View Single Post
Old 06 August 2015, 01:57   #20
matthey
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
Some FPGA's (especially the smaller CPLD's) have their flash memory integrated.
It is in the interest of FPGA manufacturers to make it easy to load the FPGA code so, yes, some FPGAs have help with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
The newer Xilinx parts will allow configuration from the design. (i.e. you could in theory change the flash contents from the Amiga)
A nice feature that could take some time to program, if possible for the Buster. At least the prototype would likely use a port.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
Way off topic but no-one is ever going to use a Classic Amiga as their main computer no matter what modernisation you add.
There is a lack of software because there is a lack of high enough spec hardware to run more modern software. A Buster upgrade is fairly complex but does not help much. An FPGA accelerator with faster I/O options would help some and isn't too much more complex. A standalone FPGA board would be more complex yet but could help a lot if the price was reasonable. Off topic when comparing multiple hardware options which all have an FPGA and I/O enhancements?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira View Post
People need to lay off the fan fiction with Amiga.
How is the "classic Amiga" an "Amiga" if you add a lot of shit that isn't "Amiga"?

None of the proponents of "modern Amiga" are ABLE to define what the fuck Amiga is or would be today. Seems to me like "Amiga" would just be a generic computer platform running a variety of unsupported OSes, based on already obsolete technology needed to keep compatibility with said archaic operating systems.
The most important quality of an Amiga, to me, is that it runs most Amiga software which requires an OS like AmigaOS. This infers executing 68k code.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira View Post
Why would any of the proposed expansions, be it SATA or PCI or whatever, bring ANYONE to the platform, if you have absolutely fuck all to use the computer with that you can't ALREADY DO with myriad of other platforms available in the market more easily and even cheaper??
Why would anyone buy a Raspberry Pi when they can buy a 10 year old PC for twice the price that has several times the CPU power, better graphics and way more expansion? Can we say it was just the low price 5-6 million Pi users later because it isn't value. Maybe some people want something different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira View Post
I totally can understand people wanting to get into an Amiga platform and push it to the limit and use it today as their main platform, people with tinkering/hacker attitude, however painful that sounds to me, but you aren't going to miraculously attract anyone to an obsolete platform that doesn't have much going on for it and a platform in which you have to pay through the nose for everything, starting with the obsolete computer to base it all on, and adding up the obsolete and modern peripherals you might need to put it on par with everyday computing technology of the year TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR.
Only the standalone board(s) option could appeal to the outside world. The first design may not be high enough spec for most of the outside world and would be aimed at existing Amiga users and ex-Amiga users while development improves. The CPU would be limited in performance while it remains in FPGA but memory could be expanded to a more usable size for modern programs. In FPGA, it could approach the Raspberry Pi single core performance which might surprise some people using an efficient OS like the AmigaOS. My nephew in his late teens, who owns an XBox, described the graphics of QuakeGL on my Amiga as very good and never complained about the speed (~24 fps). I am blessed to have what I have but we could have even faster, more modern and better integrated Amigas using modern FPGA technology. Is it an Amiga? Who cares if it is more fun, more usable and most Amiga software runs on it.
matthey is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.34470 seconds with 9 queries