[HN Gopher] Serena: An experimental operating system for 32bit A...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Serena: An experimental operating system for 32bit Amiga computers
        
       Author : doener
       Score  : 137 points
       Date   : 2024-08-13 09:33 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | makach wrote:
       | A video or a screenshot would have been nice
        
         | Aldipower wrote:
         | YouTube has a lot of videos and screenshots.
        
           | shyrka wrote:
           | Any links? I can't seem to find it on YouTube
        
             | actionfromafar wrote:
             | I think it was a jab. Youtube indeed _has_ a lot of videos.
             | Maybe not of this OS, though.
             | 
             | Anyway here is a screenshot: http://www.amiga-
             | news.de/de/news/AN-2024-08-00046-DE.html
        
             | ape4 wrote:
             | I tried unsuccessfully too. It doesn't help that Serena
             | Williams is a famous tennis player and "amiga" is "friend"
             | (female) in Spanish.
        
       | sbarre wrote:
       | This is fascinating. I love the virtual processors dispatch queue
       | concept (new to me) and I think I found my lunch reading for
       | today.
       | 
       | I also immediately went to eBay to see how much old Amiga
       | computers cost, and....
       | 
       | Wow, they are pretty much not available? All I could find was
       | parts listings, and the odd "mainboard as-is" for like $1,000 or
       | more...
       | 
       | I had no idea Amiga computers from the 90s were so rare now.
        
         | _joel wrote:
         | That ship sailed quite some time ago, it seems. At least for
         | OG, unless you want to spend large amounts. I wish I'd kept my
         | 500+ now too.
        
           | icedchai wrote:
           | Tell me about it! I had both an A500 and A3000 in the 90's. I
           | sold both for a pittance...
        
             | InsideOutSanta wrote:
             | My mom gave my Amiga 500 away when I was on holidays.
        
               | sbarre wrote:
               | Oof.. I feel that pain, we had an Apple IIe that I taught
               | myself to program on in the 80s, it was basically the
               | genesis of my life and career, and oddly enough kind of a
               | family heirloom for me..
               | 
               | When I left for university in the early 90s, my dad
               | donated it to a local library without even asking me
               | first. To be fair I had never expressed my desired to
               | keep it, it was just in the basement in a box. So it
               | wasn't that big of a deal but I know he feels guilt for
               | that one to this day, once I explained how I felt.
        
               | morning-coffee wrote:
               | Ouch. I feel for you both. I count myself lucky... I
               | still have my IBM PC XT in the basement (runs and my son
               | plays Zork II on it) thanks to my Dad not only shelling
               | out for it in 1983 but hanging on to it over the years.
               | 
               | But I empathize for other reasons... my Mom gave away my
               | huge bag of Legos, including all the cool Space stuff,
               | that I wish I still had. ;)
        
             | sgt wrote:
             | I also have regrets. You know, one time I had a 1084S
             | Commodore monitor - pristine condition. One day it didn't
             | want to turn on, and after a few weeks I just threw it in
             | the trash. So ... incredibly stupid! People like me should
             | get the death penalty.
        
               | icedchai wrote:
               | I left my 1084S in my parents' basement, and they
               | eventually threw it out. It had a fiddly power button but
               | was working otherwise.
        
         | actionfromafar wrote:
         | They are more common in Europe, since they sold better there.
         | (Except the Amiga 1000.)
         | 
         | There are also _several_ reimplementations, either with FPGA or
         | "real" 680x0 CPUs.
         | 
         | This Serena operating system fascinates me in several ways. I
         | have said it before, but I think one _very_ cool thing about
         | the Amigas is how they are the missing link between  "too
         | simple" 8-bit and 16-bit DOS computers and our modern
         | computers.
         | 
         | They are advanced enough to run modern(-ish) software and
         | simple enough to be reimplemented faithfully several times over
         | by various projects.
        
           | galangalalgol wrote:
           | I have the a1000 I learned on as a kid. And the c64 from
           | before that, but I keep saying here that the 32bit
           | microcontrollers are fairly close approximations that use
           | less power and have more processing. You can't get bloat
           | though because they still have ram constraints tied to the
           | mmu that can only do page protection, just like the amiga...
           | Could even use the DACs to spit out s-video maybe?
        
           | icedchai wrote:
           | The Amiga was my first exposure to a computer with a "real"
           | OS: tasks/processes, memory management, IPC, shared
           | libraries, etc. I first learned C on an Amiga. It also taught
           | me to be careful: a bug in your program with no memory
           | protection would often mean a crash/reboot ("Guru Meditation"
           | error.)
        
             | blueflow wrote:
             | Where does that come from that a fraction of computing
             | history is dismissed as "not a real OS" ? Did "real" OS's
             | exist for the IBM PC?
        
               | icedchai wrote:
               | I put real in quotes. I probably should've said "OS of
               | sufficient level of complexity."
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | Or name the features directly: "my first OS with
               | multitasking and memory management"
        
               | icedchai wrote:
               | I did name the features directly.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | have you considered getting tested for autism?
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | Yes. Negative.
               | 
               | Being an expert in a field and thus being sensitive to
               | semantics and autism are orthogonal.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | some level of socialising often blunts the petulant need
               | for the security of exact nomenclature outside of a
               | technical publication, hence the question. it's
               | interesting that you did get tested though. it suggests
               | this isn't the first time.
        
               | hub_ wrote:
               | OS/2 comes to mind. Version 1.x was already much more
               | sophisticated than MS-DOS.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | And Xenix.
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | For you two: The IBM PC was the first PC and had a 8088
               | CPU. OS/2 and Xenix were for the 286 and up.
               | 
               | If you make virtual memory a necessary attribute to
               | qualify as OS, there were no OS for the original IBM PC
               | as the 8088 had no support for virtual memory. That's why
               | my (tricky) question.
        
               | icedchai wrote:
               | Amiga OS didn't have virtual memory either.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | My first computer was a Timex 2068, while at the school
               | lab we had Amstrad PC1512 with 5" floppies and no HD...
               | 
               | Naturally when we speak about PC, we don't mean the
               | original IBM PC and nothing else.
        
               | hnlmorg wrote:
               | If we are being pedantic then what you're describing are
               | called IBM-compatible PCs. Ie they weren't made by IBM
               | but were designed to support most other of the same
               | software.
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | Yes and i said "IBM PC"...
        
               | deaddodo wrote:
               | The "IBM PC" was a _category_ of machines, not a model.
               | Many of which had advanced processors with MMUs and
               | 16-bit support:
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IBM_Personal_Comp
               | ute...
               | 
               | If what you're referring to as the "IBM PC" is the
               | classic model 5150 _and_ we follow your arbitrary
               | designation of a  "real OS", than no. But, by that same
               | logic, I can say ducks aren't birds "if we consider birds
               | only those with non-webbed feet".
        
               | kjs3 wrote:
               | No. Xenix through at least version 2.1 ran on the
               | original IBM PC (and early Xenix was ported to the 68000
               | (e.g. Tandy model 16), which also lacked hardware VM
               | support).[1] You could also run IBM PC Unix in the form
               | of Venix from Venturecom (Version 7 with some BSD things)
               | and PC/IX from ISC (System III). Both were 'official'
               | licensed Unix ports. In the Unix-ish camp, there was
               | Coherent and Minix, as well as various MMU-less Linux
               | projects (e.g. ELKS). And there are many interesting
               | oddballs like iRMX.
               | 
               | Yes, OS/2 did require a 286 until it required a 386.
               | 
               |  _If you make virtual memory a necessary attribute to
               | qualify as OS_
               | 
               | That would be pedantic and historically inaccurate and we
               | shouldn't engage in that.
               | 
               | [1] https://gunkies.org/wiki/XENIX
        
               | bpoyner wrote:
               | Xenix .. that brings back memories of green screens and
               | digicards (digiboards).
        
         | gxd wrote:
         | There is no reason to get the original unless you're a
         | committed retrocomputing enthusiast or collector (I am a retro
         | games collector and decided against getting an original
         | anyway). You can get an exceptional emulation experience using
         | WinUAE or https://www.amigaforever.com/ (which is also WinUAE
         | based).
        
         | teo_zero wrote:
         | > I also immediately went to eBay to see how much old Amiga
         | computers cost
         | 
         | Please note that Serena targets a Motorola 68030, so anything
         | below an Amiga 3000 won't qualify.
        
           | ekianjo wrote:
           | would that work with a A1200 equipped with an acceleration
           | board?
        
             | sgt wrote:
             | Yes it will, I have an Amiga 1200 with a Blizzard 1230IV
             | accelerator board. They were super common back in the day.
             | Its 68030 runs at a whopping 50MHz, so you pretty much have
             | to wear a seatbelt.
        
               | teo_zero wrote:
               | I had a Blizzard myself, and I kind of remember it was
               | equipped with a 68EC030, that is a 68030 without MMU. And
               | I suspect the reason Serena requires a 68030 is in fact
               | its MMU.
        
           | jdboyd wrote:
           | They specifically mention A2000 as supported. I assume that
           | requires an '030 accelerator card then, but an A2000 with
           | '030 card is probably much cheaper than an A3000 or A4000.
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | We loved them, a great gaming computer, multitasking, already
         | had sound and graphics chips we could program for, multitasking
         | (although Guru Meditation could happen quite frequently), an
         | extensible OS with plugins, dynamic libraries, scriptable
         | applications.
         | 
         | Meanwhile on PC land, Windows 3.x had just come up into the
         | scene.
         | 
         | As the only PC guy on our group, I really enjoyed the demoscene
         | meetings where I could improve my Amiga skills.
        
         | guestbest wrote:
         | Shipping is prohibitively expensive including UPS and just like
         | 15 year old flat screen televisions, sellers will rip out
         | components to cut down on costs. I once saw a horse saddle get
         | shipped to Argentina from Texas for 36 dollars through UPS in
         | 2004 in a flimsy cardboard box. I can't imagine the cost these
         | days
        
         | christkv wrote:
         | I've been eyeing the vampire v4 standalone. FPGA reimagining of
         | the amiga with backwards compatibility
        
           | galangalalgol wrote:
           | It doesn't seem like it tries to emulate any of the
           | constraints the original Amiga had. Is it essentially just a
           | way to run newer versions of amigaos on modern hardware?
        
       | cturner wrote:
       | Stefany is not advertising them for sale at the moment, but is
       | still working on a 68040/48060 platform in the background.
       | https://c256foenix.com/a2560x/?v=6cc98ba2045f
       | 
       | If you are looking for an audience for your platform, you may
       | want to connect to that community via their Discord. They have
       | some experienced network stack developers.
        
         | rangerelf wrote:
         | Heh, that made my morning. I was reading the specs on the cube
         | and grinning like a fool.
         | 
         | Thanks for sharing this.
        
       | doener wrote:
       | Via http://www.amiga-news.de/de/news/AN-2024-08-00046-DE.html (in
       | German)
        
       | Ericson2314 wrote:
       | The Windows-based build instructions are...interesting.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-13 23:01 UTC)