Ars Technica Reviews AmigaOS 4.0 405
Amiga Lover writes "While tales of the troubles behind the Amiga's ownership abound over the last 10 years, work has been going on in the background for newer releases of the operating system that powered some of the most desirable computers from the 1980s. You can now buy brand new Amiga motherboards, and the operating system is very close to a final release. Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica reviews the current developer preview of AmigaOS 4.0, going over this new small and fast OS in thorough arstechnica style."
Modern OS? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Modern OS? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Modern OS? (Score:2)
Re:Modern OS? (Score:5, Informative)
Amiga OS had both those in 1985, IIRC.
No, you don't remember it correctly. Amiga OS had true, preemptive multitasking in 1985, but it doesn't have memory protection to this day. Nor does it have virtual memory, or makes any other use of MMU present in every modern processor.
Yes, you could install Enforcer notifying you about writes to system memory, or VMM permitting swapping to disk in case the real memory is exhausted. But both these programs weren't part of system and lost of programs crashed when they were present and running. I remember having exceptions list in VMM longer than... certain body parts of pr0n stars
Other than that, Amiga OS was quite remarkable piece of software at that time with certain solutions still not duplicated in today's operating systems.
Robert
Re:Modern OS? (Score:3, Informative)
AmigaOS 4.0 includes functionality for virtual memory, paging, etc. Memory protection is optional for OS4 native applications, but will be a feature in a forthcoming version I'm sure, once enough software has been ported/created natively.
And as the review said, AmigaOS actually made computing fun and enjoyab
Re:Modern OS? (Score:5, Interesting)
For its time, it was an amazing bit of hardware.
I always liked AmigaDOS because it combined the best features of UNIX (in the shell, and with AREXX scripting) and MacOS's GUI features.
Nowadays, the GUI on Linux has gotten to the point where it is far superior than anything the Amiga ever had. A modern RedHat/Fedora box really is the spiritual successor to the Amiga.
The only thing I miss (two things actually):
1) Every Amiga application worth its salt has an AREXX port, because it was trivial to implement. That meant you could script EVERYTHING, including moving data back and forth between applications. It was awesome; you could batch-process every single application on the box.
2) The speech synth chip. This was awsome in Netrek, because you could play the team chat window through it and turn it into a radio - get all the team communications without having to take your eyes off the galaxy map.
DG
Re:Modern OS? (Score:3, Informative)
There was no speech synth chip.
The speech synthesis in 1.1 through 2.04 was done in software, via a license from another company.
The license ran out by the time AmigaOS 3.0 was released, so the A4000 and A1200 never had native speech synthesis (although you could just copy it from a 2.04 or 2.1 release.)
Re:Modern OS? (Score:3, Informative)
AmigaOS 4 DOES have virtual memory built-in. This can exist without memory protection features, which are not present in the form that Slashdot readers would recognize it. There is some limited memory protection of kernel-space, but nothing in user-space.
There HAS been use of the MMU in the past. Mostly development stuff, debuggers and whatnot. The old VMM virtual memory tool you mentioned, which added VM
Re:Modern OS? (Score:5, Informative)
Memory protection is another matter, it's not there as Linux users would expect it to be, no. It's a highly desired feature of course, but implementing it properly is an issue as it conflicts with some fundamental aspects of AmigaOS arcitecture. We want it, and it will likely happen someday, but current priorities fundamentally revolve around getting the OS ported to PowerPC native and getting it to run on new PowerPC motherboards, porting the 680x0 assembly to C, involving a great deal of "classic Amiga hardware" dependencies, as none of that hardware is present on new motherboards.
Once the fundamental porting is done then it will be time to look at rearchitecting things to allow memory protection, multiple users (it's currently a single-user OS so no user or group file or directory protection concepts). I don't know what all the project managment has in mind for adding such features, but users and developers do want them.
Re:Modern OS? (Score:2, Informative)
Ahem, first line from the RKM: Libraries (Commodore, Inc. 1992), page 2:
"The Amiga uses preemptive multitasking.. "
Re:Modern OS? (Score:2)
Re:Modern OS? (Score:3, Informative)
The Amiga had preemptive multitasking. It forced a context switch unless you where told it not to. Usually when closing a port. To keep the system stable an Amiga program had to fetch all the messages that it might have waiting at a port before closing it so you would tell the OS not to switch tasks while you did a fast tight loop to fetch the messages until it was empty then close the port. Guess what I used to program the Amiga. You are confusing preemptive multi ta
Re:Modern OS? (Score:2)
I still remember in college, in the early '90s, showing my Mac/Windows using friends that *yes*, you could format a floppy disk and do something else at the same time.
Re:Modern OS? (Score:2)
Re:Modern OS? (Score:3, Informative)
RTFriendlyArticle. For memory protection they've done the same thing as Apple did and what PalmSource will soon have to do. And they always had true multitasking.
anon coward 2:
And what is that?
RTFA: a virtual machine a la classic mode for legacy apps, mmkay.
From tfa:
Hyperion realized that with the current state of the Amiga applications market, asking developers to write for a completely new operating system was unrealistic. After all, if you are going to do that, you might as well wri
Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you for your respect. And to the article poster, we're not welcome here, please don't bother Slashdot again...
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:5, Interesting)
I always respected the Amiga a lot, and i still think it should have done better than it did, specially considering how advanced was in it's time. But other than the geek factor, what's the big deal over a new AmigaOS?
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:5, Funny)
Our office has used one every day for years to prop open an annoying fire door.
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:5, Informative)
email
web browsing
word processor
read PDF docs
software development
file managment (including PC folders via samba as Windows explorer sucks rotten eggs)
games
Wow, that sounds a lot like what some people might use Linux for, doesn't it?
It's a matter of choice. Why should my choice be wrong for me, yet your non-Windows choice is right for you?
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:3, Insightful)
But the chores you mentioned are general, common uses for compueters nowadays, and kit reviewed in the article sells for $700. This is what i meant by saying "what does it offer that Linux doesnt?". It's great if you have an Amiga lying arround - and has a lot of geek factor to it. Yet i can't justify spending that amount for a new system.
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2)
I still see TV Commercials that had their titles done with an Amiga.
We used to use it in high school and I'd recognize the tell tale signs anywhere.
Pro Video Post 3000 and a Genlock are still in use in some production environments today.
LK
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2)
I'd enjoy having a world with more OS diversification, but what point does Amiga serve anymore? I'm glad it's not dead, I just want to know what it's used for these days.
I remember the days where, in my opinion, it's only uses came down to a couple applications: Video Toaster and Scala. But now? Both of those are pretty obsolete.
I'm not going to say "Amiga is Dead," and I don'
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2)
OK, I have to step in here. The two sides of this debate (amigabill and, well, everybody else) are completely missing one another.
He's asserting
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, I use AmigaOS because of personal preference for my gerneral day to day computing, email, web browsing, etc. When the admittedly aging IBrowse web browser fails ona web site, I do use Firefox on Windows or Linux, whichever is handy. I use Windows for HalfLife2. (I understand Transgaming's thing can supposedly run HalfLife2 udner Linux now, but feel Windows is still better suited to this particular task) I have not played Doom3 since before the Linux native binary was available, but when I have time I would like to try it out and see how it fares. I do use Gentoo linux as a firewall, for geda EDA tools, and for MythTV. Each is good for certain things, and not as good for other certain things. The general user interface in AmigaOS fits my personality better than Windows or Linux, so that's my first choice. But it is not as suitable for some tasks as Windows or Linux. And instead of doing without, I do use the better platform for the job. Windows is better for certain games than Linux, Linux is better for firewalling my whole LAN and doing EDA stuff than Windows is. AmigaOS is of course behind in games available, lacks many firewall features available in Linux, and there's no ports of geda EDA tools yet, but for email, there's nothing better than security by a combination of incompatibility and this level of obscurity...
I bought my mom a PC running Windows, as I live 300 miles away and it easier for her to get support when I'm not around. I bought my sister a PC running windows, for the same reason. My dad bought his own, but I'm glad he did for the same reason. My mom and sister both run Firefox. My mom has OpenOffice. My sister has it, but usually uses MS Office because she thinks she needs it for school and that OpenOffice is inadequate.
My dad will ONLY use Microsoft products. He's one of them Joe Average guys Bill Gates wants us ALL to be. He is NOT WILLING to consider any alternative product, PERIOD. He believes that the mere fact Microsoft is so huge is proof that no other product can possibly be worth looking at, that everything else must totally suck, and the people have thusly used their wallets to vote for MS as the only possibly worthy software maker. Yet he's often calling me to help him get his PC working right again when it starts to flake out. There's zero chance reasoning with the guy, PERIOD. I've tried... He's constantly trying to talk me into using Windows and Office instead. He gave me a copy of Office so I'd have it, because I didn't have it before and must therefore have been totally unable to do anything with my computer. Something about in the real world I absolutely have to hav eit and use it because everyone else does, and I'll never survive without MS stuff at work. In reality, at work, I use a solaris box an OpenOffice... But there's no convincing him.
If you evaluate and then don't want to use AmigaOS, then don't. But don't say it's dead just because you don't want to use it. Let those of us who do want to use it, do so in peace.
If you want to use Linux, by all means, please do so. I do.
If you want to use Windows, that's your personal choice as well. I do. Same for Mac, *BSD, etc.
My dismay at seeing Amiga related posts here is that Slashdot ueres are not interested in evaluating the thing, to find out if the new version 4 AmigaOS could possibly be interesting to them. You've all already made up your mind against it, without knowing what it is or what it can do, or what it feels like, etc.
Its the same situation as Slashdot accuses most Windows users of. Joe Normal Windows user will not give Linux a chance to find out if he could possibly like it or not. Joe Average will ONLY ever use MS Office, as he is not willing to gove OpenOffice a chance and find out if it would suit him. This for good reason aggravates supporters of those products.
But those same advocates asking Windows users to at least evaluate their products BEFORE making a decision, are unwilling to co
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2, Funny)
So ahh... in other words... Amiga is dead?
forgive me if this is a F.A.Q. but ... (Score:2)
Re:forgive me if this is a F.A.Q. but ... (Score:2)
Re:forgive me if this is a F.A.Q. but ... (Score:2)
Naaw, this appears to have picked up alot of the legacy stuff from the original Amiga (as has been discussed here)...as well as much of what became lameness as it became outdated. Still no protected memory (which I find outlandish -- this is why I found MacOS pre 10 so useless). I think this was left out so that it would run legacy
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2)
Maybe you want a chat with them?
Some Amiga +points.. (Score:2)
2) Huge library of legacy free/cheap small-memory demand programs, at least by modern standards. Same could be said for CBM64, but AmigaOS apps are actually useful..
3) Lots of code written for the RISC chip of its day, the 68K, the chip that should by rights be in every PC today..
4) Great graphics 4 time=good apps
5) Guaranteed gooey nostalgic warm feeling when you use it, as opposed to fear/lothing/desparation when using Gates-evil-e
Re:Some Amiga +points.. (Score:2)
Indeed, but an Amiga on the internet today would be proof against what is out there now.
The 68000 was a CISC chip.
Technically yes, but its instruction set was closer to RISC than x86, and would be easier to implement in a fast way..
I can't tell you how much I really wanted the PC to run on 68000s instead of those shitty Intel chips.
Yup, I agree..
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:2)
No its not dead..... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm very very sorry - but i just couldn't help myself...
Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff... (Score:3, Interesting)
I had an Amiga back in the day; this is when the shiny new IBM PC-XT was the big thing, and clones were just starting to come out. I was happily typing away in AmigaWord, or playing Artic Fox (an early EA game title), or running DOS applications on an IBM PC emulator, on a machine with a graphical interface that
Too pricey (Score:5, Informative)
This is from softhut, but I don't want to direct link since it is slow anyway:
AMIGA ONE PRECONFIGURED SYSTEMS
Micro A1 System:
First True Luggable / LAN Boy Amiga System !!
See Case Images
Micro A1-C Motherboard with OS4
750fx G3 Processor @ 800MHz
Built-In Sound
80GB 7200RPM Hard Drive
DVD/CDRW Combo Drive
2 USB Ports, 10/100 Ethernet
Keyboard and Mouse
------ $ 1375.00
All completely installed, tested and ready to run
Re:Too pricey (Score:2)
1.6ghz G5
512mb RAM
80gb SATA drive
DVD/CDRW drive
Keyboard, mouse, 10/100, etc,
Oh - and an integrated monitor, TOSlink out, etc, etc.
Its funny, in a sad way, that they've been able to beat Apple at the expensive proprietary hardware game...
Vaporware (Score:2, Redundant)
While a new Amiga OS is just as intriguing to me as the next guy, this operating system has been vaporware for quite some time now, and I question when it will actually arrive.
This Amiga OS began winning Wired's Vaporware award back in 1999. [wired.com]
Re:Vaporware (Score:2)
All that said, it's kinda sad to see you sitting
Re:Vaporware (Score:5, Interesting)
Huh? I'm not begging for anything. I have a good job designing chips for a living and can easily pay for whatever I desire.
Also, when other Amiga users were drooling over the shiny new Voodoo3 drivers, I was scratching my head not understanding the obsession when Radeons and GeForces were on their second generations. Instead of begging, I made a proposal to Nvidia for an NDA, I'd do all the work, support,e tc. all they'd have to do was put hardware on the shelves at the local PC emporium, which they already did. They didn't even respond with a polite "no thank you", they completely ignored us. ATI responded to my proposal with an NDA contract and some documentation. We do all the work, support, etc. and all they have to do is put Radeons on the shelves at te local PC emporium, which they already do.
I didn't beg for anything. I made a business proposal acceptable to ATI, and AmigaOS4 now runs nicely on Radeon cards.
I discussed the convenience of AmigaOS on a laptop, and thus iBook hardware with other developers, but there doesn't seem to be a business agreeable to all involved there. I'm now investigating the feasability of developing a PowerPC laptop of my own, which if it is a viable product will make an open-platform system as much as I could, and allow anyone write their own OS, drivers, etc. which is an obstacle to some extent when looking at Macs. Is this a feasable idea? It may not be, but this hasn't been proven to me yet.
Hey, Gentoo and Freescale seem pretty happy with the "other Amiga motherboard", the Pegasos2 AKA "Open Desktop Workstation" PowerPC motherboard. Wouldn't they be happy with a more easily portable PowerPC board as well?
http://www.gentoo.org
http://www.freescale.com
Price? (Score:2)
But its probably a really really good motherboard?
Re:Price? (Score:2)
But its probably a really really good motherboard?
They are charging that much to match how pricey the Amiga was in the 80s. You have to adjust for inflation, you know.
Re:Price? (Score:2)
Yeah, for an 800MHz G3
Re:Price? (Score:2)
The people who were bitching about the price / preformance ratio of the Mac Mini are going to have a heart attack when they read this!
Re:Price? (Score:2)
PowerPC (Score:2)
I know i would love to play with a Yellowdog Linux media server running on some ultra quiet G4 rig, but the cost of kits are too prohibitive when I know that the same can be done
Re:PowerPC (Score:2)
That said, yeah, it'd be cool to have an OS X-capable motherboard.
Re:PowerPC (Score:2)
It would be interesting, but so would a lot of more probable things. If you want an ultra-quiet, inexpensive G4, those now exist [apple.com].
Re:PowerPC (Score:2)
UI Responsiveness (Score:4, Interesting)
Scrolling is about as fast as on my 2.4GHz P4 PC. While the PC clearly blows away the AmigaOne on pure CPU performance (for example, unarchiving files, or ripping to MP3), for general use they "feel" about the same. The A1 feels much faster than my 733MHz Pentium 3 running XP, and makes my poor 500MHz G3 iBook running OS X feel like a pig stuck in molasses.
The author obviously never tried RiscOS : on my 33MHz RiscPC (bought in Dec94), there's still nothing that can match its responsiveness... except a 202MHz Strong-ARM RiscPC.
You just don't have time to even think about taking an espresso when you double-click a directory folder.
But yes, that's right : RiSCOS is cooperatively multitasking, hence the quick interaction.
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:2)
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:2, Interesting)
And as the machine can just reboot in less than 5 seconds, I am fine, thanks
My advice is that you visit this site [habett.org] which a friend has 100% made on his RiscOS machine (might be an Iyonix [iyonix.com], that Xscale based RiscPC...) you'll then see how useful this machine can be to a creative mind (did I mention how its ergonomical features just made it even more straightforward for anybody to ac
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:2)
I've never considered cooperative multitasking to be a multitasking operating system at all... it's a multitasking API built into the operating system.
A true multitasking operating system has to be preemptive.
And to try out a metaphor, cooperative multitasking is like having 4-way stop signs at every intersection... it works as long as every driver follows the rules, but even then is far from optimal as regards throughput...
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:2)
However, the main disadvantage with cooperative multi-tasking is that it won't work with multiple CPUs.
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:2)
Back in days of yore I was a real Acorn fanboy, and recently I inherited a RiscPC from a friend.
It's true, they're incredibly fast and smooth and responsive and... and I can't find anything useful to do with it. That 33MHz processor simply doesn't have enough power to do anything that involves number-crunching. If you install Linux o
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:2)
Not only was AmigaOS a pre-emptive multitasking OS, but it was a real time pre-emptive multitasking OS.
This means that applications and processes did not simply time share, but that high priority processes which were ready to run are guaranteed to get the CPU within a fixed period of time (measured in ms) provided they were the highest priority task which was ready to run.
On Amiga OS, you assigned the mouse and keyboard IO a
Re:UI Responsiveness (Score:4, Interesting)
I knew this. Thats why I felt safe to predict it could not be beaten in speed by another OS. The unix mmap() must still be slower because the memory mapped file still appears in the filing system (at the very least you need to aquire a file descriptor etc to set up. ) . Unix context switching tends to requires more overhead (due to VM and scheduling), and you still can't directly dereference a passed pointer into memory, but must deference a pointer plus an offset into the memory mapped file because it would not sit at the same absolute memory address in both applications. On Amiga, address 45500 (for example) is 45500 for every single application in the entire system. Whereas you would need to say 45500 + base of shared memory space under Unix. This at a minimum requires an additional pointer arithmetic operation.
Moreoever on the Amiga virtually every single system call passed data via pointers without making copies into the called process (very fragile and delicate but very fast). Unix system calls which need to pass data to another process copy the data rather than simply pass a pointer.
Finally... mmap() is not the typical method of IPC on Unix. It is more common to use slower pipes.
If there is another OS which does this with less operations than AmigaOS (while still maintaining basic functionality.. I did not mean to include embedded Oses for single purpose machines) then forgive me. But I am not aware of it.
As for window refresh, lots of X11 window managers do the same, as can most other OS's, but it was rarely used on the Amiga - most app's did redraw, because letting the OS redraw meant having the OS keep a backing store, which meant wasting memory, which most Amiga programmers detested.
There was some utility available which forced all windows to be simple refresh windows. Thereafter the application is not notified of the refresh event and it didn't matter what the programmer chose to implement (because the app wasn't notified).
I didn't find this option in MS-Windows. I often find myself looking at non-refreshed windows in XP.
I agree that amiga programmers detested wasting memory (ahh.. I remember dynamic memory allocation well), but they also detested wasting CPU cycles to redraw. And with built in hardware blitting and video DMA... well..
once the user used that utility (I can't remember the name), all windows becamse simple refresh windows. (and for those slashdotters not familiar with Amiga that means.. "simple" from the programmers perspective. i.e. let the OS refresh)
I have run linix systems with no virtual memory at all. Windows bitches and complains if you try to have no virtual memory regardless of how much physical memory you have.
The cost of RAM is low enough these days that VM is not really required anymore.
Re:And this is a FEATURE, not a BUG? (Score:3, Informative)
Having swap in RAM defeats the entire purpose of having swap space in the first place.
Several virtual memory management apps were written for the larger of the classic Amiga's and worked fine, but most of the time we made do with a few MB of memory and the lack of a vmm was rarely an issue.
I loved the amiga (Score:5, Interesting)
The Amiga was a great games machine, with cool custom chips taking the load off the generally-not-too-great CPU, a highly consistent architecture, and an adequate, quirky OS which was good where it mattered for the applications it was used for.
Custom hardware was not something that was seen in commodity PCs at the time. Neither were good quality graphics and sound. It wasn't a better machine. In many ways it was inferior. It was a very different machine, and that's why it suceeded where it did.
AmigaOS 4.0 is simply another OS. Perhaps it's a very nice OS. BeOS was as well. But a nice OS doesn't make it better.
Re:I loved the amiga (Score:4, Insightful)
Which makes it kind of ironic that it was games that ultimately led me to leave the Amiga in favor of the PC. There were all these cool games I was seeing at my friends' houses, that I couldn't play. It sucked to switch, but the gamer in me just had to.
Amiga was revolutionary. It smoked everything. (Score:5, Informative)
Processor:
An 286 was state of the art and the 68000 compared more than favorably.
Graphics:
Heck EGA was just recently introduced, Macs were monocrhome. Amiga had extraordinary high colour capability (up to 4096 colours IIRC) and custom co-processor to accellerate 2d operations
Sound:
A basic PC beeped. The first soundblaster was still 2 years away. The amiga had multichannel digiatal waveform sound with co-processor support.
OS:
PC had Dos or Windows 1.0 (steaming pile of dung).
The amiga had a small efficient GUI OS with true pre-emptive multitasking...
The Amiga was a revolution of HW and software. What killed it was stagnation. It remained relatively unchanged for years allowing competition to catch and surpass some of its basic specs.
Personally I moved on when Win95/OS2 VGA/ 486/ Soundblaster finally made PCs tolerable.
Now that's impressive! (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, now that's impressive. The best I've been able to get from my dog is for him to ring a bell when he has to go outside to take a crap.
Re:I loved the amiga (Score:3, Interesting)
It ran games? Oh yeah there was that Wolftank von Moneybucks guy. And it made Schwab famous for doing in a weekend what Pixer took weeks to do. Got an updated mpg, Leo? Only Loren believes you destroyed all the copies...
What made the Amiga cool from my perspective (I still have A1000 serial #7) was, in an era of Windows 2.1 and an essentially unprogrammable Mac (Pascal? Hahahahaha) it let you have Bash, UUCP, a rational C compiler and a liner ("sergments are for worms"
Re:I loved the amiga (Score:2)
Gah. ROM. (Score:5, Insightful)
I was pretty interested until I got to that "custom boot rom". Hell, guys, even Apple tossed that requirement when they went to NewWorld.
Severely limits the usefulness of the hardware and software in my eyes. Guess I'm not the target audience then.
Re:Gah. ROM. (Score:3, Insightful)
Otherwise the Pegasus board or any Mac could potentially run this OS.
Stupid move #4875674 from Amiga.
Re:Gah. ROM. (Score:3, Insightful)
The ability to give this a try on a Mac would have been cool, however I'm not going to pay $1,300 for a custom board just because I'm a bit nostalgic.
Re:Gah. ROM. (Score:3, Interesting)
This would make it possible to keep the managers happy and the OS functional on Macs or Pegasos2 or whatever. Neither Apple nor Genesi of course want to get into the licensing of the custom USB widget and ship the AmigaOS CD with their card.
Re:Gah. ROM. (Score:3, Funny)
"4M1G4 0S 4.0
kr4CK3D 8Y BLU3ZM0B1L3
J3FF i5 A h0M0"
A dongle, huh? Methinks someone in charge of the current Amiga doesn't remember 1989 very well. Dongles back then meant "it might take almost TWO whole days for the kracked (yes, with the k, cuz they all thought it was k00l) version to start making the rounds." Or better yet, "I BOUGHT the damn thing and I still downloaded the kracked version because I lost
Business Amiga (Score:3, Interesting)
It always amazes me to think that
1) The Amiga, though marketed as a gaming machine or play-with-graphics machine, had an operating system so capable and Unix-like
and
2) That business never realized the huge potential of a multitasking, windowing, command-line integrated OS to run spreadsheets and wordprocessors on instead of the clunky program launcher that was MS-DOS.
Re:Business Amiga (Score:3, Interesting)
Business Amiga was also crippled by the utter lack of useful business software (e.g. the most frequently recommended Word Processor, "Excelle
But why... (Score:2)
In other news... (Score:2)
Slashdot (Score:2)
It's a time machine (Score:2)
We toast the fallen, All Hail Amiga!
This would have been relevant in 1994 (Score:5, Insightful)
The Amiga's greatest challenge in 1994 was really CPU power and system architecture. It was tied to the 68K series processor and the custom chips which made it powerful in 1985. If these PowerPC based systems and OS came out ten years ago, it would have saved the machine, at least to be a niche player.
The Amiga's primary advantage over other machines for creative users like videographers, artists and the like was the fact it was NTSC synchronized for adding titles, and for driving devices like the VideoToaster. That assumed a world view where the computer stayed as outside of the signal path, modifying analog video somewhere between source and recorder VTRs.
The world changed very quickly--and the desktop video world instantly picked up on nonlinear editing. Suddenly everything, given enough power and bandwidth, was INSIDE the machine. Certainly NewTek responded with the ToasterFlyer, but this was still a rehash of using the Amiga between playback and record devices. By 1997, even the cheapest desktop PCI NLE board was processing effects in the digital domain: The Amiga couldn't keep up, tied to the 68K series alone and was doomed in the video market.
The OS was very much suited to media applications: It was lightweight, quick and supported multiple resolutions plus had a lot of built in file formats like ANIM, 8SVX, IFF ILBM etc. But with enough CPU power and memory, this becomes a non issue: Through the brute force of a Pentium with a PCI video bus, and I don't care how bad the OS is, it's still going to be more powerful than an overheating 040 with bandwidth limited Amiga custom chips or a late model VL bus VGA chip slaved off on the Zorro II bus.
The hobbyist market was also lost when Commodore died. A lot of people, myself included, had piles of fun learning about how the Amiga worked. But when CBM went bankrupt and it's later owners died as well, most of us turned elsewhere or plain well gave up on "playing" with computers. Many turned to Linux, BSD, BeOS and the like.
There is no real market for this device, at least not a serious one.
In the end, this will be a curiosity, primarily like the cool Jeri Ellsworth C-One board. Most people buying it will be the truly hardcore. Few hobbyists will be interested, as the casual computer enthusiast will be turned off by it's high price and low feature count.
Neo-Retro-Computing (Score:4, Interesting)
Thos of you who remember the Sinclair QL (ie. people such as Linus Torvalds and some of the early AmigaDOS authors who worked at Metacomco) might like to know that some people are continuing the development of both the hardware and the operating system..
eg. Q40 [q40.de] and their latest Q60 motherboard designed to fit in a PC case.
What's old is new again!
Too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)
OS4's now years behind schedule.
You've been able to buy motherboards for awhile. In fact those that purchased early were promised the OS and a T-Shirt if I recall. As of now, nothing's shipped other than a beta release of the OS for these early adopters. In fact, just the OS4 motherboard and a G3 CPU is more expensive than an entire Mac Mini system, and is inferior in about every way.
Any hype they've managed to build for the new Amiga has long since faded away, as have their missed dealines. Anyone remember the "Amiga Anywhere" promo blitz? Partnerships with Microsoft... Going to put an amiga on every machine, etc. Never happened.
I am a former Amiga user, and was really interested in the new Amiga when it was first announced (3 years ago? Memory's kinda faded, as has the Amigas allure). I've long since wrote them off though...
As I pointed out the other day [slashdot.org], the Mac Mini would make an excellent Amiga OS4 box, but Amiga won't license the OS to run on non-Amiga hardware, so you're either stuck paying way too much for an underpowered machine, or you move on to a "real OS", and write off the Amiga as a dead-end, as most of the computing world has already done. Why Amiga, who need as many users as they can get these days, refuse to license their OS for other PPC hardware is beyond me.
Their excuse is to prevent piracy, which was a problem for Amiga in its heyday, but come on... Paranoia is no excuse for a bad business plan. And really, what is there to pirate? I don't see a ton of companies getting ready to shove Amiga warez down our throat. There's probably what? 2 dozen titles at the most currently shipping for Amiga?? That's probably about one title per user when you get right down to it.
In short, I think we'll see a BeOS come-back long before an Amiga come-back.
Re:Too little, too late (Score:3, Informative)
But buy a new Amiga? What for?
Amiga VS PC's (Score:2)
Small Footprint & Low wattage = Embedded ? (Score:2)
AROS (Score:3, Informative)
Amiga was great - back in 1985 (Score:3, Insightful)
Possible GPL violation? (Score:2, Interesting)
"Wireless PCI cards using the Prism chipset are supported thanks to an OS4 driver ported over from Linux."
If they did a direct port of the code, surely that would be a GPL violation? The Linux driver would be under the GPL and therefore they would be forced to either take it out again or license OS4 as GPL.
Of course if they just used the Linux driver to reverse-engineer the workings of a Prism card, that would be acceptable - but the article sounds like
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Possible GPL violation? (Score:3, Informative)
Why would they have to license the entire OS under the GPL because the shipped a GPL'd driver with it?
Oh, they wouldn't. They'd just have to release the code that they added to the driver.
Re:Possible GPL violation? (Score:3, Insightful)
You are not allowed to use a GPL'd library as part of a closed source application even if you open up your changes to the library.
You are however allowed to ship GPL'd software together with your closed source OS (like Apple does), as long as all the applications are seperate entities. (Although Apple also releases
Amiga PDA (Score:3, Insightful)
Even better, if they could make a custom graphics chip that could emulate AGA and maybe add some new features, this PDA could double as a great game machine (and you have all the old amiga games to run on it). There's two markets right there.
Nevermind Amiga... (Score:2, Funny)
ahh warm and fuzzy.
YES! shadow of the beast please!! (Score:2, Interesting)
ah, the 1980s!
m.
Re:Hmm, they need to work on bringing it CURRENT! (Score:2)
Re:Hmm, they need to work on bringing it CURRENT! (Score:2)
If you look at Microsoft's Bootviz documentation, they claim that the proper benchmark is "usable desktop" and are guaranteeing the same 30 sec cold boot time after tuning with Bootviz on any XP machine (that meets XP's min requirements, of course)
Re:AmigaOS -- Disks (Score:2)
Re:AmigaOS -- Disks (Score:3, Informative)
No sweat. =)
You can buy a Catweasel [jschoenfeld.de]. Or alternately, you can pop on eBay and snag an old Amiga for about 50 bucks. Find a Fred Fish disk with a terminal program...buy a null modem cable and move the files over.
Currently that's what I do. I DMS a disk into a file, and then null-modem it to my laptop. WinUAE runs 99% of the images I make that way.
Hope that helps. BTW, my Amiga 500 was my first C programming experience too. Aztec C. Loved it.
Re:AmigaOS -- Disks (Score:2)
Re:AmigaOS -- Disks (Score:3, Informative)
Cloanto also offers a data transfer service if you don't want to buy a new piece of hardware for a limited data transfer job.
No, it bloody well shouldn't... (Score:4, Informative)
This is a completely different situation. The old Amiga OS was the closest thing to a real-time microkernel desktop environment that's ever been released to the general public: QNX dropped out of a retail version of Photon, and the only other candidate, OS/9 (no relation or Mac OS 9) on the Radio Shack color computer long predated anything like a desktop OS. If Amiga went that way, well, they would just be another Linux distro... and one that didn't run a lot of important Linux software because it's not an 80x86 and so it won't run binary-only packages.
I'm amazed that this seems to have maintained almost everything that was good about AmigaDOS, including the wonderful infinitely configurable message-passing OS architecture. Until this moment I had written off AmigaOS as another doomed Linux clone. It may be doomed, but if so it's doomed with style.
Part of the *nix philosophy I believe is interoperability and choice provided by source compatability, the ability to compile software on any OS that complies with POSIX and other unix standards.
I ran the Amiga sources newsgroup for some years, and did several ports of UNIX applications to the platform. Even back in 1986 it was already a very UNIX-friendly and UNIX-compatible environment. I can't imagine that it's moved away from that since.
they need to support POSIX, X11 and other Unix source compatability standards
The first web browser I ever used was UNIX Mosaic, running on my Amiga using a local X11 server from a UNIX box running at my ISP. The text editor I used was "elvis", one of the classic "vi" clones, and porting it to AmigaDOS was almost trivial compared to what I'd had to do in other ports.
This is why we see so many different filesystems avialable on Linux for instance
The Amiga had user-written user-mode file systems, including some amazing ones like a RAM based file system that survived reboots, long before Linux existed. The Amiga API is VERY well designed for this kind of thing... and needless to say no applications had to be rewritten to make it work!
This is nothing but good news. Please do some research before dismissing this amazing OS because it's not based on Linux.