Flow Development and MorphOS SDK
  • Priest of the Order of the Butterfly
    Priest of the Order of the Butterfly
    Intuition
    Posts: 976 from 2013/5/24
    From: Englistan
    Quote:

    polluks wrote:
    Quote:

    Intuition schrieb:
    Pretty please can we have MorphOS on QEMU then? ;)

    This is not allowed, please read the MorphOS licence in RegTool.


    Obviously. That's why I asked a member of the team if can have it.
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.9

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, OSX 10.5.8, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »11.06.18 - 16:04
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    amigadave
    Posts: 2502 from 2006/3/21
    From: Lake Shastina,...
    Quote:

    Intuition wrote:
    Quote:

    polluks wrote:
    Quote:

    Intuition schrieb:
    Pretty please can we have MorphOS on QEMU then? ;)

    This is not allowed, please read the MorphOS licence in RegTool.


    Obviously. That's why I asked a member of the team if can have it.


    If/When MorphOS for x64 is ready for release/sale to the general public, perhaps the MorphOS Dev. Team could also release a ported version of QEMU that runs on MorphOS x64, and an unlocking tool, that allows existing users to run their current installation of MorphOS3.10 (or 3.11, 3.12, 3.13, what ever the version number for the PPC version of MorphOS at that time), through QEMU for MorphOS x64?

    That would possibly solve the problem of pirating MorphOS to run on anyone's computer with QEMU, if it is possible to make the tool only compatible with each individual keyfile, and only run on MorphOS x64, not any other version of QEMU. Me not being a programmer that has lots of technical knowledge about QEMU, or how the MorphOS keyfiles exactly work, maybe what I am suggesting is not practical, or even possible, but it sounds like a possible good solution, if it could be done.

    In that way, MorphOS x64 would be able to run the existing PPC MorphOS under emulation, and users could continue to use all of their existing MorphOS software. If it could also use UAE code to allow the running of Amiga 68k software and games, then users would have the best of both worlds, and still be able to run anything that they are currently running on MorphOS3.10. I guess if the ported version of QEMU works well enough, E-UAE for MorphOS3.10 would also work (an emulation running inside of an emulation), and no UAE code would be needed inside the QEMU code ported to run MorphOS3.10 on MorphOS x64?

    [ Edited by amigadave 11.06.2018 - 13:14 ]
    MorphOS - The best Next Gen Amiga choice.
  • »11.06.18 - 21:07
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4593 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    I was a little confused by your question David.
    But I kind of get the gist of it.

    Developing emulation that would allow MorphOS PPC to run under MorphOS X64 could be done, but it would require development resources that are already spread very thin.

    Every developer I have ever exchanged messages agrees on one thing, MorphOS will not be allowed to run under emulation on another OS.

    That doesn't necessarily rule out emulation under MorphOS X64, but it does make a generic QEMU supported version unlikely.

    MorphOS could run on Power 9 both in its current version, and as an advanced version
    directly (aka 'bare metal') and concurrently once the issues with KVM have been worked out.

    But doing so under X64 would require a solution such as QEMU, which would increase the cpu load.

    Whether its gets done or not is purely a matter of resources.
    To the best of my knowledge, no commitment has been made on this issue yet.

    Finally, we should probably adjust to retaining what we have now, and what comes in the next bug fix, 3.11.
    We knew there would be a period where we would have to carry on before the ISA transition.
    This is it.

    I don't expect a transition to occur this year.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »12.06.18 - 20:55
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 9749 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > MorphOS could run on Power 9 [...] directly (aka 'bare metal') and concurrently
    > once the issues with KVM have been worked out.

    I don't think MorphOS could run bare metal on POWER9 unless explicitly ported to it. Running current MorphOS on POWER9 would require QEMU to be able to provide sufficiently correct and complete emulation (bar CPU with KVM) of a MorphOS-compatible hardware platform, which is apparently not yet the case.

    > doing so under X64 would require a solution such as QEMU

    It does so on POWER9 as well, just without CPU emulation when using KVM.
  • »12.06.18 - 21:57
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4593 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    Andreas_Wolf wrote:
    > MorphOS could run on Power 9 [...] directly (aka 'bare metal') and concurrently
    > once the issues with KVM have been worked out.

    I don't think MorphOS could run bare metal on POWER9 unless explicitly ported to it. Running current MorphOS on POWER9 would require QEMU to be able to provide sufficiently correct and complete emulation (bar CPU with KVM) of a MorphOS-compatible hardware platform, which is apparently not yet the case.

    > doing so under X64 would require a solution such as QEMU

    It does so on POWER9 as well, just without CPU emulation when using KVM.


    Obviously it would require porting, and both you and Mark are aware of the current issue with KVM.
    If QEMU is used to provide emulation for the SAM460, the X5000, or the PowerMacG5 I have no idea if the developers will allow registration of those emulated platforms.

    Would they be able to tell?
    Possibly.
    I doubt that QEMU emulation outside of MorphOS 64 will be encouraged, so without a native port, we might be back to a 30 minute time out.

    My primary point in bringing up 'bare metal' is that I've heard it confirmed that it would work.

    And a direct port, without QEMU would provide the best performance.

    So, to me anyway, these look like options. Run MorphOS PPC on currently supported PPC platforms, if its ported to Power 9 then run it on that, or if its supported under MorphOS X64 then run it on that.

    Don't try to run it via QEMU on unsupported hardware, it violates the licensing terms.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »12.06.18 - 22:16
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 9749 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    >> I don't think MorphOS could run bare metal on POWER9 unless explicitly ported to it.

    > My primary point in bringing up 'bare metal' is that I've heard it confirmed that it would work.

    I'm not sure what you're referring to. What is it that you heard would work 'bare metal'?
  • »12.06.18 - 23:12
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4593 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    Andreas_Wolf wrote:
    >> I don't think MorphOS could run bare metal on POWER9 unless explicitly ported to it.

    > My primary point in bringing up 'bare metal' is that I've heard it confirmed that it would work.

    I'm not sure what you're referring to. What is it that you heard would work 'bare metal'?


    Sorry Andreas, just pointing out that QEMU isn't necessary.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »12.06.18 - 23:24
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 9749 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    >>>> I don't think MorphOS could run bare metal on POWER9 unless explicitly ported to it.

    >>> My primary point in bringing up 'bare metal' is that I've heard it confirmed that it would work.

    >> I'm not sure what you're referring to. What is it that you heard would work 'bare metal'?

    >> Sorry Andreas, just pointing out that QEMU isn't necessary.

    But it is without porting to the target platform, as I said. And that QEMU isn't necessary with a native port is a tautology that really doesn't need confirmation.
  • »13.06.18 - 00:02
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4593 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    Andreas_Wolf wrote:
    >>>> I don't think MorphOS could run bare metal on POWER9 unless explicitly ported to it.

    >>> My primary point in bringing up 'bare metal' is that I've heard it confirmed that it would work.

    >> I'm not sure what you're referring to. What is it that you heard would work 'bare metal'?

    >> Sorry Andreas, just pointing out that QEMU isn't necessary.

    But it is without porting to the target platform, as I said. And that QEMU isn't necessary with a native port is a tautology that really doesn't need confirmation.


    Yes Andreas, we keep circling around that, if it makes it clearer for you, I've been told that there is still no support for running MorphOS via emulation.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »13.06.18 - 00:19
    Profile
  • Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Minuous
    Posts: 115 from 2010/2/13
    I don't get why the MorphOS developers have this hatred of emulation.

    I can run every other OS I need, and develop for them, via emulation on the one Windows machine. But I have to depend on other programmers to port the software to MorphOS because of the refusal to let it run on QEMU or other emulators.

    It seems to be a missed opportunity to increase the userbase, increase the software base, and bring in revenue. There was a large increase in sales of OS4 after emulation of it became possible. Also, unlike Power Macs, Windows machines are still being manufactured.
  • »13.06.18 - 06:38
    Profile Visit Website
  • ASiegel
    Posts: 989 from 2003/2/15
    From: Central Europe
    Quote:

    Minuous wrote:
    I don't get why the MorphOS developers have this hatred of emulation.

    Your suggestion that there would be an overly emotional and irrational aversion to emulation is plain wrong. There is no hate but a different set of priorities.

    Quote:

    I can run every other OS I need, and develop for them, via emulation on the one Windows machine. But I have to depend on other programmers to port the software to MorphOS because of the refusal to let it run on QEMU or other emulators.

    You could also use your Windows machine to remotely test your software via VNC on a tiny quiet Mac Mini that can fit almost anywhere. In terms of convenience, this is quite close to running emulation software and it would give a better idea what real-life CPU performance is like on the most popular MorphOS hardware platform, which qemu is unable to achieve on common hardware at this time.

    For pure testing purposes, you probably would not have to even register the OS as the 30 minutes per session might be enough for you.

    Quote:

    It seems to be a missed opportunity to increase the userbase, increase the software base, and bring in revenue. There was a large increase in sales of OS4 after emulation of it became possible.

    Have you seen official sales numbers released? You have not? Then, I am afraid this is hearsay and / or speculation.

    The MorphOS developers have certain expectations that must be met by potential supported platforms - virtual or physical - with regard to the overall user experience that they can provide. MorphOS has also been shown running on various hardware platforms that remain unsupported to this day specifically because the developers believe that they are unsuitable to provide a fitting user experience at this point in time. Qemu is not special, it is just another item on a list of things that are not ready to run MorphOS.

    Quote:

    Also, unlike Power Macs, Windows machines are still being manufactured.

    The X5000 is available for sale as brand new. Just make sure you pick a compatible graphics card.
  • »13.06.18 - 07:43
    Profile
  • Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Minuous
    Posts: 115 from 2010/2/13
    Quote:

    Have you seen official sales numbers released?


    Well, I bought one myself; I also recall reading somewhere that OS4.1FE for Classic sold far more than the versions for other platforms.

    Quote:

    developers believe that they are unsuitable to provide a fitting user experience at this point in time. Qemu is not special, it is just another item on a list of things that are not ready to run MorphOS.


    So the emulator is too slow, and therefore users will think that MorphOS is slow? I think the users will be more understanding and forgiving than that.

    [ Edited by Minuous 13.06.2018 - 20:36 ]
  • »13.06.18 - 10:34
    Profile Visit Website
  • Priest of the Order of the Butterfly
    Priest of the Order of the Butterfly
    Intuition
    Posts: 976 from 2013/5/24
    From: Englistan
    My i7-7700k runs OS4 in WinUAE under Linux almost as well as my Pegasos 2 ran it natively.
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.9

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, OSX 10.5.8, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »13.06.18 - 10:55
    Profile
  • Just looking around
    Posts: 6 from 2015/1/15
    Quote:

    Minuous wrote:
    I can run every other OS I need, and develop for them, via emulation on the one Windows machine. But I have to depend on other programmers to port the software to MorphOS because of the refusal to let it run on QEMU or other emulators.



    I usually use ssh to connect remote machine which I use for cross-compiling. Then copy result to test-machine using scp ...or use smb or nfs to mount remote directory. My laptop does not have enough space to all cross-compilers I want to use. This works quite well with MorphOS ...and also with emulators I'm using with my laptop.

    Quote:

    It seems to be a missed opportunity to increase the userbase, increase the software base, and bring in revenue. There was a large increase in sales of OS4 after emulation of it became possible. Also, unlike Power Macs, Windows machines are still being manufactured.


    Price of the OS4FE classic was also quite nice. I haven't open my copy yet. So, at least I was not increasing userbase. I bet there are many people like me, who has bought it, probably tested it and finally does not really use it.
  • »13.06.18 - 14:10
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 9749 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    >>> QEMU isn't necessary.

    >> it is without porting to the target platform.

    > if it makes it clearer for you, I've been told that there is still no support for
    > running MorphOS via emulation.

    Unfortunately this doesn't make any clearer for me how QEMU isn't necessary to run current MorphOS on unsupported Power Architecture platforms. What other possibility is there than for instance QEMU's (apparently not yet sufficient) Sam460 emulation?
  • »14.06.18 - 11:30
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 9749 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > I also recall reading somewhere that OS4.1FE for Classic sold far more than
    > the versions for other platforms.

    I recall there was such statement made at one of the AmiWest shows, but that was in the early OS4.1 days (or maybe even late OS4.0 days), so years before the price-reduced OS4.1FE.
  • »14.06.18 - 11:55
    Profile
  • Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Acolyte of the Butterfly
    Minuous
    Posts: 115 from 2010/2/13
    @ASiegel, Andreas_Wolf:

    See https://keasigmadelta.com/blog/amigaos-graphics-survey-2018-rise-of-the-emulators
  • »15.06.18 - 06:00
    Profile Visit Website
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 9749 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    >> I recall there was such statement made at one of the AmiWest
    >> shows, but that was in the early OS4.1 days (or maybe even late
    >> OS4.0 days), so years before the price-reduced OS4.1FE.

    > @ [...] Andreas_Wolf:
    > See https://keasigmadelta.com/blog/amigaos-graphics-survey-2018-rise-of-the-emulators

    This seems to confirm what I think, namely that the PowerUP version of OS4.1FE should be the best-selling version, also considering that the PowerUP version was already said to be the best-selling version during late OS4.0 or early OS4.1 days when OS4 in general was much more expensive and only ran on real hardware.
  • »15.06.18 - 08:03
    Profile
  • ASiegel
    Posts: 989 from 2003/2/15
    From: Central Europe
    Quote:

    Minuous wrote:
    @ASiegel, Andreas_Wolf:

    See https://keasigmadelta.com/blog/amigaos-graphics-survey-2018-rise-of-the-emulators

    Just for the record, these are not sales numbers. Also, according to this poll, which may or may not be accurate, the number of people running real hardware clearly exceeds emulation users.

    Not that this matters even remotely with regard to anything else I had to say, of course.
  • »15.06.18 - 10:04
    Profile