|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 24.04.2011 - 07:23 ]

I am running it in a Fusion VM. Maybe this is what renders it unstable.
I think one situation I ran into was poseidon trying to use the USB devices through Fusion USB pass through.
I got cases where my 2 cores went up to 100% with running programs that took a fraction of my G3 and then G4 on morphOS (Scumvm) and continued to do so after closing it. Same thing when attempting a reset.
I do not think I ever had a hard reset. Maybe I am jumping to conclusions too quick but when you run into 3 problems in less then 5 minutes ...
I will give it another try. Maybe it was just bad luck.

Let me clarify my statement about AROS/Icaros overtaking MorphOS someday.

The only reason I say that is because AROS/Icaros is designed for hardware that will most likely still be in production in 5 years, but MorphOS is a big question mark as to what it will be running on by then, and if it will be running on anything that is being produced NEW 5 years from now. I am glad that AROS exists because of its potential future, but I would much rather have MorphOS in the future working on better hardware, than have AROS, unless AROS can truly "Catch Up" with where MorphOS is now and surpass it.

Unless the MorphOS development team grows larger and can somehow port to other platforms faster, they will always be developing for hardware that grows old before any port can be completed, unless it is a standardized platform where they develop for the standard and it works on later hardware designs that are released months or years later. Custom hardware will always have that drawback.

I know it may sound ugly and very "Amiga unlike" but would there be a decent way to run MorphOS in a VM ?
I know virtualization on PPC is no way reaching all the nice features supported on x86 Virtualization products but it would be a good way to abstract the hardware to avoid developping drivers every couple of years for another piece of hardware that will not be for sale anymore at release time ?
Are there any other alternatives to run hosted (Mac On Linux ?) or emulated on x86 (PearPC, QEmu) ?

Running MorphOS inside a virtual machine would not be compatible with the concept of requiring a keyfile that is locked to a particular hardware setup.

Good point. I guess that all the software company doing dongles must have had this problem and found a solution.
Bplan could manufacturate an usb dongle. That would bring some memories for the Scala users :)

Quote:

Well, nobody's forcing you to keep that concept

Quote:

Operating systems done by real men do take real control of real hardware. Virtualization is for sissies.

@Andre

Quote:

Amiga Forever manages it :)

The provided Kickstart ROMs are encrypted and are only unlocked by way of a key provided with the system.

There is no reason you couldn't create some firmware to load into QEMU if the work was worth the time and effort to get MorphOS in an emulated PPC environment on other boxes. That firmware binary could be locked and encrypted in the same way, as could the MorphOS ROM images, in which case you have two layers of security - only a licensed firmware runs with a key and only that licensed firmware can decrypt the locked version of MorphOS. You can tie it to whatever devices on the PC side you like - MAC address, hard disk IDs or whatever, the same way Microsoft does for Windows Genuine Advantage.

All this does in principle is move the licensing out to the host OS instead of "inside MorphOS".

By the way are you sure you wouldn't like to see MorphOS running on something like this?

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-343212.html

"By the way are you sure you wouldn't like to see MorphOS running on something like this?"

Me, no! I would for sure!
Though I'm not able to...

> At one point Genesi announced intentions to bring a 5121e-based
> net-top product to market. Not all that long ago. It didn't have a
> card and wasn't any 5200B. Granny talked about the project and he
> was right in general but he was wrong that it was 5200B.

No, Granny didn't talk about that project. He talked about a former project which indeed was announced by Genesi to use the MPC5200B (plus onboard Volari gfx chip).

> The 5200B has a gfx card slot.

A chip doesn't have a slot. If you mean the Efika 5200B, you are right though.

> The 5121e has onboard gfx.

No, the MPC5121e has on-*chip* gfx, as it is a chip, not a board.

> I and everyone who recalls that announcement knows that it wasn't a
> 5200B.

Yes, I think nobody in his right mind would dispute the fact that an MPC5121e based device doesn't have an MPC5200B. Apart from that, at one (former) point Genesi announced intentions to bring an MPC5200B-based net-top product to market which didn't have a card (but an onboard Volari gfx chip).

> A 5200B device doesn't have onboard gfx.

Why should an MPC5200B mean that the device couldn't have onboard gfx? What about a mainboard with MPC5200B and an onboard gfx chip? In fact, Genesi once announced exactly that (MPC5200B plus onboard Volari gfx chip), and you very well know that fact. At least you would if you read and understood what I wrote to you in that other thread some months ago.

> Genesi didn't go that 5200B route until the Efika.

...which was way before their MPC5121e based announcements.

Hey Neko, how about fixing your site?

Just now, it seems, your "efika netbook" is not longer a "netbook", but a "smartbook", so you changed the page from https://www.genesi-usa.com/products/netbook to https://www.genesi-usa.com/products/smartbook - but all the links from other pages still point to https://www.genesi-usa.com/products/netbook - not very clever.

Anyways, why not pursebook?

@ kolla

Thanks for the note. My mistake.

How about a nicer tone for future bug reports, though? They would be appreciated even more :)

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 26.04.2011 - 05:56 ]

> Freescale, which uses the term to refer to the board (with the gfx
> card slot). Click on the picture if you just can't believe it to be
> true.

What picture? Maybe wrong link? Freescale's evaluation board for the MPC5200B is called Lite5200B, not 5200B. The MPC5200B is the processor and the page you linked to is its product page.
Anyway, why are you suddenly distracting the discussion to Freescale boards when it was about which boards Genesi did or did not announce?

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 26.04.2011 - 05:55 ]

> Got to the page and click on "View Product Image."

This picture shows the evaluation board called Lite5200B (already linked to) and the complete development platform called Media5200. Just compare the picture on these product pages to the picture you referred to and you'll see. And is it really that you cannot comprehend that the MPC5200B product page you linked to is about a processor and not about a board? Or you're still playing dumb?

> I'm not distracting

You are. And you're not clever enough for me not noting that.

> I just don't have the time to go with every tiny bit of minutae you
> bring up.

You have so little time that you're suddenly not only discussing Genesi boards but also want to start discussing Freescale boards?

> At least you acknowledge that the discussion was about boards.

Yes, of course, boards with processors on them.

> It was clear I referred to the board.

No, it was not clear that by "5200B" you referred to Freescale's Lite5200B evaluation board when in the sentence before you were refering to Granny's mention of the MPC5200B *processor* and in the next sentence you were refering to the MPC5121e *processor* and generally the discussion is about *Genesi* boards, not Freescale ones.

> Did I not use the exactly proper terminology?

I think you're intentionally being vague hoping your utter cluelessness doesn't shine through. That's one very bad foundation for a factual discussion.

> It was clear I referred to the board.

No, see above.

> The reason that onboard graphics means the board couldn't be 5200B
> is that the 5200B doesn't have onboard graphics.

Is it now Freescale's MPC5200B based evaluation board you call "5200B" again? If yes: What has our discussion about Genesi boards to do with Freescale boards? Nobody ever said that Genesi were going to release the Freescale evaluation board when talking about Genesi's announcement of MPC5200B based board including Volari onboard gfx. Not Granny, not me. Why do you counter-argue with a Freescale board's specification at all, then? That doesn't make the slightest sense. Do you really think that because Freescale's Lite5200B lacks onboard gfx, Genesi/bplan couldn't develop an own MPC5200B based board *with* onboard gfx?

> I don't read all of your posts

You're so misinformed that I conclude that you read nearly none of my posts.

> I don't accept your representations about "MPC5200B with onboard
> Volari gfx chip" as "fact."

You think takemehomegrandma and me are fantasizing? You believe I hacked Genesi's server and placed BBRV's announcement (which I already hinted you at) of a board with MPC5200B and onboard Volari gfx there? Absolutely ridiculous, laughable.

> My recollection is that Genesi was planning to use a Volari 3VXT
> (or whatever the number is) *card* in the Efika (which is based on
> the 5200B board), which is nothing like what you're going on about.

Geez, I explained *it all* to you before in the "Volari" thread, including the differences between these two projects, of which one became reality (Efika Open Client with Volari gfx card, the reason for Frank "pega-1" Mariak to start Volari driver development) and the other (and prior) didn't (MPC5200B based Efika with onboard Volari gfx). It's all in the other thread. You just have to read with a powered on brain.

> I don't have the patience to play these games with you anymore.

You're the only one playing a game here, one of deliberate confusion.

> I don't think you're interested in learning anything

...says the one who obviously doesn't read my posts.

> you just want to argue.

No, I want to set you straight on facts. Which is really hard with you being such a lazy bugger.

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 26.04.2011 - 05:54 ]

> No, I'm not distracting.

You are. And you are doing it right now by not answering my factual arguments.

> I'm playing it straight.

Laughable. Everytime you realize your claims are exposed as the nonsense they are, you distract.

> You are the one who is the trickster.

Funny boy, you are.

> I say virtually none of the things you attribute to me in your
> insulting previous post

You said *everything* I "attributed" to you (rather: quoted you) in my previous post. It's all there, just copied.

> anymore than I said "the gfx core" when you originally began
> twisting my words

The only thing twisting was your mind twisting itself. You said everything I "attributed" to you back then.

> oh yes I believe that to be true.

The same as you believe your nonsense claims about Genesi and Freescale boards and Freescale processors to be true, right.

> You're a pathetic little boy

And you're a clueless misinformed lazy bum.

> I hope you grow up and are not still doing this when you are old.

I hope you take yourself the time and read what I wrote *for once*.

So much love... Wonder what could be achieved with all this wasted energy!
But guess what? I still can imagine Velcro and Andreas drinking beer and laughing together about all this in some future encounter.

Quote:

Hah, that wouldnt be half as fun! ;)

The truly funny part is that I stumbled on the term "smartbook" just last week and thought for myself "Wonder how long it takes for Bill Buck to pick this up?", so watching the "netbook" turn into "smartbook" on a reload in my browser was rather appreciating, to say the least.

[ Edited by kolla on 2009/10/5 19:31 ]

@ kolla

Quote:

The use of the term smartbook had been considered months ago for the first time, actually :) Back then, nobody else but Qualcomm had publically adopted the term for ARM-powered portable computers yet. Also, smartbook is involved in similar, albeit smaller trademark issues as Intel had had with 'netbook' before they eventually came to an agreement with Psion. It seemed wise to wait and see how the trademark situation would develop.

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 26.04.2011 - 05:51 ]

Before Genesi started with the 5121 there were plans to do a 5200 based device with onboard gfx. I have the mails somewhere on my hd. Initially in summer 2005 the idea was to integrate an ATI chip, later the Volari was hot. Thing is, plans emerged and vanished that frequently, that it doesn't really matter. Eveventually it didn't came to a product, thus arguiung about it is rather void.
Yes, the idea of an eclipsis reloaded was cool and I was back then quite confident it would have had some potential. As Asus proved in 2007 the idea of a cheap sub-subnotebook was indeed a successful idea. Well, things for Genesi didn't worked out as thought. Nobody to blame, no need to waste tears about lost chances....

And this fighting and bitching of two very kindergarden alike behaving persons here is just pathetic.