AmigaOS 3.2 and beyond

[E-Penguin]

Or if you've got money to burn get an X5000

[Daedalus]

Ha, indeed. To be fair, the AmiCygnix environment for OS4 is probably the best chance you'll get of having software like KiCAD ported to the Amiga. There are already ports of Gimp, Abiword, Gnumeric and others that run on it.

[Bruce Abbott]

KiCad is crap. If we are going to have a modern PCB design program on the Amiga it should have an intuitive interface. Otherwise, why bother? Just put it on a PC running Linux. Some FPGA software requires Windows? Just use a Windows PC. Treat the PC as an appliance that runs the applications you need to use.

Spending enormous time and effort attempting to port these things to Amiga OS is a waste of energy that could be used to produce software we don't already have.

[PurpleMelbourne]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

KiCad is crap. <snip>

I'm using DipTrace, but that's not the point.
KiCad is just an example pointing towards the concept of porting over newer software instead of only doing an historical recration of the early days of Gen X computing.

Amiga is heaps better than Windows. I think Amiga can move forward. But i do agree that getting the foundations solid is the correct path forward. It would just be nice if there were an eye towards system revival in upcoming versions when the other important work has been done.

Separate from the multi processor discussion, how about USB support?

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by PurpleMelbourne

Amiga is heaps better than Windows.

I am sorry - but, no, not even close. I am not a windows user, I am a Linux user, but as far as the operating system is concerned, Windows has a lot more to offer and is by far ahead of the old Amiga Os system.

Originally Posted by PurpleMelbourne

I think Amiga can move forward.

No chance, where to? Let's be realistic: There is no market for an old time, misdesigned operating system without applications and modern services. Linux has more options, yet its market share in desktop applications is marginal.

Originally Posted by PurpleMelbourne

Separate from the multi processor discussion, how about USB support?

Poseidon exists and is working.

[hUMUNGUs]

Windows far more to offer ? examples ?
If you dont have any vision, or dont belive in AmigaOS, why are you even doing this ?

Makes me sad. Maybe someone a bit more positive WITH visions should speak for the team. Just saying.

[britelite]

Originally Posted by hUMUNGUs

Windows far more to offer ? examples ?

Are you actually being serious?

If you dont have any vision, or dont belive in AmigaOS, why are you even doing this ?

You can fully enjoy something while still admitting to the realities of things, you know.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by hUMUNGUs

Windows far more to offer ? examples ?

A working process isolation, a working, albeit odd multi-user support, working memory protection, working resource tracking, working multi-CPU support, working internet stack, working browser support, a wide software basis, vendor support, a vendor support and development platform, active support by a company, working in-house support, a good working relationship between hardware vendors and the software manufacturer...

It's really hard to stop the list. I fully understand that you do not like windows. I do not like it much either. But denying the reality is not helpful.

Originally Posted by hUMUNGUs

If you dont have any vision, or dont belive in AmigaOS, why are you even doing this ?

To quote an ex-chancellor of Germany: "If you have visions, go see a doctor". No, I "do not believe" in anything. This is not the "Holy Church of Amiga".

It is an old retro platform that deserves some maintenance. That is it.

[nikosidis]

Thomas: Good answer

I look at Amiga and AmigaOS as a fun platform. It is no reason not to use it for many creative things. There are programs that are just as good as today standards, like doing pixel gfx or track music. The development going on creating games is amazing. It is also something special about using the OS. Create different screens for programs, DOpus, icons, shell etc. etc. I feel very home with AmigaOS.
It is cool that there are updates to the OS. For people that do not know or have time to add all kind of patches it is a blessing. I have a question regarding PFS3. Could it be possible to add this file system as an option to format drives?
Are the Math.libs updated and is your cpu, fpu detected from installation?

I think that the Amiga people would love if you did some custom code for different hardware to speed up things even if it where just a tiny bit.
I think you have done the perfect thing going back to OS 3.1 and improve on that.
Do things simple and effective. I like to see a little more from the updates that was done in 3.1.4 before buying. I'm pretty sure I will buy 3.2

[Minuous]

Originally Posted by nikosidis

I think you have done the perfect thing going back to OS 3.1 and improve on that.

That wasn't by choice but was forced by circumstances. OS3.9 would have been a much better starting point.

I like to see a little more from the updates that was done in 3.1.4 before buying. I'm pretty sure I will buy 3.2

3.2 is a much more significant update than 3.1.4.

[AMike]

Originally Posted by hUMUNGUs

Maybe someone a bit more positive WITH visions should speak for the team.

Thanks, but no thanks. The Amiga history since Commodore died was written by people who had a "vision". Where the vision led us can seen today.

[hUMUNGUs]

Guess I just love this platform too much to let it go.

[gulliver]

Originally Posted by hUMUNGUs

Guess I just love this platform too much to let it go.

We all do.

It is that we all just do it in our own different and twisted ways.

[Liqourice]

Originally Posted by hUMUNGUs

Guess I just love this platform too much to let it go.

Why would you have to let it go? It's still around, it's working as it is. Change it completely as some seem to wish and it'll be something else, it won't be the platform we love anymore.

The changes needed to make it "modern" are so huge that it will have to become something else, something that won't run on our old beloved hardware anymore. Where's the point with that?

As an example. You can't run windows 10 on an old 286, at least not in a way to make it usable. Yet some people seem to think that similar changes wouldn't be applicable to the Amiga. It's simply not realistic.

Small improvements, fixes to make it work slightly better, become more stable while remaining compatible. That's what our old computers and the community needs.

[lucadip]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

No chance, where to? Let's be realistic: There is no market for an old time, misdesigned operating system without applications and modern services.

Could you elaborate a bit more on amigaos being "misdesigned"? I am also a linux user and would not even start to compare amigaos with a modern os like linux or windows. But I always thought that for its time the amigaos was technically quite well done.

[OlafSch]

Originally Posted by PurpleMelbourne

So it sounds like the answer to the chicken or the egg question...
There is a software problem to be solved before a hardware solution can be created. And so no point trying to push the boundaries.

And that you say there is no intention to make that fix this?

Did I get that right?

the problem is there is a huge software base, most of the software closed

assuming you make extensive changes to modernize it, many programs relying on certain behavior would no longer work

then there would be huge threads with people moaning that this or that no longer works. At the end nobody would be happy. Or you make a big break and cut most of the heritage to add modern features like SMP and MP. But would that make sense on old amiga hardware? (If it would work at all)

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by lucadip

Could you elaborate a bit more on amigaos being "misdesigned"?.

I mean, look, all of this is pretty much old news. AmigaOs was designed in a rush, as a "consumer Os". Problem is, unlike its competitors, it was never redone at its peak popularity. Win98 was just a graphical GUI for Dos, but was entirely replaced by a new core (Win NT) when the time of DOS was over. The MacOs core was replaced by the MachOs kernel when its time was over. AmigaOs... well, we got Kick 2.0, but CBM had - even at its best time - never enough capacity to throw the core away and do it properly.


As far as the constructional errors are concerned, where to stop...


- exec: synchronization is based around forbid/permit, which are even macros, so they are not replacable. Semaphores as synchornization primitive require forbid/permit and signal handling. This prevents SMD successfully. Instead, the semaphore should be the primitive, like in other Os's.


- Exec memory handling: This is through a public and documented list with an O(n) allocator with poor performance. Bad, you cannot replace it by anything as its structure is documented. Worse, it does not encapsulate memory between processes and tasks.


- Exec message handling: A nice lean way for inter-process communcation. Unfortunately, it exchanges pointers and hence requires access across process boundaries, hence makes any process isolation impossible.


- Exec resources: There is no resource handling at all. If a task dies and does not release its resources, the resources are lost. Hence, crashing a process requires a reboot to regain the resources. There is no chance to fix this as resources are not associated to processes at all - there are numerous examples where process A obtains a resource, and passes it over to process B which releases it when done (or, hopefully so).



- graphics: Many core structures are fully documented, fixed size, without abstraction, without constructors or destructors, hence cannot be replaced. CBM had to fiddle around this with "GfxAssociate()" already in Os 2.0.


- graphics abstraction is just a very thin layer around the capabilities of the chip set (copper and blitter, bitplane graphics) and hence make it hard to apply it to another graphics model. All blitting functions assume, for example, a planar layout.


- dos and its BPTRs: dos (or rather tripos) replicates many constructions of exec as it is an operating system of its own (processes instead of tasks, getvec() instead of AllocMem(), DosPackets instead of messages,...) and adds BCPL idiocracies on top, such as the "mysterious GlobVec", "SegLists" and a "hystorically grown" shell syntax.


intuition is fairly good, actually. Also, CBM learned with 2.0. We got TagLists (an extensible argument passing mechansim), hooks, and suitable abstraction with 3.0 (datatypes, multiview), but all of this falls into "too little, too late".


So, please don't get me wrong: Of course, at the time AmigaOs was written, in the time it was written, the result is "ok", and in some places, it was ahead of its time: Multithreading, a virtual file system (essentially, what tripos offered as dos.library) and a graphical user interface with a very lean and hence fast layer on top of the hardware. Memory protection was not an option for a consumer Os, for consumer hardware, so understandable why it was never designed into the system.



However, CBM lost track, and unlike its competitors, never re-invented the system. Of course, for reasons, too. There was never the same amount of money in the market, compared to Appple and Microsoft. Wrong customers, wrong clients, that understood the Amiga as glorified game machine, and did not care about serious applications, and neither had the money to finance any improvement.


Thus, no need to get mad at anyone. It is a historical artifact of its own. But if you want to have a good operating system, you probably look elsewhere.

[lucadip]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Thus, no need to get mad at anyone. It is a historical artifact of its own. But if you want to have a good operating system, you probably look elsewhere.

Thank you for the technical details, Thomas, it was the kind of explanation I was hoping for!

[utri007]

PEople should accept that Amiga is HOBBY and not bad hobby at all. it is not mainstream computer platform and it never be.

[nikosidis]

It all depends on what you are using it for. For games it is mostly a perfect OS. There are also several apps. like Personal Paint that works perfect. It will not work any better on any other OS or better hardware for almost all operations. OS 3.1 is dead stable with well developed software.