21-Nov-2019 15:42 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 81 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 81]
[News] comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operationalANN.lu
Posted on 12-Jan-2002 22:43 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä81 comments
View flat
View list
The c.s.a.morphos newsgroup is now up and running.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 1 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by B.vd.Meer on 12-Jan-2002 21:46 GMT
Not on the Worldonline newsserver in the Netherlands at the moment.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 2 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by 4pLaY on 13-Jan-2002 00:48 GMT
Then perhaps its time for someone to make comp.sys.amiga.aros? :-).
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 3 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 13-Jan-2002 02:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (4pLaY):
or comp.sys.amiga.windows
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 4 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 13-Jan-2002 03:06 GMT
comp.sys.amiga.morphos -> For morphos running on Amiga
Makes sense as there is a growing user base.
comp.sys.amiga.aros -> For Aros running on Amiga
I don't know any AROS user on Amiga. I know some work has been done but I don't think any user can easily run AROS on Amiga.
comp.sys.amiga.windows -> For Windows running on Amiga.
Windows ? I don't know this system ;) Should have been a old OS running in an old emulator ;)
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 5 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 13-Jan-2002 03:06 GMT
comp.sys.amiga.morphos -> For morphos running on Amiga
Makes sense as there is a growing user base.
comp.sys.amiga.aros -> For Aros running on Amiga
I don't know any AROS user on Amiga. I know some work has been done but I don't think any user can easily run AROS on Amiga.
comp.sys.amiga.windows -> For Windows running on Amiga.
Windows ? I don't know this system ;) Should have been a old OS running in an old emulator ;)
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 6 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Michael Jantzen on 13-Jan-2002 04:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Christophe Decanini):
And just because you "don't know this system" are grounds for not having a usenet group?
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 7 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 13-Jan-2002 04:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Michael Jantzen):
I can not believe someone got it wrong.
Windows never ran natively on an Amiga: It runs on an emulator.
AROS is not running very widely on Amiga right now.
MorphOS is already used by many people visiting ANN.
It deserves to be in comp.sys.amiga as would be linux.
Once Pegasos will be sold it would need another newsgroups like comps.sys.pegasos.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 8 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by anon on 13-Jan-2002 09:38 GMT
so what has MorphOS got to do with Amiga ??
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 9 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 13-Jan-2002 09:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (anon):
It's an operating system that is source level compatible
with AmigaOS and runs on Amiga hardware. Grow up for christ's sake.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 10 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 13-Jan-2002 11:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Anonymous):
It's even binary compatible! :)
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 11 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 13-Jan-2002 11:25 GMT
Apart from trying to impose AmigaOS and currently leaching our hardware MorphOS has shit all to do with Amiga . Its like Wine on linux and windows , wine will run windows apps on linux but has shit all to do with windows.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 12 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 13-Jan-2002 12:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Anonymous):
MorphOS is leaching our Hardware ??? What do you mean by that ??
MorphOS has nothing to do with Amiga ?? Right !!
Under MorphOS a developer can write pure PPC-Apps just as he would do 68k-ones.
Under AmigaOS + WarpOS he to constantly keep the context-switches in mind, and
has change his code in a very ugly way to make it faster then the 68k-version.
(you can ask H&P why they newer did a PPC-version of ArtEffect). This may
change under AO4, but thats not to be seen in the near future.
Sorry for the facts :o)
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 13 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 13-Jan-2002 12:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Anonymous):
You could say that MorphOS is not AmigaOS, it's an OS compatible with AmigaOS,
but leeching the HW? You forget the fact that the hardware MorphOS runs on is their HW...
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 14 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 13-Jan-2002 13:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Anonymous):
I take it that per your definition Lindows belongs in both comp.sys.windows and comp.sys.linux, right?
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 15 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 13-Jan-2002 13:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Anonymous):
>MorphOS has shit all to do with Amiga .
>
Maybe, but then AmigaOS4 has also shit to do with Amiga, because it's for PPC and
Amiga is only 68k + customchips, right?
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 16 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 13-Jan-2002 14:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Kronos):
> Under MorphOS a developer can write pure PPC-Apps just as he would do 68k-ones.
> Under AmigaOS + WarpOS he to constantly keep the context-switches in mind, and
> has change his code in a very ugly way to make it faster then the 68k-version.
-
That's an advantage of using MorphOS, but I don't see how it is relevant to this
discussion. There are several OS'es under which native PPC-apps can be written, you
know. It doesn't imply they have anything to do with the Amiga.
-
> (you can ask H&P why they newer did a PPC-version of ArtEffect). This may
> change under AO4, but thats not to be seen in the near future.
> Sorry for the facts :o)
-
Aaarrgh!! I'm so bloody sick and tired of people who claim to have "facts" when
what they actually have is biased speculation. Knock it off, it is not insightful,
it is just plain lame.
-
But actually, I've changed my opinion on comp.sys.amiga.morphos. I now think that
it is acceptable, at least as long as MorphOS is primarily running on Amiga computers.
As the OS moves on to new hardware, I think it should be just "comp.sys.morphos". If
the OS is not AmigaOS, and the hardware is not Amiga hardware, the newsgroup has
nothing to do under comp.sys.amiga.
-
Kay
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 17 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 13-Jan-2002 14:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
MorphOS-Apps use the Amiga-API so thats a connection to Amiga.
The ArtEffect stuff was on the H&P Homepage.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 18 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 13-Jan-2002 15:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Lennart Fridén):
Errr, yes. Why not.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 19 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 13-Jan-2002 15:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
>> (you can ask H&P why they newer did a PPC-version of ArtEffect). This may
>> change under AO4, but thats not to be seen in the near future.
>> Sorry for the facts :o)
>Aaarrgh!! I'm so bloody sick and tired of people who claim to have "facts" when
>what they actually have is biased speculation. Knock it off, it is not >insightful, it is just plain lame.
Then maybe you shoudl read http://www.haage-partner.com/statements-e.htm
And again: Sorry for the facts.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 20 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 13-Jan-2002 15:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Anonymous):
Now, binary compatability isn't really that good to use when it comes to organizing usegroups. What if MorphOS not only was binary compatible with AmigaOS but also with, say, MacOS, where should it be placed then? Windows 2000 can run OS/2 applications, should all Win2k discussions be in comp.sys.os2.w2k? And what about NetBSD.
From http://www.netbsd.org/Misc/features.html
---snip---
NetBSD's unique binary compatibility protects users' investment in existing applications by in kernel support for non native binaries (for the same processor) to run transparently. Systems include:
BSD/OS (i386)
FreeBSD (i386)
HP/UX (m68k)
Linux (i386, m68k, alpha, powerpc)
OSF1/Digitial UNIX/Tru64 UNIX (alpha)
SCO/iBCS2 (i386)
Solaris and SVR4 (sparc, i386, m68k)
SunOS 4 (sparc, m68k)
ULTRIX (mips, vax)
---snap---
Do you think NetBSD belongs as a seperate newgroup or split over xx newsgroups belonging to the above platforms? The Amiga specific parts of MorphOS MIGHT belong in the comp.sys.amiga newsgroup, but the entire MorphOS? No, I beg to differ. The amiga emulation in MorphOS is a sub-set of the OS, not _the_ OS.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 21 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 13-Jan-2002 15:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Lennart Fridén):
Recently some people asked in forums about a "new Amiga" and a "system to run Amiga apps on a PowerPC mainboard". They knew it was from a company called bplan but they didn't have much information about the mainboard or the OS. They choose to ask in Amiga forums about it...
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 22 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by mark on 13-Jan-2002 15:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Anonymous):
But it's comp.sys.amiga.morphos, not comp.sys.amigaos.morphos - Linux might not have anything to do with Windows, but it does run on a PC.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 23 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 13-Jan-2002 16:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (anon):
>so what has MorphOS got to do with Amiga ?
It has to do that it is running on my Amiga right now.
Anyone with a PPC 1200/4000 can use it right now.
When we want to use the newsgrougs we go in comp.sys.amiga because we have an Amiga system.
Then we can not find a newsgroup that handle MorphOS. That's why one was created.
We could also have comp.os.morphos later but it won't help for MorphOS on Amiga specific subjects.
For the same reason we have a comp.sys.Amiga.unix
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 24 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 13-Jan-2002 18:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Anonymous):
>Maybe, but then AmigaOS4 has also shit to do with Amiga, because it's for PPC
>and Amiga is only 68k + customchips, right?
Ummm.... OS4.0 is mostly a porting of the original AmigaOS code into PPC code, plus a few bits re-written (like exec for example). The AmigaOne hooks up to an actual A1200 MB for custom chip compatibility. How much more Amiga would you like it to be?
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 25 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 13-Jan-2002 19:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
>But actually, I've changed my opinion on comp.sys.amiga.morphos. I now think
>that it is acceptable, at least as long as MorphOS is primarily running on
>Amiga computers.
If the MorphOS people were smart they would not want it to be under the Amiga group. This makes them seem subordiante to Amiga, but even more so, reliant on the Amiga name. Although MorhpOS advocates will argue that's not the case, by createing comp.sys.amiga.morphos instead of comp.sys.morphos is does appear that way to outsiders. They don't seem to want to go it on their own, which they should since the paths of AmigaOS4.0 and MorphOS are divergent from this point on (atleast from a technical perspective). You'd think they'd want their own identity, but the truth is the Amiga name (which they can't use legally) is all they got going for them (in terms of marketing) and they'll exploit it in an which way they can.
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 26 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by cOrpse on 13-Jan-2002 20:10 GMT
AROS on wheels don't cut it for me , I'll keep Real Amiga OS ;)
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 27 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 13-Jan-2002 21:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (David Scheibler):
> Then maybe you shoudl read http://www.haage-partner.com/statements-e.htm
-
I was in fact commenting on the bit about AmigaOS4 not going to be seen in the
near future. (Bet you couldn't have figured that out on your own if you tried).
-
> And again: Sorry for the facts.
-
Don't be. It's condescending.
-
Kay
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 28 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 13-Jan-2002 21:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Kronos):
> MorphOS-Apps use the Amiga-API so thats a connection to Amiga.
-
Hmm, well, sorry then. To me it sounded like you were just pointing out how MorphOS
was superior to AmigaOS+WarpOS, and I couldn't make that fit into a discussion on
whether or not the MorphOS newsgroup should be listed under comp.sys.amiga. I guess
what you meant was that MorphOS was to be considered an "Amiga" OS since it is purely
API compatible, then? Well, then I disagree, it is technically not to be considered a
version of AmigaOS. It could have been, but it isn't. And since the real AmigaOS is
being developed, and the people doing that actually has a right to use the name, I don't
think the MorphOS community should try "hijacking the brand", as someone else put it. But,
as long as MorphOS runs on Amiga's, I think it is quite okay to list it under
comp.sys.amiga.
-
> The ArtEffect stuff was on the H&P Homepage.
-
Never doubted the truth of that bit. It was the bit about AmigaOS not being seen
in the near future I disliked.
-
Kay
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 29 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 14-Jan-2002 00:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
>But, as long as MorphOS runs on Amiga's, I think it is quite okay to list it
>under comp.sys.amiga.
So does Linux. Is there a comp.sys.amiga.linux newsgroup? (I honestly don't know, is there???)
Anyways, since MorphOS runs on hardware other then old decrepid Amigas creating a group hierarchy like:
comp.sys.morphos.amiga
comp.sys.morphos.pegasos (or bplan, or whatever hardware you prefer)
...this would make more sense to me. But then again, when you really get down to it, who cares???
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 30 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Daniel Miller on 14-Jan-2002 00:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Mike Veroukis):
Mike Veroukis (sp?) typed:
> Anyways, since MorphOS runs on hardware other then
> old decrepid Amigas creating a group hierarchy like:
> comp.sys.morphos.amiga comp.sys.morphos.pegasos (or
> bplan, or whatever hardware you prefer)
> ...this would make more sense to me. But then again,
> when you really get down to it, who cares???
Evidently you do, or someone else is posting under your name, because you said yada yada "MorphOS doesn't have any marketing" and yada yada "MorphOS doesn't have its own identity." None of those comments you made in that post (in another life I guess) are accurate, and the 178 people who created the newsgroup were not indulging in a marketing exercise or having an identity crisis.
Nothing is perfect but comp.sys.amiga.morphos is a natural and appropriate name for the group. MorphOS runs Amiga software. It has a relationship to the Amiga computer platform. The people behind MorphOS made the greatest contributions to keeping the platform current in the mid to late 90s (CyberstormPPC, BlizzardPPC, the first 68060 card, Cybervision64 you name it.) The people behind MorphOS have supported the platform for a decade or more. Now you wish to drive them away and banish them. Puh-leeze!
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 31 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by voices from Mike's other life on 14-Jan-2002 05:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Daniel Miller):
>None of those comments you made in that post (in another life I guess) are >accurate, and the 178 people who created the newsgroup were not indulging in a >marketing exercise or having an identity crisis.
178 voters eh? Was that supposed to impress me?
>Nothing is perfect but comp.sys.amiga.morphos is a natural and appropriate
>name for the group.
It's natural to you maybe but I think it sort of implies that MorphOS is part of Amiga (which it is and it isn't). Take for instance comp.sys.amiga.programming. What happens when AmigaOS and MorphOS diverge and their API's become incompatible? This most likely will happen as the two will be very competitive and I doubt Warp3D will even make it to MorphOS. So should we make a comp.sys.amiga.morphos.programming too? Why not just comp.sys.morphos.programming? Do we need a comp.sys.amiga.morphos.games, comp.sys.amiga.morphos.graphics, etc... Seems kinda dumb to me.
The fact that MorphOS runs on *SOME* current Amiga models does not mean much as it has a new dedicated hardware base as well. Infact, the Amiga hardware base would be the inferior choice for running MorphOS, so why cling on to the Amiga name? Why not move on to something new and re-invent yourselves?
So like I said before, if MorphOS people were smart they would dispense with the amiga reference in the newsgroup name (and all marketing). I don't see why they need it or want it (unless they like pretending they're using an Amiga).
>MorphOS runs Amiga software.
Yeah so? So does windows/linux with UAE. And MorphOS runs only OLD Amiga software and through the use of an emulator (much like AmigaOS4). Simply running old "legacy" or "classic" Amiga apps doesn't mean much these days I'm afraid. All the new PPC binaries will be MorphOS software (even if it is source compatible with AmigaOS3.X - minus the custom chip support).
>It has a relationship to the Amiga computer platform.
Yeah, it ripped off the API and part of the user base.
>The people behind MorphOS made the greatest contributions to keeping the
>platform current in the mid to late 90s (CyberstormPPC, BlizzardPPC, the first
>68060 card, Cybervision64 you name it.)
And they did a good job too... I'm no historian, I'm not debating the past.
>The people behind MorphOS have supported the platform for a decade or more.
That was then, this is now. They are no longer on the side of Amiga. They are on the side of themselves, manipulating the Amiga market for their own needs.
>Now you wish to drive them away and banish them. Puh-leeze!
They already left the Amiga market. I would rather invite them back but they've chosen their path.
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 32 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 14-Jan-2002 05:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (David Scheibler):
If you were into OS/2 and heard about an OS that can run OS/2 apps where would you ask? I'm not saying that Win2k doesn't run OS7" apps, nor do I say htat MorphOS doesn't run Amiga apps, I say there's more to them than that and THUS they don't belong in comp.sys.amiga or comp.sys.os2. See my point?
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 33 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 14-Jan-2002 05:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Lennart Fridén):
OS7"OS/2
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 34 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 14-Jan-2002 08:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Christophe Decanini):
>comp.sys.amiga.morphos -> For morphos running on Amiga
>Makes sense as there is a growing user base.
User base? LOL! No, it's a group of beta testers, remember?
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 35 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Daniel Miller on 14-Jan-2002 11:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (voices from Mike's other life):
In Reply to Comment 30 where Mike Veroukis typed:
> It's natural to you maybe but I think it sort of
> implies that MorphOS is part of Amiga (which it
> is and it isn't). Take for instance
It really belabors the point unnecessarily to go back and forth with "sort of" and "it is and it isn't."
> The fact that MorphOS runs on *SOME* current
> Amiga models does not mean much as it has a new
> dedicated hardware base as well. Infact, the
> Amiga hardware base would be the inferior choice
> for running MorphOS, so why cling on to the Amiga
> name? Why not move on to something new and
> re-invent yourselves?
To answer the last first, I believe that is what is happening. The platform that we've loved is being reinvented. Not to cling to this or that, but that platform was until now known as the Amiga platform. I am the same person I was when I purchased that A600 years ago, and I do not recall having to sign a non-disclosure or pay a licensing fee to use the word "Amiga." And I don't intend to start now.
This whole nonsense (started by Fleecy Moss) is based on a false idea that MorphOS wants to sell itself as Amiga OS, but the truth is that "The Name" has accumulated a lot more baggage in the last two years, and people are wondering who they can trust anymore. It is really better to differentiate the MorphOS product from anything Amiga INC. is involved with and I think that is happening.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos does not imply that MorphOS is an Amiga Inc. product, but only pays homage to the computer platform that we have loved and used, and observes the reality that we are users of the Amiga computer platform originated by Jay Miner, which has nothing to do with the exploits of Amiga Inc. a Snoqulamie based marketing firm.
> The people behind MorphOS made the greatest
> contributions to keeping the platform current
> in the mid to late 90s (CyberstormPPC,
> BlizzardPPC, the first 68060 card, Cybervision64
> And they did a good job too... I'm no historian,
> I'm not debating the past.
> That was then, this is now. They are no longer
> on the side of Amiga. They are on the side of...
I disagree. I am still an Amigan. I am the same person I was. I don't have to sign on to what Amiga Inc. wants to feed me to demonstrate that. MorphOS is just the upgrade path that appears to offer the best hope for the system I have loved.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 36 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 14-Jan-2002 12:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Mike Veroukis):
>So does Linux. Is there a comp.sys.amiga.linux newsgroup?
There is comp.sys.amiga.unix
I wonder why you now complain about the newsgroup. There was a RfD long ago and I saw nobody who now complains that it shouldn't be in the amiga hierachy.
It's like not going to vote, to bad if you wanted the other candidate but didn't vote. You're problem not the candidate's one.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 37 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 14-Jan-2002 12:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Daniel Miller):
"I am the same person I was when I purchased that A600 years ago, and I do not recall having to sign a non-disclosure or pay a licensing fee to use the word "Amiga." And I don't intend to start now."
And thus registered trademarks aren't valid anymore? So it's ok for me to claim that product X made by company Y and sold by vendor Z is in fact a W? So it's ok to say that Volvos are in fact geuine Porsches? Get real
MorphOs is per definition NOT Amiga and until bplan/MorphOS buys the Amiga name this will remain a fact. Now, MorphOS might have some 'Amiga feeling' but then again you can talk about Windows having certain RTOS qualities which doesn't make Windows a RTOS.
Even MorphOS advocates and fanatics (well maybe not the latter) should know better than restict MorphOS being something Amiga-only as there's more to it than meets the eye. It'd simply be doing MorphOS an injustice not to consider it an OS in it's own right and THUS put it under comp.sys.morphos.
Anyway, the newsgroup is in place, the damage is done, let's move on people, there's nothing to be seen here.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 38 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 14-Jan-2002 15:34 GMT
Boings eat butterflys , its proven :) .
Neways OS 4 V morphos , ok morphos runs on PPC , but OS 4 is going to have :
Its own RTG gfx system
Its own 2d/3d subsystems
New filesystem
Etc
eTc
therefor os 4 will be a real os , and morphos will be paying for aros.
neone who moans os 4 isn't out has to consider how much more work has to be done on os 4 to get it running properly on new non custom chip based hardware.
Personally i think the name B PLAN speaks for itself :)
B PLAN : the crap lesser plan over shadowed by the A PLAN becuase the A PLAn rocks and the B PLANS is only going to happen if pigs fly :p
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 39 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by JensDensen on 14-Jan-2002 15:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Anonymous):
> Personally i think the name B PLAN speaks for itself :)
> B PLAN : the crap lesser plan over shadowed by the A PLAN becuase the A PLAn > rocks and the B PLANS is only going to happen if pigs fly :p
No.
B-plan, the Backup-plan, when the A-plan simply isn't going to happen.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 40 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 14-Jan-2002 16:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (JensDensen):
>No.
>B-plan, the Backup-plan, when the A-plan simply isn't going to happen.
If that's the case we should come up with plan C for when MorphOS makes it's big marketing flop down the toilet.
And since we're all fortune tellers here, my crystal ball tells me that five years from now if people are still doing development for the "Amiga" it will be for either Amiga Inc's AmigaOS4/5 or Aros.
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 41 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Brecht [darklite] on 14-Jan-2002 16:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Daniel Miller):
>To answer the last first, I believe that is what is happening. The platform
>that we've loved is being reinvented. Not to cling to this or that, but that
>platform was until now known as the Amiga platform. I am the same person I was
>when I purchased that A600 years ago, and I do not recall having to sign a non-
>disclosure or pay a licensing fee to use the word "Amiga." And I don't intend
>to start now.
I agree. MorphOS is more Amiga to me than AmigaOS4 will be. It all comes down wether you define something by name or properties. It's obvious AInc don't give a sh*t about the "classic" AmigaOS, while Ralph Schmidt & co decided to create OS4 themselves, instead of waiting for AInc to throw some licences around. I'm sure MOS would have been the official OS4, *IF* the MOS team got a fair deal. Do you really think they didn't want that?
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 42 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Brecht [darklite] on 14-Jan-2002 17:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Anonymous):
>Personally i think the name B PLAN speaks for itself :)
Yes... because AInc let us down.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 43 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 14-Jan-2002 17:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Anonymous):
Sorry.. but...
>Neways OS 4 V morphos , ok morphos runs on PPC , but OS 4 is going to have :
>Its own RTG gfx system
>Its own 2d/3d subsystems
CyberGraphX V5
MESA&Rave3D
>New filesystem
SFSPPC
>Etc
>eTc
Etc, etc?
and about that AROS stuff.... MorphOS is not AROS... It uses some AROS code
in some non critical areas of the A\BOX. OS 4 will most probably do that too.
Instead of stessing how crap MorphOS is and how good AmigaOS is/will be,
leave them alone to grow up, get out of the development phase, develop new
APIs and change their face to different OSes. Both OSes will manipulate the
AmigaOS API and will most probably grow into 2 completely different things,
compatible with the old stuff.
We will be able to compare them then. Grow up and wait.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 44 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 14-Jan-2002 17:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Brecht [darklite]):
>MorphOS is more Amiga to me than AmigaOS4 will be.
Explain that one to me. Educate me! How is MorphOS more "Amiga" then OS4.0, which is derived directly from AmigaOS3.1 source code, utilizing Amiga custom chips (via AmigaOne/A1200 hardware), developed by longtime Amiga companies and targeted specifically at the Amiga community?
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 45 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 14-Jan-2002 17:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (Brecht [darklite]):
>Yes... because AInc let us down.
Wrong. Commodore let us down. Only they can really be blamed I think. All the problems of today can be traced back to them. Blame anyone you like but the Amiga community received a mortal blow in 94. Don't blame the medics for not raising the dead in 2001. So should we blame them for trying?
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 46 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 14-Jan-2002 18:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
"and about that AROS stuff.... MorphOS is not AROS... It uses some AROS code
in some non critical areas of the A\BOX. OS 4 will most probably do that too."
Hehe, even AmigaOS 3.9 is using AROS code...;-)
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 47 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 14-Jan-2002 18:36 GMT
I'm not going to start reading yet another forum, so please someone, post here a summary of recent topics, every now and then (eg. monthly), please.
peace
priest
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 48 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 14-Jan-2002 19:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (priest):
>I'm not going to start reading yet another forum, so please someone, post here
>a summary of recent topics, every now and then (eg. monthly), please.
I have to admit the Amiga scene has been pretty boring lately. Not much going on. Hopefully that will change soon.
- Mike
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 49 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Brecht [darklite] on 14-Jan-2002 19:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (Mike Veroukis):
>>MorphOS is more Amiga to me than AmigaOS4 will be.
>
>Explain that one to me. Educate me! How is MorphOS more "Amiga" then OS4.0,
>which is derived directly from AmigaOS3.1 source code, utilizing Amiga custom
>chips (via AmigaOne/A1200 hardware), developed by longtime Amiga companies and
>targeted specifically at the Amiga community?
Hyperion are going to reinvent stuff like the libraries system and remove critical parts like SetFunction(). MorphOS build on the existsing library system, which is perfectly fine - don't fix it if it ain't broken.
How is the old source-code better than the AROS sources or the MOS own reverse-engineered sources? Unlike the AROS/MOS original sources, these are meant to be portable, and contain much less bugs and design flaws. Ask anyone who has seen the sources to the datatypes system for example...
The custom chips are nothing more than a dongle. It's time we finally drop support for them. And afterall, uae can nicely run all older software, where your real custom chips won't be any good because your software will crash on anything non-68000. And uae will allow you to multitask those old games too.
Do you really think MorphOS is targetted at users outside the current community? It still needs OS3.x for crying out loud. If anyone cares about the Amiga community, it's the MOS team, not Amiga Inc.
comp.sys.amiga.morphos now operational : Comment 50 of 81ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 14-Jan-2002 19:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (Mike Veroukis):
Companies like bplan(and the morphos team) and Hyperion care about the Amiga...
Amiga Inc. doesn't really give a f**k and that's why they let me down...
If they do anything, fine. But I think that they ONLY care for their PDA stuff.
Anonymous, there are 81 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 81]
Back to Top