Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Timberwolf (a.k.a. Firefox) Alpha 1 For AmigaOS

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the because-it-was-there dept.

Amiga 152

An anonymous reader writes "We're happy to announce the availability of the first alpha release of Timberwolf, the AmigaOS port of the popular Firefox browser. Timberwolf needs AmigaOS 4.1 Update 2 installed. Please read the documentation for information about usage and limitations. This is an alpha release, meaning it will have a lot of problems still, and be slower than it should be. We are releasing it as a small 'Thank you' to all those that have donated in the past to show that development is still going on. Timberwolf is available on os4depot.net. For further information and feedback, check the Timberwolf support forum on amigans.net."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

...really? (0, Flamebait)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516088)

People still use Amigas? Why?

Re:...really? (1, Interesting)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516140)

You can mark this as flamebait or whatever, but this was clearly posted here because of the novelty of porting a modern, popular program to an obsolete OS.

Which means that the obsolete OS still has users -- so I think my question has some merit.

HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE A DEAD OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516190)

HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE A DEAD OS [slashdot.org]

Slashdot mods: Infinitely Retarded

Re:...really? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516378)

It's not AS obsolete as one might think, amiga OS 4.1 update 2 was released in 2010. Amiga OS 4 was released in 2006. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_OS_4

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518642)

Yeah, it's just a proprietary OS that runs on outdated PPC hardware that nobody in their right mind would use.

Because it's OSS (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516538)

You can mark this as flamebait or whatever, but this was clearly posted here because of the novelty of porting a modern, popular program to an obsolete OS.

Which means that the obsolete OS still has users -- so I think my question has some merit.

The wonderful thing about open-source software is that "because you can" is a perfectly valid reason, as are "because I personally want it" and "because it's a challenge."

If this was an announcement of, say, Microsoft Office or Adobe CS5 being ported to an obsolete OS, you'd have to wonder about the sanity of the company in question.

Re:...really? (3, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517818)

>>>an obsolete OS - I think my question has some merit.

Your question makes an invalid assumption, which is why it was labeled "flamebait" or "troll" by moderators. AmigaOS 4.1 is just over 1 year old. You can that "obsolete"? Hardly. It's younger than the Vista, XP or OS X 10.5 operating systems many of us are still using. - And "I didn't know" isn't a defense when you're only a mouseclick away from google: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=amigaos+4.1 [lmgtfy.com]

The Amiga hardware is a bit slow (~800 megahertz), but then again it's always been a lightweight OS, so it doesn't need much speed. The original Amiga did true multitasking with just 0.25 megabytes of RAM and the modern Amiga OS is just as efficient.

Re:...really? (1)

mike260 (224212) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518032)

AmigaOS 4.1 is just over 1 year old. You can that "obsolete"?

Uh, age is not a measure of obsolescence. Rather, something is obsolete when it falls sufficiently far below current baseline standards. It sucks, and it didn't deserve it, but AmigaOS is obsolete. Think of it as WALL*E if that helps soften the blow.

Re:...really? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518214)

>>>something is obsolete when it falls sufficiently far below current baseline standards.

And who decides those standards? YOU? hahahahaaha. You clearly know nothing about this subject. There are many people using Amigas to surf the web, listen to music, and/or watch videos just as easily as we use our Macs or PCs to do the same tasks. The Amiga exceeds whatever "baseline standards" you have floating in your close-minded brain

Speaking about obsolete (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520292)

If we are talking about "didn't deserve but..." thing, Apple PowerPC, including G5 (which is 64bit) has been obsoleted by Apple right after 10.6 release.

It gets security updates, Safari update but at the end, core OS (including open source parts and most importantly, drivers) doesn't get updated. That is not some eccentric platform either, it is 64bit to begin with.

Amiga OS users say they got last OS update a year ago. What is obsolete? Amiga or PowerPC Mac, from $250 billion Apple Inc?

Re:...really? (3, Informative)

abigor (540274) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518150)

No memory protection is one reason why Amiga OS is fast. Unfortunately, it's also a big reason why it's obsolete, regardless of the chronology of its latest updates.

Re:...really? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518240)

>>>No memory protection

(cough) (whispers) That hasn't been true since 1992. Per usual the Amiga had this feature before either Mac or PC had it.

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518418)

Well, AmigaOS had Enforcer and later Guardian Angel all the way back then, sure. But they made your amiga run almost as slow as the next memory protected OS, since, well, they used MMU hardware on your system just like other memory protected OSes (i.e. unix). And on a double-digit-MHz machine, that hurt a lot.

So Enforcer/GuardianAngel were used mainly by developers with "accelerated" amigas with replaced CPUs with MMUs onboard - if you fixed bugs until enforcer "hits" stopped, you could be fairly confident that you wouldn't crash end-user machines running without any such memory protection.

It wasn't until amigaos 4 that any in-OS support for memory protection became official.

Re:...really? (1)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 4 years ago | (#32519110)

Are you talking about enforcer? That really was more of a developer tool - chances are if enforcer kicked in you could either (try to) debug or reboot because at that point the app was unusable, and so was the rest of the machine (especially if enforcer kept looping).

At any rate I wouldn't call it memory protection.

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518292)

AmigaOS 4 added memory protection.

No memory protection but... (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520260)

Really, a lot of people jumping to PC ship always wondered how come Amiga could work without memory protection.

Why? Basically, we had some real mean Amigas (A3000, A4000) which were in use at production, sometimes in live TV (titling etc, still used) and I never remember any of them crash. 3d titling animations like stuff sometimes required days to render and at the end, you always had the result, not some "guru meditation". Such machines were never turned off, rebooted, always used in hot environments, heavily multitasked and full of unsupported CPU upgrades.

So, really, why didn't Amiga crash that much?

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518196)

AmigaOS 4 isn't particularly obsolete (apart from being closed source, I happen to consider closed source obsolete in social terms). Classic AmigaOS's one serious failing* was its lack of memory protection, AmigaOS 4 added memory protection.

So yeah, modern OS versions have caught up in many areas with AmigaOS. But that neglects the gestalt - the macosx-like-but-different way everything hangs together coherently (I refuse to say synergistically). It has a bunch of features that would be recognisable to modern macosx/linux and even windoze users. And stuff like datatypes are still kinda neat today. Want every app on your system to be able to open some new multimedia file format? Drop in a datatype [aminet.net] (codec) for it. Want [the amiga equivalent of] /usr/local/work and /opt/mystuff/work2 to appear as one logical volume? ASSIGN ADD them together. Or you can faff about with unionfs on linux of course. Want to script a bunch of apps? Gee, you can, because there's a systemwide standard for that shit. Okay, apple has applescript and windows has windows scripting host, but amiga had analogous facilities back when windows didn't even have preemptive multitasking.

A textbook basic AmigaOS setup isn't much like what the few remaining hardcore AmigaOS users can make their system do anyway:
The line between os and add-on is very blurred (a bit like linux), of course, you've got a zillion "commodities" (daemons) that mutate the GUI and OS in various directions. You've got a bunch of deeper hacks that use SetPatch() to augment/replace core OS functionality (a bit like LD_PRELOAD on linux, if you squint).

(* and strength, back when performance mattered it allowed it to use an interproceess message passing by reference architecture, which gave amazing speed on limited hardware)

The idea of Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520228)

Firefox is designed to build and run on ANY modern 32bit OS with necessary frameworks and of course, gnu compiler chain available.

The idea behind Firefox like tools and in fact, Unix is that. Of course, they must have some nightmare to port it to Amiga but at the end, they managed to do it.

Re:...really? (1, Flamebait)

philofaqs (668524) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516226)

Quite. It's dead Jim, give it up. What's next? a DOS version, CPM Acorn OS. OK It's a geek thing to say we can. How many Amiga systems still work? So 3 other people download it, say WOW, and then never use it again? No doubt I'll be called a troll but really shouldn't you put your mad skillz to a better use?

Re:...really? (4, Insightful)

cupantae (1304123) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516338)

...and Commodore64 application development continues unfalteringly.

I can understand it perfectly. It's the novelty, the nostalgia, and the challenge. If people think they'll enjoy the results, why not?

Re:...really? (0, Flamebait)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517104)

Really? From all the things you chose in life, you choose THIS?
O...k...
I mean, do whatever makes you happy.
But... what the hell, dude? ;)
Shall I invite you to a party with some girls?
Or skydiving maybe?
Or racing a rally car trough South America?
Or even just writing a game.
You know... for great justice! ;)

Re:...really? (2, Interesting)

cupantae (1304123) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517326)

I don't do any development for old systems - I was just saying I can understand the appeal of it. I have actually gone skydiving...and paragliding...and bungee jumping (but I can't drive). And that's only in 20 years on the planet. That's fun for a change, but TBH, I prefer spending more time tinkering with machines and instruments. A general interest in the Universe is a wonderful thing to have.

And it gets you laid pretty often if you can also engage in conversation ;-)

Re:...really? (1, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517754)

Fuck off.

Seriously. Fuck off. You're on a tech site, full of people who do things because it interests them, for the sake of doing it.

You don't belong here. You're everything we fight against. Go watch Glee or whatever it is you people do.

Re:...really? (1)

mike260 (224212) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518044)

Second.

Re:...really? (1)

abigor (540274) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518170)

Thirded.

Re:...really? (3, Interesting)

RJFerret (1279530) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518084)

Even more practical than that, a tenant literally just handed me some cash, I'm popping into my Amiga software (I created with CanDo years ago) as we speak to record the transaction, with records going back almost two decades. All my banking/financial stuff I do w/Amiga software.

Okay technically my daily use "Amiga" is currently WinUAE running on my laptop, but I always wanted a laptop Amiga (and I have an A4000 and A500 still kicking, actually bought the A4000, my second, just a couple years ago for ridiculously little money from an Amiga dealer).

So the answer is you can still do some things easier on an Amiga, but web surfing via AWeb was annoying (and no Flash), that's what took me to a Linux box and ultimately to Windows. However I miss ARexx integration, standard through all software, to this day--AutoHotKey in Windows is a poor substitute.

I have MP3s that were brought over from my Amiga, as well as digital photos from way before digital cameras were mainstream, heck the background screenshot on my cellphone is carried over (was digitized with DCTV and composited/converted to JPEG with ADPro).

Just because it's not currently being promoted doesn't mean it doesn't work! Heck, it was easier/cheaper to connect my PDA to my Amiga than it was to connect it to my laptop.

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516772)

but really shouldn't you put your mad skillz to a better use?

If you're gonna tell me how I shall use my time, can I tell you how you should use yours?

Re:...really? (5, Informative)

aliquis (678370) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516958)

It's quite simple:
The most used software of todays computers for most people is the web browser.

So having a decent web-browser make AmigaOS much more usable. And for most else it already have good software. Sure it may not be the state of the art for video editing or something such but for everyday use everything is there and people enjoy their old apps I assume.

Origyn Web Browser is a Webkit based browser for MorphOS and AmigaOS4:
http://fabportnawak.free.fr/owb/ [fabportnawak.free.fr]
http://os4depot.net/share/network/browser/owb.lha [os4depot.net]

Someone has obviously made it possible to play Youtube videos from within iBrowse, which atleast back in the day was an Amiga browser not based on any other engine which I know of:
http://os4depot.net/share/network/browser/ib_youtube.lha [os4depot.net]
iBrowse web page:
http://www.ibrowse-dev.net/ [ibrowse-dev.net]
Looks like it got a flash plugin for MorphOS:
http://www.ibrowse-dev.net/news.php?id=1169229504 [ibrowse-dev.net]

And there exist a PPC-version of AWEB:
http://os4depot.net/share/network/browser/aweb.lha [os4depot.net]

Enough people use it that they have donated more than 5000 euro to get it ported to that page. I don't know if it handles the donation from the old project which was about the same think, getting a modern browser (gecko) on AmigaOS.

Re:...really? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517442)

No doubt I'll be called a troll but really shouldn't you put your mad skillz to a better use?

And people with the best skills has shown time and time again that they prefer to put it into something they enjoy, hence the demo scene (though some has of course decided that food was a good idea, and hence moved on to developing games or whatever.)

Lots of applications "suffer" from programmers ego by having functionality which may not make sense, be very useful or mostly bloat the application just because "it would be cool to be able to" / "I wonder if I could ..", maybe less so the more commercial, large and managed the project is.

Re:...really? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517894)

>>>Quite. It's dead Jim, give it up...How many Amiga systems still work? So 3 other people download it, say WOW, and then never use it again? No doubt I'll be called a troll but really shouldn't you put your mad skillz to a better use?
>>>

If Amigas are dead why can I go buy a brand-new system, right now, for less than $1000. If Amigas are dead why is a new model being released in just a few months?

The only thing that's dead here is your curiosity. You'd rather jump to false ASSumptions, rather than GOOGLE for information about the Amiga: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=amiga+os+4.1 [lmgtfy.com]

You're not a troll.
You're just an ignorant boob with a big mouth, and
you made yourself look like an idiot with your "Amiga's dead" comment.

Re:...really? (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517976)

Aaaaaaactually... Firefox was originally ported to RISC OS 5 years ago.

http://www.riscos.info/index.php/Mozilla_Firefox [riscos.info]

IIRC, there's issues with GTK2 preventing a Firefox 3.x port from being usable, but there is Firefox for "Acorn OS."

Re:...really? (1)

butlerm (3112) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518504)

What's next? a DOS version

DOS isn't a operating system, it is a system that operates disks. Porting Firefox to DOS would pretty much require you to write a modern operating system first. The disk/file support that comes with DOS just scratches the surface.

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518596)

@ philofaqs

Stating from various polls on amiga sites, there are about 1500 Old Amigas equipped qwith PowerPC acceleration cards, 3000 Amiga New Generation Machines (AONE XE, SE, MicroAONE, Sam440 EX, SAm 440Flex), 1500 to 2000 Pegasos MorphOS Users and other 500 to 1000 loading MorphOS on PPC based Macintosh computers, 5000 users of Classic Amigas equipped with 680xx acceleration cards, more than 10.000 users of WinUAE Amiga Emulator (But these are mainly persons who want to emulate old Amigas for gaming) and an an unknown but steady growing number of users of Open Source operating system AROS, even if it is incomplete (sure almost 100 to 300 are using it more and more, due to the fact AROS now has good OWB Webkit Browser, and it cames installed on some netbooks like iMica System, and ARESONE).

That's a damn*d fu**ing core userbase.

Does this sounds enough machines and enough alive and kicking for you "Jim Famous Spaceship Captain dressed in pajama suit"?

Ciao,

Raffaele
 

Re:...really? (1)

Spikeles (972972) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518788)

For the money [amigabounty.net]

Re:...really? (3, Interesting)

Samurai Crow (937687) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516234)

People use new PowerPC Amigas because they can. Classic Amigas are at least collectible because they were 10 years ahead of their time when they came out. They have held their value well.

PCs depreciate very quickly by comparison. The fact that every new version of the OS needs more hardware each time drives the value of used PCs through the floor.

I can understand why people think the next-generation Amigas with the PowerPC chips are not so great though. They use commodity hardware internally instead of doing original stuff like Commodore did.

Reality Check (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516512)

Could someone with mad hacker skills and way too much time on their hands please post some figures comparing the computing power of an Amiga to an iPad?

I'm just nostalgic as anyone else who started messing with computers in the 70s and I remember the first machines I used and owned with great fondness. But you have to recognize that your "hobby time" spent with antique hardware and software is of very little benefit to the world.

Which is why it's called a hobby.

Re:Reality Check (2, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516834)

Could someone with mad hacker skills and way too much time on their hands please post some figures comparing the computing power of an Amiga to an iPad?

Sure. This is the computing power of an Amiga:

.

See it? Now this is the computing power of an iPad:

o

And that's about as exact an approximation as we need... computing power is not a complete metric for comparing computing systems. More important is the computing ecosystem -- the applications available, the restrictions on use of the system, etc. I'm sure that there are some people out there for whom an Amiga is better suited to their computing needs than an iPad, since it is largely an open ecosystem.

But you have to recognize that your "hobby time" spent with antique hardware and software is of very little benefit to the world.

Which is why it's called a hobby.

Actually, almost everything I do is of very little benefit to the world. Yet my job is not a hobby, my family is not a hobby, breathing is not a hobby... and yet, one of my hobbies is maintaining hiking trails. Probably this is the one thing with the most positive impact on the world that I do, and it's a hobby.

My main point here is that someone spending time on Amiga development may be pursuing a hobby... but whether their hobby benefits the rest of the world in a measurable manner is beside the point. The only concern is whether or not it fulfills them without harming others. And you'd be hard pressed to demonstrate harm to others without introducing societal opportunity cost, which is a tough selling point when it comes to individual fulfillment.

All that said... congrats to the developers on a (somewhat) stable release. They should take pride in their accomplishment, regardless of how important that accomplishment is to society as a whole.

Re:Reality Check (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517980)

>>>computing power of an Amiga to an iPad?

Well an iPad won't let me play my favorite game - Elite. So that's why I keep my Commodore 64 and Amiga running, even though they are slow as snails. As for MODERN Amigas versus an iPad - I have no idea.

The latest Amiga will be released soon, with a 1500 megahertz PowerPC. So about the same as the first Mac G5, but with a much better operating system.

Re:Reality Check (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#32519346)

Yeah, no Elite. But I should thank you for making me look for trading games Warp Gate [freeverse.com] looks pretty cool. If you're into old games the iPad is actually a pretty cool device since it has a 1024x768 display and accellarated OpenGL support.

Re:Reality Check (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518710)

So you are calling hardware in the ghz range for antique?? What about the new dual core at 1.8ghz with 2gig of ram that is to be released this summer??
Even my low end Sam 533mhz is faster and more responsive than a modern windows pc for most normal computing tasks.
My amiga is usually only slower than my linux box only with software/games that is CPU or GPU resource hog.

Re:...really? (1)

atomic777 (860023) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516376)

You must be new here...

Re:...really? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516620)

    Both users should be very impressed.

    And ya, it's not flamebait. Silly mods.

Re:...really? (2, Informative)

91degrees (207121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516794)

OS4.1 is a decent enough OS, and the current Amiga OS machines have fast modern CPUs.

Some people simply like Amiga OS. The way the Amiga does screens (every application on its own desktop at its own resolution) and the fast boot time and the datatypes system are all pretty nice innovations that you don't get with other platforms.

Re:...really? (4, Insightful)

lena_10326 (1100441) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517042)

People still use Amigas? Why?

If you have to ask, then you're not a nerd. Go away. Shooo!

Re:...really? (1)

adelgado (1113833) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518928)

Well, as a geek born in the 90's I'd like to understand why people still use Amigas...

If it's just for the coolness I can easily appreciate it, hell, I ran Windows 3.11 for a few months on my Core 2 Quad as my primary OS just because I could, but otherwise are there any significant applications or niches Amiga OS fills that aren't quite addressed by modern Unix or Windows operating systems?

Re:...really? (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 4 years ago | (#32519238)

The biggest way that slashdot has gone downhill since I started reading it has been the amount of people who ask "why" a person would do some neat bit of coding, or engineering, or hacking, or whatever. Why does someone climb a mountain or paint a painting.

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32517366)

Maybe because some of us prefer a more lightweight and responsive OS?? Amiga OS 4.1 has come a long way since OS 3.x days.

I am writing this using firefox/timberwolf on my low end Sam 440ep 533mhz running OS4.1 u2.
The system boots in less than 10 seconds, has working composite hardware acceleration, and feels in general faster/more responsive than windows or linux running on a modern PC.
Why should i not use this system when it does some tasks faster than a high end pc?
This system is just simply excellent as a web surfing box, mp3 jukebox or similar. It also saves me some money on the electricity bill as the cpu only uses 3watt under full load.

The next version "4.2" will most likely both have SMP support as well as other modern features added.

Re:...really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518114)

People are still into computers? Why?

Re:...really? YARLY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518414)

We use Amiga because it is fun, easy to use, no resource consuming, low footprint.

It obeys flawlessly the user, and responds immediately.

AOS does not send unwanted private info to M$, and does not loads unwanted things by automated Hidden Update Services.

Is it intelligible for the normal user and has a plain easy system of directories unlike Linux which is aimed to geeks with a PhD in Computer Science.

AmigaOS does not treat the user as stupid baby bimbos unable to grow up as it assumes MacOS, where you must dig the OS preferences to disable all the annoying warnings that pop up the desktop and advicing you are stupid and you must be perfectly sure of any action you ordered the machine to perform.

In Amiga it is you controlling the OS and the platform, and not vice--versa.

If all these little thingie features it is not enough for you, then welcome! You are dead brain and nothing than a zombiie user from PC world.
Somewhere, somewhen you were just just lobotomized brainwashed by your PC-OS manufacturer, and you were not even capable to undestand this happened.

Ciao,

Raffaele

How responsive? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516130)

How responsive is this port? Is it fast enough to get a first post on slashdot?

Re:How responsive? (3, Funny)

sxedog (824351) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516194)

I think you answered your own question...

Re:How responsive? (1)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516220)

No no, he's looking into it to see if it's faster than what he's currently using.

Re:How responsive? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516710)

    Well, it should be faster than his C64. :)

   

Re:How responsive? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517438)

The C64 web browser is actually pretty fast. Unfortunately, with only 64KB of RAM in total, and around 10KB or so taken up with the kernel (Contiki), there isn't much left to store web pages. Basically, you need to get a first post, because if you load a Slashdot page with more than a few comments you'll run out of memory.

Re:How responsive? (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517996)

The Apple II version of Contiki does things in a way that's simultaneously very smart and absolutely fucktarded.

Because it doesn't support CSS or anything fancy, it grabs the page, and anything that it knows won't display, it discards.

To display more of the page, it makes another round trip to grab the page again.

Re:How responsive? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518026)

That is why you need the 4096 kilobyte external memory upgrade. The internal 64K is used directly by the 6502 CPU while the external memory can be used for caching of webpages, graphics, et cetera.

AmigaOS (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516170)

Does this run on anything besides official Amigas? Does it run on anything fast enough to make Firefox worthwhile? If so, does it still support all the original Amiga software?

Re:AmigaOS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516276)

It supports mah big nigga dick pummeling your tight asshole you cracka bitch.

Re:AmigaOS (3, Informative)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516468)

I'm not sure what you mean by "official Amiga". OS 4.x is strictly PPC, and specifically "AmigaOne, SAM440EP and Pegasos II" (from the "AmigaOS 4.1 Update 2" link). By my definition, there were no native PPC Amigas (i.e., from Commodore); those were all 680x0 machines like God intended.

I guess that just goes to show you the unsettled state of what's considered "Amiga".

Re:AmigaOS (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516924)

Honestly I didn't even know there were PPC Amigas. I'm guessing they won't run 68k Amiga software then.

Re:AmigaOS (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517098)

Originally the PPC stuff was done by an add-on card and you could still run 68k software AFAIK. I couldn't afford to upgrade to PPC though and ended up going to PCs instead.. I'm still slightly tempted by the whole thing just for fun.. with a decent browser then an Amiga could be almost as useful to me as any Mac or Linux machine.. then again if I'm going to bother buying a desktop machine I'd probably get it with Windows so that I could do a bit of gaming on it. If there's a PPC Amiga emulator out there I might give it a go for just to see what it's like..

Re:AmigaOS (2, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517514)

They probably can. The PowerPC instruction set was designed to make it easy to emulate x86 and m68k. The AIM (Apple, IBM, Motorola) group wanted to run Windows and MacOS on them, emulating the legacy architectures for old code. Given that most m68k Amigas had an CPU running at under 8MHz, and even the upgrades only went to about 40MHz, it's not much of a stretch to expect a 533MHz PowerPC to be able to emulate the m68k chip much faster than the real thing ran. Unless, of course, you bought one of the 300MHz m68k expansions that came out a couple of years ago, and even then the PPC is probably faster.

Re:AmigaOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518184)

Amiga OS 4.x has built in 68k emulation layer that works for most system/OS friendly software. Even my Sam 533mhz running 4.1 emulates 68k faster than the fastest 68k chips.

Re:AmigaOS (PPC and 680xx software) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518852)

PPC based AmigaOS run ancient 680xx software thru Just in Time based emulator embedded into it.

If there are software that does not apprecciate JIT Machine, you can blacklist this software and it will run slowly without JIT.

Tough you can run only Amiga Professional Software that should make no calls to original Amiga Hardware Chipset.

This means that games cannot run on new Amigas.

For example new PPC Amigas can run trhu AmigaOS based 680xx emulator all those professional software like Final Writer word processor software, good pieces of imaging software like Art Effect, Image FX and all the vaste majority of Amiga Graphic Programs vector or bitmap, DTP programs like Pagestream, various 3D rendering software like Imagine and Lightwave (only the PPC version), various music software, route planning software, stars & planetarium software, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

In order to run ancient games and good but old software like Deluxe Paint (that makes lots of use of Amiga Chipset features) Then even new generation PPC based Amigas uses UAE Emulator.

Re:AmigaOS (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518074)

>>>By my definition, there were no native PPC Amigas (i.e., from Commodore); those were all 680x0 machines like God intended.

But Commodore(spit) sold the Amiga to other companies, and those other companies followed the Apple Macintosh example: Upgraded from the obsolete 68000-series to the new PowerPC CPUs. These later model Amigas are no longer Commodore(spit)-labeled machines, but they are still Amigas.

In retrospect the death of Commodore may have been one of the best things to happen for Amiga. It freed them from a company that didn't know how to innovate (it just sat on its ass for 7 years, not upgrading the graphics or sound).

Re:AmigaOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516976)

No official Amiga shipped with eithernet, you had to buy an expansion card and buy a (or roll your own) tcp/ip stack.
Amiga's were gasping their dieing breaths when the web started to take off.

Re:AmigaOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32517500)

It already runs on some PPC systems with up to 1ghz g4.
This summer will see the release of yet another amiga system with pci express, dual core and 2gig of ram. I think this would be considered fast enough. :P
I am writing this on a low end Sam 440ep 533mhz system running firefox/timberwolf on OS4.2. The timberwolf alpha actually runs surprisingly well considering it has not yet been optimized at all and lack hardware rendering support.

oops (4, Funny)

MrDoh! (71235) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516216)

| Guru Meditation Error |

Names & Shiny Objects (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516248)

Three things:
1) Why call it Timberwolf? To avoid the Iceweasel debacle?
2) Timberwolf sounds a whole lot cooler than Firefox.
3) AmigaOS looks pretty from the screenshots.

Named after Justin Timberlake (0, Offtopic)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516464)

1) Why call it Timberwolf? To avoid the Iceweasel debacle?

The guy who wrote it has aspergers and is obsessed with Justin Timberlake.

2) Timberwolf sounds a whole lot cooler than Firefox.

Oh dear, another Justin fan!

3) AmigaOS looks pretty from the screenshots.

Note: Doesn't reserve the word "pretty" for females. Yep that about confirms it.

Re:Names & Shiny Objects (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516682)

1) Why call it Timberwolf? To avoid the Iceweasel debacle?

It's not avoiding some theoretical problem. If you modify Firefox you aren't allowed to distribute it as "Firefox".

Re:Names & Shiny Objects (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516908)

1) Why call it Timberwolf? To avoid the Iceweasel debacle?

This was the inspired effort of the lead marketing consultant (one of the grizzled developer's girlfriends).

2) Timberwolf sounds a whole lot cooler than Firefox.

Yes, this was the special insight of the aforementioned girlfriend -- she realized that there was a unique opportunity to capitalize on the zeitgeist: namely the Three Wolf Moon phenomenon and the popularity of the reality TV logging shows.

3) AmigaOS looks pretty from the screenshots.

So does your mom... but that's just because both sets of screenshots were taken using the "MySpace angle".

Sorry.

I awoke today... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516252)

...in an alternate universe where Amiga won the PC wars. All the screensavers in the office are bouncing red/white checkered boing balls. Video-toaster overlays make compiz look like MSDOS. Also, Wil Wheaton is CIO of America.

Re:I awoke today... (1)

Fantastic Lad (198284) | more than 4 years ago | (#32518594)

That would actually be an awesome universe! I remember the Amiga people were bright and happy and smart. Kind of like Apple people today, except they were more fun and they weren't scared of hacking and open source thinking.

It could have happened, too. There was this weird period where everything shifted. It was when Lucasarts released X-Wing on the PC and nothing else. I know guys who bought whole $2000+ systems just to play that game. (Such was the power of Star Wars before Phantom). Imagine if Lucas had released it on the Amiga?

Heck, Bill Gates might not have become such a force in everybody's lives.

Of course, the Evil Overlords were prepared for such an eventuality. Some ex-CIA spooks managed to work themselves into power over at Commodore, and tanked the company. Interestingly, it's very hard to look up the details of that since Google searches on the subject get confused by one of the chips inside the Amiga, called the "CIA" chip.

But whatever.

Instead we got Linux and Mozilla. And Slashdot, for that matter. Can't keep the good guys down!

-FL

Looks like Gurus will have a new gig (1)

ryan.onsrc (1321531) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516254)

Awesome, now Gurus will be mediated to troubleshoot Firefox (I mean Timberwolf) issues.

USER_AGENT (4, Funny)

RichMan (8097) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516264)

So does anyone know the exact string the browser identifies as?

I am thinking I should set my browser to match this.

Re:USER_AGENT (2, Funny)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517560)

Hmm..Perhaps we should make Amiga appear to the most popular OS on the Internet...

12 years too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516300)

When Mozilla was released back in 1998 there were several announcements of releases for AmigaOS. Only now they finally manage to do it.

Amiga. Sounds cool. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516308)

Where can I buy one?

You mean I can't. It is a dead OS?

Why don't we strap DVD players on the Wright brother's airplane?

Re:Amiga. Sounds cool. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516368)

That's stupid.

What movie could you watch in 15 seconds?

Re:Amiga. Sounds cool. (2, Funny)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516418)

Anything starring Rob Schneider or Ben Stiller? The first 15 seconds of the movie is usually the limit of what any normal person could stand of them.

Re:Amiga. Sounds cool. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520170)

The hilarious thing is, there's probably some idiot here who'd huff and indignantly ask "why not indeed". Gotta love a culture where doing anything that exercises your brain/body is consider a good thing. Very reductionist and decadent I say.

Wow (0, Troll)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516362)

I'm sure both the people out there that still have functioning Amigas are thrilled -- but only because they were both involved with the porting process!

You do all know that Amiga OS 4.1 is new, right? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516438)

This isn't the old Amiga OS running on old hardware. This is a new version (as in 2000's) of the Amiga OS to take advantage of newer, more powerful hardware etc.

Re:You do all know that Amiga OS 4.1 is new, right (3, Informative)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516986)

New as in april 30th, 2010 [hyperion-e...inment.biz] even...

Re:You do all know that Amiga OS 4.1 is new, right (1)

Simmeh (1320813) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517188)

I've heard good things so far about the alpha, things are looking up =)

Re:You do all know that Amiga OS 4.1 is new, right (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517552)

Typical Amiga user - completely oblivious to the rest of the industry. Compaq discontinued the Alpha over a decade ago...

Now I need Amiga emulator for my Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516766)

so I would be able to run recursively the browser...I do not mind the emulator to be written in JavaScript, it has a chance to be equally fast as on real Amiga, right?

Re:Now I need Amiga emulator for my Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32516814)

Sup dawg. We herd you liek running javascript emulators in your browsers so we put an emulator in your emulator so you can emulate while you emulatin'!

Oh yeah? (1)

Fished (574624) | more than 4 years ago | (#32516832)

Mac user: Your sad devotion to that dying religion hasn't helped you conjure up the stolen Commodore glory!

Amiga user: I find your lack of faith disturbing. Pinch. Pinch. Damnit. Why isn't it working!?

Hopefully better than the RISC OS port (1)

QJimbo (779370) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517022)

The RISC OS port of Firefox was overhyped and painfully slow even on the Iyonix last time I tried it. It wasn't a "true" port either, it didn't use the native GUI of the operating system. It would be a shame if this port has similar setbacks.

Re:Hopefully better than the RISC OS port (1)

Jorl17 (1716772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517156)

RTFA and get your answers.

Re:Hopefully better than the RISC OS? YES!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518264)

Stating from those who had used it, Timberwolf it is surprisingly stable and enough fast in drawing pages, even if it steals many cycles of the processor and uses huge quantities of RAM.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5470&start=0

Some found it more quick than OWB Amiga browser based on Webkit (and truly Webkit is very fast)

Ciao,

Raffaele

Good work. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32517084)

Thanks for all your hard works, guys. Can you please make this run on my TI/99-4A as well? Thanks.

Exciting news for AmigaOS users (1)

Alien1024 (1742918) | more than 4 years ago | (#32517928)

For all four of them.

I am anxiously waiting for the ZX Spectrum port.

They Said: "Firefox? It can be done on Amiga" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32518216)

Release of Alpha 1 version of Timberwolf (Amiga Shiretoko/Firefox) is truly a slap in the face that I dedicate with all my heart to all the naysayers who said publicly on dozens of forums and news articles that Firefox porting it can't be done on Amiga because it has slow PPC processors and has too few hardware resources.

Only Amiga makes it possible.

Ciao,

Raffaele

I thank you on behalf of Amiga Web Surfers (1, Funny)

fm6 (162816) | more than 4 years ago | (#32519192)

Both of them.

AmigaOS ? You're kidding, right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32519364)

AmigaOS ? You're kidding, right?

So...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520066)

....Ho hum...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?