@bhabbott

Quote:

bhabbott wrote: Quote: cdimauro wrote: You don't need a G-Sync or FreeSync monitor to enjoy a very smooth video experience with emulators and, specifically, with WinUAE. If you've a modern-enough video card, WinUAE allows you to select "Lagless V-Sync" which works very well with any regular monitor. You can make some test with Pinball Dreams, for example, which was more sensible to lags. Or instead of needing to have a 'modern-enough' video card, you could simply use that ultimate Amiga emulation hardware, an Amiga 500. This is why I have an A500 and 1084 monitor - to get effortless 'emulation' that reproduces the entire experience with no question as to how accurate it is. As well as ensuring that my precious memories of the Amiga are preserved, it's important when eg. comparing the original Amiga version of Pinball Dreams to the PC version (which was not smooth).

Too expensive and it requires money to buy all systems that you like.

Besides that, I've already enjoy the games this way, but I don't want to repeat the same experience with the floppies: I had enough. Now I prefer to play the games using WHDLoad with a much better user experience.
Quote:

But how does this relate to your 'non-existent “Amiga NG� systems'? You say they 'cannot hide the inherent limitations of the system' but this is not their real flaw. The problem is that they don't reproduce those 'limitations' completely.

Why? They have the limits (more or less: there are a few minor changes), as precisely reported.
Quote:

Once you give up original Amiga hardware to go 'NG' you no longer have an Amiga.

By definition, you've no Amiga if you haven't the Commodore's chipset or you're just missing a CPU from the Motorola family.

As it's reported (and well defined) on Commodore's Amiga Hardware Manual.
Quote:

In your blog you talk about these 'NG' OS's bringing with them 'major problems that were never solved' but are they really problems?

Yes, they are.
Quote:

Memory protection: This is only a problem on the Amiga for seriously buggy programs.

Bugs can be everywhere and there's nothing / no tool which can find them.

There's a precise theorem from the Computability theory which has proved it. IF you had a degree/master/PhD in Computer Science you should had the chance to study and learn it, and all its implications.
Quote:

If developers follow best practices and use appropriate debugging tools it should not happen.

This happens on the Fablesland. Or on Meynaf's parallel universe...
Quote:

Having memory protection just encourages sloppy coding.

Why do continue to invent (or, better, vent) non-sense?

Care to prove it?
Quote:

I run the Enforcer and Mungwall on my A1200 which picks up most memory corrupting bugs, and I quarantine programs which violate their detections until they are fixed. My system is very stable.

Single user experience (which might be untrue, since it isn't verified) -> irrelevant.
Quote:

More comprehensive memory protection could easily be added to Amiga OS if desired.

Impossible. You clearly don't know how the Amiga OS worked.
Quote:

The fact that nobody has done it just shows that it's not that big a deal.

Then why don't you do it? I'm preparing the popcorn...
Quote:

Resource tracking: IMO the OS should not have to be responsible for this. You cite the case of a program opening a file and not closing it. This is a bug. The OS shouldn't be in the business of hiding application bugs.

Bugs are spread everywhere, as I've already reported: given any program, you cannot guarantee that it has no bugs (that's what the above theorem stated, more or less).

An OS has to deal with resources anyway, so it's in the better position to at least fix those issues, which are common and could happen.
Quote:

From a developer's perspective having resource tracking could save some coding effort. But this doesn't have to be done via the OS.

Why not? As I've said, it's in the best position for doing it.
Quote:

Code can easily be developed that automatically frees resources on exit.

Clap clap clap.
Quote:

I do this in all my programs.

Until you forget something...
Quote:

Process and thread concept You say the Amiga implementation is 'A big mishmash, in short, which makes the system extremely fragile and makes it unsuitable for more “mainstream� use.'. I haven't seen any evidence that this is true.

Because you live on your cave. Have you ever seen a Guru Meditation in your life?
Quote:

Regardless, 'mainstream use' is not what the Amiga is about.

The Amiga died on 1994, so I wonder how anyone could think differently.

However it was mainstream for 9 years.
Quote:

It is as you say a 'hobby/toy' computer, and a retro one at that. Nobody's controlling a nuclear power station or running a banking system on their Amiga!

Exactly the point. With all those limits, all such systems are just hobby/toy OSes.
Quote:

Multicore This one is self-evident. There are no multicore 68k CPUs, so no reason to fret about a feature that isn't needed.

Wrong. There's at least one modern 68k implementation that has something like SMT / Hyperthreading.
Quote:

Most of my PCs don't need it either!

Another proof that you've living in caves...
Quote:

64 bits Ditto.

See above.
Quote:

The Stack Compilers can generate code that monitors the stack and extends it if necessary.

How? Do you know how memory is allocated in an Amiga OS/like system? Even using a different memory allocator, you might easily end up by having consumed all possible space in that area, and you're gone.
Quote:

Whether this is a good thing is debatable.

It IS a good thing, because that's why applications on modern OSes simply don't care about the stack and still properly work.
Quote:

IMO programs should avoid using undefined amounts of stack.

?!?
Quote:

You show a typical single-tasking OS memory map and say the Amiga 'cannot use a model similar to this, having the entire address space shared by all tasks/threads and also by the OS'. This sounds like a really bad idea to me. At a minimum it makes debugging harder because at any time the OS could dump stuff onto the stack. It also means an application could corrupt stuff on the stack used by other apps or the OS. Perhaps I misunderstand what you mean,

Exactly, that's the case.

With separated addresses space per each application / process then you have NOT memory accessible by other processes-
Quote:

but I like the Amiga way where each process (and the OS) has its own stack space.

That's not what I was talking about : see above.

BTW all applications on any OS have a dedicated stack space. That's OBVIOUS!
Quote:

As for running past the stack limits, that can easily be protected against in real time if you have an MMU. If not then make the stack large and check it every so often to see how much of it was used.

Up to where it's possible. After that -> BOOM!
Quote:

And don't write unbounded recursive code!

Why not?
Quote:

Access to OS structures (and lack of abstraction): There's nothing wrong with accessing public OS structures. If the developer wants to break the rules and access private structures, that's on them.

The point was that you can access OS structures that were/are also PUBLIC!
Quote:

Not sure where 'lack of abstraction' fits in here,

See the example with Windows for more details.
Quote:

but you say 'Obviously, the problem does not only concern Exec, but is endemic to the entire platform: the lack of appropriate APIs and/or the publication of a lot of details on the internal structures of the OS has been the main cause of the blocking of its evolution.' If there is a lack of APIs that are really needed then they should be added to the next OS version.

Too late, since applications already abused of their freedom...
Quote:

If they aren't it's because the OS designers don't think they are necessary.

And they were wrong, in fact. They are responsible for such mess.
Quote:

You cite no API for 'knowing the list of running tasks'. Why would you want this?

For applications like Scout?

And that was just ONE example, BTW.
Quote:

Kernel/supervisor mode… and more: You say, "The extreme freedom offered by the OS can also be seen in another aspect that is not insignificant and which does not immediately stand out: that of being able to easily switch from user mode to supervisor/kernel mode (and vice versa, but… only if you want to!)." I say yes! Extreme freedom is what I want! It's my computer dammit, and nobody's going to stop me from disabling multitasking or interrupts or going into supervisor mode whenever I feel like it.

That's YOU. NOT the mainstream!
Quote:

Of course with appropriate hardware and software those things could easily be blocked, but why should they?

How could you block it? Show it. On the Amiga, of course.
Quote:

Modernity is not just about going beyond the original chipset: Indeed, but 'NG' doesn't mean that - it just means going beyond the stuff Commodore made. Since we now have modern hardware capable of executing 68k code faster (Vampire, PiStorm etc.) and continued development of the original OS, 'NG' is no longer the only way forward. But Amiga OS will never be 'modern' and we don't want it to be!

Why we talk about "we". Talk for YOURSELF!
Quote:

If you really want memory protection, OS resource tracking, multicore and 64 bits, and a fully virtual OS with every API you can think of, then there are modern systems that do that. Trying to duplicate them on the Amiga would turn it into something it isn't - and seriously cripple it for no good reason.

And this happened because the system was already conceived by being crippled. That's the point.

P.S. no time to read it again.

@cdimauro

Quote:

You've to select "Lagless VS (BR), 50/60Hz" from the dropdown menu at the right of "Settings:" and "Native" (which should be Fullscreen" on the Display page of the configuration. Set also 4 slices on the rightmost dropdown menu.

Been there, done that a long time ago... no stone left unturned under the sun. :(

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

@cdimauro

My "New" Amiga NG system is my old amiga 500+ with rasperrypi on the pistorm
other are NoGood expecially A-Eon.

_________________
I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG
A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32;
PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB;
MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz;
#nomorea-eoninmyhome

@tlosm

it is emulator. use android.

@cdimauro

boring boring boring
want real NG in 2024
stop writing start working on mui clone

@ppcamiga1

It use linux not android.
It use emulation only for the 68k instructions the other things are used by hardware or in "virtualization way".
The pistorm is an emulator like was PowerUp from phase 5

_________________
I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG
A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32;
PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB;
MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz;
#nomorea-eoninmyhome

@tlosm

Quote:

It use linux not android.

Not if you use Emu68. With Emu68 there is no Linux, only emu68 itself

Android, however, is an emulator on top of Linux.
(Something ppcamiga1 ironically isn’t aware of.)

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@michalsc

szulc stop trolling start working on mui clone

@tlosm

ppc code run native on p5 hardware

@kolla

no
my software always run native on android

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

my software always run native on android

Native what on android? Native Linux/ARM? If your software is dex bytecode running through the android runtime or Dalvik to become "native", then that's "emulation".

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@tlosm

Quote:

tlosm wrote: @cdimauro My "New" Amiga NG system is my old amiga 500+ with rasperrypi on the pistorm other are NoGood expecially A-Eon.

No system without the Commodore's chipset or without a Motorola 68k CPU could be called "Amiga". By definition (take a look at Commodore's Amiga Hardware Manual).

This clarified, you were a very loyal A-Eon / Hyperion supporter, for several years.

Strange that you turned 180° now...


@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote: @cdimauro boring boring boring want real NG in 2024

Not even in 2024 you'll get.
Quote:

stop writing start working on mui clone

Not needed: MUI was/is NOT part of the Amiga OS.

That's something which even the dumbest Amigan knows it...


@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @ppcamiga1 Quote: my software always run native on android Native what on android? Native Linux/ARM? If your software is dex bytecode running through the android runtime or Dalvik to become "native", then that's "emulation".

/OT Dalvik isn't used anymore: Android switched to a completely different VM since several years.

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Too expensive and it requires money to buy all systems that you like.

I can get an A500 for less than the price of a PC powerful enough to emulate one properly - and even then can't emulate some of the things that matter to me. I like playing with the hardware too. No emulator can reproduce that experience.

Quote:

By definition, you've no Amiga if you haven't the Commodore's chipset or you're just missing a CPU from the Motorola family.

By definition if it wasn't designed and manufactured by Commodore you've no Amiga. The question is how much can you replace with something else before it becomes not an Amiga? That's a grey area, but when I see a YouTube video purportedly showing a stock Amiga 4000/040 running Quake at an unbelievable frame rate I know the line has been crossed.

Quote:

There's a precise theorem from the Computability theory which has proved it. IF you had a degree/master/PhD in Computer Science you should had the chance to study and learn it, and all its implications.

I don't need that to know what use memory protection is on the Amiga, and what is needed to achieve it.

Quote:

Quote: If developers follow best practices and use appropriate debugging tools it should not happen. This happens on the Fablesland. Or on Meynaf's parallel universe...

On the contrary, it happens in real life on my Amiga. Programs that access illegal memory areas get kicked to the curb until/unless they are fixed.

Quote:

Quote: Having memory protection just encourages sloppy coding. Why do continue to invent (or, better, vent) non-sense? Care to prove it?

Yep. This Linux box I am using right now, with Firefox - which continues to crash at times even though numerous reports have been sent and numerous updates applied. Up to bug number 1879415 so far!

Most games released these days are riddled with bugs. The developers don't care because the bugs won't damage your system and will (hopefully) be fixed with online patches.

Quote:

Quote: More comprehensive memory protection could easily be added to Amiga OS if desired. Impossible. You clearly don't know how the Amiga OS worked.

Sure I do. It's not that complicated.

Quote:

Quote: The fact that nobody has done it just shows that it's not that big a deal. Then why don't you do it? I'm preparing the popcorn...

See the 'if desired' bit? I can't be bothered. Though one thing on my mind is modifying the Enforcer so it halts bad programs and automatically directs them to the debugger. Letting them continue running to produce more hits and/or corrupt the system is not acceptable IMO.

Quote:

Bugs are spread everywhere, as I've already reported: given any program, you cannot guarantee that it has no bugs (that's what the above theorem stated, more or less).

I'm interested in practical application not ivory tower theories.

Quote:

An OS has to deal with resources anyway, so it's in the better position to at least fix those issues, which are common and could happen.

It's not an issue worth bothering the OS with. The OS deals with resources as it needs to, in an efficient manner. Bogging it down with stuff that developers can (and should) do themselves is not the Amiga way.

Quote:

Because you live on your cave. Have you ever seen a Guru Meditation in your life?

What a silly question. Of course I've seen it, and it's awesome! Makes other platforms' crash reporters look crappy. Windows with its boring text-mode 'blue screen of death', Apple's 'sad Mac', the ST's 'bombs' - all pale in comparison to the world famous Guru Meditation! Everybody should experience it at least once to appreciate its awesomeness!

Quote:

Quote: Most of my PCs don't need it either! Another proof that you've living in caves...

I live in caves because my PC's don't have multicore CPUs?

Quote:

Do you know how memory is allocated in an Amiga OS/like system? Even using a different memory allocator, you might easily end up by having consumed all possible space in that area, and you're gone.

If you run out of memory on the Amiga you're gone for sure - which is how I like it. PCs just run into virtual memory and run 1000 times slower while the program continues to gobble up memory and there's nothing you can do about it except wait and hope. The number of times I had to reset my PC because I got sick of waiting...

One example of the difference on the Amiga is a bug that Roadshow had on KS3.0 where it would occasionally get stuck in a loop while initializing the network adapter, gobbling up memory until there was nothing left. Then it would fail, with the rest of the system being unaffected. In Windows or Linux something like this doesn't stop. Instead it bogs the system down dramatically, effectively locking up the desktop.

Quote:

With separated addresses space per each application / process then you have NOT memory accessible by other processes-

That's boring and inefficient, and impossible to enforce on a system without an MMU - which most Amigas don't have.

Quote:

For applications like Scout? And that was just ONE example, BTW.

"Scout is a tool that allows you to monitor your computer system. It displays
many different things -- like tasks, ports, assigns, expansion boards, resident
commands, interrupts, etc. -- and you can perform some certain actions on them.

For example you can freeze tasks, close windows and screens, release semaphores
or remove locks, ports and interrupts."

You think users should be doing things like this? Why should the OS be bloated with APIs for stuff that belongs in a debugger?

Quote:

Quote: If you really want memory protection, OS resource tracking, multicore and 64 bits, and a fully virtual OS with every API you can think of, then there are modern systems that do that. Trying to duplicate them on the Amiga would turn it into something it isn't - and seriously cripple it for no good reason. And this happened because the system was already conceived by being crippled. That's the point.

The Amiga didn't have multicore, 64 bits, memory protection etc. because such hardware didn't exist. What's the point of adding features to an OS that cannot be used?

Amiga OS was not 'crippled', it was tuned to the available hardware and intended usage. There's nothing wrong with that.

Last edited by bhabbott on 10-Mar-2024 at 04:25 AM.

@bhabbott

Quote:

The Amiga didn't have multicore, 64 bits, memory protection etc. because such hardware didn't exist. What's the point of adding features to an OS that cannot be used? Amiga OS was not 'crippled', it was tuned to the available hardware and intended usage. There's nothing wrong with that.

What do I like about Amiga?

I like a lot about the AMIGA its light weightiness and swiftness.
The Amiga boots in few seconds. The OS is slim and light.

The Amiga chipset allows to do many things very efficient.
Dragging down screens is done for "free" with the Copper
and there is no need to copy mega bytes around for doing this.

Programs can be coded on Amiga small and swift too.
I can directly ask the mouse button using only 1 instruction.
There is no need to go through layer over layers of abstraction.

TO ME: these are all good features.
And they part of my Amiga feeling.

Why does AMIGA have this and other OS do not?

Could programs be so light and fast on Linux for example?
No they can never be so slim and light and fast as on AMIGA OS.

And this because of the different design of both OS.
Linux forbids direct hardware access ..
And many things which go fast and direct on Amiga - become slow and complicated on Linux.

So yes Amiga is different to Linux .. it has no memory protection ...
But this is good in many ways ...

If Amiga would be like Linux, would also be not a lot slower?
Think about it.

@kolla

just use google search android c++

@bhabbott

Quote:

bhabbott wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: Too expensive and it requires money to buy all systems that you like. I can get an A500 for less than the price of a PC powerful enough to emulate one properly

How much do you pay? Do you've examples? Because a MiniPC has more performance than needed even for emulating a A1200 and it's very cheap.
Quote:

- and even then can't emulate some of the things that matter to me. I like playing with the hardware too. No emulator can reproduce that experience.

That's YOUR user experience and preference: the worlds is NOT only you.

Specifically, it's YOUR mental/psychological attitudute.
Quote:

Quote: By definition, you've no Amiga if you haven't the Commodore's chipset or you're just missing a CPU from the Motorola family. By definition if it wasn't designed and manufactured by Commodore you've no Amiga.

Wrong: it's all about who owns the Amiga's IPs & brands. If the owner sells a toaster marketed as Amiga and I buy it, then I can say that I've an Amiga.
Quote:

The question is how much can you replace with something else before it becomes not an Amiga? That's a grey area, but when I see a YouTube video purportedly showing a stock Amiga 4000/040 running Quake at an unbelievable frame rate I know the line has been crossed.

I've already told you: read the Hardware Manual and you'll know what's an Amiga.
Quote:

Quote: There's a precise theorem from the Computability theory which has proved it. IF you had a degree/master/PhD in Computer Science you should had the chance to study and learn it, and all its implications. I don't need that to know what use memory protection is on the Amiga, and what is needed to achieve it.

OK, this clearly proves that you've absolutely no clue of this theorem and, in general, of the Computability theorem.

I assume that you've NO Computer Science as well, since it looks like that you've no clue about what I'm talking about (in fact, memory protection has absolutely nothing to do with what I've said).

Is it that difficult to say: "I've no idea of what you're talking about"?
Quote:

Quote: This happens on the Fablesland. Or on Meynaf's parallel universe... On the contrary, it happens in real life on my Amiga. Programs that access illegal memory areas get kicked to the curb until/unless they are fixed.

Again, this happens only on the Fablesland or on Meynaf's parallel universe.

For example, the most nasty bugs are the ones where LEGIT / CORRECTLY MAPPED memory areas are accessed by code which should NEVER have accessed it.
Quote:

Quote: Having memory protection just encourages sloppy coding. Why do continue to invent (or, better, vent) non-sense? Care to prove it?

Yep. This Linux box I am using right now, with Firefox - which continues to crash at times even though numerous reports have been sent and numerous updates applied. Up to bug number 1879415 so far! [/quote]
There's no link to this bug, So I don't know what you're talking about.
Quote:

Most games released these days are riddled with bugs.

It happens. Many softwares are published even if they have bugs because and besides it they are "production-ready".

That's because bugs usually are classified with priority and if the bugs hasn't so much impact, then the product could go in production anyway.
Quote:

The developers don't care because the bugs won't damage your system

Guess why this isn't possible...
Quote:

and will (hopefully) be fixed with online patches.

Exactly. Software is so much complex nowadays that many this is delivered with bugs which are known and that will be fixed late.

That's real life.

However, this does NOT mean this: "Having memory protection just encourages sloppy coding. ". Which YOU've to PROVE!
Quote:

Quote: More comprehensive memory protection could easily be added to Amiga OS if desired. Impossible. You clearly don't know how the Amiga OS worked.

Sure I do. It's not that complicated.[/quote]
Then explain it. I think that many Amiga OS/-like developers can't wait looking at it.
Quote:

Quote: Then why don't you do it? I'm preparing the popcorn... See the 'if desired' bit? I can't be bothered.

See above: that's a desire which Amiga OS/-like developers are dreaming on since decades...
Quote:

Though one thing on my mind is modifying the Enforcer so it halts bad programs and automatically directs them to the debugger. Letting them continue running to produce more hits and/or corrupt the system is not acceptable IMO.

That's theory. In practice and how Amiga OS works, you can only do this on very very limited cases (e.g.: non mapped memory).
Quote:

Quote: Bugs are spread everywhere, as I've already reported: given any program, you cannot guarantee that it has no bugs (that's what the above theorem stated, more or less). I'm interested in practical application not ivory tower theories.

This theory has very deep PRACTICAL application. The problem is that you don't know it, because you never studies, so you can't understand it.
Quote:

Quote: An OS has to deal with resources anyway, so it's in the better position to at least fix those issues, which are common and could happen. It's not an issue worth bothering the OS with.

Why, since it's OS which is dealing with resources?
Quote:

The OS deals with resources as it needs to, in an efficient manner.

Exactly. That's why it can do it.
Quote:

Bogging it down with stuff that developers can (and should) do themselves is not the Amiga way.

Maybe it's not YOUR way, to be more precise.
Quote:

Quote: Because you live on your cave. Have you ever seen a Guru Meditation in your life? What a silly question. Of course I've seen it, and it's awesome! Makes other platforms' crash reporters look crappy. Windows with its boring text-mode 'blue screen of death', Apple's 'sad Mac', the ST's 'bombs' - all pale in comparison to the world famous Guru Meditation! Everybody should experience it at least once to appreciate its awesomeness!

So, you judge a system message only because it's fancy and not about the information which it shows?

Have you ever compared the CONTENT of a Guru Mediation and a Windows' BSOD? I don't think so...
Quote:

Quote: Most of my PCs don't need it either! Another proof that you've living in caves...

I live in caves because my PC's don't have multicore CPUs? [/quote]
Exactly. Even the first P4 had Hypethreading -> two different processes / threads could run in parallel. And it was already more than 20 years go...

And around 20 years ago we had dual core systems.
Quote:

Quote: Do you know how memory is allocated in an Amiga OS/like system? Even using a different memory allocator, you might easily end up by having consumed all possible space in that area, and you're gone. If you run out of memory on the Amiga you're gone for sure - which is how I like it. PCs just run into virtual memory and run 1000 times slower while the program continues to gobble up memory and there's nothing you can do about it except wait and hope. The number of times I had to reset my PC because I got sick of waiting...

Again, that's YOUR personal experience. And likely depends on the PCs that you're using, which are obsolete and limited resource available.
Quote:

One example of the difference on the Amiga is a bug that Roadshow had on KS3.0 where it would occasionally get stuck in a loop while initializing the network adapter, gobbling up memory until there was nothing left. Then it would fail, with the rest of the system being unaffected. In Windows or Linux something like this doesn't stop. Instead it bogs the system down dramatically, effectively locking up the desktop.

That doesn't happen so frequently. They are very rare events.

Whereas resetting an Amiga was common/frequent.
Quote:

Quote: With separated addresses space per each application / process then you have NOT memory accessible by other processes- That's boring and inefficient, and impossible to enforce on a system without an MMU - which most Amigas don't have.

Again, Stone Age?

Of course you need an MMU. Why you shouldn't have one, since on PCs they are common since the 80286?

You also talking about the Enforce: how do you think that it works?
Quote:

Quote: For applications like Scout? And that was just ONE example, BTW. "Scout is a tool that allows you to monitor your computer system. It displays many different things -- like tasks, ports, assigns, expansion boards, resident commands, interrupts, etc. -- and you can perform some certain actions on them. For example you can freeze tasks, close windows and screens, release semaphores or remove locks, ports and interrupts." You think users should be doing things like this? Why should the OS be bloated with APIs for stuff that belongs in a debugger?

And here it's clear that you've no experience on working with UI testing, for example. How do you seek for a window belonging to an application that you want to control? Should this requires a debugger for working out? Clearly NO!

You need an API which ENUMERATES the current Windows, so that your applications can seek for the needed one and get its handle, so that you can control it from now on.

That's how it works in real life.

And the Amiga OS lacks all of those kind of enumerators APIs and forces you to DISABLE the multitasking and list what you need by yourself. This has heavily contributed on crippling the platform's future.
Quote:

Quote: And this happened because the system was already conceived by being crippled. That's the point. The Amiga didn't have multicore, 64 bits, memory protection etc. because such hardware didn't exist.

Memory protection existed when the Amiga was started being developed.

The other things not, but that's not the point.
Quote:

What's the point of adding features to an OS that cannot be used?

You don't need some hardware features to design an OS which is future-proof. Again, my article gives examples of that even with OSes which were developed BEFORE the Amiga OS one.
Quote:

Amiga OS was not 'crippled', it was tuned to the available hardware and intended usage. There's nothing wrong with that.

That's ANOTHER thing which further contributed to crippling it.

P.S. Again, not time to read it again. Too busy in this period...

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote: @tlosm it is emulator. use android.

Emu68 removes the Motorola-induced problem.

_________________
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)

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: No system without the Commodore's chipset or without a Motorola 68k CPU could be called "Amiga". By definition (take a look at Commodore's Amiga Hardware Manual). This clarified, you were a very loyal A-Eon / Hyperion supporter, for several years. Strange that you turned 180° now...

Cloned 68000 was fabricated by Hitachi and others. https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/68000/MANUF-Hitachi.html

Other 68000 cloners are Mostek, Rockwell, Signetics, Thomson/SGS-Thomson, and Toshiba.

None of the mentioned 68K cloners followed AMD's K5's X86 decoder attached to a modified 29K RISC core idea e.g. modified SuperH RISC core with 68K decoder.

There was a large ecosystem for 68K.

Last edited by Hammer on 12-Mar-2024 at 03:41 AM.

_________________
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)

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: No system without the Commodore's chipset or without a Motorola 68k CPU could be called "Amiga". By definition (take a look at Commodore's Amiga Hardware Manual). This clarified, you were a very loyal A-Eon / Hyperion supporter, for several years. Strange that you turned 180° now... Cloned 68000 was fabricated by Hitachi and others. https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/68000/MANUF-Hitachi.html Other 68000 cloners are Mostek, Rockwell, Signetics, Thomson/SGS-Thomson, and Toshiba. None of the mentioned 68K cloners followed AMD's K5's X86 decoder attached to a modified 29K RISC core idea e.g. modified SuperH RISC core with 68K decoder. There was a large ecosystem for 68K.

I know it. But do you know this:
http://amigadev.elowar.com/read/ADCD_2.1/Hardware_Manual_guide/node0003.html

These are the hardware components of the Amiga:

* Motorola MC68000 16/32-bit main processor.

?