Faster/wider CPU...

[thorsinclair]

They have produced 8 boards which were given to developers and there is no release date for the boards to be available to consumers. I agree that it should be possible, but who will do the job?? I just meant with my earlier post that also in the past this did not raise interest ... at least as far as I am aware.

[Dave]

Well, then. You can use either this or wahtever Peter Graf is offering.

I can't use what Peter Graf is offering because he isn't offering it.

Take a look at their 68050/68070 performance figures, btw. it runs at 100-150 MHz and executes two instructions per clock. WIth many new instructions, possibly extra registers, vectoring units etc etc.

Interestingly, one of the great challenges of the Super Gold Card was disabling all the extra functionality of the 680X0 to make it behave as much as possible like a 68000. QDOS isn't very happy on CPUs that behave even a little differently to a 68000. It freaks out if timings change, or flags, or interrupts...

OTOH, Amiga is much more complicated than the QL, so Natami was significantly more demanding.
But all that hardware ( blitting units etc) can be put to very good use inside new QL...

I'd be surprised if anyone could write in OS/driver support for any of those features. Or, if it would even be useful.

It seems to me that you are not just after better TNG QL, but that the quest itself has some religious overtones for you.

Not at all. I think the deal with me is that I don't care what the hardware is that the OS runs on. The OS is the tool, and the hardware is just a device to run the tool. There's a world market for maybe 100-200 more QLs *EVER* so it certainly isn't worth my effort to dive into FPGAs.

Board is cute, it's probably cheap or at least affordable, most if not all of it content is open-sourced and open for modifications, what else do you need ?

Skills? Resources? Time? Money?

What are you working on?

[RWAP]

Well, then. You can use either this or wahtever Peter Graf is offering.

I can't use what Peter Graf is offering because he isn't offering it.

I thought you said that his version is finished. Why wouldn't he offer it if it's true ?

Anyway, even if so. that still leaves Natami...

Actually it was me that said his version is finished EXCEPT for the operating system, as he has not been able to get a working version of Minerva on the board.

He will not entertain SMSQ/e

Interestingly, one of the great challenges of the Super Gold Card was disabling all the extra functionality of the 680X0 to make it behave as much as possible like a 68000. QDOS isn't very happy on CPUs that behave even a little differently to a 68000. It freaks out if timings change, or flags, or interrupts...

But, as someoune pointed out before, QDOS is not an option for you anyway. It's buggy, lacks features and above all, you have no rights to copy it and use in your HW.

SMSQ fails for similar reason, which means that you are either left with Minerva or writing your own version.

I have never really seen the argument with the licence for SMSQ/e - the sources are readily available, and it is fairly easy for someone to become an official reseller if they want to sell copies of SMSQ/e along with the hardware. The only thing is that their version has to be made available as part of the major release - ie. the source code (with conditional assembler for sections which are hardware specific) has to be made available through the SMSQ/e site.

One of the arguments about the licence was more to do with needing to use 3rd party code which was available under the GPL licence and therefore this made it difficult to incorporate it within the official SMSQ/e licence terms. That said, as SMSQ/e is designed to have modules patched in on the final distribution, so long as the GPL code is adapted to load in as a module, then it can still be distributed separately under the GPL licence.

Realistically, I see no problem in using SMSQ/e for new hardware and this is surely the preferable way to go.

[RWAP]

The sources appear at:
http://www.scp-paulet-lenerz.com/smsqe

The assembler listings should be fully commented.

If you download the single link:
http://www.scp-paulet-lenerz.com/smsqe/313/smsqe313.zip

The licence is included in that package and there is a readme.txt in the root directory which tells you how to compile the sources.

Unfortunately, that is about all the information that there is (and its a lot more than you get with Minerva!)

[Mr_Navigator]

I assume this is it, there are three headings :-

1 - Compiling the source code

2 - Additional programs

3 - Changes to the source code

followed by an explanation of each heading :-

1 - Compiling the source code
There is a document called "HowTo" in the subdirectory "extras_help".

It exists either as a simple text file (HowTo_txt) or as a Quill Doc file
(HowTo_doc).

This tells you how to compile SMSQ/E for your target.
Some familiarity with assembling and linking is presumed.

Its this part I presume that helps direct you to further info, however it does say (in italics) ...

[Mr_Navigator]

WIth all that combined, it reallly is good question whether whole thing should be rethought and started from scratch...

The problem with starting from scratch is that it is very easy to 'through the baby out with the bathwater' (so to speak)

Also starting from scratch and you will get somepeople saying why bother with anything related to the QL at all, its past, its gone, its not coming back - ever

I think that none of this is relevant and missing the point entirely.

IMHO - it is the concept and ideas of SuperBasic (easily understandable, powerful yet flexible and simple enough to use) that made the QL what the QL became. SuperBASIC sat on an operating system that allowed it appropriately or otherwise access to the hardware of the QL. Users of other languages including low level machine code will have slightly different views obviously and that is perfectly acceptable, however there is a difference between what is necessary and expected (i.e keyboard, mouse, screen, memory space internal as well as external) and what is quite specific to the QL which will have to be different (i.e. other i/o, serial ports, ROM ports, RS 232, Printer etc.).

Starting from scratch conceptually might be a good thing, but unless you are going to take your 'fan base' with you, you will probably find yourself isolated. Even those who are watching how the Amiga based home brews would probably agree and see it is a very slow process. Amiga One seems to have come to a complete stop, without community support it is unlikely to get very far, gone are the days of "lets put the whole show on in the barn" enthusiasm (Mickey Rooney fans will know this) and that is all you would need.

Without cold hard cash and lots of it, starting from scratch will be slow with no quick fix. The hardware in which only a SuperBASIC style interpreted language sits on, using different processors and different low level language I have already queried in a previous thread (see here http://www.theqlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=244). Unless I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick, I think what Dave is exploring is the possible avenues that exist, using current hardware compatible (to some extent) with the previous incantations of the QL, hence compatable with most of the intricacies of low level languages + high level languanges but not with the specific hardware that really is no longer required.

[Dave]

This looks like trolling.

[vanpeebles]

Brane2 please keep to resonable and friendly debate.

[Dave]

Sorry, I didn't know a counter-argument was needed.

I'll do this because I want to, regardless of what you think

[Mr_Navigator]

Apologies if I caused offense, I did say IMHO

I am not claiming to have all the answers, in fact I left the QL scene in the late 1980's and only returned just over a year ago so relatively still a newcomer. One of the reasons I came 'Back To The QL' was a) fond memories of programming b) I liked SuperBASIC and most important of c) It had nothing to do with work, I teach IT, ICT & Games Development.

But back to the case in point.

This is an interesting Post on another forum (spit spit) http://www.powerdeveloper.org/forums/vi ... hp?p=14610

and even better a wiki on the minimig http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimig, what is really an interesting point is this:

Minimig started in secrecy around January 2005 as a proof of concept by Dutch electrical engineer Dennis van Weeren. He intended Minimig as the answer to the ongoing discussions within the Amiga community on implementing the Amiga custom chipset using an FPGA.

and also this which comes under the Purposes and Intent

Run Amiga specific application software to convert files to newer platforms.
Run software only available on Amiga.
Running Amiga video games.
FPGA development experience using Verilog.
Creating something for the community.
Proof of Concept.
Allows creation of new games that take advantages of the new features in Minimig (faster memory, more memory sprites, colours, etc), while maintaining full compatibility with the Amiga

Dave, do you think it might be an idea to start with something like "Purposes and Intent" and then go from there?

two more points before shutting up [Star Wars reference]

1. Farnell sell this for about £6 is this the same device as you are refering to Dave, the MC68EC000EI8 ? they have about 15 in stock btw


2. The spec for this device is 8 Mhz but I seem to remember an article somewhere saying they overclocked this quite comfortably at twice the frequency, anyone else?