@Seehund

Quote:

Quote: It never crossed my mind that one could go badly after something he/she does not want. I feel enlightened Who's going after AOS4? If you're referring to the Genesi vs AInc lawsuit, there was barely any effort to try to get the court to interpret the contract broken by AInc to include AOS instead of the inexistent "AmigaDE Operating System". It looked like a hip-shot in the dark to me, it missed, and the issue wasn't pursuited further.

Since 3-level quoting does not work (at least here), I have to re-arrange things a bit.

We started discussing here because you freely decided to answer my post #212 with the post #225, to which I answered with the post #238 (topmost quote above).

For convenience, here's what I said in post #212:
Quote:

I said "you" (="BBRV"), not "Genesi". BBRV wants AOS4, and new HW for AOS4 means that AOS4 can do without him.

It is (and always been) more than clear who I am referring to. So, please, stop playing these games.
(And, no, I was not referring to the lawsuit.)

Quote:

Quote: Are you saying that AOS4 would not help selling the HW because there are already other OSes doing the job? Fine. What is BB doing here, then? I keep asking myself that. :) But believe it or not, I think it IS entirely possible that a vendor of an Amiga-like system would be likely to hang out in various fora for Amiga-like stuff, and this without being specifically interested in becoming the owner of AOS4 - or even a licensed reseller of hardware bundled with it.

Sure. Only that BB does not simply hang out and has nice chats with other fellow Amigans. He does much more than that (also outside of forums). It definitely seems that you want to deny this and, well, I'd be very, very surprised if you wanted to arrive to that point. I don't even want to know why. If you care, I suggest you go and look at all that BB has been publically saying and doing in the past years. I personally can't afford to do this huge job for you, especially considering that I suspect that it would be completely useless, given that you've been around for a long time.

Quote:

It doesn't seem like bigger opportunities are neglected just because they occasionally post here. Otherwise he needs a slap on his head! :)

Just to be clear, I've never even remotely hinted at this.

Quote:

Quote: Or - as it seems to me - are you saying that AOS4 *would* help (although not more than the other OSes) selling the HW and thus, obviously, a welcome addition to the collection of OSes? Fine. Then I don't get how it can be that he wants to sell HW, he realizes AOS4 can help and still he does not want AOS. There's a difference between entering a licensing agreement with people like AInc to sell hardware bundled with AOS and all which that entails, and simply selling hardware that AOS can be bought for. Return On Investment, and all that.

It's you that is reading "want" as "own". I never said that. In fact, if you read my post #239 - a direct question to BBRV - and several other posts of mine, you can see that I indeed consider the license.


Quote:

Quote: And, on top of that, there's the fact that he's been after AOS4 ever since. I kinda feel short-circuited. What fact? Been after how? Since when?

If you want to re-write history, feel free. But don't expect me (and others) to attend the lecture


Now, again the 3-levels quoting problem - please excuse the re-arrangment.
I wrote this (post #238):
Quote:

BB has invested and keeps investing time and money to get AOS4 (and this very thread is just the last example). The license may not be worth it, but AOS4 is In practice, he's just trying to dodge the license. Whether because he just cannot get it or does not want it is unknown and, after all, irrelevant: in both cases he is playing questionable games.

as a reply to:

Quote:

Rather the opposite, I'd think. Either way it's worth neither money nor time to try to get permission, a licence, to be allowed to try to sell AOS bundled with and dongled to their hardware

Now you say:
Quote:

Dodge, questionable... Sounds like you think he's doing something illegit!

I really hope he never broke the law. But, for sure, as I have already discussed in this thread, the way he behaved, and keeps behaving is all but professional and orthodox.
That aside, given that you have been happy with writing just that remark, I take it that you agree that AOS4 is indeed worth the efforts (unlike you originally said).

Quote:

Quote: I'll be very worried the day I can't find anything better than investing my time, energies and money to go after something I don't need (or even don't want at all). What's with this "going after" rhetoric?

"Rethoric"?!? Sure, BBRV never tried to get access to AOS4, I've dreamt it all by myself and now I'm enjoying the exercise of involving everybody here in my wild dream

Quote:

You, me, BBRV and a few hundred others are merely participating in discussions here

Sure, we're all here for the same reasons...

Quote:

(and marketing, as it were, when it comes to the various commercial entitites posting here).

... so what's the use of saying what you wrote above when immediately after you write just the opposite?
You said:

a) you, me and BBRV just discussing
b) commercial entities doing marketing

but BBRV represent a commercial entity and, guess what, they have opened this thread exactly in that role, for marketing reasons.
It strongly looks like you tried to dimish the relevance of BBRV interventions - which matches perfectly the history rewrite above.

Quote:

If anyone's going after immaterai properties, they'd probably have better luck employing other methods than posting messages on a community forum.

Tell BBRV, not us.


Ouch. We're again in 3-level quotes troubles.
We were saying:
Quote:

Quote: None of whatever pointless projects which have gotten their pre-progress reports pre-pre-pre-announced are commercially attractive. Unless you mean something else - in which case I'd ask you to elaborate -, you are saying the projects being discussed these days are commercially pointless, right? So, what facts can back up this statement? You know, without them, this is spreading FUD.

and you replied:
Quote:

No, it's not FUD! It's my certain and undoubtful opinion as a participant in this forum. I'm not selling any competing hardware.

You like to play games to dodge the points you cannot counter.
Let's play the game, then.
The link you posted says: "FUD is the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that IBM sales people instill in the minds of potential customers who might be considering [Amdahl] products."
You are not interpreting yourself that line strictly, otherwise FUD could be applied to IBM only. For your own convenience, you are interpreting your own way. So, why shouldn't I be able to interpret it my own way? Now, I tell you what: I use "FUD" in the most general and common sense, i.e. "Fear Uncertainty and Doubt" spread against something (for whatever reason/agenda).
Now, the fact is that you are trying to escape my questions, which means that you don't have any valid argument.

Quote:

Fact: People generally don't prefer to buy outdated, underperforming, slowly if at all developed, overpriced and poorly marketed computer hardware. Not when there's contemporary, well-performing, continuously developed, competitively priced and heavily marketed computer hardware available.

Right. And how do you know that the projects being developed these days are "outdated, underperforming, slowly if at all developed, overpriced" and will be "poorly marketed"? This is just more FUD.

Quote:

Quote: Case in point: AInc's compulsory hardware licencing scheme and the "AmigaOne" failure. Heck, make that every failure in history of technology that didn't evolve fast enough, cost little enough, perform well enough, and thus didn't sell enough, which in turn led to slow evolution, high prices... Now AmigaOS has for IMO no good reason been locked in that vicious circle again. I don't think AmigaOS per se is enough incentive to lure any significant number of new users to pay a premium for pretending that there still are "Amigas" and for running around in a vicious circle that's deliberately been made as small as possible.

This has nothing to do with the FUD-related discussion above and is yet another attempt at diverting the attention, shifting it on the license issue (which, BTW, I have already dealt with in other posts).

saimo

_________________
RETREAM - retro dreams for Amiga, Commodore 64 and PC

@saimo

Quote:

Right. And how do you know that the projects being developed these days are "outdated, underperforming, slowly if at all developed, overpriced" and will be "poorly marketed"? This is just more FUD.

The circumstances for most of these projects (tiny target group, nearly no profits to be made, additional license costs, tiny production runs, not much of a market for desktop PPC, costs of custom solutions, restriction to only PPC, the bad price/performance ratio of PPC compared to x86)
simply doesn't allow to produce and sell hardware which can't be described with those adjectives (well, unless you can convince Richard Branson for doing the funding ).

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

@jahc

Yes that would indeed be nice. Then all 4 cores could be utilised.

I don't think it has gone much over planning stage yet.. Please correct me if I'm wrong Hyperion!

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@Samwel

I would hope that they first do what they promised (e.g. BPPC and CSPPC versions) instead of spending their precious time on things that are unneeded at this stage of development.

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

@Kronos

* Yes I know G5 is faster than any G4. Read again what I wrote! I wrote running 32bit code in single core in the same frequency.
* Yes 7448 is expensive, but that wasn't the issue, only performance was..
* Yes of course the dual chip dual core board will out perform any G4 board if the operating system supports
either dual core and/or dual CPU's.
* Yes it's a good idea to port both MOS and OS4 to it and let them grow feature wise.

I wasn't against these things in my post, was I? If so then it wasn't meant that way.

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

If I am going to buy a PPC Instruction Set computer that does not run Amiga OS it will be a Sony Playstation 3, not an EFIKA.

_________________
Amiga user since 1985.

@Zylesea

Yes 7448 is more expensive. But you can't seriously tell me (disregarding price) that 7447A
is better than 7448 to use in a desktop solution??? I mean it runs cooler, faster and supports
more low power features. You could even run it silent @ 1GHz (without active cooling).

Of course G5 is the only real PPC chip suited for desktops today. But these are expensive
as hell to build. Not talking about the CPU alone now.

Yes 8641 will be a nice CPU indeed. Will be nice to see it in action next year

Regarding Apple.. Probably the price of the new beast that scared them off, not the
performance.

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@polka.

Sorry, but it has gone so long that I don't care if they do it anymore.
Better to support new stuff and hardware IMHO.

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@Samwel

Quote:

Sorry, but it has gone so long that I don't care if they do it anymore. Better to support new stuff and hardware IMHO.

And take the wraith of all those who believe in the promise of OS4 for CSPPC and BPPC ?

No, that would hurt Hyperions credibility too much I recon.

_________________
Site admins are people too..pooff!

@Seehund

Before the World Wide Web, when Commodore was involved were you whining about their licensing scheme? Did you constantly complain to your friends and neighbors about how horrible it was that you had to buy an Amiga computer to get a copy of Amiga OS? Did you write letters to Commodore complaining? Did you write in to computer magazines? Did you rant at computer club meetings from 1985 until 1994 about how unfair it all was? Or are you more recently outraged? Did you yell at Mac users from 1984 on about how horrible it was to have to buy Apple hardware to run the MacOS? Do you spend the same amount of your time harassing Apple? Do you complain at MacOS web sites? Even as they moved to X86 processors, one still must buy a certain motherboard to run their OS. That must infuriate you too.

Do you think staying on Amigaworld.net and lecturing me on the evils of the policies of Amiga Inc. will get them to change? Do you think that it will get me to change? I have always bought Amiga hardware to run the Amiga OS (since 1985). It is not new to me or upsetting in the least. It is the way it always has been. I will continue to buy the hardware that runs the software that I want to run. Amiga Inc. will do what they want to with their property. Your displeasure with the situation will make no difference to either of us.

Last edited by DoodooHead on 07-Sep-2006 at 02:46 PM.
Last edited by DoodooHead on 07-Sep-2006 at 02:45 PM.

_________________
Amiga user since 1985.

@Samwel

Quote:

Sorry, but it has gone so long that I don't care if they do it anymore.

Alright, after so many broken promises you think this one shouldn't matter anymore? The BPPC and CSPPC versions were announced at a very early stage of development and Rogue recently confirmed that they are still planned after "new" OS4-hardware has been released.
Some people have waited years for having OS4 on their BPPC/CSPPC. Most of them thought (thanks to humbug-announcements) that these would appear 2003, then 2004, then 2005, then 2006, and know you are telling them to STFU because "it doesn't matter anymore"?

Last edited by polka. on 07-Sep-2006 at 02:29 PM.

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

@all interested

OK, Folks, here it is:

PowerCollaboration

We are building the site now for the first demo to the Power.org BoD on 13 September. We are including a MorphOS and Solaris section. Would any *serious* person or group of persons like access to the site to build an OS4 section? Please email us if you are interested.

Eventhough MorphOS and OS4 are not "open" there *is* a community.

The Power of Community

That is the message being missed by some here. Does any one remember how the demo scene used to work when the whole "demo" had to go on a floppy because that was the best way to get it from one place to another? The first community was Amiga. We hope this has not been forgotten. We have "talked" enough. There is the chance if you want it - we don't even care if you use our boards/systems.

BYE!

R&B

_________________
genesi

@DoodooHead
Quote:

Before the World Wide Web, when Commodore was involved were you whining about their licensing scheme? Did you constantly complain to your friends and neighbors about how horrible it was that you had to buy an Amiga computer to get a copy of Amiga OS?

I'm not sure if you know this, but the Amiga used unique custom hardware which was not found on any other system. That pretty much limited the use of AOS to those who had an Amiga because AOS was designed to work only with that custom hardware. There was no reason to try to run AOS on a PC, for example, because there was no PC which contained the custom hardware AOS required.

According to Hyperion there is no technical reason OS4 couldn't run on hardware besides the A1, and it's only because they agreed to a dead-end licensing scheme that OS4 is tied to a boat anchor. Aside from a broken bus controller, there isn't anything proprietary about the A1, and supposedly the HAL in OS4 makes OS4 more portable. Hence it should be possible for OS4 to run on a variety of hardware. People working for Hyperion have made this claim in the past.

Since there was a technical reason why AmigaOS couldn't run on other hardware, but the only thing preventing OS4 from running on other hardware is a license, some people see that as an issue. There was no reason to complain about AmigaOS being tied to the Amiga, because it simply wouldn't run on anything else available at the time. The same is not true of OS4.

Hope this helps clear things up for you.

_________________
Here for the whimpering end

@bbrv
Quote:

Would any *serious* person or group of persons like access to the site to build an OS4 section?

If nobody volunteers you could just link to the official OS4 website:
http://os4.hyperion-entertainment.biz/

_________________
Here for the whimpering end

@jorkany

Quote:

According to Hyperion there is no technical reason OS4 couldn't run on hardware besides the A1, and it's only because they agreed to a dead-end licensing scheme that OS4 is tied to a boat anchor. Aside from a broken bus controller, there isn't anything proprietary about the A1, and supposedly the HAL in OS4 makes OS4 more portable. Hence it should be possible for OS4 to run on a variety of hardware. People working for Hyperion have made this claim in the past.

So could (e.g.) MacOS (on both, x86 and PPC). And ? Doesn't mean its gonna happen.

Still, AmigaOS (like MacOS) is a propietary OS owned by a commercial company and thus their soleley proerty. Like it or not, they can do what ever they want with it.

Also, I doubt that the only reason why AmigaOS did not run on any other (non Commodore) HW is the technical reason alone. Commodore in its late days was stripping the OS from it's HW dependecies already, the Actuiator Design (or however that is spelled) was a modular design running the AmigaOS. It simply did never materialize, nor was the SW finished (but even OS3.x contains the first attempts of an RTG system to remove Blitter/Copper dependencies). So, C= did try to get away from the HW dependencies, but does that mean, they would have licensed the OS (note, I am pretty sure, they did never think about giving it away for free - but that's speculation).

Fact is, they owned it and decided what to do with the OS. The AmigaOS was never free. I think that what DoodooHead tried to express. Sure, if you do not want to understand that fact, you can turn it around until you have an interpretation which suits you best. Go ahead.

_________________
AmigaOne XE G3/933/VIA/FM801/R200 (fixed),
G3SE/600/Voodoo3/Sil680/RTL8139/SBLive! (noiseless!)
µA1-MK2/G3/933/R200/CMI8738
XE/G4 (broken 7450/800)

@gary_c

Quote:

Quote: Here you list some reasons why AOS4 would be good for the PPC-oriented efforts of Mr. Buck (and why he would want AOS4)... ... and here you say that AOS4 is not worth the effort. Just so there is no confusion about what might seem to be a contradiction, my first comments were possible reasons why bbrv might think having the Amiga platform onboard at power.org would be good. Actually this is based on things they did tell me. The second comments were my personal opinion.

And here's another(*) cut-out magic for us to see
(*)No, I'm not implying you did it already with me in this thread.

Let's look at the original post (#238), which starts with the quote of a question I had asked BBRV (and which remained unanswered):

Quote:

Quote: - do you want AOS4? I'm not bbrv of course, but this is my opinion (and I hope the bbrv reply is in those questions we submitted a while ago). My impression is that any OS/user base still active with PPC is an asset for the architecture overall. Genesi is, after all, a PowerPC hardware/firmware provider and, let's face it, the platform has seen brighter days. In this context, it makes sense to get even rather small subsets like PPC Amiga on board for possible collective benefit. Part of the benefit would be more enthusiasm and perception of activity for the Power/PowerPC platform. Part might be actual increased sales for Genesi from this market, but I think that's secondary.

You explicitly introduce the reasoning with "this is my opinion" and "My impression is", and at some point you say that "it makes sense", which means that you find reasonable what you are talking about.

Then, you add:
Quote:

I suspect there is also something personal about bbrv's quest related to AmigaOS. Personally, I can't see how it would be worth the effort. Like Seehund said, I really hope this is something bbrv are doing in their spare time after the real business has been done.

Which, apart from beginning with one more motivation why, in your opinion ("I suspect"), BBRV would try to get AOS4, contains the statement where you declare an opinion totally opposite to what written above.
It does *seem* a contradiction. It *is*.

Besides that, although it's always been crystal clear that BBRV and Genesi were interested in AOS4, the passage "Actually this is based on things they did tell me." should be quite interesting for the people around here that still seem to think that BBRV is hanging around here just for the fun of it.

Quote:

Ideally, it makes sense for the parties involved with AmigaOS4 -- a PowerPC OS -- to participate in the PowerPC industry group. In general, companies join industry associations because they and the association both benefit by working together. But in this case, with people so fragmented and companies (especially Amiga, Inc.) apparently not functioning in a normal way, I wonder if it's possible or even worth the effort to try building bridges.

This is a different issue altogheter. I'm glad you introduced this with "ideally": to have a better idea of what would be better one should have a full view of the whole state of everything, and nobody here has it.
Besides that, as I've explained already (so, please, if you want answer to this do it where I have already expressed my thoughts), partnering with Mr Buck is not a wise business decision.

Quote:

Some people here have said things like why bother joining power.org, we just want to be independent. I think this illustrates the same narrow vision that the hardware-making groups might have if they think they can survive as a business by selling only to AmigaOS users. This is one thing that Alan Redhouse did understand: it's not possible to profitably manufacture motherboards/systems for such a small market only. And I think once it is realized that other markets need to be targetted, it makes sense to gain credibility and build bridges to those markets such as through power.org.

I can't see why it is either Power.org or nothing. Who said that Power.org is the only way out? - no, you did not explicitly say this, but you seem to join the voices that these days sing the refrain "Power.org or doom" which so nicely accompanies the evergreen "Pegasos or doom" line. That's a narrow vision as well. BBRV & al want to create a movement around Power.org? Well, that's fine and nobody has anything against that. What I cannot stand is the advocates that push it as the only winning way for AOS - and the reason behind is that they want AOS, which is why, in first place, BB came here and made the first post of this thread. He wants to divide & conquer. Wants the community and use the community itself to reach AOS, given that the he cannot reach it through the normal channels.

Quote:

Quote: Bad or good, pretty or ugly, like it or not, there *are* rules. Of course, but complaining about rules we think are wrong is human nature. It really is the right thing to do IMHO.

Sure, you and anybody else is free to do so. But that should not end up in a neverending, stale, boring, repetitive output of anger, frustration, attacks, insults because there is a (not so) hidden agenda (namely, forcing the community, Hyperion and AInc) or even just envy and/or desire.
It is not uncommon the hear the community built by BB say repeatedly that they are doing so well and are so happy without AOS: fine, enjoy, have fun and please let AOS in peace. It is extremely irritating seeing the community (which I am part of) used and abused.
(Of course, I'm *not* referring to those that openly and moderately say that they'd like to have AOS on their Pegasos as well - I fully understand that the situation is not pleasant.)

Quote:

Quote: If somebody does not like them, then the only way to try to change them is getting privately and professionally in touch with AInc and proposing them a valid alternative. None of us knows what has already happened in the background.

In fact, I've never, ever, said I know. On the contrary, I have explicitly said that I don't know about the specific facts and even directly asked BBRV about it (post #239, which is precisely the first one of mine that you replied to).

Quote:

I assume Genesi has already communicated with Amiga, Inc. (or tried to) about this. It is easy to see from their many other business dealings that Genesi is not averse to going through proper channels.

I agree that this could be a correct assumption and I totally agree that BBRV/Genesi are indeed capable of doing business the proper way. This means once they had been told "No, thanks", they could have just behaved like true gentlemen (as they have proved to be capable of) and at most keep on trying the proper way as hard as possible; once reached the limits, they should have just let it rest. For sure...

Quote:

I don't know if bbrv going direct to the users here is a result of attempted communication with Amiga, Inc. or in parallel to that or what.

... "directing the users", exploiting the weaknesses of the other parties is not justified by the denial: nothing in this world says that BBRV/Genesi/whoever else *must* have AOS4 on the basis of a divine right. They cannot have it. They should learn to live with it.
(More below.)

Quote:

I hope the answer will come out in the Q&A session ahead.

And what would that change? I'm rather tired of repeating myself, but here it is definitely suitable to report in its entirety the text which the last quote you reported above was part of:
Quote:

For sure, exploiting the weaknesses of the community, of the market, of Hyperion, you name it, the way BB has been doing over and over again is not the right way and is unacceptable. This, along with personal insults, sly lawsuits, open attacks and whatever has been publically witnessed in these last years (and even before... I've heard negative comments about BB since the VisCorp times), rules BB out as a reliable business partner. No wonder if AInc refused to partner with him. They can't be blamed even if BB had commercially valid proposals. BB is only reaping what he sowed - and he keeps on sowing bad seeds.

Whatever is the answer to "Did BB try to get the license the proper way", the blame cannot be thrown on AInc. - but we're spinning in circles... just again consider that that first post of mine you replied to contained the question to BBRV: "Did you try to get the license?", which, no wonder, remained unanswered.

saimo

_________________
RETREAM - retro dreams for Amiga, Commodore 64 and PC

@saimo

Are you "Samface"?

_________________
Here for the whimpering end

@Zylesea

You had said (sorry, 3-level quotes limit... I have to re-arrange things), referring to the fact that today the Pegasos is the only available machine (which, BTW, is not true because the Pegasos is certainly not the only PPC platform around):
Quote:

This may change soon (2 weeks) or it may not. For the latter case the Peg would still be an alternative.

and I answered with:
Quote:

That's what you want to believe and what you (and others, with BB in first place) want to make us believe (in order to force AInc/Hyperion using the community as a lever, which is something I find really disgusting) by repeating it over and over again. Instead, the Pegasos is *not* an option. It stopped being an option a long time ago, and the chance has been missed forever.

Now you say:
Quote:

No this not what I believe it is the palin simple truth: there are exactly two options for teh future. Either we will see some new board or we will not. For the *latter* case, the Peg would still be an alternative. This is abolutely independent from what I think/whish/dream.

which is an attempt to dodge my remarks. I was obviously(*) answering to the second part ("For the latter case the Peg would still be an alternative"), whereas here, lacking any valid argument, you are focusing on "This may change soon (2 weeks) or it may not".
Poor attempt at diverting the attention.

(*)Should you not find it that obvious, here's a hint: "Instead, the Pegasos is *not* an option. It stopped being an option a long time ago, and the chance has been missed forever."

Quote:

Quote: Can you live with it, please? It is not that hard, after all, especially considering that we're not talking about the most important thing in life and also that, as you say, "time has moved on and I gave up bothering about OS4 on the Peg long ago. Personally I was never intersted in it". But let's look at your statement closer: I was personally never intersted in OS4 *for myself*,

Wow. Some more cut-out magic - no, this is the first time you do it (with me, at least), but it's the third or fourth time that this has happened in a reply to me in this thread...

The whole passage was:
Quote:

Can you live with it, please? It is not that hard, after all, especially considering that we're not talking about the most important thing in life and also that, as you say, "time has moved on and I gave up bothering about OS4 on the Peg long ago. Personally I was never intersted in it". But let's look at your statement closer: Quote: But true, time has moved on and I gave up bothering about OS4 on the Peg long ago. Personally I was never intersted in it, but I thought one common hw would bridge the gap between OS4 and MOS a bit and the alltogether demand of MOS and OS4 fellows might become a sustainable mini market. So, assuming that "Personally I was never intersted in it" means "I've never been interested in AOS4 itself" (otherwise, literally you are saying that you used to be interested and that you have never been interested at the same time) and acknowledging that you don't believe in the "common hw" possibility anymore, can you tell me why on Earth you are wasting your time here on AW.net, in threads like this?

and it's more than evident that I had already conteplated your interpretation. The problem is that you did not answer at all to my question, but rather been happy to try to make it look like I did not understand you.

Quote:

nevertheless I was engaged in some OS4 benefiting attempts. You know why? Because I wanted to stabilize the amigaish ppc market (which includes MOS *and* OS4).

This is certainly a commendable effort, but still does not answer any of the points I raised.

saimo

_________________
RETREAM - retro dreams for Amiga, Commodore 64 and PC

@Samwel

The 7448 @ 1700 MHz (which will, no doubt, blow away the 1 GHz 7447) is about 550 EUR(!) + taxes per piece in middle quantities. Anyway both, the 7447 and the 7448 become awful expensive when breaking the 1 GHz barrier.
A 1 GHz 7447A or 7448 are both to cool passively, the 7447A starts from about 150 EUR for the 1.3 V version and about 170 for the 1.1 V version. The 7448s @ 1000 MHz are about the same prices (some percent more expensive). Which one peforms better, depends on usage, they are quite colse anyway.
Combined with the TSI 108 the 7448 may offer a signifcantly increased perfromance (200 Mhz FSB), but I haven't seen any real life TSI 108 performance tests yet (I guess it is a good chip). But even that combo (tsi 108 + 7448) is outdated b4 it even rolls out because of the competition of high clocked 744x with the 970FX.
The 2,2 GHz 970FX starts at $185,28 which is about 145 EUR. Compare that to the 550 EUR for the 7448 @ 1.7 GHz. Wow 400 EUR difference!
other to very special applications (and a desktop computer like an Amiga does not belong to this group) it does not make much sense today to use high clocked 744x cpus.
Okay, a 970 maschine will consume more electric power than a 7448 @ 1.7 Ghz (which, at these frequencies, sucks some watts, too). Underclocking of the 970 may change it to a real energy saving chip.
Also note, that the 970 is pretty good in 32 bit mode.
There is close to *no* future in high clocked 744x today. The 8641 is another story, hopefully a successfull, but unfortunately the prices are not public yet.

_________________
My programs: via.bckrs.de
MorphOS user since V0.4 (2001)

@Jorge
Just because something was good when C= had competive HW and millions of costumers 15 years ago, or is still good when Apple has competive HW and millions of costumers today, doesn't mean it's a good idea for an obscure OS without competive HW and a potential user-base ranging in th lower 4digits ......

Heck, even the guys from Hyperion are on record for complaining bout that licence from while to while.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada