New platforms discussion thread

I do not think splitting _normal_ GNU/Linux distros is a good idea. Perhaps steps should be taken to specifically prevent Linux Distro spitting by editors. Ubuntu, SteamOS, Redhat, Debian, Fedora, Sabanyon, Slackware, Slax, Puppy, Suse, Mandrake Mandriva, ALT Linux Sisyphus, Arch, Caldera, CentOS, Corel LinuxOS, Familiar Project, Gentoo Linux, Knoppix, Lindows, Pardus, PCLinuxOS, Trsiquel, PLD Linux, VLOS Linux, and any other disros can co-exits nicely in this platform. I also think all architectures of Linux distros can co-exits here. Linux-centric and GNU-centric alternative kernels (Hurd, L4) can also go here as they are drop-in replacement kernels (Much like PTS-DOS, DR-DOS, Novell DOS, Caldera DOS, 86-DOS, 4DOS, can be used as drop-in replacements for MS-DOS and there games all fit in the DOS platform)

Editors: What to do about specialized distros for platforms we already have? DS Linux, WiiLi, Gamecube Linux, Palm Treo Linux, PSP Linux. As I've stated before, I think, these belong in their existing platforms with distro tags. DS Linux games in the Nintendo DS platform, WiiLi in the Wii platform, etc...

EDIT: Note that any game written 'the only correct way' :) can be compiled for a specialist Linux just as if it were for Windows, Mac, Amiga, Android, or some other 'normal' platform. Provided that all it's dependencies can be all.

Clearly UNIX operating systems of the "Single UNIX Specification" that hold no other distinction can share a single Platform (separate from BSDs and Linuxum)
AIX, SCO UNIX, AT&T UNIX, UNIX (generic), Bell Labs UNIX, Tru64, HP-UX, and another other SUSs that show themselves.

Solaris, while being UNIX is distinguished by certain hardwares and use by certain revolutionary French game developers. SunOS 5.0+ is Solaris (tag Solaris even if it is for SunOS 5.0)

The original UNIX replacement.
BSD (generic), OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, BSDi4, SunOS (versions 1.0 to 4.1.4), and any others.

FreeBSD[15.384615384615385%] I found a complete list of current FreeBSD games with release dates and licenses. I'm entering it whilst checking it against many incomplete lists.

BSD I've only found extremely partial lists so far.

BSDi4 no lists found.

NetBSD I've only found extremely partial lists do far.

OpenBSD I've only found extremely partial lists do far.

SunOS no lists found.

IRIX is UNIX and BSD mixed. It is also and SGI MIPS specific.

NeXTstep is complicated.
NeXTstep, OpenStep, GnuStep, and Rhapsody share many aspects. However, it should be noted that NeXT split OpenStep development and end-user software from the various NeXTstep hardwares (separated head from body, so to speak) to create a cross-platform operating system (or more accurately a platform agnostic operating system or even cross-kernel operating system). Sort of Java like (Java came later, from many of the same people). Still, Many games and tools run on both. OpenStep became Rhapsody (it can be thought of as OpenStep version 5). Rhapsody eventually became Mac OS X Server 1.0. However, I don't think anything Mac should share the NeXTstep platform. If it did, then OpenStep would too. That's a problem because OpenStep runs on Solaris, NeXT, iOS, HP PA-RISC, Mac (old, classic, and new), and Windows NT. GnuStep has an even wider range including Linux.
GnuStep is based on publicly available code and APIs from OpenStep
Cocoa is a descendant of OpenStep
There are various sources that say "OpenStep is not compatible with NextStep in either direction". Yet, the same executable for many games and software will run on both and some even on Rhapsody. That said, "block box" games (NeXTstep on NeXT hardware) must be recompiled to add OpenStep compatibility. OpenStep games can be compile from the get go for OpenStep and "black box". GnuStep games generally compile without code modification on Rhapsody.
NeXTStep is by NeXT Inc.
NextStep is the licensed version (IBM NextStep for example).
NeXTSTEP is Sun's version
OPENSTEP is Apple's version.
SHORT: NeXTstep, OpenStep, GnuStep, and Rhapsody, same platform, NeXTstep. Each tagged specifically for platform and kernel and architecture compatibility)

NASCOM home computer kits ("NASCOM"). Not sure of the variants, but people have reported Frankenstein all sorts of parts among the various models (parts noted by NASCOM for _only_ model such) to add compatibility of other models without sacrificing compatibility of the original model. Sounds completely interchangeable to me, thus, only a single NASCOM platform needed. I lean towards adding now

HP 1000 and 2000 and HP 1000 minicomputer series. I'll clean this mess anyhow, but a single platform for this series seems best. I don't recall HP 2645 at the moment, I'll get back to this later. EDIT: I've looked into the HP 1000/2000 situation and IT IS A MONSTER OF A MESS to sort out. For one thing, they are not all named 1xxx and 2xxx. But the good news is, there seems to be one common platform there that is not HP 3000 nor HP 9000. HP 4000, 6000, 7000, 8000 are IBM-compatibles, HP 5000 is gameless (Lord willing). Also, this series was introduced in 1969 and continued to have units manufactured until 1990 (in the form of clones)! The clones were produced in Poland and Czechoslovakia where they still are still producing new Atari 8-bit games so why not new games for HP 1000? EDIT 2: Actually, HP manufactured new units as late as 1992.

. A significant number, no. But each of them is significant. Games like Ogre that are proprietary and legally can't be ported and the authors cannot be consulted (dead in many cases). Games like this influenced the industry and will only ever exist on BSD. It may have clones on other systems, it may even have been illegally ported, but to leave them out of their place history is to damage history. Lets not be unaware that, while GNU/Linux is meant to be a UNIX alternative, so was BSD. BSD was a completely separate effort to have UNIX without closed source. Linux wasn't even intended to do this, not until the GNU people got a hold if it.

I disagree, they as different as Windows 3.1 and Amiga OS 4:) Yes, I say we split OS X and Classic now. But we should not forget that there are over1500 games that are currently not marked as OS X or Classic. Split them by year or lump them into one; either way, each will have to be manually verified as to which it belongs. EDIT: And what about FAT binary games?

RISC OS was bundled with the original Acorn Archimedes and was included or a dual-boot option for the every Archimedes model (there's more than two). Archimedes machines need not run RISC OS (the same as IBM-Compatibles are not limited to DOS and Windows). But RISC OS was compiled for many other computers besides those. Also, the source code was forked twice and three different groups now maintain their own fork; Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd. and Castle Technology RISC OS Open
Acorn Risc PC 1987 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Acorn A7000 1995 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Acorn A7000+ 1995 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Acorn Phoebe 1998 (Acorn RISC OS)
MicroDigital Medi 1998 (Acorn RISC OS, RISCOS Ltd.)
MicroDigital Mico 1999 (RISCOS Ltd.)
RiscStation R7500 1999 (RISCOS Ltd.)
Castle Kinetic RiscPC 2000 (RISCOS Ltd., Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
MicroDigital Omega 2003 (RISCOS Ltd.)
Advantage Six A75 2004 (RISCOS Ltd.)
Iyonix PC 2002 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Advantage Six A9 (RISCOS Ltd.)
BeagleBoard 2008 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Always Innovating Touch Book 2009 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Pandora 2010 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
PandaBoard 2011 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Raspberry Pi (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
ARMX6 2015 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)
Titanium 2015 (Castle Technology RISC OS Open)

Yes, if an application is written in the only correct way :) and the necessary dependences are also available for the hardware, then it will compile for a specialist Linux distro like DS Linux, GameCube Linux, Pandora, etc. But it will also compile for Windows, Mac, Amiga, Android and such, as well (we are not lumping those in with Linux). First, note that it is usually dependencies that initially block ports. SDL, OpenGL, Wwise, Recast, MonoGame, Bullet Physics. Beyond middleware, what format is the content in? Are the graphics bmp, png, jpeg, tiff, SVG? Is the audio mp3, ogg, wav, flac? Are the cutscenes divx, avi, mov, mp4? Port the readers, or convert the content. Is the game written in or does it utilize Gnash or Java? All of these things that games need, have to be ported first. Now when one compiles a Linux game designed for personal computers for DS Linux, major changes are in order; it is rarely just changing architecture code. For instance, there's no hardware keyboard on the DS, it has two screens of reduced size, it has a touchscreen, some units have removable storage while others do not, will the port support link cable multiplayer? . So far I've listed the _easy_ problems. Throw anything at all proprietary into the mix and it get exponentially harder (even for the owner of the proprietary blockers)

Yes, Linux and games without their own platforms should stay for now. New and migrate for Unix, BSD, Solaris, and Minux.

M is good for Macs. There is actually a later Mac model called "Macintosh Classic" and this phrase is already confusingly used to refer to the original Macintosh. So I think this exact phrase should be avoided.
"OS Classic" is revisionism by Apple. 'Successful' revisionism is one of the 'benefits' of belonging to a cult:) (Mac OS wasn't even named until Mac OS 7.6). I think UVL should use this convention as well.
Macintosh OS Classic
Mac OS Classic
MacOS Classic
MacOSC

Macintosh OS X
Mac OS X
MacOS X
Mac OSX
MacOSX

Making a new platform for MacOSX is easier, but the bigger issue is what to do for games that are not know which they are for. If MacOSX is the new platform it kinda sets a precedent that unknown OS Mac games go in MacOS Classic. Do we want that? Or should unknowns go in MacOS X? Note that editors who do not tag for OS will be creating many untagged entries for MacOSX games as they are released.
Personally, I think MacOSX should be the new platform, the platform pages should have a guide (year range, arch, screen size, etc) and unknowns going to MacOSC.

As I examine more superfineprint tucked away obscurely in an unnumbered, unindexed, non-technical section of Mac game manuals, I increasingly see actual system specs that do not mention RAM, CPU, resolution, disk space, system software or anything else that useful. Rather they refer to case size, case shape, case type, screen size in inches. Slim, all-in-one, square, handles, unibody, flat, aluminum, luggable, desktop, box, dome, stacked, curved, top logo, side-by-side, vents on top, tower, single-handle, cylindrical, portable, front logo, butterfly. I suppose if I had a butterfly Mac then I would know what that meant. But since I don't have one, this must be forbidden knowledge. It is becoming slightly more acceptable to show Mac system requirements in a wider range of places (including where they are supposed to be) as time passes.

EDIT: another precious gem to add to the Mac system requirements collection from a game initially ported in 2000 (near certainty OS classic) and republished in 2003 with these system requirements:

also, an OS X only game released in January 2001 claims

They can't mean OS X 10.2 because it wasn't event _announced_ until May 6, 2002. 10.1 wasn't announced until July. In fact, I'm pretty sure there wasn't even a 10.0 at that point; OS X was in public beta until March (2 months after this game's release).
At least the writer is honest.

EDIT: I've solved the mystery of the Butterfly Mac. The opposite of butterfly is scissor of course, Apple says so. This is in reference to the butterfly mechanism used in the keyboard that eliminates key wobble and allows users to press anywhere on the key to get the same result and feel as pressing on the center (doesn't that make it easier to press multiple keys on accident with realizing it?). It also allows both the keys and the keyboard to be thinner but still have a deep stroke and a deep concave surface. And according to some publishers, this feature is a system requirement (their game is not supported if your using a scissor keyboard).

Temple OS is about as political and cultish as an OS can be. It is not (seemingly) designed to be practical, powerful, profitable, flashy, or cool. It seems to me it would make a good non-gui developer's tool (one of his videos shows two apps being debugged simultaneously, which he doesn't mention, as if that was just to be taken for granted), a good education tool and a good bootloader for OSless applications. But it is also not designed to be a user's only OS. It "commanded" to be a dual-boot OS ("Windows or Linux", Apple OSes are mentioned only in response to questions and the answer is "VMware"). It is designed to be simple. Users are encouraged to program, tinker, and break everything. It is inspired by the Commodore 64 experience. Where one could literately learn everything about their computer by buying it and studying it (the manual had an extensive map of every chip, memory, and port and no attempts to obscure *anything* about the hardware or software were made and it was not easy to break the law by studying it). The goal is to keep it under 100,000 lines of code. Outside libraries are banned. Yes, "banned"; as TempleOS is open source and public domain, that is a religious commandment rather than a licensing restriction. There will be no arguments with lawyers, any disputes concerning TempleOS must be settle with God. It is written in C/C++, scripts are C/C++, the command line is C/C++, etc... Ring 0 access at all times. Everything compiles, no interpretations. No Paging (64-bit memory access to all available memory even beyond 4GB). PCI, hard drives, drivers are avoided. It is 2D/3D VGA 640x480 ONLY. Togging between 8-bit ASCII/alphabet character sets only, no UTF. No BMP, all images are GR graphics 8-bits-per-pixel, 4-bits of color, no palette. Uses only TempleOS LZW for compression. It uses only the RedSea file system or FAT32 when necessary. No external resource files, graphics are done in code; non-text and interactive elements are done in-document.

Turns out Dianna Cowern is an alias of Terry Davis. Well, he is schizophrenic, so...

"TempleOS is, literally, more simple than necessary. It is
obnoxiously simple... to the point it hurts."

"Japan, China and Korea must switch to alphabets.
Maybe, the United States will change to metric, out of good will."

"I didn't start the operating system as a work for God, but He directed my path along the way and kept saying it was His temple."

"I have
divine authority to command any company in the computer industry to do anything
that I deem necessary to make God's temple more beautiful, glorious and perfect."

I detect no hint of insincerity in his discourse. He seems to be the real deal, not sarcastic, and a bit scary. Dig deep enough and find something to scare everyone. Warning to the politically correct crowd, there is no word on earth that this man fears. Despite evidence to the contrary, Terry Davis is a 46 year old (2016) successful but now retired industry professional. He is an unapologetic fan of all things videogame including in-game violence, "it's just that there is a good-hearted and a bad-hearted way to do it". Oh, and he's diagnosed as schizophrenic. And he's a really nice guy

Side note: "universal binary" is a trademark and not a technical term. Apple owns and authorizes use based on terms that fluctuate and include political as well as technical requirements ("FAT binary" and "Universal Binary" are not equivalent). I don't think Universal Binary should ever be tagged (like morphmation and blast processing).

8080 CPU, s-100 bus (expandable). Also Sol-10 and Sol-PC variants. The Sol-10 had no s-100 expandability and the Sol-PC was a singleboard Sol-10. "PC" stands for Personal Computer and this was the first actual digital personal computer to ever be named a PC (there's a "Pastoriza Personal Analog Computer" that predates it). From now on when a game creator tells me a game is for PC only, I will ask them "why would release only for Processor Technology Corporation Sol-PC. Or did you mean it is Pastoriza only?"