Thanks a lot Mr. Hare.
The future wasn't ever nicer and brighter.

@ Nicomen

How sad.

Perhaps you could post the log files so we can all go look at what an abysmal failure these so called 1337 HaXx0rS really are, especially when it came to doing it in a limited timespan (irc session).
Failure !!

To be expected I guess.

@ Garry Hare.

May thanks for the clarification. Its good to see the Head Honcho taking an interest in our little world.

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

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

More important questions, which covers the only thing bothering me:

1. Will "AmigaOS5.0" bear any relationship to AmigaOS4.0, be based on it in any way etc.
2. When, if ever, do we need to concern ourselves with it if it isn't.

@Wiffy

Official OS5 has ceased to exist.

That is officially there are no plans for it - officially speaking -- So I don't think Garry will say much on this.

However when he says that after OS4 development will be taken inside (ie inside AmigaInc) then practically speaking we are talking about a OS5. Afterall what else can Amiga Inc bring to it then Amiga Anywhere?

It makes sense.

But another thing makes sense also, paralell development (baring contractical impedaments).

Why shouldn't OS5, based on os4 code become the AmigaAnything OS and then OS4 PPC still progress and develop on its own. Ie OS4.9999 etc.,

Version numbers mean very little, in this context OS4 really means AmigaOS PPC and perhaps a future and paralell development bis the continuation of OS4 PPC as well.

What harm in this, letting time solve the problem.

Really I think 9/10ths of the confusion lies in a fixattion about names.

It would not be unheard of to have OS4 PPC and OS5 AA running about at the same time, Maybe even just AmigaOS-PPC and AmigaOS-AA.

OK existing contracts may disbar this, but I don't see why, if everybody becomes happy, things cannot be resolved comfortably to everyone's satisfaction especially as the difference may only be whether AA is hosted on it or AA includes it.

_________________
Greg Schofield, Perth Australia

AmigaOS 5.0 is a word/number that was used in the past by
the previous Amiga Inc. and the new Amiga Inc. will not tell
you their future plans.

It is at Hyperion how they will call it in the future and what
they wont to do with it. If they want to add AA anywhere in
the future into OS4 that is their business.

Last edited by Dirk-B on 22-Mar-2005 at 06:48 AM.

_________________
A1G3-SE + OS4.1 u1 iso (x2)

Thanx a lot Mr.G I'm impressed

_________________

@GregS

No, you are wrong as far as I can see. It does exist, as an intent. There is the intent to bring future AmigaOS development back inhouse ( beyond 4.0 ) and there is this statement here which shows an intent ( if cheekily stated ) to work on a version 5.0:

http://www.amiga.com/news/

Quote:

"....Now, let's see.....I think I'll write OS 5.0..." Question: Is Amiga Inc going to take over AmigaOS development after Hyperion? does it actually have a future? No. we honor Hyperions rights. ALL FUTURE development has been brought in-house.

Now if it is an 'Internet OS' that could mean absolutely anything, but what it is most likely to mean is that it ( if it is intended to run on anything - see below quote ) will be based on Intent/AmigaAnywhere.

Quote:

Question: What would you think if Hyperion would want to update the licence they have with Amiga: enlarging the target hardware to other platforms, enlarging the OS version to OS 5.x ? As you are interested by DE only, it would increase incomes for AInc. We don't want to harm the ferver and support for desktop Amigas. And we do and will support the desktop. But to build a sustainable business we need to enable multiple devices and are moving toward doing so. I hope people like the result. I know some won't.

There is an old business model, called 'grow the egg' where you ensure that a bit of your technology ( the egg ) gets out there into the marketplace and is widely used. You then, with the support of third parties and your vendors, grow the reliance on everyone upstream of you on the egg and then you grow the egg into the final product you wanted to sell all along.

That is what MicroSoft used to fear Netscape doing.

Quote:

Why shouldn't OS5, based on os4 code become the AmigaAnything OS and then OS4 PPC still progress and develop on its own. Ie OS4.9999 etc.,

It would make no sense for Amiga Inc to grow the egg on AmigaOS4, that is constrained by the devices it can run on. It makes sense for them to grow it on 'AmigaAnywhere' ( or better, a related technology ). You try to play down the significance of version numbers but if you have two products with the same name but different version numbers the consumer assumption is that one is a revision of the other. To do anything else just confuses the marketplace and would be incompetent.

As for fixations, I dont know but it seems to me this is slightly combative language. If someone has the choice whether to bring out a new product and call it A5.0 rather than B then there must be a purpose in doing so, and that purpose is generally to show that A5.0 superseeds anything that came before it.

To try and convince the readership otherwise is really an uphill battle against logic, sense and practises in the industry going back over forty years.

Quote:

It would not be unheard of to have OS4 PPC and OS5 AA running about at the same time, Maybe even just AmigaOS-PPC and AmigaOS-AA.

AmigaOS5.0 was taken directly from the amiga.com website. You can't play that down. Unless the two products you speculate on ( and your speculation has less credibility as it is just something you have imagined rather than be speculation based on statements that have been made not just recently but dating back three years ) have something in common other than 'The Name(tm)' then naming them so close makes no sense. The naming implies that PPC and AA are merely platforms on which AmigaOS the product runs - like Linux PPC and Linux x86.

Plus read this from the transcript of the IRC interview:
Quote:

GarryH: AmigaOS 4 is currently aimed at specific distribution. There is no business reason why that market couldn't be extended. In the bigger picture, we have said that we are moving toward enabling technology truly anywhere - most processors and all major operating systems. This includes the possibility of running native.

Again, your attempt at sleight of hand to say 'this is all unrelated and you are just a paranoid conspiracy theorist' ( which is how I read the content of your reply btw ) will not cut the mustard.

Quote:

OK existing contracts may disbar this, but I don't see why, if everybody becomes happy, things cannot be resolved comfortably to everyone's satisfaction especially as the difference may only be whether AA is hosted on it or AA includes it.

If a product is based on AA then it can run ( almost ) on anything AA runs on right? Therefore you still have the boundary blurring problem which would be a serious strategic error.

Regardless, this is interesting as one of the reasons why 'DE' was touted as not being able to become an OS was the whole removable media event propogation problem:

Quote:

For those of you only interested in the desktop, skip this. AmigaAnywhere is not what it used to be (DE). This, and future versions, not only extend the market but as I said, literally change what removable media is and does.

So I would speculate if they feel they are around that barrier that they are well on the way to believing they can breed an OS out of this.

Either or, AmigaOS5.x or whatever they decide to call it using the 'Amiga' name is important to the marketplace as to what signals it sends out and how it might potentially be seen by 4rd parties about what it sayes about AmigaOS4 ( triumphant threads on morphzone by a certain troll aside ).

Or those impassioned posts during the final stage of the court case where you talked up the threat of an incompatible product being released under the Amiga brand ( namely MorphOS ) are undermined by your own reasoning yes?

It does matter, we do need to have some better idea as to what they are planning here otherwise the Amiga fanboy marketing momentum will choose sides and I am betting it won't choose Amiga Inc, it will choose Hyperion/AmigaOS4.

What the rest of the world does, is entirely up to them.

Thx alot Garry. Now I can start sleeping again.

HI Garry !

Damn good follow up. Thanks !

_________________
AmigaOS or MorphOS on x86 would sell orders of magnitude more than the current,
hardware-intensive solutions. And they'd go faster.-- D.Haynie

Nice he did the follow up. Clears up some things.

Coder

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

Thanks Garry for the clarification about AA on OS4, and for making us having to guess what other device you might be running OS4 on.
I'll have to infere it's a set-top box as there was a mention somewhere about such a device running Linux/PPC and unless the Friedens have four arms (each) it seems unlikely for the OS to have already been ported to another CPU...

_________________
AlexC's free OS4 software collection

AmigaOne XE/X1000/X5000/UAE-PPC OS4 laptop/X-10 Home Automation

Well I'm glad to hear this news! Now if I can just get my Dad to update his website...

sorry for the stupid post but now i'm happy..

_________________
http://www.amigasoft.net

Rats, now i got nothing more to whine about!

_________________
Amon's digital home

Thanks for the clarifications Garry.

Right guys, hopefully everyone is feeling much happier and peaceful today? Maybe we can all get back to the real job now - making our Amiga a success!

_________________
Snowboarder, Airsofter, Programmer, Writer and AmigaOne XE G4 owner.
Experienced applications developer and part-time snowboard instructor

@retro

If only you knew...

Your assumptions about H&P are wrong.

What they've done with 3.9 and AmigaXL is completely unprofessional.

Looking at the way they've handled things so far, if H&P had been working on OS4, it would be released unfinished and there would never be a 4.1 version.

You should be glad Hyperion got the job instead.

_________________
AlexC's free OS4 software collection

AmigaOne XE/X1000/X5000/UAE-PPC OS4 laptop/X-10 Home Automation

Thanks Garry for clearing this up!

The problem with this community is that those issues that are under NDA and can't be talked about always goes thru a "trolling process" until someone clears things up. So I understand that you want to keep things very quiet!

...but as long as people are emotional, there is interest... Amiga is very interesting!

Good luck with AmigaAnywhere and AmigaOS!

/Christer

Amiga Inc. and Hyperion rules

@wiffy
I am at loss at your reply.

Quote:

No, you are wrong as far as I can see. It does exist, as an intent. There is the intent to bring future AmigaOS development back inhouse ( beyond 4.0 ) and there is this statement here which shows an intent ( if cheekily stated ) to work on a version 5.0:

I thought this was exactly what I was trying to convey. I have just seen your reference to OS5, which is not so much cheeky but tongue in cheek.

My argument was that Garry saying AmigaInc was going to take the OS inhouse after version 4 was exactly that, in effect, what comes out the other end is OS5 that Fleecy talked about ages ago, and when KMOS took over Garry announced that officially all bets were off in terms of officially announced plans.

My logic was then attempot to show that this can be done while OS4 is still developed and both can be marketed side by side. That simply bringing out an OS5 does not make OS4 magically dissappear and why should it. IBM use to have a thing called OS/2 and it had many versions but they still called it OS/2 even after years of development.

Quote:

As for fixations, I dont know but it seems to me this is slightly combative language. If someone has the choice whether to bring out a new product and call it A5.0 rather than B then there must be a purpose in doing so, and that purpose is generally to show that A5.0 superseeds anything that came before it.

First I meant there was a general fixation with numbers. Yes there is a reason why version numbers increase, but so what. OS5 if it comes out by that name represents a shift onto a whole new technology, my point being the persistence ofOS4 and indeed its improvement does no harm, so long as it is clear one is for PPC and other for everywhere.

Besides whichg consistant version numbers only usually apply to consistant platforms -- the whole idea of OS5 was to go beyond that.

Supercededing may not be the question and this is something I think you missed, mind you it is hypothetical. IF AA is hosted on OS4 and then OS4 future developoment is taken inhouse to produce an OS5 (based on intent perhaps), PPC code may be emulated, or may not, but AA code runs in both places.

If the Hyperion contract allows OS4 to be contiunually developed (it may not) then what the hey, OS5 is OS5 and OS4 is OS4. one does not magically disappear once the other comes out, and besides at the point of releasing OS5 it will probably be 90% OS4 recompiled to run on VP. And again so what, OS4, amigaOS whatever still has a future, which is really the point surely.

Quote:

AmigaOS5.0 was taken directly from the amiga.com website.

It was a picture. Look I am the one who has been saying all along that OS5 is a given because it is a logical step to take, regardless of officially announced plans, plans revoked or plans re-instated. I think yoiu have severely misread what I said.

In fact you are throwing back at me the very things I was saying as if I was saying something opposite!

Quote:

Again, your attempt at sleight of hand to say 'this is all unrelated and you are just a paranoid conspiracy theorist' ( which is how I read the content of your reply btw ) will not cut the mustard.

I have never said this of anyone (except myself), I can see it nowehere even implied and the quote of mine you use does not seem to support your reading.

By the way, slieght of hand is the equivelant of duplicity. I may get a lot wrong, but I do not believe I have been duplicitous in anything I have said here, on moobunny or elsewhere. That is not nice, I have sustained a reputation for intellectual honesty for most of my aduylt life, stupidity, being misinformed, pure ignorance and just being plain wrong are not in my book shameful, duplicity is however -- I take sebere umbrage with this phraseing by you.

Quote:

If a product is based on AA then it can run ( almost ) on anything AA runs on right? Therefore you still have the boundary blurring problem which would be a serious strategic error.

My whole point is that it would not be an error of any sort tactical or strategic.

Quote:

Or those impassioned posts during the final stage of the court case where you talked up the threat of an incompatible product being released under the Amiga brand ( namely MorphOS ) are undermined by your own reasoning yes?

I have never said anywhere anything at all like this, I have never said anything anywhere against MorphOS. I don't know where you thought you read this, but it might be agood idea to PM me some references. I deny this outright as ever having been an argument I have made or relied on -- most probably you are looking at some passing phrase and misunderstood its import, perhaps, or maybe mixed me up with someone else -- I hope so.

Wiffy, I find your reading of what I have said hard to fathom. I find your attempts to foist obscure arguements onto me absurd, and unfair and have little to do with what I said. I have no idea where you have got some of your opinions about what I was supposed to have said on issues far removed from this thread and I find some of things you say offensive as they are inaccurate.

Perhaps we should rephrase things a little in the future.

Last edited by GregS on 22-Mar-2005 at 08:52 AM.
Last edited by GregS on 22-Mar-2005 at 08:51 AM.

_________________
Greg Schofield, Perth Australia

Well that answers the question I asked but wasn't passed on;

"Does Garry Hare care? Does he dare care?"

Thats me a happy bunny now...

Quote:

10. Would I please disclose our strategy, features lists, partners, plans and the like? No.

Heh