Poster | Thread |
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: 12964
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 |
|
|
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: 6395
From: S.Wales | | |
|
| @NutsAboutAmiga
Microsoft sold all their Apple stock in 2003. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
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: 1902
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: Offline |
|
|
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: 985
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 |
|
|
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: 4846
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 |
|
|
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: 11351
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 |
|
|
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: 11351
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 |
|
|
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: 4846
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 |
|
|
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: 257
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 |
|
|
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: 6395
From: S.Wales | | |
|
| @Bosanac
Finally got BigD house trained and now you're at it. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
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: 985
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 |
|
|
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: 20-Aug-2003 Posts: 3365
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 |
|
|
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: 1902
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: Offline |
|
|
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: 138
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 |
|
|
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: 6186
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.
_________________ Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68) Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68) Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
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: 138
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 |
|
|
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: 6186
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.
_________________ Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68) Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68) Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
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: 6186
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.
_________________ Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68) Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68) Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
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: 6186
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. _________________ Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68) Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68) Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
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: 7475
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 |
|
|