27-Apr-2024 03:36 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 79 items in your selection (but only 29 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 79]
[Web] TeamAROS bounty program updatedANN.lu
Posted on 23-Jan-2004 02:30 GMT by Christophe Decanini79 comments
View flat
View list
The teamAROS has set three new objectives in their bounty program:
- PCI driver, ata device and support of fat32.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 51 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by hammer on 25-Jan-2004 10:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (smithy):
"It’s all about games, games, games" – some anonymous Slashdot poster(recalling)...
BeOS market doesn’t really have a strong games/demo/entertainment culture.

Secondly, AmigaOS use to have the leading edge applications (multimedia bias) e.g. Scala**, Lightwave 3D**, Cinema 4D**, ImageFX, Real 3D**, Imagine 3D**, Cando (VB like), Video Toaster**, Opal Vision, Amiga Vision and ‘etc’.
Thirdly, AmigaOS has comparable application at that time i.e. Pagestream, ProPage, Bar&Pipes, Music-X, Dyna-CAD, X-CAD, and ‘etc’. In terms market dynamics, BeOS is nothing like AmigaOS(at it’s peak).

**Now on MS Windows platform (recalling from memory).
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 52 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by hammer on 25-Jan-2004 10:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Hagge):
As I recall, they were not fitted as standard and AmigaOS(CBM) was not directly running on them. The issue can be reduced to CPU manufacture’s partner’s zeal/fighting sprit issues than the particular ISA.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 53 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 25-Jan-2004 12:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (koan):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'd really like to see AROS running on ARM/XScale,
then I could run it on my PDA.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

The Palm maintainer, has introduced some ARM stuff into AROS (with the idea of migrating the Dragonball Palm port). But it requires someone with detailed ARM knowledge to contiune it.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 54 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by John on 25-Jan-2004 21:29 GMT
Only stupid people would write a OS for crippled antique hardware, x86 is mainstream hardware and for a buyer it is cheap and powerful (TeronONE is neither).

It only seems to be these stupid people under the identity "Amigans" what ask for the most stupid,old,crappy and expensive hardware as the NG Amiga.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 55 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 25-Jan-2004 21:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 54 (John):
What can you expect from a bunch of morons what praise AmigaInc, they begged and pleaded for PPC and those morons and going to watch their favortie (new 2001 OS) crash and burn.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 56 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 25-Jan-2004 21:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 54 (John):
What can you expect from a bunch of morons what praise AmigaInc, they begged and pleaded for PPC and those morons are going to watch their favortie (new 2001 OS) crash and burn.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 57 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 25-Jan-2004 21:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 54 (John):
What can you expect from a bunch of morons what praise AmigaInc, they begged and pleaded for PPC and those morons are going to watch their favortie (new 2001 OS) crash and burn.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 58 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by pixie on 26-Jan-2004 08:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 57 (Anonymous):
<sarcasm>I guess this wouldn't happen on Genesi, as they have clearly choosen x86 as the way to go</sarcasm>
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 59 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by runetrek on 26-Jan-2004 09:10 GMT
Apple can not even compete against x86 so the Pegasos and rebadged Terons are just a total failure and the people incharge deserve to burn.

Most people want good performance and good value for money all rolled in to one, PPC only offers one or the other.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 60 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 26-Jan-2004 11:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (anon):
"What the Amiga needs is "Slow burn, long term, getting things done" rather than the jive talkin pie in the sky euphoric buzzword spouting nonsense helium filled feet-never-touching-the-ground permasmile crap that most people blindly swallow down while holding their nose, while the rest of the world looks on and snickers under their breath."

Well put.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 61 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 26-Jan-2004 11:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 59 (runetrek):
"Most people want good performance and good value for money all rolled in to one, PPC only offers one or the other."

At the moment it offers neither, mainly because Motorola let things drift. (Like Commodore).

There is a real possibility that IBM may manage to produce CPUs that are clearly superior to those from AMD and Intel, in a couple of years. But they would have to be very clearly better (such as twice the speed with less heat) to justify the higher prices.

If that happens (and if an Amiga is produced that uses them), the PPC enthusiasts will be able to say "Told you so".

As it is, the only advantage of PPC is that it is easier to program - which does matter.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 62 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 26-Jan-2004 11:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 61 (Don Cox):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As it is, the only advantage of PPC is that it is easier to program - which does matter.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I would have to stop you there, as I have found the PPC (and the x86 for that matter) very difficult to program by hand, especially when compared to the 68k. That is one reason why C is so popular now.

I think in moderen terms the PPC is not easier to program than the x86, and C compiler are better than people at coding for modern CPU's with far better ability to schedule instructions, use Vector/Floating point units, and make more efficient useage of Registers.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 63 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 26-Jan-2004 11:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 62 (Matt Parsons):
"I think in modern terms the PPC is not easier to program than the x86, and C compiler are better than people at coding for modern CPU's with far better ability to schedule instructions, use Vector/Floating point units, and make more efficient useage of Registers."

Somebody has to program the language compilers, and there is always a bit of assembler in hardware drivers.

IIRC AmigaOS4 contains a couple of thousand lines of assembler. Don't know about MorphOS.

It is certainly true that the days of coding application programs in assembler are gone. IMO the days of coding programs in C should have gone too.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 64 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Alan on 26-Jan-2004 13:54 GMT
No platform like MorphOS and AmigaOS should have gone PPC as there is no future in it, when all the die hards buy their expensive hardware the market ends there,
These companies should become software only and made the operating systems for the platform what is used the most instead of a niche platform for niche profit.

These companies picked this PPC route and i hope it all come crumbling down on them big time.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 65 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jan-2004 19:21 GMT
Of course the x86 route would have been preferred by
users...

But since there is a myriad of different PC
BIOS and motherboards, Hyperion couldn't support them all.
That's why they've choosen to go with this standard
AmigaOne motherboard.
Yes, I know, Be did manage to pull this one off, but their
resources were a lot bigger.

The other reason is that there can be no successful
alternative OSs, IF it's possible to boot Windows
on the motherboard. :) Because then people will never buy the
apps they need, they'll just use Windows apps instead,
which of course are cracked :).

Two very reasonable arguments.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 66 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by anon on 26-Jan-2004 20:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 65 (Anonymous):
> Of course the x86 route would have been preferred by
> users...

> But since there is a myriad of different PC
> BIOS and motherboards, Hyperion couldn't support them all.

Why would they have to support them all? As it is, they don't "Support them all" in the PPC world, so why would it be different for x86?
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 67 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by anon on 26-Jan-2004 20:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 65 (Anonymous):
> The other reason is that there can be no successful
> alternative OSs, IF it's possible to boot Windows
> on the motherboard. :) Because then people will never buy the
> apps they need, they'll just use Windows apps instead

That's stupid. Most AmigaOne users already have a Windows machine anyway.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 68 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Seehund on 26-Jan-2004 20:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 66 (anon):
>> But since there is a myriad of different PC
>> BIOS and motherboards, Hyperion couldn't support them all.

> Why would they have to support them all? As it is, they don't "Support them all"
> in the PPC world, so why would it be different for x86?

Precisely.

There seems to be some sort of binary thinking going on among certain groups of people in Amiga circles.

They think it's either "NO x86 hardware at all", or "ALL x86 hardware".
Another option like "support a viable subset" apparently doesn't exist.

Just as they think it's either "ONLY PPC hardware X AND ONLY when sold by this or that reseller", or "ALL PPC hardware".
"Support a viable subset and let users choose whether or not to buy it with a licensed trademark" doesn't fit in the binary world.

The same people also seem to think that all drivers must come from the OS developing company, by divine decree or something.
"Hyperion couldn't support them all."
Maybe it's got something to do with the misconception that there are still "Amigas". Apparently and for some inexplicable reason it's a fantastic idea to kill AmigaOS by only selling it bundled with these "Amigas", so a driver for a device (e.g. audio) mounted on a mobo MUST come from the OS vendor, and this device is apparently different from e.g. a PCI soundcard when it's "OK" to use a 3rd party driver (in which case it's naturally not a solution supported by the OS vendor).
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 69 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 26-Jan-2004 22:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 65 (Anonymous):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But since there is a myriad of different PC
BIOS and motherboards, Hyperion couldn't support them all.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

But it is not hard to make an OS that can run on any x86 board... hint:- have a quick play with AROS...
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 70 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by anon on 26-Jan-2004 22:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 68 (Seehund):
What are you trying to do Seehund, make sense? We'll have none of that!
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 71 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 27-Jan-2004 06:11 GMT
I just bought a Serial ATA hard drive (manufactured just about 15 days ago, as a matter of fact). 120GB, SATA-150, 7200RPM, two types of power connectors (backward compatible, for now), whisper-quiet, etc... Also picked up a drive fan, to bring the temperature down substantially.

I wonder, will AROS support SATA? Rather, is their call-out for writers of the ATA device drivers inclusive of SATA? It is the emerging new standard.

Standards form the minimum bar for which any OS that wants to compete anywhere should strive; else they can never claim to be state-of-the-art, really. I'm not saying this is the intention of AROS, or even Amiga; but I think Amiga OS, too, should support these new standards so no one would think less of them, and so they won't be left behind.

--EyeAm (encouraging Amiga OS on ABIT motherboards)
-=AMIGA OS 4.0=-
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 72 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 27-Jan-2004 06:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 69 (Matt Parsons):
>In Reply to Comment 65 (Anonymous):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>But since there is a myriad of different PC
>BIOS and motherboards, Hyperion couldn't support them all.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Why not ship the Amiga OS with its own BIOS chip--or Kickstart boot ROM. Can't one be created to replace a regular PC BIOS chip, and let users change them out? We did that with the Amiga machines, when upgrading. OR, can't Amiga work with the makers of these BIOS chips for an alternate version? (then again, why can't the Amiga OS just work with the existing chips?)

>But it is not hard to make an OS that can run on any x86 board... hint:- have >a quick play with AROS...

I want to see Amiga OS on Abit motherboards. Check out the specs on the ABIT KV8-MAX 3. :) Of course, it would require that the Amiga OS is 64-Bit (something else I want to see).

It would make a whole lot more sense; and I'm sure venture capitalists would be much relieved that the pathway is wider than the dirt road they're currently on. I've been saying this for years now.

Amiga..AMD...Abit...64-bit...SATA...an Amiga company completely uncaring as to what the Amiga OS runs on (so long as they're selling OS boxes)--giving warranty only to those on a list of tested motherboards... This is the direction it needs to go.

I'm biased *for* Abit motherboards; but I'd like to see it run on others, as well. MSI, Asus, EyeTech/AmigaOne... on and on. :)

--EyeAm
-=AMIGA OS 4.0 in '04!=-
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 73 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by anon on 27-Jan-2004 06:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 71 (EyeAm):
> --EyeAm (encouraging Amiga OS on ABIT motherboards)

Have you signed Seehunds list yet? Do that first, then once you feel up to it, we'll go release some other coppertops. Oh, welcome to the Nebuchnadezzer, enjoy your stay :D
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 74 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Seehund on 27-Jan-2004 07:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 72 (EyeAm):
... an Amiga company completely uncaring as to what the Amiga OS runs on (so long as they're selling OS boxes)--giving warranty only to those on a list of tested motherboards... This is the direction it needs to go.

Cool, you Get It! :)

What you're saying is of course applicable and even more essential to a PPC AmigaOS, where there are rather few (understatement of the year?) viable hardware and vendor options compared to x86 already. We have Macs, and on the fringe there are things like Pegasoses and Terons.

I don't agree about the "special BIOS/ROM for AmigaOS" bit though. What good would that do? Display the word "Amiga" in the POST screen? :) It's entirely pointless, and it requires extra development for each supported piece of hardware plus modification of that hardware. Companies like Award and Phoenix spend wads of cash and man-years on making perfectly fine firmware already, let them and the hardware companies worry about making hardware. Amiga (the company and the current "Amiga concept") has nothing to do with hardware any longer.

Sure, if the OS distribution scheme was anywhere near anything sane, and the OS was available for Hardware X both separately in a shrinkwrapped box and as a licensed + bundled OEM option, then it might not be such a stupid idea to have the licensed hardware option made "special" in some way. But then again, just like in the fatally sick current situation of compulsory licensing with no options, any "extra" requirements on the hardware/licensees will make for fewer or no hardware options/licensees.
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 75 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Olegil on 27-Jan-2004 11:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 68 (Seehund):
Uhm, how do you support only a subset of PC motherboards?

Remember that a PC motherboard is only in production for about 3 months.
This means either fund a longer lifespan on one bog-standard motherboard, OR make a custom one, OR continous work on supporting new motherboards as long as OS4 is in development and active life.

What's the big difference between making a custom x86 and making a custom ppc? Wouldn't you still be as active in your crusade if the AmigaOne had a P4 instead of a G4/G3? How much money do you need to have to extend the lifespan of a motherboard from for instance Intel? How much time does it take to choose a new motherboard and write support for it every 3 months? 1 month? 2 months? 3 (at which point you're better off dropping the whole idea, because your software will NEVER work on ANY AVAILABLE hardware).
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 76 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Ogun on 27-Jan-2004 12:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 71 (EyeAm):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I wonder, will AROS support SATA? Rather, is their call-out for writers of the ATA device drivers inclusive of SATA? It is the emerging new standard.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

SATA has the same legacy programming interface as normal ATA.
So there are no changes required in the drivers to use them.

To take advantage of the added features (stolen from SCSI) such as TCQ etc,
you'd need driver work done indeed.

//Johan
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 77 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by Seehund on 27-Jan-2004 16:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 75 (Olegil):
Uhm, how do you support only a subset of PC motherboards?

Was that a rhetorical question?

Less than ALL PC (or PPC) motherboards = a subset of PC (or PPC) motherboards.

Is there any OS and any OS vendor out there which does NOT support only a subset of hardware? Apart from AmigaDE.... ;)

Remember that a PC motherboard is only in production for about 3 months.

This is another strength of the PC side, and we can only hope that the PPC side will catch up in product development and release cycle speed.

But chipsets and onboard components are in production, sold and used for much longer than that. The supported subset of motherboards is basically defined on its own by the used components, not by trademarks or model numbers of mobos like "the new Abit K7-XYZ2000-B Extra Edition".

OR continous work on supporting new motherboards as long as OS4 is in development and active life.

That's essential, and I hope this is a rather obvious aspiration, regardless of whether we're talking about Hyperion's PPC OS4 or [somebodyelse's] x86 OS[whatever version number].

What's the big difference between making a custom x86 and making a custom ppc?

Is there any? They would both be dead ends, IMO.

Wouldn't you still be as active in your crusade if the AmigaOne had a P4 instead of a G4/G3?

Only developing the OS/drivers for hardware that's also sold by hypothetical licensees and only allowing people to buy their hardware from these licensees would kill the OS just as certainly on x86 as it will on PPC.

IMO that probability P(dead-as-a-dodo) currently approaches 1, but hey, let's hope it's just 0.5 and do something really really stupid and counterproductive like compulsory hardware licensing just because taking extra risks for no benefit at all to the company, the product and the customers is so much fun... :P
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 78 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 27-Jan-2004 19:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 73 (anon):
>In Reply to Comment 71 (EyeAm):
>> --EyeAm (encouraging Amiga OS on ABIT motherboards)

>Have you signed Seehunds list yet? Do that first, then once you feel up to it, >we'll go release some other coppertops. Oh, welcome to the Nebuchnadezzer, >enjoy your stay :D

I have no idea what you're talking about here.

At any rate, I'm not on the 'Nebuchnadezzer' (sic), I'm on the Messiah ;-P Quite a different mission entirely.

--EyeAm
-=AMIGA OS 4.0 in '04=-
TeamAROS bounty program updated : Comment 79 of 79ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 27-Jan-2004 19:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 74 (Seehund):
>In Reply to Comment 72 (EyeAm):

>Cool, you Get It! :)

Yeah, since years ago :)

>What you're saying is of course applicable and even more essential to a PPC >AmigaOS, where there are rather few (understatement of the year?) viable >hardware and vendor options compared to x86 already. We have Macs, and on the >fringe there are things like Pegasoses and Terons.

I support Amiga OS on PPC only insofar as it paves the way to Amiga OS on x86/64-Bit, mainstream/regular/off-the-shelf PC motherboards that the rest of us want to use it on :) I believe the Amiga OS in its shrinkwrapped box can contain the software libraries for both x86/64 and PPC--one box, installable OS intended for the most currently-used chip/architectures.

>I don't agree about the "special BIOS/ROM for AmigaOS" bit though. What good >would that do? Display the word "Amiga" in the POST screen? :) It's entirely >pointless, and it requires extra development for each supported piece of >hardware plus modification of that hardware. Companies like Award and Phoenix >spend wads of cash and man-years on making perfectly fine firmware already, >let them and the hardware companies worry about making hardware. Amiga (the >company and the current "Amiga concept") has nothing to do with hardware any >longer.

I'm sure you didn't miss what I put in parentheses () above.

I like to examine all possibilities and solutions and have them on the table. Once that list has been exhausted, the best one(s) usually are obvious. I personally don't see why Amiga OS cannot utilize what is there (the whole point of using off-the-shelf PC motherboards this time, as opposed to a time that has long since passed, when Amiga did the hardware, too.)

>Sure, if the OS distribution scheme was anywhere near anything sane, and the >OS was available for Hardware X both separately in a shrinkwrapped box and as >a licensed + bundled OEM option, then it might not be such a stupid idea to >have the licensed hardware option made "special" in some way. But then again, >just like in the fatally sick current situation of compulsory licensing with >no options, any "extra" requirements on the hardware/licensees will make for >fewer or no hardware options/licensees.

I agree. How nice it would be to go into a computer store, find Amiga OS on the shelf next to Windows and MAC OS, buy it, and bring it home to install it on what you have (nearly all of which could also easily hold Windows or MAC OS). Now Apple is in a similar situation as Amiga, insofar as the 'special' hardware (for now), but they will eventually move into the x86/64 area. I've read where Steve Jobs said so as recent as a year ago; and that probably means extended work on Darwin(?) or something brand new. I read all of that as his recognition that the fruits on the x86 side are greater than the PPC side. The numbers only verify this. It's the big fish in the small pond, deciding that there are more fish in the sea; and that the risk of the sharks is worth it.

I think the in-roads to x86 have to be laid now, rather than later; and the roadmap put forth so everybody knows where to fit and can adjust their own schedules, or can count on things being there. If Amiga worked with AROS and Bernie (Amithlon), OS 5.0 could be more than interesting if it wound up containing both sides (PPC and x86; the latter 'running ten times faster than the fastest classic Amiga'). It's like making 5.0 the intersection point where two turn into one path. A reverse 'Y' (heh. a reverse 'why?'; It would all make sense by then) :)

Yeah, I know: money. time. effort. But, that's what it takes; and at least those are knowns.

--EyeAm
-=AMIGA OS 4.0=-
Anonymous, there are 79 items in your selection (but only 29 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 79]
Back to Top