From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 16 06:01:02 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA22465 for chat-outgoing; Tue, 16 Sep 1997 06:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p60.global2000.net (315-dialup-13.global2000.net [208.133.142.23]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22454 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 1997 06:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.1 [p0] on FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <19970831221230.08862@grendel.IAEhv.nl> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 20:55:03 -0400 (EDT) Organization: Griff Enterprises From: "Eric A. Griff" To: Peter Korsten Subject: Amiga Was:Conclusion to "NT vs. Unix" debate Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk --snip-- >Perhaps I should say that I really want an Amiga, but then with a >500 Mhz Alpha chip. The Amiga had a pre-emptive multitasking OS >that ran in 256 Kb. Though some parts were a bit clumsy, the base >was very good. The basic type was a Node (ordered in a List), from >which you could derive (yes, object-orientation in C) a Task, a >Library, a Device or any system structure. > >The GUI was good and getting better, so was the shell. ARexx was >the third interface. This altogether made a system that, as I think >of it, was better than Unix (despite it's excellent shell) or >Windows 95/NT 4.0 (despite it's GUI). The fact that not all >applications supported all functions of the system, doesn't make >the system less powerfull. > >The Amiga has some functions that I really really miss in other >OS's. Writing your own installer application in some sort of >Lisp-like language - no need for InstallShield. Assigning logical >names to devices, directories or drives. Installing new devices or >filesystems while the system was running. --snip-- >- Peter Back in the late 80's I had an Amiga 1000, with the 256K ram expansion, and 2 3. 5" 700 something K floppies. It was amazing, at about 8Mhz, what this box could do.. In fact, Still have it. Needs an Analog RGB Monitor, and 2 new floppies. I ported The STadel BBS to it. For about 6 months, I ran this BBS with 100+ users (1 at a time of course) single line 1200 bps, without any difficulty.. The funny thing? Between the 2 floppies, and a little disk slinging, I was able to develo p, and compile (Using Lattice C) the whole system while it was running. User cha t was something to do during the 30 minute compile. Of course, if you wanted the networked message bases (Citadel, among others), you had to call when I wasnt compiling :) . If I fell apon a Hard drive/controller for it, and maybe able to hack 8MB into i t, and maybe a 68020, I would probably start porting FreeBSD over to it.. For th e fun of it. I liked the 68000 architecture. I believe that if it wasn't for MS, it may have very well gone a lot further.. Probably the ST too. The porting was n't that bad.. ---------------------------------- Eric A. Griff RD#1 Box 372 Oneida, NY 13421, USA (315) 495-2385 eagriff@global2000.net ----------------------------------