Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Amiga

What MorphOS Is All About 272

Posted by timothy from the sweet-icons-a-bonus dept.
Gentu writes "Genesi released today an extensive feature list of MorphOS, the pre-emptively multi-tasking operating system for PPC. MorphOS/Pegasos is a brand new platform (the last full OS+HW platform released was 7 years ago with Be's BeBox) so it is very modern and it has support for 3D cards, USB, SMP while it also features partial Amiga application binary compatibility! Additionally, OSNews today features an interview with the Eclipsis Project Manager, Nicholas Blachford, about MorphOS, and they include three exclusive screenshots of the OS."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What MorphOS Is All About More

What MorphOS Is All About

Comments Filter:
  • Anything with Amiga Support is cool. Also wanted to get the first post in.

    • Re:Cool (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Unfortunately anything vaguely Amiga related is cursed, and will not only bring financial ruin to all who promote it, it'll send them crazy, running & screaming in circles yelling "sex and free beer! sex and free beer"

      This includes if the entire AmigaOS and related code goes OSS. It'll find a way...
    • from the interview:
      >MorphOS boots in under 3 second

      Now this is an OS I'll be keeping my eye on. I wish it ran on old Mac hardware though...

  • That's Great... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Quaoar ( 614366 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:31AM (#4868777)
    ...if the guy announcing a PPC product isn't wearing a turtle-neck and saying "oh and...one last thing," I don't care.

  • FileSystems availible (Score:3, Interesting)

    by AndreAtlan ( 529906 ) <http://free-gaLI ... m minus language> on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:32AM (#4868784)
    Will this one offer HPFS file systems?

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:35AM (#4868793)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • The only reason "cutting edge" drives the economy, and determines whether or not a technology lives or dies, is because the economy is driven by "bleeding idiots" who are manipulated by anyone that wants to stay ahead of the curve.
      Every Amiga user I've talked to [one] can't stop raving about how wonderful it was, and how it got them interested in programming, and computers. Maybe we leave the bleeding idiots in the dust this time, and set our own trends...?
    • well, you say that bebox failed, and it was very much ahead of the game.

      then you say morphOS is on par with the rest of the guys. wouldn't that mean morphos has good chance?-D

      cutting edge hw costs, unless it's pc, in which case it's cutting edge because it reads so on the fancy box with cyberman riding a cyber surfboard.

      niche product, for niche people, cool anyways.
      one of these products would make a worthy addition to anyones nerdy room, and you don't buy a mac because you want a ppc, you buy a mac because you want a mac.

  • Multitasking (Score:5, Funny)

    by Comster ( 615942 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:35AM (#4868796)
    These exculsive screens even show that it can handle mp3 playback and timezone changing at the same time. What next, reading email while doing graphic design?

    • Re:Multitasking (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Jace of Fuse! ( 72042 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @07:57AM (#4869808) Homepage
      While that is funny, I don't think anybody who has ever used an AmigaOS back while it was still reasonably modern would ever be able to honestly complain about it's multitasking capabilities.

      It was quite an efficient system. I personally ran a 10 line BBS off of a single 28 mhz computer, and it was often packed full of users that were doing a combination of playing games, chatting, uploading or downloading. The single system was running the BBS software, any of the online program files for the users were running, and hosting a very large mud game. It also had FidoNet feeds and was very frequently tossing large message packages and network mail. The system never slowed down and had months of uptime only interupted by power failures. Not bad for 28mhz and 16 megs of ram.

      I have been debating buying a new PPC system to run MorphOS and or the new AmigaOS on. Not as a main system, of course, but as a neat toy to poke around with. I already run several other operating systems, and I hate them all equally. I can name less reasons not to toy with new operating systems than I can to remain exclusive to the ones I'm already using.

      It's not like my other computesr are going to get jealous if I use another OS.

  • to paraphrase an old Dilbert strip (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Squonk ( 128339 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:36AM (#4868800) Journal
    Where Dilbert creates a device to convert pocket lint into a parsley substitute:

    "That's absolutely brilliant, and completely unmarketable."

  • Here are some related links... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:37AM (#4868808)
    I'll save everybody some time and post some related links: Posting anonymously so noone thinks I'm a karma whore.
    • Um, you just reposted the same links used in the article. In addition to the article, these 4 links are in the "Related Links" column at the top right corner of the page. Do we really need to see them a third time? Next time you post anonymously, do it for the right reason: you're redundant!

  • My experience (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:42AM (#4868821)
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    I have been using the MorphOS System with a Pegasos board for a while, in a corporate environment. I feel it would be appropriate for me to share for the benefit of the greater good.

    Our MorphOS Systems, one of which I currently am using to post, are very nice. They're for the most part homebuilt with COTS components. The Pegasos Mainboard basically is a MicroATX board with a PowerPPC 133FSB slot, ATA100 3 PCI, 1 AGP, onboard LAN and FireWire. It's amazing how empty the board looks (find the photos on their web site) compared to a normal x86 board. So what you do is you get that board, a PowerPC CPU, some RAM, a case, a hard drive, etc, and you have a fully working PowerPC system devoid of an OS. It isn't cheap, but you don't pay the Apple Markup

    To that hardware platform I added MorphOS, and started developing applications, alongside a team of six programmers. We have been learning the ins and out of MorphOS, and we are producing some very nice graph visualisation software for our product. The amazing power of the PowerPC coupled with the surprising APIs of MorphOS, as well as its unique scheduler, enables us to develop much faster on that platform.

    I think MorphOS has a bright future ahead, if only people will give it a chance, and realise how good it is.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: i am sllort [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] and here's why i post AC [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]
    subscribe [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] to /.'s premiere meta publication, Trollback [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

    iD8DBQE994YeKpz2COjVE3YRAjj8AKC7crHc87aNKmhVY7jW aX ELQlrKHQCgszrq
    iUKD4oiIGlSH3OMEdrWYNbk=
    =mTZl
    - ----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    • "I think MorphOS has a bright future ahead, if only people will give it a chance, and realise how good it is."


      Substitute "MorphOS" with "BeOS", and you'll have my reason for not holding my breath...

    • So what you do is you get that board, a PowerPC CPU, some RAM, a case, a hard drive, etc, and you have a fully working PowerPC system devoid of an OS. It isn't cheap, but you don't pay the Apple Markup.

      As I understand, these are G3 based machines running around the 600-700mhz range. This makes it comparable to either the current iBooks or the original iMacs -- both of which can be had from Apple for less than a $1000.

      So, if this board isn't cheap, how much is it? I mean, it has to be cheaper than an $999 iBook, right? Otherwise, what "Apple Markup" are you getting around?

      • No, it has to be cheaper than a comparable x86 board. I'd say that if this thing costs much more than $150 (bare, no CPU) it wont sell at all. At around $200 (board + CPU) I would probably pick it up just to relive my good old Amiga days in a new light (and with some decent speed, damnit!).

        Although, some of the coolest things about the Amiga (different resolutions on the same screen!) were directly attributable to the custom chips. And in the article it talks specifically about not having support for the custom chips. :(
      • the original iMacs were in the 266-300 range, rocket-man.

        That's 233, number lad.


        blakespot

  • After the third time that I read that a company when bankrupt on the path to creating what is now MorphOS, I began to think that maybe this isn't such a good idea. But what do I know about business, I'm an engineer!

  • Yea but, (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kurt Russell ( 627436 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:49AM (#4868838)
    will it make the Internet faster.

  • Pre-Emptive Multitasking (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    MacOS X
    LinuxPPC
    MkLinux
    NetBSD/ppc
    OpenBSD/ppc
    Fre eBSD/ppc
    BeOS
    Hell, even that old version of Windows NT.

    Which one of these does *not* feature pre-emptive multitasking?!

  • No Photoshop? (Score:3, Funny)

    by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:51AM (#4868846) Homepage
    Damn, too bad it doesn't run Photoshop. We all know running Photoshop is the way to unleash the real power of the PowerPC chip. [apple.com]
  • If this can get support from game companies it has a lot more chance of being successful.
    It takes more than Solitaire to make an OS. They already have 3d card support, so if I can play counter-strike on one of these it would be worth giving it a shot.

  • A question that I need answered (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AndreAtlan ( 529906 ) <http://free-gaLI ... m minus language> on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:55AM (#4868864)
    I just dont understand why you would use something like this. I mean, what possible profit generating nitch can this thing fill?

  • Applications, please (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tinrobot ( 314936 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @01:59AM (#4868875)
    So, pardon my ignorance, but what real world applications actually run on this OS? Please don't bombard me with GNU/development/programming stuff or 10 year old Amiga apps. Is there any compelling reason to use this other than the geek factor?

    • <SARCASM>
      So, pardon my ignorance, but what real world applications actually run on Linux? Please don't bombard me with GNU/development/programming stuff or 10 year old UNIX apps. Is there any compelling reason to use this other than the geek factor?
      </SARCASM>

      And yes, I do use Linux and not for the "geek factor".

      A quote from the inteview at OSNews:

      "Nicholas Blachford: At the moment our market is "Alternative Computing" starting with current and Ex Amiga users, it provides a very similar feel and runs a lot of their software via a 68K emulator (provided it doesn't access the custom chips). There was and is a great deal of software available some of which has never appeared on any other system so this provides a body of mature software for users to work with, somewhat unusual for a brand new platform.

      Going forward we are up against Windows, MacOS and Linux. We haven't a hope attacking these markets so we intend to target different niches, there are many specific markets out there which are not dependant on Windows or Unix, they may use one of these Operating Systems but the computers primary purpose in these cases is for use as a tool and we can address these markets, looking at what they need and providing it. "

  • New platform (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Eric Smith ( 4379 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @02:06AM (#4868904) Homepage Journal
    MorphOS/Pegasos is a brand new platform (the last full OS+HW platform released was 7 years ago with Be's BeBox)
    And it's doomed to failure, just like Be, because people don't want another new, different, mostly incompatible platform. They want improved software for the platform they've already got, or improved hardware that's still compatible. Otherwise people would have ditched PCs and Windows many years ago.

    People want a nice smooth migration path. It's even OK to have a major inovation once in a while, as long as it still works with their older stuff (and without a huge performance penalty, which is why IA64 is going nowhere fast).

    IBM tried to do away with the ISA bus in 1987, by pushing their proprietary MCA bus as an all-or-nothing proposition. Despite its technical merit, it failed to take over any of the PC market. EISA, VESA local bus, and PCI were more successful because they were provided as a gradual shift. "Look, you can have some ISA slots AND some PCI slots." Of course, now ISA slots have almost vanished, but the transition period was eight years.

    EISA and VESA LB died because although they also offered a gradual transition, PCI had more technical merit. So technical merit does count for something, but it's not sufficient to justify an overwhelming degree of incompatibility.

    so it is very modern and it has support for 3D cards, USB, SMP
    Yes, so modern that it does the same stuff as all the other OSes out there. Oh, except actually having any application software. And it won't support all the 3D cards and USB devices, just a few that they've written drivers for.
    while it also features partial Amiga application binary compatibility!
    Great, if I want to run a few old Amiga games, it can do that. Woo hoo, I'm so excited.

    Pardon me if I don't rush right out to buy one. I think I'll stick to my dual Athlon box running Linux. It has support for 3D cards, USB, and SMP, and actually runs the applications I need.

    • Maybe MorphOS won't be a BeOS, but a PalmOS -- there is room for a new operating system, so long as it doesn't compete on the entrenched operating systems territory.

      Well, okay, MorphOS probably won't be that. But a new OS is possible, you just might not recognize it when it comes around.


    • Of course, now ISA slots have almost vanished, but the transition period was eight years.


      Can anyone recommend any decent boards that still have ISA slots? Just one or two would be fine. 1.3Ghz or better (or thereabouts, soft limit), more than 2 IDE channels, and a few ISA slots. Find me a dual-capable board (Intel or AMD) and I'd be very happy. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

    • Re:New platform (Score:2, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 )
      You make some good points, and I think your basically right about the platform's chances (what can I say, I'm a pessimist) but there are two points you made I have trouble with:

      1. "IBM tried to do away with the ISA bus in 1987, by pushing their proprietary MCA bus as an all-or-nothing proposition."

      It wasn't just a matter of it being all-or-nothing. If I remember rightly IBM wanted hugh royalties for making computers with the MCA bus. It was basically an attempt by them to reclaim the PC market they lost to the clones (attack of the clones anyone? sorry, that was uncalled for :).

      2. "Of course, now ISA slots have almost vanished, but the transition period was eight years."

      One reason for the 8 year transition was you just didn't need the PCI bus for say, a 28.8 modem or a SoundBlaster 16. Yes, the PCI bus behaves better than ISA, but that hardly matters to most people with only a few devices in their computers.

      I guess my point is I don't really think a smooth hardware upgrade cycle is what keeps people locked to x86. If anything it's software. Heck, nowadays their's really no good reason to upgrade hardware for anything but games. If this company's going to make headway on the desktop outside of replacing aging amiga's, they'll need to interoperate with whatever software's popular (yes, probably MS-Office I'm sorry to say).
      Anyways, that's my 2 cents.
      • I guess my point is I don't really think a smooth hardware upgrade cycle is what keeps people locked to x86. If anything it's software.
        It's both. People would be willing to change one or the other, or even both, if somehow they could continue doing what they're doing now, while getting better performance or new capabilities.

        That's where new platforms almost always fall flat. You get something new, but you have to give up a LOT of the old.

    • Re:New platform (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Julian Morrison ( 5575 )
      Who cares about what "people want"? Business isn't democracy, it's about finding a niche. If these folks can find buyers, and if they don't stupidly overextend themselves dotcom style, then they could keep ticking along despite never eclipsing the existing OSes.
      • Business isn't democracy,
        It most certainly is! At least in a capitalist economy. People vote with their wallets. If they don't want a new platform, they won't buy it.

        If they think they can hold a niche, they should target that niche, instead of trying to be the all-singing all-dancing general purpose wonder platform, because that path is doomed to failure.

        • Business isn't democracy,

          It most certainly is! At least in a capitalist economy. People vote with their wallets.

          No, you miss the Very Important Difference.

          - In democracy, everyone votes and then the bunch of politicians with the highest poll result get to forcibly impose their ideas on everyone else, expressly including the people who did not vote for them.

          - Compared to business where a vast majority wanting X in no way prevents one from selling competitor Y, provided there are enough interested customers to turn a profit. Even if that's only one or two people.
        • As far as I can remember, democracy requires an active citizenry who understand the issues before them, who engage in public dialogue, and who excercise their political power by engaging in the decision-making process (normally through voting, which is still a pretty weak system, IMHO).

          Business requires a passive market of consumers who believe everything they are told, surrender their rights to whatever licences are associated with the product/service, and are willing to complain ineffectively to phone support drones from a third company. And the only effect they have on decision-making is by holding voting shares in the business.

          Then again, the real difference is that in a democracy it is "one person, one vote". Hardly so in business, where it is "one dollar, one vote".

          So, in your conception "democracy" allows for rule by the wealthy. Which, I guess, is pretty much the standard definition of democracy these days, so I'll shut up now.
          • As far as I can remember, democracy requires an active citizenry who understand the issues before them, who engage in public dialogue, and who excercise their political power by engaging in the decision-making process
            That's desirable, but it is by no means necessary to the democratic process.

    • Re:New platform (Score:2, Interesting)

      by splateagle ( 557203 )
      You're right that it's probably doomed to failure but your dismissal of its "partial Amiga binary compatibility" is *way* off base - this thing CAN'T run old Amiga games because it doesn't have the custom chipset, besides how many gamers are going to want to pay good money to run games that are at least ten years old?

      What this machine and OS CAN run is the majority of serious Apps the Amiga has/had, and believe me there were/are tonnes, including stuff like Lightwave for example, as well as a host of other excellent creative/productivity software you'll almost certainly never have heard of, some of which still puts modern apps to shame: Wordworth 7 vs Word anyone? or Photogenics vs Photoshop? these applications were tightly programmed, smart, user friendly and incredibly feature rich, they're still more than capable of holding their own against much of the bloatware we're stuck with on other platforms...

      Bearing in mind that there are corners of the video induistry where you'll still find dusty old A2000/4000 Toasters as the main creative workhorses, this could be interesting in a very limited niche way - I'd love to see how Lightwave performed on one of these in comparison to an x86 box for example.

      All those arguments aside though, you missed the main reason why this venture is doomed which is (imho) that its declared target market has largely vanished. I'm an ex-Amigan myself and interesting though this is I wont be shelling out for one in a million years, it's VERY expensive for what it is, and only just keeps pace with the competition in terms of modern features. I held out with my modified A1200 until just over a year ago, so I reckon I qualify as being about as die-hard a user as they come (before insanity/fanaticism creeps in at least) if even people like me have moved on (and are now very happily using stuff like Mac OS X, and investing in a different hardware platform) then there can't be a viable market left for these boxes beyond the fanatics and (well off) nostalgics. The rest of us will either dismiss it because it's ancient history that we never bothered to learn (like you have) or shrug sadly and fire up our emulators (which incidentally can run most of the old games as well)

  • As a Be advocate of sorts, (Score:4, Interesting)

    by zephc ( 225327 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @02:25AM (#4868968)
    I think people should put more interest in OpenBeOS than some new Amiga-ish thing

    Sure there is the Amiga name, but there is so much more that solidarity behind (Open)BeOS can offer, increased driver support, ports to other platforms, and more robust and numerous applications can be a boon to the OSS community. Yes, Linux and *BSD are nice, but as a desktop machine, I have yet to see anything (on x86) rival the grace of BeOS.
    • Regarding BeOS, I just recently decided to fire up my copy of BeOS 5 Professional (and apply the update patches) on a PowerMac 7600 I inherited.

      My hope was, it would run well on this rather limited system - and developers of free/shareware had been plugging along with their Be compatible creations, and there'd be lots of neat stuff to tinker with.

      What I discovered was; #1 - barely anything is pre-compiled in a PPC version! I kept finding files on BeBits that I wanted, but it was usually "Intel BeOS only". #2 - the software collection didn't seem noticeably better than back when I last ran BeOS (when it was at its "peak" of popularity). Some of the software I liked best back then had gone through a number of small revisions, but seemed less stable than I remembered it before. (EG. Baxter IRC client, which kept blowing up when I tried the latest PPC version. It was nearly useless.)

      It's fine if they get Open-BeOS going, but geez - get the apps and utils. up to snuff, or else there won't be much of anything to run on it!

  • PPC Hardware VS x86 (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jago25_98 ( 566531 )
    I'd like to run something non-x86 based.

    What are the price differences though? If PPC for example is more, why bother if I'd be running the same operating system & GNU software base as I would with x86?

    - temperature
    - durability

    - price now
    - devaluation
  • This is very interesting. Should be fun to check out.

    But...what does "partial Amiga application binary compatibility" mean? The bouncing ball will be all white and lack the red checker pattern???
  • The only part which I found rather misleading, was the AmigaOS4 vs MorphOS part.

    > It's very difficult to compare the implementations of
    > the two as Amiga have never really shown much working in
    > public yet

    Actually quite alot has been showed to the public, however components weren't fully integrated yet. But with regard to these components quite alot was shown, and is known to the Amiga public already.

    > We are one of the few companies in the world who design
    > our own hardware and write our own OS (Amiga do
    > neither).

    Amiga does work on its own operating system and related technologies (AmigaDE/AA). But they have partnered with 3rd parties as well to build a new Amiga desktop computer.

    Actually I greatly prefer partnerships instead of having everything under one hood.

  • Fake screenshots? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Otis_INF ( 130595 )
    I looked at the screenshots, and there are icons for Quake 2 and Quake 3. I don't know, but IIRC Quake 2 is never released for Amiga, nor is Quake 3. To me this seems a bit fake, like "Look, we can run native apps released for other platforms".
  • the pre-emptively multi-tasking operating system

    Is it just me or isn't pre-emptiveness kinda required for multitasking? "Well, I'd love to accept some keyboard input, but I'm afraid seti is busy now..." Smells like buzzwords to me.
    • There is also "cooperative multitasking" where the app must explicitly call yield() to hand over control. Effectively single tasking with hidden, rapid task switching. The disadvantages are pretty obvious - no suitability for SMP, and it can wedge solid or hog the CPU, but it also has advantages eg: in cases where you're running a semi-realtime app that absolutely must not be interrupted while it's doing some important stuff.
    • Yes, Mac OS 9 and previous were all cooperative multitasking OS's. It's interesting to note that the Macintosh's predecessor, the Lisa, had a preemptively multitasking operating system. Few are aware of this.

      blakespot

  • The license? (Score:1, Troll)

    by Synn ( 6288 )
    Any mention of what license this OS uses? And if it's non-free, why on earth would I want to tie myself to using it when there are free(as in free to do whatever I want, free to not be controlled by a company's whims) OSes with more software support.
  • random thought... pertaining less to MorphOS and more to an insomniac's late night niggle post. hehe niggle... funny word. I think it is real. anyways... the gui is old, it is dieing... we need something less tiresome then double clicks and appearing windows. interaction needs to be efficient... not hollywoods "virtual reality", minority report style. no aqua interface. maybe instead of a mouse, our hands can be tracked... and really not have to leave the keyboard. hmmm.... imagine typing, and then lifting the right hand a couple inches above the keyboard and slightly outstretching the fingers, similar to the shape of a pistol and pushing objects in a mock three dimensional environment. picture a word processing cube- one side of the cube could be the document itself. another side could be temp clipboard space. type away at the keyboard, lift the left hand... spin the cube and punch the printer that is rendered on the "tools" side of the cube. to save, just punch the white typed document through the wall into the cube and push the entire cube to the side of the virtual space. The document was saved within the cube... would you like to play a game? lift the hands from the keyboard, with the palms to the air, grab the sphere that is dropping from the top of the monitor and punch a side of it to start up virtua girl... I dunno, what the hell I'm talking about. ahhh sleep...I'll try that !

  • Desktop critique (Score:3, Interesting)

    by zephc ( 225327 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @02:53AM (#4869081)
    I'm sorry, but the desktop looks dated and unprofessional. The icons, while detailed, lack a unifying theme other than photorealistic. OS9, OSX and BeOS have (about 99%) of their icons under their respective unified look. Dare is say it, it looks like a bunch of Linux icons I saw about 5 years ago.

  • About the current MorphOS/ABOX (Score:4, Informative)

    by Mike Bouma ( 85252 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @02:54AM (#4869086) Homepage
    Do note that everything you currently see within those screenshots is the ABOX environment. This ABOX uses a reimplemented Exec kernel (AmigaOS) on top of an "alien" (read non AmigaOS-like) kernel called Quark(/MorphOS), with this kernel(/OS) being completely hidden from the user. So currently this OS uses a two kernel approach, unlike AmigaOS4 [amiga.com] which will use a new fully native ExecSG kernel with alot more added features (compared to the classic Exec or MorphOS' reimplemented AmigaOS3.1 Exec).

    This approach could be largely compared to Wine, but is in use and approach more similar to the Amithlon [osnews.com] AmigaOS emulator, as its hides the underlying technology completely from the user. In the case of Amithlon this is Linux.

    For instance the directory structure, startup-scripts, components structure and features are currently the same or similar to the way the classic AmigaOS was designed. Instead of to the PPC native Ambient environment, MorphOS users are even able to use the classic AmigaOS3.1 Workbench environment on top of this MorphOS/ABOX environment. Regarding to what the QBOX environment will be like in usage (i.e. AmigaOS-like) in the future, very little is actually still known.

    That this all is possible can mainly be attributed to the fact that the classic AmigaOS is extremely modular, for most OS components there are several 3rd party alternatives available. For example Workbench/Magellan/Scalos, Reaction/MUI or Picasso/Cybergraphix etc.

  • Ah! The crowd has fulfilled it's expectations! (Score:5, Informative)

    by vjouppi ( 621333 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @02:54AM (#4869088)
    I went to see the comments and already knew what to expect..

    1) It's going to die just like Be / whatever
    2) Ok, so it'll run 10 year old software / a few old amiga games, so what?

    So:

    - If you say it'll die because of the same causes Be died, you're wrong. Be was totally new, but the new Amiga compatible systems build on an existing user base (albeit small) and existing application base. It's enough to get started and if the better CPUs allow developers to do more cool stuff, perhaps someone's head will turn.

    - It won't run any old Amiga games without an Amiga emulator, because it doesn't have Amiga's custom chips! These STILL aren't anything that resemble your old A500s.

    - Amiga software development has been going on all the time in the last 10 years we've been without Commodore. We even got a new OS for the 68k machines in 2000. Y2k wasn't 10 years ago! The latest update was in March this year.

    - The web browser I use at home has the copyright date set at 2002, the IRC client I use at home has the copyright date set at 2002 .. There are word processors, image manipulators, etc, all released in the last few years.

    Some of you are asking because you don't know, but some are just bashing without even wanting to find out. The latter is what gets to me.. What is wrong with you people? Go get laid or something.. :-)
    • No, it won't die like Be died. And that's because it won't live like Be lived. BeOS was actually something new and better, not something "just different" running on slow hardware. So yes, it'll die, but not like BeOS.

      AmigaOS development over the last nearly-eight years did happen, sorta-kinda. But it was very much gypsies in the palace. None of what made the AmigaOS great, none of the innovation continued. It was largely a mix of rehashes, ugly kludges, and territorial pissings.

      If you want a useful non-MS-OS, run Linux. If you want a very interesting non-MS-OS that may yet have a real future, run OpenBeOS. Don't worry about going non-x86; despite some ugly legacy, x86 is the only architecture today with true chops. PPC is falling further behind every day. And even IBM's PPC970 will be little more that foot-dragging.

  • English Joke (Score:3, Funny)

    by Chembryl ( 596546 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @03:11AM (#4869146)
    But is the mascot a little brown plasticine man?

    When can we expect ChasOS? Or even TonyHartOS? [bbc.co.uk]

  • What's up with you people? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ektanoor ( 9949 ) on Thursday December 12, 2002 @03:24AM (#4869210) Journal
    I don't really get. Some of us here are either too pessimistic or too ultimative. And don't see the real mean of this news. And the news is: for years we haven't seen any major OS development. However, there are a few people who still break the ice. That's bad news with some light for hope.

    For these last years we hanged over a few systems, majorly divided on three architectures: Windows/OS/2, *NIX, Apple/Mac. We had or have also such things like Amiga or Netware. However, we are trending into a world where we may get some weird mix Windows/*NIX. Frankly, in the bottom line, that's not bad. It's horrible. If you take into account the ideas, ideologies and theories about operating systems, which blossomed during the 70's and 80's, the Windows and *NIX architectures are pure crap. They were systems that look much like a temporary agreement between old and new theories. However, due to the fact that they became very popular, they seem to look tip-top for everyone. Unfortunately this popularity went so far that deeply froze the development of new systems.

    Well, to some of us, it may look that we don't need any other systems and we should keep happy using and developing the present ones.Wrong. That's the same kind of behaviour one gets in a totalitarian regime: you're happy because you haven't seen through the Iron Courtain. This blindness can be dangerous as we may get very deep inside the crap. And when we realize that we need something else, it will be very difficult to do it, as we no longer have the experts, the theoretics, the engineers and developers capable of working from the zero line. BTW, this thing is already seen on many fields. If we do not support a stable path of development for such things, even if, presently, they would not be so bright and shiny like Windows or Linux, we surely will loose the capacity to have real choices in the future.

    However, this MorphOS thing worries me on some details. The most is that, at their site, they not quite generous on giving information.
    • Well, there is GNU Hurd. I guess you could argue that's old too, but the concept is exceptionally powerful and the new L4 development efforts can be utilized (in theory, at least.) Innovation is slow. But things aren't completely frozen.
    • I am reminded of Stephen J. Gould's "Wonderful Life". In the early days there was a vast radiation of phyla, to a diversity not since seen. Then something really bad happened, and almost everything died. There were some survivors, though. We are their descendants.

      The interesting point here, is that there appear to have been no new phyla created since the cambrian extinction. Appearantly the startup costs are too high. (All those inefficiencies that need to be fixed! Garbage collectors to redesign. Now to tune the scheduling alogrithm. Etc.)

      I suppose that one could claim that anything new doesn't need to fight a lot of competitors, because MS has eliminated the competition. Well... except for Palm (a new phylum), Apple (a survivor), the *nix groups (a surviving phylum that seems to have split.. sort of like the insects and the arachnids and the millipedes).

      As I look this over, it looks like anything new is probably going to need to establish itself where it isn't facing competition from the established groups. (Which is probably the reason for no new phyla.)

      OTOH, splits from existing groups into new species happen constantly. So you see Windows CE, and Linux for palmtops, etc.

      This analysis is not only bad news for MorphOS, it's bad news for the Hurd. The Hurd has the advantage that it's got a devoted coterie of developers who aren't planning to make any money from it anyway. And I consider it very important because of absurd patent law possibilities. It's the suspenders that you wear with your belt. But what is the point of the MorphOS?

      Looking at their web site, the MorphOS is a receration of some work from Commodore. Not a bad idea, but...
      I'm not sure of the license. If I guessed, I'd guess GPL, but I didn't see it mentioned on the web site. The closest thing was some notes about porting gcc. And I didn't see anything important enough about it to justify putting a lot of time and effort into it (though obviously some people do). Still....

      This could have a place as another insurance project. It runs on ppc instead of intel, so if intel commits firmly to palladium, this would be a third choice for a non-palladium system (Mac, Linux, and MorphOS). Of course, that's ignoring the ARM systems, but the arm is a relatively weak processor. And it's ignoring a bunch of other minor players, that might suddenly become more important. But if you can, it's best to have your insurance in place *before* the accident.

  • I've looked at the screenshots; had some designers look at the screenshots.

    It looks hideous! If you want to be taken seriously, have a look around at other GUI operating systems. This reminds me of a rework of the original 1985 Amiga interface with mabled widgets. Definitely not good enough.

    (on a positive note, the Amiga had a pretty cool OS for the rest, so the OS may be fairly neat once they fix the UI look ;-) )

  • For PPC... will it run on my TiVo? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rcs1000 ( 462363 ) <rcs1000@@@gmail...com> on Thursday December 12, 2002 @07:02AM (#4869488)
    No joke: it would be really great to see if someone could get MorphOS running on a TiVo.

    Obviously, just to be able to say "well... I got tired of linux on my tivo, so i put morphos on" brings a certain amount of geek kudos.

    Or should I go and get a life now?

  • A HAL? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Queuetue ( 156269 )
    They have a hardware abstraction layer, which: "Makes MorphOS hardware independent"

    So... Why are they designing their own hardware? Or do I not understand the business relationships involved? Maybe this is a hardware company, and morphos is the only thing that runs on it?

    Then why not port something that already runs on PPC - one of the BSD's, Darwin or Linux?

    Someone explain this, please. Because it seems pretty risky to gamble on both a new hardware platform and the acceptance of a new OS simultaneously. Isn't that what stunted and ultimately killed a young and promising Be?

    • Re:A HAL? (Score:2, Informative)

      by AMiGR ( 628789 )
      MorphOS also runs on the Terrasoft/MAI TeronCX/PX boards, Eyetech's AmigaONE(renamed TeronCX with a different BIOS), the Pegasos and Amiga PowerUP cards. Mac support is being looked on.

      • Re:A HAL? (Score:2, Informative)

        by AMiGR ( 628789 )
        The Pegasos is open for any OSes. Linux already runs on it, MacOnLinux is very fun on it:) BSD and some other stuff are being worked on. Theoritically, porting darwin and tweaking OSX to run is not a problem.

  • Cyberdiversity (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chris Canfield ( 548473 ) <slashdot@@@chriscanfield...net> on Thursday December 12, 2002 @09:22AM (#4870436) Homepage
    I was going to write a parody of all the negative posts here, but this situation is just so gut-wrenching that I can't make fun of it.

    People, your OS Biodiversity is INCREASING for the first time in years! A small company is making a modern GUIed os that boots in 3 seconds and has already gotten to the maturity plateau where you can read your e-mail and surf. Are you all so beaten down by the beast that you can't even dream of a new OS? Yes, you need to buy new hardware. The hardware platform you are running on (appologies to Mac, BE, and WAP slashdotters) is over 20 years old. You are still using Serial ATA, with Floppy drives and PS/2 ports in the back, aren't you? And your 20 year old DOS system has just been replaced with a 15 year old NT/XP system... Have you even looked at the folder heirarchies? People, we can do MUCH, MUCH better.

    And yes, that means giving money to developers. Tightly knit, well-funded companies are capable of outperforming Open Source development in certain respects... It's just that they are so mired in money that many forgot how or why.

    Did Be Fail? They wrote a truly modern and elegant OS, spawned new interface paradigms, failed to seize Microsoft's crown, and took over Palm [theregister.co.uk]. That sounds like a pretty good ride... we should all be so lucky. Palm OS 6 should bring forth the real fruits of the project.

    The sales volume of a song does not determine its quality. If you really believe in code poetry, the same applies to us.

    -C

    • Re:Cyberdiversity (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Pengo ( 28814 )

      Well put,

      A while ago I read a post here on slashdot that has stuck with me. Had to do with Slackware, and them not having the success that RedHat and SuSE, even Mandrake have had.

      Basically the poster has said that just because their definition of success (being Patric & Co. at Slackware) isn't the same as say, RedHats, doesn't mean that they are not a success. Reaching their goal is what defines success. I found the original author of that comment quite insightful and really tweaked my perspective on things after that.
  • While the icons of an OS say nothing about the quality of the OS, the icons and the widgets of this OS look like they're a labour of love. Beautiful.

    If I had the extra money at the moment, I would buy one just for the OS.

Slashdot Top Deals

To be is to program.

Close