@zutton

Quote:

@syrtran why did hyperion get to make Amiga OS if they have never made one before?

I don't know. Maybe they asked nicely, or said the magic word. Someone should ask them or AInc.


Note to thread:
Some of the later comments have me wanting to post a disclaimer. While I said Hyperion had never created an OS before, this wasn't meant to imply that the --programmers-- working on OS4 were totally clueless about OS internals, just that they weren't experienced in creating their own OS - just like the thousands each year who play with Linux or the BSDs for the first time.

Anyway, (AFAIK) OS4 was initially supposed to be just a port of OS3.1 to PPC.

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


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

@samface

Quote:

Do you realize what a license is? I don't think you do. A license is a set of privilidges granted by the intellectual property owner. Take away those privilidges and what do you have? That's right, no privilidges at all. Hyperion wouldn't be able to program any version of the AmigaOS for any kind of hardware what so ever. How's that for a "superficial limitation"?

Is there a smiley missing here, or are you being deliberately obtuse again? Neither AInc nor Hyperion own, create or control any hardware IP. I think it's obvious that AMiGR was talking about the compulsory hardware licensing scheme intended for hardware vendors, and not Hyperion's licence to make AOS4.

An IP owner changing licensing models (or choosing a sane one from the beginning) doesn't mean that they're "taking away" their own "privileges". There is no other company that's in the same position as AInc and/or Hyperion, that has or even would consider THIS kind of hardware vendor licensing scheme. This does NOT mean that AInc/Hyperion are the only companies on this planet that have privileges or rights to their own property!

Quote:

What would be required to achieve what you want is a licensing scheme with a different set of licensing terms, not that the licensing scheme is annulled.

Replacing an old licensing scheme for a new one is the same as VOIDING, ANNULLING, TRASHING, CANCELLING the old one. Then the old one is no more. It has ceased to be.

I don't see ANYONE saying that all licensing is bad per se, and that there mustn't be any kind of licensing. There are plenty of existing statements and opinions to argue against, try one of those for a change.

Quote:

You want a licensing scheme enabling hardware companies to go past Amiga Inc. and directly to Amiga Inc.'s third party to apply for support of their hardware in Amiga Inc.'s OS.

He does? Wow. How do you know, considering he hasn't said so in this thread, and I haven't seen him say so anywhere else? Has anybody else said this? Not as far as I know.

IMO (I won't speak for AMiGR, but it appears he agrees) a sane licensing scheme would allow hardware vendors to go to AInc and ask for permission to sell OS/HW bundles with official support using "Amiga" trademarks -- just in case someone actually would be interested in doing this at some time!

Such applicants are however highly unlikely to appear, and the HW base for AOS would become unnecessarily limited and isolated if this was the only option (like it is today), and valid technical ("how easy is it to get it running on this? is it any good?") and economical issues ("how popular is this hardware? how many own it/would buy it? how many OS copies could we sell?") should be the major deciding factors instead. So the OS should also be made and sold separately for viable hardware, without making the existence of licensed hardware vendors the ultimate and absolute prerequisite.

Quote:

In any case, as the owners of the AmigaOS intellectual property, Amiga Inc. decides entirely on their own to which extent they should grant others the right to exploit it.

Is there a "Duh!" smiley?

Well, actually, you're not just stating the bloody obvious ("an owner owns"). Technically, you're also wrong. :) AInc don't decide entirely on their own. The "AmigaOne partners" -- Eyetech -- are unfortunately and astonishingly enough involved in just that decisionmaking!

Quote:

They obviously have an interest in what hardware their IP should be associated with or not and that is a condition that Hyperion has to comply with in order to not violate the license agreement. Would you have prefered that Hyperion declined to the license agreement based on that condition, leaving us with no AmigaOS4 at all?

Not sure about AMiGR, but I would have preferred a different licensing/OS distribution scheme from the beginning, and now I'd prefer that it would be trashed (i.e. changed for one that makes some sense, in case this still needs to be explained). Otherwise the AmigaOS4 project could just as well not have been started at all, given that it's supposedly a commercial venture which is still-born as long as the current scheme is in place.

You don't know if AInc were "binary" at the negotiation table: "Either you sign THIS without negotiations, or it's nothing at all!" But considering Eyetech of all goddamn people were "consulted" when creating the scheme and allowed to form the f---ing insane "AmigaOne partnership", and that AInc seemed to be braindead in all meanings of the word, you could be right. Then again, it could also have been someone in the Hyperion management who one day had a massive stroke, which made them team up with Eyetech to approach the somnambule AInc with this Cunning Plan. There are a thousand ways a FUBAR can be made. Whatever the details, an irrelevant hardware shop called Eyetech is the only one who could even possibly(!) benefit from this.

_________________
Oh, bother.

@hazydave

Quote:

Cell phones are really hard to break into. Symbian has lots of investment from Nokia and the others, thus, they get an easy "in". Palm and Microsoft have both tried to break into the market, with marginal success.

So, you agree with me that today there are no more free market where we can break into. So we should try to cut a 1% of desktop market.. this will be a great result..

Quote:

Quote: That is surely less powerful than a dual x86 athlon or p4 DVD players do their stuff via dedicated hardware, which, like the dedicated hardware on 3D cards, can very easily be more powerful at a specific job than a general purpose processor. You can't sell a dual x86 system just to play audio/video in the livingroom; it's way too expensive. People who set up PCs in the livingroom can play multimedia stuff, but they're after other things, too: games, internet, etc.

And the games are the things that are drive the PC growth in this years. nothing else. Yes today is no more needed buy a SGI if i want to make video editing because with a normal PC is possible, but not all people use a PC for video editing.

Another little question. What do you think about SCSI? Did you was agreed with Commodore when used it insead cheaper technologies?

_________________
http://www.amigasoft.net

@TrebleSix
Wasn't this the same vision of BeOS?

ace

@acefnq

Quote:

acefnq wrote: @TrebleSix Wasn't this the same vision of BeOS? ace

BeOS was doing well untill they dropped the desktop and concentrated on BeIA (the embedded BeOS) instead.

They had major software developers ready to release high end software even,

Ever since, whenever someone mentions "Embedded" I get this vision in my head of a Succubus sucking in and devouring the souls of otherwise promising desktop platforms.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@syrtran

Quote:

My reference to IBM was about them working side-by-side with MS on OS/2. I was implying that some of the IBMer's vast systems knowledge (I believe they did one or two OSes -before- OS/2) rubbed off onto the MS guys that ended up on the NT team

IBM's influence would be minor at kernel level i.e. read any documents that compares NT and VMS structures.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@Seehund

Quote:

Whatever the details, an irrelevant hardware shop called Eyetech is the only one who could even possibly(!) benefit from this.

I don't agree with that part. You can read my post above, but IMHO Amiga Inc is the main reason for the licensing scheme, and would be the main obstacle to any port on x86 hardware.

It has nothing to do with any conspiracy theory, it has all to do with experience in Microsoft's behaviour and also the simple contract terms they use. That's why I believe Amiga Inc isn't the best society to take any impartial decisions regarding Amiga OS. Again, I'm not bashing them, but everybody just now what they were interested in when they bought the Amiga (they expressed it themselves, so it's not ilke we would be spreading FUD by stating their main interest has never been the desktop OS).

So, what do you think they would certainly do : risk trashing their own solution (Amiga Anywhere) or play it safe?

OTOH, the longer Amiga OS is prevented any market share, the less a threat to Microsoft porting it to x86 would be. So maybe after having made sure the rest of the OS out there have evolved enough so Amiga OS 20th century technology can't compete with them anymore, they might eventually agree to a port to x86.

@t3g

Quote:

t3g wrote: @Seehund Quote: Whatever the details, an irrelevant hardware shop called Eyetech is the only one who could even possibly(!) benefit from this. I don't agree with that part. You can read my post above, but IMHO Amiga Inc is the main reason for the licensing scheme, and would be the main obstacle to any port on x86 hardware. It has nothing to do with any conspiracy theory, it has all to do with experience in Microsoft's behaviour and also the simple contract terms they use. That's why I believe Amiga Inc isn't the best society to take any impartial decisions regarding Amiga OS. Again, I'm not bashing them, but everybody just now what they were interested in when they bought the Amiga (they expressed it themselves, so it's not ilke we would be spreading FUD by stating their main interest has never been the desktop OS). So, what do you think they would certainly do : risk trashing their own solution (Amiga Anywhere) or play it safe? OTOH, the longer Amiga OS is prevented any market share, the less a threat to Microsoft porting it to x86 would be. So maybe after having made sure the rest of the OS out there have evolved enough so Amiga OS 20th century technology can't compete with them anymore, they might eventually agree to a port to x86.

Amiga Inc would be more likely to succeed if they WERE a threat to Microsoft, they'd buy them with pocket change.

That was actually the whole plan, and they were pretty candid about it too. Wait for someone to see a threat/potential who then buys them so they can all retire rich.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@t3g
Quote:

OTOH, the longer Amiga OS is prevented any market share, the less a threat to Microsoft porting it to x86 would be. So maybe after having made sure the rest of the OS out there have evolved enough so Amiga OS 20th century technology can't compete with them anymore, they might eventually agree to a port to x86.

Sounds bizarre. Wait until your product is so outdated that you don't need to fear competition anymore, because nobody would buy it anyway.

_________________
This signature is in the middle of a much needed facelift!

@T_Bone

Quote:

Amiga Inc would be more likely to succeed if they WERE a threat to Microsoft, they'd buy them with pocket change. That was actually the whole plan, and they were pretty candid about it too. Wait for someone to see a threat/potential who then buys them so they can all retire rich.

Microsoft only buy companies when they see the benefit they would gain for it (that is, the commercial benefit). They've never really been into buying OSes, because they wouldn't gain any substantial benefit from them (and improving their own code wouldn't be an option - they don't really make money by having a great codebase. Plus, AmigaOS technology wouldn't really be relevant in Windows word. Finaly, a mean and fast OS is not the way to succeed commercialy - big hw sellers supports you if your OS allow them to sell more expensive hw, not if it means everybody can keep their old PCs longer thanks to a good OS).

On the other hand, they welcome any third party software as long as it enhances the attractiveness of their own OS. The day you start making lots of money, then they either buy you or build a competitor product and push it with whatever they can throw at it.

@t3g

?

Bars & Pipes !!

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

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

@Seehund

Quote:

Neither AInc nor Hyperion own, create or control any hardware IP.

This argument is old and repeated by you far too many times now. When and where did I say anything that would even come close to contradict that? I talked about the AmigaOS4 licensing scheme, what other licensing scheme do you think I could possibly be talking about? Amiga Inc. owns no hardware intellectual properties that I know of, maybe some related to the old classic Amiga computers but that's it.

Quote:

Replacing an old licensing scheme for a new one is the same as VOIDING, ANNULLING, TRASHING, CANCELLING the old one. Then the old one is no more. It has ceased to be.

Is there a "Duh!" smiley?

What I was trying to point out was the difference between removing a license and replacing it. This because AmiGR argued that it was the licensing scheme that was preventing AmigaOS4 from running on more hardware alternatives and that removing it would in itself somehow grant Hyperion the privilidge to decide which hardware to support without Amiga Inc.'s interference. This is simply false because a licensing scheme can only grant privilidges, not revoke.

Quote:

How do you know, considering he hasn't said so in this thread, and I haven't seen him say so anywhere else? Has anybody else said this? Not as far as I know.

How do you interpret this quote of AmiGR then:

Quote:

without the licensing scheme, any company would be able to pay Hyperion for a port to their hardware and Hyperion could also self-finance a port that they see fit to do themselves.

?

I mean, no matter how many times I read the "without the licensing scheme, any company would be able to" part, I simply cannot interpret it in any other way as that he is saying that removing the licensing scheme would in itself grant Hyperion the privilidge to decide which hardware support by themselves. And please keep in mind that there is a world of difference between cancelling a license agreement and negotiating a different set of licensing terms.

Quote:

AInc don't decide entirely on their own. The "AmigaOne partners" -- Eyetech -- are unfortunately and astonishingly enough involved in just that decisionmaking!

If Amiga Inc. has granted Eyetech the privilidge to take part in these decissions or not is noone's but Amiga Inc.'s decission to make. Your point is null and void.

Regarding your constant whining and baseless claims about the effects of the licensing scheme, please don't be afraid to tell us a little more about the kind of licensing scheme you would prefer. All I ever read from you is what can't be done because of the current licensing scheme, I would rather here something constructive like, what *can* be done with the kind of licensing scheme you have in mind? As I've tried to explain so many times in vain, licenses is about granting privilidges, not revoking them. Yet all we hear about is how the licensing scheme would somehow be revoking rights that would have existed without it.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@polka.

Quote:

Sounds bizarre. Wait until your product is so outdated that you don't need to fear competition anymore, because nobody would buy it anyway.

I'm not saying it's a deliberate decision. When I say "after having made sure" it's not because they really planned it. It's just that their - lack of action/interest towards other markets - achieved that effect. By chosing to keep a hw platform that would cripple the OS, and having a licensing scheme that makes it far harder for others to come in and really make something out of the OS, they play it safe. But to play it safe lead to the end result : staling.

I've got nothing towards Eyetech or other companies. They should be praised for trying their best.
OTOH, I don't know the licensing terms nor do I know the terms the 3 companies agreed upon. I can only see the comments from said companies each time somebody asked what would be feasible - looks like everytime they comment it, they can't do anything because it has to be approved by the 2 other companies involved.

@t3g

Quote:

OTOH, the longer Amiga OS is prevented any market share, the less a threat to Microsoft porting it to x86 would be. So maybe after having made sure the rest of the OS out there have evolved enough so Amiga OS 20th century technology can't compete with them anymore, they might eventually agree to a port to x86.

Are you saying Microsoft are preventing a port? They couldn't do that, it's illegal.
Then again that's never stopped them before...


Quote:

They've never really been into buying OSes,

Where do you think MS-DOS or Windows came from? Neither were developed internally.
The only they have developed in house was a rip off of someone else work - advance each of the letters of VMS along the alphabet by 1 and you get WNT...

_________________
Whyzzat?

@samface

Quote:

How do you interpret this quote of AmiGR then: Quote: without the licensing scheme, any company would be able to pay Hyperion for a port to their hardware and Hyperion could also self-finance a port that they see fit to do themselves. ? I mean, no matter how many times I read the "without the licensing scheme, any company would be able to" part, I simply cannot interpret it in any other way as that he is saying that removing the licensing scheme would in itself grant Hyperion the privilidge to decide which hardware support by themselves. And please keep in mind that there is a world of difference between cancelling a license agreement and negotiating a different set of licensing terms.

Stop pretending to be an idiot, we're talking about the compulsory HARDWARE licensing scheme,
not the entire AmigaOS4 contract. Removing it == negotiating more sane terms.
Really, you've had your go with that BS, believing every single word Amiga Inc. says, on ANN.lu,
you'll find that not many people here or elsewhere believe that somehow that hardware licensing
scheme benefits AmigaOS, or that without it in the contract AmigaOS4 would not have been possible.

_________________

@minator

Quote:

advance each of the letters of VMS along the alphabet by 1 and you get WNT...

Doesn't mean anything.

'Retard' each of the letters of IBM and you get HAL from 2001. So?

@AMiGR

There is no hardware licensing scheme, only an AmigaOS4 licensing scheme. The license Hyperion has from Amiga Inc. to develop AmigaOS4 and the terms for Hyperion to develop support for more hardware alternatives in AmigaOS4, it's all a part of the same licensing scheme.

Here's how it goes; a hardware distributor/manufacturer contacts Amiga Inc., asking for their hardware to be supported by AmigaOS4. If Amiga Inc. decides to go with it, then they extend Hyperion's license to encompass that hardware alternative as well.

As you can see, there is no hardware licensing scheme involved, only an AmigaOS4 license with terms for which hardware Hyperion is able to develop support for. As Seehund has repeated so many times before, Amiga Inc. doesn't own or control any hardware IP.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@samface

Quote:

Here's how it goes; a hardware distributor/manufacturer contacts Amiga Inc., asking for their hardware to be supported by AmigaOS4. If Amiga Inc. decides to go with it, then they extend Hyperion's license to encompass that hardware alternative as well. As you can see, there is no hardware licensing scheme involved, only an AmigaOS4 license with terms for which hardware Hyperion is able to develop support for. As Seehund has repeated so many times before, Amiga Inc. doesn't own or control any hardware IP.

Excuse me? That's exactly what I'm talking about and it's exactly what should go. Do, you genuinely believe that this scheme helps AmigaOS?

_________________

this guy Dave knows what he's talking about

Last edited by samos3.9 on 21-Jan-2006 at 07:05 PM.
Last edited by wegster on 20-Jan-2006 at 04:43 PM.

_________________
Add ME!! http://myspace.com/thisis_sam

@AMiGR

Exactly as I wrote in my first reply to you in this thread then, you want a different set of terms of the licensing scheme. I guess what you mean by that the terms "should go" is that Amiga Inc. should grant Hyperion the right to develop for whatever hardware they see fit, right? My follow up question on that would then be; why? Is it because you think Hyperion would make more favorable decisions as to which hardware to support than Amiga Inc. or is it because you think it would speed up the decission making process if you cut down on a "middle man" and let hardware manufacturers/distributors turn to Hyperion directly?

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)