@KimmoK #53 Oh, it's MOS-team who are against "common Amiga"... Yes, always was since the fall. I asked about at the Morphzone once about a MOS 2.0 port. I was severely chastised for having crappy A1 hardware. Amazingly, Hyperion went and ported OS4.0 to the Pegasos! What the hell does all this mean?
Seeing as this thread has degenerated completely off topic, I'm moving it to the "Too Hot To Handle" forum.
Simon
Comments made in any post are personal opinion, and are in no-way representative of any commercial entity unless specifically stated as such. ---- http://codebench.co.uk
I would like to hear Hyperion's official view on this User Interface issue; it's the main key to all the Amiga software.
I think you mean the developers' view, since Ben would no doubt respect their opinion. Many years ago on AW, HJF expressed some views about MUI, Reaction, and even Feelin'. Frankly, my read of the post was that he saw good and bad throughout and wasn't particularly excited about any one of them.
One thing overlooked in the practical decision making, might just be this:
HJF quote:
Quote:
You can essentially pick either Reaction or MUI for GUIs. There is a GUI builder for reaction in development that will end up being commercial
This was followed by a link to Jamie's website. If I was leaning towards Reaction from a practical standpoint, only to learn that one "plus" about Reaction had vanished into the dust (when Jamie signed on with AI), I would certainly be somewhat deflated.
Snuffy, I don't mention this to start an argument about what Jamie did...I'm just mentioning it because it does show one possible reason that the team may have leaned towards Reaction a bit.
Don't try to bring facts in this discussion, it's generally not well received. :)
A typical troll comment. A statement that doesn't say anything. It's just there to incite answers of the flamy kind. Well done.
For what it's worth, my recollection of the MUI debate was that it was supposed to be ported to OS 4 by Jens Langner, and no hardware was required. Of course, other people might tell a different story.
(oh why does this forum require me to wait to correct a simple spelling mistake?)
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
My unofficial view on AmigaOS GUI toolkits ?s that they all suck dead hamsters through a garden hose. Compared to modern UI toolkits from other platforms, they lack in functionality, customization features, and about everything else.
They all of their flaws, and they hardly have any strengths. Making a list of all of it would be a waste of time. Personally I consider the list of Reaction to be the shortest one, but I am quite sure MUI supporters will chime in and say otherwise. It's personal opinion anyway, so you're welcome to yours, as I am to mine.
Personally, my favorite pick for a future GUI tool kit would be Qt. It's very functional, customizable in a decent fashion (i.e. through themes, not through the exchange of every single frame, bitmap and what have you. It has good developer support, good functionality, and a GUI builder.
But I guess this is going to be "an insult to the community" again..
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Why not go for a high-level GUI based on scripting instead? Something that allows you flexibility and expandability.
I think that would suit AmigaOS better than QT (which may be fine, but I've only seen the ugly Gnome MacOS 9-like interfaces - there may be something better hiding somewhere).
For what it's worth, my recollection of the MUI debate was that it was supposed to be ported to OS 4 by Jens Langner, and no hardware was required.
Yes, I've heard that as well. I believe both stories represent truth (the status) for a particular point in time. Bottom line is the same regardless...we don't have it.
I don't think anyone would consider your decision to look at something else an "insult". You made it quite clear that none of the current solutions meet your/teams needs. Your choice to look at alternatives is just logical, really.
As far as MUI itself goes, I tend to look at it merely from the perspective of those who are more comfortable with it, knowledgable about it...and feel they could bring more to Amiga OS with its use as opposed to learning something new.
I think the other point being, that because something like Qt doesn't exist on any of the 3 platforms, bringing that to all 3 would return the application developers to a common interface system, allowing cross platform applications to be created much easier.
Both Reaction and MUI(and its clone Zune) have their apparent problems, so choosing one of those is plainly the wrong direction to go in.
A tried and tested system, like Qt, would certainly benefit everyone. That is, unless each platform is going to go it's own way to implement it. In that case we might as well give up and stay as we are.
Working together to bring a common interface system would be quicker and ultimately less work for one team.
Simon
Comments made in any post are personal opinion, and are in no-way representative of any commercial entity unless specifically stated as such. ---- http://codebench.co.uk
As you'd need the GUI toolkit first, it's currently impossible.
Simon
Comments made in any post are personal opinion, and are in no-way representative of any commercial entity unless specifically stated as such. ---- http://codebench.co.uk
I think the other point being, that because something like Qt doesn't exist on any of the 3 platforms, bringing that to all 3 would return the application developers to a common interface system, allowing cross platform applications to be created much easier.
Thanks for explaining this to me in terms reflecting possible co-operative efforts, which is how I like to look at things.
Quote:
That is, unless each platform is going to go it's own way to implement it. In that case we might as well give up and stay as we are.
I understand that logic as well. Let's see if we can get some input here from co-operative minded individuals without me doing any prodding. Heh.
That depends on how many people are going to work on it. 2 people from each team would be great if they work together, 1 person from each team working on their own means I doubt we'll see it anytime before the 50th anniversary :)
Simon
Comments made in any post are personal opinion, and are in no-way representative of any commercial entity unless specifically stated as such. ---- http://codebench.co.uk
Well, if you plan to turn OS4 in a random linux distribution (with all the flaws without the advantages) by integrating all kind external components and concepts that will just alter the original amigaos experience, then it's surely the way to go...
I can see some remote interest in QT for some applications, but making it the OS toolkit, seriously? Well, at least you didn't choose GTK...
Seriously, where's the "Amiga feeling" in that? Doesn't anyone feel there's something wrong there?
Seriously, where's the "Amiga feeling" in that? Doesn't anyone feel there's something wrong there?
I'm sure the same was said when the move from Gadtools to Reaction was made.
Simon
Comments made in any post are personal opinion, and are in no-way representative of any commercial entity unless specifically stated as such. ---- http://codebench.co.uk
Well, reaction is at least still boopsi based and doesn't provide a too different experience (except improved functionality).
I have nothing against QT. It's quite good, even. But I don't see how you could preserve the famous "amiga feeling" by switching to a generic toolkit like that. And we all know OS4 users are really attached to this "amiga feeling" above all, so I'd expect some disappointment there. The slightest changes in workbench or preferences seems to scare them already, so imagine a completely new toolkit... :) I understand the will is to go forward and improve the OS since the current tookits indeed have flaws (though the major one i see in MUI is just the lack of unicode support, but whatever), but you certainly don't want to alienate the users..
@Fab The major difference would be for developers (users know very little about underlying GUI processes), and we are not talking about the whole OS anyway just the GUI tools. QT is not "connected" to any platform in particular (you can't call it "MAC" nor "Linux") and you could use it on Amiga without alienating end users.
SamFlex Complete System + AmigaOS4.1 Update 4 Amiga 2000 GVP GForce-040 Picasso II AmigaOS3.9 BB2 Amiga CD-32
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
