Enhancer Software OS3

[wawa]

i doubt that providing proprietary paid for replacement for basic gui elemnets by yet another company does really cut it from a user perspective.

all that will be useless again the day amigakit and aeon will go out of business. creating crowdfunding for open replacement for most necessary reaction classes would be more sensible imho, would allow people to educate themselves and contribute, and would also allow to estimate the actual demand, instead of neccessity to justify a potentially unpopular product later on with the need to support the system and the developers.

[matthey]

Originally Posted by kolla

I suspect these are classes that require Reaction, and hence only work with OS3.9/68020+.

The foundation is good but it appears they have failed to secure the property on which they build and so the new construction is not secured to the foundation.

Originally Posted by kolla

(and for what it is worth... I don't think they look so good, with no spacing between buttons and window border)

Perhaps the spacing can be set. If not, it should be possible to add it although it would be good if defaults were consistent with the look of the Amiga. The Amiga Style Guide is old and did not go into such detail. Not everyone will agree on what looks best either. It looks fine to me.

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

Yes these classes are reliant on other classes which are ClassAct compatible. We are in the process of creating a brand new set of classes now. Currently working on tickbox.gadget to replace checkbox.gadget and that is almost completed on OS3.

Sigh. Please do *not* create a new gadget with a different name unless the old gadget was seriously flawed by design. It would be much better to recreate a compatible clone of the old gadget and then enhance it from there. Also, AmigaOS 4 has an enhanced version of checkbox.gadget. I fail to see how creating a new gadget which is incompatible with AmigaOS 3 *and* AmigaOS 4 will be an improvement.

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

This class is using the H&P window.class from OS3.9 so we do not have access to the source code for that. We will be looking into other solutions.

An updated window.class is in AmigaOS 4 so A-EON's partner Hyperion also has the source for this class. I feel like we keep reinventing the wheel and using an inferior and incompatible one at that. I understand that there may be legal hurdles but this effort looks feeble to me.

Originally Posted by wawa

i doubt that providing proprietary paid for replacement for basic gui elements by yet another company does really cut it from a user perspective.

I agree. A GUI needs to be standard and consistent but I fail to see how this goal is accomplished. It looks like we will now have AmigaOS 4 Reaction, AmigaOS 3.x + ClassACT, AmigaOS 3.5/3.9 Reaction and now AmigaOS 3.5/3.9 Reaction + A-EON Reaction. This is hell for programmers. If they want to proliferate Reaction, they should have one common code base for all which is in sync with features and versions. Judging from the statements here, A-EON may have bailed Hyperion out of bankruptcy without securing control. This is sad as it likely means they are really sympathetic to the 68k Amiga and are trying to reunite the Amiga but they aren't the smartest business types. The executives at Hyperion are very stubborn, anti-68k and unscrupulous. I'm afraid A-EON is not the white knight for the Amiga and Hyperion will keep driving nails in the Amiga coffin .

[amigakit.com]

ReAction/ClassAct on OS3 is no longer developed, the source code is not available and has fallen behind a long way from the OS4 ReAction. So from that perspective, the OS3 ReAction it is a dead-end.

We need to build new applications for OS3 (not just 3.5/3.9) and as a consequence need building blocks to do that.

These building blocks must be expandable into the future when we need additional functionality, so the only solution is to create our own set of gadgets and classes. The InfoWindow Class is a good example of where we have created a class that shares a common code base across both OS3 and OS4

[matthey]

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

ReAction/ClassAct on OS3 is no longer developed, the source code is not available and has fallen behind a long way from the OS4 ReAction. So from that perspective, the OS3 ReAction it is a dead-end.

Ok, so you don't have access to the AmigaOS 3.9 Reaction/ClassAct sources. Have you talked to ThoR, olsen and Chis Aldi (original programmer) about it? All 3 of these developers are nice guys. Was Reaction/ClassAct even properly licensed/transferred or is it another P96 situation?

Why can't the AmigaOS 4 code be used for a backport? It should be much easier to comment out new methods requiring AmigaOS 4 functionality rather than recreating the whole gadget or class which is a huge waste of resources. This kind of OOP code is usually more dependent on parent classes than OS functionality anyway. Intuition may need an update as the gadgets and classes may depend on BOOPSI classes in intuition.library but there was no update past AmigaOS 3.1 (in ROM) for this.

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

We need to build new applications for OS3 (not just 3.5/3.9) and as a consequence need building blocks to do that.

These building blocks must be expandable into the future when we need additional functionality, so the only solution is to create our own set of gadgets and classes. The InfoWindow Class is a good example of where we have created a class that shares a common code base across both OS3 and OS4

I understand what you are trying to do but it looks to me like you are trying to do it the hard way. Not only does it take much more resources to recreate the needed classes and gadgets but there is twice as much code to debug and maintain while trying to keep compatibility and sync the versions with the AmigaOS 4 Reaction. If you want AmigaOS 4 Reaction compatibility, it is much simpler to use the AmigaOS 4 Reaction code. Is your business partner, Hyperion, making you spend several times as much for development to duplicate the work they have already done and which would benefit their products? This would be embarrassing enough if you (A-EON) hadn't already saved your business partner from bankruptcy. Only Amiga makes it impossible .

[wawa]

Originally Posted by matthey

This would be embarrassing enough if you (A-EON) hadn't already saved your business partner from bankruptcy. Only Amiga makes it impossible .

thats only an assumption. we dont know, what happened there for fact. judging by the course aeon is taking with their initiatives and by comments of hyperion managing director, there is definitely a disagreement. so, what we are in front of, is another issue of tearing whats left of "amiga", "amigaos" or whatever apart and trying to drag what one can get hold of his own way. and the users are expected to follow in trails.

personally, id think it best, if amiga users were spared that kind of theatre again, that could be reserved exclusively for so called ng platforms, like os4.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

ReAction/ClassAct on OS3 is no longer developed, the source code is not available and has fallen behind a long way from the OS4 ReAction. So from that perspective, the OS3 ReAction it is a dead-end.

if reaction is dead end, then why not simply take mui?
if class act has fallen behind os4 implementation, then what you currently are doing is not catching up with amiga implementation, but creating another incompatible set of classes, only dedicated application will take advantage of. and such applications dont exist, except perhaps, what you propose with your "enhancement package". definitely it wont make difference for existing applications.

[Locutus]

Originally Posted by matthey

Why can't the AmigaOS 4 code be used for a backport?

.....Such a burning question.

[kolla]

Zune is there for anyone who wants to contribute

[matthey]

Originally Posted by wawa

thats only an assumption. we dont know, what happened there for fact. judging by the course aeon is taking with their initiatives and by comments of hyperion managing director, there is definitely a disagreement. so, what we are in front of, is another issue of tearing whats left of "amiga", "amigaos" or whatever apart and trying to drag what one can get hold of his own way. and the users are expected to follow in trails.

We certainly don't have the details on the A-EON deal to save Hyperion but A-EON ended with some new products shortly after. Hyperion will say they were never bankrupt and that the incident was a mistake (necessary to avoid the bankruptcy). There is strong evidence that A-EON bailed out Hyperion. The big question is what did A-EON get in return for the likely substantial loan. Tech companies usually don't have much in assets for collateral. Their buildings and even office equipment are commonly leased. The old software A-EON received from Hyperion, which A-EON now sales, is not worth much and even less when Hyperion goes bankrupt again. I would have required control of the company before loaning one cent but it is looking more like that didn't happen. I hope A-EON at least has some kind of agreement (contract) like a right of first refusal (ROFR). Significant minority ownership is mostly worthless without a large number of stock holders (I don't believe this is the case). Of course private businesses can keep this all private so we might not know until Hyperion is "declared" bankrupt.

Originally Posted by wawa

if reaction is dead end, then why not simply take mui?
if class act has fallen behind os4 implementation, then what you currently are doing is not catching up with amiga implementation, but creating another incompatible set of classes, only dedicated application will take advantage of. and such applications dont exist, except perhaps, what you propose with your "enhancement package". definitely it wont make difference for existing applications.

It is not that Reaction has fallen behind MUI but rather that AmigaOS 3 users don't get the most up to date Reaction (AmigaOS 4 Reaction). MUI is in the same situation. There are at least 3 different versions of MUI with different versions numbers and features. The current Amiga version number system only works with one upgrade path. Otherwise, the programmer expects certain features with a certain version but gets different features. It is impossible to keep versions consistent between paths unless 100% feature compatibility is obtained on a version vs version basis between paths. It is much easier with just one upgrade path but only Amiga makes it impossible.

[Cylon]

Originally Posted by kolla

Zune is there for anyone who wants to contribute

What is a zune? That stupid microsoft thingies?

[amigakit.com]

Following on from InfoWindow.class being ported over to OS3 this week, the application tool called InfoWindow has now been ported from OS4 to OS3. I am pleased to report it is working without problems, even in 4 colour screenmodes!

Here InfoWindow tool is used to display the "Read Me" documentation for the Enhancer Software - it provides tabs so user can easily browse through the documents:

[matthey]

Originally Posted by Cylon

What is a zune? That stupid microsoft thingies?

Zune is the AROS version of MUI. I wouldn't think a 3 letter acronym could be copyrighted but they are playing it safe. MUI is prevalent enough that porting Zune back to AmigaOS and including it with the AmigaOS could be good.

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

Following on from InfoWindow.class being ported over to OS3 this week, the application tool called InfoWindow has now been ported from OS4 to OS3. I am pleased to report it is working without problems, even in 4 colour screenmodes!

Hmm. I see the "from OS4" so maybe this is the start of a proper backport to 68k. I understand that certain AmigaOS 3.9 Reaction components are missing but then why use those if they are missing from AmigaOS 4? Why not port the missing components if they are available in AmigaOS 4? I agree and support a proper Reaction port but be careful of the version numbers. Any methods or features which can not be supported by the same version of component on AmigaOS 4 (including old components) must be ignored and have no serious consequences. Building AmigaOS 4 Reaction on top of AmigaOS 3 is like building a 2nd story on an unmaintained old house. I'm not sure it was the best place to start.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by matthey

We certainly don't have the details on the A-EON deal to save Hyperion but A-EON ended with some new products shortly after. Hyperion will say they were never bankrupt and that the incident was a mistake (necessary to avoid the bankruptcy). There is strong evidence that A-EON bailed out Hyperion. The big question is what did A-EON get in return for the likely substantial loan. Tech companies usually don't have much in assets for collateral. Their buildings and even office equipment are commonly leased. The old software A-EON received from Hyperion, which A-EON now sales, is not worth much and even less when Hyperion goes bankrupt again. I would have required control of the company before loaning one cent but it is looking more like that didn't happen. I hope A-EON at least has some kind of agreement (contract) like a right of first refusal (ROFR). Significant minority ownership is mostly worthless without a large number of stock holders (I don't believe this is the case). Of course private businesses can keep this all private so we might not know until Hyperion is "declared" bankrupt.

lets simply follow occams rule and treat it as a black box. if it looks dead, it is dead.

It is not that Reaction has fallen behind MUI but rather that AmigaOS 3 users don't get the most up to date Reaction (AmigaOS 4 Reaction). MUI is in the same situation. There are at least 3 different versions of MUI with different versions numbers and features. The current Amiga version number system only works with one upgrade path. Otherwise, the programmer expects certain features with a certain version but gets different features. It is impossible to keep versions consistent between paths unless 100% feature compatibility is obtained on a version vs version basis between paths. It is much easier with just one upgrade path but only Amiga makes it impossible.

to be safe one can resign on gimmicks and simply program against features offered by mui3.8 or zune for that matter. on 68k zune and mui classes binaries are interchangeable, dunno why reaction classes need so much hassle to be "ported over"..

[Locutus]

As usual on Amiga, you can be sure the reasons aren't technical.

[idrougge]

I don't see the point in backporting Zune. There is a MUI4 port for 68k, but hardly anyone is using it. MUI 3.8 has served the 68k market well, and whatever enhancements are necessary make better sense on a platform with the memory and CPU to spare for real enhancements. 68k is not such a platform.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by idrougge

I don't see the point in backporting Zune. There is a MUI4 port for 68k, but hardly anyone is using it. MUI 3.8 has served the 68k market well, and whatever enhancements are necessary make better sense on a platform with the memory and CPU to spare for real enhancements. 68k is not such a platform.

none is using mui4 because there is no software that demands it, let alone practicable software in sight that might demand it. mui4 compatible implementation was done for the sole reason to get morphos odyssey browser working on os4. this at least was a valid reason to implement missing classes replacements.

[idrougge]

Exactly. Where is the glut of software that makes use of a new ClassAct or MUI going to come from? In the conservative 68k market, it makes sense to even steer clear of OS3.9 enhancements.

[Pyromania]

Nice work.

[Locutus]

Originally Posted by idrougge

Exactly. Where is the glut of software that makes use of a new ClassAct or MUI going to come from? In the conservative 68k market, it makes sense to even steer clear of OS3.9 enhancements.

Probably A-eon-kit itself, so essentially you can first pay for the Toolkit to run their software.

[matthey]

Originally Posted by idrougge

I don't see the point in backporting Zune. There is a MUI4 port for 68k, but hardly anyone is using it. MUI 3.8 has served the 68k market well, and whatever enhancements are necessary make better sense on a platform with the memory and CPU to spare for real enhancements. 68k is not such a platform.

If Reaction continues to be the chosen 68k AmigaOS standard GUI, it is important to realize that there are more MUI programs out there and they need to work. MUI 3.8 would be adequate if it could be installed by a 3rd party installer. A Zune port would allow to fix bugs and maintain the code while offering better compatibility and code sharing with AROS (An updated Reaction 68k should work on AROS 68k but they have chosen Zune/MUI as the default GUI). All this depends on the intentions of A-EON though. Are they just porting the Reaction classes for their own software (and perhaps a few other developers who need it) or is this the first step in bringing back development of the 68k AmigaOS based on AmigaOS 4 sources. They will likely fail to proliferate Reaction as an AmigaOS add-on although making it compatible enough to AmigaOS 4 Reaction and offering it for free may help. A newly developed 68k AmigaOS which offers better compatibility between AmigaOS 3 and AmigaOS 4 would create a much larger user base and could proliferate Reaction over MUI. It is here where providing basic MUI compatibility from a clean installation is better than users getting errors when trying to run the multitude of MUI programs.

Originally Posted by idrougge

Exactly. Where is the glut of software that makes use of a new ClassAct or MUI going to come from? In the conservative 68k market, it makes sense to even steer clear of OS3.9 enhancements.

NetSurf uses Reaction and suffers from lack of features and bugs in AmigaOS 3 compared to AmigaOS 4. A few important software products like NetSurf may make a bigger difference than a large quantity of software products. A bigger standardized market (API here but also ISA and ABI) should attract more software developers as well. The FPGA hardware is expanding the 68k AmigaOS market faster than the PPC AmigaOS market (but they are not standardizing either). I keep talking about standards and nobody seems to understand me but the Amiga user base keeps splitting into more and more incompatible camps and so much development effort is wasted without standards.