Awesome I had not seen this video. Growing up in Australia everyone of my friends who owned an Amiga tended to blame the marketing or lack of marketing of the Amiga by Commodore. I'm not sure about other countries but there tended to be a stronger following both in the UK and Europe ( Population also has something to do with this I'm sure) As I think you still see today.

I think it's raining ...Yes, it's definitely raining...And...These onions, these onions are very strong

I'm going to need a second

thanks for the link. interesting vid.

Oh, and as a quick note on the "we could open multiple copies of a program" comment.
As they former vendor of 68K based OS-9 systems, WE could run multiple instance of a program and only have ONE copy of it in memory with multiple user/data areas.

That's where you guys blew it.
Loose sloppy coding that created all those lovely guru meditation crashes.

Even without memory protection, our program were structured better and were always written for position independent addressing.

SO...there is still a currently update 68K version of OS-9 available while AmigaOS 4 struggles to convince everyone that it is an AmigaOS (which of course it is, Hyperion can even incorporate the entirety of OS3.1 into OS4 if it desires).

I'd still love to see a tight micro kernel based OS that uses position independent addressing with a good tight graphic user interface.

The Amiga could do this too.
 

 
Amiga software was position independent.
 

Amiga addressing is rarely designed to be reentrant.
In fact some coders used the heinous practice of creating self modifying code..
That makes reentrancy virtually impossible.
And the OS doesn't manage this function leaving the task to "friendly" applications.
That why older Amiga (and Windows) apps sometimes cause the system to go bye-bye.
And most code on 68K and later machines is position independent (or at least position relative).

Programs with self modifying code are crashing because of the cpu caches, not because of the OS.

So Moron? well if he is ,i hope there are another ten thousand like him Brian

I hope not, the only other positive statement I've heard about him are that some people find his trolling and thread derailling hilarious.
 
I don't care that he posted a youtube comment though.
 

And the OS doesn't manage this function leaving the task to "friendly" applications.

The OS manages sharing executables but with no MMU you are reliant on "friendly" applications. You could just as easily write an OS9 application that uses self modifying code.
 

And most code on 68K and later machines is position independent (or at least position relative).

I'm not sure what you're getting at there. The operating system in machines without MMU's relocate their executables at load time, which AmigaOS does too.
 
You're still saying the OS is bad because of programmers that wrote applications, those same programmers could write OS-9 applications.