Next gen Amiga

[kolla]

Originally Posted by Gorf

That is not so different from what MorphOS looks like, is it?
It has got a HAL and a microkernel.
It has a AmigaOS2/3 compatibility layer

It is only missing the bsd/linux/unix box ... which was planed but never came.
(and Java ... apparently everyone needed Java in 96)

Correct - MorphOS developers were following this sort of model. The inspiration for this model was NeXTSTEP, which at the time was viewed as the pinnacle of what a personal computer operating system should be like. Remember, this was before Apple bought NeXT (or NeXT overtook Apple).

Which, ironically, makes Apple's macOS the ultimate modern "Amiga experience" today.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Gorf

Well - that entirely depends on your philosophical point of view.
Is there a past? Is there only the present - or is the opposite true and there is no present and only the past and the future...
And if yes, how many of them are there ....

We do not need to examine 9 dimensions of space and 3 dimensions of time , my point was simply that there will be no new Amiga (that will satisfy most users, especially myself).

Originally Posted by Gorf

still with you
(a backwards compatibility mode would be appreciated - otherwise we would end up with coldfire)

I'm not against emulation. The only thing for me is that the new cpu must be at least as friendly for asm programmers as actual 68k is (and which the coldfire isn't). Why, i could even design the isa myself (but not implement it).

Originally Posted by Gorf

100% compatible might slow down everything else dramatically... could you elaborate "works similar" ?

Depends what we call 100% compatible. As compatible as AGA is in comparison to ECS would be enough.
Yet we could throw it away for the "working similar" hardware, which means having fully documented registers that can be accessed at will, provides all the features we like, and don't make the programming model too complicated.

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by Gorf

And ISA can do better than an OS?
A road can do better than a car?
Air can do better than a plane?

What I mean is that you can design and implement an OS for 68k that's better and faster than AOS.

Originally Posted by meynaf

Full security isn't possible, with or without memory protection.

Only because of bugs and design flaws.

Originally Posted by meynaf

Memory protection helps them for being lazy.

Doesn't matter, because humans are the problem here, not memory protection.

Originally Posted by meynaf

it's about Amigas here

In that case it's indeed quite irrelevant.

Originally Posted by meynaf

Windows programs need win64 not for 4GB limit but for 2GB because win32 is so stupid.

Just as stupid as AOS, which also allows max 2GB.

Originally Posted by meynaf

Look in programs and count the data types used. You will discover many uses for 8bit, many uses for 16bit, scarce uses for 32bit (aside of pointers), and very rare uses of anything 64bit or more. Yes, 32bit is the magic bit width. Because it's enough in 99.99% of cases.

If that's really true, than you have a point.

Originally Posted by meynaf

What features ? When I compare, sorry, I find more useful features in AOS than in peecees OSes.

Eh, just about everything? The way I work with Win10 isn't comparable to AOS, it's in a completely different league. That Win10 is top heavy bloat ware is a different story. Anyway, if I had to name just one feature: Multiple monitors.

Originally Posted by meynaf

There is nothing really good about recent OSes.

The main thing that's wrong with current and recent OSs is that they're bloated beyond belief and implemented in a lazy way.

Originally Posted by meynaf

What can they do that AOS can't ?

Maybe I'm exaggerating a bit. I still think they're better overall.

Originally Posted by meynaf

The OS interferes more than most people think. Suddenly hits the disk with no apparent reason, eats cpu for its own unscrutable purposes, etc. Do benchmarks and you will see they're unreliable.

That's very true and quite annoying. On Win10 is mostly the Antimalware executable, MSs compatibility telemetry and file system indexing.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Thorham

Only because of bugs and design flaws.

Without bugs and design flaws you wouldn't need memory protection at all.

Originally Posted by Thorham

Doesn't matter, because humans are the problem here, not memory protection.

So memory protection is just wrong way driven by humans being the problem.

Originally Posted by Thorham

Just as stupid as AOS, which also allows max 2GB.

Yeah it may be stupid too. But with AOS this limit does not need to be bypassed so it's less important.

Originally Posted by Thorham

If that's really true, than you have a point.

You can verify this yourself if you have enough source code.

Originally Posted by Thorham

Eh, just about everything? The way I work with Win10 isn't comparable to AOS, it's in a completely different league. That Win10 is top heavy bloat ware is a different story. Anyway, if I had to name just one feature: Multiple monitors.

Multiple monitors
A laughable way to do something our Intuition screens do a lot better !

Originally Posted by Thorham

The main thing that's wrong with current and recent OSs is that they're bloated beyond belief and implemented in a lazy way.

There may be good reasons for this, other than just being lazy.

Originally Posted by Thorham

Maybe I'm exaggerating a bit. I still think they're better overall.

I still need examples for this. What do you like on them ? They're flashy, eye candy maybe, but that doesn't make them any better.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Daedalus

Where to start here... Okay, while your Amiga might run sweetly without issues after being on the internet, I can guarantee you that web browsing is nigh on impossible with such a limited machine. There's only one browser for 68k that even supports CSS, and that's limited to HTML4 and some limited Javascript. Memory isn't so much an issue - the horsepower simply isn't there...

If it's 'neigh on impossible' for his Amiga then it must be totally impossible with only 16MB and a 50MHz 030, without javascript or CSS, on a PAL hires interlace screen in 8 colors to a TV via CVBS, right?

[kolla]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

If it's 'neigh on impossible' for his Amiga then it must be totally impossible with only 16MB and a 50MHz 030, without javascript or CSS, on a PAL hires interlace screen in 8 colors to a TV via CVBS, right?

Notice the absence of https on this site.
How does http://morph.zone work for you?

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by Thorham

If that's really true, than you have a point.

It's not. Just because nobody here can think of a use for a 64bit CPU doesn't mean there isn't a use-case at all.

64bit wide registers can address much larger memory spaces - which is necessary in my line of work (audio processing and music). We often use sample sets which are far bigger than 4GB in size, and being able to load them into memory (instead of trying to stream them in from disk) means a smoother experience editing and playing back. Using many of these sets at once is another bonus that 32bit really struggles with, if it can manage them at all.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Dunny

It's not. Just because nobody here can think of a use for a 64bit CPU doesn't mean there isn't a use-case at all.

64bit wide registers can address much larger memory spaces - which is necessary in my line of work (audio processing and music). We often use sample sets which are far bigger than 4GB in size, and being able to load them into memory (instead of trying to stream them in from disk) means a smoother experience editing and playing back. Using many of these sets at once is another bonus that 32bit really struggles with, if it can manage them at all.

A 32bit cpu can access more than 4GB. That current OSes don't actually do it this way doesn't mean it can't be done.

[kolla]

Originally Posted by meynaf

A 32bit cpu can access more than 4GB. That current OSes don't actually do it this way doesn't mean it can't be done.

You mean PAE? But then the 32bit CPU needs to support that, so you still need a new CPU and an Amiga operating system that supports it, and it will break compatibility - might just as well jump to 64bit.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Dunny

It's not. Just because nobody here can think of a use for a 64bit CPU doesn't mean there isn't a use-case at all.

64bit wide registers can address much larger memory spaces - which is necessary in my line of work (audio processing and music). We often use sample sets which are far bigger than 4GB in size, and being able to load them into memory (instead of trying to stream them in from disk) means a smoother experience editing and playing back. Using many of these sets at once is another bonus that 32bit really struggles with, if it can manage them at all.

Why would you want to load such a large file into RAM all at once?
AOS or any decent OS was always able to just load the relevant part of an file an eg. burn a 700MB CD with just a few MB RAM.

Your software should only load the relevant parts into RAM - even with hundreds of audio voices at once 2GB should be more than enough .. this looks more like a suboptimal disc-handling or editing strategy to me...

I can understand that raw 4K video material might be more demanding...

[MigaTech]

64 OR 128Bit CPU running new revised OS with optional classic mode switch. Meaning that within the new OS environment you can emulate any Classic Amiga and the older workbench OS. "Simple" Toni Wilen did it on WinUAE!

This offers the best of all worlds on the Next Gen Amiga!

Am I the only one realising this or not? Let's face it, us classic Amiga users are not going to get anything new in the way of OS, so concentrate these talents on the Next Gen Amiga.

Next Gen Amiga CPU should be something like the AMD FX series from the early to mid 2000's, they were awesome CPU's. I still use an FX55 to this day for film editing and music production.

It is a seriously impressive single core CPU, 64Bit at it best! Unlike Pentium, AMD do not overclock their CPU's and then offer a heat sink and Fan the size of a skyscraper, to cool it!

Amiga was American, so the CPU should be American, AMD!

AMD = American Micro Devices.

Then once it is implemented into the Next Gen Amiga, it shall be know as...

AMD = Amiga Micro Devices!

Pentium is in everything, so let's be different and use the company that has AM in it, just like Amiga!

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by Gorf

Why would you want to load such a large file into RAM all at once?
AOS or any decent OS was always able to just load the relevant part of an file an eg. burn a 700MB CD with just a few MB RAM.

Your software should only load the relevant parts into RAM - even with hundreds of audio voices at once 2GB should be more than enough .. this looks more like a suboptimal disc-handling or editing strategy to me...

For one instrument, with 128 voices sampled at 128 velocities (and other parameters) usually sampled at 192KHz in 5 channels. And all that is just one instrument - and the samples are quite often nearly a minute long.

I have a grand piano instrument here that's 4.5GB in one file.

And tracks often consist of hundreds, occasionally more than a thousand of these beasts. We're often getting requests from producers to add more mixer tracks as the 200 we provide is nowhere near enough for them.

And if they're going to do this live then on-disk streaming just won't cut it - though these days an SSD does stand a chance, it's much better and more responsive from RAM.

Seriously. The things these guys do with sound is terrifying when you contemplate it.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Dunny

For one instrument, with 128 voices sampled at 128 velocities (and other parameters) usually sampled at 192KHz in 5 channels. And all that is just one instrument - and the samples are quite often nearly a minute long.

OK ... but nobody except maybe a bat can hear 192KHz samples ... such a sampling rate makes no sense. Even 96KHz ist twice as much as any human can hear.

And what is the use of 5 different channels for a single instrument?

And why would you need all 128 velocities at the same time ... same goes for the 128 keys ...

A smarter software would just load the voices that you need, with the parameters you need and the one or two channel you want at a maximum of 96KHz.

I really see that sometimes you need more than 32bit addresse space and I would also be happy with a 64Bit AmigaOS - Aros ist doing great at 64Bit...

I just think audio should not be the examplery use-case for that ... für me that is just a example for a broken software design.
But whatever floats your boat.

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by Gorf

OK ... but nobody except maybe a bat can hear 192KHz samples ... such a sampling rate makes no sense. Even 96KHz ist twice as much as any human can hear.

And you're right, but when you have 20 effects per channel for EQ, distortion etc then lowering the sampling rate before those effects are applied is asking for trouble when the aliasing starts.

Our software typically down-samples to 44.1KHz for playback, but having the higher resolution for processing actually does make a hell of a difference to sound quality.

And what is the use of 5 different channels for a single instrument?

Depends on the instrument - chorusing, reverberation etc. Much of that can be simulated, but for really high-quality work sometimes you just need to double-up or more of each instrument - and then each of those can have their pitch adjusted in micro-tones so it's often a case of not being able to simply use a single instance in memory.

And why would you need all 128 velocities at the same time ... same goes for the 128 keys ...

You don't. But you don't know which key the user is going to press next nor at what velocity.

A smarter software would just load the voices that you need, with the parameters you need and the one or two channel you want at a maximum of 96KHz.

And in a live situation that would not be a very smart piece of software at all.

Not to mention as I said above that effects processing at low resolution isn't a very smart thing to do.

[Gorf]

Ok - that is now really OT ... I do get the need for a higher intermediate resolution for mixing and effects, but I do not understand why you would need more than twice the original frequency for it (somewhere around 90KHz). There is not even a theoretical benefit.

Storing these samples in such a resolution makes even less sense - the microphone that recorded the sample of your piano would not react to ultrasonic frequencies, so anything above maybe 48KHz is just unhearable static noise.
That noise will later iteractnwith your effects and the mixing and eventually even lower the quality...

But not really important:
A next gen Amiga should be able to handle more RAM than 2 Gig, if a user needs that.
Im my vision, 32bit instances of the OS would live next to 64Bit instances in harmony, if the processor supports that.

[kolla]

Originally Posted by MigaTech

128Bit CPU

You need a CPU that address all the RAM that will ever be in the lifespan of human existence?

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by kolla

Notice the absence of https on this site.
How does http://morph.zone work for you?

And this proves?

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by kolla

You mean PAE? But then the 32bit CPU needs to support that, so you still need a new CPU and an Amiga operating system that supports it, and it will break compatibility - might just as well jump to 64bit.

Try to do a 68k-like cpu with 64bit support. You'll quickly discover that 64bit leads to ugly instruction encoding. Besides, on the OS side all your system structures will be bigger. Apps will also use more ram than before, so say bye to the Amiga's current lean-and-mean. Big cost for little benefit.
Perhaps 64bit is necessary for x86 and some others.
But here we're talking about Amiga.

Originally Posted by Gorf

Ok - that is now really OT ... I do get the need for a higher intermediate resolution for mixing and effects, but I do not understand why you would need more than twice the original frequency for it (somewhere around 90KHz). There is not even a theoretical benefit.


Storing these samples in such a resolution makes even less sense - the microphone that recorded the sample of your piano would not react to ultrasonic frequencies, so anything above maybe 48KHz is just unhearable static noise.
That noise will later iteractnwith your effects and the mixing and eventually even lower the quality...

Digital filtering is different from analog. Filters are basically delay lines. The more filters you add to a sample increases the delay. This is fine if you are going to apply the filter and store the output sample somewhere for later, but doesn't work well for a real time system. The sample rate has nothing to do with what you can or can't hear, its based on what you want to do with the data and the final output rate.

For an extreme example, lets say you have a 1000 tap filter (or maybe a string of filters). At 44kHz you will be waiting 22ms from the time you hit the key to when you first hear a sample. With a filter of the same length 192kHz you are only(?) looking at 5ms. The recommended oversampling rate is at least 10x. So for 44kHz, you want to sample at 440kHz, do all of your filtering and decimate back down to 44kHz.



This sounds like a lot, but I can get a STM32 from digikey shipped tomorrow for $10 with a 1Meg sample/sec ADC built in. 440kHz wouldn't be a problem.

[swinkamor12]

Amiga is not awesome retro platform.
Amiga chipset is was designed in 1983.
Jay Miner and his team do their best, but it was year 1983.
It takes too much time and work to code in real true retro way on Amiga.
copper, sprites, playfields, bitplanes - it was cool cool in 1983, but even in 1992 when original amiga 1200 come out amiga chipset was underpowered, hard to use and obsolete.
Commdore instead of AGA computers should made something like 3D0.
3D0 was designed by Dave Needle and R.J. Mical the same who designed OCS.
3D0 has what was missing in AGA - 16 bit sound, 24 bit truecolor, and hardware 3D support.