SoundSquare,
Quote:

Not any more expensive then my 125 watt Phenom II based system with its 600 watt power supply.

The big electric draws in my house?
The electric stove, water heater and clothes dryer.

I could stop using my computers altogether and still see no noticeable drop in power usage.

Quote:
Fab stated (on behalf of the MorphOS-Team) in some french show (was it Alchimie ?) that they agreed PowerPC was a dead end and that they would consider switching to some other architecture later (ARM & x86 were mentionned). That said, I'm not sure he said MorphOS 3.0 would be the last PPC one. Nor that work would focus on QBox.

I agree with the fact going G5 is useless though: it would take too much time (look: Powerbook support still isn't finished, and it may still be incomplete by the time 3.0 is released)...

[ Edited by Leo 08.03.2012 - 15:48 ]

> was it Alchimie ?

Yes. There's even a whole thread here on MorphZone dedicated to this event alone.

> I'm not sure he said MorphOS 3.0 would be the last PPC one.

There have been features announced for MorphOS 3.x that are not supposed to be there as soon as 3.0 and that are specific to PPC Macs. From that I conclude that MorphOS 3.0 won't be the last PPC one.

> Powerbook support still isn't finished, and it may still be incomplete by the time
> 3.0 is released

If everything goes to the plan that was published by Fab during and shortly after Alchimie then PowerBook support will definitely be incomplete in MorphOS 3.0.

As Andreas has stated, MorphOS 3.0 can not be the last PPC revision.
We are not even likely to get R300 3D support with 3.0 (as Pega-1 and Bigfoot are still working on that.
And, again, as Andreas has mentioned, there are other features that have been mentioned that won't be implemented in 3.0.

Look, I appreciate everyone's enthusiasm and their opinions, but your negativity is not productive.
A G5 port makes sense. And, btw, even if Powerbook and G5 support are introduced, I'm not giving up my G4 any time soon.
I've got my 7455 processor running at 1.53 GHz and with the Radeon 9800XT I've got installed in it the system is about 50% more powerful then most Pegasos computers.
So I'm pretty satisfied with the current level of performance my system offers.
Once the 3D drivers are ready for the R300, this system should fly.
Powerbooks with their mobility 9700 GPU and up to 1.67 7447 ptocessors also ought to be pretty impressive.

If you all want X86 so bad, why don't you move to AROS?

Yes, negativity is not needed here. If the MorphOS Dev. Team decides to start their move to x86 or ARM some time this year, or decides to wait until 2014, it makes little difference in the survival of MorphOS.

There might be a small number of current members who grow impatient and give up on MorphOS if the switch to more modern hardware takes too long. But those few users are not going to cause the death of MorphOS and neither is the delay in moving to x86 or ARM from this year to 2 or 3 years from now.

My concern is not when the switch to x86, or ARM is going to happen. My concern is HOW LONG it is going to take to complete it with the current programming manpower to make the move from PPC to x86 and/or ARM. To be honest, I am not confident that the MorphOS Dev. Team has the number of members AND the needed number of FREE MAN-HOURS for those few Team members, to complete a transition from PPC to x86 or ARM in a reasonable time frame. That is why I have suggested that they join the AROS team after they are finished with MorphOS on PPC.

Will it take them 2 years, or will it take them 5 years, or more to successfully make the move to x86 and/or ARM? I have a greater fear of it taking closer to 5 years or more and losing more users due to inactivity and lack of updates for that length of time.

Which ever way they do decide to go, I hope that they will continue working on MorphOS as long as they are still interested in working on it. If the Dev. Team ever loses interest, or decides to work on something else, I hope they will Open Source the PPC version of MorphOS, as it is a very nice OS and should never be abandoned (EVER).

[ Edited by amigadave 08.03.2012 - 19:25 ]

@Jim, amigadave

Could you please stop throwing the word "negativity" around as soon as you don't agree with people? This behavior may be OK on AmigaWorld, but let's keep free of that stuff here, please? I wish MorphZone could implement "negativity" in the troll-word filter, automatically replacing it with "realism".

-The G5 platform is very different from what is now supported (so is x86).

-A new kind of CPU technology needs to be supported (like in x86).

-A new kind of "alien" chipset and support chips needs to be supported (like in x86).

-A new kind of Graphic cards (especially on the PCI-e x16 based quad core PowerMac, which is the most (only?) interesting one) needs to be supported (like in x86)

-The G5 systems (at least the interesting ones) are SMP, the most interesting is quad core. To utilize this in a nice and clean way, you need to cut the cord to backwards compatibility (just like you would, going x86) and start over with a new, clean slate (which won't be that bad actually)

-The G5 systems are 64-bit (just like x86), to utilize this, and in order to finally be able to break the old limiting max memory barrier in a nice and clean way, you need to cut a cord to backwards compatibility (just like you would going x86)

-Since you are breaking free from old legacies anyway, you may as well incorporate true memory protection, etc (G5 or x86)

My point is, since you need to (in order to make it worthwile/make it meaningful) spend a lot of time to produce new chipset support, new CPU support, start over with a clean slate to support multiple CPU's, 64-bit, etc (all this takes time), why spend all that development time towards only migrating MorphOS to yet a dead-end platform (the G5 platform), instead of spending it migrating to one that's alive and kicking while you are at it?

I discussed this in a thread over at amiga.org recently, here are two quotes from that:

Quote:Quote:

[ Edited by takemehomegrandma 09.03.2012 - 09:04 ]

@takemehomegrandma
I totally agree with your pov, if, at some point, the break is necessary, then better break them all and go x86...
Just my 2 cents

Quote:
What's negative about not seeing need in a G5 port ?

@takemehomegrandma: I agree.

@amigadave: sure, it will take a long time, but the sooner it is started, the sooner it is finished, right ?

Quote:
If you want PPC so bad, why don't you move to OS4 ?

What if people really like MorphOS and find it a lot more polished/mature than AROS ? What if people think that going x86 would bring lots of things (memory protection, smp,...) that AROS won't ever provide since it has the same limitations as any AOS ?

[ Edited by Leo 09.03.2012 - 07:11 ]

> in order to finally be able to break the old limiting
> max memory barrier in a nice and clean way, you need
> to cut a cord to backwards compatibility

The current "max memory barrier" for MorphOS as well as for OS4 is 2 GiB (31-bit). Hyperion (or was it OS4 developers?) recently hinted at being able to turn OS4 into a true 32-bit OS doubling the current "max memory barrier" without sacrificing too much or anything on backwards compatibility. Let's see if they can really do it.

Quote:

Isn't this the "common thread" running through everything OS4? Changes and sacrifices leading to penalties without reaching all the way anyway, so you end up "not being this" but "not being that" either? Changes in library system sacrifices a degree of Amiga compatibility, but leading where? Introduction of memory protection that won't protect memory. Multi Processing that will either be like PowerUP or some "SMP" that without doubt will lead to incompatibility and problems. Modifying the max memory barrier that will lead to sacrifices in compatibility, while still only reaching 32-bit. Etc, etc...

I would certainly prefer waiting for a future architecture switch using a 2.5Ghz G5 instead of a 1.5Ghz G4. G5 port can be done much quicker than x86 (as it already runs on G5 machines and runs current PPC software) and x86 port may take quite a lot of time.

I don't feel hurry in switching to x86, perhaps ex-morphos users like Leo&SoundSquare think it's very urgent to switch to x86/ARM but IMHO it's easier and faster to support G5 and then prepare the architecture switch. Then I won't mind if the switch takes 5 years because I'll have a lot of hardware to play with.

Those who feel that jumping to ARM/X86 is mandatory can start using AROS. I think ARM is worthless for desktop, if I cared so much about power consumption I would simply use a programable calculator. I prefer a nice i7 over any ARM thingie any day.

Crumb
I would certainly prefer waiting for a future architecture switch using a 2.5Ghz G5 instead of a 1.5Ghz G4.
,

Thank you.
That reflects my sentiments as well.
Move to the best PPC platform that can be easily supported, then with that capability we can bide our time while an ISA move is attempted.

Crumb
I would certainly prefer waiting for a future architecture switch using a 2.5Ghz G5 instead of a 1.5Ghz G4.
,

Thank you.
That reflects my sentiments as well.
Move to the best PPC platform that can be easily supported, then with that capability we can bide our time while an ISA move is attempted.
There's a lot more room to grow in our current direction.

Crumb
I would certainly prefer waiting for a future architecture switch using a 2.5Ghz G5 instead of a 1.5Ghz G4.
,

Thank you.
That reflects my sentiments as well.
Move to the best PPC platform that can be easily supported, then with that capability we can bide our time while an ISA move is attempted.
There's a lot more room to grow in our current direction.

Quote:
I don't understand why you feel the need to reject people that do not agree with you.

I could easily say as well: those who feel that we need to support another dead PPC platform can start using OS4.

But that wouldn't be constructive, would it ?

The thing is, let's say going x86/ARM takes 10 years. If you wait another one-two years for a full G5 support, from now, it will be 12 years before we see any x86/ARM support. And that's 10 years with an outdated computer, that you won't be able to take advantage of (no 64bit, no SMP,...).

If I cared so much about having the fastest PPC available in order to wait for an x86/arm OS, I'd go for an X1000 and OS4...

[ Edited by Leo 09.03.2012 - 16:37 ]

It remains to be seen if the PA6T is "the fastest PPC available"...
First benchmarks are not really proving it.

"Those who feel that jumping to ARM/X86 is mandatory can start using AROS."

That's nonsense. MorphOS is more polished and if it want to not fall without hardware to run it should go the x86 route. But as of today im enjoying it on my mini, but ppc hardware won't be forever for sale.

Henes,
Quote:
True. But what I meant is that Hyperion is working on support for new PPC hardware ;) And it seems PPC is what some people want...

[ Edited by Leo 09.03.2012 - 21:55 ]

Leo,

BEGIN EDIT:
Sorry, wrong quote, it was not the one I was thinking of when I wrote this post.

But I will ask this quesion of Leo, what makes you think that moving MorphOS to x86 and/or ARM will lead to memory protection, or SMP?

Why is MorphOS going to be different on those platforms, than it is on PPC. If providing memory protection and SMP on PPC will break all compatibility with Amiga 68k software, then how are you going to do it on x86 and/or ARM without it breaking compatibility just like it would on PPC?

And, if you are proposing a complete break from compatibility with Amiga 68k software (and probably MorphOS PPC software too), then you are going to have an OS with very little native software to run on it and you are losing the connection with the past, which is where MorphOS came from. Unless you have figured out how to solve everything by "Sandboxing" for compatibility and you have it all figured out already?
END EDIT:

I agree that the users who want x86 or ARM as the next version of MorphOS after support for the G4 PowerBook's should not be excluded, just because of their preferred choice.

But what do you think about MorphOS Dev. Team joining forces with AROS when/if they decide to move to x86 and/or ARM?

Doesn't that sound like a great idea? Or at least a good idea. Some of the AROS programmers might not want to merge with the MorphOS Dev. Team, but some will. I think that a lot of them will, as the MorphOS Dev. Team will bring a lot of talent to the AROS table. This may cause another fork of AROS to come into existence, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. The MorphOS Dev. Team could pick up some new programmers (hopefully a lot of new programmers) that have experience on x86 and/or ARM already, which will help enormously with the switch to a different architecture.

The MorphOS Dev. Team is already well acquainted with at least some of the AROS developers, so it is not a great stretch of the imagination to think that both teams, or at least parts of them could join together and be very productive. Such a merger would probably be the fastest way to get MorphOS moved over to x86 and/or ARM.

Personally, I think it would be good for both MorphOS and for AROS, for the two to join together.

Also, personally, I hope that the move to x86 and/or ARM does not happen until, or at the same time as, support for several G5 Mac models is completed for MorphOS.

We will all just have to wait for the MorphOS Dev. Team to make their decisions. They are all very busy guys and they have said that money, such as a bounty for supporting a port to the Mac G5's will not make it happen any sooner (if at all).

I wonder if that is true though, if a large sum of money could be raised that would allow some of the team members to work on MorphOS G5 support full time? Probably only some of the team members work for them selves, or have enough flexibility in their regular jobs, that would allow them to work full time, or increased hours on porting MorphOS to several of the Mac G5's. The rest of the MorphOS Dev. Team members are probably tied to jobs that will not allow them to work more than 2 or 3 hours a day, or 10 to 15 hours a week on MorphOS.

Raising enough money to pay for a port of MorphOS3.x to the G5 PowerMac, or the G5 iMac, would not be an easy task. First we would have to find out if the MorphOS Dev. Team would agree to doing such work for a set amount and then we would have to know what that set amount would be that is acceptable to them, before we could even think about trying to raise it, or determine if it is feasible to raise a bounty to have MorphOS ported to any G5 models.

If the amount seemed possible to raise and enough MorphOS & potential MorphOS users & developers showed interest in a port to the G5 and were willing to donate their money toward making it happen, I would definitely be willing to donate $200 to $400 toward such a bounty.

(hopefully, if the port was done using funds from a bounty, the people that contributed at least 111.11 euros to the bounty would get a registered keyfile for their donations)

I would pay the same, or even a bit more to get a port of MorphOS on the X1000, but I don't know think I could get many other X1000 owners who would pay that same amount to get a port of MorphOS on their X1000's.

[ Edited by amigadave 09.03.2012 - 20:25 ]

Quote:

You should get along with the fact that this is very unlikely happen, at least not with the current MorphOS team developers ...

Quote:

It has been made clear in the past that bounty money won't change anything, this bounty concept is something the AROS people should get happy with but it certainly won't be a concept for MorphOS hardware support, just accept that.

And no, there won't be any MorphOS port for X1000, just to get back to the original topic again. No bounty is ever going to change that. I can't imagine any scenario where it could help to reasonably increase the existing MorphOS userbase, so it's simply a waste of resources to put any efforts into it.
The current owners seem to be happy with what they got and what they are promised to get anyway, so I don't see what to gain with supporting it, really.

Speaking of hardware support, the future of MorphOS IMHO pretty much depends on the acceptance of the 3.0 MorphOS PowerBook release. If no considerable number of PowerBook registrations are going to follow, I don't see how more (PPC) hardware support is going to happen. Everything is going mobile while still providing high performance nowadays, supporting hardware that is stuffed into bulky hardware towers definitely feels like retro style in that light.

Well, there we go folks, a statement from one of the developers.
BTW - I never meant for the X1000 port to be serious suggestion (not with Ben involved).

I don't now about the rest of you, but I myself? Well I guess its time to look for a Powerbook.

And if Frank does not like the idea of supporting the G5 (;(), well its a fair bet some of the other developers feel the same way. That's a pity as the G5 is a much more capable machine then our current hardware.

As I've already stated my opinion, So I'll stop harping on it. I will say i do favor ARM over X86 as I already have X86 equipment and OS'. ARM would give us our own market (AROS has X86 and we currently share PPC with OS4).

Quote:

Because there's no point not adding it. It's going to break compatibility with everything anyway so why not go the whole hog and add in features like that.

Their best bet is probably to "port" MorphOS onto an existing open source kernel.
That'd provide all the main features from the beginning and you then build or replace the various parts as necessary to provide the MorphOS API and look / feel.

It wouldn't be easy but it'd probably save a lot of time.

minator,
Quote:

If they were to ditch Quark, I'd have to contact Ralph to see how much he wanted for that part of the system. That kernel is brilliant.

> not with Ben involved

Statement from amigadave from 5 weeks ago:

"IIRC, Ben Hermanns is no longer a partner of A-Eon, since they reformed in the UK and closed the Belgium based company."
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=35093&forum=32#651254

And indeed, A-Eon's October 1st press release has been the last one where the company calls itself a CVBA. Starting with the one from October 12th, all 8 subsequent press releases have missed the "CVBA" bit.
So if this is true and Ben Hermans' involvement in A-Eon ceased somewhen between October 1st and October 12th last year, it could mean that at least one obstacle has been overcome ;-)

Andreas_Wolf,
Quote:

Nice to have confirmation of that.

As a side note - Since I have a personal interest in PPC based system, I may follow AmigaDave's lead and purchase an OS4 system. Should MorphOS ever move to another ISA, that would be one way to keep using a PPC based NG system.

But, currently, I'm looking for a Powerbook and I'm not about to give up my Quicksilver as it runs great at 1.53GHz.