PureBasic Forums - English

Has anyone managed to get PureBasic running on AmigaOS 4.0?

Every attempt that I have made to get it to run causes the Grim Reaper to raise its head telling me that the PBCompiler component has crashed.

Kind regards,

Francis.

Hi, actually I don't know a thing about Amiga, I mean do they build their one computers? Are their processors based on the i386 instuction-set? Can you run AmigaOS on a pentium or AMD machine.

I'm sorry for this off-topic reply, Francis, but I thought it would be stupid to post a new toppic for this

No You can't run Amiga OS on standard PC, not without an emulator..
http://www.winuae.net/
The Amiga was based on motorola 680X0 cpu's, just like the old MAC..
Here's a link that explain the Amiga history better than me: http://amiga.emugaming.com/amigahistory.html

Side Note: I bought my first Amiga A1000 back in '86 for the humble sum of ~$3000. That was with a whoopin' 512kb memory & two floppydrives(!)....

I see now, but isn't Amiga far behind on it's concurrents?
The amiga1 runs only at a speed of 800 Mhz (That's +/- 3 times slower then my P4) or do they have some kind of state-of-the-art technology?

First of.. I don't know so much about the "new" amiga..
But they do have one "state-of-the-art" thingy.. The OS isn't anything like Windows.. IE.. It don't need 512Mb+ memory to "work".. But at the same time it gets the job done well..
And the cpu is PowerPC(?).. The same that MAC uses now, and the newest Power Mac G5 are "only" running at ~2GHz so..
Here's a clip from apple:

The PowerPC G5 processor dramatically accelerates performance in real world applications. When compared head-to-head against PCs in a large series of Photoshop tests, the dual 2.5GHz, dual 2GHz, dual 1.8GHz and single 1.8GHz Power Mac G5 systems ran the 45 filters 98%, 82%, 66% and 20% faster, respectively, than the 3.4GHz Pentium 4-based system and 75%, 63%, 48% and 11% faster than the dual 3.2GHz Xeon-based system

The down side of things are the price of the new amiga1.. It costs way to much I think..

Side Note: Why do AMD cpus have lower clock speed than P4.. But perform the same?? GHz isn't everything...

The OS isn't anything like Windows.. IE.. It don't need 512Mb+ memory to "work"..

lol, that's the main reason why I hate windows. I mean when you press ctr-alt-del on a XP-system you'll see 40 processes running and 480 threads (that's 520 pieces of code that run at the same time!). And for what I ask myself then, just for loading the kernel & the rest of the desktop (and virusscanner proberly)? 8O

Why can't those programs be loaded when the user really needs them, instead of eating the whole RAM?

Edit: Thanx for sharing the knowledge, by the way

Edit2: Btw, Intel still was the first. AMD justs wait when Intel releases a new technology and then optimises it (MMX 1st --> AMD : 3Dnow). That's not very original in my oppinion

Don't forget to mention the kernel is on a ROM, so you can boot up with just a bootable floppy and have basic API and acess to the entire kabaam.

An amiga 1200 (running at a stunning 14,19 MHz) can start the OS in 5 seconds...

Simple is better!

PC's nowdays are copying amiga designs... Indepent CPU for graphics and audio to release load of the CPU.

The amiga kernel is being ported to native x86 assembler, so in a few years you'll be able to run OS3.1 in a modern PC without the need of emulation.

Take a look here: http://www.aros.org/

Hum...... I would like too see those power eating apps from amiga running at 1.8Ghz !

Has a side note:
The entire Babylon 5 series renders where made with amiga machines!

And Seaquest DSV, and Most of the Star Trek Next Generation tv series, plus some of the Star Trek movies too.
The list is longer and quite huge really.

The graphics were actually outputed on Video Toaster graphics systems - plugged into Amigas running Lightwave.

-Anthony

and the Amos from Francois Lionet was the start for me !
remember and watch what he became here http://www.clickteam.com/English/about_us.htm