@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: utri007 Quote: Without a PPC/68k hardware I would have zero interest to Amiga OS. Amiga OS is hobby OS, to be true it is very shitty and useless, compared to any modern OS. Why would I use Amiga OS with x86 hardware, when I can run Linux or Windows with it? The AmigaOS is still a liked OS despite not having competitive hardware since the fall of CBM. Read the comments to the following video. Top 10 Best Operating Systems of All Time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp8EpZlLY6A The OSs are ranked perhaps more by historical significance where AmigaOS is #3 but by preference as a liked and fun OS to use it would likely be higher judging by the comments, at least by the people who used it.

That's the point: many people are used to the Amiga o.s., probably because they enjoyed the platform during the good old times of Commodore.

But this fact has nothing to do with the below fact.
Quote:

The AmigaOS is a good OS just not a modern desktop OS.

That's your logical fallacy: how could you say that the Amiga o.s. is "good"? Only because it got the above rank #3?

But this is just a "good preference" of the users which voted on the above video! It says nothing about the o.s. itself.

How do you define a "good" o.s.? Only because many (well, "many": many of the ones which voted) liked it?

Shouldn't an o.s. have some "measurable" features and a metric to define "how much good is it"? Are you able to define both (features and metric)?
Quote:

Call it a fun hobby or toy OS if you like but it is far from shitty and useless.

Nobody said this. Now you're changing, again, the cards on the table.

There is people which uses the Amiga o.s., so it's not shitty or useless. I think that there is people which even still LOVES it...

But this says nothing about the o.s. itself. Love and preferences are personal sentiments / opinions of human beings.

Again, this tells nothing about the o.s. itself.
Quote:

It just needs affordable toy hardware to go with it.

There's already plenty of that.
Quote:

utri007 Quote: Would it be possible just be happy what we have and support current development? Are you happy accepting the status quo of failure and defeat?

It's not a war. Because the war was lost since very long time.

The Amiga o.s. is just part of the history. It's a retro o.s.., and most of the people enjoys as it is.

We're here simply because of that: recalling the good old times.

But the o.s. has already lost its moment. I think that there's really nothing that can be done for reviving.

There are only three sane options, IMO.
The first is enjoying it as it is, in one or more of the its actual incarnations.
The second one is trying to enhance the way that the applications written for it are executed and still enjoyed by its fans.
The third is to create a new o.s. which is modern (so, having modern features. Like other mainstream o.ses.) and (only) inspired by the Amiga o.s..

@NutsAboutAmiga


trevor says a lot about a lot of things. This is why I don't follow what goes on at AmiWest. The only people who lost money dealing with Ben Hermans were the Frieden brothers. Trevor bought out the rights to Exec SG. There were others who should have been paid, but weren't.

System 54 contains entirely new code. It contains a new graphics system which never was part of OS4. Everybody I'ver talked to says System 54 is a complete standalone system totally independent of OS4. There will be very little if any legacy code in V54 when it ships. I think I've figured out how Amigakit is working this. Again, I will repeat there will be very little, if any OS4 code in V54. I completely standby what Isay.

@Neuf

Jurge Stormyer was also not payed for his work,
he worked on SFS2 and AmiDVD, PartitonWizzard, newlib.library,
and lot of other stuff.

Jurge Stormyer is alreadly working with Trever,
Stiven Solie is also working with Trever.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-May-2022 at 08:40 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-May-2022 at 08:39 PM.

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

@Neuf

Quote:

My opinion is that V54 is simply a wrapper of Enhancer software around a Linux Core.

If this is the case, then it's not tied to PPC.

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

@cdimauro

Quote:

There are only three sane options, IMO. The first is enjoying it as it is, in one or more of the its actual incarnations. The second one is trying to enhance the way that the applications written for it are executed and still enjoyed by its fans. The third is to create a new o.s. which is modern (so, having modern features. Like other mainstream o.ses.) and (only) inspired by the Amiga o.s..

I'll go with Option 3, thank you.

Also, I am not opposed to seeing some insane options

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@Neuf

Quote:

Everybody I'ver talked to says System 54 is a complete standalone system totally independent of OS4. There will be very little if any legacy code in V54 when it ships.

Sorry but your sources are wrong. At the present time System54 is just an OS4 distribution with add-ons, and in fact, very little has been replaced of OS4. System54 won't make a toot without the OS4 installation CD.

_________________
The Rear Window blog

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

Quote:

Trixie wrote: @Neuf Quote: Everybody I'ver talked to says System 54 is a complete standalone system totally independent of OS4. There will be very little if any legacy code in V54 when it ships. Sorry but your sources are wrong. At the present time System54 is just an OS4 distribution with add-ons, and in fact, very little has been replaced of OS4. System54 won't make a toot without the OS4 installation CD.

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀OH NO!!!!








⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

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

@agami

Quote:

agami wrote: @cdimauro Quote: There are only three sane options, IMO. The first is enjoying it as it is, in one or more of the its actual incarnations. The second one is trying to enhance the way that the applications written for it are executed and still enjoyed by its fans. The third is to create a new o.s. which is modern (so, having modern features. Like other mainstream o.ses.) and (only) inspired by the Amiga o.s.. I'll go with Option 3, thank you. Also, I am not opposed to seeing some insane options

Like going for all three options?

Going back to the topic: SCIENTISTS GENE HACK HAMSTERS INTO HYPER-AGGRESSIVE MONSTERS

They failed: this thread clearly proves that you don't need any gene hack to get the same effects...

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: The AmigaOS is still a liked OS despite not having competitive hardware since the fall of CBM. Read the comments to the following video. Top 10 Best Operating Systems of All Time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp8EpZlLY6A The OSs are ranked perhaps more by historical significance where AmigaOS is #3 but by preference as a liked and fun OS to use it would likely be higher judging by the comments, at least by the people who used it.

I finally had the time to watch the entire video.

So, the Amiga o.s. is ranked #3 by a guy due to... HIS PERSONAL FEELING! OK, he debated about some interesting/cool/novel features of the o.s, but this remains his opinion.

And what was then ranked #1? Linux! Which you... haven't reported (any reason for that?).
Anyway, Linux is a revolution for...? Only because... it was open source! Because we know that weren't open sourced o.ses before it...

So we should judge / rate the "goodness" of an o.s. due to the PERSONAL TASTE of a guy, which has also said that this is his INSTANT feeling because... next time he can change opinion!
Or, we should take into account people which has commented the video as a measure of "goodness" of an o.s..

Are we kidding? Really?!?

Are we technicians / engineers or priests of a new faith? Because I don't see any difference here.

Religion is the same thing, whether it's coming from a flying pink unicorn or a computer/software. It's dangerous. And making damages. As we can see...

Last edited by cdimauro on 21-May-2022 at 06:23 AM.

cdimauro Quote:

I finally had the time to watch the entire video. So, the Amiga o.s. is ranked #3 by a guy due to... HIS PERSONAL FEELING! OK, he debated about some interesting/cool/novel features of the o.s, but this remains his opinion. And what was then ranked #1? Linux! Which you... haven't reported (any reason for that?). Anyway, Linux is a revolution for...? Only because... it was open source! Because we know that weren't open sourced o.ses before it...

Most people expect Linux to be #1 so I didn't even comment on it. It's a boring but undeniably important OS that has been influential and prolific. The fact that Linux is free and likely has the 2nd or 3rd best 3rd party driver support yet only has ~2.5% of the desktop market says something about its flaws which probably includes lack of likability.

cdimauro Quote:

So we should judge / rate the "goodness" of an o.s. due to the PERSONAL TASTE of a guy, which has also said that this is his INSTANT feeling because... next time he can change opinion! Or, we should take into account people which has commented the video as a measure of "goodness" of an o.s..

The OS choices had as much to do with historical importance, influence and popularity as personal taste. It is his top 10 list but he did a good job which most commenters agreed with. It could be argued that he ranked personal computer or desktop OSs in which Linux should have been lower. There are some important OSs which were left off for larger computers like Unix and smaller devices like Android. For desktop like PCs, the largest missing complaint was OS/2. There weren't many comments about how Linux is my favorite and it can't be beat.

cdimauro Quote:

Are we kidding? Really?!? Are we technicians / engineers or priests of a new faith? Because I don't see any difference here. Religion is the same thing, whether it's coming from a flying pink unicorn or a computer/software. It's dangerous. And making damages. As we can see...

Marketing is more of a soft science and sometimes illogical. Potential customers may not even be able to explain their preferences or why they like something. Impulse buying is often about past positive associations as well as price. Marketing can use consumer polls and product reviews. I viewed the top 10 list as such rather than an unbiased completely logical list.

My original reaction was to utri007's post which I thought was unfair to the AmigaOS. My opinion is that it is far from "very shitty and useless". It can be used for most of what a small personal computer OS is used for and looks modern while being easy to use. It is well liked with thousands if not tens of thousands of people still using it despite the lack of competitive hardware which provides good compatibility. From a marketing perspective, it was liked and is likely to have positive associations with past users and fans. THEA500 Mini made use of the AmigaOS (kickstart) for tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of devices which at least makes it somewhat valuable and means that it is useful to make money at least.

@matthey

But THEA500 Mini isn’t using the kickstarts for OS, the kickstarts (plural) are merely runtime components for games running inside a software emulator on top of Linux, that provides ALL operating system features. Your reasoning is like arguing that JavaOS (on JavaStation) was an awesome OS because look, JVM!

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: cdimauro Quote: So we should judge / rate the "goodness" of an o.s. due to the PERSONAL TASTE of a guy, which has also said that this is his INSTANT feeling because... next time he can change opinion! Or, we should take into account people which has commented the video as a measure of "goodness" of an o.s.. The OS choices had as much to do with historical importance, influence and popularity as personal taste. It is his top 10 list but he did a good job which most commenters agreed with. It could be argued that he ranked personal computer or desktop OSs in which Linux should have been lower. There are some important OSs which were left off for larger computers like Unix and smaller devices like Android. For desktop like PCs, the largest missing complaint was OS/2. There weren't many comments about how Linux is my favorite and it can't be beat.

He also left an important o.s., Windows 3, which introduced memory protection (which, BTW, further shown how fragile were MacOS and the Amiga o.s.) and tons of other features (included the Win32 API, which are still there as THE Windows' foundation).

So, his top list is certainly highly questionable. As well as more "customer-oriented", rather than analysing technical features (he did for something, but more from a user perspective).
Quote:

cdimauro Quote: Are we kidding? Really?!? Are we technicians / engineers or priests of a new faith? Because I don't see any difference here. Religion is the same thing, whether it's coming from a flying pink unicorn or a computer/software. It's dangerous. And making damages. As we can see... Marketing is more of a soft science and sometimes illogical. Potential customers may not even be able to explain their preferences or why they like something. Impulse buying is often about past positive associations as well as price. Marketing can use consumer polls and product reviews. I viewed the top 10 list as such rather than an unbiased completely logical list.

See above: it's logical for him. Which makes sense, since it's his list...
Quote:

My original reaction was to utri007's post which I thought was unfair to the AmigaOS. My opinion is that it is far from "very shitty and useless".

The problem is that you're, again, changing the words, extracting the sentence from a precise context. Here's what the guy said:
"Amiga OS is hobby OS, to be true it is very shitty and useless, compared to any modern OS."

So, you missed the most important part of his statement.
Quote:

It can be used for most of what a small personal computer OS is used for and looks modern while being easy to use. It is well liked with thousands if not tens of thousands of people still using it despite the lack of competitive hardware which provides good compatibility.

I still use some retro platforms / o.ses, but they don't stop to be retro only because they are used.

The Amiga o.s. is a VERY fragile and INSECURE o.s. due to its intrinsic nature (AKA many bad design decisions).

If you compare it to a modern o.s., well, utri007's opinion applies. Sorry to say that, but working constantly under the fear that it could crash / guru losing EVERYTHING is certainly not the best thing for a user.
Quote:

From a marketing perspective, it was liked and is likely to have positive associations with past users and fans.

Without a doubt, but this is more a nostalgia sentiment. That's why I (but I think is the same for many of us) still use those old platforms, with the Amiga one at the top.
Quote:

THEA500 Mini made use of the AmigaOS (kickstart) for tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of devices which at least makes it somewhat valuable and means that it is useful to make money at least.

This is a game machine: the o.s. is only useful for stating them. As kolla correctly reported, you're advocating Linux and ... what's even worse for you... emulation.

The good thing of the THEA500 Mini is that it's using WHDLoad. Which needs and relies on the o.s.... and to patched games' binaries that shows how in a bad shape is/was this platform (horrible things were made by software developers as well).

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: So, the Amiga o.s. is ranked #3 by a guy due to... HIS PERSONAL FEELING! OK, he debated about some interesting/cool/novel features of the o.s, but this remains his opinion.

Yep, which he told us right at the start. He also said that people would disagree with his opinion, which is hardly unexpected.

Of course this instantly invalidates any claim that this video is objective evidence for which OS is 'best'. But here's the thing - the word 'best', when applied to human preferences, rarely has an objective measure that is relevant. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines 'best' as:-

"most productive of good : offering or producing the greatest advantage, utility, or satisfaction"

You could get a bunch of computer scientists to devise an 'objective' measure of the quality of different OS's, and rank them according to which is 'best'. They and other experts might all agree that it was scientifically rigorous and devoid of any personal bias. But their list would probably not match up with what many users find most satisfying, and even if it did it would only represent argumentum ad populum - because what's 'best' depends on the properties that each individual values most.

Quote:

Are we technicians / engineers or priests of a new faith? Because I don't see any difference here.

You're right. I deal with electronics technicians / engineers a lot, and they all have their own ideas on what component or topology is 'best' for a particular application. In many cases the most popular and widely regarded solution is not actually 'best' electrically, but it's still the best in practice because it is widely available, low cost, and well understood by technicians and engineers. Despite being strongly tied to objective science, electronic design is largely based on 'faith'. Most designers go with what everybody else uses because it's known to work - even when it works poorly compared to the latest technology. But in some ways that's what makes it 'best'.

Quote:

Religion is the same thing, whether it's coming from a flying pink unicorn or a computer/software. It's dangerous. And making damages. As we can see...

One of the defining properties of a religion is that it has codified behaviors and practices which its members follow. In this way it is similar to a computer OS. To a large extent what makes a religion successful is having a system that works for the benefit of the faithful, even if its core beliefs are pure fantasy. A successful religion is also in tune with its member's desires, modifying itself and adding 'features' as required to keep the faithful in the fold. Because religions, like OS's, thrive on popularity.

An OS is 'good' if it can do the things users want it to do - run programs, organize files, interact with other systems, support development of new programs to satisfy the user's desires. But much of that can only be achieved if the OS is popular. Therefore a technically 'better' OS will lose out to one which more people have and are familiar with - just like a religion.

A few religions have grown in popularity to the point where millions believe their dogma without question, rigidly following their rituals and laws - which even non-members may have to abide by. But sometimes they splinter into sects due to differences of opinion that cause incompatibilities, perhaps even going to war over trifling matters. Others happily allow groups to form with different interpretations and practices so long as they agree on the basics. Religions are generally passed down through generations, so people 'believe' in the religion they were brought up in - until perhaps they find it isn't working for them.

In the same way, the major OS's grew in popularity to point where they became religions - forcing users to conform to their dogma. This is largely a good thing because users get the familiarity, functionality and interoperability that they need, and developers produce software for that OS because it is popular. But the 'priests' who are making a living out of commercial OS's are always looking for ways to make more money. Like churches, some expect their users to tithe regularly by buying upgrades or subscriptions.

While the vast majority stick with the 'religion' provided with the machines they buy, a few jump ship to another platform because it better suits their needs or temperament. Some cannot give up the gods of their youth, even though those are thought to be dead today. Some 'pagan' OS's have even seen a resurgence of interest among young people who never knew them, despite being considered heresies that are worthless or even dangerously wrong. In most cases the appeal of these 'pagan' OS's is not that they are 'better', but that they are from a simpler time when gods were less sophisticated and more fun.

So yes, in many ways an OS is a 'religion' - and this not necessarily a bad thing. So long as people get some satisfaction from it and aren't hurting anyone, why not let them have their religious freedom? religious wars have caused untold suffering and death when different cults vehemently disagreed over what was 'best'. let's not start any flame wars over why people should be using one OS or another, and realize that what a person feels about an OS is just as valid as its technical qualities. If they like it that's enough reason to use it, and they should not be disparaged for having an opinion on what they like.

Last edited by bhabbott on 22-May-2022 at 06:40 AM.
Last edited by bhabbott on 22-May-2022 at 06:38 AM.

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: The Amiga o.s. is a VERY fragile and INSECURE o.s. due to its intrinsic nature (AKA many bad design decisions).

While I agree that Amiga OS is fragile and insecure compered to a 'modern' OS, I wouldn't accuse its developers of making 'many bad design decisions'. The Amiga, like all 'home' computers of the time, did not have the hardware required to implement modern protection and security features. I those days it wasn't considered necessary, and in truth it wasn't. The OS was protected by means of being in ROM, so it couldn't be corrupted. Software was expected to play nice and not have bugs that trashed memory, or simply took over the entire machine and 'owned' everything. This was all standard practice in those days. Users were aware that memory corruption could occur, and that you should save your work regularly in case the computer crashed. They also knew that a quick reboot restored everything, and if you kept system disks write-protected no harm would be done.

That was the way things were back then. There was no Internet, no online banking and no cybercriminals trying to steal your identity. Computer viruses hadn't been invented, apps didn't come with 'convenient' scripting languages that had access to the OS, and the OS didn't come with various back doors and spyware enabled by default. In that environment, who can blame them for not building 'security' into the OS?

In hindsight we might say that this or that could have been done differently, but it doesn't mean the decisions made at the time were 'bad'. They were rational and reasonable for the situation.

The Amiga didn't have memory protection because it wasn't built into the hardware. That was a hardware design decision which was also reasonable at the time. No MMU was available for the 68000 and even if there was it would have been too expensive and not necessary anyway. Of course this means that the OS created to control that hardware wasn't designed to have memory protection, same as other home computer OS's of the time. Yes, it means that Amiga OS becomes 'very fragile and insecure' when ported to modern hardware and used in situations where security is needed. But it doesn't mean the decisions made at the time or the hardware it was made for were 'bad'.

In a hundred years time computer historians will look at OS developments to date and conclude that yes, they were 'very fragile and insecure' due to bad design decisions - but they won't be looking at the Amiga. the number of vulnerabilities caused by prioritizing convenience over security in Windows is staggering, and the fragility of its complex disk-based OS is appalling. Even Linux has its issues.

Quote:

In an interview with German newspaper Zeit Online in November 2011, Linus Torvalds stated that Linux has become "too complex" and he was concerned that developers would not be able to find their way through the software anymore. He complained that even subsystems have become very complex and he told the publication that he is "afraid of the day" when there will be an error that "cannot be evaluated anymore." Andrew Morton, one of Linux kernel lead developers, explains that many bugs identified in Linux are never fixed... Theo de Raadt, founder of OpenBSD, compares OpenBSD development process to Linux: "Linux has never been about quality. There are so many parts of the system that are just these cheap little hacks, and it happens to run.”

@bhabbott

Quote:

bhabbott wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: The Amiga o.s. is a VERY fragile and INSECURE o.s. due to its intrinsic nature (AKA many bad design decisions). While I agree that Amiga OS is fragile and insecure compered to a 'modern' OS, I wouldn't accuse its developers of making 'many bad design decisions'. The Amiga, like all 'home' computers of the time, did not have the hardware required to implement modern protection and security features. I those days it wasn't considered necessary, and in truth it wasn't. The OS was protected by means of being in ROM, so it couldn't be corrupted.

This isn't a protection, rather a side-effect of having the need to instantly turn on the system.
Quote:

Software was expected to play nice and not have bugs that trashed memory,

This is practically impossible to be achieved, even with modern o.ses and applications.
Quote:

or simply took over the entire machine and 'owned' everything. This was all standard practice in those days. Users were aware that memory corruption could occur, and that you should save your work regularly in case the computer crashed. They also knew that a quick reboot restored everything, and if you kept system disks write-protected no harm would be done. That was the way things were back then. There was no Internet, no online banking and no cybercriminals trying to steal your identity. Computer viruses hadn't been invented,

Those were already there / available.
Quote:

apps didn't come with 'convenient' scripting languages that had access to the OS, and the OS didn't come with various back doors and spyware enabled by default. In that environment, who can blame them for not building 'security' into the OS? In hindsight we might say that this or that could have been done differently, but it doesn't mean the decisions made at the time were 'bad'. They were rational and reasonable for the situation.

Absolutely no. There were already other o.ses, even much older than the Amiga one, which offered proper abstractions with their API and which have NOT published / allowed to access their internal data structures.

This is the reasoning for my previous statement.
Quote:

The Amiga didn't have memory protection because it wasn't built into the hardware. That was a hardware design decision which was also reasonable at the time. No MMU was available for the 68000 and even if there was it would have been too expensive and not necessary anyway.

It would have been impossible anyway, because the Amiga o.s. was based on message-passing by sharing memory between all tasks (included its own).

And this is another bad design decision.
Quote:

Of course this means that the OS created to control that hardware wasn't designed to have memory protection, same as other home computer OS's of the time. Yes, it means that Amiga OS becomes 'very fragile and insecure' when ported to modern hardware and used in situations where security is needed. But it doesn't mean the decisions made at the time or the hardware it was made for were 'bad'.

Allowing applications to control the hardware (and the multitasking) is another bad design decision.

As I've already said, there were already other o.ses, some which had multitasking, which didn't allowed both things.
Quote:

In a hundred years time computer historians will look at OS developments to date and conclude that yes, they were 'very fragile and insecure' due to bad design decisions - but they won't be looking at the Amiga. the number of vulnerabilities caused by prioritizing convenience over security in Windows is staggering, and the fragility of its complex disk-based OS is appalling. Even Linux has its issues. Quote: In an interview with German newspaper Zeit Online in November 2011, Linus Torvalds stated that Linux has become "too complex" and he was concerned that developers would not be able to find their way through the software anymore. He complained that even subsystems have become very complex and he told the publication that he is "afraid of the day" when there will be an error that "cannot be evaluated anymore." Andrew Morton, one of Linux kernel lead developers, explains that many bugs identified in Linux are never fixed... Theo de Raadt, founder of OpenBSD, compares OpenBSD development process to Linux: "Linux has never been about quality. There are so many parts of the system that are just these cheap little hacks, and it happens to run.”

True, but with the Amiga o.s. it's even worse: it has 100% open doors for vulnerabilities. In fact, malware software doesn't need to use any security hole to make damages: it can already and immediately do whatever it wants.

@cdimauro

Security and Amiga in the same breath are meaningless. In some ways we are lucky that it didn't become the leading platform because if it had, malware would be total.

On the upside, that total lack of security meant we had very fast and efficient IPC mechanisms. AmigaOS was perfect for hackers. By which I mean anyone wanting to do whatever they want with the machine that they owned.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@bhabbott

To be fair, Theo de Raadt has something negative to say about most things. He's a smart guy, but his opinions are hardly definitive.

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

@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote: @cdimauro Security and Amiga in the same breath are meaningless. In some ways we are lucky that it didn't become the leading platform because if it had, malware would be total. On the upside, that total lack of security meant we had very fast and efficient IPC mechanisms. AmigaOS was perfect for hackers. By which I mean anyone wanting to do whatever they want with the machine that they owned.

Exactly. If you remove a lot of stuff, then of course you're so lightweight and fast. But... insecure. Completely insecure in the Amiga o.s. case...

@bison

Quote:

bison wrote: @bhabbott To be fair, Theo de Raadt has something negative to say about most things. He's a smart guy, but his opinions are hardly definitive.

Linus Torvalds is much worse...

@cdimauro

And for what it's worth, I appreciate the minimalism and why I don't really buy into the idea of "modernising" it. You want modern, then the AxRuntime is probably the best you are going to get. Recompiled binaries on Linux.

Any attempt at a modern AmigaOS iteration has the best part of 30 years to catch up on and would still need some sort of internally unprotected sandbox to run legacy applications in. It's just not a realistic prospect, IMO.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...