@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: cdimauro Quote: OK, I see what do you mean now. I believe that it's the second, because the displayed characters (especially) and graphics doesn't look in high resolution. Yes, it's a very bad advertising because the system is clearly very slow. Performance is somewhat relative. The 68000 Amiga seems slow to most Amiga users today. In 1985, the 68000 Amiga was amazing though.

And that's exactly the point, since here we're talking about the systems of that timeline.


@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

WolfToTheMoon wrote: @matthey Quote: CBM was targeting low priced UNIX servers and workstations. NeXT was higher end. Yes, but we're comparing apples and oranges here.... C900 is a 1985 machine. NeXT was out in 1988. By 1988, C900 would have been cost reduced and a possible C9000, with the Z80000 introduced, which could have been powerful enough and cheap enough(plus, there's 3 years of software base on the C900) to make the NeXt computer uncompetitive on the market.

But they same is with you: you're comparing apples and oranges.

The first model should have been the C900, which used the Z8000, which wasn't a good choice due to its 16 bit architecture and memory segmentation.

You can't talk about a possible FUTURE evolution using the Z80000, because the first model (the C900) already started with the wrong foot. If you don't start right, then how can you think that a completely new platform could have been made?

Also because writing 32 bit code for the Z80000 is very different from writing 16-bit code for the Z8000. If you have used the assembly language, then you've to rewrite your stuff, for example, because the two architecture are different (like when the PCs moved from 8086/80286 to the 80386).
Quote:

Quote: The Amiga 3000UX with 68030@25MHz started at $4999 and it did not include the A2410 graphics card for color or an Ethernet card. The value was ruined by needing an expensive graphics card because the Amiga chipset was not capable enough after failing to upgrade it adequately. which is already solved on the C900(high res graphics card).

Which was only monochrome...
Quote:

And I feel that if Commodore is producing the Z80000 inhouse, they'll get a better price than 68030 from Motorola.

Probably, but first was the Z8000 and not the Z80000, and see above for this.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Also because writing 32 bit code for the Z80000 is very different from writing 16-bit code for the Z8000. If you have used the assembly language, then you've to rewrite your stuff, for example, because the two architecture are different (like when the PCs moved from 8086/80286 to the 80386).

That's assuming people would be writing a ton of programs in assembly in UNIX. I don't buy it.

Quote:

Probably, but first was the Z8000 and not the Z80000, and see above for this.

I know. But despite some of it's shortcomings, it's still a very viable CPU in 1985(when the best selling home computer is still the 8 bit C64 and Apple II)... slightly slower than 68000 clock-per-clock, but MUCH smaller in execution(17500 vs 68000 transistors). If C= is manufacturing this CPU inhouse, it's a winner for them.

_________________

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

WolfToTheMoon wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Also because writing 32 bit code for the Z80000 is very different from writing 16-bit code for the Z8000. If you have used the assembly language, then you've to rewrite your stuff, for example, because the two architecture are different (like when the PCs moved from 8086/80286 to the 80386). That's assuming people would be writing a ton of programs in assembly in UNIX. I don't buy it.

Me neither, because that wasn't what I've stated.

The point is that at the time assembly was easily used to speed up the performance, so if you start using it and then you move to another architecture, you need to rewrite such code.
Quote:

Quote: Probably, but first was the Z8000 and not the Z80000, and see above for this. I know. But despite some of it's shortcomings, it's still a very viable CPU in 1985(when the best selling home computer is still the 8 bit C64 and Apple II)... slightly slower than 68000 clock-per-clock, but MUCH smaller in execution(17500 vs 68000 transistors). If C= is manufacturing this CPU inhouse, it's a winner for them.

It depends on the target market: I doubt that a Unix workstation of the time was inclined to use a 16-bit platform, which is too limited.

@cdimauro

Quote:

It depends on the target market: I doubt that a Unix workstation of the time was inclined to use a 16-bit platform, which is too limited.

In 1985, it wouldn't be limiting, not for it's target price - I've already compared it to PC AT systems of the time.

Olivetti introduced a Z8000 based system in 1982 which had less RAM, smaller disc, lower resolution display and no UNIX compatibility, compared to C900. The Olivetti was also more expensive. It sold around 50 000 units first year of introduction - don't think the A1000 did a lot better when it was introduced.

_________________

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

WolfToTheMoon wrote: @cdimauro Quote: It depends on the target market: I doubt that a Unix workstation of the time was inclined to use a 16-bit platform, which is too limited. In 1985, it wouldn't be limiting, not for it's target price - I've already compared it to PC AT systems of the time.

16-bit for a Unix platform IS limiting.

You can't really propose a 16-bit system for such market on '85, when 32-bit systems were already available on the 70s for such high-end markets, and greatly consolidated at the beginning of '80s.
Quote:

Olivetti introduced a Z8000 based system in 1982 which had less RAM, smaller disc, lower resolution display and no UNIX compatibility, compared to C900. The Olivetti was also more expensive. It sold around 50 000 units first year of introduction - don't think the A1000 did a lot better when it was introduced.

In fact, the Olivetti M20 ran a custom OS which looks derived from CP/M.

However, it looks like that a system running Unix was produced in 1982-1983: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zilog_Z8000#Z8000_CPU_based_systems
1982-1983: C5002A, C8002A and Sundance-16 from Onyx Systems used the Z8001 and ran Unix System III.

Just ONE system.

In fact:

Despite a somewhat positive reception as "a reasonably fast supermicro with generally good performance for the price", the 16-bit architectural limitations of the Z8000, with segment handling required to access more than 64 KB in a process, led to questions about the longevity of the Series 8000 products as 32-bit processor architectures from Motorola and National Semiconductor became more widely adopted.

and the solution for Zilog was:

Zilog Systems eventually adopted AT&T's 32-bit WE32100 processor, introducing it in a new product, the System 8000/32, alongside 32-bit upgrades to its existing System 8000 Series 2 models. This enabled the introduction of Unix System V on Zilog Systems' products.

adopting a 32-bit processor from AT&T.

I think that it speaks for itself...

Yes, the M20 could have sold more than the Amiga 1000, but that's not the point: a 16-bit system at the beginning of the '80s is the last flicker of life for Unixes.

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

That's assuming people would be writing a ton of programs in assembly in UNIX. I don't buy it.

68K Amix is based on Coherent source code and it was extensively forked to support A2000/3000's SCSI, NIC, network stack, and X-Windows.

C900's Coherent is barebones. Coherent introduced their X-Windows in 1992.

1988's NextSTEP 0.8 is in an advanced state as seen from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=410jnjUFtbM NextSTEP 0.8 demo.

NextSTEP 0.8's GUI widow design feels like Windows 95.

Running Coherent 3.0, 4.0, and 4.2. on PCem. https://comp.os.coherent.narkive.com/jrsQnqiI/running-coherent-on-pcem

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbrclByIpSo
Bellcore MGR running on Coherent before X11.

Comparing some basic Coherent 0.7 to Steve Job's NextSTEP 0.8 is unwise.

Many classic Unix solutions don't reach NextSTEP's craftsmanship.

Last edited by Hammer on 26-Aug-2024 at 07:35 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 26-Aug-2024 at 07:22 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 26-Aug-2024 at 06:59 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 26-Aug-2024 at 06:48 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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

WolfToTheMoon wrote: @cdimauro Quote: It depends on the target market: I doubt that a Unix workstation of the time was inclined to use a 16-bit platform, which is too limited. In 1985, it wouldn't be limiting, not for it's target price - I've already compared it to PC AT systems of the time. Olivetti introduced a Z8000 based system in 1982 which had less RAM, smaller disc, lower resolution display and no UNIX compatibility, compared to C900. The Olivetti was also more expensive. It sold around 50 000 units first year of introduction - don't think the A1000 did a lot better when it was introduced.

Can I run "Lotus 123 for Unix" on Commodore's AMIX?

https://www.techmonitor.ai/hardware/lotus_unveils_its_long_promised_1_2_3_for_sun_spreadsheet
"Lotus 123 for SUN" and it's available for SunOS's SPARC, M68K, and i386. Where's Z8000?

Quote:

Lotus Development Corp released its long-awaited Unix version of Lotus 1-2-3 Release 3 yesterday with development and marketing partner Sun Microsystems (CI No 1,223). 1-2-3 for Sun comes in versions optimised for Sun’s Sparc, Motorola and 386i stations; in beta test in the US, it is planned for second quarter ships. The Sun versions use the core 1-2-3 v3 code, re-written in C prior to its launch last year, and therefore fully compatible with MS-DOS versions, using the same interface. Sun helped Lotus with additional features such as distributed network services, multiple window support, multi-tasking and support for larger memory. Sun users will be able to view up to 26 spreadsheets on a single screen with the SunView windowing system. The partners see sales both from scientific and engineering users wanting access to spreadsheets (25% of Lotus’ sales are already to this sector), and commercial users moving up to workstations or adding a Sun server to MS-DOS nets. UK pricing is UKP550 for a standard edition, UKP750 for a server, UKP395 for a Node edition (for individual networked users). Lotus plans Unix editions for IBM and DEC hardware, and for other Sparc machines such as ICL’s Unicorn, due out today. It is also working on DEC VMS and IBM 3090 versions. It first talked of a 1-2-3 for Unix back in 1987

1. Fragmented Unix distro despite "Unix compatibility" cool aid.

This is like Final Writer 7.1 AROS (for different ApolloOS 68K, AROS X86-64, AROS X86 ABi V0 versions) not working on genuine AmigaOS 3.x.

AROS has ELF.

2. "Unix compatibility" doesn't abstract CPU differences.

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 08:45 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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

WolfToTheMoon wrote: Olivetti introduced a Z8000 based system in 1982

1982 so back when IBM was selling the OG PC (the XT came in 83) with 16-256k.

You know back before "IBM compatible" became a thing.

Back when plenty of CP/M based stuff could been seen in office along with Apple2 and even some PET.


Change the date to 85 and all that is gone.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: 68K Amix is based on Coherent source code

Nöpe.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Quote:

Nöpe.

Yep. Hint: Read the "Commodore - The Final Years" book.

Quote:

Unix Resurrection (skip) In September 1986, Bucas hired two of the lead programmers of Coherent Unix, Johann George and Randall Howard. “I started working on getting Unix running on the Amiga. And that's when Johann George joined that effort,� says Welland. (skip) With Gerard Bucas in charge of Commodore’s engineering group, including Germany, he was in a prime position to support Unix. (skip) Welland recruited a former C900 software developer to the cause as well. “I was designing memory management units for that effort,� says Welland. “One of the guys who had worked on the C900, Rico Tudor (who I had worked with at [Coherent publisher] Mark Williams) and I started trying to get Unix running on the Amiga. We made a series of memory management units, the first one being an exclusive-or gate (XOR). The first version of it was literally a single gate. It was the world’s simplest memory management unit for the Amiga. We actually got Unix running in that situation. and then I did a prototype segmenting MMU for it and he got Unix running really very fast on that. And this was Rico Tudor's brilliance actually.� When Tudor and Welland completed their demo version of Unix in the middle of March, 1987, Gerard Bucas was keen to produce an A500 MMU card. But it was not to be. “The only problem was that if you wanted to context switch between two user processes, you had to actually physically copy the user process to the bottom of memory and copy the one that was running up to somewhere else,� (skip) The team continued developing a better MMU. “There was a sequence of those designs that were trying to lead up to making a Unix machine out of the Amiga hardware,� says Welland. “And I made a segmenting memory management unit, something very similar to what the PDP-11 would do. At the same time we were doing an MMU cache chip that Commodore was going to make.� Commodore’s engineers were impressed with Welland’s work. “Bob Welland was designing stuff that was actually very sophisticated,� recalls Dave Haynie. “He was trying to get Commodore to leapfrog some of the problems we had with Motorola. They may have actually done a prototype of it, but that was one of the things that was never finished.� Eventually, Welland began looking at building a Unix machine from the recently completed A2000-CR/B2000, a cost-reduced Amiga with a Motorola processor and expansion ports, created by Dave Haynie. (skip) Amiga Networking Work Group (skip) Amix, which was built upon the Coherent operating system, had no network stack. It was up to Johann George and his group of programmers to implement one. (skip)

You're not going to win.

-------------

A500 with 68000, AMIX, and custom MMU with cache goals didn't continue.

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 02:59 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 02:50 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 02:49 PM.

_________________
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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Hammer

So not "Amix" the actual released OS based on System V UNIX, but some inhouse project that never got anywhere before getting axed that may have used the same name.

BOOOOOHUUUU

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @Hammer So not "Amix" the actual released OS based on System V UNIX, but some inhouse project that never got anywhere before getting axed that may have used the same name. BOOOOOHUUUU

Wrong.

A company can't use the "UNIX"(TM) name without a license. Commodore created AMIX to be AT&T UNIX license legal i.e. no dispute with its legal status.

Coherent was missing X-Windows until the 1992 release of Coherent 4.0.

AMIX fork has Dale Luck's X-Windows port before Coherent!

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:09 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:05 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:03 PM.

_________________
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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: A company can't use the "UNIX"(TM) name without a license.

And how is that related to the price of fish?

The Amix that shipped with the A3000UX was licensed.

Coherent was not licensed, and was a "clean room" rewrite of UNIX (or at least no one ever looked close enough to prove otherwise).

It never ran on anything Amiga (outside that doomed in house project and even here "ran" might be a bit of a stretch).

In the end just another middle manager colluding with engineers to waste resources that C= needed elsewhere....

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

The final releases of Coherent also fully supported the iBCS COFF binary standard, which allowed binary compatibility with SCO Unix applications, including WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, and several Microsoft applications including QuickBASIC, Microsoft Word, and MultiPlan. The last 386 versions supported virtual memory, but not demand paging.

TOO LATE! There's a lot of missing modern Unix middleware with Coherent.

Early 1990s reviews of Coherent pointed out that the system was much smaller than other contemporary Unix offerings, as well as less expensive at US$99.95, but lacking in functionality[7] and software support.

PC Magazine called Coherent 3.0 a "time capsule" that captured the state of Unix in the late 1970s, without support for mice, LANs or SCSI disks, good for learning basic Unix programming but not for business automation.

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:19 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:17 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:15 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:13 PM.

_________________
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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Hammer

So?


The fish is 3.99€ btw.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Note why SteamOS 3 doesn't use the "Windows" name despite it targeting modern Windows APIs. A proper corporation like Valve doesn't fck around with somebody else's trademark.

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:30 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:28 PM.

_________________
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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Hammer

Again, so what?

What is the relevance to Amix (the real one) or Amix (that vaporware Coherent port)?

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @Hammer So? The fish is 3.99€ btw.

After Commodore's Unix group's patched Coherent's missing parts, AMIX's 1991 release was compliant for "AT&T Unix System V Release 4 operating system" released in 1988.


From Commodore - The Final Years book with timeline context,
Quote:

Amiga Networking Work Group The other part of Commodore’s Unix plan revolved around networking abilities under Amix. In mid-1988, Commodore engineer Ian Kirschmann was finishing off a network adapter for the A500 called the A560, along with a card called the A2060 for the Zorro II port. Jeff Porter had decided to embrace the ARCNET communications protocol over Ethernet, due to the lower cost of ARCNET. In fact, the entire bill of materials for the cards came to only $42, meaning they could sell the cards quite profitably in the $100 or higher range. By mid-1989, the cards were still evolving with each new board revision. At the same time, a junior engineer named Joe Augenbraun finished off the A590 and A2091 hard drive controllers and was in need of a new project, so Jeff Porter handed him the network cards to finish off. They devised a schedule whereby Commodore would produce and ship 5000 units of the A560 by October 30, 1989. As things turned out, the A560 would finally go into production in early 1991. That was just the way things seemed to work at Commodore. Amix, which was built upon the Coherent operating system, had no network stack. It was up to Johann George and his group of programmers to implement one. Meanwhile, Andy Finkel and his group would implement a TCP/IP stack to use with AmigaOS, although little more than a network adapter driver came from that effort. The most coherent effort began with Dale Luck himself, who established the Amiga Networking Work Group at the June 1989 Amiga Developer’s Conference in San Francisco. His goal for the group was to make the Amiga a fully functioning partner in a network that included Macintosh, PC, and Unix machines. This included file servers, shared printers, and even an email client.

Copy and paste in full sections from Commodore - The Final Years.

By mid-1991, Commodore's Unix group was fired except for a single support personnel.

A560 network add-on is also canceled i.e. A300's PCMCIA add-ons.


Wiki's "Commodore's Unix was one of the first ports of SVR4 to the 68k architecture" is not true.

https://amigaunix.com/lib/exe/fetch.php/a3000ux_born_to_run_unix_svr4.pdf
"And we're talking about ABI-compliant industry-standard UNTX SVR4".

Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 04:37 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 04:29 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 04:22 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 04:15 PM.
Last edited by Hammer on 29-Aug-2024 at 03:58 PM.

_________________
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 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Hammer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Unix

No mention of it being based on Coherent (and neither in the brochure you linked).

Which is no surprise as it would have made 0 sense from a technical point.


Hence why I don't care about these "I did such great things while failing to achieve anything" books.....

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Hammer

What is this “X-Windows� you speak of?

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC