Quote:

lol

You know a place is run by rabid fanboys when they ban the likes of Chief Hyperion Cheerleader Helgis. ;)

> Chief Hyperion Cheerleader Helgis. ;)

His more recent article on another blog doesn't sound so cheering anymore:

http://hkvalhe.blogspot.com/2013/10/lack-of-faith.html

Quote:

i can't believe you wasted time reading that... just like i did (didn't go through all of it though)

> i can't believe you wasted time reading that...

I didn't find it a complete waste of time considering he shared the following about the Amiga Inc. vs. Hyperion lawsuit:

"Hyperion Entertainment had to pay as much as around 2-300.000 (!) EUR for laywers and other things [...]. The 2-300.000 EUR could have helped several important developments rise to completion, and we wouldn't be talking about AmigaOS 4 these days, but rather AmigaOS 5 already! This is a very important fact that wasn't wanted for the public to know, but i feel it's important to be completely honest to the community."

This is just a ballpark figure, but I can't remember any such sum being reported before by anyone. And to me it doesn't sound as if he's just guessing. I reckon he may have been told about it by the Friedens he's been in frequent communication with.

"i am about to consider making what would probably be my most difficult choice ever - To continue staying with the Amiga or leaving it."

Please God don't let him come over to "the blue side". lol

Quote:


mentioned in April, 2013

But lawsuits is plural in this claim.

#6

> mentioned in April, 2013

Ah, thanks. Must have missed (or forgotten) that.

Quote:

@Andreas_Wolf

fyi:

"AresOne PPC is SAM460 based so it is a bit too early for morphOS yet but as soon it is ready than yes."

http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6905&start=2

> "AresOne PPC is SAM460 based so it is a bit too early for morphOS yet but as
> soon it is ready than yes."
> http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6905&start=2

I read this, thanks anyway. Somehow I doubt phoenixkonsole knows any more about MorphOS on the Sam460 than we do from pega-1.


Edit: He now admits that he considers MorphOS for Sam460 to be a matter of believe:

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=751500

Uh, thanks for not posting a link to that entire thread Andreas.
I don't think my response to his stated belief was too kind.

And Frank's work with the SAM460 probably will bear some fruit later on if they port MorphOS to PCIe G5s.

@Jim

I think otherwise ...

PCIe itself ain't an issue (and MorphOS has been shown on the iMac-G5 with PCIe quite some time before anything SAM) and the GFX-cards used in the SAM460 probraly won't be found in any PCIe based PMac G5.

>> Frank's work with the SAM460 probably will bear some fruit later on if they port MorphOS
>> to PCIe G5s.

> the GFX-cards used in the SAM460 probraly won't be found in any PCIe based PMac G5.

Agreed. It could be done the other way round, though: support PCIe graphics cards that are compatible with PowerMac G5 (i.e. up to Radeon X1900), and then use the same cards in x86 ROM version in the Sam460.

@ Kronos and Andreas,

I wholly agree that you both have points.

But the last time Frank mentioned it, he was using an X1300 in the SAM and the G5 PCIe models support the X1900GT.
They are both R500 based.

And the current development trajectory would seem to point in that direction.

But we're getting ahead of ourselves if we start discussing future developments.

The PCIe G5s seem like the next natural step, but just because something is done to explore an idea, it does not mean it will reach the end users.

How long ago did Frank mention the G5 iMac?

@Jim

The iMac (mine actually) has been shown on one Geit@home this year and another in 2011, so thats atleast 2.5 years.
I also kinda remember Frank posting a screenshot somewhat shortly after bigfoot got the G5 tower booting 1st time in late 2010.

So yes, initial iMac port was done long before SAM460 ever got mentioned.

As to supporting R600s, one has to ask wether this is a just a simple framebuffer which is rather trivial compared with a proper driver.

Other than those rare (and still unsupported) R600s those PCIe-PMacs offer very little compared to the faster AGP models.

> the last time Frank mentioned it, he was using an X1300 in the SAM

Interesting. Thanks for info.

> How long ago did Frank mention the G5 iMac?

Short of 3 years ago the first time in public, as Kronos said:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7638&start=46

> As to supporting R600s, one has to ask wether this is a just a simple framebuffer which is
> rather trivial compared with a proper driver. Other than those rare (and still unsupported)
> R600s those PCIe-PMacs offer very little compared to the faster AGP models.

R600 GPUs in a PowerMac G5? Which graphics cards would that be?

Make that R500...

Oh, it has been almost three years since that was first mentioned?

Considering the popularity of small form factor devices like the Mac Mini, I am surprised that it was pursued.

And the PCIe models offer us one other possibility that has not received much attention.
A Mac compatible rom is not a necessity to use a video card.
Sure, without it you are not getting into Open Firmware, but we already have cards (like the Voodoo3 PCI cards) that run without it.

In recent years, with our focus on Mac models. I have found it useful to send the non-Apple cards I want to use to a friend Christian Guastella. He has been converting PC cards for Mac use for some time and has is pretty knowledable about the older cards and the new efi cards.

He recently mentioned this to me "...for mac pro I have some cards with boot screens and some not.. I make sure to be real clear about it when selling because there are folks that want to use the boot-selection thing to get into windows etc.. others really don't care (use multiple boot partitions/drives/OSes), and can keep an older cheaper card in the drawer (in case they need to see what's hanging stuff on boot)...

So, while we would still need to keep a Mac compatible card on hand to gain access to the boot screens, the PCIe G5 Macs open up the possibility of running virtually anything that can physically be plugged into them.

> it has been almost three years since that was first mentioned?

Yes, and you congratulated him on that half a day later :-)

> Considering the popularity of small form factor devices like the Mac Mini,
> I am surprised that it was pursued.

With a Mac mini you need a monitor, which comes already included with the iMac. So I'm not sure a Mac mini plus monitor is really smaller form factor than an iMac.

>With a Mac mini you need a monitor, which comes already included with the iMac. So I'm not sure a Mac mini plus monitor is really smaller form factor than an iMac.

Good point. It would actually be more compact.
The only thing that worries me is that they (the iMac G5s)seem to have a fairly high failure rate.

>> it has been almost three years since that was first mentioned?

>Yes, and you congratulated him on that half a day later

Damn memory. Getting old sucks.



[ Edited by Jim 04.11.2013 - 17:03 ]

> the last time Frank mentioned it, he was using an X1300 in the SAM

Confirming screenshot from yesterday:
http://scontent-b-cdg.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1460076_336954659780649_885939334_n.jpg
http://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/1460076_336954659780649_885939334_n.jpg

Quote:

Ah, that is where Yasu dug that up.
I already have people asking me questions about that.
Oh well, one less thing to keep quiet about.

Hopefully not too many people will mistake the X1300 as anything but an entry level card (ATI's numbering scheme can be misleading, if you didn't pay attention you would think an X1300 had better performance than an X800).

Quote:

Without a doubt, X1300 is a entry level card. But it comes in low profile format without any requirement for a fan, just uses a simple heatsink. That's why we basically have chosen it for the Sam460 setup and we even started our r(v)5xx based driver development based on it. You need to put things into perspective regarding the whole setup, really. E.g. just adding a Radeon HD 7xxx card to a Sam460 won't make it a pmac g5 pcie performance level machine.
We probably could have used a x1650 or x1950 for the event setup instead but that would not have made any difference for the actual presentation. Just consider it as a hint that future MorphOS releases/updates will support Radeon hardware that is beyond the r200/r300 focused scope in the past (which IMHO was kind of logical when you look at the machines that MorphOS supported)

>> Our original plans to support 460 got massively delayed already and even there is
>> quite some low level work still ahead. With all the additional issues showing up
>> in public and the rather sparse feedback we received from customers regarding
>> our plans to support ACube's hardware, it's not even sure if that will ever see
>> the light of day anytime soon ...

> Well in my opinion those are some bad news.

"Frank and Mark resumed work on the Sam460 port after almost 1 year of "freeze". They dedicated the last 2 weeks to it. Low level support was rewritten mostly from scratch, as it was too hackish, and now codebase is much better and easier to mantain. [...] the release of MorphOS for Sam, [...] tentatively, should be 3.6 sometime during 2014."
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=9691&forum=3&start=9

So I should have asked for a SAM460 for Christmas?
Actually, I have an X1300 around here, but no.
I'm happy with what I have.
And even my iBook would mop the floor with a SAM from a performance perspective.

I fully realize that Frank and Mark dealt with this to get rid of the "no new hardware available" claim.