Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site uicsl
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!hr
From: hr@uicsl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.cbm
Subject: Re: Welcome!
Message-ID: <7600004@uicsl>
Date: Fri, 6-Sep-85 12:17:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uicsl.7600004
Posted: Fri Sep  6 12:17:00 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Sep-85 00:36:28 EDT
References: <3436@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Lines: 23
Nf-ID: #R:topaz.RUTGERS.EDU:-343600:uicsl:7600004:000:852
Nf-From: uicsl.UUCP!hr    Sep  6 11:17:00 1985


<>

>> anybody besides me interested in getting OS9/68K running on the Amiga?

>  Does anybody know why they decided to "go their own way" and develop
	custom OS's for their machines.

This is from my memory of a month ago. So don't assume its completely
accurate:

At Siggraph, I asked one of the Amiga developers, (well, he WAS wearing
an Amiga T shirt) why they had not used OS/9. I don't think he had ever
heard of it. He also said something about the graphics chips needing
time critical software support. The drivers needed to be tightly
integrated into the OS. He seemed skeptical about a standard driver/OS
interface being able to respond fast enough.

Too bad. I suspect that the Amiga software could have been stable alot
sooner if Commodore and Microware could have worked together.

						harold ravlin
					{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!uicsl!hr