Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Old Motorola 68000 Systems Can Finally Move Away From Linux's Deprecated IDE Code

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Old Motorola 68000 Systems Can Finally Move Away From Linux's Deprecated IDE Code
    Excuse me what do you mean Old Motorola 68000 Systems. This kind of maps the support the wrong way.

    https://github.com/douggilliland/Ret...68000/TG68_AMR The reality is we have new 68000 systems being made based on FPGA. The good part is this fpga implementations are in fact instruction to clock identical to a genuine Motorola 68000 system. 68000 due to the high quality FGPA implementation is something you can basically still new hardware to test the functionality of the code base on.

    This is a fix up for Retro 68000 systems. Yes Retro include new systems like this FPGA and old true systems with Motorola 68000 chips. Anyone who wants a 68000 system theses days can have one made out of new hardware there are multi-able FPGA options out there.

    There has really been a lot of resurgence in retro hardware support in the recent years making system to allow people to run retro software with new hardware mostly all FPGA based hardware but not only this. Yes the FPGA support does mean it possible for a developer wanting to support this hardware to have new hardware to abuse the hell out of in a testing setup, Its a lot simpler to get new hardware to test out Motorola 68000 fixes than support a year 2000 PC GPU.

    https://www.militaryaerospace.com/co...-vme-computers
    Yes its a surprise to most people to find out that in 1999 when the asic 68000 were still being made that the plan was at that time to move to a FPGA implementation for the parties that still required it. Yes that plan has complete and its why we have basically 100 percent perfect Motorola 68000 FPGA implmentations some of those implementations were in fact done by Motorola. The reality is a Motorola 68000 system maybe less than a 1 week old of course this would be a Motorola FPGA implementation in a FPGA chip because ASIC 68000 are not made any more.

    This is one of the rare ones where the vendor supported the CPU design to migrate over to a FPGA implementations as they ceased ASIC production. Yes FPGA being made socket compatible to existing 68000 chips do exist as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • cb88
    replied
    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I see your point, and if someone has enough of an ego to think they're the next Nobel Prize winner, then they deserve to be deflated. As the saying goes, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". So, if someone really thinks they have a perpetual motion machine, you can always tell them "show the math and explain how to replicate the experiment".

    The Youtube channel Veritasium covers a lot of subjects of seemingly impossible things. The most recent was about a wind-powered vehicle that could move faster than the wind. It's not breaking the laws of physics and it's not doing anything especially complicated either. Mathematically, it's very simple (Steve Mould does a good job explaining the math in a simple way). But, that's a very easy thing to dismiss, because if you don't think outside the box, you're just going to say "that isn't possible" and move on, which the creators of this project faced multiple times. Granted, I don't like their ego, but, it's easy to have one when you have a working proof-of-concept that nobody believed could work.
    Yeah... moving faster than the wind a tiny bit counter intuitive but not terribly so. Unfortunately many people these days are overspecialized and don't know basic things like this.

    Leave a comment:


  • schmidtbag
    replied
    Originally posted by bavay View Post
    Not to defend them, there are many known examples of academia outright rejecting perfectly right and disruptive ideas. Moreover, there is no need to be disrespectful. But as part of academia (I do snow cover modeling in a research institute and I develop everything open source), trust me that we definitely receive enough totally bogus ideas (perpetual motion and more) from people who are convinced the Nobel prize is waiting for them. When you are jumping between projects, papers, proposals and you get one more of these emails, you might be tempted to just send it to the trash. It's really a (moral) fight to take the time to read the email and reply with a polite negative response. In my case, you can also add to the mix all the questions about things that are documented with our model (in a "Getting started" page) or general computer questions like "how do I open a terminal" (although by now this is also in our documentation), but this is the daily business of open source developers...

    Mathias
    PS: and I forgot questions like "my teacher asked me to use your model, could you give me a list of things it has been used for" (hint: use a search engine to find all the relevant papers!)
    I see your point, and if someone has enough of an ego to think they're the next Nobel Prize winner, then they deserve to be deflated. As the saying goes, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". So, if someone really thinks they have a perpetual motion machine, you can always tell them "show the math and explain how to replicate the experiment".

    The Youtube channel Veritasium covers a lot of subjects of seemingly impossible things. The most recent was about a wind-powered vehicle that could move faster than the wind. It's not breaking the laws of physics and it's not doing anything especially complicated either. Mathematically, it's very simple (Steve Mould does a good job explaining the math in a simple way). But, that's a very easy thing to dismiss, because if you don't think outside the box, you're just going to say "that isn't possible" and move on, which the creators of this project faced multiple times. Granted, I don't like their ego, but, it's easy to have one when you have a working proof-of-concept that nobody believed could work.

    Leave a comment:


  • bavay
    replied
    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    muncrief
    Often when academics, researchers, and scientists make fun of an idea, it either shows a lack of understanding or it shows they don't want to be proven wrong.
    Not to defend them, there are many known examples of academia outright rejecting perfectly right and disruptive ideas. Moreover, there is no need to be disrespectful. But as part of academia (I do snow cover modeling in a research institute and I develop everything open source), trust me that we definitely receive enough totally bogus ideas (perpetual motion and more) from people who are convinced the Nobel prize is waiting for them. When you are jumping between projects, papers, proposals and you get one more of these emails, you might be tempted to just send it to the trash. It's really a (moral) fight to take the time to read the email and reply with a polite negative response. In my case, you can also add to the mix all the questions about things that are documented with our model (in a "Getting started" page) or general computer questions like "how do I open a terminal" (although by now this is also in our documentation), but this is the daily business of open source developers...

    Mathias
    PS: and I forgot questions like "my teacher asked me to use your model, could you give me a list of things it has been used for" (hint: use a search engine to find all the relevant papers!)

    Leave a comment:


  • edwaleni
    replied
    Wow, Maybe I can run this on my 1990 CBUS era Cisco MGS and AGS+ with the Flash option. Wahoo.

    Leave a comment:


  • thunderbird32
    replied
    Based on the driver name, I assume this is based off an IDE driver written for the Atari Falcon? Humorous that a system as rare as the Falcon should be the basis for supporting machines as common (comparatively) as the Macintosh.

    Leave a comment:


  • schmidtbag
    replied
    Originally posted by grigi View Post
    This is the reason I never went into academia. It's run by ego-driven kleptomaniacs whom lord all over the people doing actual work. Often for effective negative payment.
    There are so many good people in academia, but if the leadership is rotten, they rot people reporting to them. And so the bad attitudes spread.

    Sorry for my reaction but that part of your message triggered some really bad memories.
    muncrief
    Often when academics, researchers, and scientists make fun of an idea, it either shows a lack of understanding or it shows they don't want to be proven wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • paulr
    replied
    Originally posted by muncrief View Post
    And when they found out I'd barely graduated high school, and had no formal training at all, they outright made fun of me.
    That cuts and speaks terribly about them. I would have expected a friendly chat and discussion of why, at the time, the current research was not heading in that direction, at least based on the personalities of the physics people I know.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chewi
    replied
    I will almost certainly use this driver at some point so thank you, Finn Thain!

    Leave a comment:


  • grigi
    replied
    Originally posted by muncrief View Post
    where I was roundly chastised for such a foolish pursuit, and scolded for wasting their time. And when they found out I'd barely graduated high school, and had no formal training at all, they outright made fun of me.
    This is the reason I never went into academia. It's run by ego-driven kleptomaniacs whom lord all over the people doing actual work. Often for effective negative payment.
    There are so many good people in academia, but if the leadership is rotten, they rot people reporting to them. And so the bad attitudes spread.

    Sorry for my reaction but that part of your message triggered some really bad memories.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X