Ars Technica Reviews AmigaOS 4.0

Amiga Lover writes "While tales of the troubles behind the Amiga's ownership abound over the last 10 years, work has been going on in the background for newer releases of the operating system that powered some of the most desirable computers from the 1980s. You can now buy brand new Amiga motherboards, and the operating system is very close to a final release. Jeremy Reimer from arstechnica reviews the current developer preview of AmigaOS 4.0, going over this new small and fast OS in thorough arstechnica style."

Comments

Modern OS?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it have true multitasking and memory protection? It surely looks like a great modern OS, but is it more than just a toy?

Re:Modern OS?

[rdc_uk]

Amiga OS had both those in 1985, IIRC.

Re:Modern OS?

[amigabill]

AmigaOS has had preemptive multitasking since day 1 back in the 1980's.

Memory protection is another matter, it's not there as Linux users would expect it to be, no. It's a highly desired feature of course, but implementing it properly is an issue as it conflicts with some fundamental aspects of AmigaOS arcitecture. We want it, and it will likely happen someday, but current priorities fundamentally revolve around getting the OS ported to PowerPC native and getting it to run on new PowerPC motherboards, porting the 680x0 assembly to C, involving a great deal of "classic Amiga hardware" dependencies, as none of that hardware is present on new motherboards.

Once the fundamental porting is done then it will be time to look at rearchitecting things to allow memory protection, multiple users (it's currently a single-user OS so no user or group file or directory protection concepts). I don't know what all the project managment has in mind for adding such features, but users and developers do want them.

Re:Modern OS?

[Gadzinka]

[removed question about true multitasking and memory protection]

Amiga OS had both those in 1985, IIRC.

No, you don't remember it correctly. Amiga OS had true, preemptive multitasking in 1985, but it doesn't have memory protection to this day. Nor does it have virtual memory, or makes any other use of MMU present in every modern processor.

Yes, you could install Enforcer notifying you about writes to system memory, or VMM permitting swapping to disk in case the real memory is exhausted. But both these programs weren't part of system and lost of programs crashed when they were present and running. I remember having exceptions list in VMM longer than... certain body parts of pr0n stars ;)

Other than that, Amiga OS was quite remarkable piece of software at that time with certain solutions still not duplicated in today's operating systems.

Robert

Re:Modern OS?

[Anonymous Coward]

Amiga OS had true, preemptive multitasking in 1985, but it doesn't have memory protection to this day. Nor does it have virtual memory, or makes any other use of MMU present in every modern processor.

AmigaOS 4.0 includes functionality for virtual memory, paging, etc. Memory protection is optional for OS4 native applications, but will be a feature in a forthcoming version I'm sure, once enough software has been ported/created natively.

And as the review said, AmigaOS actually made computing fun and enjoyable, and it seems the current version does as well. It is a shame that some software is way behind, especially web browsers, but that will probably get fixed one day.

Re:Modern OS?

[DG]

One of my favourite demos with my old Amiga 2000 back in 1989 or so was to have a C program compiling on the Bridgeboard, a Pascal program compiling in a shell window, and then drag down the Workbench screen about halfway to reveal F/A-18 Interceptor running behind. I'd then play the game (with no slowdown) while the compilers kept churning away.

For its time, it was an amazing bit of hardware.

I always liked AmigaDOS because it combined the best features of UNIX (in the shell, and with AREXX scripting) and MacOS's GUI features.

Nowadays, the GUI on Linux has gotten to the point where it is far superior than anything the Amiga ever had. A modern RedHat/Fedora box really is the spiritual successor to the Amiga.

The only thing I miss (two things actually):

1) Every Amiga application worth its salt has an AREXX port, because it was trivial to implement. That meant you could script EVERYTHING, including moving data back and forth between applications. It was awesome; you could batch-process every single application on the box.

2) The speech synth chip. This was awsome in Netrek, because you could play the team chat window through it and turn it into a radio - get all the team communications without having to take your eyes off the galaxy map. :)

DG

Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff...

[amigabill]

I always hate seeing Amiga come up on Slashdot. To all you guys, no, it's not dead. It's small and not popular. AmigaOS is to Linux what Linux is to Windows. Remember how many Windows users out there think you're crazy for using Linux and truely believe there is nothing to use Linux for except for server stuff before you post your "Amiga is dead" stuff, as you will be exactly correct as all those ignorant Windows users are in their comments about Linux and Linux users.

Thank you for your respect. And to the article poster, we're not welcome here, please don't bother Slashdot again...

Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff...

[Lisandro]

I'm not trolling here, but Linux is useful. What are the real world modern uses for an Amiga machine? I recall they were used a lot on TV stations for titeling, but that was a while ago.

I always respected the Amiga a lot, and i still think it should have done better than it did, specially considering how advanced was in it's time. But other than the geek factor, what's the big deal over a new AmigaOS?

Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff...

[Anonymous Coward]

What are the real world modern uses for an Amiga machine?

Our office has used one every day for years to prop open an annoying fire door.

Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff...

[amigabill]

My own uses for AmigaOS:

email
web browsing
word processor
read PDF docs
software development
file managment (including PC folders via samba as Windows explorer sucks rotten eggs)
games

Wow, that sounds a lot like what some people might use Linux for, doesn't it?

It's a matter of choice. Why should my choice be wrong for me, yet your non-Windows choice is right for you?

Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff...

[Halo1]

I'm not trolling here, but Linux is useful

...

But other than the geek factor, what's the big deal over a new AmigaOS?

Couldn't you have said the same thing about Linux 10 years ago? Who says it will never be useful in the future? (at least if stays owned more than 1 day by the same company)

Re:Please, no "Amiga is Dead" stuff...

[amigabill]

Good observation, and I hope others notice as well.

Yes, I use AmigaOS because of personal preference for my gerneral day to day computing, email, web browsing, etc. When the admittedly aging IBrowse web browser fails ona web site, I do use Firefox on Windows or Linux, whichever is handy. I use Windows for HalfLife2. (I understand Transgaming's thing can supposedly run HalfLife2 udner Linux now, but feel Windows is still better suited to this particular task) I have not played Doom3 since before the Linux native binary was available, but when I have time I would like to try it out and see how it fares. I do use Gentoo linux as a firewall, for geda EDA tools, and for MythTV. Each is good for certain things, and not as good for other certain things. The general user interface in AmigaOS fits my personality better than Windows or Linux, so that's my first choice. But it is not as suitable for some tasks as Windows or Linux. And instead of doing without, I do use the better platform for the job. Windows is better for certain games than Linux, Linux is better for firewalling my whole LAN and doing EDA stuff than Windows is. AmigaOS is of course behind in games available, lacks many firewall features available in Linux, and there's no ports of geda EDA tools yet, but for email, there's nothing better than security by a combination of incompatibility and this level of obscurity...

I bought my mom a PC running Windows, as I live 300 miles away and it easier for her to get support when I'm not around. I bought my sister a PC running windows, for the same reason. My dad bought his own, but I'm glad he did for the same reason. My mom and sister both run Firefox. My mom has OpenOffice. My sister has it, but usually uses MS Office because she thinks she needs it for school and that OpenOffice is inadequate.

My dad will ONLY use Microsoft products. He's one of them Joe Average guys Bill Gates wants us ALL to be. He is NOT WILLING to consider any alternative product, PERIOD. He believes that the mere fact Microsoft is so huge is proof that no other product can possibly be worth looking at, that everything else must totally suck, and the people have thusly used their wallets to vote for MS as the only possibly worthy software maker. Yet he's often calling me to help him get his PC working right again when it starts to flake out. There's zero chance reasoning with the guy, PERIOD. I've tried... He's constantly trying to talk me into using Windows and Office instead. He gave me a copy of Office so I'd have it, because I didn't have it before and must therefore have been totally unable to do anything with my computer. Something about in the real world I absolutely have to hav eit and use it because everyone else does, and I'll never survive without MS stuff at work. In reality, at work, I use a solaris box an OpenOffice... But there's no convincing him.

If you evaluate and then don't want to use AmigaOS, then don't. But don't say it's dead just because you don't want to use it. Let those of us who do want to use it, do so in peace.

If you want to use Linux, by all means, please do so. I do.

If you want to use Windows, that's your personal choice as well. I do. Same for Mac, *BSD, etc.

My dismay at seeing Amiga related posts here is that Slashdot ueres are not interested in evaluating the thing, to find out if the new version 4 AmigaOS could possibly be interesting to them. You've all already made up your mind against it, without knowing what it is or what it can do, or what it feels like, etc.

Its the same situation as Slashdot accuses most Windows users of. Joe Normal Windows user will not give Linux a chance to find out if he could possibly like it or not. Joe Average will ONLY ever use MS Office, as he is not willing to gove OpenOffice a chance and find out if it would suit him. This for good reason aggravates supporters of those products.

But those same advocates asking Windows users to at least evaluate their products BEFORE making a decision, are unwilling to co

Too pricey

[denjin]

While I loved my Amiga in the day, I can't justify spending $1375 for a G3-800 system basd on the new Micro systems.

This is from softhut, but I don't want to direct link since it is slow anyway:

AMIGA ONE PRECONFIGURED SYSTEMS

Micro A1 System:
First True Luggable / LAN Boy Amiga System !!

See Case Images
Micro A1-C Motherboard with OS4
750fx G3 Processor @ 800MHz
Built-In Sound
80GB 7200RPM Hard Drive
DVD/CDRW Combo Drive
2 USB Ports, 10/100 Ethernet
Keyboard and Mouse
------ $ 1375.00

All completely installed, tested and ready to run

UI Responsiveness

[mirko]

Running the OS and all its apps completely in memory provides a very different user experience than one is used to from modern operating systems. Switching applications is instantaneous, as is switching screens (providing you are running separate screens at the same monitor resolution, otherwise you have to wait for your monitor to resync).

Scrolling is about as fast as on my 2.4GHz P4 PC. While the PC clearly blows away the AmigaOne on pure CPU performance (for example, unarchiving files, or ripping to MP3), for general use they "feel" about the same. The A1 feels much faster than my 733MHz Pentium 3 running XP, and makes my poor 500MHz G3 iBook running OS X feel like a pig stuck in molasses.

The author obviously never tried RiscOS : on my 33MHz RiscPC (bought in Dec94), there's still nothing that can match its responsiveness... except a 202MHz Strong-ARM RiscPC.

You just don't have time to even think about taking an espresso when you double-click a directory folder.

But yes, that's right : RiSCOS is cooperatively multitasking, hence the quick interaction.

Re:UI Responsiveness

[DM9290]

I hope you realise that the reason IPC on Amiga was so fast (and no, it was not "faster than any other kernel to date") was that it was nothing more than an interrupt protected insert in a doubly linked list. You can achieve the same on Unix compatible OS's today by having apps mmap() a memory area and maintaining a linked list of messages for each app. But of course this comes at the cost of less separation of the address spaces unless each pair of apps that wants to communicate set up a separate shared memory map.

I knew this. Thats why I felt safe to predict it could not be beaten in speed by another OS. The unix mmap() must still be slower because the memory mapped file still appears in the filing system (at the very least you need to aquire a file descriptor etc to set up. ) . Unix context switching tends to requires more overhead (due to VM and scheduling), and you still can't directly dereference a passed pointer into memory, but must deference a pointer plus an offset into the memory mapped file because it would not sit at the same absolute memory address in both applications. On Amiga, address 45500 (for example) is 45500 for every single application in the entire system. Whereas you would need to say 45500 + base of shared memory space under Unix. This at a minimum requires an additional pointer arithmetic operation.

Moreoever on the Amiga virtually every single system call passed data via pointers without making copies into the called process (very fragile and delicate but very fast). Unix system calls which need to pass data to another process copy the data rather than simply pass a pointer.

Finally... mmap() is not the typical method of IPC on Unix. It is more common to use slower pipes.

If there is another OS which does this with less operations than AmigaOS (while still maintaining basic functionality.. I did not mean to include embedded Oses for single purpose machines) then forgive me. But I am not aware of it.

As for window refresh, lots of X11 window managers do the same, as can most other OS's, but it was rarely used on the Amiga - most app's did redraw, because letting the OS redraw meant having the OS keep a backing store, which meant wasting memory, which most Amiga programmers detested.

There was some utility available which forced all windows to be simple refresh windows. Thereafter the application is not notified of the refresh event and it didn't matter what the programmer chose to implement (because the app wasn't notified).

I didn't find this option in MS-Windows. I often find myself looking at non-refreshed windows in XP.

I agree that amiga programmers detested wasting memory (ahh.. I remember dynamic memory allocation well), but they also detested wasting CPU cycles to redraw. And with built in hardware blitting and video DMA... well..

once the user used that utility (I can't remember the name), all windows becamse simple refresh windows. (and for those slashdotters not familiar with Amiga that means.. "simple" from the programmers perspective. i.e. let the OS refresh)

I have run linix systems with no virtual memory at all. Windows bitches and complains if you try to have no virtual memory regardless of how much physical memory you have.

The cost of RAM is low enough these days that VM is not really required anymore.

I loved the amiga

[91degrees]

But this isn't what the Amiga was.

The Amiga was a great games machine, with cool custom chips taking the load off the generally-not-too-great CPU, a highly consistent architecture, and an adequate, quirky OS which was good where it mattered for the applications it was used for.

Custom hardware was not something that was seen in commodity PCs at the time. Neither were good quality graphics and sound. It wasn't a better machine. In many ways it was inferior. It was a very different machine, and that's why it suceeded where it did.

AmigaOS 4.0 is simply another OS. Perhaps it's a very nice OS. BeOS was as well. But a nice OS doesn't make it better.

Re:I loved the amiga

[Feanturi]

The Amiga was a great games machine, with cool custom chips taking the load off

Which makes it kind of ironic that it was games that ultimately led me to leave the Amiga in favor of the PC. There were all these cool games I was seeing at my friends' houses, that I couldn't play. It sucked to switch, but the gamer in me just had to.

Gah. ROM.

[imag0]

from TFA... ...Many people have asked whether or not they can install OS4 on their Macintosh, since both use PowerPC hardware. The answer is no, as OS4 requires a custom ROM embedded on all AmigaOne motherboards in order to boot. This was done under agreement between Eyetech and Hyperion, in order to cut down on piracy and to reduce the number of hardware combinations that Hyperion needed to test and support...

I was pretty interested until I got to that "custom boot rom". Hell, guys, even Apple tossed that requirement when they went to NewWorld.

Severely limits the usefulness of the hardware and software in my eyes. Guess I'm not the target audience then.

Business Amiga

[JollyTX]

It always amazes me to think that

1) The Amiga, though marketed as a gaming machine or play-with-graphics machine, had an operating system so capable and Unix-like

and

2) That business never realized the huge potential of a multitasking, windowing, command-line integrated OS to run spreadsheets and wordprocessors on instead of the clunky program launcher that was MS-DOS.

This would have been relevant in 1994

[tsangc]

This would have kept the Amiga minimally relevant in 1994, but not in 2005. There were really two real markets for the Amiga in 1994, the time of Commodore's demise: Creative professionals and hackers/nerds/hobbyists.

The Amiga's greatest challenge in 1994 was really CPU power and system architecture. It was tied to the 68K series processor and the custom chips which made it powerful in 1985. If these PowerPC based systems and OS came out ten years ago, it would have saved the machine, at least to be a niche player.

The Amiga's primary advantage over other machines for creative users like videographers, artists and the like was the fact it was NTSC synchronized for adding titles, and for driving devices like the VideoToaster. That assumed a world view where the computer stayed as outside of the signal path, modifying analog video somewhere between source and recorder VTRs.

The world changed very quickly--and the desktop video world instantly picked up on nonlinear editing. Suddenly everything, given enough power and bandwidth, was INSIDE the machine. Certainly NewTek responded with the ToasterFlyer, but this was still a rehash of using the Amiga between playback and record devices. By 1997, even the cheapest desktop PCI NLE board was processing effects in the digital domain: The Amiga couldn't keep up, tied to the 68K series alone and was doomed in the video market.

The OS was very much suited to media applications: It was lightweight, quick and supported multiple resolutions plus had a lot of built in file formats like ANIM, 8SVX, IFF ILBM etc. But with enough CPU power and memory, this becomes a non issue: Through the brute force of a Pentium with a PCI video bus, and I don't care how bad the OS is, it's still going to be more powerful than an overheating 040 with bandwidth limited Amiga custom chips or a late model VL bus VGA chip slaved off on the Zorro II bus.

The hobbyist market was also lost when Commodore died. A lot of people, myself included, had piles of fun learning about how the Amiga worked. But when CBM went bankrupt and it's later owners died as well, most of us turned elsewhere or plain well gave up on "playing" with computers. Many turned to Linux, BSD, BeOS and the like.

There is no real market for this device, at least not a serious one.

In the end, this will be a curiosity, primarily like the cool Jeri Ellsworth C-One board. Most people buying it will be the truly hardcore. Few hobbyists will be interested, as the casual computer enthusiast will be turned off by it's high price and low feature count.

Neo-Retro-Computing

[MROD]

Well, it's very interesting about how the Amiga has managed to continue on in the back waters of computing for the last few years. However, it's not the only one!

Thos of you who remember the Sinclair QL (ie. people such as Linus Torvalds and some of the early AmigaDOS authors who worked at Metacomco) might like to know that some people are continuing the development of both the hardware and the operating system..

eg. Q40 and their latest Q60 motherboard designed to fit in a PC case.

What's old is new again!

Too little, too late

[Mr. Cancelled]

I and others have posted about the problems before... There's nothing new here.

OS4's now years behind schedule.

You've been able to buy motherboards for awhile. In fact those that purchased early were promised the OS and a T-Shirt if I recall. As of now, nothing's shipped other than a beta release of the OS for these early adopters. In fact, just the OS4 motherboard and a G3 CPU is more expensive than an entire Mac Mini system, and is inferior in about every way.

Any hype they've managed to build for the new Amiga has long since faded away, as have their missed dealines. Anyone remember the "Amiga Anywhere" promo blitz? Partnerships with Microsoft... Going to put an amiga on every machine, etc. Never happened.

I am a former Amiga user, and was really interested in the new Amiga when it was first announced (3 years ago? Memory's kinda faded, as has the Amigas allure). I've long since wrote them off though...

As I pointed out the other day, the Mac Mini would make an excellent Amiga OS4 box, but Amiga won't license the OS to run on non-Amiga hardware, so you're either stuck paying way too much for an underpowered machine, or you move on to a "real OS", and write off the Amiga as a dead-end, as most of the computing world has already done. Why Amiga, who need as many users as they can get these days, refuse to license their OS for other PPC hardware is beyond me.

Their excuse is to prevent piracy, which was a problem for Amiga in its heyday, but come on... Paranoia is no excuse for a bad business plan. And really, what is there to pirate? I don't see a ton of companies getting ready to shove Amiga warez down our throat. There's probably what? 2 dozen titles at the most currently shipping for Amiga?? That's probably about one title per user when you get right down to it.

In short, I think we'll see a BeOS come-back long before an Amiga come-back.

Amiga was revolutionary. It smoked everything.

[guidryp]

In 1985 the A1000 blew everything out of the water. I still have my A1000 in a box somewhere. One of the coolest PCs ever built the entire team signed the inside cover (including Jays dog).

Processor:
An 286 was state of the art and the 68000 compared more than favorably.

Graphics:
Heck EGA was just recently introduced, Macs were monocrhome. Amiga had extraordinary high colour capability (up to 4096 colours IIRC) and custom co-processor to accellerate 2d operations

Sound:
A basic PC beeped. The first soundblaster was still 2 years away. The amiga had multichannel digiatal waveform sound with co-processor support.

OS:
PC had Dos or Windows 1.0 (steaming pile of dung).
The amiga had a small efficient GUI OS with true pre-emptive multitasking...

The Amiga was a revolution of HW and software. What killed it was stagnation. It remained relatively unchanged for years allowing competition to catch and surpass some of its basic specs.

Personally I moved on when Win95/OS2 VGA/ 486/ Soundblaster finally made PCs tolerable.

Re:Vaporware

[amigabill]

> All that said, it's kinda sad to see you sitting here begging for whatever name-branded Amiga scraps you can get.

Huh? I'm not begging for anything. I have a good job designing chips for a living and can easily pay for whatever I desire.

Also, when other Amiga users were drooling over the shiny new Voodoo3 drivers, I was scratching my head not understanding the obsession when Radeons and GeForces were on their second generations. Instead of begging, I made a proposal to Nvidia for an NDA, I'd do all the work, support,e tc. all they'd have to do was put hardware on the shelves at the local PC emporium, which they already did. They didn't even respond with a polite "no thank you", they completely ignored us. ATI responded to my proposal with an NDA contract and some documentation. We do all the work, support, etc. and all they have to do is put Radeons on the shelves at te local PC emporium, which they already do.

I didn't beg for anything. I made a business proposal acceptable to ATI, and AmigaOS4 now runs nicely on Radeon cards.

I discussed the convenience of AmigaOS on a laptop, and thus iBook hardware with other developers, but there doesn't seem to be a business agreeable to all involved there. I'm now investigating the feasability of developing a PowerPC laptop of my own, which if it is a viable product will make an open-platform system as much as I could, and allow anyone write their own OS, drivers, etc. which is an obstacle to some extent when looking at Macs. Is this a feasable idea? It may not be, but this hasn't been proven to me yet.

Hey, Gentoo and Freescale seem pretty happy with the "other Amiga motherboard", the Pegasos2 AKA "Open Desktop Workstation" PowerPC motherboard. Wouldn't they be happy with a more easily portable PowerPC board as well?

http://www.gentoo.org
http://www.freescale.com/ webapp/sps/site/overview. jsp?nodeId=018rH3bTdGZj9N58582822

No, it bloody well shouldn't...

[argent]

Basing Mac OS X on UNIX worked because there wasn't anything to the old Mac OS that was worth saving, except the applications, and they were able to transit the applications to a new OS reasonably cleanly over years WHILE maintaining sales wit hthe old OS.

This is a completely different situation. The old Amiga OS was the closest thing to a real-time microkernel desktop environment that's ever been released to the general public: QNX dropped out of a retail version of Photon, and the only other candidate, OS/9 (no relation or Mac OS 9) on the Radio Shack color computer long predated anything like a desktop OS. If Amiga went that way, well, they would just be another Linux distro... and one that didn't run a lot of important Linux software because it's not an 80x86 and so it won't run binary-only packages.

I'm amazed that this seems to have maintained almost everything that was good about AmigaDOS, including the wonderful infinitely configurable message-passing OS architecture. Until this moment I had written off AmigaOS as another doomed Linux clone. It may be doomed, but if so it's doomed with style.

Part of the *nix philosophy I believe is interoperability and choice provided by source compatability, the ability to compile software on any OS that complies with POSIX and other unix standards.

I ran the Amiga sources newsgroup for some years, and did several ports of UNIX applications to the platform. Even back in 1986 it was already a very UNIX-friendly and UNIX-compatible environment. I can't imagine that it's moved away from that since.

they need to support POSIX, X11 and other Unix source compatability standards

The first web browser I ever used was UNIX Mosaic, running on my Amiga using a local X11 server from a UNIX box running at my ISP. The text editor I used was "elvis", one of the classic "vi" clones, and porting it to AmigaDOS was almost trivial compared to what I'd had to do in other ports.

This is why we see so many different filesystems avialable on Linux for instance

The Amiga had user-written user-mode file systems, including some amazing ones like a RAM based file system that survived reboots, long before Linux existed. The Amiga API is VERY well designed for this kind of thing... and needless to say no applications had to be rewritten to make it work!

This is nothing but good news. Please do some research before dismissing this amazing OS because it's not based on Linux.