Talk:Amiga models and variants

message: * Spacing between the tables  --tonsofpcs (Talk) 03:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: Any objections to me moving the bit about iWin to the Trivia section of the Amiga article? Whilst the iWin hoax is worth mentioning somewhere, I don't feel it's appropriate to put it amongst a list of otherwise serious (even if unsuccessful) attempts to produce real machines. It's out of place, and kind of detracts from the others. Mdwh 23:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was I who originally added it. I seem to be the only Wikipedian to remember the iWin incident. If you don't meet any opposition, please go ahead. It doesn't really belong here as they were the only models that only ever existed as vapourware, without even real design plans. JIP | Talk 19:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've moved it. And don't worry, I remember the iWin incident too ;) Mdwh 02:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: iWin Amigas

message: A2000 (and its variants) or B2604e aren´t on the list of hardware supported by OS4. I know only one B2604e owner, who tried to install OS4 on his machine... and failed. I´m removing respective entries in the table, until someone gives source for A2000/B2604 and OS4 compatibility.Pavlor (talk) 08:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: A2000/1500 and OS4 compatibility

message: Some un-registred user added note about hardware compatibilty of AmigaOne models with classic Amiga computers. Xorxos then changed this line assuming AmigaOne models aren´t also software compatible. One of claimed features of AmigaOS4 is compatibility with AmigaOS applications. There is transparent emulation of 68k CPU (JIT or interpretive for less compatible software), 68k applications can use PowerPC components (libraries etc.) and PowerPC applications can use 68k components (eg. 68k paint program PPaint can use PowerPC datatypes to load and save pictures). There is also support for some hardware features of classic Amiga computers - since 4.0 Final it is possible to promote planar screen modes (eg. HAM/HAM8) etc.. Some OS parts are still 68k (Arexx).Pavlor (talk) 05:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion you are confused with the software compatibility. AmigaOne can not run AmigaOS 1, 2 or 3 so it is not software compatible with Commodore Amiga. AmigaOS 4 can run some older AmigaOS software but it is different matter. The software compatibility is built into operating system. Xorxos (talk) 19:19, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well my A1200 crashes when I try to run OS1.0, that doesn´t mean it is not software compatible with original Amiga (some 1.x era applications do work OK).Pavlor (talk) 11:07, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: And what happens when you run OS1 on Amigaone? Is it crashing there? Xorxos (talk) 20:36, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Crashing means doesn´t boot at all. I don´t have AmigaOne, but assuming these computers have no FDD (by default), double click on ADF file in Workbench is only way to run OS1.x there. My point is: software compatibility is ability to run software for older OS versions - AmigaOS4, MorphOS and AROS68k are software compatible with classic AmigaOS, so computers with these OSs are software compatible with Amiga.Pavlor (talk) 16:18, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. Should we add other AmigaOS compatible models? Minimig, SAM440, SAM460, Pegasos II and Amithlon? Xorxos (talk) 12:35, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Minimig, SAM440 and Pegasos II are mentioned in "Other AmigaOS compatible computers" section, Amithlon is not distinct model - rather emulation enviroment. I think it is better to separate models with "Amiga" in name from other computers. However, I still don´t know where is place for "Commodore Amiga Mini" from Commodore USA - not PowerPC-based AmigaOS model, not Other AmigaOS compatible computer and certainly not original Amiga from Commodore. There is much room for improvement (eg. "Video chipsets" section in page about Amiga models? Weird), any ideas are welcomed.Pavlor (talk) 16:50, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Compatibility of AmigaOne models

message: I see EVIL-MCDUCK changed titles of two sections ("Commodore Amiga models" and "PowerPC-based AmigaOS models (post Commodore)"). I reverted them back to prior state. However, I agree there is much to improve, but titles choosen by EVIL-MCDUCK aren´t suitable, I think. Original Amiga computers were all introduced by parent companies (Commodore-Amiga.Inc, Amiga Technologies), AmigaOne was always name for 3rd party hardware. Both are distinct platforms. I´m open to better rewording than current state, but I oppose sole word "Amiga" in title of AmigaOne section. What about simple "AmigaOne models"?Pavlor (talk) 18:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion (everyone have one) "Commodore Amiga models" and "PowerPC-based AmigaOS models" are very good. Perhaps change a description for latter models to "These models are designed to run AmigaOS but are not hardware compatible with Commodore Amiga. They can run AmigaOS 4 or newer and blah blah blah (insert better explanation how they are different to Commodore Amiga models)". Chapter 4, "Video chipsets", should be moved as subsection to Commodore Amiga models. Chapters 5, 6 and 7 should split and go under "Commodore Amiga models" and "PowerPC etc" chapters.  Or? 84.251.188.244 (talk) 20:52, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I would remove entire Video chipsets section... I wouldn´t rather mix Amiga or AmigaOne models with clones (etc.). It seems it will stay as it is now.Pavlor (talk) 16:15, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Titles of sections

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Amiga models and variants. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071023183831/http://www.amigau.com/aig/boxphase.html to http://www.amigau.com/aig/boxphase.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:17, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't understand the colours in the timeline. Are they supposed to represent something or are they just there to tell the different models apart? What I find especially weird is that "AGA" is displayed in a red bar, but the models that actually used AGA are displayed in orange bars (A4000 and A1200) and in a blue bar (CD32). JIP | Talk 23:41, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colours in timeline 

message: how is it possible if kickstarter for 2.0x and 3.x require 512KB of memory but the amiga 1000 had only 256kb of wcs memory Muonium777 (talk) 11:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a question for this talkpage (WP:NOTAFORUM), but there were third party expansions to use hardware ROM on an A1000. One can of course "softkick" ROM file into RAM (not wcs memory) and boot into it, but most A1000 configurations don't have enough RAM for this. Pavlor (talk) 05:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  AmigaOS 2.0x and 3.x on Amiga 1000