AmigaOS 3.2 and beyond

[malko]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

Any news about Cloanto vs Hyperion that would affect the release (and or release date) of 3.2?
I can't find anything recent/useful on Google.

Thanks to number6 () usually, news are posted in this following thread : https://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=94743

[gulliver]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

Any news about Cloanto vs Hyperion that would affect the release (and or release date) of 3.2?
I can't find anything recent/useful on Google.

No bad news. Currently things are still moving forward as expected.

[number6]

Originally Posted by malko

Thanks to number6 () usually, news are posted in this following thread : https://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=94743

There is a lot of information in the currently active thread:
Source

links to the news articles on AmigaNews

The German comments section is quite active. Personally too much speculation for me and some inaccurate information, but some might find it interesting to read.

Also I agree with another poster who feels that the thread you linked to could benefit from a renamed title:
It's just a place to keep info consolidated and no longer concerns the thread title

Take care. Stay well,

#6

[OlafSch]

Originally Posted by number6

There is a lot of information in the currently active thread:
Source

links to the news articles on AmigaNews

The German comments section is quite active. Personally too much speculation for me and some inaccurate information, but some might find it interesting to read.

Also I agree with another poster who feels that the thread you linked to could benefit from a renamed title:
It's just a place to keep info consolidated and no longer concerns the thread title

Take care. Stay well,

#6

any discussion what Hyperion or Cloanto might do or not do is currently speculation...

[eXeler0]

Its probably true that no one has all the answers and I think its a good idea to not engage in that discussion too deeply in this thread, but reason I asked in the beginning is mostly out curiosity about how the devs can plan their work / features/ release schedule if the legality of the product is somehow in "limbo".
Meaning if the release could be delayed to 2022 then you would probably look at the product in a different way as opposed to if you plan to release in next 3 months.

But it is what it is.. We can only hope it will be resolved in a constructive manner, not destructive.

[Tigerskunk]

I am so tired of that drama shit.
Create a thread for it if you guys need to talk the five thousandth time about it and let this thread be about Amiga OS 3.2.
Thanks

[PeterK]

Ok, these are the latest news about OS 3.2 ...

...

[Laupert]

Is it okay to ask for a ballpark estimate of release date of 3.2? I have couple of machines I want to upgrade. If it's next week I can wait, but if it's 1 or 2 months away I will probably just go with 3.1.4 for now.

[boemann]

Originally Posted by PeterK

Ok, these are the latest news about OS 3.2 ...

...

Here is a bit of news for you then: TextEdit will handle multi documents in tabs

[A500]

When I saw the news about the release of 3.1.4, I was super excited as it was such an unexpected and brilliant news. I've been following this discussion thread today, and I can say I'm equally excited again Massive thanks to you devs, looking forward to next release!

[boemann]

Originally Posted by Laupert

Is it okay to ask for a ballpark estimate of release date of 3.2? I have couple of machines I want to upgrade. If it's next week I can wait, but if it's 1 or 2 months away I will probably just go with 3.1.4 for now.

Then go with 3.1.4 as it is definitely not 1 week. The exact date is not even decided as we are still fixing bugs on it. But it is no longer major bugs. We will never fix all bugs no matter how long we work on it. So at some point we will have to go for a release.

[carls]

Originally Posted by boemann

Ahem Notepad on the very first release of the OS had a (non blinking) line cursor, Textcraft had blinking line cursor, just about every wordprocessor /dtp had blinking line cursor. The shell and also the string gadget didn't but it is far from a tradition (either way).

Yes, some word processors (especially the ones implementing their own WYSIWYG editing gadgets) had blinking line cursors, while others did not. I believe FinalWriter's was solid, for example. Text-oriented processors like WordPerfect and TransWrite used the standard solid block. But as far as I understand it, this is a text editor for things like ARexx, shell scripts and other program code.

Since v37 all of the official text inputs have a non blinking block cursor and the UI Style Guide talks about the importance of consistency already on page 4. It further suggests "use existing system elements as a general guide to style and function".

This means that texteditor.gadget will differ from other similar gadgets and applications using it will differ from similar applications including Ed, MEmacs, CEd, TurboText, DevPac - in fact pretty much all text editors I can think of.

Anyway, it's all good if there's a setting for it. Sounds like TextEdit will have lots of other new and cool features.

Originally Posted by Steril707

Blinking/notblinking is something I didn't even notice for at least the last twenty years.

I guess this is the situation for most people and I wish I was so lucky

[malko]

Originally Posted by boemann

[...] The exact date is not even decided as we are still fixing bugs on it. But it is no longer major bugs. We will never fix all bugs no matter how long we work on it. So at some point we will have to go for a release.

In the meantime of the release, I already want to thank you for the work done so far, guys & girls (if any in the team)

[boemann]

Originally Posted by malko

In the meantime of the release, I already want to thank you for the work done so far, guys & girls (if any in the team)

Thanks, and yes I'm a woman so that is one

[gulliver]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

Its probably true that no one has all the answers and I think its a good idea to not engage in that discussion too deeply in this thread, but reason I asked in the beginning is mostly out curiosity about how the devs can plan their work / features/ release schedule if the legality of the product is somehow in "limbo".
Meaning if the release could be delayed to 2022 then you would probably look at the product in a different way as opposed to if you plan to release in next 3 months.

But it is what it is.. We can only hope it will be resolved in a constructive manner, not destructive.

I do expect AmigaOS 3.2 will be released sometime during the first half of this year. Of course, it will be for Hyperion to narrow the exact date. This is the best estimate I can give you right now. As pointed out by Camilla, it is not going to be one week from now.

We will keep you updated.

Note: please keep lawsuit comments out of this thread. This thread is about AmigaOS 3.2 and beyond.

[tygre]

Thank you to all the devs and their support teams (aka families and friends ) for your amazing work and dedication!

Cheers!

[cookieninja]

Will 3.2 require me to remove and update my kickstart chip, or is it just a software update this time?

I guess as a follow on from that, should we expect the kickstart to be updated with every release or most of them? Personally, I would be happy with a commitment to update it every other release. Bug fixes could always be provided free to people who purchased releases that included the latest update, assuming that isn't too off putting to the people doing the work

[gulliver]

@tygre

Thank you.

@cookieninja

No update since the year 1993 *requires* you to physically update your
Kickstart ROM beyond 3.1.

It is up to you, the user to decide, and there are many alternatives
which include using built-in software tricks (like LoadModule), using
flash memory specialized hardware expansions, or taking
advantage of the maprom feature that many accelerators provide.

This is not new. AmigaOS 3.5, AmigaOS 3.9, AmigaOS 3.1.4 and also
AmigaOS 3.2 all have a built-in software mechanism that will update a
3.1 physical Kickstart ROM.

That said, each method has its own benefits and shortcomings which
should be considered by each user individually before making a
decision.

Several bug fixes of 3.5, 3.9 and 3.1.4 were provided free of charge.
We want to follow the same concept for 3.2.

Any discount or request to change the update policy should be directed at Hyperion. We do not manage any of those.

[cookieninja]

Originally Posted by gulliver

@tygre

Thank you.

@cookieninja

No update since the year 1993 *requires* you to physically update your
Kickstart ROM beyond 3.1.

It is up to you, the user to decide, and there are many alternatives
which include using built-in software tricks (like LoadModule), using
flash memory specialized hardware expansions, or taking
advantage of the maprom feature that many accelerators provide.

This is not new. AmigaOS 3.5, AmigaOS 3.9, AmigaOS 3.1.4 and also
AmigaOS 3.2 all have a built-in software mechanism that will update a
3.1 physical Kickstart ROM.

That said, each method has its own benefits and shortcomings which
should be considered by each user individually before making a
decision.

Several bug fixes of 3.5, 3.9 and 3.1.4 were provided free of charge.
We want to follow the same concept for 3.2.

Any discount or request to change the update policy should be directed at Hyperion. We do not manage any of those.

Sorry, you did not answer question at all Does Amiga 0S 3.2 come with a new kickstart ROM to burn to EPROM? A simple yes or no is all I need and you have not clearly stated either way. I know there's options if my kickstart is not the latest, I just need to know whether or not a newer one is coming with 3.2

[thebajaguy]

Yes - There will be a new Kickstart ROM in the eventual release.

And no - just like 3.1.4 - You will have the option to make use of an older ROM at the expense of consuming additional RAM for the soft loaded updates. This also means you cannot gain the expansion.library improvements (it can't be soft-updated) or the earliest boot up exec code (i.e. 68060 support is not in KS 3.1, but it is in 3.1.4).