Google Brings AmigaOS to Chrome Via Native Client Emulation

80's hardware by phrostie · 2013-12-12 06:05 · Score: 5, Funny

So an emulator running on 2010 era hardware can almost run at speeds of the native technology on 80's era hardware.

wow

Re:80's hardware by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:15 · Score: 0

But.... but... but... dis is teh Googlezzzz!!!!!111111
Re:80's hardware by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:23 · Score: 1

It's "in the browser", so it counts as innovation. More library/emulation/abstraction layers equals progress in the 21st century - didn't you know?
Re:80's hardware by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-12-12 06:23 · Score: 1

So an emulator running on 2010 era hardware can almost run at speeds of the native technology on 80's era hardware.
With dynamic recompilation (which PNaCl disallows, if I'm not mistaken), you could run it even on 2000 era hardware.

--
Ezekiel 23:20
Re:80's hardware by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:42 · Score: 0

I'm amazed that the emulator you wrote runs faster. How did you do it?
Re:80's hardware by Joce640k · 2013-12-12 06:50 · Score: 1

All I got was: "Error: NaCl module load failed: PnaclCoordinator: PNaCl Translator Error: Error reading bitcode file: Invalid BINOP record"

--
No sig today...
Re:80's hardware by RabidReindeer · 2013-12-12 07:27 · Score: 3, Insightful

So an emulator running on 2010 era hardware can almost run at speeds of the native technology on 80's era hardware.
wow
On the other hand, you can emulate a high-end IBM mainframe circa 1980 at higher speed than the original on a cell phone.
That's terrifying. You don't even need motor-generators or a water chiller.
Re:80's hardware by michelcolman · 2013-12-12 08:08 · Score: 5, Funny

It's emulating Windows instead of AmigaOS?
Re:80's hardware by epyT-R · 2013-12-12 08:24 · Score: 1

If it's a javascript emulator, it's going to be really slow. If it's some hybrid that are JIT, then it's not secure. Speed, security, cheap, pick two.
Re:80's hardware by mlk · 2013-12-12 09:15 · Score: 1

I thought the point of Chrome native stuff was that a layer of abstraction was removed?

--
Wow, I should not post when knackered.
Re:80's hardware by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 10:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

So while a 1980 mainframe was used for ballistic calculations, credit-card transactions, DNA structural analysis and such. Today's smartphones are essentially used for playing AngryBirds and poking on Facebook. That's what we call progress ;-)
Re:80's hardware by Tr3vin · 2013-12-12 10:05 · Score: 1

It isn't. It is C/C++ code running in a sandboxed environment. Security is done by analyzing the machine code and only allowing "safe" operations.
Re:80's hardware by 0123456 · 2013-12-12 11:38 · Score: 1

Security is done by analyzing the machine code and only allowing "safe" operations.
Some of us didn't even believe that the first time we were told it was 'secure'.
Re:80's hardware by Darinbob · 2013-12-12 11:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

No, the point of chrome is to get people to switch over to google.
Re:80's hardware by Lennie · 2013-12-12 12:18 · Score: 2

IBM Watson that defeated the humans at playing Jeopardy is basically just a cluster of machines running Apache Hadoop. So architecturally there isn't anything really special about the hardware or software.
If things keep progressing as they are: in 10 years, your smartphone will have the same processing power, storage and memory as IBM Watson does now at the price and size of a smartphone from now.
Think about that.

--
New things are always on the horizon
Re:80's hardware by Trax3001BBS · 2013-12-12 16:30 · Score: 1

So an emulator running on 2010 era hardware can almost run at speeds of the native technology on 80's era hardware.
wow
10 Megs of Sram memory, a 50 MB hard drive and I did what I'm doing with windows now. Remember 20 years ago when you played Doom and
that's all you could do? I ran a BBS in the background while playing my games.
Re:80's hardware by Sun · 2013-12-12 22:02 · Score: 1

2000 is when I first saw a computer (it was a 200Mhz pentium, if my memory is serving me correctly) that ran, through UAE, and Amiga 500 emulation at around 100% speed. It might actually have been even earlier than that. I don't remember what precise program I tested this with, but I'm fairly certain it was a game that used the copper.
So, yeah, the current technology isn't particularly impressing, at least as far as raw emulation speed is concerned.
I also can't explain why it is taking it so #!@$&!@# long to load the workbench. On the original Amiga, disks were read one track at a time, causing horrible access speed. Even with assuming they did not replace the disk access routines, the Amiga's DMA architecture would mean you'd use the native CPU to just dump the data into the Amiga's memory, which should result in much much much faster boot times. The only explanation I have is that they are deliberately emulating the horrid access times the original Amiga had.
Shachar
Re:80's hardware by fuzzywig · 2013-12-12 22:46 · Score: 1

This is definitely taking a lot longer to boot than my Amiga ever did.
Re:80's hardware by KingMotley · 2013-12-13 03:50 · Score: 1

I think your memory is failing you. The Amiga took forever to boot, but then so did all computers back then sans the Atari ST.
Re:80's hardware by Sun · 2013-12-13 07:48 · Score: 1

I think your memory is failing you. The Amiga took forever to boot from floppies

FTFY. From hard disk, it wasn't so bad. I even had a startup sequence that would test the current kickstart, if it was 1.3, load a 2.04 kickstart that was hacked to run from memory, reboot, and then load the 2.04 workbench. The entire process would not take more than a minute. I actually remember much much less, but it was many years ago, and my memory may be failing me here.

but then so did all computers back then sans the Atari ST.
I never did any serious amount of work with the Atari ST, so I wouldn't know about that. As for the others: the 8 bit machines took no time at all to load. An Apple ][ would finish loading DOS from floppies in under 5 seconds. Most other machines had all they intended to have in ROM anyways, so boot time was non existent. Situation with 16 (i.e. - IBM PC) and 32 bit machines was slightly different, I but don't recall any of them being as bad as an Amiga loading from floppies.
Shachar
Re: 80's hardware by KingMotley · 2013-12-13 12:26 · Score: 1

Yes, the 8-bits loaded fast, unless you had a hard drive. That usually required a custom OS/DOS to be loaded and initialized from the hard drive too. I forget what the name of the apple 2's was. The Ataris 8-bits had RDOS/QDOS or equivalent.
The Atari STs had it in ROM, so booting took 10-15 seconds unless you wanted to boot a custom OS, and then it was just only twice as fast as the Amiga (OS was less than half the size and actually fit on one floppy).
Re:80's hardware by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-13 12:37 · Score: 0

Of course!
Re:80's hardware by LocalH · 2013-12-13 15:01 · Score: 1

That's sort of the inherent nature of emulation. Next thing we know, you'll be complaining that it takes a fairly beefy machine to accurately emulate the C64.

--
FC Closer
Re:80's hardware by daffmeister · 2013-12-13 20:25 · Score: 2

Surely Angry Birds is just a modern version of balistic calculations.

Give me a damn web browser by bobbutts · 2013-12-12 06:06 · Score: 5, Funny

If I want an emulator, I'll get an emulator.

Re:Give me a damn web browser by vastabo · 2013-12-12 06:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

This is Google demonstrating that their platform for abstracting a client's hardware is robust and performant. I suspect that Amiga emulation is just because it's cool.
Having this layer of abstraction protects Google from the machinations of software vendors who might want a piece of their action.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:53 · Score: 0

It is an emulator. It's just happens to be an application that loads within the browser environment.
The application is native. The browser just handles display, audio, I/O and user interface.
It's just an experimental way to deliver applications. For some scenarios this might be a lot more useful than downloading an installer, installing it, and running it in the OS environment like you normally would.
This looks pretty useful for ChromeOS in particular.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by RabidReindeer · 2013-12-12 07:22 · Score: 5, Funny

This is Google demonstrating that their platform for abstracting a client's hardware is robust and performant. I suspect that Amiga emulation is just because it's cool.
No, It's just so you can play Lemmings the way it was meant to be played.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by ChunderDownunder · 2013-12-12 07:45 · Score: 1

Indeed, Firefox now plays video content via gstreamer, so I only keep Chrome around for recalcitrant flash-only sites.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by vastabo · 2013-12-12 07:47 · Score: 1

Touche
Re:Give me a damn web browser by epyT-R · 2013-12-12 08:42 · Score: 1

..while reducing the incentives for developing non SaaS software, which protects users from the machinations of google.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by epyT-R · 2013-12-12 08:43 · Score: 1

This is only useful to vendors who want control over how users use their software. I would never want to depend on such 'services' for critical workflows.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:10 · Score: 0

Become a software developer and program in JavaScript, Dart, or nacl!
Re:Give me a damn web browser by Master+Moose · 2013-12-12 09:18 · Score: 2

2 player 2 mouse! Used to love having Lemmings battles

--
. . .gone when the morning comes
Re:Give me a damn web browser by jbdigriz · 2013-12-12 09:26 · Score: 1

No, ultimately, it's so you will be able to put one Android phone in 7 bars on Tybee and 1 in a mortuary in Port Wentworth and end up with an 8-line distributed Cnet Amiga cluster to play spot the Fed on. ;-) Bonus karma if it's FTSC compliant.
Thanks and a tip 'o the hat to Don Murray and the old Night Owl BBS crowd.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by mythosaz · 2013-12-12 10:01 · Score: 1

These "services" can exist on your own network, or your own hard drive.
Re:Give me a damn web browser by peter.kingsbury · 2013-12-13 01:48 · Score: 1

Google fanbois don't need emulated lemmings...

We must go deeper! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:09 · Score: 0

We must go deeper!

Re:We must go deeper! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:21 · Score: 2, Funny

Yes! Port Chromium to AmigaOS, so you can run it in the emulator in Chrome!
Re:We must go deeper! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:33 · Score: 0

or vagina.
Re:We must go deeper! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:03 · Score: 0

If you could get it to emulate an A1200 with an 040 & MMU, you should in theory be able to run Shapeshifter and emulate a System 7 era Mac...
Re:We must go deeper! by Gibgezr · 2013-12-13 07:10 · Score: 1

....and then we can run the emulator on the emulated chrome running on the emulator, running on chrome?
It's fricking turtles all the way down!
This reminds me of someone showing off his Amiga by seeing how many clock apps he could run simultaneously on the desktop. At the time we were all suitably impressed with the egregious display of multitasking of having 100 overlapping clocks all ticking away the seconds simultaneously. I would still be impressed (and entertained for at least a minute) by chrome->AmigaOS->chrome->AmigaOS->chrome web browsing.

Let me guess... by 3seas · 2013-12-12 06:10 · Score: 1

.... this will be found under the "apps" chrome browser links .... right along with Facebook...

Great! If they could only bring us.... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · 2013-12-12 06:13 · Score: 1

a new Duke Nuke... errrr ..... nevermind...

What's The Point? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:16 · Score: 1

What's the point of this recent spate of in browser OS inception? Do we really need yet another abstraction layer in the software stack? It would seem that these guys want to make it so.

What kind of processor and internet pipe will I need to run Amiga OS, inside Chrome, on "my" Chromebook?

Re:What's The Point? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:08 · Score: 0

The point is software distribution. The future is full of app-stores. Chrome is a distribution channel for apps.
Re:What's The Point? by epyT-R · 2013-12-12 08:45 · Score: 1

I think the gp's point was that it's not his future. I am in full agreement. I will never use 'app' stores and remote access SaaS for critical applications.
Re:What's The Point? by Darinbob · 2013-12-12 11:59 · Score: 1

Hardware and low level software is scary to younger programmers. Thus to make it more less intimidating we put the hardware and software in a browser.

So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Nyder · 2013-12-12 06:19 · Score: 1

So it takes 20 years to finally get a Great OS on my modern computer, though it runs on top of a crappy OS (Windows. Yes, i know a lot of peeps run Linux, but I'm referring to Windows, because Linus isn't really a crappy OS).

Sweet!

All joking aside, I've always thought the AmigaOS should of went to a linux kernel and brought the sweetness of the Amiga OS as a GUI.

--
Be seeing you...

Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:27 · Score: 1

should of
Maybe you should of went to skool?
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:27 · Score: 0

should of
Your opinion is invalid.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:28 · Score: 0

So it takes 20 years to finally get a Great OS on my modern computer
Amiga emulators have been around for 18 years. This is "news" because it runs inside Chrome.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Stormwatch · 2013-12-12 06:45 · Score: 1

If you want to use AmigaOS on your PC so bad, just use this. Or even get some specialized hardware.

--
Circumcision is child abuse.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:46 · Score: 1

Linus isn't really a crappy OS
Personally I wouldn't call him an OS at all.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by jones_supa · 2013-12-12 06:47 · Score: 2

should of
In the recent couple of years a new trend seems to have emerged where people incorrectly write "should of" instead of "should have".
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:51 · Score: 0

Back in the 90's there weren't a shortage of window managers that mimicked the Amiga GUI. I don't see why you want to do it, the Amiga OS has a very interesting kernel. You can probably find the source somewhere on the internet if you look around.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by cervesaebraciator · 2013-12-12 07:00 · Score: 5, Funny

Irregardless of what you say, "should of" works for all intensive purposes. Pacifically when writing informally, anyways. What else is one suppose to do in this case and point?
Re: So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 07:04 · Score: 0

I was specifically taught not to write "should of" at school, so people have been doing that since the 80's at least.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:10 · Score: 0

"Irregardless" isn't a word. The word's regardless, regardless of what you said.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by fatphil · 2013-12-12 08:12 · Score: 2

I detect someone whom needs to sit down and relax with a nice expresso, and watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3y0CD2CoCs

--
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:29 · Score: 1

And, walla, the world was made hole.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by beernutz · 2013-12-12 08:38 · Score: 2

That whooshing sound is the point of his post flying over your head at mach 3! 8)

--
(stolen from DaBum) I am dyslexia of borg - your ass will be laminated.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:51 · Score: 0

*woosh*
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Trogre · 2013-12-12 08:52 · Score: 1

My head just exploded.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re: So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by jbdigriz · 2013-12-12 09:07 · Score: 1

Tsk. That's "shoulda", not "should of".
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by anagama · 2013-12-12 09:26 · Score: 1

Don't worry about it -- it's a mute point.

--
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by anagama · 2013-12-12 09:34 · Score: 1

I'm not so sure. Maybe you're hearing the whooshing sound because the only thing AC complained about, was "irregardless" -- which though nonstandard, was actually spelled correctly and used as it normally is used. This distinguishes it from the other terms which were phonetic misuses of familiar phrases. So maybe it was a subtle riff on the previous joke. If so, it was deep. Then again, maybe not. It's pretty hard to tell here.

--
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by mythosaz · 2013-12-12 10:03 · Score: 1

This begs a number of questions....
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 10:37 · Score: 0

Both an incorrect use of irregarldss and the erroneous 'all intensive purposes' instead of all intents and purposes in one sentence.
Bravo.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by cervesaebraciator · 2013-12-12 10:59 · Score: 2

Since "News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters" is out, maybe you've just hit upon the perfect new slogan.

Slashdot: It's Deep. Then Again, Maybe Not. It's Pretty Hard to Tell Here.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by kirkc99 · 2013-12-12 11:00 · Score: 1

for all intensive purposes
I thinks meant "for all intents and purposes."
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by kirkc99 · 2013-12-12 11:05 · Score: 1

Doh! I _think you_ meant "for all intents and purposes."
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 13:52 · Score: 0

> 3! 8)
Invalid expression error.
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by cwsumner · 2013-12-13 08:21 · Score: 1

Irregardless of what you say, "should of" works for all intensive purposes. Pacifically when writing informally, anyways. What else is one suppose to do in this case and point?
AhuuGh!!! The pain!!
Re:So Great OS ran on top of crappy OS? by popoutman · 2013-12-17 03:30 · Score: 1

People need to learn how to use English correctly, informally or not. "Should of" does not read correctly nor does it enhance understanding, therefore it is nonsensical to use it. Informal usage should not transfer to the written word. As far as I can gather the usage comes from ill-educated people that spell phonetically with unusual accents such as Essex English. I consider it close to txt spk for parsing ease when reading, and the poor use of language really gets in the way of the author's point coming across.

--
- This sig deliberately left blank. Nothing to see, move along.

Can I run Chrome inside of Chrome? by jfdavis668 · 2013-12-12 06:30 · Score: 0

A browser running in a browser would be even more secure.

Re:Can I run Chrome inside of Chrome? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:36 · Score: 0

A browser running in a browser would be even more secure.
They'll get around to that as soon as they have Minecraft running in Minecraft so they can run the meta-Chrome securely.
Re:Can I run Chrome inside of Chrome? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:37 · Score: 0

Yo dawg! I heard you like Chrome so I put a Chrome in yo Chrome so you can browse while you browse!
Re:Can I run Chrome inside of Chrome? by gstoddart · 2013-12-12 06:47 · Score: 1

Yo dawg, I hear you like browsers ... ;-)

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Can I run Chrome inside of Chrome? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 07:42 · Score: 0

i hope ya like yur new ride!!!
Re:Can I run Chrome inside of Chrome? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-13 13:08 · Score: 0

I used Agile to put my sandbox in the cloud! Ask me how.

Loading... (yes, it'll load faster the second time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:37 · Score: 0

There is not going to be a second time, kthxbye.

nice...if it actually worked by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 06:44 · Score: 0

With Chrome Version 31.0.1650.63 on OSX 10.7:
Error: NaCl module load failed: PnaclCoordinator: Compile stream chunk failed. The PNaCl translator has probably crashed.

Re:nice...if it actually worked by jrumney · 2013-12-12 12:27 · Score: 1

Works for me:
Something wonderful has happened Your AMIGA is alive !!! and, even better...
Some of your disks are infected by a VIRUS !!! Another masterpiece of The Mega-Mighty SCA !!

Only on Windows Apparently by Art+Challenor · 2013-12-12 06:50 · Score: 1

Needs Chrome 31 or high, no iOs or Android. Also:

Version 30.0.1599.114 Ubuntu 13.10 (30.0.1599.114-0ubuntu0.13.10.2)

So Windows only.

/. is really loosing it.

Re:Only on Windows Apparently by jonabbey · 2013-12-12 07:00 · Score: 1

No, it loads and runs on Linux with the latest stable release of Chrome as well.
It doesn't run _well_.. it failed to capture the mouse and it locked up the browser, but it does run. I got to see Workbench and everything.

--
- jon

Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by gstoddart · 2013-12-12 07:05 · Score: 1

It doesn't run _well_.. it failed to capture the mouse and it locked up the browser, but it does run.
For small values of 'run', apparently.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by Winter · 2013-12-12 07:11 · Score: 1

Runs fine on my Ubuntu box with latest chrome.

--
main(i){putchar(177663314>>6*(i-1)&63|!!(i<5)<<6)&&main(++i);}
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by sootman · 2013-12-12 07:15 · Score: 1

Runs perfectly on a Mac. (10.8)

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by Balinares · 2013-12-12 07:25 · Score: 2

Linux here, works fine for me. Chrome 31. I'd ask "can you try to upgrade to the latest version?", but I wouldn't want to contribute to, you know, Slashdot losing it. :)

--

-- B.
This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by Art+Challenor · 2013-12-12 07:27 · Score: 1

Runs perfectly on a Mac. (10.8)
Interesting. From above the black box on Chromium 30.0.1599.114 (Chromium probably explains the lack of support on my system):

This page uses Portable Native Client, a technology currently only supported in Google Chrome (version 31 or higher; Android and iOS not yet supported).
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by Art+Challenor · 2013-12-12 08:31 · Score: 1

Actually I suspect that the problem is that I'm running Chromium and not Chrome proper. I don't really have any incentive to change that since I don't really have much immediate use for an Amiga emulator or the willingness to spend the time to get it to work. It'll happen eventually, and if I still care I'll check out the demo. This is Slashdot so I can expect a dup in a week or so to remind me, which may be far enough into the future.

Of course, if there isn't a dup in a week or two then I'll know for sure that Slashdot is irrevocably changed.
Re: Only on Windows Apparently by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:20 · Score: 0

I'm reading these comments after playing around with it on my Mac for half an hour. it was either working or I seriously need to stop drinking.
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 10:55 · Score: 0

Actually it seems to run just fine on fedora here as even the fullscreen mode and sound works nicely. Only downside is that there is horrible input latency and its very noticable in the workbench desktop when using the mouse. Though i think this comes directly from Google Chrome as it seems to have some problems with the vsync on linux desktop.
Re:Only on Windows Apparently by sootman · 2013-12-19 09:04 · Score: 1

Yup. Chrome 31 on a Mac.
Mac != iOS.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Open message to all developers by mewsenews · 2013-12-12 06:52 · Score: 1

Please stop with cutesy loading messages (reticulating splines, fetching slippers, percolating coffee). You were too lazy to include an accurate bar indicating when the loading process would finish, and you are insulting our time wasted looking at your "jokes".

Re:Open message to all developers by chthon · 2013-12-12 07:16 · Score: 1

And reticulating splines is plagiarism from SimCity 2000.
Re:Open message to all developers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 07:39 · Score: 1

So, by all means, write a perfectly accurate progress bar.
No, please. You're the go-getter telling us lazy gadabouts what we're doing wrong, so prove yourself. Go write a progress bar that perfectly consistently predicts how long an application startup operation will take. This application will need to touch upon fifty or sixty different OS subsystems to get everything in order, must be runnable on any modern computer architecture with any reasonable storage hardware and give accurate predictions on non-realtime kernels under any conceivable load (both system AND memory/swap). And it goes without saying, accounting for processor stepping if the startup triggers an overheat condition is expected.
Go right ahead and make that. I dare you. I double-dare you. Go make your magical progress bar. Should take, what, an afternoon? An hour? Hell, I don't know, I'm just a lazy developer who can't figure this thing out. But it shouldn't be too long. Go do that, and don't come back until you've got code to show for it.
Re:Open message to all developers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:10 · Score: 1

Please stop taking out your psychological problems on happier people.
Re:Open message to all developers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 14:41 · Score: 0

How about you just not be an idiot, and not "touch upon fifty or sixty different OS subsystems to get everything in order", and then your program will startup instantly, and not need a progress bar at all.
Re:Open message to all developers by Pseudonym+Authority · 2013-12-12 18:57 · Score: 1

Some people write more interesting things than `Hello World' in node.js you ignorant code monkey.
Re:Open message to all developers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 20:51 · Score: 0

you sound like a homo.
Re:Open message to all developers by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-13 02:53 · Score: 0

PYou were too lazy to include an accurate bar indicating when the loading process would finish, and you are insulting our time wasted looking at your "jokes".
You're right. Those in-jokes and obscure references are way less funny than any Microsoft progress bar. One of those provides hours of entertainment! Er, twelve minutes of entertainment. About sixteen days of entertainment. Negative twenty-seven minutes of entertainment. Calculating time of entertainment, please wait....

Why? by gstoddart · 2013-12-12 06:56 · Score: 1

The approach gives software more direct access to a computer's hardware

Why the hell would I want my browser to be able to do that?

This just smacks of something which is going to become a huge security issue, even if Google is trying to prevent malware.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.

Works pretty well by PhantomHarlock · 2013-12-12 07:02 · Score: 4, Informative

As a former long time Amiga user, this seems to work pretty well on the outset, and gives an authentic experience in regards to the clock timing and boot time. (though it thankfully may be a little faster :) ) It looks like they are using the emulation code from Cloanto (Amiga Forever) which has been around for quite a long time now.

This OS and demos may look very simple to younger folks, but it was quite groundbreaking at the time. the H.A.M. (Hold and Modify) demo showing 4096 colors was pretty impressive at a time when most PCs were stuck with 256 colors. There are a lot of really nice demos for the Amiga from the demoscene that took all of that a step further even, hopefully someone thought to save and compile them.

The only issue I ran into so far is on the juggler demo, the ESC key is needed to exit the demo, while on the emulator the ESC key is what switches you away from the emulator mouse to your native mouse, so it does not trigger an ESC on the Amiga. (you need to reset the emulator) Juggler doesn't let you pull down the screen to reveal the workbench. There may have been a keyboard shortcut that I have forgotten about to toggle screens. I haven't touched an Amiga in 20 years.

Hats off to the coders, brought back a lot of memories.

Re:Works pretty well by theArtificial · 2013-12-12 08:56 · Score: 2

The scene is still alive and well, and there are still Amiga demos to be found without great searching. Pouet.net is a great place to begin. For more general eye catching demos take a look at scene.org

--
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
Re:Works pretty well by Dogtanian · 2013-12-12 09:18 · Score: 2

The H.A.M. (Hold and Modify) demo showing 4096 colors was pretty impressive at a time when most PCs were stuck with 256 colors
HAM was around almost two years before VGA debuted (with the PS/2 in April 1987)! (*)

The downside was that it was hard to use for animated graphics, since the colour of most pixels were modified shades of the one to their left, meaning one had to take into account surrounding pixels when moving an object to avoid miscoloured streaking. Few action games used it, though I'm still convinced more games could have exploited HAM if the problem had been analysed methodically and restrictions on the use of base colours and general shading worked out to minimise artifacts and keep calculations workable.

Possibly this wasn't really considered because in Europe (where the Amiga was popular), most 16-bit games were also written for the Atari ST (***) and this would have made them harder to adapt. Hence most used the regular 32-colours-from-4096 or occasionally, the sort-of-64-colour "halfbrite" modes.

(*) AFAICT the best widespread PC adaptor around when the Amiga launched was EGA (i.e. 16 colours from 64). IBM *did* apparently have a graphics adaptor comparable to VGA in 1984, but the card alone was four times the price the Amiga cost when it launched the following year(!)

(**) HAM gave 12-bit colour using only 6 bits per pixel. One could either choose from 16 "base colours" (chosen from a palette of 4096 RGB colours) or choose to modify the red, green or blue component of the pixel to its immediate left, meaning that it could take up to 3 pixel positions to get an exact value; this led to fringing, which could be minimsed by choosing the base colours wisely (and by dynamically changing the base colours on every line with software assistance).

(***) Apparently there was a program for the Atari ST that gave it a software-assisted 512 colour display, but I don't know how restricted *that* was; apparently there were timing issues.

--
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Re:Works pretty well by lgw · 2013-12-12 10:02 · Score: 1

HAM was great for scrolling a hi-res background gradually to the left. I was amazed how few side-scroller games took advantage of that: I can only remember a couple, but they had astonishing graphics by the standards of the time.

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Re:Works pretty well by Darinbob · 2013-12-12 12:06 · Score: 1

Most people at the time were stuck on black and white with PCs, with 256 colors only for those who spent a huge amount of money for it.
I think the demos are still around if you search for Fish Disks. However the original floppies are essentially unusable on any standard PC floppy drive (no ability to control rotation speeds).
Re:Works pretty well by Darinbob · 2013-12-12 12:54 · Score: 2

HAM was actually sort of a side effect. It was started as an experiment in ways to process NTSC signals in the chip, modifying hue and brightness. Later when changing to RGB there was no need for this anymore but it was impractical to remove it without doing a new layout of the chip (these were some of the last digital chips layed out by hand).
HAM was very useful for static images, especially things like photographs where colors changed gradually. Especially with modes that could change the color palette on every scan line (Copper chip did this).
Overall though, the 256 color VGA mode on some PCs was superior to Amiga in many ways. However the VGA graphics cards were very expensive at the time of the Amiga, whereas EGA (16 colors) was more common, or black and white even more common (PCs were still serious machins for running Lotus-123, not silly things for artists or gamers). HAM was used a lot as proof of how much better Amiga was, and for things like photos or 3D modeling it really was.
More interesting I think was the difference in design between Amiga display and a typical PC display. Amiga used single-bit layers whereas PCs used multi-bit pixels. Most people today think in terms of pixels. Setting a pixel on a PC involved writing just one byte, but on an Amiga it meant changing one bit in several layers. So porting PC code that wrote in pixels to the Amiga often gave disappointing performance (though hardware helped). Whereas having an overlay of text on top of a dynamic picture was very simple on the Amiga but complex on the PC, or perhaps moving sprites on top of a background image.
What really made things work was the extra hardware to support all this. Hardware bit blitter (ala Smalltalk) made a lot of graphics much simpler, coprocessor to manage layers, coprocessor synchronized to video stream for sprites or various effects, synchronizing to external video signals, etc. In the PC world much of this stuff that chips did on the Amiga were moved off to peripherals. This meant that a lot of the early demos were about trying to extract the most possible from the hardware available just to push back the envelope. There were abilities that came into common use that the designers had not planned for.
Re:Works pretty well by hraponssi · 2013-12-12 16:37 · Score: 1

I like www.flashtro.com. Works best on chrome of course, with flash auto-updating. And youtube has plenty of the demos videoed as well. Such things are what I use chrome for when I do use it.. fits the theme of the day I see
Re:Works pretty well by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 16:44 · Score: 0

The emulation code is NOT FROM CLOANTO! Cloanto just ships WinUAE and bought a license to the old Amiga roms and OS from some copyright troll who *maybe* acquired the rights to the OS and roms from Commodore's liquidators (who knows? maybe they just said they did).
WinUAE is by Mathias Ortmann and Toni Wilen, based on code from UAE by Bernd Schmidt.
Re:Works pretty well by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 18:39 · Score: 0

For that matter, there's even still the AmigaNet BBS network, complete with a good number of BBS systems still running on AmigaOS (either on native hardware or emulated).
Naturally, most BBS systems these days use TCP/IP rather than modem connections, as copper wire phone lines are on the endangered species list, but other than the fact that things transfer fairly quickly, and you can still get phone calls while using them, the experience is pretty similar. I'd strongly advise grabbing a copy of Syncterm (cross platform) to ensure proper display of ANSI art, though windows hyperterminal isn't terrible about it.
Re:Works pretty well by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 23:52 · Score: 0

You can use Amiga-N (Windows-N, or Insert-N) to bring Workbench back to the front. Also, try Amiga-M.

Lack of vision by mcrbids · 2013-12-12 07:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

Sometimes, Google just baffles me. The lack of direction in their product lines makes me shake my head.

We have several distinct software platforms:

1) Android. Development in XML with Java used as glue to hold everything together. Unless you don't. You can use standard C libraries and call the Linux kernel directly, bypassing the Dalvik Java VM.

2) Chrome browser. Development largely in javascript, again there are some obvious exceptions. Javascript is, of course, preferred because it's safer, so ChromeOS protects you by having everything done in Javascript. Except that it isn't.

3) ChromeOS. Kinda/Sorta like using the Chrome browser, except that it's not, because you are developing things that run as if they were actual clients. In Javascript. And of course, this too, is just as strictly enforced.

4) But Let's not forget the 4th platform in the trio: Google's Go language is clearly a contender, and it's designed to replace C, except for a few bone-headed decisions like linking everything statically resulting in enormous binaries. Because you really, really need to have the same library installed once for every app installed, because that way you get to recompile everything installed on your system any time a security update comes out for your favorite library. Except that, of course there are exceptions here, too.

And most importantly, you cannot target all these platforms with any single codebase written in any language. It's like they are trying to make their product suite as difficult as just using products from multiple vendors anyway.

--
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.

Re:Lack of vision by stenvar · 2013-12-12 07:18 · Score: 2

And most importantly, you cannot target all these platforms with any single codebase written in any language
Yeah, because that worked out so well for Sun and Microsoft, right?
Different users have different needs that are met by different languages and environments. And unlike other companies, Google seems to have concluded reasonably that they don't know what people are going to be using, so they give people options.
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 07:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

Dynamic linking is cancerous, thank the gods they chose not to use it. Of course, it's Rob Pike and Ken Thompson, so there was never any risk of it. And never will be as long as they're on it.
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 07:59 · Score: 0

It's almost as if Google is a huge but not monolithic organization or something.
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:05 · Score: 0

You forgot AppEngine.
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:51 · Score: 0

I'm so glad some people get this.
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:58 · Score: 0

Sometimes, Google just baffles me. The lack of direction in their product lines makes me shake my head.
Your confusion likes in your underlying assumption that the software (etc) they make is their product.
That's wrong. The information they collect from all the users of that software (etc) is their product, that and the users' eyeball time, all of which they then sell to advertisers and other interested (*cough* NSA *cough*) parties.
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:19 · Score: 0
I think mcrbids problem is that there is not a single language that can target all the platforms.
- Android : Java, C, C++ (Android NDK)
- Chrome : JavaScript, C, C++ (NaCl)
- ChromeOS : JavaScript
- Server development language pushed by google: Go (No bindings for Android/Chrome/ChromeOS)
Basically all the platforms pushed by google stand as isles completely unconnected. If you want to publish some library that works on all of them that means 3 or 4 rewrites of the same code in different languages and a project needing that isn't even far fetched. All of the target devices are internet enabled and have good reasons to talk with each other, which requires the same encoding/decoding, validation, sorting, etc. logic on all of them.
Re:Lack of vision by Just+Some+Guy · 2013-12-12 09:32 · Score: 1

Re Go being statically linked: great! It's meant to be a language for writing services. Those are typically deployed by creating a giant tarball of all the artifacts needed to deploy a service, copying it to all the hosts that will run it, extracting in place, and restarting. In this case, the tarball is the compiled executable. You can copy it to its server and have everything required to run it in a single tidy package.
Contrast with a Java deployment where the tarball will contain many JAR files, etc. Rolling back to a previous version either involves a symlink shuffle and restart or updating CLASSPATH to point to the old version. The Go equivalent is stopping the service and running the previous binary.
Static linking would be a pain in the ass for replacing everything in /bin. It's awesome for deploying network services, where building a new binary and deploying it to 1,000 servers is no harder than updating a particular library on each of those 1,000 (and avoids version conflicts where another service on the same box really wants a slightly older version).

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:Lack of vision by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:34 · Score: 0

Google isn't Microsoft; they don't have grand platform strategies or try to lock you into something.
Chrome and ChromeOS are just browsers and run what browsers do. NaCl and Go are just projects at Google, not an attempt to take over the world. And Android is stuck with "Java" for better of for worse, but it's not like you can't program it in JavaScript or other languages.
Re:Lack of vision by CTachyon · 2013-12-12 09:47 · Score: 2

Sometimes, Google just baffles me. The lack of direction in their product lines makes me shake my head.
We have several distinct software platforms:
1) Android. Development in XML with Java used as glue to hold everything together. Unless you don't. You can use standard C libraries and call the Linux kernel directly, bypassing the Dalvik Java VM.
2) Chrome browser. Development largely in javascript, again there are some obvious exceptions. Javascript is, of course, preferred because it's safer, so ChromeOS protects you by having everything done in Javascript. Except that it isn't.
3) ChromeOS. Kinda/Sorta like using the Chrome browser, except that it's not, because you are developing things that run as if they were actual clients. In Javascript. And of course, this too, is just as strictly enforced.
4) But Let's not forget the 4th platform in the trio: Google's Go language is clearly a contender, and it's designed to replace C, except for a few bone-headed decisions like linking everything statically resulting in enormous binaries. Because you really, really need to have the same library installed once for every app installed, because that way you get to recompile everything installed on your system any time a security update comes out for your favorite library. Except that, of course there are exceptions here, too.
And most importantly, you cannot target all these platforms with any single codebase written in any language. It's like they are trying to make their product suite as difficult as just using products from multiple vendors anyway.
It's really quite simple. A lot of Google projects started from a handful of people going "you know what would be a cool idea?" and doing it with very little approval or red tape (the fabled 20% time). That's certainly the only explanation I can think of for DART, at any rate.
Go is basically what you get when you hire a former Plan 9 developer, expose him to Google's internal hermetic build system (where a 100MiB binary is small), then let him build cool stuff to keep him from getting bored.
Disclaimer: I work at Google but do not speak for my employer. I don't work on any of the teams mentioned in your post. The information in this post is already available to the public in various places.

--
Range Voting: preference intensity matters

Get busy GoG!!! by MetricT · 2013-12-12 07:52 · Score: 2

Just think about all the great old Amiga/Commodore-64/etc games you could sell using something like this. I'll pay good money for Bard's Tale I/2/3 and Raid on Bungling Bay.

Re:Get busy GoG!!! by QuantumLeaper · 2013-12-12 08:49 · Score: 1

I MESS those games, it when old games were better than some of the newer games. There are quite a few C64 emulators and some very good Amiga emulators also.
Re:Get busy GoG!!! by demonrob · 2013-12-13 21:05 · Score: 1

then go to gog.com and get them. The original Bards Tales are included with the 2005ish Bards Tale game. Steam has it as well. Even Androids and Ipads have it. Actually, send me the good money and I'll forward you my copy! Mmm,. good money, its the best sort.

Go Google. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 08:29 · Score: 0

Wish they ported it to asm.js, at least that works in other modern browsers. But hey, that wouldn't upsell their own replacement web stack components, so I can sympathize. Far better to create their own tech no one else wants then it is to put their resources into something like Shumway or other tech that wasn't invented there.

Meh by Trogre · 2013-12-12 08:53 · Score: 1

If it's not sync'd to the video refresh it's going to be a very choppy, tear-ridden experience.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife

Re:Meh by wonkey_monkey · 2013-12-12 20:52 · Score: 1

If it renders everything upside down it's not going to be very useful.
If it continuously plays a fart noise at full volume it's going to be very annoying.
If it summons Cthulhu it's not going to be very enjoyable for anyone.
If...
If...
If...

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Re:Meh by Trogre · 2013-12-14 22:41 · Score: 1

Well yes I suppose that is correct, but given that the situations you described are incredibly unlikely and the scenario I described is in line with every single emulator-in-a-browser I have ever seen, what is your frickin point?

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife

ActiveX by Dan+East · 2013-12-12 09:03 · Score: 0

What is this, ActiveX reborn?

--
Better known as 318230.

YES! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:07 · Score: 0

Whoohoo! Less than 20 minutes of tinkering with it and I got a Guru Meditation!

Aaaah, the memories...

Enormous binaries versus shared libraries by swb · 2013-12-12 09:15 · Score: 2

I'm not a software developer, but as a long-time network admin it always struck me that shared libraries were a great idea except when they weren't.

Before I switched to FreeBSD, Linux always seemed to have headaches with shared library problems, with some apps not working with some versions of shared libraries and a general nuisance being made with multiple versions of shared libraries being around.

Windows, of course, has its reputation for DLL hell, which I think was more of an issue in really old versions than it is now.

Given the size of storage generally available now, is it really so bad to have statically linked binaries? It greatly increases application portability and version independence and probably makes package management a lot simpler and more risk-free since you don't have to worry about shared libraries.

I've always been tempted to do a statically linked buildworld to see just how much extra space it takes.

Re:Enormous binaries versus shared libraries by 0123456 · 2013-12-12 11:47 · Score: 1

Before I switched to FreeBSD, Linux always seemed to have headaches with shared library problems, with some apps not working with some versions of shared libraries and a general nuisance being made with multiple versions of shared libraries being around.
I think you're thinking of Windows. Linux works because it can have multiple versions of the same library, and minor versions are compatible, so you only need one copy of each major version to remain compatible with old software.

Given the size of storage generally available now, is it really so bad to have statically linked binaries?
Uh, yes. Do you really want to have to download a new copy of every single application on the system when there's a security fix for the standard C library?
That said, Windows isn't much better off when every program has its own copy of zlib.dll and you have to update fifty of them when a new security fix is released.
Re:Enormous binaries versus shared libraries by mdielmann · 2013-12-12 15:30 · Score: 1

I think you're thinking of Windows. Linux works because it can have multiple versions of the same library, and minor versions are compatible, so you only need one copy of each major version to remain compatible with old software.
I've heard of problems with Linux with shared libraries, but not to the same degree as with Windows. I got the impression that it was more irritating because it was the exception rather than the rule, so it was tested lower on the list of things that might go wrong. This is a vague recollection from decades ago, so it likely isn't relevant today.

That said, Windows isn't much better off when every program has its own copy of zlib.dll and you have to update fifty of them when a new security fix is released.
And this is how Windows solved DLL Hell. It's almost as good as statically linking for linking errors (the dll can still be deleted), less download time for library patches (just the dll instead of the whole application), and actually works. That last step is vital. Prior to this, they tried to have multiple versions in a Windows directory, and I think it was a toss-up over what caused more problems: apps using a newer dll version than they were supposed to, apps using an older version than they were supposed to, or slightly different dlls overwriting others while having just enough difference to break an app somewhere (I've seen more than one dll with all metadata the same except for the modified date and the number of bytes).

--
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
Re:Enormous binaries versus shared libraries by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 18:42 · Score: 0

Space issues are largely less of an issue now, though you have to consider that while desktops/laptops have more space, we also have more embedded systems and other such things where space is if anything more of an issue than it was on desktops 15 years ago.
The issue, as the poster above you pointed out, is that when a vulnerability comes out in a library, instead of just updating the library, you have to update every single program t hat uses that library. Hope you got them all...

Re:Beta - default to now for ACs??? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 09:21 · Score: 0

The beta looks pretty good the future of slashdot!

FWIW by Dogtanian · 2013-12-12 09:49 · Score: 2

Thought I'd point out that technically, AmigaOS is still around- in fact, last time I heard it's being "actively" developed (*) and sold, albeit as a very niche product targeted at diehard hobbyists. (**) As I commented, though even several years back:-

Really, the Amiga OS nowadays is just a plaything for a few very hardcore hobbyists willing to pay for overpriced, underpowered custom hardware that isn't even directly compatible with the original Amiga anyway. Amiga OS (and the original hardware) was fantastic in its day, and beat the living heck out of MS-DOS and early Windows, but that was a long time ago. Anyone for whom Amiga OS/hardware compatibility was essential or even useful would have been forced to give up and migrate elsewhere by the late-90s at most. For that reason, even if one *could* upgrade it to a modern OS, it'd make more sense just to write a new OS from scratch- the "classic" core would just end up being legacy baggage that would please the Amiga obsessives because they could call it Amiga OS, but have little real world use beyond muddying the design.

(Sorry, didn't want that to sound like a dismissal of the genuinely innovative Amiga OS, but things have moved on too far now).

Also, the rights to the various Amiga and Commodore IPs (names, hardware and software all separate) have been split up, passed around like a bad game of pass the parcel, sublicensed and disputed; I won't go into the details because (a) I can't be bothered and (b) I'm not sure myself! :-)

But... yeah. Technically, last time I heard you can still buy a "modern" AmigaOne and run the new versions of AmigaOS on it.

(*) Though that may be for values of "active" comparable to the rate of flow of glass in medieval windows. And yes, I know that's possibly a myth. :-)
(**) To be fair, this is mentioned on Slashdot at regular intervals, so it's possible that many of you are aware of this anyway. The rights to the Amiga name, to manufacture the hardware and to the OS http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2710941&cid=39268663

--
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).

I'm glad they didn't emulate the Commodore 64 by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 10:27 · Score: 0

That allows ASM.JS to do C64 emulation in a much more cross-browser compatible way.
Meanwhile Here's the Unreal 3 engine running using ASM.JS

Amiga 1.3 Please... by gabrieltss · 2013-12-12 12:06 · Score: 1

They are running Amiga OS 1.3 please...... At LEAST be able to do AmigaOS 2.1..

--
The Truth is a Virus!!!

Re:Amiga 1.3 Please... by smash · 2013-12-12 14:08 · Score: 1

This is merely a choice of ROM. No real technical reason it won't run 2.1 as well or instead. 1.3 is compatible with far more games than later versions.

--
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.

licensing by smash · 2013-12-12 14:07 · Score: 0

So, Google have done a deal with cloanto for the ROM licensing? Thought not...

--
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.

Re:licensing by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-12 14:53 · Score: 1

If you had actually bothered to take ONE SECOND and click on the demo, you would have seen right in the corner of the demo a logo: "Powered by Amiga Forever(r), Cloanto(r)".
So obviously, yes, they did do a deal with Cloanto for the ROM and OS licensing (though the legitimacy of Cloanto's claims to rights over AmigaOS and Kickstart is rather questionable).

Once again the Amiga surfaces... by Trax3001BBS · 2013-12-12 16:35 · Score: 1

Amiga is always surfacing with new purchasers with great plans that
never work out. This one just might fly.

I've honestly been avoiding Chrome like the plague, if someones trying
to force something on you, I figure it can't be a good thing. I mean you click
the wrong area on just about any web page you find yourself downloading
Chrome.

But this Amiga things got me, I have two other boxes just like this one http://i42.tinypic.com/2hwpx82.jpg
all Amiga related "stuff", mostly games.

I started on the TRS-80 III, and I couldn't find software for it, if I did it was spendy
and just what Radio Shack stocked, I learned Assembly language only because an assembler showed up.

So when I got the Amiga I grabbed everything Amiga I could due to the famine I had with the TRS-80.
I was the one you visited if you wanted Amiga software :} and was happy to copy whatever you brought
with you.

I still have two Amiga 500's, a 2000 and a 3000; that 3000 is like a bad penny. I enjoyed it
very much, ran a BBS from it, then sold it... twice; it always returned as a "gift" :}

Let's see it in asm.js by caspy7 · 2013-12-13 08:07 · Score: 1

I really would like to see this same setup in asm.js to see how it compares.

I wrote a Commodore PET, C64 and Apple ][ emulator by KPexEA · 2013-12-13 10:26 · Score: 1

I wrote a Commodore PET, Vic-20, C64 and Apple ][ emulator in native-client as well. You can play with it here: http://www.scale18.com/nc/game/game.html

I works perfectly!!! by Optali · 2013-12-15 04:48 · Score: 1

I got a Guru Meditation!

--
-- 29A the number of the Beast

Slashdot Mirror

Google Brings AmigaOS to Chrome Via Native Client Emulation

157 comments