Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!cronkite!exodus!stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis@stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: Letter to Commodore Message-ID: <15543@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 20 Jun 91 06:00:33 GMT References: <177458@netw23.uucp> Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. Lines: 145 In article <177458@netw23.uucp> val@netw23.uucp (Oberon Kenobi) writes: The following is a wish list that Oberon send to Commodore, I don't work for Commodore but I can guess what they would answer if they were in a mind to. (I've deleted the intro part) > ... Couldn't you make it so that V2.0 will run on the > Amiga 1000 by loading it into some RAM location? They did this, the developer versions work fine on a 1000. There are of course a couple of drawbacks to this. 1) The A1000 doesn't have anyway of protecting this memory from being written over (first 512K of a 2MB expansion board), so when your programs go astray they not only trash AmigaDOS they trash the "ROM" image as well. To reboot requires you to boot into 1.3, then load 2.0 into memory, and then reboot into 2.0. From power on that is four boot disks, 1.3 kickstart to 1.3 DOS, 2.0 kickstart to 2.0 Dos. Are you willing to pay that price everytime you hit Ctrl-Amiga-Amiga ? 2) If they stuck 2.0 in the internal 512K you wouldn't have any RAM for applications so you have to have a 2MB ram board attached to your A1000. Do You? Do you know what the percentage of A1000s is that has more than 512K of RAM? It is about 3,000 machines. If you do have an expansion RAM, is the company that made it still in business? 3) Support for A1000s costs developer resources that Commodore doesn't have. The people who took Commodore up on their upgrade offer would rather have fewer bugs than to have them spend time testing whether or not 2.0 breaks the "Spirit InBoard". > The current Amigas are wonderful, but there is insufficient > incentive for me to upgrade. 2.0 is an incentive. Don't upgrade and you can't run 2.0. Want to upgrade now? > - Resource tracking: When tasks terminate, they should return > all system resources back to the operating system even > under abnormal termination (i.e.: task deletion). This > most definately includes memory. You ask for two different things, but most people would recognize this request. Commodore has an OS that supports full resource tracking and the killing off of errant tasks. Its called UNIX System V. Believe people when they tell you that there are fundamental design decisions that went into the development of AmigaDOS that make what you ask for impossible to provide in a compatible fashion. > - Memory protection: One of the (occasional) problems with > programs on the Amiga is that if they are not perfectly > behaved, they crash the system. This isn't too bad most > of the time, but it happens EVERY time I try to > demonstrate it to someone who owns another computer > system. Sorry chap, no can do without hardware. This is another incentive to upgrade to a 68030 based system, and UNIX. You won't find your UNIX programs trashing each other. As for AmigaDOS it is a fact of life just like it is for Multifinder and Windows. > - Virtual memory: It would be nice, on Amigas with MMUs, to > have virtual memory possible. Special consideration must > be made for memory that was allocated with the MEMF_PUBLIC > bit. There should also be a way to allocate > non-paged/swapped (but not necessarily public) memory. Easy to say tough to do. People who have really understood the system looked at the problem and backed off. How about the UNIX, looking better every minute isn't it? Part of the attraction of AmigaDOS is that it is lightweight and practically real-time in its response. Adding virtual memory breaks that model for no good reason. > - Networking: Standard networking layers should be > distributed with the operating system. The network should > be accessed either as a library or a "device". This > networking "device" should be independant of the phyical > medium (i.e.: serial port, parallel port, ethernet, token > ring, etc.) that is used. And multiple protocols (i.e.: > TCP/IP, DECnet, AMIGAnet (?)) should be able to share the > same physical device. (A cheap ethernet interface would > be nice.) > Apple supplies networking with their Macintosh and even > includes the physical port with which to do it. > Networking support should be built into the file system > (as DECnet on VMS is), and the programs should not have to > worry about routing. The ability to cluster and/or remote > mount file systems should be included (i.e.: VAXcluster, > NFS, RFS) with the networking software. Again, look into that UNIX stuff. They've got everything you ask for. But you can't run Shadow of the Beast under UNIX. Everything costs in one way or another. > - Graphics: Support for varying sizes of graphics screens, > aspect ratios, and color depth should be included. > Different, and multiple simultaneous, display devices > should be supported. (The NeXT and Macintosh do this.) > This should include expanding the address space of the > custom chips to 8-megabytes. (As well as faster custom > chips.) Every seen OpenLook? How about the Xt intrinsics? Now there is a window system that trades off speed for generality. X runs on everything with a variety of colors and display architectures and guess what? Its included with UNIX. > Overall, however, I am pleased with the Amiga line of computers and > still recommend them to all my friends. Unfortunately, many of them > want to buy NeXT computers (when they can afford them). Guess what the NeXT computer runs? You guessed it, something like UNIX. :-) > Speaking of networking, would any hardware types out there be willing to > create a network adaptor for which a SANE driver could be written. It > should be a bus type network. To make it work with all Amigas and get a > reasonably fast throughput, the adaptor could be made to fit on the back > of the floppy drive chain. Any takers? You'll get better performance out of the parallel port (PARNET) then you will with the Floppy connector. And you can already get DNET sort of stuff from the software distillery. If you're going to a broadband type of net use the serial port with 422 drivers. > Most of the rest of the letter is self-explainatory. Some of the rest has > been done, but I want a Commodore standard that comes with the machine. Why should Commodore spend time making AmigaDOS a UNIX wannabe when they have a perfectly good UNIX? (and a machine that will boot either easily) Understand that what AmigaDOS is good at (real time interactive simulations) is what UNIX sucks at, but what UNIX is good at (software development and commercial application support) AmigaDOS sucks at. Attempting to make one into the other just ends up making it less good at what it does. Wait for the Amiga 4000 with the 68040 and mondoacclerated graphics (could be a long long wait) where you can boot into either system depending on what you are doing at the time. Commodore seems to be addressing all of your concerns, just possibly not in the fashion you would like. -- --Chuck McManis Sun Microsystems uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "I tell you this parrot is bleeding deceased!"