What does your REAL Amiga WB look like?

Bloodwych · 15 January 2002, 21:35

With so many Amiga HD owners kicking around this board, I'm just wondering what you all face when you boot up good old Workbench.

My machine is a lowly A1200 with 6MB RAM, 320MB IBM IDE drive, 2 diskdrives and my pride and joy - a 4 player adapter.

Essentially my WB is designed around practicality for running games and handling incoming PC files/achieves over a serial cable.

I don't need nothing flash, but my setup is powerful, really easy to use and looks great on my monitor or even a standard PAL TV.

The monitor I have is a multisync, so I'll jump to productivity if I'm doing some serious file handling, but most the time I leave it in PAL with full overscan as it's more compatible for running HD games/demos. Essentially I use WB most the time just for executing these files.

The other benefit is space. This WB setup, including all those useful OS hacks, runs in at about 10MB. This leaves loads of room for my programs/games/demos.

I love this bad boy, so what are you guys staring at most of the time?

RetroMan · 15 January 2002, 22:16

I posted this before in a thread from Paul I guess, but the screenshot was removed

Anyway, here it is again

Amiga1992 · 15 January 2002, 22:36

I like my WB, but I cant access it right now, so when I get back to Buenos Aires ,I will post a pic of it.

It's got a nice image backdrop thanks to WBPicture

Frog · 15 January 2002, 23:32

Amiga 1200, Blizzard IV 030+882 / 50 Mhz, Monitor M1438S, 20Go HD (ide), Plextor burner, PCMcia network card + ADSL ...

Running under Scalos + various patch, all under AGA in 64 colors only !

and Delitracker with some Jochen Hippel musics

16 January 2002, 00:05

I don't have a real Amiga. But this is the workbench I see everyday on UAE.

Bloodwych · 16 January 2002, 01:09

WOW, they're some kick-ass lookin' WB being posted on this page. Very impressive. Puts mine to shame!

Am I the the only one that still has a WB that resembles the original 3.1 on a real Amiga? Just call me Mr old timer. Is there anyone out there with a "TV friendly" WB like mine?

After all the A1200/600 was primarily a TV based machine, so I like my Amiga true retro (that's what I tell myself, not that I have much choice

). You can just get away with PAL overscanned WB in my opinion. NTSC must be truely a bad resolution.

Still, like I said my needs are minimalist. You guys obviously use your WB for much more than me. All I need is lots of chip ram, HD space and a fast WB for a '020 14 to run games.

WinUAE and Picasso96 cards aside, Frog that's a cool looking desktop for a "mere" (in modern terms) A1200 '030 50 and 64 colours. Good skills. Never thought it possible.

Retro, looks like you've got an even more powerful machine. What specs? You definitely get the award for the most colours I think I've ever seen used in an OS scheme!

That fast RAM looks healthy, although the chip is struggling. How do you guys get around the low chipram problem without graphics cards?

For real Amigas please post what OS you're all running (mines obvious, came with my A1200) and system specs. I like to see how these machines have been pushed!

For WinUAE users, show us how AIAB should look!

Burseg, that's a good-looking screen grab, literally!

I'm really impressed - keep up the posts!

I'd especially like to see someone getting the most out of a good old A1200HD '020 14 like my setup, and tell me how it runs.

Akira, is that an A600 WB you have back at home or WinUAE? If you can't give us the pic, give us the specs/details!

RetroMan · 16 January 2002, 01:21

Well, I use standart AGA 256 colors

The low chipram is because of that

I have nothing else installed but OS 3.9 oh btw. here are my specs :

A1200 AGA
2 meg chip
Blizzard 1230@50Mhz + FPU + MMU (use to have a 1260, but it´s broken

)
40 meg fast
2gig HD
8x CDRom
Philips CM 8833 Monitor

Wait until you see my A2000 desktop, I hope to get it ready next week (surprise, surprise)

16 January 2002, 01:27

Bloodwych, I like the look of original 3.1 with Magic Workbench. It's prettier than newicons but it has too few colors and after having a desktop exactly like yours for years, I decided to take advantage of picasso emulation

Nian · 16 January 2002, 07:27

All those workbenches suck. Ofcourse I would be glad to show you my masterpiece but sadly the a4k is in for repairs so I can't get an sgrab. But let me say that you have all a long way before your systems look fantastic, atleast install Magic Menu, ScalOS, VisualPrefs, Birdie, Oh and a dozen more patches that I fail to remember the names of. at any rate you need more eyecandy. Make some brilliant textures and some flashy backdrops.
I had a workbench almost as good as those lot on my old a500 2mb no HD.

andreas · 16 January 2002, 08:24

Quote:

Am I the the only one that still has a WB that resembles the original 3.1 on a real Amiga? Just call me Mr old timer.

You've got a companion now. Me.

(just due to my laziness, though)

P.S.: You've just convinced me to dig out my old 1.3 WB out again... Stay tuned...

utri007 · 16 January 2002, 08:37

MagikTV is a Patch wich give allmoust fliker free 640x512 with 16 colors, it ok to use with TV and Workbench, but not suitable textprosessing

I have allso real aMIGA 1200 with 68040 40mzh, 18mb, 1.5GB, Nec Multisync 3d

I use Fplit and so other patches wich makes it quite much faster.

RemApollo makes possible to use 3.1 rom so I have WB3.9, it's nice and lot of better than WB3.1

What Patches should use with Amiga, opinions????

Drake1009 · 16 January 2002, 10:16

Well seeing as I still have my old unmodified A1200 with a harddisk in it I haven't got that impressive a desktop. I think the only thing I changed was set the screen to 8 color display and change the background color to black and drop a couple of icons where I could get at them without browsing.

RetroMan · 16 January 2002, 10:27

Well, I also had WB 3.1 with all those fancy patches installed (MagicWB, Scalos, Birdie and all that stuff) but practically I´m only 5% of my time on the workbench, the other 95% I´m playing games or using Apps .... so why bother and install patches that make your system unstable and slow

I don´t need that !

Paul · 16 January 2002, 10:30

When my A600HD was working, it had a menu toolbar along the top (I think the tool I used was called AmiDOC), 8 Colour Magic Workbench screen. Thats about all the enhancments I could use as it only had 2MB Ram and a 20MB HD.

Anyway here is my WB desktop from Winuae

Riempie · 16 January 2002, 17:51

Setup:
A1200 8 MB Fast Ram, Turbo Card running at 40 mhz, 2 GB HD, 2 floppy-drives and 1 Archos Overdrive

Installed WB patches:
MUI, MCP, PowerWB, Happy-Env, Tools Deamon, Birdie, Magic WB 2.0, RomIcon (for these nice 16 color whdload game icons) and some commodities,

This is a 640 x 256 WB screen, 256 colors

As you can see I play Kick Off 2 a lot

16 January 2002, 19:52

I don't understand why being flashy should be the goal.
WinXP as flashy as an OS can ever get and it has lots of patches and hacks built in but it's the slowest windows ever. And yes I've got VisualPrefs installed for the sake of system gadgets with square aspect because they don't look right on 800*600 resolution. Magicmenu is just a windows menu system imitation.It's not too bad however, it's totally useless and unnecessary for an OS. With it, my desktop doesn't feel like an Amiga. The goal should not be the not eyecandy but stability and ease of use.

It just came to my mind. There are lots of lamers who apply filters to photographes they found somewhere and declare they are "graphic designers" but obviously they are not because design is all about ease of use and functionality. A GUI is a form of design and actually it's directly related to industrial and graphic design.

Surely everyone can have their own tastes and have a desktop in any way they wish but not everyone can be a judge about this matter.

Twistin'Ghost · 17 January 2002, 01:32

I see your point, but I think MagicMenu is a must. Yes, the things I like about it should be a part of the OS windowing system anyhow, but I hardly consider it to be an imitation of Windows menus (as I also use the shortcut thingie for opening a new shell). I like having menus that stay dropped until I choose, rather than having to hold the mouse the entire time. Hardly useless and unneccesary for an OS. The embossed menu look option I can take or leave, but that's just aesthetics and doesn't add anything to the functionality.

As for all of those other pretty things adorning these Workbench pics, I was never able to get beautiful setups like that. Anytime I did anything like higher res, more colors, backdrops, etc., it made the system crawl, so mine is barebones OS3 grey. As minimalist as it gets (MagicMenu being the only exception). And I use DOpus 4 and the shell, so WB is only used by me if I have no other choice. It would be nice to be able to have a Workbench as beautiful as these pics show, but only if the system can run full speed.

My 2k...

17 January 2002, 01:38

Yeah you like it, you use it. How can I have any objections? But it doesn't mean that your desktop sucks unless you use it. Just meant to point this out.

Amiga1992 · 17 January 2002, 22:36

Ive been using MagicMenu for, like, 7 years now, and I Cant get back to not using it. I dont care if it looks flashy or not (I think it doesnt, at least not my old version) but its friggin useable. Since I love the NeXTStep way of things, a menu of that type i a MUST in any configuration I use.

BTW, WinXP is not as flashy as OSes get, its too dull... the Enlightenment WM under X is much flashy (and shitty)

MethodGit · 18 January 2002, 00:54

Seeing as people here are showing their desktops, let me show you my current liked one.

I usually use 1024x768 resolution, but for the sake of the 56k modem people and to keep this page in size (and also so it fits under the 102400 byte limit), I've temporarily shortened down to 800x600 for this grab.

Try to guess who the girl in the pic is, and you might just win a prize.

15 January 2002, 21:35	#1
Bloodwych Moderator Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: I'm behind you! Posts: 3,763	What does your REAL Amiga WB look like? With so many Amiga HD owners kicking around this board, I'm just wondering what you all face when you boot up good old Workbench. My machine is a lowly A1200 with 6MB RAM, 320MB IBM IDE drive, 2 diskdrives and my pride and joy - a 4 player adapter. Essentially my WB is designed around practicality for running games and handling incoming PC files/achieves over a serial cable. I don't need nothing flash, but my setup is powerful, really easy to use and looks great on my monitor or even a standard PAL TV. The monitor I have is a multisync, so I'll jump to productivity if I'm doing some serious file handling, but most the time I leave it in PAL with full overscan as it's more compatible for running HD games/demos. Essentially I use WB most the time just for executing these files. The other benefit is space. This WB setup, including all those useful OS hacks, runs in at about 10MB. This leaves loads of room for my programs/games/demos. I love this bad boy, so what are you guys staring at most of the time? Last edited by Bloodwych; 18 November 2004 at 18:30.

15 January 2002, 22:16	#2
RetroMan Registered User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Germany Age: 51 Posts: 3,704	I posted this before in a thread from Paul I guess, but the screenshot was removed Anyway, here it is again Attached Thumbnails

15 January 2002, 23:32	#4
Frog Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: France Posts: 1,385	64 colors rulez... Amiga 1200, Blizzard IV 030+882 / 50 Mhz, Monitor M1438S, 20Go HD (ide), Plextor burner, PCMcia network card + ADSL ... Running under Scalos + various patch, all under AGA in 64 colors only ! and Delitracker with some Jochen Hippel musics Attached Thumbnails

16 January 2002, 01:09	#6
Bloodwych Moderator Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: I'm behind you! Posts: 3,763	WOW, they're some kick-ass lookin' WB being posted on this page. Very impressive. Puts mine to shame! Am I the the only one that still has a WB that resembles the original 3.1 on a real Amiga? Just call me Mr old timer. Is there anyone out there with a "TV friendly" WB like mine? After all the A1200/600 was primarily a TV based machine, so I like my Amiga true retro (that's what I tell myself, not that I have much choice ). You can just get away with PAL overscanned WB in my opinion. NTSC must be truely a bad resolution. Still, like I said my needs are minimalist. You guys obviously use your WB for much more than me. All I need is lots of chip ram, HD space and a fast WB for a '020 14 to run games. WinUAE and Picasso96 cards aside, Frog that's a cool looking desktop for a "mere" (in modern terms) A1200 '030 50 and 64 colours. Good skills. Never thought it possible. Retro, looks like you've got an even more powerful machine. What specs? You definitely get the award for the most colours I think I've ever seen used in an OS scheme! That fast RAM looks healthy, although the chip is struggling. How do you guys get around the low chipram problem without graphics cards? For real Amigas please post what OS you're all running (mines obvious, came with my A1200) and system specs. I like to see how these machines have been pushed! For WinUAE users, show us how AIAB should look! Burseg, that's a good-looking screen grab, literally! I'm really impressed - keep up the posts! I'd especially like to see someone getting the most out of a good old A1200HD '020 14 like my setup, and tell me how it runs. Akira, is that an A600 WB you have back at home or WinUAE? If you can't give us the pic, give us the specs/details! Last edited by Bloodwych; 16 January 2002 at 01:28.

16 January 2002, 07:27	#9
Nian Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sol / Earth Posts: 45	Lame. All those workbenches suck. Ofcourse I would be glad to show you my masterpiece but sadly the a4k is in for repairs so I can't get an sgrab. But let me say that you have all a long way before your systems look fantastic, atleast install Magic Menu, ScalOS, VisualPrefs, Birdie, Oh and a dozen more patches that I fail to remember the names of. at any rate you need more eyecandy. Make some brilliant textures and some flashy backdrops. I had a workbench almost as good as those lot on my old a500 2mb no HD.

15 January 2002, 22:36	#3
Amiga1992 Registered User Join Date: May 2001 Location: ? Posts: 19,644	I like my WB, but I cant access it right now, so when I get back to Buenos Aires ,I will post a pic of it. It's got a nice image backdrop thanks to WBPicture

16 January 2002, 00:05	#5
oldpx Posts: n/a	I don't have a real Amiga. But this is the workbench I see everyday on UAE.

16 January 2002, 01:21	#7
RetroMan Registered User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Germany Age: 51 Posts: 3,704	Well, I use standart AGA 256 colors The low chipram is because of that I have nothing else installed but OS 3.9 oh btw. here are my specs : A1200 AGA 2 meg chip Blizzard 1230@50Mhz + FPU + MMU (use to have a 1260, but it´s broken ) 40 meg fast 2gig HD 8x CDRom Philips CM 8833 Monitor Wait until you see my A2000 desktop, I hope to get it ready next week (surprise, surprise)

16 January 2002, 01:27	#8
oldpx Posts: n/a	Bloodwych, I like the look of original 3.1 with Magic Workbench. It's prettier than newicons but it has too few colors and after having a desktop exactly like yours for years, I decided to take advantage of picasso emulation

16 January 2002, 08:37	#11
utri007 mä vaan Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Finland Posts: 1,653	MagikTV MagikTV is a Patch wich give allmoust fliker free 640x512 with 16 colors, it ok to use with TV and Workbench, but not suitable textprosessing I have allso real aMIGA 1200 with 68040 40mzh, 18mb, 1.5GB, Nec Multisync 3d I use Fplit and so other patches wich makes it quite much faster. RemApollo makes possible to use 3.1 rom so I have WB3.9, it's nice and lot of better than WB3.1 What Patches should use with Amiga, opinions????

16 January 2002, 10:16	#12
Drake1009 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Denmark Posts: 2,284	Well seeing as I still have my old unmodified A1200 with a harddisk in it I haven't got that impressive a desktop. I think the only thing I changed was set the screen to 8 color display and change the background color to black and drop a couple of icons where I could get at them without browsing.

16 January 2002, 10:27	#13
RetroMan Registered User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Germany Age: 51 Posts: 3,704	Well, I also had WB 3.1 with all those fancy patches installed (MagicWB, Scalos, Birdie and all that stuff) but practically I´m only 5% of my time on the workbench, the other 95% I´m playing games or using Apps .... so why bother and install patches that make your system unstable and slow I don´t need that !

16 January 2002, 10:30	#14
Paul RIP Friends Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: UK Posts: 2,157	When my A600HD was working, it had a menu toolbar along the top (I think the tool I used was called AmiDOC), 8 Colour Magic Workbench screen. Thats about all the enhancments I could use as it only had 2MB Ram and a 20MB HD. Anyway here is my WB desktop from Winuae Attached Thumbnails

16 January 2002, 17:51	#15
Riempie Amiga freak Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Netherlands Posts: 351	Setup: A1200 8 MB Fast Ram, Turbo Card running at 40 mhz, 2 GB HD, 2 floppy-drives and 1 Archos Overdrive Installed WB patches: MUI, MCP, PowerWB, Happy-Env, Tools Deamon, Birdie, Magic WB 2.0, RomIcon (for these nice 16 color whdload game icons) and some commodities, This is a 640 x 256 WB screen, 256 colors As you can see I play Kick Off 2 a lot Attached Thumbnails

16 January 2002, 19:52	#16
oldpx Posts: n/a	I don't understand why being flashy should be the goal. WinXP as flashy as an OS can ever get and it has lots of patches and hacks built in but it's the slowest windows ever. And yes I've got VisualPrefs installed for the sake of system gadgets with square aspect because they don't look right on 800*600 resolution. Magicmenu is just a windows menu system imitation.It's not too bad however, it's totally useless and unnecessary for an OS. With it, my desktop doesn't feel like an Amiga. The goal should not be the not eyecandy but stability and ease of use. It just came to my mind. There are lots of lamers who apply filters to photographes they found somewhere and declare they are "graphic designers" but obviously they are not because design is all about ease of use and functionality. A GUI is a form of design and actually it's directly related to industrial and graphic design. Surely everyone can have their own tastes and have a desktop in any way they wish but not everyone can be a judge about this matter.

17 January 2002, 01:32	#17
Twistin'Ghost Give up the ghost Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: U$A Age: 33 Posts: 4,662	I see your point, but I think MagicMenu is a must. Yes, the things I like about it should be a part of the OS windowing system anyhow, but I hardly consider it to be an imitation of Windows menus (as I also use the shortcut thingie for opening a new shell). I like having menus that stay dropped until I choose, rather than having to hold the mouse the entire time. Hardly useless and unneccesary for an OS. The embossed menu look option I can take or leave, but that's just aesthetics and doesn't add anything to the functionality. As for all of those other pretty things adorning these Workbench pics, I was never able to get beautiful setups like that. Anytime I did anything like higher res, more colors, backdrops, etc., it made the system crawl, so mine is barebones OS3 grey. As minimalist as it gets (MagicMenu being the only exception). And I use DOpus 4 and the shell, so WB is only used by me if I have no other choice. It would be nice to be able to have a Workbench as beautiful as these pics show, but only if the system can run full speed. My 2k...

17 January 2002, 01:38	#18
oldpx Posts: n/a	Yeah you like it, you use it. How can I have any objections? But it doesn't mean that your desktop sucks unless you use it. Just meant to point this out.

17 January 2002, 22:36	#19
Amiga1992 Registered User Join Date: May 2001 Location: ? Posts: 19,644	Ive been using MagicMenu for, like, 7 years now, and I Cant get back to not using it. I dont care if it looks flashy or not (I think it doesnt, at least not my old version) but its friggin useable. Since I love the NeXTStep way of things, a menu of that type i a MUST in any configuration I use. BTW, WinXP is not as flashy as OSes get, its too dull... the Enlightenment WM under X is much flashy (and shitty)

18 January 2002, 00:54	#20
MethodGit Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The Streets Age: 39 Posts: 2,731	Seeing as people here are showing their desktops, let me show you my current liked one. I usually use 1024x768 resolution, but for the sake of the 56k modem people and to keep this page in size (and also so it fits under the 102400 byte limit), I've temporarily shortened down to 800x600 for this grab. Try to guess who the girl in the pic is, and you might just win a prize. Attached Thumbnails

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Real Unity: Directory Opus Magellan II for all Amiga and Amiga-like systems.	spoUP	News	0	19 March 2012 02:09
Amiga SYS AGA on real Amiga 1200	W4r3DeV1L	New to Emulation or Amiga scene	14	24 November 2009 17:04
Converting ADF to real Amiga floppy disk without Amiga ???	Old Fool	support.Hardware	9	13 July 2007 15:31
This is the REAL Amiga	Amiga1992	Nostalgia & memories	8	22 January 2005 01:29
Using Pc Cd with a real AMiga	peanutuk	support.Hardware	1	08 July 2001 13:37