@number6

That’s great news!

_________________

AmigaMac Quote:

Not everyone who is into the Amiga wants to do that. Having choices is a great thing.

I thought the same as agami when reading Hammer's comment. Not many people are going to pay roughly twice as much for half the performance of PPC hardware vs x86-64 hardware. Then there is emulation overhead that would likely reduce performance to 1/3 of 1/2 which is 1/6 or ~17% of the performance of x86-64 hardware. Considering PPC performance to be 1/2 of x86-64 performance is being nice to PPC hardware and 1/3 performance for emulation is a rule of thumb best case. PPC single core performance may actually be closer to 1/3 of high end x86-64 cores giving 1/9 or 11% of x86-64 performance with a highly efficient emulator. Windows on ARM has a similar problem emulating x86-64 programs but ARM has newer silicon and high end ARM cores may reach 2/3 of x86-64 single core performance which is 2/9 or ~22%. This may be acceptable if using mostly ARM native programs but is not appealing if using x86-64 native programs. At least ARM hardware is generally a little cheaper than x86-64 hardware unlike PPC hardware.

I am not saying there would be no appeal for x86-64 emulation in PPC LE mode but the problem is PPC AmigaOS 4 hardware is niche, expensive, limited by old silicon, low performance, and a resource hog. At least Linux supports more than a single core with multi-core unlike AmigaOS 4. If you want PPC to be more appealing, emulate the PPC consoles and the PPC Mac like the 68k Amiga emulated the 68k consoles and 68k computers like the Mac. The popularity of 68k retro games has created more than a niche retro market but emulation on any semi-modern hardware offers better performance and features than ancient 68k silicon.

PhantomInterrogative Quote:

My initial thought when Mirari first popped up was "Troika Amy05 all over again." I am pleased that my initial thought has been proved wrong.

Troika Amy'05, Panda, Athena. A PPC motherboard for $300-350 USD or 227 Euro may have sold back in the mid to late 2000s. Low cost PPC hardware including the cheaper PPC Efika, PPC Macs and PS3 were never supported by AmigaOS 4. I wonder if the potentially lower cost Mirari PPC hardware for AmigaOS 4 will have the same trouble gaining support. MorphOS supports low end hardware and AmigaOS 4 seems to be for the elitists with $. There remains a conflict of interest between some of the AmigaOS 4 IP licensors and expensive AmigaOS 4 hardware producers with gimmicks like Xorro slots and handicaps like missing FPUs. An angel investor's professed love for everything Amiga would surely avoid any shenanigans today though.

@matthey
Quote:

I thought the same as agami when reading Hammer's comment. Not many people are going to pay roughly twice as much for half the performance of PPC hardware vs x86-64 hardware. Then there is emulation overhead that would likely reduce performance to 1/3 of 1/2 which is 1/6 or ~17% of the performance of x86-64 hardware. Considering PPC performance to be 1/2 of x86-64 performance is being nice to PPC hardware and 1/3 performance for emulation is a rule of thumb best case. PPC single core performance may actually be closer to 1/3 of high end x86-64 cores giving 1/9 or 11% of x86-64 performance with a highly efficient emulator. Windows on ARM has a similar problem emulating x86-64 programs but ARM has newer silicon and high end ARM cores may reach 2/3 of x86-64 single core performance which is 2/9 or ~22%. This may be acceptable if using mostly ARM native programs but is not appealing if using x86-64 native programs. At least ARM hardware is generally a little cheaper than x86-64 hardware unlike PPC hardware.

Windows ARM edition only emulates the X86 CPU, while OS system calls are native ARM LE. My point, Windows ARM's emulating X86 CPU is not full machine emulation like with WinUAE.

Unlike the Xbox game consoles with DirectX12 microcode engine, Windows GPU support has JIT recomplier as part of the graphics stack. Vendor-specific graphics API extension can skip JIT recomplier with specfic hardware code path e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7RSszCPt68
AMD's Shader Intrinsic functions i.e. hit-the-near-metal, lower than DirectX12 or Vulkan.

NVIDIA also has a vendor-specific path via NVAPI.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@matthey

Quote:

AmigaOS 4 seems to be for the elitists with $

Sorry, neither the OS nor its users are at fault. We certainly didn't choose to have expensive hardware.

_________________
The Rear Window blog

AmigaOne X5000/020 @ 2GHz / 4GB RAM / Radeon RX 560 / ESI Juli@ / AmigaOS 4.1 Final Edition
SAM440ep-flex @ 667MHz / 1GB RAM / Radeon 9250 / AmigaOS 4.1 Final Edition

@cdimauro

Quote:

Choosing a viral license is only a purely ideological stance, and nothing more.

It’s not even that for me. It’s “want to use my code? Knock yourself out but i want your changes or you can GTFO�.

Plus as I mentioned recently it pisses off the blue haired Rust fangirls so that’s just an added bonus 🤣

_________________

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @kolla Quote: kolla wrote: @cdimauro [quote]The license isn't so much commercial-friendly... Why?

Simple: because it's a viral license.[/quote]

Yes, and for me as a customer and consumer, that’s a good thing.

Quote:

Quote: Because it doesn’t allow “the business� to harass their customers with unreasonable and and insane “terms and conditions�? No, this isn't a consequence of have no viral license. I mean, it's not a protection against such bad behaviours that some companies MIGHT have.

We aren’t talking about just any viral license, we’re talking about (L)GPLv3.

You say it’s bad for business because it is viral.
Well, so are certainly all “commercial� licenses as well.

Quote:

And to be more clear, you don't need a viral license for avoiding them.

But you may very welll prefer a viral license, and especially a GPL one, for practical and pragmatic reasons.

Quote:

As a customer, ie. "the market", I much prefer products that are GPL licensed.

Irrelevant: that's only YOUR preference, and it has nothing to do with the viralness of such licenses.[/quote]

And viralness has nothing to do with whether a license is “commercial-friendly� or not.

This is pretty darn simple - if you don’t want to license your software under GPL, you are perfectly free to do so, and make sure you’re not entangling your software with “viral� dependencies. Easy.

Quote:

In fact, there are other licenses that are NOT viral like GPL ones, which are commercial-friendly, AND are still protecting the (original) sources (and their authors). Hint: MPL (AROS' APL, which is derived by it).

And?

Quote:

Choosing a viral license is only a purely ideological stance, and nothing more.

You should preach for the authors of all the commercial licenses then. GPL is more about the rights of the users than rights of the developers.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

Trixie Quote:

Sorry, neither the OS nor its users are at fault. We certainly didn't choose to have expensive hardware.

Who is at fault or is it coincidence that the 3 cheapest PPC hardware options are or will be available for MorphOS without being available for AmigaOS 4?

1. PPC Macs
2. PPC Efika
3. PPC Mirari

Does someone not want cheap PPC AmigaOS 4 hardware? Who would gain the most benefit from expensive PPC AmigaOS 4 hardware?

@IntuitionAmiga

Quote:

IntuitionAmiga wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Choosing a viral license is only a purely ideological stance, and nothing more. It’s not even that for me. It’s “want to use my code? Knock yourself out but i want your changes or you can GTFO�.

Then a license like MPL/APL is perfectly fitting your needs.
Quote:

Plus as I mentioned recently it pisses off the blue haired Rust fangirls so that’s just an added bonus 🤣

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: @kolla Simple: because it's a viral license. Yes, and for me as a customer and consumer, that’s a good thing.

You've to better define it here. In fact, it's only for you: a customer/consumer doesn't need a product to have a viral license like GPL.

Unless... you prove it. And I'm preparing the popcorns in the meanwhile .
Quote:

Quote: No, this isn't a consequence of have no viral license. I mean, it's not a protection against such bad behaviours that some companies MIGHT have. We aren’t talking about just any viral license, we’re talking about (L)GPLv3. You say it’s bad for business because it is viral.

Exactly.
Quote:

Well, so are certainly all “commercial� licenses as well.

Then, as above, PROVE IT!

IF you know the meaning (and implications) of "viral licenses", of course.
Quote:

Quote: And to be more clear, you don't need a viral license for avoiding them. But you may very welll prefer a viral license, and especially a GPL one, for practical and pragmatic reasons.

You can prefer whatever license you want, and it's strictly YOUR decision.

Which has not necessarily nothing to do with the "practicality" (what do you mean in THIS context?!?) and/or "pragmatism" (same as before: what do you mean?!?).
Quote:

Quote: Irrelevant: that's only YOUR preference, and it has nothing to do with the viralness of such licenses. And viralness has nothing to do with whether a license is “commercial-friendly� or not.

If it's propagating to OTHER code which is using it or "being in touch" with it, yes: it's not commercial-friendly by definition.

You can ask Microsoft, as one of the notable example, what it has forced to do when it released his first Linux (kernel) hypervisor for WSL...
Quote:

This is pretty darn simple - if you don’t want to license your software under GPL, you are perfectly free to do so, and make sure you’re not entangling your software with “viral� dependencies. Easy.

Which proves my point...
Quote:

Quote: In fact, there are other licenses that are NOT viral like GPL ones, which are commercial-friendly, AND are still protecting the (original) sources (and their authors). Hint: MPL (AROS' APL, which is derived by it). And?

Such licenses perfectly satisfy the requirement/need to get back the changes that anyone could do with code licensed under their terms, if a product has modified it and published a product using them.

WITHOUT impacting all other code which wasn't using the same license.
Quote:

Quote: Choosing a viral license is only a purely ideological stance, and nothing more. You should preach for the authors of all the commercial licenses then.

See above: then PROVE it! Take whatever commercial license that you want and show me why it's "viral".
Quote:

GPL is more about the rights of the users than rights of the developers.

The same applies to other NON VIRAL license.

Whereas GPL is ONLY about (pseudo)religion: forcing ALL code to become GPL.

@Trixie

Quote:

Trixie wrote: @matthey Quote: AmigaOS 4 seems to be for the elitists with $ Sorry, neither the OS nor its users are at fault. We certainly didn't choose to have expensive hardware.

Incorrect. By engaging in the market economics of expensive hardware, you are in fact "choosing" to have expensive hardware, a.k.a voting with your wallet.

Every person's purchase of a X1000, X5000, and A1222 is a tacit, implicit, and more often than not an explicit and repeated endorsement of A-EON's pricing policy.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@agami

The some shit again.
The some scumbags instead of hard working on aros waste time on attacks on ppc,
ppc users and companies thats sells ppc hardware.
24 years wasted for nothing .
Want cheap hardware start working on aros.
Made it as good as at least Windows XP.

@ppcamiga1

Again, who made you project manager? It's over! The A1222+ was meant to be cheap but it turned out not to be. No new PPC chip development equals a dead end. There's nothing more to say!

Last edited by BigD on 15-May-2025 at 06:29 AM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

Quote:

matthey wrote: Who is at fault or is it coincidence that the 3 cheapest PPC hardware options are or will be available for MorphOS without being available for AmigaOS 4?

I think it's the puristic ideology about Amiga being both hardware and software, made somehow "in-house" and sold together, and they try to keep to that even today when the whole environment has changed and results aren't that convincing either (hardware and software are quite separated still).

I guess it's mostly the developers' fault, but they probably also think that it's their audience's will too, and it quite likely is partly true.

An exception to this is Pegasos II, for some reason they ported OS4 to it even when it was a "MorphOS branded" computer. And Sams aren't AmigaOne branded either... so, it kinda waters down the original ideology and makes you wonder why other cheaper options wouldn't do too.

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

@jPV

Quote:

jPV wrote: An exception to this is Pegasos II, for some reason they ported OS4 to it even when it was a "MorphOS branded" computer.

Actually not an exception just the prime piece of evidence on what it was all about.

In 2001-7(ish) the mantra always was that bPlan needed to buy into AmigaOne branding sprinkled with some technology nonsense like replacing OF with UBoot.

All while the Teron boards seemed liked a somewhat real option offering kickbacks to various "partners" in the world of OS4.

Only when that dried up, with no plausible official HW on the horizon the Peg2 port was made available (selling OS4 without kickback is still better than not selling it at all) and Moana was worked on.
When new HW started appearing again in the form of the SAM460 (which at some time was sold as AmigaOne500) and later X1000 that path was soon forgotten.

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

agami Quote:

Incorrect. By engaging in the market economics of expensive hardware, you are in fact "choosing" to have expensive hardware, a.k.a voting with your wallet. Every person's purchase of a X1000, X5000, and A1222 is a tacit, implicit, and more often than not an explicit and repeated endorsement of A-EON's pricing policy.

To an extent, your logic is correct but the situation may be more nuanced. There are other questions and answers about the market which may be important.

Q: Is the AmigaOS market a free market or a controlled market?
A: The AmigaOS market appears to be a controlled and corrupt market with collusion, price fixing, coercion, fraud, conspiracy, perhaps bribery, etc.

Not only will the 3 cheapest PPC systems be available for MorphOS and not AmigaOS 4 but other systems may have not been released due to shenanigans and uncertainty in obtaining a license like the PS3 and Troika hardware.

Cheapest potential PPC AmigaOS 4 hardware
1. PPC Macs
2. PPC Efika
3. PPC Mirari
4. PPC PS3 (unreleased)
5. PPC Troika (unreleased)

A partially working AmigaOS 4 for the PS3 was leaked. Troika public relations were sketchy but there were multiple people involved including a developer for the boards and at least a non-working prototype board.

Q: Is the product essential?
A: An AmigaOS system is not an essential good. However, Hyperion claims "exclusive" rights to the "AmigaOS" through the 2009 Amiga Inc v Hyperion VOF settlement agreement even though other licensees already had licenses to use the "AmigaOS" which were grandfathered into the agreement. So in fact, the "AmigaOS" is not an exclusively controlled product meaning customers should have a choice for "AmigaOS" products if not for shenanigans like the coercion of RGL partners sabotaging THEA1200 (Maxi). "AmigaOS 4" and "AmigaOne" product use appears to be controlled by multiple sources due to Hyperion sub-licensing and various other contracts. If customers demand "AmigaOS 4" and "AmigaOne" products, then Hyperion is just a starting point and it is not clear who needs to be payed off to get a product to market. Hyperion is beyond shady considering all the shenanigans. I would classify Ben Hermans as a straight up con man and his associates and conspirators in crime are not much better.

Q: Could AmigaOS 4 customers actually demand more expensive hardware?
A: Some AmigaOS 4 customers demand expensive SoCs and extensive expansion which in a way is demanding more expensive hardware. There are valid reasons for more expansion like non-functioning on-board I/O and reliance on discreet GPUs. The way to make hardware cheaper is integration though. Jay Miner understood that integration would allow an affordable Amiga to be brought to market and that further integration and enhancement was required to keep it relevant which is why he created the Ranger chipset right after the OCS chipset. SoCs are integrated improving the value but the old silicon, no integrated GPU and expensive expansion I/O instead is not competitive with cheaper ARM SoCs.

jPV Quote:

I think it's the puristic ideology about Amiga being both hardware and software, made somehow "in-house" and sold together, and they try to keep to that even today when the whole environment has changed and results aren't that convincing either (hardware and software are quite separated still). I guess it's mostly the developers' fault, but they probably also think that it's their audience's will too, and it quite likely is partly true. An exception to this is Pegasos II, for some reason they ported OS4 to it even when it was a "MorphOS branded" computer. And Sams aren't AmigaOne branded either... so, it kinda waters down the original ideology and makes you wonder why other cheaper options wouldn't do too.

The 68k Amiga did not use random commodity computer parts. It was created by a visionary in Jay Miner who demanded a 68k CPU and created a custom integrated chipset for it. Hardware was the most important part of the 68k Amiga which is important to fans of the Amiga and for compatibility of Amiga software. Jay asked for a minimalist AmigaOS but fortunately Carl Sassenrath showed up wanting to create an advanced OS resulting in the advanced minimalist AmigaOS. The Amiga was about the 68k and chipset hardware even though Jay was more than happy with how the AmigaOS turned out. Developers who love the elegant 68k Amiga design do not think much of PPC hardware choices though making hardware development a liability. There is criticism of how PPC AmigaOS 4 development has progressed too. It misses the original philosophy of an advanced minimalist AmigaOS and still lacks modern desktop features like SMP, 64-bit, process isolation, resource tracking, etc. With all the shenanigans, high prices, philosophy changes and lack of compatibility, it is understandable why PPC AmigaOS 4 hardware is not seen as a 68k Amiga successor by the majority of Amiga fans. Many Amiga fans with a "puristic ideology" want hardware and software but purists want 68k CPUs, Amiga chipsets and the AmigaOS.

Last edited by matthey on 15-May-2025 at 06:07 PM.

@Kronos

Quote:

Only when that dried up, with no plausible official HW on the horizon the Peg2 port was made available (selling OS4 without kickback is still better than not selling it at all) and Moana was worked on. When new HW started appearing again in the form of the SAM460 (which at some time was sold as AmigaOne500) and later X1000 that path was soon forgotten.

You forgot the Sam440, OS4.1 was released for Sam440 about four months before the Pegasos 2 verion.

@Rob

So?

It's not about what was released when and how but about what those in control thought to be the future at that time. Not a far fetch they thought about the 440 as a short term non-fix mostly unattractive for potential costumers.

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

@matthey

Quote:

The 68k Amiga did not use random commodity computer parts. It was created by a visionary in Jay Miner who demanded a 68k CPU and created a custom integrated chipset for it.

Yeah a HW guy that cared about HW.

HW designed in a way that only made sense on base 68000 with low memory (where it was fantastic). HW that was meh when paired with a even slightly better CPU/more RAM. HW that was so different and so badly supported in the OS that everyone just banged it, forcing C= to create the next gen in a way that made into a boat anchor for those 020-040 AGA Amigas.

Whether it is a true SJ quote or not, very few words wiser than "too much HW".

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

@Kronos

It's important to include Sam440 in the timeline for completeness.

Moana was essentially an Acube project. So Acube was driving the OS in both directions, although I suspect the intention was to bundle OS4 with NOS Mac Mini harrdware.

@matthey

Quote:

1. PPC Macs

Missed opportunity. Some MorphOS users still bought Sam460 and X5000 despite the fact that cheap used Mac hardware was supported, so there's no reason OS4 for Mac couldn't have co-existed with Acube and A-EON hardware.

Quote:

2. PPC Efika

They probably felt that 128MB RAM would be too limiting.

3. PPC Mirari

Why wouldn't the Mirari get an OS4 port.

Kronos Quote:

Yeah a HW guy that cared about HW. HW designed in a way that only made sense on base 68000 with low memory (where it was fantastic). HW that was meh when paired with a even slightly better CPU/more RAM. HW that was so different and so badly supported in the OS that everyone just banged it, forcing C= to create the next gen in a way that made into a boat anchor for those 020-040 AGA Amigas.

Commodore did not upgrade the Amiga hardware! They were still using 5000nm NMOS chips in 1994! The 5000nm NMOS process was from the mid 1970s so about 20 years out of date. The Mirari PPC SoC silicon is only about 10 years old and the X5000 and A1222 PPC SoCs only about 15 years old yet they are getting destroyed by ARM SBCs that cost less than the PPC SoCs. That is what old silicon does yet you are hear reading about this "acceptably" old PPC silicon?

Kronos Quote:

Whether it is a true SJ quote or not, very few words wiser than "too much HW".

Ron Nicholson gave some insight on that conversation since he also worked for Apple. Apple developers were working on their own Amiga like chipset that they were trying to simplify into fewer chips but they failed. Steve Jobs thought Apple would be more successful than the Amiga developers at integrating a chipset when he made the "too much hardware" statement but he was wrong.

Rob Quote:

Quote: 1. PPC Macs Missed opportunity. Some MorphOS users still bought Sam460 and X5000 despite the fact that cheap used Mac hardware was supported, so there's no reason OS4 for Mac couldn't have co-existed with Acube and A-EON hardware.

Some people choose to support expensive hardware. Some people choose to support beyond shady businesses too.

Rob Quote:

Quote: 2. PPC Efika They probably felt that 128MB RAM would be too limiting.

The original Amiga supported 256kiB of memory and PPC AmigaOS 4 was too limited by 128MiB of memory?

Rob Quote:

3. PPC Mirari Why wouldn't the Mirari get an OS4 port.

Why did these other cheap PPC systems not get OS4 ports?

Last edited by matthey on 16-May-2025 at 12:12 AM.
Last edited by matthey on 15-May-2025 at 11:30 PM.