> beta of MorphOS (this time for the G5)

I don't think this even exists as a beta, maybe not even as what could be called an alpha.

> Amiga OS 4 auf gleicher Maschine wäre sicher effizienter als ein X1000.

Ich denke, das Gegenteil wäre der Fall, denn der PA6T arbeitet effizienter als der PPC970MP.

I would love to have a beta copy of MorphOS3.x that could run on my G5 PowerMac, but I think Andreas is right and it does not exist. I think it was just an experiment from one of the MorphOS Developers, who just wanted to prove to himself that he could get it to boot on a G5 computer.

Hopefully the entire MorphOS Development Team can complete their work on supporting the G4 PowerBook's within the next 4 to 6 months and that will allow them time to begin working on support for the G5 Mac's, if they have no other targeted systems that are more important to them.

I would not even think of asking for a beta version of MorphOS for my G5 PowerMac, until they have officially announced support for it and were close to being ready to release it. Then perhaps I would ask for a copy of it so I could demonstrate it at the 2012, or 2013 AmiWest Show.

Edit: I can't read German, but could pick up the words Quad and 2.7GHz G5. The only Quad Core G5 model of the PowerMac only came at a 2.5GHz clock speed (2- dual core 2.5GHz G5 cpu's).

[ Edited by amigadave 02.12.2011 - 15:41 ]

> I can't read German, but could pick up the words Quad and 2.7GHz G5. The only
> Quad Core G5 model of the PowerMac only came at a 2.5GHz clock speed

Yes, AltiVeced already corrected DanicaTalos on that in posting #425.

0,2 GHz.... Wow.... ;)

Es geht mir wahrlich nicht um 0,2 GHz Unterschied (2,5 bzw. 2,7). Ich wollte lediglich zum Ausdruck bringen, dass der X1000 (leider) viel zu teuer für die Masse ist. Ich lasse mich, was die Leistung angeht, gerne eines Besseren belehren. Es wäre zu wünschen, dass der Amiga zu alter Größe findet!

I paid for a Quad G5 in october 2005 3000€, IIRC? Not really cheap
Der Quad G5 war auch nicht gerade billig.
Und wie gesagt, ein 2GHZ PA6T wird nicht so viel langsamer als ein 2.5 GHz PPC970MP sein.

> ein 2GHZ PA6T wird nicht so viel langsamer als ein 2.5 GHz PPC970MP sein.

Allerdings wird der X1000 nur mit 1,8 GHz ausgeliefert. Und das vermutlich nicht ohne triftigen Grund, denn 2,x GHz würde sich ja viel prestigeträchtiger anhören als 1,x GHz. Die Übertaktung auf 2,0 GHz liegt dann vollständig in der Verantwortung des Users.

First Contact systems are a new production run, not left overs from the beta testers production run. I got confirmation from a very reliable source.

I am trying to find out how many new boards are going to be, or have been produced for the First Contact group sale.

@amigadave

When you receive your machine it could be nice to have some sort of report how it compares to current hardware and have some benchmarks.

Absolutely!

I will write a report for all of you about the X1000 and give my impressions as well as try to do some testing and benchmark results.

Is there a chance to order a X1000 in the future?

> Is there a chance to order a X1000 in the future?

I very much think so, else the "First Contact" systems should better be named "Last Contact" systems ;-)

Update:

>> Sold out? Users on Amigaworld.net were complaining that Amigakit
>> didn't even put it on their site yet.

> I think what was referred to is that page which went live 5 or 6 weeks ago:
> http://www.amigakit.com/x1000/

Order page online:

http://www.amigakit.com/x1000/order.php

(URL taken from screenshot)

Update:

>> how long do you think it will be before we can get specifications on
>> the P5 that are as good as those you referenced on the SB810/850?

> Somewhen in the course of this year, I guess.

It's 2011 still, and the QorIQ P5 product brief is publicly available:

http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/prod_brief/P5020PB.pdf

Also, there's a narrated P5 overview on Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkmmcqIpTwM

> you would expect to see some sneak previews but public demonstrations so
> far have been very limited. [...] complete lack of any proper demonstrations of
> PA6T performance are telling its story.

Public demonstration of OS4 on X1000 running several applications:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXEd50DUns0

Some comments from an attendee:

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=34746&forum=16#642670

Quote:


The specifics are different but that looks remarkably similar to the PA6T. I guess it's intended for the same market.

> I guess it's intended for the same market.

Yes, I think there may be some overlapping. The PA6T has been used in aerospace/defense field primarily, and Freescale says the QorIQ P5 is intended for control plane, industrial robot, aerospace/defense and network storage applications. That said, we know that one of the main reasons for the aerospace/defense industry to pick the PA6T has been its AltiVec capability. As the QorIQ P5 lacks any kind of SIMD capability I think that this industry will mostly skip the P5 and wait for the AltiVec-enabled T5 to emerge.

More negativity from MorphOS-User against OS4-User than other way round? I was active in f.e. amigaworld in the last 18 months and I have a different opinion. I saw much negativity from OS4-Users/Supporters against EVERY other platform including MorphOS. I did not see the same degree of negativity from MorphOS-supporters against AOS (and the other platforms).

I think it is emotional from the AOS-supporter, not fact-based. Because of that discussions are senseless and only lead to personal attacks. A little like in a kindergarden.

[ Editiert durch OlafSch 14.12.2011 - 11:29 ]

OlafSch,
Quote:

So you must not have been following amiga.org then. There were some MOS users/devs who had the task to put something negative about AOS4 in the first 10 posts in every thread which had an OS4 related subject.
Seems to be better lately.

greets,
Staf.


[ Edited by Fats 14.12.2011 - 19:15 ]

> I would like to see a Linux implementation.

First step taken:

http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2012-January/095489.html
http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2012-March/096792.html

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 20.03.2012 - 11:56 ]

@SoundSquare : +1
MorphOS was ported to many computers so, theorically, if the MOS team did the job correctly, the main core of MorphOS shouldn't need much tuning to work on another computer.
the main part of the job will be on drivers.
Hope a member of the MOS team can confirm ?

I have the feeling that the MOS team fear to port MOS on a computer where AmigaOS4 is ... Theorically MOS is faster and more complete than AmigaOS4 so, why should they fear to ? It may bring new AmigaOS4 user to MOS ...

For me, it's the same Fight than for Sam440EP & Sam460 à 1Ghz from Acube ..
These computers are enough powered to run MorphOS more than correctly ... However ... Mos Team will *never* port MorphOS to these boards ...
It's a sad thing because the most board you support, the more people you can reach ...

@ +
AmiDARK

In the end it's a simple question, what would be more effective in regard of the target-audience ?

X1000 or a (re)start of the G5 port ?

SAM 4x0 or more G4-Mac options (not that there are many left) ?

Or maybe not adding more (PPC) options at all ?

"drivers" in this case also means much more than just some slightly different IDE/SATA or sound chip, it means adding support for new CPU-families, working around quirks&bugs both in those CPUs, the mobo and the firmware (and yes those do exist) all for HW that must be bought at high prices while promising rather limited returns.

Nope, the decision not the support "pharmacy-HW" is a very wise one !

>...(re)start of the G5 port ?

Yes! Please.
Any other option seems pointless.

It depends what you mean by effective:

There are a number of reasons given by MorphOS devs for not supporting the SAM4x0, AmigaOne or X1000 systems. In summary, the ones I've read are:

1) That these systems are too exotic, there are not enough out there to be worth the porting effort.

- A fair point on the surface, but when you consider that almost 100% of the ownership base is aware of MorphOS already, if not fully aware of how good it is, this point becomes less valid.
Admittedly, there are some AmigaOS4 users who would not even contemplate trying it, let alone buying it, but there is a good proportion who would do both.
The current strategy of supporting hardware which exists in the gazillions has sold only around 750 licenses since Mac hardware support was introduced (based on the latest graph from Koszer).

2) That anyone wishing to try MorphOS can do so on more powerful, more proven hardware at a fraction of the cost.

- Also a fair point, but who wants/has room for another system to hook up? Additionally, one of the most important strategies in sales is reducing the barrier to entry, and we are talking of a market which already owns the hardware.

3) That the devteam would not want to follow a strategy that would profit Ben Hermans to the tune of a single penny.

- Valid enough, and not one to argue against. Each to their own.
However, a) this excludes the Sam systems which are available without AmigaOS; b) even if BH gets any profit from the sale of a SAM system who would buy one just for MorphOS given point 2)?; and c) once production of the X1000 ceases this would also exclude this system also.

I'm not trying to influence any decision making here, but I think it's important to point out that support for these systems is not at all analogous to supporting Mac systems, since the userbase is more-or-less 100% aware of MorphOS as an alternative.
Also, as there seems to be no existing (or potential) strategy to make owners of supported G4-based Macs aware of MorphOS (at least, I've not seen the ads), or any realistic way to make it an attractive choice for them (since they could pay £50 for an x86 Linux system if they wanted to migrate to anotherOS), this seems an attractive potential market for MorphOS (purely from the point of view of additional licenses sold) by comparison.

Of course, it all comes down to what the MorphOS team want to do, so this is a pretty arbitrary analysis...

> I have the feeling that the MOS team fear to port MOS on a computer
> where AmigaOS4 is

Don't know about fear, but the MorphOS Team's reluctance to port MorphOS to any OS4 hardware is a known and admitted fact.

> it's the same Fight than for Sam440EP & Sam460 à 1Ghz from Acube ..
> These computers are enough powered to run MorphOS more than correctly ...

True, MorphOS itself may run good enough on almost anything with at least a three-digit MHz number, but using an OS is about running third-party applications as well. You may now argue that the Efika 5200B is slower than even the slowest Sam440, which may be true, but then Genesi paid for the port.

> Mos Team will *never* port MorphOS to these boards ...

It all depends on the right amount of money I guess ;-)