24-Apr-2024 17:23 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 81 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 81]
[News] Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001ANN.lu
Posted on 31-Oct-2001 01:27 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä81 comments
View flat
View list
BPlan announce the first official public presentation of the Pegasos system running MorphOS at the Amiga 2001 show in Köln on 17.-18. November. They've also revised the specifications of the system. Read the full announcement here (in german).
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 1 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 31-Oct-2001 01:00 GMT
WinUAE, UAE, Amithlon, Amiga Forever
All emulators don't change a thing,
HEY I CAN MAKE 68K PROGRAMS RUN FASTER THEN A 060,
How about native PPC code, you Amithlon freaks.
all of this emulators run 68k programs with a 32 bits
address pointer not able to address all the memory
on modern system i686 system.
MorphOS, PowerUP, WorphUP,
All PPC Os's, will Amiga OS 4.0 be
yet an otter unsupported PPC split?
or will it be compatible with one of this?
Will all you're PPC programs be obsolete with Amiga OS 4.0?
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 2 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 01:47 GMT
The specs are quite cool - but why is http://www.bplan-gmbh.de/news/news05_e.html
written in german and not in english just as the suffix "_e.html" hints at?
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 3 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 31-Oct-2001 02:43 GMT
Try, http://www.bplan-gmbh.de/news/pegasos_e.html
or go to news on the page.
Pegasos is with I always wonted,
To bad AInc don't own the hardware or the OS!
Way don't Amiga Inc use MorphOS as an low-level OS
for an desktop system called Amiga OS 4.0?
Oh ye then the Amiga One/Eyetech will lose out.
The problem with the Amiga market to day is
not New Amiga hardware it is to agree to
use bplan as Amiga Hardware.
The second problem, with making bplan an new Amiga
is all the UAE users, they will attack this idea,
as PPC is harder to emulate the 680x0.
any way emulating 680x0 is faster on PPC the I686,
as bits is stored in a different way on i686 then PPC/680x0
The hidden agenda with AInc, Amintalon now Amiga XL,
inn fact one time Ainc head all most no faith in the
classic Amiga or the PPC Amiga they only wonted
the name and the feeling of the OS, they wonted
to steel the spirit of Amiga (the developers)
for there SDK (Stupid Developers Kit/Amiga DE and
stupid looking C64 Games for the DE player).
It was only the hard work of Amiga community to convince
Amiga Inc to make Amiga OS 3.5 and Amiga OS 3.9, and priorders,
This is the only thing that pushed them to do so.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 4 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Agimax on 31-Oct-2001 03:04 GMT
The BPlan/PegasOS/MorphOS IS A Damn Near Finished product, which users can feel, touch, and demo. Most Users flame MORPH OS/BPlan, but in the end-THEY PRODUCED. If the MORPH OS owner is such an idiot-Then how in the hell is there a semi-finished computer w/os and AMIGA inc. Still can't get done a piece of hardware/software that would be the equivalent of an add-on pentiumIII-backward compatible board for old ibm XT computers?
MorphOS Team/Bplan/& all others involved get a round of applause-even if it isn't AMIGA name. YOU PRODUCED!
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 5 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 31-Oct-2001 05:04 GMT
I don't have anything to say about MorphOS, but the hardware guys at bPlan do deserve a round of applause. If only this thing were cheap- which it won't be, I'd wager- it'd make a killer machine. It'll be interesting to see what Merlancia does with it, and any variants on it (their credibility rating has certainly gone up 300% or so, with Dave on board)...
That said, some minor aspects of the spec are a bit interesting. I seem to remember hearing AGP 4X, at first- did that get downgraded, or was it always meant as a 2X maximum? Anyone want to chime in with specs on Apple's video interface, for comparison?
The integrated peripherals are a minor surprise. The sound isn't that shocking- did it require any other chips, or was it a freebie? The ethernet is more of an eye-opener, and that modem- is that being driven somehow through the AC97 architecture (which, IIRC, allows for a softmodem interface)? If a softmodem, are QNX and LinuxPPC likely to see support, or are drivers only underway for MorphOS?
Certainly a piece of dream hardware... I won't be buying in for a while, and if I did buy in, it'd likely be for Linux, QNX or AmigaOS... but maybe a year or two down the line, when dual G4s might be looking affordable...
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 6 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 05:31 GMT
Ralph suxs enough said.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 7 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 07:46 GMT
This whole bPlan/MorphOS thing seems scary similar to the BeBox project and their pOS. They too had their hardware displayed with the software up and running... wasn't Dave Haynie involved in that too?
Well, well... we'll just have to wait and see like always... :-/
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 8 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 08:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Samface):
Samface - LOL! Way to mix your FUD up completely.
Hint 1 - BeBox came from Be, not P5/bPlan/MorphOS crew.
Hint 2 - pOS was nothing to do with P5/bPlan/MorphOS (additional hint - see ProDAD).
Not much of a fudmeister are you, whenyou can't even get basic facts right to support your FUD!
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 9 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by ANdrew Deacon on 31-Oct-2001 08:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Agimax):
They haven`t produced yet! BPlan state 1st quarter 2002 , same as Eyetech!
Anyway OS4.2 should run on Pegasos since it meets Zico specs I beleive.
Amiga One is a standalone PPC motherboard once OS4.2 is ready, is it not.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 10 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 09:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Anonymous):
I'm *really* getting tired of people jumping to conlusion and *NOT* reading what I'm actually trying to say...
"BeBox came from Be, not P5/bPlan/MorphOS crew."
Tell me where I said so... Hint 1 - I DIDN'T!!!
"pOS was nothing to do with P5/bPlan/MorphOS (additional hint - see ProDAD)."
Tell me where I said so... Hint 2 - I DIDN'T!!!
"Not much of a fudmeister are you, whenyou can't even get basic facts right to support your FUD!"
What facts? Where's the so called facts??? I don't get it, all I ever said was that the MorphOS/bPlan project *seems* similar to what ProDAD tried to accomplish, a PPC AmigaOS clone with a PPC only Motherboard. Also, as a *question* I asked if Dave Haynie wasn't somehow involved in that project too. Do you even know how to read???
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 11 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 09:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Anonymous):
And you blow.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 12 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Ville Sarell on 31-Oct-2001 09:34 GMT
Christian: I'm sorry but I'm really getting frustrated to those pointless anon comments. Almost all of them are flame comments anyway.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 13 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Andrea on 31-Oct-2001 09:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
As I already said in a previous post, at Pianeta Amiga I asked for the price of a complete system to a guy from Titan Computers, who said they plan to sell a complete setup (with G3@350MHz,HD,DVD,RAM,GFX board, lacking only the monitor) for 1000EUROs/950USD. I know it's not out yet, but I would concentrate my fears more on the functionality of the "beast" than on price (even if I do think that the retail price will be a bit higher than what they claim, although I don't have any evidencies). But, as I said, I have seen it working with both PPC and 68k programs, and although I'm not convinced wheter to buy one once it's out (hopefully soon...), I'm definitely keeping an eye on it.
Kind regards,
Andrea
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 14 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 09:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
>That said, some minor aspects of the spec are a bit interesting.
>I seem to remember hearing AGP 4X, at first- did that get downgraded,
>or was it always meant as a 2X maximum? Anyone want to chime in with
>specs on Apple's video interface, for comparison?
Afair it was always AGP2X - but "only" >500MB/s is not a big drawback
for the Amiga, is it? *lol*
>The integrated peripherals are a minor surprise. The sound isn't that
>shocking- did it require any other chips, or was it a freebie?
I do not know, the chip they use is fairly new and I think it is good
they did not use el some cheapo 16Bit noisegenerator that can be found
on some PC mainboards with "sound"...
>The ethernet is more of an eye-opener, and that modem- is that being
>driven somehow through the AC97 architecture (which, IIRC, allows for
>a softmodem interface)? If a softmodem, are QNX and LinuxPPC likely to
>see support, or are drivers only underway for MorphOS?
I think it is a softmodem according to AC97 specs (a special solution
would not have made sense). After all, Zico specs demand for a modem. ;-)
>Certainly a piece of dream hardware... I won't be buying in for a while,
>and if I did buy in, it'd likely be for Linux, QNX or AmigaOS... but
>maybe a year or two down the line, when dual G4s might be looking affordable...
G4 is a dead end imho. It did not deliver the power it was expected to.
Means PPC7400 only at 500MHz, PPC7450 still <1GHz and slower than PPC7400
at the same clock frequency, PPC7460 not in reach.
It did not have the multicore feature nor the 128Bit Maxbus.
Our last best hope will be the WunderCPU G5! :-)
(And maybe for lowcost Systems the PPC750FX up to 1GHz next year)
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 15 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 09:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Samface):
Samface - nice change of direction there, but let's remember what you originally wrote -
"This whole bPlan/MorphOS thing seems scary similar to the BeBox project and their pOS."
Contrast with what you are now saying you meant to write...
Note your use of "THEIR pOS" in that sentence...
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 16 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 10:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Anonymous):
Sigh... A like in Ape, B like in Bicycle, C like in...
"This whole bPlan/MorphOS thing seems scary similar to"
Subject A (bPlan and *their* MorphOS) *seem* similar to...
"...the BeBox project and their pOS."
...subject B (the BeBox and *their* pOS).
"Contrast with what you are now saying you meant to write..."
What contrast?
"Note your use of "THEIR pOS" in that sentence..."
Yes, as in the BeBox project's pOS.
And don't forget to do your homework for tomorow...
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 17 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 10:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (Samface):
ROTFL!
"Yes, as in the BeBox project's pOS. "
Boy, you need even more clues than I first thought...
Clue 1 - BeBox was designed by Be (you know, the inventors of BeOS).
Clue 2 - pOS was developed by ProDAD (you know, NOT the inventors of BeOS, nor the BeBox).
You were saying...?
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 18 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 31-Oct-2001 10:26 GMT
You mean this looks a lot like the PIOS one. Working prototypes shown, only not in production....
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 19 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 10:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Anonymous):
You got PMS or something? Yeah, I mixed the BeBox up with the PIOSOne, so what? It's still besides my point for christ sake!!!
Geez, picking on 4 or 5 years old facts... get a life!
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 20 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 10:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Amifan):
Aaaaah... atlast, a sign of intelligence! Thank you! :-)
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 21 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 31-Oct-2001 10:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (Anonymous):
They have translated it now.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 22 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 31-Oct-2001 11:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Samface):
PIOS One has nothing todo with pOS.
pOS by Prodad.
PiosOne by Pios aka Met@box.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 23 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 11:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (David Scheibler):
MorphOS - by the MorphOS team
Pegasos - by bPlan
What's your point?
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 24 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 31-Oct-2001 11:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Samface):
And what, dear Sammy, does pOS have to do with the PIOS-1?
If you are going to start dragging up old projects, at least make an effort to drag up the right ones.
*sigh*
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 25 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 31-Oct-2001 11:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Samface):
And that's also wrong.
Pegasos by Bplan.
MorphOS by Bplan.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 26 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 11:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (David Scheibler):
Now THAT was new information to me, I thought they where just a partner of the MorphOS team. We'll, I never claimed to know it all so I'm not going to argue.
However, I wish people would stop getting stuck with facts. You see, I'm not trying to state facts, I'm only trying to make a point. Read Amifan's post (18) and you'll see what I mean.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 27 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 31-Oct-2001 12:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (Samface):
Do you actually read laire's posts where he told you that several
times? Or do you just press F1-F10 to generate a random answer which
includes some silly nameplay?
And BTW: AFAIK there has never been a working PIOS1 prototype. Dave
always tried to make it work (even on a fair he still worked on the
motherboard) but failed.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 28 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 12:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (David Scheibler):
"Do you actually read laire's posts where he told you that several
times?"
I *NEVER* spoke with Ralph about the bPlan. Now, get off my back.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 29 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 12:35 GMT
After that is settled, let´s get back on topic, shall we?
@ Kjetl:
So what exactly are you bragging about? PPC software is the key, you think? Well, try considering this:
1) Apple has cornered the PPC market just about as well as Microsoft did with the x86 market. Just another PPC OS won´t take a bite out of that, and neither would just another x86 OS take a bite out of the Windows / Linux/x86 market.
2) As of AmigaOS 5.x, the whole plan involves HW independance and Virtual Processor technology anyways (at last according to the last clear statement we got from Amiga Inc., they´ve become a bit less specific on this recently). Your great, hard-to-emulate, saving-the-world PPC software will be obsolete then, emulated by OS 5 in a *sandbox* (look it up at the Technology "Update"). You are right, it´s harder to emulate a PPC than emulating a 68k, so your favourite PPC software will bog down OS 5 even more than 68k software.
3) Lots of people have only one meaning of keeping in touch with AmigaOS at all - emulators. The choice for them is not AmigaOne/Pegasos vs. Amithlon/UAE, but Amithlon/UAE vs. no AmigaOS at all. Try figuring out which alternative is better for Amiga OS / software development.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 30 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 12:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Solar (BAUD)):
Hello there, m8! :-)
"So what exactly are you bragging about? PPC software is the key, you think?"
Until we get a hardware independant system, yes. I know, that leaves the emulation community out in the cold, but I'm afraid that's something we can't take into consideration. Example: Should Sony support Bleem? I don't think so.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 31 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 12:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Kjetil):
Round #2...
> Way don't Amiga Inc use MorphOS as an low-level OS
> for an desktop system called Amiga OS 4.0?
Two parties each blaming the other for being not cooperative don´t make a good cooperation, don´t you think? I won´t judge who is to blame (truth usually resides somewhere in between), but I doubt the MorphOS team (especially Ralph Schmidt) and Amiga Inc. could work together for any extended period of time without killing each other.
> Oh ye then the Amiga One/Eyetech will lose out.
I doubt that´s the reason. Eyetech is currently working on the only solution to make a "smooth" transition from the "Classic" AGA-dependant OS to a newer, independent one. Pegasos simply doesn´t offer that, which would either break the downward compatibility so many people adhere to like the holy cow, or delay the next AmigaOS release even further.
> The second problem, with making bplan an new Amiga
> is all the UAE users, they will attack this idea,
> as PPC is harder to emulate the 680x0.
You didn´t understand the needs of other people.
> any way emulating 680x0 is faster on PPC the I686,
> as bits is stored in a different way on i686 then PPC/680x0
Which is just so much bull. For emulating the CPU, endianess doesn´t *really* matter, and the moment you access the software data, it doesn´t matter either if your 68k is native, PPC emulated, or x86 emulated.
> The hidden agenda with AInc, Amintalon now Amiga XL,
> inn fact one time Ainc head all most no faith in the
> classic Amiga or the PPC Amiga
Which is a very reasonable approach since neither an 68k AmigaOS nor a custom PPC AmigaOS have any significant live expectancy.
> they only wonted
> the name and the feeling of the OS,
If they get the "feeling" right, I don´t care what hardware it runs on or what´s the name on the package, and neither do any of my coleagues at work, which are professional software engineers, and would be really interested in a desktop OS alternative *not* spelled "Linux". If it feels OK for both developers and users, why should they care about hardware or name, or underlying technology for that matter?
The price tag of the bundle *does* matter, however, both for developers and users.
> they wonted
> to steel the spirit of Amiga (the developers)
> for there SDK (Stupid Developers Kit/Amiga DE and
> stupid looking C64 Games for the DE player).
That certainly was part of their plan, yes. Some things turned out different than they planned them, as has been discussed before, so AmigaDE appeared much sooner than the promised desktop OS - but in the end, either Amiga fails, or they win with the Tao technology underneath. I simply cannot see any other chance anymore.
> It was only the hard work of Amiga community to convince
> Amiga Inc to make Amiga OS 3.5 and Amiga OS 3.9, and priorders,
> This is the only thing that pushed them to do so.
I doubt so. Amiga Inc. needs the developers, since there are only two "aces" Amiga Inc. can play that sets them apart from BeOS, QNX, Atheos, MorphOS or whatever underdog OS you can think of:
1) Hardware independancy due to Tao technology;
2) an existing developers community as a head start.
What you, and several others, seem to be completely ignorant of is the fact that almost everything AmigaOS once stood for is dead and buried today. What´s left is the feeling, the impression of simplicity, transparency, and ease of use.
All this can hardly be achieved by just continuing development of the old code base. They have to start something new, and they try hard to do so with AmigaDE and AmigaOS 5, providing users and developers with a migration path (AmigaOS 4.x). No matter what, AmigaOS 5.x will either be HW independant - means end of Amiga PPC era - or they will finally retreat into a niche (like, home server) where they will vanish from the radar of all those looking for an alternative desktop OS.
Yet still, people are evangelizing the PPC, and honestly think they are doing Amiga Inc. any good with it...
As for MorphOS, they don´t have a plan beyond PPC. If you don´t realize what that means, go to top and read again.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 32 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 13:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Samface):
@ Samface:
Hello, back to the original arena, eh? ;-)
> "So what exactly are you bragging about? PPC software is the key, you think?"
> Until we get a hardware independant system, yes. I know, that leaves the
> emulation community out in the cold, but I'm afraid that's something we can't
> take into consideration. Example: Should Sony support Bleem? I don't think so.
Do you think PPC-specific software does help a HW independant AmigaOS 5, unless being recompiled to VP? I don´t think so - yes a PPC *is* harder to emulate, and emulating it would be necessary for any AmigaOS 5 trying to run OS 4 software on *non*-PPC hardware. We would have the same situation all over again - where there should be a clean cut towards the latest technology, there´s legacy software to be taken into account, effectively limiting our choice of performant hardware.
Calling for PPC-specific OS 4.x software might very well be killing a HW independant OS 5, that´s what I am afraid of. I´d rather have AmigaOS 4 being a 68k emulator with improved APIs, *without* support for PPC software, cutting that part of CPU dependance off right now, so we can switch to AmigaOS 5.x later on even more easily.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 33 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 31-Oct-2001 13:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Ville Sarell):
> Christian: I'm sorry but I'm really getting frustrated to those pointless
> anon comments. Almost all of them are flame comments anyway.
I've got a few ideas on that subject, but my past experiences indicate that
it might take a while before they materialize as code.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 34 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 31-Oct-2001 13:30 GMT
Well done bPlan for having working hardware now that they are willing to show off working. The price appears to be reasonably cheap as well. The system is also generally quite up to date, by using the PCI version of VIA's most recent southbridge for network, audio, IDE, modem possibly, and USB. Nice to see Firewire as well - lets hope they demo it working at the show.
This will be a nice bit of hardware to stick Linux on. A couple of fast IBM PPC750's as well...
Still wondering who makes the northbridge though... :)
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 35 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 13:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Solar (BAUD)):
"Do you think PPC-specific software does help a HW independant AmigaOS 5, unless being recompiled to VP?"
Do you think x86-specific software does help a HW independant AmigaOS 5, unless being recompiled to VP? You see, I really don't see the difference. I see the AmigaOne as a necessary transition platform towards hardware independancy. I mean, we need to stay away from the most common platform to avoid falling into the "cheapest-and-most-available-hardware" trap. Look at Linux, not much of the software developed for it is also made available to the PPC users. If we fall into something similar, where did the hardware independancy go? That won't happen if we choose another platform since it will force the community to develop in a more hardware independant friendly way. (portable source code)
But that's besides the most important reason, you have to remember that the community already has gone halfway through the PPC transition. Another change in platform target just wouldn't be very wise right now.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 36 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 31-Oct-2001 13:49 GMT
While Amiga Inc act like calamities and lurch from one disaster to another, MorphOS seems to be getting stronger every day!
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 37 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 13:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (smithy):
"...MorphOS seems to be getting stronger every day!"
Is that supposed to be good news? I still don't want a simple PPC version of the classic AmigaOS with the features of Windows 95 added to it. Wake up and smell the coffee, it just won't make a viable alternative on the market of today. (and I'm not just talking about the Amiga market, wich is barely alive these days...)
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 38 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 13:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Samface):
I don´t see how going PPC specific for the time (AmigaOS 4.x) being helps a "HW independant" approach. I´d daresay, by making AmigaOS 4.x running (emulated or native) on a wide variety of hardware, improving it´s 68k code to being independant form AGA (native or emulated), and then step from there *directly* towards full HW independancy by means of VP, would be better than channeling everybody through the AmigaOne, potentially losing many hobbyists and not-so-hellbend-on-PPC developers in the process.
Yes, it is my belief that the whole PPC episode did more harm than good to the AmigaOS as whole.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 39 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 31-Oct-2001 14:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Solar (BAUD)):
There will be native PPC/x86 applications also for OS5. VP is not solution for everything.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 40 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Georg Steger on 31-Oct-2001 14:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Solar (BAUD)):
>> any way emulating 680x0 is faster on PPC the I686,
>> as bits is stored in a different way on i686 then PPC/680x0
>
> Which is just so much bull. For emulating the CPU, endianess doesn´t *really* matter, and the moment you access the
> software data, it doesn´t matter either if your 68k is native, PPC emulated, or x86 emulated.
Yes, but the problem is there when you want to run 68k programs side by
side with (x86/ppc/whatever) native programs. Where native code is allowed
to call 68k code, and 68k code is allowed to call native code. That's what
Ralph means when speaking about "mixed mode".
Let's assume a x86 native AmigaOS -> the OS structures are little endian.
And we have a native x86 app which does this:
struct NewWindow nw;
struct Window *win;
struct IBox box;
nw.LeftEdge10;
nw.TopEdge20;
nw.Title"titel";
winOpenWindowTags(&nw, WA_Activate, TRUE, WA_Zoom, &box, TAG_DONE);
xwin->LeftEdge;
--> this native app works of course fine. Now think about having
a 68k exe, which you run through emulation in this x86 native AmigaOS,
and which does exactly the same things
--> lots and lots of problems, like x86 native OpenWindowTagList function
getting passed a NewWindow struct in big endian format, although it needs
it in little endian (= native) format. When the 68k program does "xwin->
LeftEdge" it will of course a assume that win points to a big endian
"struct Window", but it doesn't. Etc. ...
Only solution for this problem is IMHO to wait for future x86 cpus which
support being switched into big endian mode, or to use tricks/macros/special
compiler in x86 native code to basically have a *big* endian x86 native AmigaOS,
even though the cpu is little endian.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 41 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 14:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Solar (BAUD)):
"I don´t see how going PPC specific for the time (AmigaOS 4.x) being helps a "HW independant" approach. I´d daresay, by making AmigaOS 4.x running (emulated or native) on a wide variety of hardware, improving it´s 68k code to being independant form AGA (native or emulated), and then step from there *directly* towards full HW independancy by means of VP, would be better than channeling everybody through the AmigaOne, potentially losing many hobbyists and not-so-hellbend-on-PPC developers in the process."
Exactly like the Linux community? They support (kernel wise atleast) nearly every platform out there but then, look at the software released for it. Is it really that hardware independant? No, if you like Linux I recommend getting yourself an x86, period. Let's not give the developers the opportunity to lean against that comfortable x86-wall, for me it would be even better if the AmigaOS didn't support anything but VP code.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 42 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 14:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (priest):
Which is, again, missing the point. There is a huge difference between an OS 4.x PPC native application and a VP .00 application enhanced by a .14 (?) PPC native binary.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 43 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 14:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (Georg Steger):
> Yes, but the problem is there when you want to run 68k programs side by
> side with (x86/ppc/whatever) native programs.
Which was not the subject. It was about "PPC can emulate a 68k faster than a x86", which is basically nonsense.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 44 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 14:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Samface):
Sam, you are actually reinforcing my standpoint: Don´t give developers the chance to lean against the "better" PPC wall, force them to think generic, which *includes* the x86.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 45 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 14:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (Solar (BAUD)):
"Sam, you are actually reinforcing my standpoint"
I have no problems of seeing your standpoint. What I wonder is, can you see that alternative platforms tends to support x86 more than x86 supports alternative platforms?
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 46 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 14:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (Samface):
Hmmm... *scratchingmyhead*
I can see your drift here. Yet still, PPC-native OS 4.x software is more or less a kludge the second we have a VP-based OS 5, and people will hop around advertising the PPC all over again "because it can run the software so much faster", and I am simply afraid that someone important might actually agree with this standpoint, ruining the whole concept of VP.
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 47 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 14:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 46 (Solar (BAUD)):
"...I am simply afraid that someone important might actually agree with this standpoint, ruining the whole concept of VP."
Yes, I understand that. That's a risc we'll reduce by choosing PPC because the chance of that happening (atleast in my point of view) would be so much greater if we chose x86. It has happened before (back to my Linux example) and could easily happen again.
Also, that combined with the whole already halfway transitioned PPC Amiga community, x86 just isn't an option for the AmigaOne/OS4.x, I'm afraid. :-/
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 48 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Solar (BAUD) on 31-Oct-2001 14:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (Samface):
You are, IMHO, confusing the dangers of a x86 *native* AmigaOS, akin to AROS or the Amithlon native plug-in ability, with the advantages of having AmigaOS 4.x available in some emulated form on x86 hardware *in* *addition* to AmigaOne...
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 49 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 14:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 48 (Solar (BAUD)):
Not really, thanks to Amithlon's x86 API people can now develop x86 *native* software for the Amiga. :-(
Pegasos to be presented at Amiga 2001 : Comment 50 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 31-Oct-2001 15:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 49 (Samface):
Doh! Too fast on my replies today... :-P
Well, UAE/Fellow is of course not harmful to the AmigaOne/OS4.x project, agreed. Amithlon on the other hand... :-(
Anonymous, there are 81 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 81]
Back to Top