Learning to love Workbench 1.3

Is anyone running stock ( no patches or gizmos ) levels of Workbench?

I tried recently, here is what I found:

Workbench 1.3

ARRRRGGGHHH!!! God this is AWFUL. Like the busy pointer though.

Workbench 2.04

Ugly, more pro looking but really ugly and doesn't do much. No backdrop picture!

Workbench 3.0

Disgusting. How was I ever persauded to use one of these?

Workbench 3.5

Hmm, almost like a real OS ;)

Workbench 3.9

Getting better, works pretty well off the CD.

Workbench 4.0 ( AmigaOS 4.0 )

Now that is what I call a decent out of the box experience.

You make one big mistake here, you compare it all to the present time!

All the AmigaOS-versions where great seen in the time-frame they where in.

I can also say something negative;

all the OS's that you see today will be bad in 10 years time, see?!

It isn't a mistake, it is the whole point. You don't realise that things are progessing as much as they are when they are progressing.

This is why I don't get people who say that AmigaOS4.0 isn't a proper AmigaOS because it doesn't feel like AmigaOS. I say these people haven't used it, or they have gotten so used to their old tweaks and customisations they forget half of what they find alienating is their own home-making.

How did I ever learn to love Workbench 1.3? By coming from the ZX Spectrum.

Could I love it now? No.

AmigaOS 4.0 is the culimation of what AmigaOS is, and although it is essentially out of date ( in comparison with the latest Linux distributions and Windows XP/Vista ) in certain respects it is utterly Amiga.

Amiga OS 3.9 on the other hand always felt a bit like using someone elses customised Workbench 3.1.

Ok, sorry when i was a bit too harsh.

But i will give you an example of what i mean.

There are people who are buying every year a new computer
like some people do it with buying a new car every few years.
Then you have people who dig out their old computers or
startup an emulator because they love the simple way it all
worked. I gues you can compare these people with people who
refurbishe their old classic car.

So what i want to say is that you can not generalise your thoughts
that it must always be the newest and fastes computer that you
must have to do the right thing. It depends from person to person.

Yes, I understand. However people who boot into stock classic Amigas are in for a shock.

I bought an A500 quite early on and found it painful until I made commands resident ( a simple modification, but it is a big shock without it ) and had a second disk drive.

Then I got an external hard disk and realised that this was how the Amiga was meant to be used. Fast, slick and no sounds like a constipated geriatric straining on the loo whenever you opened a drawer.

But even those simple modifications, which made all the difference to how I viewed WB1.3, are way beyond what a stock Amiga can do.

I thought about this because of that user on another thread whom bought a stock A1200 and is looking to modify it. I forgot for a bit it doesn't come with a pretty workbench, IBrowse and has to put up with AGA and started to remember what it was like: Bad.

It is pretty daunting getting from stock to "usable" on those older machines - usable for our expectations today.

But so long as amigans.net users don't get as arrogant as Linux users were some 8 years ago or like a web page recently which had a nasty remark on it ( they call it irony ) at someone who asked how they could get TCP/IP stack down onto a machine that doesn't have TCP/IP.

The point is new users of computers today have different expectations. They don't like to go around the houses to do what is common currency and they don't remember about 3.5" floppy disks and things like that. They probably don't think that you can connect a computer up to a TV ( a computer, not a console ).

The literate forget also.

Hmm, about OS 3.9 and 4.0, that depends on the hardware you are using.

I have an A1260/G2 with OS 3.9 and that runs fast enouph.
My A1SEG3 runs OS 4.0 even faster so that is very good for me.
My old A500 did run OS 2.1 and that was the fastest and best OS for it.
MY old A2000 did run OS 1.3 and that was also a fast machien.

If we are talking abouth OS 4.0 then that can only get better as
my SE runs at 600 mhz and is not the newest hardware anymore.

So if we take the SAM440 at 667 mhz with a very modern board then
that must be a verry fast experience, i think.

Speed is important, yes, but function is too. Now users install an OS and say "where are the games? Where is wordpad? where is IE?"

Now so much gets bundled with modern OS we forget how stark life with a traditional OS is before you do work on it.

I doubt any user is running a truly stock pre OS 3.9 anywhere. They will have made some usability modification.

But stock Windows? Stock linux? All over the world. Why? Because the optional extras aren't so optional anymore.

Ok, i see your point, but like you say these are bundles and
you can not say that from an Amiga OS alone.

I am sure that if there would be an Internet-bundlle with
the new hardware that that would be a big step forward.
If you would look at it from a desktop perspective ofcourse.

But i see more benefit in special bundles like for example
OS4 + hardware as a basic system where you could add
extra services with inhouse or external software addons.

Quote:

And that is why today OS fails to be a great experience anymore.A lot of services and extras that i never use slowdowning my computer.I prefer a basic system and the services loaded when needed and not at startup.

I think that people and the industry has forgotten what an operating system is, and confusing operating system and applications in one.An operating system is an interface that interact between the hardware and you,nothing more nothing less, it must be simple and clean and the functions and services must be provided by the applications and not by the OS, that is not its function (not wouldn?t have to be).But the world insist in integrate more and more in the OSs making them more and more slow, bloated and unresponsible making them (ironically) more "unoperating"

@Fransexy

You hit the nail on the head. So much work has gone into throwing in the "bells and whistles" into an operating system that it's basic functions have been ignored. I can't look at any of the three major ones (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux desktop distros) and see any sort of effort to get back into the basics and allow the OS to become transparent instead of getting in the way of the user. It's like the OSes try to be everything for everyone, and I think we all know how that turns out...a jack of all trades but a master of none. I think that AOS goes a long way towards being a transparent experience just from its simplicity and efficiency, and that efforts to make it more "modern" shouldn't lose sight of this.

I also find this to be one of the charms of delving into AOS 3.0, which is what I have on my A1200 at the moment. Sure, there are more modern functions that I do miss while playing aroudn on it, but even then most other OSes didn't have them at that point in time either.

I use 1.3 and 2.05.

For productivity I mainly use my A600 with 2.05.

I prefer using the 'stock' OS instead of 'mucked up' and 'patched' versions.

I know where everything is!

I'd never heard that before ( aliens ) and it wasn't particularly advanced - advanced for the price point perhaps, advanced as a package.

It may have been said, but it isn't true unless the only OSes you were aware of at the time were consumer oriented ones.

But we are consumers! When it was released, AmigaOS was the best of all consumer operating systems.
My sister used to own an Atari ST at that time. We always argued about what the better computer was.
As I remember, the Atari did not have any multitasking capabilities at that time. And the operating system looked very ugly and had neon green colours!
I preferred my Amiga with a blue Workbench 1.3.

Quote:

You are kidding right?

The alternative was a peecee running with 4 colours, sixteen if you were lucky and a rasping beep sound. The operating system was MSDOS 2 or 3 and you could run Digital Research GEM if you were a masochist.

I agree with the Sister that Workbench 1.x was out of this world when it appeared in the shops running on an A1000.

The whole package was more futuristic than the science fiction films of the time. I remember configuring 'Say' to sound like HAL from the movie 2001. I used to try and get it to say;
"I'm afraid I cannot do that, Dave".
I used to invite friends round and say to my Amiga, "Open the pod bay door HAL".
Later, I would program all the phrases spoken by HAL into my Amiga. "Just a moment!, just a moment!, "I'm losing my mind Dave", "I can feel it".

Al in all, I really do believe that for productivity, you just can't beat WB2.05. I am yet to see something out there that can compete with this sublime Operating System.

If Retrogeek can find me a decent A2000 then I might try 3.1 - he advises that the A2000 is the best machine to run this on - but deep down I believe that I will probably go back to 2.05.

In this case, I will probably return to my A600 because it is a very convenient size and I never use the keypad.

UNIX. VMS. MVS.

All highly advanced operating systems of the time. Again, for a shop-OS it was advanced, but in the real world of "all OSes" it wasn't.

Plus I am talking about the OS, not the "hardware" of the Amiga.

Then that is before we mention the Sinclair QL.

Quote:

That is interesting! My younger brother of two years bought a 520ST some time after I bought my A500. We had big arguments over the computers and he turned increasingly vitreolic and vile towards me and my family.

I ended up having a nervous breakdown which I believe was a direct result of all this. I believe he was so eaten up with jealousy over my A500 that he went out and bought the ST in sheer malice and spite. Luckily I was saved (physically, emotionally and spiritually) by the Jehovah's witnesses from the Kingdom Hall 2 blocks away. I haven't spoken to my brother since this time (1989) and I have been told by God that the devil used my brothers' Atari as a conduit to take his soul.

I don't have a grudge against Atari users in general.

@Mitch

I don't know what the VMS and MVS operating systems are about. I have never heard about those. Which computer were they designed for?
Of course I have heard about Unix, but I don't think it is comparable to Amiga OS. Unix is made for servers and the world wide web while Amiga OS is made for us, the consumers. People who appreciate its advanced multitasking capabilities.

@RomanceClip

I am shocked to hear that you had these fights with your brother. A computer system should not be the cause for such negative emotions. I think we should all make sure that we are here because of the fun of computing. Everytime I look at my Amiga, I get this warm feeling in the stomach. Positive emotions, that is what the Amiga computer is to me!

Quote:

I drew 2.0-style 1.3 busy pointer (ie. a zzz with the 2.0 3D effect) ages ago, and I'm still using it on my AmigaOne. It's nicer than the default stopwatch (or I think so, anyway).

I uploaded it to Aminet not long ago as I thought others might like to use it:
http://aminet.net/package/pix/theme/zzz

Chris

They still existed though, and that was the point I was making.