28-Mar-2024 10:27 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 327 items in your selection (but only 77 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 327]
[News] Strong Genesi presence at AmiwestANN.lu
Posted on 29-Jul-2003 17:41 GMT by Daniel Miller327 comments
View flat
View list
In the Genesi presentation on Sunday, Matt Sealey got up and did a passionate job explaining all the great things that are available and coming for MorphOS. The other Genesi speakers did an excellent team presentation that showed off the great benefits and many positive attributes of MorphOS on the Pegasos. My early reporting for Amiga-News.de related the story of Saturday's Genesi presentation, which went poorly due to technical problems unrelated to the abilities of MorphOS or the technical excellence of the Pegasos. The problems owed more to configuration and hard-drive settings, and the Genesi team stumbled a bit because of that. Conversely the OS4 presentation, done on a A4000 (OS4 has yet to be demonstrated on an Amiga One), went very well. In all cases those reports dealt only with Saturday. The Genesi presentation on Sunday went smashingly, and they showed a lot of teamwork and frankly they recovered completely from Saturday I wrote the Saturday's report as a journalist, not a MorphOS advocate. I don't like it being portrayed the way it has been on ANN in the post by anonymous AM. My article was not about the stupid OS4 vs. MorphOS war, it was about Amiwest on Saturday. The MorphOS presentation on Sunday kicked ass. I am sorry I wasn't able to report on it later Sunday, being on the road. It is a bit of an injustice that so called advocates are the ones who do a lot of the reporting, leaving Internet readers hostage to their prejudices. I tried to stay away from that in my reports. In the Genesi presentation on Sunday, Matt Sealey got up and did a passionate job explaining all the great things that are available and coming for MorphOS. The other Genesi speakers did an excellent team presentation that showed off the great benefits and many positive attributes of MorphOS on the Pegasos. Bill Buck spoke very well also. Genesi made a lot of friends on Saturday and Sunday, and showed that they 100% earned their place in the Amiga community, where they belong. They have an almost complete solution that is so far more advanced than OS4 that it is not even funny. The OS4 presenter did a great with the presentation but as far as the actual product there is absolutely no comparison. Maybe someday Hyperion and partners will produce something to compae with MorphOS and Pegasos but not yet, and this fact was clear to anyone who attended Amiwest. I wish ANN would adopt a policy of not letting anonymous posters leave news stories. The article as characterized by AM is an oversimplification and really is a distortion. Let's leave the MorphOS-OS4 war behind for once. At Amiwest we did.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 251 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 01-Aug-2003 07:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 248 (Anonymous):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Btw, I guess it's not only the transparency/shadow issue but also the fact that they are not rendered like classic intuition menus, directly on the screen, locking out everything else (= fast), but like MagicMenu menus in system-friendly mode.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Just a question... Have you ever tried AROS? THe Menus are both non blocking and instant... I certainly would not tolerate any delay between pressing the right mouse and the menu appearing.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 252 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Phill on 01-Aug-2003 08:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 231 (Fabio Alemagna):
>In a shared address space, mmapping files is just a quicker alternative to >copying it all into memory, hover it doesn't overcome the "side effects" of >attemptin to load a, say, 2GB file into 512MB of available total memory: no >space. For tiny files, mmapping is quite unneeded, better use a buffering >mechanism.

Memory mapping files into the address space is purely an optimisation & also allows for files to be accessed easier. After you've spent all your time writing a decent virtual memory system, it just seems like pure overhead to go back and add it into your application.

If you don't have virtual ram on your system then it's a bit of a problem, such is life.

64bit addressing really comes in useful when memory mapping or you're limited to 4gb files, but the advantage of doing simple things like:

*( p_file + 10 ) = 20;
*( p_file + 0x123412341234 ) = 21;

Rather than buffering it yourself are pretty obvious.
It would be interesting to see how things would have differed if memory mapped files had been included in every o/s since day one. No fread() etc :-)

Phill
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 253 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 01-Aug-2003 08:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 251 (Matt Parsons):
>I certainly would not tolerate any delay between pressing the right mouse and the menu appearing

I don't think I would notice a delay with MorphOS in that situation. It's starting to be a problem if you browse the menus and one menu is closed, the next is opended. An OS should be able to do that blazingly fast and snappy.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 254 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by André Siegel on 01-Aug-2003 08:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 248 (Anonymous):
"No, using a G3/600. MOS 1.3 menus are quite a bit slower than other systems I am using (ie. Windows, emulated Amiga with OS3.5 menus, probably even classic Amigas wiht their black/white menus). Too slow for my taste. To put that into perspective: I expect menus to appear instantly, zero delay, snappy. I don't like lag at all, even if it's just some tenths of a second."

I cannot see any real delay at all. Menus appear instantly on my machine.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 255 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Aug-2003 09:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 248 (Anonymous):
some anonymous person wrote:
> MOS 1.3 menus are quite a bit slower than other systems

Hmm, check Settings/MUI Settings.../Menus

You'll find a setting for "Delay". Make sure this is 0.0s. I have some
memory this was set to >0 when I got my system. Disgusting! :-)
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 256 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by itix on 01-Aug-2003 09:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 254 (André Siegel):
> I cannot see any real delay at all. Menus appear instantly on my machine.

My BPPC cant handle menus that fast :/ But on the other hand if Pegasos G3 is lowend machine then BPPC machine is cheap junk :-D
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 257 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 01-Aug-2003 09:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 255 (Johan Rönnblom):
v
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 258 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 01-Aug-2003 10:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 255 (Johan Rönnblom):
>I have some memory this was set to >0 when I got my system. Disgusting! :-)

That's right, submenu opening delay set to 0.2 sec. But that is not what I meant. One problem appears to be that Ambient refresh is a bit slow under MorphOS 1.3. You don't notice this with Ambient's own menus because those are small. But if you run other programs with larger menus and open their leftmost menu and then the next, you can see how all the icons in the area that was covered by the first menu - three or five Ambient HD icons here - are rather slowly refreshed. You can follow the refresh with your bare eye while browsing menu. Damaged icons. Then refresh runs over them. The whole process looks slow. That would not happen under AmigaOS because AmigaOS locks the layer and it's a single blit to restore the background. On top of slow refresh, you have all the eye candy: shadows, transparency. In my humble opionion, MorphOS should ship with a menu configuration that favours speed over looks.

There is one other erconomic problem mith MOS 1.3 menus: if you move the mouse pointer to the top of the screen until it stops (normal way to go to menus, right?) you can not open menus by moving the mouse pointer left or right. That is because the mouse pointer must be exactly over the text of a menu item and apparently items are located one pixel line or so below the screen's top border. The exact geometry probably depends on the installed fonts.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 259 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by hooligan/dcs on 01-Aug-2003 12:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 255 (Johan Rönnblom):
Thanks for the tip, mine was 0.2s :)
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 260 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 01-Aug-2003 13:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 250 (Fabio Alemagna):
For the record, I still don't think I'm wrong but I choose not to discuss this anymore in public because it serves no purpose whatsoever.

Wisdom comes with age I guess.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 261 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 01-Aug-2003 14:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 256 (itix):
Your BPPC also is not running the latest version of Ambient either.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 262 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 01-Aug-2003 15:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 260 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wisdom comes with age I guess.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

And so does incontinence... :(
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 263 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 01-Aug-2003 16:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 262 (Matt Parsons):
Spot on, Matt. There was much more evidence of verbal incontinence than wisdom in that post.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 264 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Aug-2003 16:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 258 (Anonymous):
Hmm, I can't really see this. However.. ambient menus are MUI menus,
while other apps use some other config. If I'm not mistaken this will
be integrated so you will have MUI menus everywhere (please don't kill
me if I'm wrong here, anyone :).

I see a *very* slight delay on my non-mui menus. Nothing like what
you're talking about, but still not 100% good. Certainly infinitely
faster than XP. :)
I'm not sure why there is a slowdown - but it may be related to the
little "shadows". My MUI menus are very fast, even though I have
textures and stuff. No shadows though (MUI in 1.3 only seems to have
chequered shadows, which looks rather bad). Opeing them over icons
does not slow down the refresh or anything.

Btw, I agree about your last point, it should be possible to select
menus at the top row of pixels, I've been annoyed by this too now that
you mention it. I'll keep this in mind, if it's not fixed in 1.4 I'll
report this issue.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 265 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 01-Aug-2003 16:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 264 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Btw, I agree about your last point, it should be possible to select
>menus at the top row of pixels, I've been annoyed by this too now that
>you mention it. I'll keep this in mind, if it's not fixed in 1.4 I'll
>report this issue.

?????
I have been trying to reproduce that "feature" for hours now, but I CAN select
menus at the top-pixel-row just fine.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 266 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 01-Aug-2003 17:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 263 (Bill Hoggett):
Don't worry Bill, i'll share my diapers with you because you certainly need them more than I do.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 267 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 01-Aug-2003 18:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 266 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
@Ben

I've said it before on this issue so I'll say it again since you obviously didn't uderstand: provide proof to back up your damaging accusation or else STFU and stop spreading FUD.

What you are doing is far worse than the public speculation you pulled Bernie up for earlier in this thread.

Red or blue, anyone telling lies is a liar and anyone making accusations they are not prepared to back up is a FUD spreader. Those incapable of showing proper respect are in turn not entitled to any themselves.

I agree with Fabio on this. It's not a matter of personal opinion. It's a public accusation without a shred of evidence to back it up.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 268 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 01-Aug-2003 18:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 267 (Bill Hoggett):
You are trying to bait me into having another go at it but I won't.

I find it amusing that everybody is entitled to have his or her opinion about everything, even about stuff where clearly they have no particular expertise on but yet you call on me to refrain from expressing an opinion about something for which I'm considered an expert in my profession by my peers.

I don't remember you having such qualms when it came to commenting on the legal status of Amithlon even though you have no particular schooling or expertise in this area.

I don't deny you that right but at least grant me similar rights.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 269 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Aug-2003 18:29 GMT
Ben Hermans wrote:
> For the record, I still don't think I'm wrong but I choose not to
> discuss this anymore in public because it serves no purpose
> whatsoever.

You mean, in other words, that nowadays you're only spreading this FUD
through private channels? Well, I've heard from several sources
already that you do, but it's nice to have it confirmed directly from
you.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 270 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Sigbjørn Skjæret on 01-Aug-2003 18:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 268 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
First of all you are not expressing an opinion, you are making a grave accusation without even an ounce of proof, something which you should know is libel .. secondly I don't see what possible expertise you (or anyone else for that matter) could have for making such accusations...


- CISC
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 271 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 01-Aug-2003 18:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 269 (Johan Rönnblom):
Some people in your own team agree with me but they will go nameless as what told me these things in confidence.

Again, I'm won't be baited into starting another 200+ messages thread.

Wait and see, that's all I have to say.

Meanwhile I'll express my qualified opinion to whomever I chose.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 272 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 01-Aug-2003 18:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 270 (Sigbjørn Skjæret):
Eh? Is Mr Hermans still claiming that the MOS team stole AmigaOS source code?!?!?

This has to be a flight of fancy... I doesn't really make sense, who would want that old code anyway (other than Hyperion)?
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 273 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Sigbjørn Skjæret on 01-Aug-2003 18:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 271 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
..and instead you are trying to bait others to do your dirty work for you? I see, really clever .. btw, this is already a 200+ thread... ;)


- CISC
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 274 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Pete on 01-Aug-2003 18:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 271 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
->Ben Hermans:

I've to agree with Matt, who want such an old code btw?

Please stop spreading shit now. If you were a serious and professional lawyer you'd get REAL proofs and then do what you've to do if you really get valid proofs.

Speculation based talking as you are doing now are useless and plain stupid. So stop that.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 275 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Sallin on 01-Aug-2003 19:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 274 (Pete):
Well, he will just stop replying in public but will continue
to privatly brainwash other people...

And then they will repeat to their own friends how illegal MorphOS is
supposed to be, his authors being nasty AmigaOS source code thiefs and
Hyperion can prove it and will do it and blah blah blah...

Still the same story since 3 years now.

And still no real argument, even though it's supposed to be proven
"soon", "wait&see", "you will see", "beware", "I know better than
you", "I'm a lawyer but not you", "I will sue you"...

Pathetic, isn't it ?
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 276 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by brotheris on 01-Aug-2003 20:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 275 (Nicolas Sallin):
ppl need entertainment before os4 materializes on linuxone. someone provides it and nobody notices YAD (yet another delay) ;-)
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 277 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 01-Aug-2003 20:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 268 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
@Ben

> I find it amusing that everybody is entitled to have his or her opinion
> about everything, even about stuff where clearly they have no particular
> expertise on but yet you call on me to refrain from expressing an opinion
> about something for which I'm considered an expert in my profession by my
> peers.

I'm not questioning your competence, Ben, I'm questioning whether you have any basis for your accusation at all. For all the proof you have provided, even secondary evidence, you may as well be making the accusation up.

> I don't remember you having such qualms when it came to commenting on the
> legal status of Amithlon even though you have no particular schooling or
> expertise in this area.

IIRC, I clearly stated why I had a certain opinion about the status of Amithlon, including the evidence I based my opinion on.

> I don't deny you that right but at least grant me similar rights.

The situation is not the same. In that case, the onus for providing proof was on Haage & Partner, who claimed to have a valid license but were unwilling or unable to provide any evidence that this was true. In this case, the onus for providing the proof lies with those making the accusation, and yet there's as much proof that you have a reasonable basis for your accusation as there is that H&P had a valid license agreement (i.e. none whatsoever).

In fact, I'm being perfectly consistent. In both cases I choose to distrust that side which, when required to produce the proof to back up their position, refuses to do so.

(In deciding who carries the burden of producing the proof, I apply a simple rule: those claiming that something exists must provide proof of their claim.)

This is not about personal opinions or suspicions any more. I have my own take on this particular case, and it may well surprise you. However, it's just a personal belief and I have no evidence that it's accurate whatsoever, so it remains a private opinion. Perhaps if you are not prepared to offer any explanation for your standpoint you should also make sure your opinion remains private.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 278 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 01-Aug-2003 20:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 219 (Bernie Meyer):
The content of the stack in irreverent to the stack pointer address, due to the indirect addressing, the problem with even numbered addresses are not a problem, it's jit emulator or the interpreters that adds or subs the stack pointer as long as there is no bug with in the program it self there should not be a problem,

reallocation of the memory as the stack is addressed with indirect pointer or the stack pointer as it is called, if a task where to assign otter pointers to that address space that may break, if the memory where just relocated.

so they most be using the new virtually address space system, allowing on address to be an otter address in the system it self, one way to solve the stack problem is to reserve it in out side the physical memory, use virtual address spaces for all stacks, one task not allowed to access a otters stack etc, all stacks uses the same address spaces, different emmu maps for different tasks, all stacks redirected to the physical memory, when the stack overflows the physical address space changes, the virtual address stay the same, the limit to this mechanism is that the more memory you have the less virtual address spaces the less room for stack or Virtual memory.

I guess if they ever go 64 bit then every thing will move inn to the Virtual address space with exception of the shard memory that will stay on first memory segments so every task can access it.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 279 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 01-Aug-2003 21:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 277 (Bill Hoggett):
Every one has the right to have there believes, as long as none get hurt inn the process, first one question Ben's believes then when bean answer, they dislike his replay?

All of you stop asking for answers you don't like....

It's not like he is yelling it out..

Any wait it's all past, you Se MorphOS having more PPC modules then OS4.0 to day, they where forced to move faster wither print to replace the 68k modules,

on the subject of the asm source code, the OS1.3 code in on Aminet, and the autodocs and header-files are free, using part of the code can be quit temping then again it's in 68k and you need to port it to C anyway, the resemblance is not as good, it's in may cases easy to start from the beaning when Se lots of JMP and JSR instructions and lot's of label names, start putting them in side functions can give you hard time, unless you don't care about there format and just convert it from 68k to PPC code direct with a application, then again you can not be shore it will work,

Me I don't know what they have used or not however if they used any thing, I dout if they used any thing important or if they used any thing at all, if any thing it will be the header files for there api emulation with extension layer called A/Box running top Quark.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 280 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 01-Aug-2003 21:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 279 (Kjetil):
@Kjetil

> Every one has the right to have there believes, as long as none get hurt inn
> the process,

Ahem. So accusing someone of being a thief is not hurting them? It's the intent that matters here, and Ben's statements are clearly meant to discredit his competitors, whether shouted from the rooftops, quietly mentioned in this thread or that, or just slipped into private conversations.

> first one question Ben's believes then when bean answer, they dislike his
> replay?

But Ben has _NOT_ answered. He says we should just accept his word on it because of his profession. He refuses to explain what the basis of his opinion is however.

> All of you stop asking for answers you don't like....

I'm not asking for answers that I like. I just want an answer as opposed to an evasion. The questions is: what is the basis of Ben's accusation, in specific terms? The answer is still MIA.

> It's not like he is yelling it out..

He's posted it to ANN and discussed it with people on a non-confidential basis. Considering his position, that is the equivalent of "yelling it out". The proof of the effectiveness of his approach lies in the fact that there are plenty of people who believe him implicitly, despite the fact that they have seen and heard no more evidence than I have.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 281 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 01-Aug-2003 22:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 279 (Kjetil):
>Every one has the right to have there believes, as long as none get hurt inn >the process, first one question Ben's believes then when bean answer, they >dislike his replay?

I would honestly *like* a reply. He has not given one, instead put up innuendos and masks.

Just like a lawyer. 8)
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 282 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by itix on 02-Aug-2003 00:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 261 (Nate Downes):
> Your BPPC also is not running the latest version of Ambient either. Oh bugger. Can't you /dcc the latest 1.4 ROMs and Ambient for me? :-)
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 283 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Lee Bosch on 02-Aug-2003 01:22 GMT
I must disagree with the use of superlatives in reference to the Sunday presentation. Saturday's presentation should not have happened and Sunday's was a struggle in the happiest light.

1. Wayne Hunt was decidedly not briefed on what is going on. This is probably not his fault given his being thrust into the position with very little notice.

2. Matt's presentation was informed, but it took a dozen or so prompts for him to get going. Towards the end of his presentation, it was clear that exciting things were coming, but he was kind of the polar opposite of Wayne: he knew what was going on but not how to present it.

3. It was still obvious on Sunday that Genesi hadn't sufficiently gathered themselves to do a finished presentation but if you could follow it, there was much to be learned in spite of the stumbling.

Bill Buck communicates well with audiences and I'm sure that this will rub off on the other members of Genesi as they work together to bring the Super Bundle and the Pegasos to an anxiously awaiting public.

I believe that like the original Amiga and the Atari ST computers, having both platforms out there will bolster the perceived legitimacy of the Pegasos and the AmigaOne.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 284 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by strobe on 02-Aug-2003 02:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 260 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
>Wisdom comes with age I guess.

How humble of you
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 285 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bernie Meyer on 02-Aug-2003 02:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 278 (Kjetil):
I am not sure I understood you correctly, but you seem to be saying that the OS can move around the stack because all accesses to it are through the stack pointer. Unfortunately, that is not so...Example: Take the C function int f1(void) { int a=1,b=2; swap(&a,&b); return a+2*b;}In that, a and b are so-called automatic variables, which get allocated on the stack. However, when "swap" gets called, the addresses of these variables are passed to the called function --- which means that "swap" can access those variables, *without* going through the stackpointer. If a stack extension were required as part of "swap", that extension *must* keep a and b stored at the addresses passed into swap, because otherwise swap will fail. And It's not enough to just keep *copies* there, and move "the real thing" around --- because "swap" may change the values, and thus influence the return value of f1.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 286 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bernie Meyer on 02-Aug-2003 03:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 232 (Hans-Joerg Frieden):
Regarding the idea of "gapped" stack spaces on the PPC side --- I don't see how that can work. In my copy of the SYSV ABI, in the "Coding examples" section, subsection "Function Prologue and Epilogue", bullet point 4 states that deallocating a stack frame can be done *either* by following the back reference, *or* by incrementing the stack pointer by the same amount it had been decremented.So while you are guaranteed to have a fully-linked list of stack frames, those stack frames also need to be continuous.There is at least one more problem with the idea --- stackpointer operations are non-privileged, and (see section "Stack Frame") "The Standard Calling sequence does not define a maximum stack frame size". Considering the very first thing put into a stackframe is the back reference (which lives at its bottommost address), how would you leave "enough" guard space to reliably detect the need for a stack frame extension before unrelated memory gets clobbered?In fact, how do you ensure that you have "enough" space in your current setup?
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 287 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Aug-2003 03:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 281 (Nate Downes):
>I would honestly *like* a reply. He has not given one, instead put up innuendos and masks.

I don't know how many times I have read his replies to this, but since
some people constantly starts to shout 'you are lying' on every occasion
that someone disagrees with them, I don't blame Ben for not trying to
explain the same thing _again_.

Just out of curiosity, if I were in possession of the source code for
a certain executable which undoubtable is a part of the KS3.1
distribution, would that mean I could be in possesion of parts the KS3.1
sources? And what does it imply about the person that gave me the source
code?

FWIW, all evidence here is based on what other people have said. I am
pretty sure that Ben knows nothing about the look of the MOS1.4 sources
(and that he would gladly admit it too). However, on the possesion part,
I am sure that he is basing his opinion on what people, whom he chooses
to trust, have said.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 288 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Aug-2003 06:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 287 (Anonymous):
> FWIW, all evidence here is based on what other people have said. I am
> pretty sure that Ben knows nothing about the look of the MOS1.4 sources
> (and that he would gladly admit it too). However, on the possesion part,
> I am sure that he is basing his opinion on what people, whom he chooses
> to trust, have said.

Well, you see, that's the problem. I suspect I have heard the same things Ben has, and I have my own opinion about this, BUT and opinion based on hearsay only amounts to a personal suspicion. Ben's position means that he cannot voice his personal suspicions without them being taken as statements of fact, and so they become actual accusations for which Ben has provided no evidence, either primary or secondary.

His actions do not live up to the resposibility of his position. He should either tell us what proof he has to formulate his opinion or else shut up about the issue completely. He keeps telling us about his legal qualifications, so he should know this himself. Ben is not "just an ordinary punter", and as such he is not entitled to voice "personal opinions" as if they were facts, particularly when those opinions contain legal accusations against his competitors.

So far, all it amounts to is a FUD spreading campaign.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 289 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by jabba on 02-Aug-2003 07:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 271 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
"Some people in your own team agree with me but they will go nameless as what told me these things in confidence."

Unlike what he might have told you, Mike Bouma WAS NEVER part of the MorphOS development team!

;-)
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 290 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 02-Aug-2003 07:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 252 (Phill):
> Memory mapping files into the address space is purely an optimisation & also
> allows for files to be accessed easier. After you've spent all your time
> writing a decent virtual memory system, it just seems like pure overhead to
> go back and add it into your application.

Unfortunately, applications won't be able to _only_ rely mmapping, because it might fail for lack of memory, and thus would have to go back to normal file operations anyway. When I talk about "buffering", I talk about _transparent_ buffering: you could, for example, provide a C++ class which implemented the operator[] method and which provided access to a file's content trough that operator, as if the file had been loaded all into memory, without using all the memory that the file would really need.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 291 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 02-Aug-2003 07:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 260 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
> For the record, I still don't think I'm wrong but I choose not to discuss this
> anymore in public because it serves no purpose whatsoever.
>
> Wisdom comes with age I guess.

All I wanted to say is that you can't *expect* people to treat you as a friend if you don't first apologize for the damage you've done to them. Of course they CAN, but it's their choice to do so, you can't expect anything.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 292 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Aug-2003 07:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 288 (Bill Hoggett):
>He keeps telling us about his legal qualifications

I think that he started to refer to his legal qualifications when people claimed that MOS does not contain any KS3.1 sources so everything is ok.
The Ben tried to explain that it didn't matter if it contained the sources
or not if the authors were in possesion of the said source code. But by
this time, people couldn't differ between the 2 different questions.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 293 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Aug-2003 08:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 288 (Bill Hoggett):
The problem is that people don't understand European coypright law nor no they understand German, French etc. laws on unfair competition.

The fact that you see the word "theft" being used is already proof enough of that.

Copyright infringement is not theft by any stretch of the imagination (RIAA, pay attention).

It does no good for me to explain it time and again.

Like I said, I'm entitled to my opinion which I already expressed in tempore non suspecto prior to the OS 4 project getting under way.

I find it ridiculous that people are trying to deny me that right whilst they'll happily go along with Bill Buck trying to discredit my professional qualifications both in private and publicly.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 294 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 02-Aug-2003 08:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 293 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
> The problem is that people don't understand European coypright law nor no they
> understand German, French etc. laws on unfair competition.

Unfair competition because both OSs run the same SW? LOL, ever heard about _compatibility_, Ben? No even microsoft attempted to sue Lindows for THAT, they sued it for the NAME, and LOST.

As for the theft: there's been talk about _stolen_ source code, if that's not theft, what is it?

There's no breach of copyrights here, Ben, get over it.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 295 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Aug-2003 08:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 294 (Fabio Alemagna):
Stick to what you know Fabio.

Theft of source-code is impossible legally in most countries.

Theft requires tangible, material things to be misappropriated.

Source-code is not tangible.

You can steal CD's, you can't steal source-code.

I also never claimed that anybody stole source-code or CD's containing source-code.

Get over it, you don't even understand the basics.

Like I said, I won't discuss it further.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 296 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 02-Aug-2003 08:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 285 (Bernie Meyer):
Guess I where thinking about alot of things when you wrote the last post,
you are right about not being able to move the stack whit out virtual addressing,

I where allows think about stack pages when I wrote the last statement, just read trow all your inspiring posts, list of reserved memory that emulator keeps track of allowing push and pull opcodes to allot more than move the stack pointer,

AAAAA------BBBBB----CCCCCC-----TABEL

let's assume you have A page of stack and a B page of stack, and TABLE contain the content of the what stack spaces allocate when you get stack over run in stack area A you allocate B stack space, when you get stack over flow in B you allocate a C stack space, when you get stack under run i C you move the stack pointer to B, and free C page, when you get stack under run i B you free B area and move back A stack area, you can keep track on even and none even addresses you can alway do address & 0x1 or address%1 what ever you preferred, this can only be done interpreted, if you can't trap the push and pull instructions that is.

the last paragraph of my post talks about using virtual address space map the stack pointer to physical address, lets say fution PPC or 68k what ever emulator UAE, the program in the emulator thinks it's accessing address 0x4 for reading exec base, how ever the exec base is not really in that address it's in address (A0) + 0x4 where a0 is 0x400 the program never know the difference, on a emulator every thing is locate in virtual address space, on a OS4.0 parts of the memory is located in virtual address space, example stack or any otter none shared memory, it's all controlled by the ppc mmu,

and the virtual memory is not really some thing need to share with otter programs, so they can keep using the same address space if they keep a backup of the mmu memory map, there are now lower kernel to take in to consideration when do this like Amitalon or MorphOS.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 297 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 02-Aug-2003 08:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 286 (Bernie Meyer):
A)
if you can trap the pull push instruction how you get some what penalty if it's allowed to do so, nested function etc.

B)
Interpreted it should not be problem.

Or else you need to go fore the Virtual address mechanism, guess there most be some penalty for using the PPC MMU I ready don't know tow or tree extra clock cycles?

It be call to check the speed of shard memory compared with none shard memory and executable memory etc.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 298 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Aug-2003 09:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 293 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
@Ben

You are spreading FUD about a competitor, opinion or not. You should therefore be treated as such, whether you like it or not.

If you have proof of copyright infringment, show it. If you cannot show it, then explain why you keep making the claim despite the lack of proof. If you cannot even do that STFU or admit you've just been lying all along.

The burden of proof is on YOU. You are making the accusation, so you back it up.

I do find it ridiculous that you are demanding respect in both your legal and Amiga related fields, yet you show total disrespect for the intelligence of the people you are addressing.

If you don't want to discuss it further then don't mention it anywhere.
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 299 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Zorro on 02-Aug-2003 09:26 GMT
Aren't you tired of these stupid flamewars ?
We are four cats. We have so little chances...
we need unity or we will die... can you still understand this ?
Strong Genesi presence at Amiwest : Comment 300 of 327ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 02-Aug-2003 09:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 295 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Stick to what you know Fabio.

Theft of source-code is impossible legally in most countries.

Theft requires tangible, material things to be misappropriated.

Source-code is not tangible.

You can steal CD's, you can't steal source-code.

I also never claimed that anybody stole source-code or CD's containing source-code.

Get over it, you don't even understand the basics.

Like I said, I won't discuss it further.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Since I don't want to discredit you, either publically or privatly why don't you EMail the "facts" to me, because I'm not fully aware of the suituation, at least as you have described it.

You know where to find me.
Anonymous, there are 327 items in your selection (but only 77 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 327]
Back to Top