First :)

Banana time anyone ? :D

When will MorphOS 3.11 be released? We have already been waiting for 30 minutes!

Yey!

Very nice! Thanks to the team for their continued support!

I have already updated MorphOS 3.9 to version 3.10. No problems during update, PowerBookG4/1,67 started normally. Release notes are impressive!


Could someone tell me how I should understand this part of releasenotes:
Libs/Tinygl/Drivers/R300
- Vertex programs support

Do we have pixel/vertex shaders in TinyGL?!?!


Thank you MorphOS Team!


BTW
I have checked Tower57 in 1440x960 24-bit. Now there are no artifacts and gamescreen looks correct like in 16-bit. :)

[ Edited by MDW On 2018/3/25 21:44 ]

Thanks a lot the MorphOS Team for all your work !!!

Yes release notes is impressive.

Congratulations! Clearly a lot of hard work has gone into this release.

No support for Pcie G5

Zomg

thank you!

btw, OWB is still version 1.24. There just have been some bugfixes. YouTube login works again f.e.

Oh nice !! Thanks :D

wow!!! Downloaded and installing!!!

Fantastic news!

Well done!

Finally!
The night wll become short.

Finally!
The night wll become short.

This is all great news...unless you are running a x5000 with a Radeon 7700 or R250 series card, don't bother trying to install it. It hangs at boot.

It gets me that the video card series that is installed in the majority of x5000 system is the one with ZERO support in the new release. The team dropped the ball in this aspect.

[ Edited by SteveE617 On 2018/3/25 20:58 ]

[ Edited by SteveE617 On 2018/3/25 22:15 ]

@ Cego
Quote:

And it should eat much less memory from this time.
Quote:

HOLY SHIT!!!! I didnt expect this today. Well..time to fire up the G5.

Edit: I know some of you will be disappointed...but the new version of 'dir' and 'ls' is not included. It was sped up by 1000%. As soon as you hit the enter key, your directory listing will appear. If you blink..its there.

[ Edited by TheMagicM On 2018/3/25 19:43 ]

Thank you Morphos teaam! 'Just updated my G5 and Powerbook. Now time to play around. Woohoo!

Awesome!!!

I was just looking at the SCANdal part of the MorphOS library, as that part of MorphOS has also been updated, but the scanner driver download links from: This is the Mustek "rzookol" driver - other drivers are also inaccessible, so I trust this will be either fixed/re-instated or re-located to where they can be downloaded from quite soon.

I've not had chance as yet to Install v3.10, but I'll be doing so, as soon as I can. Ideally, once I know lots of other users are happy with it, as I'd prefer not to have to wait for the v3.11 bug-fix release, which maybe/hopefully won't even be required,

This is great news, and many thanks to all of you for all your hard work.

I've just installed MorphOS v3.10, on my PowerBook and ...

Sadly, OWB v1.24 that is included with v3.10 is currently unuseable on parcel2go.com, though it was limited in its use before with v1.23 and the previous release of 1.24 that was not part of the MorphOS Official release, but even those releases worked better for me, so this is a major disappointment for me.

With this current release I cannot even get past the "reCAPTCHA" on the initial page of the website, nevermind if there are other pages like the login and account pages that might cause other issues, as they had before. So, OWB remains a major stumbling block for me, and frankly I had hoped for better support that OWB would work with this release.

I will have to use the OWB v1.23 from the MorphOS v3.9 release as that version can at least get me into the site to check my account details, wheras this version does not even allow me to do that.

Oh, and is the RegisterISO utility supposed to still work with the latest MorphOS.iso?

As I got the Shell Output confirmation message that the keyfile had been injected into the downloaded .iso file, but I couldn't see the keyfile in Devs, ... and .... then the CD would not Boot either ! So I had to use the downloaded .iso file burned to a CDRW that didn't have the keyfile installed on it, so I was limited to the Demo version of the CDRW as I couldn't save the keyfile onto it. Anyone else got any observations like me, or any other observations on this utility?

[ Edited by NewSense On 2018/3/26 6:56 ]

Very nice !
Looking forward to try my USB dac with this release!
thanx morphos team!

Scanner drivers are included in MOSSYS:Devs/Scanners. I'll update morphos library page today.

I am always impressed how fast the update process can be. I booted the ISO this time from the ssd to update the mini and the actual update process took less than two minutes (I should have run a stop watch)! Typing in the OF boot parameters and selecting keyboard, language and time zone took longer that the actual updaze process.
Which other OS can update an installation that fast?

Quote:

Thanks for pointing that out. Forgot to test RegisterISO with the final MorphOS 3.10 version.

An overflow in the buffer offset calculation was triggered and the iso got patched at the wrong place. This is hopefully gone now as I reworked the code to be much cleaner.

It should work now with all MorphOS ISOs again.

Update is available via Grunch or direct download: http://www.geit.de/eng_additional.html

[ Edited by geit On 2018/3/26 12:30 ]

Quote:

not yet

Showconfig.jpg

Woohooo! Thanks to the devs for all their hard work.

Wish I could fit a few more hours in the day to install it tonight. :/

Quote:
Interesting. I used RegisterISO on the 3.10 image, but I was still able to install it. Does this mean I have ended up some corrupt files? Should I overwrite them with the ones from a "vanilla" 3.10 iso?

Quote:

It was stated even before the release of 3.10 that GCN series cards would not be supported yet.
And if you consider the breadth of the update (in regard to video card support) its still quite impressive.

For those cards that should be working and aren't, give Mark some time to address the issues.

As to GCN cards, Mark has a few, and I have a few here to send to him (including an R5 240 Oland card that could help get those cards, including the 250, running).

The current stated goals for 3.10 have been met, and support for these later cards is a future goal.

That's hardly "dropping the ball". Similar to the lack of PowerMac 11,2 support, you all knew what you were getting ahead of time.
Also, AGP support (for later cards) was never a given, and I tried to warn you that it might not happen as the bridge chips are not well documented.

Instead of complaining about what you knew wouldn't be included, lets start exploring what we've received.

Thanks for release! Very nice features!
But I have issues: games Neverball&Neverputt on PowerBook 5.9 (ATI9700M) now looks hmm... very dark. Something goes wrong.
And i’m can’t select group of files via shift+cursor now.

Quote:

List selection was changed quite a bit. You may want to give alt-click combo a try.

Quote:


If you used the 1.10 version of RegisterISO some data on the ISO got for sure corrupted.

The 3.10 ISO is bigger than previous ISOs, which cause some buffer page size calculations to result in wrong offsets.

I strongly suggest to download a new ISO and use the 1.12 of RegisterISO on the new one. I will now investigate myself and check what file(s) would have been corrupted.

UPDATE: I just compared a patched and an unpatched ISO. The only difference seems to be the missing keymaps.info file,so no harm was done in the end.

[ Edited by geit On 2018/3/26 16:03 ]

@Jim

Quote:

...and it was discussed many times before that this could easily be seen as a strange decision, since it was not exactly a secret what cards people used on their X5000's (and probably Sam460's as well). Puzzled questions about this are justified, since no logical answer was ever given (and still isn't). But it is what it is I suppose.

> new version of [...] 'ls'

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=12108&start=47 ;-)

I have a few problems with Flow Studio. When executing a program it seems to not allow relative access from the progdir of where the program is located. For instance if I execute a compiled program from ambient or shell it finds all files relative to where the program was executed from. When executed directly from Flow Studio it can not locate the same files. I tried setting the 'execution directory' in project settings but this didn't change anything.

Another issue is I have to manually delete the release.d file between every build or it complains of 'multiple target patterns'.

> scanner driver download links [...] are [...] inaccessible, so I trust this will be either
> fixed/re-instated or re-located to where they can be downloaded from quite soon.

"Devs/Scanners/Fujitsu New
Devs/Scanners/Genesys New
Devs/Scanners/Gt68xx New
Devs/Scanners/Hp3500 New
Devs/Scanners/Hp5590 New
Devs/Scanners/Lexmark New
Devs/Scanners/Mustek_usb New
Devs/Scanners/Sm3840 New
Devs/Scanners/Umax New
http://www.morphos-team.net/releasenotes/3.10

> I cannot even get past the "reCAPTCHA"

http://library.morph.zone/Tips_and_Tricks#OWB_Doesn.27t_Work_or_Stopped_Working_with_Certain_Web_Pages

Tried this?

> I had hoped for better support that OWB would work with this release.

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=9&topic_id=12204&start=8

Quote:

rzookol added the drivers himself to the distribution. It makes no sense to install the outdated ones,

Hi,

Thanks for your feedback. See some answers below:


Quote:

You are probably right that there is an issue with this. Currently the path is inherited from the Flow Studio application so if you first start the application from shell in the directory where your project is located, it will likely find the paths as expected. I will look into this.

Quote:

That should definitely not be the case. We use automatic dependencies for quite a few projects (such as e.g. Flow Studio itself) and I have never seen such an error. Could you guide me through how your have your project setup. If it's a simple test, then maybe you could even send me the project file?

/Nicholai

Quote:

It is what was expected. Acill had to swap his video card out to run the beta of 3.10 at AmiWest, and so will we have to initially.
And Mark's logic WAS discussed, he focused on providing drivers for all the cards leading up to the GCN series first so as not to skip support for some series (as has occurred in OS4.1, which still doesn't have accelerated drivers for the R300 series).

You can agree with that path, or disagree with Mark's logic, suggesting he should have shifted to cover the later cards first, but it was HIS decision to make.

And frankly, I support his logic as AMD gpus have historically been evolutionary and creating the drivers in the same sequence as the gpus were introduced makes sense to me.
GCN gpus are a significant change from the older designs, and will we see support for them eventually.

As I've stated in the past, we've never been promised anything that didn't get delivered (its what distinguishes our community from the other NG communities).

Quote:
you have to press the space key to select an entry, same like before.

>> no logical answer was ever given (and still isn't)

> Mark's logic

The terms "logic" and "approach" or "strategy" are not always synonymous ;-)

> OS4.1 [...] still doesn't have accelerated drivers for the R300 series

Normal 2D acceleration is supported, I think. 3D is absent, and thus also compositing.

> You can [...] disagree with Mark's logic

Thanks. Will do :-)

> AMD gpus have historically been evolutionary [...]. GCN gpus
> are a significant change from the older designs

If that's not a point for skipping some pre-GCN generations for good and tackling GCN support instead I don't know what is ;-)

> we've never been promised anything that didn't get delivered
> (its what distinguishes our community from the other NG communities).

There's not much promising going on with AROS either.

Nice work guys, thanks for the update.

I'll install and take a look at it on the coming weekend.

Impressive change-log btw.

Quote:

LMAO! You never cease to amaze me.

Quote:
Yes, I used the old version. That's good to hear, thanks for putting my mind at ease :)

>There's not much promising going on with AROS either.

That has multiple interpretations too!

>> You can [...] disagree with Mark's logic

>Thanks. Will do

I know, I know. Paul wasn't happy either.
And I'm sure a lot of us would have like to see support for the AGP HD variants, but if they don't perform well...

I'd probably be more upset if I'd already invested in an X5000. Right now (at least until December), I'm focusing my spending on education.
Although, since X5000 sales aren't breaking any records, I have to wonder if the X5000/40 will actually see the light of day.

I'll reevaluate all this late this year or early in '019 and I may just buy an X5000/20.

SO...in my case, Mark has extra time.
Besides, I want GCN Gen 2 or later if possible.
Mark has an R7 260X that he has been able to poll (along with at least one GCN Gen 1 card).
I'd like one of those or an RX460 or 560.

But honestly guys, I'm not that impressed with the difference between an HD 6870 and an HD 7870, so I can wait for GCN.
And I don't anticipate using OS4 that much.
So the need for different cards isn't that big an issue for me (but then I am being selfish since I don't own a system that supports any of this yet anyway).

So Aaron Smith over at Amiga on the Lake is trying very hard to get in touch with somone frm the MorphOS team that will give him a proven hardware configuration for the X5000 that will be compatible. He wants to sell pre configured machines with MorphOS on them and include a full licensed working system. They have yet to reply back to him. It seems like a huge miss here for them to generate some sales. if anyone can help out and get them in touch it would be great to see!!!

Guys, I'll make exactly one comment on the supported vs not supported Radeons:

MorphOS can not and will never be able to support every graphics card in existence, and there will always be someone who already has a graphics card that MorphOS does not support. MorphOS has always been, and will always be, an OS that can't support every single piece of hardware that exists, and thus if you want to use MorphOS, you'll have to use hardware supported by MorphOS.

However, MorphOS right now supports Radeon models that are cheap and available new. The Radeon HD 6450 and Radeon R5 230 are available to buy, right now, in shops, worldwide. They're cheap, powerful enough, passively cooled and actually available to buy. The same can not be said about any GCN-based cards, and certainly not the specific models mentioned in this thread.

South Africa - R641 - about 44 euro

USA - $40 + sales tax - about 32 euro

Denmark - 265 kr - about 35 euro

United Kingdom - £29 - about 33 euro

Is there a good reason why X5000 owners all seem to have picked R250 cards for their builds? What were they expecting to do with it, play Fallout 4? Most of that power will simply never be used.

@KennyR

Th AmigaOS 4.1 X5000 configurations are set to able to use Warp3DSI and Warp3DNova for 3D.
These only work with Radeon HD7000 and R7/R9 series Models.
Also the supported models need to be those that dealers and users can get new and in relative quantity .

Prior to Oct 2016 this meant the low end card was a Radeon HD7750 until support for Oland based cards (R7-240 R7-250)
was introduced. Oland ddr3 cards do not perform up to the level of a HD7750 card thought .
There currently is no (maybe never ?) support for 3D on older Radeon up to the HD6000 series.

By the way the current card on my Sam460ex is a Radeon Rx550 .


Quote:

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/3/26 17:48 ]

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/3/26 17:58 ]

Quote:

AeonKit for some reason made this choice for them. It’s what is installed in the ”AmigaOne X5000” systems, so it’s what the X5000 owners have (and nothing else). It’s also where AeonKit’s funded OS4 gfx driver development is. Since there is no gfx driver development at all in OS4 itself, it’s the card OS4 users *wants* to have. They don’t want nothing else, since it’s the only usable gfx card option of that driver feature level.

I agree with you that it’s a “waste” though. Even if the drivers etc would fully support all the features of that gfx HW (which will never happen) and even if they would be efficient and optimal enough to be compared with AMD’s and Windows/Direct3D drivers of that generation (which will also never happen), even then the 2005 level PPC HW would be insufficient to saturate the gfx HW fully (had there been any games/apps like, well, Fallout 4 for OS4, which will also not happen, at least not in a contemporary context). Like putting a Ferrari engine in a DDR Trabant; it won’t ever make the “Trabby” much faster and more useful than with the original engine, since the rest of the car simply couldn’t provide for it. A Trabby kind of engine is the best match for a Trabby kind of car.

For MorphOS on X5000, a second hand X1950 card seems like a good option IMHO. Both 3D and Overlay.

In one case would I prefer more modern cards, and that is in very high resolution cases, like 4k and higher. But most regular people aren’t there yet. I’m not either.

One thing, morphos 3.10 includes new version of my printing system which for now works only with postscript printers only. Support for ghostsript and other drivers will come later. I suggest also to regenerate profiles. It was extended/fixed (together with vpdf)

>> There's not much promising going on with AROS either.

> ;-) That has multiple interpretations too!

And both are intended :-)

> X5000 sales aren't breaking any records

I‘d have thought that they wouldn‘t have problems selling the 500 pre-manufactured boards.

> I have to wonder if the X5000/40 will actually see the light of day.

Not releasing the X5000/40 would be a real pity as the Cyrus Plus board design had to be severely limited by making it compatible with the P5040 and could have been way better designed for just the P5020.

> I'm not that impressed with the difference between an HD 6870 and an HD 7870,
> so I can wait for GCN. And I don't anticipate using OS4 that much.

Yes, the majority of users who want MorphOS to support GCN-based cards are probably doing so because they are (primarily) OS4 users with an interest in MorphOS, not for performance reasons.

> They're cheap, powerful enough, passively cooled and actually available to buy.
> The same can not be said about any GCN-based cards

I just had a look and found that the currently cheapest GCN-based card in the EU meeting the remaining criteria is the XFX Radeon R7 240 Core Edition Passive available for 84 EUR, so about twice the price you mentioned for the pre-GCN cards.

Quote:

I circumvented the dependencies file issue by turning off ‘Manage Automatically’ in the target settings. Must be something weird about my include files. I never used dependencies until now in any case. Unfortunately I can’t use the debugger either since my program relies on accessing stuff relative to the program directory. I might have to define a header string in my program to go in front of the file paths as a work around for now.

Despite these slight issues Flow Studio really evolves the state of software development on MorphOS. Great work.

> These only work with Radeon HD7000 and R7/R9 series Models.

HD7700 and up to be more precise.

> Oct 2016

Dec 2016 ;-)

> There currently is no (maybe never ?) support for 3D on older Radeon up to the HD6000 series.

Up to HD7670 to be more precise.

> 2005 level PPC HW

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11696&start=47 ;-)

Quote:

Try to invoke
sh -c "(cd /etc; ln -s /MOSSYS/Data/zoneinfo)"
in a shell instead.

Quote:
Quote:
It's the library information that should have been updated - inline with the v3.10 that we have all been waiting such a long time (well over 2 years) for, and I'd have hoped that this would have been enough time to consider during the development time, to keep everything up-to-date for when it was released, but that it seems hadn't happened .. that's all.

I was also referring to keeping the access to the files active, or located somewhere that is referenced in the library information .. and .. that's all. No need to waste space/point out where they are now on the Installation disc as I'm fully aware of that.
Quote:
Quote:
I couldn't find the spot on that section of the library that indicated where to "suck eggs".

I had tried spoofing, but that doesn't offer a solution, and I cannot think of anything else that's in the "Tricks and Tips" section to circumvent or solve the issues I have pointed out. As it seems OWB in whatever version there is, that has been released, won't access these pages, as it overlooks and cannot handle/interpret the complex pages of that website. Though the XP Firefox ESR version manages to do what's required and loads the page correctly. An efficient and up-to-date web-browser is essential for any modern OS, and this release has, from my standpoint, a -ve mark against it for failing to supply an improved web-browser with this release, IMHO.

In fact, I'd have to say that this release triggers the reCAPTCHA in such a way that I cannot access anything on those webpages as I get 'blocked' by the reCAPTCHA with the OWB v1.24 release supplied with MorphOS 3.10.

Bear in mind that I can access the webpages, to some extent, with the OWB v1.23 release from the MorphOS v3.9 release (and the later v1.24 seperately released versioin of OWB while MorphOS v3.9 was the current release) a lot more than I can do with the OWB v1.24 release with MorphOS v3.10, sadly, and in any case ... why is that?

The library also mentions that any version of OWB can be used, so an older one or a newer one can be used if required, ... but ... I cannot launch the version supplied with MorphOS v3.10 on my MorphOS v3.9 installation to gain the benefit of the memory leak fix, which I find very weird. Anyone else noticed this?

I doubt I will be updating my Mac Mini v3.9 system to v3.10 for a period of time, if what I have seen of this release so far indicates it has sufficient issues to make it too much trouble to install, for me, so I will bypass it until the limitations it seems to exhibit are resolved.

I'd like to have the PostScript Printer as part of the OS, but the Beta I have will do for now, and OWB v1.24 is a non-starter in v3.10. I prefer some of the icons with 3.9 to what is supplied with 3.10, and I prefer the way some of the screenbar modules work with v3.9 compared to v3.10. I'd like the update that's been done with SCANdal, as I use my scanner quite a bit, but the version supplied with v3.9 works fine for me, and I don't need any more features everyday, though I do have an ADF (Auto Document Feeder) for my Epson Perfection 1640U, but I can't fit it on my scanner where it is currently located so that doesn't matter at the moment. The accuracy of yWeather, that is now part of MorphOS, is somewhat suspect as well, as using a dedicated website for the weather usually finds that the temperature is about 1 to 2 degrees out with yWeather from what it actually is from the more precise services there are available, at least that is true, it seems, for the UK/GB. Data comparison was usually with the BBC Weather service, which has been found to be particularly accurate for me.

Quote:
Quote:
I was already aware that the "engine" would not be re-vamped/re-designed for v3.10, but I would have hoped for some feedback in the forums about the issues I identified on 29th December 2017 - Forum Link would have been looked into, and either some work done to minimise its effects, or some effort made, and reported back on, to fix the issues, but I have to say that, from the developers there was no feedback, in any way, forthcoming AFAIK, which is generally quite unusual.

Any modern OS relies a great deal on its web-browser, so to not have it working as well as possible, then it's a mistake to release a major version update with such an anomaly staring you right in the face, IMHO.

I was surprised that the RegisterISO tool had been overlooked by its developer for this release, seeing as we'd been waiting for v3.10 for sooo long, but glad that it's been fixed so very promptly ... thanks Geit.

Currently, for me, it seems like there are too many problems that exist in this release, and too much time has been spent on/talked about for high-end GFX cards, when we don't have the facility to utilise them to their full potential in most cases anyway. How many screens, programs and images do you have to run to end up with no GFX card memory left over? Do we have that many high-performance pieces of software that cannot manage without a relatively new 256MB, or higher VRAM populated, GFX card?

I have a 64MB Mac Mini and I cannot remember the last time I ran out of GFX memory. However, I can remember the last time I ran out of System RAM memory - while using OWB usually, but the current official OWB release leaves a lot to be desired IMHO, guys!

I would hope that the development team would focus more on what I would consider (if I understand the conversations in the forum correctly) as the important factor of the OS being useable, rather than us focusing on playing old PC/Open release games with a high-end GFX card, as this seems like a waste of time and effort to me. Most people will have played these games on other systems anyway. It's nice to play a game every so often for a bit of fun, probably, but the OS is what I use MorphOS for, not games predominantly, if I did then I'd have an X-Box or a PlayStation, etc., but I didn't buy MorphOS just to play games. I like the OS.

Quote:

I actually did try that at Nicholai’s request but it didn’t change anything. Maybe I will try a fresh install of the sdk sometime as I think it is more the build environment than anything with Flow Studio. I had a similar issue when compiling fceu before but I do not use .d files in my own projects till now.

@ takemehomegrandma

Quote:
Please allow me to blow your mind:
Trabant 601 with 270 HP and all-wheel drive



[ Edited by ASiegel On 2018/3/27 7:19 ]

Quote:

https://www.facebook.com/sham.alikhan.33/videos/1609887299130734/

The following items have been removed:

Classes/Blankers/Pigvasion.btd


:(

Quote:

I've got a quad core 2.5, which on MacOS has (past tense) served me well as my main, update computer, but it's huge, and I've been waiting for this update to see if I should sell it, as it's only there for a potential future release of MorphOS, so I was waiting for this update to decided what to do.

Looks like I'll have to wait till 2019 or thereabouts then..
HashtagFirstWorldProblems

[ Edited by stephen_robinson On 2018/3/27 11:15 ]

@NewSense

i can totally relate to the points you made about OWB. I just think that theres no one else than Fab, who could've done the job. And he's the one who's pretty much out of the game right now. Honestly, i dont have any other explanation for that. We've been waiting 2 years for this release, which is titled as one of the biggest ones, if not the biggest update in MorphOS history. So i would've assumed that an up-to-date browser is the least that should've been integrated. For me thats really disappointing. F.e. YouTube login works, but i cant manage my profile, because the buttons are dead, Facebook is broken, a lot of news sites dont work correctly, Whatsapp Webmessenger doesnt work, etc.
Using MorphOs actually means using OWB for 90% of the uptime.

Are there any plans on updating OWB or are we stuck until MorphOS migrates to a LittleEndian architecture?

another thing regarding OWB:
watching html5 videos still takes 100% cpu time and video is still frameskipping. Going Fullscreen works only on some html5 video players (like Youtube). On Facebook that doesnt work.

Quote:

To be fair Facebook was broken to begin with. :P


- CISC

Quote:

Yes, from my tests the R5 240 is a better performer than the R5 230 (actually its better than the HD8490/R5 235X, which in turn is better than the R5 230), but that will have to wait.

And Mark's point about current GCN cards is very valid. When the RX 560 was introduced I was considering buying one for shipment to him and wish I had. The price of all RX cards is outrageous right now (Ethereum and Bitcoin miners are screwing up the AMD video card market).

Anyway, what are you going to ask for next, Vega drivers?
That would be serious overkill.

Although...future Ryzen variants might require it for built-in gpu support (once an X64 shift is made, of course we should still have discrete gpu support).

Right now I'd go for an HD 4770, 4830, 4850, 4870 or 4890.
They offer overlay support and they no longer work well under Windows (Win10 anyway), so they're cheap.

This is where I'd start the 2D benches against OS4.

Oh...and support for the HD 4650/4670 AGP cards would have been nice...but that didn't happen.
If you're like me at this point you are itching to try a PCIe solution.

[ Edited by Jim On 2018/3/27 9:12 ]

> the OWB v1.23 release from the MorphOS v3.9 release
> (and the later v1.24 seperately released versioin of
> OWB while MorphOS v3.9 was the current release)

As confusing as it is, that's not how it went. This is:

- 12/2013 v1.23 (separate)
- 02/2014 v1.20 (MorphOS 3.5)
- 06/2014 v1.23 (MorphOS 3.6)
- 04/2014 v1.24 (separate)
- 08/2014 v1.23 (MorphOS 3.7)
- 05/2015 v1.23* (MorphOS 3.8)
- 06/2015 v1.23* (MorphOS 3.9)
- 03/2018 v1.24* (MorphOS 3.10)

* uses same WebKit engine as older release with same version number, but enhanced/fixed in other way (SSL, memory leaks etc.)

> The library also mentions that any version of OWB can be
> used, so an older one or a newer one can be used if required,
> ... but ... I cannot launch the version supplied with MorphOS v3.10
> on my MorphOS v3.9 installation [...], which I find very weird.

The statement clearly refers to running the (then-)current and an older OWB version on any given version of MorphOS. Newer OWB versions may require OS features/functions not present in older MorphOS version.
With MorphOS-supplied executables (as opposed to 3rd party executables like OWB from Fab's site) it's even more special as they're using a proprietary, DRM-enabled, compressed file format since MorphOS 2.0 to match them with the respective MorphOS version they came with. This prevents them from being executed on older MorphOS versions.

> yWeather [...] is now part of MorphOS

Is it? It's not in the release notes (and I haven't upgraded to 3.10 yet).

> from the developers there was no feedback, in any way, forthcoming AFAIK,
> which is generally quite unusual.

Fab, the MorphOS team's browser guy, has made himself scarce during the last 3 years.

> I was surprised that the RegisterISO tool had been overlooked by its developer
> for this release, seeing as we'd been waiting for v3.10 for sooo long

I guess this oversight was due to the way the tool works. The final ISO image has to exist before the tool author can determine at which address offset to inject the keyfile.

> too much time has been spent on/talked about for high-end GFX cards,
> when we don't have the facility to utilise them to their full potential in
> most cases anyway. How many screens, programs and images do you
> have to run to end up with no GFX card memory left over? Do we have that
> many high-performance pieces of software that cannot manage without a
> relatively new 256MB, or higher VRAM populated, GFX card?

The two most recent members of the MorphOS-supported hardware family require PCIe graphics cards. This is not primarily about high-end, full potential, number of screens, VRAM or such, but simply about basic support of the machines. Furthermore, modern screen resolutions indeed require more VRAM, even with just one single screen opened (the limit with MorphOS still being 256 MiB, AFAIK).

> watching html5 videos still takes 100% cpu time and video is still frameskipping.

...and it will stay this way until OWB's Cairo gets hardware-accelerated.

Has anyone tried a VIA Envy24HT or Tremor based audio card yet?
And what about the C-Media CMI8738 based cards?

Any thoughts or comparisons to the SB Live?

>> XFX Radeon R7 240 Core Edition Passive

> Yes, from my tests the R5 240 is [...]

I linked to R7 240 :-)

> Mark's point about current GCN cards is very valid.

His point was about all GCN cards, including 6-year old GCN1 cards.

> what are you going to ask for next [...]?

Whatever is the lowest PCIe graphics card series supported by OS4 in 3D :-) Even with the announced GCN4 support for OS4 coming, I doubt that GCN1 support will cease anytime soon.

>Whatever is the lowest PCIe graphics card series supported by OS4 in 3D Even with the announced GCN4 support for OS4 coming, I doubt that GCN1 support will cease anytime soon.

Good Point, Andeas.

Would that be Oland or Cape Verde?

Mark has a Bonaire card, but that is GCN Gen2. He also has a Pitcairn card.
A full list is posted on the developer site.

Also, I have a Radeon R5 240 I've had for a few months that I should have shipped awhile ago.

Since we only have 2D drivers for the higher end cards right now (and compositing only up to the 4000 series), while OS4 has 2D compositing drivers from the R500 to the GCN1 series, we can only make direct comparisons up to the HD 4890.

But obviously someone concerned with OS4 is going to want to avail themselves to Hans' nifty 3D driver and that would be GCN only if I'm correct?

So the R5 240 ought to get shipped ASAP (although I'd rather go for Pitcairn, Bonaire or Baffin).

Quote:

And again you are missing the point. Well, you ignore it. All you do is repeating the same blame over and over in every forum available.

When fab did the stuff, PPC was not completely dead on other platforms. There were several other linux systems using PPC CPUs. They do no longer and the developers simply do not care anymore and are introducing such issues on a daily base and since there is noone correcting them, we are stuck. With fab or without.

Someone needs to review the entire code and look for all the traps and fix them. And when he is done, there are new traps. This won´t be a job you can simply finish and go away.

[ Edited by geit On 2018/3/27 18:40 ]

@Jim

Quote:

Like introducing gasoline to a market consisting entirely of diesel cars, knowing beforehand that what these car owners wants is *diesel*, and nothing else. Of course it’s possible to replace the engine in those cars, but...

Thanks MorphOS team for this new update.

>> Whatever is the lowest PCIe graphics card series supported by OS4 in 3D :-)

> Would that be Oland or Cape Verde?

Warp3D SI and Warp3D Nova support (from lower to higher performance) Oland, Cape Verde, Pitcairn/Curacao and Tahiti.

> Mark has a Bonaire card, but that is GCN Gen2.

Yes, GCN2 is not supported by OS4. GCN3 will be skipped as well, it seems.

> A full list is posted on the developer site.

Which list on which site?

> compositing only up to the 4000 series

Aren't compositing (aka 'Enhanced Display' in MorphOS parlance) and overlay different things?

> Hans' nifty 3D driver [...] would be GCN only if I'm correct?

Yes.

> I'd rather go for Pitcairn, Bonaire or Baffin

Pitcairn/Curacao is supported by OS4, Bonaire (GCN2) will be skipped and Baffin (GCN4) should be supported soon.

Quote:
Broken in which way you mean? If you can't login, because Facebook complains about cookies, just re-enter your password and it accepts it then. Or if you mean it's broken because it defaults to the mobile version, spoof as Safari and it'll go to full version. In these ways I can use Facebook for the little I need at least.

Quote:

how can I miss or ignore something, which was never officially stated from the MorphOS Team? Maybe you should start to accept criticism, instead of attacking me, for something which is for a fact, a downside of the current release. Thanks for clarification and no thanks for your rude and arrogant behaviour.

[ Edited by Cego On 2018/3/27 23:31 ]

@jPV

by broken i mean, that the layout is completely messed up. The notification, PM and Profile buttons + search bar are located in the middel of the screen covering other elements underneath. When i scroll down other elements appear like facebook ad posts, which wont disappear anymore. its totally unusable that way. And videos wont work neither.

Thanks for the detail Andreas.
And yes, I did make a mistake, overlay and compositing are two different things.

I'll try to address the rest of that in the AM.

@Cego

Then the website you are referring to, resembles the effect that I encounter on the Parcel2go website - elements out of position, and blocking access to other input areas, or not loaded correctly, and some of the code is just totally overlooked/ignored as OWB just cannot handle it all in its present form - and that's on the "working" version of OWB - that came with the MorphOS v3.9 release.

Because if I load up the latest re-incarnation OWB v1.24 (included with MorphOS v3.10 - that won't load up under MorphOS v3.9) it cannot even get past the reCAPTCHA check point.

OWB in MorphOS v3.10 for me might as well never have had the time spent on it to "fix" it, as I cannot justify migrating to v3.10 as I end up in more online trouble that I do with v3.9 - it's better the devil you know, as far as I I'm concerned.

In any case, why can't v1.23 that came with MorphOS v3.9 release just be updated with just the memory leak fix?

As that at least may enable browsing without running out of RAM anymore.

I say that, because whatever has been done to the current version of OWB v1.24.000.000.00h-blimey-what-have-they-done-to-our-baby, is pointless if it can't even do what v1.23 with MorphOS v3.9 can do!

Quote:
I'd have to say, this is nit-picking virtually to the extreme, and Cego is correct to mention that you are beginning to upset some users by your brusque attitude, he, and myself for 2 of them, pointing out trivial facts, that don't and won't help the situation we find ourselves in currently, and it obviously does not solve the fact that OWB is past-its-use-by-date - even with this latest v3.10 release, as it's unfit for the purpose, from the extent I have used it, and got frustrated with it.

Anyway, so which features/functions does this new v1.24 released with MorphOS v3.10 require that make it incompatible with MorphOS v3.9?

Can it be released in a version that will work with v3.9, and won't have the issues that I have pointed out, as it is obviously not just a straight fix, as something has changed as I cannot even get past the reCAPTCHA on Parcel2Go, which I can do with the v1.23 and v1.24 - both released prior to the OWB v1.24 included with MorphOS v3.10.

Why did the development team think it wise to release OWB as v1.24 when FAB had already released a version with that version number, no matter if it was slightly flawed, which just makes matters more confused now as a result?

It was IMHO a bad idea to do so, and makes it seem poorly thought through.
Quote:
Why weren't we told, and why won't he specifically get involved, i.e. what has he said exactly regarding this state of affairs , if known?

Is there anyone else who would be prepared, and is capable of taking on this project?
Quote:
That sounds like making excuses for the author, who has fixed the RegisterISO tool anyway, but who also happens to be on the Development Team, and this handy utility should have been considered by someone, including the author, to ensure it worked with the current ISO... before they made available the latest release - seeing as they've had 2+years to think out a release plan/strategy..

Rather than me discover it, after the release! It's not fair to call it an oversight, as it seems it never got into the planning stage, and that's after 2+ years of developing this release, which is overall, for me, a real let down.

I was going to purchase a licence for another PowerBook, and one for a PowerMac G5 I own, but that has "gone out the window" for now!

IMHO, it was bad planning, and even though some neat features have been incorporated into this release, and long-standing fixes been implemented, it is, for me, a real let down.
Quote:
So, more development time seems to have been allowed for an X5000, which is an OS4 'baby', which has, as a result, apparently stymied, and probably hindered the work that should have gone into the many Apple based systems that licenced MorphOS users have already owned for probably 5+ years and they have been overlooked to cater for an X5000 release, whoop-ti-doody, well that's just great !!

Talk about putting the cart before the horse! Too much time has been spent on solving GFX card issues for an overly expensive piece of kit, rather than on what most people seem to have access to, and are currently using.

What percentage of MorphOS users are going to buy an X5000?

How many MorphOS users are quite happy with the hardware they have, probably many, and probably, just like me, they have hardware that has a hardware fixed GFX chip, as in the Mac Mini and PowerBook, as I believe many MorphOS users have this hardware, unless for some reason the percentage figures have changed dramtically since the last figures were mentioned. Aim for those users predominantly as they are the active ones, and deserve more effort afforded them, IMHO.

[ Edited by NewSense On 2018/3/28 7:21 ]

> yes, [...] overlay and compositing are two different things.

It is stated that overlay is supported for HD2350 to HD4890, whereas for HD5450 to HD8490 (R5 235) it is not. Now the interesting question: What about Enhanced Display? Is it supported for all, some or none of those?

> Cego is correct to mention that you are beginning to
> upset some users by your brusque attitude

Huh? Cego hasn't addressed anything I wrote in this thread even once. Seems you are mistaking me for someone else.

>> With MorphOS-supplied executables (as opposed to 3rd party executables
>> like OWB from Fab's site) it's even more special as they're using a
>> proprietary, DRM-enabled, compressed file format since MorphOS 2.0
>> to match them with the respective MorphOS version they came with.
>> This prevents them from being executed on older MorphOS versions.

> which features/functions does this new v1.24 released with MorphOS v3.10
> require that make it incompatible with MorphOS v3.9?

Please re-read my above-quoted text (key parts in bold) for the explanation as to why the OWB v1.24 executable from the MorphOS 3.10 ISO image cannot run on MorphOS 3.9.

> Can it be released in a version that will work with v3.9,
> and won't have the issues that I have pointed out

I don't know. But why would you want such version that doesn't have the issues that you have pointed out to be able to run on MorphOS 3.9? Why not run such version on MorphOS 3.10?

> Why did the development team think it wise to release OWB as v1.24
> when FAB had already released a version with that version number

I guess they did so for the same reason they released three different OWB v1.23 versions in MorphOS 3.6/3.7 (same as Fab's separate v1.23), MorphOS 3.8 and MorphOS 3.9, each time updating it in the SSL/TLS department. I think their stance has been to increase the revision number only when the integrated WebKit engine is updated. Of course, they could have done like kas1e did for the OS4 versions and add a third number to indicate OWB updates containing the same WebKit version.

> which just makes matters more confused now as a result?

Hence my "nit-picking virtually to the extreme", as you called it, to clear the confusion somewhat.

>>> I was surprised that the RegisterISO tool had been overlooked by its developer
>>> for this release, seeing as we'd been waiting for v3.10 for sooo long

>> I guess this oversight was due to the way the tool works. The final ISO image
>> has to exist before the tool author can determine at which address offset to
>> inject the keyfile.

> That sounds like making excuses for the author, [...] this handy utility should
> have been considered by someone, including the author, to ensure it worked
> with the current ISO... before they made available the latest release - seeing
> as they've had 2+years to think out a release plan/strategy [...] It's not fair to
> call it an oversight, as it seems it never got into the planning stage, and
> that's after 2+ years of developing this release

Me making excuses for geit? Good one ;-) I just wanted to explain why the long waiting/developing time for MorphOS 3.10 was irrelevant for this oversight.

> more development time seems to have been allowed for an X5000, [...] which has, as
> a result, apparently stymied, and probably hindered the work that should have gone
> into the many Apple based systems that licenced MorphOS users have already owned
> for probably 5+ years and they have been overlooked to cater for an X5000 release [...]!
> Too much time has been spent on solving GFX card issues for an overly expensive
> piece of kit, rather than on what most people seem to have access to, and are
> currently using. What percentage of MorphOS users are going to buy an X5000?

Don't forget that driver code developed for PCIe graphics cards will be usable for future MorphOS on x64 too.

> probably many [...] have hardware that has a hardware fixed GFX chip, as in the
> Mac Mini and PowerBook, as I believe many MorphOS users have this hardware,
> unless for some reason the percentage figures have changed dramtically since
> the last figures were mentioned.

Not that it matters for the discussion of PCIe graphics card support, but I think the figures changed dramatically because they were published 4½ years ago when G5 support was still limited.

Quote:
The problem with the Library is that you can't change it beforehand (even if you'd know what's going to change, and when the release date would be), because the information wouldn't match the current version then. There will always be some lag before it gets updated after a new release.

Quote:
The link from Andreas doesn't seem to work, maybe because the http->https switch, anyway he meant this.

For me spoofing as IPad works for the popular captchas with, for example, images you have to click. Can the page you have issues with be used anonymously to the point of reCAPTCHA, or do you need registration to be able to test it?


Quote:
I would say that you won't see much issues with Mac mini and 3.10, and it would be worth to install it. After all there are many bugs fixed etc.


Quote:
yWeather isn't part of MorphOS, it's still a 3rd party extension.

And if you use the automatic update feature in IWizard, your old icons won't get replaced. You'll get new icons only if you do a fresh install.

Which screenbar modules work different way? Some have new options, like memory sbar modules, but you can configure them in the old way too.


Quote:
Out of curiosity, why do you use RegisterISO anyway? Do you boot and use the installation media that long that you need to have timeout removed?


Quote:
I don't think you'd see much, if any, problems when updating your Mac mini. Make a copy of your OWB dir to some other location if you want to keep using what you've got earlier. And if for some reason you'd want to revert back to the previous MorphOS version from the updated system, just rename the automatically created backup of the SYS:MorphOS directory back into use.

Quote:

Luckily the fullscreen fix for YouTube, and watching other videos separately/fullscreen with the embedded media player, take a lot away from the CPU load, and they play pretty much without any overhead then.

> watching other videos separately/fullscreen with the embedded
> media player, take a lot away from the CPU load

Yes, that's what I do as well. Maybe Cego doesn't know how to do it with Facebook videos?

Quote:
You probably know about this fork which is still developed, but in case you don't here's the link: https://github.com/annulen/webkit

They do care about ppc bugreports, but I am not an experienced dev and had a hard time delivering them.

Been running this via Otter-Browser on Gentoo ppc64, whicks works - with glitches.

Quote:

There's also this: https://sourceforge.net/p/leopard-webkit/wiki/Home/

Just to say, MOS 3.10 is more more stable than 3.9 on my G5 !
No freeze when i compile or test or edit to speedly.

Thanks very mush to MOS Teaaaaaaaam

Quote:
My apologies to you, for that comment about something unrelated to you that Cego mentioned, as you are correct I see it was someone else, but my comments about the "nit-picking" are still relevant, as knowing which release was made available on which date won't fix this OWB incompatibility, and none of the Tricks & Tips you pointed me towards make the slightest difference to this situation, so nothing you mentioned related to OWB will apparently fix the issues I have discovered and reported here on 29th December 2017 - Forum Link but that thread has few additional replies to what I said back then, and certainly nothing from the Development Team, who could have looked into the problem, and replied with either good or bad news - but nothing.
Quote:
You have made this topic as clear as mud, as your comments seem to relate to later versions that would be incompatible "since MorphOS 2.0", which this should not apply to, but I have to ask, if the OWB release with OS4.1 FE can have its version modified to continue to run on OS4.1 FE with the memory leak fixed, then why can't it be fixed for a version of OWB that will run on any version of MorphOS since 2.0, and prior to, and including v3.10?

Why make it so incompatible with prior releases when it seems that it should be possible to release it to work with all MorphOS releases since 2.0, as the engine has not changed, and the memory leak was supposed to be a fix that could be done with the current release, as far as I understand it.
Quote:
Then at least the memory leak would be fixed for many other websites, even if the site I have quoted cannot be realistically accessed with any of the OWB versions currently available.
Quote:
If there was plenty of time to think things through, as we've been waiting for over 2+ years, I consider some thought should have been included as to how the changes would likely affect the RegisterISO tool, and for the library to have been updated inline with the latest release, again seeing as we've been waiting for over 2+ years - plenty of time to get all that edited for the changeover, when the pieces of the release all fell into place, and then have it all uploaded as a block update to keep the library up-to-date.

I know there is only a small core of developers, and maybe I am expecting too much, but I would hope this methodology would be implemented for any future release, and all the developers tools that are checked that they work with the intended release ... before it is released.

Surely the v3.10 was not just committed to ISO, and then released on the spur of the moment, meaning someone, several users that are, at the very least, betatesters tried it out to see that it all ran smoothly before it was announced to us all ... surely? So there should have been sufficient time to plan for all those other release tools, that are part of the Development core or contributed by its Developers to work harmoniously with the update release ... maybe next-time.
Quote:
I am all too well aware of that, but for now many users have systems with fixed to the logicboard GFX hardware, so it's irrelevant for many, and probably should be managed "behind closed doors" as it's basically irrelevant to most users, just like me who see the discussions, and probably think why are there all these discussions about GFX cards in the forum that are irrelevant to most users for now.

Quote:

Actually I did not even think a single time during the 3.10 development about RegisterISO, a tool I wrote years ago for users who want to create a time unlimited live cd for e.g. running SFS- or PFSDoctor

Why I forgot? Because I was busy with other things. Beside MorphOS there are other interests in my live and somehow I still managed to add quite some stuff. I contributed new/rewritten screenbars/blankers/utilities/commands/games to the 3.10 release.

Sorry, that somehow during that more than two year long process I completely forgot about some tool I wrote for free years ago, which also should have been worked fine, even with the latest iso. It simply failed due some stupid bug, which got triggered by the iso size.

So yeah. You are right. You can even blame me twice. For bloating the ISO with stuff and for forgetting to test the tool at least once during the last year. :D

Speaking of the MorphOS DRM. It simply prevents you from using new(er) applications on some old(er) MorphOS. The reason for this is quite simple. It reduces useless complains, errors and bugreports. Things we dont want to waste our time with. Searching bugs for hours just to find out some strange mixture of new and old components on the users side took place, is not an option.

You of course can run MorphOS 1.0 to 3.9 applications on MorphOS 3.10. Just not MorphOS 3.10 components on any old version. MorphOS is backward compatible and not forward compatible. The DRM stuff ensures this along with the nice binary compression.

[ Edited by geit On 2018/3/29 12:25 ]

> my comments about the "nit-picking" are still relevant, as knowing which
> release was made available on which date won't fix this OWB incompatibility

No talking we do here will ever fix any incompatibility, so by that logic we can stop right away, can't we? Besides, it wasn't about the dates proper but about the seemingly confusing release order and to explain why some non-identical OWB releases bear the same version number nonetheless.

> none of the Tricks & Tips you pointed me towards make the slightest
> difference to this situation, so nothing you mentioned related to
> OWB will apparently fix the issues I have discovered

I really thought there was a slight chance that the reCAPTCHA issue you're facing with that site may be circumventable by spoofing as Safari/iOS, as I experienced this to work with some (re)CAPTCHAs myself. Sorry for having wasted your precious time.

>>> With MorphOS-supplied executables (as opposed to 3rd party executables
>>> like OWB from Fab's site) it's even more special as they're using a
>>> proprietary, DRM-enabled, compressed file format since MorphOS 2.0
>>> to match them with the respective MorphOS version they came with.
>>> This prevents them from being executed on older MorphOS versions.

>> You have made this topic as clear as mud

I really put effort into my explanation to make it as clear as daylight. Seems I failed miserably.

> your comments seem to relate to later versions that would be
> incompatible "since MorphOS 2.0", which this should not apply to

My comment explains that executables supplied with any version of MorphOS are intentionally made incompatible with any older version of MorphOS. This DRM scheme has been in place since MorphOS 2.0. So while executables supplied with MorphOS 1.4 could be run on MorphOS 1.3 (except when requiring new features/functions of 1.4, of course), executables supplied with MorphOS 2.0 could not be run on MorphOS 1.4 (even when not requiring new features/functions of 2.0), and so on. So executables supplied with MorphOS 3.10 can not be run on MorphOS 3.9 (even when not requiring new features/functions of 3.10).
I hope I made myself clear now.

> if the OWB release with OS4.1 FE can have its version modified
> to continue to run on OS4.1 FE with the memory leak fixed

I'm not sure I understand the meaning of this. Is kas1e's OWB also supplied with OS4.1FE or is it a 3rd party download only? Anyway, OS4 doesn't have any DRM scheme in place, AFAIK, so executables supplied with OS4.1FE may be able to run on older OS4 versions (except when requiring newer features/functions, of course), I guess.

> then why can't it be fixed for a version of OWB that will run on any
> version of MorphOS since 2.0, and prior to, and including v3.10?

It can, and I see two ways:
- Fab (or another MorphOS team member) provides the MorphOS 3.10 variant (or newer) of OWB v1.24 (or newer) with a non-DRM'ed executable as separate download, or
- somebody takes the latest available source code of OWB for MorphOS and incorporates deadwood's fixes (essentially duplicating what has already been done by the MorphOS team).

But what would be the purpose? MorphOS 3.10 is a free upgrade, so I see no reason to use MorphOS 3.9 or older to run the MorphOS 3.10 variant of OWB v1.24 (or a duplicate version by someone else).
And there are dependencies in the MorphOS 3.10 variant of OWB v1.24 that won't allow it to run "on any version of MorphOS since 2.0, and prior". Fab's separately released OWB v1.19 to v1.24 require MorphOS 3.x (while v1.18 and older require MorphOS 2.x, or 1.4 with 2007 MUI snapshot).
Btw, kas1e's OWB v1.23r4 requires at least OS4.1 Update 6.

> Why make it so incompatible with prior releases

See geit's comment for the reasoning behind the DRM scheme introduced with MorphOS 2.0.

> the memory leak was supposed to be a fix that could be done with
> the current release

Yes, deadwood's fixes can be applied to at least v1.23 (as done by kas1e for OS4), v1.24 (as done by the MorphOS team for MorphOS 3.10) and v1.25 (as done by deadwood himself for AROS).

>> why would you want such version that doesn't have the issues
>> that you have pointed out to be able to run on MorphOS 3.9?
>> Why not run such version on MorphOS 3.10?

> Then at least the memory leak would be fixed

I'm not sure I understand. Do you think a 3.9-compatible OWB version with incorporated memory leak fixes and without the issues that you have pointed out somehow wouldn't have the memory leak fixes when run on MorphOS 3.10?

> many users have systems with fixed to the logicboard GFX hardware,
> so it's [...] basically irrelevant to most users, [...] who [...] probably
> think why are there all these discussions about GFX cards
> in the forum that are irrelevant to most users for now.

I'm not sure how the current GPU-related forum discussions impact on what the MorphOS team has developed for MorphOS 3.10. I'm not even sure they will affect the future development of MorphOS.

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf On 2018/3/29 19:13 ]

> the MorphOS DRM [...] simply prevents you from using new(er) applications
> on some old(er) MorphOS. [...] It reduces useless complains, errors and
> bugreports. [...] Searching bugs for hours just to find out some strange
> mixture of new and old components on the users side took place, is not an option.

Seeing as MorphOS updates have been free, I suppose the prevalent case of mixing components is running the current MorphOS version together with components from older MorphOS versions. This is not prevented by the DRM.

> You of course can run MorphOS 1.0 to 3.9 applications on MorphOS 3.10.

...very much enabling a "strange mixture of new and old components" :-)

Just to clear up some confusion, enhanced display (aka compositing) is supported on all Radeons supported by MorphOS, including the 4 new GPU families for which support was added in MorphOS 3.10 (R600, R700, Evergreen, Northern Islands).

>> What about Enhanced Display? Is it supported for all,
>> some or none of those?

> enhanced display (aka compositing) is supported on all Radeons
> supported by MorphOS

Thanks for the clarification.

Quote:


Yes, but that is a combination that should work. This way you can use some old component and check if a bug is gone with that, which is very helpful in some cases.

I just got 3.10 installed on my X5000 and am happy to say all the issues I had in the beta and reported seem to be gone! The only remaining issue is finding a good middle ground for video cards that i can use in both OS4.1 and MorphOS. Right now I swapped out the only card I can get working with 3.10. Its an older HD6750 card. Better than nothing.

Also registration went perfectly and was $79 Euro if anyone was wondering.

You can add your serial number, around here someplace...

If you want to, that is.

> You can add your serial number, around here someplace...

He used that thread to report his number in 2013 and overally made 15 comments to it between 2009 and 2014, so I hope he's aware and won't forget to comment again :-)

Thank you Morphos team for the new release =)

I updated my Powerbook but i cant found the new themes, on preferences/screens shows albulus, ater, clara, classic, e-skin, ferox, ghost, nebulosis, nescio, niteo, nox, origo and zulu.

I miss something or a bad update?

Thanks!

> i cant found the new themes, on preferences/screens shows
> albulus, ater, [...] niteo, [...] origo [...]. I miss something [...]?

„Skins/Albulus New [...]
Skins/Ater New [...]
Skins/Niteo New [...]
Skins/Origo New“
http://www.morphos-team.net/releasenotes/3.10

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf On 2018/4/1 0:59 ]

Yes my fault... themes are on the list but i forgot the MUI theme, thanks

Quote:

Good to know that card works correctly, Paul.
I was getting worried when it wasn't working right with the beta copy of 3.10 (because it performed perfectly under Windows).

So folks, to heck with the HD 6570, go with an HD 6750 instead.

You'll be limited to 2D composting under OS4 and MorphOS, but you are likely to see 3D introduced for MorphOS eventually.

And the card is a nice compromise between power draw and performance.

I see no point in installing extremely powerful cards in MorphOS or OS4 platforms as they are bound to be limited by the cpus we are using.

BTW - 79 Euros? Cool. I was worried that they'd up the price on that platform.

HD6750 is a weak card.
Even on a lowly Sam440ep flex a HD6670 had better 2D performance back in the old days of testing.

HD6670

HD6750

By the way both the HD6750 the HD6670 on the Sam440ep-flex had a better 2D score than one of those "Mega" Radeon R-7240's that are one of the current configuration for a complete x5000/020 system .

R7-240

Quote:

Obviously we have tested these under different OS', as the 6750 dusts a 6670 in all tests I've run under Windows.

As to running a PCIe card in a system that only has a PCI slot, we leave that kind of stupidity to the OS4 crowd.

While the 6750 has a slightly slower clock speed than the 6670 (700 MHz vs 800), the 6750 has 50% more shaders, 50% more texture units, and twice the number of render output units (ROPs).

Perhaps your drivers for the 6750 just plain suck (or don't take advantage of the clearly superior hardware).

In any case, given a choice between these two, the 6670 would no more be my pick than the 6450 would be over either.

Have you ever considered that what might have been the problem was that the 6750 was being limited by the incredibly weak cpu of the SAM440?

That factor really makes me question the drive in the OS4 market to support video cards that have capabilities that will NEVER be fully exploited by the hardware most OS4 users have.
Obviously the X5000 would be the system best suited to higher end cards, the Acube SAM series is far weaker than comparably clocked G4 based systems.

And Hans now wants to push for drivers for the RX series?
The only advantage there will be higher gpu clock speeds.

Because pathetic hardware like the A1222 (aka Tabor) will never be able to push cards like those anywhere near their limits.

You should stick to what you know, Linux.
Because it becomes quickly apparent that the only OS4 guru that knows anything about video cards is Han de Ruiter.
And he's forced to work within the limitation of the hardware supported by OS4.

I look forward to the release of the A1222.
When everyone has access to that system, the real world benches of that hardware are bound to disappoint.

Addendum - That was unnecessarily harsh. And Spectre660 has offered me some useful information in the past. It IS quite likely that NG drivers do NOT utilize gpu hardware fully and that a 100MHz difference could create the situation he has mentioned.
IF so, it provides an illustration of just how limited NG video drivers truly are.
And it also points to the fact that the rush to support the latest video cards will provide only limited benefits.

Both the OS4 and the MorphOS communities seem so concerned that they support the latest hardware, when the much higher costs may give them hardware that only provides a limited benefit.

After some consideration of what I'd like to implement next, I've decided to buy a Radeon HD4890. As our new video drivers only support 2D (at this point), this will provide me with the most powerful card I can get that still offers overlay support.

SO...my apologies to Spectre660 for my rush to criticism. What works well in mainstream OS' may very well prove to perform differently under our OS'.
His point is likely to be true (although this 6750 IS a much better card than a 6670).
And, to the rest of you, I am even less concerned about GCN support, RX support, or anything to do with the latest cards. The idea of spending $150 or more on a card that may only perform fractionally better than a card that costs a quarter of that seems ludicrous.

We shouldn't base our decisions on those of the alternative systems. Obviously some of the things they are doing just don't seem that bright (case in point, the Tabor design with its poor choice of cpus and its virtually total lack of expansion capability).
So, we have 3.10, a nice upgrade. Could we use even more? Sure, but I think the direction we are taking, the stability of the OS, and the talent of our developers are all points in our favor.

We're NOT AmigaOS. There's something to be said FOR that.

[ Edited by Jim On 2018/4/2 16:49 ]

Remember I said 2D performance.

The Sam440ep-flex bottleneck is pci bandwidth with the bridge chip.
With the larges rectangle size (1024x1024) the results for operations are close between the Sam440ep-flex and a X5000/20 using the same card . With smaller rectangles because of the bridge chip we see slower performance.
What this show is that even the less powerful machines can use plenty of GPU power.

When looking at 3D performance the new AmigOS4.1 game Spencer is quite interesting.

Spencer News Item
Spencer thread

One binary supports both older Warp3D capable cards as well as the newer Warp3D Nova cards.(Warp3D support uses lower detail versions of the graphics)
We can see the GPU power being used if available as the fps counter on X5000/20 machines ranges from 52-55 on a Radeon R7-250 (verde) and 72-80 on a Radeon R9-270x .

In the Radeon GCN 1st Gen family there are about 8 different performance classes among 4 chip sets. The R7-250(Verde) is third from the bottom and the R9-270X (Pitcairn XT)is third from the top. We can see a performance difference of +45% without yet hitting the two fastest cards in the family.

By the way I am using an entry level RX550 (Polaris 12) as the card in my Sam460ex and can say that we are due for a real treat when the driver is released.

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/4/2 18:42 ]

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/4/2 18:50 ]

>> 2D performance

> 50% more shaders, 50% more texture units, and twice the number
> of render output units (ROPs).

Not relevant for pure 2D.

> don't take advantage of the clearly superior hardware

See above.

> what might have been the problem was that the 6750 was being
> limited by the incredibly weak cpu of the SAM440

Unlikely, as this would explain the score being as low as that of the 6670, but not lower.

> the only OS4 guru that knows anything about video cards is Han de Ruiter.

Exactly :-)

> I am even less concerned about GCN support, RX support, or anything to do with
> the latest cards. The idea of spending $150 or more [...]

In the EU, GCN1 cards currently start at 56 EUR (69 USD) and GCN4 cards at 92 EUR (113 USD).

> We shouldn't base our decisions on those of the alternative systems.

„We“ have to live with this then: https://amigax5000.blog/2018/03/30/morphos-3-10-the-view-of-a-frustrated-x5000-owner/

You two, I trust, so my diatribe WAS a bit over the top.

Although I will take exception to Andreas' suggestion that those capabilities are not important to 2D performance, because there are no 2D functions in these gpus and all 2D routines are being performed via 3D functionality.

And 56 euros may seem cheap to the Europeans who are used to paying higher prices, but I can buy a used HD 6670 for less than half that (and as Spectre has mentioned, that would outperform a low end R5/R7).

Spectre's use on a RX550 doesn't surprise me.

The low end RX cards have looked promising since their introduction.

I should have sent an RX 460 or 560 to Mark while they were still reasonable.

The RX 550 might be worth thinking about since the miners haven't really impacted those (actually, I'm not sure why the RX 560 prices went up, except that since the higher cards that were suited to mining became hard to get so the demand for the lower end cards became greater).

And as to my high opinion of Hans? I've been in contact with him since he started developing for OS4, and he really does know his...stuff. Plus he posts great tutorials. The OS4 community is really blessed to have him.

That article you posted Andreas? Fair argument. I don't tend to think about the OS4 crowd, but this is one of our few common platforms and it would make it easier on them if they didn't have to downgrade their video cards.

This situation won't last forever though. Right now I'm a little strapped when it comes to sending Mark more cards (and btw, David is the only one who has offered to chip in on this, and he's on a limited income), BUT Mark does have an HD 7850. So a driver for the early GCN cards is doable.
And I have an Oland based card here, so that is covered.
We need later cards (like the RX560), BUT as it is Mark has delivered a veritable shitload of drivers in the current package.
And they still need the 3D components added.
FURTHER, he will eventually start writing the GCN drivers.
He mentioned testing the cards months ago to see if they could be found on the PCIe bus (hackers just can't help but play with things even if their priorities lay elsewhere).

However, there is only so much a small team can do guys (and just so many hours in a day).

This WILL get done. Just not rapidly.

Oh, and for those that don't know (or remember, since I'm sure I've posted this multiple times), my affection/admiration for the coders of graphic drivers (be they MorphOS or OS4 developers) stems from my own experiences writing 68K drivers for ISA ET4000 based cards decades ago.
Graphic hardware is just my thing, always has been.

So having Mark and Frank on our team, and Hans on team Red...NG has some good developers working on graphics drivers, eh?

Edit - I just looked at RX550 prices and they are out of line as well, before the big price jump I could have gotten an RX460 or 560 for less than they are asking for the RX550. An RX550 SHOULD be a sub-$100 card.

[ Edited by Jim On 2018/4/2 21:00 ]

>> In the EU, GCN1 cards currently start at 56 EUR (69 USD)

> 56 euros may seem cheap to the Europeans who are used to paying
> higher prices, but I can buy a used HD 6670 for less than half that

The 56 EUR is for a *new* R7 240. Just having a quick look I can see that used HD6670 are starting at about 30 EUR here as well.

Sweet spot to attract current AmigOS4.1 Sam460ex and X5000 users would be Verde chipset.
So HD7750 or HD7770

> Sweet spot to attract current AmigOS4.1 Sam460ex and X5000 users
> would be Verde chipset. So HD7750 or HD7770

Yes, and Cape Verde would also cover R7 250E and R7 250X, which some might have installed.

Thanks.
I was on a UPS during a power outage so had to go with the sort version as shutdown was approaching.
Also the some R7-250's are verde (ASUS R7-250 Model # R7250-1GD5-V2 is verde)

Quote:

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/4/4 15:00 ]

>> Cape Verde would also cover R7 250E and R7 250X

> some R7-250's are verde (ASUS R7-250 Model # R7250-1GD5-V2 is verde)

R7 250 is Oland (including the model you quoted). As I wrote, R7 250E and R7 250X are Cape Verde.

I actually do have an ASUS R7-250 Model # R7250-1GD5-V2 and it is Verde not Oland.
It uses a laptop version of Verde HD8830M (Venus LE) but it is faster in 2D than the basic HD7750 .

My Source
Note the 512 stream processors in the description.
Oland only has 384 Stream processors


Result 2022


Quote:

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/4/4 17:39 ]

> ASUS R7-250 Model # R7250-1GD5-V2 [...] is Verde not Oland.
> It uses a laptop version of Verde HD8830M (Venus LE) [...]
> Result 2022

You are right. I just confirmed it via http://pci-ids.ucw.cz/read/PC/1002/682b. Seems to be kind of a misnomer by ASUS then.

@Jim

SB Live + Pciex1 Realtek RTL8168 working well during my short basic X5000/020 test.
Did not get a chance to stress these out as I did not try simultaneous video playback + Network usage.

Looking good as apart from my Radeon R9-270X my AmigaOS 4.1/Linux configuration boots ok with no conflicts.


PCIEx16 = Radeon Graphics Card . R9-270X . (Used Radeon HD6450 for MorphOS 3.10 test)
PCIEX4 = Empty (usually blocked by video Card)
PCIEX1 = SATA 3 Controller (Marvel 88SE9215 chipset) for Linux Hard Drive
PCIEX1 = TP-Link Gigabit Ethernet PCI-Express Network Adapter (TG-3468) works under all 3 OS'es
PCIEX1 = ATI FirePro 2260 Graphics Card . Linux 3D card (Does not function under AmigaOS 4.1FE or MorphOS 3.10)
PCI = Empty
PCI = SoundBlaster LIve! Works under all 3 OSes (Memory Needs to be set to max 3.5GB in Linux using boot args)

ESATA for DVD drive (Used externally) with SATA to ESATA connector. allows optimal use of second onboard SATA connector,

Quote:

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/4/6 5:55 ]

.

[ Edited by Spectre660 On 2018/4/7 15:01 ]

@CISC
Actually the below comment was not made by me (NewSense)
Quote:
It was made by Cego - 2018/3/27 13:29 - please check thread date/time if you need to confirm this.
Quote:
So those comments of yours above should be directed at Cego, not me (NewSense)

On this occasion I am "the innocent party"!

> Actually the below comment was not made by me (NewSense) [...] So those
> comments of yours above should be directed at Cego, not me (NewSense)

As I see it, the „@NewSense“ is just part of the quote. If the reply was directed at you, „@NewSense“ would have been placed outside the actual quote.

Fantastic work Morph Team!
Def the best dev team out there!

So, I've finally tested 3.10 and found two bugs.
The first one is rather heavy. I post them here,
because there is no bugtracker :/

1:
I did a fresh install, not an update.
After the installation was done, I was
about to change the background-image
to a single-color. Saving and reopen
the Ambient-prefs froze the entire system.
The keyboard was also dead, only the reset-
button helped. After reset, the problem
was still there. Everytime I've tried to
open the prefs, the system froze. So I had
to manually copy the original config-file
back from CD.

With 3.10, there is now a file/dir-
requester for the BG-image in Ambient-
prefs. It seems, the system does freeze
if there is "a file selected". After I
removed the file-name from string-gadget,
crashes were gone. So, there must not be
a BG-image selected and a single-color-BG
used at the same time.

2:
I opened 'WorkFlow' and created a test-project in RAM:
A select-button appeared at the top. 'Debug/Release' iIrc.
Everything worked so far. Then I closed the project and
cleared the RAM-Disk by hand. After clicking 'Debug/Release',
again, WF crashed.

Except from that, I had no crash and no mem-hit.
Nice work, it even feels a bit faster :)

Quote:
Videos do work for me, I can even select the option to continue watching them while using FB.

And I think I got rid of those jumping ad posts by resizing the browser window more narrow. For some reason they don't seem to jump to block the view anymore.