@AdvancedFollower

Intel have z8300 atoms and celeron . You can find N4200 complete minipc at less then half of the price than tabor . N4200 have really good power in junction of intelhd 505 gpu

_________________
I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG
A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32;
PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB;
MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz;
#nomorea-eoninmyhome

@AdvancedFollower

Quote:

Of course there are inexpensive x86 systems available too, so I don't know what advantages ARM would bring over x86 other than "not being x86", which is apparently still important to some.

No "management engine" is one advantage.

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

@bison

That can be disabled: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/system76-disables-intel-me-firmware,36030.html

Last edited by AdvancedFollower on 05-Dec-2017 at 08:49 AM.

@AdvancedFollower

It can, but your manufacturer must disable it, or you'll need good knowledge of your OS to get it disabled. It's not something most people can do on their own.

@cgutjahr

Quote:

In case of a switch to a different processor architecture, PPC compatibility might be a much, much bigger problem. Because most people who developed software for either OS4 or MorphOS are gone now - and in typical Amiga fashion, the sources are not available.

That's true. PPC added yet another layer that has to be emulated in case of an ISA switch. But, at least in an ELF, it is cleaner. Seperation of code and data. So possibly PPC code could be interpreted as a virtual CPU. Load PPC code and data in memory. Then convert PPC code to native host CPU code. Like JIT but a premeditated emulator that converts all code upon loading. PPC code has rigid alignment which is easy enough so the problem is then host CPU code which would expand dynamically into different code sized blocks.

@Hypex

MorphOS team decided to integrate 68k not as JIT but as emulator (likne AROS). Simply reason not enough resources to develop such a JIT. And now you propose that for PPC. Another problem... it only works as long API is the same, if there would be a completely new OS (like some propose) then the API would be different too so software would not run. The only realistic option is to have PPC code run in UAE what already works.

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @Hypex MorphOS team decided to integrate 68k not as JIT but as emulator (likne AROS).

Decided when and where? For the future x64 version or? I don't remember hearing confirmation myself, although it's likely... can you point to some reference?

The current PPC MorphOS has had 68k CPU emulation (with JIT) since about the beginning. It's called Trance (mostly written by Teemu Suikki, who you might know from Delfina sound cards) and it's pretty much like Petunia on OS4. AROS doesn't have anything similar and it has to use UAE solutions.

Quote:

And now you propose that for PPC. Another problem... it only works as long API is the same, if there would be a completely new OS (like some propose) then the API would be different too so software would not run. The only realistic option is to have PPC code run in UAE what already works.

I think there are better emulators to emulate a PPC machine than UAE...

Last edited by jPV on 05-Dec-2017 at 02:14 PM.

_________________
- The wiki based MorphOS Library - Your starting point for MorphOS
- Software made by jPV^RNO

If Amiga were to ever had a modern os again, they would need to start over. Do like apple did, throw away the current amiga os, and take a kernel from freebsd or beos or what ever, and build on that. Then implant a sandbox for running legacy apps/games...

but it would probaly requere to many resources... Amiga OS / Amiga DOS was afterall just a fork of TRIPOS. Time to move on...

Hell mabye talk to Matthew Dillon and get Dragonfly BSD...

Last edited by StarF on 05-Dec-2017 at 02:18 PM.
Last edited by StarF on 05-Dec-2017 at 02:13 PM.

@jPV

on morph zone one of the core developer admitted that 68k would be integrated as emulation, not JIT. I cannot remember who but I could try to find it.

@StarF

While I agree that Dragonfly BSD is quite nice, I doubt that people will be enthousiastic about yet another Unix like OS posing as a Classic OS. While that worked out for Apple in the long run, it was only because they could keep throwing money at an OS that was at its inception, save architecturally, inferior in all ways to it's classic predecessor.

@StarF

Welcome!

@AdvancedFollower

I've been following that, but I'm going to wait a few months and see how it works out for people who are more impulsive than me.

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

@StarF

Welcome to Amigaworld.

Quote:

Hell mabye talk to Matthew Dillon and get Dragonfly BSD...

Dragonfly would be a good base system. One could use FS-UAE for running old apps, and create a custom Wayland-based compositor and a new toolkit that's about 1/10th the size of GTK+ or Qt for creating new apps. It could be a nice system.

The toolkit is were the Linux desktop is really missing it at present. GTK+ is a pain to use, the documentation is bad or non-existent, the community is generally unhelpful, and the API keeps changing with each new version of Gnome. There's opportunity for creating a system that programmers actually want to write software for.

Last edited by bison on 05-Dec-2017 at 04:42 PM.

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

@WolfpackN64

Quote:

While that worked out for Apple in the long run, it was only because they could keep throwing money at an OS that was at its inception, save architecturally, inferior in all ways to it's classic predecessor.

If I read this right, you're saying that OSX was superior to MacOS9 in terms of underlying architecture (e.g., kernel, inter-process communication, truly pre-emptive multitasking), but inferior in terms of everything else (GUI, file system?).

_________________
I've decided to follow an awful lot of people I respect and leave AmigaWorld. If for some reason you want to talk to me, it shouldn't take much effort to find me.

@bison

Well there are lots of Linux's that clam to have some thing to do with AmigaOS, but they are just a PIG's with lipstick on.

http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uploads/12.10/gldt1210.png

People don't like adaptation of .so objects, so putting Linux under it, and Linux is bit to nerdy for most people, a lot of work no fun.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 05-Dec-2017 at 10:55 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 05-Dec-2017 at 10:53 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 05-Dec-2017 at 10:52 PM.

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

@simplex

GUI is always something subjective, and frankly, yes, I really liked the classic Mac . GUI. The classic Mac Finder is in my opinion even superior to the current Finder. Mac OS X was quite slow compared to the classic Mac OS and software compatibility wasn't always that great. Mac OS X was supposed to be less crash prone as the Classic Mac OS, but really, it wasn't.

@WolfpackN64

Quote:

OS X was supposed to be less crash prone as the Classic Mac OS, but really, it wasn't.

I can only speak for the school computer room but spinning beach balls that couldn't recover were common on the Bondii Blue iMacs under Classic MacOS. Force Quit on OS X has eliminated that.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@NutsAboutAmiga

I'm not sure what your objection is to shared libraries -- the lipstick on a pig metaphor is a bit vague -- but the main problem that I've had with them is finding symbols. This problem is mostly alleviated by using scanelf.

bison@home ~ $ cat bin/findso
#!/bin/sh

# scanelf is in the Debian pax-utils package.

scanelf -l -s $1 | grep $1
bison@home ~ $

This will almost always find what I am looking for. For example:

bison@home ~ $ findso XftDrawString8
ET_DYN XftDrawString8 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libXft.so.2.3.2
bison@home ~ $

Last edited by bison on 06-Dec-2017 at 12:23 AM.

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

@simplex

Quote:

simplex wrote: @WolfpackN64 Quote: While that worked out for Apple in the long run, it was only because they could keep throwing money at an OS that was at its inception, save architecturally, inferior in all ways to it's classic predecessor. If I read this right, you're saying that OSX was superior to MacOS9 in terms of underlying architecture (e.g., kernel, inter-process communication, truly pre-emptive multitasking), but inferior in terms of everything else (GUI, file system?).

Yea... OS 9 and prior was tidy visually and got the job done simply, but even OS 9 was certainly inferior to what NeXTSTEP offered when it debuted in 1988. NeXTSTEP (or OpenStep more accurately) becoming OS X was the best thing that ever happened to that OS in all ways that I can account. I left the Mac years before, but when news landed in the lat '90s that Apple acquired NeXT, I vowed that my next computer would be a Macintosh, and I haven't looked back.

_________________
:::: Amigas: 1000, 2000 '020, SAM440ep-Flex 733

@blakespot

Well, I used my Mac's extensively in the transition period and Mac OS X wasn't all roses and sunshine in the early days. It got a lot better, but I'm starting to get tired of macOS at this point.