Live data from Hacker News

Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

dfarq.homeip.net

101–110 of 181 posts

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#101
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't as if the tools aren't there, Powershell with .NET/COM (yes COM really needs a DX improvement), AppleTalk/XPC/zsh, GNOME/KDE/D-BUS. Yet as you very well point out, it is a mess, and no where close to using AREXX or Datatype libraries.

BeOS/Haiku uses datatypes natively

Interesting, I didn't use it much beyond the famous demo CD.

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#102
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Atari fans showing up does bring up the nostalgia of BBS and Usenet flamewars though. The Atari was so unpopular in my parts that was the only exposure I had to the two of them.

It's funny, at the time I thought there was a lot more parity between the ST and the 500 but when I watch videos of the two these days, I realise just how much better the Amiga was. I'd always assumed the sound would be great on the Atari because it was midi-compatible, but I was horrified to hear how tinny and bleepy the sound effects were in a game I knew from the Amiga. Oh, to go back in time and use that in an ar…

I somehow do really like the sound that some managed to squeeze out of that YM2149 sound chip in the ST though. It was an old low-end chip when the ST was new already, and most games do indeed sound like ass. But the people in the demoscene worked their magic on it to great effect.

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#103
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Atari fans showing up does bring up the nostalgia of BBS and Usenet flamewars though. The Atari was so unpopular in my parts that was the only exposure I had to the two of them.

It's funny, at the time I thought there was a lot more parity between the ST and the 500 but when I watch videos of the two these days, I realise just how much better the Amiga was. I'd always assumed the sound would be great on the Atari because it was midi-compatible, but I was horrified to hear how tinny and bleepy the sound effects were in a game I knew from the Amiga. Oh, to go back in time and use that in an ar…

Yeah, my old flame wars with Atari users were all largely based on vibes and spec sheets and screenshots in magazines and how ugly TOS looked, not on actual experience with the Atari... But I've been happy to be vindicated by various videos...

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#104
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The A3000 had a ficker fixer. If you meant that the other later models should have also included it, I agree. Regarding the MMU, the problem was/is the OS. AmigaOS uses message passing between processes extensively, and those messages often involved passing pointers to structures that the receiver expected to be able to dereference and even writ to in some cases. I'm on record repeatedly arguing over the years that i…

With mmu, every app has its own 32bit address space, and the mmu “maps” the app space to physical space. Legacy apps get shared address space, while newer apps get isolated space. To port apps, its only the messaging system that needs rework, and if the system does its magic with same API, transition is invisible. At the end of the day, only the message address space needs to be shared. Sendmessage() behind the scene…

The problem with that is that the messaging system permeates everything on the Amiga, so you'd lose basically every app without rework. That might have worked if the Amiga had a growing market share, but at the time this became an option, the Amiga market was already dying and most users still only had 68000 based machines without MMU until long after Commodore died.

It's not "only" the message address space, as e.g. messages included pointers to a lot of other data structures that'd now either need to be copied or mapped into the receiving process, or the message formats reworked.

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#105
post #77
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mac hit a completely different market. Nobody I knew got a Mac until after the iMac. Lots had Amigas. In the 80's Mac's were expensive machines for professionals, and while the Amiga due to Commodore's persistent sales and marketing failures were also pigeon holed in professional markers in the US, in Europe the Amiga was also the step up from 8-bit home computers, and the Mac didn't compete in that space at all.…

Yes, the Mac was hardly anywhere in Europe until after the reverse acquisition from NeXT. In Portugal there was only an importer in Lisbon for the whole country, at the university campus, only a single lab had a couple of LCs, as did some secretaries on the CS department and that was it.

Mac was the platform for journalists and printed press audio and media producers in Spain. Outside of that niche... good luck.

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#106
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK, its main contemporary in the non-PC realm was the Atari ST, which was cheaper, arrived on the market sooner, and took the “professional” market because of its excellent mono monitor (“small, but perfectly formed”). The ST didn’t multitask, but Amiga multitasking wasn’t memory-protected, so crashing something meant you could (would) lose everything running. It also couldn’t do the graphical tricks the Amiga…

I think the Acorn Archimedes (1987) might be the closest UK vision to the Amiga. Of course it was 2 years later. But, mouse-oriented interface, graphics central, kind of 32 bit CPU with limitations (similar to the 68k which is 16 bit aspiring to be 32 bit), thoroughly weird desktop environment.

In the case of Acorn they had hardware memory protection[1] and their own CPU designs[2].

In place of Irving Gould Acorn ended up with some clown called Stan Boland who decided it was better to change the name, stop making workstations and refocus on TV set top boxes. The company was dead six months later.

1. https://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/29468/Acorn-MEMC-Dat...

2. Not sure whatever happened to the Acorn Risc Machine but I'm sure it'll turn up again. :P

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#107
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The mouse is a hardware sprite and its movement stays responsive and smooth even under heavy load and even when the OS freezes Modern macbooks do something really interesting when the OS freezes. If the OS OOMs or something like a kernel panic happens, the trackpad stops clicking! There's something in the trackpad hardware that polls the OS and locks the trackpad when the OS stops responding so that it can't be pre…

The trackpad is not "locked", it's moving just as much as it used to, but the driver running the haptic fake click feedback is dead. Apple's haptic technology is some deep black magic

It's very convincing, my fingers believed the illusion for years. When the Mac finally crashed, for a minute I thought the touchpad was broken.

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#108
post #28

I’d argue that it's still ahead of a lot of modern systems. Aside from the loading times, the thing is incredibly fast. I invite you to try one if you have the chance, as words don't make it justice. I can't think of anything today that comes close to how instantly it responds to user input, even iOS feels sluggish in comparison. It had only a few kilobytes of memory, a bunch of CPU cycles and a dream, but By God the…

The keyword being latency.

Even a powerful PC, such as running WinNT or Linux on my 9800x3d, doesn't feel as tight as my pretty basic Amiga 500 does.

It's the difference between a RTOS proper (AmigaOS, QNX, BeOS) and a toy (Windows, Linux, MacOS).

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#109
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The A3000 had a ficker fixer. If you meant that the other later models should have also included it, I agree. Regarding the MMU, the problem was/is the OS. AmigaOS uses message passing between processes extensively, and those messages often involved passing pointers to structures that the receiver expected to be able to dereference and even writ to in some cases. I'm on record repeatedly arguing over the years that i…

It would be simple, but somewhat incomplete. It would not look like a virtual memory subsystem where merely accessing an address can allocate physical RAM to it. The API is already there! AllocMem(, MEMF_PUBLIC) allocates shared memory, otherwise you get private memory . You can then enforce memory protection around that, but obviously the entire OS is still built on message-passing between tasks where the message it…

I think "somewhat incomplete" is underplaying it as such a large proportion of message exchange tends to include pointers to shared structures. That the message handling uses intrusive lists doesn't help. So "simple" really depends on where you set the bar for what you consider useful levels of memory protection.

I still think it's possible but doing it to a meaningful extent would be a long tedious effort, at least for my definition of meaningful.

You have Janus-UAE which sandboxes/emulates M68k apps for AROS "rootlessly" in that it bridges a number of structures etc. That mostly solves the problem on modern hardware for legacy apps, though it's a painful solution.

Then you could aggressively upgrade message formats for "native" apps to replace pointers with opaque handles.

If done at the time you could of course had relied on more of the developers of various apps still being active and willing to update their code and might have been able to avoid the Janus-UAE approach, but there was never a point at that time where anywhere close to a majority of users had MMU's,

Re: Amiga 1000: Ten years ahead of its time

#110
post #12

I was trying to figure out it's contemporaries, the i386 was still a few months away, you could get a sun-2, which had a sweet 4 MB of ram, but wikipedia sez that would cost you a eye watering 29 thousand dollars, in 1985, for the low end monochrome graphics version, oh, you want color that is "just" a cool 50k. Yeah Sun is not really playing the same game. The mac was probably the closest equivalent, it came out the…

> The mac was probably the closest equivalent, it came out the year prior had more memory and a built in screen but cost more than twice as much.

I remember the Mac emulator running Mac software faster than a classic Mac. Too bad the drive was not compatible so you had to convert disks for them to be readable.

Post reply on HN