How long before it's available for purchase(and also what pricepoint to expect)?

_________________

@all responsible

I hope Terminills looks at it and answers it...

what will be the business model? You can earn money by selling the OS or earning by the content (apps like appstore on iPhone) or both. Best in my view would be earning with the content and giving away the OS for free. But that has to be seen.

What is the relation to AROS. Will it f.e. be possible to have Icaros Desktop based on ARIX or is there one OS developed and maintained by "Arixfoundation". What will it mean that most of the Aros devs have joined Arix. Will they f.e. remove erorrs in the free branch or will "Aros" dry out?

How do they want to motivate 3d party developers from the commercial world to support it? Finally content decides success or failure of any OS. How does it differentiate to Linux and Windows?

How is the legal status of Arix? The nice thing about Aros was it could not be destroyed by anyone because it was opensource. How is that regarding Arix? I do not stick to "Opensource" at any price but we have a long history of failed commercial ventures in amiga history beginning with Commodore so I like the ideas to have a opensource OS where most parts are available freely,

What versions of Arix will be available?

Last edited by OlafS25 on 20-Nov-2013 at 10:40 AM.
Last edited by OlafS25 on 20-Nov-2013 at 10:37 AM.
Last edited by OlafS25 on 20-Nov-2013 at 10:33 AM.
Last edited by OlafS25 on 20-Nov-2013 at 10:33 AM.

@Arix devs

A very simple question:
in relation to the whole Amiga scene state of things, issues, wishlists etc. - what would you list as the 3 main opportunities opened by Arix?

Thanks

@Arko

Quote:

Arko wrote: @megol Quote: megol wrote: @Arko [quote] Arko wrote: The micro vs. monolithic discussion is quite useless. OSX and WinNT(XP, 7, 8) are claimed to have micro-kernels. But for better performances some important parts of the driver system are integrated into the kernel. Neither of those are microkernels.

OSX Microkernel:
Quote:

The first microkernels, notably Mach, proved to have disappointing performance, ... By 2000, most large-scale (Mach-like) efforts had ended, although OpenStep used an adapted Mach kernel called XNU, which is now used in the OS known as Darwin, which is the open source part of Mac OS X.[2] As of 2012, the Mach-based GNU Hurd is also functional and its inclusion in testing versions of Arch Linux and Debian is in progress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microkernel
[/quote]

First you are quoting a wikipedia article. The quality of wikipedia articles vary a lot and IME anything associated with Apple tend to be "polished" by non-technical fanboys wanting to make their OS seem unique and innovative.

But also the above doesn't say the OS/X kernel is a microkernel - because it sure as hell isn't one. It is a mix of MACH, BSD and proprietary code but doesn't use a microkernel architecture. If I'd take e.g. QNX (which is a proper microkernel) and added a lot of kernel space resident functionality from BSD and then ran all device drivers in kernel mode mostly bypassing the QNX IPC design it wouldn't be a microkernel either.

Quote:

WindowsNT Microkernel: Quote: Windows NT's kernel mode code further distinguishes between the "kernel", whose primary purpose is to implement processor and architecture dependent functions, and the "executive". This was designed as a modified microkernel, as the Windows NT kernel was influenced by the Mach microkernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University,[19] but does not meet all of the criteria of a pure microkernel. Both the kernel and the executive are linked together into the single loaded module ntoskrnl.exe; from outside this module there is little distinction between the kernel and the executive. Routines from each are directly accessible, as for example from kernel-mode device drivers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

It doesn't meet the criteria of a pure microkernel - because it isn't one! FFS it isn't like the Windows NT design isn't well documented.

@megol

Quote:

But also the above doesn't say the OS/X kernel is a microkernel - because it sure as hell isn't one. It is a mix of MACH, BSD and proprietary code but doesn't use a microkernel architecture.

It's worth adding that it wouldn't really have been one if it was "pure Mach" either. The OS/X kernel started out based on Mach 2.5. It was first Mach 3 that was a proper micro-kernel.

Early versions of Mach started out with pretty much an entire BSD kernel *and* the Mach code both running in kernel space, and then they gradually migrated the BSD stuff to userspace. So "just" Mach 2.5 already was a mix that included substantial parts of BSD, as they were still running into performance problems with moving the BSD parts into userspace.

_________________
Wiki for new/returning Amiga users - Projects: ACE basic compiler / FrexxEd / Git

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Arko Again, "stupid"? Do you know how to discuss without insulting who thinks differently? Or is it a natural defense because you cannot sustain the discussion? .. You better have to study how Amiga o.s. works...

Nothing needs to be added, so I wont.

_________________
Blog

Its been interesting to read all the technical stuff going on. However one of the key areas I am interested in is how the system will perform for the average person, such as myself, who has had no experience with Aros prior. How easy will this OS dual boot with Windows 7 or 8 on modern UEFI systems. Because many, again like myself, will have to use Windows in order to get day-to-day stuff done. What sort of packages should we expect to see within the OS for word processing, net usage, email and other productivity tasks along with day-to-day computing needs?

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

@megol and all others who wish to debate the pros and cons of kernel architecture,

Take your arguments to a new thread.

If your posts do not apply to the title of this thread, start a new thread of your own, as many of you are detracting from the original point of this thread and going too far off topic. All forum threads have some off topic discussion, but when it begins to over power the rest of the thread, it becomes detrimental to the original poster and the title of the thread.

Thanks for your cooperation.

_________________
Amiga! The computer that inspired so many, to accomplish so much, but has ended up in the hands of . . . . . . . . . .

@amigadave
Quote:

amigadave wrote: @megol and all others who wish to debate the pros and cons of kernel architecture, Take your arguments to a new thread. If your posts do not apply to the title of this thread, start a new thread of your own, as many of you are detracting from the original point of this thread and going too far off topic. All forum threads have some off topic discussion, but when it begins to over power the rest of the thread, it becomes detrimental to the original poster and the title of the thread. Thanks for your cooperation.

But that discussion is about Arix in proxy as the kernel design have impact on the whole system design.

Or would you like it better if no one discussed Arix at all? The released information is close to nil and that includes the information about it being based on Linux+something else (not revealed)+AROS userland. Now that something else could be a co-located kernel, a partially co-located kernel or even a proper microkernel. And yes, it matters!

@megol

It's clear from what michalsc described that ARIX implements a Linux userspace process which translates AROS/Amiga APIs into Linux kernel/C library calls. There are a few details like the multitasking implementation, but the diagram is otherwise quite self explanatory. The monolithic kernel/hybrid kernel/whatever kernel discussion is meaningless, as Arko said.

_________________
Blog

@megol

Quote:

Or would you like it better if no one discussed Arix at all?

That isn't at all what AmigaDave said, suggested or requested. Of course it matters, however, if you wish to debate and argue the relative merits of kernel architecture, please start a new thread. I'm sure you'll get loads of focussed responses if you do.

Thank you for your attention and compliance.

_________________
¤¤ Official Hyperion Zealot ¤¤

(No, I didn't type that with a straight face.)

@OlafS25

Quote:

what will be the business model? You can earn money by selling the OS or earning by the content (apps like appstore on iPhone) or both. Best in my view would be earning with the content and giving away the OS for free. But that has to be seen.

I strongly agree. Or they could try to monetize it a bit using a search engine deal or something like that too.

But if they try to sell the OS itself, who besides a handful here would even buy it? It really restricts the possible userbase, when AROS is free and Linux is free. It makes no sense at all then to try to sell the OS.

Does it comes with a browser? or any other software? that we have not seen on aros

_________________
http://aros-exec.org/

http://serk118.blogspot.com/

@ Nameless, Quote:

But if they try to sell the OS itself, who besides a handful here would even buy it? It really restricts the possible userbase, when AROS is free and Linux is free. It makes no sense at all then to try to sell the OS.

I'd buy it. I bought MorphOS when it's total cost came to about 300$. In fact, MorphOS sales spiked once they started offering it on cheap Mac hardware. If they charge a reasonable price, they'd sell more than just a handful. Especially if it offers m68k compatibility, which that architecture diagram suggests that they very well could.

I wouldn't suggest that only a handful would buy. PC hardware is cheaper, faster and more advanced. With m68k compatibility, they could easily outstrip MorphOS sales.

My humble opinion, of course. :)

@EDanaII

I think you possibly could be right, but our definitions of a 'handful' differ. 1K or so sales for an OS is god awful, when looking at it from outside of the niche Amiga market. And that is an optimistic sales number, in my opinion.

In the longrun, I'd think they'd be better off just giving it away, as they have both x86 and ARM people who may at least try it out. If it offers any advantage at all to existing Linux flavors, or has built in emulation for older Amiga games (68K software bundle would be nice), or anything at all that would appeal to former Amiga people, they could a gain small, but viable, hobby userbase. I would define that as 5-20K+ at least semi-active users.

Besides those with PCs, you have things like Raspberry Pi, and if they ever add any touch optimizations, a ton of cheap ARM tablets. If they charge, let's pretend MorphOS prices, what percentage of those people would even bother with it? Even free, it won't be easy to get people to try it.

Last edited by Nameless on 21-Nov-2013 at 01:10 AM.

@serk118

Quote:

Does it comes with a browser? or any other software? that we have not seen on aros

I'd assume that it comes with the current build of MUI OWB. If there's any other software not currently available remains to be seen. There seems to be very little meat at the moment so besides better hardware compatibility via the Linux kernel side it's not really not at the moment why you'd pick Arix over one of the currently available distros.

I agree that the success of ARIX would be much greater if they are able, or willing to give the OS away free, but charge a small amount for bundled customization with existing AROS software for a small fee. That plus any number of other ways that can generate an active income for their efforts would be preferable to charging for the OS like MorphOS and AmigaOS4.x do at this time.

I have long thought and said that AROS would eventually over-take MorphOS and AmigaOS4.x as the leading AmigaNG operating system, and maybe this combination of developers with ARIX can make that happen years sooner than I had previously thought possible. It is too early to tell what they can do.

What I would like to see, is ARIX remain Open Source, but guided by the group who have founded ARIX, but that might not be what they want to do. Perhaps ARIX and AROS will coexist and cooperate with each other and share code, so that ARIX simply ends up being a fork of AROS (it appears to be that to me, but a closed source fork at the moment). I like MorphOS the best right now, but also use AmigaOS4.x. My highest hope is that AROS (or ARIX) as an Open Source project, would eventually surpass both MorphOS and AmigaOS4.x so completely that every single Amiga user, both current and former, would join together and leave all of the wars against each other in the past. This is a very long term dream of mine, and it might never happen, but each person is free to dream what they like.

It will be very interesting to see what this ARIX Foundation comes up with, and what they decide to do in the future. Where is that popcorn?

_________________
Amiga! The computer that inspired so many, to accomplish so much, but has ended up in the hands of . . . . . . . . . .

@amigadave

AROS is already free and should be able to give people a good idea of what ARIX is about and wasn't there something about a free hosted version anyway. Also without knowing how much they are going to charge it's difficult to say if they'd have a higher take up. If it's under $20 dollars they might not get that many less copies shifted than if it was free.

Ultimately it's their product, they've stepped up to the mark and invested their time and maybe a little money into ARIX so why should we be trying to dictate what we think they should do, especially when details about it are currently pretty scare.

@OlafS25
Quote:

@all responsible I hope Terminills looks at it and answers it... what will be the business model? You can earn money by selling the OS or earning by the content (apps like appstore on iPhone)

Pretty much the plan.

Quote:

What is the relation to AROS. Will it f.e. be possible to have Icaros Desktop based on ARIX or is there one OS developed and maintained by "Arixfoundation". What will it mean that most of the Aros devs have joined Arix. Will they f.e. remove erorrs in the free branch or will "Aros" dry out?

Most of Arix is Opensource why would that have to change in order to have eventual commercial goals? Look at Tivo it's a glorified Linux box with HD tuners and some proprietary software on it and they do very well.

tivo



Quote:

How do they want to motivate 3d party developers from the commercial world to support it? Finally content decides success or failure of any OS. How does it differentiate to Linux and Windows?

this is being worked on. :)

Quote:

How is the legal status of Arix? The nice thing about Aros was it could not be destroyed by anyone because it was opensource. How is that regarding Arix?

Same applies to Arix as it does Aros..

Quote:

I do not stick to "Opensource" at any price but we have a long history of failed commercial ventures in amiga history beginning with Commodore so I like the ideas to have a opensource OS where most parts are available freely,

So do I. :)

Quote:

What versions of Arix will be available?

There seems to have been some confusion as to "versions". The only versions shall be the ones the distro maintainers decide to make.

It's late now so expect me to clarify this a bit more in the morning. :)

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

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

@terminills

Definitely interested. Sign me up as a customer

_________________