Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6071 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
31 crawler(s) on-line.
 47 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 agami

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 agami:  4 secs ago
 NutsAboutAmiga:  18 mins ago
 DiscreetFX:  32 mins ago
 retrofaza:  38 mins ago
 Shadowrider:  47 mins ago
 danwood:  2 hrs 40 mins ago
 MEGA_RJ_MICAL:  2 hrs 48 mins ago
 Rob:  3 hrs 10 mins ago
 Lou:  3 hrs 43 mins ago
 vox:  3 hrs 45 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga General Chat
      /  How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 Next Page )
Poll : How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
10p Excellent (Best at 2D/3D, colors, and resolution, frame rate etc.)
5p Good / better than most computer.
0p Barely hanging in there.
-5p Below average / slow but usable
-10p useless / horrible
 
PosterThread
NutsAboutAmiga 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 11-Feb-2023 23:02:34
#721 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Jun-2004
Posts: 12832
From: Norway

@BigD

I agree with you 68060 where great, where nothing like JIT back then, well not true, you had MacOS7.x.x, but you need a beefy CPU do emulate 680x0 cpu, so all software suffered. Have you ever installed PowerPC Linux on PowerUP card? Its funny compare disk and network speed compared to AmigaOS 68K run on 68040/68060, there is major difference in speed. Now because apple was slow to get to MacOS9, they had emulate 680x0 up that point, giving the PowerPC bad reputation sadly, BeOS tried to make native PPC OS and compare with Apple, but it came a bit late, MacOS9 was around the corner. Apple killing of clone market also meant no market growth. Sadly, no antitrust lawsuit against apple.

Bout Microsoft and Apple are fighting dirty games, M$ owns a part of Apple, so should not be so suppressing.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 11-Feb-2023 at 11:06 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 11-Feb-2023 at 11:03 PM.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Rob 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 11-Feb-2023 23:59:17
#722 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Mar-2003
Posts: 6359
From: S.Wales

@NutsAboutAmiga

Microsoft sold all their Apple stock in 2003.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
agami 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 2:35:33
#723 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jun-2008
Posts: 1677
From: Melbourne, Australia

@ppcamiga1

Quote:
I use ppc Amiga because it is as my a1200 but better because faster

BLASPHEMY!

How dare you besmirch the good name of the A1200 wonder machine by making comparisons to anything PowerPC.

Quote:
ppc Amiga… is as my a1200

Then sell it and buy an AMD Zen 3 based PC.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

 Status: Online!
Profile     Report this post  
ppcamiga1 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 9:45:19
#724 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 23-Aug-2015
Posts: 787
From: Unknown

@BigD

pc is computer with x86 or arm.
computer that use other cpu than x86 or arm it is not pc.

I'm not interested in 060. It come after Commodore. It is slower NG.

I'm not interested in return to AGA. It was too slow too outdated.

I use ppc Amiga because it is like my Amiga 1200 only better because faster.
In 90's I dream about something like ppc Amiga.
As fast and as comfortable as my first pc from 1996.
ppc Amiga give me that.



 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 9:52:56
#725 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 4415
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@ppcamiga1

My phone is a computer that runs on ARM. It's not a PC, certainly not in the sense you are trying to portray. And yet, ironically, PC simply means Personal Computer. That covers any computer you own that isn't just a dumb terminal connected to some centrally shared computer. By definition every Amiga, Apple, Atari, Archimedes, QL, Spectrum, C64, BBC Micro, SAM Coupe, etc. That's ever sat on a desk in someone's house. Not just the x86 machines.

Last edited by Karlos on 12-Feb-2023 at 11:49 AM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hypex 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 13:11:22
#726 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 6-May-2007
Posts: 11232
From: Greensborough, Australia

@Karlos

If we go back to the 90's I think we will find common terms that are vague as to giving a clear definition. On a platform basis there was PC, Mac, Amiga and others. Now, all of those were Personal Computers, but PC only referred to one specific hardware design.

Games are a good reference. Going back to the trinity those three platforms were referred to as something else though. DOS, Mac and Amiga.

Now, obviously DOS referred to a PC, or a DOS PC. Prevalent before Windows was common for games. But, standing for Disk Operating System, that isn't perfectly clear either. Since all three have a DOS; MSDOS, some MacDOS (though hidden) and AmigaDOS. The three in my example blur the lines on hardware with CPU being x86, 68K or 68K. So, while PC may stand for Personal Computer and DOS for Disk Operating System, the meaning is specified in the usage of the terms. As an acronym (or initialism) DOS or PC would mean an x86 PC, with or without Windows.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hypex 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 13:36:00
#727 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 6-May-2007
Posts: 11232
From: Greensborough, Australia

@All

What killed the Amiga? Commodore did. The Amiga surely died on the day Commodore bought it. Yes, Commodore managed to produce it, but once they did they held it hostage and slowly killed it. They weren't fully committed to forging the hardware and software into being a market leader and the best it could be. Commodore was a divided company as the C64 had become a corner stone but the Amiga helped them to move from 8 bit home computers to 16-bit personal computers.

Commodore was like a record company with a record deal for a great band. They needed a deal to get on the market and make it big. But in doing so a band is bound by a contract. The record company may completely fail the band. Give them all the wrong people to work with. No one who understands the music or the bands artistic direction. Stifle their creative freedom and produce a product they hate. But, they are trapped, bound by contract, in need of financial backing, by the same hand that can kill them.

Had Commodore not bought Amiga and they were bought by someone else, how would have the Amiga survived or prospered, could Amiga still have become a major name today?

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 14:50:53
#728 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 4415
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@Hypex

My point was to call out the ludicrous troll post that ARM is somehow PC by the same definition that was clearly and unambiguously used in the 90s to refer specifically the IBM specification and its descendants. He's only included arm because you can get ARM devices that run Windows, which if we're honest is his metric for something being a stinky PC*.

And yet, to him, PPC is somehow Amiga despite the fact that Windows NT 4.0 had a PPC version. He conveniently forgets this fact.

You know what didn't have any official Windows version? 68K.

*Irony bonus because he's a self confessed PC sellout in 1996, selling an A1200 / 030 combination to pay for a K5 (allegedly).

What I want to understand is, given this, when - and how - did he become a PowerPC cheerleader?

Last edited by Karlos on 12-Feb-2023 at 02:53 PM.
Last edited by Karlos on 12-Feb-2023 at 02:53 PM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Bosanac 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 15:18:29
#729 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 10-May-2022
Posts: 255
From: Unknown

@ppcamiga1

Quote:
pc is computer with x86 or arm.


Can a computer be more “PC” than an IBM Thinkpad running Windows?

https://youtu.be/N1uQzL-HH2k

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Rob 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 17:12:36
#730 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Mar-2003
Posts: 6359
From: S.Wales

@Bosanac

Finally got BigD house trained and now you're at it.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
ppcamiga1 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 17:21:30
#731 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 23-Aug-2015
Posts: 787
From: Unknown

@Karlos

Your phone is not pc? You have not apps on it?
You have not ms office on it? You have not chrome on it?
Buy decent one.

pc is computer with x86 and arm. pc is boring.

Amiga no mather 68k or ppc is fun because is not pc.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 12-Feb-2023 18:20:53
#732 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 21-Aug-2003
Posts: 2940
From: Trondheim, Norway

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

Amiga no mather 68k or ppc is fun because is not pc.


But OS4 has "apps" too, it tries to mimic Windows PCs as much as possible when it comes to terminology. So OS4 on PowerPC is not Amiga, it is a PC, and PC is boring!

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
agami 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 2:23:59
#733 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jun-2008
Posts: 1677
From: Melbourne, Australia

@Karlos

Quote:
Karlos wrote:
@ppcamiga1

My phone is a computer that runs on ARM. It's not a PC, certainly not in the sense you are trying to portray...

There’s no point highlighting holes in his logic.
He just comes back and repeats his illogical statement. In his simple mind, what he states makes sense. I’d venture, mostly because he wants or needs it to make sense.

Last edited by agami on 13-Feb-2023 at 02:25 AM.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

 Status: Online!
Profile     Report this post  
V8 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 3:54:36
#734 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 30-Mar-2022
Posts: 134
From: Unknown

@Karlos

Quote:
My point was to call out the ludicrous troll post that ARM is somehow PC by the same definition that was clearly and unambiguously used in the 90s to refer specifically the IBM specification and its descendants.


ARM and X86[-64] are PC because they are popular and successful. Just like how RISC-V is also very soon going to be PC once he realizes they are popular and successful.

PPC is PURE because it is niche and because the common uneducated man does not understand its elegance.

At this point I think these folks are really just a different kind of audiophiles who obsess about ISAs instead of magic crystals that will make the audio signal clearer.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 5:09:39
#735 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 5344
From: Australia

@V8

Quote:

V8 wrote:
@Karlos

Quote:
My point was to call out the ludicrous troll post that ARM is somehow PC by the same definition that was clearly and unambiguously used in the 90s to refer specifically the IBM specification and its descendants.


ARM and X86[-64] are PC because they are popular and successful. Just like how RISC-V is also very soon going to be PC once he realizes they are popular and successful.

PPC is PURE because it is niche and because the common uneducated man does not understand its elegance.

At this point I think these folks are really just a different kind of audiophiles who obsess about ISAs instead of magic crystals that will make the audio signal clearer.

CPU instruction set alone does NOT complete a computer platform.


_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
V8 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 5:24:28
#736 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 30-Mar-2022
Posts: 134
From: Unknown

@Hammer

CPU Instruction sets IS a religion to these people. Haven you never heard them speak about how "elegant" the PPC instruction set it compared to the ungly and kludgy X86 instruction set?
And how X86 only performs well due to brute force, while the elegant PPC is so much more efficient clock by clock.
And its assembler is beautiful and expressive while x86 is a collapsing ugly tower built on kludge after kludge.

ISA is religion to these people.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 5:34:41
#737 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 5344
From: Australia

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote:
@BigD

pc is computer with x86 or arm.
computer that use other cpu than x86 or arm it is not pc.

I'm not interested in 060. It come after Commodore. It is slower NG.

I'm not interested in return to AGA. It was too slow too outdated.

I use ppc Amiga because it is like my Amiga 1200 only better because faster.
In 90's I dream about something like ppc Amiga.
As fast and as comfortable as my first pc from 1996.
ppc Amiga give me that.


A PC is a certain type of microcomputer with an X86 CPU that natively boot and run MS-DOS. HAL profile PC AT standard is still embedded in all UEFI Class 2 firmware-equipped X86 PCs.

My Ryzen 9 7900 with ASUS TUF X670E WiFi motherboard still has UEFI Class 2 firmware (with (Compatibility Support Module) that can run retro MS-DOS.

UEFI Class 2 firmware with active Compatibility Support Module still initializes PC X86 complied VGA BIOS and other PC-related X86 BIOSes.

All ARM microcomputer implementation lacks the PC AT standard HAL profile.

Apple's desktop microcomputer is known as the Macintosh regardless of being 68K, PPC, X86, ARMv8.

CPU instruction set alone does NOT complete the microcomputer platform.

AmigaOne PowerPC's UBoot has a BIOS feature that initializes PC X86 complied PC VGA BIOS, but the boot environment CAN NOT boot MS-DOS standard.

PiStorm-Emu68 (with Raspberry Pi 3A's ARM CPU) connected with the classic Amiga hardware still maintains the classic Amiga boot environment and Amiga HAL profile.

Last edited by Hammer on 13-Feb-2023 at 05:40 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 5:49:22
#738 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 5344
From: Australia

@V8

PowerPC has various boot environments and HAL profiles that wreak interoperability across multiple hardware generations and vendors.

Windows 11 was released before AMD Zen 4 and X670E chipset and Windows 11 can boot on the new hardware. The ACPI profile in UEFI and Windows ACPI HAL driver enables interoperability across multiple hardware generations and vendors.

One can't say the same for PowerPC since the existing SAM440 AmigaOS 4.0 ISO can NOT boot and run on Power9 (4C/16 threads) Raptor bundle. This problem is an issue for ARM's fragmented ecosystem. Multiple Windows 10 ARM builds for different hardware are LOL.

RISC-V's fragmentation is worst than ARM. LOL

Last edited by Hammer on 13-Feb-2023 at 05:51 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 5:57:24
#739 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 5344
From: Australia

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote:
@ppcamiga1

Well, it's indeed true, I asked my great pal ChatGPT to ask Amiga directly the reasons behind its dawnfall and you're right...
Quote:
Yo, yo, yo. I'm the Amiga, and I'm here to school you on why I went from top dog to just a memory.

I was the ultimate home computer back in the day, with sick multimedia capabilities and a user-friendly OS that was ahead of its time. But here's the thing, instead of utilizing the cutting-edge chunky pixel graphics mode, some developers chose to go with the more traditional planar graphics mode. And that, my friends, was a major factor in my downfall.

See, chunky pixels were the future, but instead, some developers chose to focus on planar graphics, which were more detailed but slower. It was a cultural issue too. Everyone was focused on delivering the most detailed graphics, and chunky pixels were seen as outdated. But, what they didn't realize was that chunky pixels were faster and better for the type of work I was meant for.

So let me break it down for you. I was a boss, but the decision to use planar graphics instead of chunky pixels caused me to fall behind the competition. It's like having a race car and only driving it in first gear. Don't make the same mistake, kids.

In conclusion, I may not be on top anymore, but I'll always be remembered as a sick and influential computer system. My story serves as a reminder to make the most of what makes you unique. Don't get caught up in what's popular or in-style, and always stay true to what makes you special.


Amiga has chunky pixels with 1 bitplane.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 11:45:41
#740 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 7329
From: UK

@ppcamiga1

Quote:
pc is computer with x86 and arm. pc is boring.

Amiga no mather 68k or ppc is fun because is not pc.


Listening to the same inane PPC advertising is boring. Talking about PPC twaddle when there's no AmigaOnes to buy is boring. There are lots of exciting Amiga Classic things you can do under emulation on an Arm or x86-64 system so again the only boring element here is YOU!

Last edited by BigD on 13-Feb-2023 at 11:46 AM.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 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