@agami

Quote:

When Amiga OS 3 was presented to me with my shiny new A1200 back in the day, it immediately stood out as a highly capable, flexible, and an very enabling operating system. Prior to that, I have used Amiga OS 1.x, Windows 3, text-based mainframe terminals, and I had seen system 6/7 from a distance, and by all appearances Amiga OS 3 was superior in every way, further affirming the innovator/early adopter within me.

Most of my experience would be friends with DOS and Windows 3.11. And true, Windows did make Amiga Workbench look old fashioned, since all the windows could have different colours borders and be very customised. But, WB3.0 on my A1200 was a world away from WB1.3 on my A500, as I found OS3 to be much more usable.

Quote:

Even after Windows 95/98 and MacOS 8 were released, the orphaned AmigaOS 3.x kept up in large part due to its modular and extensible architecture and enviable community, but I do admit that as the years progressed it was less and less the right tool for the job at hand.

I recall it was a few years Amiga users could still joke about the Windows DOS prompt. We still had history and scroll bars. And then Windows '95 came along and killed it.

Quote:

And somewhere after both ESCOM and Gateway plans soured, and Amiga Inc drafted the AmigaOS 5 and 4 plans, AmigaOS 4 devolved into an OS for tech laggards? People who see the OS as the "killer app" itself, and are happy just fiddling with that as a surrogate for nostalgia?

I wouldn't say tech laggards as most OS4 users would have had other machines. It would continue the AmigaOS experience but not affect other computers in the house. For some they would have wanted it as a sole provider, but browsing was always a big problem, and that hasn't changed since CSS made iBrowse look weird. For my self, I was already getting into Mac laptops to learn about other systems and have a working browser my A1200 lacked. And it was only after I bought my AmigaOne I accepted donor PCs to run Windows when needed.

Quote:

When I think about it, since 2009 it has certainly enjoyed the levels of minimal improvement and backward momentum, worthy of the marketing tag line "Made by geriatrics, for geriatrics".

A few Amiga users that were adults when they embraced it would be geriatrics by now!

PPC, 68k is just like family arguing over THE SAME topics every year after year after thread

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

@Gunnar

Quote:

Is 8Bit Audio outdated, is this true what you say?

when he says he doesn't use 8bit it's only because 4bit is his limit!

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@Gunnar

Quote:

Gunnar wrote: Quote: Hammer wrote: A1200's laptop 2.5-inch hard disk wasn't cost-competitive. But is this just black and white? True a 2.5 Laptop drives had a higher price per MB This is a clear disadvantage. But what advantages did they have? * needing less power!! * producing less heat, and being less noise * being a lot more resilient to movement of the Amiga Maybe you recall that in the old days drives were very sensitive to movement of the Computer. You could even crash/destroy your drive with this. Laptop drives were designed to be more forgiving to this. I think as always there are two sides to the coin.

Yes, but the A1200 wasn't a laptop to move around: it usually stayed on the same place.

Also, and as I've said, many 3.5" hard disk haven't used a lot of power and the A1200's power supply was perfectly able to feed them.

And I don't recall it being noisy, but time passed and I have no clear memory about it.

The A1200 was the new A500: "computers for the masses, not for the classes". Like the tradition of Commodore.
So, the company should had to provide a cheaper solution instead of embedding a very expensive technology.

@Hypex

Quote:

Hypex wrote: @Gunnar MMX is now left behind in place of SSE which replaces x87 as well.

Not yet. If you use ffmpeg to encode a video with the latest HEVC/H.265 codec you can see from its output console that it's still using the MMX extension. Just to give a notable example.

x87 is also used in several softwares. You can also use in WinUAE, for example.
Quote:

Quote: So we know Altivec / VMX like the back of our hand ... And we tried with AMMX to make something much better to use for game coding than Altivec... Well, VMX doesn't look like it's evolved, last I checked it was still stuck at 128 bits which is rather obsolete

Indeed. They only doubled the number of "vector" registers with VSX, by reusing the floating point ones and extending them to 128 bits.

But there's a new vector ISA proposal, Simple-V: https://libre-soc.org/openpower/sv/executive_summary/
Quote:

when Intel is at 1024 bits now is it?

Intel is still at 512 bits (AVX-512). The prefix encoding allows to specify another vector length, so 1024 is definitely possible, but if Intel's engineers aren't stupid they should used for a vector extension instead of another packed/SIMD one. The actual packed/SIMD can be left as it is.


@Gunnar

Quote:

Gunnar wrote: @Hypex Quote: Well, VMX doesn't look like it's evolved, last I checked it was still stuck at 128 bits which is rather obsolete when Intel is at 1024 bits now is it? I can see that someone without coding experience - looks at 1024 bits and things that this is most important. But is this really the most important? No, in reality more bits is not what is important. Real programmers know this. What is really important you ask? What is really important are the features of the instructions and if the instructions have limitations. In reality, 64bit instruction with no limitation will often beat 1024 bit instructions with limitations. That 1024 is bigger than 128 is easy to see. And yes every child can say this - without understand the topic. I my opinion an intelligent conversion would be to review the instructions features and their limitations and based on this you could discuss in which areas AVX, Altivec or AMMX have each their advantages.

It also depends on how much general a SIMD or Vector extension is.

However, for mainstream SIMD/Vector ISAs, bigger registers are used because on average they increase the performance.

It wasn't just a case that Intel extended to 512-bit the existing SSE/AVX SIMD registers. Neither a case that Fujitsu's ARM/SVE-2 supercomputer is using 512-bit vector (not SIMD) registers. And that SiFive's RISC-V chips are using as well 512-bit vector (not SIMD) registers.

Size matters in this case. Of course, having also a set of instructions that is general enough to cover the usual code which can be "vectorized". Plus... how many features / flexibility offer the single instructions (here AVX-512 shines, since it supports a lot of cool stuff which almost any instruction can use / benefit fro,).

@Gunnar

You forgot to mention that Super-AGA is open source.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @agami For the Australian 1993 market, I dispute this.

Dispute it all you want, but my experience was an Australian experience.

I purchased my A1200HD from Maxwell's in Abbotsford in December of 1992 for $1,199 AUD. What I was able to do with that machine during 1993 and well into 1994, other systems could only do at a higher price point, for both hardware and software.

You appear to have some sort of hard-on for hardware specs and a fetish for "bigger number means better".

I shouldn't assume that English is your first language, but I was very clear in what I wrote. For $1,200, what I could do with my existing software, and new software released in 1993 and 1994, was amazing bang for buck.
I didn't engage in some superficial d!@& measuring contests with Mac and PC users, about who has nicer screen savers or better support for VGA monitors. It's not about the tool itself, rather what you can accomplish with the tool.

I too did eventually use the 3.5" HDD hack, and I didn't get an 030 accelerator until well into 1994, and it might've even been early 1995. But that was not a prerequisite for using the multi-media capabilities of Amiga OS 3 and the software, and I leveraged all of it. Graphic design and printing, audio editing and home video titling, entertainment, BBS comms, word processing, spreadsheets, etc.

The way I see it, for $1,200 AUD I got a brain upgrade in terms of redefining "what's possible". A bargain at twice the price.
No IBM compatible machine running DOS/Win 3.x or Mac with System 7 machine inspired such a paradigm shift at the time, and I can honestly say that there haven't been many new things that have done so since, and definitely not to the same degree.
And I can tell you, it's not from a lack of looking.

Last edited by agami on 28-Feb-2024 at 11:50 PM.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

Another machine, PC running windows, you need to connect PC and Amiga to stupid switch or a hub, as long as it’s not too intelligent it should work. if you have a smart switch it can remember what ports to send packet to, and reduce network traffic on ports that should not receive packets, in that case its not so easy to listen in.

I used to have a switch but haven't seen one in years. Be good to do it on the machine it has trouble with, Though I suppose it doesn't matter if it's local or remote transfer.

Quote:

RoadShow should also come with TcpDump, it also be used to monitor TCP packets, not sure you can compare with that, however.

Yes I recall that. There is also a debug mode. I've tested it before in dial up days.

@Kronos

Quote:

Did get an HD? -> decent value IF you were already heavily invested in the Amiga eco system

I read that as high definition at first.

I did get a HD with mine, a 40MB, double the size of the 20MB in my A590. But I did buy a demo model which kept costs down. What I did notice is that hardware like HD drives were more expensive on the Amiga because of the Amiga tax. You'd see a smaller HD drive at a more expensive price on the Amiga side. While on the PC side a bigger drive was more reasonable. Where I bought my A1200 they offered an 80MB for about the same or similar price as a 500MB, so I bought the better drive on the other side. Worked fine.

@Hammer

Quote:

PowerPC AmigaOS 4.1 doesn't run Deluxe Music 2.

I had another go at this. It can in fact work. Work being a matter of semantics. On its own screen it freezes. But I checked the icon and it can be changed to PUBLIC. It will then open on the Workbench. But smaller on HD but it does look nice for the age.

I managed to load, play and exit it with no hiccups. I did get a complaint about the play task exiting without freeing memory. This could be freezing it on a custom screen.

Here comes the but. But, the sound was garbled. Shouldn't affect it since it does work otherwise but I wonder if the broken locking in the OS4 audio device is causing disruptions.

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: @Gunnar Quote: Is 8Bit Audio outdated, is this true what you say? when he says he doesn't use 8bit it's only because 4bit is his limit!

As an electronic musician, I'll tell you this, just so there's no doubt. I'd choose more channels of actual Paula audio over any boring AF sterile 16/24 bit playback solution any day of the week ending in the letter Y.

If it were possible, I'd take multiple Paula chips on a board, routing the left/right from each one through digitally controlled SSM2040 style analogue resonant filter and a digitally controlled pan back into a stereo field.

Now that would be interesting.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@klx300r

Quote:

klx300r wrote: PPC, 68k is just like family arguing over THE SAME topics every year after year after thread

It's deathbed vigi. ARM BE is an EXIT ticket from Motorola/Freescale CPU BE products.

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Feb-2024 at 05:04 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)

@Hypex

Quote:

I had another go at this. It can in fact work. Work being a matter of semantics. On its own screen it freezes. But I checked the icon and it can be changed to PUBLIC. It will then open on the Workbench. But smaller on HD but it does look nice for the age. I managed to load, play and exit it with no hiccups. I did get a complaint about the play task exiting without freeing memory. This could be freezing it on a custom screen. Here comes the but. But, the sound was garbled. Shouldn't affect it since it does work otherwise but I wonder if the broken locking in the OS4 audio device is causing disruptions.

With AmigaOS 4.1 FE with RTG, I run Deluxe Music 2 on the Workbench screen. The problem is when the play button is clicked.

Fully functional emulated Paula on AHI would be nice. I assume CIA functions are fully functional on AmigaOS 4.1 FE/Amiga NG.

With RTG on fast 68K or PPC, I usually run my Amiga apps on Workbench.

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Feb-2024 at 05:10 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)

@Hypex

Quote:

Hypex wrote: @Kronos Quote: Did get an HD? -> decent value IF you were already heavily invested in the Amiga eco system I read that as high definition at first. I did get a HD with mine, a 40MB, double the size of the 20MB in my A590. But I did buy a demo model which kept costs down. What I did notice is that hardware like HD drives were more expensive on the Amiga because of the Amiga tax. You'd see a smaller HD drive at a more expensive price on the Amiga side. While on the PC side a bigger drive was more reasonable. Where I bought my A1200 they offered an 80MB for about the same or similar price as a 500MB, so I bought the better drive on the other side. Worked fine.

Commodore selected a higher-priced 2.5-inch laptop HDD instead of a lower-cost desktop 3.5-inch HDD. The decision-making process at Commodore is strange.

For A1200, there are 3rd party 3.5-inch HDD mount kits that replace Commodore's 2.5-inch HDD mount, but that's an extra cost.

_________________
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:

Dispute it all you want, but my experience was an Australian experience.

My experience is in Australia's Sydney.

Quote:

I purchased my A1200HD from Maxwell's in Abbotsford in December of 1992 for $1,199 AUD. What I was able to do with that machine during 1993 and well into 1994, other systems could only do at a higher price point, for both hardware and software. You appear to have some sort of hard-on for hardware specs and a fetish for "bigger number means better".

Wrong, software sells hardware that delivers certain "32-bit" gaming experiences e.g. 2D/2.5D/3D PC games from 1991 to 1994,
Star Wars X Wing (1993),
Doom (1993),
IndyCar Racing (1993),
Wing Commander 1 (1990, 256 colors on VGA),
Wing Commander 2 (1991),
Doom II (1994),
Hectic (1994, Doom engine D&D theme),
Frontier: Elite II (1993, 256 colors on VGA),
Ultima Underworld II (1993, RPG with texture map 3D),
Mortal Kombat 1 (1992, good port),
Mortal Kombat 2 (1994, excellent port)

The mentioned games are on my 386DX-33/ET4000 PC clone. MS Office 4.x and Lotus Ami Pro 3.x are installed on this PC. These apps are from my Dad's work.

-----------
For my A3000/030 @ 25Mhz, I also have Wing Commander 1, Frontier: Elite II, Mortal Kombat 1 and Mortal Kombat 2.

My A3000's Formula One Grand Prix (1991) was F1GP mod'ed with higher frame rates.

Wing Commander 1 on Amiga has similar CPU requirements i.e. 25 Mhz 68020/68030.

From my stock A1200, Frontier: Elite II and Wing Commander 1 run better with a faster 25 Mhz 68030 CPU.

There are many full applications from British Amiga magazines, for example, I used IntroCAD (1992) and Turbo Print cover disks during my technical drawing in my high school subjects.

When Shapeshifter was released in 1995, my Amiga 3000 gained MacOS and MS Office.

My family has two computers due to my Dad, myself, and my brother are heavy users. My family's budget for computers is $1500 per year.

After owning both A1200 and A3000/030 @ 25Mhz, A1200's gimped 68EC020 (effectively 7.5 Mhz) is not enough.

_________________
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)

@Karlos

Quote:

As an electronic musician, I'll tell you this, just so there's no doubt. I'd choose more channels of actual Paula audio over any boring AF sterile 16/24 bit playback solution any day of the week ending in the letter Y. If it were possible, I'd take multiple Paula chips on a board, routing the left/right from each one through digitally controlled SSM2040 style analogue resonant filter and a digitally controlled pan back into a stereo field.

Super-AGA has the following feature:

16 Amiga/Paula DMA audio channels
Each of them can be selected to be stereo positioned controlled "pan" with two volume to be between Left/RIght
Each channel can play has either 8bit, 16bit, or 2x16bit stereo samples.
Each has own volume own sample rate.
The 16b channel allow you to play CD quality music files in parallel.

Did I understand that you as musician this "sounds not bad"?

@Gunnar

Also… Super-AGA IS OPEN SOURCE!!!

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@Gunnar

So, musically, it's helpful to separate a few use cases here.

1. Amiga as a DAW
2. Amiga as an Instrument

Use case 1 requires high frequency, high resolution, ultra linear DAC and high quality (linear, low distortion) amplification for correct reproduction of the mixdown. Multiple hardware tracks are not especially important here. In fact, they may even be counter productive as the end result of multiple hardware channels would sound different than the final mixdown.

Use case 2 is where the original Paula sound comes into it's own. All the things that people consider defects in the sonic capability of Paula are what makes it musically interesting; the nonlinear DAC, the aliasing, the bass heavy reproduction. If your Paula implementation lacks these then it's not as interesting.

Generally when using the Amiga as an instrument it's audio is captured externally and put into a mixdown in a DAW.

If you want a killer musical application for your SAGA Paula, you should consider having a breakout board which allows separate mono output jacks for each hardware channel. This is a standard feature on, for example, drum machines, where each sound is typically a hardware channel. This allows musicians to route the individual channels through whatever outboard audio processing they have already.

A couple of ultra linear 16 bit channels are of course handy for using actual samples (breaks, vocals, etc) you want to include, but for me, the original Paula sound is amazing for many instrument use cases.

A MIDI capable sequencer application that can play the 16 channel while simultaneously controlling said outboard hardware would be a very compelling system.

At a purely hardware level programmable resonant filters per channel would be awesome. Maybe you'd need to do that digitally which isn't quite as nice, but has it's own charm nevertheless. Personally speaking, you can't beat the sound of the SSM analogue filters.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Karlos
Check Bomb the BassMX. How cool are those musics!?

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@Karlos

Quote:

A MIDI capable sequencer application that can play the 16 channel while simultaneously controlling said outboard hardware would be a very compelling system.

Don't you have all this on Amiga already?
The Amiga program "HORNY" can do "infinite" number of Midi channels
Is this not perfect for this?