@Caveman

Quote:

i can't see a reason staying ppc for the foreseeable future.

No problem.
Suggest a better, compatible solution.

@phase5fan

compatibility is only good if you have a lot software you can not replace. But you can gain compatibility in different ways. One working way is an emulation like WinUAE. You can run the old software and that on a new platform.

You need to look in the future and not staying in the past, the ppc is dead in the desktop/laptop world. So you need to move on and give the user what they want and not what you want, thats business. You can't beleave that all remaining Amiga fans use the old ppc hardware forever and the old software won't get better and the users want maintained software and a maintained software should be able to port to a new arch.


Even Microsoft is trying to reduce their old compatibility problems in a way.

So why shouldn't the Amiga move on too?

@pavlor

Quote:

NBench is not really representative benchmark.

Nbench includes typical code fragments in a typical application.
Its source code is available and well commented.
Is available since 1995.

Quote:

Sure, you can find some uses, where your G4 is much faster.

In most cases, G4 will be faster.

@Hisoka999

Agree!

_________________

@Hisoka999


100% agree...

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

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

@Hisoka999

Writing software for the MS Windows is my daily work.
And as long as customers pay for it, I may rewrite my applications for any new version of MS Windows and MS Office.
From writing Amiga software is not even 0.001% of money which is from writing software for the MS Windows.

Writing software for AMIGA like systems is hobby.
And for the AMIGA like systems, must be one set of source code.

A situation where I need one set of sources for Amiga Os 3, Amiga Os 4, MorphOS and the second set of sources for AROS is not acceptable.

@phase5fan

So in 10 years time,when x86 or Arm is everywhere,even maybe a Arm based flush mechanism on your toilet,running iToilet OS What do you do then?

Last edited by Caveman on 20-Feb-2010 at 06:32 PM.

_________________

@Caveman


What if you get a virus on your iToilet OS?

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

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

@terminills

oh crap Do as dogs do? on the neighbours lawn?

_________________

@phase5fan

Quote:

Nbench includes typical code fragments in a typical application. Its source code is available and well commented. Is available since 1995.

Dhrystone is avaiable since 1984... and it doesn´t make it good benchmark for today´s use.

I mentioned some weird results of this benchmark (nbench) on page you linked (eg. Power6 vs Pentium D etc).

If I should choose between G4 and Atom, my choice would be G4 without question. G4 was nice CPU in its days. But now, we have 2010, not 2003. Even most powerful PowerPC CPU in existence (970MP) is 3 times slower than cheaper x86 CPUs (eg. newer Core 2, i5, even i7 is not much more expensive than G5...). AROS is weak in many areas, but its CPU platform makes it really interesting Amiga-like OS.

@Al4

As now i don't see that. Due to the fact that linux has xxxx times more devs,and runs on practically every x86mobo.

And aros needs many key apps first.
A os needs a good browser,bittorrent,gfx program,3d program,msn,word processor. And programs people use on a daily basis. If one would attract users from other os'es its not only hw issue. But wether they have the programs they need,or a good alternative. That's my thought on the subject.

Quote:

AROS could be a proper alternative to Windows. AROS and linux are both free. But, linux has lots of graphics tearing on watching videos and is slow for certain things. AROS doesn't have either of those issues. Therefore, it could be the alternative to Windows in the future, in a way linux can't. ??

_________________
I'm an antique. Don't light my fuse

@pavlor

Quote:

I mentioned some weird results of this benchmark (nbench) on page you linked (eg. Power6 vs Pentium D etc).

Most developers and users use gcc on x86.
Additional Power6 platform capabilities are not used by gcc.
Therefore, Power6 reaches such poor results.

Quote:

AROS is weak in many areas, but its CPU platform makes it really interesting Amiga-like OS.

Unfortunately, because this is not a bigendian processor ,
AROS on x86 is not compatible with existing software.

Amiga OS clone which is perhaps twice as fast with the fastest PC,
but is incompatible is obsolete and redundant.

If I want to use on the x86 stable,fast system which is incompatible with the Amiga Os I will choose MS Windows.

@phase5fan

Obsolete and redundant ?
I thought you were talking about PPC for a moment there.

It's not so obsolete as you may wish. But show me any day the success of
MOS or OS4 and I will start to believe in you soon. Everyone of the Amiga like
OSes are small in their own sphere.

I choose WIndows any day too, that's why AROS is a hobby to me. How can a
hobby be obsolete and redundant ? AROS is about having fun not a business plan
that will rule the world, I gladly let MOS an OS4 take care of that bit.

Just let us play and we can let you play with your toys too.

_________________
AmigaOS or MorphOS on x86 would sell orders of magnitude more than the current,
hardware-intensive solutions. And they'd go faster.-- D.Haynie

@phase5fan

And how many apps is AmigaOS 4.x native? And how many apps is ported from other platforms? Classic apps needs emulation on ppc amigas,and why would'nt this be possible on another platform? In fact,it's already done...

_________________

@Caveman

Many and many.

_________________
I'm an antique. Don't light my fuse

@phase5fan

Congratulations!

Quote:

Warranty, etc. I was not interested. Apple has produced the millions of mac mini G4, if it breaks I will buy a other one.

and

Quote:

Unregistered version only requires rebote every half hour. With the system taking on in a few seconds is not a problem.

are exactly the silliest arguments I had the pleasure to hear on ANY information technologies forum ever. Firstly you started comparing a 2nd hand computer to a new one, then you posted a Nbench test just to demonstrate... nothing, and in the end you stated you'd prefer to have a system automatically rebooting every 30 minutes, than a working (and, best of all, respectful) one, for free. Yes, only amiga makes it possible. But that's not something we should be proud of.

@phase5fan

Quote:

Unfortunately, because this is not a bigendian processor , AROS on x86 is not compatible with existing software. Amiga OS clone which is perhaps twice as fast with the fastest PC, but is incompatible is obsolete and redundant.

OMG, are we goin' to listen to this pathetic rant for long time, more?

Can you please tell everyone here what should AROS be compatible TO, exactly? To old 68k software which is no more useful to do almost ANYTHING in the modern world? Should AROS be blamed because in 2010 it can't run natively that old PageStream or Wordsworth or Deluxe Paint application? Seriously!? Are you seriously suggesting us that everyone here still uses those programs, for the tasks they were wrote to perform? Or are they using InDesign, Word/OpenOffice Write and Photoshop/Gimp instead? Because one things are dreams, another reality. I simply don't believe everybody here still uses Amiga only for their everydays jobs. Maybe someone, but that would be only a fraction of the people here.

I simply can't understand why people should, today, want an AmigaOS clone running on top of modern hardware architectures... to stick with 20 years old applications! I believe, instead, that they would prefer an AmigaOS clone which allows keeping exactly the same habits of before, but running on much much much more faster and reliable hardware, ready to run NEW applications, being them ports from somewhere else or written from scratch. I personally prefer an AROS able to run Cinnamon Writer, than one running 68k version of Wordsworth. And I absolutely prefer people writing software for AOS4, MOS AND AROS, than ones complaining for old age 68K compatibility.

68K compatibility is good to do retrocomputing. But people DON'T SPEND their money on a X1000, or a SAM, a Mac or a plain PC to do retrocomputing, they spend their money to get a system able to fulfit their needs. A system which should be on par with other mainstream platforms, or at least that tries to be. And, just to stop your whining refrain about lack of software on AROS, we *already have* what people listed here: a modern web browser, MSN, a word processor (Cinnamon Writer... where have I heard about it before?) and much, much more. Believe it or not, my netbook already IS "my new Amiga 1200": a funny computer I can use to entertain myself when I don't have to work... I just need to reboot it into AROS and... tah dah, my Amiga is back. Everywhere I need it.

Sorry for being harsh, but boring arguments cry for an answer, sometimes.

@paolone

+1

_________________

@phase5fan

Quote:

Most developers and users use gcc on x86. Additional Power6 platform capabilities are not used by gcc. Therefore, Power6 reaches such poor results.

??? For your information, Power6 is 2 times faster than Pentium D in Spec CPU2006 benchmark (both integer and floating point performance). In your benchmark is even old G4 1.5 GHz faster (in integer score) than Power6!

Quote:

Amiga OS clone which is perhaps twice as fast with the fastest PC, but is incompatible is obsolete and redundant.

Again. Core i7 is more than 6 times faster than most powerful PowerPC CPU used by Amiga-like OS (7447A 1.5 GHz in Mac Mini). It is the same speed difference as between 68030 and 68060...

Quote:

Unfortunately, because this is not a bigendian processor , AROS on x86 is not compatible with existing software.

Even OS4 on 680x0 would be not compatible with current OS4 apps... New software can be recompiled for AROS (like for AmigaOS 4 or MorphOS), there are fast emulators for 680x0 software (I admit that UAE is not comparable with Petunia/Trance).

@paolone

Quote:

Are you seriously suggesting us that everyone here still uses those programs, for the tasks they were wrote to perform?

I use PPaint for drawing maps of dungeons and some other work with low colour images (converting from 16M colors to 8 bit or even less - for my other computers, eg. 486SX notebook with B/W display). For usual drawing is PPaint much better than Gimp (very good application, but has not much friendly user interface).

Quote:

68K compatibility is good to do retrocomputing. But people DON'T SPEND their money on a X1000, or a SAM, a Mac or a plain PC to do retrocomputing, they spend their money to get a system able to fulfit their needs.

68k compatibility is good if you want to gain old AmigaOS users for your OS (as MOS and OS4 did).

Quote:

Believe it or not, my netbook already IS "my new Amiga 1200": a funny computer I can use to entertain myself when I don't have to work... I just need to reboot it into AROS and... tah dah, my Amiga is back. Everywhere I need it.

I fully agree with that! However I rather use my old Amiga 1200.