Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6093 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
50 crawler(s) on-line.
 9 guest(s) on-line.
 0 member(s) on-line.



You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 PixelsAtDawn:  5 mins ago
 TrevorDick:  30 mins ago
 MEGA_RJ_MICAL:  51 mins ago
 agami:  58 mins ago
 OlafS25:  1 hr 26 mins ago
 DiscreetFX:  2 hrs 17 mins ago
 Hexaae:  2 hrs 22 mins ago
 BigD:  2 hrs 32 mins ago
 Jasper:  2 hrs 33 mins ago
 gryfon:  2 hrs 38 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga OS4.x \ Workbench 4.x
      /  Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )
PosterThread
Hammer 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 1-Jul-2021 8:30:36
#101 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4270
From: Australia

@matthey

Quote:

The 68000 is not high performance for it's frequency so the the matchup with the 5A22 is closer than it first appears but the 68000 has a better ISA, nicer features and better code density. The 68EC020 outclasses the 5A22 and should be several times better performance. SNES hardware may be better than ECS but AGA looks more competitive. Maybe the SNES is closer to the performance of a 68000 with AGA?

65C816's cost density is not RISC.

The official SuperFX add-on was used to hold off the mindshare competition which gave Nintendo enough time for Nintendo 64's release in mid-1996.

SuperFX2 with cutdown Doom was enough for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing for the SNES.

For Europe, both SNES and A1200 AGA released in 1992. A1200 production was gimped by HK-to-Philippines factory move.

In 1993, Nintendo has a short-term plan for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing while C= management has no short-term plan for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing for A1200/CD32.

C= management didn't counter the damaging mindshare remarks from John Carmack.

My parents can afford both Amiga and X86 PC purchases, hence my Dad and myself weren't isolated in the C= PR sphere.

Quote:

That was part of the problem. CBM, Atari and Apple were buying more of the low end 68k processors making it difficult to mass produce the high end full (not EC or LC) processors. At that time, a processor like the 68060 was too expensive for all but the highest end embedded market which was also buying the lower end 68k processors. Today, the 68060 would be considered low end and in the sweet spot of embedded market demand.

68060 is dead in the embedded market since it not being produced by NXP.

Apollo Accelerators is too small to be the "AMD insurance" for 68K, but AC68080 was a good attempt. Apollo is in danger of repeating Phase 5's "gold plating" mistakes.

Quote:

Not entirely true. Apple sold a lot of 68040 CPUs. CBM sold some of the low clocked 68040s Apple didn't want. Neither Apple or CBM used the 68060 but Motorola was anti-marketing it for personal computers by that time telling them PPC was the replacement. Ironically, Apple had trouble making a descent early PPC laptop and the 68060 would have been perfect for a laptop.

Apple 68K such as Macintosh LC 475 has 68LC040 CPUs, but they didn't match 68000 in terms of numbers.

Macintosh Quadra 605 (from October 1993) was also sold as the Macintosh LC 475 and Macintosh Performa 475. The introductory price for Quadra 605 (with 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz) was $1000 for the pizza box. Apple's attempt was okay and they survived into the PowerPC era and beyond.

From 1994, Doom was officially released for the Macintosh with 68040 or PowerPC system requirements.

My A1200 with 68LC040 as a C= official SKU argument is partly supported by Apple's $1000 introductory price Quadra 605 with 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz. Apple was aware and responded against 486SX PC cloners with the $800 to $1000 range.

Windows Chicago magazine previews and Pentium road map effectively locked my family's next computer purchase with the Pentium + Windows 95. In 1993, it's the end of the Amiga and Commodore era for our family i.e. my Dad skiped AGA generation.

During COVID-19 lockdown, I revisited my A500 from storage and purchased a cheap "broken for parts" A1200. The A1200 wasn't broken i.e. the seller wasn't wise. I later purchased TF1260 and modified A1200 with a timing fix. A1200 with 68060 @63Mhz is similar to the early Pentium class PCs.




Last edited by Hammer on 01-Jul-2021 at 08:54 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 01-Jul-2021 at 08:44 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 01-Jul-2021 at 08:39 AM.

_________________
Core i9-9900K, DDR4-3800 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Ryzen 9 3900X, DDR4-3200 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, 68K 50Mhz, 12 MB RAM)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
MEGA_RJ_MICAL 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 1-Jul-2021 8:48:26
#102 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 13-Dec-2019
Posts: 534
From: AMIGAWORLD.NET WAS ORIGINALLY FOUNDED BY DAVID DOYLE

@matthey
@hammer

Dear friends,

Is there any other thread you might want to turn into endless banter about half clock cycles and the coating of the 7th capacitor from the left?

I can open a new one for you if you please!
The topic doesn't matter, does it?




Re: Cinnamon buns recipe
by matthey-hammer on 1-Jul-2021 5:30:00

No!! The oven cooks better @ 3.22MHz if the RISC reg-mem architecture has a 32 bit ALU, 16 bit data bus, 24 bit address bus, 32 bit C0-A9, F0-B7 (10 GP registers) 16*16, 32/16 just look at this benchmark from 1979

ALU-Instructions 16MB 64KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
nop 2929.4 3009.9
add-reg 884.9 925.7
add-im16 903.0 897.2
shift-reg 531.5 542.5
shift-im8 537.3 536.1
and-reg 916.5 925.8
and-im16. 542.4 540.6
mul-reg 294.4 294.2
mul-im16 198.5 202.8
div-reg 32.2 32.6
-----------------------------------------------------------
ALU-Workloads 16MB 64KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
Workload AAAA 1010.7 999.8
Workload LA 666.3 674.2
Workload LAA 790.6 792.7
Workload LAAA 803.4 802.4
Workload LAAAA 862.2 862.6
Workload LLA 610.9 619.4
Workload LLAA 723.0 721.7
Workload LLAAA 673.3 686.9
Workload LLAAAA 797.9 795.2
Workload LAALA 688.5 673.7
WORKLOAD addq 1019.9 1027.6
WORKLOAD add.w 1029.9 1017.5
WORKLOAD add.l 302.7 306.2
WORKLOAD lea 567.5 576.0
Work 26 388.7 399.3
Work 2266 455.4 472.1
Work 4x2 4x6 474.6 475.8
Work 8x2 8x6 471.0 471.1
WORK memadd 301.9 307.8
WORK memadd++ 302.1 305.3
-----------------------------------------------------------
ALU-Addressmodes 16MB 64KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
LOAD ea-im(r) 527.8 523.2
LOAD ea-(r)++ 377.7 375.2
LOAD ea-im(r)+A 329.7 328.1
LOAD ea-(r,r) 331.0 325.0
write ea-im(r) 521.4 531.1
write ea-(r)++ 296.1 296.2
write ea-im(r)A 291.5 293.6
write ea-(r,r) 290.9 294.3
-----------------------------------------------------------
ALU-Branches 16MB 64KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
gosub chain-1 8.9 8.9
gosub chain-4 12.4 12.4
gosub chain-8 13.2 13.2
gosub chain-16 13.7 13.7
gosub chain-32 14.2 14.2
BCC IF(FALSE) 140.2 140.9
BCC IF(TRUE) 69.1 69.0
BCC IF(50%) 82.5 82.1
BCC IF(25%) 75.7 75.3
goto-bra 377.1 377.0
goto-bra + 2A 83.6 83.7
goto-bra + 4A 74.0 74.1
-----------------------------------------------------------
ALU-Latencies 16MB 64KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
add-reg-2loop 165.0 164.0
add-reg-4loop 292.6 292.6
add-reg-6loop 394.0 390.2
add-reg-8loop 477.4 477.3
add-reg-16loop 696.4 695.9
add-reg-32loop 924.3 925.7
add-reg-64loop 1078.0 1062.7
add-reg-128loop 1185.1 1200.0
alu_latency+0 529.8 518.9
alu_latency+1 840.0 822.1
alu_latency+2 830.5 837.8
alu_latency+3 0.1 836.1
alu_latency+4 0.1 795.3
cache_latency+0 269.6 269.1
cache_latency+1 262.7 263.4
cache_latency+2 210.6 209.3
alu->ea_lat+0 294.1 293.6
alu->ea_lat+1 225.2 224.6
alu->ea_lat+2 187.3 187.5
-----------------------------------------------------------
Measuring memory latency:
Result is million random accesses per sec.
Higher value is faster.
Memory Latency 16MB
-----------------------------------------------------------
rand-read 2MB 5.2
rand-read 4MB 5.2
rand-read 8MB 5.1
rand-read 16MB 3.4
-----------------------------------------------------------
Measuring memory throughput:
Results are in MB/sec. Higher value is faster.
Memory 2 Memory
Alignment 0-0 16MB 64KB 4KB 1KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
libc memcpy 128.6 127.3 125.7 115.9
read 8 44.9 45.0 45.0 45.0
read 8x4 69.8 70.0 69.9 70.0
read 32 128.7 128.3 129.0 128.8
read 32x4 178.1 177.8 177.6 177.6
write 8 57.9 57.7 57.8 58.1
write 8x4 36.3 36.1 36.2 36.3
write 32 117.9 117.9 117.2 117.8
write 32x4 123.4 123.6 123.5 123.5
copy 8 69.5 69.7 69.2 69.8
copy 8x4 98.9 98.8 99.0 98.1
copy 32 123.9 123.5 123.3 122.3
copy 32x4 129.0 128.8 129.0 127.4
-----------------------------------------------------------
Cache 2 Cache
Alignment 0-0 16MB 64KB 4KB 1KB
-----------------------------------------------------------
libc memcpy 128.9 900.6 1765.2 875.8
read 8 45.1 53.6 54.7 54.5
read 8x4 70.0 94.0 97.4 97.3
read 32 128.9 244.5 263.0 264.0
read 32x4 177.2 559.9 660.4 653.4
write 8 57.8 71.8 73.0 73.0
write 8x4 36.2 50.7 51.5 51.3
write 32 117.9 288.6 291.7 292.4
write 32x4 123.7 699.2 703.6 705.7
copy 8 69.7 115.2 119.1 119.3
copy 8x4 98.7 207.7 218.4 218.7
copy 32 123.7 433.8 476.7 475.8
copy 32x4 129.5 790.5 948.7 937.0
-----------------------------------------------------------

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 1-Jul-2021 22:03:26
#103 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

Hammer Quote:

In 1993, Nintendo has a short-term plan for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing while C= management has no short-term plan for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing for A1200/CD32.

C= management didn't counter the damaging mindshare remarks from John Carmack.


The lack of a response by CBM made the remarks by John Carmack mostly true. The Amiga needed games like Doom to push users to buy higher end hardware and force CBM to increase performance.

Hammer Quote:

68060 is dead in the embedded market since it not being produced by NXP.


Sure. While the 68060 had a modern design, the methods used to produce it were old school. The code is likely *not* fully synthesizable and the silicon platter size was the old smaller size. It would be difficult to bring it into production again as is. It would also need some modernization and upgrades as it lacks some basic functionality like an on chip memory controller. The lack of an on chip memory controller has helped the 68060 age better though as it can be interfaced with modern memory even though it is slower and more expensive than having a modern on chip memory controller.

Hammer Quote:

Apollo Accelerators is too small to be the "AMD insurance" for 68K, but AC68080 was a good attempt. Apollo is in danger of repeating Phase 5's "gold plating" mistakes.


The only insurance of a CPU core with resources and ISA optimized only for an FPGA is that it won't be used outside of an FPGA.

Hammer Quote:

Apple 68K such as Macintosh LC 475 has 68LC040 CPUs, but they didn't match 68000 in terms of numbers.

Macintosh Quadra 605 (from October 1993) was also sold as the Macintosh LC 475 and Macintosh Performa 475. The introductory price for Quadra 605 (with 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz) was $1000 for the pizza box. Apple's attempt was okay and they survived into the PowerPC era and beyond.

From 1994, Doom was officially released for the Macintosh with 68040 or PowerPC system requirements.

My A1200 with 68LC040 as a C= official SKU argument is partly supported by Apple's $1000 introductory price Quadra 605 with 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz. Apple was aware and responded against 486SX PC cloners with the $800 to $1000 range.

Windows Chicago magazine previews and Pentium road map effectively locked my family's next computer purchase with the Pentium + Windows 95. In 1993, it's the end of the Amiga and Commodore era for our family i.e. my Dad skiped AGA generation.

During COVID-19 lockdown, I revisited my A500 from storage and purchased a cheap "broken for parts" A1200. The A1200 wasn't broken i.e. the seller wasn't wise. I later purchased TF1260 and modified A1200 with a timing fix. A1200 with 68060 @63Mhz is similar to the early Pentium class PCs.


The 68LC040 Macs were low end trash. It didn't help that there was a bug in some masks which caused them to lose F-line exceptions for the Mac software FPU. The Mac Quadras had full 68040s and the AV models received the AT&T DSP which Mehdi removed from the Amiga 3000 along with AGA when he took over. The 68040 had enough performance to play Quake but it was the wrong direction in CPU design and ran too hot for smaller and mobile devices. I bet your 1200 with 68060@63MHz runs cooler than your 1200 with 68LC040 (25MHz?) did. The 68060 can be used in fanless systems which is a major asset for embedded systems and mobile devices while most of the competition of the day with similar performance could not. The 68k good code density saves memory heat as well. CBM sabotaged the Amiga low power advantage with the custom Amiga chips still in NMOS for so long using 10 to 20 times the power of CMOS custom chips which Jay Miner complained about. CBM was focused on the desktop almost as much as A-Eon is today despite the 68k Amiga advantages in smaller cheaper systems.

Last edited by matthey on 01-Jul-2021 at 10:07 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 1-Jul-2021 22:36:28
#104 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

MEGA_RJ_MICAL Quote:

Dear friends,

Is there any other thread you might want to turn into endless banter about half clock cycles and the coating of the 7th capacitor from the left?

I can open a new one for you if you please!
The topic doesn't matter, does it?


This thread topic isn't enough of a joke for you? Ben is a control freak with an ego problem holding the Amiga hostage so he can fail with his precious. He was never a white knight but was tolerated when his con games aligned with the Amiga community desire to get rid of another con business that was doing even less for the Amiga. Now he is the one holding the Amiga back and the Amiga community is turning on him. If he actually cared about the Amiga, he would be cooperating with Amiga related businesses to make Amiga something other than an embarrassment and failure. Sadly, us reminiscing is more productive to the Amiga than all these lawsuits wasting valuable financial resources for a last attempt at a post CBM legacy for the Amiga. Only Amiga makes it possible to have worse upper management than CBM forever.

Ben the black knight still trying to bite Michele after being nuked from orbit.

Last edited by matthey on 01-Jul-2021 at 11:17 PM.
Last edited by matthey on 01-Jul-2021 at 11:16 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 2-Jul-2021 2:38:43
#105 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4270
From: Australia

@matthey

Quote:

The 68LC040 Macs were low end trash. It didn't help that there was a bug in some masks which caused them to lose F-line exceptions for the Mac software FPU. The Mac Quadras had full 68040s and the AV models received the AT&T DSP which Mehdi removed from the Amiga 3000 along with AGA when he took over. The 68040 had enough performance to play Quake but it was the wrong direction in CPU design and ran too hot for smaller and mobile devices. I bet your 1200 with 68060@63MHz runs cooler than your 1200 with 68LC040 (25MHz?) did. The 68060 can be used in fanless systems which is a major asset for embedded systems and mobile devices while most of the competition of the day with similar performance could not. The 68k good code density saves memory heat as well. CBM sabotaged the Amiga low power advantage with the custom Amiga chips still in NMOS for so long using 10 to 20 times the power of CMOS custom chips which Jay Miner complained about. CBM was focused on the desktop almost as much as A-Eon is today despite the 68k Amiga advantages in smaller cheaper systems.

FYI, Doom doesn't need FP math. I was running on cheap 68LC060 Rev 4 at 50 Mhz (via TF12600 with Doom Attack AIO (All-In-One). 68LC060 rev 4 was OC to 63 Mhz. I later upgraded TF1260 with full 68060 rev 1 for $200 and OC to 63 Mhz. I can reuse 68060 for any future A1200 accelerator like Warp 1260.

68060 rev 1 at 63 Mhz has about 40C temps (via laser temperature gun) running Doom.

Like a fast 486SX33 PC, 68LC060 treated as a very fast 68030 like CPU is okay on the A1200. I hated AT's Walker's rehash 68030 specifications in 1995.

ACT Elektronik Vertriebs GmbH has Apollo 1240 (a.k.a Magnum 1240) for A1200, but a small 3rd party vendor couldn't match CBM's platform holder status and economies of scale.
Apollo 1240 PCB design was reused for the Apollo 1260 (68060) model.

Quadra 605 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz has direct passive cooling solution. http://quadra605.mcdonnelltech.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/quadra605_3.jpg
Macintosh Quadra 605 has 68LC040. For the price, Macintosh Quadra 605 is superior to Amiga 3000/030, 3000T/040 and 4000/030.

The embedded focus market argument doesn't concern me (and other desktop PC customers), Hint: 486 VLB, and the Pentium PC market.


http://www.sgistuff.net/hardware/systems/images/indigo-ip20b-1001.jpg
SGI's MIPS 4400 with a wide area heatsink. Clock speed range from 100 Mhz to 150 Mhz. The shipment announcement was in Sep 1992.

NEC marketed its version as the VR4400. The first version, a 150 MHz part, was announced in November 1992. Early versions were fabricated in a 0.6 μm process.

In mid-1995, a 250 MHz part began sampling. It was fabricated in a 0.35 μm four-layer-metal process. The first version, a 150 MHz part, was announced in 1994. In 1995, a 200 MHz part was announced.

VS
Intel knows it needs to rapidly catch up against MIPS competition e.g. Pentium "P54C" (0.6 μm) reached 100 Mhz in March 1994, 120 Mhz in March 1995, 133 Mhz in June 1995.

Pentium Pro (P6) reached 200 Mhz in November 1995.
Pentium reached 166 Mhz in January 1996.
Pentium reached 200 Mhz in June, 1996.

Intel effectively killed the business case to move towards Advanced Computing Environment (ACE)'s MIPS CPU family.

Intel's Pentium road map matched the MIPS road map.

Newtek ScreamerNet with MIPS CPU + Windows NT 3.x in an Amiga magazine was a wake-up call in 1992.



Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 04:31 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 04:16 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 04:09 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 04:04 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 04:02 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 03:50 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 03:44 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 02-Jul-2021 at 03:40 AM.

_________________
Core i9-9900K, DDR4-3800 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Ryzen 9 3900X, DDR4-3200 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, 68K 50Mhz, 12 MB RAM)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 2-Jul-2021 11:52:37
#106 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 1912
From: Trondheim, Norway

@matthey

Quote:
He was never a white knight but was tolerated when his con games aligned with the Amiga community desire to get rid of another con business that was doing even less for the Amiga.


More like.. he was "tolerated" because he was only effing up for OS4, which only a small fraction of the community gives a squat of care about. Now that OS3 is in the tumbler as well, there is a lot less "toleration".

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hypex 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 2-Jul-2021 16:20:53
#107 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 6-May-2007
Posts: 10360
From: Greensborough, Australia

@Lou

Quote:
Ask Gunnar! He'll be happy to explain it to you!


 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 3-Jul-2021 6:19:11
#108 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 1912
From: Trondheim, Norway

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote:
Hammer Quote:

In 1993, Nintendo has a short-term plan for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing while C= management has no short-term plan for "can play Doom" tickbox marketing for A1200/CD32.

C= management didn't counter the damaging mindshare remarks from John Carmack.


The lack of a response by CBM made the remarks by John Carmack mostly true. The Amiga needed games like Doom to push users to buy higher end hardware and force CBM to increase performance.

CBM did, at leat CBM Germany did - they made PCs.

Over in the US, CBM engineers were well aware of what was holding Amiga back - the operating system, its lack of (by 1993) modern features and standards, and its dependency on 68k - a processor family already well on its way to be replaced on the other platforms. It was clear that in order to "go" anywhere, Amiga would have to change drastically anyways - just slapping on a faster 68k wouldn't do much.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 3-Jul-2021 9:36:58
#109 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 6054
From: UK

@kolla

Quote:
CBM did, at leat CBM Germany did - they made PCs.


How did that work out? They were always one generation behind and they were hardly great PC machines to play Doom! They allowed C= middle management to use PC apps while using C= hardware in the office. Other than that they were a waste of money, focus and man power to build that trash.

Last edited by BigD on 03-Jul-2021 at 09:38 AM.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
fishy_fis 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 3-Jul-2021 16:37:03
#110 ]
Super Member
Joined: 29-Mar-2004
Posts: 1967
From: Australia

Ben Herman's has always been an idiot. Since day one.
He simply didn't advertise it as regularly or openly at 1st, but he didn't hide it either.
He's in the top 3 of most harmful people to the platforms history.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 3-Jul-2021 22:50:24
#111 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

kolla Quote:

CBM did, at least CBM Germany did - they made PCs.


The CBM PC clone business hurt the Amiga. The PC guys (Bill Sydnes, Jeff Frank, Henry Ruben) took over, used valuable resources which should have been used for the Amiga and didn't know what they were doing. Watch the video below about it.

RJ Mical, Carl Sassenrath, Dave Haynie speak at Amiga30.eu
https://youtu.be/fur2quOIufs?t=2535

CBM was paying more to build their own 286 clones than it cost to buy 386 clones at one point. There was no margin in clones and the market went through major consolidation with the few remaining winners which were now huge having the economies of scale to survive. CBM would have disappeared sooner if it had dropped the Amiga and focused on the PC market.

Mehdi Ali put Bill Sydnes in charge who stopped AGA production (including in the 3000), ditched the DSP and was responsible for the Amiga 600 cost reduction failure which was still brought into production. Not only would the Amiga 3000 have likely sold better with AGA and a DSP, but the Amiga 1200 and CD32 may have saved CBM if they were available earlier.

The later Lew Eggbrecht was also a PC guy but he was an engineer and understood the Amiga better. He knew the PC clone market was a no go.

Lew Eggbrecht Quote:

In fact, one of the first things I did when I started at Commodore was move people from the PC division to Amiga, and we procure most of our DOS machines from Taiwanese vendors like other people (including IBM). I'd much rather use those engineers on Amiga projects than on PCs.


Lew Eggebrecht interview
http://www.bambi-amiga.co.uk/amigahistory/leweggebrecht.html

Lew did a good job but he couldn't undo the damage done by Bill Sydnes, especially with the delay of AGA.

kolla Quote:

Over in the US, CBM engineers were well aware of what was holding Amiga back - the operating system, its lack of (by 1993) modern features and standards, and its dependency on 68k - a processor family already well on its way to be replaced on the other platforms. It was clear that in order to "go" anywhere, Amiga would have to change drastically anyways - just slapping on a faster 68k wouldn't do much.


I *strongly* disagree. The AmigaOS was still one of the Amiga strong points in 1993.

Lew Eggbrecht Quote:

We do get squeezed with clone PCs at the top and Sega underneath, and also boxes like 3D0, although I'm not as concerned about this because of its price point. We are in that gap and below us there is no one with a stable operating system. We always have the option of cutting down but it's difficult for them to move up. PC clones are a valid concern as they're improving in capability although they're light years behind in understanding multi-media. There is a large enough gap and we're going to charge out ourselves.


The AmigaOS was an asset in the low to mid performance markets at least as it was stable, efficient and had a small footprint. Lew talks about the lack of competition "below us" and mentions that the the Amiga can go lower which would not be possible unless the AmigaOS allowed it. The low end competition from consoles did find it difficult to move up. Sega tried with the MegaPC and TeraDrive which were PC clone hardware with Mega Drive hardware including the 68000 integrated inside.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amstrad_Mega_PC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_TeraDrive

The Amiga moved down with the CD32 to challenge the Sega consoles and could have quickly enhanced the CD32 with better performance or cost reduced it by "integrating the processor with the Amiga chips for the next generation machine". The AmigaOS allowed the CD32 to be turned into a computer and used for embedded markets (Lew calls them vertical markets in the interview) which increases sales volumes.

Single threaded CPU core performance was king in 1993. This was about the time Moore's Law kicked in hard with chip fab technology improving quickly. Chips could contain enough transistors for large enough caches to increase CPU core clock speeds. RISC was developed and the Alpha and MIPS processors started a clock race it looked like RISC would win but more heat was generated than expected and the increased code size and instructions of RISC created an instruction fetch and execution bottleneck. CISC caught up by incorporating RISC pipelines and superscalar execution while avoiding the bottlenecks. Because of the heat problem at higher core clock speeds which could only be reduced by chip die shrinks, competitive cores switched from the simplest cores which could be clocked up the most to stronger cores and single thread performance/MHz became king. RISC designs had difficulty competing in single threaded performance/MHz so they decided to add more of their smaller cores often sabotaged by larger cache needs due to the larger code. With more cores and the cheapness of transistors on a chip by this later date, core performance/Watt became important as it allowed more cores to be placed on a chip up to the desired power limit. Using multiple cores requires dividing workloads into parallel tasks which is not always possible and sharing resources between cores and threads can reduce the performance/MHz which is still very important for serial tasks like is preferred for game performance. Multi-threading improves performance/Watt of a core also allowing for more parallel performance. It is multi-core and multi-threading where SMP is advantageous which the AmigaOS does not support but this came later than 1993. It was 2002 before Intel introduced multi-threading (Pentium 4 with Hyper-threading) and 2005 before they introduced the first dual core processor (Pentium D Smithfield) for the desktop. ARM and embedded processors had multi-core earlier (around 2000?) but this was because using smaller weaker cores allowed reduced maximum power even though a given amount of work takes more power than a processor with better performance/MHz (work is done quicker and the core can go to sleep). Lower power is required by some embedded processors and can allow hardware without a fan saving cost and improving reliability. A processor with good single threaded performance/MHz doesn't need multi-core for performance as soon. The 68060 was one of the best processors of the day at single threaded performance/MHz and performance/Watt yet it was amazingly abandoned. The Pentium, which was inferior in both these holy grails of processor design today, was clocked up faster giving it better single threaded performance due to chip die shrinks and the heat limitation wasn't exposed until later with higher clock speeds. The 68060 wasn't a fluke either. The 68040 outperformed the 486 and the 68030 outperformed the 386 at the same clock speed. The 68060 with its deeper pipeline should have been easier to clock up than the Pentium as well. The 68k and ColdFire embedded processors were successful without multi-core for many years past when ARM needed multi-core for its weak cores.

Last edited by matthey on 03-Jul-2021 at 10:52 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 3-Jul-2021 23:57:24
#112 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

fishy_fis Quote:

Ben Herman's has always been an idiot. Since day one.
He simply didn't advertise it as regularly or openly at 1st, but he didn't hide it either.
He's in the top 3 of most harmful people to the platforms history.


Top 3 most harmful people to Amiga history? Care to rank them?

Medhi Ali, Irving Gould, Bill Sydnes, Jack Tramiel, Bill McEwen, Ben Hermans

Ben is the black knight who keeps saying, "None shall pass." Why? Does he own the AmigaOS? Does the Amiga need help he can't provide? "None shall pass." Nuke from orbit it is then. Don't the black knights realize they lose to white knights? Why can't they save themselves the misery and just let the white knight pass instead of thinking they are invincible?

Last edited by matthey on 04-Jul-2021 at 12:35 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 11:50:07
#113 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 1912
From: Trondheim, Norway

@matthey

CBM did PCs also before Amiga, the "hurt" part is debatable.

But my point was that "force CBM to increase performance" wasn't possible on m68k, CBM wasn't developing m68k, Motorola was, and they were calling EOL on it. So even if CBM had survived and things had moved on, Amiga/68k was a dead end.

Quote:

kolla Quote:

Over in the US, CBM engineers were well aware of what was holding Amiga back - the operating system, its lack of (by 1993) modern features and standards, and its dependency on 68k - a processor family already well on its way to be replaced on the other platforms. It was clear that in order to "go" anywhere, Amiga would have to change drastically anyways - just slapping on a faster 68k wouldn't do much.


I *strongly* disagree. The AmigaOS was still one of the Amiga strong points in 1993.

I know you disagree, but that was reality - Internet came around as a public service, and with it came a whole range of new requirements for the operating systems, requirements that AmigaOS had a hard time meeting.

As for interviews with Dave etc. it is much more interesting to read contemporary interviews from back when things were actually taking place, than those done with 20-30 years of hindsights :) He was very much into everything "wrong" in your eyes... CHRP/PREP (PIOS), OS-level HALs (like Windows NT), BeOS, Linux etc.

And Lew Eggbrecht is quite on the point there in that interview - 68k is about to EOL, Amiga about to move to RISC, with Unix and Win NT as OS, legacy Amiga to run only on a AA+68k chip ("thinking of") or emulation etc. with 5 years.

Last edited by kolla on 04-Jul-2021 at 12:51 PM.
Last edited by kolla on 04-Jul-2021 at 12:50 PM.
Last edited by kolla on 04-Jul-2021 at 12:12 PM.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
NutsAboutAmiga 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 13:20:03
#114 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Jun-2004
Posts: 12005
From: Norway

@kolla

Problem they used to long time to decide what CPU to use, after commodore was bankrupted.

DEC ALPHA, ARM, MIPS, POWERPC, maybe few more was on the table.
The problem switching CPU, back then was you need massively stronger CPU to emulate the 680x0 CPU, if you look at MacOS7 Speedometer benchmarks, we can see that PowerPC 60X, where not up to the job, at least compared MC68060 running shapeshifter.

AMP like approach Cyberstrom PPC/Bilzzard PPC was kind logical choice, but it came way too late, we need it instead of walker, we need radical shift in graphics and sound, too many programs where to tided to hardware.

Maybe a low cost Draco might helped, moving this into the right direction, but they needed lots of money to produce substantial software for what be essentially a new platform, it might have worked if it happened in 1995/96 when there was something left of the Amiga market, they need to have worked with the software houses in the shadows, releasing a new computer without software be big failure.

Anyway AmigaOS were kind screwed due to the competition at time, Microsoft with Windows95 did create earthquakes in the market. I believe it where in the commodore years there was a real chance, to move away from classic chipset dependency, hell.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 16:52:42
#115 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4270
From: Australia

@matthey

SNES with SuperFX2 upgrade enabled cutdown Doom to run. LOL.

C= shouldn't focus on Sega Mega Drive.

"Only the paranoid survives" - Intel

Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:38 PM.

_________________
Core i9-9900K, DDR4-3800 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Ryzen 9 3900X, DDR4-3200 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, 68K 50Mhz, 12 MB RAM)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 17:20:22
#116 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4270
From: Australia

@matthey

Quote:

Lower power is required by some embedded processors and can allow hardware without a fan saving cost and improving reliability. A processor with good single threaded performance/MHz doesn't need multi-core for performance as soon. The 68060 was one of the best processors of the day at single threaded performance/MHz and performance/Watt yet it was amazingly abandoned. The Pentium, which was inferior in both these holy grails of processor design today, was clocked up faster giving it better single threaded performance due to chip die shrinks and the heat limitation wasn't exposed until later with higher clock speeds. The 68060 wasn't a fluke either. The 68040 outperformed the 486 and the 68030 outperformed the 386 at the same clock speed. The 68060 with its deeper pipeline should have been easier to clock up than the Pentium as well. The 68k and ColdFire embedded processors were successful without multi-core for many years past when ARM needed multi-core for its weak cores.

FYI, classic Pentium has "speed bin" embedded and mobile variants that consumed less power than their desktop counterparts.

Embedded Pentium 133 with VRE (Core=3.1V I/O=3.3V) has about 7.9 watts TDP.

Pentium 133 has 11.2 watts TDP
Pentium 150 has 11.6 watts TDP
Pentium 200 has 15.5 watts TDP

From 1993 to the Ghz race, Intel's high clock speed Pentium focus for the desktop PC market is correct.

Classic Pentium has the pipelined FPU and 64-bit bus bandwidth superiority over 68060.

Classic Pentium has a five-stage pipeline. The FPU pipeline of Pentium consists of eight stages which are used to speed up the execution of the floating-point units. FPU's eight-stage pipeline gives a single cycle execution for many of floating-point instructions such as floating adds, subtract, multiply and compare.

Pentium MMX has a six-stage pipeline to reach higher clock speeds.

68060 has a four-stage pipeline. FPU is not pipelined.

On 0.6 μm, classic Pentium P54C (and some Pentium 120 P54CQS) was designed for higher clockspeed when compared to 0.6 μm 68060.

IPC's 486 and 386 has access to motherboard L2 cache. PC has faster integer IPC 386 variants such as AMD 386DX40 and Cryix 486SLC (nearly 486 like design on 386 socket).

486 PC has faster VLB that are not limited by 25 Mhz clock speed (VLB 486SX-25/DX-25/DX2-50).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQDEKoRcXZc&t=259s
386DX33 with Tseng Labs ET4000 SVGA running Doom. Our Amiga 3000/030/882 @25 Mhz can't to that! My Dad also owns 386DX33 with Tseng Labs ET4000 SVGA and motherboard 64KB L2 cache.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWnPU8fZZjE
Doom on Amiga 1200 with Blizzard 030 @ 50 Mhz.


During 1993, C= wouldn't win on performance per $$$.

Our 386DX33+X387 @ 33 Mhz beats Amiga 3000/030/882 @ 25 Mhz on Imagine 3D.


Commodore didn't release Amiga 1200 with 68030 @ 50 Mhz + 4 MB fast ram SKU out-of-the-box. Proposed SKU against 386 DX-66. Targeting Doom.

Commodore didn't release Amiga 1200 with 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz + 4 MB fast ram SKU out-of-the-box, estimated price in 1993 around $800. Proposed SKU against 486SX25 PCs. Targeting Doom.

Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 06:06 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 06:01 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:58 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:56 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:54 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:50 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:45 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:44 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 04-Jul-2021 at 05:37 PM.

_________________
Core i9-9900K, DDR4-3800 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Ryzen 9 3900X, DDR4-3200 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, 68K 50Mhz, 12 MB RAM)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 21:49:49
#117 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

kolla Quote:

CBM did PCs also before Amiga, the "hurt" part is debatable.


CBM likely profited from their PC clone business early but may have been losing money at the end from it. The margin disappeared from the market. I worked at Radio Shack in the early '90s and their inventory computer system showed a negative margin on their low end PC clones. They were break even at best selling computers but made up for it with high margins on accessories sold with it.

kolla Quote:

But my point was that "force CBM to increase performance" wasn't possible on m68k, CBM wasn't developing m68k, Motorola was, and they were calling EOL on it. So even if CBM had survived and things had moved on, Amiga/68k was a dead end.


CBM could have significantly increased m68k performance with higher performance accelerators and memory to start with. CBM hardware couldn't touch aftermarket Amiga hardware which was often several times better performance. CBM did try to license the 68k from Motorola to use in a SoC. They also looked at options to improve hardware which would have moved them away from the 68k but often came back to an enhanced 68k with Amiga custom chips using the AmigaOS as software compatibility was important as Lew talks about in the interview. He also mentions porting other OSs to CBM RISC hardware like "NT and UNIX" which may have been talking about projects like Hombre seeking to expand into higher performance markets. The earler Amiga 3000UX had tried to do this with the 68k but CBM management managed to miss that opportunity as usual.

kolla Quote:

I know you disagree, but that was reality - Internet came around as a public service, and with it came a whole range of new requirements for the operating systems, requirements that AmigaOS had a hard time meeting.


The internet was not a problem for the AmigaOS. There was a problem with CBM supporting newer technology on the Amiga like ethernet but this is coming from a company that had a difficult time adding standard hard drives and fast memory.

kolla Quote:

As for interviews with Dave etc. it is much more interesting to read contemporary interviews from back when things were actually taking place, than those done with 20-30 years of hindsights :) He was very much into everything "wrong" in your eyes... CHRP/PREP (PIOS), OS-level HALs (like Windows NT), BeOS, Linux etc.


These technologies are good but they have their place and disadvantages. The AmigaOS was designed to be slim which allows it to go smaller than the competition. A HAL may be useful for a server for example but is unnecessary abstraction for the 68k AmigaOS as can be seen by the elimination in the Apollo version of AROS. There are places where the AmigaOS did not have enough abstraction as can be seen by the graphics.library making it more difficult to add RTG support.

kolla Quote:

And Lew Eggbrecht is quite on the point there in that interview - 68k is about to EOL, Amiga about to move to RISC, with Unix and Win NT as OS, legacy Amiga to run only on a AA+68k chip ("thinking of") or emulation etc. with 5 years.


Motorola stopping development of the 68k was a reality but this didn't stop CBM from trying to license the 68k. Had CBM survived, continued cost reductions into a single chip Amiga SoC could have allowed the AmigaOS to take better advantage of the fast growing embedded market. The low end computing market and embedded market was a much better fit for the 68k AmigaOS capabilities and still is. Lew was very open minded and considered many opportunities. There was a lot of hype with RISC but that was the direction many big companies were going and they were pushing it including Motorola with PPC. I went to an Amiga show during the post CBM Amiga Technologies' days where Motorola employees came to the dev meeting to speak to us. They were PPC pushers but they needed adopters and customers to be successful as the many RISC architectures caused market dilution. PPC, Alpha, MIPS and PA-RISC were all considered for future CBM hardware but they are all dead now which shows the danger in rashly following the hype. Hombre and PPC Amigas would be dead now too but a cheap little 68k Amiga SoC could still be in production today. The 68000 is still in production after more than 40 years.

Wallowing in 68K Nostalgia by Jim Turley (2020) Quote:

As old as it is, the 68K is still a great microprocessor architecture to learn on. It’s easy to understand, easy to program, and easy to debug. Plus, the 68K doesn’t suffer from weird anomalies that plague some other vintage processors (cough, x86, cough) so it’s less likely to trip up the unwary.

When I stumbled across Matt Sarnoff’s 68K-Nano project on GitHub my first thought was, “You can still buy 68K chips?” Yup. Turns out, a few of the major distributors still carry 68K-family processors and peripherals, although they helpfully suggest that they’re “not recommended for new designs.” You think?


https://www.eejournal.com/article/wallowing-in-68k-nostalgia/

Last edited by matthey on 04-Jul-2021 at 09:51 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 23:06:51
#118 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

Hammer Quote:

FYI, classic Pentium has "speed bin" embedded and mobile variants that consumed less power than their desktop counterparts.

Embedded Pentium 133 with VRE (Core=3.1V I/O=3.3V) has about 7.9 watts TDP.

Pentium 133 has 11.2 watts TDP
Pentium 150 has 11.6 watts TDP
Pentium 200 has 15.5 watts TDP

From 1993 to the Ghz race, Intel's high clock speed Pentium focus for the desktop PC market is correct.


It makes sense to raise clock speeds for better performance on the desktop. Dropping the voltage is very important to reduce power as P=nCV^2f.

Hammer Quote:

Classic Pentium has the pipelined FPU and 64-bit bus bandwidth superiority over 68060.


As poor as the PPC 603 design is, their data bus is 32/64 bits. That could have been an option for a 68060 successor where transistors were cheaper although more pins would still increase the cost.

Hammer Quote:

Pentium MMX has a six-stage pipeline to reach higher clock speeds.


Intel recognized the need for higher clock speeds quickly unlike Motorola who stuck with shallow pipeline PPC designs as customers complained about the low clock speeds. One of those customers at Apple even went to IBM to have them design a higher performance G5 CPU with a deeper pipeline.

Hammer Quote:

68060 has a four-stage pipeline. FPU is not pipelined.


The 68060 has a 8 stage pipeline. The branch misprediction penalty in cycles usually gives close to the pipeline length. The 68060 and some other processors can hide one stage so the penalty is 7 cycles (8 cycles for DBcc and FBcc).

Hammer Quote:

On 0.6 μm, classic Pentium P54C (and some Pentium 120 P54CQS) was designed for higher clockspeed when compared to 0.6 μm 68060.


The 68060 should have an advantage over the Pentium and most PPC cores due to the deeper pipeline for higher clock speeds. Perhaps it was rushed to market before the stages could be rebalanced for maximum clock speed. We were fortunate to get the 68060 at all as Motorola had already switched the high performance focus away from the 68060. The 68060 was a balanced design where the Pentium was a higher performance design (trades power and area for performance) so it was doing good to be as competitive as it was.

Hammer Quote:

IPC's 486 and 386 has access to motherboard L2 cache. PC has faster integer IPC 386 variants such as AMD 386DX40 and Cryix 486SLC (nearly 486 like design on 386 socket).

486 PC has faster VLB that are not limited by 25 Mhz clock speed (VLB 486SX-25/DX-25/DX2-50).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQDEKoRcXZc&t=259s
386DX33 with Tseng Labs ET4000 SVGA running Doom. Our Amiga 3000/030/882 @25 Mhz can't to that! My Dad also owns 386DX33 with Tseng Labs ET4000 SVGA and motherboard 64KB L2 cache.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWnPU8fZZjE
Doom on Amiga 1200 with Blizzard 030 @ 50 Mhz.


During 1993, C= wouldn't win on performance per $$$.

Our 386DX33+X387 @ 33 Mhz beats Amiga 3000/030/882 @ 25 Mhz on Imagine 3D.


Commodore didn't release Amiga 1200 with 68030 @ 50 Mhz + 4 MB fast ram SKU out-of-the-box. Proposed SKU against 386 DX-66. Targeting Doom.

Commodore didn't release Amiga 1200 with 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz + 4 MB fast ram SKU out-of-the-box, estimated price in 1993 around $800. Proposed SKU against 486SX25 PCs. Targeting Doom.


Motorola had a 6 stage 68040V which ran at 3.3V and was 1.5W@33MHz without an FPU. This is the same pipeline length as the original Pentium design and the lower voltage may have allowed it to be clocked up more than a normal hot 68040. Maybe this could have been used to compete with the early Pentium before the 68060 came out. Despite the confined space of an Amiga 1200, CBM would never have considered it though.

Last edited by matthey on 05-Jul-2021 at 06:32 PM.
Last edited by matthey on 05-Jul-2021 at 06:03 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 4-Jul-2021 23:45:28
#119 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 1912
From: Trondheim, Norway

@matthey

“ethernet” isn’t Internet, that’s not where the obstacle is.
Also, “the web” isn’t Internet. It’s all that stuff in between those that is lacking, and always has been missing. The Amiga IP stacks have always been compromises between what’s practical and what’s possible to achieve with all the limitations that the OS comes with, there was never any “complete” stack, always lots of features lacking and seemingly strange limitations. Remember all the devs that fled to Linux, BSDs in that period.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
matthey 
Re: Back when Ben was the White Knight!
Posted on 5-Jul-2021 0:29:26
#120 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Mar-2007
Posts: 1297
From: Kansas

kolla Quote:

“ethernet” isn’t Internet, that’s not where the obstacle is.


The Amiga was slow to adopt networking (like TCP/IP over ethernet) and where there was not a connection there was an obstacle. Many Amiga users were still on serial dialup back then but the lack of ethernet support usually meant the loss of an Amiga user, at least daily user, when ethernet became available at the location. Lack of networking support was a problem for educational markets as well. The CBM Pet was able to use the IEEE-488 as a local area network which could share peripherals saving schools money and resulting in a large part of the educational market (CBM had 67% of the Canadian educational market). Some 10 years later and there was no need for networking or the educational market. The Apple Macintosh had AppleBus/AppleTalk in 1984 and adopted EtherTalk and AppleShare in 1987. Apple did well in the education market with the Macintosh and the Amiga did not. Coincidence?

kolla Quote:

Also, “the web” isn’t Internet. It’s all that stuff in between those that is lacking, and always has been missing. The Amiga IP stacks have always been compromises between what’s practical and what’s possible to achieve with all the limitations that the OS comes with, there was never any “complete” stack, always lots of features lacking and seemingly strange limitations. Remember all the devs that fled to Linux, BSDs in that period.


There are porting issues with converting Unix originating networking software to the Amiga but there is no big obstacle because of AmigaOS. There are more primitive OSs than AmigaOS on mobile and embedded devices which also have no problem supporting networking software. The MacOS with no multitasking and then only cooperative multitasking added later was inferior to the AmigaOS and it had no problem supporting networking. You are smarter than this. Don't be a troll.

Last edited by matthey on 05-Jul-2021 at 12:38 AM.
Last edited by matthey on 05-Jul-2021 at 12:33 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle