Create a Yahoo! account and try again. Good luck.

Amigas are extremely overrated. The fanbase is rabid and out of touch with reality, over a computer that was done and over with when it couldn't run Doom, in spite of all its "power." I kinda respect their sheer insanity of making new hardware for them...

So? It was something that was created with heart, and as such it won over hearts of hundreds of thousands users worldwide.
Hobby isn't about what's usable or what's not, all of these are obsolete junk, its about enjoyment of doing things that are proven to be joyful and fulfilling.

Amiga is a complex 'platform'... There are various 'camps'...
On the one hand, we have the 'real' Amiga, as in, the computers sold by Commodore, with the original chipset, or the AGA one, and a 680x0-CPU.
On the other hand, we have the 'next generation' Amiga, which is PowerPC-based or even x86-based, shares no hardware with a 'real' Amiga whatsoever, and runs an OS that resembles AmigaOS (AROS is one of these, as is MorphOS, which can be run on some PowerPC-based Apple machines).
They use a compatibility layer based on UAE to run 680x0-based 'real' Amiga software.

There is nothing 'overrated' about the 'real' Amiga: both its hardware and its software were nothing short of groundbreaking at release time.
During the late 80s/early 90s, it was a very nice gaming platform, and the Amiga is almost singlehandedly responsible for the big demoscene boom in those days (and a lot of demosceners from those days are now working in the gaming industry. Most well-known example is DICE, which was founded by members of The Silents to market the game they had developed: Pinball Dreams).
I can recommend developing on a 'real' Amiga to anyone who likes to dabble in graphics programming, because the hardware is unique (even today), and it is quite an experience to write code for it, and develop all sorts of tricks for 2d and 3d rendering with this unique chipset.

In my opinion, if you're curious about Amiga, you should be looking at UAE and 'real' AmigaOS/hardware/software.

Aros is more an Amiga OS 3.1 compatible OS where MorphOS aims on 4.x (and you need PPC hardware like a Mac Mini G4). You can run Amiga software on it and that is (for me) the only reason to use it (sometimes). I never tried internet whit Aros, only whit MorphOS.

But.. I just tested it in virtualbox and OWB is working fine. So I think that Aros just does not have the drivers for your network card.

calvin wrote:

Amigas are extremely overrated. The fanbase is rabid and out of touch with reality, over a computer that was done and over with when it couldn't run Doom, in spite of all its "power." I kinda respect their sheer insanity of making new hardware for them...

Amiga's are way underrated. The arcitechture is one of the greatest ever concieved. Yes there are not enough power in the old machines, yet the new stuff is way overpowered when it comes to the operating system. Speaking of arcitechture.... An amiga is really well balanced, and it has been proven and aged well. Have you seen the new Amiga X1000 system's? X5000 system's? They have an user programable FPU and is PPC based. They even use new and modern technology, such as USB and stuff.

Shure you can not play Doom on an a500, though you can play Quake on an A4000, with PPC board.
Yes, even in 1994, the amiga had PPC upgrade boards.
It's like saying, that you don't get why people use pc's, because P-133's can not play Far Cry.

If it was not for the Amiga, stuff like chipsets and plug and play were not as developed today as it is.
And you might still have to sort out IRQ's and DMA's on the most modern computers.
There is a reason why people called it plug'n pray. While autoconfigure just worked from the start.
As like in 1987... Way before PNP even excisted as a standardised technology on the PC-Platform.

Besides. Most amiga fans have a new and modern windows computer as the daily workhorse.

I'm a linux user this was just a curiosity I couldn't help trying, I've always wondered about AROS since I read about it. Believe me I would love to own an Amiga right now because of it's legendary graphics and sound but unfortunately in the US they are rare as hell and expensive as hell on the internet. 🤣

all i know is that it has that damn "cat" who had a kart.

King_Corduroy wrote:

I'm a linux user this was just a curiosity I couldn't help trying, I've always wondered about AROS since I read about it. Believe me I would love to own an Amiga right now because of it's legendary graphics and sound but unfortunately in the US they are rare as hell and expensive as hell on the internet. 🤣

Well, I guess the point of the Amiga is the hardware, not so much the software (most games, applications and demos are on self-booting floppies, so you wouldn't even interact with the OS very much).
Probably difficult to understand in this day and age where Windows PCs, Linux PCs, Macs are all using the exact same hardware, and they're trying to use software to differentiate themselves.

King_Corduroy wrote:

I'm a linux user this was just a curiosity I couldn't help trying, I've always wondered about AROS since I read about it. Believe me I would love to own an Amiga right now because of it's legendary graphics and sound but unfortunately in the US they are rare as hell and expensive as hell on the internet. 🤣

They are easy to come by here in Denmark. Yet expensive as hell, for such an old computer.
They cost around 150 to 485 US Dollars, depending on model and what you will get with them.

The most expensive at this moment, that I can find. (485 Dollars)
http://www.dba.dk/commodore-spillekonsol-am/id-1008110890/

Another expensive model. (295 Dollars)
http://www.dba.dk/amiga-1200-spillekonsol/id-1018198344/

Well... Not all Amiga's are expensive, as I have found some under 150 Dollars, yet they are in such bad shape.
They need to be refurbished and/or fixed for broken parts. I have seen one that did not work, for 70 US Dollars.
70 Dollars for a big door-stop? I think not. It is all insane pricing, if you ask me.

Scali wrote:

Well, I guess the point of the Amiga is the hardware, not so much the software (most games, applications and demos are on self-booting floppies, so you wouldn't even interact with the OS very much).
Probably difficult to understand in this day and age where Windows PCs, Linux PCs, Macs are all using the exact same hardware, and they're trying to use software to differentiate themselves.

Well... Look at it this way: A gaming console, expanded to a computer. There were CD32's and a bit more computer-rish model called CD-TV.
Of course it's about the hardware. 😉 They had processors (custom chips) for like every task. One for GFX, one for the Floppy, one for the sound, and even one for ports. This way, the main CPU had no to little work that it was supposed to take care of.
This way, it was possible to do multitasking. Imagine a system, were you ran more than 4 programs at the same time. And you only had a 7.14mhz CPU and 512kb of ram. All this in 1987. Try to make this possible on same specs on a PC. So yeah. It was pretty advanced for it's day's.

Nasa used to run these machine's for launching of spacecrafts (the shuttle), and some school in the US are still running an Amiga to control the heating system in multiple buildings. Those in charge of the heating system and the Amiga running it, have said that they need to spend a couple of millions, if they want new hardware to be able to do the same. And the electricity bill for such a computer, vs an amiga? No way...
In this case, the Amiga rule supreme. Speaking of Nasa. They have a couple of extra A-2000's in store, if the hardware should brake.

It's that good an architecture. A tough workhorse wich just works. Eventually, age will kill them all off.

I mean, even the true believers in Amigas know Workbench is a bit of a turd. They're in it for the HW, (though some realize the >1000$ underpowered un-Amiga like "Amiga" PPC machines are a bad idea) software, (not really productivity but more creative like DPaint and Tracker) and games.

calvin wrote:

They're in it for the HW

Have to see, I just asked a question about what's the best, HW or SW, on a amiga-community.
Was too qurious not to ask. 😉

calvin wrote:

I mean, even the true believers in Amigas know Workbench is a bit of a turd. They're in it for the HW, (though some realize the >1000$ underpowered un-Amiga like "Amiga" PPC machines are a bad idea) software, (not really productivity but more creative like DPaint and Tracker) and games.

Is there any reason they choose to go with expensive underpowered PPC machines rather than focus on approaches like AROS/ICAROS? From what I've read, their PPC machines are just like PCs, but with a PPC processor instead, and do not really share the architecture philosophy of the older Amigas. So why not just go x86 (like Apple did), where things are cheaper, the Amiga community wouldn't have to worry about making the hardware, and its easier to jump into?

calvin wrote:

I mean, even the true believers in Amigas know Workbench is a bit of a turd.

I don't agree with that really.
Sure, it's an OS designed in 1985, so it's quite rough around the edges compared to modern OSes.
However, compare to other OSes from 1985 on microcomputers, and the AmigaOS is quite revolutionary. It is much closer to today's Windows than to OSes of that day (Gem/TOS, MS-DOS, 16-bit Windows, MacOS classic etc).

For example, it already had shared libraries (DLLs), and pre-emptive multitasking. The PC world was still on MS-DOS by then, and had to wait until ~1993 for Windows NT to give them pre-emptive multitasking... with system requirements much higher than the Amiga.
Another interesting feature is the multiple desktop windows. You can simply drag the whole screen down to reveal the screen of another application. All made possible because of the elegance of the hardware.

I've heard of aros/icaros but never really used them... I just stick to classic WB3.9 setups for my amigas . I don't really care about NG stuff tbh - a 030+fastram is good enough for me to enjoy some apps, mods and good'old whdload gaming 😉

And yes, amigas did make quite an impression back then. Maybe if comoddore/escom would abandon back then their old chipset and implement something resembling a VGA chipset things could be very different now 😎

alexanrs wrote:

Is there any reason they choose to go with expensive underpowered PPC machines rather than focus on approaches like AROS/ICAROS? From what I've read, their PPC machines are just like PCs, but with a PPC processor instead, and do not really share the architecture philosophy of the older Amigas. So why not just go x86 (like Apple did), where things are cheaper, the Amiga community wouldn't have to worry about making the hardware, and its easier to jump into?

Indeed, hardware-wise it doesn't make much sense to go with PPC instead of x86.
I think it's mostly about the software. There have been PPC turboboards for real Amigas, so the PPC is somewhat more 'at home' in the Amiga world, and perhaps there is more software available for it.
I've personally only experienced 68k-era Amiga, so I don't know too much about the difference between x86 and PPC on a 'modern Amiga' in practice.
To me it's all about the classic Amiga, and I still like coding graphics stuff on the original chipset and the 7 MHz 68000.

I mean Workbench as the file manager. It's clunky compared to Finder.

PowerPC Amigas are for crackpots Expensive, little SW, and pointless. (Fun fact: Had the Amiga lived, it wouldn't have gone PowerPC (because if Apple did 68k->PPC, EVERYONE did rite) but possibly cut-down PA-RISC.)

Yeah after my experience with AROS I have to agree, it's supremely clunky albeit interesting. Then again I think mac is pretty damn clunky also and everyone seems to think that is a very user friendly OS. 🤣

Also I agree about the modern Amiga computers, they are stupid expensive with a very proprietary OS, featuring little or no new software. The only real selling point is the namesake really. These manufacturers of the modern Amiga 4 compatible hardware will probably go the way of the recent Commodore 64x (which seemed like a much better idea but was ultimately too much money for an under powered machine crammed into a tiny case that overheated without additional fans). Personally I wish someone would come out with a PC compatible machine in the form factor of the C64C or Amiga 500 / 1200. Those things just looked cool as hell and I personally would buy something like that in a second provided it was good processing value for the dollar. Expandability isn't really an issue for me either personally because like I said I'm a linux user so I don't really play modern games at all anymore, which means my AMD Sapphire 7790 isn't currently getting much of a work out from day to day (I'm contemplating pulling it out also because frankly it's a waste of energy to have it in there with no real use 😜 ). But yeah, original Amiga's are cool but not practical. New Amigas are not only not practical but also a really stupid waste of cash.