@OneTimer1

On MorphZone there are a lot of answers from Mos Dev Team.
If you want to interact with them I suggest you to post questions in that place.

_________________
Pegasos II G4@1GHz 2GB Radeon 9250 256MB
AmigaOS4.1 fe - MorphOS - Debian 9 Jessie

@matthey

“64 bit support“?

I’m do not believe they promised 64bit OS,
they did promise large disk support that’s NSD64 also know in AmigaOS3.5/3.9
they did promise large file support, aka support 64bit file offsets, its is supported like forever.

what maybe talking about is full memory protection, not partial memory protection.
or maybe stack enlargement feature.

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

@matthey

That’s not at all what happened, what happened was they late with contract work for Amiga Inc because delays in the hardware that was promised did not make it, the AmigaONE accelerator for the Amiga 1200 / 4000 hardware, because they were late Amiga Inc sued Hyperion early, legal turbel started even before AmigaOS4.0 prerelease. Hyperion’s relationship with Amiga Inc turned sour quickly, over promises and hype from Amiga Inc, about AmigaOS5, everything started off pretty badly. contract work on AmigaDE that was not payed for by Amiga Inc, and so Hyperion refused to turn AmigaOS over.

Lots people interested in the start and lots people did buy hardware, but it was short lived because hardware was broken, mailogic prototypes, in the end Eyetech stopped producing hardware, we went into dark period without hardware, and people left because hardware problems and issues, I believe many users lost fate in this period.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:30 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 06-Jun-2020 at 10:19 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 06-Jun-2020 at 10:17 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 06-Jun-2020 at 10:13 PM.

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

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: I’m do not believe they promised 64bit OS, they did promise large disk support that’s NSD64 also know in AmigaOS3.5/3.9 they did promise large file support, aka support 64bit file offsets, its is supported like forever. what maybe talking about is full memory protection, not partial memory protection. or maybe stack enlargement feature.

I must have mixed up 64 bit support with full memory protection. It has been too many years since the promises to remember.

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: That’s not at all what happened, what happened was they late with contract work for Amiga Inc because delays because hardware that was promised did not make it, the AmigaONE accelerator for the Amiga hardware, because they were late Amiga Inc sued Hyperion early, legal turbel started even before AmigaOS4.0 prerelease. Hyperion’s relationship with Amiga Inc turned sour quickly, over promises and hype from Amiga Inc, about AmigaOS5, everything started off pretty badly. contract work on AmigaDE that was not payed for by Amiga Inc, and so Hyperion refused to turn AmigaOS over.

Hyperion can put Hyperion only copyright notices on licensed technology? Hyperion will stop using the licensed technology when payed in full for the original contract work?

Quote:

Lots people interested in the start and lots people did buy hardware, but it was short lived because hardware was broken, mailogic prototypes, in the end Eyetech stopped producing hardware, we went into dark period without hardware, and people left because hardware problems and issues, I believe many users lost fate in this period.

How is that different than today?

@matthey

I'm interested in knowing why this word "promise" is always flying around?

Can someone please point me to a text by an Hyperion representative where it promises a said feature?

I read a couple of communiqués and listen to their plans on Amiga Shows, published by Hyperion or their spoke persons, but not any promise.

The wikipedia armchair-lawyers guide states that
Quote:

In the law of contract, an exchange of promises is usually held to be legally enforceable, according to the Latin maxim pacta sunt servanda.

So, if there was a promise, why not start yet another lawsuit?

As much as many people hate Hyperion, one thing I'm pretty sure of: if AmigaOS was released as open source years ago, it would be more "dead" than it is now.

@Amigo1

Quote:

Amigo1 wrote: As much as many people hate Hyperion, one thing I'm pretty sure of: if AmigaOS was released as open source years ago, it would be more "dead" than it is now.

How could it be "more dead" than it is now?

Give me a list of added new OS4 features, or even improved existing features that Hyperion has done themselves, or paid other developers to do over the last 12 months. Can you remember, or find any? Okay, I'll give you a break and extend the time to 24 months, can you find any? 1, 2, maybe 3? Certainly it is less than 5. Remember, we aren't talking about what the group of paid developers are doing for A-Eon/AmigaKit, I'm asking you to list what Hyperion has done, or paid to have done.

So I ask again, how could it be "more dead"? Without A-Eon & AmigaKit funding the Enhancer Pack, and Hans' video card drivers, nothing appears to have been done except the porting to the Tabor motherboard, which is still not finished after "how many years"?

As for your request that the MorphOS Dev. Team provide more official announcements, you are just not looking in the right places, as many recent official announcements have been made just this year alone, as well as frequent updates every year for the past decade, IMHO.

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

@amigadave

if only thay talking about what thay where working on at AmiWest, instead of talking about future planes that may or may not happen. I don’t think sharing roadmaps was a good idea.

I’m not sure when it changes from Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4 to talking about two more week with a smiley-face.. but culture changed, as the deadlines for there roadmaps where slipping.

Clearly if want to make money better ship product, and lot updates for AmigaOS4.0/4.1 was free, it did not look like a money maker.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:24 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:22 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:21 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:19 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:18 AM.

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

@amigadave

Well now large part of it is now Trever / AmigaKIT / A-EON.

ExecSG + SDK + UBOOT = ExecSG Team / Trever team.
GFX Drivers + Enhancements = A-EON / Trever team.
USB / Amiga Input / prefs / AmigaDOS / Intuition / graphics = Hyperion.
3rd party addons = roadshow, not really part of AmigaOS but included.

The developers are the same, let’s see if the culture sticks with the developers or if its leadership problem.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:32 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 07-Jun-2020 at 10:33 AM.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: The developers are the same, let’s see if the culture sticks with developers or if its leaderships problem.

I was just answering the claim from Amigo1, who claims that AmigaOS4 would be even more dead than it is now, if it had been released as Open Source years ago.

Since the developers are the same, and Hyperion hasn't had any money to pay anyone for a long time, why wouldn't releasing AmigaOS4 as Open Source be "at least as good, if not better" than the lack of progress we have seen from Hyperion for the last several years?

I just don't understand how any users can argue that Hyperion has been better for AmigaOS4 development than Open Source would have been? Why do people continue to support and defend Hyperion, after everything they have done, and most of all, what they have NOT DONE! It is just so very clear to me, but everyone is free to believe what they want. Just please make sure you are basing your beliefs on the facts, and not untrue statements.

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

Quote:

Amigo1 wrote: I'm interested in knowing why this word "promise" is always flying around? Can someone please point me to a text by an Hyperion representative where it promises a said feature? I read a couple of communiqués and listen to their plans on Amiga Shows, published by Hyperion or their spoke persons, but not any promise. The wikipedia armchair-lawyers guide states that Quote: In the law of contract, an exchange of promises is usually held to be legally enforceable, according to the Latin maxim pacta sunt servanda.

The word "promise" was likely *not* used by Hyperion or representatives. They still may have entered into a verbal agreement with customers to provide features depending on who made statements and the wording. For example, if a representative said "AmigaOS 4.3 will include SMP and full memory protection. A free update of AmigaOS 4.3 will be included with all new hardware." then this may end up being an obligation to customers buying new hardware. It's complicated by A-Eon selling the hardware and they may be the ones sued first if AmigaOS 4.3 was delivered without the features. Failing to deliver AmigaOS 4.3 may avoid the obligation if there was no time frame given. Also, was Hyperion acting in good faith to deliver the features or were they trying to gain sales by making false promises they knew could not be delivered?

Quote:

So, if there was a promise, why not start yet another lawsuit?

There are no lawsuits because you can't get blood from a turnip. The money Hyperion made off of the 68k AmigaOS has likely disappeared to service debt. Hyperion likely has little cash and few assets (development was often contracted making it difficult to obtain ownership).

Quote:

As much as many people hate Hyperion, one thing I'm pretty sure of: if AmigaOS was released as open source years ago, it would be more "dead" than it is now.

Abandoned software is more dead than open source software?

Last edited by matthey on 07-Jun-2020 at 07:11 PM.

@Amigo1

Quote:

Amigo1 wrote: As much as many people hate Hyperion, one thing I'm pretty sure of: if AmigaOS was released as open source years ago ...

It's not theirs to open source. AmigaOS is not their property, not their decision to make.

In the bottom, the foundation of everything, is the 68k operating system from Commodore. This is now fully owned by Cloanto, together with the rest of Commodore IP. Cloanto has been positive about open sourcing. They could do that, but it would be the original sources, meaning prehistoric languages, very much dependent on original Amiga hardware (not easily portable), relying on an ancient toolchains, etc.

Based on this, Olaf Barthel wrote a port/reimplementation. Also 68k but more portable, more modern languages, toolchain, etc. This post-Commodore development would make better sense to open source. But then there are (at least) two entities that must agree on this (Cloanto and Olaf Barthel (and other contributors)). But Olaf Barthel has also expressed positive thoughts on this as a future path.

When it comes to OS4, the situation gets way more complicated. While being based on (and forever intertwined with) the former developments, there are way more contributors in the OS4 equation. Many of them obviously not paid, which could be a base for hidden conflicts, locking things down. Cloanto has a track-record of solving these kind of situations though, like they did to be able to release their own take on 3.9 (the Workbench 3.X) by striking parallel deals directly with individual developers. Don't know if it would be possible here though. And the situation gets even more complicated by AeonKit, that bit for bit is trying to annex Amiga and OS4 IP. They (and not Hyperion) are now the owner of ExecSG, it is they who owns the most meaningful graphic drivers, etc. And they have shown no interest towards the open source idea, rather the opposite I must say.

So OS4 is a mess that might never be sorted out.

But Commodore's/Cloanto's OS and/or Olaf Barthel's versions of 68k AmigaOS is perhaps even likely to be open sourced at some point in the future.

Last edited by TRIPOS on 07-Jun-2020 at 11:42 PM.

WE NEED MORE INTERVIEWS

MORE INTERVIEWS WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING

















IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@TRIPOS

Quote:

They (and not Hyperion) are now the owner of ExecSG, it is they who owns the most meaningful graphic drivers, etc. And they have shown no interest towards the open source idea, rather the opposite I must say.

A-EON have invested an insane amount of money to get developed what Hyperion should have been developing. I really wonder at which particular point in you life you have come to the conclusion that A-EON should open-source the work they own and have paid for.

_________________
The Rear Window blog

AmigaOne X5000/020 @ 2GHz / 4GB RAM / Radeon RX 560 / ESI Juli@ / AmigaOS 4.1 Final Edition
SAM440ep-flex @ 667MHz / 1GB RAM / Radeon 9250 / AmigaOS 4.1 Final Edition

Quote:

TRIPOS wrote: It's not theirs to open source. AmigaOS is not their property, not their decision to make. In the bottom, the foundation of everything, is the 68k operating system from Commodore. This is now fully owned by Cloanto, together with the rest of Commodore IP. Cloanto has been positive about open sourcing. They could do that, but it would be the original sources, meaning prehistoric languages, very much dependent on original Amiga hardware (not easily portable), relying on an ancient toolchains, etc.

The 68k AmigaOS sources should be in C, B (old AmigaDOS) and 68k assembler.

Quote:

Based on this, Olaf Barthel wrote a port/reimplementation. Also 68k but more portable, more modern languages, toolchain, etc. This post-Commodore development would make better sense to open source. But then there are (at least) two entities that must agree on this (Cloanto and Olaf Barthel (and other contributors)). But Olaf Barthel has also expressed positive thoughts on this as a future path.

Olaf rewrote much of intuition.library which was compiled with the old Green Hills C compiler. There were very inefficient stub calls for functions due to limitations of the compiler as well as structure alignment issues as I recall. Time consuming and error prone to update but nothing monumental. I don't believe intuition.library hits the hardware as it is a little higher level than for example the graphics.library which does most of the banging (needs major work too but parts of it are in assembler and neither Olaf nor ThoR are 68k assembler experts). As I recall, Olaf rewrote much of workbench, icon.library and perhaps others. Most, if not all, of the 68k AmigaOS should compile with SAS/C now but C= was already mostly using it at the end. There may still be some use of old assemblers though as assemblers for compilers can be finicky with their assembler syntax and formatting (vbcc's vasm assembler is an exception). AmigaOS 68k has probably only been updated to use decades old unsupported SAS/C technology and still using standard C. AmigaOS 4 is probably all compiled with an unofficial GCC and probably using a newer C standard like C99 with GCCisms (non-standard GCC additions) which makes backporting newer modules more difficult.

Quote:

When it comes to OS4, the situation gets way more complicated. While being based on (and forever intertwined with) the former developments, there are way more contributors in the OS4 equation. Many of them obviously not paid, which could be a base for hidden conflicts, locking things down. Cloanto has a track-record of solving these kind of situations though, like they did to be able to release their own take on 3.9 (the Workbench 3.X) by striking parallel deals directly with individual developers. Don't know if it would be possible here though. And the situation gets even more complicated by AeonKit, that bit for bit is trying to annex Amiga and OS4 IP. They (and not Hyperion) are now the owner of ExecSG, it is they who owns the most meaningful graphic drivers, etc. And they have shown no interest towards the open source idea, rather the opposite I must say. So OS4 is a mess that might never be sorted out. But Commodore's/Cloanto's OS and/or Olaf Barthel's versions of 68k AmigaOS is perhaps even likely to be open sourced at some point in the future.

It is possible that some of the new 68k AmigaOS work is done based on AmigaOS 4 work. This could complicate the picture as it could bring in code not owned by Cloanto.

A-Eon may be afraid there would not be enough incentive for developers with open source. There are too few Amiga companies and users left supporting software financially so requiring payment may be viewed as necessary. A-Eon at least gives a good portion of the money back to developers. They do miss out on open source contributors but they also keep projects from being forked which can cause problems. The Amiga needs more standardization and less division. That doesn't mean the sources need to be closed though. The vbcc compiler has most sources available but copyrights are retained. This has worked well with many contributors.

@TRIPOS

A-eon (better Trevor D.) is prefinancing hardware and software as hobby and hoping to getting back the money.

So I do not think the prepaid software will ever be open sourced. And I am not sure if he could even if he wanted.

@amigadave

Quote:

I don't think that Hyperion can say the same for AmigaOS4 features (I'm still waiting for the features promised to be included in AmigaOS4.2, which I prepaid for with my X1000 purchase).

I'm waiting for OS4.2 regardless of features. Some OS4.2 features turned up in FE. Which was like an interim release.

Quote:

I just don't understand how any users can argue that Hyperion has been better for AmigaOS4 development than Open Source would have been?

Here's one reason. There wouldn't be any Amiga OS4 had Hyperion not produced it. OS4 would have remained as a side note in the 90's and also as an x86 OS that never came out in the 2000's.

Quote:

Why do people continue to support and defend Hyperion, after everything they have done, and most of all, what they have NOT DONE! It is just so very clear to me, but everyone is free to believe what they want. Just please make sure you are basing your beliefs on the facts, and not untrue statements.

At the end of the day they hold the keys to the castle. They are running a business and peoples livelihoods depend on that. As well as a medium for developers to contribute to it officially.

Last edited by Hypex on 08-Jun-2020 at 06:13 PM.

@TRIPOS

Quote:

In the bottom, the foundation of everything, is the 68k operating system from Commodore. This is now fully owned by Cloanto, together with the rest of Commodore IP. Cloanto has been positive about open sourcing. They could do that, but it would be the original sources, meaning prehistoric languages, very much dependent on original Amiga hardware (not easily portable), relying on an ancient toolchains, etc.

So an open sourced AmigaOS would be just like that one that was leaked onto a torrent a few years back?

Last edited by Hypex on 08-Jun-2020 at 06:17 PM.

@matthey

Quote:

Olaf rewrote much of intuition.library which was compiled with the old Green Hills C compiler. There were very inefficient stub calls for functions due to limitations of the compiler as well as structure alignment issues as I recall. Time consuming and error prone to update but nothing monumental.

I examined the function calls of inituition many years ago. It was very much written in C. All the 68K parameters are stacked and then it jumped to the real routine. This was likely the stub call I was looking at. This would make C go slow. A C program, stacking the parameters, calls an internal initution library stub that pulls them out and puts them in registers. The actual intuition library call then stacks them again before another call making it to the actual routine. I can see how they were very inefficient stub calls!

@Hypex

Yes I agree, we be talking about AmigaOS, like we talk about AmigaDE, AA, AA2 if Amiga Inc was in control over it, Amiga Inc, did not have any clue about what they where doing, they did come cross tech, but did not know what or how make into anything.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 08-Jun-2020 at 10:32 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 08-Jun-2020 at 09:29 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 08-Jun-2020 at 08:54 PM.

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

Quote:

Hypex wrote: I examined the function calls of inituition many years ago. It was very much written in C. All the 68K parameters are stacked and then it jumped to the real routine. This was likely the stub call I was looking at. This would make C go slow. A C program, stacking the parameters, calls an internal initution library stub that pulls them out and puts them in registers. The actual intuition library call then stacks them again before another call making it to the actual routine. I can see how they were very inefficient stub calls!

Yep. Stack thrashing like this is reminiscent of the x86 which can have more than twice as many memory accesses as the 68k in some code. This really hurts on the 68000-68020 which have no data cache. The 68k AmigaOS never achieved the performance and size optimizations that were possible despite being reasonably responsive on a 68000 with 256kiB of memory. SAS/C had some nice features and supported the Amiga despite generating average code quality at best. The unofficial GCC 2.9.3 still generates the best integer code quality for the Amiga but developer support for it fell apart and the GCC 68k backend went downhill with later versions. Does it even matter anyway when developers don't even pay attention to code. There isn't even a 68020 compiled version of the AmigaOS so a simple 32x32 multiply instruction turns into 11 instructions with 3 16x16 multiplies (division is worse). Unrelated to AmigaOS development, the newest version of the vbcc compiler fails to generate the 32x32 multiply instruction sometimes even when compiling for the 68020+. Developers struggle just to keep things working with bug fixes. It is really difficult to provide good support for a shrinking user base without new hardware.

Ironically, the Green Hills compiler is still around and supported today. It even supports the 68000-68060 and PowerPC with Altivec and SPE extensions. The company web site claims, "Careful implementation and cutting-edge technology mean that on most programs the Green Hills Compilers can improve speed and reduce size by at least a 20% compared to the both GNU and LLVM compilers."

https://www.ghs.com/products/compiler.html

Why not use a compiler optimized for embedded use which also requires a small footprint? The developer tools are only about $6,000 per programmer which the company claims to be a bargain considering development costs and $150,000 per year programmer salaries.

https://www.ghs.com/FreeSoftware.html

Outside of the Amiga time warp, there is an embedded industry where companies and programmers make good money. The Green Hills are made of cash. The secret to the Raspberry Pi success is likely the embedded market. Too bad the Amiga has nothing competitive to offer.