Quote:

Easiest solution is to just stay away from aw.net and amigans.net that way you avoid most of the looney tunes nutters.

It would be unfair to claim such things don't happen in our camp too ...

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=36326&forum=2

[ Edited by Yasu 15.08.2013 - 17:18 ]

I see it this way and there are other examples. I do not need to make a "group look bad" how you write. I was so angry that I slept bad in that night. And even if you cannot say it was "just a comment" because that is untrue. But everyone can have his own opinion.

Quote:

+1

and there was the example of ClusterUK using icons in "amigaos-style" but with permissions. And that are just the "visual" examples I can remember.

Quote:

+1

OS4 is not as bad as some people make out, it's just not as good as MorphOS.

It also has some very strange design decisions that are totally alien to Amiga.

Getting back on topic, I think the SAM460 port of MOS will prove that OS4 is inferior on the same hardware just as the Peg2 port of OS4 did.

Quote:

It's probably just a language barrier issue.

As a native English speaker that comment from djrikki didn't look like a direct threat and even an implied threat would be pushing the limits of interpretation.

> I see it this way

You obviously like to see legal threats where there are none.

> there are other examples.

I'm talking about the one incident you referred to in this thread.

> I do not need to make a "group look bad" how you write.

Then why do you allege a legal threat where there clearly was none as everybody can see?

> And even if you cannot say it was "just a comment" because that is untrue.

Sorry, I don't understand this sentence. Can you please rephrase it?

> everyone can have his own opinion.

Exactly. My opinion is that you like to make things up for a certain purpose.

Quote:

last comment on this topic... wrong link because it was started by someone with "I love using Amiga OS4.1 on my A1-X1000 & Sam440" in his profil.

Quote:

I have written my last comment on this. And your personal negative view on me is ok for me, I must not necessarily like your views and not that of me.

Quote:

It's threads like those that keep me away from that place.

Here's an OS4ish theme for MOS to drive them all crazy! ;)

http://www.five-star.com/kens_icons/downloads/imaz_MOS.lha

> I have written my last comment on this.

You could have used it to answer my questions :-)

> your personal negative view on me is ok for me

Fine. I use to judge people by their actions. And in my book, alleging bad actions that never happened is a bad action in itself.

> I must not necessarily like your views

Yes, I can very well imagine that you don't like my view on fabricating legal threats.

> Here's an OS4ish theme for MOS to drive them all crazy! ;)
> http://www.five-star.com/kens_icons/downloads/imaz_MOS.lha

Or this one:
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=8568&forum=3&start=3

> I can't remember where now. If I find where, I will post here.

Thanks.

>> I'm surprised that a problem like faulty memory sockets can be cured in software at all.

> I meant that even when I got a working board, it was still a useless system due to it's
> unfinished drivers and such. That problem they can fix over time, and it seems they are
> making progress.

Ah yes, got it now. This was a misunderstanding on my part. Sorry.

> instead of asking he went to attack.

Yes, as if you had seen the question whether you have the required permission as less an attack than stating the assumption that you have it.

> When I said he should stop that because it is untrue another AmigaOS user popped up
> and started to attack me.

What incident are you referring to here? It is certainly not the djrikki one.

Back to topic: Would be cool if a team member could confirm whether Sam440 support is actualy planed or not.
The Sam440 is obviously rather weak, but also has a not too high absolute pricetag, hence I would welcome a port to it. For non demanding things it could make a small, low wattage 100% silent machine.

@Zylesea

I agree. But since power is not much of an issue for MOS (remeber, it works rather nice with the Efika) I would welcome this addition for no other reason really than it's cheap enough for me to consider it.

Quote:

I'd be tempted to get one myself if it could run MOS. They are quite reasonably priced all things considered.

Quote:

+1 i got a Sam440 that i hardly turn on because OS4 is unusable and boring, i'd love to turn it to a morphOS box.

I'm sorry to spoil the party but MorphOS support for Sam440 is very unlikely to happen. Our original plans to support 460 got massively delayed already and even there is quite some low level work still ahead.
With all the additional issues showing up in public and the rather sparse feedback we received from customers regarding our plans to support ACube's hardware, it's not even sure if that will ever see the light of day anytime soon ...

>>> MorphOS will officially support Sam460 at some point.

>> Also Sam440?
>> "MorphOS will run on SAM 440 and SAM 460"
>> http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=38014&forum=14&start=60#715081

> MorphOS support for Sam440 is very unlikely to happen.

Thanks for clarification.

> With all the additional issues showing up in public

Is this referring to the memory socket issue Yasu reported on or the missing AC'97 clock source selection resistor? If neither, what issues do you mean?

> and the rather sparse feedback we received from customers regarding our plans
> to support ACube's hardware, it's not even sure if that will ever see the light of day
> anytime soon

Too bad.

Well in my opinion those are some bad news. Why? Well, Sam 440 is nowadays the cheapest NEW hardware around which is able to boot AmigaOS 4.1 and there are people who would like to spend an affordable amount of money to have a machine that would be able to boot BOTH AmigaOS 4.1 AND MorphOS, so Sam 440EP was a good case. It can also boot PPC Linux. It would be cool to have a cheap piece of hardware OUTSIDE the used market to boot all those PPC OSes.

@pega-1

Thats a shame, but only a litte. AOS 4.1 users have very little choice when it comes to hardware, but not us MOS users so it's not a major problem. Besides, my G5 2,7 GHz with a screen cost me less than just a SAM 440 motherboard would. Having MOS on a SAM board (440 or 460) would be a welcomed addition, but if porting is a major hassle I don't think we need to bother at this stage. I don't think 4.1 users would switch to MOS anyway (maybe a dual boot at best), and I doubt that MOS users would go out and buy a lot as well (not mentioning non-AOS4 and non-MOS users). I would, but that's because my love for MOS (and AROS) is rather irrational

I would rather see the effort going into making this brilliant OS more brilliant. Maybe that would change the minds of some AOS users

Does anyone know which SAM is the hardware wise most stable and well rounded? I got the impression that it's one of the 440's, but I would like to get that confirmed.

> Does anyone know which SAM is the hardware wise most stable and well rounded?
> I got the impression that it's one of the 440's, but I would like to get that confirmed.

I remember having read about stability issues with the 800 MHz version of the Sam440ep-flex when running CPU-intense tasks for long, which I think was ascribed to the 20% overclocking of the CPU (CPU manufacturer rates it at 667 MHz max). For the 733 MHz (10% overclocked) version I don't remember reading about such issues.

Quote:

That's a shame but no great loss considering the already wide range of supported hardware available to us.

If this means that more resources will now be transferred to improving MorphOS on existing hardware then it's actually great news. :)

> If this means that more resources will now be transferred to improving
> MorphOS on existing hardware then it's actually great news. :)

Wouldn't this mean that the announced Sam460 support has been bad news all along as it has drawn resources away from "improving MorphOS on existing hardware"? :-)