Keep the questions coming!

Aye! Keep the questions coming! But sometimes I can't understand the answers , I am such a when it comes to the hardcore concepts! All I can say is, good luck Fleecy and co.!

_________________

-Many users also own a PC. Do you plan to include as contribution VNC and Windows Terminal Server clients?

http://wuarchive.wustl.edu/pub/aminet/comm/tcp/rdesktop.lha

An integrated Samba or at least an easy to configure ftp server or some kind of ftp integration in the system (FTP-Mount) would be dessired...

Nowadays I'd like to use my network to transfer files...

_________________
The only spanish amiga news web page/club: CUAZ

@ crumb, that's a good question, hopefully it will be selected for the next round of Q&A's.

_________________

Please ask your questions for the next Fleecy Q&A here.

Was particularly interested in his last answer. Amiga has lost a lot of ground and if it's to start looking good again, it's going to need to roll with the changes at high speed. An adaptable foundaton for this development will be a distinct advantage in keeping up with the Gates's.

_________________
Folding@Home Team AmigaWorld no: 33424

Sorry the Q&As were a bit late this time, someone forgot to send them to Fleecy, i.e. Me

_________________
Join the Amigaworld.net Supporters Scheme and get your Supporter Tag

No problem Good Q&A as always!

_________________
ikir

It's starting to sound like 4.1 will be a nice update package, as alot of questions keep getting the answer "planned for 4.1".

Quote:

Since printing is integrally bound up with the visual services, the foundation for pDP (Digital->Physical) emission of content, with the emission/output device being anything from a TV to a monitor to a projector to a printer to potentially anything else capable of manifesting a physical visual image is being built into the AG2 visual services. Once this is done then it will be relatively simple to make it network aware.

In other words, every visual device will be treated in an homogeneous way, like windows does with GDI.

Was all that "buzziness" really necessary? I sense an attempt at making people go "woooow, I don't know what he said but it sounds so coool" there.

Also, I don't know if you guys noticed, but all he's saying is basically that the old APIs are being put in the trashcan and new ones are being born, much like MacOSX does with Carbon and Cocoa. Mind you, nothing bad about this, it really sounds cool, but I can't help but notice the hypocricy that permeates this whole situation: how can they even dare to criticize the boxed approach of MOS, if they are basically going the same way? But, hey, "they have two kernels, it MUST be bad, there's only one true exec!". Yes, right, whatever.

@falemagn

Yes but morphos is not amiga, so the overwhelming majority don't particularly care which direction morphos has taken and is heading.

Quote:

Yes but morphos is not amiga,

As in "it doesn't have rights to the Amiga name"? Yes I agree. Does it matter? No, I don't think so. If it matters, please give me a well reasoned and non emotional explanation of why it does matter.

Quote:

so the overwhelming majority don't particularly care which direction morphos has taken and is heading.

If the "overwhelming majority" limited itself to not care there would be no problems, the problem lies in the fact that the majority _does_ care and even makes bold claims about the other party.

But what really amuses me is the way Fleecy answers to the questions and how people follow him without even the slightest degree of objectivity. It's really sad, so sad that it amuses me.

-edit-

I decided to delete my post here since this could quickly degenerate into a flamefest .

*sigh*

/Björn

Quote:

I decided to delete my post here since this could quickly degenerate into a flamefes

I don't understand that. It's like saying that with me it's very likely that it's not possible entartaining an intelligent discussion, which I find really offensive.

I read your post last night (night for me, of course) and thought I'd answer today. I still remember one of your points, which was that you don't understand what there would be in Fleecy's answer which would let me bring in the discussion the boxed approach of MOS, since what Fleecy talks about is something more than just that (I repeat it, these were your thoughts).

Well, let me reply: you do realize that by saying that you just made my point even more valid, don't you? My point was that they are going more or less the same way as MOS is going, and yet people criticize MOS with nonsense words because they fear it's going to be something "different" than what AmigaOS currently is, due to its boxed approach et all. Now, Fleecy is telling us that almost everithing we know about AOS will be obsoleted in the near future, yet I don't see anyone saying anything bad about this.

If this is not hypocrite...

Quote:

I don't understand that. It's like saying that with me it's very likely that it's not possible entartaining an intelligent discussion, which I find really offensive.

Not at all. Whenever either side begins these debates they quickly degenerate. If you think that I tought that it would not be possible to conduct an intelligent discussion with you then a severe misunderstanding has occured. I just this as having the potential to escalate to an ann.lu type discussion.

Quote:

I repeat it, these were your thoughts

Yep, seems about right.

On your reply. I don't really see MorphOS as really heading in any new direction in its current incarnation. The issue of the Q/Box is a totally different issue as is the issue of Amiga Generation 2. Also, the reason you do not see anyone saying anything bad about what Fleecy has stated is simply because we as yet don't have any real idea as to what Amiga Inc have up their sleeves. If that warrants me and the rest of A. Incs a bunch of a hyprocrites, well, fair enough.

BTW, I don't that think that we critise MOS because it is going in a different direction. Heck, we already knew that the current Amiga Inc would itself be doing that from the day they took over the reins. Rather, criticisms typically emerege when confronted with blatant attacks from the "blue" side against our chosen solution.

PS: How is AROS coming along?

@ falemagn

Quote:

Now, Fleecy is telling us that almost everithing we know about AOS will be obsoleted in the near future

That's not what Fleecy stated at all, that's your personal interpretation of the fact that AmigaOS for the long run is in need of an overhaul.

The intergration of AG2 modules should happen gradually and to think the bulk of all desirable aspects from the classic OS will simply be thrown away is nonsense. AmigaOS as a commercial product will need to advance to being something that can be competitive to the mainstream again.

Here a quote from a previous Fleecy Q&A:

Quote:

AmigaOS5.0 will mark the first time when there is no more Amiga Generation 1 technology in the AmigaOS. It will be 100% Amiga Generation 2. That said, Amiga Generation 2 will include many parts in its Opportunity Analysis, including a full review of the existing AG1 elements for each domain.

There have been many questions asked and answered with regard to the future of AmigaOS. Fleecy Q&A sessions have offered valuable information with regard to such raised questions and if something is still unclear to you then why not ask Fleecy yourself instead of coming up with personal interpretations.

With regard to MOS, it's pretty much off topic in reply to this Q&A... But if people are worrying about how much it will remain AmigaOS-like in the future this has probably to do with the fact that the QBOX (non hosted) environment was often said to be THE future in reply to brought up limitations of the hosted ABOX environment, yet still very little is actually known about what the QBOX will be like. IMO the questions raised are just as valid as the questions being asked in these Fleecy Q&As.

Hello Fabio, nice of you to join the Red Trolls

Quote:

Also, I don't know if you guys noticed, but all he's saying is basically that the old APIs are being put in the trashcan and new ones are being born, much like MacOSX does with Carbon and Cocoa.

Not quite, API deprecation and innovation does not have to be so
emotionally repackaged - unless you want to provoke a reaction.

Do you honestly think that the API for AmigaOS should be at the Workbench 1.x level? We
already know that 4.0 is a significant advance with many extensions and
skeleton code for backward compatibility.

This will be more of the same, but is quite far in the future.

Plus, Fabio, I don't know if you noticed this but this message of
a "sandbox" running DE type foundation layers and QoS brokering
was Amiga Incs. message since January 2000. So its not as if it is a
surprise to anyone.

Quote:

Mind you, nothing bad about this, it really sounds cool, but I can't help but notice the hypocricy that permeates this whole situation: how can they even dare to criticize the boxed approach of MOS,

Ahem. The criticism was always initiated the other way around, you would
be more historically accurate if you said "how blue trolls can even dare to
criticise the sandbox approach of AmigaDE" or if you said "how blue trolls can
even dare to criticise the emulation approach of AOS4". Now we know that
these technologies are divergant, that applications written to take advantage
of AOS4 will not work without serious modification on MorphOS or Q/Box. In fact
applications written specifically for AOS5 will not work without serious
modification on AOS4, and probably yet more on MorphOS.

The point is, that beyond AOS3.1 we have a serious branching of the ways, the
API has forked already.

Quote:

if they are basically going the same way?

You think that just because ideas can be described in such a way
that they sound similar that they will be vaguely compatible? Do you
think that say AROS is going the same way as Intent?

Quote:

But, hey, "they have two kernels, it MUST be bad,

Google search for anyone from Amiga Inc saying this yeilded
no results. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. However your
counter argument is nonexistent and your posting oversimplified
it is hard to even start to discuss it with you.

Quote:

there's only one true exec!". Yes, right, whatever.

You sound hysterical. If you want to bring fights with Sammy
Nordstrum onto here then please take it to email, I know I am not
interested.

The only one bringing up the "one true" rubbish and the tone
of derision in this thread is you.

I and most people frequenting AmigaWorld are quite comfortable with
AOS4, have strong views on anything beyond that and mostly
don't care too much about divergent solutions that are compatible
only with historical versions of AmigaOS.

If you want to pop in to tell us that we are all nasty hypocrites
over saying nasty things about MorphOS then next time do us
the courtesy of furnishing us with quotes that we can go look
at to apologise if merited.

You say that the reaction above of Bodie and a few others indicates
that you are not up to muster to engage in civilised debate with
others and you take offense at this. But your combative attitude
in your first post adopted a fighting stance. The rest sounded like
you were blowing a fuse over something so small.

And you wonder why people don't want to discuss this with you
and others with an equally strong chip on the shoulder about
MorphOS?

Im not here to read about your old angst with Amiga Inc, or your
bitterness over the fact that MorphOS is not the official direction
or even your incredulity that users have chosen AmigaOS over
MorphOS for a reason you clearly cannot empathise. If I wanted
to read such divisive nonsense then there is Amiga.org, ANN, Moobunny,
Morphos-news, MorphZone, Amiga-news.de and all sorts of
weird and wonderful places.

Quote:

As in "it doesn't have rights to the Amiga name"? Yes I agree. Does it matter? No, I don't think so. If it matters, please give me a well reasoned and non emotional explanation of why it does matter.

I think the Amiga brand name does matter. A name or brand has value. A short Google search will reveal many links that assert the importance and value of product branding.

I think the more appropriate question is, "How valuable is the Amiga brand today?" We won't know the true value until Amiga branded products ship and hit the general marketplace. But I do know that when I mention Amiga computers with anyone I know (not all of them computer savvy) they all have a good feeling about it and are immediately interested in knowing if anything new is going on.

The Amiga brand may not matter as much to the, relatively speaking, infinitely small "geek" marketplace but it certainly will matter a great deal when Amiga Inc. begins to target more significant (i.e. larger) markets.

So does the name matter to me, the "geek" customer? I like to think it doesn't but it does. I'm more interested in what the computer does, how it does it and what I can possibly do with it. But I also care about my investment and therefore, the future of the company making my computer. If that company happens to have an internationally well known brand name to go with it, that makes me feel a little bit better about investing.

_________________
ExecSG Team Lead

Gee I thought that last question sounded awfully familiar

question for Hyperion regarding Nova

Thanks for the credit....

_________________