@jorkany

Quote:

jorkany wrote: @saimo Are you "Samface"?

At least he's 'good' copy of samface and thus not worth the typed words.

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

@Jorge
Quote:

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

I agree completely!

Quote:

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.

I never said they couldn't, I don't think Seehund did either. If they want to further denigrate the once respectable Amiga name, then they paid for the right to do so. What is disturbing is that some people seem eager to support them in doing so.

Quote:

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,

Yes, a hardware independant AOS never materlized, so it was never an issue. Commodore died off before it ever got to that point. OS4 is supposedly (according to Hyperion) hardware independant, so now it is an issue.

Quote:

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.

I agree that AOS has never been free. What's odd is that people like DoodooHead think that is an advantage, when there is overwhelming imperical evidence that indicates otherwise. OS4's fate is firmly tied to a company that Hyperion and Amiga Inc. have no controlling interest in. That is significantly different from the situation with Commodore.

However, given the AmigaOne Partners lack of initiative to try to do anything about the situation, I have no problems with watching OS4 circle the drain while we enjoy these academic arguments. I think several others feel the same way.

_________________
Here for the whimpering end

@saimo

Quote:

saimo wrote: @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:

Do you know the meaninhg of subjunctive? *Would* be an alternative. You can try to twist the words as you like, it only does make you looking mor foolish and pathetic.

Cheers!

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

@polka.

Quote:

polka. wrote: @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 ).

Please report the facts that prove that "the circumstances for most of these projects" are:

- "tiny target group";
- "nearly no profits to be made";
- "tiny production runs";

and also those that prove that:

- the "costs of custom solutions" are unbearable also in the specific cases;
- the bad price/performance ratio of PPC compared to x86) would deadly affect the success of the projects - not to mention that for some of the projects nobody even knows which PPC processor is going to be used;
- the "additional license costs" are unbearable.

Yours is no less guesswork than SeeHund's.

saimo

edit: I mentioned SeeHund exclusively because the discussion - which the quote polka reported belongs to - was going on between him and me.

Last edited by saimo on 07-Sep-2006 at 04:28 PM.

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

@Zylesea

Quote:

Do you know the meaninhg of subjunctive? *Would* be an alternative.

That "would" implied a possibility; my answer precisely targeted the issue by ruling out that possibility (my opinion, of course, but still a precise answer).

Quote:

You can try to twist the words as you like,

I twisted no words. In fact, like I always do, I report as precisely as possible the context, try to be clear about it and try not to wander around.

saimo

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

bbrv:
Now that is a very good Pegasos.org article, methinks.
Hehe!

@saimo

Quote:

saimo wrote: @Seehund Quote: Who's going after AOS4? It is (and always been) more than clear who I am referring to. So, please, stop playing these games.

No games. Looks like a language barrier between us non-native speakers to me. :) As you have seen in all my posts now, you know that I'm well aware of your belief that BBRV are the ones going after AOS4. I used a rhetorical question, I could also have written "nobody's going after AOS4". Cf. "Who's to say ... ?", meaning "Nobody knows ...".

Quote:

(And, no, I was not referring to the lawsuit.)

Then exactly what were you referring to? The aftermath after winning the lawsuit, and before that the VisCorp affair, are the only BBRV attempts at going after AmigaOS in any shape that I'm aware of. It could be that he/they/someone indeed is after AOS, but posting about his own products or personal thoughts on a community web forum doesn't mean anything.

Quote:

[What BBRV are spending time here for?] 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.

So it's more like a general feel based on some inherent dislike of him and the fact that you disagree with what he writes, then? Could you give ONE tangible, real-world, demonstrable example showing how anyone is "after AOS", excluding historical business transactions like Gateway, Viscorp, Amino (->AInc->Itec->KMOS->Ainc) and the lawsuit aftermath?

I don't deny that BBRV have been behaving strangely, even like a$$holes at times. This doesn't mean they're "after AOS", though.

Anyway, if only it were so well that that someone IS after AOS.
BBRV, IBM, DKNY, or a cold lump of porrage for that matter, would do a better job at selling AOS than the current owners/squatters have.

Quote:

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.

Then they're not wasting any company time or effort posting about their wares here, even if they're not after AOS.

Quote:

Quote: 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.

Obviously nobody that could make a difference, including BBRV, is considering AInc's hardware vendor licences, and those few who applied didn't get one. Getting an AInc licence is not an option. Forget about it. They don't "want" a licence, and AInc/Eyetech don't want to sell them, which I think should be sufficiently clear, now that almost five years have passed since the licences were first "offered".

There are two options that make sense to any hardware vendor under the current conditions. Either simply keep selling hardware and let customers and software vendors worry about whatever non-essential (to the HW vendor) 3rd party software they buy and install, or gaining ownership of said 3rd party software (AOS).


Quote:

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.

I can see how one would think it's unprofessional and unorthodox if one thinks it's part of any attempt to "get" AmigaOS! But why would one think anything like that? "Look at that zoo-keeper washing the elephant! That's a really unprofessional way to get AmigaOS! FUD! FUD!"

Not everything in the world is about getting AmigaOS. It's just not that important.

Quote:

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).

Please assume that people agree or disagree about something when they say so. Like you wrote, I already said I disagree on that.

Quote:

Quote: 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

We're not talking about "tried", past tense, i.e. the attempt to get an amendment to the judgement, or Viscorp.

We're talking about forum posts, and about something which still is unclear and which you say is "questionable", something sinister which I apparently would want to "deny", you ask if they've tried to get a licence "in a legal way" (as opposed to what?), there are apparently "dirty games", "weaknesses of the community, of the market, of Hyperion, you name it"(!!) that have been "exploited" (I found that one particularly hilarious), and the "lawsuits" (plural?) have been "sly".

Yes, you're dreaming!

Quote:

Quote: You, me, BBRV and a few hundred others are merely participating in discussions here (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.

BBRV are marketing their stuff, and they're also discussing, just like Troika or whatever. What's so strange with that? Should I draw a Venn diagram of forum participants, showing that some participants also try to sell you stuff? Discussion and marketing aren't mutually exclusive. There's no contradiction. There's no conspiracy or cover-up, it strongly looks like you're building strawmen or spreading FUD... ;) Would you like a pre-announcement of a pre-progress pre-report with that?

Quote:

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.

"Us"? You're the one who sees take-over attempts in forum posts.

Quote:

You like to play games to dodge the points you cannot counter.

No games, and I explained why I think "new Amiga hardware" is futile. I have also developed an allergy to the sickening misuse of "FUD", probably dating back to when Bouma was active.

Quote:

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?

No, I'm not looking at that one single line alone, you're right. I'm pointing out the generally accepted meaning of FUD (outside of Bouma articles or AW.net of the year 2004 or so, that is), disregarding your personal interpretation.

Further down in that article: "After 1990 the term FUD was associated increasingly frequently with Microsoft, and has become generalized to refer to any kind of disinformation used as a competitive weapon."

I'm not competing. I'm not selling you anything. I'm not posting disinformation. Like you I'm writing what I think. Thoughts and opinions aren't FUD. AInc/Eyetech saying that normal hardware is "potentially sub-standard" is FUD. You or me saying the same on a forum is not FUD (only embarrassingly idiotic).

Quote:

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.

What do you mean how do I know? Haven't you read the same specs, hints, ads, "hardware clues", and other stuff as everyone else?


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... [snip] 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).

Eh? You asked for substantiation to my statement that it's doomed! Dooooomed, I tells ya! :) You got it. Quit complaining, or ask for more.

Last edited by Seehund on 07-Sep-2006 at 04:46 PM.

_________________
Oh, bother.

@Samwel

I don't know that you have been smoking. I can't discuss with you harry. Comeback then ACK have shown their hardware. It maybe is a hoax, who knows.. Genesi have proven that they can get hardware out to the market.

@jorkany

Quote:

jorkany wrote: @saimo Are you "Samface"?

Funny you should think that too! :)

_________________
Oh, bother.

@mr.calibra

Nice! You can't discuss with people that have different opinions?

Why is everything a hoax because it hasn't been shown to the general public?
Is Pegasos3 also a hoax? All we have heard is words from BBRV.. I still believe
BPlan is working on this hardware.

Talking to the developer directly sets everything to another perspective. Adam logs
on almost every night (used to anyway) on IRC. I don't think he can sit there and lie
to everyone day after day. He rather seems like a a nice guy that's VERY busy.

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@jorkany

Quote:

However, given the AmigaOne Partners lack of initiative to try to do anything about the situation, I have no problems with watching OS4 circle the drain while we enjoy these academic arguments. I think several others feel the same way.

I don't know where this conclusion comes from or on what facts you base this on. According to all information which is public available, this is simply not true. Call me naiv, but if people are not completely blind, then you have to admit, that there are initiatives from that "camp" to bring the Amiga back to live. Talks about AmigaOS licenses have taken place (if they have been granted yet is _unknown_ (== can be yes or no!)) and it is publically known, that more then one vendor is trying to deliver a ppc based solution to run AmigaOS and sell it as a consumer product.

I don't know. Even if these things haven't materialized, yet, you can simply not argue, that nothing is happening.

I agree, however, that things could have worked out better - for all parties, vendors and customers. But that's live. Things don't always work according to plan.

But at least there is a plan. And rules are defined. Maybe these rules will need some adjustments here and there, but fact is, they are there AS IS now. And we have to live with it.

I however understand the frustration. But then, take it easy guys. It's not a live threadening event if nothing will happen at all.

_________________
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)

@polka.

Hyperion will of course honor their promise and release OS4 for the classics.
But how many users with CSPPC/BPPC are left? Will it sell to cover the cost?

IMHO they should release OS4 for classics the same way MorphOS did. For free
with no promises of updates.

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@Kronos

Quote:

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

Nobody denies this. But I think the critics don't opose the license itself, but would prefer a bit more flexibility. I think, still, all parties try to run a business thru it (AInc, Hyperion and even the dealers). A common agreement is necessary to reach that goal.

Maybe the current form is not perfect, but I think no matter which route you go, there will always be some rough edges.

Well, what I don't understand (and don't get this wrong, I appreciate the effort), if a "free" solution is what we want, why is AROS not there yet? It supports x86 (a main stream HW), is not bound to any licensing scheme, has tons of developers (thru open source) and is in development longer than AmigaO4.

I just think we can debate this up and down. Won't change a thing. Finaly, some products will emerge, and the frustration will hopefully decrease over time (I don't expect it to disapear immediately. There will still be cases where a product is too expensive, not powerfull enough, etc. Also, even in this case, you can't please everyone).

_________________
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)

@saimo

Quote:

....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.

Well, there's probably an element of fun in it too. I hope so, as there may well not be any substantial outcome.

Quote:

I can't see why it is either Power.org or nothing.

I doesn't need to be. But there is no other PowerPC industry group like it, as far as I know, no other means to link directly to other companies and groups who all have the architecture's advance as a priority. Genesi got involved for the same reason that they are trying to get others involved: power.org is the natural forum for companies and others involved in PowerPC computing. If you see other possibilities, what are they? What is the third option, in addition to "Power.org or nothing"?

Quote:

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.

Looks more to me like he's advocating cooperation, not division. And it's already been acknowledged that we don't know what he has done thorugh normal channels, so I suggest you refrain from stating what he cannot do through normal channels when you really have no idea.

Quote:

once reached the limits, they should have just let it rest.

Many successful individuals in many fields would disagree with you about that. A limit may be only an apparent one, and may be surpassed on the next effort. We see this all the time in sports, technology, science, etc.

Quote:

Whatever is the answer to "Did BB try to get the license the proper way", the blame cannot be thrown on AInc.

It's reasonable to assume half the blame can be, if not more. But it's rather pointless to speculate. The bottom line is that no company other than Eyetech has gotten a license, and it remains to be seen if any will in the future. This is entirely in the hands of Amiga, Inc.

-- gary_c

_________________
zukakakina.com - themes.tikiwiki.org

@Seehund

I realize that we really live in a different world, so, given that because of that our discussion becomes terribly difficult (if impossible) and time/energy demanding (and I lack of both), I hope you excuse me if I close it.

saimo

edit: [OT]I had originally written "(if not impossible)" but then it occured to me that the "not" should be omitted... can anybody bother telling me which form is correct? Thanks.[/OT]

Last edited by saimo on 07-Sep-2006 at 06:06 PM.

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

@gary_c

Quote:

I suggest you refrain from stating what he cannot do through normal channels when you really have no idea.

I can tell you - if he had gone through the normal channels and procedures then there can only be few reasons why he doesnt have an OS4 licence right now. From what we can tell he has not and therefore does not have a licence.

If politics and points of principle get in the way then that does not change that fact.

It is not in anyones interest to sell an OS4 enabled device without an actual licenced copy of it - unless of course you just want to flog motherboards and let people source their own - legit or not. Its pretty much the problem MS have and why they force the OS to ship with the PC.

@saimo

If it is not impossible (therefore possible) - then it is terribly difficult.

A bit like getting an OS4 licence.

@Thread

Please calm down a bit.

BBRV posted:

Quote:

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.

There is only one comment about the above, if you're willing to give him the benefit of a doubt, and would like to do something constructive for OS4, consider the offer above.

If nothing else, it will give OS4 some limelight amongst the other PPC-OS'es on power.org , which is a good thing.

@BBRV
If not allready asked, here is a question:

Have you contacted Amiga Inc. for an OS4-licens, and if so, was the answear positive, negative, or the terms something you could not accept?

Last edited by tomazkid on 07-Sep-2006 at 06:26 PM.

_________________
Site admins are people too..pooff!

@Benji

Quote:

If it is not impossible (therefore possible) - then it is terribly difficult.

No doubt about it
But what I wanted to know the correct grammar for "it is difficult (or maybe even impossible)" in the kind of form I used in the original post (assuming it can be used at all).

Quote:

A bit like getting an OS4 licence.

saimo

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

@gary_c

Quote:

What is the third option, in addition to "Power.org or nothing"?

Well, the amiga "platform" ? Why not? Who says it will be ppc until end of time.
Sure, I see no reason why not support it, but also no reason why to bound themselfs to powerpc (or power.org) so tight.

I mean, there was one design once which didn't include a 68k (but a PA-RISC), and the actuator design was refering to the 88k (what happend with that, BTW. Has this been "assimilated" by the ppc ?).

Not much of a choice these days, but still there is ARM (and XScale) and MIPS out there. (but these are just hypotetical thoughts).

Maybe Amiga shouldn't bound themselfs to close to an architecture again and keep the flexibility to change if required (e.g. like Apple did). Doesn't mean, they can't be part of power.org right now. But I think it would also work without. I don't know if power.org promotes Amiga more then Amiga does beeing a member of power.org.

Despite the Linux name, not much of branding available which the avarage couch potato would recognize, in power.org. I think that's one reason for the interesst in Amiga? But maybe not.

Is actually Sony and MS (and Nintendo) part of power.org ?

_________________
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)