AmigaOS 3.2 and beyond

[Jope]

Originally Posted by Ulysses13

Is VisualPrefs compatible with 3.2? I installed it but uninstalled it again as it was producing some weirdness, in particular with the right and bottom window borders.

Are you running the latest VisualPrefs?
http://aminet.net/package/util/wb/VP-QuickFix

[Ulysses13]

Ooooo, no - thanks! - I expect that will take care of it!

[Ulysses13]

Works perfectly. Seems to override settings in iControl etc, so I expect there's room to integrate the features into 3.2 and make VisualPrefs redundant...

[bubbob42]

Originally Posted by Ulysses13

While I'm here - I would love to be able to alter the padding of screen title bars, above and below the text, to correct the weirdness of fonts looking too high up. And perhaps control the content of window title bars, like has been added to the Workbench screen title bar, the 'XX% full, XX free XX in use' text.

Title Bar Control: Check Workbench Prefs.

Extra padding to window and screen titles: IControl->Appearance settings

[kamelito]

Bug?
https://www.amigans.net/modules/xfor...d=8557&forum=7

[shaf]

I can Verify that bug, any bad assigns will cause user-startup to fail and not return to Startup-Sequence. Different than previous behavior and should be documented.

Shaf

[gulliver]

@kamelito
@shaf

Thank you both for the bug report and confirmation. I will add it to the database for later inspection.

[golem]

I received ROMs, Pre-installed CF drive and OS3.2 CD from Amigastore.eu last week. I set up my 1200 with Bliz 030 over the weekend and it works very well. I especially like the Auto-arrange function for icons and it boots really fast compared to my 3.9 system (which has to do the double boot). I'm discovering more stuff each time I boot it up. Happy customer! Well done to the developers.

[gdonner]

Originally Posted by boemann

You mean something like this that I'm playing around with

Mind you it is still early days

Yes, indeed! I've been eager to do some icon creation for quite a while, but just kept running into brick walls.

A much-needed overhaul to icon.library to go along with it (if possible at some point) would be a breath of fresh air, too.

[gdonner]

Originally Posted by Tomislav

I don't about original digital copies, but on archive org are some books converted to PDF:
https://archive.org/search.php?query...-Amiga+Inc.%22

Thanks; yes, these are very nice, but there's still quite a few docs/manuals that aren't online anywhere AFAIK.

[Minuous]

All the current RKRMs seem to be available there. Which ones do you think are missing?

[kamelito]

The future versions covering the OS up to 3.2, current are just 2.0 as you know

[Minuous]

Yes, 3.x versions of the RKRMs don't yet exist so it is not surprising that archive.org doesn't have them :-D

[mateusz_s]

Hi,
Didn't test it myself yet, but I heard
From two sources that icon.library from 3.2
Is much slower than in 3.1.4. And there
Is suggestion to install a new replacement
From aminet that is very optimised.

[Michael]

Originally Posted by mateusz_s

Hi,
Didn't test it myself yet, but I heard
From two sources that icon.library from 3.2
Is much slower than in 3.1.4. And there
Is suggestion to install a new replacement
From aminet that is very optimised.

Have not speed tested 3.1.4 v 3.2, but in theory should not be much different.

And yes, the asm optimized version is like getting a free turbo card in your machine. Well worth a try.

[PeterK]

The Workbench of OS 3.2 should be faster than the WB of 3.1.4. If not, then these two "sources" probably made a mistake in their OS 3.2 installation. Maybe some parts of the OS are installed in ChipMem instead of FastMem or something else is going wrong. My icon.library may increase the performance a bit, but it can not fix OS installation bugs, even worse, it would just hide them, but you still won't get the best possible speed.

[mateusz_s]

Originally Posted by PeterK

The Workbench of OS 3.2 should be faster than the WB of 3.1.4. If not, then these two "sources" probably made a mistake in their OS 3.2 installation. Maybe some parts of the OS are installed in ChipMem instead of FastMem or something else is going wrong. My icon.library may increase the performance a bit, but it can not fix OS installation bugs, even worse, it would just hide them, but you still won't get the best possible speed.

I am just courius, if your icon lib is optimized better, so there is a room for optimalization in the 3.2 version. I hope it will be also optimized in future realases.

[Daedalus]

Originally Posted by Minuous

Yes, 3.x versions of the RKRMs don't yet exist so it is not surprising that archive.org doesn't have them :-D

It's not quite the same thing as a full, printed RKRM, but the 3.x autodocs are part of the 3.5 NDK and are available at http://amigadev.elowar.com/

[PeterK]

Originally Posted by mateusz_s

I am just courius, if your icon lib is optimized better, so there is a room for optimalization in the 3.2 version. I hope it will be also optimized in future realases.

Olaf Barthel (alias Olsen) has written a German comment in post #23 at amiga-news.de some months ago:

http://amiga-news.de/de/news/comment...l?frm_start=20

olsen (profile) (16-Mar-2021, 17:53)
The icon.library in AmigaOS 3.1.4 is practically identical to the one in AmigaOS 3.9. It is still written completely in 'C', without any special optimizations. Why? The way the icon.library works and the data structures it uses, together with the way the Workbench uses them, is very "optimization resistant". If you want to make the reading, evaluating, displaying of the pictogram files as viscous and slow as possible, icon.library and the format of the data are perfectly tuned to achieve this goal :-(

Something can be done about that, but when working on the operating system we have our own requirements. We can't do the effort Peter did like that. It has advantages to maintain a project all alone over the years, but if you share the work on the operating system with others, the source code of the icon.library must also make collaboration as easy as possible. This limits the resources we can use. The current icon.library is a compromise, but, I hope, at least more robust than the previous versions from 1993, etc.

The main problem especially with the icon.library in interaction with the workbench.library is that the optimization possibilities lie in this interaction. Until this gets better, it will take time. Neither icon.library nor workbench.library are built in such a way that design decisions that turn out to be very short-sighted over time can be corrected or replaced without much effort.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

[crazyc]

So are there any downsides to installing peterks icon library on 3.2?