Why can't we have a computer like Amiga?

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Thorham

It's also just plain fun (no nostalgia). Not that programming on the peecee can't be fun, but that's a different story.

Right, it's plain fun. For programming on the peecee, i've never seen it being fun (not only because of the mere architecture, but also because the amiga keyboard fits my needs much better). This is why i'm for building a new computer like the miggy ; it's not only fun to code on, it's also the a place where we can have full control on everything that's happening. I could even help with the design, but who will implement it ?

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by meynaf

For programming on the peecee, i've never seen it being fun

Try Unity3D with C# (Mono). Makes for a nice change from assembly language and C.

Originally Posted by meynaf

This is why i'm for building a new computer like the miggy ; it's not only fun to code on, it's also the a place where we can have full control on everything that's happening. I could even help with the design, but who will implement it ?

Good question. Does it have to be 68k based, or Amiga compatible at all?

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Thorham

Try Unity3D with C# (Mono). Makes for a nice change from assembly language and C.

I regard C# as degenerated C++ . Less freedom to do things.
And i don't like complicated frameworks (nor do i like oop, btw).

Originally Posted by Thorham

Good question. Does it have to be 68k based, or Amiga compatible at all?

Nope it does not need to be compatible ; if it's powerful enough it's possible to run old programs thru emulation. But the spirit must be there. Code that is lean and graceful (and thus it'll look a lot like 68k, m'kay). Complete control over the machine, total freedom to do whatever we want (and thus it'll look a lot like amiga, m'kay).

BUT
it must not confuse "modern" with "pc-like", which is done much too often.

[Mrs Beanbag]

"complete control over the machine" seems to be somewhat the antithesis of "modern".

although obviously something has to have complete control over the machine, at some level. but this is typically locked down very early on in the boot process for quite sane reasons.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

"complete control over the machine" seems to be somewhat the antithesis of "modern".

Here we can see the confusion i told about. This is "pc-like", no human control over the machine - full control is not the real antithesis of modern.
IOW, "modern" doesn't mean "overly complicated", even if current implementations are.

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

although obviously something has to have complete control over the machine, at some level. but this is typically locked down very early on in the boot process for quite sane reasons.

What sane reasons can these be ? I don't see any.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by meynaf

What sane reasons can these be ? I don't see any.

One great big word!

SECURITY!

If you have total control over the machine, you can write anywhere on the hard disk, access network, steal files, steal passwords... or just nuke everything by mistake.

It's not just PCs, look at how well locked-down the Xbox 360 is. PS3 less so but programming is still done through APIs.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

One great big word!

SECURITY!

Security ? Sorry, but i see no security in attempting to lock everything. Early control by the os has never prevented any attack.

Damned ntfs on w$ 8.1 refusing to delete files of an old, long uninstalled app is annoyance, not security.

Same for seeing a task named "System" suddenly starting to eat cpu without a warning (even if it's officially supposed to be some kind of system maintenance).

A system that's so complicated that nobody knows much about it, is everything but secure.

Systems and programs getting a security patch, then another, and again, every time a hole is discovered, you call THAT secure ?

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

If you have total control over the machine, you can write anywhere on the hard disk, access network, steal files, steal passwords... or just nuke everything by mistake.

Ok but i know what i'm doing so i won't do all these.

Sure, i can write anywhere on the hard disk, access just about everything. But it's only ME. Not remote people, nor the system itself.
If my A1200 shows some hard disk activity, or network activity, i know immediately if it's normal or not.
On a PC this is simply impossible. Apps connect regardless if you want it or not. Even the OS constantly hits the disk and you can't tell why.

If i don't have the control then someone else has it and it's BAD.
I prefer nuking my computer myself than letting a rootkit do it

Security on MY computer is ME having full control.

Oh, btw. Spam is sent by computers on which the user has no control, isn't it ?

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

It's not just PCs, look at how well locked-down the Xbox 360 is. PS3 less so but programming is still done through APIs.

And ? What are the threats on game consoles ?
Anyway, old SNES and Megadrive are not less secure than xbox 360 and ps3, are they ?

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Systems and programs getting a security patch, then another, and again, every time a hole is discovered, you call THAT secure ?

it's more secure than no security at all. wish i'd installed updates more frequently on our old server when it got hacked.

There are good and bad ways of doing it, of course, and it's like sticking a finger in a crumbling dyke sometimes on these legacy systems. i'm all for simplicity.

Security on MY computer is ME having full control.

So you will never run anybody else's software, or use the network? Well, ok, but i don't think that would be a popular use case for a new product.

And ? What are the threats on game consoles ?
Anyway, old SNES and Megadrive are not less secure than xbox 360 and ps3, are they ?

XBox 360 is VERY secure. look it up. They do it to prevent piracy, and stop people installing Linux or any sort of homebrew to that end, over the top in my opinion, but it's very competently done, and they can do that because they have complete control over the hardware configuration, which they designed from the ground up with security in mind.

Consoles now are connected to online user accounts where you can spend real money, so security is certainly an issue there.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

it's more secure than no security at all. wish i'd installed updates more frequently on our old server when it got hacked.

There are good and bad ways of doing it, of course, and it's like sticking a finger in a crumbling dyke sometimes on these legacy systems. i'm all for simplicity.

Simplicity brings in more security than any security update.
Besides, no security at all isn't necessarily worse. Securities can sometimes be returned against the user, like an enemy controlling a fortress which you can't take back easily (and so you regret having built that fortress in first place).

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

So you will never run anybody else's software, or use the network? Well, ok, but i don't think that would be a popular use case for a new product.

Of course i run someone else's software and use the network, how did you come to the conclusion i didn't ?

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

XBox 360 is VERY secure. look it up. They do it to prevent piracy, and stop people installing Linux or any sort of homebrew to that end, over the top in my opinion, but it's very competently done, and they can do that because they have complete control over the hardware configuration, which they designed from the ground up with security in mind.

This sounds more about business (i.e. big money) than security...

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

Consoles now are connected to online user accounts where you can spend real money, so security is certainly an issue there.

Yup, but it's only the connection to the outside that must be secure.

[Amiga1992]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Yup, but it's only the connection to the outside that must be secure.

Your friend can come round and use your device. In that aspect, the Xbox 360 is still no secure as it has no way to lock you out of purchases. As long as you have access to the console, you can make purchases.

Anyway, again, comparing personal computing of back then to nowadays is just plain silly. Many things have changed so much, new needs have appeared, etc.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Akira

Anyway, again, comparing personal computing of back then to nowadays is just plain silly. Many things have changed so much, new needs have appeared, etc.

Things have not changed that much, and these changes are not necessarily in the right direction...

[vxm]

I agree with meynaf.
Moreover, it is absurd to argue by balancing different profiles.
The fact that a majority of users relies on a third party for their safety does not mean it is a universal behavior.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Simplicity brings in more security than any security update.
Besides, no security at all isn't necessarily worse. Securities can sometimes be returned against the user, like an enemy controlling a fortress which you can't take back easily (and so you regret having built that fortress in first place).

I do know what you mean, often Windows gets itself stuck and you can't perform the operation you need to do because a file is locked even after you stop all processes, and the only way to fix it is to reboot, which is particularly annoying if it's your continuous integration server...

There has to be a balance somewhere. You can't do these days with no security at all. Windows has become the victim of its own success (try turning off all your security options and see how long it takes before your PC is full of malware). On Amiga we enjoy security by obscurity, although back in the day i did get a few viruses. But there is only so much damage they can do if all your data is on floppies. That's physical security...

Of course i run someone else's software and use the network, how did you come to the conclusion i didn't ?

because you said you wanted complete control over your machine.. well if you run someone else's software, you don't. you don't know what bugs are in programs that you run, or if they have been compromised in some way. And if you use the network, someone halfway round the world can take control of your computer.

This sounds more about business (i.e. big money) than security...

security for the sake of business, yes. i won't defend Microsoft's decision to lock down the XBox360 so hard, but the point here is that good security is possible, with a new system designed around it.

Yup, but it's only the connection to the outside that must be secure.

until you legitimately download someone's PD game and it compromises your system when you run it.

[Amiga1992]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Things have not changed that much, and these changes are not necessarily in the right direction...

It's ok Don Quijote, you tell them

[Mrs Beanbag]

"The customer should want the product i want to make" is surely not a recipe for success, unless you are already Apple.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

I do know what you mean, often Windows gets itself stuck and you can't perform the operation you need to do because a file is locked even after you stop all processes, and the only way to fix it is to reboot, which is particularly annoying if it's your continuous integration server...

Rebooting did not fix a thing. Only changing the files owner and rights did. Yikes !

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

There has to be a balance somewhere. You can't do these days with no security at all. Windows has become the victim of its own success (try turning off all your security options and see how long it takes before your PC is full of malware). On Amiga we enjoy security by obscurity, although back in the day i did get a few viruses. But there is only so much damage they can do if all your data is on floppies. That's physical security...

On the Amiga you notice unusual activity quite quickly and can get rid of any virus as quickly. Back in '97 VirusZ took 5 mins to clean up my HD of Ebola 2. In 2006 i got some malware on the peecee at work - took a whole week of blind fight to finally be able to get rid of it (antiviruses saw it, said they removed it, but it was still there).

Honestly i felt a lot more secure with MiamiDx, IBrowse and Yam.

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

because you said you wanted complete control over your machine.. well if you run someone else's software, you don't. you don't know what bugs are in programs that you run, or if they have been compromised in some way.

Some programs can be trusted. When you get something off Aminet, usually you're not so much at risk.
However if you run every dirt you get your hands on, sorry, but you deserve the malware

And in the unlikely event the machine finally gets some dirt, it's incredibly easy to remove it.

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

And if you use the network, someone halfway round the world can take control of your computer.

Huh, no, nobody can (at least not the miggy).

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

security for the sake of business, yes. i won't defend Microsoft's decision to lock down the XBox360 so hard, but the point here is that good security is possible, with a new system designed around it.

But, on a console, it's security against what ?

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

until you legitimately download someone's PD game and it compromises your system when you run it.

This occurs as well on so-called secure machines, and guess what ? They get compromised even more.

The chair-to-keyboard interface is the most unsecure part of any system

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

"The customer should want the product i want to make" is surely not a recipe for success, unless you are already Apple.

It's rather about giving back customers something that has stupidly disappeared from the market.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by meynaf

On the Amiga you notice unusual activity quite quickly and can get rid of any virus as quickly. Back in '97 VirusZ took 5 mins to clean up my HD of Ebola 2. In 2006 i got some malware on the peecee at work - took a whole week of blind fight to finally be able to get rid of it (antiviruses saw it, said they removed it, but it was still there).

i got a virus like that on Windows XP once, i'm usually pretty careful with my browsing but somehow the firewall had got turned off... i blame the install program from my internet provider.

Huh, no, nobody can (at least not the miggy).

well we're not talking about "the miggy" we're talking about (or i thought we were) some new system like a sort of raspberry pi/console/htpc that might pull in a few million on Kickstarter.

Anything that gets popular will be a target, if it's got no security people will ruin everything just for fun, i never understood that attitude. Somebody hacked the Mr Beanbag website, don't ask me why.

But, on a console, it's security against what ?

i've already TOLD you!

This occurs as well on so-called secure machines, and guess what ? They get compromised even more.

Windows machines are far more popular, so obviously they are going to be a popular target. And i know Windows security isn't very good. But that's not an argument against the very idea of security.

Here's another problem that plagues even Amiga users, i see complaints about it on this very forum. If a program crashes, it can take out the entire system, because it can just write into memory at random. There's no resource tracking, no memory protection... nobody in their right mind would design a new system where that would happen. This is supposed to be a multitasking platform. One program gets a "null pointer error" or what have you, and you lose all your work in everything else you have open.

And i'm afraid to say you really need to take your head out of the sand. The way people use computers has changed enormously. 30 years ago computers were either, serious business, games for children, or hobbies for geeks. Every time i go on the bus or train these days, everyone around me has their phones out, tapping away, writing messages on facebook or looking at cats. People do their shopping and banking on computers, they store all their family photos and sensitive personal information. You might personally just want to go into a cave and tinker on your own, but computing is mainstream now, and it's social.

You asked me what the sane reasons are for locking down direct hardware access, well i've told you.

Anyway i do kind of wonder what you really mean by the terms "modern" and "PC", maybe by PC you mean "Windows". But at other times not. I don't know.

You DO have direct hardware access on a modern PC, if you want to put the effort in. The operating system obviously has it or it couldn't work. You can write your own operating system if you want. Write a boot loader. I did it once.

The problem with PCs on the hardware side, is that there are so many different possible configurations, hundreds of different chip sets, graphics cards, CPUs even... it would be impossible to program anything with any degree of compatibility without APIs. It's not the security model that hinders you in that respect. The advantage the Amiga has is that its hardware is always more or less the same, you know the location of the registers and what they do... yet still people managed to write games for A500 that didn't work on later models. Also Commodore really didn't want programmers to "bang the hardware" for precisely this reason, and AAA chipset wasn't planned to be backwards compatible with AGA or OCS at that level. You were supposed to use the graphics library.

Whatever way you go about designing a system, a games programmer shouldn't have to worry about compatibility issues. If it works it should just work... this is the case on consoles, a PS3 is a PS3, an XBox 360 is an XBox 360... (well no doubt there are some edge cases but on the whole it's true). Games programmers treated the Amiga like a console, in order to get best results, and i don't blame them, i wouldn't use graphics library either if i cared about performance... but i see no reason whatsoever to go over the system's head when it comes to, for instance, file access. They did that for purposes of copy protection, of course, and back then nobody expected to install games on hard drives anyway.

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

Somebody hacked the Mr Beanbag website, don't ask me why.

Wow

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

Here's another problem that plagues even Amiga users, i see complaints about it on this very forum. If a program crashes, it can take out the entire system, because it can just write into memory at random. There's no resource tracking, no memory protection... nobody in their right mind would design a new system where that would happen.

Indeed, it's absolutely terrible when programming in assembly language, C is not as bad.

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

This is supposed to be a multitasking platform. One program gets a "null pointer error" or what have you, and you lose all your work in everything else you have open.

How much work do you really loose because of crashes? A few minutes? I save VERY often, even on my Winbox. Obviously memory protection should be an option at the very least, but if you're loosing real amounts of work because of crashes then you need to learn how to save

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

but computing is mainstream now, and it's social.

You call everyone messing with their phones EVERYWHERE social? LOL As much as I like technological advancement, all those phones are just ridiculous. Seriously, take people's phones away and they'll get physical withdrawal symptoms

[gimbal]

Originally Posted by Thorham

It's also just plain fun (no nostalgia). Not that programming on the peecee can't be fun, but that's a different story.

Its getting excessively more difficult to have fun with it, that's for sure :/ Even game programming is too abstract nowadays.

Originally Posted by Thorham

You call everyone messing with their phones EVERYWHERE social? LOL As much as I like technological advancement, all those phones are just ridiculous. Seriously, take people's phones away and they'll get physical withdrawal symptoms

I used to think the same; if you look out the window of a metro you see a whole line of people just staring at their phone. Its very easy to call that anti-social.

And then I go back 15 years in time when I was riding the same metro and then everyone was gazing at a newspaper or a book. Not much changed really, only the medium to pass the time

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by gimbal

Its getting excessively more difficult to have fun with it, that's for sure :/ Even game programming is too abstract nowadays.

With game engines like Unity3D it couldn't be any easier.

Originally Posted by gimbal

And then I go back 15 years in time when I was riding the same metro and then everyone was gazing at a newspaper or a book. Not much changed really, only the medium to pass the time

Good one.