Not MorphOS but perhaps interesting for some here. AROS now boots natively on Raspberry PI:

http://aros-exec.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?start=50&topic_id=7720&viewmode=compact&order=ASC&type=&mode=0

Quote:

Quote:

I just read on amigaworld.net that AROS now boots natively on Rasp.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=37366&forum=2&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=0

Quote:

IMG_20130315_003257_zpsf11b836e.jpg

> I just read on amigaworld.net that AROS now boots natively on Rasp.

I guess OlafSch beat you to it :-)

Quote:

Ooops yes true story, now I noticed his post hahaha!

Forget all this capitalistic crap, and port MorphOS to this!
images

i own the two devices, Efika MX and Raspberry Pi and while the Efika is much more well designed in terms of hardware, it performs poorly compared to the Raspberry Pi. Genesi was supposed to have access to documentation and stuff from Freescale but the linux images available for the Efika always lack something in drivers or functionality (not mentionning the rare updates), it has an unfinished feel that the raspberry pi doesn't have. I've been able to do much more things on my rasp than on the efika even if i really prefer the efika. I suppose the dev community size and commercial success really matters here.

Efika MX was well supported by Genesi's Ubuntu (BT, 3G by phone or internal modem). It was very slooooowwww, but stable. After that I tested Bodhilinux (looks fine, but unusable in real life), Debian images I found on powerdeveloper...

Now I use Debian 7.0, and there is no bluetooth, also I can not use mobile phone as modem (it seems, internal Huawei EM770W modem is dead :( )

It seems, Genesi lost interest in Efika i.MX515 at least year ago.

Jupp3,
Quote:

Naa, if you want to be obscure you want the MCST KM-4.
A real Russian computer with it's own Elbrus 2C + dual core VLIW processor.

Even has SATA, PCIe etc... See here.

minator,
Quote:

I actually find the Russian motherboard interesting.
PCIe expansion and SATA? Only 500 MHz, but not that much slower then the Pi.

BTW - Why do we keep discussing weak ARM based systems when better options are out there.
Why not the Chromebook?

> Why not the Chromebook?

...or the ArndaleBoard?

I think ARM is the best future route fo MorphOS. A €35 light/stripped MOS version ported for RPi would be a perfect match to raise awareness until Cortex 64 bit A57 is brought to market. RPi have many benefits to piggy back on that attracts interest:

1 it is REALLY small - yet a real computer
2. It is unique new appoach
3. It has 512 mb mem and cpu can be overclocked up to 1000MGz
4. It is fun
5. It can be used as mediaplayer.
6. It needs a good and light OS when you like to surf, play simple games etc
7. It is selling big volumes so many can come in contact with MorphOS, preparing them for more powerful hardware on cortex A57 in 1-2 years

Jim,
Quote:

It's not comparable with the Pi. The Pi has an ARM11 which IIRC is a single issue pipeline (it can issue 1 instruction per cycle).
The Elbrus core is quite different, it can issue 23 instructions per cycle, including several (6 I think) double precision floating point ops.

It's quite exotic!

> It has 512 mb mem

...which is shared with the GPU.

minator,
Quote:

Neat. Russian Spark CPU.
How hard is it to obtain Russian hardware?

I shipped a 1.42GHz Power mac processor in (to Moscow), but I have never tried to order something from there.

[ Edited by Jim 18.03.2013 - 00:44 ]

> Russian Spark CPU.

MCST's Elbrus-2C+ CPU implements Elbrus VLIW ISA natively and x86 ISA through dynamic binary translation (similar to Transmeta's Crusoe and Efficeon CPUs), but not SPARC ISA. MCST has developed other CPUs that are SPARC-compatible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus-2C%2B
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus_2000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCST-R1000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus_(computer)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Center_of_SPARC_Technologies_(MCST)

Thank you, Andreas.
Something tells me the Russians are not that interested in commercializing this.

Mostly for their own use?

TomKeric wrote:,
Quote:

I agree that porting MorphOS3.x to the Raspberry Pi "could be" a good way to spread awareness of MorphOS3.x to thousands of users who would probably otherwise never hear about it, but in answer to your 7 points above:

1. Yes it is small, but the definition of what is a "real computer" is debatable.
2. You did not say what part of the Raspberry Pi you thought was so unique, but I guess I can agree that one or more the technologies used with the Raspberry Pi are done in a unique way.
3. Stating the obvious.
4. Subjective assessment, your level of "fun" is dependent on what you think is fun and what you are going to do with your Raspberry Pi. Running MorphOS3.x on my Raspberry Pi would be fun for me.
5. Again, stating the obvious, but lots more work would probably be needed to allow the Raspberry Pi to be even close to as good a media player while running MorphOS3.x, as it currently is while running Linux.
6. MorphOS3.x is a very nice and very lightweight OS that could be a perfect fit for the Raspberry Pi, but we still need tons more software to make a port to any hardware successful with the general public, instead of just former Amiga users. I think that with more native MorphOS software, it could be attractive to many users who are currently Non-MorphOS users.
7. The potential for increased exposure for MorphOS3.x, if ported to the Raspberry Pi, is huge, but it would only be good exposure and successful, if the port of MorphOS3.x to the Raspberry Pi also included the same level of graphics drivers which are currently available, that allow Linux to run 1080p video at respectable frame rates on the Raspberry Pi, plus more software that is needed and usually expected by the general computing user, and which is currently lacking in the MorphOS community. As for the Raspberry Pi being a good choice as a first port to any ARM based computer device, the price is certainly right, so I say "why not". When the MorphOS Dev. Team is ready to make the jump to a different architecture, they could do a lot worse than the Raspberry Pi.

I agree Amigadave

What is unique with RPi is that it is so small in combination with trying to be a real desktop computer. And it is available at a superlow price. Takes little energy.

It has a coolness factor. It would be a great kick to make a nice MorphOS case for it and run morphos. Having your desktop computer in your pocket. Have already seen blue cases suited for the butterfly and raspberry.

You meed to be able to watch movies on youtube/vimeo, use it as a mediaplayer for hd videos annd music. You need to be able to surf the web,and install libre office and some games.
Possibility for extreme customizing of your desktop is needed - personilze your MorphPI

If ou get this unto it you have reached really far,


If you can do at least above you

With its memory, processor, and GPU limitations, I still favor an A15 over the RPi.

@amigadave

I agree with most of your points although driver support would be essential.

No 3D/video acceleration = fail.

I would prefer a port to x86-64bit hardware as it's better documented, easier to find, easier to replace by a faster machine and less limited. 256MB was very bad and 512MB is not so bad but I prefer having 8GB and being able to connect a pair of 2TB drives instead of using 512MB of ram, a sd card as hd, a slow ethernet port and not so fast usb2.0. It's fine as xbmc box but I would never use it as a desktop without proper driver support.

Come on, it even struggles playing videos using cpu that an old peg2 plays perfectly. If you want it to use GPU you have to buy linux binaries not easily useable from other operating systems.

Jim,
Quote:

Raspberry is the product of a charity, it's meant to be functional and cheap. That said time has moved on since it was started and you can now get Mac mini type power for the same price.

Type "iPEGTOP" into ebay ...No, I'm not joking.

You'll get a load of cheap USB computers with specs quite significantly higher than the RPi
Dual core Cortex A9, 1.6GHz. 1GB DDR3 Ram 8GB flash, USB, HDMI, WiFi etc...
They're quite limited but at that price who cares!

No A15s down there but once the Chinese start making them...


As for the whole x86 Vs ARM debate for MophOS I can kind see the benefits of both sides.
The closed platform and raw processing power of the Macs makes them a very good target but good Macs ain't cheap.

ARMs don't have the same level of processing power but see above.

If anything they should be cross platform, Macs for the high end, cloud sticks for the "mass market" low end.

As for the problem of every ARM from different companies being a different architecture isn't quite what it once was.
That's true at the high end where companies can afford to add their own components.

At the low end it's completely different. The low end guys compete on price so they just buy in parts and put them together. Well, it's actually nowhere near that simple but the point is they are not developing their own modules, they use standard parts most of which probably come from ARM.

As for how you would support 2 platforms well there's an answer to that but I suspect it'll be rather unpopular.
Use a Linux Kernel.
You get all the drivers, protected memory and multiprocessor support built in.
You customise the kernel for low latency, cut out all the legacy guff and build the MorphOS environment on top.

Won't this just make MorphOS into a Linux distro?
No, Linux distros are a hodge podge of open source components on top of one another.
Android uses a Linux kernel but it's nothing remotely like any Linux distro.

I suspect this will be an unpopular opinion but remember the kernel is only one component and it's completely invisible to the user. I suspect it'd speed up development quite significantly.

<runs away>

>"iPEGTOP"

Interesting, but the listing mentions a vague 1.2-1.6 GHz operating speed.
Still, slightly more then $50?
Pretty cool.

Crumb wrote:,
Quote:


I thought that what I wrote equaled exactly what you stated again in your reply above, except I did not mention my preference for x86/x64 for more powerful solutions.

In my opinion, the only thing the Raspberry Pi has going for it is the low price, but more important is the number of units already sold and likely to be sold in the future. That huge community of users is what would be attractive, because assuming we could interest even 2% of the people we could show MorphOS3.x to on the Raspberry Pi, 2% of 20,000 to 40,000 Raspberry Pi users (I don't know how many have been sold so far, but it is a large number), is much higher than 30% of the users of a much less popular product. Also, given the popularity of the Raspberry Pi, and the amount of media coverage it receives when something new comes out that can run on it, or a new use that someone finds for it, there would be a greater chance for wide spread coverage of an announcement of a port of MorphOS3.x to the Raspberry Pi, than there would be to any small production run alternative, even if the alternative was twice as powerful at half the price.

All I am saying is that "IF" the MorphOS Dev. Team decides to port to "ANY" ARM device, I think it would be smart for them to start with the Raspberry Pi, but only if, as Crumb and myself have tried to point out, they could leverage the Raspberry Pi's GPU as well as the Linux kernel currently does.

No drivers & no 3D/Video acceleration = FAIL! Which is why this port will probably never happen.

> 20,000 to 40,000 Raspberry Pi users (I don't know how many have been
> sold so far, but it is a large number)

News item from 2.5 months ago:

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/3011

amigadave,
Quote:


This is so true!!

Start with the RPi where volumes are and get volumes out and coverage. Then move on to the 64bit highend ARM CortexA57 (coming in a year or 2) to attract RPimos users to modern powerful but light RISC based ARM , as a legacy to the existing PPC RISC architecture.

It makes sense. i wish any of the development team would give their view on this.