Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Moderators: Mug UK, Zorro 2, Greenious, spiny, Moderator Team

User avatar
GokMasE
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 182
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 11:16 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby GokMasE » Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:30 pm

1st1 wrote:
Cyprian wrote:
1st1 wrote:I think all of you should talk less about them but more with them.



Do you know what is a "chicken egg problem" ???



This is not a chicken/egg problem at all IMO, it is a problem of you failing to realize that not everyone is sharing your beliefs or ideas on how things should be done.
IMO it is fully up to the Apollo team to decide what they want to do, and what market they want to target.
If there will be a product from Apollo that appeals to Atari users, that is cool. If not, then that is how it is. No "problem" at all to me.

But if they were REALLY interested in Atari users they should, for example, absolutely WANT to add 68k MMU compatibility, noone should have to talk them into doing that.

All the best wishes to anyone who might be interested to assist in the development, of course.

Atarieterno
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby Atarieterno » Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:32 pm

I will be brief: I like Atari and I do not like Amiga, I like all the devices that are developed for Atari (and I buy almost all of them) but I do not like the prices and Amiga style.
It is only my opinion, as respectable as that of others.
ST/fm/e, STacy, Mega ST/e, TT, Falcon, C-Lab MKX... and more music tools.

OL
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 467
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 6:59 am
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby OL » Sun Nov 19, 2017 2:57 pm

GokMasE wrote:
1st1 wrote:
Cyprian wrote:


Do you know what is a "chicken egg problem" ???



This is not a chicken/egg problem at all IMO, it is a problem of you failing to realize that not everyone is sharing your beliefs or ideas on how things should be done.
IMO it is fully up to the Apollo team to decide what they want to do, and what market they want to target.
If there will be a product from Apollo that appeals to Atari users, that is cool. If not, then that is how it is. No "problem" at all to me.

But if they were REALLY interested in Atari users they should, for example, absolutely WANT to add 68k MMU compatibility, noone should have to talk them into doing that.

All the best wishes to anyone who might be interested to assist in the development, of course.


An MMU compatible (with wich 68K processor?) is absolutely not need, MMU exist, it should only take into account in Mint, that's all. To use 68080 capacity in all case Mint should be modified (more register ...)
OL

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby 1st1 » Sun Nov 19, 2017 2:58 pm

Atarieterno wrote:I will be brief: I like Atari and I do not like Amiga,


That is nonsense. Also the Amigas are cool machines.
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3

Atarieterno
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby Atarieterno » Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:04 pm

1st1 wrote:
Atarieterno wrote:I will be brief: I like Atari and I do not like Amiga,


That is nonsense.


Can I have my own criteria and decide what I like and what I do not like? Or maybe it's nonsense to have freedom of opinion.
Greetings.
ST/fm/e, STacy, Mega ST/e, TT, Falcon, C-Lab MKX... and more music tools.

User avatar
Neurotoxic
Atari maniac
Atari maniac
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:29 pm
Location: Bremen (Germany)
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby Neurotoxic » Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:29 pm

Atarieterno wrote:
1st1 wrote:
Atarieterno wrote:I will be brief: I like Atari and I do not like Amiga,


That is nonsense.


Can I have my own criteria and decide what I like and what I do not like? Or maybe it's nonsense to have freedom of opinion.
Greetings.


Very good answer! 8)

I think for the Apollo team the Amigas are in the first place. They will finish their work on these adapters. Perhaps they will release a version for the Atari, too. I think that depends on the possibility if they can make money with a ST version. I think that the Amiga community is much bigger than the Atari community. So it's very unlikely that there will be a ST version released by the Apollo team. I think that the Amiga EmuTOS solution will remain the only one to run Atari Software on the Apollo core.
520 ST(M) (TOS 1.02), Falcon030 (16 MHz, 16 MB RAM, CF-Card, MiNT & MyAES), Milan040 (25 MHz, 48 MB RAM, EasyMiNT 1.90), Firebee, PowerMac G5 Late 2005 (2 x 2,3 GHz, Mac OS 10.5), iMac 4K Late 2015 (intel Core i7 4 x 3,3 GHz, Mac OS 10.11.6), IBM XT SFD (640 KB RAM, DR DOS 6.0), Compaq LTE 5300 (Pentium/133 MHz, DR-DOS 7.03), AT-PC (Cyrix 6x86L/200 MHz, Windows 98 SE/MS-DOS 6.22 & Windows 3.11)

User avatar
GokMasE
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 182
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 11:16 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby GokMasE » Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:33 pm

OL wrote:An MMU compatible (with wich 68K processor?) is absolutely not need, MMU exist, it should only take into account in Mint, that's all. To use 68080 capacity in all case Mint should be modified (more register ...)


Maybe it is just me, but personally I don't like the idea of MiNT having to adapt to support things that could (should?) have been made compatible from the start, especially since compatibility seems to be one of the things mentioned on the list of pros. For those who would fancy the currently suggested approach, that is fine, but to me it makes the whole project a lot less appealing. And feel more like FreeMiNT ported to an Amiga bord rather than an Atari clone, if you will.

I certainly wouldn't be buying something like that myself.

OL
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 467
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 6:59 am
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby OL » Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:30 pm

GokMasE wrote:
OL wrote:An MMU compatible (with wich 68K processor?) is absolutely not need, MMU exist, it should only take into account in Mint, that's all. To use 68080 capacity in all case Mint should be modified (more register ...)


Maybe it is just me, but personally I don't like the idea of MiNT having to adapt to support things that could (should?) have been made compatible from the start, especially since compatibility seems to be one of the things mentioned on the list of pros. For those who would fancy the currently suggested approach, that is fine, but to me it makes the whole project a lot less appealing. And feel more like FreeMiNT ported to an Amiga bord rather than an Atari clone, if you will.

I certainly wouldn't be buying something like that myself.


The case of MMU is different, each 68K has already it's own MMU management in Mint because MMU has never been compatible from one version processor to the other, 68080 need to be added to support protection mode (it run already without any change in non protected mode), except system piece no software use MMU by itself.
OL

User avatar
calimero
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:01 am
Location: STara Pazova, Serbia
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby calimero » Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:02 pm

OL is right here.

Why you insist of 68K compatible MMU (which one? 030, 040...?) in Apollo silicon when MiNT could be adopted to Apollo MMU?
using Atari since 1986.http://wet.atari.orghttp://milan.kovac.cc/atari/software/ ・ Atari Falcon030/CT63/SV ・ Atari STe ・ Atari Mega4/MegaFile30/SM124 ・ Amiga 1200/PPC ・ Amiga 500 ・ C64 ・ ZX Spectrum ・ RPi ・ MagiC! ・ MiNT 1.18 ・ OS X

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3684
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby joska » Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:17 pm

First of all, FreeMiNT is not the only piece of software that would have to be adapted. TOS also use the PMMU. The reason FreeMiNT works on the Amiga (with or without 080) is that the hardware is already set up by the booting OS. This is the case on Ataris as well. On any PMMU-equipped Atari FreeMiNT will inherit the existing PMMU setup. It is not capable of initializing this itself.

Secondly, why do the Apollo-team call the 080 core the "most compatible" CPU and then fails to implement an FPU and a PMMU that's actually compatible with any existing 68xxx CPU? Because they design this for the Amiga where this is not important. "1st1" say we have to talk to the Apollo-team - well, the Apollo-team already knows perfectly well what needs to be done to get the Vampire running in an Atari. It's up to them if they want to actually make one or not.

Personally I'd buy one if they made it. Even without a PMMU, although that probably means that it will get used about as much as my FireBee...
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

ThorstenOtto
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:54 pm

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby ThorstenOtto » Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:13 am

joska wrote:On any PMMU-equipped Atari FreeMiNT will inherit the existing PMMU setup. It is not capable of initializing this itself.


Thats only true for 040/060. For 030, it *will* do the setup itself. And i think the only reason for this is that at the time it was written, 040 primarly meant Milan/Hades, where there had more to be done than just setting up a page translation tree.

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby 1st1 » Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:23 am

Atarieterno wrote:
1st1 wrote:
Atarieterno wrote:I will be brief: I like Atari and I do not like Amiga,


That is nonsense.


Can I have my own criteria and decide what I like and what I do not like? Or maybe it's nonsense to have freedom of opinion.
Greetings.


I personally think if somebody is not particular interested in a topic that he/she should not give his/her comments on the topic. This would be a very consequent behaviour. This sould also show respect to those who are interested, because he/she would not disturb them. So, thanks for your comments, but they advance nothing.
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3684
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby joska » Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:29 am

ThorstenOtto wrote:Thats only true for 040/060. For 030, it *will* do the setup itself. And i think the only reason for this is that at the time it was written, 040 primarly meant Milan/Hades, where there had more to be done than just setting up a page translation tree.


The reason for doing this was to *not* have to duplicate the PMMU setup in MiNT when not needed. Medusa, Hades, Milan, Afterburner, CT60... On all of these machines MiNT relies on the underlying OS (or drivers) to set up the hardware. This philosophy is why MiNT boots on the Amiga/Vampire in the first place.

Anyway, my point was that this is not "just" a problem with memory protection and MiNT. It's a TOS problem too.
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

ThorstenOtto
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:54 pm

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby ThorstenOtto » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:11 am

joska wrote:Medusa, Hades, Milan, Afterburner, CT60... On all of these machines MiNT relies on the underlying OS (or drivers) to set up the hardware.


But this "philosophy" was introduced only later. When Mint was part of MultiTOS, there was no "underlying OS"; Mint itself was the OS that had to do all initialization itself. And thats actually what a "real" OS should do. But of course you need at least the necessary information to do so, and the manpower to implement it.

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2969
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby AtariZoll » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:30 am

1st1 wrote:...
I personally think if somebody is not particular interested in a topic that he/she should not give his/her comments on the topic. This would be a very consequent behaviour. This sould also show respect to those who are interested, because he/she would not disturb them. So, thanks for your comments, but they advance nothing.

Actually, what I see here is that people, Atari people is somehow disappointed in this project. And it helps not that thread title talks about Atari ST. It is just not good idea using such CPU on 16-bit ST. Will not talk about HW problems, only SW - TOS needs serious overwork. Plenty of SW will not work just because CPU is way to fast for it (well known problem with PC SW too). Then, plenty of SW will need diverse patches because low CPU compatibility of 'most compatible 68xxx clone' - what leads to other problem here - promotion says things which are simply not true.
So, I don't think that anyone should go and try to talk to Vampire team people. If they mean Atari ST serial (more support for Falcon would be reasonable for instance) as serious target for Vampire they should look here and reconsider what is more important: compatibility or some speed (what is as we know far below speed they talked some months, year ago).
Then, I have very bad experiences with talking with people working on some such project. And I guess, many others.

Summa summarum: Atari people is interested for new HW, faster CPU. Negative comments here are because mentioned mistakes here, and in many other posts in this thread. If you want advance use what is already written here, talk with people who gave constructive critic. If developers are really interested in really good Atari support they should listen more. Otherwise this thread is for nothing.
Famous Schrodinger's cat hypothetical experiment says that cat is dead or alive until we open box and see condition of poor animal, which deserved better logic. Cat is always in some certain state - regardless from is observer able or not to see what the state is.

Atarieterno
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby Atarieterno » Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:53 pm

1st1 wrote:
Atarieterno wrote:
1st1 wrote:
That is nonsense.


Can I have my own criteria and decide what I like and what I do not like? Or maybe it's nonsense to have freedom of opinion.
Greetings.


I personally think if somebody is not particular interested in a topic that he/she should not give his/her comments on the topic. This would be a very consequent behaviour. This sould also show respect to those who are interested, because he/she would not disturb them. So, thanks for your comments, but they advance nothing.



I am a free man, I live in a free country, I am in a forum of Atari (I think so) and I will exercise my right to express my opinion.
Your advice is valid for followers of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc.
Greetings and remember: Atari forever.
ST/fm/e, STacy, Mega ST/e, TT, Falcon, C-Lab MKX... and more music tools.

Atarieterno
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby Atarieterno » Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:58 pm

AtariZoll wrote:Actually, what I see here is that people, Atari people is somehow disappointed in this project. And it helps not that thread title talks about Atari ST. It is just not good idea using such CPU on 16-bit ST. Will not talk about HW problems, only SW - TOS needs serious overwork. Plenty of SW will not work just because CPU is way to fast for it (well known problem with PC SW too). Then, plenty of SW will need diverse patches because low CPU compatibility of 'most compatible 68xxx clone' - what leads to other problem here - promotion says things which are simply not true.
So, I don't think that anyone should go and try to talk to Vampire team people. If they mean Atari ST serial (more support for Falcon would be reasonable for instance) as serious target for Vampire they should look here and reconsider what is more important: compatibility or some speed (what is as we know far below speed they talked some months, year ago).
Then, I have very bad experiences with talking with people working on some such project. And I guess, many others.

Summa summarum: Atari people is interested for new HW, faster CPU. Negative comments here are because mentioned mistakes here, and in many other posts in this thread. If you want advance use what is already written here, talk with people who gave constructive critic. If developers are really interested in really good Atari support they should listen more. Otherwise this thread is for nothing.



You're right.

I also refer to the data of this topic: 441 post in 18 pages for ... nothing is clear, everything is smoke!
I add once again that the commercial maneuvers of other brands are obviously a business, will hardly be dedicated to Atari ... or cost the device 1.000 € (that is compatible with all platforms :twisted: ).

Regards.
Last edited by Atarieterno on Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ST/fm/e, STacy, Mega ST/e, TT, Falcon, C-Lab MKX... and more music tools.

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby 1st1 » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:56 pm

Yes, a lot of smoke. And because of so much smoke nobody sees the perspective. ANd at the end when something Atari compatible based on Apollo is available you knew it and it was your idea and you are so brilliant.
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3

Atarieterno
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby Atarieterno » Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 pm

1st1 wrote:Yes, a lot of smoke. And because of so much smoke nobody sees the perspective. ANd at the end when something Atari compatible based on Apollo is available you knew it and it was your idea and you are so brilliant.


I will not wear a medal, dear mate, I'm just a humble musician who still uses Atari.
Do not get angry, we're just talking.
Best regards. :cheers:
ST/fm/e, STacy, Mega ST/e, TT, Falcon, C-Lab MKX... and more music tools.

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3684
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby joska » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:33 am

ThorstenOtto wrote:But this "philosophy" was introduced only later. When Mint was part of MultiTOS, there was no "underlying OS"; Mint itself was the OS that had to do all initialization itself.


This is not correct. MiNT has always relied on TOS to set up and access the hardware. In the early days even more than now.

ThorstenOtto wrote:And thats actually what a "real" OS should do.


So the only "real" OS on Atari is TOS :) Useless definition. FreeMiNT is a *part* of an operating system, together with TOS. This does not mean it's not "proper".
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

User avatar
calimero
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2064
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:01 am
Location: STara Pazova, Serbia
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby calimero » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:39 pm

joska wrote:
ThorstenOtto wrote:
So the only "real" OS on Atari is TOS :) Useless definition. FreeMiNT is a *part* of an operating system, together with TOS. This does not mean it's not "proper".

and MagiC?
MagiC have it's own "ROM". How much MagiC relay on TOS?
using Atari since 1986.http://wet.atari.orghttp://milan.kovac.cc/atari/software/ ・ Atari Falcon030/CT63/SV ・ Atari STe ・ Atari Mega4/MegaFile30/SM124 ・ Amiga 1200/PPC ・ Amiga 500 ・ C64 ・ ZX Spectrum ・ RPi ・ MagiC! ・ MiNT 1.18 ・ OS X

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2969
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby AtariZoll » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:44 pm

calimero wrote:...
and MagiC?
MagiC have it's own "ROM". How much MagiC relay on TOS?

Nothing. You can use MagiC as standalone OS - when replacing org. TOS ROM chips with those which hold Magic, ROM version.
And of course, even MagiC RAM uses not built in TOS .
But of course, MagiC is made to be TOS compatible as much possible - so SW made for TOS work on it ...
Although, saying that Mint is part of OS sounds not really good for me. I would rather call it as extension of TOS. I mean 'part of OS' may suggest that it is part of TOS. And combo TOS + Mint may be called as combination of 2 OS-es, where one is depending on other - mostly because Mint expands filesystem for instance. For me OS is what is done as it, by one team, firm, and released as 1 unit.
Case of early Windows - like 3.1 - it was on top of DOS, and was called rather shell.
Even better - we have GEMDOS + AES, Desktop - they are pretty much separated in ROM. But they were launched at once, and therefore we call combo of 2 as TOS. Difference in compare to DOS + Win 3.x is that there is no command line shell for GEMDOS (not talking about extra SW available), it is done as GUI OS from beginning and released at once.
Famous Schrodinger's cat hypothetical experiment says that cat is dead or alive until we open box and see condition of poor animal, which deserved better logic. Cat is always in some certain state - regardless from is observer able or not to see what the state is.

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3684
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby joska » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:29 pm

Yes, I forgot MagiC. MagiC can boot from ROM and thus satisfies ThorstenOtto's personal definition of a real OS ;)

This is a silly discussion. The fact that MiNT does not replace everything in TOS does not mean it's not a "proper" OS. Does that mean that TOS+NVDI is not a "proper" OS? EmuTOS+MiNT? EmuTOS was written specifically to boot MiNT without TOS. What about those odd operating systems "Windows" and "Linux"? Neither of these satisfies Thorsten's or AtariZoll's definitions of a "real" OS since neither is able to bootstrap a computer...

Neither is MagiC either, as soon as a CPU > 68030 is involved. MagiC can *not* boot from ROM in a computer with a 040/060 (or 080 for that matter) unless some hacker sits down and patches MagiC itself. It's not sufficient to path TOS to boot MagiC, you must patch MagiC itself too. This is the sort of things that FreeMiNT tries to avoid. Just like Windows and Linux is able to boot on a huge variety of hardware thanks to 3rd party BIOS and hardware drivers.

However, that doesn't change the fact that a "68080" with a 040/060 PMMU would be much better for the Atari as it means that existing code would work. That's not a small issue on a platform with maybe five coders that's capable of adapting the OS to a new MMU...

I have nothing more to say on this issue.
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

User avatar
mfro
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 687
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:33 am
Location: SW Germany

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby mfro » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:58 pm

joska wrote:...I have nothing more to say on this issue.


... and there's nothing to add than "I agree".

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Apollo Team announces developing of Vampire standalone version to run as AMIGA and ATARI ST

Postby 1st1 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:06 pm

Atarieterno wrote:
1st1 wrote:Yes, a lot of smoke. And because of so much smoke nobody sees the perspective. ANd at the end when something Atari compatible based on Apollo is available you knew it and it was your idea and you are so brilliant.


I will not wear a medal, dear mate, I'm just a humble musician who still uses Atari.
Do not get angry, we're just talking.
Best regards. :cheers:


Yes, you are just a musician, I knwo you also from the german forum, you are from Sevilla. So if you don't care about faster TOS machine, why then talking about it and recommend others to think like you?

I also don't talk about the fun and danger of Tauromaquia as I am not interested in it at all. Poor bulls!
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3


Return to “FPGA Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest