Quote:

Have you ever used a 5:4 resolution on an 8:5 format? Or any non-native resolution on a tft? It looks ugly and stupid. It would almost make explode *me*. Today's monitors are mainly full hd or 1680x1650 px.
The 1280x1024 resolution is of course okay as long as you use 17" or 19" monitors that were popular until recently. But the market has shifted and while my good old 1280x1024 px monitor is still nicely working (still hooked up to my old Peg) I don't want to shwitch back from my 24" now.

Quote:
They *hope* a lot. They hope to get usb 2.0 soon, they hope to get firefox soon, they hope to get the X1000 before summer, they hope since ages and while after ages some hopes eventually get fulfilled uncounted new hopes arised already.
Not to say it will be impossible to see R600 hw accereration, but I don't give a flying -BEEP- on *hopes*. During my many, many years on Amiga and MorphOS I learned that it only matters what actually *is* available, not what will come in some uncertain and promised future.

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 25.04.2011 - 07:25 ]

Quote:

The aspect doesn't fit any more. The pixels aren't quadratic any more. Also everything becomes unsharp, because there are more real pixels than delivered pixels, thus the pixels must get stretched. The benefit of the high precision is void with a tft when operated in another resolution than the native one (except you accept black bars or use the n-th fraction on the native resolution).
long short: You're doing yourself a favour if you don't operate a 1280x1024px resolution on a display that doesn't fit exactly this resolution natively. But thechnically it works of course.

@Jim

Neither MorphOS nor OS4 currently fully support all the features of the Radeon92xx and below, OS4 doesn't even supporet everything a Voodoo can do (not sure about MorphOS). 3D and 2D drivers on Radeon92xx are way ahead in MorphOS compared to OS4. Hard to "keep up with AOS" under those terms.

The only problem for MorphOS & GFX I see are:

- cards can (will soon) only be bought used
- no decent way to go beyond 1920x1200 as MorphOS does not support DualLink DVI and no supported card has HDMI

I would like to see support for the 9700 and 9800 because I'm upgrading my old 9k to one and I want to use this card in MOS, even if its 2D

> 1680x1650 px.

Strange resolution ;-)

Quote:
Hm, no? All that is needed is an "editor" for known_hosts, to add (ssh-keyscan) and remove entries, a bonus would be to also display fingerprints (ssh-keyscan -l, -v etc) for each of them.

As it is currently, one has to edit known_hosts with a text editor if for example a host changes keys (not saying that it's a good thing that hosts do that, but it happens).

Quote:

OK, but the implementation would have to be rather different I imagine, due to lack of socket files etc?

Quote:

Exactly why I didnt count in "SSHCon" as an "ssh client" - it is "just" a dedicated console handler for the real ssh client, openssh.

So I'll just say it again - MorphOS also lacks a "serious" ssh client, pointing fingers at OS4 here doesnt make much sense, the differences are rather marginal, IMO. It would be really cool with ssh put into a library or something, that apps can use to access remote resources, for example for browsing, maybe even sshmounting etc.

A usefull thing that I suppose should be easy to implement in SSHCon is cluster feature, sending the same input to multiple consoles at once.

[ Edited by kolla on 2010/4/8 19:51 ]

Quote "MPC7448 @ 2.0 GHz (overclocked) vs. one core of PA6T-1682M @ 2.0 GHz would be an interesting comparison. It might not come out as clearly as you think, maybe even the opposite way "

Is that the processor they're using? I thought from the listed specs (running at 1.6) that they were using a Titan based processor. The last time I contacted someone making a PA Semi based board, they were having trouble obtaining the processors.
If they are indeed using that processor, then you're right, it would dust a 7448. However, when you think about it, neither MorphOS or AOS requires anywhere near the processing power of either processor.

> Is that the processor they're using?

They didn't name it yet, but the hints are aiming closer and closer at the PA6T. See below.

> I thought from the listed specs (running at 1.6) that they were using a Titan based
> processor.

From the A-Eon Q&A #3 which I already referred to in this thread:

* "The A1-X1000's BIOS is the Common Firmware Environment, or CFE."

My find regarding this:
"The Electra board comes with a Common Firmware Environment (CFE) boot monitor loaded into the flash memory. CFE is used to initialize the CPUs, caches, memory controllers, and other peripherals on the PA6T-1682M device."
http://web.archive.org/web/20070821022508/http://pasemi.com/processors/pwr_evaluation_kit.html

* "To date all A1-X1000 motherboards have used CPU Samples and to avoid potential damage we have not run the CPU to its maximum rating."

My comment regarding this:
We had already known that the tests were run at 1.6 GHz but it was also said that this wasn't the CPU's nominal clock frequency. Some suspected the nominal speed to be below 1.6 GHz (hinting at APM83290/Titan) while others (including me) above 1.6 GHz (hinting at PA6T). Now, thanks to above statement from Q&A #3, we *know* that the nominal clock speed is indeed *above* 1.6 GHz, ruling APM83290/Titan out.

> The last time I contacted someone making a PA Semi based board, they were having
> trouble obtaining the processors.

Regarding the CPU, A-Eon told: "It's quite a story, actually..."
That would fit the PA6T quite well.

I think... If (if!) A1-X1000 will be released and if (if) it will be equipped with the PA6 - can we expect MorphOS for this board?

(Yes, i read the pega-1's statement about Ben Hermanns, but... )

> can we expect MorphOS for this board? (Yes, i read the pega-1's statement
> about Ben Hermanns, but... )

More recent statements from pega-1 about chances of MorphOS for X1000 (German):

http://www.pegasosforum.de/viewtopic.php?p=43637#p43637 (3 days ago)
http://www.pegasosforum.de/viewtopic.php?p=43672#p43672 (2 days ago)

Quick'n'dirty translation:

"It's extremely improbable that further exotic hardware will ever be supported by MorphOS again. Personally, I'd even completely rule out this possibility. Regarding Sam460ex and X1000 we're talking about approx. a couple hundred boards. Minus the buyers who wouldn't purchase MorphOS for it on principle, that's not worth the hassle... [...] In case your Sam460ex or X1000 breaks you'll probably have a hard time getting a replacement. The value of having warranty on such hardware could be observed by looking at Eyetech's AmigaOnes..."
"With any of the devices neither would the porting of MorphOS be within reasonable limits nor would the whole thing be somewhat profitable due to the reasons told above... The acquisition of the hardware alone would cost in the thousands if more than one reference unit is needed. Not counting further imponderables like compulsory OS4 purchase..."

PowerPC based Macs are also rather exotic these days (and it will not improve), so I'm not sure what to read from that statement.

Thank you, Andreas. I can understand position of MorphOS Team. Due to lack of another new PPC-based hardware, I can make the only conclusion: this is the end of MorphOS :(

> PowerPC based Macs are also rather exotic these days (and it will not improve), so
> I'm not sure what to read from that statement.

Regarding PPC Macs he said (in the part I left out):

"In Q4/05 alone 1.2 million PPC Macs were sold, half desktops and half portables. Allegedly about one third of the desktops were Mac mini PPC... New hardware aside, where's possibly the greater potential?"

Quote:

Hi,
If It has a PA6, It' """about""" a PowerMac G5, and I prefear always a PowerMac G5 with PCIe or AGP...

First I'd like to see the support for Emac G4, Ibook, Powerbook G4 and in particular PowerMac G4 ...
Second I'd like to see the support of Dual G4 CPU (some PowerMac G4)...
Then a day the support for PowerMac G5 Single, Dual and Dual Core (with AGP and PCIe)
regards

regards

@mobydick

Again?

> I prefear always a PowerMac G5 with PCIe or AGP

Just FYI: The X1000 is supposed to have PCIe.

Mobydick: should I shut down my mac mini and forget about MorphOS? Because i don't understand your statement at all.

Quote:

sure I know... while PowerMac G5 has AGP or PCIe, but I prefear the PowerMac G5 as hardware

> Due to lack of another new PPC-based hardware

Let's revive the PS3 chanting.

"It's possible this CFW will also work on the slim to actually *enable* OtherOS"
http://geohotps3.blogspot.com/2010/04/otheros-supported-on-321oo.html

Nah, just kidding ;-)

Quote:
If all sources of ppc maschines are dried out eventually, then either no new supply will come or MorphOS will change its target cpu-architecture (helluvalot work!). But yet the supply of used Apple ppc stock will last a while. So enjoy *while* the coaster is rolling!

Personally, I'm surprised that they went with a company that is producing a processor that will not continue to be developed. While I was really excited by the announcement of PA Semi's PPC processor, once they were bought by Apple and announced that their processor would continue to be supplied for existing designs but not further developed, I figured it wouldn't make sense to develop new hardware based on that product.
Just yesterday I contact a UK company that builds PPC boards (mainly because the head of the company had designed an XMOS based PCIe sound card). He basically discouraged me from looking into the PA Semi based board he had designed because he was having trouble obtaining the processors. I don't understand how A-EON is able to secure these. The last time I heard a statement from PA Semi, they were only assuring a supply of processors to important contacts (like military applications).
That's why I assumed that the processor would be Titan based. Applied Micro has finally gotten these into production and intends to continue to develop the line. While the PA Semi processor is pretty powerful, the Titan's no slouch and it is low power and able to be passively cooled.
While Applied Micro's not promoting their processor for PC application, they seem well suited to our use and they're being produced by one of the few companies still developing lower end PPC processors. I'm also really impressed with the new gating technology AMs licensed for these products. It's allowed them to build a low draw product on a cheap, mature 90nm process. As 65 and 45nm processes mature, AM should be able to allow Titan scale the processor's speed up.
If I had my say, any new MorphOS board would be based on these processors (not PA Semi's).
I willing to bet that many of the readers on this site feel the same way. Probably due to the fact that MorphOS users have more common sense the AOS users.

> Personally, I'm surprised that they went with a company that is producing a
> processor that will not continue to be developed.

Beware, it's still not official that they use the PA6T. Up to now it's just my and other's educated guess, based on the specs and hints revealed so far.

> Just yesterday I contact a UK company that builds PPC boards (mainly because the
> head of the company had designed an XMOS based PCIe sound card). He basically
> discouraged me from looking into the PA Semi based board he had designed because
> he was having trouble obtaining the processors.

It's not Varisys you're speaking of, is it?

> I don't understand how A-EON is able to secure these.

Seems it's quite a story, actually... ;-)

> I'm also really impressed with the new gating technology AMs licensed for these products.

http://www.google.com/search?q=intrinsity+apple ;-)

Yep, you obviously know this company.
Trust me, after spending several years working for a company that sold 68K based computers in the late 80's and early 90's (and actually had product to sell and a customer base), I always take my initial contacts with individuals in small companies somewhat sceptically.
We had competitors that announced products that never got produced (or if they did had major flaws).
If Varisys, as an organization, has some peculiarities, I'm not sure I want to know. I was impressed by what I saw on the internet (and in exchanging e-mails), but I'm not too familiar with the company yet.
It would disappoint me to run into another phony front.
I used to have to deal with "competitors" that had no real products (and often compared their vaporware to our shipping hardware unfavorably).
The main reason I trust you Andreas, is that in interacting with you I've come to realize you're far more informed than I am and I respect your opinion and your accomplishments.
It takes me awhile before I trust people, because I've dealt with too many people (many apparently respected by others) who seemed to rely on baffling others with bull****.


[ Edited by Jim on 2010/4/9 3:47 ]