#Workbench 2.0
58 messages in this thread
[Sysop: I lost my CompuServe Navigator section titles listing for this
forum, so I'm shooting in the dark. Navigator will grab them as this is
uploaded, so I will have them next time. For now, please move this message
to the proper section. The following message deals with the Amiga operating
system.]
There is something that my son would like brought to the Amiga users
attention. He currently has an Amiga 2000 & is using the program 'ZKICK' to
load in the KickStart 37.175 and WorkBench 37.52.
There is one major problem that should be noted and sent to the people
that are writing the Amiga O.S. On both the MAC and the ST you can use an
"expand box" to surround a group of files, then hold down the shift key to
de-select any files that you do not want selected. On the Amiga, once the
files are selected you cannot de-select one file from the group. This is a
major short-coming that deserves attention.
Another note on the above is that when you select a group of files on
the Mac or Atari, all you need do in order to grab/drag all of them is to
click and hold on any one of the selected files. On the Amiga, you must
also hold down the shift key; otherwise, the file you click on will be
selected and all the other files will be de-selected.
Thanks, —GeM
Jim,
Perhaps your son misread the document files which come with the 2.0 beta
stuff. Deselecting an icon is done with the RIGHT mouse button while the
left is deprressed. NO, I don't know why they chose this method, but it
DOES work.
Maybe he doesn't really understand 'extended select' which has been on
the Amiga since 1.1. Shift click has ALWAYS added one more icon the the
selected 'set', while simply clicking on an icon deselects ALL others.
Why don't you have your son join us some evening in CO? That way he can
get answers fairly quickly, there are several other developers who hang out
regularly in AmigaTech CO…mostly from 2100PDT onwards.
Vic, Nick, Bob, Betty, Don, & Mike,
I'll pass your message on to my son. I shouldn't, though, 'cause I did
not expect him to use my name in the message he wrote. You see, I had
nothing to do with the inquiry that seemed to come from me. I've never
restricted my son from using my home office computer station in any way,
but I will now <sigh>.
James thought that since my name would automatically be attached to his
message it would be best if he penned the message as if it were from me.
Well, it wasn't. Still, I would not have known to disprove of it even if I
had known the content. He and I share my Mac quite a bit, but I have never
touched the keyboard of his Amiga. I am reasonably aware of the Amiga's
merits, because James is quick to point out areas in which he thinks it
outperforms the Mac.
Vic, I was once an Apple II person, moving to the IBM PC soon after its
debut. Macintosh stole me away from the clunky PC world in 1986, and I'm
not likely to make any more platform moves until a main-stream platform
significantly surpasses the talents of Macintosh. I lump the Amiga with the
Atari and consider neither to be mainstream. They are, in my opinion,
solutions for folks who can't or won't pay to go first class.
One of the things I like about the Mac is the Mac community. I lively
bunch, in my opinion. Perhaps the bad side to this is that every innovative
piece of new software gets a lot of attention, which usually leads to my
purchasing it. I now have so much software that I'm getting upgrade/update
notices on an almost daily basis, sometimes two or more at a time. My point
is that my interest in the Amiga is slight. I wish your chosen platform
well, though, and hope it can pioneer at least one or two things that can
be ported to the Mac.
If you
[continued in the reply]
[continued]
I stopped writing and decided to ask my son to come over (he does not live
with me) and answer for himself. His answer is attached as a response to
Nick's.
Regards, —GeM
gHy~
Jim—
Just a thought, you might want to get your son an Amax Mac Emulator for the
Amiga so that he can use some of that vast MAC library you own. It's too
bad that the MAC won't allow you to run any of the nice Amiga software
available <G>. Do stop in and chat here once in awhile!
Michael – Whapping from the North Coast
RE: "Do stop in and chat here once in awhile!"
Thanks for the invitation, Michael. This is not my first time here.
Some time back I explored Whap! as a preliminary to coaxing my son to
join CompuServe. I came real close to succeeding, but close doesn't earn
any points on this <sigh>.
James (I call him by his middle name, Wayne, so if I forget…) does
have a Mac emulator of some sort, but I don't know just what it is. Right
now he is trying to find one final piece to a puzzle that will allow him to
try one of my Syquest removable hard disk drives on his Amiga.
Regards, —GeM
Jim
The point is well taken … thanks for that.
When you say that you "lump the Amiga with the Atari", I think that is how
a lot of people feel (perhaps that is the fault of Commodore marketing) …
but the Amiga is a _very_ different machine to the Atari. Apart from
feeling much more repsonsive, the Amiga is a true multi-tasking computer
and has very powerful graphics. Those that know the Amiga and the other
"mainstream" machines often see the Amiga as more like the Mac than the
Atari. It gets lumped with the Atari because of its appearance, price and
the games that are available.
Yet the Amiga is finding a popular place within the audio/video world, and
is starting to become a proto-standard with many studios using it for
animatics, animation, on-screen graphics and titling … it is starting to
find its place in the market.
Of course, the Amiga can emulate the Mac extremely well … the AMax board
might be a useful investment for your son since it will allow him to run
Mac software. The only difficulty is in the disk drives, since the Mac is
rather quirky in that it uses variable-speed drives … but that is not
insurmountable.
You'll also find that the Amiga community is also a lively one … the
Amiga forums are certainly very active.
Anyway, I'm glad that you were able to clear up the situation regarding 2.0
… I think we all feel very defensive about this new OS, because we know
that the Amiga's image suffers when the down-side gets unfairly and
prematurely publicised.
All the best
Mike (Whapping from the UK)
Mike,
Your welcome, and I hope you caught the message written by my son.
RE: "When you say that you "lump the Amiga with the Atari", I think that is
how a lot of people feel (perhaps that is the fault of Commodore marketing)
… but the Amiga is a _very_ different machine to the Atari."
I'm sure you are correct, Mike, and James, my son, says the same thing
(James roots are in Atari, and he still has a powerful ST set-up). Just
bear in mind that there are surely items that you unwittingly lump just as
I do. If the Mac did not so fully satisfy my computer needs, either the
NeXT or the Amiga would be my next check-it-out consideration.
RE: "the Amiga is a true multi-tasking computer and has very powerful
graphics"
James has never wowed me with on-screen Amiga graphics, but he has
impressed me with some of his print-outs.
Multi-tasking remains a debatable issue. Some knowledgeable folks I know
who have played with your preemptive multi-tasking _and_ the Macintosh
cooperative musti-tasking say they both have some advantages over the
other, but preemptive is the overall best. James seems to think many Amiga
folks are led to believe Macs can not truly multi-task. A demonstration is
easy to set up <g>.
Of course, many purists hold that __TRUUUURE__ multi-tasking requires two
or more central processors, that what the Amiga and Mac does is merely
time-sharing, rather than _real_ multi-tasking. Can't speak for the Amiga,
but while the central processor is aware, some things the Mac does is done
by other onboard processors. Guess that's still not what the purists mean,
but I don't really care. Someday, I think, I will have a personal computer
that uses three top level central processors.
RE: "Yet the Amiga is finding a popular place within the audio/video world"
[continued in the reply]
[continued]
Yeah, I know. I am a long-time subscriber to Video magazine.
RE: "with many studios using it for animatics, animation, on-screen
graphics and titling"
I know that also. One of the local television stations uses Amiga
generated graphics in its weather report, or so I'm told <g>.
RE: "The only difficulty is in the disk drives, since the Mac is rather
quirky in that it uses variable-speed drives"
The latest Mac floppy drive abandoned the Steve Wozniak variable speed
feature, at least in the 1.4mb format mode. Some Mac'ers were upset over
this, 'cause the variable speed method would have produced 1.6mb. It's good
for me and my son, though, 'cause we can utilize my Superdrive (the name of
the new model) to share stuff on floppies.
RE: "You'll also find that the Amiga community is also a lively one … the
Amiga forums are certainly very active."
I found that out some time ago, and reported that to fellow Mac'ers in
the CompuServe Mac forums. I also teased a few DOS friends an colleagues
over this, pointing out how dead their forums are <g>.
—GeM, Mac Navigator'ing from Texas, with the assistance of Voice
Navigator II, a speech recognition hardware/software solution that allows
my Mac and I to communicate vocally.~~~~
I think you are going to get bit by this one Jim 8^) Maybe you should ask
your son how the Amiga works. With the 68000 on board, the Amiga also
contains 3 custom processors called Agnus, Denise, and Paula. Agnus
contains DMA channel controllers as well as coprocessors within itself,
including the Blitter (responsible for large memory moves–especially
usefull for animation), and the Copper (controls screen resolution on the
fly, i.e. one part of the screen can be Hi-Res, the other Low-Res, etc).
The DMA controllers on Agnus control memory moves between the ram and other
custom processors, such as Denise and Paula. Denise is responsible for
Graphics generation and Paula is responsible for various I/O functions such
as Audio, Disk drive control, Serial I/O, and all inputs (Keyboard, Mouse,
Joystick, etc). So while other computers spend a lot of processor time
taking care of these chores, the Amiga uses very little processor time to
take care of these mundane tasks….Hmmm–notice I mentioned the word
tasks. So if all of these processors are taking care of these tasks, and
the software also does multitasking, then we have hardware and software
multitasking….a good definition of TRUE Multitasking in my book. I don't
think the Mac could even come close. Although I might defend your son when
everyone jumped on him for ZKICK, when you start bad mouthing the Amiga, I
get a little defensive 8^)
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
John–
I didn't hear Jin 'bad mouth' the Amiga. He may a little misinformed or
uneducated about it, but that's certainly understandable, if he doesn't own
one. BTW, you did a nice job explaining the custom chip set and AMIGADOS
as being designed to handle true multi-tasking. I'm sure he has a better
idea now of what real multi-tasking (and the Amiga) is all about.
– Whapping from the North Coast Michael
Well maybe Jim didn't intentionally 'bad mouth' the Amiga, but he said
something to the effect "People buy Amiga's and Atari's because they don't
want to go First Class", which in effect is saying the Amiga is a second
class computer. I think if you read all the threads from Jim, you will get
the idea. Anyway, doesn't really matter, he knows how a bunch of us feel
about the Amiga and we can leave it at that. No need to get into a Computer
Holy War. Thanks for the comments about the Chip set explanation. I tried
to be as accurate as possible without getting into too much detail 8^) I'm
sure others will have some comments to add also.
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
RE: "I didn't hear Jin 'bad mouth' the Amiga. He may a little misinformed
or uneducated about it, but that's certainly understandable, if he doesn't
own one."
Quite correct, Michael. Why would I bad mouth the Amiga when I have a
soft spot in my heart for it. Besides, I am not one given to picking on
someone (or something) who is down, and the Amiga is relatively down
(reasonably the bottom).
Also quite correct that I am not effectively educated about the Amiga.
How many folks are, percentage-wise. A pitiful few. We all know that. I
know that grates on Amiga enthusiasts, but blaming me won't help. Actually,
Amiga folks would better blame themselves. You are probably unaware, but we
Mac'ers are more responsible for the Macs relative success than Apple.
I am fortunate enough to have immediate and easy access to a powerful
Amiga set-up, but to date I have not utilized that advantage. Hey, it won't
run programs such as Digital Darkroom, Adobe Illustrator, Quark Express,
Adobe PhotoShop, Theorist, and FileMaker Pro. Is that my fault? Even if a
platform is ten times as powerful it would not do me any good if I couldn't
run such software.
You may not be aware that Apple has always made certain that good
software has always been available for Macintosh. When Apple couldn't
attract a major developer (or well respected small developer, which it
often courts), it develops its own, or at least provides pertinent tools.
Have fun, —GeM
My Mac also has several other processors on its logic board. Very
similar to the set-up you relate (Whose copying who?). Nubus cards include
even more processors. Some things can be done without involving the central
processor. But that is not what I was pointing out, John.
I was very careful to stipulate "central" processor because that's what
I meant. You took off on a tangent. I can see that you must know a lot of
what Amiga has to offer, hardware-wise, but what you may not realize is
that other platforms have that much and more.
The multitasking argument is a very old one. It has many facets. It's
interesting, but I really don't wish to lay all the ground work necessary
to bring you into the broader circle of issues therein. Sorry.
RE: "Maybe you should ask your son how the Amiga works."
The odds are good that my son could teach even you a thing or two
about how the Amiga works. He is very aware of the Amiga's
interworkings. He and his friends like to experiment with hardware
modifications. You know, desolder, move or exchange, resolder, test,
undo/redo, and on and on and on. Myself, I helped put myself through
college with the proceeds from a television repair service I jointly
owned, and I no longer desire such "fun."
Jim,
correct. One chip that comes to mind is the IWM ("Integrated Wozniak
Machine") that handles the floppy drives. Having met many of the machines
on a technician level, I must say that the Amiga carries the multiprocessor
approach to extremes that is only matched recently by the demonstration
machines from Apple and the clone market. Give them a year and they should
have it down pat. About time too.
Brian J. Bartlett
Jim
Yes, I did see your son's message.
I understand how things do get lumped together .. although Commodore must
take a lot of the blame for the Atari/Amiga equation .. but they are _very_
different machines.
I have seen the Mac multi-tasking (we use many of them at work), and I
can't say I'm that impressed … the Amiga's multi-tasking centres on a few
k of hand-crafted machine code which is tightly written and is actually a
pleasure to examine. I suspect that this, coupled with the pre-emptive
multi-tasking, is what makes the Amiga's multi-tasking so very efficient.
Of course, multi-processing is a different ball-game 🙂
I had heard that the variable-speed drives had been abandoned … for the
sake of at least some standardisation, I guess the storage loss will be
worth it.
Anyway … for a non-Amiga man, you have certainly seeded a very lively
discussion 🙂 I hope we see you here again.
All the best
Mike (Whapping from the UK)
RE: "Anyway … for a non-Amiga man, you have certainly seeded a very
lively discussion 🙂 I hope we see you here again."
Unfortunately, Mike, I tend to stir up lively discussions most
everywhere I travel. For that reason I will not be hanging around here much
longer. I am a pretty fast touch typist, but I'm only barely managing to
keep up with all the discussions I'm presently involved in. I've got to
unload. Heck, my years old practice of running at least one CompuServe
session a day is currently being broken.
I've enjoyed the discussion, though, —GeM
Jim,
Just a response to one line in your message, "They are [Amiga and Atari],
in my opinion, solutions for folks who can't or won't pay to go first
class". In _my_ opinion, that statement is 100% correct when you replace
the word Amiga with the word Macintosh. With Mac you pay a premium to go
second class. Better than a PC, yes, but that's not saying a lot.
-sja
Well, it seems I stepped on heavily biased toes <sigh>. Did saying that
make you feel good <grin>. Thank goodness some of your colleagues are more
gracious; otherwise I would not feel very welcome here. In fairness, I
often witness Mac zealot's pouncing on visitors who admit loyalty to other
platforms in Mac forums. Guess I am partly blamed for the company I keep
<sigh>, but I'll assure you I don't join a pack of crazed rock-throwers.
Steve, when it's truly obvious to anyone outside of Amiga insider
circles that Amiga has surpassed the Mac, you won't have to go far to find
me. I'll be an Amiga user by then. Loyalty to a computer platform is not
one of my obsessions. In fact, I _hope_ Amiga surpassed the Mac–I like
progress, no matter which path it takes.
I can easily see where Amiga could outpace Macintosh. Macintosh is
hampered by blazing its own trail. Amiga tends to learn a great deal from
other existing platforms, which gives it a big boost.
I once had a Commodore 64. I liked it, but I moved on the Apple II, then
the IBM PC, and finally (so far <g>) Macintosh. I've had my eye on NeXT.
There's a lot to like about the NeXT, but it's installed base is just not
large enough to generate all the solutions I'm used to getting from the
countless innovative large and [especially] small developers. Perhaps next
year or so…
Hope you can tolerate us second class folks, —GeM
Jim,
You pointed out rather blantantly that you felt Amiga users are "folks who
can't or won't pay to go first class". That deserves a response. This is
the AmigaForums, the vast majority of folks here do not consider the Mac
"first class". "…pouncing on visitors" is not the case here. Just a
response to being called second class.
Okay, Steve, I hear ya. I'm okay if you're okay <g>.
RE: "Just a response to being called second class."
Please don't take it *exactly* that way. I was sharing my opinion. That
should have been clear. If not, please accept my assurance of that now. I
certainly had no intention of calling the Amiga and/or Amiga users (not
certain how you meant that) second class. I merely meant to share my honest
position/opinion so you would know where I'm coming from. In other words, I
was trying to be fair, whereas name calling would be an opposite stance.
I noted that my person was attacked by at least one individual, so
perhaps a number of folks mistook my meaning. That tends to indicate poor
communication on my part <groan>. Oh well, what can be expected of a poor
old misguided Macintosh person <hehe>.
You know, while it's obvious that people add things up differently, that
may not even be the case. We must remember that you and I and others have
different sets of data to add. If we were to swap data files, then add what
once belonged to the other, whose to say we wouldn't each turn up on the
other side of the fence? Something to think about, eh?
I guess we are all loyal to the computers we have, otherwise we wouldn't
have that computer in the first place. I'm sure if I went up to some of the
Mac and IBM forums and started to point out how I feel why they are "Second
Class" computers, I would probably get jumped on also. You asked for it
Jim, I can't defend you this time 8^) John (in beautiful downtown Walla
Walla) – via Whap!
RE: "You asked for it Jim, I can't defend you this time 8^)"
Well, you and others better show your true colors rather quickly, 'cause
I became bored with endless loop platform arguments years ago. I am
presently involved in more interesting discussions in six of the CompuServe
Macintosh forums, four CompuServegeneral interest forums, three other
online services, and two BBS's. Whew, it's a good thing I'm a quick typist
<g>.
For what it's worth department, —GeM
PS: I may be here for a couple of more sessions in order to see what comes
from the voice-mail discussion. I _am_ interested in that <g>.
What kind of response did you expect? From what you've said here, you know
little about the Amiga, and obviously know nothing about the lead Amiga has
over the Mac and IBM in video.
So, please quit acting like a poor hurt puppy when you post messages like
that.
Jim,
I realize I shouldn't get involved in this…but I do resent your
comment, ".. solutions for folks who can't or won't pay to go first class."
Based on the software available…yes, the Mac line has more
software available for it. However, based on the hardware and operating
system….I think you'll find the Amiga to be every bit as "first class" as
the Mac.
Don
Don,
I apologize. I did modify that statement with "in my opinion," but I
realize that was not nearly enough. At the very least, I should have also
said "in my opinion, and from my perspective" instead. Alas, I didn't, and
I regret it. Sorry.
Ironically, my reason for stating my opinion of the Amiga was for
purposes of fair play <argh!>. You see, I like it when folks share their
bias, so I try to remember to share mine whenever it might be appropriate
(golden rule, you know). In this case, I though you Amiga folks would want
to know where I stand. Sorry if that assertion is off-target.
Allow me to commend you for the way you approached me with your
resentment. Resentment is consuming enough without compounding it by not
even giving a fellow a chance <g>.
RE: "Based on the software available…yes, the Mac line has more software
available for it."
Well, Don, which is says more about the platform, the software or the
hardware? Think about it. I'll guarantee I'd prefer a NeXT, or a Sun, or a
Silicon Graphics workstation if they could do anything that I need better
than the Mac. They can't, but it ain't because of their hardware. See my
point?
I am fortunate to have enough bucks to have any platform I want, along
with all the best peripherals. To me, the Mac is currently my best
selection. Any platform that outdistances the Mac significantly enough to
make the learning curve agony worthwhile will quickly become my platform of
choice.
When I went from the IBM PC to the Mac I deeply missed a couple of
pieces of software that I left behind. Other than that, though, the switch
was a good one. Much of today's DOS software is either outdated or
rinky-dink, from what I've seen, and the platform and operating system is
severely behind the times. DOS has been chasing the Mac's tail now for
about two
[continued in the reply]
[continued]
years.
Workstation manufacturers have been courting Mac software developers
with some success. Perhaps within the next two or three years <fingers
crossed>.
Perhaps one major thing that drives Mac software developers is the
ability of the Mac's installed base to pay. Mac folks are often very well
heeled or budgeted (as in the art departments of news rooms and other
graphics "factories"). Myself, I can testify that I annually spend in the
thousands for Mac software.
Sincere apologies, —GeM
Jim–
Your day has come… actually, it's been here for some time. You can move
up to that superior platform (AmigaDos) without having ANY learning curve,
or need to lose any of that software you love. The Amiga, outfitted with
an AMAX emulator, will run all of your applications (in most cases, faster
than a stock MAC). And the AMAX isn't priced the way most MAC peripherals
are… it'a about $150 for the board and software… you just add MAC roms
and a mac drive. Want to have some fun?… go ahead and buy a used 2000
and outfit with Amax, and at the same time, start to get to know the Amiga
from a real upfront and personal perspective. I dare you <g>.
– Whapping from the North Coast Michael
RE: "Want to have some fun?… go ahead and buy a used 2000 and outfit with
Amax, and at the same time, start to get to know the Amiga from a real
upfront and personal perspective. I dare you <g>."
Yours is a selfish dare, Michael. Obviously, you have nothing to lose.
You offer nothing in return, and do nothing in return. An empty dare has
little value to me. Sorry.
A similar tactic moved me to attempt computer compatibility with my son
back in 1984. I bought a full Atari 800 set-up at his urging. My own
opinion prevailed and I returned to my other platform, with James picking
up my Atari equipment for a song <g>.
I've toyed with adding an Amiga to my home network, just to see more of
my son, if nothing else. If I did (or do <g>), though, you wouldn't find me
buying some low end piece of used equipment. Nope, I'll go for the top of
the line, just as I do with Macintosh as well as video and other equipment.
I am fortunate enough to have enough money to buy virtually anything I
want, so why not?
Having said the above, I want to make it clear to folks that I'm not
really as selfish/greedy as that may make me sound. Being a Christian and
thus realizing the importance of setting a poor example, I need to make
that clear. I'll assure you that I have long been a major charitable giver.
Right now, as an example, I'm _very_ worried about an AmerAsian child I
sponsor through the Pearl S. Buck Foundation. She, Kailen, lives in the
Philippine volcano evacuation zone. We, the foundation and I, have lost
touch with her <sob>. I praying hard for her well-being. Kailen has written
me the best letters I've ever received, and I've received some grand ones.
Thanks for the stimulus, —GeM
Jim,
I fully agree…if the software you want/need is not available on a
certain platform…then for you, it wouldn't make sense to purchase that
particular computer.
I often reccomend other brands of computers to folks because of the
things they need to do. For instance, my brother designs aircraft
interiors for a living, he *must* be able to run AutoCAD. That means for
him, the Amiga is out. No matter how good Amiga CAD software may be.
As another example, for myself…I need a computer where I can run
Oracle. Oracle isn't available for the Amiga…but it is available for
MS-DOS. Thus, I have an XT BridgeBoard inside my Amiga. Were the
BridgeBoard not available, I would have had to either had 2 computers
here…or had an XT.
So while I need the capabilities of an XT, I don't think anyone
would seriously call an XT a first class computer at this point in time.
However, the type/quality of software available doesn't make one
computer "better" ('first class') than another computer ('second class').
It mearly means that for a particular application (set of applications) one
brand/type of computer may be better suited for a particular user.
Don
Just curious… what are you doing with ORACLE ??
I am designing a maintenance and admin terminal for a telephone switch, and
the database engine is ORACLE. Unfortunately, we also opted to use their
forms and menus packages, based on their description of version 3.0 of the
forms. This was back in November 1988, we still don't have that version of
the forms.
All in all we have been very impressed with the database engine, and their
support. There were a few things they told us couldn't be done, which we
went ahead and did anyway, but overall we have been pleased!
I'd be interested in hearing about your experience with ORACLE!
RE: " However, the type/quality of software available doesn't make one
computer "better" ('first class') than another computer ('second class').
It mearly means that for a particular application (set of applications) one
brand/type of computer may be better suited for a particular user."
Folks would be better served by first determining the best software for
their needs/wants (not an easy task, I know), then finding the platform
that best runs that software (a much easier task, IMO). Kinda like food
preparation equipment/tools; no sense buying a food processor when your
taste would be better served via a high-end blender, or buying a light hand
mixer for mixing heavy dough.
For what it's worth department, —GeM
Hi Jim, I have been reading the thread here for a little bit and have a
friend who has a MAC IIci. You said that the MAC can do true multitasking
and that you could demonstrate it. What would you show a person if they
asked you to show them multi-tasking. Also is it possible for you to
download off either CompuServe or a bbs and also do other things on your
machine like word processing or some other application? We have MACs here
at work and are kinda new to the Mac world. We have System 7 by the way. So
how exaclty do you multitask with a Mac?
Poor misguided fellow.
…Dave
How did your son get ahold of AmigaOS 2.0 beta? I thought only developers
had access to it? Is it released?
Nick
I am afraid that one or more of the beta testers let the 2.0 out…I
was not aware that I was not supposed to use it. It is on several of the
area boards in a kit with KickStart 2.0, WorkBench2.0, & a file Called
Kickit (which allows you 2.0 Kickstart to be moved into RAM). I realize
that the 2.0 is not released in ROMs yet, and would like to voice any
problems with it through here before it is made permanent in a chip set.
James Whitlow
James,
The problems in the 2.0 software are being thoroughly discussed by the
developers and CATS on BIX (where Commodore chose to do developer support.)
The discussion has been going on for at least a year – closer to two
years, I think. They have a section there in the area for commercial and
certified developers especially for bug reports, and another for discussion
other suggestions. I really think that it is now too late to be making any
changes in the way 2.0 will work. I suspect you will be seeing it in the
stores very soon now.
Betty
Betty,
That's correct — "2.0" has been frozen at version 37.175 and is now being
produced in rom (in quantity). Now the guys at CBM are working on 2.1 —
which they say will be a disk upgrade, not a rom change. (Yeah, I know, it
sounds ridiculous to me to be talking about 2.1 when 2.0 isn't out yet).
-sja
Jim,
If your son is legitimately using WorkBench 2.0 on his 2000, then he has
access to the proper channels to report any problems encountered. 2.0 for
the 2000 is ONLY available to developers registered with Commodore, and
there are specific methods available for developers to work with CBM.
From the sound of your message, I suspect that your son is not a
registered developer. He is running a risk of real problems using
unauthorized Beta version software, as there may very well be real
problems. Developers are informed of problems as they are found, and have
been provided with guidelines as to how to "be prepared" for any
contingency. I'm not saying that there ARE problems in those versions –
I'm covered by non-disclosure agreements that do not permit me to talk
about any specifics regarding Commodore's beta test programs.
Hope this helps….
…BobR
Jim,
Is your son an Amiga developer? If so, he should have access to the CATS
team for delivering his message. He can join the Amiga developer's
conference on BIX, or he can contact them by phone or by mail. I ask
because the workbench and kickstart you mention have only been released to
developers and every developer who gives it to an non-developer risks
having his own dev. status taken away! Actually, I rather believe that it
is too late now to make changes in the 2.0 software. It is my
understanding that the current release has been sent to the Rom burners,
manual writers, and packagers to finally get it released for everyone. Any
more changes will have to wait for 2.1 or whatever.
Betty
Jim,
While your son's points may be valid points…if he's using that
software legally…then he knows exactly how to contact the "people that
are writing the Amiga O.S.".
That software was made available ONLY to registered developers with
explicit instructions on how to contact Commodore with
problems/suggestings/etc.
Don
Don't harp on Jim or his son too much guys. Lets face it, there are a lot
of "Public Domain" versions of ZKICK floating around in the Amiga
community. I could get it tomorrow if I wanted to, but I don't need it
since I have a 3000. To have so many scold him for having some CBM beta
software seems a little ridiculous. If he wants to take the chance, then
that is his problem. 2.0 is just around the corner, so it's not a big
secret anymore.
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
John,
I didn't 'harp' on Jim OR his son. However, I'm GONNA HARP on you.
Possesion of stolen (yes, if it ain't yours to have, it's STOLEN) property
is illegal. I'm not asserting that ZKICK is stolen (although I _thought_
that C= owned it), but sure as heck KS 37.175 and WB 37.52 belong to C= and
are ONLY available to developers. Sheesh, this kid has a later version of
WB than _I_ do, and _I'm_ a commercial developer…they mail me updates as
part of my developer package, I don't have to ask for them.
a quick question about ZKICK….
I am not a registered developer and have no great desire to play with 2.0
until they tell me it will work… I would however like to boot my 2000
with older kickstarts! Will ZKICK do this?? Is it available to
non-registered developers??
The reason I ask is that I have some games I bought when I got my 1000 that
were either never updated or I never bothered to update them. I am getting
an accellerator with an MMU later this summer, at which time I will use
SETCPU to boot from the old kickstarts.
In the meantime it would be a kick ( no pun intended ) to be able to boot
under 1.1!
Thanx for any info!!
..Bill 😉
Bill,
ZKick uses a specially compiled/assembled version of kickstart to do its
magic. It will not work with a "standard" kickstart image. As far as I
know, SETCPU (or the equivalent) is the only way one could run a "standard"
kickstart image from a file, and that requires the use of an MMU (which
will slow the system down somewhat).
…BobR
OK, thanks for the info. I figured an MMU was the only way. As I said, this
is not something I am in a real rush to do. I have a couple of games from
the 1000 that it would be funny to run, and when I get an accellerator with
an MMU I'll give it a try.
I am a little confused that you think that an MMU will slow things down, my
understanding was that RAM was sufficiently faster than ROM that the slight
delays caused by remapping would be more than covered. Am I missing
something?
..Bill 😉
Bill,
It really depends on what is being remapped. In the case of the KS ROM
being remapped by the MMU, then you are correct that the "speed hit" is
offset by the gain achieved by the speed difference between 32-bit RAM
access and ROM access. Other uses of the MMU, however, can and do slow the
machine down. For example, using a program like Enforcer (which is a
developer tool that uses the MMU to detect memory access to areas where a
well-behaved program should not be) will slow a machine down. Similarly,
an attempt to implement a form of Virtual Memory on the Amiga will slow the
machine down.
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
…BobR
I believe that virtual memory schemes, whether MMU based or software based,
will slow down any machine and any OS. Virtual mmemory was necessary once,
but I do wish they'd get rid of it at this point. We use SUN 3's at work,
and the VM just kills the poor little things. Seems they spend all of their
time swapping stuff in and out.
I was thinking of a speed increase based on moving the KS ROM image only.
That Enforcer program you mentioned sounds very useful. I generally rely on
segmentation violations to tell me I've blown the end of an array or
wandered into someplace I shouldn't be. Not very elegent, but VERY
effective!
..Bill 😉
Bill,
If you didn't have VM in those Suns of yours at work…the programs
you are/were running that caused it to swap…simply wouldn't run at all.
So your choice is to have them run slowly, or not run at all.
That presumes you don't add memory. If you can and do add memory,
then you'll have less problems with swapping.
Don
More memory does improve things, bt the VM is still annoying!
..Bill 😉
RE: "an attempt to implement a form of Virtual Memory on the Amiga will
slow the machine down"
Virtual memory will slow any computer down, unless you count crashes
that are prevented by having it. As far as I'm concerned, virtual memory is
good to have as a backup to DRAM, so that in the event I reach beyond the
limits of my DRAM it will kick in. _When_ that begins to occur with any
frequency it's time to buy more DRAM (currently, I'm about to upgrade my
8mb Mac IIfx to 20mb or 32mb).
FWIW, —GeM
27525
Go ahead and harp Vic, I sometimes leave controversial messages just to get
people's reaction 8^) I didn't say I had ZKICK, but I know where I can get
it if I want to. And I bet if we had a HONEST show of hand's of people who
have recieved Beta versions of CBM software in the past, and who were not
developers, then I would certainly not be alone. (Hands up–but not 2.0). I
really don't blame the people who do have it. CBM has certainly done
nothing yet to make it available to 2000 and 500 owners.
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
John
Yes, Commodore is taking a long time releasing 2.0 … but there are two
good reasons for that … one is that they really are trying to make it as
good as they can … two is that they are also having to write things into
it to help some software houses (who didn't do everything quite by the
book) make their 1.3 software work.
My own feeling is that Commodore has only made one mistake with 2.0 … and
that is allowing news of it get out before it was ready. Unfortunately,
that would have been difficult to prevent … not all developers are able
to keep it to themselves and they also wanted to ship it with the 3000.
Mike (Whapping from the UK)
John,
I think that each person who saw the message just answered, without reading
the other replies. I know that I did, because Whap! does not tell me
whether there are already replies and I just answer messages as I come to
them. We did not mean to jump on Jim – just to tell him what is going on.
I suspect that each one of us really thought we would be the only one
answering the message.
Betty
Betty, Every update I've gotten for Whap!, I filezap and insert the string
to include the number of replies. I like to see how many have replied,
especially if it's a help question. If there are five replies on how to
find an archiver program why should another person tell 'em which library
to find it?
For anyone interested here is the string that needs changing.
OP;E LIN;MO COM;PA NEV;CH;RE NEV;SK NO;DIS;L;S
CHANGE THIS /\.
TO THIS \/
OP;E LIN;MO COM;PA NEV;CH;RE COU;SK NO;DIS;L;S
Use NewZap or whichever other filezapper you prefer.
chris
ACCU-TYPE & GRAPHICS
Oh I know you didn't mean to purposely harp on Jim, but you have to admit
when he gets on-line and read's — You have 6 messages waiting, all with
the subject of YOUR SON HAD BETTER BE A DEVELOPER, that he might be a
little defensive, but I'm sure he will understand the situation. Anyone who
uses Beta release versions of software is playing with a loaded gun if he
is not a developer, especially if it does something drastic like destroy a
Hard drive partition, etc.
John (in beautiful downtown Walla Walla) – via Whap!
John,
Just because something is easily available, or "everyone's doing
it" doesn't make it right.
Don
As an asied, I just showed your message to a friend here in London, and he
commented that he had heard of pirated version of 2.0 that had had their
version numbers doctored to make them seem like much later versions than
they really were. Some of them go back a _long_ way, and were very buggy
…. I certainly wouldn't trust my system under such circumstances.
Mike