. 68k is the nicest CPU ever but for some reason ditched early. If 68k had "survived" I think it would be better than PPC because it's more efficient in code size and no.of instructions per amount of work. Today number of transistors is no problem either, like it was when it was ditched. It was difficult to clock fast, just like x86, but Intel and AMD poured tons of money into x86 development.

Quote:

and "classic"? What is that? The last Amiga I bought back in the days was called A4000 and not AC4000 (Amiga classic 4000)

The original Commodore Amiga machines has gotten the label Classic after the birth of the next generation Amigas: the AmigaOne/Sam/etc. with AmigaOS 4. Quite simple. You bought an Amiga back in the days, and now you have a Classic Amiga, because it got old, whether you like it or not Quite simple, happens to cars as well People didn't buy a Classic Chevy back in the '60s, but if they still have it, it has now become a Classic Chevy.

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Quote: Deniil715 wrote: * Then there is the third strange group: The front-line should be classic group: This group ONLY think Classic Amiga is real Amiga, but they still want faster hardware and run the latest software. This is contradictive and paradoxal. This thread (and a few others) are about the third group, or "wish" if you like. So you excluded other amigans, like me, which like Amiga and one of the post-Amiga o.ses (AROS).

So that puts you in group 2 then, with 'Amiga' meaning everything Amiga(-like): A500, A4000, MorphOS, AmigaOS 4, X1000, AROS, etc...

Quote:

Quote: What is Amiga? - To group 1 it is the Classic Amiga range by C= with 68k CPU and OS up to 3.1 (maybe 3.9). OK, so it excluded my Amiga 2000 and 1200, which aren't Classic Amigas, but simply Amigas.

Please read my reply to OlafS. Commodore Amigas has become Classic (Commodore) Amigas simply because of their age and to differentiate them from AmigaNGs. It's just a reference term, like AmigaNG meaning PPC machines made "in the Amiga spirit" after Commodore. Maybe I should use a lower case 'c', but it looks more classy with a capital 'C'

Quote:

Quote: - To group 2 it is all Amigas (I'm in this group) which range from the original C= Amiga to the X1000, some also include MorphOS and AROS in this group. Myself I would call myself an Amiga user if I was using for example Pegasos/MOS, but I would personally probably not call the machine itself an Amiga. No problem: there was no Amiga machine sold other than Commodore or Escom.

Back to group 1; not accepting that Amiga actually did live on, and is still alive today by means of X1000/Sam/AmigaOS 4.

Quote:

Quote: Group 3 complains that custom chips are not made in-house but instead bought from specialized third-party companies (AMD/Creative/VIA/whoever makes USB/whoever makes all other chips on the motherboards). "It should all have been made by Commodore and soldered onto the motherboard." Problems is: Today this is impossible because custom chips today are a million times more complex than 30 years ago. (Moores law: Double power every 18 month for 30 years = 1 million.) Only specialized companies are able to make them. Moore's law doesn't talk about doubling (processing) power every 18 months (18-24, in reality; and in the last period the rate seems that went to 30 months), but only about doubling the transistor count.

Did I talk about processing power? No. I said complexity which is pretty much equal to transistor count. And yeah, I guess the curve has flattened out a bit...

Quote:

Quote: Already back in the '80s, '90s Commodore and the "valid" expansion companies used off-the-shelf parts and standards: SCSI, IDE, ATAPI, SD-RAM, 3.5" floppy (although the controller had a track buffer instead of sector buffer), USB, PCMCIA. Of course, the 68k CPU line was dead so a switch was absolutely necessary and PPC was chosen since it was already present in some accelerators (and we hate Intel/x86 of course ). Well, many of the things that you reported come from the company that you hate: Intel. How can you live with it?

The horror!!!

Quote:

Quote: So of course the X1000 was made for AmigaOS. It leaves room for AmigaOS to expand (become multi-core, 64-bit, use more memory etc). Besides, there are no high-end 32-bit single-core CPUs on the market today, because that is not high-end. We get 64-bit and multi-core in the package whether we like it or not. Actually you got no 64-bit neither multi-core support. Regarding the first, you'll never use it. For the second, you may get an AMP solution.

I meant we got 64-bit and multi-core in the hardware as part of the package. It's just for AmigaOS to use it.

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.

@cdimauro

>So, please, can you report some benchmark which compares this supercool PA6T with some G4 and/or G5?

https://www.ll.mit.edu/HPEC/agendas/proc07/Day3/09_Artz_Pres.pdf

(page 20 etc... Already superior with just 2/8 cores. (PA was also designing towards 16 core))

((But how one could benchmark inferior design, for example PCIe or memory performance of a CPU, when G4 and G5 does not have those controllers in the CPU chip at all.))

Last edited by KimmoK on 13-Aug-2015 at 09:23 AM.

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

@pavlor

>Amiga Technologies went bankrupt.

(even when it does not matter...)
It's mother company (owner) went bankrupt, Amiga Technologies was always profitable business according to Petro.



68k Amiga has been owned by "bad people" after Lorraine left the carage (IMO). Now in the hands of Cloanto ... let's see what happens.

Last edited by KimmoK on 13-Aug-2015 at 09:53 AM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 13-Aug-2015 at 09:52 AM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 13-Aug-2015 at 09:52 AM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 13-Aug-2015 at 09:49 AM.

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

@Deniil715

I have a little problem with "NG" in general

I would split in two groups... one group is happy with tinkering with the old hardware (seen on many amiga meetings) and perhaps adding a new card from time to time. Additionally people use UAE.

The secong group what people here call NG wants to revive amiga like it was in the past. I think that is a illusion because the OS would need so many changes that it would break any compatibility. Then you might have a modern OS but no software. Additional without drivers and expecially the software base of the other platforms I see no realistic chance there. People who are happy with shall use it but i am happy with 68k for nostalgy and fun and use my windows pc for serious working.

68k is not modern or cheap? i use it with UAE on modern PC and it is fast there :) and modern? What is possible on PPC that is not possible on 68k?

@OlafS25

Quote:

What is possible on PPC that is not possible on 68k?

Altivec, 64bit, bi-endian, SMP, hardware-assisted virtualization, access to modern fast RAM technology, data buses... among other things.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@cdimauro

don't you remember my earlier post from another tread that Amiga inc. officially renamed the original Amiga from amiga to classic amiga in late 90's? and that is in fact official. and i don't get your stubbornness, what's the problem? it was chosen just too be more easy to discern from the orginal and the new. thats why Amiga Classic was born legally and officially.

_________________
nox's in the house!

@kolla

yes

who does the software for it?

@noXLar


except perhaps X1000 and G5 everything PPC related is classic too

old technology, slow processors...

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @Deniil715 I have a little problem with "NG" in general I would split in two groups... one group is happy with tinkering with the old hardware (seen on many amiga meetings) and perhaps adding a new card from time to time. Additionally people use UAE.

Yeah, in my mind I'm also in this group because I like the nostalgia and tinkering with my old A1200, but i don't have time, so it just sits there. But I wouldn't call this NG. This is still Classic (OS1-2-3/68k) with new or old addons. NG is AmigaOS4/PPC.

Quote:

The secong group what people here call NG wants to revive amiga like it was in the past. I think that is a illusion because the OS would need so many changes that it would break any compatibility. Then you might have a modern OS but no software. Additional without drivers and expecially the software base of the other platforms I see no realistic chance there. People who are happy with shall use it but i am happy with 68k for nostalgy and fun and use my windows pc for serious working.

Your second group is my third group. Those who don't want the new stuff that is available, but want the old stuff in a new shape. But that's where the paradox kicks in. It is just as you say an illusion, because one cannot modernize the old stuff without making it new and "un-Amiga-like". That's what group 3 fail to understand, and I find that strange and amusing

I completely understand the feeling, and I also want to have the "original" Amiga in a new shape, but that's just not possible. It's an illogical thought. AmigaOS 4 tries to go this route a bit by modernizing, but then people complain that gfx isn't integrated and cannot be hardbanged like in the old days, AHI is required and sucks/low quality etc. has no AGA/Paula chipset etc etc. Well, the new way is simply not the old way. Besides, eight 32-bit channels at 192kHz is better than four 8-bit channels at 28kHz. Period.

And the almighty copper!! OMG what a master piece!!! not... With modern gfx cards you can do a lot more cool stuff that then copper and blitter ever could dream of. I would be surprised if modern 3D HW could not emulate the copper's visual effects with easy, but also vertically or in any angle, something the copper was way too slow and simple for.

Amiga OS3 with MP and SMP and seamless integration of new gfx and audio-HW (like the original Amigas) is simply what OS4 is trying to achieve. But fans aren't happy because gfx isn't planar (instead we have 32-bit 3D), audio channels cannot be individually controlled (instead we have surround capability at MUCH higher sample quality), we don't have low memory footprint (instead we have fullHD 32-bit desktop with composition and modern webbrowser), soon we can't rely on Forbid() anymore (instead we would have SMP).

Group 3 is simply never satisfied. They only want some dream version of OS3 on fast HW, and fail to realize that OS4 on PPC is just that. AmigaOS 4 *is* a modern version of Amiga OS3 on fast hardware. (I'm not referring to you, Olaf, here since you seem happy with current OS3 on UAE.)

Quote:

68k is not modern or cheap? i use it with UAE on modern PC and it is fast there :) and modern? What is possible on PPC that is not possible on 68k?

Well in that case you already have what you asked for
The only thing OS4/PPC has over OS3/68k are a couple of more modern APIs and apps. And of course, being actively developed.

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.

@noXLar

Quote:

don't you remember my earlier post from another tread that Amiga inc. officially renamed the original Amiga from amiga to classic amiga in late 90's? and that is in fact official. and i don't get your stubbornness, what's the problem? it was chosen just too be more easy to discern from the orginal and the new. thats why Amiga Classic was born legally and officially.

+1
Thank you for finding this info!

Last edited by Deniil715 on 13-Aug-2015 at 01:17 PM.

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.

@OlafS25

>I have a little problem with "NG" in general
>I would split in two groups... one group is happy with tinkering with the old hardware (seen on many amiga meetings) and perhaps adding a new card from time to time. Additionally people use UAE.

I would definitely call that OG. Those are the fans of the old generation or retro fans.

FPGA68k I would see as NG68k fans.

Then there are AOS4, MorphOS and AROS fans. WannabeNG, I think.
I see those OSs as a stepping stones towards true NG currently.
Stepping stones are needed to get free from CBM component bindings, to morph to something that can use what is available today (/take better use of the HW available today) and to something that does more than 68k AOS3 systems.

>The secong group what people here call NG wants to revive amiga like it was in the past.

I think some want true-NG to be more capable than old Amigas (but it's just not sane to dream AmigaNG beating the mainstream). For many people it is very cool if they are not forced to boot to windows every day for every computing need.

> I think that is a illusion because the OS would need so many changes that it would break any compatibility.

Compatibility can be fully preserved if there is unlimited amount of AOS R&D power.

As there is very limited amount of AOS+MorphOS+AROS R&D, at least some or all of the (AOS binary + some of the source code) compatibility must be dropped for Amigalike OS version that uses SMP + MP + 64bit.

For me, since 1995 or so, Amiga has meant mainly the things the OS offers. Way to do things, speed of OS operations, responsiveness, simplicity, looks etc.
I prefer to boot to 68k AOS / AOS4 / MorphOS3 when needing compatibility and using the most modern (SMP+MP+64bit) Amigalike OS for additional fun.

> Then you might have a modern OS but no software.

The true NG AOS can easily be 68k+32bitPPC SW compatible with janus like UAE solution.
(not perfect but better than nothing)

(Great deal of PPC SW for AOS4 and MorphOS, same for AROS are portable.)



But there are so many different things people like around Amiga.

Last edited by KimmoK on 13-Aug-2015 at 02:11 PM.

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

@Deniil715

My reasoning is that the 68k base still exceeds all NG platforms combined multiple times. Example for me are compiler and development environments. In Aros Vision I have more than 10 compilers and scripting languages integrated. Most of them are not available on NG. Partly you can use them on AmigaOS/MorphOS and even run the binaries but they still compile 68k, not PPC. That is similar on almost anything.

Software decides what a platform can be used for and I do not see chances here for NG. NG as I understand it had the idea to move the platform to new hardware (Aros to X86, the other two to PPC). But when AmigaOS and MorphOS became reality it was already too late for that because most developer left in late 90s and because of that it failed.

I am of course mostly involved in Aros but it has the same problem as the others, lacks of drivers and lacks of manpower.

Aros 68k had the advantage that it combined both Aros (OS in development) and 68k software base, that was basically how I created Aros Vision, taking a 68k nghtly and adding and testing 68k binaries. So for me that is most interesting and running almost everywhere. Regarding expectations what you can do with your amiga I assume that you are realistic but I have often seen people obviously dreaming of taking the world and this will not happen.

For me the most realistic next step is to create FPGA based hardware (accellerators and/or standalone) because it lifts the existing software base because I do not think that there are enough developers to create a new base.

@KimmoK

I still do not see the developers creating new software for a new Hyper-AmigaOS with 64bit, SMP and MP and thus heavily changed API. The MorphOS-Team has announced that they will make a ISA change in future and drop compatibility for it. In many regards it will be more like Aros with 68k running in UAE and people who are comforted to existing systems will have to change. But even if a system would be modernized who will create the software for it? Even worse, all devs work for fun and in sparetime so they will propably only support what they have, so you do only have NG but also NGNG.

But everyone his own I tinker around with my distrbution

@number6

Quote:

So, you're pretty much saying "Amiga" (no prefix no suffix) licensed to CUSA as well as to IContain never happened. gotcha.

I pointed to 2000-2005 time period, long before IContain or CommodoreUSA.

Quote:

not bad, but I would have gone with "is" and "touches" and "turns".

I don´t think Bill owns now anything of value he could ruin (more than he did)...

@OlafS25

I don't see why MOS on another ISA needs to drop compatibility. The fact is 68K emulated in Trance runs in a sanbdbox so all they need is a new sandbox. Shouldn't be a problem. Amuihlon proved this ten years ago.

But the question does remain what will happen to Quark and the A/Box. I pressume Quark can be compiled natively for a new ISA and then it needs an A/Box emulation layer. Since the A/Box, AFAIK, is tightly coupled with emulating the Amiga 68K ABI.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Here is the same. So, after the agreement no one has the legal right to call Amiga what's labeled as AmigaOne.

Except Amiga.Inc of course (again in legal sense).

Quote:

End of legitimates successors of Amigas...

Of course AmigaOne is legitimate successor of Amiga (don´t you see AmigaOne?). And up to this day only legitimate successor still sold.

@blizz1220

Quote:

In the case of famous agreement it was the judge that advised the parties to come up with agreement and in such case party that would refuse to do so would risk more in US court than the other.

Source for such claim?

Quote:

If that case happened in Europe and was handled by civil law I think Hyperion would probably win the case instead signing agreement.

Hyperion´s argumentation was weak in some crucial points: notably they excused breach of 2001 Agreement on their side by prior breach by Amiga.Inc. 2001 Agreement clearly stated who owns what and who shall give source/object code to whom. However, as corparate history of Amiga.Inc was notably shady, it rather didn´t continue in court battle that could expose all its dark (and maybe even illegal) past. Hyperion would have no chance against any "normal" company. This is only my explanation, of course.

@noXLar

Quote:

don't you remember my earlier post from another tread that Amiga inc. officially renamed the original Amiga from amiga to classic amiga in late 90's?

Last time Amiga.Inc declared such divide between "classic" and "NG" was in 2000 after AmigaOne announcement: AmigaOS vs AmigaDE (AmigaOne was then presented as add-on to Amiga computers). In this sense, even AmigaOS 4.1FE is "classic".