Quote:

TRIPOS wrote: @retro ......But anyway. Even a "rough portover" would remove one of the key features of MorphOS, the [binary] Amiga compatibility. This because of the endianness difference. Which makes it no point in trying to maintain that aspect of the OS, so it would in practice become similar to AROS in that aspect, i.e. source compatible where the OS and applications could be ported/recompiled to other architectures. But one snippet of info that one of the developers shared on Morph.zone at one point (was it Piru?) is that the new MorphOS will not even be source compatible; that changes will be needed to be done to source code for applications in order for them to run, albeit changes would be kept to a minimum. This indeed suggests new Amiga-incompatible features. Like real SMP, real 64-bit computing/addressing, etc. The new kernel supports both real SMP and real 64-bit. The rest of the OS is a different matter. But IMHO it wouldn't make sense to go all this way without going all the way. A clean slate restart, no "a-box", instead all OS components and all applications running directly on the new kernel. In fact, I would be disappointed if it would turn out to be anything different than this. I would want MorphOS to move forward, on its own merits. Not staying in limbo of not really being retro and not really being "Next Generation" either.

I should have read your reply above before replying to Olaf, but I must have missed the comment you are referencing from Piru, about all applications will need to be recompiled. That does make me hopeful that the Dev. Team has moved away from the limitations of backward compatibility. Where is your source about the new kernel being both real SMP and real 64bit? That is great to read, so I want to confirm it for myself, before I repeat it anywhere.

Like you, I would also be disappointed if the new MorphOS for x64 turns out to be less than a clean slate with the full possibilities that x64 hardware brings. I agree that it is better to move MorphOS away from being a retro OS, and concentrate on bringing the things we love about MorphOS into a modern new OS, instead of just settling for porting old limitations to new hardware.

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

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: It shouldn’t be rocket science to port the linux kernel to run ontop of Quark through the usual virtualization methods.

You mean to run a Linux virtual machine in a separate window on MorphOS? I think I would prefer that someone write a Wine like application that allows the new MorphOS to run either Linux software, or a different Wine like application that would allow us to run Windows software, in a way that it is mostly transparent. Then the problem of not having enough native MorphOS x64 software is irrelevant and we can take our time porting software to native MorphOS versions, or creating new MorphOS x64 native software.

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

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @TRIPOS that is all nice. I only see the problem who will do the new software for the OS. The OS developers alone cannot do it. And if existing software no longer works you have at best a new OS with modern features but no software.

I think the Internet experience is fully covered quite nicely, and will improve even more as Wayfarer develops. So is multimedia playback. That alone make up for a great deal of most peoples everyday usage. Then there are a few developers left in the community, they will hopefully port their software to a new MorphOS. And maybe some will return and a few new will turn up. Who knows.

But the point is that you have to make a choice. Either continue walking in the same dwindling circles forever, not letting the OS become more than it is today, or take a leap of faith and aim for becoming something new. This is not unique for MorphOS. The "Silly-SMP" and 64-bit experiments for AROS also means that source compatibility breaks. The same would be true for OS4. Basically it comes down to making a choice and putting down your foot.

@geit

Quote:

geit wrote: @Hypex The MorphOS X64 demo shown at Amiga34 in Neuss was able to "play" PPC and 68k code transparently.

Maybe you know something I don't, but IMHO there were a lot of contradictions and "impossibilities" in the statements that followed that presentation, at least from a POV that expects further evolution. For me it boiled down to this: It was a proof/demo of the new kernel being up and running, nothing more, nothing less. To make it more interesting, they ran the "A-box" on top of it in some way, but considering endianness etc I would expect this to have been an emulation of some kind. I would be careful to read in anything else (like "68k and PPC transparently on AMD64") beyond this as feature promises. At least I hope it is like that. Because upholding transparent 68k and PPC Amiga compatibility means no SMP, no 64-bit, all old limitations remaining and no real benefits whatsoever of running on AMD64 other than actually having physical HW available, and that the HW runs faster.

@amigadave

Quote:

You mean to run a Linux virtual machine in a separate window on MorphOS?

No, not a full fledge virtual machine. I meant run Linux kernel as a “box” on top of Quark, I didn’t say anything about window, Linux doesn’t need windows, it can just run in the background and if you insist on using graphical Linux programs, there must be a display service for MorphOS that can open windows for Linux programs. This may be X11, but these days we are moving away from X11, so Wayland compatible or even RDP.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@TRIPOS

Quote:

upholding transparent 68k and PPC Amiga compatibility means no SMP, no 64-bit, all old limitations remaining and no real benefits whatsoever of running on AMD64

I'm not sure where you derive that from, but running more than one box should eliminate these issues.
Ambient would have be reworked to run from the 64 bit environment, while interfacing with both boxes, but I don't see the problems as insurmountable.

We do have the best developers in the Amiga community, after all.

@kolla

Quote:

No, not a full fledge virtual machine. I meant run Linux kernel as a “box” on top of Quark, I didn’t say anything about window, Linux doesn’t need windows, it can just run in the background and if you insist on using graphical Linux programs, there must be a display service for MorphOS that can open windows for Linux programs. This may be X11, but these days we are moving away from X11, so Wayland compatible or even RDP.

Building MorphOS on top of this would be next level: https://genode.org/index

Anyone knows the origins of Quark? Is it based on something proven like L4*?

_________________

@OlafS25
The people not use AROS because isn't like OS4 or MorphOS, burning one CD with the system and you have one computer to run it, AROS doesn't work in PC machine that you have, it abuses of virtual machines to run on a perfect PC with memory, graphic card, sound card, etc., is more easy for example run MorphOS on an old Mac machine or use WinUAE more easy with the great program WinUAE.
The success of MorphOS x64 will depend of hardware where it can run, the programs and games availables and the price for keys, because Linux is a big rival but neither we forget that currently when you buy one PC computer bring Windows installed.

Last edited by Templario on 16-Nov-2020 at 12:04 PM.

@Templario

Aros is difficult to install and you must find supported hardware. That was certainly always a problem that will be avoided by supporting selected PCs. But I think more important was that it not offered a similar feeling as people were used to, be it the desktop that was different, be it that there was no direct integration of 68k like on AmigaOS or MorphOS on PPC. That will decide if amiga users accept it or not. We will see...

Regarding Linux and Windows (and MacOS), they are in another league. No chance to compete there. The MorphOS team will certainly supply a basic set of applications but of course not comparable to the software base you have on the mainstream platforms.

Last edited by OlafS25 on 16-Nov-2020 at 12:37 PM.

My PC is waiting for Morphos X64, AmigaOS 4 is so far behind except in the 3D area.

@kamelito

very propably your PC will never see MorphOS either because they will only support selected models. If you do not already own it you have to buy a new PC for MorphOS

@OlafS25

I’m confident but will see :)

@OlafS25

No matter how much the MorphOS Team warns people about this, once you go x86/x64 the average user expects the OS to run on the configuration they happen to have. I'm curious how many of them will be willing to put together a new PC to run MorphOS x64. We will see.

_________________
This is just like television, only you can see much further.

@BSzili

additional they need a OS license

if they are not lucky they will need new PC and the not cheap OS license. Some hardcore morphos fans certainly will spend the money. For the rest we will see...

@sTix

Quote:

Anyone knows the origins of Quark?

I thought it was named after the Mac DTP package. Quark XPress. Or some Startrek character. Though strangely not the Q character. That's what I used to think of when I read about the Q/Box.

@OlafS25

Normally MorphOS has 30 minutes trial period for not licensed users, I'm confident they'll use the same rule even for next x64 release.
Everyone can test compatibility before buy anything.
Anyway I doubt will be supported more recent hardware, probably they sill start from less recent platforms, based on well documented chipsets and expansion boards.

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

@BSzili

Another alternative: they could host MorphOS on Linux, similar to what AROS does.

I've never been able to get native AROS to run on any of my hardware, but the hosted version works on everything I've tried.

Last edited by bison on 16-Nov-2020 at 03:58 PM.

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

@BSzili

If it is the same OS with the same limitation very few I guess.

@bison

That's not likely to happen, for the same reason why there's no "official" QEMU support: you won't be able to register MorphOS in a virtualized environment.

_________________
This is just like television, only you can see much further.

@BSzili

you mean it will not work in something like VMWare?

That would be bad... you would need to buy a new PC just to test MorphOS ;) Hardly tempting

The hardcore fans will buy one anyway but people from outside will be difficult to convince if they cannot test it before

Last edited by OlafS25 on 16-Nov-2020 at 06:35 PM.