@matthey

Quote:

Adding 64 bit support would also require new structures and functions but it should be possible to maintain some 32 bit compatibility. The best compatibility would come from making a custom 64 bit 68k CPU core.

And this sounds exactly like the Apollo 68080.

Yes this is true. But for what AmigaOS? The classic OS 3.1 could be ported and reworked for a 64-bit 68K. OS4 is now worlds apart with the library interface and other ideas that don't work like OS3 did. It too could have a 64-bit rework and port, but as to whether it would be more compatible with other 68K software isn't guaranteed.

I've experimented and found some 68K software just does bad things. Games can not be trusted. Some hack into the OS if they don't take over the OS. Other software does other low level things, be that a slight bang on the hardware, or some other action that trips up. Some assumes a certain layout for bitmaps and writes directly that breaks. It's easy to blame OS4 but I found that a lot of 68K software was bad on the real thing; it just worked so we didn't notice. OS4 came as a real kick up the bum but by then it was too late.

Either way about it, the next stage for 68K integration in any future Amiga OS, IMHO will be to sandbox the 68K apps in their own memory space and create a classic 68K API instance that wraps to native API functions. So the operation is transparent to the user. A 68K opening up directly on the OS4 user interface.

Last edited by Hypex on 04-Aug-2018 at 07:54 AM.

@Hypex: mixing 64 and 32 bit applications on the same, current, Amiga o.s. "fashion" (OS4 included) is not possible.

Sandboxing the old, 32-bit apps is the key. And we have plenty of processing power nowadays for it.

@cdimauro

Quote:

The problem is that the Amiga o.s., as is, is too fragile. The creators traded robustness for performance/responsiveness, and customers are still paying the bill...

I was reading they actually intended to put these modern features into it in the first place. In the form of CAOS. But they lacked the time to do it. Perhaps we can blame time and not Commodore for this one.

It uses the same message passing method as Exec, which helped with efficiency and speed. I thought this was a main feature of Exec. Though now I wonder if they changed Exec to match. Still, I have always liked the AmigaDOS command line interface, the device structure and command templates. I don't know how it would have been with a Unix like structure. It is useful to refer to objects as files, which can be still be done on AmigaOS, but it is harder to mount file-systems. But by comparison AmigaDOS always looked more user friendly and understandable compared with Unix like terminals and cryptic scripting.

@OlafS25

Quote:

. Libre Office would be ported I fear it would not be fun using it on Tabor. Also I do not expect Tabor (if ever released) to attract new users, I assume most Tabor buyers would just replace older hardware like one of the SAMs.

I don't think Libre Office is that great. It doesn't roll off the tongue like Open Office. Why change a hook? I've used it on Mint x86 and if it isn't buggy the workflow is hard to make sense of. Most of the time I'm typing up a relatively simple document and it just crashes. Fortunately it did recover it but crashing three times in a row within 20 minutes is not uncommon. Apart from that, it has weird behaviour, like I try and add a text box. I click on the window to draw out the box and boom, it deletes the whole thing. Where's my box!? Too sensitive. It also lacks spell checking for anything that isn't US English. It doesn't pick up the words. Even with Wordworth on OS4, which is years behind, I don't recall having these problems. And it can crash on OS4. Though it seems rare.

@Hypex

Add me as not a fan. I'm not a fan of the behemoth integrated office suite as I think it is ultimately quite a poor user experience. KDE Calligra does this better IMHO.

What is more important to me is specialized tools with embeddable data, event better with embedded editors.

Also everything should be HyperCard ;)

@Hypex

Quote:

It is useful to refer to objects as files, which can be still be done on AmigaOS, but it is harder to mount file-systems. But by comparison AmigaDOS always looked more user friendly and understandable compared with Unix like terminals and cryptic scripting.

I spent some time tinkering with this:

https://packages.debian.org/stretch/rc

It's worth the time if you're interested in CLI design.

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

@remotenemesis

Quote:

Add me as not a fan. I'm not a fan of the behemoth integrated office suite as I think it is ultimately quite a poor user experience.

Add me to that list too.

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

@Hypex

Quote:

Hypex wrote: @cdimauro I was reading they actually intended to put these modern features into it in the first place. In the form of CAOS. But they lacked the time to do it. Perhaps we can blame time and not Commodore for this one.

If you want to introduce the usual (common) modern features, then you essentially need a new o.s.. Inspired by the Amiga o.s., for sure, but a new o.s..
Quote:

It uses the same message passing method as Exec, which helped with efficiency and speed. I thought this was a main feature of Exec. Though now I wonder if they changed Exec to match.

Then I doubt that they have solved the robustness (and protection) issues.
Quote:

Still, I have always liked the AmigaDOS command line interface, the device structure and command templates. I don't know how it would have been with a Unix like structure. It is useful to refer to objects as files, which can be still be done on AmigaOS, but it is harder to mount file-systems. But by comparison AmigaDOS always looked more user friendly and understandable compared with Unix like terminals and cryptic scripting.

I definitely prefer too the AmigaDOS CLI, devices, volumes and assigns concepts, and I'm NOT a big fan of Unix et similia:
web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf

@cdimauro

Quote:

I definitely prefer too the AmigaDOS CLI, devices, volumes and assigns concepts, and I'm NOT a big fan of Unix et similia: web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf

I hope you will find enlightenment in the end.

But I am not a Unix apologist. A lot of it is inspired, but not all of it, and some of it is downright awful -- bourne shell syntax, for example.

My favorite line from the book is from Dennis Ritchie's anti-forward:

Quote:

Here is my metaphor: your book is a pudding stuffed with apposite observations, many well-conceived. Like excrement, it contains enough undigested nuggets of nutrition to sustain life for some. But it is not a tasty pie: it reeks too much of contempt and of envy.

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

@bison: I don't think that I would find any enlightenment about Unix systems: I don't like them both as a user and coder. Personal taste.

@Hypex

Libre Office is certainly not perfect but what is the alternative to it?

That people develop native amiga PPC office software is not very propably

Of course there is the old 68k software but that will hardly motivate new users to buy Tabor

@cdimauro

What's your opinion of BeOS and its derivatives: Haiku and Fuchsia?

I use Linux daily, Windows never, and my best Linux box is an old Intel Mac Mini.

@Samurai_Crow

Quote:

Samurai_Crow wrote: @cdimauro What's your opinion of BeOS and its derivatives: Haiku

I was fascinating about BeOS and used it for some time after that I've left the Amiga. However we know that happened with Be Inc. and this o.s., so another dream shattered.

I never tried Haiku, but AFAIR is still immature.

Anyway, what I still don't like is the Unix APIs & philosophy. So, this includes BeOS, QNX, etc.
Quote:

and Fuchsia?

I'm waiting for something usable for "desktop". But it's not based or derived from BeOS.
Quote:

I use Linux daily, Windows never, and my best Linux box is an old Intel Mac Mini.

I used Linux a lot in the past, but now much less (because I moved to a more "management" position. It's quite rare that I develop code).

Usually I use Windows, from when I've left the Amiga (with some experiments with BeOS in the middle, as I said before).

@edponpon

Resurrect Amithlon and you have Amiga OS running on Intel/AMD architecture.

@Amigamia

I think Amithlon is the definition of the good and bad and ugly.

-1 The Linux kernel need by Amithlon was a hindrance for many users, because it required a special modified kernel. As result it mostly only run on old hardware.

+1 The Linux kernel did provide access to hardware not supported directly by AmigaOS, it problematic to support all kinds of hardware with small team.

+1 Amithlon did provide direct access to real hardware.

+1 compiling x86 code in big endian mode was smart move, this allowed for some optimizing in key places, AHI drivers and so on.

-1 the emulation layer might been a hindrance to continued development of AmigaOS, SMS support, memory protection, virtual memory.

-1 did not support WarpOS / PowerUP programs.

-1 Lacked chipset support, many programs did not run, it was not a good solution for everyone.

+1 Not emulation chipset improved speed, and made the OS more responsive under emulation.

4 bad, 4 good. 4 of 8 = 50 points.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 06-Aug-2018 at 12:36 PM.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

So what's ugly? :)

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@paolone

Quote:

2. it is based on AROS, which is a very romantic project most Amigans just pissed off, instead of helping.

I don't know if that' really fair to say, Paolo. :) I, for one, would have loved to help with AROS over the years, but... I had so many other things I had to balance in my life. Family, work, a veteran's association, various other hobbies to deal with. It was always a matter of finding the time and AROS development was always hard to get set up without a steep learning curve on my part.

Then, of course, there's been the issue of usage. All the tools I need to do computer related stuff are in Windows these days. :/ Even with you're excellent distribution, I can't accomplish some of my computer related hobbies with it. And it's been, sadly, years since I downloaded the latest.

No, I would have loved to have helped over the years, but Reality often overrides my wishes.

Last edited by EDanaII on 06-Aug-2018 at 03:19 PM.

@kolla

Not 100% native is a bit ugly.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 06-Aug-2018 at 07:37 PM.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

I couldn't agree more but I don't just mean resurrect and keep using it in the state it is in. I mean resurrect and continue development on it to address all those issues and add new features. You can't deny that Amithlon was (is ?) the fastest Amiga OS ever and the Linux layer was the only way to unshackle it from the 68K & PPC architectures, since none of the owners were interested in porting it to other architectures.

@Nonefornow

Quote:

Nonefornow wrote: What If OS 4.X (or other OS Amiga) was re-designed for classic Amiga only with full compatibility of existing classic software and no more switching of WB if you wanted to play an old game.? As it was already mentioned for modern PC there's AROS and for certain MACs there's MorphOS. Practically speaking to run AROS 68K on a classic Amiga one really needs a super duper ultra beefed up Amiga. We need a modern OS for the classics.

The Classic is too slow for a modern OS. Period.
There is already a re-designed version of OS4 for Classic. It is called OS3 :-p

Problem with old games is that they take over the entire machine. Force changing the screen mode, hacking the mouse, trashing AHI by hardcoding the Paula chip etc. -> Not possible to have WB running at the same time.

Only way is to sandbox such games in for example UAE. -> RunInUAE on an Amiga PPC machine. Or why not WinUAE. It's probably possible to start two WinUAEs; one for WB and one for the game

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.