[Jawbone54]

It's not art. They're trying to develop a system, not express themselves. They're allowed to see it however they want to, but I doubt many people outside their circles would take what they do as "art." I don't even think most of them would consider it art.

And how does it being considered art make it any different?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Not to sound snotty or belittling or something, but I'm actually somewhat surprised with some of the reactions in here. I thought Mac users were supposed to be tolerant idealistic users understanding of what it is like to be the underdog?

There's a difference between being an underdog and being an endangered, soon to be extinct underdog.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

It's not art. They're trying to develop a system, not express themselves. They're allowed to see it however they want to, but I doubt many people outside their circles would take what they do as "art." I don't even think most of them would consider it art.

So intricately crafting a chair, playing music on a guitar or writing a book is an art, but writing an amazingly complicated piece of software that operates elegantly is not? I'd like to hear you justify this idea.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

There's a difference between being an underdog and being an endangered, soon to be extinct underdog.

OK, and 10 years ago, Apple was the latter in almost everybody's minds. What is the difference here?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

So intricately crafting a chair, playing music on a guitar or writing a book is an art, but writing an amazingly complicated piece of software that operates elegantly is not? I'd like to hear you justify this idea.

I wouldn't consider at art, but a science. Neither is more noble than the other, in my opinion. Others might consider it art, but that's their own opinion. Just as you don't see how I can think of programming as an art, I can't see how anyone can think of it as such. Who can tell which of us is right?

OK, and 10 years ago, Apple was the latter in almost everybody's minds. What is the difference here?

Apple was worth salvaging.

Amiga doesn't have the name recognition of Apple, Microsoft, or even LINUX. The OS marketplace is crowded as it is. There are other, better ways to do what Amiga does. I've been studying up on it for the past hour, and I can't find any reason to keep it around as a viable option for the common user. If hobbyists want to fool around with it, that's fine. But to think that it will ever be a contender is ludicrous, at least within the next decade or two...or three...or ten.

The reason people don't know what it is anymore (unless they used them in the late 80s/early 90s) is that it gets no attention; not from the media, not from the public, not from anyone. 99% of the population doesn't care and won't care.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Do you feel the same way about your designs?

Websites aren't always art nor a product. They are a medium for information.
Doesn't mean they can't look good but I am not selling a DESIGN to visitors but giving them the content in an attractive manner.

On top of that I don't charge someone today $1000 to use the dated eWorld even though it had a few neat tricks.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Amiga doesn't have the name recognition of Apple, Microsoft, or even LINUX. The OS marketplace is crowded as it is. There are other, better ways to do what Amiga does. I've been studying up on it for the past hour, and I can't find any reason to keep it around as a viable option for the common user. If hobbyists want to fool around with it, that's fine. But to think that it will ever be a contender is ludicrous, at least within the next decade or two...or three...or ten.

Quite frankly, any OS with an actual design philosophy and dedicated team behind it stands at least as good a chance of being a "contender" as Linux. Linux is designed by a bunch of geeks with their heads stuck too far up their asses to realize how hard to use it actually is.

Also, Windows is so far and away the leader, why keep anything else at all if being unpopular is reason to discontinue something?

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

The reason people don't know what it is anymore (unless they used them in the late 80s/early 90s) is that it gets no attention; not from the media, not from the public, not from anyone. 99% of the population doesn't care and won't care.

Again, welcome to Apple 10 years ago.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

It's not art. They're trying to develop a system, not express themselves. They're allowed to see it however they want to, but I doubt many people outside their circles would take what they do as "art." I don't even think most of them would consider it art.

And how does it being considered art make it any different?

Why would they care about whether people outside of their circles view what they do as art? They feel compelled to do what they do, and it is likely a labour of love since it is difficult to correlate their efforts to prospects for monetary gains, especially given the vast amount of work involved to develop an OS and the obstacles it would face to hit critical mass.

GNU/Linux started as a labour of love too, as did many other operating systems. If you are creating something and not in the business mindset of making a product (which applies to many of these developers, I'm sure), what would you call this?

Programming is a language, and when people immerse themselves in any language they deal with expressing thoughts and ideas.


This discussion came about when somebody asked what is motivating these developers, so I speculated.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Websites aren't always art nor a product. They are a medium for information.
Doesn't mean they can't look good but I am not selling a DESIGN to visitors but giving them the content in an attractive manner.

On top of that I don't charge someone today $1000 to use the dated eWorld even though it had a few neat tricks.

I realize we are only arguing semantics here, but I disagree.

There is difference between art and design in my opinion. A design can fulfill something tangible for somebody other than the creator, while art can be just for art's sake. You are indeed selling a design, not just wrapping up content in an attractive manner. As per your definitions, I'm not sure what you'd even call what you are trying to describe (I'm also not certain I understand what you are trying to say).

[Judge_Fire]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

If you think about it, the dock isn't much more advanced than the "Launcher" was in OS8.

The Launcher even had a few advantages, such as a windowed mode and above all, the items reflected an actual folders contents. The Dock and Sidebar's paranormal icons that go *poof* are evil.

[Dark Helmet]

The fact that this whole thread is a "What is the point" "Art vs design" shows the usefulness of this Amega project.

The OS will never even create a niche and is probably bleeding money like mad. They need to move on with something more impressive and worthwile.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Quite frankly, any OS with an actual design philosophy and dedicated team behind it stands at least as good a chance of being a "contender" as Linux. Linux is designed by a bunch of geeks with their heads stuck too far up their asses to realize how hard to use it actually is.

No, Linux was designed with a completely different purpose and audience in mind. You are right, it wasn't designed for Grandma, but I'd say that this was a conscious decision, not a result of being disconnected from reality (i.e. having their heads up their asses).


As a server OS, Linux/Unix is a wonderful design, although it does have a steep learning curve. However, once one is familiar with the command line environment, they'll notice that the interface is actually quite well thought out in being consistent, predictable, and transparent. It is possible for a command line environment to have a good interface, so long as you don't make direct comparisons to any GUI.

The decision to make Unix primarily a command line environment also makes a lot of sense given the history of Unix, its roots, and where it works best today.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

The OS will never even create a niche and is probably bleeding money like mad. They need to move on with something more impressive and worthwile.

I'm sure they're very glad you have weighed in on their interests.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

The fact that this whole thread is a "What is the point" "Art vs design" shows the usefulness of this Amega project.

The OS will never even create a niche and is probably bleeding money like mad. They need to move on with something more impressive and worthwile.

My only real criticism is in worrying about selling hardware at all. A lot of their risk as a business would be removed if they didn't have to contend with this by simply making it an open source software project that runs on commodity hardware.

They would have to give up on hardware/software integration, but perhaps they should bring hardware into the picture only after their software has more leverage.

This is my first post addressing the project as a business.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

No, Linux was designed with a completely different purpose and audience in mind. You are right, it wasn't designed for Grandma, but I'd say that this was a conscious decision, not a result of being disconnected from reality (i.e. having their heads up their asses).

Right, that's why Linux weenies are constantly going on about how it's so user-friendly nowadays with great productivity apps like GIMP and OO.o and how they just need to get people to use it and it'll destroy Windows, yada yada yada.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I'm sure they're very glad you have weighed in on their interests.

They would probably be more glad if their product was good enough to make me spend $1000 to play with a tech demo.

What is the 1 main advantage to this OS again?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Right, that's why Linux weenies are constantly going on about how it's so user-friendly nowadays with great productivity apps like GIMP and OO.o and how they just need to get people to use it and it'll destroy Windows, yada yada yada.

Well, those users are the ones with their heads up their asses then I don't agree with these arguments that your weenies have made.


However, I will also say that yes, Linux has been improving in its user-friendliness. I don't think we are eons away from being able to think about replacing Windows with a Linux distro. I do think that it will happen too, eventually. Microsoft can't simply give away Windows indefinitely.

I'm not saying we are there yet though.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

They would probably be more glad if their product was good enough to make me spend $1000 to play with a tech demo.

What is the 1 main advantage to this OS again?

I thought we made it pretty clear that there isn't yet a compelling advantage for an ordinary user to buy one of these machines? Why is this being debated?

[Judge_Fire]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

There is difference between art and design in my opinion.

There is indeed. Design practices stem from blacksmiths, tailors, carpenters, draughtsmen - craft, to be more exact. Design is always utilitarian, it has a 'client', while Art often has more freedom of experimentation without direct responsibility to anyone other than the artist.

Sometimes these two approaches can be opposite; finding something unexpected can be rewarding in Art, a revelation. Designers, on the other hand, try to eliminate surprises to make sure everything works as intended.

The relationship between Art and Design resembles that of Mathematics and Physics, respectively. One is a space of exploration and aesthetics. The other is selective application of those findings.

Art is important for design. Too much of it and you get a cool looking sofa that you can't actually sit on. Too little, and you get something mundane, like a Sandisk music player.

Balance function and aesthetics right, and you get a good design.

/end lecture - I actually got the Amiga 1000 when it was released back in... uhh, way back. I'll try to get on topic

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I thought we made it pretty clear that there isn't yet a compelling advantage for an ordinary user to buy one of these machines? Why is this being debated?

I didn't say ordinary users. I mean ANY advantage at all.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Judge_Fire 

There is indeed. Design practices stem from blacksmiths, tailors, carpenters, draughtsmen - craft, to be more exact. Design is always utilitarian, it has a 'client', while Art often has more freedom of experimentation without direct responsibility to anyone other than the artist.

Sometimes these two approaches can be opposite; finding something unexpected can be rewarding in Art, a revelation. Designers, on the other hand, try to eliminate surprises to make sure everything works as intended.

The relationship between Art and Design resembles that of Mathematics and Physics, respectively. One is a space of exploration and aesthetics. The other is selective application of those findings.

Art is important for design. Too much of it and you get a cool looking sofa that you can't actually sit on. Too little, and you get somethings mundane, like a Sandisk music player.

Balance function and aesthetics right, and you get a good design.

/end lecture

Very well said, especially your definitions!

So, do you think that computer programming can be thought of as art?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

I didn't say ordinary users. I mean ANY advantage at all.

I haven't used the new machines obviously, but if I had to represent the Amiga (not Amega) philosophy, I would say that the most compelling advantages of the Amiga is performance, and a lot of optimization and tight software/hardware integration. If an Amiga ROM wasn't required, you could in theory run the OS quite well on an old PPC machine.


I know you were asking about pragmatic advantages, something tangible that will be of benefit to people like you, and like I've said, I have no answer for you.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I would say that the most compelling advantages of the Amiga is performance

That is the problem though.

The BeOS (Which I did use a lot) had great performance. Mostly because it didn't do much.
The second they added basic multimedia functions the whole OS got more bloated and slower.

So far it seems the Amiga is also excels at doing nothing really fast and neatly.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

That is the problem though.

The BeOS (Which I did use a lot) had great performance. Mostly because it didn't do much.
The second they added basic multimedia functions the whole OS got more bloated and slower.

So far it seems the Amiga is also excels at doing nothing really fast and neatly.

Adding more capability shouldn't make things slower though, unless you are Microsoft. This is why subsequent OS X releases seem to become progressively faster, especially between 10.0 - 10.3. It's not a given that adding more features would cause a loss in performance.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Adding more capability shouldn't make things slower though, unless you are Microsoft. This is why subsequent OS X releases seem to become progressively faster, especially between 10.0 - 10.3. It's not a given that adding more features would cause a loss in performance.

I'm not so sure about that one. We are talking low level additions here like printing, networking, graphics, multimedia, sound etc.

It is widely known when Be started adding these things the OS bogged down.

[Chuckit]

It had all those things when I tried it on my old Windows box and it worked great.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I used Macs and Commodore 64s at school. My dad's offices used PCs. No one I knew used Amigas either.

They were very popular in Europe, especially Germany. I got one in 1987 for Christmas, best Christmas present ever. For a few years, I was king of the hill. When I got my new pc, it was a big disappointment, nothing but DOS (they forgot to ship Windows 3.1) … 

Just for those who don't know: Commodore 64s have nothing to do with Amigas.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

I'm not so sure about that one. We are talking low level additions here like printing, networking, graphics, multimedia, sound etc.

It is widely known when Be started adding these things the OS bogged down.

Then explain how OS X has gotten faster?


Those actually aren't very low level things. Low level things would be the kernel and things such as memory/resource allocation, task scheduling, etc. There is absolutely no reason why something like printing should slow down your OS. Having printing support should not add a footprint to your applications or OS, these should simply be libraries that are called upon as needed.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Then explain how OS X has gotten faster?

Because it had all those things from the beginning so it set the standard for slow and luckily things got better over years of optimizing.

This Amiga is doing it backwards. It is stripped down and now that they have to add all those things and bog it down on a code and performance level.

[Dark Helmet]

Be Dope - All the news that fits we print

""I'm really torn by the news of Java for BeOS," said one longtime Be user. "On the one hand, it will be great to instantly have access to thousands of Java applications and visit websites that require Java. On the other hand, I'm worried about the increased OS crashes that true compatibility would bring.""

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Be Dope - All the news that fits we print

""I'm really torn by the news of Java for BeOS," said one longtime Be user. "On the one hand, it will be great to instantly have access to thousands of Java applications and visit websites that require Java. On the other hand, I'm worried about the increased OS crashes that true compatibility would bring.""

Hee, don't know where that came from, but great article.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Hee, don't know where that came from, but great article.

The point was once they start adding common features the stability will tank, performance suffer and the OS will bloat in size.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

The point was once they start adding common features the stability will tank, performance suffer and the OS will bloat in size.

I thought it was just a joke about how shitty Java was in 1999.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I thought it was just a joke about how shitty Java was in 1999.

Take it how you like

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Because it had all those things from the beginning so it set the standard for slow and luckily things got better over years of optimizing.

This Amiga is doing it backwards. It is stripped down and now that they have to add all those things and bog it down on a code and performance level.

OS X added Bonjour, CUPS, Core Animation/Video/Audio, Quartz Extreme, Expose, Dashboard, and several other technologies along the way. Why didn't these additions bog things down?

[Jawbone54]

Browsing through tons of Amiga OS4 screen shots, all I can think of is how antiquated the whole thing looks.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

OS X added Bonjour, CUPS, Core Animation/Video/Audio, Quartz Extreme, Expose, Dashboard, and several other technologies along the way. Why didn't these additions bog things down?

Oh lordie.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Oh lordie.

They are all non-kernel level changes and operating system services, no?

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

So, besides nostalgia, any point in buying this POS today ?

1. Just because it's not for you does not mean it's a POS.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

The OS marketplace is crowded as it is.

2. There are only two major consumer OS platforms and one (or many, depending on how you see it) major "geek" platform which is inching its way to the mainstream, but is still years away. How is this market crowded? We need more OS choices, not less!

3. The more OSs, the better security we have. When most of the population uses one OS, then most of the population is vulnerable to the same thing, which is why a number of worms and viruses have been able to effectively paralyze huge numbers of computers, including government and business computers, with debilitating effects.

4. Each OS has its own underlying design philosophy and its own set of strengths and weaknesses. Having more options available means being able to choose an OS that's most suitable for you and comes closest to your own criteria (big and feature-full or lean and light, single user-focused or multi-user focus, etc.)

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Apple was worth salvaging.

5. The Amiga platform has been around for a long time, and was very distinguished in its prime time. The Amiga was the other bright kid in the class, even besting the Apple II and Mac in areas of graphics and audio. I'm surprised that no one has mentioned how Amigas were used to create special effects in Max Headroom, SeaQuest DSV, Babylon 5 and other shows.

Unfortunately, probably because of the ineptness of its past owners and other factors, the Amiga platform has fallen into what is presently a very small niche following. However, if you recall, our beloved Mac platform was in grave danger of becoming just that, and it survived many of the rough times in great part due to the hardcore Mac users who refused to bail out of a seemingly sinking boat because they believed in the platform.

And so could the Amiga resurrect and perhaps even one day become a mainstream platform choice, or at least one big enough to count. Even if it doesn't, as others have said, we can still benefit many elements of the Amiga and AmigaOS in the long-run.

I see every reason why the Amiga is worth salvaging, and none why it's not.

6. I think too many here are judging the OS just by its screen shots. The Mac OS is beautiful, and I cringe when I have to use Windoze because it looks ugly in comparison, not to mention the ill-conceived UI design and OS behavior.

So the Amiga OS is not pretty by our standards, but that can be remedied. NeXTStep wasn't very pretty, and the first server version of Mac OS X (which carried over the NeXT-like design) wasn't very pretty either. The fact is that this OS has more merit in its design philosophy and unique UI design than a Windows or an otherwise "prettier" OS.

Pretty UI graphics aren't everything, and UI graphics are much easier to remedy than critical underlying design flaws. Even a skinable interface might do the trick!

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Not to sound snotty or belittling or something, but I'm actually somewhat surprised with some of the reactions in here. I thought Mac users were supposed to be tolerant idealistic users understanding of what it is like to be the underdog?

I think that as our user-base has grown, our collective idealism has shrunk, which is partially because we have a lot of new users who never had to live through the difficult times when our platform was in a slump and don't have the same idealism as the old, and because we're no longer as niche as we once were; we're no longer in grave danger, so the "need" for that idealism has shrunk. I find this rather unfortunate and disconcerting as well.

Originally Posted by Powerbook 

... is written Amiga. That's Spanish / Pig latin for GIRLfriend.

Well, a female friend, with no particular romantic implication. Of course, Amiga users can be as romantic with their computers as Mac users are.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Gamoe 

Unfortunately, probably because of the ineptness of its past owners and other factors, the Amiga platform has fallen into what is presently a very small niche following. However, if you recall, our beloved Mac platform was in grave danger of becoming just that, and it survived many of the rough times in great part due to the hardcore Mac users who refused to bail out of a seemingly sinking boat because they believed in the platform.

Well said Gamoe!

I think maybe your theory about some Mac users not being around for the worst of Apple's times might be true.

All of this pragmatic talk and implications that Mac users are generally rational and logical are somewhat laughable when you look at how badly the Mac OS and Apple was doing before OS X came along. Frankly, when I look back at those days, I guess only my lacking of knowing any better as a kid, and/or ambivalence kept me on the Mac.

Really, the Amiga was better than the Mac was. OS/2 was better. Windows 2000 definitely was, as was BeOS. It's easier to take a holier than thou attitude now and blow off the Amiga, but Apple has not always been the golden child.

If the goals of the Amiga team are to make it a viable platform again, I'll be cheering them on and hoping that they kick ass, for all the reasons Gamoe eloquently stated. If someday the Amiga, Windows, Linux, or anything else is a better product for my client or server needs, I'll switch. If Apple was able to bring crappy old Mac OS up to where it is now, just about anything is possible!

[Judge_Fire]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So, do you think that computer programming can be thought of as art?

Why not. The word Art has different meanings to different people, though, so maybe we should look at a definition first. From Wikipedia (no doubt a consensus result of endless bickering) :

"Art is a result of human creativity which has some perceived quality beyond its usefulness, usually on the basis of aesthetic value or emotional impact" and "The modern use of the word "art", which rose to prominence after 1750, is commonly understood to be skill used to produce an aesthetic result." The article goes on to say much more, but lets go with that.

Then we can look at programming from two (or more) perspectives;

Practice; is the process one of creating something ambitious, where the skill and motivation of the programmer build towards a result beyond mere good-enough functionality, perhaps something elegant and ambitious?

Outside opinion; a programming connoisseur could look at a piece of code, an advanced framework or compiled application and form an expert opinion on how 'artful' it is.

In either case, people outside the field may have a hard time valuing the work or the discourse around it. Regardless, if there is ambition for something beyond mere functionality, the person is a practising artist in my book. The quality of the work is up to the critic.

[PB2K]

After all these years, Amiga has yet no killer application so nobody needs it. it's strictly for hobbyists. It's not meant to be competition for Windows or OSX.

I was a hardcore Amiga 500 user 15 years ago. I knew Deluxe paint so well, I have 100's of floppies with pictures on them. I met a friend who had a 1200 later on, it was the first time I used a harddisk inside an amiga