@jPV

Quote:

jPV wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: In fact, there's no NG o.s.: AROS, MorphOS, OS4, are all ports or reimplementation of the original o.s.. There's absolutelu nothing "NG", because all problems of the original o.s. are still there... Seriously? :D Shouldn't laugh at this ignorant comment, but I'm just speechless. And if it was a joke, not a funny one and spreads false information.

False only because a MorphOS fanatical said it? Ah, ok! Normal stuff, with people like you.
@jPV

Quote:

jPV wrote: @Karlos Quote: Karlos wrote: @jPV Ok, let's unpack that. What is "next generation" from the standpoint of a 32-bit, unprotected single-cpu platform? - Multicore SMP - Full memory protection - 64-bit addressing In which rule-book it is told that these define the "next generation"? What would be needed for 3rd generation then? Are there this drastic changes, for example, in the PC or console world between generations?

And in which rule-book is there a definition of "next generation"?
Quote:

After all, these operating systems that we commonly call "next generation" on Amiga, are running on whole new CPU architectures, have fundamendal improvements in core components to match more modern standards (new memory systems that don't slow down by fragmentation, new layers implementations that don't slow down by having more windows open, 64 bit DOS support everywhere, whole new desktop environments, re-designed intuition, new media streaming systems, etc.), and of course lots of bundled and improved stuff from graphics drivers to USB, TCP/IP, Firewire stacks, etc. There's practically nothing that wouldn't have been improved somehow compared to the original 68k operating system releases.

Most of those things were implemented by subsequent (to 3.1) o.s. versions and/or third-party tools/patches.

It was even possible to completely replace the Workbench with things like Scalos or Directory Opus / Magellan.

Ambient could also be ported. In general, you can add what's missing to the Amiga o.s..
Quote:

I just can't see why these couldn't be called as the next generation (2nd) and if/when we get the mentioned features call it as 3rd generation, but fine if you don't want to call it like that.

Since no fundamental issue of the o.s. is addressed, then yes: there's nothing that you've listed above that could be called "next generation".
Quote:

It is still utter underestimation to call these new operating systems just as "reimplementations of the original o.s." and to tell that "ALL problems of the original o.s. are still there", because those statements simply aren't true. I just can't believe someone can claim so.

Well, I'm here: now you can believe it.

And yes: my statements are perfectly valid, whatever a blind fanatical like you can claim differently, since they perfectly match with the reality.

Something that you can't see because you're using your MorphOS-tinted glasses...


@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote: @jPV Quote: jPV wrote: @cdimauro Seriously? :D Shouldn't laugh at this ignorant comment, but I'm just speechless. And if it was a joke, not a funny one and spreads false information. Ok, let's unpack that. What is "next generation" from the standpoint of a 32-bit, unprotected single-cpu platform? - Multicore SMP - Full memory protection - 64-bit addressing There are AROS derivatives that do some of these things, but nothing in the PPC sphere. Like it or not, OS4 and MorphOS are the same generation as 3.x/68k, they are just faster. All the new stuff is peripheral (figuratively and literally - peripheral changes and changes for peripherals). This is not to deride either "NG" platform, it's just a reality check. There's very little they can do to become NG without breaking backwards compatibility or making some sort of sandbox for the older stuff that relies on unprotected, single threaded 32-bit (31 if you want to be really pedantic) addressing.

This. And a bit more, to be honest: the above that you've listed are just the most obvious ones, but there are things which the Amiga o.s. ports/reimplementation haven't fixed as well.

Even Windows 1.0 and MacOS 1.0 were better in some aspects (crucial for the evolution of an o.s. to modern standards)...
Quote:

Karlos wrote: @jPV Quote: In which rule-book it is told that these define the "next generation"? Well, let's see. How about the rule book of "common sense"? You have a hardware platform both defined and limited by 32 (31)-bit address space, uniprocessor model with no memory protection, all widely recognised as shortcomings well before the migration to PPC. If common sense is not the rule book, then what should count as a generational leap over the above?

Common sense is something that is missing to blind zealot like the above guy.

They will never see the reality even if you put it in front of their nose.


@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @Karlos You don’t seam to care about size of data bus or the cpu register size.

Well, size matters... when talking about CPU architectures.

And o.ses: too. In fact, in the last years no 32-bit mainstream o.s. is released: all of them are 64 bit in size (!). And for good reasons.

@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote: @NutsAboutAmiga Well, given that most CPU architectures tend to use integer registers in a general way (for either addresses or data), what do you suppose a 64-bit addressing model implies regarding register and bus width? The point stands. There's nothing revolutionary about "NG" to warrant the moniker. I'm sorry if I don't happen to regard running your 64-bit multicore CPU natively hobbled as "next gen" because it supports better graphics cards. I'm sorry I don't happen to regard having a native 64-bit capable SMP capable all singing, all dancing HAL abstracting microkernel as "next gen" when it only thing it runs is a single 32-bit box that has all the same 32-bit limitations as the "competition".

*
Quote:

OS4 and MorphOS have many nice features for the end user but it's all incremental. Show me a single thing they can do that is impossible to do on 3.x 68K system (include in that UAE, PiStorm, Amithlon etc). And by impossible, I don't mean runs exclusive software that isn't available for the 68K like 3DNova, Reggae or Wayfairer, etc, I mean something that something that is completely and forever out of reach of said 3.x 68K system because it relies on a generational leap over it architecturally.

And absolutely this, of course, which is they key point about this (sub) discussion.
Quote:

Maybe then you'll understand why some of us don't regard it as next generation.

"Maybe"...

@Karlos

If we go by that definition, every feature of Win11 or the latest macos could be made in 32bit and is thereby backportable to an early PPC or Pentium.
Heck, make it a fake retro emulated 68030 or 386DX with unrealistic clockspeed and memory size and your golden.

In reality noone will ever do such thing just as noone as yet backported most the NG stuff that makes NG what it is.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Ok then, what's your definition of "next gen" from the perspective of 3.x/68k and why?

Quote:

just as noone as yet backported most the NG stuff that makes NG what it is.

Which is what, exactly? What is it that NG/PPC is and 3.x/68k is not?

Last edited by Karlos on 05-Feb-2024 at 07:25 PM.
Last edited by Karlos on 05-Feb-2024 at 07:24 PM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @Karlos If we go by that definition, every feature of Win11 or the latest macos could be made in 32bit and is thereby backportable to an early PPC or Pentium.

How do you address more than 4GB of memory? Possible without resorting to the 8-bit era bank switching.

That's the most important thing nowdays which justify the move to 64-bit-only o.ses..

Just take a look at the modern applications: games and browsers require plenty of physical memory (not only virtual) that a 32-bit o.s. / platform can't provide.
Quote:

Heck, make it a fake retro emulated 68030 or 386DX with unrealistic clockspeed and memory size and your golden.

And 8-bit bank switching for addressing such memory beyond 4GB...
Quote:

In reality noone will ever do such thing just as noone as yet backported most the NG stuff that makes NG what it is.

That's because you never took a look at AROS or, recently, at the new Amiga OS 3.x releases.

@cdimauro

When have to fake it to make it then fake it some more just in case.

No real Amiga could do 1GB or more, no real 68k ever went past 100MHz, so what is some 32+ bit addressing trickery in the great scheme of things?

Running AROS on a fake 68k is running the worst NG OS on the worst possible HW but it’s still NG.

Real AmigaOS in whatever version and with whatever patches on a real Amiga can’t do s##t.

The point is YOU came up with up a random set of features that would define NG which is something noone asked you to do and you are also the one calling people blind fanboys who don’t agree with.

All PiStorm, UAE and other forms of emulation have done in the past 20 years is „numbers go up“ which means all the good stuff could be done but is also pointless aslong as noone really does them.

Yeah fanboys indeed

Last edited by Kronos on 05-Feb-2024 at 07:54 PM.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @cdimauro When have to fake it to make it then fake it some more just in case. No real Amiga could do 1GB or more, no real 68k ever went past 100MHz, so what is some 32+ bit addressing trickery in the great scheme of things? Running AROS on a fake 68k is running the worst NG OS on the worst possible HW but it’s still NG. Real AmigaOS in whatever version and with whatever patches on a real Amiga can’t do s##t.

Is it due to your MorphOS-tinted glasses that you aren't able to see that I never mentioned an Amiga, rather only its o.s.?

Regarding AROS, your statements are expected, since you as well are a MorphOS zealot.

@cdimauro

AROS is NG
So your saying x can’t be NG because it could be done in y (also NG)

All random words with little to no meaning.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @cdimauro The point is YOU came up with up a random set of features that would define NG which is something noone asked you to do and you are also the one calling people blind fanboys who don’t agree with.

Well, as I've said before, I don't expect that blind fanaticals can see the reality even if it's in front of them.

Ah, sure: you have plenty of memory with your MorphOS systems, you use tens and tens of CPU cores, your o.s. is rock solid and applications can't bring it down with a breath, and so on...
Quote:

All PiStorm, UAE and other forms of emulation have done in the past 20 years is „numbers go up“ which means all the good stuff could be done but is also pointless aslong as noone really does them.

Isn't it the same which OS4 and MorphOS users trumpeted when talking about the incredible performance of Petunia and Trance?

Now that even a small and cheap device brings a lot of computing power to a real Amiga (which you do NOT have) then you feel the threatening, eh?
Quote:

Yeah fanboys indeed

Absolutely.

BTW, next time don't immediately push the Submit button if you still need to puke something from your stomach...

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @cdimauro AROS is NG

YOUR definition!

NOT mine, certainly (for the same reasons that I've already explained).
Quote:

So your saying x can’t be NG because it could be done in y (also NG)

No, absolutely.
Quote:

All random words with little to no meaning.

Well, it's another proof that you don't read / understand what people are writing. Hence the non-sense that you write.

You feel touched, eh? Once someone is touching your beloved o.s. then you sprout up immediately...

@Kronos

I gave a clear and concise definition as to what I would regard as "NG" - specifically overcoming three key architectural limitations* of the existing platform - limitations that were well-known long before the move to PPC. I don't think there's anything unfair, biased or exclusionary in that definition. Nevertheless, the objection was made, "where is it said that this is the definition of NG?". So I am all ears.

What is the PPC/NG definition of "next gen" and why?


* Only AROS has actually tackled any of those three challenges in any meaningful way and that has always been at the expense of binary compatibility. However, seeing as AROS aims at source level compatibility only, that's somewhat manageable. AROS is thus the closest contender for the NG moniker as far as I can see.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: In reality noone will ever do such thing just as noone as yet backported most the NG stuff that makes NG what it is.

AOS4 or MOS are 32 Bit, they could be ported back to 68k and with PiStorm or UAE there should be hardware fast enough and with enough RAM to make it usable.

This could have be started 20 years ago but no one* really did it and I see no reasons why it should be done now.

*Except AfA OS but that guy was a weirdo.

Last edited by OneTimer1 on 05-Feb-2024 at 08:34 PM.

@Deniers

"NG" is just a label, and at the turn of the millennium as we looked forward toward a new generation of Amiga-influenced hardware and operating systems, AmigaOS 4, MorphOS, and AROS were all a step along the road toward "NG".

Other than AROS finally getting around to it, the other two pretty much halted after that first step, and just did minor refinements. And it's not unreasonable to conclude that this halt is directly linked to the halt in the CPU architecture for which they are written, namely single-core, 32-bit, Power PC.

So what may have been viewed as "NG" twenty-odd years ago, when Windows XP, and MacOS X were also mostly 32-bit and single-core, today it should no longer be using that label.
Just like once upon a time a PS3 and an Xbox 360 were considered "Next Gen" consoles, but not today by the standards of 2024.

That is your wake up call.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Not on par: they distroyed Apple's M3. As well as Intel's and AMD's x86/x64 chips on their market of excellence: desktop. The used benchmarks aren't cherry-picked ones: they have shown also industry-standard SPEC results. That's something which very very seriously Apple, Intel and AMD have to look at and propose efficace products to contrast it.

Qualcomm X Elite is not yet released. Qualcomm X Elite's plan release is mid-2024.


Qualcomm has confirmed that the first Snapdragon X Elite PCs will launch alongside the next version of Windows in mid-2024. These PCs will be the first to ship with the upcoming Germanium platform release of Windows.


For X64 camp.
https://www.pcgamer.com/fresh-amd-zen-5-cpu-details-leak-suggesting-a-likely-launch-date-between-april-and-june-of-this-year/
Fresh AMD Zen 5 CPU details leak suggesting a likely launch date between April and June of this year


https://www.notebookcheck.net/Packed-AMD-Zen-5-leak-reveals-Ryzen-8000-CPUs-could-release-in-Q1-2024-with-20-25-IPC-uplift-up-to-16-cores-and-larger-L1-L2-caches.704808.0.html

Paul maintains that Zen 5 will have an IPC uplift between 20-25% with one of his sources mentioning “over 25%� for single core.


Intel ArrowLake release follows Zen 5's release. AMD plans to release Zen 5 X3D SKUs after non-X3D Zen 5.

AMD's Zen 5 has a platform cost advantage since the existing AM5 install base can run with Zen 5 SKUs.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1/2/3 SoCs are not cheap and Samsung is complaining about it.

Last edited by Hammer on 06-Feb-2024 at 02:20 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@agami

Quote:

agami wrote: @Deniers "NG" is just a label, and at the turn of the millennium as we looked forward toward a new generation of Amiga-influenced hardware and operating systems, AmigaOS 4, MorphOS, and AROS were all a step along the road toward "NG". Other than AROS finally getting around to it, the other two pretty much halted after that first step, and just did minor refinements. And it's not unreasonable to conclude that this halt is directly linked to the halt in the CPU architecture for which they are written, namely single-core, 32-bit, Power PC.

A CPU only defines an hardware platform where something is running. There cannot be any "NG" linked to it only because a processors family is getting in the oblivion.
Quote:

So what may have been viewed as "NG" twenty-odd years ago, when Windows XP, and MacOS X were also mostly 32-bit and single-core, today it should no longer be using that label.

Talking about just CPUs / architectures is all about porting, and nothing else. Specifically the Amiga o.s. was ported to PowerPCs: full stop. Even AROS was ported to different architectures and nobody can claim that one a new port is done then we've a (new) NG system.

Anyway and as long as the original Amiga o.s. limits of the ports or the reimplementations are there, it's a complete non-sense talking about NG.

NG should have some of those original issues fixed.

OneTimer1 Quote:

AOS4 or MOS are 32 Bit, they could be ported back to 68k and with PiStorm or UAE there should be hardware fast enough and with enough RAM to make it usable. This could have be started 20 years ago but no one* really did it and I see no reasons why it should be done now.

There were 68k beta versions of AmigaOS 4 modules. My understanding is that there are still 68k modules that were never converted to PPC (ARexx?). How hard can it be to re-enable 68k support in the code? Is it worth it for emulated 68k systems though?

agami Quote:

"NG" is just a label, and at the turn of the millennium as we looked forward toward a new generation of Amiga-influenced hardware and operating systems, AmigaOS 4, MorphOS, and AROS were all a step along the road toward "NG". Other than AROS finally getting around to it, the other two pretty much halted after that first step, and just did minor refinements. And it's not unreasonable to conclude that this halt is directly linked to the halt in the CPU architecture for which they are written, namely single-core, 32-bit, Power PC.

There were 2 primary problems that I can see for AmigaOS 4 and MorphOS.

1. The NG OS was standardized before it was adequately improved. Software was created and people don't want to lose that. AROS was perceived as being in a work in progress state which has allowed for more modern progress. I believe this is partially due to the OS source code and more source code of software for AROS being open source. MorphOS really should make modern improvements for x86-64 as they change architectures since they are breaking compatibility anyway. AmigaOS 4 is in the most trouble as AmigaNOne is beyond hopeless yet Trevor refuses to face reality. PPC AmigaOS 4 is dead and it isn't ever coming back. Too many mistakes were made. There won't ever be 64 bit, SMP or full memory protection. There is some hope for some form of it on other architectures with needed changes but denial is keeping any form of porting and transformation from happening, other than the partial backporting to 68k AmigaOS 3. Despite legal issues with backporting to the 68k, this may be the best hope as AROS and MophOS are ahead in supporting to x86-64 and ARM architectures. I don't think 68k emulation is attractive enough to non-hardcore Amiga users and performance on cheap ARM CPUs is weak.

2. PPC hardware wasn't standard enough, especially the embedded hardware. I don't think SMP will ever work on PPC AmigaOS 4 but even if it did, it's unlikely to work on all multi-core hardware. It is also not possible to enable 64 bit on all PPC hardware even if it could be for some. The A1222+ doesn't even have a FPU let alone SIMD unit support. As much of a complex mess x86-64 hardware is, it is much more standardized and the stronger memory model makes SMP easier. ARM AArch64 is much more standardized because earlier ARM ISAs suffered from lack of standardization like PPC.

It is possible to have 32 bit and 64 bit code running together. ARM CPU cores can do it except where 32 bit support is removed on newer cores. It's not even that special. I believe it is possible to add 64 bit support to the Amiga while retaining compatibility. SMP is harder but I think it could likely be added with partial compatibility. Full memory protection breaks compatibility but much increased protection is possible (one place where AmigaOS 4 made improvements). Security is perhaps the hardest of all without major changes that breaks most existing software. The Amiga on the desktop is dead end with any CPU architecture anyway. Cool retro and hobbyist systems are where it is at but I don't think emulation is attractive enough. The Amiga wasn't just about the AmigaOS.

Quote:

Karlos wrote: OS4 and MorphOS have many nice features for the end user but it's all incremental. Show me a single thing they can do that is impossible to do on 3.x 68K system (include in that UAE, PiStorm, Amithlon etc). And by impossible, I don't mean runs exclusive software that isn't available for the 68K like 3DNova, Reggae or Wayfairer, etc, I mean something that something that is completely and forever out of reach of said 3.x 68K system because it relies on a generational leap over it architecturally.

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Most of those things were implemented by subsequent (to 3.1) o.s. versions and/or third-party tools/patches. Ambient could also be ported. In general, you can add what's missing to the Amiga o.s..

Of course everything could be done, but wake me up when someone actually does implement them all. I don't want to waste my time on daydreaming.

You just can't hack & patch OS3 to, let's say, MorphOS level with all the features currently. And even if you try, the result will be a fragile house of cards, that is no good for anything more serious. It might look semi-fine if you just use it occasionally, but it's not for productive daily use. Been there, done that.

And if we'd strictly compare OS advancement, we'd also leave 3rd party hacks out of the comparsion.


Quote:

It was even possible to completely replace the Workbench with things like Scalos or Directory Opus / Magellan.

Yea... I'm a big Magellan 2 fan and I've been using it as a Workbench replacement for 25 years now on all of my HD equipped Amigas. I have it installed currently on five 68k Amigas and on several... how should I call them... "incremental operating systems"?

Unfortunately it is outdated in too many aspects nowadays to be a contender to, for example, Ambient, which is a more modern take on the same approach. And yes, I do know Magellan 2 is open source now and I also donated to get it open sourced, but nobody has really modernized it yet, but it will conquer the world when someone does it! While I wait for that, I'll keep using what's better and available.


Quote:

And yes: my statements are perfectly valid, whatever a blind fanatical like you can claim differently, since they perfectly match with the reality. Something that you can't see because you're using your MorphOS-tinted glasses...

"ports or reimplementation of the original o.s." gives me the impression that there haven't been anything new in the new operating systems and they'd be simple clones only, which of course isn't the case. I don't think that I need MorphOS-tinted glasses to get that impression...

There are also many problems that don't have solutions under OS3 currently, but have been fixed in MorphOS and OS4, so I'm not accepting your "all problems of the original o.s. are still there". Can you elaborate why you claim that nothing has been improved? Or is that "all" limited to certain types of issues?

Last edited by jPV on 06-Feb-2024 at 10:56 AM.

_________________
- The wiki based MorphOS Library - Your starting point for MorphOS
- Software made by jPV^RNO

@jPV

Quote:

Of course everything could be done

Thank you. This is all I was looking for, either an example of something fundamentally inaccessible to 3.x/68K that warrants the "next gen" definition, or the recognition that it's just a label.

Nobody - well not me anyway - is making the claim that MorphOS, OS4, et al are not significant improvements quite the contrary. They are not, however, generational leaps.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote: @jPV Quote: Of course everything could be done Thank you. This is all I was looking for, either an example of something fundamentally inaccessible to 3.x/68K that warrants the "next gen" definition, or the recognition that it's just a label. Nobody - well not me anyway - is making the claim that MorphOS, OS4, et al are not significant improvements quite the contrary. They are not, however, generational leaps.

Fine by me, I was more upset about belittling comments about improvements in these new operating systems by the other user. The NG term was just a sideline in the discussion for me.

BTW. do you have any suggestion what term should be used to separate these new systems from the "classics" then? :)

Last edited by jPV on 06-Feb-2024 at 12:24 PM.

_________________
- The wiki based MorphOS Library - Your starting point for MorphOS
- Software made by jPV^RNO

@jPV

Quote:

BTW. do you have any suggestion what term should be used to separate these new systems from the "classics" then? :)

I tend to think of them as "enhanced compatibles", but I don't have a specific term. I use PPC/NG because that's the term everyone uses. Yes, I appreciate the irony given the discussion.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...