Slashdot Mirror
Amiga As A Compatibility Tool For Linux
Milk-Boy directs your attention to this amiga.org editorial, which raises an interesting point about compatibility, and the downside to Linux's constant development. The work-around suggested to breaking programs is to use the (upcoming) Amiga OS under Linux. It reads, in part, "[W]hy should developers slave away writing one game over and over again when they can write it once, optimize it for specific platforms if desired (Amiga's operating system is real-time and thus quite fast), and release it on all major software platforms -- including Linux -- simultaneously. Suddenly Windows becomes a choice, not a given -- and the world will be well." The argument is extended by mentioning that StarOffice and Mozilla are also planned for the Amiga OS.
If the operating systems Amiga is running on top of are not real-time, how does it achieve real-time status? Or is it one of those shutdown your OS and restart with another things? Does anyone know?
--
-- Slashdot sucks.
Ahh a program that can be ported to any platform almost instantaniously. It will work without flaws and bring joy to all gamers. You have reached: nerdvana.
I am !amused.
"It [Linux] is a support nightmare due to the multiple flavors of popular versions (of Linux) and the ever-changing kernel. Retailers don't want it, and the Linux Q3A sales were disappointing."
Its becomming more and more clear that linux needs a standard distro. Like it or not, this is one of the strengths of windows. People are tired of software saying thinks like --it works with linux but with debian you have to do this and with slackware you have to do something else to get it to work.
But non-free commercial software is fairly scarce on Linux, and when it does come out it tends to fail in the commercial market, as Quake III Arena has done.
A side effect to the free-software movement. I think its obvious that the FSF has been unable to adequatley make its point that free speech != free beer. Im not saying the FSF has failed, but only not made its point clear enough on this issue.
So why does Linux need Amiga? Well, believe it or not, there are Linux users that will want to use and buy Amiga software.
see above comment. This is why Amiga will fail. It has to be baught. Linux users (right or wronge) want stuff free. I think its a frustration over paying outrageous prices for windows software with all its holes and bugs. As a result, linux users would rather take development level software for free -- even if it never gets out of development level.
Of course, all of this hinges on the final Amiga DE actually being released
READ: VaporWare
when is amiga ever going to actually release something and just stop promising to?
Im sorry to be so harsh here, but it is kind of sad.
Amiga's operating system is real-time and thus quite fast
Real-time only means it meets timing guarantees. Not that it is fast. Real-time only means when I say it'll take 100 days to add two numbers, it absolutely won't take 101 days.
Sure, real time operating systems commonly are relatively quick but one does not automatically imply the other.
Armed with a legacy of being the most capable gaming platform on the market, the new Amiga DE
It is either new or it has a legacy. I don't understand how it can have both. In any case I seriously doubt this statement is anything other than marketing vapor.
For game developers, Amiga's powerful multiplatform, multimedia-centric Amiga DE is a dream come true.
Multiplatform and multimedia-centric are relatively useless buzzwords for game developers. Until Amiga's SDK becomes as powerful as DirectX (not that I'm saying DirectX is perfect, just that it's nice not to have to reinvent the wheel all the time) the Amiga will never be a dream come true for developers.
At under 5MB total, the Amiga DE can even run piggy-back on game discs for Nintendo's Game Cube
and Sony's Playstation
That's a lot. The original Playstation only has 2 MB of system memory. The N64 has 4 MB. The Dreamcast has 16 MB. I'm not sure I want the OS eating up over 1/4 of the available memory on my console. Since it doesn't sound like they're talking about consoles, what do they mean when they say "multiplatform"?
Ports of StarOffice and Mozilla (and thereby Netscape 6 and beyond) are already planned
Lots of things are planned. Some of them actually end up happening.
Why the hell do people ALWAYS bring Java into the discussion when talking about anything that involves the word "multi-platform"?
Java is SLOW, no matter how fast you can make it run. Java is NOT AN OPTION. This discussion is NOT about Java. We've discussed Java about a million times already and I'm tired of it.
Java has its various uses and is a very good programming language IMHO, but it's not for anything huge like StarOffice or Mozilla or anything designed for intense performance like Quake.
Now to keep this on topic, I believe I'm another skeptic. I question AmigaOS's capability to run things as well as advertised on all platforms. For example, consider the efforts that Microsoft puts into DirectX. Do you seriously think that you'll have comparable performance and features on all the platforms that AmigaOS supports?
I'd also like to extend the editorial's topic. If AmigaOS is all it advertises to be, it won't only "save" Linux, but every single obsolete architecture that's used for compatibility reasons. Above all, AmigaOS may ensure a smooth transition from Windows to, say, Linux and from x86 to, say, anything else.
Flavio
Amigori
-----------
Amiga. It just keeps going and going and going...
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
Bottom line: if Linux were to become an Open System by adopting open industry standards and stating compliance, rapid change would be irrelevant to developers because Linux would always be backward compatible. UNIX did this years ago.
More information on open systems is available at the SEI's Open Systems page.
How many applications interface directly with the kernel in such a way that if the kernel work is done it breaks API/ABI ? This is not a LINUX problem this is what you get when you use x11 toolkits that are under heavy development. This is a strong reason why SDL is used by loki. Every notice how the same Netscape works on almost kerenel minor number as long as major is correct, and how many people change from libc5 to glibc on a whim? Netscape works because they staticly compiled in motif. If you want compatiblaty staticly compile in your X11 tool kit. I dont want to see the pace of development slowed down just so some moron can use shared librarys. Screw them, we dont need the application anyways. Oh by they way if they would distribute source why would it matter??... ooops closed source Im sorry, you dont get to play
Too bad. I sold thissystem on eBay last February. Oh, and believe it or not, it fetched $2450 (2.45x10^3).
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Its becomming more and more clear that linux needs a standard distro. Like it or not, this is one of the strengths of windows. People are tired of software saying thinks like --it works with linux but with debian you have to do this and with slackware you have to do something else to get it to work.
I remember a quote from J. Carmack in his .plan file (which is unfortunately gone now), where he stated why the Q3Test was released for Mac OS first: because the hardware was "predictable" and there was only one OpenGL implementation n the platform, so it made for an ideal test environment.
My point being: while that doesn't always translate to shipping commercial software, I think it says something about the value of a standard platform or "reference" platform.
note: this is not Mac evangelism.
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
If I were to make a game that needed the Amiga OS, could I ship a version of the Amiga OS with my game without increasing the price? Realistically, 5 people in the world are going to have this "Amiga" environment installed on their PCs, for anyone else it would have to be included with the game to make this a reasonable proposition, and I don't think Amiga is giving it away.
I will be happy if I am wrong. I was an Amiga fanatic back in the day. I'd love to see something bearing the Amiga name make a comeback (however little it has to do with actual Amigas)
Now that the idea has been put forward, however, I think a more likely propositon for a universal environment for games would be an X-box emulator/VM. Anyone know any reason that wouldn't be by far the easiest route to go, with X-box hardware being basically a PC anyway?
Amiga had some neat stuff, yes, and Unix had them before Amiga did.
I'm not knocking the old Amiga line, those were superb machines, arguable ahead of their time. A hacker's dream.
However...
Amiga was a victom of Commodore's idiocy, and useless marketing and management. The company had no idea how to keep what they had. They squandered what they did have, and I believe some of them are now living rich in the Carribean?
The Amiga was a great machine, but it died because it was bought and raped by commodore.
Why the hell do people ALWAYS bring Java into the discussion when talking about anything that involves the word "multi-platform"?
At the risk of being marked as another troll for talking about Java I couldn't help telling you this:
JAVA PROGRAMMERS GOT PAID MORE!
Let me be more explicit.....if they want us to write games, we wouldn't get more pay; if they want us to write high performance dialog popup gui animation etc., we wouldn't get more pay.....
But we write programs for Enterprise Application in Java and they've to pay us more!
Java is SLOW, no matter how fast you can make it run. Java is NOT AN OPTION. This discussion is NOT about Java. We've discussed Java about a million times already and I'm tired of it.
Yeah, java is tired of being compared in an area where those companies pay craps to programmers. So count java out of such discussion in the future. Appreciated.
So, isn't this like writting the software for, say, the Superfamicom/Snes console and then telling everyone to use their prefered Superfamicom emulator on whatever OS/cpu they are running? BTW: I believe most 2d games have anything they could ever need from such emulated consoles, and since the emulators are there anyway...
:)
:)
/Me wonders why people don't just use SDL + an emulated "CPUx" or something, and make SDL+CPUx work in all Platforms available, via emulation.
Then somebody like Transmeta could take the emulation thing more seriously, and allow people to reprogram their cpus and change the standard x86 emulation, to, say, CPUx emulation. Maybe this could be achieved with dual Transmetas, or something, one in x86 mode, and the other in the desired CPUx emulation mode, giving incredible speed emulation... Hmm this could also help Java and friends, doesn't it?
I believe this could be called hardware emulation... Maybe a simple PCI board with a programable Transmeta like cpu (hence, an "emu-coprocesor") to run on any desired architecture (well, at least the ones with PCI available to them
> I'm amazed that nobody has thought of something like this before.
Try this on for size.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Ha! And how much success have those two applications had in bring Linux to the modern business desktop?
Windows has always been about choice. Much more so than Linux, anyway. Linux users are still stuck with the obselete and inferior Netscape line of browsers, while Windows users are able to choose between Nescape and Internet Explorer. Linux does not support exciting languages like Visual Basic and C#. Linux does not support ActiveX or DirectX. I've even been informed that Linux doesn't even support keyboards!Linux offers relatively little choice. The few areas where there are competition (and therefore choice), however, like window managers, are overrun with one piss-poor product after the next. Choose between KDE and GNOME? That's like asking to choose between a gunshot wound or a stabbing; it's just a question of which is less painful.
And you're telling me Linux is about choice?! With its poor hardware support, lack of real software, and ugly, impish, foppish developers, it's no wonder that Linux can't compete.
You want choice? Stick with Microsoft. We offer you a choice of operating systems: Windows Me, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2000 Advanced Server, and Windows 2000 Datacenter. We offer you a choice of development languages: C++, J++, L++, E++, and F++. We even offer a choice of hardware vendors: Dell and Compaq. Much different than the Linux world, where all hardware is owned by monopoly vendor VA Linux, which only allows users to lease hardware for periods of three weeks at a time.
And finally, Microsoft developers are allowed choice of sexual orientation. The Linux world enforces a strict policy of violent homosexuality. Proving my point are the abundant "assman" hyperlinks on this site.
Thank you for reading.
See you in hell,
Bill Fuckin' Gates®.
See you in hell,
Bill Fuckin' Gates®.
(This post is ©2001 Microsoft(TM) Corporation.)
I think the fact that it is ray traced is just a coincidence.
The A1000 had some neat demo programs, one of which was a person jugaling these checkered balls. There might have been an earlier demo that used the ball, but this is the first I remember.
Like many, the Amiga is a distant memory of a child hood a long time ago.
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
I wonder how the first developers view the new Amiga direction.
I have mixed feelings. I was so anxious for the Gateway box that was supposed to come out. I loved the A1000 we had years ago (look at the games I can play... what can your AppleIIGS do?).
My first experience with a dos machine was on the Amiga emulator and the 5 1/4 drive. Also, my first experience with public domain games (Freddy Fish?) Also, programing too, some form of basic. And pascal too, I think.
Now, we have something that looks a little like Java or that web browser plugin (mentioned earlier). I have so many mixed feelings. The idea that you can still develop for something under the Amiga name is cool if only for the rich history. I guess if it delivers what it promises, it should be worth developing for, but is there a contingency for those that spend the time and it never pans out? I know that the current carrier of the Amiga name has promised not to pull a Gateway-type move on us fans, but Gateway also promised to not do it either.
Maybe I am jaded by all of the past lies and promises or maybe I just wonder what is wrong with developing for individual platforms.
Who knows... enough from a person looking at the past.
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
where the marketing's all true and the processor's smart,
it's magic,
when five megabytes,
can make twenty plaforms move like dancers in tights...
So, with just five megabytes in any environment, Amiga can solve every cross-platform issue known to man, and implement a real-time OS on top of non-real-time OS's? This I have got to see. Sign me up for the first game that runs on my Dreamcast, my windows computer, and my linux computer with this groovy five megabyte magic addition. I expect it to run faster then the equivalent Java game!
Only then will this little voice inside of me stop composing mocking ditties set to old sixties music.
--
-- Slashdot sucks.
AmigaDE is meant to run on top of the API layers so most likely it'll be using DirectDraw in Windows and X on Unix machines. However the API inside of the runtime environment will have its own set of graphical toolkits and whatnot so apps will look the same across systems.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
So, being RT enabling developers to make better use of hardware doesn't make it faster, then? How does that work?
Please use the new Real-Time TRS-X-OS-80! Imagine, the power of mach, the micro-kernel, freed of resource hogging servers. Other systems downgrade mach by adding on extras, I doubt you'll ever need. Instantly, you can learn how to use the entire system with the intuitive Aqua-Velva user interface. Forget bewulf, we can add 2 or 3 extra Z2000 processors, for real speed. Imagine a processor dedicated to managing keyboard input, or screen output, data entry has never been this fast before. Also extra modules mean you can also run programs written for the 68000 cpu made so popular in our original model 16! Re-use those powerful Xenix programs, don't throw them away! What we have here is a powerful new operating system with the added benifits of being able to take advantage of the huge pre-existing TRS80 cassette-tape software library, and the tens of thousands of TRS-80 developers. OS/2 developers will be thrilled with our powerful OS/2 cross-development SDK!! Watch out IBM, we just might steal that market away from you!!
The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
I don't know why people wants to keep posting these Amiga stories (well... and non Linux/PS2 in general) on Slashdot. It alway ends up in the same mudfight of illiteracy.
First there is the massive swarm of posts that states just how outdated AmigaOS, blitter, 68k, Kickstart are. Oblivious to the fact that AmigaDE shares little with classic Amiga, apart from the name and community.
Then there is the "vapour"-attacks, labeling AmigaDE as pure vapour, "come back when you have something to show" seems to be the mantra. Apparently all those "Know-it-all-linux-l33t-wannabees" missed the fact that Amiga Inc recently released it's 2nd edition of their SDK for linux and windows. It's actually possible test how much vapour there is in the "vapour-ware".
Then there are all those who keeps insisting on how slow java is. AmigaDE is not java. And those have actually *tested* the VM in AmigaDE are truely impressed by the speed. You don't beleive? Why don't the get at copy of the SDK and have a try yourself?
All these stupid comments ruins any serious comments that might have poped up. But I guess that's their agenda.
Welcome to Slashdot, yesterdays news for linux-l33t.
Bjarne
Well I have the SDK so I think I could answer some of your questions:
.04=386, .16=PPC, .24=Pentium2, etc.
Real-time only means it meets timing guarantees. Not that it is fast. Real-time only means when I say it'll take 100 days to add two numbers, it absolutely won't take 101 days.
Yes, its true. It only means that it will meet the timing requirements. I'm sure that it doesn't meet them when it is hosted, but for a virtual processor is really fast. I always read here comparisons with Java. Java is slow, very slow. I have the Windows SDK and everything runs as fast as the host. I heard the Linux SDK is even faster. I was really surprised with the speed of the alpha blending demos that come with the SDK.
It is either new or it has a legacy. I don't understand how it can have both. In any case I seriously doubt this statement is anything other than marketing vapor.
You are right, this line is just marketing stuff.
Multiplatform and multimedia-centric are relatively useless buzzwords for game developers. Until Amiga's SDK becomes as powerful as DirectX (not that I'm saying DirectX is perfect, just that it's nice not to have to reinvent the wheel all the time) the Amiga will never be a dream come true for developers.
The Amiga DE will come with RenderWare (according to the manuals) and the framework is used in PS2, Dreamcast, PC and Mac. Don't know anything about sound or input devices but they are supposed to be working on something. We'll see.
That's a lot. The original Playstation only has 2 MB of system memory. The N64 has 4 MB. The Dreamcast has 16 MB. I'm not sure I want the OS eating up over 1/4 of the available memory on my console. Since it doesn't sound like they're talking about consoles, what do they mean when they say "multiplatform"?
The PS1 and the N64 don't count anymore. Everyone will start programming for the Dolphin, PS2, and Dreamcast only. They are talking about consoles and computers as well. The OS can run hosted in other operating systems and native in a lot of chips. Why everyone that posts here doesn't even bother to look for information before posting? Visit TAO which is the basis of the new OS.
Another thing you guys should know. Not everything is 'virtual-assembly'. When you compile a program the extension is program.00 (.00 means VP, the virtual processor instructions). You could compile to native code if you wanted but you will lose the portability. There is an extension for each native processor, for example
The only thing that I actually is a huge, but HUGE mistake is, believe it or not, that it doesn't have memory protection. It only protects the addresses from 0-128. I heard they were going to add it, and that currently it wasn't there because it was an embedded os. I hope is true.
> You're comparing AmigaOS to UCSD Pascal? Congratulations, you've found a new way to be ridiculous on slashdot.
Pay attention to context, please. If you had done that, you'd know that I was refering to UCSD's p-code as a precedent to Java's byte code, which was brought up by the previous poster, rather than comparing Pascal to an operating system.
Since we're on the subject of pseudo code...
You could compile other languages to p-code, just as you can now compile other languages to byte code. IIRC, Apple had a Fortan compiler that spilled p-code which ran on the same Apple ][ interpreter that their Pascal did. Nowadays, JGNAT will compile an Ada source file and spill byte code for a Java VM. (Someone observed about a year ago that there were enormous similarities between Java and Ada "under the hood", and once the idea was out, they apparently didn't have to do much except change the back end of the compiler.)
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade