AmigaOS 3.2 and beyond - Page 24

Thomas Richter · 18 May 2020, 13:04

A 3.1 Kickstart for an A2000 works in an A2000, for obvious reasons. A "whatever 3.1 Kickstart" does not. So, no, "in general" it does not work. Kickstarts are machine dependent, and were at least up to 3.1, CPU dependent and chipset dependent. The latter two dependencies no longer hold, but other dependencies still exist, unfortunately.

McTrinsic · 18 May 2020, 13:04

3.1 ROM(s) are machine-specific.
There is a 3.1 ROM release for e.g. Amiga 500 that will run on an Amiga 500.
3.1 ROMs for an A1200 will run in an A1200 but not in an OCS/ECS machine.

The thing is, there is non suich thing as "a 3.1 ROM".
There are only machine-dependent variants of that.

amigo1 · 18 May 2020, 13:47

All right, we are getting there

Apparently we have a different understanding of the wording "in general"

I will keep that in mind for the future.

In this context "in general" referred to the kickstart contained in the package know as AmigaOS 3.1. The "Kickstart" meant as a product, not as a specific Kickstart chip compiled for a specific Amiga model. not as a specific Kickstart chip containing compiled code for a specific Amiga model.

That said, as far as I know, there has never been an AmigaOS 3.1 package released for the Amiga 1000 computer.

So "in general" AmigaOS 3.1 works on Amiga500, Amiga600, Amiga2000, Amiga2500, Amiga 3000, Amiga1200, Amiga4000.
More specifically the Kickstart 3.1 officially works on these machines.
Even more specific, a specific ROM for your specific machine Model is needed as the ROMs are machine-dependant.

So then, "Kickstart 3.1" generally works on 68000 if you use it on a Commodore Amiga computer that was released with a 68000 CPU and the officially sold ROM which has been released for your specific Amiga model.
So then, "Kickstart 3.1" generally speaking, works on 68000 (built-in in a supported Amiga) if you have the ROM released/sold for your specific Amiga Model.

All right, I hope I entertained you with my arising self-doubt to explain my thoughts to you regarding this matter. If in any of my prevous posts I sounded offensive, I specifically tell you now, it was not meant to be.

All right, I hope I entertained you with my arising self-doubt to express myself to you. If in any of my previous posts I sounded offensive, I specifically tell you now, it was not meant to offend you.

Keep up the good work on AmigaOS 3.2!

DamienD · 18 May 2020, 14:59

Now, now children.

Hewitson & britelite; you guys clearly don't get along, just ignore each other. It's that simple...

All your off topic post / bickering has now been deleted.

coldacid · 19 May 2020, 01:57

So at this point, I'm wondering: Do I buy 3.1.4 to put on the V4S I intend to buy with a portion of my tax refund or do I wait for 3.2? In other words, what does the timeline look like for 3.2's release?

gulliver · 19 May 2020, 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by coldacid

So at this point, I'm wondering: Do I buy 3.1.4 to put on the V4S I intend to buy with a portion of my tax refund or do I wait for 3.2? In other words, what does the timeline look like for 3.2's release?

My advice is to wait for that V4S to arrive before purchasing anything related to it. The manufacturer seems to have production and logistic issues.

PurpleMelbourne · 21 May 2020, 12:24

Coldfire support can buy us time while we try to figure out our post Motorola 68K future.

We can make the hardware, but we cant build cheap fast 68K CPU's. If AmigaOS could be compiled for the half 68K compatible Coldfire, and support a second CPU which is actual 68K CPU, then over time software can be recompiled for coldfire while the majority of stuff runs on the 68K. Advantage being that without running the OS that the 68K chip will be a little bit faster too.

Heavy software like Quake which needs an expensive 060 could get better speed on a cheaper Coldfire.

MC68040 + V4e 200-266Mhz Coldfire would be both cheaper than 060, while also being higher performance than even a 120MHz 060.

Maybe we'll all be running 350MHz 68080's in a few years... And they add Coldfire instructions to complete 68K/Colfire compatibility...

First we can be running cheap 266Mhz V4e Coldfire + 68040 Gemini dual core Amiga's to celebrate Christmas this year when WB3.2 allows it :-)

PurpleMelbourne · 21 May 2020, 12:35

For new Amiga compatibles, how about a two part ROM.

Device specific ROM and Generic hardware abstracted ROM.

Atari ST could run Amiga and finally get a decent OS

Samurai_Crow · 21 May 2020, 15:24

@PurpleMelbourne

Coldfire encodings conflict with existing 68060 instructions. 68080 is a pretty good idea but Coldfire is a bad idea all around. That's why Coldfire is so cheap.

PurpleMelbourne · 21 May 2020, 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samurai_Crow

@PurpleMelbourne

Coldfire encodings conflict with existing 68060 instructions. 68080 is a pretty good idea but Coldfire is a bad idea all around. That's why Coldfire is so cheap.

And 060's so expensive. Sigh.

Tigerskunk · 21 May 2020, 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by PurpleMelbourne

Coldfire support can buy us time while we try to figure out our post Motorola 68K future.

We can make the hardware, but we cant build cheap fast 68K CPU's. If AmigaOS could be compiled for the half 68K compatible Coldfire, and support a second CPU which is actual 68K CPU, then over time software can be recompiled for coldfire while the majority of stuff runs on the 68K. Advantage being that without running the OS that the 68K chip will be a little bit faster too.

Heavy software like Quake which needs an expensive 060 could get better speed on a cheaper Coldfire.

MC68040 + V4e 200-266Mhz Coldfire would be both cheaper than 060, while also being higher performance than even a 120MHz 060.

Maybe we'll all be running 350MHz 68080's in a few years... And they add Coldfire instructions to complete 68K/Colfire compatibility...

First we can be running cheap 266Mhz V4e Coldfire + 68040 Gemini dual core Amiga's to celebrate Christmas this year when WB3.2 allows it :-)

There would be literally no software for Coldfire CPUs.
The Atari scene tried that ten years ago with the Firebee, and apart from being an interesting experiment, nothing much every grew out of it as far as I know.

The 68080 FPGA way is the right one to go, imo.

AJCopland · 21 May 2020, 17:35

I think FPGA based CPU's are the future, whether that's TG68k, 68080, or whatever comes out of http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=100729

Cards like the Warp1260 are amazing, like the last great 68060 card possible since there's no new chips and so many fakes out of China.

Is there any benefit to compiling the Kickstarts for higher end CPUs?
Or (re)writing 68000 asm parts for 68020+ CPUs?

markpaterson · 21 May 2020, 19:22

What is the current rough ETA on a 3.2 release? I'm about to drop some money on 3.1.4 but if it's only a couple of months away I might wait as I assume it will not be a free up or discounted upgrade from 3.1.4.

gulliver · 21 May 2020, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by markpaterson

What is the current rough ETA on a 3.2 release? I'm about to drop some money on 3.1.4 but if it's only a couple of months away I might wait as I assume it will not be a free up or discounted upgrade from 3.1.4.

We have internal target dates and goals.

They are not public because they depend on a lot of internal and external factors.

To understand a bit why this is a complex matter in software development, please watch the video on this blog (which happens to authored by a well known Amiga developer, not by any of us):

https://keasigmadelta.com/blog/when-...tware-project/

Fastdruid · 21 May 2020, 21:20

Not to mention the Osborne effect!

markpaterson · 22 May 2020, 00:00

Understood! I'll buy the current version and then just buy 3.2 whenever that becomes available (though a discount would be nice for recent purchases at least). I'm happy to support active Amiga development, wherever it may come from!

EUR 30 / $32 is not an outrageous price either. That's less than a meal for two at a chain restaurant, and think of how much money we're all saving in quarantine!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gulliver

We have internal target dates and goals.

They are not public because they depend on a lot of internal and external factors.

To understand a bit why this is a complex matter in software development, please watch the video on this blog (which happens to authored by a well known Amiga developer, not by any of us):

https://keasigmadelta.com/blog/when-...tware-project/

Gorf · 22 May 2020, 00:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by markpaterson

Understood! I'll buy the current version and then just buy 3.2 whenever that becomes available (though a discount would be nice for recent purchases at least). I'm happy to support active Amiga development, wherever it may come from!

EUR 30 / $32 is not an outrageous price either. That's less than a meal for two at a chain restaurant, and think of how much money we're all saving in quarantine!

yeah - sure a lot of people save money by not getting paid like the waiter in the closed restaurant ...

vxm · 22 May 2020, 17:57

Hello

Would it be possible to extend the amigaguide.library (and maybe multiview) to display text and image simultaneously in a help file?

Because, launching a web browser to do it, is a bit heavy.

NB: Thanks for updating OS 3.1.4 (1) and for the upcoming 3.2.

eXeler0 · 22 May 2020, 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by gulliver

We have internal target dates and goals.

They are not public because they depend on a lot of internal and external factors.

To understand a bit why this is a complex matter in software development, please watch the video on this blog (which happens to authored by a well known Amiga developer, not by any of us):

https://keasigmadelta.com/blog/when-...tware-project/

I wouldn't really expect exact feature lists or precise deadline, but it seems you do have a list of stuff to add to 3.2 and the stuff that will not make it but probably in a future release. That reasoning alone would mean you do have fairly clear vision of where you're drawing the line for this release.
So I'll rather ask this: Approximate timeframe when will be comfortable with sharing a "locked down" feature list (no dates attached)?

gulliver · 22 May 2020, 21:50

@vxm

Added to the feature request list. It is being considered.

@eXelr0

I really don't know because we are still adding features. And then, after extensive testing I am sure a couple of features will be discarded or modified (that is how usual development goes).

I am a man of my word, and would like not to give false hopes on dates.

I know you are anxious. We, and I mean all developers, are anxious too.

AmigaOS 3.2 is absolutely fantastic. And you are all going to like it. It has tons of improvements all over the place. It is definately a game changer.

3.2 is no minor fix or small update.

18 May 2020, 13:47	#463
amigo1 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2016 Location: Cork/Gallia Posts: 27	All right, we are getting there Apparently we have a different understanding of the wording "in general" I will keep that in mind for the future. In this context "in general" referred to the kickstart contained in the package know as AmigaOS 3.1. The "Kickstart" meant as a product, not as a specific Kickstart chip compiled for a specific Amiga model. not as a specific Kickstart chip containing compiled code for a specific Amiga model. That said, as far as I know, there has never been an AmigaOS 3.1 package released for the Amiga 1000 computer. So "in general" AmigaOS 3.1 works on Amiga500, Amiga600, Amiga2000, Amiga2500, Amiga 3000, Amiga1200, Amiga4000. More specifically the Kickstart 3.1 officially works on these machines. Even more specific, a specific ROM for your specific machine Model is needed as the ROMs are machine-dependant. So then, "Kickstart 3.1" generally works on 68000 if you use it on a Commodore Amiga computer that was released with a 68000 CPU and the officially sold ROM which has been released for your specific Amiga model. So then, "Kickstart 3.1" generally speaking, works on 68000 (built-in in a supported Amiga) if you have the ROM released/sold for your specific Amiga Model. All right, I hope I entertained you with my arising self-doubt to explain my thoughts to you regarding this matter. If in any of my prevous posts I sounded offensive, I specifically tell you now, it was not meant to be. All right, I hope I entertained you with my arising self-doubt to express myself to you. If in any of my previous posts I sounded offensive, I specifically tell you now, it was not meant to offend you. Keep up the good work on AmigaOS 3.2! Last edited by amigo1; 18 May 2020 at 16:06. Reason: tried to make the wording more clear, as an exercise for me personally, and others who might read it.

22 May 2020, 17:57	#478
vxm Registered User Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Luxembourg Posts: 87	Hello Would it be possible to extend the amigaguide.library (and maybe multiview) to display text and image simultaneously in a help file? Because, launching a web browser to do it, is a bit heavy. NB: Thanks for updating OS 3.1.4 (1) and for the upcoming 3.2. Last edited by vxm; 22 May 2020 at 18:05.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
AmigaOS 3.1.x v 3.9	steve_mynott	New to Emulation or Amiga scene	35	19 April 2020 06:23
AmigaOS 3.9	PoLoMoTo	support.WinUAE	8	27 August 2011 18:06
AmigaOS 3.5 or 3.9	maddoc666	support.Apps	12	22 February 2010 08:02
AmigaOS	koncool	request.Apps	6	04 June 2003 17:45
AmigaOS XL	sturme	New to Emulation or Amiga scene	4	15 January 2002 02:13

18 May 2020, 13:04	#461
Thomas Richter Registered User Join Date: Jan 2019 Location: Germany Posts: 3,214	A 3.1 Kickstart for an A2000 works in an A2000, for obvious reasons. A "whatever 3.1 Kickstart" does not. So, no, "in general" it does not work. Kickstarts are machine dependent, and were at least up to 3.1, CPU dependent and chipset dependent. The latter two dependencies no longer hold, but other dependencies still exist, unfortunately.

18 May 2020, 13:04	#462
McTrinsic Registered User Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Germany Posts: 527	3.1 ROM(s) are machine-specific. There is a 3.1 ROM release for e.g. Amiga 500 that will run on an Amiga 500. 3.1 ROMs for an A1200 will run in an A1200 but not in an OCS/ECS machine. The thing is, there is non suich thing as "a 3.1 ROM". There are only machine-dependent variants of that.

18 May 2020, 14:59	#464
DamienD Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: London / Sydney Age: 47 Posts: 20,420	Now, now children. Hewitson & britelite; you guys clearly don't get along, just ignore each other. It's that simple... All your off topic post / bickering has now been deleted.

19 May 2020, 01:57	#465
coldacid WinUAE 4000/40, V4SA Join Date: Apr 2020 Location: East of Oshawa Posts: 538	So at this point, I'm wondering: Do I buy 3.1.4 to put on the V4S I intend to buy with a portion of my tax refund or do I wait for 3.2? In other words, what does the timeline look like for 3.2's release?

21 May 2020, 12:24	#467
PurpleMelbourne Banned Join Date: Dec 2018 Location: Australia Age: 51 Posts: 99	Coldfire support can buy us time while we try to figure out our post Motorola 68K future. We can make the hardware, but we cant build cheap fast 68K CPU's. If AmigaOS could be compiled for the half 68K compatible Coldfire, and support a second CPU which is actual 68K CPU, then over time software can be recompiled for coldfire while the majority of stuff runs on the 68K. Advantage being that without running the OS that the 68K chip will be a little bit faster too. Heavy software like Quake which needs an expensive 060 could get better speed on a cheaper Coldfire. MC68040 + V4e 200-266Mhz Coldfire would be both cheaper than 060, while also being higher performance than even a 120MHz 060. Maybe we'll all be running 350MHz 68080's in a few years... And they add Coldfire instructions to complete 68K/Colfire compatibility... First we can be running cheap 266Mhz V4e Coldfire + 68040 Gemini dual core Amiga's to celebrate Christmas this year when WB3.2 allows it :-)

21 May 2020, 12:35	#468
PurpleMelbourne Banned Join Date: Dec 2018 Location: Australia Age: 51 Posts: 99	For new Amiga compatibles, how about a two part ROM. Device specific ROM and Generic hardware abstracted ROM. Atari ST could run Amiga and finally get a decent OS

21 May 2020, 15:24	#469
Samurai_Crow Total Chaos forever! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Waterville, MN, USA Age: 49 Posts: 2,186	@PurpleMelbourne Coldfire encodings conflict with existing 68060 instructions. 68080 is a pretty good idea but Coldfire is a bad idea all around. That's why Coldfire is so cheap.

21 May 2020, 17:35	#472
AJCopland Registered User Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Beeston, Nottinghamshire, UK Posts: 238	I think FPGA based CPU's are the future, whether that's TG68k, 68080, or whatever comes out of http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=100729 Cards like the Warp1260 are amazing, like the last great 68060 card possible since there's no new chips and so many fakes out of China. Is there any benefit to compiling the Kickstarts for higher end CPUs? Or (re)writing 68000 asm parts for 68020+ CPUs?

21 May 2020, 19:22	#473
markpaterson Registered User Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Bay Area / USA Posts: 43	What is the current rough ETA on a 3.2 release? I'm about to drop some money on 3.1.4 but if it's only a couple of months away I might wait as I assume it will not be a free up or discounted upgrade from 3.1.4.

21 May 2020, 21:20	#475
Fastdruid Registered User Join Date: Apr 2020 Location: UK Posts: 144	Not to mention the Osborne effect!

22 May 2020, 21:50	#480
gulliver BoingBagged Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The South of nowhere Age: 46 Posts: 2,358	@vxm Added to the feature request list. It is being considered. @eXelr0 I really don't know because we are still adding features. And then, after extensive testing I am sure a couple of features will be discarded or modified (that is how usual development goes). I am a man of my word, and would like not to give false hopes on dates. I know you are anxious. We, and I mean all developers, are anxious too. AmigaOS 3.2 is absolutely fantastic. And you are all going to like it. It has tons of improvements all over the place. It is definately a game changer. 3.2 is no minor fix or small update.

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