107 replies to this topic

[Lynxpro]

Isn't the AmigaOS [in]directly responsible for shared libraries like what Microsoft implemented into Windows with the curse-ed DLLs? Wasn't that part of the patents/IP that Amiga licensed to IBM/Microsoft for use in OS/2 and in return Amiga got ARexx out of it?

[atarian63]

Those were some fun days!

Edited by atarian63, Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:04 PM.

[kenjennings]

Lynxpro, on Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:47 PM, said:

Isn't the AmigaOS [in]directly responsible for shared libraries like what Microsoft implemented into Windows with the curse-ed DLLs? Wasn't that part of the patents/IP that Amiga licensed to IBM/Microsoft for use in OS/2 and in return Amiga got ARexx out of it?

Unix existed long before the Amiga and it used shared libraries. Though the Amiga Os does do it particularly well.

[kenjennings]

retrogeek, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:39 PM, said:

atarian63, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:04 PM, said:

wgungfu, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:43 PM, said:

DracIsBack, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:32 PM, said:

So in short, the legend of the ST being designed from start to finish after the Amiga fell through for Atari Corp is nothing more than a legend ...?

I didn't know that.

That's correct. A lot of it stems from misinformation from RJ, some from the press surmising, etc. Again, the Amiga deal never fell through with Atari Corp. - there was no deal with Atari Corp.

The deal was with Warner Atari who financed the developement of the amiga chipset ie Atari 1600XL

Speaking of the Atari 1600xl:

http://www.atarimuse...0xl/1600xl.html

Oddly, the first picture on that page shows a box shaped like an amiga 2000.

[kenjennings]

Rybags, on Sat Mar 22, 2008 6:03 AM, said:

The green desktop was ugly. Professional isn't exactly a word that comes to mind either, although I guess it did stack up reasonably well to the Mac at the time.

The Amiga dark blue was slightly less ugly.

It was always a mystery to me why computer makers chose such bad default colour combinations (A8 and C-64 included).
. . .

The first Amiga OS defaulted to a similar color scheme as the Atari 800 (white on blue) for essentially the same reason -- both were designed to use a NTSC TV. People with deeper pockets could buy a nice RGB monitor for the Amiga.

In any case, the defaults don't mean a lot. The original GUIs on both computers allowed the user to change the colors. I usually set the Amiga to use black on light grey, which turned out to be the default used for the version 2 Workbench.

[Retro Rogue]

kenjennings, on Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:00 AM, said:

retrogeek, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:39 PM, said:

atarian63, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:04 PM, said:

wgungfu, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:43 PM, said:

DracIsBack, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:32 PM, said:

So in short, the legend of the ST being designed from start to finish after the Amiga fell through for Atari Corp is nothing more than a legend ...?

I didn't know that.

That's correct. A lot of it stems from misinformation from RJ, some from the press surmising, etc. Again, the Amiga deal never fell through with Atari Corp. - there was no deal with Atari Corp.

The deal was with Warner Atari who financed the developement of the amiga chipset ie Atari 1600XL

Speaking of the Atari 1600xl:

http://www.atarimuse...0xl/1600xl.html

Oddly, the first picture on that page shows a box shaped like an amiga 2000.

1600XL/Shakti had nothing to do with the Amiga project.

[oky2000]

Retro Rogue, on Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:10 PM, said:

oky2000, on Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:45 PM, said:

I personally think The STE is what the ST would have been and what Shiraz Shivji wanted it to be, but money needed to be made FAST and a new computer needed to be signed off on by Jack T after he lost out on the Amiga chipset to start paying the creditors and generating some profit simple as that.

Once again, never happened. It was never planned around the Amiga chipset, that's based on RJ Micals misinformation and tall tales floating around, as you've been explained time and again.

No what I meant was those Commodore engineers Jack walked into Atari with would have all wanted, and were perfectly capable, to produce a machine with custom chipset. Not the Amiga chipset specifically (although that could also have happened had things been different).

[kenjennings]

Retro Rogue, on Sat Mar 10, 2012 4:36 PM, said:

kenjennings, on Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:00 AM, said:

retrogeek, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:39 PM, said:

atarian63, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:04 PM, said:

wgungfu, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:43 PM, said:

DracIsBack, on Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:32 PM, said:

So in short, the legend of the ST being designed from start to finish after the Amiga fell through for Atari Corp is nothing more than a legend ...?

I didn't know that.

That's correct. A lot of it stems from misinformation from RJ, some from the press surmising, etc. Again, the Amiga deal never fell through with Atari Corp. - there was no deal with Atari Corp.

The deal was with Warner Atari who financed the developement of the amiga chipset ie Atari 1600XL

Speaking of the Atari 1600xl:

http://www.atarimuse...0xl/1600xl.html

Oddly, the first picture on that page shows a box shaped like an amiga 2000.

1600XL/Shakti had nothing to do with the Amiga project.

I didn't say it was an Amiga. I was just noting the coincidental similarity of the case.