Wrong. VP code is not interpreted as it is executed. It is translated at load time into native assembler before execution. While the program is running, there is no interpretation process.
OK, why do I think that Amiga Inc. have the right to call it an Amiga?
Because they are trying to do things that nobody has done before:
No nonsense portability on a base level rather than application level for many processors and different computer systems and heterogenous multiprocessing.
Nobody in 1985 had the chance to buy a computer system for less than 5-10000$, which at the time allowed for full screen animation, video effects editing, had a real multitasking OS with a color GUI, stereo sound and the works. The Amiga creators gave people that opportunity with a custom chipset and an OS.
Today, to make the same leap, you can't create a custom chip set, because many companies today can create chips with incredible horse power. So you have to be smart in other areas: Software.
The point: To be revolutionary, you can't keep on using the same formula. To win a war, you can't keep on reinventing gun powder. You have to resort to different methods.
I'm an Amigan and I would say that building a new computer with a custom chipset would be a waste of time and downright silly.
The other point: The way I see an Amiga, is not by looking at the chipset (most of us have already replaced parts of the chipset with higher performance current industry standard parts). I don't look so much at the OS either (though that is what really is left of the classic), it's more the principles and the philosophy in use here.
Principles:
Keep it small. Optimize. Choose the solution which will work well, instead of the one which will just work. Spend time designing carefully.
Philosophy:
Elegance, simplicity, flexibility, ease of use and functionality.
If they can keep those principles intact from the original Amiga as well as the philosophy, they can call it an Amiga.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. VP code is not interpreted as it is executed. It is translated at load time into native assembler before execution. While the program is running, there is no interpretation process.
Because they are trying to do things that nobody has done before:
No nonsense portability on a base level rather than application level for many processors and different computer systems and heterogenous multiprocessing.
Nobody in 1985 had the chance to buy a computer system for less than 5-10000$, which at the time allowed for full screen animation, video effects editing, had a real multitasking OS with a color GUI, stereo sound and the works. The Amiga creators gave people that opportunity with a custom chipset and an OS.
Today, to make the same leap, you can't create a custom chip set, because many companies today can create chips with incredible horse power. So you have to be smart in other areas: Software.
The point: To be revolutionary, you can't keep on using the same formula. To win a war, you can't keep on reinventing gun powder. You have to resort to different methods.
I'm an Amigan and I would say that building a new computer with a custom chipset would be a waste of time and downright silly.
The other point: The way I see an Amiga, is not by looking at the chipset (most of us have already replaced parts of the chipset with higher performance current industry standard parts). I don't look so much at the OS either (though that is what really is left of the classic), it's more the principles and the philosophy in use here.
Principles:
Keep it small. Optimize. Choose the solution which will work well, instead of the one which will just work. Spend time designing carefully.
Philosophy:
Elegance, simplicity, flexibility, ease of use and functionality.
If they can keep those principles intact from the original Amiga as well as the philosophy, they can call it an Amiga.