Update:

>> The PA6T CPU paves the way for the introduction of SMP with AmigaOS4.x.

> OS4 core developer tonyw:
> "I would expect OS5 will be 64-bit and SMP."
> http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=33968&forum=33&start=20#622636
>
> Seems SMP got postponed to "OS5".

Hyperionmp says:

"The way in which it will be implemented however is already clearly defined and was subject to peer review by other developers. Obstacles to an efficient implementation were removed (e.g. the use of Forbid) and replaced in many OS components over the years (e.g. DOS).The foundation for SMP support was put in place, a clear picture exists what needs to be done to accomplish it and how. I'm willing to take a bet that it won't take 2 years ;)"
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=34171&forum=33&start=40#627520

>> https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6570&forum=3

> It's not quite the same. As I understand it, on ARM the problem would be
> intermixing big endian code (68K, PPC) with little endian code (ARM). In
> both cases the data is all big-endian. On IA32 everything is little-endian,
> code and data. What I had suggested is essentially 2 A-Boxes. One includes
> a PPC emulator to run PPC and 68K code. The second A-Box (B-Box?)
> would only run natively compiled ARM code. No intermixing.

Zylesea has now put his thoughts on the matter into a nice article:

http://via.i-networx.de/q86.htm

Quote:

Interesting, a couple of points though:

Quote:

Full Memory protection these days is really best described as "basic" memory protection, desktop OSs these days are starting to run things in sandboxes. I can see eventually everything running in a virtual machines.

What he means by cost? There is a cost in terms of API changes, but a well designed memory protection system wont be noticeable to the use performance wise.


Quote:

For backwards compatibility you use an emulator. Anything else, modify as necessary and recompile. It works for AROS, why shouldn't it work for MorphOS?

> What he means by cost? [...] a well designed memory protection system wont be
> noticeable to the use performance wise.

I think that copying the contents of a memory area is always slower than just passing a pointer.

>> For MorphOS to keep backward compability a true bigendian mode is required.

> For backwards compatibility you use an emulator.

Yes, that's what's done in MorphOS (and OS4). And for such transparent emulation you need a matching byte order, as Zylesea correctly points out.

minator,
Quote:
Andreas said the things about MP already. But as I said in the article,I think MP is debatable. I don't say MP is evil, but I think the equation MP=good is too easy, too. Depends a lot on the way of implementation at least. But I am not an OS designer, it's just about what I read and the conclusions I drew from that. I haven't exercised it myself.

Quote:

Every new feature has a cost Vs benefit. In this case all mainstream desktop OSs, most smartphones and pretty much all tablets have MP, it's obviously not that much of a cost. MP needs to be set up by the OS it'll mostly be done by the hardware afterwards. It also shouldn't involve much copying of data, you can do that by remapping pages.

It's not exactly a new problem so there's plenty of examples out there to look at. I doubt the MorphOS developers will have much problem figuring it out

> all mainstream desktop OSs, most smartphones and pretty much all tablets
> have MP, it's obviously not that much of a cost.

From my own experience with MorphOS vs. Linux on a 600 MHz G3 and MorphOS vs. Mac OS X on a 1500 MHz G4 I can say that there's a vast difference in general OS responsiveness. In my humble layman's opinion this should in large part be attributed to the much lower overhead of the message passing concept that MorphOS' ABox is built upon. I'm not sure I would like MorphOS the way I do if it felt as little responsive on my gear as the mainstream desktop OSs do ;-)

> I doubt the MorphOS developers will have much problem figuring it out :-)

"Will", or rather "would"? ;-)

Again Andreas wrote much of the things I'd also say. However it is also true that there are OSes out there that are actually *very* snappy and lightweighted and come with MP. Most prominently and from my 1st hand experience qnx neutrino springs to my mind. That was impressivly fast and rock solid. So I know MP is possible on a lightweight and fast OS. But I also think it is often overrated. I mean most crashy apps are caught already and don't shot down the OS - not much different as if there were MP. Only difference: A program *can* shot the OS dead. But so can apps on OSes that offer MP (I quite well remember the issues I had with a program for data acquIsition I wrote for windows 2k/XP that locked the machine dead again and again - calling a faulty dma routine from driver was the issue... Okay on a micro kernel OS like QNX where all drivers are separated tasks this may be a different story.
Anyway, MP is definitely not a bad thing per se, but many OSes with MP are dog slow (for many reasons) and still not 100% stable against full locks.
I rather see the bigger demand for a change in the field of resource tracking, removing dead tasks and freeing all resources would be big plus. But I imagine work on resource tracking and MP are often going hand in hand anyway. But I emphasize it again MP is at least debateable - it's not the holy grail nor the devil.

Quote:
And this is coming from same people, who claimed AmigaOS4 would be done in a few months, and would include some features it still doesn't have (many pointed out to be impossible back then (auto-expanding stack, anyone?), but dismissed by Hyperion as FUD)

So at least I have some reservations whenever it comes to deadlines from Hyperion

Also, in no point does he state, it will NOT be postponed to OS5.

After all, it's only a matter of what do you want to call that particular release (personally, I can't see the big difference between, say, OS4.5 and OS5, they are both likely paid updates anyway)

> in no point does he state, it will NOT be postponed to OS5.

Yeah, it's quite possible that it's the release of "OS5" that is supposed to not "take 2 years".

Quote:

So nothing to do with OS X using display PDF then?
OS X's display system alone has a lot of overheads in it that simply don't exist in MorphOS.

A better comparison would be to try Haiku. I tried it on an Atom based system a couple of years back and it's quite a different story.

> I doubt the MorphOS developers will have much problem figuring it out

Quote:

IIRC the Q-Box was meant to have all the modern features years ago.

> So nothing to do with OS X using display PDF then?

I don't know. "In large part" doesn't equal "solely", you know ;-)

> OS X's display system alone has a lot of overheads in it that simply
> don't exist in MorphOS.

Okay.

> A better comparison would be to try Haiku.

I would really like to compare MorphOS and Haiku in terms of responsiveness but unfortunately Haiku doesn't run on anything I've ever run MorphOS on (although there seems to be work done on a PowerPC port of Haiku). Being run on the same hardware is a requirement for a fair OS comparison, I think.

>>> I doubt the MorphOS developers will have much problem figuring it out :-)

>> "Will", or rather "would"? ;-)

> IIRC the Q-Box was meant to have all the modern features years ago.

Yes, but I don't think that alone justifies usage of will-future tense, especially considering what MorphOS Team members have said on this matter during the last couple of years:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6287&forum=3&start=13
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6248&forum=3&start=1
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6775&forum=11&start=37

> Aeon's current "north of 1500 GBP" price estimate

Now we know how much north of that estimate the price will be:

"Prices start from: £1699, USD $2682.56 (excluding AmigaOS4 license, shipping, handling and sales tax)."
http://amigaprez.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/amigaone-x1000-to-be-at-amiwest-2011/
http://www.amigakit.com/x1000/newsrelease.pdf
http://www.a-eon.com/news.html

Seems I won the bet I had with someone on another site over the price of the X1000 with me saying that it will be more than 1800 EUR :-)

Furthermore:

"The First Contact system includes the official AmigaOne X1000 Boing Ball case in either black or white and includes the Nemo rev 2.1 motherboard complete with 1GB of DDR2 RAM, a Radeon HD4650 graphics card, 500GB HDD, DVR R/W optical drive, Audio & Ethernet cards."

Anyone has an idea why it will come with only half the amount of RAM that the X1000 product page claims, and why it will come with "Audio & Ethernet cards" when Nemo has both audio (via SB600) and Ethernet (via PA6T) onboard?

Edit: photo of Nemo board with PCI slots populated by audio and Ethernet cards (AmiWest)

Andreas_Wolf,


Quote:

Not a good sign, not good at all.

If this is about 1950EUR + around 150EUR for OS license/postage + 19% (german) VAT = 2499EUR, i would call this a quite expensive dream machine, definitely way too steep for the proposed comeback.

The one that expects that this machine has any reasonable impact on the future of the HYPErionOS platform or even attracts new users/devs besides the current fanbase, must really be a true believer.

The X1000 is to late and to expensive. I think, Amiga is a very very expensive hobby.

Still I wish trevor the best with this. Still a great achievement with little resources in a very small market. What to think about it ? Stupid, brave or ....we'll see.

In my opinion porting OS4 to something common and cheaper instead of taking such a big risk would have been a better move. And something that had to be started at the moment it became clear that Eyetech went out of business.

>USD $2682.56 (excluding AmigaOS4 license, shipping, handling and sales tax)

For an AOS4.1 machine?
One that probably won't have any more power then a G5?
And one that would be severely throunced by a Windows or OSX system?

Good luck selling those.

I think Trevor and A-EON did a favour for MorphOS community. With 3.0 comming over there is a simple choice between PowerBook for about 400 bucks and X1000 for about 3000 bucks. To be honest - MorphOS can offer much more than AmigaOS can do at this moment. Choice is quite simple, at least for me.

pampers,
Quote:

I agree. I wish the MorphOS team could include G5 support in MorphOS 3.0, even if it was extremely limited G5 support. Some people seem to be dreaming about the X1000 running circles around a G5 system. I find this very hard to believe.

Ouch!

I thought £1500 was bad, but the final price will be at least £2160. That's a *lot* of money.
I think they're going to have a hard time selling their 250 units at that price. They might do it but I don't think they'll sell anymore.

> I think they're going to have a hard time selling their 250 units at that price.

Some 100 of those 250 units have already been sold to beta testers for a lower price. So only about 150 to go ;-)

Reply to myself:

> why it will come with "Audio & Ethernet cards" when Nemo has
> both audio (via SB600) and Ethernet (via PA6T) onboard?

Interesting comment regarding onboard Ethernet:

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=664411

Quote:

-dream

There is nothing "dreamy" about this at all IMHO. And that specs to that price looks rather like a "nightmare".

Quote:

I'd say *blind*...

redrumloa,
Quote:

NO NO and NO !!!

Releasing the G5-port in it's current (assuming it is true that nothing substantial has been done on it since I saw it last time this summer) state would mean the MorphOS-team repeating HYPE's worst mistakes.

There is no point in releasing something that can only be used by typing in cryptic commands into the OF prompt to than boot from a a specially prepared USB-drive only to be harrased by a bunch of fans running full speed all the time.

In this state it isn't even worth considering further beta-testing...... Would I take such an ISO if offered ? Sure yes !! Would I use it beyond the sporadic novelity boot and to brag on user-meetings ? Probraly not

If they can address those 2 issues (read power/fan managment and SATA) I'll be 1st inline for an extended betatest, but for the general public it would still be another year till it's finished enough to meet the MorphOS-teams quality-standards.