@cdimauro

Quote:

IF you stated something AND I say that I've written an article which covers it, what's not clear to you that I gave my answer/reply on that? Do you understand it?!?

You are participating in this forum, hence it's your responsibility to present your arguments in this forum. The world DOES NOT revolve around your website.

Copy and paste is not hard.

Quote:

Fact: this is YOUR statement which you NEVER PROVED! Bot!

It's PROVEN by multiple game results from A500 vs Atari ST, and A500 vs Spectrum QL comparisons. Games include visuals and sound.

Hint: 68000's soft blit performance is inferior to Amiga's hardware blitter.

I already posted A1200's gimped 68EC020-14 soft blit performance being about 49 percent of Alice's 1985-era Blitter performance in this forum.

CP System 1 has a 68000 CPU with an entirely different 2D performance class from the western 68000 home micros.

CP System 1's 33 games include Street Fighter II: The World Warrior, Street Fighter II: Champion Edition, and Street Fighter II: Hyper Fighting. The value added from CP System 1 is the two "CPS Super Chip" tile-based 2D co-processors.

68000 software-rendered version will not be able to match CP System 1's custom chips.

Sharp X68000 is Street Fighter II arcade-quality capable.

You're blind.

Many game consoles in the 1990s removed Motorola as their CPU partner. Commodore's Amiga Hombre's CPU selection switches away from Motorola.


Quote:

Again the childish "Specchio riflesso"

Your Italian job means little to me. Hint: the imperialist Roman Empire is dead, get over it.

The Cold War's "zero-sum" is real.

Quote:

Where? In your parallel universe? I've already replied on that,

You posted "this is YOUR statement which you NEVER PROVED".

Fact: 68000 alone is not enough for a strong multimedia machine. I don't need to prove the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Quote:

as it was reported on my article as well.

Again, you are participating in this forum, hence it's your responsibility to present your arguments in THIS forum. The world DOES NOT revolve around your "Italian job" website.

Copy and paste is not hard.

Quote:

Guess what: it has the same processor or the Amiga.

So what. You can take 68000 DIP from the Mac and transfer to A500, and it works like Commodore's supplied 68000.

Commodore's supplied 68000 can be Motorola's or a license clone.

Sharp X68000's "value add" is its strong 2D custom chipset i.e. Sharp-Hudson custom graphics chipset.

Quote:

How, could you please tell me which processor should have been picked since the 68000 sucked so much at multimedia?

68000 sucked at multimedia, hence the Amiga's fatter custom chipset value adds when compared to Atari ST's and Spectrum QL's.

If 68000 has strong multimedia capabilities for A500's memory bandwidth, you wouldn't need Amiga's custom chipset level.

Amiga's custom chipset "value add" is diminished when CPUFastBilt patches are faster than Amiga's blitter.

Not factoring APUs with fused CPUs and GPUs, a fast custom chipset would need a CPU to host the OS and fulfill the command role.

In the early 1980s, 68000 was a low-cost option for a linear memory model CPU until the competition offered superior products. Motorola wasn't able to repeat 68000's success.

SNES didn't use a 68K CPU and has superior graphics when compared to the western 68000 competition.

SNES has 60 million installs base to prove it which is far above Mega Drive's 30 million install base. SNES's 65K CPU has a memory-segmented model.

SNES can solo fight against the entire 68K gaming install base and still win.


Quote:

Hint: PiStorm wasn't an option on the first half of the 80's...

I wasn't comparing PiStorm with 68000. My argument is Amiga chipset's value adds on top of plain Jane 68000..

PiStorm is just an adapter board for RPi SBC which hosts the CPU translator software.

Quote:

It's obviously false, what do you expect?!? It's hyperbole. Do you know its meaning and why it's used on a discussion?

I know hyperbole's meaning. The false statement is still false i.e. bullshit.

Last edited by Hammer on 18-Jul-2024 at 07:58 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 18-Jul-2024 at 07:35 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 18-Jul-2024 at 07:08 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 18-Jul-2024 at 07:01 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

@cdimauro

Why? Some customers are perfectly happy using ApolloOS. Why give them an extra expense that they might not want? They are free to buy and install any version of AmigaOS that they like. Maximum flexibility for customers.

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

Quote:

AROS has been around for a long time though... It seems the only open source projects the community has some fondness are hardware related https://youtu.be/kv4aIT50zZw

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZvdcHXi-k2g

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: @cdimauro Why? Some customers are perfectly happy using ApolloOS. Why give them an extra expense that they might not want? They are free to buy and install any version of AmigaOS that they like. Maximum flexibility for customers.

Nothing to say about that, however wasn't the discussion about the Amiga definition?

No Amiga o.s. (built-in) -> no Amiga. It's simple.

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @cdimauro Quote: IF you stated something AND I say that I've written an article which covers it, what's not clear to you that I gave my answer/reply on that? Do you understand it?!? You are participating in this forum, hence it's your responsibility to present your arguments in this forum. The world DOES NOT revolve around your website.

Then be coherent: don't go around and post links coming from outside this site.

To me it's very simple: as long as I provide a link which proves something, then it's done. You don't open it: np -> it's YOUR problem, because YOU decided to don't do it SELECTIVELY, because you're biased against me, whereas when it's something about you then you post alien links and people should... read them, right?
Quote:

Copy and paste is not hard.

For a bot? I fully agree...
Quote:

Fact: this is YOUR statement which you NEVER PROVED! Bot!

It's PROVEN by multiple game results from A500 vs Atari ST, and A500 vs Spectrum QL comparisons. Games include visuals and sound. [/quote]
This doesn't apply to your PRECISE sentence, which I report again for YOUR convenience:

Fact: Amiga's custom chipset is a patch for multimedia incompetent and weak IPC 68000.

And you still have to PROVE it.
Quote:

Hint: 68000's soft blit performance is inferior to Amiga's hardware blitter.

Messier De La Palice is back in action...
Quote:

I already posted A1200's gimped 68EC020-14 soft blit performance being about 49 percent of Alice's 1985-era Blitter performance in this forum.

The bot in action: comparing technologies which have 7 (SEVEN) years of difference.

Only the official Amiga forums bot make it possible...
Quote:

CP System 1 has a 68000 CPU with an entirely different 2D performance class from the western 68000 home micros. CP System 1's 33 games include Street Fighter II: The World Warrior, Street Fighter II: Champion Edition, and Street Fighter II: Hyper Fighting. The value added from CP System 1 is the two "CPS Super Chip" tile-based 2D co-processors.

Yes, sure: I've played those games on 1985... On 1985... on 1985... on 1985...

Sorry, I got botlobotomized...
Quote:

68000 software-rendered version will not be able to match CP System 1's custom chips.

Yes, I recall it on 1985... on 1985... on 1985...
Quote:

Sharp X68000 is Street Fighter II arcade-quality capable.

Yes, I recall it on 1985... on 1985... on 1985...

An yes, I've played Street Fighter II as well on 1985 on 1985... on 1985...
Quote:

You're blind.

Sure. See above...
Quote:

Many game consoles in the 1990s removed Motorola as their CPU partner.

WoW. Mr. Incredible...
Quote:

Commodore's Amiga Hombre's CPU selection switches away from Motorola.

RI-WoW... Mr. Unbelievable.

Really? Seriously?
Quote:

Quote: Again the childish "Specchio riflesso" Your Italian job means little to me.

Of course: because bot do NOT understand things, even when someone has explained them.
Quote:

Hint: the imperialist Roman Empire is dead, get over it.

The bot started repeating again the same things...
Quote:

The Cold War's "zero-sum" is real.

And adding more stuff. Precisely like the description of bots that I've reported...
Quote:

Quote: Where? In your parallel universe? I've already replied on that, You posted "this is YOUR statement which you NEVER PROVED". Fact: 68000 alone is not enough for a strong multimedia machine.

What a news... but that's different compared to your previous sentence.

Do you recognize it? Or it's because bots don't understand the semantic differences of such expressions?
Quote:

I don't need to prove the Earth revolves around the Sun.

You aren't capable to prove a simple sentence that YOU've written..
Quote:

Quote: as it was reported on my article as well. Again, you are participating in this forum, hence it's your responsibility to present your arguments in THIS forum. The world DOES NOT revolve around your "Italian job" website. Copy and paste is not hard.

The bot in action: repeating again the same things...
Quote:

Quote: Guess what: it has the same processor or the Amiga. So what. You can take 68000 DIP from the Mac and transfer to A500, and it works like Commodore's supplied 68000. Commodore's supplied 68000 can be Motorola's or a license clone.

Sure, and? It was know AND stated on this forum...
Quote:

Sharp X68000's "value add" is its strong 2D custom chipset i.e. Sharp-Hudson custom graphics chipset.

Really?
Quote:

Quote: How, could you please tell me which processor should have been picked since the 68000 sucked so much at multimedia? 68000 sucked at multimedia,

Again: could you please tell me which processors was better when the Amiga was designed?
Quote:

hence the Amiga's fatter custom chipset value adds when compared to Atari ST's and Spectrum QL's.

Amiga would have that chipset despite of the processor which would have used.

Do you get it now?

Do you know the story of this machine? How it was conceived and developed? I don't think so...
Quote:

If 68000 has strong multimedia capabilities for A500's memory bandwidth, you wouldn't need Amiga's custom chipset level.

See above.
Quote:

Amiga's custom chipset "value add" is diminished when CPUFastBilt patches are faster than Amiga's blitter.

Do it on an Amiga 1000 and then tell me...
Quote:

Not factoring APUs with fused CPUs and GPUs, a fast custom chipset would need a CPU to host the OS and fulfill the command role.

On 1985 on 1985... on 1985...
Quote:

In the early 1980s, 68000 was a low-cost option for a linear memory model CPU until the competition offered superior products.

Right. And it was on 1985. There's no UNTIL that applies here. Even because the project started 3 years before.
Quote:

Motorola wasn't able to repeat 68000's success.

Guess what: it moved to PowerPCs...
Quote:

SNES didn't use a 68K CPU and has superior graphics when compared to the western 68000 competition.

On 1985 on 1985... on 1985...
Quote:

SNES has 60 million installs base to prove it which is far above Mega Drive's 30 million install base. SNES's 65K CPU has a memory-segmented model.

On 1985 on 1985... on 1985...
Quote:

SNES can solo fight against the entire 68K gaming install base and still win.

On 1985 on 1985... on 1985...
Quote:

Quote: Hint: PiStorm wasn't an option on the first half of the 80's... I wasn't comparing PiStorm with 68000.

Really?
Quote:

My argument is Amiga chipset's value adds on top of plain Jane 68000..

Which I've already stated several times and on my article as well.

BTW, the new ones gives more details to people which don't know how the Amiga was developed and how it works.
Quote:

PiStorm is just an adapter board for RPi SBC which hosts the CPU translator software.

Really?
Quote:

Quote: It's obviously false, what do you expect?!? It's hyperbole. Do you know its meaning and why it's used on a discussion? I know hyperbole's meaning. The false statement is still false i.e. bullshit.

ROFL

Bot do NOT understand...

@cdimauro

Amiga operating systems refer to any operating system that works directly on Amiga hardware. There are several to chose from.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @cdimauro Amiga operating systems refer to any operating system that works directly on Amiga hardware. There are several to chose from.

The Amiga definition only talks about the Amiga o.s. (bundled with the machine) and nothing else.

@cdimauro

I’ve purchase Amigas before and they did not come with AmigaOS because they were used and the seller lost the disks. By your definition are these classic machines not Amigas too?

Last edited by DiscreetFX on 20-Jul-2024 at 11:39 PM.
Last edited by DiscreetFX on 20-Jul-2024 at 11:38 PM.

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

@DiscreetFX

Well, a significant proportion of Amiga OS was still in there, unless the ROMs had been removed also (or it relied on a kickstart disc)... :popcorn:

Last edited by Karlos on 21-Jul-2024 at 02:10 AM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: @cdimauro I’ve purchase Amigas before and they did not come with AmigaOS because they were used and the seller lost the disks. By your definition are these classic machines not Amigas too?

First of all, you're still entitled to a license of the OS which comes with the machine. So, you can legally make a copy of the missing disks (friends, ... someone who owns the same disks...).

Second, from the Amiga Hardware Manual:

These are the hardware components of the Amiga:
[...]
512K of system ROM containing a real time, multitasking operating system with sound, graphics, and animation support routines. (V1.3 and earlier versions of the OS used 256K of system ROM.)

Which is enough to boot the system, and launch any software which is found on a disk (if you've inserted the floppy, of course).


@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote: @DiscreetFX Well, a significant proportion of Amiga OS was still in there,

Yes, but see above.
Quote:

unless the ROMs had been removed also

In this case that's not an Amiga anymore, because ROMs are part of the system (see above).

The (proprietary) "Amiga system software" (cit.) is the third component of an Amiga (after the chipset and CPU): if the system misses it then it clearly cannot be called Amiga.

Definitions are... definitions.
Quote:

(or it relied on a kickstart disc)... :popcorn:

Even the Amiga 1000 had a ROM to load the Kickstart disk (and allowed to boot anything from the inserted floppy).

Nice to know that once kickstarts are removed/replaced, it’s no longer an Amiga.

Someone better notify Chucky, his DiagROM is specifically made for NOT Amiga!

Last edited by kolla on 21-Jul-2024 at 08:01 PM.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

I boot the Amiga Kickstart ROM and load AmigaOS 3.2 on my Vampire V4 no problem in seconds so I guess it’s definitely an Amiga then.

:)

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: Nice to know that once kickstarts are removed/replaced, it’s no longer an Amiga.

Well, it was enough to read the documentation for understanding it.
Quote:

Someone better notify Chucky, his DiagROM is specifically made for NOT Amiga!

?!?


@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: I boot the Amiga Kickstart ROM and load AmigaOS 3.2 on my Vampire V4 no problem in seconds so I guess it’s definitely an Amiga then. :)

Well, it depends entirely on HOW you have the Kickstart on your system: is it a ROM? Really?

Last edited by cdimauro on 21-Jul-2024 at 09:56 PM.

@cdimauro

The Kickstart is software based just like on the original Amiga (A1000).

Last edited by DiscreetFX on 21-Jul-2024 at 11:43 PM.

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: @cdimauro The Kickstart is software based just like on the original Amiga (A1000).

The Kickstart is not only software based: it has a part in ROM and another one is loaded in RAM.

All Amigas had "the Amiga system software" (note the quotes!) in a ROM (see Commodore's definition).

Do you have such software in ROM (whatever is the model: 1000, 500, 2000, etc.)?

I don't think so, right? So your system can NOT be called Amiga.

It's very simple: you've to stick to the definition and check if it fits. Commodore's guidelines are there for that.

@cdimauro

Quote:

@cdimauro Then be coherent: don't go around and post links coming from outside this site. To me it's very simple: as long as I provide a link which proves something, then it's done. You don't open it: np -> it's YOUR problem, because YOU decided to don't do it SELECTIVELY, because you're biased against me, whereas when it's something about you then you post alien links and people should... read them, right?

It's your responsibility to post your argument in this debate forum. Copy and paste is not hard.

I only use web links as references as per academic standards e.g. I make a claim in this forum, and then I cite a reference.

The world doesn't revolve around your website.

Quote:

@cdimauro For a bot? I fully agree...

What's the matter? do you have a disability?

Quote:

@cdimauro This doesn't apply to your PRECISE sentence, which I report again for YOUR convenience: Fact: Amiga's custom chipset is a patch for multimedia incompetent and weak IPC 68000. And you still have to PROVE it.

I don't need to PROVE IT when there are many examples.

From https://www.powerprograms.nl/amiga/cpu-blit-assist.html
Bobs per PAL frame benchmark

A500 Blitter = 11
A1200 CPU = 8
A1200 Blitter = 17

A1200's gimped CPU is 49 percent of A1200 Blitter.

A500's gimped CPU is slower than A1200's gimped CPU.

From
http://amigadev.elowar.com/read/ADCD_2.1/Hardware_Manual_guide/node012B.html
Quote:

The blitter is given the higher priority because it performs data copying, modifying, and line drawing operations operations much faster than the 68000.

Quote:

@cdimauro Again: could you please tell me which processors was better when the Amiga was designed?

I made my argument about Amiga's custom chip value added in addition to baseline 68000.

If you don't recognize Amiga's custom chip value-added, why don't you transfer to Atari ST or Spectrum QL?

Quote:

Do it on an Amiga 1000 and then tell me...

Your Amiga 1000 argument is irrelevant to this topic.

Read https://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=45268&forum=2#871243


Quote:

From TC, So we got a new high-end classic Amiga market merging, Vampire, Pistorm, A600GS, Emulation have all pushed the Classic Amiga platform and the 68k performance far above anything the original 68000 platform could do. I think the fastest 68060 was pushed on real hardware was 100Mhz. Most ran at 50mhz. Most users only ever had 68030 or 040 running around that speed, and these were great Amigas for their time. Again most users only had 8, 16 or 32mb of fast Ram only hard core Amiga fans and top end user had 128mb+ of Ram. Plus, the software that required this much was very little back in the day. Now thanks to these new platform we got 68000 system running as fast as PPC system! Now I know some may not like this, due to it being virtual or FPGA based but I just see these as tools bring us an Amiga platform we could only dear to dream about in 90s. This new platform is starting to get an increase in software support, Amikit XE a high end Amiga Desktop system that was design more for emulation platform, due to it slow performance on classic Amiga, has finally come back on to the system, thanks to things like Vampire or Pistorm. Hollywood and Hollywood Designer runs so much better on these Enhanced Amiga's. Quake 2 port really works well on these platform ad so do many other high end 3d games that would struggle on real hardware. Gorky 17 a 3d RPG game that Hyperion ported to AmigaOS4 will soon be ported to these Advance Amigas as well, hopefully proving that this new classic Amiga market is now here to stay. Which leads me to this question what and if this new market needs a name and minimum spec to qualify be of this new platform. In a way I guess Vampire V4 system could be the formation of the minium spec being that Pistorm and Emulation system can push a bit above it grunt. But as names, here my ideas "Classic Next Gen Amiga", "Advance Amigas", "Enhanced Amiga's", "New Amiga Market", "Amiga Plus", "68K+", "ClassicNG" what do you think and does this new platform need a name/ minium spec standards to help devs etc?

Quote:

@cdimauro On 1985 on 1985... on 1985...

See above.

Quote:

@cdimauro Right. And it was on 1985. There's no UNTIL that applies here. Even because the project started 3 years before.

For mainstream CPUs, 32-bit ARM and 32-bit 386 ultimately doomed 32-bit 68K.


Quote:

@cdimauro Guess what: it moved to PowerPCs...

Where are Motorola's PowerPC game consoles? IBM is not Motorola.

From https://segaretro.org/History_of_the_Sega_Saturn/Development
Sega rejected 68030 for SuperH-2.

Motorola's PowerPC 601 wasn't the "cheap RISC".

Quote:

@cdimauro On 1985 on 1985... on 1985...

That's your argument framing which is frozen in 1985.

My argument is for 16-bit era gaming platform results.

Last edited by Hammer on 22-Jul-2024 at 06:22 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

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @cdimauro Quote: @cdimauro Then be coherent: don't go around and post links coming from outside this site. To me it's very simple: as long as I provide a link which proves something, then it's done. You don't open it: np -> it's YOUR problem, because YOU decided to don't do it SELECTIVELY, because you're biased against me, whereas when it's something about you then you post alien links and people should... read them, right? It's your responsibility to post your argument in this debate forum. Copy and paste is not hard. I only use web links as references as per academic standards e.g. I make a claim in this forum, and then I cite a reference. The world doesn't revolve around your website.

Then don't add comments on threads where my article are posted, since you don't read them: I don't copy & paste their content here, rather just links are reported.

Articles are there for being read.
Quote:

Quote: @cdimauro For a bot? I fully agree... What's the matter? do you have a disability?

Yes: I can't imitate bots. Sorry for that...
Quote:

Quote: @cdimauro This doesn't apply to your PRECISE sentence, which I report again for YOUR convenience: Fact: Amiga's custom chipset is a patch for multimedia incompetent and weak IPC 68000. And you still have to PROVE it. I don't need to PROVE IT when there are many examples.

Examples aren't relevant. You've to carefully read your sentence, and understand why it's so different compared to what are trying to do now.

As I've said, SEMANTICS are different.

If I spot such differences as a non-native speaker, you should think about it.
Quote:

From https://www.powerprograms.nl/amiga/cpu-blit-assist.html Bobs per PAL frame benchmark A500 Blitter = 11 A1200 CPU = 8 A1200 Blitter = 17 A1200's gimped CPU is 49 percent of A1200 Blitter. A500's gimped CPU is slower than A1200's gimped CPU. From http://amigadev.elowar.com/read/ADCD_2.1/Hardware_Manual_guide/node012B.html Quote: The blitter is given the higher priority because it performs data copying, modifying, and line drawing operations operations much faster than the 68000.

Same as above: this doesn't prove your PRECISE statement.
Quote:

Quote: @cdimauro Again: could you please tell me which processors was better when the Amiga was designed? I made my argument about Amiga's custom chip value added in addition to baseline 68000.

And I've absolutely no problem about such sentence, because this is DIFFERENT from your previous one.

BTW, this (new: not the one which you've to prove) is absolutely acceptable for the standards of the time (with one exception: the Archimedes).
Quote:

Quote: Do it on an Amiga 1000 and then tell me... Your Amiga 1000 argument is irrelevant to this topic. Read https://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=45268&forum=2#871243 Quote: So we got a new high-end classic Amiga market merging, Vampire, Pistorm, A600GS, Emulation have all pushed the Classic Amiga platform and the 68k performance far above anything the original 68000 platform could do. I think the fastest 68060 was pushed on real hardware was 100Mhz. Most ran at 50mhz. Most users only ever had 68030 or 040 running around that speed, and these were great Amigas for their time. Again most users only had 8, 16 or 32mb of fast Ram only hard core Amiga fans and top end user had 128mb+ of Ram. Plus, the software that required this much was very little back in the day. Now thanks to these new platform we got 68000 system running as fast as PPC system! Now I know some may not like this, due to it being virtual or FPGA based but I just see these as tools bring us an Amiga platform we could only dear to dream about in 90s. This new platform is starting to get an increase in software support, Amikit XE a high end Amiga Desktop system that was design more for emulation platform, due to it slow performance on classic Amiga, has finally come back on to the system, thanks to things like Vampire or Pistorm. Hollywood and Hollywood Designer runs so much better on these Enhanced Amiga's. Quake 2 port really works well on these platform ad so do many other high end 3d games that would struggle on real hardware. Gorky 17 a 3d RPG game that Hyperion ported to AmigaOS4 will soon be ported to these Advance Amigas as well, hopefully proving that this new classic Amiga market is now here to stay. Which leads me to this question what and if this new market needs a name and minimum spec to qualify be of this new platform. In a way I guess Vampire V4 system could be the formation of the minium spec being that Pistorm and Emulation system can push a bit above it grunt. But as names, here my ideas "Classic Next Gen Amiga", "Advance Amigas", "Enhanced Amiga's", "New Amiga Market", "Amiga Plus", "68K+", "ClassicNG" what do you think and does this new platform need a name/ minium spec standards to help devs etc?

Irrelevant: see above.
Quote:

Quote: @cdimauro On 1985 on 1985... on 1985... See above.

Idem.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Then don't add comments on threads where my article are posted, since you don't read them: I don't copy & paste their content here, rather just links are reported.

I don't take my orders from you. You're not in any position to enforce demands.

Quote:

Yes: I can't imitate bots. Sorry for that...

You're just lazy.

Quote:

Examples aren't relevant. You've to carefully read your sentence, and understand why it's so different compared to what are trying to do now.

Examples are reverent. SNES doesn't need 68000 to kick ass in 2D graphics.

Quote:

relevant: see above.

Your frozen "1985" argument is Irrelevant.

_________________
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

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: @cdimauro I’ve purchase Amigas before and they did not come with AmigaOS because they were used and the seller lost the disks. By your definition are these classic machines not Amigas too?

To replace my A500 Rev5 with Kickstart 1.2 ROM, I purchased an A500 Rev 6A motherboard that didn't include a Kickstart 1.3 ROM while bundled free 68000. My A500 Rev 5 was my friend's abandoned A500 in 1993.

Without my paid Amiga Forever licenses, I wouldn't be licensed for Kickstart 1.3/Workbench 1.3, Kickstart 2.04/Workbench 2.04 and Kickstart 3.1/Workbench 3.1.

My A1200's physical ROMs are Kickstart 3.0, Kickstart 3.X (AmigaForver), Kickstart 3.1.4 and Kickstart 3.2.

I sold my 1st A500 Rev 6A and A3000 in the 1990s.

Amiga Forever and AmigaOS (1985 to 1993) are owned by Amiga's current IP holder.

I'm licensed for AmigaOS 4.1 FE which includes its own UAE installation.

Last edited by Hammer on 22-Jul-2024 at 06:59 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 22-Jul-2024 at 06:56 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

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: I’m sorry - my question was meant for MagicSN and not you, my mistake! @MagicSN Does my Commodore Amiga cease to be Amiga once I replace AmigaOS with Linux or NetBSD? What if it starts mac emulator at boot? Or boots Minix? Or present Oberon as desktop instead of Workbench? Despite all these operating systems using the term “amiga� specifically about this hardware? Does Linux identify an X5000 or A1222 as “Amiga�?

Shapeshifter and Fusion are effective ports of MacOS's abstraction layer components for the Amiga.

Shapeshifter and Fusion couldn't run Apple's A/UX.

_________________
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