OSNews

Why not? Not enough rounded corners, transparency, and 3d-effects for you?

for example, yes ;-)

But I guess it's usable... Though I can hardly believe it truly has the functionality my KDE environment provides, I can imagine it's pretty good for basic use.

Well, what functionality are you looking for in an interface? Then I can tell you weither it lacks it or not.

Hmmm, depends on the app of course. things like movable and configurable toolbars and shortcuts in each app, and flexible notification systems, full network transparancy etc I consider basics. So for applications, I'd say I like good tabbed browsing in my browser. Not retarded like IE 7 or Firefox, but GOOD. So drag'n'drop between windows and such. A nice, usable filedialog (I currently consider the KDE one the best I know, though the KDE 4 one might be better. But I don't know Amiga's one).

What else... Well, the desktop stuff: good medianotifications, configurable panels, multiple desktops, good and configurable window management... Lots of stuff, you see ;-)

It probably has as much if not more functionality but lacks in apps ;D..

Or well, lacks in new modern versions of apps, there are plenty of old apps for all sorts of usage of course.

Hmmm. So I can put a CPU (or whatever) monitor on the panels, configure the windec buttons (I want an always-on-top button), have window snapping there too of course, and fully configurable actions (eg I want doubleclick on the windec to maximize the window, don't like shade at all).

who am I kiddin', NO DE has half the functionality in the panels alone KDE has. Even KDE 4 is gonna be a step backwards from kicker in KDE 3.5.x, gonna take a while to get back at that
So I think I can forget about what KWin can do, even 'neh neh you can't find any config option cuz I have so many of them layed out horribly' compiz can get close. I'm not going to get used to a DE without proper focus stealing prevention - XP makes me grind my teeth...

And I don't believe ANY OS/DE has anything comparable to Konqueror - again a showstopper for me.

I think only programmers made AgimaOS's design. Noone real designer works on it.
P.S. If I'm wrong please excuse me.

Actually, Amiga is one of the only OS that was designed by users for users. Which is why it was so good usability-wise.

For the design, the Amiga world had the best designers in its time (design won the demo competitions, which is why the PC never fared well against amiga-ones), with custom icon sets and custom DE that were the envy of most people.

However, you have to take in account that design evolves - and you're looking at what is essentially an 80's design, made (at the time) for 16 color screens (to save memory). Maybe they kept it in OS4 to mark the filliation with Amiga.

PS: I don't know why you got modded down. Not knowing your history well is not a crime

No the whole style is back from the 90ies. Even Workbench 3.1 looks better.

are you looking at it's design or the appearance of the GUI? if the design, it's been a very modern OS from day 1! and that's the important part. Obviously every modern OS has features missing in every other - just because a particular feature may be missing in one modern OS doesn't make it any less modern.

Even though I use Linux everyday, I still don't consider it like a modern OS. The fact the version I use has been released only a few month ago doesn't make it any modern either.

Amiga OS4 doesn't bring anything new, but, put in perspective, mainstream OS aren't groundbreaking either. Give a Ford-T a new paint as much as you want, it's still a Ford-T.

True, AmigaOS 4 doesn't bring anything new. That's because the mainstream OS'es haven't caught up with AmigaOS yet (in regard to Desktop functionality, that is).

2001-2002? I think that 1995 was a better year for it.

"Oh wait, Classic is really a lie? Only PPC enabled machines? Liars."

No it means that you need to have A1200, A3000 or A4000 with PPC turbo-card. if you have A1200 you ned also Blizzard PPC, if you A3000 or A4000 then you ned Cyberstorm PPC too.

XP is a monolithic heap of junk!

I don't think you mean monolithic as in kernel architecture... and so I suspect you're using the term incorrectly.

Furthermore, I guess you're insinuating that Windows Vista is so much better than XP? I'm pretty certain that people will be using Windows XP for many years yet, so you should maybe get used to the idea that people consider it extremely usable as opposed to whatever you're suggesting is so much better.

Now on the other hand, you sort of sound like you're just Windows bashing, so I'll leave you alone now so you can continue having fun.

edit: grammar corrections.

Edited 2007-12-02 03:33

Are you on drugs?

@Raffaele

You must be on another planet! As much as I want my old Amiga's back and to be the dominant platform showing people what can be done on minimal ram and cpu.... you are living in a dream land!

As much as I would love to see the Amiga make a come back I don't think we are gonna see it happen. The market is hard enough to break into and between Windows, Mac and Linux you would need to bring something amazing to the table.

Also I gotta call you on that needing a computer science degree to use Linux, I know it is an exaggeration but I know a great number of people with little computer skills that use Linux on their home desktops and have no issues doing so.

Would help if the Amiga OS was something special, but what made the Amiga special was the merging of OS with hardware to the point that the two were indistinguishable.

Funny, at 160Mhz my old PPC amiga running OS 3.5 had a smoother media playback than my 1.5Ghz Athlon. Maybe the bottleneck in media isn't the CPU in the end?

Hum, what were you running on your athlon? An amiga emulator?

"Hum, what were you running on your athlon? An amiga emulator?"
Actually the Athlon with the Amithlon amiga emulator was pretty snappy. I was comparing it to Windows, which I know is not very media-friendly.

Man I miss BeOS sometimes...

"Windows, which I know is not very media-friendly. "

WTF????

No, the bottleneck in media playback smoothness is not always the CPU. But media is not only playback, try your Amiga with a cheap 8 MP camera. Or try your Athlon with BeOS :-)

I think 4.0 got memory protection, probably not for old apps thought.

Yes, I see it says "memory protection". I'm not an Amiga expert, I don't know what it could do with old apps. However, it's a bit too late to call it "modern".

it most likely can protect the OS from old apps, or stop old apps from accessing memory that has NOT been allocated by anything. there may be other things too.

"Yes, I see it says "memory protection". I'm not an Amiga expert, I don't know what it could do with old apps. However, it's a bit too late to call it "modern"."


I really don't understand your logic. memory prot3ctuion sure is modern feature which can be found in modern operating systems. it really does not matter when first memory protection system was invented.

well, I believe CTSS had a form of memory protection, back in the 60s and the PDP had memory protection...

This stuff is good only for those who have an old Amiga and love it. There isn't any serious use for such a system.

I find it amusing that people insist this machine is not usable for day to day stuff. I got through high school on a C64 and SpeedScript (which I typed in using MLX). Sure there are nice things in modern computers but if someone needs to type a letter or maintain addresses, the C64 or Amiga is still usable. While most people are addicted to the internet with MySpace and other rubbish, there are a number of people who just want to use the basics in a very simple manner.

I am no proponent of hindering the forward march of technology, but you have to realize that not everyone has the same computing needs of yourself and that usefulness is relative.

I was very happy with my 286, no doubt. I learned programming on it (QBasic, Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++). I used Word and Excel and several games. All this was funny and interesting.
But since then, someone invented the DVD, the digital camera, the MP3, the DivX, Internet, Bluetooth cellphones, 24 inches HD monitors, new programming languages, 3D games, and so on. Now I can't call funny and interesting a computer who cannot do these things.

If you do, good for you. But if your computing needs are so little, are you going to pay 90 € for that OS?

Edited 2007-12-03 20:36

If you do, good for you. But if your computing needs are so little, are you going to pay 90 € for that OS?

Because it is their choice. I could do everything I need to do on an Amiga so long as it had an SSH client and a browser. Vista and OS X are bloated beyond reason. Linux is getting there, too.

Some people want a small lightweight OS with low system requirements. Computing has gotten out of hand on the workstation level.

"I was very happy with my 286, no doubt. I learned programming on it (QBasic, Turbo Pascal, Turbo C++). I used Word and Excel and several games. All this was funny and interesting.
But since then, someone invented the DVD, the digital camera, the MP3, the DivX, Internet, Bluetooth cellphones, 24 inches HD monitors, new programming languages, 3D games, and so on. Now I can't call funny and interesting a computer who cannot do these things."
You see, normally I would agree with you... except your 286 can't do those things, but an Amiga built at the same time *can* with the proper upgrades. People run them on Amiga 3000's with PPC cards all day long. (save maybe the bluetooth, haven't seen that yet) That is one of the reasons for their passion.

To answer your second question first: Before, I don't have enough money for after and prefer to drug myself with cheap alcohol instead.

As you've noted well, I said believe, as in "I have not tested it, but by reading about this topic I got the impression, that..."

When I talk about Linux, I talk about a complete system including the userland and a xserver. I myself use Arch with plain OpenBox, so I've one of the more lightweight setups already.

But I'm convinced that Linux (although better than major competing operating systems) is not the best choice for a low-power computer, simply because it is not as light-weight and desktop/multimedia optimized (tighter integration of multimedia capatibilites) as some alternatives. I have only experience with Syllable, which was more fun to use on a 650MHz/256MB and 466/128 machine than Linux (with XFCE), but I *believe* the same applies for AmigaOS as well.

"Amiga was never really know from it's operating system. It was mainly known from it's hardware those custom ships Fat Agnus, Denise, Paula... are what made Amiga the multimedia monster of it's time."

That's not true. AmigaOS was as much ahead of it's time as the hardware was. All who have really used Amiga and not just played games know that. AmigaOS was much more modern OS than any other OS of it's time. Even Apple's MacOS was far behind. It's the operating system which made Amiga so great.

Don't forget that even Classic Amigas can be expanded using eg. PCI-busboard and PCI gfx-card, ethernet card etc. My Amiga 1200T has PCI-busboard, PCI Voodoo3 3000, PCI tv-tuner card, PCI-ethernet card. PCI soundcard etc. chips on the motherboard are rarely used, because PCI-cards replace those.

I and many other do think that it's the AmigaOS operating system which really made Amiga so great, not just the hardware.

"which is better... to see NOTHING of AmigaOS 4 or to at least have the version for Classic Amigas with PPC cards?"

Both situations are equally disappointing and useless.

"Here's a question... with the (finally!) arrival of AmigaOS 4 for Classic Amigas (w/ PPC upgrades), is it likely anyone could design a "Classic Amiga" (3000, 4000, or 1200) on an Lattice FPGA chip or something, and add on 603e (or greater) coprocessor hardware, based on PPC boards that used to be made for the Classic Amigas? "

Look at the MiniMig. It's an open-source chipset clone in an FPGA (OCS atm) and from there, you could work to other options, including trying to make it compatible with the CPU slot of the A1200 or A3000/4000(same slot IIRC).

The New ( unofficial? ) Amigas are SAM440ep
http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/hardware.php

Supposed to be able to run AmigaOS 4. But seem to be on the pricey side.
http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&...

Or the alternative is to buy low cost Efika board/system & run MorphOS. Which may be even better idea?!