@gary_c

Quote:

Simple: I like puzzles. And it bugs me when I think people are b*llsh*tting me.

Considering that you've never expressed any interest in actually buying anything that Amiga Inc, Hyperion or Eyetech sells, one has to wonder why you believe you're being b*llsh*tted.
Could it be you're trying to goad people, so they'll slip up and say something that's covered by an NDA they have with KMOS? it would definitely help your friends at Genesi, would it not?

@gary_c

Quote:

Sure, I'd love to ask and get answers from Bill McEwen and Fleecy Moss, but that doesn't mean Garry Hare shouldn't have an strong opinion about it. After all, if you just bought a major piece of tech IP from a company and their people continued to claim it as their own and describe their future plans and current development efforts and so on for it, wouldn't you wonder what was going on and maybe ask them why they were doing that and tell them to stop? I mean this is the natural reaction in a normal business situation; obviously something was not as it seemed.

Firstly, if it is an opinion you want, then ask for an opinion clearly.You questions never mention the word opinion so it is quite clear that what you were after is a factual reply which should be directed at the persons directly involved.As Gary Hare mentions in his interview, he wished to remain "incognito" something pretty hard to do when you make a rukus about owning IP.Obviously he wanted everything to remain quiet until such time as he completed whatever it is he was trying to do at the time, and have the product/ solution he mentions ready and can come onto the scene and announce it with all the fanfare and whistles.It also helps in keeping a low profile when you have the likes of BBRV taking a shot at anything that moves in this community.Is it really that hard to understand?

Quote:

Actually KMOS did cooperate in a rescue package of sorts as Mr. Hare describes in detail, regarding the perceived threat to Amiga IP. Despite your contention, this isn't an issue, it's a demonstrated fact. My question is simply why he didn't show the same concern earlier in the process.

Quite simply, Mr Hare did NOT put together a "rescue package" for Amiga Inc.IP that KMOS owned was put under direct threat forcing him to respond to protect the assests of KMOS, that it also helped out Amiga Inc. is incedental but not the focus of his efforts as he has already explained.
Quote:

realize these questions are apt to make Mr. Hare uncomfortable. For a "fan" that would be a good reason not to ask them; for someone looking for full disclosure on the Amiga IP sale, the point isn't to avoid making the person uncomfortable. Sometimes you have to "stir up trouble" to get to the bottom of things.

Stir up trouble as much as you want, but stir it up in the right place. It is Amiga Inc. and or Itec that is responsible for the handling of the sale of IP, it is thier conduct which is under question, and thier actions whch are under suspicion so go to them and ask your questions. Anything else is heresay.Throwing in the term "fan" and the comments it was included in is just another attempt to stir thing up in an uneccessary and inacurate way which will do nothing to get you the information you require.This is indicative of your own motivations.

Quote:

I asked because AOS for PPC A1 is Hyperion's project, not KMOS's. KMOS seems to be interested in other markets, although Mr. Hare mentions the serendipity of programs running "cross-platform". Earlier, regarding the legal problems, IonMane referred to these being separate companies with no obligation to each other; now regarding funding and development are they all working together with money flowing freely between them? Which way is it?

Here once again you are mixing things up.I never mentioned anything about KMOS and hyperion not having any sort of obligation to each other, where they obviously and publicly do have an obligation to each other by the very public announcement that KMOS would honour the contract that hyperion had with Amiga Inc. now that they own the OS.

I suggest you go find a dead horse and begin kicking that, rather than these "issues" you keep bringing up.It won't be more satisfying, but at least the rest of us wont be having to deal with it and we can get on with things without these annoying interruptions.

_________________

@gary_c

Quote:

gary_c wrote: Simple: I like puzzles. And it bugs me when I think people are b*llsh*tting me.

I think you're b*llsh*tting us with your pretence that you have no hidden agenda.

Quote:

@Uncharted Quote: These questions are as unreasonable as it would be to ask the CEO Buger King about why the executives at Diageo plc. did something. I don't think your comparison is accurate. These are not totally unrelated companies. Mr. Hare makes it clear in his interview that there is cooperation on some level, and his actions related to the court case show that he's far from detached. While the management of Amiga, Inc. has no involvement in KMOS, according to Mr. Hare, I would guess that behind the scenes there are investors, etc. in common.

Okay change the example to the group of entities that are co-operating with each other against SCO, see? What I said still fits, it is not reasonable to ask the motivations of someone outside of his own company. Perhaps someone could eMail the head of Freescale and ask them why Genesi management tried to screw over CrunchBox?

Quote:

Quote: You are suggesting that there was a threat to that particular IP, when there is no evidence of such. You have invented a scenario and made it out to be fact. The interview stated the reasons why the IP was bought and why KMOS was formed. Yes, rereading the interview, I see now that a threat to the Amiga IP was not mentioned as a reason for Itec and then KMOS to buy the IP. So I'll withdraw that scenario; thanks for bringing that to my attention.

That begs the question of how and why you came up with that in the first place.

Quote:

I think "spin" means intentional distortion in a presentation of information. Really, I am not intentionally trying to distort anything. I am looking at this situation as a skeptic (because from the beginning things didn't add up, in my opinion) and trying to make sense of it. I admit that some of my motivation originates from the early arrogance of Amiga, Inc. and their accusations of others. Where I've misread things, I'm willing to amend my view, as in the previous paragraph, because this gets us closer to reality. But where information is missing or contradictory, I still have questions.

The fact you volunteer for an organisation that promotes an alternative product to the products owned by KMOS and thier partners would have nothing to do with your skeptisim? I believe you are spining your questions negatively and insinuating false information in order to seed unecessary uncertainty and doubt. You just keep reinforcing those suspicions.