@AMIGASYSTEM

it depends if it uses reaction for GUI. And there is hardly any new software for OS 3.2, I could name it with one hand

@OneTimer1

there is definitely lowlevel stuff that has problems or not runs at all. As I understand it they also move components from rom to harddisk that also might affect compatiblitly.

I do not know how many programs really not work on 3.2

@OlafS25

The Reaction interface in OS 3.2 is not compatible with the Reaction interface in OS 3.9 unless you mix the two operating systems.

Try running OS 3.2 applications on OS 3.9

The ‘reaction’ GUIs in OS 3.2 are static (like those in OS 3.1), unlike the ‘reaction’ GUIs in OS 3.9, which are resizable (you can expand or shrink the GUIs)!

Olaf, you should test things before you write!

_________________

@AMIGASYSTEM

and you should also read and not just write

I mentioned GUI and Reaction in my posting. At 3.2 they backported from OS4 that is not compatible to 3.9

@OlafS25

The translator had led me to believe otherwise, but what matters is that AROS 68k (based on the OS 3.1 API) is only partially compatible with OS 3.1, whilst OS 3.2 and OS 3.9 are completely incompatible with AROS 68k.

_________________

@AMIGASYSTEM

Quote:

by AMIGASYSTEM on 18-Apr-2026 19:12:36 AROS 68k is considered an unstable system; the reason for this is that people want to use Amiga 3.1 software, which has poor compatibility, and if we then consider that OS 3.2 and 3.9 are completely incompatible. In my opinion, AROS 68k should only be used with native AROS 68k software, and Amiga software should only be used if it has been recompiled for AROS 68k; this would make it more stable and more appealing. There is a lot of AROS x86 software that could be ported to AROS 68k, as well as software from other platforms. I have stopped distributing my AROS One 68k for this reason, mainly to prevent incompatible Amiga software from being installed and then being criticised for having an unstable distribution.

This is obsurd... It's this mentality that holds the system back. If you want a system to improve sometimes it does have to go out of it's way to handle badly written software and the only way for that to happen is for people to use it and find bugs.

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@terminills

That’s how it should be; an AROS enthusiast might do this, but a user unfamiliar with AROS who encounters these incompatibilities will simply throw the whole thing in the bin, that’s the reality, especially given that AROS has never really been taken seriously by AMIGA users.

Last edited by AMIGASYSTEM on 20-Apr-2026 at 07:48 PM.

_________________

@AMIGASYSTEM

Quote:

by AMIGASYSTEM on 20-Apr-2026 14:47:55 @terminills That’s how it should be; an AROS enthusiast might do this, but a user unfamiliar with AROS who encounters these incompatibilities will simply throw the whole thing in the bin, that’s the reality, especially given that AROS has never really been taken seriously by AMIGA users.

Your mentality is exactly why many people have given up working on AROS ... and personally if I didn't have prior commitments I'd be gone too.

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@terminills

I am 73 years old, and what I have written is based on my experience with the many Amiga and Windows users I have helped.

Users have turned away from AROS because of the differences and divisions between AROS developers, not amongst users.

_________________

Last edited by terminills on 20-Apr-2026 at 09:34 PM.

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@AMIGASYSTEM

I am 20 years younger and have high respect of older persons

But every impression is subjective, your impression and view is not general and the same with my impression or anybody else that is also subjective. But you should at least accept different views, something you sometimes seems to have problems with

AMIGASYSTEM Quote:

The Reaction interface in OS 3.2 is not compatible with the Reaction interface in OS 3.9 unless you mix the two operating systems.

AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.9 Reaction are partially compatible and unlikely fully compatible even with mixing modular classes/files (some BOOPSI/Reaction classes, images and initialization code are in intuition.library). AmigaOS 3.2 has many objects upgraded and bug fixes meaning newer Reaction using programs are less likely to remain working on older versions of the AmigaOS (new features require new versions which fail with older AmigaOS versions). This is nothing new as AmigaOS 3.1 programs usually do not work on AmigaOS 1.3 either even though it is possible. More programs from AmigaOS 3.1 work on AmigaOS 2.x though. Most programs from AmigaOS 1.3 and AmigaOS 2.x work on AmigaOS 3.1. AmigaOS backward compatibility is easier and higher while forward compatibility is more difficult due to an unknown future, especially with many changes to APIs. Forward compatibility would be better if newer programs opened each class with the minimum version they use. Another problem is multiple versions of modules with the same name from different sources where the AmigaOS version numbering system fails unless the features and behavior exactly match existing modules.

There is some Reaction compatibility even with PPC AmigaOS 4, perhaps the least compatible version of AmigaOS. There was an attempt at API compatibility with the original 68k BOOPSI/Reaction/ClassAct.

https://developer.amigaos3.net/autodocs/button.gadget/ Quote:

BUGS Unfortunately, this class shares the same filename and tag range as the button gadget released by David Junod of C=, released in the GI1.lha V42 beta archive on BIX, and later the AT DevCD. We admit it, we screwed up... but it's not a majorly serious issue as this class is atleast 90% compatible. A few rarely, possibly never, used tags of the original are NOT currently supported. The usage of BUTTON_PushButton in ReAction is not totally compatible to Junod's. Ours acts like GA_ToggleSelect of Junod's. Please report any incompatibilities immediately.

One of the goals of 68k AmigaOS 3.2 Reaction was likely to increase API compatibility with AmigaOS 4 Reaction easing development. However, PPC AmigaOS 4 APIs were changed in ways different from 68k AmigaOS APIs and making compatibility more difficult. For example, 68k Reaction uses OpenLibrary() for classes while AmigaOS 4 would need IExec->OpenLibrary() which was then replaced by IIntuition->OpenClass(). PPC AmigaOS 4 is neither code compatible or binary compatible with the 68k AmigaOS. AmigaOS 4 developers did not care about maintaining and combining 68k AmigaOS development until Ben realized PPC AmigaOS 4 development was a financial failure for a niche of niche market.

AMIGASYSTEM Quote:

Try running OS 3.2 applications on OS 3.9 The ‘reaction’ GUIs in OS 3.2 are static (like those in OS 3.1), unlike the ‘reaction’ GUIs in OS 3.9, which are resizable (you can expand or shrink the GUIs)!

I expect AmigaOS 3.2 Reaction uses AmigaOS API norms for compatibility when porting AmigaOS 4 Reaction back to the 68k AmigaOS. I believe even AmigaOS 4 retained the modularity of 68k Reaction which are normal Amiga dynamic libraries but varying in how they are opened as mentioned above. Reaction/ClassAct was created due to lack of Amiga dynamic layout and resizable GUIs. You may be getting Reaction mixed up with Gadtools which received a major overhaul by ThoR for Hyperion's AmigaOS. Gadtools predates Reaction and the goal was for a simple to use GUI. It was very limited in scalability but ThoR was able to improve it some. The API is in gadtools.library which is an Amiga dynamic library but not as modular as Reaction. Even the old intuitition.library and gadtools.library based GUIs used dynamic libraries instead of static linked libraries.

AMIGASYSTEM Quote:

The translator had led me to believe otherwise, but what matters is that AROS 68k (based on the OS 3.1 API) is only partially compatible with OS 3.1, whilst OS 3.2 and OS 3.9 are completely incompatible with AROS 68k.

AROS 68k did not include Reaction last I looked. If it were compatible enough, it may be possible to install the predecessor ClassAct which is on Aminet.

https://aminet.net/dev/gui/classact33.lha https://aminet.net/package/dev/gui/classact33
https://aminet.net/dev/gui/ClassAct2Demo.lha https://aminet.net/package/dev/gui/ClassAct2Demo

The older ClassAct2Demo.lha includes many examples which can be used for testing. I expect most of these examples will work on 68k Hyperion AmigaOS 3.2, AmigaOS 3.9 and AmigaOS 2.04-3.1 after installation. I recall the examples working on AmigaOS 3.9. It is a good backward compatibility test where I expect compatibility to be high. Newer programs using new features of newer classes are more likely to have low compatibility. There used to be one standard 68k AmigaOS and the more the AmigaOS diverges into AROS 68k, AROS x86, Hyperion 68k AmigaOS 3.x, PPC AmigaOS 4, PPC MorphOS, H&P 68k, AmigaOS 3.9, A-EonKit PPC Enhancer, A-EonKit 68k Enhancer, etc., the more compatibility suffers. It is kind of like Linux flavor, distro and binary hell except worse in a way because more Amiga source code is not available to recompile for incompatibilities and there are no standards like POSIX. A dozen incompatible non-standard AmigaOS flavors with less than 10k users each is a dead NG Amiga market.

Last edited by matthey on 21-Apr-2026 at 12:20 AM.

@matthey

Matthey, I’m familiar with what you’ve described: OS 3.9 with a mix of libraries and the 3.2 ROM can run 3.2 software, but then loses compatibility with OS 3.9 software.

As for AROS, at least on my AROS One 68k, no Amiga software or system files are installed and never will be; my distribution will be redistributed ‘health permitting’, once native AROS 68k software becomes available.

Last edited by AMIGASYSTEM on 20-Apr-2026 at 11:19 PM.

_________________

@OlafS25

I don’t know if my translation is incorrect, but I have never forced anything on anyone; what I write is simply my own honest opinion

_________________

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: AROS 68k did not include Reaction last I looked. If it were compatible enough, it may be possible to install the predecessor ClassAct which is on Aminet.

Reaction was 'officially' added to AOS3.1 + (n * 0.1) because Haage&Partner didn't had the rights for MUI. Haage&Partner had already included it into their Compiler and distributed it interdependently.

So I'm asking myself if AOS3.1/AROS will be compatible enough to use newer AOS3.x programs (if some exist) if the library is installed exactly like AOS3.1 should be compatible to MUI applications if MUI is installed.

A real compatibility breach with AOS3.1 would be catastrophic, on AOS3.5 or AOS3.9 you would still have AOS3.1 compatibility if you had installed the right libraries to AOS3.1.

---

Making AOS3.2 partially incompatible to AOS3.9 would have been just another silly move of the AOS3.2 crew to split away from the only official AOS68k history tree we had. Distributing a slightly advanced AOS3.1 as AOS3.14 might have been valid but interfering with newer AOS3.x versions is just stupid.

Last edited by OneTimer1 on 21-Apr-2026 at 10:50 AM.
Last edited by OneTimer1 on 21-Apr-2026 at 10:11 AM.

@OneTimer1

Classact works on aros 68k so I assume reaction would do. Never tested it because it was and is copyrighted and not distributable.

Regarding compatibility between 3.2 and 3.9, I have not compared both in detail so I am not sure if the changes are only under the hood or also breaking the surface (API). In any case reaction on 3.2 is backported from PPC so it is certainly possible to do GUI who not work on 3.9.

@OlafS25

Before writing anything, you should first carry out some tests so that you can state facts with certainty. I always run several tests before writing anything; having said that, you only need to try the latest utilities released for OS 3.2 to see that none of them will ever work on OS 3.9.

Not even AfA OS – in my opinion, the best thing ever made for OS 3.1 and 3.9 – worked with OS 3.1.4, but from 3.2 onwards, AfA OS no longer works.

_________________

@AMIGASYSTEM

you do not need to lecture me all the time

my patience too runs thin

it is known that not everything runs on 3.2. I cannot say why and what they changed. And I do not care either

There can be a lot of reasons why something not works. Perhaps GUI Toolkit like reaction. Perhaps they also changed something on API level. I do not know!

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @AMIGASYSTEM you do not need to lecture me all the time my patience too runs thin

How dare you speak to AMIGASYSTEM in such way!!
RESPECT THE ELDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




/���� “��� �����

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@AMIGASYSTEM

Quote:

from 3.2 onwards, AfA OS no longer works.

Because AfA doesn't rely solely on APIs and interfaces, but also on patching directly into the memory space of the OS components, such as Intuition.library. If you wish to use AfA OS with 3.2, you need to make sure to use versions of the OS components that AfA is compatible with. This is not the fault of OS 3.2, AfA was always a hack.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC