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!

Amiga OS Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes

Roblimo posted more than 15 years ago | from the why-can't-they-make-up-their-minds dept.

Amiga 236

First we heard that Amiga's new OS was going to be based on the QNX realtime OS. Then we read that the new Amiga OS would use a Linux kernel, and QNX issued this proclamation. Then Amiga issued this one. Now Zenn sends us a link to this article from BeDope that claims the new Amiga OS will really be based on BeOS. Okay, the BeDope story is a satire, but this Amiga thing has gotten out of hand. Has Amiga really settled on the Linux kernel? I wish they'd make up their minds. I am one of the millions who would (sigh) love to have an Amiga again...

cancel ×


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

AmigaUI vs. KDE vs. Gnome... (1)

CryptdotX (30285) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809590)

I really hope they come in and make a truly visionary GUI that blows the whole KDE vs. Gnome vs. Enlightenment thing out of the water.

And I hope they make it free to code for.

GPL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809591)

If Amiga are using the linux kernel, how much of the other parts of the OS are going to be released under the GPL? I don't think they have a reason to keep their OE proprietary, especially if their using custom hardware. Open Standards/Open Source, and they'll win consumers, including me.

Be careful....... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809592)

I think I'd wear 2 rubbers for this one.

Re:Exit clauses? (1)

HaveBlue (35622) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809613)

Keep in mind that Neutrino (the OS component) is still being worked on and still does not have all the features of QNX 4. It's a safe bet that the '40 engineers working for the past 7 months' have been working on standard items that were to have been included in Neutrino anyway - QNX seems to simply be spin doctoring the situation to make it appear that they've been terribly shafted by Amiga.

I hope QNX doesn't throw away any Amiga-geared development that they've done - Neutrino will be a fantastic OS once all the features of QNX 4 make it in. Unfortunately, it's darn near impossible to get a copy of QNX or Neutrino to play around with on a hobbyist/hacker level (and I don't mean the demodisk - I want a bootable QNX partition). Perhaps QNX will persue some more multimedia/desktop applications now...

Re:I have it on good authority... (1)

NtG (61481) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809614)

Or make a new version like 'Dos 99', incompatible with any other versions, forcing users to buy all their new software and making it impossible for previous DOS owners to reuse their OS.

Ok, please tell me... (1)

Knos (30446) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809615)

I read the bbs to have an idea of what the amiga user says of the late news.

I'm a bit confused.

From what I saw, amiga user who are against the linux kernel use basically just repeating again and again that the qnx kernel is technically better, and innovative. (and Realtime... :) )

It seems they'd prefer to have a far technically better kernel, with no support, no apps, performant for the sake of it against a kernel which have been prooved to develop very quickly.

Sounds like they have suicidal tendancies ;)

I have another concern. Again and again they say the original AmigaDos was a micro kernel. I thought microkernels are still research cases even if they are implemented yet. I'd think a small start up like amiga wouldn't have been able to develop such a concept back in 89 (was it before)

It seems too those people are seeing microkernels as the best design. I've read Linus didn't quite agree on that.

Was the AmigaDos kernel really a realtime kernel? If I remember well, lots of apps bypassed the kernel. (games, demos) Would they have done that if it really was Realtime?

And what is this Convergence Technology industry they're talking about? vaporindustry?

I bought an amiga1200 last year. I never owned any amiga before. I realised the os back then was really flexible, user friendly. (the only one gui I was astonished to use naturaly) What if Amiga International brought those elements to Linux? (frankly I don't care, I mostly don't use Gui, but I'd think it would be a reason not to flame Amiga Int. for their switch)

What about the way Amiga Int. deal with its partners... was there no communication between qnx and amigados.

We should buy this 'revolutionary' Amiga 'cause..? (1)

NtG (61481) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809616)

Is it going to be expensive?
What sort of support is there going to be for these machines?
What can Amiga come out with that is not already available?

Personally, I buy on value for money. I dont give a toss if it is 'stylish' or 'revolutionary'.. sounds like its gonna cost lots of money, going to raise compatibility issues.. certainly lost my interest already.

Re:*What* work did they really do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809617)

its being developed for x86...whether or not it was going to be the amiga's OS was the question

So, if its Linux kernel, will it be portable? (1)

L20 (33516) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809618)

This may be a silly question either yes or no, but, since the "Amiga OE" is based on the Linux kernel, can it be ported to x86 and the rest? Or is it Amiga OS, and just that, an OS...?

(I hope it will/can be portable, I'm sick of windows, I don't have the time to learn Linux (no flames please), and BeOS isn't maintream)

Amiga & archaelogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809619)

It's nice to see people really dedicated to their old Amigas. I am also interested in archaelogy.

Think of it, I myself get this kind of weird feelings about old technology. Simetimes I get the urge to build a real 1940 style relay computer. This would be something to brag about on slashdot.

Shouldn't we start a website for perverted technichians where we could share our ideas about technology from old ages. I think my relay computer and the Amigas would fit very nicely together on such a site.

Anyone that have a large surplus supply of relays?

Should my relay thing also run Linux??

QNX probably would've been a bad choice (3)

Improv (2467) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809620)

QNX probably wouldn't have been a good choice
for an OS foundation for the Amiga. I took a
quick browse to the QNX website, and they make
a lot of neat stuff. The relevant products to
the decision probably were QNX and QNX/Neutrino.
Each has serious problems as a foundation.
QNX is tied to x86. This alone is a serious
problem, as presumably Amiga would want to go with
a high-performance, clean CPU (e.g. Alpha, PPC,
MIPS, ARM). QNX also lists very few choices as to
what hardware you can use. This may or may not be
a concern in a relatively closed system (in the
sense that the system would be sold mostly
complete), but considering the really keen
hardware Amigas had when they were new, their
target market would probably want something like
a Voodoo3 videocard (for instance), something
not supported by QNX, as most of their hardware
supported looks fairly old.

QNX/Neutrino, unlike QNX, is portable, and it
looks like it supports at least the x86, some
PPC, some MIPS, and a few obscure CPUs. As such,
it probably would be a better choice than QNX
for an AmigaOS, but as stated on the webpage,
most of its components are very minimal.

QNX and QNX/N both look like they'd take a lot of
work to make a consumer product. Is Linux a better
choice? Maybe. What does Amiga need to do? Here
are some ideas:

Select a set of hardware peripherals that are
relatively inexpensive, are made by a vendor
friendly to third-party OS's, and ideally are
close to best-of-breed, and offer their vendor
an exclusive contract where all Amiga-branded
machines come with said hardware in exchange for
price cuts and input into design of said products.
Hardware worth considering:
Voodoo3 Graphics
Alpha CPUs

Ensure that Linux/glibc binaries can run

Write an X server that will talk to the
AmigaOS graqphical layer to allow
X programs to run (within a window?)

Write a really good emulator for the 68k-based
Amigas, ideally capable of running dirty programs

In the end, I imagine we'll probably see something
that doesn't look much like a Linux system as
we know it (i.e. non-X GUI, not Unixy), probably
making extensive use of kernel modules to avoid
GPL issues and keep things closed source.

Re:Hmm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809621)

My beos r4.5 boots up within 7 second.
and beos got rid of over 1000 files from previous 4.0 versions to make more improvements.

their os is getting smaller and smaller.. which means faster and faster? :) example of it only require 1mb of file to run like a Microsoft word. :)

and redhat is getting bigger and bigger..

Re:BeDope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809622)

just find it funny how many people yesterday thought AmigaOS would be YALD, the only
thing they are using is the kernel, it'd be like calling MacOS X, Nextstep just because it uses
the Mach Kernel. A kernel does not an OS make.

Nope. It would be like calling MacOS X, NextStep, and HURD all Mach. And that's what I call all three.

The kernel is the OS, silly.

BeDope is satire (4)

Pascal Q. Porcupine (4467) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809630)

BeDope is satire, dude.
"'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.

Exit clauses? (1)

Barbarian (9467) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809632)

Aren't there some sort of exit clauses in whatever contract Amiga had with QNX? If Amiga was having QNX do OS work for them, then who owns it?

Or am I mistaken about this all? I don't follow the Amiga scene at all.

It's Linux. (Maybe) (1)

pb (1020) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809636)

From the little I've read, it looks like the Linux kernel will be used because of it's driver support.

The GUI on top of QNX looks really neat, but it sounds like if we ever see that, it'll be a separate project (or run on top of the Linux kernel... I hope).

The BeOS idea sounds like vaporware, like Taligent (and like the new Amiga too, if they don't stop yapping and start shipping).

Anyhow, I hope they add on to an existing OS, or make things very compatible. I need a new 'standard' like I need a hole in the head. (Pop quiz: what's the character(s) for the end of a line in a text file? How about the end of the file?)

Re:BeDope is satire (4)

Pascal Q. Porcupine (4467) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809639)

Ah, the joys of revisionist history. When the article was first posted, it made no mention of BeDope being satire, so now I just look like a flaming idiot, eh? (As opposed to the usual, when I'm just an idiot. Or flaming, I'm never quite sure.)
"'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.

old os support please! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809642)

oh, how I pray for support for old amiga progs and files somehow! maybe a built-in emulator? That would be only fair to us amiga fans who never believed/repressed commodore's fall and kept our amiga boxes alive.

BeDope (2)

tono (38883) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809646)

First, let me say that arcticle was hilarious. I've been a fan of BeDope for awhile, its much better than segfault.

I just find it funny how many people yesterday thought AmigaOS would be YALD, the only thing they are using is the kernel, it'd be like calling MacOS X, Nextstep just because it uses the Mach Kernel. A kernel does not an OS make.

Re:GUI only thing? (1)

tono (38883) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809647)

dude re-read the story or look at the first post.

Re:BeDope is satire (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809650)

Well, I for one was fooled (until I read your follow up). I'm sorry I doubted you.


Re:It's Linux. (Maybe) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809651)

The GUI on top of QNX looks really neat, but it sounds like if we ever see that, it'll be a
separate project (or run on top of the Linux kernel... I hope).

Umm, that GUI was just standard QNX Photon. It's been available for four or five years now. And it runs on QNX, not on Linux.

Re:If Amiga is going with the Linux kernal... (1)

Phill Hugo (22705) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809652)

Idiot. If you are going to tell people not to flame then at least make some sense.

Stallman has nothing to do with Linux. HURD is the GNU kernel. Since Amiga is unlikely to bundle GNU as the base OS system (libs and apps) then it needn't really include GNU in the name like Linux should. If the Linux kernel is used with other lib sets and apps then it needn't include GNU.

If the new Amiga is to be a GLIBC system with GNU apps as standard and the Amiga bit being tantamount to an E theme then yes, it should pay homage.


That explains... and Roblimo should use updates (1)

Trojan (37530) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809653)

That explains why this article got posted at all. Except for the BeDope link, everything had appeared in yesterday's article already.

Roblimo, instead of trying to not look as an idiot, just add an update like Rob always does, and admit you goofed up. Revisionist history is scary.

Amiga Linux Synergy 2000 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809654)

The astronauts of the nineteenth century were the explorers---those intrepid men, often British, who mounted expeditions from the club rooms of Pall Mall to the most exotic hinterlands of the world. When the astronauts came back from the moon they told their stories to Life magazine. When the Victorians returned from their expeditions, they presented their findings in lectures before the Royal Geographical Society, and then they wrote their memoirs in large leather-bound volumes. But make no mistake; they were some of the greatest celebrities of their age.

Today we have Linus Torvalds to look up to and admire. The magic that Linus and Transmeta are now working on will find its form embodied in the new Amiga, a combination of some of the greatest technological breakthroughs in the history of computer science. It is this stunning combination of software and hardware wizardry which will lead us into the 21st century. When Linus finally sits back and gives us his leather-bound memoirs, the history of Transmeta and Amiga Linux will be a most delightful read, a peek into the mind of one of our few god-like mortals.

Re:Ok, please tell me... (1)

mountain (17902) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809655)

You want the truth.. You got it. :)

Point your browser at:

Open Sources : Appendix A : The Tanenbaum-Torvalds Debate []

And read the whole thing (I would quote from it, but it's worth the read), it will answer all your questions.

Re:The Amiga is dead, accept it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809656)

You don't know if there is anything the new Amigas can do that Mac or PC's can't do, because the new Amiga hardware isn't ready or released yet.

And what "good" Amiga software relied on the hardware? In my eyes, if it relied on the hardware, except for the games, it was shit. And even in the case of the games, lots of stuff was written that didn't mess directly with the hardware (Pirates, for instance... I still miss it... Maybe it's time to boot up my A3000 again.. Or the C64... Sigh, I remember messing with the BASIC v2 part of Pirates :-)

IMHO, BeOS sucks. It has nothing of what made me love the Amiga.

Re:The Amiga is dead, accept it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809657)

Amiga is dead forever. Just forget it.
Every year there's a rumor about a new amiga coming out. "It will be a PPC"! "It's gonna be RISC!" "It's linux-based!" "No, it's qnx" "It's amigaOS 3.0".."a great new company bought the amiga technology!"..and nothing ever comes out at the end.
There will be no new amiga out on the market. It died when Commodore died. That's all.

Deja-vu? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809658)

I thought I read this yesterday.

Beta Release w/o Hardware? (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809659)

The beta release of QNX/Amiga Operating Environment was scheduled to be on x86-based developer machines, as these were cheap and easily available. From there, the relevant software could easily be ported over to the new hardware's spec.

Of course, after seeing this announcement yesterday, anything is possible. I'm sure Amiga Inc's other "close development partners" are shaking in their shoes. Who'll be next to get the axe?

Re:So we'll see what's revolutionary (3)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809660)

The same message is posted at too.

One thing most people seem to ignore, though, is that Linux (the OS), is defined by way more than Linux the kernel. An Amiga that uses the Linux kernel, and Amiga system libraries, Amiga shells, an Amiga GUI etc., won't look much like Linux the OS at all.

However, it will likely just be a question of adding the right libraries and binaries to let it run all Linux applications.

And this is the sweet thing about this: They can completely redefine the OS, by building something new on top of the kernel, without loosing Linux compatibility.

Which means that they can provide whatever "revolutionary" features they like, and at the same time offer access to the huge amount of existing Linux software out there.

That is something they wouldn't get with QNX - the amount of available QNX software is a lot smaller.

Contrary to QNX there is also a huge groundswell of support for Linux from third parties, and it will be a LOT easier to convince those third parties to provide Amiga applications, if they can do it in a way that let their apps run on Linux as well (maybe with some Amiga specific functionality taken out).

This can be good for Linux too, because Gateway is throwing lots of money at this, and if they start getting people to port to the Amiga, and the Amiga uses the Linux kernel, and can run Linux applications, a lot of those people are likely to make sure their applications run without the Amiga operating environment too.

In a way, I see what they are trying to do as something similar to OpenStep, which is a set of API's, that run on top of any host OS you care to port it to (ref. [] . It completely redefines the interface to the user, and for the developer, but the host OS is still there, and easily accessible.

If well done, it also means that if Amiga Inc. in the future should choose to support other host OS's besides Linux, any applications written to the Amiga OE APIs should instantly run in that environment.

Re:old os support please! (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809681)

Everything I've read thus far points to support for legacy apps ("classic Amiga") being provided through software emulation like UAE. Yup. The Amiga emulates an Amiga to get the job done.

Re:The Amiga is dead, accept it... (1)

darkglobe (45755) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809682)

I thought it was going to be based on a Cray T3E..

Agreed though, who wants ANOTHER computer platform. And if they go proprietary again, it will be just like the old days, only they will die more rapidly this time since what can they offer that the rest of the industry cannot? And if its PPC based, who wants another one of those systems around, don't we have enough already (Macs, Powerstacs, RS6000, AS400, etc.etc.etc)

IMHO, the only reason apple has survived (before the Imac revival) is due to all the advertising hype. When the amiga was around years ago, if you asked me what IBM was, I woud say "computer". If you asked me what a mac was, I could say "computer". Hell, if you asked me what a TANDY was, I would say "computer"(ugh). But Amiga, the first image that came to mind was a new space ship in the starwars line of toys.

If they run linux, get themselves known, keep the system open, they may stand a chance. Best of luck to the Amiga. (the'll need it!)

Kernel? Microkernel? (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809683)

Overheard some developers talking about all of this yesterday. They were making distinctions between the use of the Linux Kernel in a future AmigaOE, and the use of the Linux MicroKernel. I've never splitexistential hairs like that before (which is why I was basically eavesdropping instead of participating). Goofy?

OS's. (0)

Ellis-D (19919) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809684)

Talking about new os and stuff.. Trumpet Software [] will soon be releasing their own OS with is going to run windows 9x/nt apps natively. Also it will support IPv6.
I ate my tag line.

Re:Killer man... (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809685)

The latest pictures which were released to Amiga Format magazine by Amiga Inc. are kinda cool in this regard. Very techy looking, though I shudder to make comparisons between the Amiga designs and the iMac (can you say E-Power, kidz?).

Among the sketches are a number of palmtop/tablet device designs. They even go into some laptop-like systems, "kitchen countertop" systems, and definitely gaming systems.

Still. Sketches are one things. I need to see it to believe it.

Touch it. Feel it. Love it.

Re:They better start acting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809686)

The stronger base of support is everything for a company that wants to be profitable... If they make sure their box can still run Linux applications, they can be reasonably sure to get a certain percentage of Linux users (many of us are ex-Amigans ;), if the hardware is anywhere near what their hype makes it out to be.

And if it still runs Linux apps., that also mean that they instantly have a huge software base for it, to kickstart the acceptance of the platform.

How much better do you think Be would have done it if they had added a compatibility layer to let for instance Linux apps run unmodified on it, so they could have said "look, there's already thousands of applications that run on our OS"?

They would still have all their other advantages, but they would have an initial software base too.

The other point here, is that this means that they always have all the Linux applications, and in addition, they can boast about any extra features and apps. they get that aren't available anywhere else. So they take the Linux hype and support, and give you all of that, and then some.

That's a good model. Instead of just having the "and then some" part, they get the Linux part for free.

GNU/Amiga! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809687)

Since the Linux kernel is a Gnu project and anything that uses GNU software absolutely *must* be prefixed with "Gnu", it should be "Gnu/Amiga". Otherwise RMS will walk out of any press conferences where people refuse to call it by it's *proper* name ;-)

Re:Killer man... (1)

Rick_T (3816) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809688)

| I think that Amiga really has the muscle to push
| linux into the mainstream.

In all honestly, I think that *Linux* just might have the muscle to put the *Amiga* into the mainstream. Linux has been steadily growing for years now. The Amiga has been dying since 1992.

Of course, these days I just can't get excited anymore about a new "Amiga" coming out - if in fact it ever does.

Re:The Amiga is dead, accept what? (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809689)

Every year there's a rumor about a new amiga coming out. "It will be a PPC"! "It's gonna be RISC!" "It's linux-based!" "No, it's qnx" "It's amigaOS 3.0".."a great new company bought the amiga technology!"..and nothing ever comes out at the end.
I think part of the problem is that Amiga Users, such as myself, have been living in this development vacuum for way too long. Throw the Amiga community even the slightest hint of something new, and they go completely off on it. Some say it's advocacy to a fault, some just point to it as an example of the lunatic platform devotion that Amiga has engendered.

Me? I'm happy to discuss what they're working on... it's nice to see someone is actually attempting to do something. But I won't be completely happy or even concrete in my thinking about Amiga's future path(s) until I start seeing some product. And I dont mean their silly products like offical Amiga boxer shorts and AmiCola. (I'm not kidding, see it here [] ).

"Death is just the beginning. - Amiga T-shirt.

Re:Ok, please tell me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809690)

The Amiga was getting old in 1989.... I got my first used Amiga 500 about then, after drooling after an Amiga since '86, when the Amiga 1000 hit the shelves in Norway. I seem to remember it came out in late '85, but I may be mistaken. It had certainly been in development for a couple of years before '86.

As for microkernel or not... Maybe. It depends on how you define it. Remember that they didn't use a MMU, so there weren't really a great distinction between kernel and userspace.

However, I seem to remember that the relevant part of Exec that ran in supervisor mode on the M68k's, and handled the context switching etc. was about 4kb.

The rest, including message passing (Amiga OS relies heavily on message passing), device drivers, filesystems etc., were just separate dynamically loadable libraries, or ran as separate "tasks" (Amiga lingo for process/thread - there's no distinction of the two, since there were no memory protection to distinguish them by :-)

So, in a sense it was a microkernel, but without memory protection it really wouldn't have any impact whether you ran things in supervisor mode or not.

Its usage? (1)

RottenApple (10663) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809702)

Hmm.. Well, BeOS is good, Amiga OS is good.

But it doesn't mean that it is successful
in the market.

Except for the Linux, other OSes than the Windows
are not successful enough to survive.
Whether you admit it or not, there are two strong
OSes for personal computers. ( tech. + user base )
Yes. One is the Windows and the other is Mac OS.
But, as you know, the Windows is too strong.

Can a new OS have its own market which are enough
large for getting users' and developers' attention?

Are Amiga famous as Mac, OS/2 in countries other
than the U.S.?

It would be hard to make the new Amiga recognizable in the world market.

Let's see what will happen.

Re:Killer man... (1)

DrPsycho (13308) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809703)


You only have to get hit in the head so many times before you learn to duck. :^)

Re:Ouch! Not right at all. (1)

RonVNX (55322) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809704)

Actually, the Linux kernel is *not* a GNU project. If they use Amiga utilites rather than the GNU utilities, then Amiga/Linux *is* correct, and it does indeed look like Stallman is correct in his naming system for the GNU/Linux we commonly think of as simply "Linux".
In light of this it sounds like Stallman's convention is the right way to go, as it clearly spells out what you're getting.

Re:Ok, please tell me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809705)

AmigaDos was NOT the kernel.

The Amiga OS was split in three parts: AmigaDos (the file handling parts, which drew heavily on Tripos, and started out in written in BCPL, something we suffered for for years), Intuition (the GUI), and Exec (the kernel).

And whether you consider the Amiga OS realtime or not depends on what you consider realtime. It was easy enough to get realtime behaviour out of it, but as far as I remember, some of that required "acceptable" ways of bypassing the OS...

Lets just say that lots of the features that made Amiga lightweigth and fast was due to a design that pushed everything to its limits in a non-memory protection environment. The Amiga OS would be extremely difficult to add memory protection to - you'd break almost every Amiga application in existence unless you'd add it for new applications only.

After CBM filed for bankrupcy there was lots of discussion about writing an open sourced OS to replace it, and one of the models suggested for adding memory protection, was letting all "old" programs running in one address space, where they could do whatever they wanted to eachother, and protecting only new apps... I seem to remember that this might be what was done with the Mac?

However, several people wanted to stick with a system without memory protection for the simple reason that memory protection would mean a rather big performance loss unless the OS was completely redesigned, since the Amiga OS does LOTS of stuff that involves passing pointers around, and lots of message passing etc.

So, realtime? Maybe. But you'd loose most of that if you add modern features without redesigning.

Exec (1)

Trojan (37530) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809706)

The Amiga kernel was called Exec, and it really is a micro kernel. It might have been realtime as well, but I'm not sure about that. Realtime is overrated anyway. The C-64 was realtime. Realtime doesn't mean it's fast, just that a process is guaranteed to get cpu time within some amount of time.

One of the reasons that Exec was a blazingly fast micro kernel is that there's no memory protection of any kind. It's a lot more difficult if not impossible to come up with a micro kernel offering full protection and an efficiency anywhere close to that of Exec.

You say that games bypassed the kernel. Maybe some did, but are you sure you know what the Amiga kernel is? It's not Intuition, the user interface. It's not even the file system. You can bypass all that and still make use of the Amiga micro kernel.

Re:The Amiga is dead, accept it... (1)

Flammon (4726) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809707)

The computer you speak of is dead and died years ago and I accept that. But the people with the capability of creating the legendary Amiga are alive and creating like they did years ago.

Microsoft is strong today because of creative ideas, the ones they purchase from creative people and companies. As long as good ideas are up for sale, Microsoft will prevail.

But times are different now. Ideas aren't for sale under the GPL, the're free. And this is why Microsoft and all other companies who depend on other people for great ideas, will lose. The GPL drains Microsoft's source of life and they know it.

Don't dismiss a group of people with great ideas just yet, look at what is happening with Linux.


Re:Exec (1)

Knos (30446) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809708)

Well many games claimed to boot with their own special os. And mostly, before the hdd games, I think they only accessed the chips directly... for gfx and sound, perhaps even for savegames and such.

Re:So we'll see what's revolutionary (1)

Brandon S. Allbery (500) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809709)

Eh? For a start, they can provide a completely different user-space --- and I don't mean just a "user interface".

Just because the kernel is Linux doesn't mean the system riding on top of it has to look anything like a typical Linux distribution. Most of what ordinary people (as opposed to kernel developers) think of as "Linux" is defined not by the kernel, but by /sbin/init and the programs run by it; the kernel itself only defines (a) the *raw* --- not libc-"cooked" --- kernel interface and (b) /sbin/init as the program run to "launch" user space.

Pathnames? They're part of the raw kernel interface. If the standard library doesn't export routines which use kernel-style pathnames, they're effectively invisible to userspace unless a program makes raw system calls using assembly language: can *you* tell whether's open() is a simple wrapper around the kernel's "open" syscall or a complex one which maps DOS or Mac or VMS, etc. conventions to the kernel? In a properly designed system, the kernel interface would be entirely irrelevant to everyone except OS and kernel programmers; in particular, neither application developers nor users need to care. Apple's "Carbon" (aka Yellow Box, etc.) is based on the same idea.

Chaos Ruled (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809710)

Man.. reading this really bring back some great
memories. Remember Delta/RSI, Laxity/Kefrens, Dr. Skull/VD, jmagic and all the other great coders? Getting all fuzzy and warm on the inside.

Demoscene rules

Re:BeDope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809711)

Don't be silly. The correct definition of an OS includes the high level APIs, the GUI, and other vendor specific additions. An OS definition based on vague kernel principles will get you nowhere fast. For example, some Mach derivative is used in NEXTSTEP, OpenStep, MacOS X, OSF/1, GNU Hurd, MkLinux and Darwin. Do you really think that they're all the same OS?

Amiga/Atari --- DEAD ISSUE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809712)

I don't get it?
Amiga, along with Atari, has been dead for years.
Drop it already. No one wants it.

The response letter is on the Amiga web site (1)

exa (27197) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809713)

Check Jim Collas response letter [] . The letter, which has been posted as one of the comments, is on the Amiga web site.

Looking forward to the technology brief.

Re:If Amiga is going with the Linux kernal... (1)

stevied (169) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809714)

I don't think s/he's an idiot. Or even the idiot. Read it again. No, Stallman has nothing to do with Linux - except of course it is released under a license he wrote. The point is he seems to propose that distributions be named as "<Distribution>/<Kernel>", which has some merit. And under such a scheme, a Linux kernel-based AmigaOS would be called "AmigaOS/Linux" or something similar. Slashdot note: handling of '<' and '>' is thoroughly fucked in plain text mode, and handling of the escaped versions '<' and '>' in extrans is doubly fucked. Oh, and it doesn't work in HTML mode either. Sheesh.

Re:They better start acting (1)

Brandon S. Allbery (500) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809715)

> I really wish Amiga would start putting its plans into motion. Its always a bad sign when a
> company says they'll do blah A, then decide Blah B,and then doing absolutly nothing.

How do you know they're not doing anything? There is a *lot* of stuff involved in what they're doing, and most of it is visible only to the people working on the infrastructure (which is invisible and meaningless to most people). Part of the reason Linux got going so quickly is that there were convenient GNU and BSD user-space programs sitting around that already fit on top of it because Linux was designed to be interface-compatible with them from the start; Amiga Inc. has to start almost from scratch with the user space. It's a *big* job, and one that's virtually unnoticeable until it's almost ready for release relative to the entire development cycle.

An example: how much of Berlin development is actually visible to most people? Not much, except to the people developing it. Does that mean it's nothing but vapor, or just that it's not yet ready for people to start *using* it yet? (Well, Berlin is somewhat more visible because its development is a' la bazaar, but that's another issue entirely.)

Shouldn't it be Ch(x4)-Changes? (1)

Luquid (16517) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809731)

If we're both thnking of the same David Bowie song (Changes) then I think there's only four "ch's" at the begining.

publicity? (1)

_jaeger_ (24349) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809732)

Sounds to me like Amiga wants all the popular publicity they can get. Amiga knows that technical users will be their main market and this is a good way to advertise :)

I dont get this bootup stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809733)

My linux boots up and goes to X in less than 7 seconds. Actually 7-10 seconds depending on it's mood. Now I dont think Be booting in 7 seconds is such a major improvemnt, given my Celeron 300a (450mhz does this at around the same speed), this is compairing to their Xenon 500 (the system they always quote, with 512 mb ram) -- mine is just 128mb. with lots of services as well. (I doubt they run a web server, msql and mysql, named, time, sshd, proftpd... blah

Re:How dare you! (1)

Luquid (16517) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809734)

You fool! Amiga was always God. If IBM didn't make it big, the world would have been a better place. I mean, jeez, the 500 had a speech emulation command in the BASIC! The Amiga machines were way ahead of their time, and I'm glad to see thme comming back. Besides if they do take QNX it's not going to be propritary, QNX is a Unix clone (and a good one at that too).

He has a point about failure... (1)

Paul Crowley (837) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809735)

IT WAS MY ASSESSMENT THAT WE WOULD FAIL ON THIS PATH. Please take note of this statement. How could I NOT make the Linux decision if I truly believe this? How could we continue on a path that I think will have us fail? Who will benefit if we fail?
It seems to me that he was right: yet another proprietary platform wouldn't stand a chance in the modern marketplace, and Linux may be their only hope of survival. If that's so, then going QNX becaue it maximises coolness wouldn't be the good thing to do, would it?
Employ me! Unix,Linux,crypto/security,Perl,C/C++,distance work. Edinburgh UK.

Brilliant! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809736)

Another masterful use of the net to market your cause... Nobody would care about "Amiga2000" if they didn't create this ambiguity. Drop some strategic disinformation, drop another morsel of information everyone wants to here... boom you've got buzz.

Recall ChaosOS by Chaos of Sanity? (1)

exa (27197) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809737)

I think that was pretty well suited for a demo OS, it had interrupt manager, file system, exe loader, small fast sound gfx libs... kinda blurry but it was cool 68k assembly. Yay for Chaos!!

Re:Ok, please tell me... (1)

Luarvique (31853) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809739)

So, what is there to read? Torvalds displays his lack of understanding of operating systems and Tannenbaum promises him a "C" in the operating systems class. You can also go to EGCS discussion board at Cygnus and read a more recent piece where Torvalds tries to teach EGCS developers about programming language semantics. Quite depressive, I must say.

Re:QNX probably would've been a bad choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809742)

"This alone is a serious problem, as presumably Amiga would want to go with a high-performance, clean CPU (e.g. Alpha, PPC, MIPS, ARM)."

Amazing that Intel CPUs are the performance leaders isn't it.

Re:Killer man... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809744)

If Linux needs Amiga for that I am going to switch to MS DOS again. Taking the complete Amiga mess into account ... Amiga : The Phantom but where is the menace ?

Re:Exit clauses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809751)

The QNX web site (here: )
appears to suggest that they are going to carry on and develop their own multimedia operating sysetm. Reading between the lines I would guess that they were doing the work on spec and believe they can finish the operating system themselves, presumably becuase they wrote enough of the code or had rights to it.

John Styles

How dare you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809752)

How can you say you have been waiting for a.. for a.. propriety operating system! You are not one of us!

-- Herbert, Open source is my savior.

Re:BeDope (1)

pb (1020) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809753)

Um. I would have to partially disagree with you here. It was pretty clear from the announcement that they were just using the kernel for driver support, but the kernel still makes the OS.

With both, say, MacOS X and Nextstep using the Mach kernel, it'd be much easier for the two OSes to coexist than, say, if you were implementing UNIX on top of NT (you can do that too, but it's messy).

With a core Linux (and thus UNIX-ish, and POSIX-compliant) kernel, you can bet that a lot of UNIX stuff will compile and run out of the box, or with less porting than it would with a completely different kernel. (and I'm sure that the Amiga development will help the Linux side, and there will be porting, better compatibility, and much rejoicing)

A good kernel design will work for the user, but a bad one will be worked around, and the last thing we need is yet another layer of emulation above the kernel to look like a different kernel. Please.

Killer man... (1)

Pengo (28814) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809755)

I think that Amiga really has the muscle to push linux into the mainstream. I am very happy that not only I will be able to turn my pc into an amiga, but Linux will get even more attention.

Now all we need is a PDA.

Chronologically incorrect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809757)

Amiga released linux news, then collas posted his update. Then QNX posted where we stand. Timing is everything :)

It's Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809759)

Collas has had several meetings with Linus Torvalds which convinced him that Linux was the way to go. Collas also hinted that the Transmeta processor might be part of the new Amiga. The QNX announcement was just a temper tantrum by QNX after they were rejected.

The Amiga is dead, accept it... (1)

Max von H. (19283) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809760)

Come on. The Amiga was a great computer, but it was almost a decade ago. Who's going to buy it? There's basically nothing an Amiga could do a PC or Mac can't. Who's going to be foolish enough to invest in it, if it needs *proprietary* hardware as to run the old software?

All the *good* Amiga software relied on hardware (gee, coding in assembly, eh), and there's no way to make them work on actual platforms, apart from emulating.

Be realistic. Learn from what the amiga was able to do, and how. There's already enough OS wars.

IMHO, BeOS is certainly the *best* example to compare the Amiga to. Poorly distributed, but great...

My 0.02

A bit more info... (2)

Khortl (67133) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809763)

For those interested, Jim Collas has posted another message about the whole ordeal on the bulletin board at It has a bit (but not much) more explanation on how they came to the big decision.

*What* work did they really do? (1)

Aleksandr (10716) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809765)

If you follow QNX at all, or even take the look at the rest of their site, you'd notice that this new and wonderful interface is merely Photon. This isn't anything new, custom designed for the as yet undescribed new Amiga Hardware, but their standard graphical interface. So all QNX appears to have lost was some marketing manhours, and a lot of face for what appears to be a premature press release.

I personally would be more interested in hearing about the hardware that comprises these new machines, first. Many of the tricks which made the old Amiga such a revolutionary design are now commonplace, and I'm curious to see how they justify the new machine. I'm afraid it's just going to appear, then disappear, like the BeBox, or stay vapor, like Apple's CHRP.

I especially found QNX's optimistic goal to start beta testing in Fall interesting.. Beta testing *what*, exactly? Noone would have the hardware, so they can't be testing drivers. And I'm fairly sure their kernel has been tested elsewhere.

Re:The Amiga is dead, accept it... (1)

starman97 (29863) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809770)

The hardware platform that made up the original Amiga is so dated and obsolete it's not funny. 3 and 4 micron chips that did cute video hacks are pointless with todays .18u device geometry.
Shackling youself to legacy apps and API's is a waste of time and an architecture nightmare.

If they want to do it right, they need a clean-sheet hardware design top to bottom. And then, open source the whole thing, post the schematics, post the gerber files and BOMs. Post the FPGA verilog code and test vectors. Use standard parts for things like the PCI bus, SCSI bus and firewire.
Otherwise, who will buy it? The 4000 Amiga fanatics out there who refuse to accept the demise of a 10+ year old machine? Hell of a market there... Who is going to write App software for a total niche machine? It's hard to get support for the Macintosh platform. I dont see any OpenSource non-linear Video Edit suites out there, or games for that matter.
I've got an A500 sitting in a closet somewhere, it's not worth the time to run it when I've got a Linux C450A/128MB/TNT system that is so much more powerful on my desk. The same hardware reboots and runs Quake2/unreal/shogo/Descent3/3DSMAX/Premier5 and I can play DVDs/vidcapture with my ASUS3400/MX300 5.1 digital sound system. Why would I ever want a new hardware platform, so I can run 10 year old programs? Not!

The Amiga "Efficiency" fetish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809771)

You know, the way Amiga users talk about "efficiency" and "bloatedness" really mean nothing. Much of the supposed "inefficiency" of modern operating systems comes about due to such "inefficient" concepts as memory protection and virtual memory, and yet Amiga people continuously go on and on about how every other platform is inefficient. This opinion is really based on poor understanding of the issues involved in writing a properly abstracted (read portable) operating system. Could someone point out to me ONE "efficiency" improvement they could make to the Linux kernel?

I wish the new Amiga all the best, but from the description above it really doesn't sound all that impressive. I'll wait to see the full technical specifications, before making any final judgements though.

Re:Its usage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809772)

I would say the Amiga is BETTER known throught Europe. It has always enjoyed more support there.

Re:They better start acting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809773)

Counter-example: Utterly amazing Windows 3.1 support didn't help OS/2 back in 1993 AT ALL.

QNX is NOT a "unix clone"! (1)

jonr (1130) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809774)

EEEP! Thanks for playing, but you are just plain wrong.
QNX is not a UNIX clone, it has good posix compliance (Better than BeOS at least) but calling it a unix clone is wrong. It's a real real-time OS, designed from ground up as a real-time (and embedded) os.
You don't want a hourglass showing up on your ABS breaks, do you? :)


Re:The Amiga is dead, accept it... (1)

Brandon S. Allbery (500) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809775)

Like that doesn't happen in the Windows, Mac, OS/2, Solaris, Linux, etc., etc., ad nauseam communities as well?

Re:Its usage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809776)

Are Amiga famous as Mac, OS/2 in countries other than the U.S.?

In Europe, Amiga (especially the less-expensive, keyboard-integrated models) was very well known as a general hobbyist, demo scene and games platform. Countries such as UK, Germany, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Italy etc. used to have a very large number of Amiga users in its heyday. Most computer shops were carrying Amiga hardware and peripherals and there were several dedicated Amiga magazines (or at least general home computing magazines with extensive Amiga coverage) around.

As this era was also the heyday of text mode MS-DOS programs and IBM compatibles, most of the corporate people were still slowly adjusting to the idea that it could actually be useful to have colourful graphics or a sound capability in a computer (not to speak about multitasking, which - according to most MS-DOS users of the time - did not have any practical use...).

Thus, most grown-up users dismissed Amiga as a teenager games machine that booted up games from 3.5" floppies, and never even saw a decent Amiga model with a hard disk running a desktop environment. Of course, more powerful models were used in a number of kiosk/info-TV/video production etc., but since the actual computer was mostly hidden under the hood in these applications, the general public had no idea that it was an Amiga running these things.

So yes, Amiga is very well-known name in Europe. Unfortunately most of the people that did not own one at that time still think it was no good for much more than games.

This really looks like a *good thing* [!] (2)

AtariDatacenter (31657) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809778)

Admittedly, it looks rather bad to be flip-flopping on core aspects of a product. But this really isn't as negative as some have played it to be. This company wants to build something innovative -- and successful. Ask Apple... the two don't always go together.

They found that their success factor was unacceptably low, and they were forced to make a change. Heck, I'm glad they're carefully looking at these kind of issues. I'm even more happy they've chosen a Linux kernel.

The interesting thing is, if they both follow through on their announcement, you've got even more innovation and competition than before. QNX is going to continue with developing the operating system. Amiga is going to continue with developing their OS and with a Linux kernel.

If you're one to track win-loss comparisons, it seems like a win for the consumer, a win for Gateway, and a lesser win for QNX.

Of course, it isn't ALL roses. If you're porting or developing software, you've got an OS decision to make. And users will have one to make as well. One side to this to keep aware of is on the hardware end... the Linux version is going to take advantage of far more hardware than the QNX version. Might marginalize QNX if you've got the latest monster video card and QNX won't do it.

Maybe, maybe not.... (1)

Deega (41540) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809781)

This could be the splinter. You think the differences between distros are bad, imagine this:

Amiga/Linux (it would be best if they left the word Linux out of it all together)
A system based on a Linux kernel. Amiga specific kernel patches, Amiga specific API layer, Amiga specific filesystem layout. Linux will not be helped if they do this. The only winner would be Amiga, essentially stealing the wind from the Linux sail(as far as hardware vendors are concerned).

On the other hand, there seems to be a link to Linus/Transmeta(!!). This indicates that the Amiga plans are endorsed by Linus, which may be a good thing. We don't know anything about Transmeta.
We should wait for a statement from Linus. If Linus does NOT comment on this situation, it becomes obvious that Transmeta is a player in this move.

Re:Killer man... (1)

C.Lee (1190) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809783)

Get real. The Amiga needs linux, but linux doesn't need the Amiga. This is the reality of the matter. Let's be honest here, how many of the former Amiga users like myself who are now running linux really care all that much anymore what's happing within the Amiga world these days? Not very many.

If Amiga is going with the Linux kernal... (1)

extrasolar (28341) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809790)

then will it be labeled Amiga/Linux using Stallman's naming system? I guess Stallman makes a little more sense I guess. It kind of says, "You can call it Amiga, but, Hey! there is a Linux kernal in there!" Kind of sweet.

(No flames please. I have read alot of anti-Stallman flames and I don't think you can come up with anything new.)


So we'll see what's revolutionary (1)

exa (27197) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809791)

I suppose that the following points hold even if the mail is a hoax, though it seems to be real.

Among the Amigans addressed, I belive that there will be others with similar suspicions to mine. The Amiga has once been revolutionary, and basically that's why we love it so much. It has made many attempts at a come-back, and haven't reached a desired position. Now Mr. Collas promises that the next generation Amigas will be as revolutionary as their first ancestors.

However, I am skeptical whether making some desktop machines + handheld devices which run Linux and Java is sufficiently revolutionary. In my opinion and thus from a developer's viewpoint, it's difficult to see what the Amiga Operating Environment can accomplish that a plain Linux distribution cannot.

At any rate, I would be definitely pleased to see Amiga to revive, and in good shape. I mean, not like your casual mummy. I will have to attain both the goodies (standards, swift desktop..) and the fancies (the rev. part as we hear it). I think that Amiga has the chance to make it, and free software/open source/whatever-you-call-it community will certainly benefit from it by some contributions from the Amiga (at least some kernel configs are on the way as Collas states)

Re:So we'll see what's revolutionary (1)

exa (27197) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809792)

man, I have some grammar errors. forgive me :)

Be Vaporware? Compared to Amiga NG? Hahahaha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809793)

Only some truly sick (long-dead-)Amiga worshipping compu-necrophiliac could come up with the idea that a shipping OS with 10,000 registered developers is "vaporware" while some mythical mystery media AmigaOS of the future is actually a viable product.

They better start acting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809794)

I really wish Amiga would start putting its plans into motion. Its always a bad sign when a company says they'll do blah A, then decide Blah B,and then doing absolutly nothing.

I don't see whats wrong with be building a new ultra cool/fast PowerPC system, then porting linux, and writting drivers for its hardware. Then utilizing KDE, GNOME, plain olde Linux/X, or just making there own.

XFree86 4.0 and perhaps ASLA thing (that nifty Linux sound driver) could create a rich multimedia baseline for Linux (3d, sound, video, etc).

However, I think it would be wiser if Amiga went with BeOS. Mostly because amigas have (and probably always will) be desktop multimedia powerhouses.... Be is the perfect OS for that.

However, Linux isn't to far behind. I believe it has a stronger base, better support, and a more powerful (but perhaps a bit to rowdy) community (more so then Be anyway).

When you put a power GUI, and tie it in with Advanced 3d and sound with Linux... You have the PERFECT OS for our next amigas.

I missed the amigas, I was like 8 or so when they were the shit. And I think its time another really phat ass PC to come out and kick some x86 ass :).

I have it on good authority... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809795)

That for maximum performance, they've just decided to scrap Linux and will be moving to MS-DOS.

Re:BeDope... What is an OS? (1)

Sun Tzu (41522) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809796)

If you use the traditional definitions, yes, the kernel is the OS.

If you're using Microsoft's DOJ trial definitions, then whatever they say is part of the OS is OS. This difinition is also used by many users and is simply another term for "distribution".

In the beginning (TM), the operating system was the program that controlled and provided access to the computer's resources. I imagine that this is closer to the definition used in the computer science world. Note that by this definition, those handy Unix utilities like ls and vi are applications, not part of the operating system proper.

Re:I have it on good authority... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809797)

Which version, MSDOS 3, 5, or 6.22? My money's on 3.

Be, the new FUD factory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809798)

Why is that evertime i look at this very interesting OS, that they try to make me hate it? Why is that evertime I try to get closer, they kill something I love? Once again, Be is spreading FUD. I really dont think be is in a possition to spread such FUD. We could coexist, lets all concentrate on getting rid of MS, before starting wars.

Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809819)


Re:old os support please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809820)

Tried UAE?




Re:Be, the new FUD factory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809821)

Yeah dude, these be-oets seem to be grabing any and every piece of OS news just to give themselves some media. It's shameful, even thought beDOpe is for fun, this kind of crap aint fun. It's not even funny. Maybe segfault should do a story on how beOS finally decided to get rid of their kernel (ro what ever they use) and instead build everthing on top of linux or gnu hurd.

Re:Be, the new FUD factory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809822)


i think i'm the only one who heard your sarcastic tone :)

good one

Lighten Up! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809823)

BeDope is a JOKE site. J-O-K-E. You know: Funny Shit (TM). Look at the site. 90% of the stories are laughing at Be. Beers don't take themselves quite so seriously as others seem to. Try using Be and you'll see why the Be newsgroups are a haven of goodwill and reason in a sea of fanaticism.*

*Don't take THAT too seriously either :^)

Linux gets a HOT X-Girlfriend: The new Amiga! (1)

joetee (13215) | more than 15 years ago | (#1809824)

The Amiga misses your tender touchtype, late hours, and hacking thrills!

Amiga deflowered many a Linux guru, and now they are (openly!) omnipotent tool honer emeritus.

Linux users are _almost_ as fiercely loyal...

Now they code any OS of thier choice. Linux most often. MS most loathed. Amiga most loyal.
Millions of X-Amiga and Mac users have been shafted for the last 15 years by little things like detecting a diskchange operation. Sheesh!

Maybe it will be "new-technology" from MS in Y2K.... Naahhh!

It's no accident that our mutual evangelism of what we know is good, and firmly believe in can be
so tirelesly improved, for all to benefit.

Stay tuned for the news to come, then "Make up your own mind" about the future Amiga.
It's more than a FeeCee turned Linux box.

The "World of AMIGA" show is in London this month, and the Computer99 show November in Cologne....and then the slew of Amiga shows in Toronto, St. Louis, Columbus, and CA next year.

"Amiga will show you hers, if you'll show her your Linux!" that it's all grown up...

Just type:> "makeout"


BeHurd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#1809825)

Be on Linux or Hurd? WOW! Then Be would run, what....75% slower than it does now? Boot up in 45 seconds instead of 10 seconds like it does now?
Really, I think BeDope might like that as a feature. It sure is funny!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>