Re: [MiNT] New MiNT distribution is n.. ..project

[josephus <catbird@airmail.net>]

Konrad M. Kokoszkiewicz wrote:
> 
> > RioRed related messages. I'd like to know why : are MiNT gurus uninterested
> > in the RioRed project ? Are they just "waiting'n seeing" for the RioRed to
> > come out before speaking about it ?
> 
> I would say the latter is the answer. You know, there were many
> announcements last four years, and what, only Milan became reality (I
> don't mean that it is bad, the "only" is related to the number of
> announcements).
> 
> Anyways, I am not quite sure the new machine/platform would be "an Atari"
> still. I personally don't have anything against fast machines and efforts
> made to bring us new hardware, contrary, but I must personally say I am
> still amazed with the simplicity and elegance of the m68k design... from
> the assembly programmer point of view, obviously. I understand that new
> processor would make any m68k experience useless, although without any
> doubt it may result in a number of marvellous programs. Provided people
> buy the hardware. Mixed feelings in other words.
> 
> Another topic a bit
> 
> Someone here said about VDI that (IIRC) if there is a need to port the
> entire VDI to any new graphic card, 90% of programmers will do nothing but
> writing VDI drivers. That's damn true. Before we cry on the little number
> of new software appearing, we must understand some general problem
> programmers may have writing application software for Atari (and
> compatibles). Well, the problem is a lack of a general environment. No, I
> don't mean a programming environment (and editor and a compiler is
> perfectly okay), but rather an operating environment. Briefly, if a
> programmer must know everything about BIOS, GEMDOS, VDI, AES whatever to
> write even a simple program (e.g. a GEM version of 'Hello world'), we will
> never have programs.
> 
> I personally dream about a hudge number of application servers (like
> syslog is for example) offerring complex functions. Also about a huge
> number of shared libraries, which would be comon and handy. Example, a
> library providing a simple single-file text editor, a library for
> processing config files, a library for anything else. The point is, that
> if I want to provide a simple editing function in a program, I must now
> write an editor from scratch. Et cetera.
> 
> Modularity (someone has already used this word) would be the answer I
> would like. As long as we keep supporting TOS ("my program will work even
> on TOS 1.0"), we will never see software that uses the full possibilities
> sleeping inside MiNT as a multitasking OS. From THIS point of view,
> abandoning m68k in favour of a Power PC processor would be damn good
> thing, since native PPC programs would not work on TOS machines and hence
> we wouldn't have to worry about that disaster (Single TOS) anymore.
> 

hi,
     just a thought....
      here is is URL I have for a synthisized 68000. Anyway, it
      is a reference for anyone interested in 68k advanced CPU's

       josephus



> --
> Konrad M.Kokoszkiewicz
> |mail: draco@atari.org                  |  Atari Falcon030 user   |
> |http://www.obta.uw.edu.pl/~draco/      | Moderator gregis LATINE |
> |http://draco.atari.org                 |       (loquentium)      |
> 
> ** Ea natura multitudinis est,
> ** aut servit humiliter, aut superbe dominatur (Liv. XXIV,25)
> *************************************************************
> ** U pospolstwa normalne jest, ze albo sluzy ono unizenie,
> ** albo bezczelnie sie panoszy.

-- 
Joe Widows  --   972 783 8944
I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter.
Everybody's ignorant-- just on different subjects. 
---- Will Rogers jr.----