08-Jul-2020 03:49 GMT.
[News] OS3.9 Boingbag 2 availableANN.lu
Posted on 20-Mar-2002 18:03 GMT by Christian Kemp125 comments
View flat
View list
Jarmo Laakkonen writes: H&P is proud to announce the availability of Boing Bag 2 for AmigaOS 3.9
OS 3.9: Boing Bag 2 available now!

20. March 2002: H&P is proud to announce the availability of Boing Bag 2 for AmigaOS 3.9. Boing Bag 3.9-2 contains many bug fixes, small enhancement and new features in the areas multimedia (AMPlifier, PlayCD, sound datatype), shell, Workbench (Find, AsyncWB, UnArc, XAD v10), ReAction and harddisk support. The Boing Bag is delivered in three parts: The main archive with all the files needed to update AmigaOS 3.9, the translations into different languages and the contributions (CDDB library, OpenURL, ClassAction). We want to thank all people that made it possible.

Please download at least the main archive and the translation(s) for the language(s) you desire. The contributions are optional.

Note: This Update requires AmigaOS 3.9 with Boing Bag 1. AmigaOS XL users can install the Boing Bag 2 directly.


List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1redrumloa20-Mar-2002 17:22 GMT
Comment 2ehaines20-Mar-2002 17:48 GMT
Comment 3redrumloa20-Mar-2002 17:56 GMT
Comment 4cOrpse20-Mar-2002 18:03 GMT
Comment 5StAn20-Mar-2002 19:22 GMT
Comment 6Rassilon20-Mar-2002 19:35 GMT
Comment 7Amon_Re20-Mar-2002 20:04 GMT
Comment 8Bill Hoggett20-Mar-2002 20:17 GMT
Comment 9StAn20-Mar-2002 20:21 GMT
Comment 10thanks H&P20-Mar-2002 20:24 GMT
Comment 11darklite20-Mar-2002 21:44 GMT
Comment 12Matthew20-Mar-2002 21:53 GMT
Comment 13Anonymous20-Mar-2002 22:05 GMT
Comment 14StAn20-Mar-2002 22:12 GMT
Comment 15redrumloa20-Mar-2002 22:38 GMT
Comment 16pVC20-Mar-2002 22:58 GMT
Comment 17Prince Charles II20-Mar-2002 23:37 GMT
Comment 18Ville Sarell20-Mar-2002 23:47 GMT
Comment 19Joe CD3221-Mar-2002 00:06 GMT
Comment 20Budda21-Mar-2002 00:21 GMT
Comment 21zippo21-Mar-2002 00:50 GMT
Comment 22AmiTroll21-Mar-2002 01:32 GMT
Comment 23AmiTroll21-Mar-2002 01:34 GMT
Comment 24jack21-Mar-2002 02:10 GMT
Comment 25sutro21-Mar-2002 03:43 GMT
Comment 26Anonymous21-Mar-2002 05:45 GMT
Comment 27Thomas Würgler21-Mar-2002 06:35 GMT
Comment 28Darren Glenn21-Mar-2002 07:15 GMT
Comment 29Fabio21-Mar-2002 07:44 GMT
Comment 30John Block21-Mar-2002 08:20 GMT
Comment 31darklite21-Mar-2002 08:25 GMT
Comment 32simpleppc21-Mar-2002 08:41 GMT
Comment 33Keith Blakemore-Noble21-Mar-2002 08:51 GMT
Comment 34luomake21-Mar-2002 09:11 GMT
Comment 35John Block21-Mar-2002 09:18 GMT
Comment 36darklite21-Mar-2002 09:29 GMT
Comment 37John Block21-Mar-2002 09:39 GMT
Comment 38Rik Sweeney21-Mar-2002 09:43 GMT
Comment 39Ville Sarell21-Mar-2002 09:44 GMT
Comment 40Morgoth21-Mar-2002 10:39 GMT
Comment 41Bill Hoggett21-Mar-2002 10:42 GMT
Comment 42Zadoc21-Mar-2002 10:48 GMT
Comment 43Snuden21-Mar-2002 10:50 GMT
Comment 44Bill Hoggett21-Mar-2002 10:51 GMT
Comment 45Alkis Tsapanidis21-Mar-2002 10:58 GMT
Comment 46redrumloa21-Mar-2002 11:12 GMT
Comment 47redrumloa21-Mar-2002 11:18 GMT
Comment 48m0ns00n21-Mar-2002 11:27 GMT
Comment 49Guess Who!21-Mar-2002 11:58 GMT
Comment 50John Block21-Mar-2002 12:33 GMT
Comment 51BetongApe21-Mar-2002 12:34 GMT
Comment 52green cup21-Mar-2002 12:42 GMT
Comment 53redrumloa21-Mar-2002 12:44 GMT
Comment 54alan buxey21-Mar-2002 12:46 GMT
Comment 55Alkis Tsapanidis21-Mar-2002 13:16 GMT
Comment 56Samface21-Mar-2002 13:26 GMT
Comment 57darklite21-Mar-2002 13:40 GMT
Comment 58Alkis Tsapanidis21-Mar-2002 13:45 GMT
Comment 59Alkis Tsapanidis21-Mar-2002 13:47 GMT
Comment 60Zadoc21-Mar-2002 14:04 GMT
Comment 61Anonymous21-Mar-2002 14:07 GMT
Comment 62Mathew21-Mar-2002 14:27 GMT
Comment 63Samface21-Mar-2002 14:33 GMT
Comment 64GuiZmO21-Mar-2002 14:51 GMT
Comment 65Christophe Decanini21-Mar-2002 14:52 GMT
Comment 66Mike Veroukis21-Mar-2002 15:26 GMT
Comment 67Bill Hoggett21-Mar-2002 15:47 GMT
Comment 68Mathew21-Mar-2002 15:50 GMT
Comment 69John Block21-Mar-2002 15:56 GMT
Comment 70darklite21-Mar-2002 16:01 GMT
Comment 71Mike Veroukis21-Mar-2002 16:14 GMT
Comment 72darklite21-Mar-2002 16:34 GMT
Comment 73Christophe Decanini21-Mar-2002 16:38 GMT
Comment 74John Block21-Mar-2002 16:42 GMT
Comment 75Christophe Decanini21-Mar-2002 17:00 GMT
Comment 76Bill Hoggett21-Mar-2002 17:01 GMT
Comment 77Mike Veroukis21-Mar-2002 17:03 GMT
Comment 78Alan Watson21-Mar-2002 17:05 GMT
Comment 79Bill T.21-Mar-2002 17:21 GMT
Comment 80Alkis Tsapanidis21-Mar-2002 17:23 GMT
Comment 81Alkis Tsapanidis21-Mar-2002 17:25 GMT
Comment 82John Block21-Mar-2002 18:01 GMT
Comment 83cOrpse21-Mar-2002 18:09 GMT
Comment 84smithy21-Mar-2002 18:11 GMT
Comment 85Mekanix21-Mar-2002 18:19 GMT
Comment 86Christophe Decanini21-Mar-2002 18:20 GMT
Comment 87smithy21-Mar-2002 18:23 GMT
OS3.9 Boingbag 2 available : Comment 88 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by darklite on 21-Mar-2002 18:36 GMT
In reply to Comment 75 (Christophe Decanini):
>It is very often that you are provocative.
And the obvious anti-x86 crap like "why do you need an amithlon x86 divx player, you can use media player in windows?" isn't?
Just like Bill says, you seem to 'miss' those all the time.
>I don't blame them to have expressed their opinion but sometimes I feel that there is an amiga news >that has nothing to do with x86 vs PPC or Amithlon vs AmigaOS 4 etc and that you turn it into this >flamewar and everytime they backed you up.
>At the end instead of having comments on the thread we have a flamewar.
When they backed me up it was not to have some silly flameware, but because trolls were spreading x86 FUD again. You won't see me insulting people all the time, but argumenting my point. That can't be said for the anti-x86 crew, they just start calling me <censored>, <censored> and <censored> without even trying to give some good arguments (prolly because there are none).
>It is not censorship of Amithlon, it is censorship of your provocative attitude.
And *only* of *my* provocative attitude.
>Oh, *I* am dividing the Amiga community, I (but not only me) who repeatedly
>>advocated cross-compiling and compatible API's between x86 and PPC?
>By setting up flamewar you participate in a "spiritual split"
"spiritual split"... good one.
>>Not Amiga Inc who obviously don't give a damn about the 'classic' Amiga (how
>>about a statement about x86 AmigaOS, it's all been vary vague - a simple yes
>>or no will do), or Hyperion who stab little Bill Gates voodoo dolls and sh*t
>>their pants every time someone mentions x86. It's sad that even you believe
>>their pathetic x86 FUD, which makes no sense at all BTW.
>AmigaINC do not post on ANN.
What does that have to do with anything?
>Hyperion did and I should have removed some posts like the BeOS thing that was targetting pro x86
>guys. It just happened when I was away. Next time I will do it.
Should have, would have, ... You're starting to sound like Amiga Inc.
>>>You blame Hyperion, Bplan, whoever but at least they don't have a bunch of
>>>trolls that come here regularly to provocate people.
>>You are one of them, but you don't seem to realise.
>I could be as a ANN users (some comments) but never as a moderator. If so I would have deleted a lot
>of stuff that I disliked and added a lot of posts to make a point about something.
>Perhaps I should have a nickname so you would not mix my two sides.
And I say it's pretty obvious you're moderation is subjective sometimes.
>>You removed a perfectly fine post, there was nothing provocative about the
>>post in itself.
>This post was made to make your point
I can honestly say I didn't think of adding that comment until after I submitted the news item.
>it was not an Amiga news
It IS Amiga news, as the new Amigas will run PPC cpu's.
And it certainly is more related to Amiga than any MS trial.
>>I'm sure Christian wouldn't have deleted it.
>Perhaps not because Christian is not around that much. I'am sure i delete more posts than he does.
That's not the point, the point is that Christian wouldn't have deleted it.
You could have just deleted my comment BTW.
>> Also, I would *never* add my own opinion to a news item. The comment was a joke, hence the
>>smiley. Plus most other comments were very interesting.
>A smiley does not give the right to do everything.
>A lot of people reading you do not see the smiley and jump into the flamewar.
So it's my fault people don't see the smiley?
Shall I add <JOKE> tags next time, maybe 10 to be sure? That would ruin the joke though.
>>Whatever you say, I believe you deleted that post because it wasn't positive
>>about the powerpc. Yet, any post about someone sueing Microsoft never gets
>>deleted, isn't that ironic?
>No you are plain wrong. i want amiga news thats all. i missed the MS post. i would have deleted it.
It wasn't Amiga news *AT ALL*? Read above.
"I missed the MS post"... I don't believe you
>Christian will perhaps do a new category for this kind of posts.
>It will save my time as I won't administrate it.
I wouldn't mind... But I guess Christian doesn't trust me, because I might be biased :/
#93 darklite
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 89darklite21-Mar-2002 18:37 GMT
Comment 90Christophe Decanini21-Mar-2002 18:41 GMT
Comment 91Christophe Decanini21-Mar-2002 18:47 GMT
Comment 92Mekanix21-Mar-2002 19:12 GMT
Comment 93darklite21-Mar-2002 19:14 GMT
Comment 94Bill Hoggett21-Mar-2002 19:26 GMT
Comment 95Anonymous21-Mar-2002 19:31 GMT
Comment 96darklite21-Mar-2002 19:35 GMT
Comment 97cOrpse21-Mar-2002 21:08 GMT
Comment 98redrumloa21-Mar-2002 21:16 GMT
Comment 99darklite21-Mar-2002 21:48 GMT
Comment 100amigasteve21-Mar-2002 21:59 GMT
Comment 101smithy21-Mar-2002 22:11 GMT
Comment 102Amigan Software21-Mar-2002 22:13 GMT
Comment 103smithy21-Mar-2002 22:13 GMT
Comment 104smithy21-Mar-2002 22:17 GMT
Comment 105redrumloa21-Mar-2002 23:30 GMT
Comment 106redrumloa21-Mar-2002 23:39 GMT
Comment 107darklite22-Mar-2002 00:01 GMT
Comment 108Daniel,Stefan,Anders22-Mar-2002 02:12 GMT
Comment 109Christophe Decanini22-Mar-2002 02:25 GMT
Comment 110Christophe Decanini22-Mar-2002 02:31 GMT
Comment 111Alkemyst22-Mar-2002 02:44 GMT
Comment 112Anonymous22-Mar-2002 07:30 GMT
Comment 113Fabio22-Mar-2002 07:39 GMT
Comment 114redrumloa22-Mar-2002 10:10 GMT
Comment 115Samface22-Mar-2002 14:13 GMT
Comment 116Alkemyst22-Mar-2002 16:09 GMT
Comment 117Anders22-Mar-2002 19:19 GMT
Comment 118smithy22-Mar-2002 19:26 GMT
Comment 119mark23-Mar-2002 00:13 GMT
Comment 120Donovan Reeve23-Mar-2002 03:57 GMT
Comment 121Joe CD3223-Mar-2002 13:03 GMT
Comment 122samface24-Mar-2002 00:00 GMT
Comment 123samface24-Mar-2002 00:00 GMT
Comment 124samface24-Mar-2002 00:04 GMT
Comment 125Patrik24-Mar-2002 10:16 GMT
Back to Top