@Overflow

Fanatism exists on both sides

I think what more people dislike is that some call Amigas "classics". Go on the street and ask people above 40 (in europe) what a "classic" is, they will look at you and say "Huh?" propably , if you ask them what a Amiga is there is a chance that they say "Amiga? Oh yes the A500. Long time ago". So Amiga is for most people 68k based hardware, the same for most "non-NG" related meetings today. So I would say for majority Amiga is 68k based, but the world will not go under if some will use it in context of AmigaOne/X1000 (PPC based). Even though I see noone using "Amiga" in context of AROS or MorphOS so to me it seems very much a AmigaOS related discussion.

@Rob
Quote:

Rob wrote: @fishy_fis Quote: Rhetorical, but you do realize uae isn't needed to run Amiga software on OS4.x right? We've been through this a million times with HL over at Moobunny. He's either unwilling or incapable of understanding it.

You have a wild imagination, Rob. It fits the style of your OS4 hobby on your imagined Amiga machines. LOL

I said at least about 99% of all Amiga Software need an emulator to run in AmigaOS4. The petunia emulator you use is also an emulator but is probably used on only a very small number of Amiga software, the rest need to use the Universal Amiga Emulator.

Last edited by Hillbillylitre on 12-Apr-2015 at 01:52 PM.

_________________
Using: One Commodore C64 - One Commodore Amiga 500 - One Commodore Amiga 1200 with BVision and Blizzard 68060 with PPC coprocessor running Amiga DOS - One Hellbillylitre Amigatwox86x64x6000x running Windows7

@Overflow

Quote:

Overflow wrote: @WhatsIsName Fair post, but the "Amiga" name is so washed out at this point it doesnt really matter. http://www.amiga.no/ for example ^^

The "Amiga" name has been used for many types of business for a long, long time...

http://www.amigaplumbinganddrainage.co.uk/

But the difference is unless you were really bonkers you wouldn't be expecting to buy a nice new Amiga computer from the Plumber above...

When it comes to the Amiga in terms of computers then I agree with you the name is indeed "washed out" these days in terms of a commercial product... :-/

That's why I say why not let the Amiga legacy rest in peace as it should be in the annals of computing history based on what it actually was at it's height (and still is to many), one of the best ever conceived and produced home computers of all time that paved the way for todays multimedia systems in both software and hardware...

All this endless dreaming, wishing, hoping and praying for the past two decades by some that these "NG" systems & the use of "Emulators" on PC or Mac are somehow the "future" of the Amiga is all pie in the sky, nonsense and nothing more. If you enjoy using "NG" machines or even an "Emulator" then just get on with it and use them, enjoy them but what's the point in pretending to yourself or the world that they are an "Amiga" when the reality is they are not and just use the things, enjoy them but call them what they really are instead of for some strange reason forever trying to link them to the legacy of what was and is the the only real range of Amiga computers...

As Olaf says, most folk whom you mention the Amiga to will talk about the original machines as that is what they knew and used. Many/ most of those people have never heard of or know very little about all this "NG" stuff and most of them would think you were either telling porky pies or just plain crazy if you tried to tell them you owned an "NG" Amiga...

More importantly though, at the end of the day no matter how many more years or even decades this old debate goes on for (and it probably will), what I have to say on the subject or what others have to say on the subject doesn't actually matter in the slightest when it comes to actually enjoying whatever hardware we each choose to use and that's the way it should be...

Just like my taste in music, it doesn't matter to me that others don't like it or that they put it down cos it doesn't affect my enjoyment of it in any way. Whether you want to call it "arguing", "debating" or just "conversing" on the subject at the end of the day that's all it is are words/ opinions of complete strangers but those words in reality don't affect my enjoyment of something be it music or the Amiga but that doesn't mean any of us should be told to shut up or go away just because we don't agree on something, life would indeed be incredibly bland if we all liked the exact same things and just sat about agreeing with each other all day long...

@WhatsIsName

No it's just that my pecs are high up.

And again no, as I only get hyped up by the X.

@Hillbillylitre

Quote:

You can always use a Universal Amiga Emulator in an operating system

Thanks I was wondering what that U meant for ages. Theres was the E version. And now an FS version. Haven't seen an FSEU version yet.

Well, now back to using my UNG Amiga. Which as it happens has a UAE with a GUI and JIT engine.

@WhatsIsName

Quote:

As Olaf says, most folk whom you mention the Amiga to will talk about the original machines as that is what they knew and used. Many/ most of those people have never heard of or know very little about all this "NG" stuff and most of them would think you were either telling porky pies or just plain crazy if you tried to tell them you owned an "NG" Amiga...

So by this you are actually admitting the NG machines exist. You may prefer not to call them Amiga in despite the official license, I think Amigaone is enough to remove them from the original 16/32bit lines but they are an official product like it or not as is AmigaOS4 to give it its full title, which as it happens also runs on the A1200 and A4000.

I see no harm in OS4 continuing the Amiga legacy under the Amiga name. Yes the current hardware is expensive and still a little behind times but that's life on a small budget.

I'm sure if Commodore was still around today and had not made the mistakes of the early 90's modern hardware would probably not be to far removed from these NG machines. Would you still be in denial of them being Amiga's as they would unlikely be able to run the games etc of the 80's/90's just as much as a Windows or Mac machine can in their respective lines without emulation, that's progress.

I admit that in my first post that by saying nobody is interested in compatibility with the old machines was a bad choice of words. I myself do like the old machines and programs that go with them but just because the NG machines are not 100% compatible I'm not denying their importance.
I have 5 classic Amiga's plus an Amigaone with nearly all versions of AmigaOS, they are all Amiga to me, even though not a single one of them is 100% compatible with another.
No single Amiga will run all Amiga software and that's a fact.

Last edited by Arnie on 12-Apr-2015 at 06:40 PM.

@WhatsIsName

franko! welcome back, buddy! we missed ya.

-- eliyahu

_________________
"Physical reality is consistent with universal laws. When the laws do not operate, there is no reality. All of this is unreal."

@Arnie

if you talk about "official" they have no license to be called "Amiga" but "AmigaOne". I do not understand why AmigaOS supporters insist that their expensive PowerPC machines are "Amigas" and the other "classic" or "clones". Why not staying exactly, there are "Amigas" and "AmigaOnes"?

BTW the last "Amiga" I bought was called A4000, guess what the "A" was for. Right Amiga . Not C4000 for Classic.

Last edited by OlafS25 on 12-Apr-2015 at 06:00 PM.

@OlafS25

The A could be for Acorn. The original A4000 arrived a month before Commodore's effort.

@Rob

Acorn 4000 from Commodore with Amiga hardware? You really just changed history

@OlafS25

We had that discussion a while back.

I got A1200, and its an Amiga. But I call it classic when the thread discusses PPC, MorphOS, AROS etc etc for "identification".

Some of you might say "if its a1200, just say Amiga, since its the only hardware family that fits the Amiga name". But people understand what I mean with "classic", so im sticking to it.

Its a bit like Apple products. They have branched away from their original hardware lineup, but its still "Apple" products.

Gist of it is; I dont feel like a zealot when it comes to branding/names.

@OlafS25
Quote:

if you talk about "official" they have no license to be called "Amiga" but "AmigaOne". I do not understand why AmigaOS supporters insist that their expensive PowerPC machines are "Amigas" and the other "classic" or "clones". Why not staying exactly, there are "Amigas" and "AmigaOnes"?

I believe I did call the new generation AmigaOne, I was just to lazy to type classic Amiga in that last statement something I will correct. I'm not or never have said that they are no longer Amiga and I'm sure no other AmigaOS user has. These very forums have classic Amiga threads for these machines, should this not be changed to just Amiga then. The word classic is just used to refer to the old generation of hardware that is now out of production long ago, it's not denying their Amiga status.

The last Amiga I bought from new was the AmigaOne XE, It has the full Amiga word not just an A although it can be cut down to A1XE if you like. .

@Overflow

hmmm but on certain sites certain users use three phrases: "Amiga", "classics", "clones". "Classics" are what I call Amigas, "clones" are AROS and MorphOS and "Amiga" is used exclusively for SAMs and X1000. That is a little strange to me (and I am not the only one). I have no problem when some people use "Amiga" different than I but tying Amiga to SAMs and X machines and the other call different is changing history. What am I? A clone and classic user? Sorry that is nonsense

@Arnie

then you will have a problem when FPGA based hardware is available. How will you call it then? NG classics? These differentiations are artifically

@OlafS25

Quote:

then you will have a problem when FPGA based hardware is available. How will you call it then? NG classics? These differentiations are artificially

Nope, they will be clones

Well after reading this thread I am terribly confused now about what constitutes an Amiga and this after 20 odd years of using one in various guises...... I've been told that an Amigaone 500 operating with Amiga OS 4.1 isn't an Amiga because it doesn't run OCS and ECS software natively and has to do it via an emulator, yet the Amiga 1200 which I have which also have and could also run that same OS 4.1 that my Amiga one 500 uses is considered a proper Amiga, yet this is the same machine that can't run certain OCS and ECS software natively and has to use a degrader disk before it can run.....

I think I better go and check up on my CD32 and see what he thinks he is??

_________________
Amigaone X5000/20 4GB Radeon RX 550 Polaris 12 AmigaOS4.1 Final Edition Update 1
Amiga 1200 Workbench 3.1.4
Amiga CD32

@Arnie

You may know that OlafS25 likes "clones" as much as "classics".

@outrun1978

You hit the nail on the head, +1

Quote:

WhatsIsName wrote: ...Dear Gawd, Where do you get em and WHY did you have to send em all to Amigaland ???

hi Franko So I'm assuming you have made another bet with a different friend this time around

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

Quote:

outrun1978 wrote: Well after reading this thread I am terribly confused now about what constitutes an Amiga and this after 20 odd years of using one in various guises

The way I see it it's simple. An Amiga is a computer sold by Commodore under the Amiga brand name (this includes the Escom machines, because they simply have a different badge). Machines designed to run AOS are AOS machines.

Another criterium is the chip set. An Amiga also has to have OCS, ECS or AGA to really qualify as a true Amiga. If Commodore had done what Apple did with their Macintosh line, then the machines would be Amigas only in name.

The current trend of calling whatever one wants an Amiga is a bit silly if you ask me, especially because it's the hardware that made Amigas what they were back in the day, and not the operating system (someone could've made a similar OS for the Atari ST, or 68k Mac).