Vanilla 68000s and the lack of homebrew...

commodorejohn · 26th July 2010, 23:50

Okay, this has been a pet peeve of mine for a while, but I gotta get it off my chest: Why does damn near every serious homebrew project on the Amiga require major hardware upgrades!? Seems like it doesn't matter if you're looking at something as simple as a Tetris clone or as complex as a raycaster 3D demo, practically none of it will run on any kind of semi-basic Amiga setup. At least most of the projects on Aminet that are PPC-based have a 68k equivalent, but within that set, nearly every large-scale project (particularily games) requires AGA and/or a 68030, plus maybe an FPU or a non-Workbench OS, depending on the phase of the moon when the programmer was writing it.

Not all of us HAVE this kind of setup! I'm just a casual appreciator/minor collector; as you can see in my signature, even with my upgrades, I don't come close to any of those items. I can't even run most of the games on Aminet. Why!? 95% of the Angband variants, as uploaded, require a 68020+, yet the game itself can be run on an IBM XT with an 8086 (not very well, but that's not the point.) What is there about any of the Angband variants that necessitates a processor that was barely even in use when the game was created? And why do so many of these projects need AGA when only three Amiga models even had AGA? It's frakkin' exasperating.

I mean, seriously. I like playing through the period classics that were actually designed for low-end Amigas as much as the next retrophile weirdo, but it'd be nice to actually be able to run some new stuff too.

blankstare · 27th July 2010, 01:51

We as end users can only keep up with the current trends to a certain degree at the expense of our bank accounts I'm afraid.

Just how far are people willing to go in order to have a super-duper all-singing and dancing machine that blows other machines out of the water and run the latest OS or demo?

Personally, I'm happy with my computers as they are. Sure, they don't run everything - but what they do run makes me happy and thats all that matters

Khyron · 27th July 2010, 04:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by commodorejohn

Not all of us HAVE this kind of setup! I'm just a casual appreciator/minor collector; as you can see in my signature, even with my upgrades, I don't come close to any of those items.
I mean, seriously. I like playing through the period classics that were actually designed for low-end Amigas as much as the next retrophile weirdo, but it'd be nice to actually be able to run some new stuff too.

My systems are kinda frozen in time as they were upgraded. My 1K has an 020, my 2K 030, my 3K 060, 4K 060/PPC. all of them w/zorro slots also have some sort of RTG graphics etc. The upgrades were in there when they went into the closet. (I pulled them out recently just to remove the batteries and pull off some old data from the drives. That's what got me back into playing with an amiga again. )
Aminet in general reflects that, As time goes on, the required specs for the games/apps increased. I knew very few people that stuck with stock Amiga's back in the day, those who kept the stock systems usually jumped ship to the PC early on.

Most people coding (excluding demo coding) for the amiga today are coding in C with SDL etc.. porting PC stuff etc.. No one's using devpac and hand coding for speed anymore to write games or apps, so it's automatic you need a faster CPU..

And on the side note.. for a raycaster that'll work on a stock 500,
dowload with the copyright holders blessings..
http://www.ppa.pl/rodzynki/cytadela.php
another one I think might work was called "behind the iron gate"

and zangband from aminet should also play on a bare 68k

Harrison · 28th July 2010, 23:59

You could argue that their are more than enough 68K A500 demos and other software in the PD/Shareware scene from the Amiga days when everyone had one and we were all enjoying running the software and fairly standard Amigas.

People want to push hardware as far as they can, and today the reason for continuing to code on the Amiga is to keep pushing the old hardware as far as they can, to try and show it can still keep going and doing new things. Why would coders want to just code old 68K stuff now that already exists in the Amiga archives?

HonestFlames · 18th August 2010, 15:46

If you're doing C or C++, there's an easy option for 'compile to 68000'. However, if you're doing a project in assembler, or mixing assembler and C (or another language), it's really tempting to write for 68020+, because the 68000 is quite limited in a number of ways. From first-hand experience, it's a little easier to code for 68020 than 68000 when using pure assembler.

Requirements for AGA may have more to do with the speed of intended operation as much as it is about the extended colour capabilities. AGA is quite a bit faster than ECS.

Of course, some coders are just lazy!

26th July 2010, 23:50	#1
commodorejohn 32768 kilowords of core! Amibayer! Feedback: 5 reviews Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 180	Vanilla 68000s and the lack of homebrew... Okay, this has been a pet peeve of mine for a while, but I gotta get it off my chest: Why does damn near every serious homebrew project on the Amiga require major hardware upgrades!? Seems like it doesn't matter if you're looking at something as simple as a Tetris clone or as complex as a raycaster 3D demo, practically none of it will run on any kind of semi-basic Amiga setup. At least most of the projects on Aminet that are PPC-based have a 68k equivalent, but within that set, nearly every large-scale project (particularily games) requires AGA and/or a 68030, plus maybe an FPU or a non-Workbench OS, depending on the phase of the moon when the programmer was writing it. Not all of us HAVE this kind of setup! I'm just a casual appreciator/minor collector; as you can see in my signature, even with my upgrades, I don't come close to any of those items. I can't even run most of the games on Aminet. Why!? 95% of the Angband variants, as uploaded, require a 68020+, yet the game itself can be run on an IBM XT with an 8086 (not very well, but that's not the point.) What is there about any of the Angband variants that necessitates a processor that was barely even in use when the game was created? And why do so many of these projects need AGA when only three Amiga models even had AGA? It's frakkin' exasperating. I mean, seriously. I like playing through the period classics that were actually designed for low-end Amigas as much as the next retrophile weirdo, but it'd be nice to actually be able to run some new stuff too. __________________ Amiga 500 (KS 3.1/WB 3.1, 800MB HD, 8MB fast RAM, Supra Turbo 28 accelerator) Macintosh IIsi (System 7, 120MB HD, 14MB RAM, SCSI CD) Commodore 128 (JiffyDOS, 2x 1541, 1x 1581, 512KB REU, 64KB VDC RAM) Packard-Bell 286 (DOS 3.3, 32MB HD, 2.6MB RAM, HGC/EGA) Tandy 1000TX (DOS 3.2, 640KB RAM, TGA)

27th July 2010, 01:51	#2
blankstare I think it's funny, don't you? Amibayer! Feedback: 48 reviews Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,016	We as end users can only keep up with the current trends to a certain degree at the expense of our bank accounts I'm afraid. Just how far are people willing to go in order to have a super-duper all-singing and dancing machine that blows other machines out of the water and run the latest OS or demo? Personally, I'm happy with my computers as they are. Sure, they don't run everything - but what they do run makes me happy and thats all that matters __________________ 1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g0 g37 50m3 h3lp Last edited by blankstare; 27th July 2010 at 02:38.

28th July 2010, 23:59	#4
Harrison vB Guru AmiDev Administrator Feedback: 9 reviews Join Date: Dec 2007 Age: 36 Posts: 3,996	You could argue that their are more than enough 68K A500 demos and other software in the PD/Shareware scene from the Amiga days when everyone had one and we were all enjoying running the software and fairly standard Amigas. People want to push hardware as far as they can, and today the reason for continuing to code on the Amiga is to keep pushing the old hardware as far as they can, to try and show it can still keep going and doing new things. Why would coders want to just code old 68K stuff now that already exists in the Amiga archives? __________________ classicamiga.com, your guide to everything Amiga. ===================================== A500 x2, A500+ x2, A600 x2, A1200 x3, A4000D/40, CD32.. 520 STFM, 4160 STE, 2600 PC x10, Wii, GC, N64 x3 + Z64, SNES, GB, GBA, DS, Dreamcast, Xbox, PSX, PS2, PS2slim, PSP x2

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Location - and the lack there-of	ZeBeeDee	General Chat	18	30th October 2008 07:03

18th August 2010, 15:46	#5
HonestFlames Feedback: 0 reviews Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 105	If you're doing C or C++, there's an easy option for 'compile to 68000'. However, if you're doing a project in assembler, or mixing assembler and C (or another language), it's really tempting to write for 68020+, because the 68000 is quite limited in a number of ways. From first-hand experience, it's a little easier to code for 68020 than 68000 when using pure assembler. Requirements for AGA may have more to do with the speed of intended operation as much as it is about the extended colour capabilities. AGA is quite a bit faster than ECS. Of course, some coders are just lazy!