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?
In fact I had an A1200 that did NOT have a dodgy floppy -- it was fine. The boot errors I was seeing were due to the software not working under the A1200's ROM version. I assumed, and the guy behind Catweasel assumed, that it was a dodgy-floppy A1200. It would seem he would stay abreast of the status of A1200 production drive models being the sort to offer something like Catweasel. My time (and money) was wasted.
So is it possible to send data as though it were voice, for lack of a better way of putting it, on my T68i? I have an AT&T plan and data, e-mail, etc. on the phone costs me $$$. But voice is unlimited ($99/mo for unlimited hours). Can I transfer data in the unlimited mode of my connection?
I had an Amiga 1200 (060 50MHz, towered) that I was trying to use a PC drive with. (Sold the Amiga to fund the purchase of an iBook 700 recently...) I purchased a Catweasel for the Amiga and could never get it working properly. The reason I went this route is that I was under the impression that the floppy in the A1200 was configured such that certain software would not run on the machine. (It was a very recent A1200, do a google search to find out what I'm talking about).
Anyway, I was talking with the main guy behind the Catweasel (can't recall his name right off) via e-mail and giving him my situation and photos of different parts of my mobo and he was walking me through the process of getting the drive wired properly w/ the Catweasel, etc. but it was not working. Turns out he had incorrect information regarding the configuration of these late-model A1200's and that my whole wiring, soldering, and Catweasel experience was for naught. As this was being discovered, the guy got tired of going through the back and forth in trying to get Catweasel working on my Amiga, and stopped responding to me.
Left a sour taste. Wasted $$. I'm sure most people won't have this need for support or this less than ideal experience. My $.02.
Vector based graphics -- indeed they beat OS X to it. And how...nice...that desktop looks. Hrmmmmm. Umm--it seems more vanilla basic than even Windows 95.
I'll stick with OS X. Hell, it's father NEXTSTEP was out in '88 and had a slicker interface....
Apple could have cared less what Jobs over at NeXT thought about anything at the time that PowerPC was being laid out.
Also as for Jobs forcing OS X on you -- it's a miracle Apple is even here, peddling a OS all these years that is, from a kernel perspective, the inferior of Windows 95.
Hopefully Epic spent some of the effort in getting it running on Linux to get it working under Mac OS X. That would be far more appealing than kicking the PC code to Westlake Interactive and letting Mark / Glenda Adams (he / she, think Dan Bunten revisited) work a semifunctional port.
Technically, the Unix that's 30 yrs old is not the Unix on which Mac OS X is based. Remember that Mac OS X is based on NeXT's OS, which is in turn based on Mach. Darwin borrows very heavily from xxxBSD however.
Actually NeXT is based on Mach + BSD just as OS X is based on Mach + FreeBSD. BSD was there from day one on the NeXT.
So you can compile and run, say, Linux apps that havea GUI. Linux uses X-Windows System and Apple's GUI is (superior and) proprietary. GIMP is an example.
I think the square kilometer array, to be completed in 2010 would be an excellent tool to augment our search for extraterrestrial life. I hope that the funding, so critical to such an endeavor, is made available and that we can cooperatively, as a planet, make use of this in harmony. An intersting thing about such a large arr -g@@! #$ 01001 #3t245@
These machines do have DDR memory and a DDR system bus but the G4's themselves are running at 133 or 167MHz (depending upon model). The system controller and memory are running full tilt though (266 or 333 depending).
This is an excellent move for Apple. Solid UNIX high-end workstations making use of multiple processors, as a robust, pre-emptive multitasking system should. Let's hope Apple finds some what to make the public aware of this singificant spec of their tower machines.
Sadly...my dual G4 800 may be getting grey hair...
Slashdot Mirror
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
In fact I had an A1200 that did NOT have a dodgy floppy -- it was fine. The boot errors I was seeing were due to the software not working under the A1200's ROM version. I assumed, and the guy behind Catweasel assumed, that it was a dodgy-floppy A1200. It would seem he would stay abreast of the status of A1200 production drive models being the sort to offer something like Catweasel. My time (and money) was wasted.
bp
So is it possible to send data as though it were voice, for lack of a better way of putting it, on my T68i? I have an AT&T plan and data, e-mail, etc. on the phone costs me $$$. But voice is unlimited ($99/mo for unlimited hours). Can I transfer data in the unlimited mode of my connection?
Thanks.
blakespot
Oh my lord. how I loath Domino.
Shelter me, oh Lord on high, from having to work with that "system" ever, ever again.
blakespot
I had an Amiga 1200 (060 50MHz, towered) that I was trying to use a PC drive with. (Sold the Amiga to fund the purchase of an iBook 700 recently...) I purchased a Catweasel for the Amiga and could never get it working properly. The reason I went this route is that I was under the impression that the floppy in the A1200 was configured such that certain software would not run on the machine. (It was a very recent A1200, do a google search to find out what I'm talking about).
Anyway, I was talking with the main guy behind the Catweasel (can't recall his name right off) via e-mail and giving him my situation and photos of different parts of my mobo and he was walking me through the process of getting the drive wired properly w/ the Catweasel, etc. but it was not working. Turns out he had incorrect information regarding the configuration of these late-model A1200's and that my whole wiring, soldering, and Catweasel experience was for naught. As this was being discovered, the guy got tired of going through the back and forth in trying to get Catweasel working on my Amiga, and stopped responding to me.
Left a sour taste. Wasted $$. I'm sure most people won't have this need for support or this less than ideal experience. My $.02.
blakespot
I'd love to see video of that presentation. Anyone?
blakespot
Vector based graphics -- indeed they beat OS X to it. And how...nice...that desktop looks. Hrmmmmm. Umm--it seems more vanilla basic than even Windows 95.
I'll stick with OS X. Hell, it's father NEXTSTEP was out in '88 and had a slicker interface....
blakespot
...and without a Mac-head at Epic to do the Mac work like they have done with Linux, it's not possible to do in-house.
Epic has stated that the Mac version is being done in house.
blakespot
OS X version coming in December
blakespot
Within the past year, Pixar switched over to mainly Mac hardware.
blakespot
Apple could have cared less what Jobs over at NeXT thought about anything at the time that PowerPC was being laid out.
Also as for Jobs forcing OS X on you -- it's a miracle Apple is even here, peddling a OS all these years that is, from a kernel perspective, the inferior of Windows 95.
Get some knowledge.
blakespot
They're call Cobalt's.
blakespot
Great, another desktop interface for Linux.
...hmm...actually...ahem...I'll go back to OS X now.
The more the better, right?
blakespot
The "Multimedia extensions" on the XScale come in two forms
MMX does not stand for "multimedia extensions", it stands for "matrix math extensions."
blakespot
How is the Xscale an improvement to the StrongArm SA-1100?? Is there a comparison? Thanks.
blakespot
Hopefully Epic spent some of the effort in getting it running on Linux to get it working under Mac OS X. That would be far more appealing than kicking the PC code to Westlake Interactive and letting Mark / Glenda Adams (he / she, think Dan Bunten revisited) work a semifunctional port.
blakespot
All your crush are belong to us.
Anyone working on an OS X port?? I've played lots of original Quake of late using the OS X native client. How about porting this to OS X as well?
Thanks.
blakespot
Technically, the Unix that's 30 yrs old is not the Unix on which Mac OS X is based. Remember that Mac OS X is based on NeXT's OS, which is in turn based on Mach. Darwin borrows very heavily from xxxBSD however.
Actually NeXT is based on Mach + BSD just as OS X is based on Mach + FreeBSD. BSD was there from day one on the NeXT.
blakespot
So you can compile and run, say, Linux apps that havea GUI. Linux uses X-Windows System and Apple's GUI is (superior and) proprietary. GIMP is an example.
blakespot
ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS--EXCEPT EUROPA.
ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE.
blakespot
Have a look at my NeXTstation Turbo Color.
68040 @ 33MHz, 128MB RAM, 2GB HD, 21" color screen
Fast, fast, fast -- no lie.
blakespot
But you can't run OS X on it.
What was the point of that purchase?
blakespot
As an FYI:
These machines do have DDR memory and a DDR system bus but the G4's themselves are running at 133 or 167MHz (depending upon model). The system controller and memory are running full tilt though (266 or 333 depending).
blakespot
This is an excellent move for Apple. Solid UNIX high-end workstations making use of multiple processors, as a robust, pre-emptive multitasking system should. Let's hope Apple finds some what to make the public aware of this singificant spec of their tower machines.
Sadly...my dual G4 800 may be getting grey hair...
blakespot