You can attach it to the CSPPC when you want to use it. When you dont want to attach it there you cant use it. Quote:
Is the mk68 scsi.device supported/emulated under OS4?
The A1200/A4000/A4000T IDE versions of scsi.device, yes. The A3000/A4000T SCSI versions of scsi.device dont work. If the A600 IDE version works cant be tested so it wont be included
How many millions was it spend for developping an OS to about 1000 persons?
You know in advance how much copies will be sold? Interesting. Then we can close this thread which was thought to tell interested people which features/drivers are present which could eventually change the number of copies.
To answer your question, I dont know how many millions the other developers will earn, I only know my own contract. AFAIK it was made public in the AI vs Hyperion court documents, maybe somebody can post the URL so you can verify if I'll be rich next month or not.
Quote:
I understand you probably have to create a driver de novo for the BPPC SCSI but for the 3000T/A4000T, it was included with OS3.1, so you have its source I presume?
The A3k/A4kT SCSI driver sources exist, yes, unfortunately the binaries dont work, the reason is unknown (IIRC we excluded known possible reasons and created a non-DMA driver but this didnt work). And until today I assumed nobody would really need an A3k/A4kT SCSI driver for OS4 just because the only possibility to run OS4 on A3k/A4kT is to install a CSPPC which has a supported UWSCSI port which is faster anyway.
Have been sold. These numbers are public.
Thanks for the infos about the driver pb. You assumed wrongly. I want a driver for internal SCSI because I see no point slowing down the UWSCSI HDDs chain to the speed of a Fast SCSI2 DVD/HD drive. Will the mk68 scsci.device run (emulated) on OS4?
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
You can attach it to the CSPPC when you want to use it. When you dont want to attach it there you cant use it. Quote:
Is the mk68 scsi.device supported/emulated under OS4?
The A1200/A4000/A4000T IDE versions of scsi.device, yes. The A3000/A4000T SCSI versions of scsi.device dont work. If the A600 IDE version works cant be tested so it wont be included
Really, you see me open the case to connect/disconnect the scanner and the DVD drive each time I need/do not need them? Ah, so the scsi device does not work. No luck. Option B then.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
Really, you see me open the case to connect/disconnect the scanner and the DVD drive each time I need/do not need them?
The CSPPC manual recommends to attach non-ultrawide SCSI devices to the motherboard SCSI port to avoid slowing down the CSPPC UWSCSI to Fast-SCSI2 speed. I'm not an expert in UWSCSI so I googled a bit but could not find an explanation for this described behaviour. Its IMHO logical that the SCSI bus frequency has to be reduced when talking to a slow SCSI device, but why has that to happen permanently and not only when needed?
Or in other words an external switched off(!) scanner should IMHO not affect the speed on the UW part of the SCSI bus, and eventually a switched on DVD-RAM does only affect the bus speed when its used (which may happen every few seconds when the filesystem checks for a disk change). Please correct me when I'm wrong.
You could also boot an OS3 installation to use the scanner on the motherboard SCSI port when you dont need the scanner very often.
BTW, even when the CSPPC has a theoretical maximum speed of 40 MB/sec and you would really reduce that by attaching all your SCSI equipment, its IMHO possible that OS4 will be faster than OS3. Raw bus transfer speed is not everything, CPU and OS speed are important too.
I am ready to pay for an usbscanner.device or a scsi.kmod if that will exist in the future.
Set up a bounty for BPPC/A4000T/A3000 scsi drivers, maybe there are external developers who will implement it. Maybe there is even someone who will implement SCSI drivers for free once the classic Amiga version of OS4 is released. But there is nobody in the OS4 team who will do it (not interested in SCSI at all, not having the required hardware, no knowledge about SCSI, no knowledge about scripts based SCSI chips (BPPC and A4000T), etc., for most it's all of that together), AFAIK we don't even have anyone who would or could do it if payed full time for it, which might require more money than the complete profit of Hyperion for the classic Amiga version of OS4, and definitely much more than for the few additional sales to users who wont buy OS4 as long as there is no BPPC, A4000T or A3000 SCSI driver.
I was refering to all the IRQ conflicts etc, how PCI cards conflict with each other.
I thought you would, however, you should be aware that they are always present on Zorro since there is only one interrupt on the Zorro bus as opposed to four on PCI.
There actually are no IRQ conflicts on PCI (and zorro) because it is a purely software issue to check. An interrupt on a PCI card should check whether there actually was an interrupt from your card, and if it wasn't, you should not handle it. The fact that some drivers didn't do it is a problem of the drivers, not of the bus or the autoconfig.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
The whole "SCSI vs. IDE" debate reminds me about "Beta vs. VHS" or "KDE vs. GNOME" or "Windows vs. OS/2". Especially since it is about as fruitless.
Let's face it. SCSI hardware is a hell of a lot more expensive than IDE. You pay about ? 1.50 per gigabyte on SCSI and about ? 0,3 on SATA. The speed difference is neglectable, you won't notice it unless you run a "make-me-happy" type benchmark program.
Error tolerance is not better on any of those.
So it all boils down to price, and sorry to say so but SCSI is overpriced, a lot more complicated to set up (termination, SCSI ID, cabling) and plainly nobody but workstations ever uses it anyway.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
But I disgress. I expect to buy a product with the drivers I need to install/use it, that's all. Difficult to understand?
There is a limited amount of hardware that can be supported. We do not even try to support all the clockport/Zorro/made-up zorro/solder-to-mainboard type of hardware that is around.
Since you need a CyberStormPPC, SCSI equipment can be used on the 3000/4000/4000T via the CyberStorm's SCSI port, I can't see the reasoning why the onboard SCSI needs to be supported.
Quote:
For the moment I can use my scanner on the PC with USB (impossible with A1/OS4, no USB driver)
Why not buy one of the supposedly cheap SCSI cards? Actually, there is support for one in AmigaOS 4 on the AmigaOne.
Quote:
and on the A4000T with SCSI (impossible with A4000T/OS4 no USB/SCSI driver). I see no reason to change to a product that do not met my requirement(s) be it called AmigaOS4 or whatever.
Wrong. You can connect it to the CyberstormPPC. That controller is supported.
In the end, it's up to you. If you think that this is asking too much, fine, so be it.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
I understand you probably have to create a driver de novo for the BPPC SCSI but for the 3000T/A4000T, it was included with OS3.1, so you have its source I presume?
68k Assembler sources that no one would touch with a ten foot pole unless there is a good reason for it. I don't really think there is.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
I musst agree with the OS4 Devs in a couple of points and so DisAgree ...
I can logical follow the sense that the BPPC-SCSI driver is not in the first Relase [to bring the OS4 quicker to the user] and that it is not a Real sense to support the A3kT/A4kT SCSI controler [with a clarification later].
BUT i cant follow the way that Devs say "forgot the expansive SCSI stuff and buy cheap IDE drives..." !
By the point from the BPPC-SCSI i see [already said] the Delay for the driver ..the resources are limmited.
But to say the IDE device is a nearly Full replacement for the SCSI on BPPC is a nonsens. The IDE driver eat more CPU cycles and is signifikant slower,this on a low CPU power system make the wohle system not faster .. And i would say all user that use a BPPC have a good and running SCSI system already, so switch to IDE generate only extra costs. I dont think a BPPC user will buy nowdays a new 160GB U320-SCA HD for 400EUR for his old Fast-SCSI system ... [I have on my CS-MK-III UWSCSI only U160SCA drives .. more make no sense] And SCSI drives have a realy LONG life ... [compared to IDE drives] So ... for BPPC-SCSI user the "cheap IDE" point is nonsens...
The Tower modells SCSI controler is only a good point for scanners [SCSI1], i have self an SCSI2-DVD-ROM [Pionear-Slot-In] and an SCSI2-CDRW [Plextor] in my UWSCSI system and my Big SCA HD get ~38MB/sec with AmigaMARK. IF a usb-scanner solution come in the near Future, the usage of this hard to support device is pointless.
Now we come to my point that hurt me... No SCSI support [i mean usable SCSI support- not a limmited support with an 8bit SCSI1 driver for usage of the {above as ancient marked..} SCSI scanner and data transfer from old SCSI1/2 HD?s to the IDE drive] in OS4 in the next Future ....
To say SCSI is nowdays expansive is right ... But this to say to a usergroup that love his exclusive OS [dont Mainstream!] on very expansive [much more if it in relation to the Power he offers to actual other systems] HardWare with the Touch of individualism .. is maybe a little bit wrong ...[from my sense] If the users need "Cheap" .. i dont think Amiga is his option. And SCSI have a big history on Amiga systems ...
We have drivers for Audio cards [not all and not the proffesional High-End but a good Mixture of cheap,good and semi-pro cards] and GFX cards [not the actual High-End but very nice in the ATM right level] and IDE cards [a good mixture from various cards] ..but no SCSI card.. I dont say support actual SCSI [SAS] or exotic Pro-SCSI cards.. I dont pray for the older U320SCSI cards or the old U160SCSI Cards .. I pray for ancient UW2SCSI cards [the chipset that is already in the limmited 8bit SCSI1 mode supportet .. dont remember the name] to use very good HD?s with a much more power than a IDE/SATA drive [not only the TransferRate/Seek-Time, tagged-queuing btw is only anounced for SATA2 ...... on SCSI it is already!] and much more quality and duarability ...
I see the point that not much user would use on new systems SCSI ... But for me with my equipment it is a MUST HAVE [specialy for the Backup on DLT Streamer]. To Clarify- this is going only for my Main System .. on my second or third Amigas i use always IDE .. I have no problem to pay [even 200EUR] for an GOOD SCSI driver ... But OS4 without SCSI for me is not a good Option.
That one's easy. The porn industry adapted VHS... Good bye beta.
Its not true! Betamax died due to lenght issues.
You could from the beginning not record more than 1h movies with betamax, later on 2h movies (with reduced tapespeed), but the quality with 2h betamax movies was lower than VHS. And VHS allready had 4h tapes.
1h format with betamax = good quality (better than vhs) 2h or more with betamax = bad quality (or equal to vhs 4h movies)
This is one of the largest media myth ever, that the pornindustry would have decided which format should be standard..
I pray for ancient UW2SCSI cards [the chipset that is already in the limmited 8bit SCSI1 mode supportet .. dont remember the name]
The AOne lsi53c8xx.device SCSI driver supports LSI/NCR/SYM53Cxxx SCSI boards. It requires fully working PCI DMA. There exists no PCI board for classic Amigas with fully working DMA. Ask the manufacturer of your PCI daughterboard for working DMA, eventually for support for 3.3V-only PCI boards (which would allow using a PCI IDE/SATA/PATA board too which would give you access to cheap *and* fast drives working with DMA), and eventually for an OS4 driver for PCI SCSI boards which supports faster transfer modes, while you are at it.
IMHO you wont find a developer which writes you a driver for non-existing hardware, and there doesnt exist a PCI daughterboard for a classic Amiga which supports DMA. Sorry. You need an AOne or a CSPPC when you want to use SCSI with OS4.
But to say the IDE device is a nearly Full replacement for the SCSI on BPPC is a nonsens. The IDE driver eat more CPU cycles and is signifikant slower,this on a low CPU power system make the wohle system not faster ..
The point is that this is not an IDE issue, but rather an issue of the (rather botched) Amiga 1200 machine, which, let's face it, was never ever intended to be extended as it now.
Quote:
And i would say all user that use a BPPC have a good and running SCSI system already, so switch to IDE generate only extra costs.
You are wrong, I know a good number of BPPC users that don't use SCSI.
Quote:
And SCSI drives have a realy LONG life ... [compared to IDE drives]
Also wrong. The drives and technology is the same, only the electronic on it is different. I have IDE drives running here that are about 8 years old already and in daily use.
Quote:
So ... for BPPC-SCSI user the "cheap IDE" point is nonsens...
Just repeating this over and over will not make it any more true.
Quote:
To say SCSI is nowdays expansive is right ... But this to say to a usergroup that love his exclusive OS [dont Mainstream!] on very expansive [much more if it in relation to the Power he offers to actual other systems] HardWare with the Touch of individualism .. is maybe a little bit wrong ...[from my sense] If the users need "Cheap" .. i dont think Amiga is his option. And SCSI have a big history on Amiga systems ...
Yeah, SCSI has a long history on the Amiga... as do PS/2 memory modules. And I find it hilarious that users complain about prices (of AmigaOS 4.0, of the hardware etc) but then claim that over-expensive server harddrive are "individualism".
Quote:
.but no SCSI card.. I dont say support actual SCSI [SAS] or exotic Pro-SCSI cards.. I dont pray for the older U320SCSI cards or the old U160SCSI Cards .. I pray for ancient UW2SCSI cards [the chipset that is already in the limmited 8bit SCSI1 mode supportet .. dont remember the name] to use very good HD?s with a much more power than a IDE/SATA drive [not only the TransferRate/Seek-Time, tagged-queuing btw is only anounced for SATA2 ...... on SCSI it is already!] and much more quality and duarability ...
For one thing, read Tetisoft's comment on PCI on the classic, then you know why you cannot get a SCSI card into your A1200 (or one of the excellend Silicon Images IDE controllers).
Secondly, what do you actually noticed about the supposed speed of SCSI on the A1200? Any IDE setup on the AmigaOne is faster than that, and even PIO mode on the AmigaOne is about as fast as that. Boasting with the features of SCSI that you don't even notice doesn't make sense.
Quote:
I see the point that not much user would use on new systems SCSI ... But for me with my equipment it is a MUST HAVE [specialy for the Backup on DLT Streamer]. To Clarify- this is going only for my Main System .. on my second or third Amigas i use always IDE .. I have no problem to pay [even 200EUR] for an GOOD SCSI driver ... But OS4 without SCSI for me is not a good Option.
So be it then. Matter of fact is that so far no one was willing to work on a Blizzard SCSI driver, simply because no one saw the need for it. It is a simple matter of fact that the demand for SCSI on the A1200 is limited, and only a few people actually complained about it.
That concludes the matter for me.
Seriously, if you do want to contact me write me a mail. You're more likely to get a reply then.
The AOne lsi53c8xx.device SCSI driver supports LSI/NCR/SYM53Cxxx SCSI boards. It requires fully working PCI DMA. There exists no PCI board for classic Amigas with fully working DMA. Ask the manufacturer of your PCI daughterboard for working DMA, eventually for support for 3.3V-only PCI boards (which would allow using a PCI IDE/SATA/PATA board too which would give you access to cheap *and* fast drives working with DMA), and eventually for an OS4 driver for PCI SCSI boards which supports faster transfer modes, while you are at it.
IMHO you wont find a developer which writes you a driver for non-existing hardware, and there doesnt exist a PCI daughterboard for a classic Amiga which supports DMA. Sorry. You need an AOne or a CSPPC when you want to use SCSI with OS4.
SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC-
My understanding is that the only way to use a scanner on OS4 is via scsi, because of the lack of (as of yet) a USBscanner.device. I have an expensive (at the time I bought it) Epson GT-9500 scanner which has both parallel and scsi connectors. At the moment I use this on my A1200 using the parallel port, and a special cable. Can I actually use this on my A1, via either the parallel, or the scsi connector? I know somebody has managed to scan on an all-in-one printer to the card, but I have problems with mine not doing it correctly, I assume a dodgy card port. Therfore I am left with my existing hardware, which I would like to use.
I think that when os4 will be out in the next 6 months we will see drivers made by differents people as it happened for the classic hw where on aminet you could find different drivers for different hw..
My understanding is that the only way to use a scanner on OS4 is via scsi, because of the lack of (as of yet) a USBscanner.device. I have an expensive (at the time I bought it) Epson GT-9500 scanner which has both parallel and scsi connectors. At the moment I use this on my A1200 using the parallel port, and a special cable. Can I actually use this on my A1, via either the parallel, or the scsi connector?
The documentation for the AOne SCSI driver (lsi53c8xx.device) which can be found on os4depot.net as part of an (old) ide_driverpack.zip archive and on the OS4Final CD for A1 says that the driver was tested with an Epson GT7000 scanner.
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
