| [News] AmigaOne no on-board sound? | ANN.lu |
| Posted on 06-Mar-2004 01:38 GMT by lawd | 135 comments
View flat
View list | |
Commenting a recent news item on amiga-news.de, Davy Wentzler of OS4 fame said the on-board sound of the AmigaOne does not work, furthermore explaining the chip is physically not present on AmigaOnes produced the last 9 months.
Frank Gutschow said on 05-Mär-2004, 23:38: "Meines erachtens sollte definitiv wirklich ersteinmal der Onboard-Chip des AmigaOne unterstützt werden."
Davy Wentzler answered on 05-Mär-2004, 23:45: "I'm gonna say it once more: it doesn't work. There's even a big chance, the chip is not physically present anymore on boards manufactured in the past 9 months."
Will Eyetech exchange all defect and component missing AmigaOnes or will they refund users that received broken hardware?
|
|
| List of all comments to this article |
| AmigaOne no on-board sound? : Comment 40 of 135 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 06-Mar-2004 13:19 GMT | In reply to Comment 36 (Don Cox):
> "And how else would you code an Amiga-like OS? Java? :-D"
> I would use C for the lowest level components only. Parts such as the Prefs
> programs should be written in a high level language, IMO.
Although I agree that a decent operating system should provide enough high level building block to allow for writing entire applications by even using an interpreted language, that wouldn't solve any particular problem regarding the instability of the system: the OS would still have certain semantics that allow any apps, even written in the most secure language, to crash the entire OS.
> "Besides, the language used has very little to do with the instability of the
> system... The system is instable because apps do wrong things AND the system
> lacks memory protection."
> IMO "broken by design" is an over-dramatic way to say "it doesn't have memory
> protection."
No, it's not. There's a big difference between a system that has no memory protection and a system which _works on the assumption_ that there's no memory protection.
Take Windows, for instance: it was born on systems which lacked MMU, hence it was without memory protection. Nowadays, you can't certainly say windows lacks memory protection, yet old application run seamlessy and seamlessy integrated with the other applications, witnessing that the system's API was, in fact, not "broken" (stability-wise) (ok, perhaps not *entirely* broken, given some old apps DO cause problems) yet it did not have MP.
AmigaOS' API is, instead, really broken in that it _assumes_ that pointers can be passed around and lets common application access vital parts of the system, giving them the chance and ability to crash the whole system by simply writing wrong values at the right place. |
|
| List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|
