There is (was) a rumour of (A)REXX not being a legal part of AmigaOS.

Well Rexx was used by Commodore but their never really paid the author so he dropped support.

@OneTimer1

he completely disappeared from the community... last signs are from 80s

@OlafS25

Quote:

he completely disappeared from the community... last signs are from 80s

Well I found his traces from early 90s, but basically you are right. Open source reimplementation would be best solution, but today is probably too late. New software can use other languages like Python or Lua.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Usually they are introductory courses, because physics need to write some code to create simulation of their models. Depends on your field of study.

That's why I've written "Usually".
Quote:

Quote: But they didn't become experts in those fields, like the ones which get a proper degree. Capable enough to understand, I would say.

See above: it depends on the kind of studies.
Quote:

Quote: Ask him to prove that it's not possible to virtualize the AGA chipset (that's your thesis) My thesis? My memory must be even worser than I thought.

From your comment #315:

"This is highly theoretical discussion as AAA was not ready even in 1994 when AA compatibility would be crucial."

This was NOT theoretical, and has nothing to do with the AAA implementation and status. As I've reported, this argument was already addressed on amigacoding.de: PRACTICALLY, not theoretical.

If you are still on the same position, that's your turn to show why it doesn't work.
Quote:

Quote: So, what's wrong here? The fact that I left the project? Be clear. In this thread you wrote about end of TiNa: If the company then decided to drop the project, it's not my problem anymore, But, as you admit, the real reason for TiNa´s demise was your own action - new job had simply higher priority: In the end I decided that an hobby isn't worth the risk to lose the job of a life...

"Strangely", you missed the most important thing here:

They haven't found a replacement in more than a year

In fact, I'm NOT the only Amiga chipset expert. Right? There are even some which know it much better than me: Toni Wilen, Marcel ("Veda"), Natami's leader (don't remember the name), just to name some known ones.

Maybe I'm one of the few that didn't asked for a single cent for all work that I did, but that's another thing.

And BTW, the company completed the board, but they didn't implemented any Amiga chipset firmware.

In fact, the plan was:
- define what kind of hardware use for the board (DONE; the company & me);
- define the chipset's registers specifications (DONE; me);
- design and build the board (DONE; the company);
- write the Amiga specific firmware (not DONE; wasn't my duty: I'm NOT a VHDL/Verilog engineer);
- write or buy a 68K softcore (not DONE; the plan was to use an existing soft core, or buy one. Anyway, not my duty: I'm NOT a VHDL/Verilog engineer).

And of course, I had to coordinate everything.

At the end they decided to implement an alternative (minimal) chipset using also a simple RISC core for their needs.

So, that was a missed opportunity for the Amiga community.
Quote:

I could write you are the very reason behind failure of TiNa, but that would be too harsh. Well, I apologize to you. Of course you aren´t liar, you only have highly selective memory...

Well, I think that it's quite clear who has a "selective memory": the one which reported only some part of the cake, carefully hiding some important pieces. That's called mystification: another prove of your intellectual dishonesty.
Quote:

Quote: Well, I only reported what some MorphOS developers (read: NOT me!) already expressed about such argument. But, as usual, maybe you know it better than them. Question of 68k compatibility is voiced on MorphOS forums, I don´t think MorphOS developers have deaf ears. However, MorphOS transition to another architecture is not question of this year (or probably even next year), so they have enough time to think about possible substitute solution.

It's normal that users ask for 68K compatibility. Even OS4 and AROS users do.

But a solution like Trance/Petunia is NOT possible. And again, that doesn't come (only) from me, but from o.ses developers.

If you or your PhD friend want to contribute, you can show us how to do. I can't wait.

@cdimauro

Quote:

This was NOT theoretical, and has nothing to do with the AAA implementation and status. As I've reported, this argument was already addressed on amigacoding.de: PRACTICALLY, not theoretical.

So, you have working AAA board with AGA compatibility? I fear what you mean under "PRACTICALLY" is in real world only theoretical.

Quote:

Well, I think that it's quite clear who has a "selective memory": the one which reported only some part of the cake, carefully hiding some important pieces. That's called mystification: another prove of your intellectual dishonesty.

I proved your original statement about end of TiNa was false. That alone should prove "intellectual dishonesty" of one of us.

However, thanks for another TiNa background.

Quote:

But a solution like Trance/Petunia is NOT possible. And again, that doesn't come (only) from me, but from o.ses developers.

As you may remember, I accepted your explanation of this problem in another thread (it seems we both waste too much time here...). I don´t know why you think I insist on Trance/Petunia-like solution of 68k compatibility. Maybe you know me even better than myself... To be more serious, I wrote possible substitute solution in post you responded. This may be clever sandbox with some shared resources with host OS or plain UAE with clipboard only integration. Available resources of MorphOS Team are of course crucial question for any such solution.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: This was NOT theoretical, and has nothing to do with the AAA implementation and status. As I've reported, this argument was already addressed on amigacoding.de: PRACTICALLY, not theoretical. So, you have working AAA board with AGA compatibility? I fear what you mean under "PRACTICALLY" is in real world only theoretical.

Who talked about an implementation? Not me.

The argument was: AGA chipset virtualization. It IS possible, and the technical explanation is found on the usual site.
Quote:

Quote: Well, I think that it's quite clear who has a "selective memory": the one which reported only some part of the cake, carefully hiding some important pieces. That's called mystification: another prove of your intellectual dishonesty. I proved your original statement about end of TiNa was false.

I wasn't the TiNA's owner, and I'm not the only Amiga chipset expert. It's the company which has to find another replacement for me.
Quote:

That alone should prove "intellectual dishonesty" of one of us.

See above. And maybe in your parallel universe a company depends only by single man for a project, which isn't replaceable. Right?
Quote:

Quote: But a solution like Trance/Petunia is NOT possible. And again, that doesn't come (only) from me, but from o.ses developers. As you may remember, I accepted your explanation of this problem in another thread (it seems we both waste too much time here...). I don´t know why you think I insist on Trance/Petunia-like solution of 68k compatibility. Maybe you know me even better than myself... To be more serious, I wrote possible substitute solution in post you responded. This may be clever sandbox with some shared resources with host OS or plain UAE with clipboard only integration. Available resources of MorphOS Team are of course crucial question for any such solution.

Yes, we discussed it, and the only possible solution is an "UAE sandbox", with limited set of shared resources.

@cdimauro

Quote:

The argument was: AGA chipset virtualization. It IS possible, and the technical explanation is found on the usual site.

Well, my point was about AAA not ready in 1994, and not AA compatible by then (that was in post 315). Your reply implied how AA compatibility would be possible to implement in AAA (post 345). Possibility of some design is one thing, reality another.

Quote:

I wasn't the TiNA's owner, and I'm not the only Amiga chipset expert. It's the company which has to find another replacement for me.

So, you promised TiNA, then found new job and left the project to its doom. And now you blame others for consequences of your decision. Priceless.

Quote:

See above. And maybe in your parallel universe a company depends only by single man for a project, which isn't replaceable. Right?

In this case, you (obviously) weren´t replaceable.

Quote:

Yes, we discussed it, and the only possible solution is an "UAE sandbox", with limited set of shared resources.

As true BAF, I always hope for miracles.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: The argument was: AGA chipset virtualization. It IS possible, and the technical explanation is found on the usual site. Well, my point was about AAA not ready in 1994, and not AA compatible by then (that was in post 315). Your reply implied how AA compatibility would be possible to implement in AAA (post 345). Possibility of some design is one thing, reality another.

I already reported that Commodore's decision to don't support AA with AAA was only "political" (AND coherent).

TECHNICALLY it's feasible, as it was discussed on amigacoding.de. And this has nothing to do with the AAA status. They are two different things.

If you don't believe that AGA chipset virtualization (NO AAA mention here) is possible, you're free to confute what was written on the the above forum.
Quote:

Quote: I wasn't the TiNA's owner, and I'm not the only Amiga chipset expert. It's the company which has to find another replacement for me. So, you promised TiNA,

I promised nothing. I wasn't the owner, as I reported several times, even well BEFORE that I left:

"I'm a team member, but not the project owner.
[...]
The project isn't mine, dear friend. I can only ensure you my passion, time, and professionalism for TiNA."
Quote:

then found new job and left the project to its doom.

Being part of the team I reported news about it, and also asked help to complete it, but I'm not the one which can define the doom of the project: that was responsibility of the owner.
Quote:

Quote: And now you blame others for consequences of your decision. Priceless. I blamed nobody: I reported FACTs about what happened, and which you should know because you followed the project, even on its web site (and on this one, as well). Quote: [quote]See above. And maybe in your parallel universe a company depends only by single man for a project, which isn't replaceable. Right? In this case, you (obviously) weren´t replaceable.

Again, from the above thread BEFORE I left:

"Help is definitely needed, because there's a lot of work to do, if we want to reach the goal of a "superAmiga" sooner. So, if there's some VHDL expert (which is the first priority now, when the PCB is finalized) which wishes to join the team, he's welcome.
[...]
I'm not a VHDL guy, so I have a very limited role
[...]
the project will be interesting for the Amiga comunity if somebody will give an hand to reach goals sooner
[...]
we are absolutely open to contributions
[...]
But the hardware needs a software to run, and for the dreamed SuperAmiga help is needed.
[...]
The hardware is far more powerful. But, as I said, without a proper software (firmware, AmigaOS patches, AROS 68K) it's useless...
[...]
But there's A LOT of work, as you can think, and help is very welcomed from the Amiga community to reach goals sooner.
[...]
Give an hand, contributing to the dream, and everybody will happy.
[...]
We'll support EIDE/PATA, because engineers had experience with it. But if someone can provide support for SATA, we can provide it from the beginning.
[...]
But firmware requires much more effort.
[...]
I think that the only way to succeed for a so much complex project, is to open it to the community."

And now AFTER that I left (but you already know this thread, right?):

"So actually TINA is putting on hold, due to missing an Amiga chipset expert that can coordinate/contribute to the hardware "mapping" and implementation.
If someone is interested to cover this fundamental rule, he can propose himself to the team.
[...]
It depends on the community. Sorry that I cannot contribute anymore, but it doesn't mean that TINA is dead. It can continue with other people IF there's interest on the project.
[...]
Yes, if there's no one that can contribute, the project can be considered died.
[...]
It'll, only if other people can manage it.
[...]
I wasn't an ex-Commodore engineer, but just a game coder with a good knowledge about the Amiga chipset and some (I believe interesting) ideas on how to implement and make it evolve the platform.
[...]
Right now I think that to continue with it an Amiga chipset expert is needed.
[...]
While putting together several minds could be a good solution on the paper, the experience that I had especially in amigacoding.de shown that it's better to have a single person which, after evaluating all the different ideas, traces the road and takes decisions.
That's because there are different, sometimes VERY different opinions, and without a clear leadership that decides what to do, I thought it could be very difficult to go ahead.
[...]
What's missing now is an Amiga chipset expert that has knowledge of the platform, and has an idea clear enough on how to bring to project to the defined goals: adapting the Minimig core to the new Cyclone V board, adding AGA support, adding new features in an incremental basis."

I marked the most important parts, which speak by themselves what was the situation.

And now guess how much help we had from the community, and how many hardware engineers joined the team...


Now from the same thread, but regarding some other interesting information about my work:

"All my ideas and the chipset definition are mostly on amigacoding.de or the TINA forums, and they cover pretty everything.
[...]
As I stated previously, I documented almost everything of my ideas; I hope that they can be useful to some Amiga-on-FPGA projects."

That's to "close the circle" with your squalid historical revisionism tentative...
Quote:

Quote: Yes, we discussed it, and the only possible solution is an "UAE sandbox", with limited set of shared resources. As true BAF, I always hope for miracles.

As true atheist, I don't believe in miracles.

@cdimauro

Quote:

I already reported that Commodore's decision to don't support AA with AAA was only "political" (AND coherent).

Quote:

TECHNICALLY it's feasible, as it was discussed on amigacoding.de. And this has nothing to do with the AAA status. They are two different things.

AAA status was most important for actual (not)release...

Quote:

If you don't believe that AGA chipset virtualization (NO AAA mention here) is possible, you're free to confute what was written on the the above forum.

I don´t think I refuted such idea. Again, it seems you know my mind much better than myself. Arguing against argument you yourself forged is "strange".

Quote:

reported several times, even well BEFORE that I left: That's to "close the circle" with your squalid historical revisionism tentative...

Yes, we know that the Amiga community had experiences with projects that claimed big things, and then disappeared.

Your own words...

You may read in threads you linked I was actually supportive of TiNA and followed its developement. In the end, my concerns about excessive ambitions were fully justified. Lets face it: your withdrawal from TiNA team was first nail to its coffin, there was noone to replace you. And as you were public face of TiNA for Amiga community, it was you who raised false hopes and then smashed them in pieces. To blame your own responsibility on others is not worth of man of your background.

Quote:

As true atheist, I don't believe in miracles.

Your loss.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: I already reported that Commodore's decision to don't support AA with AAA was only "political" (AND coherent). Quote: TECHNICALLY it's feasible, as it was discussed on amigacoding.de. And this has nothing to do with the AAA status. They are two different things. AAA status was most important for actual (not)release...

Again, you're mixing two different things.
Quote:

Quote: If you don't believe that AGA chipset virtualization (NO AAA mention here) is possible, you're free to confute what was written on the the above forum. I don´t think I refuted such idea. Again, it seems you know my mind much better than myself. Arguing against argument you yourself forged is "strange".

If you haven't refuted it, there's no problem.
Quote:

Quote: reported several times, even well BEFORE that I left: That's to "close the circle" with your squalid historical revisionism tentative... Yes, we know that the Amiga community had experiences with projects that claimed big things, and then disappeared. Your own words...

Yes, but it seems that you like to forget all others. Is it the normal behavior of an historian, or it's just you the exception?
Quote:

You may read in threads you linked I was actually supportive of TiNA and followed its developement. In the end, my concerns about excessive ambitions were fully justified.

Nothing to say here. I'm also disappointed of what happened.
Quote:

Lets face it: your withdrawal from TiNA team was first nail to its coffin, there was noone to replace you.

If Amiga is still remembered 'til now is because it had an incredible amount of games, with many of them being authentic masterpieces.

It's hard to believe that with thousands and thousands of game coders which know the Amiga hardware architecture, there's no one which was available to get my role, especially with all the hard work already done (see my previous comment; and of course amigacoding.de saves everything).

Maybe the problems were others, and I'll report below some data.
Quote:

And as you were public face of TiNA for Amiga community,

I wasn't the only one. Anyway, and like I said, I reported news about the project, like any other team member, and like any team member does with other projects.
Quote:

it was you who raised false hopes and then smashed them in pieces. To blame your own responsibility on others is not worth of man of your background.

As I said many times, even well before I left, I wasn't the owner of the project neither a responsible for it. My involvement was limited, as I publicly reported, and you're still ignoring:

"I can only ensure you my passion, time, and professionalism for TiNA."

That's what I did and fulfilled. Of course, you can prove that I'm wrong, but not without your usual empty words and jokes. And historian should have acquired the knowledge of "proof", but it seems that you are one exception here.

Now I report some writings regarding who owned the project and made the ultimate decisions. They come from another TiNA team member, which was involved with the web site, forum, and communication. You can find all his comments here, but I limit to report some sentences directly translated (and untouched) from Google Translate. His nickname in the Italian forum is "schiumacal", whereas "Alberto" and "bertocar" identify the company's owner, which is also the TiNA's owner, of course, and Caesar is me (according to Google Translate ).

BEFORE I left:

"but the answers may just give alberto now, he opened the forum. I personally have done my duty and I will continue to do it for what I compete, that is managing the site with any news of course when it is necessary and when I can expect communicated. everything else is managed by alberto personally..
[...]
alberto is the only one who can have decision-making power over everything. and today only he can give concrete answers on tina. he is the creator of the project, as it has always been. I can not do anything but follow his instructions as I always do, trying to put even my where I could."

Quite clear, right?

AFTER I left:

"Unfortunately ... and I say with a very strong displeasure, the reasons that led the project to the temporary stop, I have not understood it myself.
[...]
although I was personally involved in the project, I was naive enough to believe it too. But at least I both Caesar would have put his face ... how many of you have said.

This is not say that the project Tina is dead and buried, just like all of you, I have not heard it myself. And believe me ... definitely does not depend either that Caesar is left out of the project for business reasons. OK.

Ps. the issue of money is not there own. And I do not think the fact that everything is currently stopped due to lack of programmers VHDL.

Only instead ... puff !!! Boh !!! simply there were more answers.

Things are not made only on one side, especially when working in team.
[...]
Caesar is not a VHDL programmer, I have not read that any of you thought he would be able to solve everything himself from expert Amiga. Caesar knows the Amiga system, and in fact would have to act as a guide and as a coordinator between ing. and VHDL programmers.
[...]
If you have to take it to someone, go ahead, but head directly over who had launched the initial project.

If you really can not figure out who it is, just do a whois on tinaproject ...
[...]
I understand your point of view, but I've been in the project for a while ', and I assure you I would never have done if I had not received proclamations absolute certainty about the feasibility of the project.

The resources should have been all ... in fact the figures that were fired to invest in the project, to the sound of msg. private, they were substantial, more than you can imagine. So be sure that the project would have a constant was 100%.

This is my anger ... that is to receive assurances from those who were really responsible, then work for free help and pursuing the idea, and then close without even a warning.

Me had everything: email, cell. He could contact me as he wanted. But unfortunately it was me that while working for free and with such passion, I had to always call over and over again just to have a photo that could make more credible the site ... and the great thing is that even those receiving.

I remember one night ... exacerbated by the fact that they no longer news, I called Caesar, setting out my problem. Caesar then said to me: "I'll try to contact him and see what he says ...".
Caesar called me after a while ', telling me that he had discussed everything and that we absolutely had to worry about anything because the project was going ahead, because there was already a beta of the motherboard, because probably in June to August 2013 ... then we had in hand a sampling of matherboard ... then ... then ... then ... and in the meantime the months passed.

I did not know what to do with the site, but sometimes the news came out that everything was going so well ... because I was told.

I got to a point I was annoyed ... indeed highly annoyed.

Anyway. for me it was over ... so much the concern of those who then had to justify everything was just me and Caesar.
Okay !!! Personally, now I put a cross on top. End."

I think it should be quite evident the responsibilities and the roles of everyone involved in this project.

I've to add that me and "schumacal" got not even a penny from this project. We invested A LOT of time, with professionalism, only for passion. That's all.
Quote:

Quote: As true atheist, I don't believe in miracles. Your loss.

On the contrary: it's my gain, since I don't have to lose my time for prayers, rituals, and in general any non-sense stuff which is imposed by such man-made mythological entities. And no money too, of course.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Again, you're mixing two different things.

I fear we are going in circles here.

Quote:

I think it should be quite evident the responsibilities and the roles of everyone involved in this project.

Thanks for another evidence. You really put great effort in your defense, but I don´t think the outcome will please you. I must admire patience of your colleague, true friend who defends action of other, but his frustration is evident.
You might think back in the day, when you left TiNA project, they will find another one with your skills. But this didn´t happen and TiNA crumbled to pieces. I understand motives of your decision, but no walls of text will relieve you of blame of TiNA demise. Humility, not pride, should guide you.

Quote:

On the contrary: it's my gain, since I don't have to lose my time for prayers, rituals, and in general any non-sense stuff which is imposed by such man-made mythological entities. And no money too, of course.

I wonder, not knowing about your explicit declaration, I would think you belong in our flock. You waste great time arguing about tenets of Amiga cult.

@thread

Its common for all hardware projects FAIL because the AGA chipset cannot be recreated.

So make new system ONLY OCS + 24 bit GFX RTG , copper simulator.

DONE AGA could be done in time by developers.

I dont know how much ex commodore hardware engineers charge to add AGA capability on a freelance basis.

Last edited by asymetrix on 27-Aug-2015 at 11:33 AM.

_________________
Download 499.26 Mbps, 659.94 Mbps Upload :)

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: I think it should be quite evident the responsibilities and the roles of everyone involved in this project. Thanks for another evidence. You really put great effort in your defense,

It wasn't me now: I reported facts from another person.
Quote:

but I don´t think the outcome will please you. I must admire patience of your colleague, true friend who defends action of other, but his frustration is evident.

Which I share, because I didn't like what happened, as I already stated, after all work that we did (at least me and my friend).
Quote:

You might think back in the day, when you left TiNA project, they will find another one with your skills. But this didn´t happen and TiNA crumbled to pieces.

Well, even before I left the biggest problem was finding some hardware engineers for writing the firmware (SuperAmiga chipset + new CPU). That was clearly stated, and I also asked help here, never finding anyone who wanted to contribute. So, even if wasn't left the team, this project had no way to reach even the bare minimum goal.
Quote:

I understand motives of your decision, but no walls of text will relieve you of blame of TiNA demise.

The "wall of texts" was a wall of facts, which should be of interest for anyone who wishes to rebuild the history. Especially for any historian...
Quote:

Humility, not pride, should guide you.

That's another thing, which doesn't changes the above facts. I was and I'm still pride of what I did with TiNA, and other Amiga FPGA projects too.
Quote:

Quote: On the contrary: it's my gain, since I don't have to lose my time for prayers, rituals, and in general any non-sense stuff which is imposed by such man-made mythological entities. And no money too, of course. I wonder, not knowing about your explicit declaration, I would think you belong in our flock.

Not anymore. I was sheep, but very long time ago.
Quote:

You waste great time arguing about tenets of Amiga cult.

Hum... it's right the fact that it can be configured as religions. Well, it was at my time, and I was an integralist too.

@asymetrix

Quote:

asymetrix wrote: @thread Its common for all hardware projects FAIL because the AGA chipset cannot be recreated. So make new system ONLY OCS + 24 bit GFX RTG , copper simulator. DONE AGA could be done in time by developers. I dont know how much ex commodore hardware engineers charge to add AGA capability on a freelance basis.

Even them didn't liked, since there was no AGA compatibility for AAA.

But I agree with you: it's better to add RTG on top of OCS/ECS, and only after that think about adding AGA emulation.

@cdimauro

Quote:

The "wall of texts" was a wall of facts, which should be of interest for anyone who wishes to rebuild the history. Especially for any historian...

"Facts" again. Work of historian is to found substantial in walls of text and write conclusion, which I did...

Quote:

I was and I'm still pride of what I did with TiNA, and other Amiga FPGA projects too.

And that is the problem.

Quote:

Hum... it's right the fact that it can be configured as religions.

Exactly.

Quote:

Well, it was at my time, and I was an integralist too.

If you mean this Integralism, I rather don´t want hear more. Quite long religious journey you did.

@cdimauro

Quote:

But I agree with you: it's better to add RTG on top of OCS/ECS, and only after that think about adding AGA emulation.

Here we both fully agree.

@LimoU.Sin

Quote:

LimoU.Sin wrote: @pavlor Quote: Never heard about FireBee? Yes it looks much better than so-called NG Amiga.

As it is just mentioned and if you are interested, FireBee has new site: http://firebee.org

@dovi

Welcome!

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: The "wall of texts" was a wall of facts, which should be of interest for anyone who wishes to rebuild the history. Especially for any historian... "Facts" again. Work of historian is to found substantial in walls of text and write conclusion, which I did...

Normal users can take them and draw their conclusions as well...
Quote:

Quote: I was and I'm still pride of what I did with TiNA, and other Amiga FPGA projects too. And that is the problem.

I don't see why. Many writings and ideas of mine were appreciated, and are still valid for who wants to build an advanced Amiga on FPGA.
Quote:

Quote: Well, it was at my time, and I was an integralist too. If you mean this Integralism, I rather don´t want hear more. Quite long religious journey you did.

We were talking about an Amiga, which is a computer.

I think that the historical "fights" between Commodore VIC 20 vs Spectrum ZX81 supporters, Commodore 64 vs ZX Spectrum supporters, etc. give a much better picture of what kind of integralism I was referring to.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Normal users can take them and draw their conclusions as well...

Exactly.

Quote:

We were talking about an Amiga, which is a computer.

Even computer can be object of religious following... However, we should rather leave this topic to another thread.