Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!

Sections

Who's Online
199 user(s) are online (142 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 0
Guests: 199

more...

Headlines

Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (Rogue)




Re: Timberwolf!!!!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


About the speed: Yes, it's slow on the lower end systems. It's quite fine on the X-1000, though. As has been said elsewhere, the current focus is on feature completeness and stability. There is no optimization whatsoever.

For example, page refreshes are merged into a single refresh no matter what. That means if there is a small animation running at to opposite sides of the window, the whole window will be refreshed. Once we get into optimizing, we'll work out a metric for merging page refreshes based on the additional pixels they introduce, this alone should already speed things up.

The rendering itself is done in software, nothing is hardware accelerated, not even text output or picture composition. When you scroll, it repaints the whole window. The layer manager uses the generic software only layer manager.

Obviously, there is ample room for optimizations :)

BTW, anyone found the easter egg yet?

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Timberwolf!!!!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Quote:

ssolie wrote:
That bug is fixed in 4.1 Update 4 for all platforms so there shouldn't be any problems there.


Thanks, Steven. I somewhat lost track of what went where to be honest :)

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Text rendering speed (Qt vs. native)
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Check your PM :)

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Timberwolf!!!!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


I corrected the web page in the meantime. Update 4 should be sufficient to run Timberwolf. The only thing that might happen (not sure about that) is that it crashes on exit. This was due to a bug in elf.library, and I am uncertain whether the fix for that was in Update 4 or Update 5.

In any case, you should be able to run it with the above strings attached on older versions.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Timberwolf!!!!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Absolutely (posted with Timberwolf 4.0.1 :) )

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: OS4 netbook!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Quote:

djrikki wrote:
*Everyone replies in Unison*


"Two more weeks...!"


You know, we never actually used that sentence, that was the others.

We say "When it's done"

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: OS4 netbook!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@billt

It has a two-button mouse pad.

@chris

I don't know how much freedom we have with the keyboard, but we'll certainly check the possibilities.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: OS4 netbook!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Thus is all subject to change, so don't complain to me when any or all of the items below do not make it onto the final device:

- It's a netbook. That means it isn't intended to compete with a desktop system. It is using an integrated graphics chip. No RadeonHD. No PA Semi.

- Price point will be the complete system, including AmigaOS 4. Hopefully, it will be around $300, but we cannot say this for sure yet so calculate a price of $300 to $500.

- The prototypes we have (plural, yes) all have 2 USB ports, internal audio with external jack plugs for headsets/microphone, Keyboard and touch-pad mouse.

- The prototypes have built-in Wireless and wired ethernet. Whether both or just one of them will be on the final device I do not know yet.

- Internal mass storage. Don't ask me about the capacity, few gigs AFAIR.

- The prototypes have 512 MB memory -I think-. No idea about the size of the final product.

- AmigaOS *is* running on the device, although in a very early state. There are questions to be answered still, so the tentative release date is somewhere near the middle of 2012.

That's all I can say right now without getting punishment from the Hyperion management :)

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: OS4 netbook?
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@kas1e

No, this is a specific product for AmigaOS, not just any netbook. It's a PowerPC-based system.

@Skov
$300 - $500. Hopefully closer to the first number than to the second.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: OS4 netbook?
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Just for clarification, this will come with AmigaOS 4.x installed. You don't buy an extra license for it, and AFAIR, the cost of AmigaOS was included in the price quoted by Steven.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: OS4 netbook?
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


I can confirm it too. There will be an AmigaOS 4 netbook.

EDIT: Yes it has an external VGA connector, at least my prototype has. It can also operate on external USB keyboard and mouse

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: New update
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Quote:
i take it there may be a version running at amiwest this weekend?


A definite "Maybe".

Sorry for the edit of your post, I didn't even know I could moderate here so I pressed the first button.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: New update
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@kas1e
Quote:
Btw, just for learning purposes: those bugs was because of cairo, or just because of code-porting of firefox ?


The Firefox code assumed hierarchical windows like in X or Win32. We had to emulate that, and the black boxes where essentially caused by a bug in the way that we handled this. It's neither Firefox's code nor cairo that is to blame for that.

Quote:
Btw, current public version use HW-accelerated cairo and compositing or not ? I mean did i understand right, that current public beta are use HW-accelerated cairo, but the new one, will not use it , and because of it will be a bit slower in rendering ?


No, the current public version never used hardware acceleration for Cairo. They only rendered into main memory and blit to screen. The only hardware acceleration in it was scrolling.

@samo79
Quote:

Do you think it could be possible to implement a bit more native GUI already in this first Alpha version ? (expecially menus)


It's difficult to say. See, as they are currently, Amiga menus are somewhat limited. There is a limit to the number of levels of submenus that a menu can have, which other systems do not have. Firefox supports native menus, but they have certain constraints. We'll try to get this working, but there is no way of telling right now.

What we will definitely try to do is getting the same basic layout as the Windows version, i.e. there are no menus at all and most of the functionality is in the orange button on top.

We'll also try to get a more Amiga look and feel. Currently this employs the default Firefox 4.0.1 style.

Quote:
Also how about the real speed ?
Ok you say a bit slow, yep currently i think it's quite normal for that HTML5 videos but how about "normal" navigation ?


I've compared it to MUI-OWB and found them to be roughly the same speed. OWB is a bit faster in scrolling, but Timberwolf seems to be a bit faster in other graphical effects like blending (slideshows that blend one image into the other seem to be less jerky on Timberwolf)

Quote:
Once released can be already usable on a slow hardware (like Sam440 for example) ?


No idea. If OWB works, I'd venture to say Timberwolf will, too. It might be a memory hog, but so far, I haven't run into an out-of-memory situation, and I only have one gigabyte in my machine and pager disabled.

Personally, I was quite pleasantly surprised about the speed. After all, this doesn't even use hardware acceleration at all, and still I could be using it for my daily browsing needs. There are a few quirks (like some textboxes refusing to activate, missing refresh in some of the popup boxes), but basically these quirks are what keeps us from releasing a new public version now. Even stability is good. I had tested it a lot today and only got one or two crashes.

Edit: I have extensively tested this page http://www.armedzone.com/, and found that it was perfectly usable, even fluid. And that page has a lot of special effects.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: New update
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


There are some issues left that mostly affect popup windows. During the "normal" operation, there is no rendering errors. You can get the preferences window, there are no more black boxes in the window, and no flickering during scrolling.

All in all, I think people will find this to be a big improvement over the last version.

BTW, I post this from Timberwolf on the AmigaOne X1000 ;)

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: How to manually initialize a bitmap
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Quote:
It looks like w does nothing. No matter what value I put there nothing changes and the picture looks twisted when rotating it around x or y axis.


Here's the amended part of the Autodoc for CompositeTags:

Quote:
* VERTEX ARRAY MODE
*
* Instead of using a rectangle, the Composite call can also use
* triangles defined by an array of vertices. When in vertex array
* mode, the tag items COMPTAG_SrcX, COMPTAG_SrcY, COMPTAG_SrcWidth,
* COMPTAG_SrcHeight, COMPTAG_ScaleX, COMPTAG_ScaleY,
* COMPTAG_OffsetX and COMPTAG_OffsetY are ignored. Instead of
* rendering a single quad, the compositing engine will render a
* set of (disjoint) triangles using the composition source as
* a "texture".
*
* A vertex array is a set of points on the 2D plane. Each vertex
* consists of at least two floating point values defining the x
* and y coordinates of the vertex on the destination operator,
* relative to the top left corner of the bitmap (not the
* destination rectangle!). Furthermore, each vertex can have
* three or six more floating point value attributes, both of which
* are sets of texture coordinates.
*
* The first set of extra coordinates, if present, address the
* source operator bitmap itself. The second set, if present,
* are used to address the alpha mask. Each set consists of three
* floating point values. The first two values, named s and t
* respectively, define the X and Y coordinates on the source
* operator bitmap that this vertex maps to. The third, called w,
* is a homogenous space coordinate of the texture. Usually, this
* will be 1.0f, but it is possible to use different homogenous
* coordinates per vertex to achieve a perspective corrected 3D
* texture map
*
* The tag COMPTAG_VertexFormat is used to describe the format of
* each individual vertex. If ommited, the default value is for
* a vertex to only have x and y coordinates. Otherwise, the
* tag's value must be a compination of the two values
* COMPVF_STW0_Present and COMPVF_STW1_Present. These two values
* are bit masks and can be combined in any form. Each bit adds
* three floating point values to the vertex' required size. When
* both are specified, each vertex has a size of 8 floating point
* values.
*
* Vertex arrays must be specified compact, i.e. to get from one
* vertex in the array to the next, the compositing engine adds
* the size of the vertex, in bytes. Typically, your application
* would define a vertex "structure" like this:
*
* typedef struct {
* float x,y;
* float s,t,w;
* } myVertex_t;
*
* #define MYVERTEX_Format COMPVF_STW0_Present
*
* A vertex array could then be defined as
*
* myVertex_t vertices[20];
*
* The tag COMPTAG_VertexArray is used to enter triangle mode by
* providing a packed vertex array as described above. The
* size of the vertex array is undefined.
*
* A vertex array does not, however, define triangles. It only
* defines vertices. To start drawing triangles, these vertices
* must be grouped into triplets that define a triangle. There are
* two possible ways to do that, either implicitly, or explicitly.
*
* The normal mode of operation is to assume implicit grouping of
* vertices into triangles. Each three consequtive vertices,
* starting at vertex index zero, is assumed to be one triangle,
* i.e. the first triangle consists of indices 0, 1 and 2, the
* second one consists of indices 3, 4 and 5, and so on. The
* number of triangles to draw is specified via
* COMPTAG_NumTriangles, and the vertex array must have at least
* three times this number of vertices.
*
* The second mode of operation is explicit index mode. In index
* mode, the triangles are not defined by the order of vertices
* in the index array. Instead, the caller can pass an explicit
* array of indices for each triangle. As in the implicit mode,
* the tag COMPTAG_NumTriangles determines how many triangles are
* drawn, but the size of the vertex array is unaffected by this
* value, since each vertex may be used zero or more times through
* specifying its index. To pass in the indices of the desired
* triangles, the tag COMPTAG_IndexArray can be used. Indices are
* passed in as an array of 16 bit unsigned integers. If we denote
* the index array as I and the vertex array as V, then triangles
* are defined as
*
* V[I[0]], V[I[1]], V[I[2]]
* V[I[3]], V[I[4]], V[I[5]]
* and so on.
*
* The number of vertices in the array must be at least as many as
* the highest index used in the index array. No consistency check
* is done whatsoever for speed reasons, so an application has to
* take care the input to this function is valid. Failure to do so
* will have an undefined result, with "undefined" ranging from
* "nothing at all" to "total system lockup".
*
* IMPORTANT: As of AmigaOS 4.1 Update 3, triangle mode only works
* with hardware accelerated rendering. There is currently no
* software fallback.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Timberwolf wont start/run?
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Remember that the first startup of Timberwolf can take quite long due to the font caching in FontConfig. You should give it a few minutes. The next startup will be substantially faster.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Gallium (OpenGL) being ported to OS4 now!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@Mrodfr

Quote:
I want to know the origin because if all ports for AOS4 are new that mean some time to be made and if based on AROS, less time to be made, thats all...


I finally got what you mean. No, the ports will be new and not based on AROS code, and yeah, it will mean it will take a while, but as has been pointed out, the code base from AROS would not work anyway.


Quote:
As hans answered recently MESA and GALLIUM, for me the port for AOS4 is 99% based from the AROS port (of course IMHO)....


This doesn't have anything to do with IMHO. Your statement is, or rather is going to be, wrong.

Quote:
OpenGL (???): just mean unknown origin and one, two or tree ??? is allways the same question


As Hans said, OpenGL is an API specification, while Mesa is an implementation. OpenGL alone isn't the answer either, you have to have glue code as well. For X, this is glX, for Windows WGL; EGL and GLUT try to be mostly OS independent. AGL is used by Apple. They're all rather small API's and their only purpose is to create OpenGL contexts and associate them with something that can be displayed.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Gallium (OpenGL) being ported to OS4 now!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@ChrisH

Quote:
But maybe nice to speculate about what it will mean for OS4 in the future...


From what I gathered, Gallium3D covers the 3D part quite nicely; it has an abstract internal API and translates external API's into a collection of states and resources, which is why they call for example EGL a state tracker.

With that in mind, OpenGL is just one way to access gallium. The next logical step would be to remove the custom Compositing code and move the compositing to Gallium as well, i.e. have graphics.library be a state tracker/client for Gallium3D as a backend for compositing. In theory, this can continue for drawing operations as well.

It will also make the Cairo hardware backend as we have it now more or less redundant. While that is based on the CompositeTagList call in graphics, it could be moved to glitz, and we could eliminate further maintenance requirements.

Our ultimate goal is to replace the current graphics system entirely. As I pointed out on Amiwest, some of the mechanisms we are using are anachronistic.

Let me pick an example here - screenmode id's. While it was a good idea in the days of Amiga custom chips (being able to identify the output device along with very specific parameters of the display) this kind of idealization is no longer required, and might even be counter-productive. To illustrate that, picture a video playback at 30 FPS running on a 70 Hz display. Since the output device's frequency is not a multiple of the playback speed, tearing and/or flickering is mostly unavoidable. If you could configure the display to use 60 Hz, or 90 Hz, you could very well fit the frame flicks into the VBI, making for a much more stable display.

Obviously, on a TFT this issue isn't as obvious as on a CRT, but it's just one of the examples were a freely configurable display (from an application's point of view) makes more sense than a fixed set of resolution/color depth/frequency settings.

Another example is true multi-display support, with the usual stuff like extending a screen to two or more displays, dragging windows across, etc. While this could be retrofitted to the current system, it would be an ugly thing.

All these changes will take time though, and for the moment, we'll be concentrating on the issues at hand.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Gallium (OpenGL) being ported to OS4 now!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@kas1e

Quote:
And if aros code even can help (As Hans say), i think it will be pretty strange to not say about AROS at all, you don't think so ?


Gallium is a Linux driver project, so you could argue this is about Linux.

Mesa has been ported to Windows, so you could argue this is about Windows.

Gallium has been ported to AROS. So you could argue this is about AROS, as much as it is about Windows or Linux.

Yes, a look at the AROS code might be interesting, but the chance is that it isn't because the driver side of things is very different. Also, our memory architecture is quite different as far as I understand; that makes it next to impossible to use code from an AROS version. We're not going to port the AROS code. We're going for a clean-room port of the Linux code.

So, to reiterate, we are not going to port Gallium from AROS. We are not going to port Mesa from AROS. It would be completely pointless anyway, since Mesa is independent from the OS as far as possible, minus the glue required for context creation etc.

We are also not doing this because AROS did it. We're doing it because it makes sense. As I pointed out elsewhere, we're not developing based on envy or because of competition; we're developing based on what we think makes sense and what our users might need. As such, the decision to go for Gallium3D is not based on the fact that it was ported to AROS, as a matter of fact, the idea is quite old already, and we even had contact with the Gallium team a couple of years ago, but at that time the only supported platforms were software and the Intel I915 chips.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top


Re: Gallium (OpenGL) being ported to OS4 now!
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


@Mrodfr

Quote:


1- MESA and GALLIUM from AROS.
or
2- OPENGL (new port) and GALLIUM from AROS.


I still don't get it.

Mesa and Gallium3D aren't "from AROS". They're from the Linux world, and any port will naturally start from there.

Mesa and Gallium are quite connected, so naturally we will use Mesa as the OpenGL implementation.

Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
Go to top



TopTop
« 1 2 3 (4) 5 6 7 ... 27 »




Powered by XOOPS 2.0 © 2001-2023 The XOOPS Project