19-Jun-2024 04:01 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 125 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 125]
[News] Frieden brothers talk about OS 4ANN.lu
Posted on 27-Nov-2001 15:40 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä125 comments
View flat
View list
The Frieden brothers from Hyperion have been answering questions about AmigaOS 4 at comp.sys.amiga.games in the recent days. I've c&p'd their answers below. [Warning, it's rather long - Teemu]

Note: the comments by the Friedens are in normal text, and the comments by other people are in italic

First of all, the idea is to get the AmigaOS from 68k to the PPC. Of course, there's a lot of code in the system, and lot's of code that's beyond our reach (hardware drivers in ROMs, for example). So one of the core components is of course the 68k emulator. The JIT version is already very fast, if you have a 040/25 and a fast 603e, you'll actually be able to run some programs faster than on the physical 040/25...

The second core component will be Exec SG. This is a reimplementation of the original Exec, written in C and placed onto a hardware abstraction layer so that it ports easily from one hardware to the other (remember, we intent to support a lot of different hardware, some of these will not have the Amiga chipset anymore). New features (compared to the old Exec) will be virtual memory. Don't worry, you'll not have to select "Shutdown" from the "Start" menu, you can just switch off ;) We also want to introduce some weak form of memory protection, like protecting code from being overwritten.. Later version will also include resource tracking.

The third mayor (new) building block is the new-style library interface. The cool thing about this is that it enables old 68k libraries to act as new OS4 libraries. To OS4 applications, 68k libraries will look like PPC native libraries. OTOH, new PPC only libraries will look like old 68k libraries to emulated 68k programs. This is achieved by the new library loader: Whenever a library is loaded, the "missing" part of the interface will be generated on-the-fly (by creating so called "stub" functions). So, even though a library is not yet ported to PPC, it can be used as if it were a PPC library, and as soon as it's ported, the program using it will use PPC code, even without recompiling the program (sorry if that comes out a bit complicated....)

For the initial release, we want to have at least the new Exec SG (otherwise, the whole system wouldn't work, anyway), a PPC native DOS, the TCP stack, new file system, and some devices. If there's still time, we'll port as much as possible to native PPC.

Nice. How about my 68060/50-604e/233 combo... What kind of speeds can I expect from the emulated 060 versus my real 50 MHz 060?

That's hard to say. The JIT compiler is still in the works, and the speed you get actually greatly depends on the program you're running - we have some cases where the speed is on par with a 060/50, and sometimes only with a 040/30. In any case, there's still a lot of room for optimization. As with any sort of emulation, statistical results may help finding those instructions that are executed most frequently and can receive special optimizations.

Is this based on the AROS work?

No, the ExecSG will be a complete re-implementation. AROS' exec is basically a re-write of the old exec, but SG will get a lot of new features, new library concept, Hardware abstraction layer etc.

With the virtual memory, will it be intelligent enough to shut itself off? Nothing is worse then the Windows implementation that once it needs to come on it stays on for the rest of the session whether it needs to or not.

No, there will be no shutdown required. Swapping will go to a dedicated swap partition preferably, and this will be re-initialized when the system starts, since the memory image on the swap space will be invalid anyway. So you can basically switch off the machine even when it's writing - no filesystem will get corrupted since there is no file system involved.

How is virtual memory better then spooling from the hard drive? What are the advantages?

Spooling from Harddrive is almost always the slower solution. For one thing, files on the harddrive are almost never in any format that the program in question can use out-of-the-box. For example, sound files may be encoded/compressed, and reading them from disk means decoding/decompressing them. Virtual Memory just dumps the memory image to the harddrive and reads it back when needed, no need to convert anything.

Awesome! Any hints as to how you pull it off? I know you can't give specifics, but I'd love to know anything about how that will work.

The libraries have an old-style jump table as well as a new-style symbol table once they are in memory. Both parts can be recreated using the FD file (which must be on disk obviously for this to work). The PPC side of things will use name binding, you don't have something like a library-relative jump but rather a textual symbol store in the file that gets "patched" at load time. This has the additional advantage of eleminating one jump - normally you do a "jsr -$nn(a6)" into the jump table and then take the "jmp $xxxxxx" that is stored there (on WarpUp it's slightly different but principially the same). The new system looks for the symbols at load time, and patches the subroutine jump directly into the executable, meaning there is only one direct jump into the library, not two.

Also, will my old PowerUP ELF's work at all on this system (there are only like 2 things I even remotely care about that aren't likely to see a Warp OS release)> This solution is Warp OS compatible, yes?

WarpOS uses a mechanism very similar to the 68k libraries. The basically work without system intervention, i.e. they use the jump table directly. Since the jump table is there, both 68k and WarpUp will work right away.

For PowerUP, I have to admit that I don't know how they work, but I am sure that it would be no problem to incorporate them. We're thinking of some sort of plugin interface for the loader, where you could write a small piece of code that can load a certain file type. This would for example make it possible to load Java JAR files, shell scripts, or any binary format transparently.

I have a Cyberstorm PPC, all my media (2 HD's and CD-ROM) barring my floppy are currently connected to the SCSI controller on my Cyberstorm. The HD's are formatted w/ the Trackdisk 64 filesystem provided on AOS 3.5/3.9... Are these still going to work w/ the new filesystem? If not, how can I migrate my data w/o "backing it up" elsewhere (eg: burning it to a CD)?

I think that the new file system is completely backward compatible, but I might be mistaken there. Olaf is doing it. If it doesn't work, we might provide a convertion program, but I am quite sure that the system *is* compatible.

What TCP stack are you going to use? I curretly use Miami DX, how does the AOS 4.x stack compare?

The TCP stack is the fastest one around, beating every other stack in terms of transfer rates. It gets over 900 kb/s on a Ariadne II board.

WHY OH WHY can't there be a Kickstart ROM upgrade?!? I'm sick of patches and kludges that reboot my machine before it's even up and working and require SetPatch or a mount list to mount my TD64 devices. Is there anything to be done?

Yes, a new kickstart would be good. We're thinking about that. I would personally prefer the kickstart to be loaded from disk (I mean, how doesn't have a harddisk these days?) and the ROM only containing a minimal bootstrap and drivers for booting the system (harddisk, minimal video driver for text messages, ethernet for BOOTP boots, CDFS for CD-ROM boots) and the rest being loaded from a harddrive.

With the multi-platform target, is optimization going to be possible, or will this be a straight compile of C source code?

There will be optimizations as far as possible, but most of the stuff will be plain C. The HAL will be the most critical part for a port.

Note, though, that although the prerequisites are there, a port to e.g x86 (I hear that coming :) is currently not planned, as our licence only covers PPC.

I see. How is this system going to integrate w/ the VP? Will there be two types of libraries? Executables?

Doing cross-calls to VP stuff is impractical, I don't think that there is such a mechanism. The DE will be integrated to a certain amount, but it will more or less stay a blackbox, a machine in the machine so to speak.

I like screens (dragable ones are nice but not required), I can't live w/o a dynamic RAM drive, I like push/pull gadgets, etc. Cosmetically Intuition/ GADTools need a serious overhaul, but the function is pretty much exactly the way I think a GUI should be. How will this compare in AOS 4.0?

The concept of screens is still in Intuition and will stick there. We are planning a major overhaul of Intuition, but that will have to wait until after the release. More modern GUI classes are required, and a real overhaul in favour of a skinnable, probably scaleable user interface.

Virtual memory is not really that much magic as it might seem. The new memory system will no longer be allocating every little block from the main memory list as the old one, it will work on a page basis. This will also prevent fragmentation: Multiple small memory allocations will be collected in pages (much like the memory pool system now). If it runs out of pages, pages in memory that haven't been used in a while will be swapped out.

Of course, when there's no room on the swap disk anymore, the system runs out of memory, and the allocation will fail. You can imagine that it's a no-brainer just to prevent the swapping: If the system runs out of physical pages, and swapping is turned off, it reports an error just as if the swap space is full...

The only problem with completely shutting down the VM system is if a large task has already swapped-out pages. In this case, turning off the VM will require the large task to page in it's VM stuff again, and this might not fit (remember that with VM, you can run tasks that are a multiple of the normal memory in your system). Of course, you can just quit the task...

It should also be said that the allocation of memory is under full control of the application. There will be an additional memory flag that will prevent memory allocations from being virtual.

But think about ROM based library (even if they are on disk), ie. the ones which are already in memory before any normal app can be started. SnoopDOS for example patches a lot of dos.library functions. So will you add lots and lots of callback support to dos.library functions, to make tools like SnoopDOS work?

SetFunction *only* works with libraries that are already loaded, so it's no problem to SetFunction anything on dos.library, or even exec.library. It would just change the value of the function's symbol in the library base, replacing it with another address. It's programs that are already loaded that will not use the new functionality. OTOH, chaning the workings of a function during program execution is very dangerous, anyway, so that could even be regarded as an advantage.

Fact is that SetFunction is a very dangerous functionality that is an invitation for every virus or misbehaving hack to make your system instable, unsecure, or crash. It has caused major headaches in the past, and should definitely be limited. The system will offer certain callbacks, and the rest is off limits. This will make the whole system a lot more stable.

A solution we're thinking about is loading a kernel image from the hard disk's boot block. The Amiga's disk structure allows arbitraty sized boot blocks, so theoretically, a whole kernel could fit there.

We will in any case offer the possibility to use something like SetPatch (including the dreaded reboot). This means that you do not have to reformat your harddrive or even repartition or something like that. As another possibility, we will try to offer the bootblock loading. We'll see if that works out.

There might be other solutions, but a update of the physical ROM is currently out of question. I wouldn't go for such a solution anymore, anyway, and rather prefer the mainboard to receive some sort of flashrom. We'll see what will be possible...

Once AmigaOS frees itself from original Amiga hardware, will we also lose compability games-wise?

We've contacted the author of WHDLoad, and we'll see what comes out of it.

We've also thought about the following: We discussed the possibility to include a UAE in the system (this is for later, mind you ;) that will kick in when binaries are executed that require the chipset. That way, running old games could be made transparent...

The other potential problem is that some programs did bad things with Exec. For example, some programs directly grope into the Exec memory lists. This is of course bad programming, but some games do that, and this will fail in OS4 because the memory subsystem will be completely replaced by the new VM stuff. We're keeping a small (resizable) memory pool for old stuff (for example, chip ram can't be virtual, so it's probably still there in it's old form).

However, what I fear the most are programs that assume, for example, stack frames or similar stuff. Chances are these will fail....

People wanting to develop for OS4 should for starts read the stuff included on all Developer CD's, a file named FutureOS or similar. It's very valid, and gives a lot of DON'Ts for future compatibility...

Honestly, OS4 will still be AmigaOS. That means that it will still be very small and efficient. The fact that we will have virtual memory will *not* turn it into Windows. You will still not need 70 MB just to boot, as it's in Windows 98...

The memory consumption will rise a bit compared to OS3.1 (mainly because PPC code is larger than 68k code), but the speed will rise as well... remember we have a PowerPC, which is a very powerful CPU, and this time, we can run it without the ball-and-chain 68k...

Most programs will run, however, those that for example - jump directly into the ROM
- mess around with ExecBase
- mess around with Intuition
- etc.

will have a hard time. I'm afraid that there will be some programs that will cease to work, however, this is inevitable, otherwise we would be dragging around a lot of old stuff for eternity.

Do you have any kind of ball park figure (percentage) of games that would fail with the 68 emulator (Exec?) ?

No, the emulator is still eveloving. Plus, we will have something in there that I will not talk about right now. Only so much: We will have facilities that will ensure maximum compatibility with maximum performance. I don't think more than 1% of the old code will fail...

Eyetech's AmigaOne has a FlashROM - could the whole Kickstart ROM fit in there (I don't know the size of it), rather than using it as a minimal boot ROM which then loads the proper "ROM" from HD?

Sure, we will use the AmigaOne's flash rom for booting.

a second question: can you tell us somthing about a maybe-cooperation with bplan?

We've talked to them.

If so, - do you get as one of the first a bplan-developer-machine?

We will apply for their developer program, but we will not get special treatment.

- are the drivers for various hardware motherboard-independent? (can i use GFX-cards, that don't would supportet in MorphOS but in OS4 (Radeon?)

That's a question I can't answer yet. The first version to come out will probably still have some chipset dependencies, that will be thrown out in various updates. So there's still some time until any other non-Amiga hardware is supported, anyway...

- will be the whole hardware supportet, f.e. FireWire drivers in OS 4?

See above. This will be decided as soon as we're actually running on the board. Support for FireWire will probably be in there at some point, but right now, it's not a priority.

- do i need different patitions for MorhOS and OS4

The OS4 library files will look somewhat different from the actual Amiga libraries (they are a different file format), so this might get you into trouble when MorphOS would try to open a new-style library. Theoretically, it would be possible...

Therefore most work is useless when noone develops with it, would it be possible to put a OS4.0 RKM - Amigaguide-file with all new OS4.0 related features documented on the CD too ?

We will make as much information as possible available as soon as possible. This includes documents as well as pre-release version of OS 4 for developers. Of course we want as much stuff on OS 4 as possible, so this is going to be a high priority.

Documentation will be available for download probably. I don't know if we do a CD, probably later after the release.

1. How much and what work was done on OS4.0 before it was handed over to Hyperion/Eyetech?

Mostly "secondary" technology, stuff like additional programs like the TCP stack and file system. We have some technology from H&P (like WarpUp, from which we will borrow code, and the H&P emulator). In fact, the "only" thing we are doing is Exec right now.

2. How integrated will the TCP/IP stack be? I'd rather have a real bsdsocket.library on disk and a separate config program than be forced to manually load it first.

I must admit that I don't know. I haven't seen it yet :/ I guess it will be an application program which will be launched from wbstartup...

3. Is sound support still targetted for OS4.2, or is this now coming in OS4.0?

We will have some new sound support already in OS4, but I don't know how much it will really be. As I said, we're doing the Exec, the rest will be done by others.

2) How can you possibly expect to get this done by February? ;)

Although Hyperion is doing most of the core work, a lot of work is carried out by others. Last time I counted there where a total of 18 people working on it; most of the developers from OS 3.5 and 3.9 are on board, as well as a few other very competent folks :-)

Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 1 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Teemu I. Yliselä on 27-Nov-2001 14:44 GMT
Note also that the questions and answers are in a more or less random order, and all the text under a certain question may not be a part of an answer to that particular question, but to a whole different question. I hope it's not too confusing. :)
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 2 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 27-Nov-2001 15:11 GMT
Nice.
I hope they'll put up a OS4.0 web site and a FAQ, with regular updates.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 3 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 27-Nov-2001 15:11 GMT
>Note, though, that although the prerequisites are there, a port to e.g x86
> (I hear that coming :) is currently not planned, as our licence only covers
> PPC
Will Hyperion be seeking a x86 license?
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 4 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 27-Nov-2001 15:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (smithy):
I doubt it - they have enough on their plate as it is. Maybe in the future - especially if they work on the hardware independent OS5.0 they will get an x86 license.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 5 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Brecht [darklite] on 27-Nov-2001 15:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (smithy):
>Will Hyperion be seeking a x86 license?
It's rather clear they don't *want* any x86 licence. :(
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 6 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by AmiDelf on 27-Nov-2001 15:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Graham):
That would be not good at all. AmigaOS's home should be PPC, rather jumping over to x86...
- amidelf
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 7 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by adam on 27-Nov-2001 15:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (AmiDelf):
>AmigaOS's home should be PPC, rather jumping over to x86...
or the next 24 months i completely agree with you, then if amiga de is succeeds it will branch out...
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 8 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 27-Nov-2001 16:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (adam):
Yes, but AmigaDE is just for gameboy style machines (that's why they needed a
"homeserver" PPC OS as basis for desktop systems).
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 9 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Jack Perry on 27-Nov-2001 18:11 GMT
Any moment now... proponents of another OS will start saying, "We told you so! These guys don't know what they're talking about!"
Any moment now...
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 10 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Nathaniel Downes on 27-Nov-2001 18:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Jack Perry):
Honestly, they don't. Making an OS is a serious responsibility, but they're using buzz-words without understanding the underlying concept for them.
Shutting down power while writing to virtual memory has very little to do with the need-to-shutdown a system. UNIX uses a dedicated partition, just like what they're claiming they'll do to eliminate the need for a shutdown, yet it needs to be shut down or else major file damage occurs.
Overall, they look like ameteurs.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 11 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Hans-Joerg Frieden on 27-Nov-2001 19:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
Yeah, sure. We've never seen any lectures on operating systems at university, and we just looked up all the words in a dictionary.
Shutting down will not be required, among other things, because there is no file system that might get corrupted (don't tell me that's not true). It also is required because you need to flush your buffers to disk (because for example Linux uses free memory for disk caching).
I know that perfectly. Overall, you look like an amateur right now :-)
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 12 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 27-Nov-2001 19:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
Try reading a bit more carefully, didn't he say the "so-called" swap partition won't use a filesystem and therefore no filestructure could be damaged? Well, yes he did. UNIX uses a filesystem for the swap and therefore require a shutdown before powering down. See the difference?
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 13 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Toner on 27-Nov-2001 19:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
Why exactly does Unix have shutdown issues? How might Hyperion avoid such issues? A lot of that seems like caching problems, where if a "saved" file is in a cache somewhere but has not actually been written to disk yet, this strikes me as a large part of other OSes and shutdown. If Hyperion make these things write to disk immediately and not wait, there is much less of a problem in switching off the power supply, as stuff intended for disk is not loitering around in a write cache someplace. What other technical issues are involved with the shutdown requirement of other platforms?
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 14 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ruben Monteiro on 27-Nov-2001 19:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Brecht [darklite]):
>It's rather clear they don't *want* any x86 licence. :(
Who is Hyperion to determine the future of AmigaOS? This is Amiga OS, not Hyperion OS (at least I hope so). This can't be a matter of what they want.
If Amiga Inc does want a x86 AmigaOS, Hyperion just has to shut up and cooperate.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 15 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 27-Nov-2001 19:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
>Shutting down power while writing to virtual memory has very little to do with >the need-to-shutdown a system. UNIX uses a dedicated partition, just like what >they're claiming they'll do to eliminate the need for a shutdown, yet it needs >to be shut down or else major file damage occurs.
Besides VM, file cache systems are also a major reason to perform a formal shutdown. The cache needs to be flushed back to disk. Also, apps with files open with on-going I/O can corrupt files (and perhaps the filesystem itself), but this can happen on current Amiga systems. Personally, I think the Amiga should have a formal shutdown mechanism, even if it's not really required. Think of it as a safe power-off. Sure, we can just shut it off when ever we want to, but I think we should be able to have the system shut itself down gracefully.
However, since Hyperion is working on Exec and VM, which has nothing to do with DOS or file caches, from their point of view their VM system will not require a safe shutdown. However, I would not read into this statement that AmigaOS4 will not have that feature, or that it might not require a formal shutdown (just like every other modern OS).
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 16 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 27-Nov-2001 19:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Bill Toner):
>Why exactly does Unix have shutdown issues? How might Hyperion avoid such >issues? A lot of that seems like caching problems, where if a "saved" file is >in a cache somewhere but has not actually been written to disk yet, this >strikes me as a large part of other OSes and shutdown. If Hyperion make these >things write to disk immediately and not wait, there is much less of a problem >in switching off the power supply, as stuff intended for disk is not loitering >around in a write cache someplace. What other technical issues are involved >with the shutdown requirement of other platforms?
Well, even if you removed file caches from the OS you can still screw up files that were being written to when the power was cycled. However, a file cache is generally a good thing as it greatly improves performance. You can avoid write caches, however, if you want to setup a serious server on your AOS4.0 you'd really appreciate the write cache then. It's possible that OS4.0 will NOT have a write cache (read-only from disk, just like addbuffers) on it's file system in which case shutting off the power will be as safe/dangerous as it is on your OS3.9. This however would make it tough for 3rd parties to add a file cache with write buffers in the future. Oh well.
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 17 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 27-Nov-2001 19:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Ruben Monteiro):
Well if they only have contracts for OS4PPC then they can't do a x86
version. If Amiga wants them to do but Hyperion doesn't want then they
don't do it and Amiga has to search for someone else.
It's Hyperion who has the choice not Amiga.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 18 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Thomas Frieden on 27-Nov-2001 19:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
> Honestly, they don't. Making an OS is a serious responsibility, but they're
> using buzz-words without understanding the underlying concept for them.
We don't ? I didn't know that.
> Shutting down power while writing to virtual memory has very little to do
> with the need-to-shutdown a system. UNIX uses a dedicated partition, just
> like what they're claiming they'll do to eliminate the need for a shutdown,
> yet it needs to be shut down or else major file damage occurs.
If you care to go to news net, you could reread what I said there: I've been asked multiple times if the VM would make a shutdown a necessity. This was asked *very* often. That's why I put it there.
I know why Linux needs to shutdown, and I don't need somebody to tell me. And I was not "claiming" that we would need a swap partition. We just use it, and as the Amiga system itself doesn't have disk caches, a shutdown is not needed.
> Overall, they look like ameteurs.
Overall, you look like a troll. Plese know every fact before making stupid comments.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 19 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ruben Monteiro on 27-Nov-2001 19:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (David Scheibler):
What I meant is that if someone wants do a x86 OS 4.x, they will have to work with Hyperion. But I fear that, with their insane anti-Intel and run-away-from-Windows policy, Hyperion may cause problems to the possibility of an x86 port.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 20 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Thomas Frieden on 27-Nov-2001 19:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Ruben Monteiro):
> Who is Hyperion to determine the future of AmigaOS? This is Amiga OS, not
> Hyperion OS (at least I hope so). This can't be a matter of what they want.
Who are *YOU* to determine the future of AmigaOS ?
> If Amiga Inc does want a x86 AmigaOS, Hyperion just has to shut up and
> cooperate.
1. Amiga Inc hasn't asked us for doing an x86 version. Surprised ? Probably, but not knowing the facts before speaking is becoming usual.
2. We have accquired a license to do Amiga OS4 on PPC. If somebody wants to do an x86 version, he can go ask Amiga for it. We don't have the resources to do one, and Amiga does not have any inclination nor leverage to "force" us to do it.
Your post just shows that you are one of those people who don't know the fact, but still have to comment.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 21 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ruben Monteiro on 27-Nov-2001 20:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Thomas Frieden):
>Who are *YOU* to determine the future of AmigaOS ?
Someone, like you, that loves the AmigaOS and want to see it as a competitive alternative to what OS's are available today.
Someone, unlinke you, that would like to see AmigaOS easily available and widely spread to anyone in the world like it once was, instead of a "private club" OS running on exotic and unavailable hardware, that only a couple of thousands know exists.
>Your post just shows that you are one of those people who don't know the >fact, but still have to comment
That's right, I don't know some facts. I don't know why you run an anti-x86 policy, and I don't know why you don't want to see the AmigaOS spreading outside the Amiga community.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 22 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by tinman on 27-Nov-2001 20:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (Mike Veroukis):
I suppose it could be done like PFS3 - it doesn't exactly use a cache for disk writes (writes to the disk but only updates the filesystem about a second later). I guess the performance isn't as good as a proper write cache, but it also doesn't require a shutdown.
Although it's a complete pain in the ass if you forget to wait for the filesystem to be updated and find your new file ain't there after rebooting :/
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 23 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Douglas McLaughlin on 27-Nov-2001 20:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
> Honestly, they don't. Making an OS is a serious responsibility, but they're using buzz-words without understanding the underlying concept for them.
> Shutting down power while writing to virtual memory has very little to do with the need-to-shutdown a system. UNIX uses a dedicated partition, just like
> what they're claiming they'll do to eliminate the need for a shutdown, yet it needs to be shut down or else major file damage occurs.
> Overall, they look like ameteurs.
You certainly don't know what you're talking about. There are a dozen other reasons why *nix systems need to shutdown and having a dedication swap partition
is not one of them. Go back and read what you typed. If you turn off a *nix system you run the risk of corrupting active file partitions, but NOT the
swap partition.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 24 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Brecht [darklite] on 27-Nov-2001 20:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Mike Veroukis):
>However, I would not read into this statement that AmigaOS4 will not have that
>feature, or that it might not require a formal shutdown (just like every other
>modern OS).
A shutting down requirement doesn't make an OS modern. And I hope you're not talking about linux, not very modern. :)
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 25 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by ike on 27-Nov-2001 20:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Ruben Monteiro):
coz if it is on X86, A lot of user will use Windows... This is the end of amiga.
Why windows user will spend some money on another system where all software is avaible *free...*? Why amiga companies in these condition will continues to develop for amigaos, they have a biggest market just near... and why people like r.schmid, hyperion or the other produce new hardware. Because THAT's a amiga, not an X86 who are just windozz. The only fact is <<yes they are cheaper...>>. Ask to mac user if he wants a X86.
ike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 26 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 27-Nov-2001 20:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (ike):
coz if it is on X86, A lot of user will use Windows... This is the end of amiga.
Why windows user will spend some money on another system where all software is avaible *free...*? Why amiga companies in these condition will continues to develop for amigaos, they have a biggest market just near... and why people like r.schmid, hyperion or the other produce new hardware. Because THAT's a amiga, not an X86 who are just windozz. The only fact is <<yes they are cheaper...>>. Ask to mac user if he wants a X86.
ike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 27 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 27-Nov-2001 20:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (tinman):
I think that people would like to see a "shutdown" and "reboot" option in AmigaOS4, even if it isn't required for safe operation. It will still make it safer than just hitting the power button.
A lot of work has gone into filesystems since FFS came about in both the Amiga (PFS for example) and the Unix (ReiserFS, XFS, ext3, JFS, etc) camps. I think it would be a shame if we didn't take the good points of each (that would work with each other at least) in order to make a solid, fast, reliable and great file system for the future.
I do agree about using separate partitions for swap - that is the most reliable method, and it doesn't interfere with the rest of the system. Also, you can have a swap filesystem that is optimal for swapped memory!
As for everything else, lets wait and see what comes out. I am happy to see that the new TCP/IP stack is very fast - but what of the applications that come with it (C:ping, C:traceroute, etc?) and is it fast at the expense of features?
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 28 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 27-Nov-2001 21:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Brecht [darklite]):
>>However, I would not read into this statement that AmigaOS4 will not have >>that feature, or that it might not require a formal shutdown (just like every >>other modern OS).
>
>A shutting down requirement doesn't make an OS modern. And I hope you're not >talking about linux, not very modern. :)
You're very right, it doesn't make it modern. However, many "modern" OSes have "modern" features which require a formal shutdown mechanism. Servers for example need this and rely on the OS to provide this service. I would hesitate running a DB/web/file server on a machine that people like to just flick off/on as they see fit.
Please, don't take my words, mungle them around and throw them back at me. I never did say that adding a formal shutdown would make the Amiga modern, or that lacking it makes it non-modern, it's just that almost all modern (and even some which are not modern) OSes have a formal shutdown procedure. There are many good things about a shutdown procedure, not just file system protection, but servers and user applications benefit from it too. If someone can find a way to provide all the modern features mentioned above and elsewhere without a formal shutdown then there obviously wouldn't be a need for it. However, until then we either live with a formal shutdown procedure or live without some modern features.
Personally, I would like to see support for a system suspend or "sleep" mode feature. This is pretty much standard on all modern ATX motherboards. I'm note sure if the PPC supports such a feature, or if any of the AmigaOS4.0 designated motherboards do, but it would be a great feature for the OS. That way you won't need to shut it down, just suspend it. Then, when you want to work with it again, tap your space bar and the system is restored in a matter of seconds exactly where you left it. Wouldn't that be nice? :-)
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 29 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ruben Monteiro on 27-Nov-2001 21:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (ike):
>coz if it is on X86, A lot of user will use Windows... This is the end of >amiga.
And what will prevent an AmigaOS PPC user from going to the shop next door and get a x86 box with Windows anyway?
If people have to choose between an AmigaOS PPC and a Windows x86 option, believe me my friend, 99.99% of them will not even think twice...
>Why amiga companies in these condition will continues to develop for amigaos, >they have a biggest market just near...
That market is always near. Even with a PPC OS, what prevents me from doing Windows software only?
> Because THAT's a amiga, not an X86 who are just windozz.
That's wrong. Just because Windows is, well, what it is, doesn't mean that the hardware is no good. Try Amithlon and you'll get a taste of what it's like to have a decent OS in x86 hardware (and that's just an emulator...)
x86 is what you want to do it. It doesn't have to be Windows.
>Ask to mac user if he wants a X86.
;) Stranger things have happened....
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 30 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Eva on 27-Nov-2001 21:25 GMT
First point. I am the happy possessor of Heretic 2 and Shogo.
Second point. I admired Hyperion for their goood work in Amiga game scene.
Third point. AmigaOS4 ... yeah, we can SAY everything, we can PROMISE everything...
BUT the reality is that something SIMILAR to these OS4 specs exist and run NOW, not in the future...
It' a poliMORPHED OS...
It has a new PPC filesystem (SFS), it has a lot of 68k rom libraries "translated" into PPC one. It runs and it has got TWO YEARS OF BETATESTING, not 3-4 months.
It runs on a REAL PPC new machine (not a Cpu board or alike) by 6 months.
Please give me a real, not a futuristic, alternative to MorphOS.
Please tell us if in March (when Bplan+MorphOS will be released) there will be an AmigaOS4 that will run on a PPC machine (not an accelerator with a 604e)...
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 31 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 27-Nov-2001 21:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (ike):
>coz if it is on X86, A lot of user will use Windows... This is the end of >amiga.
I disagree with you here. For the Amiga to survive it will require that people invest in new Amiga hardware and software. However, I find it hard to believe that anyone other then die-hard Amiga fanatics will be willing to invest in expensive proprietary hardware AmigaOS4.0 requires. Basically this means I do not expect a huge hardware base for AmigaOS4.0. With that said, software companies will treat the future Amiga market much like how they do now; ignore it.
However, I believe that an x86 AmigaOS would have more market potential. The down side is that the Amiga hardware market will die completely, however, it will give the software market a fair chance. Many claim that companies which port games from Windows to Amiga might also feel the sting as users might choose to play the game in it's original release on Windows. My argument to this is that this is correct, however, real gamers (those who buy computers just to play the latest and greatest games) already have a PC and will buy the Windows version anyway. Where the Amiga community might really take off is in the area of it's own original releases like Perfect Paint or ImageFX. Amiga-only applications would greatly benefit from such a marketing model (not to mention allowing the Amiga to be more self-directing and not dependent on good ports from the PC world). We already have some great software out there. I say we should just focus on our great OS and software applications and forget about the hardware wars. The general public couldn't care less if it's a x86, PPC, Sparc, MIPS, Alpha.... They just want to surf the web, send emails, manage their accounts and play games. That is what will sell AmigaOS, not fancy hardware.
On the technical side, most prefer PPC, however I believe that most would never be able to tell the difference by just using a system. Intel hardware has progressed a lot and for most people it's just psychological. They don't want to use Intel just because it's Intel.
Anyways, having said all that, I understand Amiga Inc have decided to go PPC. I wish them the best of luck and I plan to support them as much as I can. I hope I'm totally wrong and PPC takes off (believe me, I'd be so happy to be wrong on this).
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 32 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ruben Monteiro on 27-Nov-2001 21:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Eva):
Please, not MorphOS. You could as well be talking about Linux or Windows here. That's not Amiga!
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 33 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Brecht [darklite] on 27-Nov-2001 21:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Mike Veroukis):
>Please, don't take my words, mungle them around and throw them back at me.
Nah, I knew what you meant, should have added a smiley :)
>Personally, I would like to see support for a system suspend or "sleep" mode
>feature. This is pretty much standard on all modern ATX motherboards. I'm note
>sure if the PPC supports such a feature, or if any of the AmigaOS4.0
>designated motherboards do, but it would be a great feature for the OS. That
>way you won't need to shut it down, just suspend it. Then, when you want to
>work with it again, tap your space bar and the system is restored in a matter
>of seconds exactly where you left it. Wouldn't that be nice? :-)
I agree. I also think it would be nice to use AmigaOS for server applications. I think muFS should be integrated (but only optionally). Wouldn't disk cashing be possible with a special filesystem (suggesting unmounting before reboot)? There are a few tools on aminet that will unmount fs and do all the usual unix shutdown stuff. Combine that with reset-handler (traps ctrl-am-am), and you've got your shutdown :)
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 34 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by JOSF on 27-Nov-2001 21:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Hans-Joerg Frieden):
"Yeah, sure. We've never seen any lectures on operating systems at university, and we just looked up all the words in a dictionary.
Shutting down will not be required, among other things, because there is no file system that might get corrupted (don't tell me that's not true). It also is required because you need to flush your buffers to disk (because for example Linux uses free memory for disk caching).
I know that perfectly. Overall, you look like an amateur right now :-)"
Hostile as usual....
Did you coderz ever think of the fact, that a _healthy_ system is not only the case of the filesystem ?
Making the filesystem rock solid does not cure the fact, that a system still should be shut down..
It is just to signal all applications (which should have an API for that: "We are going home now, baby.")
Olaf Barthel, yes the very talented guy doing the filesys and the TCP stack, already tried to implement such an API a few years back. I guess it was not without reason.
It is good in *general* to shut down a machine. Only C64 and old-school ASM c0Drrz think serioulsy the way you talk.
Good Lord ! This is really going to be funny...
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 35 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ville Sarell on 27-Nov-2001 21:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Eva):
"First point. I am the happy possessor of Heretic 2 and Shogo.
Second point. I admired Hyperion for their goood work in Amiga game scene.
Third point. AmigaOS4 ... yeah, we can SAY everything, we can PROMISE everything...
BUT the reality is that something SIMILAR to these OS4 specs exist and run NOW, not in the future...
It' a poliMORPHED OS..."
And your real point is..?? We all know morphos exists. Great, but it's no news. It's about AmigaOS4.0 we are talking about. I'm eagerly waiting for both :)
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 36 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Ruben Monteiro on 27-Nov-2001 21:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Mike Veroukis):
You've spoken words of wisdom and sanity. I agree entirely.
I'm still keeping the hope though, that Amiga will realize that a x86 OS is crucial to expand the Amiga home-server solution to the rest of the world, and will seek 3rd party help to make it happen.
Other that that, my hope lies with AmigaDE.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 37 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 27-Nov-2001 21:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Brecht [darklite]):
>I agree. I also think it would be nice to use AmigaOS for server applications. >I think muFS should be integrated (but only optionally). Wouldn't disk cashing >be possible with a special filesystem (suggesting unmounting before reboot)? >There are a few tools on aminet that will unmount fs and do all the usual unix >shutdown stuff. Combine that with reset-handler (traps ctrl-am-am), and you've >got your shutdown :)
Yeah, works for me I guess. When they design OS4.0, they must make it easy for applications to trap the reset signal (ctrl-am-am, or whatever it will be in the future). I would still like to have controlled shutdowns standard as I think user apps can benefit from shutting down gracefully. For example, YAM would some times need to re-build it's index files when you turned of the computer without exiting YAM. Or how about a background task that's downloading a file from the net? A formal shutdown process could cause that background task to warn you the file isn't complete. There are many advantages to a formal shutdown.
Also the MB and power supply should be able to handle this as well. On my Athlon system I have an ATX powersupply. When the system is on and I hit the power button the system stays on. However, it does signal the OS and it will (optionally) go into "sleep" mode. This is a great little feature as I can not accidently shut my system off. I still can force the computer off by holding the power button in for 4 seconds. This might seem really weird to an Amiga user, but I really like it. Of course, when I tell the OS to shutdown, the computer shuts itself off, thus not requiring the 4 second power-off (another nice little feature).
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 38 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mekanix on 27-Nov-2001 21:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Thomas Frieden):
> 1. Amiga Inc hasn't asked us for
> doing an x86 version. Surprised ?
> Probably, but not knowing the facts
> before speaking is becoming usual.
Seeing how Ben went ballistic by Bills presentation of Amithlon month back, I'm not surprised. Ben had already declined, long before Amiga Inc. considered Hyperion for the task. AmigaOS have turned into ugly politics, that's why words are considered carefully....
> 2. We have accquired a license to do
> Amiga OS4 on PPC. If somebody wants
> to do an x86 version, he can go ask
> Amiga for it.
... interesting comment... almost sounds like an invitation to Frank and Bernie... if it wasn't because Ben would do anything to stop that from happening...
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 39 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mika Hanhijärvi on 27-Nov-2001 22:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Nathaniel Downes):
Eg. Linux keeps recent changes to files in buffers. Files are really changed only when those buffers are flushed to disk and that's the major reason why shutdown is required in Linux. if you don't shutdown properly it's quite possible that those buffers wil not be flushed and that will cause loss of data or damage.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 40 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 27-Nov-2001 22:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Ruben Monteiro):
>I'm still keeping the hope though, that Amiga will realize that a x86 OS is >crucial to expand the Amiga home-server solution to the rest of the world, and >will seek 3rd party help to make it happen.
Well, by the sounds of it OS4.0 is really just a developers OS. It's not the OS that would bring in new users even if it were on an x86. Although to me this is even more reason to go x86... However, it's quite possible that in the final stage (the famed OS5.0) might be hardware independent (cross your fingers) and an x86 version might emerge.
The only good thing about the PPC OS4.0 is that it will get (atleast some) people to (re)invest in Amiga (by buying hardware and software) which (hopefully) will keep the developers (and the community) focused on Amiga. However, by the time OS5.0 comes out the AmigaOne (and all other current PPC computers) will be totally obsolete and a jump to a new platform (like x86 or whatever happens to be mainstream at the time) will be easier to take. Will it work out that way? I sure hope so.
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 41 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by RLFrost on 27-Nov-2001 22:42 GMT
These guys are whacky. This is going to be the most expensive game machine you have ever seen
It will not be February, June, or September in 2002.
I wish Hyperion all the success in the world with their games, but Amiga, Inc. has rung a death knell for a comeback of they continue in this narrow and unproductive vein.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 42 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mika Hanhijärvi on 27-Nov-2001 22:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Ruben Monteiro):
then why are't those millions new Amig users here already ? UAE hs ben there long long time and it's quite fast too. i can't see any huge amount of new users starting to use AmigaOS x86 if they don't use UAE actively. And many people would also think "if I can run AmigaOS under windows in UAE, why should I install AmigaOS to it own partition and be forced to double boot?" I think AmigaOS x86 would not be such success as some seem to think.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 43 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 27-Nov-2001 22:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Ruben Monteiro):
Then why aren't those millions new Amiga users here already ? UAE has been here long long time and it's quite fast too. i can't see any huge amount of new users starting to use AmigaOS x86 if they don't use UAE actively. Many people would also think "if I can run AmigaOS under windows in UAE, why should I install AmigaOS to its own partition and be forced to double boot?" I think AmigaOS x86 would not be such success as some seem to think.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 44 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 27-Nov-2001 23:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (ike):
>coz if it is on X86, A lot of user will use Windows... This is the end of
>amiga.
This is just plain wrong. If this were true, then how do account for the GROWTH in development of Linux software, and the GROWTH in the number of Linux users on their PCs?
Please stop re-spouting old and flawed soundbites.
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 45 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 27-Nov-2001 23:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Graham):
>I think that people would like to see a "shutdown" and "reboot" option in
>AmigaOS4, even if it isn't required for safe operation. It will still make it
>safer than just hitting the power button.
I agree, I think a shutdown should be a mandatory, if not for safety, then for completeness. During a shutdown an OS could do any number of things - it could save the position of the windows on your desktop, ready for you when you reboot, it could do some essential backups of internal databases - then Joe User stubs his thumb onto the power button and integrity has been compromised.
I think shutting down is a necessary evil, Windows will shutdown in just 5 seconds, so there's no reason for AmigaOS to be any longer..
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 46 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by adam cheese on 27-Nov-2001 23:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Ruben Monteiro):
>Please, not MorphOS. You could as well be talking about Linux or Windows here. >That's not Amiga!
Maybe you should have a look at the peoples backgrounds on the morphos credits and then repeat your statement..
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 47 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by redrumloa on 27-Nov-2001 23:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (RLFrost):
What is with you X86 fanatics? Just because you won't be able to have a native
OS4.0 to dual boot on your Windows box(even though you will stay in Windows 90%
of the time anyhow), you guys need to jump up and down screaming in every forum.
The real problem with all these X86 fanatics is most likely they havn't owned a
real piece of Amiga hardware since their Amiga 500. If you want to use an Amiga,
pony up the $$ and buy Amiga hardware. Otherwise take your so called "Amiga" talk
to an Emulator forum.
Yeeesh
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 48 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 28-Nov-2001 00:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (Mika Hanhijärvi):
>then why are't those millions new Amig users here already ? UAE hs ben there >long long time and it's quite fast too. i can't see any huge amount of new >users starting to use AmigaOS x86 if they don't use UAE actively. And many >people would also think "if I can run AmigaOS under windows in UAE, why should >I install AmigaOS to it own partition and be forced to double boot?" I think >AmigaOS x86 would not be such success as some seem to think.
Well, there's a number of reasons really. WinUAE, although pretty good, is not complete. Infact, only recently has it gotten "pretty good", I remember it being rather flaky in the past. Also, it is not a true OS all on it's own, it's just an emulator. But despite the technical reasons, it has almost no real marketing behind it, no projected date for a final release and does not provide a vision for the future. WinUAE is just for nostalgia sake or for hobby.
It will be interesting to see how well Amithlon sells. Again, it's not much different from WinUAE but is a bit more official and has some marketing (although not a lot) behind it. I don't have Amithlon (yet) but I can say that WinUAE is pretty nice for what it is. I still like to use my real Amiga 4000. Perhaps when I get Amithlon that might change.
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 49 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 28-Nov-2001 00:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (redrumloa):
>The real problem with all these X86 fanatics is most likely they havn't owned >a real piece of Amiga hardware since their Amiga 500. If you want to use an >Amiga, pony up the $$ and buy Amiga hardware. Otherwise take your so >called "Amiga" talk to an Emulator forum.
Not a very nice attitude, Mr! Fact is aside from the A500 I bought in '87 (currently hiding under my bed) I've owned an 1200 and still own an A4000 which I use just about every day. So, I don't know about anyone else but I think I'm in the right forum.
- Mike
Frieden brothers talk about OS 4 : Comment 50 of 125ANN.lu
Posted by ike on 28-Nov-2001 00:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (smithy):
This is not old, I use windows and my primary system is linux. I have seven amiga but was unlucky with the one that i use (a4000/cyberstormppc... burned). I can't agree with you that X86 is a positive future for amigaos.
You would agree with me that for use an amiga now, you must a little bit fanatical coz youre "stick" to old hardware with a lot of patch.
If you jump to another hardware that have many os with many more application and sorry, more complete now, you just let an old os decide the fate. You loose the last things that they made the identity of amiga, difference (a good one). You just put amigaos (old) with linux, windows, qnx, ... NoOne apart fanatical people will follow these road by the times.
Two solutions are avaible now: - keep PPC with the same userbase (it
would be hard to have new one without
a major new os).
- jump to X86, and stay with the same
userbase. but with the tentation to
jump otherside. And by the times
these would be strong one.
I believe the first one will give the time to develop something, the last not, it will be just "a super emulator" for amiga with no new developpement quickly (or very expansive).
This is my opinion and i think we will not agree, that's life. I will not buy an amigaOs on a X86 (i'm little bit fanatical too). I will wait Amigaone or Pegasos board.
And...
"Please stop re-spouting old and flawed soundbites"
Plz you too :)) that's a poor argument.
Ike who write bad english :)) (maybe in french we will develop these one with a lot more subtilities if you understand :))) )
Anonymous, there are 125 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 125]
Back to Top