I would be really interested to hear where Aros lacks features and has bugs that are always mentioned but nobody really says precise. Bugs can be reported of course. Zune is certainly not on the same level as MUI on MorphOS and propably never will but because noone is porting applications from Aros to MorphOS or MorphOS to Aros it is not important anyway. And what is needed for Odyssey is added at the moment.

[ Editiert durch OlafSch 27.11.2015 - 09:47 ]

The topic is definitely misleading. If you want to know what AROS lacks, don't try to mix MorphOS into it ...

Quote:
It is tricky conversation to have because the term "AROS" is used to refer to the standard nightly builds as well as various distributions that all have their own specific sets of features as well as technical problems.

Frequently, discussions end up with "ah well, if you do not like something about standard AROS, then use a distribution" or "this problem only happens with this particular distribution, please use standard AROS instead".

The level of diversity found in the AROS ecosystem is both a blessing and a curse.

For better or for worse, if someone discovers a bug in a distribution, that will be attributed to "AROS" even if it may only occur with a specific distribution.

Quote:

Aros lacks compared to what? Most discussions are Aros is behind MorphOS because it lacks features or is buggy but never anyone mentioning something but just generalizations or phrases or emotions (happened in ARM thread again)

So Connor (as example) can write here what the bugs are that are still there and what features it misses and they compare it to MorphOS

Quote:

yes that is right... there is not a "standard-installation" like on AmigaOS or MorphOS, more comparable to Linux (of course on a much smaller level). But end-users use one of the distributions, nightly are officially for developers and testing purpose. Additionally you have different hardware and in many cases both hosted and native with differences what is supported and what software is available. I very much see that when I compare what I can use on 68k and on X86. The difference on abailable software base is huge.

[ Editiert durch OlafSch 27.11.2015 - 09:54 ]

Quote:

The most important one is that ReAction is missing.

[ Edited by Minuous 28.11.2015 - 00:13 ]

Quote:

AROS has end-users?

Quote:

LOL

Somehow I did not expect anything else from you

You did not disappoint me

To strike back, you can continue with your toy hardware and I will continue on modern hardware


[ Editiert durch OlafSch 27.11.2015 - 23:48 ]

Aros is perfect for me as i don't really care about it. Don't make another aw.net in here.

Why post about AROS bugs at a MorphOS forum?

OK, I was an AROS end user for about a year: May 2012 to May 2013 when I switched to MorphOS. 2012 was a good year for AROS with a lot of bugfixes, added functions and the future seemed bright. But then the pace slowed down around Christmas and Nikolaos stopped updating AspireOS which was my distro of choice.

Since then I have tested Icaros on my ZG5 from time to time. AROS certainly has become more stable and crashes not annoingly often nowadays. But it's still way too much AmigaOS 3.1 for me. I want something more modern, more polished. Sure, DOpus is very nice and cool, but it's just not for me.

So why do I prefer MorphOS? I just do. Let's leave it at that. I don't bash AROS because I like it for what it is and I support it.

Quote:


Olaf please refrain from bringing up comparison threads between MorphOS and AROS on Morphzone. You will simply find that it will do nothing but stir the pot. As a huge AROS supporter I will simply say this. AROS is missing many features. However they wouldn't be features from MorphOS or AOS4 they would be features from the modern computing world.

> AROS [is] still way too much AmigaOS 3.1 for me. I want something more modern,
> more polished. [...] I like it for what it is [...].

;-)

68k binary compatibility is the biggest missing feature for me still. I know UAE integration has got pretty good on AROS, but it's still not the same at all (as discussed elsewhere enough).

MorphOS is going to lose that some day too, but until then we still have time to finetune the native replacements and can use 68k system components etc to have more complete experience.

@Andreas_Wolf

Yes, it's very good at being AOS 3.1, but it's not what I want nowadays.

Quote:


How do you define it being good at 3.1 btw? Are you speaking of wanderer? How about the API? Hardware support? Amount of supported memory?


I'm fine with someone saying they just don't like it that's your choice. However saying it's good at being 3.1 is kind of a cop out since all 3 "ng" OSes are designed around the 3.1 api. MorphOS is great at being AOS 3.1 if you're talking about API compatibility.

Quote:

Depends on how you define AROS... If you're talking about simply AROS code. AROS has more end users than MorphOS and AOS4 combined considering they are both tarnished with AROS code. ;)

Hmm... somtimes I get the feeling that "trying to work for all" is contra productive.. Waste of energy, time and giving people the wrong impression that they are a "huge and important" audience which again leads to such stupid discussions...

In other words:
Except multiplatform ports and 1 developer (scriba etc) I don't see any point which makes morphos outstanding and not replaceable.
Sometimes I think it was a failure to be kind and Open-minded and that we should have made aros mos compatible so it becomes totally irrelevant.

If it is all about ambient... Well "we" Decided to ignore it. If we Decided "yes" than it would be on aros since 2012.

So what ?

I understand that People Need choices... But there are no technical reasons to believe morphos is better.
In fact it is not.

And my "collected" numbers tell me that morphos crowd is only noisy(in a arrogant way) but not active or interesting... At least compared to aros or amigaos4

There are facts and there is noise.... Which belongs to "truth"

[ Edited by phoenixkonsole 29.11.2015 - 11:12 ]

I mean Wanderer, and also DOpus.

Quote:

You mean Magellan? Where is the problem?

You mean Magellan is like 3.1.?

If you mean that it shows that you have no clue of Magellan

Small hint: even MorphOS users had contributed to the Magellan bounty for good reasons



[ Editiert durch OlafSch 29.11.2015 - 11:44 ]

Quote:


Now that is fair. I'm a fan of the upcoming version of Wanderer but the current version definitely needs work.

I don't like your tone. For information, I donated to the DOpus bounty too. Because I knew people wanted it, even if I never got fond of it myself. I donated for something I don't need because I thought it would be good for the entire community.

For me, Magellan is still like 3.1 but with more buttons. Don't like that I think so and don't bother to learn all the mechanics: well, tuff!

Please have a look at p2p and the top fund donors. I'm number 2 there. You don't get to judge me about my relationship with AROS.

Quote:

not really if he includes current Magellan

Quote:

Well to be fair I'm not a huge fan of Magellan either. I would prefer we start looking to linux, MacOS and Windows for ideas not the past. But it's everyone own choice on how they feel about an interface. You shouldn't get upset if someone doesn't like the same things you do. Personally I wouldn't consider Ambient modern either.

Quote:

Sadly that general fund was poorly defined and no one has a clue what to use the money for. Personally for me it would make sense if the General fund was a general fund that could be put up for a vote for it's use. As an example it would have been handy if the donors were asked if they wanted to transfer funds to the Magellan bounty when it came up or other larger bounties.

Quote:

I have read a lot of nonsense about Magellan in the past from people that obviously never used it (not against you now). So if somebody says Magellan is 3.1. and I know that it is wrong then I write that. You have to invest time to configure it and read manuals or use something preconfigured like Icaros Desktop, Amikit or my distribution. Or invest time to do it yourself. Or say you just do not like it and prefer Ambient. But to say Magellan is like 3.1. is simply wrong.