@number6

Quote:

If you read my quote from Hyperion management, it seems to read quite contrary.

They only say license was restricted to PPC platform. Nobody said it was a demand from Amiga Inc.

Quote:

Do you know something about the contract that I don't know?

Hyperion (just like the MorphOS developers back then) was extremely pro-PowerPC making PPC Linux and PPC Amiga ports from PC games. Knowledge, experience nor willingness to port AmigaOS to any non-PPC platform simply didnt exist.

(In fact I am not sure if they ever made any 68k native game.)

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@Nameless

Quote:

I see no reason, besides perhaps legal ones, why they couldn't have chosen x86. And yeah, you have so many flavors of x86 it's a pain to code for all. But they didn't need to.

OS4 project was started in 2001 - PowerPC was still competitive at that time. Now, there is not enough resources and money to port AmigaOS to other architectures with maintaining backward compatibility.

Quote:

Pick an x86 system, code OS4 for it, and that's the new X1000. It'd have to be cheaper than 3000 dollars, unless they were using the most expensive Alienware models out there (and even then, I think it's less).

OS is useless without applications. Quick OS4 port to x86 is of course possible, but it would cost compatibility - all current PowerPC and 68k applications would not work. Proper port would be much more expensive.

If you want Amiga-like OS on x86, try AROS. It is for free, fast and has only one flaw - nearly no useful applications.

@jas_mc

Quote:

The combination of custom hardware and rare OS is intoxicating. But I'm open to ideas.

Me too.

I would like to have X1000 for this year´s Saturnalia (or Christmas)... why not x86 based X2000 for Christmas 2013?

@itix

HyperionMP quote:
Quote:

Then there are some legal issues like some licences being tied to PPC only.

Your response:
Quote:

They only say license was restricted to PPC platform. Nobody said it was a demand from Amiga Inc.

Gateway then? [evil grin]

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Quote:

Gateway then? [evil grin]

Hyperion.

(Just in case someone missed it.)

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@pavlor

Quote:

Now, there is not enough resources and money to port AmigaOS to other architectures with maintaining backward compatibility.

Generally supporting two platforms at the same time is not that much work. OS4 was "dual developed" on 68k (components were developed on a 68k system and then compiled for PPC).

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

Quote:

68k system and then compiled for PPC).

OS4 has (had) 68k compatibility - it is not comparable to possible "quick" x86 port.

@pavlor

68k compatibility has nothing to do with it. Their initial port didnt run any 68k code.

With x86 port you of course are getting endianess problem. It is topic that is very rarely addressed in Amiga software so you have to do some bug hunting there (though it is not big deal, it is just like PPC varargs, ie just minor detail). But if you really go for x86 port today you may start considering to drop some old legacy crap because it wont allow native 68k integration anyway. To do it properly you need more planning than straightforward 68k to PPC port would require.

Last edited by itix on 28-Jun-2011 at 08:01 PM.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@pavlor

It would just need a Rosetta and Universal Binary (Apple) for backward compatibility.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(binary_translation_software)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_binary

About CUSA, criticism has quite piled back in time, proper bussines
would neva have it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_USA#Controversy

No matter of all the flamming about what Amiga is,
its nice to see Classic model, some clones and AmigaPPC machines
make Amiga models and variants, without cases and stickers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_models_and_variants

_________________
OS 3.x AROS and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionalism. Learn it harder way!
SinclairQL and WII U lover :D
YT http://www.youtube.com/user/rasvoja

@itix

Quote:

To do it properly you need more planning than straightforward 68k to PPC port would require.

As I wrote - more time, resources and developers.

@jas_mc

Quote:

jas_mc wrote: @Mechanic You don't have to support any and every model of PC, or even try to. You could just support one or two boards, then sell AmigaOne-branded complete systems built around them. The situation would be similar to now - i.e., you would have to buy specific hardware to run AmigaOS - but the board would be a mass produced one that had been selected for an OS port, rather than an expensive custom one, so you would have a much more competitively priced product (cheaper, faster).

I agree. I really do.

And I can see it as a possible solution for some laptop thingie.

I also think any such branch into x86 should be done most carefully. Not both feet first.
Should AmigaOS ever get into that 'gotta have the latest and greatest' hardware, no matter
how inexpensive, , , then what's the point. That is already available, and no thank you.

Hyperion/A-eon are doing things right, no matter what others who wish them only failure THINK.

Thanks for the replies explaining the situation, or at least explaining it the best one can with info out there.

I wonder how difficult an ARM port would be for OS4? I noticed several MorphOS people recommending that route in that forum link listed in this thread -- several had basically a 'port or die' attitude, which I'm not sure I can disagree with.

If MorphOS + OS4 stick to the PPC platform longterm, how can they ever expand their userbases?

If OS4 had its origins in 68K-land, would a backward port to Natami or FPGA arcade be feasible? Yes, you lose PPC software compatibility, but I wonder if that matters really?

I mean (and again, don't want to offend OS4 or MorphOS users), the majority of people, and I'll include even the majority of ex-Amiga people, use modern computers nowadays, with either Win, Mac or Linux. I expect many here use such machines too... it's just the way things are if you want to run certain pieces of software.

Do most OS4 or MorphOS owners use it for the OS itself, or the library of software available for each? Do they run dual-boots with Linux or have another machine with a different OS to run browsers, photoshop, and modern software?

I'd think that since the PPC is library rather small -- considering I don't think OS4 even has FF ported to it yet... and FF just jumped ahead another version -- that losing the PPC library may not matter as much as one would think.

I could be very wrong about this, as again, I don't follow every OS4/MorphOS post or what is available, but was curious how people felt.

And I expect it explains why CUSA didn't feel it really was a big deal to bother with OS4 (that and the license agreement forbidding them to use an Amiga OS). If you had a giant wad of cash, would you be better off porting OS4/MorphOS/updating AROS to something modern, or starting from scratch with a linux core? If they just slap an Amiga theme on Ubuntu, which is what I think they are starting with, it's pretty lame (to me, anyway). But if they wanted to make a new OS (not a ubuntu variant, but a new OS using the core) for their Amiga machines, they probably are better off forgetting about the current Amiga OS options, and just starting over -- the linux software library will dwarf anything available on PPC OS4/MorphOS.

@Nameless

Quote:

I mean (and again, don't want to offend OS4 or MorphOS users), the majority of people, and I'll include even the majority of ex-Amiga people, use modern computers nowadays, with either Win, Mac or Linux. I expect many here use such machines too... it's just the way things are if you want to run certain pieces of software.

Indeed. I only use Amigas and Ataris and I get my share of laughter as a result. Heh. Most people here use a PC, followed by Mac. That would include both developers and users really. On Morphzone, you might find Mac gaining quite an edge though, for obvious reasons.

Quote:

Do most OS4 or MorphOS owners use it for the OS itself

Developers often don't even use applications. Users, I would hope use the systems for the applications, although I would say they have more than a normal interest in their operating system than the average PC user does.

Quote:

I'd think that since the PPC is library rather small

It is. Most people using applications are using a lot of what you would term classic software.(68k)

Quote:

And I expect it explains why CUSA didn't feel it really was a big deal to bother with OS4

Honestly that's a discussion that has to take place under NDA. The users will post about it freely, but that won't change the fact.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

itix & jas_mc speaks a lot of sense in this thread.

Make sure you read post #57 & #60 again.... its perfectly reasonable when you take the emotion and personality out of the equation.

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@Nameless

By running on better processors like the Freescale QorIQ P4080 or QorIQ AMP series, you get better price preference ratio but at higher price.

OS4 has FF is called timerwolf, but its not yet extremely usable, main problem its done by same developers writing the OS, so progress looks to be slow.

MUI OWB is a lot better and faster then Reaction OWB, we don't really need FF, but FF is a great browser.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 28-Jun-2011 at 10:46 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 28-Jun-2011 at 10:44 PM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@vox

----
About CUSA, criticism has quite piled back in time, proper bussines
would neva have it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_USA#Controversy
----

Ah you couldn't resist mentioning them again could you just when the thread was getting more interesting.

Updated wiki page btw as it was riddled with spellings errors, inaccuracies oh and whenever Amiga OS was written 'conveniently' the links were missing.

Last edited by djrikki on 29-Jun-2011 at 01:17 AM.

_________________

@Nameless

Quote:

And I expect it explains why CUSA didn't feel it really was a big deal to bother with OS4 (that and the license agreement forbidding them to use an Amiga OS).

Ben stopped communicating with Barry so that closed the door on OS4 for C=USA machines.

Quote:

If you had a giant wad of cash, would you be better off porting OS4/MorphOS/updating AROS to something modern, or starting from scratch with a linux core? If they just slap an Amiga theme on Ubuntu, which is what I think they are starting with, it's pretty lame (to me, anyway). But if they wanted to make a new OS (not a ubuntu variant, but a new OS using the core) for their Amiga machines, they probably are better off forgetting about the current Amiga OS options, and just starting over -- the linux software library will dwarf anything available on PPC OS4/MorphOS.

COS 1.x is based on Ubuntu and is deemed the quickest way to get something that is some what customized on C=USA machines. C=USA is a startup, it takes a bit of time and effort of really talented coders to come up with a decent new OS. This is the reason why I keep trying to remind folks that what is important is COS 2.x series and not COS 1.x series. COS 2.x series is going to be the make or break in separating C=USA from HP/Dell/#? retail shops because Linux has failed in the mass desktop/laptop/nettop market to wow the consumers. C64x, you can get away with Linux because there was no desktop associated with the C64 so it was a good choice that could be produced in a short period of time. C=USA's new Commodore Amigas, will need a very special new OS that is fully modern and that will not take years to develope.

_________________
Dammy

@damocles

I'm almost hesitant to ask this, due to all the anti-CUSA feelings here, but...

Has CUSA ever stated their plans for 2.x?

Are they developing their own Amiga-like OS with a Linux core, or just 'sprucing' up Ubuntu further for 2.x as well? What time-line are they using to develop it and do they have dedicated coders working on it now? And are they even allowed to make an Amiga-like OS of their own, due to that licensing agreement between Amiga Inc and Hyperion?

If CUSA can't sell machines with AROS pre-loaded, how would they be allowed to sell COS 2.x if it's similar to an Amiga OS?

For their C-64x series, I expect many will be pre-loaded with Win7, at least in retail shops (assuming they are sold in retail shops). So the Ubuntu thing would seem less important there. But
for their Amigas, will they have 2.x ready in time?

I find it a little odd that if CUSA wanted to buy a license or port of OS4, Hyperion wouldn't at least listen and keep communications open, as... well, I'm not sure how Hyperion even makes money at this point. They aren't into Amiga Inc-realm of dinky PDA games, but I don't see a solid income source there to run a company longterm. Unless CUSA's terms were so ridiculous that it wasn't even worth listening to (a possibility). At the very least, I'd think CUSA-Hyperion could have worked out a naming license -- Amiga OS, Commodore-Amiga OS, or some variation with the name would have been better for marketing purposes.

Or is this all guesswork at this point, and nobody really knows (besides CUSA)?

Last edited by Nameless on 29-Jun-2011 at 04:15 PM.

@Nameless

Quote:

Has CUSA ever stated their plans for 2.x?

Very little and what has been said is subject to change. I doubt you will hear anything before Oct-Nov 2011 as "Iacta alea est."

_________________
Dammy

@Nameless

Quote:

Or is this all guesswork at this point, and nobody really knows (besides CUSA)?

I'm not too convinced that CUSA even knows yet; I think this is still in a state of flux. I've read nothing concrete, just generalizations -- it will be "the biggest and the best," etc.

If they were to say that it will be the smallest and the best, then I might be more inclined to be hopeful. I don't think CUSA has a handle on the basic philosophy of the Amiga.

Last edited by bison on 29-Jun-2011 at 05:15 PM.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner