Is it just me or am I spot on...

So OS 4 is based on Workbench 3.1 sources. MorphOS isnt, yet it functions perfectly when running Amiga software that doesnt bang custom chips. IMO, having a OS based on actual sources of WB 3.1, is that a crutch?

Just curious...

http://www.osnews.com/story/29030/AmigaOS_3_1_source_code_leak_official_statement

I think the central part of the equation is the API. Sources are merely means to an end, not the end in itself; the end is the API. With a deep understanding (in this case coming from both open documentation and years of experience) of what the Amiga API and general environment is (and what it is not), the MorphOS Team was able to create an OS on their own that shows better compatibility than the competitor that started off with the old sources. And also better performance and stability; the MorphOS code is new and developed from scratch with modern tools and methods. Olsen himself said regarding the leaked 3.1 mish-mash sources mess "I for one would like to see a new, proper AmigaOS 3.1 68k build which is not bound by the severe restrictions of the late 1980'ies/early 1990'ies tools available to the Commodore engineers. The code never saw a proper, concerted effort to improve its overall quality in the past 20 years." MorphOS is just that! A clean, modern method reimplementation of the API; a fresh OS developed from the beginning with modern tools, and expert knowledge about the Amiga API and curiosities and oddities (31-bit unified addressing memory space, no SMP, 32-bit computing, etc).

So yes, the old sources would have damaged more than doing good IMHO. As Olsen himself said, a rewrite and build with modern tools is what he would like to see. MorphOS is just that! Old sources are worthless and would have delayed things a lot. Good thing they did it from scratch, fresh and modern, using modern tools and knowledge and methodology. Results better in evey way of measure!

OS4 can have the sources, I say (oh, but it's probably Cloanto's call anyway). The results may have been poorer, but at least they can say "its teh reeel!1!!", while the rest of us winks and nods amongst ourselves in common consensus.

For the purist source code is everything. But yes, if having the source code had been helpful it shouldn't have taken Hyperion 5 years do make the first non beta version. And it should have way less bugs than MorphOS.

Quote:

All other things such as developer skills being the same perhaps. ;)

Probably yes, but could WB 3.1 be improved if one had the sources and by how much?

@Intuition

Maybe, but I guess that it wouldn't have mattered much if the code wasn't a mess, not written in several odd programming languages and require several different compilers to work. If it was a matter of some small rewrites and press a "compile" button AmigaOS 4 would have beaten MorphOS.

@TheMagicM

It would probably help to see the code when things doesn't work or doesn't make sense. Other than that it obviously didn't mean much as MorphOS is pretty compatible and stable as it is.

> it's probably Cloanto's call anyway

Indeed:

"When the repository eventually was disabled I fully expected that the resubmitted takedown notice had been executed (it had taken almost a week), but then I learned that Cloanto had succeeded instead."
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=40828&forum=27&start=220#776855

@Yasu

As far as I understand it Hyperion based OS4 on the cleaned up 3.1 codebase that Olaf Barthel had already done several years before that 3.5 and 3.9 were based upon.