Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!tandem!zorch!amiga0!mykes From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: 2.0 Compatibility Message-ID: Date: 30 Apr 91 06:58:05 GMT Organization: Amiga makes it possible Lines: 81 I'm posting this with no intention of starting a flame war... I've been using 2.0 for a couple of weeks now, and despite a few bugs and missing features, it is delightful. As I use it, though, I am beginning to see the Amiga market becoming highly fractured. I've seen it run on a 68000 machine, and it is reminiscent of the Mac (SE, Plus, etc.) in terms of performance. I have a 1Meg Amiga 500 that still has 1.2 in ROM, and I suspect that there are a lot of similar machines in the universe. This is the first segment of Amigas that programmers must consider. If there are, say, 1.5 Million A500s with 1.2, .25 Million A500s with 1.3, and some future number with 2.0 (all in ROM), we programmers must at least support 1.3 and 2.0 features. This means writing two sets of routines for our programs... The A1000 is appearing as if it is not going to get much continued support, at least from Commodore, but as developers, we should still support it. The A1000 is an Amiga after all, and it should run all the programs even if hardware expansion becomes limited in the future. The A2000s should definately be upgraded to 2.0, so we see another class of machine to support. And there is the 3000, too, which has subtle differences in hardware which can (and possibly should) be taken advantage of. And there was talk a while ago about Commodore coming out with a new graphics standard a while ago (the Lowell board), which again requires a different programming strategy. And what if CBM comes out with yet another standard? And then there are all the various 24-bit graphics adapters (toaster, HAM-E, DCTV, etc.) which might deserve consideration for support... Slowly but surely, the Amiga has gone from a machine that had a finite set of standard features to deal with to one that is going to be as varied as the PC is. With the PC, there are several graphics adapters, mouse devices, audio peripherals, operating systems, etc., that an applications programmer has to write almost as much device support code as application specific code. I do like the new and powerful features that can be added to the Amiga, but I wonder how cost effective it is, for example, to write a 2.0 only application. How possible is it to make software that is going to be compatible for a long time to come? As good as 2.0 and the rest of the addons are, I am concerned that it will be a long time before we see developer support for most of it. I know it is currently possible to just stick to 1.3 calls and still support 2.0, but there isn't much good in all the great things that have been added if they aren't used. The Macintosh family of computers has been successful because Apple has forced people to adhere strictly to the use of the OS for even the most primitive operations. Unfortunately, the Amiga OS is designed to allow multiple applications to share and directly manipulate the hardware. It is quite common on the Amiga for an application to bypass the graphics library and use the blitter (directly) or the cpu to render directly into bitplanes. All these applications won't work on a radically different display device (such as the lowell one). It sure looks safe to simply write CLI based applications, because they won't break as easily, but these kinds of programs aren't any better than a Unix or MS-DOS or MPW program (to a large extent). The Amiga has a decent GUI in Intuition, but even its use doesn't appear as if it is going to keep applications compatible for a long time to come... One of the first things I noticed about 2.0 is that when I run CygnusEd in a workbench window, the pull-down menus no longer line up correctly (thanks to 2.0's ability to allow me to change the default screen font). This is not a lament, but a objective view of what looks like is going on. It would be ideal to be able to rely on the OS for future compatibility, but there are going to be a zillion gotchas that we are going to have to deal with from now on (for each new hardware and OS platform). The Amiga is becoming like the Mac in that when the hardware/software changes, those who get the improvements will have to upgrade their software to gain full compatibility. -- **************************************************** * I want games that look like Shadow of the Beast * * but play like Leisure Suit Larry. * ****************************************************