@damocles

Quote:

damocles wrote: @Lou The proper thing is to come to an agreement of the cost over runs.

And here we are today...

@Lou

This is the last time I'll reply to you, I won't explain this again. Read this for as long as you have anything to object to because so far, any arguments you have provided has stemmed from your inability to comprehend what I've written. Here goes:

Since Hyperion acquired the source codes on their own initiative and without anyone forcing them to do so, any damages that Hyperion may have suffered from it are self-inflicted and not something they can hold anyone else but themselves liable for, PERIOD. The terms in the contract saying that Amiga Inc. was to provide necessary source code is a right Hyperion could've exercised but waived when they decided to do it themselves.

Furthermore, you still don't seem to comprehend that the $25,000 is not a payment for the development. The contract clearly states that AmigaOS4 was to be developed at the sole expense of Hyperion. In exchange, they got to market and sell the result of their development without paying any royalties to Amiga Inc. So, any arguments related to development costs for Hyperion are null and void in the matters of what Amiga Inc. are owed to Hyperion or not.

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

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

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

@abalaban

In order for Hyperion to seek damages for having to acquire the source code themselves, they would have to prove that Amiga Inc. were somehow forcing them to do it. If they were not forced to do it, they shouldn't have done it. No matter what Amiga Inc.'s obligations were, the damages from Hyperions own actions are noone's fault but Hyperion themselves.

Like people besides me have already pointed out, Hyperion had their chance of holding Amiga Inc. responsible for supplying the source codes they needed. That opportunity was lost when they decided to go and get it themselves. It's a decision their going to have to live with, end of discussion.

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

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

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

@Dandy

"Amiga OS Source Code" != "necessary Source Code"

Again, they screwed up royally when the contract was drafted. It was drafted by Hyperion's managing partner.

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

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

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

@Dandy

Quote:

Just that they didn't get it from AInc, as contractually required. So lets keep in mind that AInc was in breach of the contract since the day they signed it.

If it's so important that the source code had to come from Amiga Inc. as you say, then one could argue that Hyperion were the ones in breach by acquiring it from another source.

_________________
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:

Furthermore, you still don't seem to comprehend that the $25,000 is not a payment for the development. The contract clearly states that AmigaOS4 was to be developed at the sole expense of Hyperion. In exchange, they got to market and sell the result of their development without paying any royalties to Amiga Inc.

Which they were not allowed to do, because AInc refused to license any new hardware. AInc created a situation where Hyperion were unable to recoup their development costs under the terms of the contract, and then they want to aquire OS4 for a measly $25,000. I realy wonder who is holding whom to ransom.

_________________
Peter Swallow.
A1XEG3-800 [IBM 750FX PowerPC], running OS4.1FE, using ac97 onboard sound.

"There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don't."

@Dandy

Yes, about the timeline... acquiring the sources on their own initiative obviously didn't help them deliver within their given timeframe anyway. So, if they hadn't gone acquiring the source codes themselves, they would actually be able to blame the failed delivery on the lack of source code access, now they can't.

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

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

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

@Swoop

Quote:

Swoop wrote: @samface Quote: Furthermore, you still don't seem to comprehend that the $25,000 is not a payment for the development. The contract clearly states that AmigaOS4 was to be developed at the sole expense of Hyperion. In exchange, they got to market and sell the result of their development without paying any royalties to Amiga Inc. Which they were not allowed to do, because AInc refused to license any new hardware. AInc created a situation where Hyperion were unable to recoup their development costs under the terms of the contract, and then they want to aquire OS4 for a measly $25,000. I realy wonder who is holding whom to ransom.

That's complete BS. Hyperion didn't complete their obligation to develop for the specified hardware of the contract until 30th of November last year. You can't expect Amiga Inc. to grant Hyperion the right to develop and market for more hardware before they were not even finished developing for hardware they had a contractual obligation to develop for. Besides, if the terms of only having the right to develop for the AmigaOne and the classic Amiga1200/4000 computers were not acceptable terms, they shouldn't have signed the agreement. So, this argument really is complete bullocks. Let's not hear it being repeated again, ok?

Last edited by samface on 28-Feb-2008 at 10:11 PM.

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

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

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

@Lou

Quote:

No, you keep twisting everything. It's pointless. You don't get it. If they both made the same clerical error, why do you insist only Hyperion should suffer from it? Perhaps Amino should have paid their bookkeeper. If I miss my very last mortgage payment, the bank can still foreclose.

No actually they can't. First they would have to send you a letter saying that your last statement was in error because of there bookkeeper, then they would have to send a letter requesting your final payment and give you 60 or 90 days to pay it, because they made a mistake and wrongly told how much you had paid. Then after a few more letters about please send the last payment, etc., you might possibly get to a level where they could forclose on you. We dont have any of that here. Hyperion wrote a receipt for the wrong amount, and even in 2006 didnt catch on about the missing $250, but now you want to punish KMOS for not paying Hyperion money they didnt ask for and imply thats what would happen with your bill, even though you actually know thats not true Lou.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 28-Feb-2008 at 11:58 PM.

_________________
We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world.

@Lou

Quote:

A "managing partner" is not a developer or expert in development and I'm sure that statement was just PR and will get thrown out.

Seeing as this managing partner also happened to be the OS4 project manager at the time --- you know, the guy responsible for making sure things come in on time and on budget --- his opinion is pretty much the authoritative one on why things took so much longer.

And it's not like he kept his mouth shut, like someone who doesn't know what they are talking about should. No, he very much stated that his views were authoritative and that he was well informed, much better informed in fact than the various people who *were* experts and who *did* call the thing "bugged".

You seem to be under the impression that public statements made as "PR" have no relevance. You are mistaken --- while PR may be assumed to put a positive spin on things, such statements still establish facts as seen by those making the statements. Unless Hyperion can produce concurrent internal communication to Amiga along the lines of "Actually, the damn thing is buggy as hell, and the whole 'it's a special performance feature' nonsense is just to make the faithful feel better. Please expect extensive delays", Amiga can point at such "PR" statements by the project manager to dismiss the "bugged hardware" excuse for the schedule overrun.

On a related note --- quite a few public Hyperion statements, which if taken at face value would be rather damaging for Hyperion's case, have been dismissed with the "that was purely PR, reality was obviously quite different" argument by people who'd like to see Hyperion win this case. Considering that "that was purely PR, reality was obviously quite different" can also be expressed as "Well, Hyperion lied to the public", I wonder why people who think Hyperion should not be held to the things they say want them to get the OS? No, I am not saying that Amiga is any better in that regard.

@Swoop

Quote:

AInc created a situation where Hyperion were unable to recoup their development costs under the terms of the contract, and then they want to aquire OS4 for a measly $25,000.

I think you got the order of events wrong here.

Itec did acquire OS4. Then they gave Hyperion another year to actually make something work (this was meant to be a 4 month project, remember?). Then Hyperion refused to hand anything over. Then the hardware partner gave up (in no small part, one imagines, due to the unavailability of OS4 --- read the recitals in the OS4 contract if in doubt). And then others started asking Hyperion for an OS4 port to their hardware and were sent to Amiga --- at a time when, according to Hyperion's current position, Hyperion had an exclusive license to do whatever the hell they wanted, anyway.

@umisef

Quote:

Seeing as this managing partner also happened to be the OS4 project manager at the time --- you know, the guy responsible for making sure things come in on time and on budget --- his opinion is pretty much the authoritative one on why things took so much longer.

Don't forget to mention that the buggy hardware was not the hardware that OS4 was supposed to run on first. It was going to run on the 'classic' hardware first. In fact, nearly all the components of that hardware - which are now listed on the compatibility page - were just as available in 2002 as they were in December 2007. The fact that Hyperion (and its subcontractors) took the extra time to develop and distribute the A1 version first was a choice they made. It wasn't due to the lack of suitable hardware.

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


1989 - 500 / 1991 - 3000 / 1997 - Genesis Flyer 1200T / 2003 - A1XE

@syrtran

Hyperion had done all by themselves all this time without Amiga approval, yeah right...

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@samface

Quote:

samface wrote: @Lou This is the last time I'll reply to you

If I believed in god(s), they'd be thanked right about now.

Quote:

, I won't explain this again. Read this for as long as you have anything to object to because so far, any arguments you have provided has stemmed from your inability to comprehend what I've written. Here goes: Since Hyperion acquired the source codes on their own initiative and without anyone forcing them to do so, any damages that Hyperion may have suffered from it are self-inflicted and not something they can hold anyone else but themselves liable for, PERIOD. The terms in the contract saying that Amiga Inc. was to provide necessary source code is a right Hyperion could've exercised but waived when they decided to do it themselves.

So multiple people telling you that your logic is incorrect and...

Quote:

Furthermore, you still don't seem to comprehend that the $25,000 is not a payment for the development. The contract clearly states that AmigaOS4 was to be developed at the sole expense of Hyperion. In exchange, they got to market and sell the result of their development without paying any royalties to Amiga Inc. So, any arguments related to development costs for Hyperion are null and void in the matters of what Amiga Inc. are owed to Hyperion or not.

I do comprehend that but KMOS assume they are going to get 100% of the source code for that money and that is the problem now, isn't it?

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: @syrtran Hyperion had done all by themselves all this time without Amiga approval, yeah right...

And this has WHAT to do with my post?

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


1989 - 500 / 1991 - 3000 / 1997 - Genesis Flyer 1200T / 2003 - A1XE

@Lou

Quote:

So multiple people telling you that your logic is incorrect and...

multiple people telling him that his logic is just fine.

Sounds like a web forum to me.

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


1989 - 500 / 1991 - 3000 / 1997 - Genesis Flyer 1200T / 2003 - A1XE

@samface

Quote:

samface wrote: @Dandy Quote: Just that they didn't get it from AInc, as contractually required. So lets keep in mind that AInc was in breach of the contract since the day they signed it. If it's so important that the source code had to come from Amiga Inc. as you say, then one could argue that Hyperion were the ones in breach by acquiring it from another source.

Go back to your political kindergarten to play that kind of twisting games...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Dandy

Quote:

Go back to your political kindergarten to play that kind of twisting games...

Pot, Kettle, Black. If it was anywhere near as critical as you are making it out to be, Ben/Evert should have ended the contract right then and there. Guess what, they didn't. Guess it wasn't that huge of an issue for them, now was it? AI-DE pure as the driven snow? Hell no, but that does not mean they are not in the driver's seat on this. Ben/Evert's lack of professionalism on this whole project does not mean AI owes them anything beyond what the contract calls for.

Had Ben/Evert been professional about this whole project, they would have had legal paperwork (amendments to the contract) to cover any additional coding beyond what the orginal contract called for and clearly defined compensation for that additional work that the Devs did. They didn't bother, they just wanted to build their little AOS empire which blew up in their faces because they failed to run Hyperion properly.

IMO, your attitude is entirely misguided when it comes to Hyperion. Hyperion deserves not a single ounce of respect from any OS4 supporters, the OS4 Devs deserves it all. Had the OS4 Devs had a real software publisher running this project, OS4 Devs would either have been compensated by now or had the project cancelled and save the OS4 Devs years of what is now wasted time and effort. As much as I like to urinate on AI for their shear incompetence and stupidity, I've come to view Hyperion even in a worse light. Hyperion was suppost to be there for the Devs, instead they took advantage of the Devs and created today's disaster. Hyperion has left the Devs owed tens and hundreds of thousands for their work, and I seriously doubt they will ever see any of it. Way to go Hyperion!

_________________
Dammy

@syrtran

Quote:

And this has WHAT to do with my post?

Quote:

The fact that Hyperion (and its subcontractors) took the extra time to develop and distribute the A1 version first was a choice they made.

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: @Lou Quote: No, you keep twisting everything. It's pointless. You don't get it. If they both made the same clerical error, why do you insist only Hyperion should suffer from it? Perhaps Amino should have paid their bookkeeper. If I miss my very last mortgage payment, the bank can still foreclose. No actually they can't. First they would have to send you a letter saying that your last statement was in error because of there bookkeeper, then they would have to send a letter requesting your final payment and give you 60 or 90 days to pay it, because they made a mistake and wrongly told how much you had paid. Then after a few more letters about please send the last payment, etc., you might possibly get to a level where they could forclose on you. We dont have any of that here. Hyperion wrote a receipt for the wrong amount, and even in 2006 didnt catch on about the missing $250, but now you want to punish KMOS for not paying Hyperion money they didnt ask for and imply thats what would happen with your bill, even though you actually know thats not true Lou. -Tig

Here's what I know is true: they admit to being $250 short.
Here's what else I think: they BOTH need better bookkeepers.
Again, your opinion of what should have happened is meaningless, it's all about what the judge thinks of it...which we won't know for some time.