Slashdot Mirror


PPC Amigas Go On Sale

nastyphil writes "After a wait of almost 10 years and passing through a series of owners' hands, new Amiga hardware is on sale. G4 processors at up to 800 Mhz. Development of AmigaOS 4.0 has been continuing at a steady pace by Hyperion and will be ready for release early 2003."

156 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The old days by nicomen · · Score: 3, Informative

    I believe it can run MaconLinux which in it's turn can run Mac OS X.

    --
    Nicolas Mendoza
    Prepare for MSIE 7
  2. Paula? Is that you? by saihung · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm only interested if they rename the PPC chip "Even Fatter Agnus".

  3. GUI by selderrr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    not to insult anyone or disrespect the work of the OS authors, but the interface is BUTT UGLY. My neighboors donkey poops better gooey than this stuff.

    On a G4 there surely has to be another OS with better interface. I vaguely recall something... Can't remember. I'll ask the donkey.

    1. Re:GUI by nicomen · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm going to disappoint you, but the GUI _is_ adjustable just like AmigaOS GUI always has been.

      Those screenshots with brown, blue, green and whatnot is the preferences of that specific developer's computer. Actually those screenshots aren't even of an AmigaOne PPC. It's PPC version of Workbench running on a classic 68kAmgia with a PPC-card in it.

      Beware though, according to this interview with Ben Hermans, Hyperion (makers of OS4.x) there will be more Intuition (Workbench) screenshots soon.

      --
      Nicolas Mendoza
      Prepare for MSIE 7
    2. Re:GUI by e8johan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I take it that you don't use amiwm. I actually used this windows manager a few years back (before KDE and Gnome). It has a great retro feel!

    3. Re:GUI by VirexEye · · Score: 2, Funny

      The GUI thinks you are ugly too.

    4. Re:GUI by Mike+Bouma · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually these are just some preview screenshots by some AmigaOS programmers demonstrating some OS functionality. The are some great graphics artists doing their best for the platform as well, and soon (probably within a week) you will see new AmigaOS4 screenshots, likely reflecting this.

      Note however that the GUI can be fully customized to suit the taste of the user. Similar but more advanced as you can currently do with classic AmigaOS. Here you can view some examples of what can be done with the GUI with even the classic AmigaOS.

    5. Re:GUI by selderrr · · Score: 2

      doh. That's the same ugly interface, but with hot chix on the desktop wallpaper...

      When the GUI allows to replace ugly shades of green with ugly shades of pink, you guys freak out like it's a work of art. Windows does exactly the same shit since 95 and there you'll barf it an ugly OS. I see NOTHING in AmigaOS that is better looking than windows.

      Note to moderators (always talk to moderators. If not, they feel insulted and mod you down) : I'm strictly talking GUI here, not the guts of the OS. The article talked bout kewl gui, and I'd like to correct that. AmigaOS GUI is birdypoop IMHO. In the attic. With a fork.

    6. Re:GUI by mdwh2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When the GUI allows to replace ugly shades of green with ugly shades of pink, you guys freak out like it's a work of art ... The article talked bout kewl gui, and I'd like to correct that. AmigaOS GUI is birdypoop IMHO

      There's more to a GUI than simply how it looks. Interfaces aren't intended to be hung up on your wall and looked at, they're there to be used.

      Of course I don't know what the article was referring to when it talked of a "kewl GUI", but there are some little (but important) things that I like about AmigaOS (compared with Windows, at least).

      For example, menus at the top of the screen rather than attached to each window (which is important because it means you can access them quickly just by shooting the mouse to the top of the screen, rather than having to click in a small area).

      Additionally, thanks to toolkits such as MUI and Reaction, there seems to be a lot more Amiga programs whose interfaces are automatically resizeable; you resize the window, and everything inside automatically resizes in a sensible manner. Of course other platforms can do this too, though my experience with Windows[1] is that it is less common. I feel like screaming everytime I see a window that has some too small GUI item like a text box, and then find it won't let me resize the window.. I suspect that a lot of the reason for this is that it's easier for the programmer to create fixed interfaces, especially with "Visual" languages; the aforementioned Amiga GUI toolkits otoh are designed so that the windows will always be resizeable, unless you explicitly forbid it.

      [1] Windows is now my main OS, before anyone suggests I have little experience of it;)

  4. The PPC family of users by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, as a bit of a Mac zealot, at least now I know that my kind aren't nearly the most fanatical people using PPC these days.

    1. Re:The PPC family of users by Dog+and+Pony · · Score: 2

      Who'd have thought that anyone could beat the champs? ;-)

  5. Several Amigas by nicomen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FYI: This is the official PPC Amiga (AmigaOne) backed up by Amiga Inc. I'm looking forward to OS4 is finished, the presentation at the WOASE show last weekend was promising.

    And even if the box could run Mac OS X, Apple doesn't allow it as stated in their EULA.

    (There are other PPC based computers claiming to be Amiga-compatible (Pegasos))

    --
    Nicolas Mendoza
    Prepare for MSIE 7
    1. Re:Several Amigas by Sloppy · · Score: 2
      And even if the box could run Mac OS X, Apple doesn't allow it as stated in their EULA.
      MacOS is available in retail stores, and you can get it in exchange for money without signing anything. Therefore, there is no EULA.
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  6. Mmmmmm Amiga! by jamesjw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Cool news!

    If only now they'd release Lotus Turbo Esprit Challenge 2 with TCP/IP multiplayer for it!

    Definately one of the cooler games for the amiga way back when...

    Cant see it happening though :(

    --
    -- If at first you don't succeed, lie!
    1. Re:Mmmmmm Amiga! by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2

      Lotus Turbo Esprit Challenge 2 with TCP/IP multiplayer

      I think I just had an orgasm... *stares at the big Lotus Esprit Turbo SE poster above his bed as a reminder of his fascination with the aforementioned game*

    2. Re:Mmmmmm Amiga! by jafuser · · Score: 2

      Someone should fire up their Amiga and run some of these old games just to sample the music for "historical archival" purposes.

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    3. Re:Mmmmmm Amiga! by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 2

      Done!!

      Lotus Turbo Challenge 2 is there. I personally am partial to Pinball Dreams.

  7. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by redcliffe · · Score: 3, Flamebait

    No, you run Linux PPC on it. Then it is exactly the same as your PC, except faster for certain math operations.

  8. Re:Paula? Is that you? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm only interested if they rename the PPC chip "Even Fatter Agnus".

    Agnus was just a memory controller and blitter (Block Information Transfer Chip), with extra hardware to control the CopperLists (Coprocessor Instructions for such things as Colour Register manipulation and handling of sprites).

    Agnus was replaced by the Fat Agnus which could allocate 1 meg of ChipRam (Video/Sound memory - memory that could be access by Denise and Paula).

    Later, Agnus was replaced by Super Fat Agnus, which could allocate a full 2 megs of Chipram.

    Finally Agnus was replaced with Alice, the AGA version, and Denise was placed with Lisa.

    There would be no reason to call the processor by any name other than it's own. And since the new Amiga design does not have a truely Custom Chipset in old Amiga fashion, this new Amiga isn't truely an Amiga in anything other than name.

    Very sad indeed that they're praying on the hopes of the few remaining Amiga fans. I would support this platform by both switching over to it and developing for it, but the hardware is only so-so at best and the OS is obsolete before even being completed.

    If they want me back, they're going to have to do a whole lot better than this.

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  9. Re:PPC LINUX, OSX by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'm not sure whether you are referring to the US price, or the UK price for Apple Systems, however, the 700 Mhz iMac is available for £999 in the UK - under a grand.

    Is the 100Mhz speed boost really worth it when you consider that for the Apple price you'll receive the 15" LCD screen? Bear in mind that you'll also have the benefit of dedicated Apple support for OS X, and genuine Mac Hardware. I believe that you can run versions of PPC Linux on the iMac, so unless you really want to run AmigaOS, I don't see any real benefits over the long term.

    Tim

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  10. what does this mean? by Zorikin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The prospect of being able to buy an inexpensive PPC system from another vendor (besides apple, et al), is great news in purely technical terms - it's another option for replacing legacy x86 hardware, for example - but what are the broader implications?

    Will there be enough interest in PPC-based platforms for a consumer PPC market to take off? In what areas does PPC in general (as opposed to MacOS, AmigaOS or LinuxPPC in particular) offer signifigant benefits? Apple has certainly found their own way of using this architecture, but I'm sure we all remember Power Computing ...

    1. Re:what does this mean? by Megane · · Score: 2
      but I'm sure we all remember Power Computing ...

      Huh? All of Power Computing's machines were based on Apple's various motherboard designs and chipsets. All they did different, other than having one model with both NuBus and PCI slots, was whatever else they put in the box and plugged into the motherboard. I've even got 10.2 running on mine, minus the internal SCSI bus and a couple of PCI cards that I can hand down to a cheap PowerWave that I found a few months back.

      And of course by being a clone maker with lower volume requirements, they could sell faster CPUs than Apple could. As their final advertisement for clearing out their old stock said, "Apple pulled our license for speeding".

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    2. Re:what does this mean? by G-funk · · Score: 2

      More importantly though, is, will this run MacOnLinux? If it does, I'll be a happy happy man... A nice linux box, and a nice mac, for the price of a PC? What more could you ask for? Plus you get to tell people you have a new amiga ;-)

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    3. Re:what does this mean? by mr_gerbik · · Score: 2

      inexpensive PPC system

      OXYMORON ALERT!

  11. Does anyone know... by Alsee · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wonder when they're coming out with the new Vic-20?

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    1. Re:Does anyone know... by BigJimSlade · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder when they're coming out with the new Vic-20?

      Be careful what you wish for... The CommodoreOne is already in development. Individual Computers (makers of the Catweasel, featured on /. a few days ago) has signed on to sell the board when it goes into production.

      I still can't believe /. didn't accept the story about this when I submitted it. I mean, it's a new C=64 being developed by one cute Electrical Engineer (see bottom of page)

  12. Re:Wow, great!!! by jamesjw · · Score: 2, Informative


    Yeah but you cant compare CPU's on Mhz alone..

    The architecture the current P4's and lower are built around has its roots back in the late 70's, PowerPC's were designed some years later..

    I do recall a 4mhz Acorn RISC CPU that ran rings around a 16Mhz 68030 for speed..

    --
    -- If at first you don't succeed, lie!
  13. Where are the games? by zeendr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A new Amiga is, of course, a very cool thing but the question is where are the games. A new platform isn't going to be succesful without tons of games.

  14. Will this new AMiga OS work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    On the Amiga 1000 I have waiting in my closet? It doesn't need a harddrive, I hope. How many floppies, I wonder?

  15. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by Erik+K.+Veland · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sadly this is true. By the look of the GUI-screenshots of the OS it hasn't really improved much except for the horrible nightmare of customizable GUI.

    If the computers were dirt cheap, maybe they would be good for something. But now it would just have nostalgia value for the Amiga-tinkerers. I live with one so I can relate.

    --
    "I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
  16. Re:Paula? Is that you? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 2

    This is just a stepping stone on the path to a better OS.

    I never used to be the "Wait and see" type when it came to the Amiga. An Amiga 1200 and then an Amiga 4000, years of broken promises, and a whole slew of delays has changed that.

    I still watch the Amiga with a passing interest, but I'm certainly not about to buy a new one anytime soon.

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  17. Amiga & OS X by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apparently you can do this using Mac-on-linux but it is against Apple's EULA. Anyone know how Apple feels about this? Is there an "official" position from the Maconlinux people? I imagine as long as no company starts selling Amigas with OS X pre-installed that Apple would "look the other way" at a bunch of geeks putting OSX on Amigas. It gives Apple more underground geek appeal and promotes OS X more widely. It's not like they would support X on Amiga but I wonder if they would really get upset if a visible group of Amiga-OSX users appeared, along with a few HOWTOs, if there are any secret incantations required to get mol running properly on AmigaPPC. Then again, Apple lawyers have gone apeshit over much less....

    1. Re:Amiga & OS X by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just looked through the mol docs and didn't see anything about Apple's EULA. What I did see is this: "MOL can run on non-Apple hardware. APUS hardware (Amiga PowerUp System) is currently unsupported, but work is in progress." So apparently it doesn't run out of the box on Amigas, though who knows about the new G4s.

      Another interesting tidbit from the front page -- "Linux can be booted inside MOL" ... is that really necessary? Can you run mol-on-mol like this, and keep going until your computer explodes?

      What would be really cool is if the MOL guys figure out how to install AmigaOS 4 on Apple PPCs using mol.

    2. Re:Amiga & OS X by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 5, Informative

      What would be really cool is if the MOL guys figure out how to install AmigaOS 4 on Apple PPCs using mol.

      This might be difficult since the new Amigas have special Firmware, very closely related to the classic Amiga's "KICKSTART" roms.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    3. Re:Amiga & OS X by commodoresloat · · Score: 2

      Wouldn't it just be a matter of capturing the rom image from an actual Amiga? That's what you have to do to run mol on older Macs.

    4. Re:Amiga & OS X by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, it would be a matter of doing just that.

      Since not owning a board but having the Firmware would be piracy, I can't see someone buying the board just to get a copy of the Firmware, so most people will likely just pirate the ROM.

      This is of course assuming Amiga Inc. doesn't think smart and sell the ROM images out-right for use with such software. There is certainly money to be made off of the honest people.

      Pirate are going to pirate regardless.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    5. Re:Amiga & OS X by nusuth · · Score: 2
      Just looked through the mol docs and didn't see anything about Apple's EULA.

      It is right there in the faq:

      Q: Does MOL run on non-Apple hardware?

      A: It does. MOL runs for instance on the Pegasos board, the Teron board and on AmigaOne hardware. In short, MOL should run on any PowerPC hardware (with the except of 601-based systems). However, the EULA of MacOS prohibits its usage on non-Apple hardware (it is of course perfectly legal to use MOL to boot a second Linux though).

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    6. Re:Amiga & OS X by anarchic_teapot · · Score: 3, Informative

      ' "APUS hardware (Amiga PowerUp System) is currently unsupported, but work is in progress." So apparently it doesn't run out of the box on Amigas, though who knows about the new G4s.'

      APUS is a PPC accelerator board setup on what are now dubbed 'Classic' Amigas. MOL runs quite happily on the AmigaOne, including the G3 versions if you compile Altivec support into the kernel.

    7. Re:Amiga & OS X by nusuth · · Score: 2

      I have no idea if the information in MOL faq is accurate. I don't have *any* Apple products, so I can't check the claim myself. I have just quoted the relevant part of FAQ, the part parent poster missed while reading it, for /. crowd. If you are sure MacOS EULA permits running MacOS (expecially X) on non-apple machines, please inform MOL people.

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    8. Re:Amiga & OS X by Megane · · Score: 2
      Wouldn't it just be a matter of capturing the rom image from an actual Amiga?

      Well, that and the small matter of needing drivers to support the Mac hardware!

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    9. Re:Amiga & OS X by Tassach · · Score: 2

      The product to which you refer, Amiga Forever, is still available. It's a very useful investment if you still have a lot of Amiga software you want to run under UAE.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  18. Re:brand name....backfires by fyonn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I bet half the folks think of a CGA display 40x25 text mode when they hear the name "Amiga".

    why? because thats all the PC had when the amiga of the time was showing 4096 colours (HAM) at 640x512?

    it lways seemed unfair that the amiga, which had damn advanced for the time graphics and sound, was written off as a mere "games machine" yet what drives new pc hardware now?

    dave

  19. dodgy Amiga Mozilla user agent string by elbobo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Somewhat off topic, but I've been getting a charmingly interesting user agent string in my apache logs lately, (which has the magical ability to segfault my stats engine, webalizer).

    that string would be:
    tSi Mozilla/5_EXPERIMENTAL (AOS4.1 ALPHA; PPC)

    Amiga OS 4.1 Alpha? hrm. Is this string fake? 4.1 when 4.0 isn't out yet?

    1. Re:dodgy Amiga Mozilla user agent string by RealAlaskan · · Score: 2
      My current user agent string is Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows_98_under_Linux_on_SGI_Octane). Not a word of it is true, but it gets past those sites which will serve up content only to IE on Windows.

      If Mozilla would spoof the string on a case-by-case basis, then only the lazy, bigoted idiots who want to lock out other browsers/OSs would get garbage in their logs. As it is, I have to spoof all of them or none, so mozilla doesn't get the representation it deserves in the server logs of the world.

  20. 1985 vs. NOW by nicomen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Strangely enough when you say PC. I think of CGA screens, sounds that go blipp blopp and bad gaming experiences.

    Tha Amiga had 4096 colors right from the beginning although 32 and 16 colours where the most popular ones. The resolution was 320x256 -> 640x512. But that was 1985.

    Nowadays you can use most of the modern add-on cards out there (PCI, AGP etc.), as long as there are drivers for them that is. Not to mention Amithlon that actually runs on x86s.

    --
    Nicolas Mendoza
    Prepare for MSIE 7
  21. Do we need this?! by Jezza · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is it just me, or does anyone else thing we really need this? The original Amiga was a strange beast, originally developed as a pure games machine, then retooled as a "business computer" it had the genlock device (video could be pumped through and mixed with the machines graphics). It was always an "odd" machine. And I guess that's why these people love it, how can you categorise it? Good at games, useful for video and able to do things like DTP, it was very exciting as a machine.

    Now I don't know about everyone else, but I for one get a bit bored these days - machines are dull - really dull. Sure they have whizzbang new CPUs and there are some amazing graphics cards, but they don't quite capture the excitement of those earlier machines.

    I for one am glad to see the Amiga haul itself out of the past, maybe it's nostalgia, but whatever if these things can help capture any of the excitement of the Amiga1000 or the Amiga2000 (you could put a PC card in one of those - so you really could "have your cake and eat it") then this will be worthwhile.

    Sure I don't think the PC is going to become an endangered species or that this thing will even make much impression over the Mac, but does it have to? If they can make a profit out of these and a few nostalgic geeks can have some fun, it all sounds good to me.

    I for one need some excitement!

    1. Re:Do we need this?! by nicomen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Amiga users have been asking for a PPC Amiga for years. Sure, in the meantime most Amiga applications have been outdated (although not all). In addition it's not that difficult to port stuff to the Amiga either.

      My point here being, if we want a new Amiga can't you just let us have it? I'm starting to get a bit frustrated over all those "Amiga is Dead", "Let it rest in peace" that constantly hits the comment section when something new Amiga-related has arrived.

      Using an Amiga on a 68060 processor is as a matter of fact much more responsive than any Linux or Windows or OSX computer I've used (graphical interface that is). The only ones competitive in speed and fast look'n'feel must be OS9 or BeOS which both are pretty dead. And don't give me the OBOS etc. speach...

      Nicolas Mendoza

      --
      Nicolas Mendoza
      Prepare for MSIE 7
    2. Re:Do we need this?! by guacamole · · Score: 2

      What does that have to do with Amiga?

    3. Re:Do we need this?! by Jezza · · Score: 2

      Of course I did! But we've seen Macs before. They are exciting (I've got one) and great and the world would be totally boring without them - but there is plenty of room for more platforms.

    4. Re:Do we need this?! by fstanchina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The point is, the Amiga is not dead (and I have an A3000/68040 in perfectly good shape on my desk to back that up), but it hasn't evolved for more than 10 years and this new toy is the proof: it's just standard PC hardware with a PowerPC CPU. Nothing in there remotely resembles the Amiga hardware. You might as well spend the same money on an Athlon + modern mobo + lots of memory and get far superior performance; if you really want some Amiga feeling from time to time, just install UAE.

      What defined the Amiga was the integration between the OS and the hardware. The OS alone on standard hardware doesn't make much sense IMHO: Linux or *BSD or, hell, even Windows is better these days. I don't know what hardware does currently offer something like the extreme multimedia capabilities of the original Amiga hardware+software because I'm not interestad in that kind of stuff, but certainly it's not standard PC hardware. I guess you would have to buy a Silicon Graphics or something like that.

    5. Re:Do we need this?! by Jezza · · Score: 2

      Well I couldn't agree more - there are far too few platforms at present, it's a bad situation. BeOS looked really exciting, and it's a shame that it's lost (on the desktop) I do hope one of the projects to rework it can comeup with something as interesting as the original. (Of course it's not actually totally lost, it seems Palm OS 6 will be heavily influenced by the BeOS).

      So I'd like to see Amigas like the old ones, exciting and different, but as capable (well ideally, more so) as modern PCs. There seems to be no reason this can't happen - and this is an important second step (the first being the original developer boards).

    6. Re:Do we need this?! by DrXym · · Score: 2
      The Amiga is dead and buried. I suspect there is still a market for Amiga products however because there is a hardened core of fanatics who won't accept reality or make their life easier by accepting the fact and moving on.


      Personally I had an Amiga for five years and was all set to buy an A4000 when Commodore hiked the price. I'm glad they did since it allowed me to snap out it and buy a PC instead. I did love my Amiga and it taught me valuable lessons, including a love for the command line, but its day and been and gone. Commodore blew it big time. Besides, moving to the PC meant I could play with OS/2 2.1 and Linux and these were just as much fun.


      Nowadays I fire up UAE if I want to run an Amiga. I see no point in a new PPC version.

    7. Re:Do we need this?! by GregWebb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've had this discussion many times on the various Amiga lists over the years. I started out with your position.

      The problem, though, is that there's so many hardware companies out there making the new stuff that no independent custom solution could hope to compete.

      The OS, on the other hand, still has heaps of cool features. That really nice shell, easily modifiable startup sequences. Twin state icons with proper information backing them up. Really nice handling of devices, libraries, fonts and so on. Datatypes. I could go on...

      The hardware, done now, isn't a sensible dream. The OS is. So, for those who liked the OS, why not try that? If that doesn't appeal to you then no matter.

      --

      Greg

      (Inside a nuclear plant)
      Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!

    8. Re:Do we need this?! by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 2

      Erik K. Veland wrote:

      > There's plenty more room for more platforms in the
      > world, but it's sad to see the once great Amiga
      > being shoved back to novelty value.

      This isn't novelty value, this is the first baby steps of a real rebirth. They put something out, best as they can manage, and get a limited release out to the long time fans. This gives them capital for more development, so they can move Amiga all the way to the modern world and beyond.

      > And novelty value isn't going to cut it any
      > more. Heck, look at the demise of Be. Great
      > innovative things even miss out. I'm glad Apple
      > has made it so far as it's truly the one
      > platform that innovates out there anymore.

      Apple is but the first of many that will be returning. Just as Linux is the first alternative OS on the x86 platform to be a successful contender to Windows.

      Back before the plague of Windows, there were many personal and small home computers, and many flavors of Unix. They could have played together nicer, but at least there were choices. While some died off due to stumbles by the various makers, the coming of Windows had a tragic chilling effect.

      By 95 and 96, most of those computer makers had died or faded into obscurity. Apple nearly died, but was rescued by a kindly Moth, who dropped Steve Jobs off to tend her poor tree. Microsoft trumpeted the demise of Unix, not noticing the infant Tux playing in its shadow.

      By the late 90's, anger at Microsoft was kindling. They were confronted with a Unix they could not kill (that adorable baby penguin grew up). And that charred Apple sappling put forth new branches and bore fruit: first the iMac, and then their future .. OS X!

      Now look at where we are! Thanks to Mozilla, Netscape is back. Word Perfect and Lotus 123 ship on new computers (not to mention Star/Open Office and the other office suites that have sprouted up). Apple is knocking on enterprise doors, and being welcomed inside. In less than a year, Apple has gone from no server product to being the fifth largest US server maker! Linux is running on all kinds of stuff from PDAs to supercomputers. Be will be back in the form of Palm 6. Amiga is coming back, and even OS/2 has shown some signs of new development.

      If we can avoid the Hollings' bill, all of Microsoft's rampaging about will only hasten its demise by further driving away its customers. Already, according to ZDNet, 40% of companies are looking for alternatives. The more alternatives, the healthier the market will get.

      Let's make life easier on ourselves this time, and use some open standards to make all those lovely choices play well together. ;)

      "It's a miracle! The sea water has once again created new life."
      Moll, "Rebirth of Mothra 2"
      Released in Japan 5 months before the announcement of the iMac (Rainbow Mothra) and OS X (Aqua Mothra).

    9. Re:Do we need this?! by GregWebb · · Score: 2

      So you didn't like the features. You're quite welcome to that opinion.

      Fact is, I still seriously dislike Unix-family OSs from a user experience point of view. The Amiga was just really, really nice to work with. I could tinker for hours in almost complete safety, all sorts of things that you think ought to be possible were.

      I used to characterise it as the best of MacOS' user experience combined with the best of DOS' power - but with extra cool bits. Unix doesn't do that for me, Windows most definitely doesn't so I want to see what they can do with new Amigas.

      --

      Greg

      (Inside a nuclear plant)
      Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!

    10. Re:Do we need this?! by Jezza · · Score: 2

      Yeah, well Jay Miner really designed the Amiga as a successor to the Atari400/800 series (also really nice machines). So the main focus was to create a "home computer". Those were popular back then, and were considered quite distinct from "business computers". Personnally I think this schism was opened up with the introduction of the IBM PC, a machine that was hard to love as an "entertainment" device (no graphics, no colour, high price tag). Where machines like the Atari had hardware just for playing games ("Missle/Player Graphics" - an early form of hardware "Sprite" graphics, and of course joystick interfaces) and a display designed to be displayed on a TV - and therefore not suitable for business applications of the era (usually home computers had displays of 40 columns of text or so, business machines had 80).

      What Jay produced in the Amiga was great "gaming" hardware with a high resolution display to show enough text for business applications (and require a monitor). What Commodore did when taking the project over from Atari was see the Amiga as a "Mac with hardware accelleration". Amiga proved to be such a flexible design, and AmigaDOS such a flexible OS that the Amiga became both the gamers system of choice and at the same time the hacker's system of choice while also making a dent into business computing (especially the Amiga2000 that could take a PC card).

      The Amiga2000 is a machine that I always wanted, and I guess even now I wouldn't mind one. personally I liked the really ugly HUGE desktop case - towers are all well and good - but that big grey box had a magic all it's own. I think Commodore tried to make it look "serious" and the effect was that it looked "mean". For a while there seemed to be nothing it couldn't do.

      So yeah, if this new system can bring back THAT feeling then I'll be very tempted - after all: "what price a dream?"

  22. Amiga did not HAVE a textmode! by Troy+H+Parker · · Score: 4, Informative

    SIGH, more Amiga-clueless people pretending to know what an Amiga is.

    There IS no textmode on an Amiga!

  23. Great news, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the better place for an Amiga OS system -nowadays- would be into some embedded or portable hardware. The core system was (and I believe still is) very responsive, say near realtime, and small; no protected or virtual memory is required to have it working. In the Ol' days half a meg (0.5 Mb) was enough to run the system, the desktop and some good programs with absolutely no need for a hard disk.

    Some good development in the right direction would give us the best system ever on PDAs, cellphones, tablet computers, small control systems etc.

  24. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I really don't care if AmigaOS "makes a comeback", I want to continue using and developing AmigaOS, and as such I am dying to get my hands on an AmigaOne XE and OS4.

    I agree that there are certain things about the AmigaOS that I absolutely loved.

    the C: and DEVS:, and LIBS:. The way everything in the S: directory was there for a reason. I loved how STARTUP was handled, and I loved how you could modify the icon properties to change startup options of programs.

    Some things about Amiga OS have not been matched since, not even by Linux or BeOS (Yes, Linux fans, AmigaOS did some things much nicer than your precious little unix wannabe.)

    On the other hand, most other operating systems have completely evolved past the Amiga. Protected memory, built in virtual memory. REAL retargetable graphics instead of a nasty hack. REAL retargetable sound instead of a nasty hack.

    There are checks and balances when comparing any of the many operating systems, and what it boils down to is that none of them are perfect.

    Amiga OS suffers from severe obsolescense, lack of modern software support, and a GUI that is over 13 years old.

    Linux still suffers from the "let's throw files in places that only a seasoned unix user will think to look for them" mentality that is standard with all Unix workalikes, and the commercial industry still touches on it with a bit of uncertainty and a whole lot of fear.

    Windows sucks on too many levels to mention, but at least it has market dominance and a whole ton of games (for what that is worth anyway).

    Mac OS X has a whole lot going for it, but unfortunately it draws in a whole bunch of moron users and thus using it might be hard for the tech-savvy user to admit. "Yes... I... uh... hmm. :( Use a MAC. I know... I know... but hey!"

    BeOS is dead kind of like the Amiga, only it's not quite as rotten yet.

    Of course, there are going to be tons of morons who will swear FreeBSD is dead, but blah. It's like all the other Unix operating systems. If you love Unix, you won't use anything but, if you don't already love Unix, it may take you years before you ever get comfortable enough to try it.

    When comparing all of the operating systems, it's not easy to choose one that I would say is "On top", but it's pretty easy to pick out the ones that are certainly on the bottom, even if they don't necissarily deserve to be there.

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  25. Dear god... by megaduck · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...what a year! Mozilla hits 1.0, Warcraft III is released, Apple makes a rackmount server, and now Amiga finally releases new hardware.

    Hell must be a cold, cold, cold place by now. At this rate, I expect my quantum computer to arrive by Christmas.

    --
    This .sig for rent.
    1. Re:Dear god... by yelims · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not like Duke Nukem Forever was released, though.

    2. Re:Dear god... by Erik+K.+Veland · · Score: 2, Funny

      More evidence:

      CmdrTaco switches to mac
      Dell sells iPods
      Amazon made a profit

      Now where's Duke Nukem Forever?

      --
      "I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
    3. Re:Dear god... by Seehund · · Score: 2

      Amiga finally releases new hardware.

      Heh. You'll still have to wait for that miracle to happen. Amiga Inc. has nothing to do with hardware (and not much to do with AmigaOS besides the trademark).

      What this story is reporting is that yet another distributor has started distributing Mai Logic's Teron series motherboards (but using an "AmigaOne" trademark this time, instead of for example Phoenix, like another distributor uses to sell the same mobo). The story submitter probably got carried away when reading the marketing and seeing "Amiga" in the blurb.

      --
      Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
    4. Re:Dear god... by ShavenYak · · Score: 2

      At this rate, I expect my quantum computer to arrive by Christmas.

      Okay, as long as you don't ask for anything really far-fetched like the release of HURD.

      --

      Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
    5. Re:Dear god... by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but Daikatana has been out for years now. So who knows.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
  26. GUI look by Coryoth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These days much talk of GUI look and feel is bandied about. I don't know how the new Amiga GUI feels, but it looks awful. Maybe that's the last stage in their design and the whole thing is (hopefully) themeable - we can but hope.

    Otherwise I'm afriad this just isn't going to sell. In the past the feel was the only part that counted because all GUIs were, let's face it, pretty damn ugly. These days however the look of a GUI (given the high powered graphics hardware sported by commodity machines) is actually rather important. Look how much attention OS X garnered solely on it's looks.

    These days you can't afford to have an ugly GUI anymore - sure it can be an option for those people with no aesthetics - you need something that is attractive. I've never understood the people who deride attractive interfaces TBH - I spend 10+ hours a day staring at a computer screen, tell me again why I want it to be merely functional?!

    Sure, if you're taking a serious performance hit for the graphics, then by all means turn them off (as linux kindly allows with it's myriad of window manager and desktop solutions), but these days you should b able to get quite a nice GUI for very little cost.

    here's some snapshots of what my desktop sometimes looks like: screenshots

    Jedidiah

    1. Re:GUI look by Coryoth · · Score: 2

      Come now, everyone know that to karma whore correctly one needs to provide a link. This was the closest I could find that showed any vague relevance.

      Jedidiah

  27. Re:Paula? Is that you? by Simon+Kongshoj · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, they were named Agnus, Fat Agnus, Super Fat Agnus, and Alice. Alice was the final incarnation of the chip, from the Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000's AGA chipsets. There might have been others in the specialty Amigas, such as Dave Haynie's prototype "A3000+" which was (according to rumor) only produced in two specimens, but there was no Obese Agnus in a general-production Amiga. :)

    --
    Six sick .sigs, the Number of the Beast!
  28. Re:The old days by WowTIP · · Score: 5, Informative

    Back in the days the Amiga was easier to configurate, had better multimedia capabilities than *any* platform, the best multimedia applications (video, at least). Some video/audio apps still outperform anything you can get for linux today.

    That said, I am still not sure why a "normal" user should get a new Amiga instead of a Linux box today. No memory protection (planned, though) and no application advantages.

    But, if you are an old Amiga user, interrested in the latest Amiga technology and also have an interrest in running a pretty cheap PPC box (LinuxPPC?), then this might be something for you.

    --

    --

    "I'm surfin the dead zone
    In the twilight, unknown"
  29. Re:Amiga DID have a textmode! by nicomen · · Score: 2, Funny

    What Amiga model was that? I never saw this in A500, A1200 nor A4000.

    Maybe it was one of the Atari Amiga models ?

    --
    Nicolas Mendoza
    Prepare for MSIE 7
  30. Re:Wow, great!!! by e8johan · · Score: 3

    Did you see the pictures, the PPC runs without a fan at 600MHz. Quiet, good history, great name, can it get any better?!

  31. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by R.Caley · · Score: 2
    Linux still suffers from the "let's throw files in places that only a seasoned unix user will think to look for them" mentality

    Er, no. Linux distributions suffer from the ``let's throw files in weird places no one will look for them, then throw together some god awful configuraton tool to try to hide the fact we haven't thought any of this through'' mentality.

    The traditional unix places generally made sense, Nothing like a couple of decades of slow development to get things right.

    --
    _O_
    .|<
    The named which can be named is not the true named
  32. Re:Amiga is Stable by fstanchina · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Are you joking? AmigaOS 1.x stable? I guess you're tinkering with the wrong Linux distro if that's really what you think. ("The" linux distro for me is Debian, but of course YMMV.)

    By the way, this new Amiga is nowhere like a true Amiga in terms of chipset. It's just a PowerPC with PCI, AGP, USB and all the usual stuff you'll find in a not-so-modern PC. Note the southbridge (what would *that* have been called in the original Amiga?) is a now-outdated Via part, the same I have in my PC.

  33. Amiga???? by codexus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How can these machines be called Amiga. They have nothing in common with the original Amiga and are just pretty standard and boring PPC machines.

    You might as well put an Amiga sticker on your mac or PC...

    --
    True warriors use the Klingon Google
    1. Re:Amiga???? by Mike+Bouma · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually they do. Let me explain, in 1994 my Amiga was equiped with a cool 4MB Retina BLT Z3 graphic board (1900×1426 8bit 70 Hz or 1024×768 24bit) and 16-bit Toccata soundcard (48KHz).

      The Amiga market was already moving towards 3rd party developed hardware solutions back then, sadly this slowed down due to the unfortunate situation of the time. But fellow Amiga users who only owned standard unexpanded Amigas drooled all over my machine, so I believe more people would have expanded their Amigas with 3rd party hardware solutions, if they could afford it at the time.

      These new Amigas will run a PPC native port of AmigaOS and the hardware is fully licensed, so IMO an Amiga. (BTW Future 3rd party PCI solutions are planned for adding legacy classic Amiga hardware support.)

    2. Re:Amiga???? by lemkebeth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      By that logic Macs aren't Macs as they have nothing in common with the orginal other than being from the same company.

      Apple switch processors, uses PCI uses AGP, uses USB1.1, uses Firewire, etc. None of that was in or around in the days of the original Mac.

    3. Re:Amiga???? by Junta · · Score: 2

      By that logic, you can't call current Macs 'Mac'. After all, the Mac platform was m68k. Now there's AGP, PCI, and all based around a PPC core. Nothing to do at all with the original, right?

      If they tried to release Amiga based on the same platform it died on, it would be ridiculous. m68k never scaled far. It is even now being deemed too slow for handhelds, in favor of ARM...

      Amiga in its day did great things with the hardware available, unbelievable things. Now they can do it again (hopefully) with a more advanced core architecture. I can't say I agree with the choice of PPC (beautiful architecture, but Motorola is not adequately supporting it and thus the only hope lies in IBMs work...). I mean Apple is bandaiding performance problems through SMP in all powermacs... PPC is a more efficient platform in terms of IPC, but the x86 world was overcome this through sheer brute force of clock speed...

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    4. Re:Amiga???? by radish · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except that Mac's are made by Apple, and were always made by Apple. If they want to release two different machines and call them both "Mac" - that's their choice. Add to that the (limited) binary compatibility and you have a family of machines, even though the hardware has changed.

      The new Amigas are nothing whatsoever to do with the old Amigas. They don't run the same hardware (or even any relation to it), and they're not made by the same company (anyone remember Commodore?). There's also no binary compatibility.

      If I installed this PPC AmigaOS on an iMac would it be an Amiga? Nope. If I installed OSX on one of these new "Amigas", would it be a Mac? Nope. Hell, if I got TOS running on an original 68k Amiga would that make it an ST? No!

      Computer names are defined by the hardware first, branding/manufacturer second, and OS last.

      If Amiga Inc wants to make PPC machines and install some version of AmigaOS on them, well more power to them, choice is always a good thing. But to somehow say this is an evolution of an A1000 is crazy IMHO.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    5. Re:Amiga???? by Crispy+Beef · · Score: 2, Informative

      To me it's an ethic. A way of doing things.

      The OS always made using the system a dream, fast and responsive and given that ExecSG (the new kernel) is faster than QNXs' the new Amiga stuff will retain that snappy feel.

      --
      -- See ya, Crispy
  34. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by vjouppi · · Score: 2, Informative

    Please research your subject before posting flamebait.. This is nothing near to anything an Amiga emulator emulates.

    It's a completely new architechture, that brings the platform to more current standards. You won't be able to run any old A500 games on it, just system-friendly apps and games from your workbench.

    Amiga has word processors, web browsers, irc clients, what have you. You start them from your workbench and run them in windows and screens, a bit like you would do if you use X11 or Windows.

    This is not a souped up A500! Nothing of the original hardware architechture is left, this is why you can't run those hardware bangers. Actually, my A4000 won't run most of the old games either thanks to all the expansions that make it better for workbench use.

    Times change, my friend. What if I told you that Linux can only run two tasks, the other outputting A and the other outputting B? That's about what you're saying of the Amiga.

    Have you ever used a proper Amiga, or just an unexpanded old A500 or A1200?

    --
    -Jope
  35. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 2

    Er, no. Linux distributions

    You know, Linux distributions DO make things worse, but Unix by it's own design has a very steep learning curve.

    The file hirarchy of Unix is also one of it's worst things, if you ask me. I was simply pointing out that in this respect the Amiga OS was (in my opinion) far superior to Unix.

    Of course, the Amiga OS wasn't a multiuser operating system, either.

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  36. For the latest new on AmigaOS4/AmigaOne by Mike+Bouma · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here you can find a summ up of what has been announced at a recent Amiga show held in the UK. The article includes links to show reports and Audio recording from the presentations done by Amiga Inc, Hyperion and Eyetech.

    Here you can read an article which takes a closer look at the AmigaOS4/AmigaOne solution. The article is a couple of months old and does not include the latest informations given at the WoASE show.

    And finally here you can find more information about MorphOS/Pegasos, a promising Amiga-like rival system.

  37. Re:Wow, great!!! by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do NOT try to tell me that the 800 MHz PPC outperforms a 2GHz PIV

    Why not? I mean for integer stuff at least, a P4 spends a lot of its time copying data between the sparse set of registers, and there's a limitation on the instructions that can actually be paired to get maximum throughput. The extremely deep pipeline also means there's a high penalty for incorrect branch prediction. The legacy 386 stuff makes the CPU extremely inefficient.

    The facts about floating point are a little harder to come by. Nevertheless, a different processor architecture will allow much better internal parallelism. The x86 series of chips still has latency issues, reducing performance here. A G3 is about twice as fast as a Pentium 2.

    Incidentally, do you realise that a Pentium would run at about 3 times the speed of a 386 clocked at the same rate?

    It may well be that an 800MHz G3 is not as fast as a 2GHz Pentium 4, but don't make the mistake of making any estimates based on clock speed.

    Finally, I should point out this is not designed to be the ultimate in speed. It's only trying to be competitive, not a world beater. Just has to be as fast as a typical pentium CPU.

  38. Mobo vs. complete sytem by msobkow · · Score: 3, Informative

    The 450/500 GBP prices (roughly 704/780 USD) are just for the mobo with CPU, not a complete system. Assume another $20 for shipping (which would be cheap!), and you're looking at $800USD just for the mobo. You still need to add memory, a case, video card, HDD, CD[-RW]/DVD[-+RW], keyboard, mouse, and monitor.

    Lets assume for sake of argument you're going cheap, cheap, cheap, so:

    • 40 - memory
    • 50 - case
    • 25 - video card
    • 50 - 40G HDD
    • 25 - CD-R
    • 15 - keyboard
    • 15 - mouse
    • 100 - 15" monitor

    You're now running $320 in basic components, bringing the price up to $1045-1120 (700/800MHz variants.) Or you can get an eMac for $1100 (700MHz) that upgrades you to a CD-RW with a better video card, modem, and FireWire port that is pre-installed with a currently shipping copy of OSX. Alternatively, $1300 gets you an iBook with a 12.1" screen (slightly smaller 30GB HDD.)

    Having decided to buy the AmigaOne mobo anyhow, you now have the option of running PPC Linux or waiting for the new OS. Either way, you miss out on the commercial product support for Linux (DB/2, Oracle, Sybase, et. al. are x86 binaries, not PPC.) Assuming pure open source is just fine by you, you've still got a box that is woefully underpowered to a similarly priced/configured AMD system (and maybe even Intel P4.)

    Much as I loved my Amiga 1000, I just can't see any reason I'd want one of these new "Amiga" systems. Most of the reasons I loved my A1000 just aren't valid anymore -- everyone has hardware accelerated video and audio now, video capture and processing cards are common, and I'd rather be coding *nix than a system with no mind/market share.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  39. It runs AmigaOS by nicomen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. Amiga Inc is behind the hardware
    2. Same reason you can call PPC Macs for Macs.
    3. It runs AmigaOS.

    --
    Nicolas Mendoza
    Prepare for MSIE 7
    1. Re:It runs AmigaOS by Seehund · · Score: 2

      1. Amiga Inc is behind the hardware

      No, they're not. Not at all.

      It's Amiga Inc's decision to have AmigaOS run on third party hardware. In this case they license the "AmigaOne" trademark to one of the distributors of these Teron CX/PX motherboards, Eyetech. Just like they intend to license the trademark to any other hypothetical licensee of any other feasible hardware (too damn bad that there's a licensing requirement for AmigaOS to run on a piece of hardware in the first place though).

      Mai Logic is behind the hardware. The hardware has been sold by them since august 2001.

      2. Same reason you can call PPC Macs for Macs.

      No, we call Macs "Macs" because Apple made them, designed them and sold them, and Apple call their machines Macs.

      What the story refers to as "Amigas" are POP boards designed and made by Mai Logic, and now one new distributor, Eyetech, is just starting to distribute them under the licensed trademark "AmigaOne".

      3. It runs AmigaOS.

      So does any x86 box with Amithlon or another emulator. AmigaOS 4 and beyond will run on third party hardware, which unfortunately has to be licensed/bundled/dongled. So if someone licensed a Titanium Powerbook, would that be any more or less "Amiga" than the Teron CX board? How about a Pegasos POP board? A Barbie POP board?

      The Amiga is dead, long live AmigaOS. Let's just hope that Amiga Inc. realise their mistake to effectively eradicate the advantages of running on third party hardware by inventing the braindead and harmful compulsory hardware licensing requirement.

      People don't care about whether some distributor has slapped an Amiga sticker on a piece of hardware, when they can buy the exact same hardware elsewhere for less money, and when there's nothing "special" (better) about the hardware other than the higher price.

      --
      Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
  40. The GUI is just fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The AmigaOS gui is just fine. The buttons is in the correct places (you don't accidently close a window for example). You don't have to waste desktop space for the menu thanks to the old patent there the menu shows up in the title bar then you presses the right mousebutton. You have screens which works like virtual desktops in X, which means a program can choose if it only wants to have a window or a screen of it's own with only it's own windows in it. Those screens was dragable to and you could actually have a screen with one resolution dragged over another with another resolution on the old Amiga hardware.

    Talking about looks there exists a lot of patches for the old AmigaOS which makes it look good.

    But then again, I don't care that much about looks, i care about comfortability. That's why i use ratpoison as window manager aslong as i don't need a stupid program like gimp which uses a lot of windows. //Hagge@IRCnet

  41. Re:Amiga DID have a textmode! by vidarh · · Score: 2

    Thats bullshit, and shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. No Amiga model was even capable of a text mode, and that was one of the things that really annoyed me when I got my first Amiga, as updating a screenful of text was sometimes slower than on my C64 (got better once people started learning how to exploit the platform, though).

  42. Amigas had craftsmanship by Hecatonchires · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Under the lid of my A1000 were the signatures of all the developers, molded into the plastic. _That_ was class.



    These people had style. Pity the business model didn't work out.

    --

    Yay me!

    1. Re:Amigas had craftsmanship by blakespot · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Under the lid of my A1000 were the signatures of all the developers, molded into the plastic. _That_ was class.

      The two most classy machines of that era shared that feature. I recently picked up a Mac Plus and cracked it open to do a 1MB -> 4MB RAM upgrade and grabbed a shot of its signed interior.


      blakespot

      --
      -- Heisenberg may have slept here.
      iPod Hacks.com
  43. Re:Amiga is Stable by vidarh · · Score: 2

    The Amiga OS in itself was rock stable. The problems (and the guru meditations :) came whenever you used an application that contained any bugs - which meant quite frequently. So yes, the OS was stable, the system as a whole wasn't thanks to the lack of memory protection. You don't have to go back that far though, to find Amiga users arguing that memory protection was a waste of resources and shouldn't be added to the OS.

  44. Big German Amiga Fair - 7th and 8th of December by Mike+Bouma · · Score: 2, Informative

    Individual Computers is organizing this year's big German Amiga fair. The new AmigaOne/AmigaOS4 systems, Pegasos/MoprhOS systems and even a new ATX c64 successor motherboards, called the c-one will be presented at this fair!

    To see what last year's main German Amiga Fair was like, watch this great video coverage. The upcoming big German Amiga fair will be held on the 7th and 8th of December 2002 at the Eurogress in Aachen.

  45. What's special about Amiga... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...was two things:

    1) Cool hardware. It could do cool stuff: colorful screens, good sound, Hold And Modify mode, everything DMA-driven to waste as few CPU cycles as possible, blitter, copper, ... Then there was PAL/NTSC compatibility of course.

    2) Cool OS. Incredibly efficient, multitasking, windowing, and yet understandable. Files had logical names. There was a pervasive system-wide scripting language. You could modify OS-behavior in any way you saw fit. It did what you wanted it to do, without ever bothering you.

    Amiga users like either the hardware or the software, but rarely both ;-)

    The new hardware is not all that spectacular. Sure, PPC is nice, so is a big fat 3D card, but it isn't _cool_ like the old hardware was. You cannot fuck around with it and do cool hacks. Everybody else had it a long time ago.

    The new software is not all that spectacular either. Other OS'es have learned about multitasking, and the brilliant original concepts got diluded by outside influences (I'm not saying those are wrong, but simply inappropriate for AmigaOS).

    And then of course there was the other people you knew who had an Amiga. They made it fun: showing off cool hacks, borrowing each others' software (yeah, I know, that's what helped kill it in the first place...), seeing amazing demo's. The new platform will have to start from scratch in this regard.

    In short, although I am happy people are still working on Amiga, I do not really see the point. Amiga should stand for massively powerful hardware, an elegant OS, and amazing innovation. What I see is a standard (not all that powerful) PC, using the same old OS except that it now has UNIX-style libraries.

    I still have my A4K, which I used regularly up until about two years ago. I turn it on about once every three months, but the spark is gone.

  46. Re:Ugly GUI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "It is an elegant OS, meant for a more civilized era..."

    As with so many OS'es, you must experience it before you can understand this. Let's just say this: it never gets in your way; it lets you do what you want to do in the way you feel like doing it.

    If you are performing a task you do not do often, or if you are a rank beginner, you can do your task graphically. Activating a new device? Just doubleclick on it. Installing it permanently? Just drag it into devs:. Changing screen resolution? Move a slider.

    And if you are an experienced user doing the same thing over and over again, you can automate that using the systemwide pervasive scripting language, ARexx. The language is not great but because it hooks into just about every single application you can use it to perform any task you want to do, automatically. The raw power of this feature (ie. the ability to bring any number of applications together to do what YOU need) cannot be overestimated.

    Of course there is a commandline too. It is the only OS that has the following commandline command:

    > list all files since yesterday

    (list = ls, all = -R, files = don't show directories, since yesterday = only files since a certain date) ;-)

    And if you do not like some OS behavior, you can always change it. The net has huge amounts of interesting patches: different ram-disk behavior, different window management, different looking controls, different schedulers, ...

    The kernel, exec, is a true microkernel. Since AmigaOS lacks memory protection there is virtually no context switch overhead. You can add devices on the fly.

    The bulk of the OS (exec, graphical subsystem, windowing subsystem, most devices, many libraries) are loaded from a 512KB ROM. This helps explain the sub-10s boot time.

    The major disadvantage is of course the lack of memory protection. Similarly, there is no virtual memory. There are some virtual memory solutions in the form of patches, but these rely on applications correctly specifying DMA- and interrupt-accessed memory - which often is not the case.

    Linux can learn a lot, and improve considerably, by taking some of the Amiga features on board. Systemwide scripting support in all applications would be a good start.

  47. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by allanj · · Score: 2

    Have you ever used a proper Amiga, or just an unexpanded old A500 or A1200?


    That's just it - an unexpanded old A500 *IS* a proper Amiga to the vast majority of the people old enough to have tried or owned one. I've seen more Amigas than most of the geeks I know, but to me a proper Amiga is an old unexpanded (OK, maybe the 1 Meg expansion) A500. They totally rocked, and that's probably because they were very useful without all the fancy schmancy stuff that caused later Amigas to become more like an incompatible PC than the cool original piece of hardware it originally was.


    I'm not agreeing with the original poster or anything - I'd just like to point out that your cool A4000 and its likes are mere droplets in the ocean of old A500's.

    --
    Black holes are where God divided by zero
  48. "The Amiga" by jagapen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To me, the Amiga was special. It wasn't just a chipset, or an operating system. Indeed, there were the games and the demoscene that banged away at the hardware and made it really perform. There were the digital artists and animators who used the fantastic software of the time to take advantage of the machine's capabilities to create great works. There were electronic music composers galore putting out more MODs than anybody can count. There were the users who adored the multitasking operating system which boosted their productivity and enjoyment. There were the programmers who filled up Aminet with software. There was the desktop video production revolution begun with the Video Toaster. And there was the team of dedicated people designing and building the machine itself. "The Amiga" was a gestalt of all these things; hardware, operating system, and a wonderfully creative, vibrant user community.

    That's dead. I left the Amiga scene four years after Commodore went toes up. It was finally time to go when most of the talented, dynamic people had fled the platform for greener pastures: BeOS, Linux, even Windows. All that was left were the "somebody should" people. Y'know, the people who say "somebody should do X," but do nothing themselves. Well, except for the well-meaning, insane people who would try to run Amiga development companies on a wing and a prayer before collapsing into financial ruin. That reminded me very much of the "ghost dancing" of the plains Indians as they tried to fight a force that was extinguishing their whole way of life.

    All that's left now are some real die-hards who are happy to just now get Quake II, a company that has salvaged the Amiga name from the post-Commodore disaster, and an outdated operating system. This new hardware is a fine thing for those die-hards. It'll give them new hardware, faster machines, and new OS features. It's not enough, though, to even reverse the Amiga Diaspora and bring back all the talent and drive that made for such a rich user community. It's certainly not enough to bring in significant new blood.

    I wish Eyetech luck. I hope they can make a profit on the AmigaOne, that there are enough die-hards to keep it going. I just won't be back, because it's not "the Amiga" anymore.

    1. Re:"The Amiga" by splateagle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      very well said: I clung on a little longer myself finally bailing on the remains of the platform/community in 2001, tbh I think that had more to do with the fact that up until then I couldn't afford anything I wanted to move to (which as it turned out was a Powerbook G4 running OS X)

      One thing you neglected to mention however is that the climate which created that once vibrant scene known as Amiga is also gone: home computers aren't just the playthings of the technically inclined few anymore as they were in the late 80s and early 90s.

      imho it's this modern-day status of home computers as appliances rather than toys as much as the short comings of the AmigaOne and OS4 that mean we're unlikely to see the old girl really rising from her ashes any time soon.

      a shame really.

  49. Re:The old days by ideonode · · Score: 2, Funny

    I believe it can run MaconLinux which in it's turn can run Mac OS X.

    Shit. I misread that as "I believe it can run MalcolmX" ;)

  50. Re:"Near" realtime? by jagapen · · Score: 3, Informative

    I keep hearing this about AmigaOS, and I still can't figure out what definition of "realtime" you're using. I learned that a realtime operating system is one that can guarantee a response to an external event within a given time.

    AmigaOS patently does not satisfy this condition, because any running task on the system can disable interrupts, and therefore multitasking. Any program that need to walk the Exec list does so, which means that multitasking is disabled for varying amounts of time depending on the contents of the Exec list.

    (My memory is hazy. Can't programs also install their own interrupt handlers? That, too, is going to lead to varying, unknown latencies.)

  51. Sync by olethrosdc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    On another note, I remember ALL games on my amiga, no matter wether they were running at 10 or 50fps, had perfect synchronization of input, video display and audio. I know this was made possible because of input, copper and lisa interrupts, (for sound there was also the fact that you could update the sound-playing pointer in two cycles, i.e. there was no mixing buffer that would add latency.) but.. why doesn't it work with Linux? It seems very weird.

    Interrupts also work on the user level - I am not sure how linux works, but a user level program could request to be added to a list of interruptable processes for a specific event. I am not sure how large the latency of an interrupt is, but I think most OSes can manage something below 10ms.

    As for the sound, I find it extremely strange that people use mixing buffers the way they do in current linux games. If you know what is the sample-rate of the audio card and what position of the buffer it is currently reading from you can have SFX with latency that is NOT dependent upon the length of the mix buffer. Simply predict in which memory address you should write to, so that you are just ahead of the audio DMA. (I wouldnt think there are any cards that dont support DMA right now..).

    --

    I miss my rubber keyboard.(Homepage)

  52. Re:Paula? Is that you? by colinramsay · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To be quite honest, this: "OS is obsolete before even being completed" Seems to be a very telling statement when finding out what's wrong with current opinion on non-Windows OS's. If Linux distro's consolidated and improved the core of what they had rather than bolting on new whizzbang stuff they'd have got a lot further than the hotch potch of usability they have now. I'm not saying this OS is any better or worse than any particular Linux OS. But slating it because it's not high tech enough is a little silly.

  53. Re:A beige box. by PigleT · · Score: 2

    Methinks you have it exactly the wrong way up.

    I *want* a "PC" - whatever the heck that might mean these days - but most importantly, I want Architecture. I'm sick of buying Intel, and I don't want to buy into the intel concept by getting AMD instead, either. x86 can go whistle, I want ppc or alpha. And I want to run NetBSD on it, too, as forcing linux to run on various bits of kit (amiga A500+, anyone? Psion 5MX?) has lost its appeal with me. I have intel with Gentoo, FreeBSD and OpenBSD atm; need to complete the set!

    So who else do we know who does G4-800 chips? One answer: Apple. And how much do they cost? about 2x-4x as much as this new amiga effort. So by sacrificing apple's proprietary mobo and peripherals, I fulfil my desire for "Architecture" and slice the cost right down. That's looking pretty peachy to me.

    Now, the really worrying and annoying thing is that clause about needing some "enabler" to get OS4 to run on it. I read it like this: they want me to pay for something (always dodgy) that helps them fight me. Erm, yeah, right, time to open-source it and sell CDs with added manuals or other value for $20. *Then* I'd be interested in the OS.

    --
    ~Tim
    --
    .|` Clouds cross the black moonlight,
    Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
  54. Re:The old days by blakespot · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It is defenitly 4 sure that a G3 600 Mhz Amiga Blow's a mac based on the same specs out of the water (i have seen it running)

    How's that? As far as instilling that tingly sensation being on the rare, bleeding edge and having a great deal of of hope for new apps generated by the dearth of existing apps? I get that feeling running OS X (on my dual G4 800 and iBook 700), well, at least the bleeding edge part, because the apps are here for OS X.

    Don't get me wrong. I purchased the first Amiga sold in the state of Virginia back in 1985, an A1000 from the fist store that was taking stock back then. I've left and come back a few times over the years, having owned that A1000, and A2000, an A1200, a used A500, and most recently another A1200 (towered, '060 -- but sold for the iBook) and A2000 (that I found new-in-box two years ago amazingly). I use the Amiga about every other day to relive the great days. But come on.

    The new Amiga is an AmigaOS-compatible machine. It's not an Amiga compatible machine. It will run apps that are OS friendly, but no oldschool apps/games that hit the hardware. And what was the Amiga with its wonderful Hardware Reference manuals for but to invite hitting the hardware?? You may ask why anyone would be interested in running those old apps/games--why not look forward to current and new future apps running on AmigaOS 4.0. Well...if that's the point, then why not just run Linux or some other *NIX (OS X for example)?

    As far as I can see, the "heart" of what was Amiga is nowhere to be found in these new machines. Even though I still use my Amiga 2000 happily (I have a 68030 accelerator coming in the mail for it as I write this), I simply cannot see what sort of user benefit comes from these new, seemingly alien machines.

    Anyway, I'm all about that feeling. I remember it when I was using that A1000 back in '85. I also remember waves of it using that first A2000 back in '88-'89. Sacrasm aside, it's a fullfilling feeling, well the positive sides of it are. I am reliving the positives of that feeling using OS X and it's fun, fresh. I can't imagine getting that feel from these new machines. What am I missing?

    Here's a list of the Amigas I've gone thru, for what it's worth.


    blakespot

    --
    -- Heisenberg may have slept here.
    iPod Hacks.com
  55. Davie Haynie on x86/PPC... by nickos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's an interesting thread on ex Amiga hardware guy Dave Haynie's views on the new Amiga stuff. Of course, everyone knows that the x86 instruction set's shite, but he says performance wise it's the only way to go (and wait for Itanium for a clean architecture).

  56. Re:Paula? Is that you? by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 2, Funny
    I'm only interested if they rename the PPC chip "Even Fatter Agnus".

    That would be "Rubenesque Agnes" or perhaps "BBW Agnes"

    --
    ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
  57. Re:The old days by 13Echo · · Score: 2

    Not to mention that for a while, it was *the* platform for video apps. I can still remember Toaster and Lightwave 5 on those things. We probably have a few of these boxes around here, somewhere.

  58. Re:Ugly GUI by Wdomburg · · Score: 2

    >Of course there is a commandline too. It is the
    >only OS that has the following commandline
    >command:
    >
    >> list all files since yesterday
    >
    >(list = ls, all = -R, files = don't show
    >directories, since yesterday = only files since a
    >certain date) ;-)

    find . -type f -ctime -1

    Matt

  59. a little pricey... by Leimy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But you know what... If I had the extra bucks right now I would probably buy one [I am a computer junkie.... ouch my wallet.].

    I believe one of the AmigaOSs was the first true multitasking OS on a PC level system in existence... it would be really interesting to see how far they have come now. Linux PPC can't be all that bad either... perhaps even Darwin runs on these things [or could be made to anyway]

  60. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by Wdomburg · · Score: 2

    >Linux still suffers from the "let's throw files in
    >places that only a seasoned unix user will think
    >to look for them" mentality that is standard with
    >all Unix workalikes, and the commercial industry
    >still touches on it with a bit of uncertainty and
    >a whole lot of fear.

    Um, modern distributions "suffer" from the "let's throw files in standard locations, which are actually pretty to learn even if you're not already familiar with them, and besides, the package manager can list the files for a particular program, so you can easily find them even if you're completely clueless."

    Matt

  61. Re:A beige box. by lemkebeth · · Score: 2, Informative

    You wrote:

    So who else do we know who does G4-800 chips? One answer: Apple. And how much do they cost? about 2x-4x as much as this new amiga effort. So by sacrificing apple's proprietary mobo and peripherals, I fulfil my desire for "Architecture" and slice the cost right down. That's looking pretty peachy to me.

    :scratches head:

    You do know that Amiga is just a board, right? 2X to 4X for Apple? Hardly. Have you looked at Apple's prices lately? You can buy a complete system for the amount you spend on this thing.

    I'm not saying the Amiga might not be good, I'm just saying it is hardly cheap.

  62. The problem... by artemis67 · · Score: 2

    is that the PC industry has greatly matured since the heyday of the Amiga. Today it would be laughable to think that Hyperion could simply stick audio or video chips on the motherboard and call it a superior system. I would dare to say that the computer industry in 2002 has assimilated or surpassed most every advantage that made the Amiga great.

    Hyperion's challenge, then, is to come up with a computer that fills a large market need in a way that currently isn't being met. And until they can do that, they are just watering down the Amiga brand.

  63. No Amigas by Seehund · · Score: 5, Informative
    This "story" is horribly misleading, it's almost as if somebody made a cut-n-paste from the Eyetech marketing...

    No, there are no "new Amigas." No, nobody will make any "new Amigas."

    Hardware has no longer got anything to do with anything "Amiga."

    Once upon a time (almost two years ago), the UK Amiga shop Eyetech became "hardware partners" of the new company "Amiga Inc." They were to provide actual new PPC Amiga hardware, and contracted the German firm Escena to design it. This failed. I'm sure those "AmigaOne 1200/4000" motherboards are still praised somewhere on the horribly outdated amiga.com web site.

    Instead, AmigaOS 4 and newer will run on third party PPC hardware. That could of course have been fantastic news, but for some reason Eyetech, as a thank you for services not rendered and already being a "partner," got to invent a compulsory hardware-licensing scheme.

    In order to see AmigaOS run on a piece of hardware, a hardware vendor has to:
    • Get a license from Amiga Inc., both for himself and his hardware.
    • Become an AmigaOS vendor, distribute AmigaOS together with his hardware and provide software support.
    • Apply some form of hardware-license verification mechanism, a dongle, to his hardware.

    AmigaOS will NOT be sold separate from hardware.

    Not very surprisingly, Eyetech is the only distributor that has accepted Amiga Inc's and Eyetech's rules. They are now distributing Mai Logic's Teron CX and Teron PX POP motherboards under the trademarks "AmigaOne SE" and "AmigaOne XE" respectively. (NB: the 4 figure price listed on Mai's Teron CX page is for a developer board including unlimited dev tech support, they sell their commercial version for $500). The market for the exact same hardware is split up into one microscopic "for AmigaOS" part and one "for everyone else" part.

    If you're interested in AmigaOS, you're not allowed to buy it. You have to buy a new Teron board via the sole Amiga Inc-licensed hardware distributor Eyetech. You aren't allowed to buy a board cheaper directly from Mai. A very easily made port to other POP boards like e.g. the Pegasos, or to (in comparison) cheaply and abundantly available PowerMacs can't happen until someone decides to become an Amiga Inc licensee and AmigaOS distributor, and renames the hardware to "Amiga."

    In one blow, AmigaOS by default lost every possible hardware option on the planet, except for the "licensed" one.

    "Why do they not want to sell AmigaOS?" you ask. Who knows. Amiga Inc is a newly formed company that has nothing to do with AmigaOS (and certainly nothing to do with any hardware), their interest lies in selling their "content engine" AACE/AmigaDE to PDA and mobile phone vendors, and distributing third party developers' little games for that thing. Apparently, and judging from their silence in response to e.g. this petition from AmigaOS fans, they seem to just not care as long as they get some licensing cash from a few Teron boards sold to trademark fanatics. The only apparent beneficiary of this damn ludicrous mess is the sole licensed hardware distributor, Eyetech. Hyperion, the company that has taken over AmigaOS development, has repeatedly stated that they themselves naturally are interested in seeing AmigaOS run on as much hardware as possible, and since AmigaOS no longer is tightly coupled to custom chips or something like that, the HAL is very easily portable.

    --
    Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
    1. Re:No Amigas by Seehund · · Score: 2

      Exactly. Not only theoretically, but practically.

      The bare board (Teron CX) is $300 without a CPU, in single specimens. Buy a container load, and...

      One thing that's f*cked up is that potential AmigaOS users wouldn't be allowed to buy those boards, because they wouldn't be dongled, bundled with AmigaOS and sold via a licensed distributor.

      "We will require, as part of the licence conditions, that a copy of Amiga OS is purchased with all boards sold that are capable of running it" - there has to be two separate markets, one dongled/bundled/licensed/microscopic/overpriced "for AmigaOS customers" and one normal "for everyone else."

      --
      Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
    2. Re:No Amigas by Seehund · · Score: 3, Informative

      It doesn't matter what the heck kind of hardware-license verification mechanism Eyetech happened to have chowen (which are socketed ROMs).

      It's totally irrelevant if it's a dongle in ROM or a requirement to paint the southbridge chip blue.

      Other hypothetical licencees are "free" to choose another method, like a USB dongle - which serves as an excellent illustration of why the silly "anti piracy" excuse I've seen used is total and utter bollocks. A USB dongle is no more secure just because a hardware vendor is forced to supply it with his hardware, than it is if it's supplied with a separately sold copy of AmigaOS!

      No, Thendic haven't said that they'll get a license. They have said that they'd love to see AmigaOS run on their hardware, the Pegasos mobo.
      In the Normal (non-Amiga) world this means just that, that the software vendor ports his software, prints "runs on hardware X" on the CD cover, and tries to SELL as MANY COPIES as possible of his software!

      No, the license is not free. There might be no fee, but there are royalties to use the licensed "Amiga" trademark. It wouldn't matter even if that would be free - there's still a licensing/bundling/OS-selling-and-supporting/dongl ing requirement made on hardware vendors, whereas a hardware vendor has the option to sell his hardware normally to everyone else. Which option is more attractive?

      Do you think Apple will be interested in an Amiga license for their Macs? Do you think that even if someone else licensed/dongled a batch of Macs and distributed them with AmigaOS, it would be OK to not let AmigaOS and its customers have access to the ENTIRE Mac market, regardless of vendors and bundling/licensing agreements?

      It's a sick situation, and it's killing AmigaOS.

      --
      Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
    3. Re:No Amigas by Jhan · · Score: 2

      No, Thendic haven't said that they'll get a license. They have said that they'd love to see AmigaOS run on their hardware, the Pegasos mobo.

      If they would love it so much, how come that...

      Hyperion ordered a Pegasos developer board about 8 (more?) months ago, in order to port OS 4 to Pegasos. They still haven't received it, even though Pegasos is now being mass (heh) produced and sold to the public.

      Don't bite my head of. Don't go ranting about THE NAME. I really like Pegasos. I even like MorphOS a lot. It's just that it's my second option. I want a Pegasos with Amiga OS 4.

      --

      I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.

    4. Re:No Amigas by Seehund · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't know, Bill Buck (loose-lipped CEO of Thendic, vendor of the Pegasos POP mobo and the "AmigaOS classic" compatible MorphOS, for those who wonder) has not yet shared any private correspondence regarding that... ;)

      The "word on the street" is that Hyperion only filled out and faxed back a survey of interest sent out to potentially interested developers some time last year, and then never actually ordered a board.

      I see there's a thread on ANN.lu now, and from Buck's posts there it seems like Hyperion haven't contacted them since February, and there's also a public PR stunt about inviting Hyperion's Ben Hermans to lunch and offering a Pegasos board.

      I seriously doubt that Hyperion - or anyone else - would actually be refused to buy a piece of hardware by anyone.

      If an OS is to be ported to another piece of hardware (and the Pegasos and TeronCX are nearly identical in that respect), it's of course up to the software vendor/developer to make it happen, nobody else. Again, it's not as if it's difficult to get hold of a Pegasos (or a friggin' Mac or whatever).

      OTOH it's pretty pointless for Hyperion to start porting the OS to any hardware, until some hypothetical distributor rides in on a white horse waving a license and a dongle. That's the obstacle which must be removed.

      The big issue is not what preoccupies a few fanatic trolls in the Amiga community, i.e. some kind of twisted, invented animosity and faction-forming among people who for one reason or another have "chosen" one POP board over another, or one Amiga-classic emulating OS over another. It's about the survival of AmigaOS and its dependency on the availability of hardware options, which unfortunately are things largely ignored in the pathetic flamewars.

      --
      Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
    5. Re:No Amigas by Seehund · · Score: 2

      "No new Amigas"? I'm sorry but Eyetech's license for the "Amiga" trademark from Amiga Inc. is perfectly valid.

      Did I question the validity of someone's trademark license? I'm sure everything's signed and sealed. It's the invention of those two companies after all.

      The AmigaOne is an "Amiga" wether you think of it as such or not.

      Oh yeah? And my daddy is stronger than your daddy! Lalalala-I-can't-hear-you!

      What the hell kind of argument was that supposed to be?

      An Amiga was a home computer system that ran AmigaOS. The same company made both the hardware and the OS. The hardware was a custom job, as all computers back then, and the OS was dependent on custom chips and tightly coupled to the Amiga hardware. The hardware and the OS were made for eachother.

      Those days are over. THANK GOD! Unless some industry giant or inhumanly rich hardware genius comes along and pulls out the fastest, most advanced and cheapest hardware anyone's ever seen - and can keep up with development and pricing - then "new Amiga hardware" is something to fear.

      AmigaOS is all that is left today, and you simply cannot have avoided that nobody makes or is planning to make any hardware with AmigaOS in mind, especially not Amiga Inc. Instead AmigaOS will run on third party hardware. No, you haven't missed that.


      > I'm sure those "AmigaOne 1200/4000"
      > motherboards are still praised somewhere on the
      > horribly outdated amiga.com web site.

      You should really try reading the official information available from Amiga Inc. before citisizing them. Your speculations are not appreciated, Seehund.


      Oh well. Here is my "speculation." While you read it and weep, please note the old humourous references to an operating system based on "AmigaDE". It's really good for a laugh. Ooooh, they've got that embarrassing old Zico joke still up there! "AmigaOS will run on... ummm... a computer... with some processor of some kind... And a next generation Matrox GFX card! That's mighty important!"

      That garbage is linked to from THE FRONT PAGE of the "corporate" site.

      Your disappreciation of my "speculation" is not appreciated... Go troll on amiga.org or something.


      > In order to see AmigaOS run on a piece of
      > hardware, a hardware vendor has to:

      That should read; "In order for your product to be officially AmigaOS4 licensed, the hardware vendor has to:".


      Which is synonymous in this case. What the FUCK is your problem?

      AmigaOS vendor? Please elaborate, I have no idea of what you're refering to. You do NOT have to distribute AmigaOS4 with your licensed product.

      "we will require, as part of the licence conditions, that a copy of Amiga OS is purchased with all boards sold that are capable of running it."

      A licensed product == a dongled product (required for licensing) == a board that is capable of running AmigaOS.

      What you intentionally keep misunderstanding is that when you decide to ship AmigaOS4 with your product, it must have the hardware verification binaries installed on some kind of ROM attached to the hardware. Preferably a FlashROM, but a USB dongle for example, would do the work as well.

      I've had it with you. I have said THE EXACT SAME FUCKING THING as quoted above FOR EIGHT DAMN MONTHS, and I even said IN THE VERY SAME POST that you're replying to, and you start babbling about me failing to understand?

      The hardware vendor does NOT have to provide support for AmigaOS4. On the contrary, Amiga Inc. is willing to provide support for the licensed hardware as a part of their AmigaOS4 services.

      That's total bollocks. Amiga Inc has NOTHING to do with AmigaOS apart from the trademark and license.

      There's nothing more odd about this policy than the one of Apple and their MacOS ROM images.

      With the "minor" difference of course that Apple design, make and sell, and make a living out of selling, THEIR OWN DAMN HARDWARE, with which they can do what the fuck they want! You might have heard of that hardware, it's called Macintosh.

      However, the difference is that Amiga Inc. allows *anyone* to become an Amiga hardware manufacturer rather than Apple's total MacOS hardware monopoly. On top of that, they're willing to provide customer support for the licensed hardware as a part of their AmigaOS4 services. Does all this really sound so awful?

      "Amiga Inc ALLOWS anyone to become an AMIGA HARDWARE manufacturer"? And you compare the AmigaOS situation with Apple's OWN HARDWARE? And you top it off with basically saying "it doesn't suck because it sucks less than another totally unrelated and incomparable and irrelevant thing that really sucks"?

      Begone. You made me SHOUT. My brain hurts.

      --
      Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
  64. Re:A beige box. by Megane · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You do know that Amiga is just a board, right?

    Mod this up! I'm tired of people comparing the price of random stripped down equipment with the price of a fully loaded Apple box. Usually it's people comparing the price of a headless white-box PC vs an Apple system that includes an LCD display, sometimes even the Cinema display. This time it's someone comparing a bare CPU board (not even a case and power supply!) with a fully loaded high-end Mac.

    Don't forget to count what your time is worth to tinker with all this crap and get it working... call it at least $10/hr. And that's time to go shopping for all this crap and to open the boxes too. So what if you happen to like putting computer parts together... that's less time you could be spending playing Counterstrike. Er, except Counterstrike won't run on this thing when you're done. All you've got is a pretty toy with all the (in)compatibility of Mas OS X and none of the apps.

    Someone else has already posted that once you go through your shopping list (case, power supply, video card, RAM, hard drive, keyboard, mouse, display), you've already spent enough to go ahead and get a 15" iMac. Not only does the iMac look better, but it's got a properly supported OS that's had two years to get stable, not some beta that'll be released Real Soon Now.

    If you're going to compare prices, why not compare the price of an Amiga board ($600-$800) with your typical ATX mobo and AMD/Intel CPU, which runs more like $200-$300, or even less if you don't mind something "old" like a 1GHz Celeron or Duron.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  65. I'll be impressed by Wordsmith · · Score: 2

    I'll be impressed when the G4 C64's finally go on sale.

  66. Re:"The Amiga" - Takes Time by KalenDarrie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, look at it this way. They just got back into the game. I spoke with a few more knowledgeable friends of mine briefly(I've never even touched an Amiga before) and I'm of the opinion that this could be just a dip into the pool.

    After all, for the real stuff to come back, you have to start small. Its been a long time. The custom hardware and special nature of the Amiga can't just manifest suddenly. Takes time. Have to get money for more R&D and have to build awareness and get the name known once more.

    This could be an opportunity to bring back the old. I don't know if it truly is or if the folk in charge now are thinking that, but it's worth a second look and some considering.

    --
    Kalen D'arrie
  67. Features from AmigaOS that I miss by hasse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here are some of the features from the original AmigaOS (now nearly 20 years old) that I still miss in operating systems today:

    The device system. Need to pipe something over TCP/IP? Just use TCP:. Need to open a console for whatever reason. Just use CON:. Etc. etc.

    Full localization of all programs through a library (it still amazes me that programs for Windows are released in different language versions).

    Dynamic size RAM disk, always present. Just copy something to RAM:, and there it is. No more temp files all over the place.

    Revocerable ram disk (RAD). A ram disk that survives booting, and can even be booted from.

    Datatypes. A kind of codec architecture for every kind of file. Programs didn't need to know what a gif file, a jpeg file or a text file was or how to show them on screen. The os could handle that.

    Long filenames from the start. A jpeg picture was always picture.jpeg.

    Fully user patchable. Any os function could be patched with SetPatch. The only reason people have been able to use it up until now (and also a virus writers dream in the old days).

    System wide scripting/IPC with Rexx (ARexx really). All serious programs were fully scriptable with ARexx. Extremely powerful concept.

    Screens. Think of them like virtual desktops. But every program could have one if you wanted. Flipping screens were instantenous and if you dragged them, you could even have split-screen resolutions (although this was more thanks to the hardware).

    A powerfull shell, aswell as a nice intuitive (but not overly, like the Mac) graphic environment. Linux got this. Windows still doesn't.

    These were just some of the features that made AmigaOS a tinkerers dream. Sheer elegance all the way. It saddens me that Linux, with it's monolithic and archaic approach, is the best viable os alternative at the moment. People growing up with computers nowaday have really missed out on something special.

  68. The OS won't even be free! by Megane · · Score: 2

    I just looked at the page, and noticed that the OS is only included in the price for orders before Dec 31 or when OS 4 is released, whichever comes first. So add that (however much it will be; they don't say) into your costs as well! Or else it will just be one helluva expensive Linux box.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  69. It was about REAL Innovation... by skandalfo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, in its time, I LOVED Amigas because they were a far better design that competing architectures: - Custom chips for specialized tasks. - True multitasking OS, including dynamically mounted filesystems and device drivers. - Built in graphical environment. - True AutoconfigTM (PNP-like). Only now consumer PC hardware is getting close to that innovation level (once technologic advancement and Moore's law is taken into account). PC hardware got up with Amiga rather quickly (custom graphic/audio chips, specific cards for specific needs). It took several years for this to happen after beeping 8086's and 80286's. They lack, anyway, true PNP support. While Autoconfig was REAL "Plug & Play", what today we actually have is "Plug & Install the f***ing broken drivers if you have them for your current Winslows version & Play if you are lucky". In Amiga the driver came in a ROM with the hardware, and you could install filesystem drivers directly into the partition table, so you could take your WhoKnowsWhichFS-formatted hard-drive to your friend's computer and read it flawlessly after pluggin it. About operating systems, it's true that the original design for AmigaOS left out very important things, like memory protection, virtual memory, security and a truly generical device model. These shortcomings were the main problems for the system to evolve further, but may be understood taking into account the state of the HW those days (neither 68000 or 8086 knew what an MMU unit was). But the important thing about the OS (and with lesser importance the HW) was innovation. Nobody had true multitasking then in a home computer (Macs, windows and GEM had stupid, fake multitasking). Nobody got an environment so straighforward, easy, dynamic, versatile and simple. Windows doesn't have yet all those dynamic features, and even Linux is still catching up (like recent developments for devfs and not so recent kernel modules, for instance). I won't advocate for the resurrection of the Amiga. I would rather prefer to be able to use a current platform, equally elegant and innovative. BeOS was the closest thing I saw for a long time. Hard to kill like Unix, friendly to configure like Amiga. What a shame that we allowed Microsoft to kill it! I think I would currently bet for Linux as my innovation horse, although being so heavily Unix-based, it will never have the elegant, easy to understand philosophy the Amiga had. I only hope the unsurpassable massive power of Free Software allows it to be successful where BeOS failed.

  70. My own meandering thoughts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm an old fan of the Amigas and paid hard earned/stolen/borrowed money for my Amiga 500 w/SupraDrive/Clock and Amiga 1200 w/RAM exp/750HD but this whole haphazard attempt to profit from the nostalgia seems misguided. There's certainly little to no entertainment or productivity value to be had when compared to PeeCee offerings that have had years and years to not only bridge the gap but blast right past anything the Amiga ever offered other than the hardware cursor which is still more responsive than any Windows box.

    As others have said, this thing is not the Amiga reborn. Hacking Workbench to work with new hardware and calling it 4.0 will never be profitable; not even on a novelty scale. The thing isn't even backwards compatible which would be the only reason I'd buy one. Using a cable to make two computers act like the old one by itself does not count as backwards compatibility. 1 + 1 != 1

    I still have an Amiga 1200 in my closet with an entire packing box full of (probably)magnetically migrated floppies. If I want to watch the SpaceBalls demo for the 2000th time or play "Shadow of the irritatingly difficult Beast" I'll pull that out and load it.

    This thing just cannot compete in todays market and I feel very sorry for the investors, early adopters and most importantly, the hopeful developers and designers whom I have much respect for. I'm sure they've put their hearts and souls into this effort and it saddens me to think about the eventuality of this endeavor.

    Now I'm just SAD...

    AC

  71. Re:It was about REAL Innovation... (now good post) by skandalfo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    (The one before was my first post to Slashdot) (I have corrected the new lines, I hope... :)

    Well, in its time, I LOVED Amigas because they were a far better design that competing architectures:

    - Custom chips for specialized tasks.

    - True multitasking OS, including dynamically mounted filesystems and device drivers.

    - Built in graphical environment.

    - True AutoconfigTM (PNP-like).

    Only now consumer PC hardware is getting close to that innovation level (once technologic advancement and Moore's law is taken into account).

    PC hardware got up with Amiga rather quickly (custom graphic/audio chips, specific cards for specific needs). It took several years for this to happen after beeping 8086's and 80286's.

    They lack, anyway, true PNP support. While Autoconfig was REAL "Plug & Play", what today we actually have is "Plug & Install the f***ing broken drivers if you have them for your current Winslows version & Play if you are lucky". In Amiga the driver came in a ROM with the hardware, and you could install filesystem drivers directly into the partition table, so you could take your WhoKnowsWhichFS-formatted hard-drive to your friend's computer and read it flawlessly after pluggin it.

    About operating systems, it's true that the original design for AmigaOS left out very important things, like memory protection, virtual memory, security and a truly generical device model.

    These shortcomings were the main problems for the system to evolve further, but may be understood taking into account the state of the HW those days (neither 68000 or 8086 knew what an MMU unit was).

    But the important thing about the OS (and with lesser importance the HW) was innovation. Nobody had true multitasking then in a home computer (Macs, windows and GEM had stupid, fake multitasking). Nobody got an environment so straighforward, easy, dynamic, versatile and simple.

    Windows doesn't have yet all those dynamic features, and even Linux is still catching up (like recent developments for devfs and not so recent kernel modules, for instance).

    I won't advocate for the resurrection of the Amiga. I would rather prefer to be able to use a current platform, equally elegant and innovative.

    BeOS was the closest thing I saw for a long time. Hard to kill like Unix, friendly to configure like Amiga. What a shame that we allowed Microsoft to kill it!

    I think I would currently bet for Linux as my innovation horse, although being so heavily Unix-based, it will never have the elegant, easy to understand philosophy the Amiga had. I only hope the unsurpassable massive power of Free Software allows it to be successful where BeOS failed.

  72. That's a switch by Interrobang · · Score: 3, Funny

    A friend of mine who's still using his Amiga of old has an amusing anecdote similar to this: At one time he had the "fastest Mac in the world" -- an Amiga running it under an emulator. He said the Apple guys were really pissed. :) (Hi, Knute!)

    I still miss my old Amiga. We had some good times. --snif-- I doubt I'll get this one, though, as it's probably more fun to sit around and be nostalgic in a diffuse kind of way.

  73. Re:Seriously, who is going to use this? by amigabill · · Score: 2, Informative

    I will.

    Why?

    Games, apps, internet, email, word processor, software development, etc. Much the same stuff you probably use Linux instead of Windows for.

    Why would I do this with AmigaOS? Why not? I happen to like it. Why would you guys use Linux instead of Windows? It's such a small group of users compared to the world of Windows folks out there... You happen to like Linux more than you like Windows, and that's good enough reason for you. Why not for us Amiga fans?

    Some would think you slashdot guys insane to use Linux for games, apps, internet, etc. "Everyone else uses Windows, why don't you?" Sound familiar?

    I'm putting together a Linux box to use as a firewall. A friend of mine couldn't fathom why in the world I'd even consider using Linux. He stumbled upon a retail boxed Linux port of Heretic 2 a while back, and got it for me because he thought I should have something to actually use on Linux, as if this box was the one and only piece of software to ever be made for Linux. Now, you and I know better, there's a bunch of stuff to use Linux for. My friend is wrong about that.

    Now, having said that, you are wrong about how useful an Amiga is. It's the only platform I use at home for email, period. Nice and immune to all them email viruses going around. Also nice and immune to web browser viruses. Linux is also immune to a lot of this, sure. But I like my email client, so that is what I use. My CD burner is on my Amiga. I have scanner and image editing software. I have games, which believe it or not include a native AmigaOS PPC port of that same Heretic 2 game. Quake 2 was just released. I have native AmigaOS port of Myst. I have a word processor I'm happy with, and they're working on porting OpenOffice, which you Linux guys are so fond of. I like my web browser, and who in the world has bothered to make hacks into Amiga computers via holes in an Amiga browser? It's also faster than Moz is. No, it isn't as up to date as I'd like, and does fail on a number of web sites, and when it does I do fire up Moz on my x86 box.

    Point is, Amiga is not completely useless as you believe, just like Linux is not completely useless as my friend thinks. If there wasn't a use for it, there wouldn't be any market at all. They wouldn't be doing this if they didn't feel there was a market... Sure, it's a small market, but it most certainly is there, like it or not.

    I always hate to see Amiga related stories on slashdot, because people like you just don't get it, for much the same reason that Windows sheep don't get Linux. Though, oddly enough, the recent thread about building PPC motherboards from scratch had some rather nice things to say about the AmigaOne hardware. Nice to see you're back to bashing anything with the "A" word involved.

  74. mandatory by Lxy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Amiga.. the only way a /.'er can get a chick.

    --

    There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
    :wq
  75. Re:A1200? by Virtex · · Score: 3, Informative

    Say what you will about the limited hard drive space, but the Amiga could do more with 170MB back then than most computers can do with 170GB today. It was very efficient with regards to disk space.

    I used to know a guy who set up kiosks and displays for movie theaters using Amiga hardware. He had systems that allowed people to interactively search and view movie times, view movie trailers (from a laser disc), and do all kinds of fancy overlays and screen wipes. All this for an entire theater, including the OS, software, graphics, and data, would only fill about 10MB of disk space. How much do you think it would take these days to do the same thing?

    --
    For every post, there is an equal and opposite re-post.
  76. hmm.... by Suppafly · · Score: 2

    So you buy the hardware now, but then you get the OS in early 2003 assuming it's released on schedule?

  77. Re:Paula? Is that you? by downix · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, correction:
    The A3000+ had 100 units produced, and were standard AGA amigas, running Alice, Lisa and Paula.

    The AGA's replacement was AAA, found in the 3 Nyx motherboards. They replaced the 3 custom-chips with 4:
    Andrea -- replaced Agnus. Added a RISC-like semi-processor to the copper, to speed up operations. Also added new modes to the blitter, like pattern fill.
    Denise was replaced by 2 chips:
    Linda -- A line display buffer, could decode video-stream instructions on a line-per-line basis.
    Monica -- The actual display chip, contains the color-palettes/color decode tables, the HAM display system, playfield decoder, sprite display system, etc. Also had the added ability to do video-input.
    Mary -- Paula's replacement. This chip actually surpasses even chips availible in PC's now. Contained raw, CGR, MFM, RLL and bitplane mark encoding. The "Floppy Controller" was so advanced it could push a CD-ROM or low-speed hard drive. 64kHz sampling rate, 8 channels, 12-bits of audio volume, could sample in 8 or 16 bits, supported digital out directly, and of course the ability to use channels to modulate another channel.

    AAA was on revision 2 when Commodore went under. By all practicality, it was 14-18 months from completion. The design was altered to become the last Amiga chipset commodore worked on: Hombre. Hombre dumped sprtes and planar video, replaced the copper with a PA-RISC CPU with the copper commands added, and PCI support for inclusion on an expantion card. An evolved Hombre could compete even today, but the money needed and time demand makes that a pipe dream as well.

    --
    Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
  78. Well Duh. by Bingo+Foo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Amiga (from the beginning) was not really about GUI elegance or prowess. It was about cutting edge hardware. When Amigas hit the market, "IBM clones" as they were called, had EGA graphics, PC speaker sound, and a "boot to BASIC" interface, and Macintoshes had the WIMP desktop in honest to goodness one-bit black and white, and a system beep for sound.

    Amiga came out with a machine with "virtually" 4096 colors display due to its custom on-board graphics chips, a servicable but inelegant GUI, and built in digital stereo audio. This enabled it to be the PlayStation2 of its day. It was easy to program and developers jumped on board from the beginning.

    It's popularity among gam3rz led to it's software being the most pirated around, and while the gam3rz were trading their Psygnosis games, they also copied all of the office/productivity/graphics software around, to the point where it was easier to get a pirated copy of a $100 word processor or $300 MIDI sequencer from the clerk at the mall software store than to find a store that carried the package for sale, even if you had the money to spend (True story.)

    Amiga was loved to death by W4r3ZaX0rz and dead it will stay, because its real advantage as "ultimate gaming hardware" will never be regained.

    --
    taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
  79. Re:Paula? Is that you? by operagost · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe they should just call it "Rosie". Now, that says FAT!

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  80. Re:Amiga is Stable by vidarh · · Score: 2
    Amiga Basic was a Microsoft product, so I'm not surprised. It was also slower at many tasks on my Amiga 500 than my Commodore 64 were...

    As for stability, the programs I used were stable, and even when I was writing my own assembly programs I rarely crashed the machine. But the very nature of a machine without MMU is that it is trivial to crash and programs needs to be written to a much higher quality to be usable...

    But I still like the Amiga. It still has innovative features that I aren't in widespread use, such as Datatypes, a sane, well working DLL system, a standard scripting language for automating applications that made it easy to expose functionality from your app (Arexx), Assigns (aliases for paths that shows up in file selector windows etc.), Screens (thought some version of Enlightenment apparently introduced screens that works approximately like the Amiga, except for the ability to have different resolutions on different screens) and more.

    I like Linux, and it's certainly more solid, but from a design point of view the Amiga was much more well structured and clean than any Linux distribution I've used (and don't get me started on Windows ;)

  81. CommodoreOne sites by Antity · · Score: 2

    Last time I checked (~5 minutes ago), this CommodoreOne link pointed to a Yahoo/GeoCities page that was out of available traffic.

    Magically, it seems to work again (has to be located somewhere where a new day starts at something:55 minutes instead of full hour :-)).

    If it should be shut again, here's the official mirror for CommodoreOne (taken from the page when it worked).

    --
    42. Easy. What is 32 + 8 + 2?
  82. Oh, the memories =) by jafuser · · Score: 2
    It all seems moot to me if I can't put in my old 3.5 DD OFS/NFS floppies and boot up to revive some old memories...

    I do seriously miss the device modularity and directory standardization of the Amiga though... Assigns/device names were nice... All CLI commands were primarily in C:, Most configs in S:, DLLs in LIBS:, boot drive was always SYSTEM:, etc... That was a sweet setup, and nothing today seems to compare to that level of OS organization and potential.

    Hell, I remember writing Arexx scripts that talked to the abstracted TCP: device to do all kinds of nifty things (SMTP, NNTP, IRC, etc), long before I learned more complex languages like C and Java... I even got some of them bundled with AWeb (my 15 seconds of fame, as it were) =)

    Will this bring back those days? Probably not... At least not unless I can find a VNC server for this system, since I've got enough monitors on my desk already =)

    Anyone know of a graphics editor that'll run on win2k that works like DPaint did? BTW, EA has come quite a long way since then, eh? =)

    --
    Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  83. At Least Three Markets by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Some people are saying there is little reason for this product existing, or that it's just for nostalgia. IMHO, there are actually three different markets for this motherboard (and two of them also apply to the competing bplan/Morphos project):
    • The Amiga name. Some people nostalgically want to see a new machine with the word "Amiga" on it. They'll buy it for the name. (I have trouble identifying with this position.)

      And I guess I'll throw another group into this category: there may be people who have actually been following whatever Fleecy's software team has been doing and think that it's a good idea. (I am very ignorant about this.)

    • Software performance/elegance freaks. Some people want a new platform where they can run a super-light OS. This kind of thing will appeal to some '80s hackers who think that much of the last 10-15 years of the software industry's "progress" has been illusion.

      Why this software goal requires a different hardware platform, is difficult to explain, and is controversial. Maybe the Mac guys can explain it to you. ;-)

      (Some of your Penguinheads might fall into this category, although I think prolonged exposure to the overall Unix environment, can kill this type of thinking. When you start thinking that X11 is a good idea, it's probably too late.)

    • OpenPPC fans. A lot of people, more than just Amigans, wanted the PREP/CHRP/OpenPPC thing started by the Apple/Motorola/IBM alliance a decade ago, to take off. (There are valid motivations for wanting this. Some are rational, and some are irrational.)

      Looking at the prices, I don't think the revolution is here yet. But if it's ever going to start, it has to start somewhere. These projects can possibly create at least some installed base, which may lead to there being a real "cheap PPC" market down the road.

      (Some of you Penguinheads might be in this category as well.)

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  84. Nice, but at this stage, so? by nurb432 · · Score: 2

    In its day amigas were something special, so were the Atari's ( my personal preference, but not wanting to re-start an old war here.. see where that got us .. )

    But today its pretty much standard equipment..

    So its pretty much irrelevant now. Even if it also ran TOS :P

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  85. Amiga or not, this is a GoodThing(tm) by stokes · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Personally, I've never used an Amiga, other than playing with a Video Toaster setup at a NewTek party. I do see this as a very good thing, however, for a number of reasons:

    1. It's another OS with a GUI. Maybe they'll eventually break away from some of the paradigms and other bad habits of existing UI design. I'm not holding my breath, though.
    2. It's another machine using a PowerPC. It's a good processor -- smaller die size and a fraction of the heat of a Pentium or its kin, et cetera -- but is currently way too expensive. More demand could drive down the prices.
    3. More is better. I have my personal doubts about the effectiveness of the "free market," but in this case the competition is clearly beneficial. Neither Apple nor Microsoft would have advanced as far as they have without having each other to compete with/copy from/whatnot. Another player could push everyone even further. Even if this incarnation of the Amiga fails, maybe they'll put forth some good ideas to which the others will have to answer.
  86. Re:alive? by miksuh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you don't follow Amiga-news then you might think it's dead. That's understandadble. But thats the mistake what people usually make. If you or majority of people don't hear something awhile it does not mean it does not exist anymore. Usually people stop following things they don't care or which they THINK don't exist anymore. And when all people around you use PCs and all you hear is PC this, PC that, then it's understandable you think something like Amiga is dead. If you don't hear anyone talking about it then how could you know it still is alive. That's what Windows does to other OSs, most of todays kids don't even know MacOS exists, but is MAC a dead platform ? I don't think so :) If you would have followed Amiga-forums you should have noticed that there was lot's of energy and action all these years. So Amiga newer was dead for us, maybe it was dead for mainstream guys, but BeOS, Linux and MAC are dead for mainstream too and those still exist so why couldn't Amiga ?

  87. Re:PPC mobo with BoingBall Sticker. by dbrutus · · Score: 2

    PPC is a dead end? PPC was always Power-lite. It's just that the desktop is growing up. So, will Amiga work with the PPC 970?

  88. Re:what a crazy year by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 2

    Apple plans to put out computers with CPUs made by IBM

    Umm, have you not heard of the G3? Guess who makes those.

  89. Re:cheap PPC Linux box by Tokerat · · Score: 2

    Does this mean that PPC motherboards will start to become availible? Is there finnaly hope I could one day build my own PPC (read: not nessisarily Mac)?

    P.S. Apple CPUs are upgradable, but you usually have to wait for another company to make an upgrade card :-\ Better than nothing, I suppose, but for a server farm the Amiga is the way to go.

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  90. Re:configurate by darien · · Score: 2

    Here, we say 'confugure', there they say 'configurate'. Here we say 'commercial'. There, they say 'advert'. Here, we say 'color', there they say 'colour'. Here we say 'street sign'. There, they say 'street furniture'.

    Speaking as a Briton: no we don't, yes we do, yes we do and no we don't, respectively. I've never heard anyone say "configurate" or "street furniture." Maybe it's a German thing?

  91. Actually by Snaller · · Score: 2

    The first chips for the Amiga (before it was called Amiga 1000) were called AGNES - somewhere along the line (perhaps a typo?!) it changed name and gender to Agnus...

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:Actually by Snaller · · Score: 2

      >Uh, no?

      Uh, yes.

      Check this guy

      I still have an Amiga from before they called addded the "1000", perhaps I'll find the crate some day.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  92. Re:configurate by WowTIP · · Score: 2

    Maybe it's a German thing?

    Nah, it's a swedish thing. Or rather, my thing. Sorry, my english vocabulary seems misconfigured. :)

    But then, what do you say? "configurationize" seems pretty awkward to me?

    --

    --

    "I'm surfin the dead zone
    In the twilight, unknown"
  93. Re:The old days by WowTIP · · Score: 2

    I stand corrected then. :)

    Last thing I heard, it was still under development (planned).

    --

    --

    "I'm surfin the dead zone
    In the twilight, unknown"
  94. Germany i.e. Amigas outside the US by theolein · · Score: 2

    The Amiga had it's biggest userbase in Germany of all places (perhaps the German tradition of tinkering has something to do with it), and after Commodore was announced DOA , one of the later owners was a German company who failed miserably to market it well.

    I am amazed that a hardware/OS name has managed to persist as long as this has and this is right up the street for exactly those people who want a hardware software combo that is more flexible than Linux (although x86 tinkering is a huge industry and this is the major roadblock to the PPC mobo being accepted).

    If I had the money right now I would buy one to tinker with: a lot of people who learnt assembler in the eighties learned it on the Amiga. The Amiga was *the* platform to make super efficient fast code on, because the hardware was accessible and the OS didn't stand in your way. I really hope this gives the PPC platform a boost.

  95. Re:The old days by uncoveror · · Score: 2

    I wonder if the new Amiga will run Amiga 500 software? I would love to play Smurf Hunt again! "Okay suckas!" Bang Bang.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  96. Re:configurate by styrotech · · Score: 2

    The only place I've heard the term 'street furniture'* was in civil engineering to refer to road markers, cats-eyes, road paint etc. ie everything that went on after the top layer of seal and before the traffic.

    * Although the term really was 'road furniture'. And is was just technical jargon for engineers to talk to other engineers about or to write as a category in a spec etc. Definately not as everyday language for the wider public.

  97. Re:Paula? Is that you? by styrotech · · Score: 2

    Maybe they should just call it "Rosie". Now, that says FAT!

    So that was what that old ACDC song was about - having a souped up Amiga!

  98. Dongles get cracked in 5mins by DABANSHEE · · Score: 2

    So don't panic.

    I'm sure with all the Amiga heads out there, that it would be piss easy to install it on any equilivent POP board.

    Who gives a fuck if they're breaking some bloody licence? 99% of computers users don't.

  99. Nostalgia alert! by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 3, Informative

    I moved to the Amiga in 1988, after learning all about BASIC on a C-64. I was only 10 at the time and had a budget of $0 so I relied on my parents for games, demos etc. but there was a users group - two actually, the Latham Amiga Users Group (LAUG) and the Capital District Amiga Users Group (CDAUG).

    I'd tag along with my dad to meetings and we'd get floppy disks from Fred Fish. We had Digi-Paint, which used a b&w camera that could take color images using red, green and blue cellophane - pretty ingenious at the time. Then there was Deluxe Paint III, with animation and animated brushes and tutorials on VHS (I remember creating the bouncing ball demo). I also learned how to use MED (a music editor) and Deluxe Music for writing out scores. These were some real tools that taught you how to be clever. And every application could run off a floppy - with only 20MB of hard disk space you had better be able to run things off floppies.

    Speech synthesis was another wonderful thing - the program I used even made a simple mouth that would animate when it spoke!

    I think the Amiga's crash was the best I've ever seen too - Guru meditations! Somebody at Commodore realized that if they could make you laugh at a crash, the problem wouldn't seem so bad.

    When my dad decided we should take the plunge into PC's, I was disappointed at how far behind they were. Sound cards?? Amigas had built-in sound! Mouse drivers? The Amiga's mouse worked right off the bat! And don't get me started on those damn 8.3 filenames. Windows 3.1 was a beast, and where's the icon for the hard disk? But it had a CD-ROM drive, eight megs of ram (when most new computers had four- we splurged), and hundreds of megabytes of hard disk space. And I knew other people who had PC's - that was important. Now that I'm a Linux user I don't know if I have any needs that an Amiga would fill. I hope I'm wrong.

    --
    I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
  100. Re:configurate by darien · · Score: 2

    We just say "configure" - though I can't fault your deduction from "configuration" (which would be correct by analogy with "innovation," "enumeration," etc).

    Of course, the noun from "configure" ought really to be "configurement" (by analogy with "procure"), "configurity" (by analogy with "secure"), "configury" (by analogy with "injure"), "configurance" (by analogy with "assure") or "configure" (by analogy with "cure").

  101. Re:The old days by Archfeld · · Score: 2

    Anyone still got a TOASTER ? That alone would make the new hardware worthwhile. Man we had fun rendering things over the course of 3 days :)

    You still out there Smitty ? not heard from you in a while...I miss the 24 hour hacking sessions.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?