Quote:

OS4 has quite good OS3.9 compatibility, MOS also can run most OS3.9 software due to the 68K emulation, whereas AROS is still strictly OS3.1 and cannot. So AROS is clearly lagging behind the other Amiga-like OSes unfortunately.

[ Edited by Minuous 29.11.2015 - 22:21 ]

Quote:

it is not... Aros 68k can. I use Classact on it

Quote:

Reaction is not even on the radar as it was decided it wasn't worth the time. Mui is what was decided as the standard on both MorphOS and AROS you may not agree with that decision but it's what was decided. Even today no one on the AROS side of the fence even care about reaction.


As Olaf pointed out since Reaction is classact and AROS 68K can run Classact. I'm almost 100% positive that if you pulled reaction from your 3.9 CD and ran it on AROS your reaction programs would run that kind of kills that argument.

Quote:
Visually, it is extremely reminiscent of OS3.1. You may not personally care about this issue whatsoever, which is fine, but please note that others do care about look and feel as well. Telling them they are wrong just means that you have missed the point.

Ouch.. Clearly lagging behind : )
Was the first os with wifi..
Nouveau 2d/3D
Runs hosted on virtually everything
Hmm..
Can use 4gb ram

It has just more publically active anti-aros voices than mos has anti-mos voices..again
It is just noise and not true.

Quote:
People can only vote if there are options to choose from When asked for ideas what the general fund could be used for, I do not recall any specific ideas being recommended.

Quote:
For the Odyssey bounty, donors were contacted and asked if they would consider to move funds to it.

Quote:

I do not think so but it is a matter of taste. Some preferred the old workbench, some used Scalos or Magellan. Most people do not want to use Magellan because it is not like the old workbench. First time I read the opposite :). i have no problem if someone prefers another desktop and it is difficult to discuss about taste. But Magellan when configured properly has nothing to do with 3.1., I read descriptions about Ambient that sounded very much like the description of Magellan. When you only know it from standard install you not even scratch the surface. The biggest difference I see compared to Ambient is that it not uses MUI. But that is of course personal view because I do not know enough about Ambient to compare it feature by feature. On the other hand Yasu admitted that he has no experience with Magellan but knows that it is like 3.1.. And that is wrong. BTW some prefer AmigaOS because of the desktop. As I wrote... a matter of taste. But to write Aros is just 3.1. including Magellan just 3.1. is both wrong.

[ Editiert durch OlafSch 29.11.2015 - 12:49 ]

Quote:
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.

Quote:

Visually like 3.1.? Where? You can change Themes easily

And then configure almost any behavior

Quote:

I know and we've discussed ideas before. I simply meant that when it was first setup it would have made more sense to have clearly defined it's purpose.

Quote:

Would it be possible to setup a mailing list for donors to the general fund? Maybe then when stuff like that comes up you could simply send an update to all donors.



[ Edited by terminills 29.11.2015 - 13:26 ]

I just prefer Ambient over Wanderer and DOpus (Wanderer with a lot of buttons). It has NOTHING to do with anti-AROS sentiments or such crap. I have never said that no one should use AROS, only that it's not as stable, not as polished and too much 3.1 for _MY_ taste. And this doesn't change because you tell me I'm wrong, because I have come to this conclusion by actually using AROS. I have found what I like and I will keep using it until AROS can provide a better experience, for _ME_.

Now just please go away and leave me alone.

AROS is nice, but I prefer MorphOS for some reasons. And I probably keep it that way.
MorphOS 1st ... some distance ...AROS 2nd ... long distance... OS4 3rd.

Just a note to this discussion which seem to end up more like head banging aw.net style thread, but as a hardcore daily Magellan2 (17 years) and MorphOS (11 years) user, my view is that Ambient is basically like a light version of Magellan2 by functionality, but on the other hand, it has implemented them a bit more modern way and also has some features which weren't current at Magellan2's times. But they definitely are close relatives and neither of them should be put down by comparing to each other :)

Ambient is heavily inspired by Magellan2 and every Magellan2 user feels like home with it, but it only picked the important features people might want today and haven't implemented them as deeply or finished way as Magellan2 did, and still missing some functions I'd like to see. So, for a hardcore user Ambient feels a bit light and won't allow that much customization as Magellan2 offers, but still lightyears ahead of standard Workbench (be it OS3 or OS4). Magellan2 feels naturally a bit oldish in some parts nowadays, but for power users it's still unbeatable by functionality.

Ambient is better out of the box experience for casual users who don't want to take a look to settings and who want the modern look. That's why it's better for the default desktop and users still get pretty much functionality. Usual Magellan2 haters are kind of tricked to the Magellan2 way of thinking with it and I wouldn't wonder if they one day try Magellan2 and see what the fuss was 20 years ago and what they did miss on original Amigas ;)

I'd still want to see more Magellan2 features implemented to Ambient, there are few critical functions which keep me using Magellan2 on side by side with Ambient on the same screen every day even today. I actually do the most of the work on the Magellan2 side all the time, but of course that's far from the optimal situation and definitely isn't for everyone.

I think it would be easier to polish Ambient by adding few more Magellan2 kind of features to it and finetune the existing features little more and have that way a one good desktop for everyone, than start upgrading the whole Magellan2 that much that it'd become attractive enough experience for today's general public who have used to see certain things in modern mainstream way.

Anyway both are very good options with their own flaws. If few systems would be put to order purely by functionality and features it'd still be: OS3 < OS4 < Ambient < Magellan2. But the age shows on Magellan2's face and that'll drop it down as a generic option. You can hide something with patches now when it's free, but still hard to believe it'd be upgraded that much that it'd be attractive option for the general public that easily... for example porting it for MUI would be a really huge task...

BTW. I just happened to record a video of my A1200/030 setup, which shows Magellan2 in use on that kind of machine. You can see similarities to Ambient, but also how it can look like a standard WB for those who would like to use the OS just by the icons ;) Looks is stripped down to pure 3.1 look on purpose to have it just as a games launcher machine with max amount of chipmem free. But of course I can't use such a machine without Magellan2 either, or I'd be totally helpless ;)

[ Edited by jPV 29.11.2015 - 19:54 ]

Quote:

Can't understand why anyone would consider ReAction "important" really

Okay, here's a challenge. Name 10 "worthy" ReAction programs that fill the following criteria:

-There's no "non-ReAction" alternative of the same exact program (meaning, you can't simply "select MUI ui instead" during install)
-There's no similar "non-ReAction" program that does (almost) the same thing.

Okay, this far the challenge might be actually possible. Now the bonus criteria:

-Isn't closed source AmigaOS4-exclusive program.

I've thought about this quite a bit in the past (on MorphOS), and only two programs I can name are:
-ZoneXplorer
-A-Web

Sure, A-Web is "just another outdated browser", we can use iBrowse or Voyager instead (or a modern browser), include it if you want.

But the point is... I don't think without ReAction, we would be missing much. As said, those two probably work on AROS 68k, and if we talk about other platforms, we immediately lose ZoneXplorer, as I think it's closed source (A-Web is open source though)

So, because of this, I can't see much sense in doing any ReAction => MUI wrapper for MorphOS (As has been discussed in the past), NOR would I see it a big issue, if ReAction wasn't available for AROS (it is, but 68k-only, like majority of the few worthy non-OS4 RA programs)

Also, I think it's worth noting that many bigger programs, such as Odyssey and Timberwolf, don't use RA on OS4 either. Also Hyperion have stated they'd like to have some different GUI toolkit in the future. No way they'd accept MUI though.

Quote:

I was referring to x86 AROS; I would have thought that was obvious. Of course 68K code can run on 68K-based hardware.

Quote:

There is a MUI-based alternative to something like MCE?

Quote:

Congratulations, we now have a whopping list of *3* ReAction programs!

(Although, I must say, that sounds like something mostly useful for classic amiga anyway, since all(?) the games it can edit are classic amiga games)

Still, a worthy addition to the list.

Quote:
Don't change the subject. I was talking about AROS being "strictly 3.1", which is not true. Actually AROS implements more post-3.1 functions than MorphOS, icon.library being a good example, but you can look at the SDKs for more.

Quote:

Could be because Minuous is a ReAction programmer and prefers to use it instead of MUI, or any other GUI toolkit?

I agree with you that ReAction is not needed, or even wanted by hardly any programmers doing coding for AROS or MorphOS, and that many AmigaOS4.x programmers would rather use something else, if it were available. But I can't back up this impression with any hard facts, just the impression I have gotten reading many forums and not seeing more than one person asking for ReAction on AROS, or MorphOS.