On a message board about FORTH, a guy is complaining that he cant get things to run on his 32 bit macbook..  

Dude, its time to move on.. really..

I want to take a screenshot and share it here - but I'm listening to a playlist on my Vampire 4 Stand Alone FPGA Amiga on BackAMP - an Amiga WinAmp clone, while I surf here. 
Bill Withers Aint' No Sunshine, right now. 
It isn't that I hate digital music - it is that I hate what digital media has become - because playing lossy MP3s on my FPGA Amiga is better than lossless streaming on a modern system. It is just the RETRO part I like. 

I disagree. I've got an "Early 2013" iMac and an i7 Macbook Pro and neither of them will run BigSur - and either could. So I can't update to the latest browsers. 

Windows is doing the same shit with Windows 11. Excluding machines that can plausibly run the latest OS - forcing hardware upgrades and unnecessary hardware obsolescence. 

My friend brought me his mother-in-laws Late 2013 iMac. Both nearly identical i5 cores and relatively powerful GPUs. The difference, I've cracked mine open and it has 16GB of memory and a 512GB SSD, vs the late 2013 has 8 GB of memory and a 500GB mechanical hd. Mine is absolutely more powerful - but because they're not "user upgradable," mine is prohibited from Big Sur, from OS X 11 - and therefore "obsolete". 

That is absolute bullshit. 

I can run a hacked version of OS X 11, of course - but doesn't that defeat the purpose of running Mac OS? 

Mon Dec 22 2025 17:03:15 UTC from Nurb432

On a message board about FORTH, a guy is complaining that he cant get things to run on his 32 bit macbook..  

 

Dude, its time to move on.. really..

The point is that its 32bit.  Not that it was old or out of support, or even that it was an Apple product. If one is still fighting with a 32bit 'computer' ( non IoT device ), its time to move on. If one cant afford a new one, plenty of cheap refurb 64 bit out there. And yes, due to Microsoft teaming up with Intel and AMD for forced early obsolescence, there will be lots more available coming soon.

Now all that said, i don't feel that a company should support a device *forever*. At some point its cost prohibitive and not practical as legit new stuff comes around ( like new instruction set extensions which directly effects backward compatibility ) .  Now is that last years models? No, of course not.  But there does have to have a line in the sand, somewhere.

Sun Dec 28 2025 06:45:26 UTC from ParanoidDelusions

I disagree. I've got an "Early 2013" iMac and an i7 Macbook Pro and neither of them will run BigSur - and either could. So I can't update to the latest browsers. 

Windows is doing the same shit with Windows 11. Excluding machines that can plausibly run the latest OS - forcing hardware upgrades and unnecessary hardware obsolescence. 

My friend brought me his mother-in-laws Late 2013 iMac. Both nearly identical i5 cores and relatively powerful GPUs. The difference, I've cracked mine open and it has 16GB of memory and a 512GB SSD, vs the late 2013 has 8 GB of memory and a 500GB mechanical hd. Mine is absolutely more powerful - but because they're not "user upgradable," mine is prohibited from Big Sur, from OS X 11 - and therefore "obsolete". 

That is absolute bullshit. 

I can run a hacked version of OS X 11, of course - but doesn't that defeat the purpose of running Mac OS? 

 

Mon Dec 22 2025 17:03:15 UTC from Nurb432

On a message board about FORTH, a guy is complaining that he cant get things to run on his 32 bit macbook..  

 

Dude, its time to move on.. really..

 

I'm pretty sure my Surface Pro 5 is a 64 bit platform - not 32 bit. Maybe I'm wrong. 

I don't think a platform has to be supported indefinitely - and I love that there are retro-movements keeping things working all the way back to 8 bit platforms. Unofficial support can sustain the lifespan of nearly any technology practically "indefinitely" to the point that I am nearing 60 and there are methods to get a Commodore 64 or Atari 800 online with TCP/IP today. 

But - I think both Apple and Microsoft abuse this concept to the disadvantage of the consumer. 

Sun Dec 28 2025 15:34:34 UTC from Nurb432

The point is that its 32bit.  Not that it was old or out of support, or even that it was an Apple product. If one is still fighting with a 32bit 'computer' ( non IoT device ), its time to move on. If one cant afford a new one, plenty of cheap refurb 64 bit out there. And yes, due to Microsoft teaming up with Intel and AMD for forced early obsolescence, there will be lots more available coming soon.

 

Now all that said, i don't feel that a company should support a device *forever*. At some point its cost prohibitive and not practical as legit new stuff comes around ( like new instruction set extensions which directly effects backward compatibility ) .  Now is that last years models? No, of course not.  But there does have to have a line in the sand, somewhere.

 

 

Sun Dec 28 2025 06:45:26 UTC from ParanoidDelusions

I disagree. I've got an "Early 2013" iMac and an i7 Macbook Pro and neither of them will run BigSur - and either could. So I can't update to the latest browsers. 

Windows is doing the same shit with Windows 11. Excluding machines that can plausibly run the latest OS - forcing hardware upgrades and unnecessary hardware obsolescence. 

My friend brought me his mother-in-laws Late 2013 iMac. Both nearly identical i5 cores and relatively powerful GPUs. The difference, I've cracked mine open and it has 16GB of memory and a 512GB SSD, vs the late 2013 has 8 GB of memory and a 500GB mechanical hd. Mine is absolutely more powerful - but because they're not "user upgradable," mine is prohibited from Big Sur, from OS X 11 - and therefore "obsolete". 

That is absolute bullshit. 

I can run a hacked version of OS X 11, of course - but doesn't that defeat the purpose of running Mac OS? 

 

Mon Dec 22 2025 17:03:15 UTC from Nurb432

On a message board about FORTH, a guy is complaining that he cant get things to run on his 32 bit macbook..  

 

Dude, its time to move on.. really..

 

 

Sat Nov 29 2025 06:24:24 UTC from ParanoidDelusions

An Apollo V4 standalone Amiga "clone" - for lack of a better word - it is an FPGA Amiga built on a hypothetical 68080 that is 68040 instruction backward compatible - dispensing with the 68060 which was evidently difficult to work with and broke a lot of backwards instructional compatibility. It is running iBrowse - in this case, searching Soutcast.com for streaming radio stations in .m3u playlist format to download and play on BackAmp, a WinAmp compatible clone for the Amiga suited for 68040 based Amiga computers like the A4000 and A3000. 

You can see it has a mapped persistent share to my Synology NAS. It looks pretty modern - and - it is kind of an illusion - it is pretty - but it isn't really on the level of modern Windows/Mac OS/Linux platforms. It can't access Facebook or X or even Uncensored - they're just too demanding for this processor. 

But it is bare metal FPGA - running native code without translation - not emulation. But I took this screenshot, while it was multitasking web browsing and streaming audio - and saved it to my NAS, so I could cut and paste it on Facebook, and now, here - with the same ease you would do the same on a Windows, Mac, or Linux machine. 

Which is pretty cool. Otherwise, it acts like a very compatible ancient Amiga - with modern benefits. I can boot into any one of about a half dozen Amiga OS systems from Amiga OS 1.2 to 3.9, and AROS, a modern open source alternative AmigaOS - or ApolloOS, an Aros variant specific to Vampire platforms. 

If you want a more general experience - MiSTer FPGA or MiSTer Pi, an inexpensive FPGA clone - are better alternatives - but not nearly as powerful. 

If you have questions about any sort of retro computing - ask me. I probably know at least a little - but maybe a lot more.

I have a MiSTer Pi but haven't used it much. I wanted to make an open-source knockoff of the 68080 and SAGA cores. The MiniMig core on the MiSTer series platforms is glacial and under-developed in some ways and based more directly on running the same software as WinUAE and related emulation. For example, the MiniMig core has an integrated Defina Flipper or equivalent in the core so that any standardized APIs like AHI and P96 drivers (using the UAE_gfx driver, IIRC) can just work with existing software. The reason I wanted to make an open-source knockoff of the Apollo cores are that ApolloOS is open-source and a far more viable alternative to AmigaOS than any other open-source variant. AROS tries to be cross-hardware but loses most of the efficiency of the original platform, thus defeating the purpose of its continued development, IMO.

The basis of my development wasn't to make just a new core for running Apollo compatible Amiga software but to build up higher-level gate layout tools and toolchains. I wouldn't waste my time writing raw VHDL like Gunnar (the original Apollo core developer) does, nor would I use Varilog variants because they introduce ambiguity into the finished gate layouts. The most promising higher-level gate layout language is SpinalHDL, a dialect of Scala v2. The more I learn about the major release of Scala v3 strongly suggests that it is a major-release break that shouldn't have happened and that it would be wiser to fork Scala2 and continue from there rather than try to migrate to Scala3, due to major regressions and bad changes in the runtime.

Where I lost interest, is where Gunnar von Boehn decided to add a "proper" MMU to the 68080 which increased the complexity level of the core design to the point that I lost interest almost entirely. The EmuTOS environment needs it but the Amiga side rarely does. If the Amiga needs it, its only for diagnostics and parlor tricks. Maybe someday, if the LibSnowHouse and its LibCheeseVoyage dependency emerge as anything useful, it might be something useful for developing a core but for now, I'm done.

I'll be honest, you lost me right about here - way beyond my pay grade. 

I'm way more "intuitive". Ask Ig about how I approached getting my handle on Linux and Citadel... I kind of slam dance my way into technical solutions... I just thrash and flail until things start working... and honestly - it is pretty effective for me - at the end I was pretty good at both Debian *nix, Proxmox and Citadel-UX - but it wasn't in the methodical way you cats all do it. I'm a systems guy, and not a dev guy, by any fair measure - and I use a hammer for every problem, never a scalpel. This undisciplined "break stuff until it works," ethos got me pretty far in my IT career - but was obviously not as sustainable as knowing the kind of things you guys know. 

But - from my perspective - whatever is going on with Minimig on FPGA (MiST or MiSTer are my primary experience) or V4 feels WAY more authentic than any software based emulation built on UAE. I've got 3 accelerated A500 systems, an accelerated A600 system - I just never use them. They would have been DREAM systems for me in 1987-1990... but the FPGA systems blow them away by every measure. It is like having an ORIGINAL Shelby Cobra which is priceless, but actually kind of a shitty car, compared to a modern REPLICA Shelby that is a way better vehicle from an engineering perspective - but not "authentic". I use that analogy a lot - because it feels appropriate. The FPGA Amigas are BETTER Amigas than real Amigas - from a pure "userspace" perspective. 

From a technical electrical engineering or developing/coding perspective - maybe that isn't true. To me, END USER experience is what counts. If you're familiar with the demo "State of the Art," - it runs the same on my MiSTer, my MiST, my V4 and my real Amigas - but has unique glitches on WinUAE, and FS-UAE on Intel Mac and ARM (Pi/Anroid) (I assume on Apple Silicon too). 

I am confident if you launch that demo on real Amiga systems from an A500 to an A4000 and FPGA - I won't be able to tell you the difference... 

But the minute you load it on software emulation - 40 seconds or so in, I'll be able to go, blind - "That isn't a real Amiga." 

To me - that is what counts. 

Fri Jan 09 2026 05:05:26 UTC from SamuraiCrow

 

I have a MiSTer Pi but haven't used it much. I wanted to make an open-source knockoff of the 68080 and SAGA cores. The MiniMig core on the MiSTer series platforms is glacial and under-developed in some ways and based more directly on running the same software as WinUAE and related emulation. For example, the MiniMig core has an integrated Defina Flipper or equivalent in the core so that any standardized APIs like AHI and P96 drivers (using the UAE_gfx driver, IIRC) can just work with existing software. 

But also - Gunner is a dick. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt for just being German - but I think even other people on the Apollo team think he is a dick. 

Commodore seems to be a dick magnet, though. The MiSTer guy - Sergei - is kind of a dick, too. 

And - there are a lot of Retro-guys that are dicks. I suppose if you ask around enough - you would find a large group supporting the idea that I myself, an somewhat of a dick. 

I think we're all autistic. 8 bit PCs attracted undiagnosed people in the 80s who didn't quite fit in with normal people. But I suppose that is a topic for another room. ;) 

I thought about it some more... the SAGA open core for MiSTer because the Minimig is "glacial", and it cut through the whisky fog and I get it. Yes - MiniMig is only really useful for "classic" 68k Amiga emulation - and the FPGA core in MiSTer is probably capable of a lot more. It tops out at a 68020 at 100 Mhz, I think... which is still far slower than a 68030/30 in MIPS, right? That is what you were getting out, in "less smart than you are," terms... because... I'm a bright guy with technology compared to average users - but I'm a mouth-breather compared to people who are actually FLUENT in technology. 

People have also talked about using the ARM core on MiSTer as a PiStorm to give Minimig on MiSTer a Vampire type of performance boost - but that didn't ever pan out for some reason. 

I'm happy with the MiSTer being a very rock solid Amiga alternative running native code on bare metal (even if it is FPGA bare metal with some ARM support in the background). 

It beats WinUAE/FS-UAE. 

But it has all gotten pretty good. I've got a The A500 - and the USB workbench for that is pretty awesome - and I've got a preoder for the TheA1200 Maxi. 

To me, it is incredible that we can get these close approximations... that my Note 25 Ultra can do a damn good portable Amiga - a better Amiga than my genuine Amiga 2000 I paid $4000 for in 1997 ever was. 

Like - at the time - if a CLONE had been available that approached WinUAE compatibility and worked on a device that fit in my pocket and had 1TB of storage... I would have thought it was magic. But today I go, "Well, it really isn't good enough, is it? It isn't as good as it COULD be!" 

I'm now rocking CDE style window decorations and IBM Plex fonts on most of my machines.  It's like a weird mix of Solaris and OS/2.  And it's awesome.

It's funny, I didn't realize how much I missed having visible draggable edges on my windows until I could finally see them again.

For reference: this is the "Commonality" theme available for KDE, plus a switch back to some of the standard window colors, and the fonts set to IBM Plex [Mono|Sans].

My gosh, the more they gussy up the desktop the more I love the 1990s style.

Linux guys tend to make a lot of compromises without realizing they're letting their boundaries be pushed, in my opinion. 

But it is because Linux pushes a lot of limits that mainstream OSes simply don't allow, I guess. 

LXDE is pretty lightweight and easy on the eyes..

Linux guys tend to make a lot of compromises without realizing they're letting their boundaries be pushed, in my opinion. 

I've read through this comment a few times and I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by it.

Are you suggesting that we tolerate second-rate software, or that we're tolerating the enshittification of software, or something else?

I think so. GIMP is a terrible photoshop program. The Office alternatives like Libre Office and Open Office are shit. Blender is super powerful, but in some ways so raw and unrefined. 

Linux is like the FIRST album from Metallica or Motley Crue... raw, hard, unpolished, unfinished, full of potential - but not very consumer accessible. 

I don't know that it is "2nd rate" or enshittification - necessarily. Maybe it is BETTER. But it isn't as ACCESIBLE - because it requires way more THINKING to get the most out of it. Maybe if you think HARDER - if you're smarter - it actually gives you way MORE for way LESS sacrifice, less cost. Adobe is ridiculous with their pricing models, their subscription models - their greed. But it is EASIER and more stable for people who don't want to screw around with fighting to learn it and get it to work right than anything Linux. 

So... no, I guess not where you went with it, exactly. I'm not saying it is 2nd rate or enshittification. It is definitely *harder* - requires way more brain-power - and therefore is less accessible. 

It is kind of like how early David Lee Roth Van Halen was way better - way more raw and immediate - than Sammy Hagar Van Halen... but Sammy Hagar's Van Halen had WAY more success - because it appeals to such a wider audience. 

I think DLR Van Halen was *better* - but it never had the mass appeal of more accessible Sammy Hagar, radio friendly Van Halen. 

Same thing. Seriously. Linux struggles with commercial success by being too unpolished. Windows and Mac OS are super polished - and therefore, way less interesting. 

Does that make sense? 

Wed Jan 28 2026 03:20:08 UTC from IGnatius T Foobar

Linux guys tend to make a lot of compromises without realizing they're letting their boundaries be pushed, in my opinion. 

I've read through this comment a few times and I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by it.

Are you suggesting that we tolerate second-rate software, or that we're tolerating the enshittification of software, or something else?

 

I had to sit and think about this for a moment. It isn't just, "doesn't work like the Windoze program I want to replace." 

I'm going to use Photoshop as an example. It is the absolutely preferred photo-editing software for professionals. Likewise Illustrator is the ultimate vector graphics program. I'm trained in both - I understand why they're preferred by graphic designers. They're rock solid, they're easy to use, they're super well supported. There is this huge Adobe corporate machine that wants to encourage you to use them. Because they're so dominant, they only want this subscription model and their model says, "you need to make a lot of money using our apps so that you can afford the monthly subscription. If you can't monetize it, you should go somewhere else." 

Bluntly. Like Cisco. If you're not profiting from their platform - they don't want you. You can't be a casual user. You can be a student, or a pro - there is no casual use model. 

So, the next step down is Paint Shop Pro - and they have a suite of programs. You don't have to subscribe - you can buy it on discount every Black Friday - for $80 instead of $250. Corel. They have lots of tutorials, lots of features, they're pretty solid, and they've got decent support - because they want you to buy their product. There is 24x7 support from Indians who will read the scripts but don't use the software - and it has more execution problems. It isn't as bulletproof - so if you're a PRO - you probably won't use it - because it might let you down on a deadline - but it is perfect for a casual user. 

Then there is GIMP. It has all the power and features of all the above - Paintshop Pro, Photoshop, and Illustrator - and you can do ANYTHING in it you can in any of the above. Support is forums full of neckbeared Linux geeks who will tell you to RTFM when you ask a simple question - and it might crash - it isn't polished - it is in a constant BETA state of development. You can't just be a graphic designer with an graphic pad - you need to be a system engineer, a linux admin, a hardware specialist. If you are - you can get as far - further - than with either of the 3 previous applications - but if you're not - you might not even get past compiling it for your Linux distro. 

It isn't that it is BAD - but "doesn't work exactly like the Windoze program I want to replace," is a big one. And in these examples - it is the OS X program I want to replace... another *nix based platform. It isn't as COMMERCIAL and accessible. 

I like to drive - so... I could buy an 80s Supra twin turbo and put $80,000 into it and make it perform better than a factory stock Corvette Z06 in every measure - but I'm going to need to know how to tear the whole thing down, replace springs and shocks and suspension and transmission (DK Buzzbomb is on right now. Ironic) - anyhow I can't just be a driver - I can't even just be a mechanic and a driver - I have to be a whole engineering team that knows how to fab custom parts to keep that 1000hp Supra running. Or I can buy a 640 HP Corvette Z06 and do... nearly as good, maybe better - and just take it to my GM dealer if it breaks to fix it - probably under warranty. 

Linux is a custom hotrod based on an obscure chassis that only gearheads can really leverage. Windoze and OS X are factory built casual but track ready rides that a guy in Jorts and New Balance sneakers can take to a track day and get pretty good performance out of. 

It isn't bad. It is a matter of how much effort you want for the results you get. 

Fri Feb 06 2026 04:03:10 UTC from IGnatius T Foobar

Please do not conflate "bad" with "doesn't work and look exactly like the Windoze program I want to replace".

So, a holy grail of retro-gaming emulation is the Vic 20. It had 16k of total memory, reduced by basic, with a 20 column screen displayed most often on a TV. It was the precursor of the C64. I had one - and I thought it sucked - but it was really WAY better than my Atari 2600 - just- difficult and not as many titles and they were hard to find. It is the bastard child of retro-emulation - because of memory expansion and ripping carts to .rom images means you have to know hardcore memory address locations and how to make your Vic 20 emulator act like one with an 8k and 16k memory upgrade. Right? It isn't easy. 

But I bought this thing - called an ESP32 VGA - it is an Audrino board. I'd never messed with that - but it is basically a SoC eprom you can burn a program to. I KINDA get that. And one of them is a Vic 20. This one, the ESP32 VGA has a VGA port and PS/2 keyboard/mouse ports, an SD, USB power - and BT and WiFi on the board - for $15. 

And it is a f'kin Vic 20. Which shouldn't impress me. Anything can do a Vic 20 now. I've got a MiSTer FGPA and a MiST FPGA that do Vic 20 without breaking a sweat. 

And I just bought a Vic 20 - the real deal - and of course, it is dead. For $25. A good, tested one costs $100 or more - and still might be broken. 

Pockets of the real may be attractive - but simulations of the real that are user friendly are more satisfying for most people - but right now - all of it - 

I had no Adurino experience - I had to learn about what it takes to make a programmable SoC board programmed as an Adurino system so I could make this thing a Vic20. Most people who are non technical would fail. I almost did. 

Wed Feb 11 2026 22:41:57 UTC from IGnatius T Foobar

We certainly are balanced on the edge of a singularity unlike
any mankind has ever balanced on before. 

"Retro" anything, is popular for just that reason. People appreciate the raw, unpolished authenticity.

Quark on DS9 liked to impress important guests with food that was "all fresh, not replicated."

Pockets of THE REAL will be attractive forever. For just this reason.

That's pretty cool, actually.

The fact that an off-the-shelf microcontroller can bit-bang a VGA port and still have enough power left over to emulate a 1980s computer at full speed is impressive.

What else can it do?  I've got one monitor left with a VGA port.  If I could turn it into a display for a microcontroller project that could be neat.