Yokemate of Keyboards
Posts: 11609 from 2003/5/22
> Petro said all kinds of things that weren't true. They were talking PowerPC then,
> but doing absolutely nothing about it... maybe that was Petro's cozying up to
> Phase V to have something to sell.
Now you're being unfair towards Tyschtschenko here when you make it seem like this "Power Amiga" thing was his pet idea alone. This press release is from November 1995 when Amiga Technologies still had a dual leadership consisting of both Petro Tyschtschenko and Stefan Domeyer. And it seems they had the blessing of their boss Manfred Schmitt, founder and chairman of Escom, who said only 4 days later:
"we have decided to leave the Motorola 68000 range of processors and upgrade the system with the power PC processor next year. The future machines will of course run with Amiga OS. The choice of the Power PC was made for its speed, and also because it is actually the only RISC processor that is currently used in personal computers, which will insure us that needed quantities will be available at attractive prices on a mass market. [...] we will concentrate on improving and porting Amiga OS to other processors. [...] The implementation of the Power PC processor will be a first step in that direction. Later, this processor will replace the 68000 chips in the rest of the Amiga product range. This is possible thanks to the range of versions that Motorola provides, from the 602 up to the 604.
> actual PPC development didn't really start until December of 1995, when
> Stefan Domeyer was in charge and brought Andy Finkel and I into the
> company in order to actually deliver on this. Which was happening
I don't think that a one month delay between a declaration of intent and actual development start is that unusual.
> they had hired an outside firm to make the "Walker"
Yes, these were MAZeT
for the electronics and KS Design
for the housing.
> 1997 wasn't necessarily a real date, either, but it did depend on
> just how well they financed the software port.
Yes, it's not unknown to me that press releases are usually created to represent an (sometimes overly) optimistic stance on the things supposed to come ;-) Yet it was "1997" that was announced in the press release as the target date, that's why I mentioned it.
> The Gateway version of Amiga, Inc. ran from 1997 until sometime in
> 1999. Bill and fleecy founded their version of Amiga, Inc. that same year,
> but AmigaDE wasn't announced until sometime in 2000. MorphOS was
> started in 1999, maybe earlier... a few years before the Amiga, Inc. debacle.
According to Ralph Schmidt, MorphOS development started in 1998, so midway through the Gateway-Amiga era. To quote from what you in this very thread told about that time: "Gateway wanted to basically toss AmigaOS out and replace it with Linux
". Even when it was still QNX in 1998 (plans changed to Linux only in 1999), my assessment still stands that MorphOS was the only way forward in terms of "AmigaOS" as we knew it, no matter whether we talk about mid-2000 (when the first public beta of MorphOS was released) like I have done or about 1998 (when MorphOS development started).
> Maybe MorphOS made a little better approach out of this by supporting used Macs,
> but really, neither was a "way forward", except for hobbyists. "Runs on old Macs"
> is hardly a business model, or a way to bring in a significant number of new users
When MorphOS development started in 1998, it was still to take 7 or 8 years for Apple to ditch PowerPC, so I don't know why you're mentioning "old Macs" and "used Macs" when in fact we're talking about the 1998 to 2000 time frame here as that's what my assessment of "only way forward" was in reference to. It's true that Mac support didn't eventually come before 2009, but the original plan (uttered early 2002 by Ralph Schmidt) was to commence work on a Mac port end of 2002, which it seems didn't happen for various reasons.
> not that AROS does that either. And AROS isn't finished. But it's also something
> that's not going to die just because some company gets tired of it.
True. I was talking about a point in time 11 years ago. To get an impression on the state of AROS back then, here's the AROS status update from the same day the first public beta of MorphOS was released, even containing a short note to the MorphOS developers at the end:
> AROS has certainly helped out MorphOS, eh?
Yes, definitely. Nobody's denying that, quite to the contrary:
> if you're happy with an old Mac running MorphOS, more power to ya.
I am, thanks.