Quote:

That is one point of view, I don't put all my expectations for a bright future on MOS 2.0. What would make it bright for me would be lots of developers, constantly producing new software and a vibrant scene.

Although we (users) can't do anything about the hardware part, or the MOS part; I would like to see more screenshots, more howtos and more interaction. That's something we can do.

I have projects in development but I must admit that I start to get feelings like "what's the point if MOS 2 is never released ?" Another point is, will MOS 2 have a feature that will make it easier for my software/make my software redundant ? The feature lists already posted do not have enough detail to decide. How about officially announcing some of these known features in more detail ?

Quote:

Yes, when Thendic France went bankrupt.

Quote:

Well, if you miss a train, there is always an opportunity to "catch" the next one, right?

Quote:

Yeah man - that's the attitude.
And even if there is no other train going to the original destination,
there might be a train to other fine
destinations.

Quote:
Why? I might want to play VGP2 HD (the new circuits/textures JaguarGod
is releasing) at a decent framerate. I can with a G4 @ 1GHz and a
Radeon 8500, not so sure about a 400MHz machine. The PPC Mac version
of VGP3 (in development) requires a 1+GHz G4 or G5, and I'd like to
see it on MOS one day, as well. And there are other games as well,
that we already have or that we might get one day. On a more serious
note, I do batch conversions of 100s of 5MegaPixel photos with
ShowGirls. The faster the CPU, the lesser time it takes. The lesser
the time, the happier the guruman...
And I might want to use good ol' Cinema4D, or good new Blender to
render an anim, one day. Or one might want to convert a DVD to an AVI
with MEncoder... and the examples can continue. We don't have much
modern software, but why do we have to castrate a system? If the best
machine is a 10MHz one, you'll never get more modern software.

That's not to complain or to pretend I absolutely need a faster
machine: that's just to try to explain why faster hardware is ALWAYS
better for desktop use. You are right in saying that MOS is good in
using very little resources, and thus leaving most resources to the
programs. This doesn't contraddict with the fact that the most
resources that are actually left in absolute terms, the better for the
user experience.

Kind regards,
Andrea

Quote:
Do we need to know? I think that only commercial "players"/developers
should need such an info. And I guess that if there still is any, it
might get this info asking the team, as well as getting not only a
feature list of MOS 2.0, but MOS 2.0 itself, as confirmed by
jacaDcaps. I agree that anyone investing money for work should know if
it makes any sense.
But for normal users or spare time developers of free software? My
opinion is that choice should be made in the basis of the fun factor.
Do you still have fun using MOS or developing for it more than other
operating systems? Then go on. One day we'll get an evolution of the
OS. I find the OS nice as it is now. I don't think the next version
will change everything and will be a revolution, but I think it'll get
nicer. And I'll simply enjoy it, until the following version or until
I don't have fun anymore. Or my HW breaks and there is no alternative
to pick/buy (let's hope it won't happen, though! )

Kind regards,
Andrea

Quote:

Well, you misunderstanded me. I always mean the original destination, the Amiga/MorphOS destination and only this.