@opi

Are you being serious?

I don't believe for a second that Eyetech did batches of less than 200-250 boards.
Maybe even 500 boards some runs. The cost of handling them would out weigh the
profit otherwise.

_________________
/Harry

[SOLD] µA1-C - 750GX 800MHz - 512MB - Antec Aria case

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@Coder

Quote:

Coder wrote: Don't forget that without Eyetech there would not be any hardware and OS.

Errr... That's one way of looking at it, I guess. That is if one can only accept the theory that Eyetech of all damn dealers on Earth is the only one capable of selling hardware also to those customers that happen to use one particular OS called AmigaOS. Unfortunately, that seems to be the thinking behind the compulsory hardware licensing scheme. Eyetech or nothing.

Another way of looking at it, is that without Eyetech (and their hardware licensing co-invention), we might not have seen one particular series of motherboards being re-sold under the "AmigaOne" label. So what? Big F-ing Deal.
Instead, we might have seen AmigaOS4 actually being sold for faster, fully functional, properly guaranteed, not-so-ridiculously-priced and generally available (not only on an "Amiga" pseudo-market) hardware from reliable dealers a couple of years ago.

Merely selling a product (especially if you've made yourself the only one allowed to sell said type of product) doesn't by itself make anyone automatically "deserve some credit", IMO.

_________________
Oh, bother.

When an improved MoBo becomes available ... ie: Faster cpu, pci-e (using Olegils doodarr?) etc, Then I'll upgrade to that and put my XE on the market.

_________________
******************************************
I dont suffer from Insanity - I enjoy it

******************************************

@Samwel

Sure, I don't know the real amount of CPUs ordered in one batch. I was speaking about current situation, ie. when Eyetech has some problems with cash. They have "boards without CPU". So, if there's less that 500 boards, IBM couldn't care less for shiping small number of CPUs.

_________________
OpenWindows Initiative. Port PS3 hardware to bananas. For free. Join today and receive expired $50 cupon from AI!

@opi

iirc Alan said he could get the cpu's from various sources. But not at the price needed (OEM ?).

_________________
******************************************
I dont suffer from Insanity - I enjoy it

******************************************

@Seehund

Alan helped out a lot behind the scenes that kept everything going. Not only by bringing out new hardware. But I guess it depends on how everyone looks at it.

Coder

_________________
Can't get enough of me?
The Bucket Diary Blog
The Bucket Diary Twitter Account

@Seehund

I'm getting tired of your incessant repetition. You seem to miss one -very- important point:

Amiga Inc (actually their investors) doesn't want any hardware at all.

The business plan was for the intent-based Amiga DE/Anywhere/wherever. We were all supposed to follow the 'name' to 'a whole new computing paradigm'*.

The -only- reason we are using AOS4 instead of MOS (no slight to MOS) is because Alan offered to make hardware - because of the 'licensing scheme'. The whole point, from AInc's view, of the 'scheme' was to appease the existing customer base (us), not to expand it. Originally, it was just supposed to be an add-on to a 1200. When that didn't work, that's when we got the A1. Without that 'scheme', there would be no OS4 - for any hardware.

You won't see OS4 on any non-approved hardware. (I wonder about Troika) The only way we'll see it spread is if Hyperion can show AInc. that there is a bigger market for OS4 than for -Anywhere.

If it weren't for Alan, we'd all be over at Morphzone, complaining about BB not shipping the 'new' MOS or Efika.



Disclaimer - the preceding anouncement is from left field. I have no 'insider' information.


* - Apparently, someone forgot to tell the investors and AInc about Java[tm], or even about the old UCSD P-System.

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


1989 - 500 / 1991 - 3000 / 1997 - Genesis Flyer 1200T / 2003 - A1XE

@syrtran

Quote:

The -only- reason we are using AOS4 instead of MOS (no slight to MOS) is because Alan offered to make hardware - because of the 'licensing scheme'. The whole point, from AInc's view, of the 'scheme' was to appease the existing customer base (us), not to expand it. Originally, it was just supposed to be an add-on to a 1200. When that didn't work, that's when we got the A1. Without that 'scheme', there would be no OS4 - for any hardware.

Stop rewriting history please, the OS4 project was "started" "in-house" by Amiga Inc., after they saw interest in AmigaOS again, which happened after they saw MOS running (I could be wrong, but I think that it was Olaf Barthel that showed them the beta) and failed to reach an agreement with the MorphOS team. That OS4 would on "Zico-spec" hardware, which *included* the Pegasos, the SharkPPC and Escena/Eyetech's AmigaOne1200/4000. Of course, that failed, and Hyperion took over the project. Eyetech **DID** help them economically, according to Alan, but I do not believe that Hyperion would not had taken the project without Eyetech. The whole hardware licensing scheme was a way to control the market and get as many quick bucks the Amiga Inc. pillocks could get, with the further (questionable) advantage of reducing piracy. It was and is a stupid idea, hardly any large hardware manufacturer would actually pay for a tiny OS. For this to work, you need a hefty market share, a lot of software and many potential customers, that would make sure than an investment, on the Hardware manufacturer or dealer side, is worthwhile.

Note, that I am **NOT** saying that Eyetech did not do a service to this market and OS4 itself, they did. However, that is not to say that **many** things he did could not be done much better, retrospectively and it certainly is not to say that "without them there would be no OS4". How do you know? The what if scenarios are plenty.

Quote:

If it weren't for Alan, we'd all be over at Morphzone, complaining about BB not shipping the 'new' MOS or Efika.

It's not BB that ships MOS. And new shouldn't be in quotes, it's in constant development, they aren't delaying an old version, the old 1.5 betas they'd shown are already out of date.

Last edited by AMiGR on 22-Feb-2006 at 01:59 PM.
Last edited by AMiGR on 22-Feb-2006 at 01:57 PM.

_________________

@AMiGR

Quote:

Three possible reasons:

Speculation and nothing else. The real reason is reason 4.

Quote:

3) The 7447 doesn't work with the ArticiaS for some reason. - I will assume that this is not the case with their implementation, bPlan claimed that it didn't but Eyetech claimed that it did, I give them the benefit of doubt.

Uh, not wanting to burst anyone's bubble, but I *do* have a 7447 1.4 GHz in my AmigaOne. The reason I am only running it at 1.1 GHz is because the thing is getting too hot with the crappy Crystal Orb cooler and I am too lazy to build an adequate cooling, but the card already ran at 1.4 GHz earlier.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@Rogue

Quote:

Speculation and nothing else. The real reason is reason 4.

Muh? I answered to the "Evil CPU companies do not give Eyetech their precious CPUs" arguement, there could be many many MANY other reasons for the current situation, I addressed the one that was brought up here.

Quote:

Uh, not wanting to burst anyone's bubble, but I *do* have a 7447 1.4 GHz in my AmigaOne. The reason I am only running it at 1.1 GHz is because the thing is getting too hot with the crappy Crystal Orb cooler and I am too lazy to build an adequate cooling, but the card already ran at 1.4 GHz earlier.

Muh? I gave some possible reasons and I'm pretty certain that I did say that one of you two have a working card, which is why I said that the third option is not likely.

BTW, don't those cards have GPU cooling mounting holes? In that case, there are many pretty good cooling solutions on the market, that are made to cool GPUs that dissipate much more power than a G4, although they are bloody expensive.

Last edited by AMiGR on 22-Feb-2006 at 02:06 PM.
Last edited by AMiGR on 22-Feb-2006 at 02:03 PM.

_________________

@AMiGR

Quote:

Eyetech **DID** help them economically, according to Alan,

For the records, there never had been any sort of gifts from Eyetech to Hyperion. Eyetech agreed to pay certain things to Hyperion at an earlier time than when they where due, but it's not like anybody donnated money to Hyperion. We even paid for all the development machines we are using.

Quote:

It was and is a stupid idea, hardly any large hardware manufacturer would actually pay for a tiny OS.

Some people sound like a broken record.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@Rogue

Quote:

For the records, there never had been any sort of gifts from Eyetech to Hyperion. Eyetech agreed to pay certain things to Hyperion at an earlier time than when they where due, but it's not like anybody donnated money to Hyperion. We even paid for all the development machines we are using.

Well, that was Alan's claim, not mine, so down it goes, my only point is that I do not believe that the "without Eyetech" or "without the licensing scheme there would be no OS4" are correct, as you guys would probably just find another way to market the OS or different hardware.

Quote:

Some people sound like a broken record.

Hm? Have I ever claimed that Apple would pay Amiga Inc, for an Amiga license and you for a port and I didn't know it?

_________________

@AMiGR

Quote:

Muh? I answered to the "Evil CPU companies do not give Eyetech their precious CPUs" arguement, there could be many many MANY other reasons for the current situation, I addressed the one that was brought up here.

You said "three possible reasons" and went on to post speculative reasoning. As I said, the real reason is the one you didn't name. What are you complaining about?

Quote:

Muh? I gave some possible reasons and I'm pretty certain that I did say that one of you two have a working card, which is why I said that the third option is not likely.

Your reasoning was "I will assume that this is not the case with their implementation, bPlan claimed that it didn't but Eyetech claimed that it did, I give them the benefit of doubt.", not that anyone actually has a card.

*shrugs* Nevermind. I am sure you didn't mean to participate in any urination contest, seeing how you your name only pops up in this kind of thread...

Quote:

BTW, don't those cards have GPU cooling mounting holes? In that case, there are many pretty good cooling solutions on the market, that are made to cool GPUs that dissipate much more power than a G4, although they are bloody expensive.

You cannot simply put an X86 cooler on the CPU. For one thing, the cpu is on a card, you cannot and should not put much weight on it or you might damage the connector in the long run.

Secondly, some of the parts on the CPU card might interfere with a large cooler, must the same as you had trouble with some X86 mainboards that hard large capacitors near the AGP slot that interfered with proper placement of GeForce FX cards.

Finally, as I said, I am lazy

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@AMiGR

Quote:

Hm? Have I ever claimed that Apple would pay Amiga Inc, for an Amiga license and you for a port and I didn't know it?

Ooops, sorry, stupidity of the moment. I'm a pillock sometimes, could be the lack of sleep, I read the expression and my brain had stuck on something else. Yes, I do repeat myself a lot on this issue, because I believe this. But anyway, this is not to say, YET again, that if Eyetech, or ANYONE, for that matter, provides affordable hardware, I won't buy it.

_________________

@AMiGR

Quote:

Well, that was Alan's claim, not mine, so down it goes, my only point is that I do not believe that the "without Eyetech" or "without the licensing scheme there would be no OS4" are correct, as you guys would probably just find another way to market the OS or different hardware.

I didn't say it was wrong, I just tried to clarify.

Quote:

Hm? Have I ever claimed that Apple would pay Amiga Inc, for an Amiga license and you for a port and I didn't know it?

Nevermind. If you didn't get it first time, you'll never understand.
(edit: Just saw your follow up post )

Last edited by Rogue on 22-Feb-2006 at 02:18 PM.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@Rogue

Quote:

You said "three possible reasons" and went on to post speculative reasoning. As I said, the real reason is the one you didn't name. What are you complaining about?

Again, I'm complaining about nothing at all, again, somebody brought up the "no CPU" argument and I countered that. Is it true that they cannot get CPUs? If yes and it is for a different reason,
I publically admit to be wrong and thank you for pointing this out to me.

I'm a human, just like everyone in here.

Moreover, if it is a case of them having ordered CPUs from a supplier, having paid for them and not received them, or any similar case, I apologise to Eyetech and Alan, as well.

Quote:

Your reasoning was "I will assume that this is not the case with their implementation, bPlan claimed that it didn't but Eyetech claimed that it did, I give them the benefit of doubt.", not that anyone actually has a card. *shrugs* Nevermind. I am sure you didn't mean to participate in any urination contest, seeing how you your name only pops up in this kind of thread...

A pissing contest? Sorry, but I prefer calling it a discussion, even if it is a pretty heated one. Whether there's a point in it or not, I cannot say, but I, and other people, might end up with more knowledge on matters out of it. It's not as if I haven't proved already that I *DO* accept my mistakes when I'm wrong.

Quote:

You cannot simply put an X86 cooler on the CPU. For one thing, the cpu is on a card, you cannot and should not put much weight on it or you might damage the connector in the long run. Secondly, some of the parts on the CPU card might interfere with a large cooler, must the same as you had trouble with some X86 mainboards that hard large capacitors near the AGP slot that interfered with proper placement of GeForce FX cards.

No, no, I'm talking about graphics card coolers, not x86 CPU coolers!

Quote:

Finally, as I said, I am lazy

You're not the only one, my PC at home is a mess. .

Last edited by AMiGR on 22-Feb-2006 at 02:26 PM.
Last edited by AMiGR on 22-Feb-2006 at 02:26 PM.

_________________

@AMiGR

Quote:

Stop rewriting history please,

I apologize, I wasn't trying to rewrite history. I was rushing to work and had simply mixed up a few things while replying to Seehund. Thank you for pointing out that some people will assume the worst when reading an ambiguous or incorrect post.

Quote:

the OS4 project was "started" "in-house" by Amiga Inc., after they saw interest in AmigaOS again, which happened after they saw MOS running (I could be wrong, but I think that it was Olaf Barthel that showed them the beta) and failed to reach an agreement with the MorphOS team.

Again, thank you for correcting me. I was under the impression that the original PPC OS project was proposed by the MOS developers to AInc, and that it was going to run on the Phase 5/DCE boards, and that the Escena board was only proposed by Escena and Eyetech later, after the falling-out with the MOS devs. I apologize for any mistakes.

Of course this doesn't invalidate my original point to Seehund, which, in case you missed it, was:
Quote:

Amiga Inc (actually their investors) doesn't want any hardware at all.

especially the part inbetween the parentheses/curved braces. Again, I was under the impression that the whole Itec/KMOS deal was the investors trying to separate the OS4 part from the -Anywhere part. It seemed from public postings that this was the investors "pulling in the reins" on AInc to get them back to their original business plan - the one the investors actually bought into - "the intent-based AmigaDE/Anywhere."

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


1989 - 500 / 1991 - 3000 / 1997 - Genesis Flyer 1200T / 2003 - A1XE

@tomazkid

Quote:

tomazkid wrote: @Moxee Quote: HA ! No one is prying my XE away from me without a fight ! What about asking nicely: Pretty please with sugar on top?

Well, I "might" let you come over and use mine if you are co-operative and have the proper plumbing.

_________________
Moxee
AmigaOne X1000
AmigaOne XE G4
I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

@Moxee


cut snip

Quote:

Well, I "might" let you come over and use mine if you are co-operative and have the proper plumbing.

You are just a dog.

@Samwel

Quote:

I don't believe for a second that Eyetech did batches of less than 200-250 boards. Maybe even 500 boards some runs. The cost of handling them would out weigh the profit otherwise.

Assuming each board costs 500e to Eyetech making batch of 500 boards is ridiculous amount of money (500 boards * 500e = 250000e).

Now you must sell boards to resellers too... Assuming there are 20 Amiga resellers (optimistic guess) every dealer must consume 25 boards on average. Now if dealer can sell one board per week stock of 25 boards would last six months... obviously dealers dont order more boards than they could sell in reasonable time which means Eyetech must stock extra boards making loss on them (value of money inflates, stocking costs).

Even batches of 200-250 boards is ridiculously expensive...

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook