I'm curious to see what makes it into 2.8.

I've had good luck with 2.7 (even though I've heard some reports of issues when compared to 2.6).

I would not be at all adverse to Powerbook support.
I just haven't been able too secure one with the specs I want (15" screen, 128MB VRAM).

You have already got one. Don't you? ;)

> I've had good luck with 2.7 (even though I've heard some
> reports of issues when compared to 2.6).

You mean things that are worse in 2.7 compared to 2.6? Any examples?

> You have already got one. Don't you? ;)

I've been aware that you think I've got a PowerBook. But no, I don't. And I don't know where you got this idea :-)

>You mean things that are worse in 2.7 compared to 2.6? Any examples?

Nothing I've been able to confirm. Everything works as well or better for me.

>> You have already got one. Don't you? ;)

>I've been aware that you think I've got a PowerBook. But no, I don't. And I don't know where you got this idea

I can't remember who originally suggested this myself.

I'm approaching the whole idea cautiously as I have a fairly high spec, and don't want a piece of crap (unfortunately a lot of G4 Powerbooks are looking pretty rugged these days).

> Nothing I've been able to confirm.

I meant examples of such reports, not necessarily something you experienced yourself. Got any? I ask because 2.7 was supposed to be mainly a bug fix release.

> I can't remember who originally suggested this myself.

Someone other than you suggested I had a PowerBook? Really strange.

I have not seen anything but speculation about the possibility of MorphOS2.8 supporting G4 PowerBook's, for and against.

I won't rule it out until I see an announcement from one of the Team members that clarifies what 2.8 will, and will not have in it.

> I have not seen anything but speculation about the possibility
> of MorphOS2.8 supporting G4 PowerBook's, for

Yes, so far we only have Zylesea's recent statement on aw.net for possible PowerBook G4 support in 2.8.

> and against.

In Bad Bramstedt in November 2010 it was said by MorphOS Team members that

1. faster R100/R200 3D drivers were supposed to come in 2.8,
2. R300 3D drivers were supposed to come after the faster R100/R200 3D drivers,
3. PowerBook G4 support would definitely not come without R300 3D drivers.

Now do the math.

>faster R100/R200 3D drivers were supposed to come in 2.8

At least that will be impressive. MorphOS 3D drivers for these cards already work fairly well (although I couldn't see moving back to an R100).

That kind of math is still just rumor, just like the first time you tried to support your theory that 2.8 would not include support for G4 PowerBook's. Until confirmed by one or more members of the Dev. Team, I won't rule out the possibility of 2.8 supporting the G4 PowerBook's. Basing your prediction on statements which are "supposed" to come in 2.8, or "supposed" to come after faster drivers, does not mean much to me. Also, plans change and those statements are old and indefinite.

You might be right and the Team members who made those statements stuck to those plans of what was "supposed" to happen first, and second, and third. But there could be just as likely a chance that development has been faster, or slower on one or more parts and plans have changed. We shall see, when some real announcements are made on the official MorphOS Development Team website.

[ Edited by amigadave 31.05.2011 - 21:56 ]

> That kind of math is still just rumor

I'd call it logical deduction.

> I won't rule out the possibility of 2.8 supporting the G4 PowerBook's.

Me neither. Zylesea's recent statement could be a hint that the MorphOS Team's plans have changed in that regard. That's what I said.

> Basing your prediction on statements which are "supposed" to come in 2.8, or
> "supposed" to come after faster drivers, does not mean much to me.

I didn't mention any "statements which are "supposed" to come in 2.8, or "supposed" to come after faster drivers". Why should MorphOS 2.8 contain statements? Why should statements "come after faster drivers"? This doesn't even make any sense to me.
As for "predicting", I'm not predicting anything. I'm merely reporting what was said by MorphOS Team members in November 2010 in Bad Bramstedt and drawing logical conclusions from this. What's wrong with that as long as we don't have any better information from the MorphOS Team?

> plans change

Yes, plans may change. That's what I said.

> and those statements are old and indefinite.

Yes, but we don't have anything more recent or precise, do we? (Apart from Zylesea's statement who's not a MorphOS Team member that is.)

> You might be right and the Team members who made those statements
> stuck to those plans of what was "supposed" to happen

Huh? Please don't put words into my mouth. I never said I thought they stucked to those plans. Quite to the contrary. When I stumbled upon Zylesea's comment on aw.net I was the first to suspect that the old plan that was valid in November 2010 may have changed by now.

> there could be just as likely a chance that development has been faster,
> or slower on one or more parts and plans have changed.

Yes, that's what *I* right in this very thread suspected may have happened. So don't pretend I didn't do that.

> We shall see, when some real announcements are made on
> the official MorphOS Development Team website.

Yes, and until that happens the best we have is still what was publically said by MorphOS Team members in November 2010.

Update:

>>> I thought 2.8 wasn't going to support Powerbooks.

>> Yes, as far as I'm aware that didn't change.

> Or did it?
> http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=32432&forum=41#616764

Apparently, it did:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7960&forum=3&start=12