> Roberto Innocenti contacted me to clarify that while the gpu will not be soldered
> onto the prototype mainboards, that they don't want to explicitly promise MXM yet
> (until the design analysis is complete).

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Does that mean the prototype boards may get a non-MXM graphics card slot? If yes, which type of slot may that be? And/or does that mean the non-prototype boards may get this non-MXM slot?

Quote:

Hmm, ah, yes? I don't know Andreas. I think it means they want to get through the first step before commitment to a specific solution, but they know they are not incorporating the gpu board into the design.
Frankly, I'd just go with MXM, but maybe they want Acube's input, or possibly they are thinking of an eventual production design that does incorporate the gpu.
Honestly, I though we had this worked out.
But in any case, Roberto only suggested the delay in the decision would only last until the completion of Phase 1.

They haven't changed their minds about Radeon HD graphics, and personally I'd like to see them stay with a separate graphics board (preferably MXM).

Quote:

I think that pretty much sums it all up. The discussion has entered its fourth page seeking detailed answers to what it's all really about and what the results will be. That it's all so unclear at this point when they are asking for so much money is a bad sign IMHO. I feel that there is no real plan, and no responsible body to actualy carry it out anyway. And the design phase is the cheapest part. To actually carry out manufacturing of a big batch of actual products requires an enormous amount of money up-front, months ahead of even being able to hope to recover any of it, should there really be a market for PPC products that the real world left behind a decade ago. On top of it all is the extra challenge of making a laptop computer out of it, that has a lot more to it than simply slapping a motherboard into some casing and calling it a system. The chance of this resulting in actual consumer products are practically zero percent IMHO. And the possibility that any money spent is a complete waste is inverted from this. I'm staying way clear of this.

Quote:

I didn't really expect you to participate.
On the other hand, IF they get built, Mark has said he'd like one.

So would I.

I remember when we were first discussing the prospects of Aeon's success, there were similar predictions.
Luckily Trevor had the funds to push forward.

So does it matter that you're not in?
Well, I didn't think you were a likely candidate to buy an X5000 either, so no, not really.

> I think it means [...] they know they are not incorporating the gpu board into
> the design. [...] or possibly they are thinking of an eventual production design
> that does incorporate the gpu.

A new public statement regarding GPU:

"we want to have an MXM connector for the graphic card but we cannot guarantee that it will be finally included."
https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/2017/06/fundraising-powerpc-notebook-reaches-20-goal-six-days/

In terms of slot type, I still can't think of a feasible alternative to MXM.

Quote:

Neither can I, which makes their waffling doubly confusing.
As I said, I thought we had worked this out.
Every single feature and component has been discussed to the point where I thought we had pretty much beaten every topic into submission.

But they are a cautious bunch, for having so much ambition.
I don't think this will impede progress, as once Acube proceeds with their part of Phase 1, they will have to have a locked down target (and have already been helpful in suggesting some design points).

"we want to have an MXM connector for the graphic card but we cannot guarantee that it will be finally included."

But the prototypes won't have gpus soldered to the boards, which leaves no real alternative to MXM cards, at least for the prototypes.

So, Andreas, what do YOU think is the likely resolution of this confusion?
I just see it as just being overly cautious, and not a real impediment to progressing through Phase 1.

If a future redesign eliminates the MXM card, so be it, but the goals for the initial prototypes shouldn't be affected.

[ Edited by Jim 30.06.2017 - 03:31 ]

> Andreas, what do YOU think is the likely resolution of this confusion?

I think if ACube don't endorse MXM, they won't have a choice but to solder the GPU to the mainboard. And I think they should not deliberately design the prototypes differently in this regard. After all, the sole purpose of the prototypes is to subject to real-life test the design decisions made for the production boards, which should include the connection of the GPU.

Quote:

Very good point. I ought to relay that to the others.
I'd like the production boards to incorporate MXM, but if this all leads to something that doesn't, then the prototypes should be built that way from the start.

Quote:

Eh... mmkay...? But in no way does that bring clarity to the confusion... were you trying to apply legitimacy to the fundraiser by mentioning a vague connection to a famous name who could potentially think about buying it at some point? Wow...

Quote:

But Trevor isn't pushing funds on this one, right? And AeonKit never asked the public for handouts to develop their machines, they took care of the development themselves like serious companies do! Is trevor even involved in this at all, or are you using his name in the discussion for the same reason as above? To apply a sense of legitimacy?

Anyway, the only time I can think of where a public fundraiser was used in a similar way, was when Genesi/bPlan didn't believe in that "Pegasos III" design themselves, but agreed to do the R&D and build a number of boards for a developers program against a cost funded by the community. For projects they believed in, they took care of everything completely in-house and only approached the public with finished products. Same with AeonKit, Acube, Individual computers, etc


Quote: Quote: Quote:Quote:Quote:



Very much thought through indeed...

BTW, what are the exact terms/license/conditions for the "Open Source" part?

> AeonKit [...] took care of the development themselves like serious companies do!

To be fair, the Power Progress Community isn't even a company.

Quote:

Thank you Andreas! Its just an umbrella organization for the non-profit work, we're just a collection of hobbyists. And the development is contracted to a company with experience in producing for our community, Acube.

I thought we'd taken everything quite seriously.

Quote:

I don't see anything wrong with you informing members here that might be interested in a new PPC laptop design, and letting them decide for themselves if they wish to donate, or contribute in some other way to the project. I also don't think you were "name dropping" in an attempt to sway anyone's decision to participate or not to participate.

The indecision and continued discussion is because the people trying to do this project are inexperienced, and they are asking for input from anyone who wishes to contribute. It is not an easy task, so they are taking time to discuss every step thoroughly with anyone they think can help advise them, before making final decisions. Even when some decisions seem to be made, if new information is learned, this small group may make last minute changes, if the changes will benefit the project and add to its chances for success.

As I have stated before, I don't see this project going anywhere, without using a "crowd funding" mechanism of some kind to get the production money raised. I just don't believe that any company will pony up the money to produce PPC laptops in the hopes that they will be able to find enough buyers to recoup their money and make a profit.

This project is definitely not for everyone, so stay away from it unless you are willing to risk losing the money you donate to the design process. There is no guarantee that it will ever make it to the production stage, and any money you donate toward the design stages, will not count at all toward the final purchase price of the production stage.

After looking closer at what is being done, and who is doing it, I have decided to get involved in a small way, and also to donate toward the design stages.

Edit: If the design process is a success, I don't see why ACube and A-Eon would not be interested in helping to get this laptop produced and both AmigaOS4.1FE, and MorphOS3.10, or 3.11 ported to it. AmigaOS4.1FE desperately needs a PPC laptop, since it appears that Hyperion has no interest, or intentions to port AmigaOS4.1FE to the G4 Mac PowerBooks, or iBooks, like MorphOS has done. Both ACube and A-Eon might wait to see how the crowd funding of this project goes, before they decide to join in and help make up for any lack of funding to get the first production run realized, or they might show no interest in this laptop, and not help at all (which would really confuse and baffle me completely).

[ Edited by amigadave 01.07.2017 - 17:53 ]

Quote:

Ahem.. We shall see. ;)

Quote:

I think De Groot may have some surprises up his sleeve, eh Nik?
And that individual has already stated he's open to discussing a port to the proposed laptop.

Meanwhile, I've got takemehomegrandma (an community member, but not directly involved) making this comparison to Aeon "they took care of the development themselves like serious companies do".

Uh yeah, they paid someone else to design it. Sorry that we're not a company, and that none of us are wealthy.
Further, its not a practical project, its for hobbyists, so instead of being 'serious' we are spending our own money and what ever we can raise on something to benefits us and our fellow hobbyists.

If I was 'serious', I'd get a second job to occupy my spare time and stop devoting it to somewhat thankless pursuits.

In the meanwhile, about 1/5th of the money needed for phase 1 has been raised.
And Roberto and few of the others have wondered if they should post here.
I'm not sure they need the drama, although I have assured them we're actually more rational than most Amiga related communities, however we ARE just as rude as most.



[ Edited by Jim 01.07.2017 - 21:28 ]

Quote:

Let me know when Hyperion's intentions toward porting to any used Mac hardware have changed. Seems to me that they had a good chance to get a port of AmigaOS4.1 to the G4 MacMini, and decided against it. Plus, I've never heard any positive comments from any AmigaOS4.1 community member, or developer/Hyperion team members, regarding using used Mac hardware of any kind. I think that stance was stupid, and if it has changed, it will be a great thing for expanding the AmigaOS4.1FE user base. Why they have limited themselves to severely under powered and over priced hardware for so long is a complete mystery to me. I think that Trevor did a great job completing the X1000 project, even though it was rendered impossible to continue producing it by Apple's purchase of PA Semi, and the shut down of production of X1000's CPU.

Unless I missed the announcement, I don't think that AmigaOS4.1FE is finished for the X5000 yet, and the port to the Tabor A1222 is taking forever as well, so how does Hyperion have any chance of working on yet another port of AmigaOS4.1FE to any of the G4 PowerBooks or iBooks? By the snails pace that Hyperion appears to work, it makes me wonder if they have any full time developers working on anything, or if it is just a very few part time volunteers, who work on AmigaOS4.1FE ports and updates? Edit: Fewer volunteer programmers than the MorphOS Dev. Team has working on updating and porting MorphOS to x64 hardware. It has always seemed to me that the MorphOS Dev. Team completes much more coding work than Hyperion does on AmigaOS4.1FE, but I may just be biased.

[ Edited by amigadave 03.07.2017 - 16:16 ]

Rumors are floating around that Hyperion has accelerated a program to develop OS4 ports for Mac hardware.
But as no one has announced anything, and no one wants to say that they've seen the work in beta (at least publicly), we'll just have to wait and see whether there is any truth to it.
A PowerBook port would answer the calls for laptop support, while a PCIe G5 port would put them one up on us.

Quote:

Are these "rumors" anything like their last announcement that they would be supporting a laptop? I don't believe anything regarding AmigaOS4.x development, or anything "rumored" from Hyperion, until it is actually finished and released. They are a joke of a company, and an embarrassment at developing anything in a reasonable time frame. When was the X1000 first announced with the free upgrade to AmigaOS4.2? How many years has it been that they have supposedly been working on that upgrade? Hyperion has no credibility at completing anything, but they are pretty good at rumors and broken promises.

Yeah, they still owe you a copy of OS 4.2, don't they?

Hey, have faith, that is apparently what everyone else in the OS4 community operates on.

Posted about the project in the Phoronix-Linux forums (klick) as the community there is rather big concerning Linux. Some are interested in alternative Archs (ARM, Risc-V, POWER). The Talos Desktop Workstation was also discussed there.

Quadcore, 8 threads ...

@AltiVeced: Thanks for pointing that out! I corrected the posting, though I was not able to edit the thread title accordingly...

> Seems to me that they had a good chance to get a port of AmigaOS4.1
> to the G4 MacMini, and decided against it.

Moana was based on AmigaOS 4.0.

> I've never heard any positive comments from any AmigaOS4.1 community member, or
> developer/Hyperion team members, regarding using used Mac hardware of any kind.

Bill "billt" Toner (who is also part of this initiative) has always been a vocal proponent of an OS4 port to Mac hardware, especially iBook G4.

http://amigabill.blogspot.com/2011/10/amiga-netbook.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20101009102122/http://amigamac.wikispaces.com

> it makes me wonder if they have any full time developers working on anything,
> or if it is just a very few part time volunteers, who work on AmigaOS4.1FE
> ports and updates?

Some years ago, the Friedens were said to be the only full time developers by Hyperion. 2 years ago, it was revealed even this was no longer the case.

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=11137&start=308

> Fewer volunteer programmers than the MorphOS Dev. Team has working on updating
> and porting MorphOS to x64 hardware.

I think only a very small fraction of the MorphOS Team members can do such low-level work.

Quote:

But they are a clever bunch!

"I know people claimed the MorphOS Team wasted time on the SAM460. Sales wise you are right. And it was predicted by the Team. But it had some sideeffects everyone using MorphOS right now benefits from. Huge parts of the boot process and the kernel needed to be rewritten/cleaned. Tons of bugs sitting there were found and fixed. Stuff optimised. Less memory used. So the other systems are now even more stable, have a little more free memory for applications and boot faster. Starting with the Efika and Ending with G5 Systems. It also (main reason for supporting the 460) allowed to support X5000 boards (getting it to boot) in hours instead weeks."

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=6805&post_id=129619&viewmode=flat&sortorder=0&showonepost=1

Just a quick update.
The first 4000 euros (of the 12,600 needed for the initial design schematics) has been donated so work should commence soon.

I anticipate that eventually at least the goals of Phase 1 will be reached, and an open design schematic should be made available to the public.

As this will detail the use of the T2080, I'm happy if we make it that far.

After that, a board layout will have to be created, then then prototypes will have to be built, and finally they will have to be rigorously tested.

To some, the these goals don't seem to go far enough, and others think they go too far (as they believe this process ought to be left to the manufacturers).

Regardless of what position you hold, its now in the hands of design professionals, so I (for one) am happy.

[ Edited by Jim 15.07.2017 - 14:03 ]

> I'd like the production boards to incorporate MXM

"Regarding the Radeon card, a few days ago ACube confirmed the inclusion of an MXM connector in the notebook."
https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/2017/07/first-engineering-task-started-soon/