@Hypex

Amiga one upwards??

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@Karlos

I always hated that Amiga did use standard PC parts, that can’t just pop in normal dim ram, or a normal floppy drive, it was bullshit you need to have special floppy drive all needed to do is have dedicated motor signal, to etch driver. And drive can have worked without modifications.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@NutsAboutAmiga

You mean you wanted Amithlon.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Karlos

No that was back in 1990, Amithlon did not exist back then.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

Actually there was one Windows NT distribution for PPC that was enjoyed by a great many users until comparatively recently.

No? Nobody remembers the XBox 360?

I guess they all had the red ring of death by now, chilling out in Silicon Heaven with all the Teron boards.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@NutsAboutAmiga

No, it existed later. How does that not fulfil your original wish, albeit late? You said you always hated it. What, you actually only hated it in or up to 1990 specifically? What was the time frame over which you hated it?

Last edited by Karlos on 29-Nov-2023 at 06:07 PM.
Last edited by Karlos on 29-Nov-2023 at 06:06 PM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: I always hated that Amiga did use standard PC parts, that can’t just pop in normal dim ram, or a normal floppy drive, it was bullshit you need to have special floppy drive all needed to do is have dedicated motor signal, to etch driver. And drive can have worked without modifications.

IMR you could use a standard floppy drives as internal drives and my A2000 hat normal dual in line RAMs, DIMMs where very unusual in that time but some where used later in the A4000.

Last edited by OneTimer1 on 29-Nov-2023 at 06:17 PM.

MagicSN Quote:

I wouldn't say this is strange at all. With PC we mean Windows/PC/DOS-Boxes. Was always like this. And is the source why some people use "this is a PC" for platforms they do not like. The second part of it is the whole "Intel Outside" thingy. Calling a platform which isn't a PC is like "not much better than some x86 clone".

I suppose a women has always been anyone who identifies as a women too? The Webster dictionary may sadly include the definition of a women as anyone who identifies as a women if that definition becomes popular enough but the biological definition of a women remains valid. People called cells (AA, AAA, C, D) batteries long enough that it became part of the definition even though it was wrong.

The definition of PC has changed over the years. At first it was a pre-assembled affordable computer for personal use.

1. The first PCs were the Kenbak-1 and Altair 8800 but may not have been marketed as PCs.
2. The C= PET was the first mass marketed microcomputer and PET became known as "Personal Electronic Transactor". The Apple II and TRS-80 were likely called PCs too.
3. The IBM (5150) PC used "PC" in the name and marketing and became popular enough to be a 2nd definition of "PC" as the "IBM" was often dropped.
4. Other personal computers continues to be called PCs including the Amiga and Mac.
5. IBM PC clones started being called "PC" from the 2nd definition. At first CPU=8088 and BIOS=IBM but later CPU=x86 and BIOS=IBM.
6. IBM PC clones with MSDOS became standard and then with Windows expanding the 2nd definition of a PC.
7. The PC clone definition became the most popular use of PC as PC clones took over the PC market but the original definition is still valid.

MagicSN Quote:

I have to admit I never heard of Windows NT available on a PPC Hardware, and if it is it is the exception which proves the rule then

It's true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Version_history Quote:

Windows NT 3.5 was released in September 1994, focusing on performance improvements and support for Novell's NetWare, and was followed up by Windows NT 3.51 in May 1995, which included additional improvements and support for the PowerPC architecture.

@matthey

I'm waiting for the phrase "Adult human female" to be declared as hate speech.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@MagicSN

A PC (Personal Computer) and The PC (Pee Cee) are two different things.
An Amiga was and still is a PC. And so is anything running AmigaOS 4.

The PC was once a label for an IBM compatible (more specifically AT) Personal Computer running DOS/Windows combo, and later any intel ATX (and derivatives) running Windows, a.k.a Wintel machine/box.

The PC platform became so popular that it of course engendered a series of industry-wide standards (DDR RAM, PCI and PCIe buses, SATA, USB, etc) which have also been adopted by systems not running on a x86(64) processor (PPC Mac and Be Box, Sun's SPARC-based systems, Sgi's MIPS-based systems, etc), or in some cases not even personal computers (servers, game consoles, STBs, etc).

For most of these, they were running so much of the industry standard hardware, that the only thing that was different was the CPU. So Sun moved to x86, Sgi moved to x86, Be Inc moved to x86, and Apple moved to x86.

The custom UltraSPARC mainboard inside a Sun Microsystems workstation was not very different from the custom x86 mainboard that Gateway, Dell, or HP would put in their desktop systems.
That's right. Not all Windows PCs are made from standard off-the-shelf ATX motherboards + components + cards. Ever try to upgrade a special OEM Wintel machine? Special board shapes, weird cable headers, non-standard CPU cooler, WTF PSU.

As a long time Mac user, I remember that Mac users rejoiced when Apple adopted industry standards and made their systems more like the PC. How many people cry about loosing NuBus, ADB, or special Apple RAM modules?
How many people left the Mac platform when they moved away from PPC CPUs, vs. how many came to the Mac platform because they moved to intel CPUs?*

So the fact that a Sam440/460 system or A-EON X systems running AmigaOS 4 are built on top of industry standards shaped by the popularity of The PC is not what is making them less Amiga-like.
It's the fact that they are unable to build an Amiga-like developer and community, that there isn't any exciting Amiga-like software (apps/games) to be used/played, that a user can't enhance their creativity like they did with the Amiga, and that even the budget options are either so under-performing, expensive, or both, that it can't reach the critical mass required to be commercially viable, that is making these AmigaOS 4 systems more like the PC we remember.

*Note: Yes, unfortunately the Apple Mac story has gone back to highly integrated and customised tech stack, with fewer industry standards, and almost no user-replaceable/upgradeable components. But for a while it was just another [Windows] PC. To prove the point, Apple released Boot Camp for their intel line of personal computers.

Last edited by agami on 30-Nov-2023 at 04:14 AM.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@matthey

1. In the 1980s, microcomputers referred to small desktop-size computers e.g. BBC Micro.

In the 1970s, the press referred to the Altair 8800 as a "minicomputer."
https://www.vintagecomputer.net/altair-poptronics.cfm

2. The "PET" label was Commodore's microcomputer acronym.

Apple's Macintosh microcomputer line is just a Mac.

https://www.timidfutures.com/2017/07/commodore-vic-20-print-ads/
Commodore used the "home computer" term for the VIC-20.

The original IBM PC's PC-DOS 1.0 is Microsoft's supplied OS, but it's marketed as MS-DOS with IBM PC clones.

Modern PCs have a "design for Windows" ACPI in the UEFI and little-endian X86 CPU.

For HAL targets, Windows 7/8/10/11 targets ACPI.

There's mainstream expectation for the "PC" acronym that usually refers to IBM PC clones and they usually run Microsoft-supplied OS with the expected boot, firmware, and hardware topology.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote: what I see here is some pople as usually not accept reality. there is nothing special in 68k except it works in 32 bit big endian mode. beyond that 68k is cpu like many other.

Big Endian 68K has good code density.

Quote:

68k may be changed in "classic" amiga to almost everything except x86, arm, risc-v.

ARM is a good candidate to replace 68K since Emu68 operates in ARM's big-endian mode and has a low entry cost.

Raspberry Pi 3A and Pi 4B SKUs have good economies of scale.

ARM can fulfill "power without the price" better than PowerPC camp.

PowerPC camp's high cost has departed from Commodore Amiga 500's original "power without the price" mission.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@MagicSN

Quote:

MagicSN wrote: @BigD At best my knowledge they cannot run Windows (not without Emulation) and do not use x86. So they are not PCs. A PC is a computer with some sort of x86 which is able to run Windows (even if it actually might run Linux). Since the 90s I always defined Amiga over the operating system, never over some extremely old chips.

The Amiga is defined in a certain price range and Amiga games usually kick the OS.

As a 4096 color palette graphics chipset, the Amiga is a "power without the price" solution from Commodore.

There were other higher-priced 4096 color palette graphics chipsets in 1985 e.g. IBM PGA, and NEC PC-98.

Atm, Intel offers lower-cost GPU alternatives with ARC series GPU cards.

AMD and NVIDIA need to avoid the SGI effect.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@Karlos


Quote:

What's that according to this definition? Schrödinger's Box?

Hehe, Does this mean it's Crashed and and Not Crashed at the same time ?

Wol..

_________________
It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.~Albert Einstein

@Wol

Something like it's a a PC or not a PC. You can't know until you observe which OS was selected in the bootloader

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Karlos

when people at that time thought of PC they thought of X86 hardware with MS-DOS and later Windows. Of course there were other options (even better) like OS/2 but the market was dominated by Microsoft.

And yes PC was even used in combination with C128, but typical people think of something else

@OlafS25

Sure, but we're talking about people who in 2023 still think of a PC as a windows/does box. What's their excuse?

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

Assuming that etch induvial core has their own exception handlers, I guess it possible to do some type of mutex check in the exception hander. But what use is it without knowing what data it belongs to, can exception handler also do cache flush, to resync the cores.

Internally Exec could do that. Externally it could be a problem since the method is disabling all interrupts. At this point 68K code shouldn't be allowed to do it for real and even native code disabling interrupts should should be depreciated in favour of a safer method.

@matthey

Quote:

OpenPOWER is not as open as the name implies.

It's a 2014 document. So are they still charging for the license? Last I checked you still needed to pay for an ARM license but it must be cheaper and more common. PowerPC looks like it's day powering any appliances and cars. ARM would be taking over now.

Quote:

While I believe the RISC-V ISA has limited performance potential and am not a fan including others like architect Mitch Alsup (88k CPU designer), the open RISC-V ISA is making an impact. I believe it is one of the reasons why OpenPOWER has failed to gain traction and it has practically finished off more open MIPS and (Open)SPARC efforts.

What I wonder is for long it's been on the market. There's talk online it's relatively new and other talk it's been on the market for a while and scaling up. And, being called RISC-IV, what happened to the previous 4 versions? It looks like the closest competitor to Power. While Power seems to have disappeared and even a basic search on RISC server CPUs reveals no mention of Power still being around but does mention ARM and RISC-IV servers.

Quote:

This Mini-ITX board with 4xU74 core SoC is discontinued likely because it cost too much at around $700 while there is not enough of a market for RISC-V yet and the large board with PCIe makes it expensive (there is no good open hardware GPU that could be integrated to reduce the cost). SiFive may leave the market of building boards themselves choosing to stick to higher margin licensing and custom design for customers.

With those prices, performance and slightly limited desktop expansion capabilities it's perfect for the OS4 market!

Be interesting if RISC-IV could provide a bridge for a possible 68K reboot.

Quote:

Yes, the way the 68k AmigaOS disables interrupts is tied to the 68k. It is not unusual to use the Forbid/Permit and Enable/Disable 68k assembler macros which are still used in even the newest 68k AmigaOS.

And also the disabling of interrupts with a #$4000 in INTENA in ASM macros IIRC.

Quote:

Yes. PPC may not even be able to perform an atomic operation if the data is not naturally aligned and only a limited number of datatypes are supported. This is common for RISC architectures.

I wonder how it works around it. The atomics don't look the best either with busy looping until a lock. If it's taken.

But, they've somehow the old counters to work, by what ever means.

Quote:

PPC defines a weak memory (access) ordering that often requires sync memory barriers all over the place for SMP and may be the reason why SMP is still not working in AmigaOS 4. RISC weak memory ordering can cause problems for code written for CISC x86(-64). What other reason besides compatibility would RISC-V define an optional x86 like stricter Total Store Order (TSO)?

Interesting it does that in a similar way. The main problem is the data protection design to lock the whole system down. Any Forbid needs to lock all cores down from running any tasks. I suppose it could just do that. But it affects the system so where there are attempts for over a decade to work around it since it's a difficult issue.

Quote:

PPC code ends up with sync memory fences, load-reserve/store-conditional pairs, semaphore/mutex/spin lock protection, etc. that bloat up and slows down code near critical sections. Are there hardware choices that make programming easier and did PPC choose them?

OS4 does add mutexes. But the semaphore locks in AmigaOS rely on Forbid. I'm not aware of any easier hardware choices and some hardware configurations can disable CPU features.

Quote:

The G5 is kind of like a Pentium 4 which can be used as a space heater in the winter.

But unlike the P4 the G5 is 64-bit and has no LE mode.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Because Forbid/Permit, Disable/Enable and their ridiculous 8 bit counters are clear examples of why the Amiga o.s. BadByDesign.

It's also unusual as in other places like a library it's a UWORD. So some what consistent. I'm no expert on system design but to me, looking at it in hindsight, it's looks like bad design to lock the whole task system down for one task needing to share or protect data. Of course, the OS is open by design, so not only allows but also encourages user programs to peek and poke around in core OS structures. Any shareable object needing protection should have had a dedicated embedded structure with an associated access function that locked it out. At least that's what I think. Even a Forbid/Disable type counter could have worked for local data. Memory was tight but it wouldn't have needed much.

Oh, lol.
https://execlibrary.com

Quote:

Well, this is not "a blog": it's THE blog. Raymond Chen is simply amazing!

I stumbled upon it by accident. Whatever I was looking for an MS site was the last place I expected to find an article about PPC. But it was the most informative article I had found on the subject regarding PPC.