@Fleecy
> against other on going possibilities in the tens of thousands

You're holding out on us you big tease

Ok, that makes sense. If you have these other offers I guess the Pegasos would have to be compared to them and prioritised. I hadn't known interest had piqued to that extent, but that's good to hear.

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

Quote:

Genesi are a company that makes it's profit through hardware.

Genesi does not make profit (yet?), at least not with the Pegasos (and I don't see they will in the near future), this is also from bbrv.

Ciao, Alfred

Quote:

If it were licensed, it would require each board to have a paid OS4 license, weather or not the user ever runs OS4 on it.

Sorry, totally wrong.
You still can sell boards without OS4 licence but, of course, they will not be able to run OS4. If a user wants to run OS4 on his/her Pegasos, he buys an "OS4 enabled" Pegasos, if he does not, he buys a "normal" Pegasos.
This is so simple, why is there always someone who does not understand it?

Ciao, Alfred

Quote:

Serpi wrote: Quote: If it were licensed, it would require each board to have a paid OS4 license, weather or not the user ever runs OS4 on it. Sorry, totally wrong. You still can sell boards without OS4 licence but, of course, they will not be able to run OS4. If a user wants to run OS4 on his/her Pegasos, he buys an "OS4 enabled" Pegasos, if he does not, he buys a "normal" Pegasos. This is so simple, why is there always someone who does not understand it? Ciao, Alfred

To be pedantic, I was right. If the "Pegasos" were licensed, all "Pegasos" (note same product/product line) would be burdoned with license fees. The pegasos is one product line.

What you are talking about are 2 different product lines. That's the whole point, there'd have to be two whole product lines. That's been discussed to death and probably doesn't need to be repeated here, or people will start throwing tomatoes at us.

I'm not argueing weather this is right or wrong (there's plenty of places to do that), I'm saying that this "one" product line's whole purpose is to be multiOS in and of itself, and creating a separate "product line" to support an os defeats this purpose.

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

But what would it take to seperate them into two product lines?

One ships with Open Firmware and the other with U-Boot?

This is not a hard technical problem to resolve.

> One ships with Open Firmware and the other with U-Boot?
> This is not a hard technical problem to resolve.

But presents a marketing problem for a product that's selling point is "it can run all these OS's", which is now modified to "line A runs all minus X" and "line B runs X and everything else but cost a little more" (Or they could avoid product line segregation by flatly charging everyone for the license, and just not tell them)

I'll steer clear of the license arguement/right or wrong issue, just pointing out why it probably doesn't make much sense from genesi's POV.

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

OK, lets rest the subject here, you are right, it could go on forever

Quote:

which despite the rider to the contrary only seeks to inflame the issue further.

Hey Fleecy, was that directed at my comment? that hurts, all I wanted is something we can use to counter the perpetual allegations against Amiga Inc

Still, I understand - you guys are all under pressure from many different directions right now and you're just overreacting a bit. No harm done

> Hey Fleecy, was that directed at my comment? that hurts,
> all I wanted is something we can use to counter the
> perpetual allegations against Amiga Inc

Lol! I figured he was talking about me! I just like to know everything, but I think I've kept it down to a dull murmor here.

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

Quote:

Ok, that makes sense. If you have these other offers I guess the Pegasos would have to be compared to them and prioritised. I hadn't known interest had piqued to that extent, but that's good to hear.

Interest doesn't have to be that grand at the moment.

Regarding OS4, it's not quite finished yet and I'm sure everyone here (except bbrv and maybe some others) would like to see it on Amiga hardware first.

As for the DE, fleecy just said that it will first appear on a PPC Amiga OS and even if work is already underway it can't be finalized until a working version of OS4 is ready.

Meaning that if any resources are pulled to get a version onto the Pegasos then certainly everyone can realize that these versions on the AOne will suffer for it.

As a matter of fact, this might be the only reason for the offer in the first place.

I would think for the moment that this is the primary concern for Amiga Inc. and all their partners?

_________________
Fixed A1G4XE 7455 RX933PC with fried CPU
Sapphire Radeon 9100 128mb
ESI Juli@ 24bit 192kHz Envy24HT
Sil 680 Ultra Ata 133 E-ide
SeaGate Barracuda 120gb 8mb cache

about that uboot thingy , you know if its like this .. 1000 machines with os4 enabler (a rom) and 1000 without , sure that wouldnt hurt anyone but how long will this take before someone hacked it to pieces and put out a patch for people to upload it to their "NON os4 enabled" machine to make it "os4 enabled" , now thats the thing , so i totally understand this...either 1 or all.

ever seen a x86 that couldnt run windows?
(after the ibm compatible brand)

maybe there is....i for one havent seen it atleast.

cheers

_________________
See my blog and collection website! . https://www.blog.amigaguru.com

> ever seen a x86 that couldnt run windows?
> (after the ibm compatible brand)

I understand what you're trying to say, (I disagree with your point, but I'll leave that for elsewhere) but your example is downright hardcore goofy!


Windows is *supposed* to run on all x86 machines! It wasn't *hacked* into running on them! It's whole modus operandi is to run on all x86 hardware It wasn't a bunch of MOS haX0rs who made Windows run on the hardware circumventing protection code, it ran on it by design!

That's like saying "Have you ever seen a Mac that didn't run MacOS? well that proves haXors will circumvent stuff!"

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

Quote:

ever seen a x86 that couldnt run windows? (after the ibm compatible brand) maybe there is....i for one havent seen it atleast.

We may all see things change soon enough...
Microsoft Moves to Integrate Windows With BIOS

_________________
ExecSG Team Lead

DaveP wrote:
Quote:

Are you claiming "lack of tenacity" was behind the corporate lawyers request to step down?

I was speaking euphemistically. I have no information on why they asked to withdraw; however, some guesses might be Amiga, Inc.'s inability to pay for their services and the casual, sarcastic attitude demonstrated by Bill McEwen as shown in the deposition pdf.

-- gary_c

fleecy wrote:
Quote:

no one but Amiga Inc and our attorneys have any information about our legal strategies. As usual, even those claiming to want the truth are engaging in supposition and guessing,

I assume you have some resources other than the US$100 in the bank that Bill McEwen spoke of, to execute your legal strategies. Otherwise, this is all rather academic, isn't it? Then of course there's also the matter of budget priorities. I believe the court would like current obligations to be met before new legal ventures are begun, and those obligations must be over a half million dollars owed other employees plus the $1.8 million owed by AI to you, Bill, and Randy (figures from this pdf, which is recommended reading for a taste of Bill McEwen's attitude and grasp of the facts alone). For the sake of completeness, Bill McEwen does talk about funding just about to come through, that will cover all the debts. But he has apparently made this assertion, even to the judge, every month with no results ever materializing.

But, for the sake of discussion, I believe people "claiming to want the truth" are doing so for several reasons, including:

- AI has made accusations about IP infringement and theft but AFAIK no actions have been initiated.
- Despite the intention of AI to not discuss its business, some legal and financial aspects of it are publicly documented.
- Statements by AI staff made to minimize the damage of such things as the auction have worked against the company's interests when shown to be incorrect.

At a certain point, a person could wonder "why bother trying to ferret out the truth". Most of us don't really have that much at stake one way or the other. Some may still want to see a viable enterprise and computing platform under the Amiga brand to carry on the legacy, and are disappointed with how things have been managed. Others just like seeing people they feel are scoundrels squirm. There isn't a monolithic opposition in any case; some loyal to the cause just want clarification for future success, some adversaries want evidence of the company's impending demise.

As others have said, it really would be nice to see the positive, Amiga side to this messy situation, since the documents we come across seem to paint such a negative picture.

-- gary_c

Quote:

T_Bone wrote: Quote: Serpi wrote: [quote]If it were licensed, it would require each board to have a paid OS4 license, weather or not the user ever runs OS4 on it. Sorry, totally wrong. You still can sell boards without OS4 licence but, of course, they will not be able to run OS4. If a user wants to run OS4 on his/her Pegasos, he buys an "OS4 enabled" Pegasos, if he does not, he buys a "normal" Pegasos. This is so simple, why is there always someone who does not understand it? Ciao, Alfred To be pedantic, I was right. If the "Pegasos" were licensed, all "Pegasos" (note same product/product line) would be burdoned with license fees. The pegasos is one product line. What you are talking about are 2 different product lines. That's the whole point, there'd have to be two whole product lines. That's been discussed to death and probably doesn't need to be repeated here, or people will start throwing tomatoes at us. I'm not argueing weather this is right or wrong (there's plenty of places to do that), I'm saying that this "one" product line's whole purpose is to be multiOS in and of itself, and creating a separate "product line" to support an os defeats this purpose.

Well the way I saw it, the AmigaOne motherboards shipped seperate to the License ROM initially, so why cant Genesi do that, this way you dont need two product lines at all. Only ship an OS4 lisence for those people requesting a to run OS4.

I dont know about you, but if I was forced to alter my schedule, have to explain my actions with regards to my personal health and welbeing, among other unwarrented personal invasions of privacy, that I know would then be made public and construed in the worst possible light by some parties, all in the name of answering a frivulous lawsuit, I would be pretty damn surly myself!

I am tired of these "court documents" being constantly used to support arguments/claims when in my view these documents in and of themselves are suspect.In the very least they only apply to the last financial quarter, and they certainly do not show even close to a full financial breakdown of assets, revenues and so on and as such have no real validity in showing the financial positions of Amiga Inc!

In any case, the deposition also shows clearly that the pegasos was never included in the contract to have DE ported to it, and though Genesi had the right to ASK to have it ported, thats all they had.

And people have the gall to pick B. McEwen's attitude in this matter?

If you want the truth, then you had best start putting the other side under such microscopic scrutiny.

_________________

Quote:

Well the way I saw it, the AmigaOne motherboards shipped seperate to the License ROM initially, so why cant Genesi do that, this way you dont need two product lines at all. Only ship an OS4 lisence for those people requesting a to run OS4.

Can you get a nonlicensed board from Eyetech? I looked briefly, but couldn't find a way to order one.

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

You can certainly get one from Mai.

Quote:

T_Bone wrote: Quote: Well the way I saw it, the AmigaOne motherboards shipped seperate to the License ROM initially, so why cant Genesi do that, this way you dont need two product lines at all. Only ship an OS4 lisence for those people requesting a to run OS4. Can you get a nonlicensed board from Eyetech? I looked briefly, but couldn't find a way to order one.

Well from what i remember when the AmigaOnes first came out, the poeple that purchased an AmigaOne got the Lisence rom posted to them a few weeks later. Can any AmigaOne owner confirm that? Besides by the look of the Motherboard the Lisence rom is just a small flash rom of some kind, that sits in a rom socket. And its that rom that contains the lisence so take that out and its no longer lisenced.