@samface

Quote:

A couple of interesting reads related to the discussion about a possible x86 version of AmigaOS4: http://www.birdhouse.org/beos/byte/30-bootloader/ http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=11085

These facts are well known (nice to link them for the ones that haven't followed these events, though) and after reading them again they don't really change the reasonning.

Nobody is suggesting Hyperion would make the same mistakes as Be. No one is even thinking we'll blip on Microsoft radar (only Amiga Inc might still be fearing that, and since their business is done with Microsoft's products they wouldn't be keen to push a x86 port).

Your articles are quite outdated though. Zeta's success selling BeOS is the proof you can have a great success with a commercial x86 OS. Yes, 100 000 copies sold would be a great success for Amiga OS. Even 10 000 more Amiga OS users would be a great success, and the fact lots of them would also be Linux users (remember, piracy is a Windows user attitude, GPL software users have a strong commitment to law and licensing. When the want to use commercial stuff, they pay it) would be an even greater victory, cause they would pull the available software for OS4.

Hyperion won't sell OS4 to Dell. Who cares? They can sell thousand of copies through the net, and then we'll see more apps coming.

More apps means a far greater chance of success when someone gets the money to build a Cell platform. Cross-compiling between two OS4 versions is nothing compared to the difficulty of porting an app to OS4.

Oh, and for the "Cell is the way" idea :
I'd welcome a Cell platform running OS4. However, we should also be realistic. Amiga userbase has died because so much people were just happy to dream about miraculous PowerPC hardware. They were also confident about the benefits of such a processor, that would outspeed lame x86 harware.

During that timen x86 has improved and crushed any "wall of performance" smart people predicted. x86 was not suppose to have the potential to evolve so much after they built the Pentium (look at AMD's offering). The power consumption was so hudge everybody would prefer PPC to save on electricity bills (look how Intel mobile dualcore processor are such a great improvement compared to power-hungry G5).

Cell's development isn't as fast as x86. The time someone built a motherboard for AOS4, x86 will have dual core dual processor mb for cheaper (they already exist, and they're real cheap too), or quad core dual processor ones.

And if you take in acount PS3's life expectancy (it's not even out yet, boys) Cell 2 would only be done in 5 years. Think about 5 years of x86 developpment. Then you have to add the one or two years before the Cell processor is used in an available dektop/laptop mb...

So yes, if a Cell desktop mainboard is availiable with OS4 running on it in one year at the max, it could still outspeed x86 PC. Else it will just be yet another slow PC (even AmigaOne is just a PC, only difference with a x86 is the processor is a PPC - no better architecture, in fact it's even worse that 2 years old PC architecture).
(I don't want to rant about Amiga One. It's still better than nothing, and I would perfecty understand Amiga One owners are happy with it and that it suits their need)

But AFAIK, only PPC hw will be available (hopefully).

Last edited by t3g on 23-Jan-2006 at 12:40 PM.
Last edited by t3g on 23-Jan-2006 at 12:36 PM.

@samface

Quote:

Then we have the problem of piracy. With a dedicated hardware supplier, it's possible to bundle the OS with the hardware, making the OS a part of the hardware purchase. Doing so renders the entire piracy issue null and void. There is no point in pirate copying an OS that is delivered with all hardware that it is compatible with. A stand-alone OS on the other hand, is about as vulnarable to piracy as any other PC-game out there. In fact, certain level of compatibility with hardware it wasn't originally intended for is sometimes enough for people to pirate copy the software in question. As an example, the leaked x86 version of MacOS is still one of the most popular "warez" on piratebay.

Piracy isn't a problem if you still sell more standalone copies of OS4 than you would have sold bundled with hardware. In fact (but don't take me wrong, I loathe piracy) piracy has been used by many software company to increase their userbase, get people to use and learn (for free) the program then buy newer versions/ask their company to buy it/support the ones that bough the software and also as a very efficient publicity. Even Microsoft success has to do with the fact it's always been easy to get the OS for free. Thus endangering cheaper or even free OS (that's also why I can't stand people proud of using Windows without having paid the license, especially the ones that were/are Amiga OS users... Maybe we should start a pool to see how many "proud" Amiga One owners also use Windows, having paid the license or not)

Usually, the ones that are afraid the piracy are the ones that don't always pay for their software, or that spend too much time with Windows users. The rest of the world has a better proportion of sane people. I don't see much concern for piracy with other OS's users because unlike Windows users, we are happy to support the software we use.

And sorry if I've hurt the few Windows users that never pirated anything. I know there are some - they just need a bit more time to leave Microsoft's boat and find themselves in better company :)

@Leo

Quote:

Only to show people this situation is totally stupid and a big waste. But it seems you are all happy with it. FINE.

Except that none of us know the details. Who knows what went on all those years ago when MOS was about to be OS4? Neither of us know what was the failing point of that deal. As such you cannot deem the current situation 'stupid' because it isn't. It clearly wasn't impossible to come to a deal with AInc. at the time as Hyperion and Eyetech did so.

Big waste of time? We can only answer that when OS4 eventually gets released - although I am not holding my breath on that one - hardware looks an awful long way away from here.

_________________
Sam

@t3g

If things are really going well for Zeta (couldn't find any figures to support this), it just proves the point I'm trying to make. BeOS dropped the BeBox concept in favor of the promising x86 market a bit too soon and without enough financial resources to survive the transition. They ended up in a situation where they were unable to keep up with all the new hardware standards that they had to support in order to sell their OS. They soon discovered that the only solution was to find a specific hardware supplier to cooperate with and focus their hardware driver development on. Then they would gradually expand to more hardware alternatives from there as their business grew. As we all should know too well by now, M$ made this an impossibility. Now YellowTAB has picked up the torch and with big enough investments, maybe they can get or even already has gotten BeOS to support as much hardware as needed to sell. With a self-sustainable market for their product, they have managed to establish themselves as a business. But keep in mind that it cost them a bancrupcy and probably quite some investments by the new owners, something no Amiga company could afford.

Like I said earlier, we need to take things one step at a time.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@samface

Quote:

If things are really going well for Zeta (couldn't find any figures to support this),

They've sold 100K units, more than Be ever sold.
Yellowtab have been a lot more clever than Be in that they've done a lot more marketing and they've sold product as a result.

Quote:

it just proves the point I'm trying to make. BeOS dropped the BeBox concept in favor of the promising x86 market a bit too soon and without enough financial resources to survive the transition.

Actually it disproves your point.
Be dropped hardware because it was losing them $200 per unit.
Their market expanded when they moved to Mac clones and expanded a lot more when they moved to x86.

To support your own hardware you need a critical mass of users or have deep pockets, neither exist in the current market. You might be able to still do hardware but it's not going to be as fast or as cheap as mass market stuff.

Quote:

They ended up in a situation where they were unable to keep up with all the new hardware standards that they had to support in order to sell their OS.

Er, no. They couldn't get anyone to ship BeOS (even for free) because of MS so they did a focus shift to "internet appliances", the market didn't take off and they went down.

At the time they went down the hardware, they listed everything compatible on their site and you would know what would or would not run. You just bought the right parts and they worked fine.

The irony was when they went down they had got to the point where the software support was so good that I only booted into Windows to use Photoshop.

_________________
Whyzzat?

@samface

Quote:

Anyone claiming that there wouldn't be any risks involved with trying to survive as a commercial stand-alone OS (ie shipped without hardware) on the mainstream hardware market simply hasn't thought all things through.

I never claimed there was no risk. I think I did claim there was substantially less risk though.

Quote:

First of all, forget about support from the hardware manufacturers, their too busy licking M$'s hairy behind to bother with a niche like the AmigaOS. Studying Linux drivers and reverse engineering chipsets is the only thing you can do to in order to be able to write hardware drivers, always one step behind those that are one step behind the cutting edge of hardware.

So exactly the same scenario as the present then? Where people plug in old Radeons and Voodoos into their AmigaOnes, with no support from hardware manufacturers, and always one step behind the cutting edge.

Quote:

Remember that it has taken thousands of developers world-wide many years to get Linux where it is today with regards to hardware compatibility, yet it is still always one step behind M$ Windows which alot of hardware is specificly designed for nowadays.

You don't seem to realise that the hardware compatibility problem exists nomatter what processor you have. You use off-the-shelf graphics cards and sounds cards with your AmigaOne - there are no specific AmigaOne graphics cards, printers, or joysticks that will get you out of this trap. Hardware support is needed for these even (yes) if you use PPC.

Quote:

All Amiga related efforts in the world combined would still not make up a fraction of the resources we would need to maintain compatibility with the middle- nor low-end PC standards of today and tomorrow.

Again, the exact scenario we have today by using PPC processors, then?

Quote:

The only solution would be settling for a very specific sub-standard PC setup as a requirement for running AmigaOS, requiring most PC owners to replace their computer, either in part or completely, in order to run AmigaOS anyway.

For Pegasos and AmigaOne there are lists of supported hardware.

So your hardware argument, while valid, applies equally to using PPC hardware too. The only way to get round this is to sell a Linux clone complete with x86 hardware (or maybe Tao) and slap an AMIGA sticker on it. I think we all agree that nobody wants that, so we just have to accept that the hardware problem is just one of the many unavoidable challenges of using a non-Windows operating system.

Quote:

Then we have the problem of piracy. With a dedicated hardware supplier, it's possible to bundle the OS with the hardware, making the OS a part of the hardware purchase. Doing so renders the entire piracy issue null and void. [.......], is about as vulnarable to piracy as any other PC-game out there. In fact, certain level of compatibility with hardware it wasn't originally intended for is sometimes enough for people to pirate copy the software in question. As an example, the leaked x86 version of MacOS is still one of the most popular "warez" on piratebay.

There are two ways to combat piracy: you can either give up and go work for the public sector. Or you can make your product so unattractive that nobody wants it anyway. Amiga's solution of over-priced, under-performing hardware with serious supply problems meant they obviously went for the second option. Clearly though, both options will consign you to failure. Just look at AmigaOne sales figures compared with its nearest rival that went for open hardware (YellowTab/Zeta) for proof of how much of a failure this strategy was.

Quote:

There is no point in pirate copying an OS that is delivered with all hardware that it is compatible with. A stand-alone OS on the other hand

Then why is Windows the most pirated piece of software ever when it comes with almost every PC sold? It's because they release new versions that everybody wants. How are you going to get around this? Custom CDs that only expensive, proprietary CD-drives can read?

Quote:

Considering all this, especially the articles I refered to in the beginning of this rant, there is quite alot of risks involved with making the AmigaOS a stand-alone OS on the PC hardware market. Risks that the companies involved simply cannot afford to take at the current state of affairs. I, for one, can atleast understand why they have chosen to "play it safe", atleast until they have managed to build up a self-sustainable market. I believe someone from Hyperion once said that it would require something along the lines of 10,000 sales, which is something they also seem to think that they will be able to achieve.

The whole point of business is about risk-taking. If a business is frightened of risk then they should give up and put its money in a low-interest savings account. Doing business is about taking calculated risks. The people in charge of OS4 have gotten it spectacularly wrong. Their strategy has failed: look at the sales figures for proof. And now they have no hardware and no credible plan to get any. Now is the time to re-engage brains: in 6 years now, nobody has come up with any real commonsense arguments why not to use x86.

Quote:

Now please don't get me wrong, I really don't have anything against an x86 version of the AmigaOS per se. It's just that I think we need to take one step at a time and not take any risks that we cannot afford to come true. As the old saying goes; the elevator to success is broken, use the stairs.

The elevator was never broken - somebody just pressed the DOWN button. And now they've gotten out and started digging.

Last edited by smithy on 23-Jan-2006 at 04:30 PM.
Last edited by smithy on 23-Jan-2006 at 04:28 PM.

@samface

Quote:

samface wrote: @Mr_Capehill I hear you, let's get back on topic. A couple of interesting reads related to the discussion about a possible x86 version of AmigaOS4: ...

A hilarious post, but I think other people, along with actual reality, have already pointed out why.

Quote:

Now please don't get me wrong, I really don't have anything against an x86 version of the AmigaOS per se. It's just that I think we need to take one step at a time and not take any risks that we cannot afford to come true. As the old saying goes; the elevator to success is broken, use the stairs.

But the elevator to success (well, survival at least) is NOT broken at all. It's just that "we" refuse to enter it.
Instead, "we" sit around waiting for someone to give us the keys to the staircase (and hope they'll pay "us" for that privilege), and when we enter the staircase we stumble down to the basement like "we" are used to. "It's good enough! One step at a time!"

"Take one step at a time and not take any risks"? Jesus.

Starting up a venture by deliberately making your product (AmigaOS) unattractive to customers isn't taking a risk? OK, maybe it's not a "risk" per se, since Failure is certain...
Hoping that someone somewhere MIGHT one day make "special" hardware that's even remotely competitive is a reason to "take one step at a time", instead of doing all you can to sell your software for the most viable hardware that actually exists and that people will want to buy or already own?

I think each step should at least make some sense and be in the right direction!

----
Edit: Note to self: If you walk away to make some coffee, reload the page and check if smithy hasn't already posted something good when you get back to the computer! :)

Last edited by Seehund on 23-Jan-2006 at 04:50 PM.

_________________
Oh, bother.

@Colin_Camper

Humm, not good. Two more pages and the thread
will break in two lines here...

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@Seehund

Quote:

Edit: Note to self: If you walk away to make some coffee, reload the page and check if smithy hasn't already posted something good when you get back to the computer! :)

@smithy

Quote:

The whole point of business is about risk-taking.

While that is true to an extent, I still say we should see how Apple fares before we do anything like even think about going x86. If Apple takes half the business away from MS then perhaps it would be a good idea. If they loose their shirts, then we know what not to do. I think in this case we can afford to wait a little and see what happens. It is not going to take that long to see what happens to Apple so why should we jump in with both feet when the guy next to us is more than willing.

So we do not even have to take the risk to find out what is going to happen. We just wait for the other guy to take the risk. I think Apple is in for a rough ride though. I think it will start out with a bang, then they are going to have problems with Windows being loaded on Macs and Macs loaded on Dells and such. Then software houses are going to say the Macs can run Windows, and it is harder for a Dell to run Mac so we will just write for Windows as the Mac users will just buy the Windows version and run that.

@nzv58l

I really don't think people will want windows on their x86 Macs !!

( how would you like to be infected today ?)


I can definately see geek win users wanting MacOs ( X ?) on their wintel machines though.

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

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

@The_Editor

I see what you mean, but I think that anything can happen. It is going to be pretty a pretty wild ride. Apple definitly does not want Windows on the Mac or Mac on the Windows, but I do not see that they can totally shut the door on this. I think it would be good for Amiga if Apple steals some more otherwise windows users. If it does it will cause a bit of confusion as to what the "standard" computer user is using and that will open the door for other non-Windows systems.

@nzv58l

Agreed.

Maybe they'll have to rename Pc World !!

hehe

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

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

@smithy

Quote:

Just look at AmigaOne sales figures compared with its nearest rival that went for open hardware (YellowTab/Zeta) for proof of how much of a failure this strategy was.

Even better, compare the potential profits.

Hardware+Software system:
Lets say you can make $100 profit per system sold for hardware.
$100 x 2,000 systems = $200,000

Software only:
Lets say all that marketing and hardware support costs more so you only make $10 profit per copy of the OS.
$10 x 100,000 sales = $1,000,000.

Q.E.D.

_________________
Whyzzat?

It's no use ranting at Hyperion - they are already commited to PPC, switching to x86 would require a large investment (that they can't afford on their own) for backwards compatibility, and they aren't keen on x86 in the first place.

If you lot want Amiga x86, then you're going to have to look elsewhere. Luckily we already have it: It's called AROS. I'm sure that they'd appreciate a ground-swell of backing from the community - perhaps create an "AROS club" with membership fees, some of which would go towards the developers, along with a mailing list & maybe a monthly letter. Or perhaps some other scheme, if you think that sucks.

Of course AROS has it's problems, not the least of which is drivers the vast range of hardware out there. But OS4 x86 would have exactly the same problem.


In summary: What we won't get (no matter how much we whine) is OS4 x86. It's too late. Get over it.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@ChrisH
Quote:

In summary: What we won't get (no matter how much we whine) is OS4 x86. It's too late. Get over it.

Why is it too late?

@nzv58l

Quote:

While that is true to an extent, I still say we should see how Apple fares before we do anything like even think about going x86. If Apple takes half the business away from MS then perhaps it would be a good idea. If they loose their shirts, then we know what not to do. I think in this case we can afford to wait a little and see what happens. It is not going to take that long to see what happens to Apple so why should we jump in with both feet when the guy next to us is more than willing.

Looking to Apple as a way to see what would be good for Amiga OS seems just like the creation of a new myth. Sorry, but *why in the world* would any of that be relevant to a niche OS like Amiga OS? Do we have thousand of developpers to feed, and hudge bills to pay? Are we planning an OS that has to sell millions of copies to be affordable? Are we even willing to make the mistake (again :( )of bundling a niche OS to custom x86 hardware whereas unlike Apple we can't afford it?

You want to see how Amiga OS would fare? You already have that example with Be OS, which had a far smaller userbase as Amiga OS, around the same time, and has already shamed the Amiga world by selling 100k copies (that number would be a hudge failure for Apple, but be more than enough to ensure OS4's future, and maybe even custom Cell mainboard if Hyperion want to run the risk to sink their company).

So *why* would we be dumb enough keep on saying "let's wait to see how *** will fare..."
Are we too afraid we won't fail we can't even consider an example for the only reason it was a success? Then if Apple does succed on x86 (not that it would be of any relevance)... we'll just have to forget it and find another reason to think x86 would be a bad choice!

But sure, let's wait again. By that time Apple will have taken the rest of those that are sick of Windows. And if not, let's wait for Linux to continue getting easier for newbies, so we'll be sure nobody would want to run Amiga OS on x86. *That* would solve any piracy problems ;)

Last edited by t3g on 23-Jan-2006 at 10:30 PM.

@ChrisH

Quote:

In summary: What we won't get (no matter how much we whine) is OS4 x86. It's too late. Get over it.

Let it die quietly, eh?

Quote:

Of course AROS has it's problems, not the least of which is drivers the vast range of hardware out there. But OS4 x86 would have exactly the same problem.

Didn't I just already cover this? The choice of CPU has no bearing on whether you can get hardware drivers for new whizzy printers, webcams, feedback-steering wheels, etc.... Yes, OS4 PPC has the same problem too.

@nzv58l

Quote:

While that is true to an extent, I still say we should see how Apple fares before we do anything like even think about going x86. If Apple takes half the business away from MS then perhaps it would be a good idea. If they loose their shirts, then we know what not to do. I think in this case we can afford to wait a little and see what happens. It is not going to take that long to see what happens to Apple so why should we jump in with both feet when the guy next to us is more than willing.

The comparison with Apple is a very poor one. It's a totally different business model. Apple has NOT released OSX for the open PC market. Apple still sell closed hardware, and whether it's powered internally by IBM or Intel processors, or gerbils on wheels, makes no difference to their market. Most of their customers are interested in fashion not computers. And Apples are very fashionable.

If Apples sales shift upwards it'll be because of better prices, not because their boxes happen to use an Intel processor.

@-Sam-

Quote:

It clearly wasn't impossible to come to a deal with AInc. at the time as Hyperion and Eyetech did so.

A deal which, to the best of the public's knowledge, contains a $25,000 buyback clause.

Do you *really* have a problem understanding why Ralph wouldn't enter into such a deal, given that he alone would have had spent much more than $25k worth of time on MorphOS?