Talk:AmigaOS 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Amiga (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Amiga (marked as Top-importance).
 

Own article for AmigaOS 4[edit]

I think AmigaOS 4 deserves its own article as Windows XP, Windows Vista, Mac OS X, Linux Ubuntu etc -- Marko75 (talk) 03:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Is AmigaOS 4 the correct spelling?[edit]

How is the correct spelling? AmigaOS4, AmigaOS 4, Amiga OS4 or Amiga OS 4? -- Marko75 (talk)

I suppose it's "AmigaOS 4" What's in a name? -- Marko75 (talk) 00:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Now Hyperion spells it consistently as "AmigaOS 4" and "AmigaOS 4.1". -Marko75 (talk) 23:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

AmigaOS 4 versions[edit]

First update mess: Since AmigaOS 4.0 First Update version[25], the AmigaOS could now allocate paging memory on mass storage devices[26] and defragments "on the fly" the memory space[27].

I think that there are some errors in the phrase above: 1) First Update? It was AmigaOS 4.0 July 2007 Update. 2) New memory system (slab allocator etc.) was introduced in AmigaOS 4.0 Final Update 3) Paging memory on mass storage devices... NOT in the public release of OS 4.0. This "paging" is avaiable in OS 4.1.

--Pavlor (talk) 20:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome to change it so it becomes correct, I don't mind :) --Marko75 (talk) 21:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Style[edit]

"Function sets and tools from several applications can be brought together into a single, integrated interface to allow the most complex jobs to be performed with the utmost simplicity." I don't quite know how to fix it, but that is too evaluative ("utmost simplicity") and sounds like ad copy rather than a Wikipedia article.65.65.63.117 (talk) 19:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

AmigaOS4 Image in the Box[edit]

The image in the box to the right is not a good example for AmigaOS4. It shows a extremely modified Workbench theme. IMHO it will better fit under "Customisable GUI"

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b7/AmigaOS4.png

This image is much better as it shows the out of the box Workbench. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.194.156.203 (talk) 23:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I actually agree :) However, now I have uploaded and replaced it with a new screenshot of the latest version 4.1. I hope it is a "out of the box Workbench", if not then the old image may be replaced back again. -Marko75 (talk) 23:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

OS 4.1.1 and OS 4.2 announced, how about a roadmap?[edit]

We now have enough info from AmiWest & Pianta Amiga to partially construct Hyperion's roadmap for OS4:


  • OS4.1 (final) is already released for Amiga Ones & Pegasos 2. It seems that there may never be a non-beta release for Sam440s...


  • OS4.1.1 (final) will be free & available for Amiga Ones, Pegasos 2 & Sam440. Although not yet finished, it is very likely to have:

- A more modern metallic-looking theme, although this may not be the default.

- Much bigger new icons as standard. Looks a bit OS X-ish IMHO.

- Dynamic icon scaling on Workbench! So users with huge monitors won't be forced to live with small icons, but user with smaller monitors can still have small icons if they wish.

- A pop-up notification system: All applications registered to the application.library can send notifications to the notification server (called Ringhio) that can be configured to display them on the WB screen. Should be used by at least the USB stack & some 3rd-party programs like XNet-RSS.

- Replacement of the WbStartup folder by a StartUp preferences app, so you don't have to worry about programs in the WbStartup folder becoming out of date. And the loading of programs is accompanied by display of their icons on a bar in the middle of the screen (like in many other OSes).

- Automatic monitor configuration, using DDC (monitor plug'n'play).

- A new shell with support for multiple tabs, scrollbars (with buffer), command history & auto-completion. EDIT: Rigo says this will probably miss OS4.1.1, but will appear in a later minor update.

- A new intuition, with shadows around windows, and extended ReAction.

- More beginner-friendly installer.

- More beginner friendly set-up of OS4, e.g. ContextMenus & ClickToFront running by default.

- Special versions of Tunenet, SimpleMail, and possibly other programs.

- EDIT: 10% faster video playback on Sam440 (at least with DvPlayer), thanks to improved graphics handling.

- A ton of bug fixes, which makes OS4 much more stable, especially on the Sam.

- Better USB support, and especially a lot more stable.

- Support for USB2.0 *might* make it, but this is still in development.

- Workbench automatically updates itself when files change now (this was a past complaint about OS4.1 in an OS News review).


  • OS4.2 was revealed by Steven Solie:

- Multi-core (SMP) support! Sounded like this would continue to be developed after OS4.2, presumably because it is such a major change.

- Better USB support (and of course definitely USB2.0 if it doesn't make it into OS4.1.1).

- A focus on printer support.

- A focus on graphics driver acceleration. i.e. More stuff being hardware accelerated, which fits in with Rogue mentioning elsewhere that Cairo now has hardware support.

- Replacement of the graphics subsystem.

- *Plans* for JAVA support! He did say "for OS4.2 and beyond", so I guess it may not be fully supported in OS4.2 (if at all), because it would be such a big project.

- There is surely a lot more planned, but it's currently secret!


Related news:

  • It seems that the Most Amitious Project (which is NOT Firefox!) will be announced before the end of this year.
  • The Firefox port (Timberwolf) will *hopefully* have an early alpha release made by the end of the year, but this is not a commercial project, so anything could happen. The bounty is already over 3,000 Euros, which Steven Solie said "will really help things along" :)
  • Hyperion's settlement with Amiga Inc (both of them & other related parties) was due to mediation that started 28th November 2008. There were in fact several lawsuits (by the different parties), not just the one that was publically followed.
  • It will take time for the judges in all of the court cases to be updated on the settlement (and presumably officially close those court cases).
  • The number of developers working on OS4 has varied between about 10 & 30. It is currently "in the high teens", so over 15.


For those who missed some of these facts, and don't believe me, here are my main sources: http://blip.tv/file/2751322 Pianeta Amiga post by Tuxedo Pianeta Amiga post by guruman http://codebench.co.uk/4.1installcd_shots/ http://codebench.co.uk/ScreenShots/images/silvergreen_wb.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.175.71.90 (talk) 22:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the Roadmap section should be removed - it is mixture of rumors and hopes, not true section in encyclopedia. I suggest to wait until the release (so called 4.1.1) arrives and then write section for it. However, current Roadmap section will be (hopefully) obsolete before end of this year (2009).

Pavlor (talk) 22:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, 4.1.1 update is obvious, since the 4.1 is still beta for SAM, and even with quickfix OS 4.1 is not at a glance now. Its a minor update at all, OS 4.2 is guess matter at the moment. Once it become official, it will go to the article, now is subject of discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.175.113.124 (talk) 01:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

(1) I also think that the 4.1.1 part should be removed, once the official update is here then the proper features of 4.1.1 will get properly included in the "versions" section anyway. (2) Then, when it comes to the 4.2 part. This "Roadmap" could also be remove OR reworked/refactored to "Future goals", it is also no official roadmap as Steven Solie clarifies here. --Marko75 (talk) 20:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
The section has been rewritten, I guess this matter is now resolved. --Marko75 (talk) 14:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Renaming Discussions at AmiWest_2010 to Roadmap?[edit]

Should perhaps the Discussions at AmiWest 2010 section be renamed to Roadmap, or not? -Marko75 (talk) 15:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

As the source says. Xorxos (talk) 21:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Final version of OS4.0[edit]

Xorxos changed phrase ""The Final Update" was released on 24 December 2006" to "The final version of AmigaOS 4.0 was released on 24 December 2006". I fear that this change substantially alters sense of this phrase. Final can mean not only "complete" (non-developer version), but also last. As we know, there were later updates to 4.0 (July, two versions for "classic" computers). I´m not native English speaker (my point is based only on my feeling of this change), thus I will not revert to prior state of respective phrase. However, I think original (""The Final Update" was released on 24 December 2006") was more accurate. Your opinions? Pavlor (talk) 16:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

You are probably correct. I didnt notice there was another update released after "The Final Update". The original phrasing was ""The Final Update" was released on 24 December 2006 (...)" which I changed to "The final version of AmigaOS 4.0 was released on 24 December 2006 (...)". My edit is obviously wrong since it was not final version assuming "the final update" really meant "the final update". However, shouldnt it mention the last update? "The Final Update" apparently is not relevant. I suggest rephrasing this sentence to "The last update to AmigaOS 4.0 was released on <insert date here>". It would look more encyclopedic. Xorxos (talk) 21:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Final Update has great significance for AmigaOS development, because it was the first OS4 version not marked as "developer pre-release" - all prior public revisions were called AmigaOS 4.0 pre-release (Update, Update 1, Update 2, Update 3 and Update 4). At that time (2006), there were some legal concerns (dispute with Amiga.Inc) that forced Hyperion to mention original 2004 release. I suggest to write respective phrase like this: "On 24 December 2006, after five years of development by the Belgian company Hyperion Entertainment under license from Amiga, Inc, the "Final Update" of AmigaOS 4.0 was released denoting maturity of the OS since the original public release in 2004." (or something like that...) Pavlor (talk) 10:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
I reverted this to the original wording. Xorxos (talk) 15:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

References to AmigaOS 1.0 - 3.9 should be removed[edit]

AmigaOS 4.x is the name given to a PPC-based OS created by Hyperion Entertainment. It is not related to the versions of AmigaOS which ran on the Amiga computer. Therefore references to AmigaOS 1.0 - 3.9 have no place in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edarticle (talkcontribs) 21:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Why? Amiga OS 4 is based in part on Amiga OS 3.1 (and later) sources, fully licensed by Amiga.Inc. I really don´t understand why do you think that it isn´t related to previous versions of Amiga OS.Pavlor (talk) 17:05, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree. There should be see AmigaOS history. Versions since first developer version to 4.1.2 are relevant It`s not "based on code" thing (then DOS should lead to CP/M, and so on) it`s how code evolved.

Fast ON and OFF[edit]

Description: Instant off / fast reboot: An oft-touted feature is that AmigaOS can be switched off in an instant by just hitting the off switch.[16] Arguably, however, this is not a feature, but a low expectation. AmigaOS is as vulnerable to dataloss as any other operating system, should it be switched off at the wrong time. In fact, operating systems with modern filesystem data integrity checking are actually more capable of surviving this. Untrue: It is a feature. Everyone with a bit sanity would finish the disk operation and switch off, but even insane person would just cause disk validiation. It`s much more horrible to try to do this on Windows and "newer file system" machines. So it is still a feature. Amiga disk operations are rare and fast (no constant HDD writting) and even contents of RAM can be copied to RAD to survive softreset. Fast off is feature because there is no shutdown procedure (and no multiuser too). Also, this should focus on fast reboot more. It`s still shortest in the universe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.121.39.186 (talk) 17:13, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I dare to say every computer can be switched off instantly by turning off mains. Xorxos (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC).
I reverted your edit. The youtube video is not good source in the first place. Instead of deleting the whole instant on/off I reverted to the more informative original wording. Quick reboot/on/off is quite subjective. I looked at ref15 and it was rebooting 30 seconds. Xorxos (talk) 22:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I left the first sentence. Other part is untrue, so by revert you left the uncorrect text. Its only way to shutdown the OS, its feature because its instant, and disk activity due to small filesizes is not frequent as well as swapping since AmigaOS 4 uses small ram compared to XP. Third, no the DATA LOSS is not higher than with any computer, as it will self validiate and continue. Only data in RAM is lost ,as expected. And even then if its saved to RAD it will be waiting. Person that wrote this extension obviouslu never really used Amiga. User:Vox

Yes data loss (probably) is not higher than on other computers if switched off from mains. Latter part ("arguably low expectations") is original research but this fast reboot/on/off is not encyclopedic. Youtube video does not make good reference. I can dig some sources where users claim AmigaOS booting can last several minutes (I know why, it is DHCP). Please provide reliable source. Xorxos (talk) 18:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
I added WP:OR and WP: tag to this section. Mainly General section but there are also other items I could dispute. Like "The Grim Reaper", a crash handling system that catches crashes and lock ups. What it does to catch crashes and lock ups? Source anyone? Xorxos (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Small addendum in the article regarding "Classic Amiga"[edit]

Actually, this should be put into the summary but for some strange reason the summary got killed but my edit was accepted nonetheless. That's why I'll elaborate facts in this section for a moment. "AmigaOS 4 for Classic Amiga" doesn't sound too good as a headline; "AmigaOS 4 for Classic Amiga (with accelerator card)" sounds much better. Why? Well, because for the reader it's a bit disappointing if you have to read the "small print" to know that your god-knows-what-plenty-of-RAM-equipped A1200 won't run AOS 4 because you lack the PowerPC chipset support. Yes, I too was one of the readers, exclaiming at first "WOW! You can now run AOS4 on a, say, A4000T with plenty of RAM?" until I read about the downer..."needs PPC extension card" ;-) Nicely trapped, I must say. =D -andy 77.190.61.131 (talk) 05:33, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

OS4 and B2604e[edit]

Is there any proof that OS4(.0) works on Blizzard 2604e? According to Hyperion, only Blizzard 603e(+) and CyberstormPPC are supported (in both 4.0 and 4.1).Pavlor (talk) 21:20, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I recall I have seen a link where OS4 is running on Blizzard 2604e. Maybe it should be removed from the list because it is not officially supported and there are only few (two?) B2604e prototype cards in the existence. Xorxos (talk) 10:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite of the OS4 versions section[edit]

OS4 versions section in its current form is too long and hard to read. I would like to lighten it a bit. Detailed features of particular updates could be moved to "AmigaOS versions" article and I would like to replace them with table like this:

AmigaOS 4 Version Information
Version Release Date Supported Hardware Introduced Features
AmigaOS 4.0 Developer Pre-release April 2004 AmigaOne-SE/XE First public release
AmigaOS 4.0 Developer Pre-release Update 10 October 2004 AmigaOne-SE/XE/micro AltiVec support, PowerPC-native Picasso96 and MUI, USB support for input devices

Your opinion? --Pavlor (talk) 15:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

The list of supported hardware is too long. Could it be better move new supported HW to introduced features? And is some PowerPC native MUI really important to mention here? It is not new functionality. It could be mentioned as general performance improvements. Xorxos (talk) 07:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, list of supported hardware will be probably too long, problem is that not all next versions of OS4 supported the same hardware (eg. first 4.1 release didn´t supported Classic machines etc.). Concerning MUI - considering that at that time (2004) 68k emulation in OS4 was only interpretive (slooow) and MUI is used by many applications as GUI, I think it is major feature. In all cases, table can be refined (and not so important features removed or important added). I only wanted to know if such radical move (table instead of the current list) has support of other editors.--Pavlor (talk) 09:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps you could create separate table for supported hardware. By the way. PowerPC native is perhaps faster but unless it is coming from reliable source it is original research. Xorxos (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I will wait for other opinions and then we can decide (probably it will be without entries for supported hardware; it is not so important after all). Concerning PowerPC native versus interpreted 68k emulation, I can of course provide sources (benchmarks, reviews, presentations etc.), difference is significant (around 1:20). As I wrote, nothing is carved in stone - my goal is only to make this article more comprehensible.--Pavlor (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I fear changes must be even more radical than I expected. Current detailed informations about OS4 versions are too long to be moved to "AmigaOS versions" article. So choice is to let it as it is now or to summarize only most important informations in simple table (and drop all other). OS4 versions section takes up now more than 1/3 of the whole article, any new version will make it even worser. Shame on me, because it was me who "improved" this section few years ago by including detailed informations. What now?--Pavlor (talk) 15:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I was bold and did that change (only forgot to login...). I hope it is better now. --Pavlor (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

New layout is more informative. Good work! Xorxos (talk) 20:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it's much better now. However, it would be a shame if we lose all Pavlor's "improved" and detailed information. Therefore, I moved it to its own article AmigaOS 4 versions (since it's perhaps too long for the "AmigaOS versions" article as well). What do you think? --Marko75 (talk) 08:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)