AROS 3D with Deadwoods latest abi v.0 build.

[aGGreSSor]

Why screw all their efforts concentrating our attention in the wrong version?

Because this version (ABIV0) exists in our real world. Welcome to the real world!

Later, they were aware of the design flaws of the original kernel, so they decided to start again doing it right (not an easy decision at all).

Later, they were aware of the design flaws of ABIv1, so they they decided to start again doing it right in ABIv2. This is an iteration. Here we aren't talking about fears, but it is simply clear that this will be so. Because there is simply no planning. People don't believe in miracles more than once.

If the aros devs don't keep all their priceless time in the future/sustainability of aros, it will slowly die.

Amiga already died. The reason was the same: lack of planning. About AROS can be said as about Amiga: it was. It can only be about bringing it closer to existence for a small handful of people while they are alive. But we all have been for many years. Operating systems don't live on their own. Operating systems don't live without users, in the minds of developers. Therefore, users will use what exists in the real world, not potentially.

But I'm also sure people would understand that just maybe 1, 2, 3 or 5 at the most configurations are "officially" supported by an AROS dev board (which their devs can select at their taste) and everybody will understand and support

Sumptuously! We all love to talk right! In this place you need to write specific configurations, the choice of which will be obvious to everyone. When you see that everyone likes this idea, you will coordinate it with all the remaining developers. Are you sure you are right? 

[x-vision]

Why screw all their efforts concentrating our attention in the wrong version?

Because this version (ABIV0) exists in our real world. Welcome to the real world!

Later, they were aware of the design flaws of the original kernel, so they decided to start again doing it right (not an easy decision at all).

Later, they were aware of the design flaws of ABIv1, so they they decided to start again doing it right in ABIv2. This is an iteration. Here we aren't talking about fears, but it is simply clear that this will be so. Because there is simply no planning. People don't believe in miracles more than once.

If the aros devs don't keep all their priceless time in the future/sustainability of aros, it will slowly die.

Amiga already died. The reason was the same: lack of planning. About AROS can be said as about Amiga: it was. It can only be about bringing it closer to existence for a small handful of people while they are alive. But we all have been for many years. Operating systems don't live on their own. Operating systems don't live without users, in the minds of developers. Therefore, users will use what exists in the real world, not potentially.

But I'm also sure people would understand that just maybe 1, 2, 3 or 5 at the most configurations are "officially" supported by an AROS dev board (which their devs can select at their taste) and everybody will understand and support

Sumptuously! We all love to talk right! In this place you need to write specific configurations, the choice of which will be obvious to everyone. When you see that everyone likes this idea, you will coordinate it with all the remaining developers. Are you sure you are right? 

In short:

- ABI1 exist exactly the same as Abi0. It just have more bugs because it was less tested
- Aros don't die as long as there are devs working on improving it. You consider it dead and just wanna concentrate on what you got, so fine by me! you already have what you want, what's the problem in now concentrate in what others want (and the OS needs)?
- I didn't want to write the post to "lead" or "command" the community, that's why I carefully said "a developer board": a group of the active developers to decide what configurations THEY WANT to work on. I sure have my own ideas, but the ones working on it are the ones that must feel confortable. And I think (not sure, but almost sure) everybody would understand that decision given the situation (they can't cover it all)
- There is an alternative explored years ago: use linux as an underlying layer to take care of drivers, network and some other bits&pieces, but as integration has proven difficult, I came back to the idea of just a few fixed configurations.

[x-vision]

Why screw all their efforts concentrating our attention in the wrong version?

No one want this to happen. The only wrong choice was made is to not transition the older and working ABI into the new one. A little change at a time. This is IMHO. All the user base on X86 is on the older ABI. All the application are on the older ABI. You are asking to people to switch from a working environment to a buggy, not fully working and application less one all of the sudden. Do you really want to switch from a working Windows system to a buggy and application less one just because when completed is better than the working one?

I don't agree to those premises: There is NO user base (sad, but true), there is no "working" or "buggy" envs, they are just more or less buggy. But even if it was like you said, I never said you cannot enjoy ABi0 anymore, or you should stop using it. I just asked devs to conventrate their work on Abi0, and users to please stop asking them to support Abi0, cause is not fair for them, and not good at all for the future of Aros.

But, as you consider Abi0 so good, you can keep using it. It's not that hard, isn't it?

[aGGreSSor]

- ABI1 exist exactly the same as Abi0. It just have more bugs just because it was less tested

No. ABIv1 doesn't exist. ABIv1 doesn't even load.
I checked all nightly2/<date>/AROS-<date>-pc-x86_64-boot-iso.zip within a last month.
Do you want to argue? Ok.

1) Download AROS-<any_date>-pc-x86_64-boot-iso.zip
2) Show us your Wanderer/AROS/About...

Let's arrange a competition for the freshest ABIv1 "Wanderer/AROS/About..." ?
condition one: ISO image must be downloaded from https://sourceforge.net/projects/aros/files/ and launched the same day.

Are you participating? Why not? 

[nikos]

When someone with the knowledge as Deadwood have, and you question what is right or wrong, you better come up with some dammed good arguments why he stick with ABI v.0!! and do not want to get involved with the ABI v.1 version
I'm not a developer, but ABI v.1 is for sure a mess!!
For political reasons he does not want to make a statement about that.
It is not war!! if you do not like abi v.0 stay away from it!
It is an open source platform, and people do as they want with it.
I followed this project almost since the beginning, and one thing I learned is that what might be promised, might never happen!
We are not going to take over the world anyway! It is a fun platform that is in the spirit of AmigaOS, and the most powerful there will ever be! Forget multi core, SMP, memory protection, bla bla. It is not going to happen. If that is important to you f... off. End of story!

[cdimauro]

The answer is very simple and very well known, and it was already reported tons of times: AROS developers work on what they like.


Which is mostly ABIv1, because that's what they think is the future of AROS (albeit, as I've already said, the specs aren't yet finalized).


ABIv0 stays and lives only because there is people like deadwood which is backporting what it's being made on v1. So, enjoy it until this work is being done.


Currently the main problem for the ABIv1 is that developers aren't actively working on the most common and promising architectures (x64 AKA x86-64, ARMv7, ARMv8), but are involved on the less interesting, already died long time, and without a future: the 68K one.
What's worse is that they forked AROS and are removing (if not even already done) the HIDD and rewriting parts of the o.s. to mimic the crappyness of the original Amiga o.s. (which is strictly tight to the chipset) just to improve the performance on this very under powered platform, which is struggling otherwise (and which is expected, since it's an ultra-outdated hardware: "Pentium" class).
Years an years of work to abstract AROS from the hardware which are thrown into the trash can...

[aGGreSSor]

(albeit, as I've already said, the specs aren't yet finalized).

Who writes the specs? Does he have coordinates?
If the answer is: everyone writes specifications, then this is the same answer: nobody writes specifications.
No specifications = No plan = No future = No ABIiV1

What was planned to be achieved had to be agreed and described BEFORE the development of ABIv1 began.
If the developers don't know this even now, after so many years, then what should users expect?

[Mazze]

The developers aren't fully planless 

From documentation:
https://aros.sourceforge.io/documentation/developers/specifications/drafts/abiv1.php

From project page:
https://github.com/aros-development-team/AROS/projects

[aGGreSSor]

The developers aren't fully planless 

From documentation:
https://aros.sourceforge.io/documentation/developers/specifications/drafts/abiv1.php

From project page:
https://github.com/aros-development-team/AROS/projects

Thank you!
Didn't know that github could look like Jira.
I want to clarify: when I write about planning, I don't mean documenting (although it's important).
The code as documentation has not been canceled. 
But when I read: do something in core components, there must be a list of those components somewhere.
Otherwise, my question is, where do core components end and user-space components begin?
The person who wrote the text on the links you indicated clearly understood what he was writing.
It's more difficult for readers to understand because of the use of vague concepts.
If you believe the grouping of tasks under the second link, then nothing has been done in the last year.
This is certainly not the case, which means that such a description of the tasks is incorrect.

[OlafS3]

The answer is very simple and very well known, and it was already reported tons of times: AROS developers work on what they like.


Which is mostly ABIv1, because that's what they think is the future of AROS (albeit, as I've already said, the specs aren't yet finalized).


ABIv0 stays and lives only because there is people like deadwood which is backporting what it's being made on v1. So, enjoy it until this work is being done.


Currently the main problem for the ABIv1 is that developers aren't actively working on the most common and promising architectures (x64 AKA x86-64, ARMv7, ARMv8), but are involved on the less interesting, already died long time, and without a future: the 68K one.
What's worse is that they forked AROS and are removing (if not even already done) the HIDD and rewriting parts of the o.s. to mimic the crappyness of the original Amiga o.s. (which is strictly tight to the chipset) just to improve the performance on this very under powered platform, which is struggling otherwise (and which is expected, since it's an ultra-outdated hardware: "Pentium" class).
Years an years of work to abstract AROS from the hardware which are thrown into the trash can...

Cdimauro before posting you should have a clue what you talk about

Which of the Aros devs is involved in 68k currently? Kal not (you see it on changelog). Schulz is developing a kind of Amithlon-solution on ARM. Both are not involved in the vampire related fork. None of the devs involved there was or is active on the main branch, they are new. And they are only active because of 68k. Nothing is thrown in the trashcan, both are different forks. It is planned to give back changes but those will certainly adding features or removing bugs. The structure of Aros will not change. And if 68k or other architctures will be more successful has to be seen.

[OlafS3]

When someone with the knowledge as Deadwood have, and you question what is right or wrong, you better come up with some dammed good arguments why he stick with ABI v.0!! and do not want to get involved with the ABI v.1 version
I'm not a developer, but ABI v.1 is for sure a mess!!
For political reasons he does not want to make a statement about that.
It is not war!! if you do not like abi v.0 stay away from it!
It is an open source platform, and people do as they want with it.
I followed this project almost since the beginning, and one thing I learned is that what might be promised, might never happen!
We are not going to take over the world anyway! It is a fun platform that is in the spirit of AmigaOS, and the most powerful there will ever be! Forget multi core, SMP, memory protection, bla bla. It is not going to happen. If that is important to you f... off. End of story!

SMP or 64bit needs dedicated software, who will write it? MP breaks almost any amiga software. You would start at zero then, a modern platform but without software except some 68k software running in emulation. That would hardly convince new users. As I wrote... amiga users must feel at home that means a environment including 68k that makes people forget that they are sitting at a PC and not a new amiga.

[x-vision]

Are you participating? Why not? 

Because even kalamatee already told you why?

"Yeah - I wouldn't worry about that build, it was expected to be broken. A
newer nightly should work correctly though." 

No. ABIv1 doesn't exist

So: False. YES, it does. There are tons of proofs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xg4NAscOw7k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdB1Vc_CbsI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E8rYDOrlfI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAVrnxUz2tw

A nightly build is never a proof that something does not work, much less it does not exist. If you are a developer you should know that already. If you wanna test something, you must try a more stable version

https://vmwaros.blogspot.com/2019/10/icaros-64-v000-pre-alpha-is-available.html

So trying to deny the facts is just your speech, not reality. And for me this is enough waste of time or energy spent into childish arguments: do as you please. I won't maintain endless discussions in amigaland style.

[x-vision]

When someone with the knowledge as Deadwood have, and you question what is right or wrong, you better come up with some dammed good arguments why he stick with ABI v.0!! and do not want to get involved with the ABI v.1 version
I'm not a developer, but ABI v.1 is for sure a mess!!
For political reasons he does not want to make a statement about that.
It is not war!! if you do not like abi v.0 stay away from it!
It is an open source platform, and people do as they want with it.
I followed this project almost since the beginning, and one thing I learned is that what might be promised, might never happen!
We are not going to take over the world anyway! It is a fun platform that is in the spirit of AmigaOS, and the most powerful there will ever be! Forget multi core, SMP, memory protection, bla bla. It is not going to happen. If that is important to you f... off. End of story!

Your post is full of biased oppinions, much rudeness and bile, but 0 proofs or facts, so I will keep around just to see you rage that much, and because you are no one to dictate what should I say or where should I stay. Cheers! 

[terminills]

When someone with the knowledge as Deadwood have, and you question what is right or wrong, you better come up with some dammed good arguments why he stick with ABI v.0!! and do not want to get involved with the ABI v.1 version
I'm not a developer, but ABI v.1 is for sure a mess!!
For political reasons he does not want to make a statement about that.
It is not war!! if you do not like abi v.0 stay away from it!
It is an open source platform, and people do as they want with it.
I followed this project almost since the beginning, and one thing I learned is that what might be promised, might never happen!
We are not going to take over the world anyway! It is a fun platform that is in the spirit of AmigaOS, and the most powerful there will ever be! Forget multi core, SMP, memory protection, bla bla. It is not going to happen. If that is important to you f... off. End of story!

Your post is full of biased oppinions, much rudeness and bile, but 0 proofs or facts, so I will keep around just to see you rage that much, and because you are no one to dictate what should I say or where should I stay. Cheers! 

Ignore him as he’s angry and not as informed as he likes to think. 

[aGGreSSor]

Because even kalamatee already told you why?

"Yeah - I wouldn't worry about that build, it was expected to be broken. A
newer nightly should work correctly though." 

In Russian it is called "ПЦ". I cannot translate this concept into English so that it becomes clear.
The user has been trying to download the image and run it for a month and get the result: it shouldn't have worked!
Is it adequate? Nightly builds are usually much less stable than regular releases, but they run!
I can't imagine Ubuntu, FreeBSD or ReactOS nightly build not starting within a month and it is considered "and should not have"..
If it shouldn't, then it doesn't exist. Who can use it? Nobody.

So: False. YES, it does. There are tons of proofs

These aren't your proofs. I seem to clearly wrote what you need to do?
Don't show me what others people have done in the past.
Look at the calendar: what date is it today?

A nightly build is never a proof that something does not work, much less it does not exist. If you are a developer you should know that already. If you wanna test something, you must try a more stable version

The stable version of ABIv1 doesn't exist. Nobody is interested in ABIv1 builds made 3, 5 and more years ago. So I am trying to use nightly build. Which doesn't exist in the same way. Doesn't start = doesn't exist. You understand this perfectly when your formal logic is good.

https://vmwaros.blogspot.com/2019/10/icaros-64-v000-pre-alpha-is-available.html

Say: thank you paolo. How does this relate to the life of ABIv1 today (27-12-2020)? It doesn't matter.

So trying to deny the facts is just your speech, not reality. And for me this is enough waste of time or energy spent into childish arguments: do as you please. I won't maintain endless discussions in amigaland style.

Fact: you couldn't run nightly build and show us screenshot.  If you open the guinness book of records, you will find even more facts there. Only these facts do not concern us in any way. because for us - ordinary people, jumps of 3 meters from a place simply don't exist. I hope this is a clear comparison.

AROS-20201227-pc-x86_64 doesn't start: https://youtu.be/nHH1AYRlBfk
Who would tell you how and why to test something that doesn't start?
And how to switch to ABIv1? Let's say we want to do this: how?