@Samface

I never seen you try to see it from the other guys point of view. Or even try to understand what the other person is thinking or where they are coming from. I only see 10 comments with your own personal opinion. For your next post, I would like to see you try to describe how the other person is thinking.



@Ionmane

I disagree with some of your comments here. It appears you do not understand how things got to the situation they are today. Perhaps it would benefit you to do reseach on the history of how things got to be the way they are.



@Darth_X

So which is it? Are you an armchair lawyer or armchair psychologist? Should we take a poll to decide? Or both?

_________________
Men who have girlies in their avatars are Girliemen!

@samface

Quote:

You're a lost cause, Fabio. You're still not understanding anything from what I've said. I'm sorry but there simply is nothing more I can do for you.

There you go, when there's nothing else you can come up with, that's your fall back statement.

Sammy, what to say... if you can't help yourself, no wonder you can't help others either.

Hopefully, this time you're gone for good.

[Added later]

And you know what, Sammy? The sad thing is that people here - and me specifically - put so much effort in trying to entertain an intelligent discussion with you, they elaborate their thoughts, come up with examples you could, if you wanted, provide counterexamples for, they make analogies, they'd even make drawings if that serveds something useful... and all you can say, after such (wasted) efforts is "you've not understood anything of what I've said".

That's one of the most insulting things one could ever say, either to you - for your inability to make yourself understood - or to the people you address that statement to - for your allusion at their comprehension abilities - or lack thereof.

You're one sad individual, and I wonder how you can get away with such behaviour in real life.

Last edited by falemagn on 22-May-2006 at 02:21 PM.

_________________

@samface

Quote:

There is a business strategy in the works, let's see how it unfolds before we start jumping to such conclusions.

Already? I would have thought that companies do that before starting a business. Well, I am curious how it "unfolds" too.
I hope that this time, it's actually about earning some money and not making huge investments without any significant return.

_________________
This signature is in the middle of a much needed facelift!

@Darth_X
Quote:

So which is it? Are you an armchair lawyer or armchair psychologist?

"Forum psychologist" would make a nice emblem under your avatar.

_________________
This signature is in the middle of a much needed facelift!

@falemagn

falemagn:
Quote:

Because, Sammy, regardless of your conclusions, whatever anyone says, can be either a lie, or a truth.

Far be it from me to defend Samface’s position in general, but I believe I am in agreement with him on the need to tone down some of the conclusions. In a world that is hardly black and white, there are infinitely more conclusions that can be drawn from anyone’s comments other than just 1) a lie or 2) a truth.

There is a saying in business that I believe is especially worthwhile in this case: “It’s not what you don’t know that hurts you. It’s what you know, but just ain’t so.”

Any number of participants in within or relevant to this discussion (including Hyperion and AHT) could make claims that they believe to be correct, that they are making in good faith, but turn out incorrect from one perspective or another. Labelling them as liars when they may have been just mistaken is a bit too much.

On the other hand, I do not accept Samface’s notion or quest for an absolute truth (to quote him) as any more appropriate. Some philosophers postulate, while others may disagree, that there are hardly any absolute truths in this world. In any case, be that true or false, real-life situations usually require dealing with uncertainty, because we are rarely served with absolute certainty (if it is, indeed, even possible to attain absolute certainty).

***

Where I disagree with Samface, and I’m trying to backtrack the conversation to about page 8 or so, is the part where he claims gary_c to be giving an “example of absolute nothing”. Here is gary_c’s original message:

gary_c:
Quote:

It's funny (I mean strange, not humorous) that Amiga, Inc. has zero positive interest, but seems to be interested when it affects AmigaOS in a negative way. Stepping in at the last minute to kill the AHT Europe set-top box deal is one example. This is the kind of thing that makes me think, even as near-dead as they are, there's still enough life to smack down anything to do with Genesi.

Could gary_c have picked his words more carefully? Sure, maybe toning down the initial claim a bit would have helped. But he, and also falemagn and pixie, have also presented some good points as to why gary_c’s original comment has some merit to consider. I believe Samface was making the same mistake in his response, as far as making too absolute remarks goes.

I don’t think we really can or even should dismiss (as “example of absolutely nothing”) the notion that Amiga Inc. “stepped in at the last minute to kill the AHT Europe set-top box deal” based everything we do know, relatively certainly, about this case in particular as well as Amiga Inc.’s history with license negotiations and granting licenses in general. This may well be a fair assessment of what happened.

We can, and certainly we should as Samface has done, present alternative theories and contradicting information as to what could have gone wrong. We can even quote Amiga Inc.’s website as Samface did to get some glimpse into their opinion (even if, some may say, said opinion or marketing text on the website may not have any connection to real-life action). We should discuss the case as a whole, everything we do know, everything we don’t know and any and all theories we come up with.

If I’m interpreting Samface correctly, he feels that this is where it should stop. I don’t agree. I do believe we can legitimately try and connect the puzzle pieces. Make some conclusions, even if we are only given partial information to do so (as is so often in life). Call it what you will: analysis, speculation, making hypothesis. Some of our conclusions should be left at this purely speculative level, some probably have enough probability of hitting the target that there is reason to elevate them to something more.

For instance, going back to the quoted gary_c’s posting and his use of AHT as an example. I believe the context was, to simplify matters a bit, that Hyperion is not free to act with Genesi even if they wanted to, because Amiga Inc.’s licensing has a history of interference/ignorance with negative results. While we can certainly hope that this won’t be the case forever (it may not be), I do think gary_c and others who have made the case, have valid reason and enough information to make conclusions.

Always waiting for complete information to arrive usually results in complete inability to act. Especially so, when dealing with corporate entities and their public relations. Even if we have ample evidence of some action, a corporate PR machine might deny the case to the very end, and we’d never have a picture of the events that is completely free of controversy. Thus, the wait for the arrival of that absolute, unequivocal truth is a long one. We are usually left with a need to analyse sources, their motives, even speculate to some extent, to fill in the gaps.

Having said that, I do still believe that individuals should take great care when wording their postings and reflect the certainty of their information in the absoluteness of their claims.

I think it's a bit too much to call gary_c's example as "of nothing", as it is to call Samface a liar or Amiga Inc. as having killed the AHT deal. More likely Amiga Inc. did have a negative effect on AHT deal, and they do have a history of very difficult demands, but we don't know they wanted to kill it. They may have just been unreasonable, which probably be a quite valid guess. (They probably are a bit unreasonable or just uninterested in licesing for the real-life Amiga market since there has been a lot of effort and very, very little success.) Samface is certainly far from objective (as am I), but I don't think he lied. And as for gary_c, well, I think he had a point, even if probably should have toned down the commentary a bit.

@samface

Quote:

You're a lost cause, Fabio. You're still not understanding anything from what I've said. I'm sorry but there simply is nothing more I can do for you.

Now, here's an excercise. For a moment, attribute the above quote if Falemagn had said it instead, and guage your own reaction to it.

Telling someone over and again to 're-read my post' or 'you don't understand' generally does nothing towards swaying someone's viewpoint. It would be better if both of you simply acknowledged neither of you will agree with the other, and/or to wonder if you're (anyone) contributing anything to the dicussion with certain comments, or simply prolonging or starting yet another argument that you know won't be 'won.'

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

After spending some time reading this extensive thread, my question is, did you enjoy this argument? Why can't each person just state his point of view, and then leave it at that? You don't always have to convince every other person. Some people will just not listen to you for the sake of not listening to you.

Many people read these posts, logged into AW or not. What is more important: appear calm and in control of yourself, (and thus maybe convince other people reading this of your viewpoint), or hammer your "opponent" into the ground by name calling or derogative statements?

@jtsiren

Quote:

Any number of participants in within or relevant to this discussion (including Hyperion and AHT) could make claims that they believe to be correct, that they are making in good faith, but turn out incorrect from one perspective or another. Labelling them as liars when they may have been just mistaken is a bit too much.

Generally speaking, I agree with you completely, but in this case we've got to deal with a very specific situation, and very specific statements.

A statement like "Amiga, Inc stepped into the deal with last minute conditions" can either be true or false. There's no space for interpretation, here, or grayness, it's either true that Amiga, Inc came up with those last minute conditions, or it's not.

In the same vein, if AHT says that the deal wasn't made because of Amiga, Inc stepping into the deal with last minute conditions, I've got to decide that that's either a lie, or a truth: after all, whoever else other than AHT themselves could possibly know what was their motive to pull out of the deal?

It's like me going to, say, a grocery shop, to buy some ham, then going away as soon as I notice that the ham, there, costs too much. Then, when I go home, I tell you "hey, did you know, that shop has the most expensive ham ever, I went to buy some but then walked away".

Is there anything to interpret there? Is there anything more we need to know? What Sammy is suggesting is that we wait for some kind of confirmation that the ham really costs so much that I decided to not buy it: tell me, whoever is going to give you that confirmation? And, most of all, isn't waiting for such confirmation another way of saying "I don't believe you"?

_________________

@falemagn

Quote:

A statement like "Amiga, Inc stepped into the deal with last minute conditions" can either be true or false. There's no space for interpretation, here, or grayness, it's either true that Amiga, Inc came up with those last minute conditions, or it's not.

[samface emulation on]

Not necessarily because this depends how the involved parties define the word "conditions". For some involved party these are just some minor amendments while other parties regard them as very important and effecively a very strong restraint.
Further, the time-scale is very important here. "Last minute" can be interpreted very differently depending on the parties upbringing, social background and school education and does in most cases not always resemble exactly one minute. Therefore you need to aknowledge that the sentence "Amiga, Inc stepped into the deal with last minute conditions" is by no means either true or false, but in fact _extremely_ fuzzy and very dependend on personal interpretation which is a major result of the beforementioned factors.

[samface emulation off]

Last edited by polka. on 22-May-2006 at 04:25 PM.

_________________
This signature is in the middle of a much needed facelift!

@polka.

Well... you might just be right!

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

@samface/falemagn

Please give it a rest guys - and this applies equally to both of you. I'm not interested in who started it, let's just leave it here and move on now, otherwise I will act on some of the reports we have received.

_________________
Test sig (new)

@falemagn

Quote:

Generally speaking, I agree with you completely

OK, thanks - acknowledged. :)

Quote:

A statement like "Amiga, Inc stepped into the deal with last minute conditions" can either be true or false. There's no space for interpretation, here, or grayness, it's either true that Amiga, Inc came up with those last minute conditions, or it's not.

Sure, generally speaking I agree - that statement can be either true of false. We could go into details of particular words (like, what is "last minute" etc.), but basically the statement is simple enough to be either true or false.

Quote:

In the same vein, if AHT says that the deal wasn't made because of Amiga, Inc stepping into the deal with last minute conditions, I've got to decide that that's either a lie, or a truth:

This is where things get a bit more complicated. AHT may see it that way, and thus proclaim that as the reason, but what if a) they don't have all the information (like something happening on the background between other parties) b) they have misunderstood something c) AHT feels like the reason was Amiga Inc.'s last minute conditions when someone else might see the reason as some failure on AHT's part (resulting from a miscommunication or something) etc...

I have seen some pretty hairy negotiations that have two parties both believing they are correct and owners of the truth. :) Objectively speaking (if one can ever do that), sometimes it is very, very hard to tell who, if anyone is right because everyone sees the situation from their own perspective.

You are quite possibly right in your interpretation of the AHT/Amiga Inc. situation, but I do think there are possible shades of gray in there anyway.

Quote:

It's like me going to, say, a grocery shop, to buy some ham, then going away as soon as I notice that the ham, there, costs too much. Then, when I go home, I tell you "hey, did you know, that shop has the most expensive ham ever, I went to buy some but then walked away". Is there anything to interpret there?

Sure there is. What if you are absolutely clueless about the price-level of ham and thus walked away from a perfectly acceptable price? :) Does it make you a liar? No, just mistaken. (And very expensive ham to some may just be reasonably priced name-brand ham to someone else, so once again, more room for interpretation and shades of gray.)

Quote:

What Sammy is suggesting is that we wait for some kind of confirmation that the ham really costs so much that I decided to not buy it: tell me, whoever is going to give you that confirmation?

Since nobody is going to give me that confirmation, I have to make conclusions based on limited information - hence the rest of my post. :) That is where Samface and I disagree.

Quote:

And, most of all, isn't waiting for such confirmation another way of saying "I don't believe you"?

Probably. It's like when people tell other people "It's not that I don't believe you, but I have to verify" when what they are really saying is "I don't believe you, so I have to verify"... :) But basically, I don't think it comes down to belief as much as wanting to make sure. To an extent, it really isn't always about someone not believing someone else, it may be just that one isn't 100% sure the other person knows right.

It's not always about thinking the other person is a liar, just making sure the other person isn't mistaken.

Once again. It's not what you don't know that hurts you the most. It's what you do know, but just ain't so.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-May-2006 at 06:42 PM.

@wegster

I even posted three quotes of myself trying to explain the main point of what I'm trying to say here in three different ways in three individual posts. I'm sorry, I don't think it's possible for me to be any more clear than that. If he still doesn't understand and wonders off down the Fabio-logic lane where he proclaims that it's not possible to refrain from making conclusions about things we don't know, yet someone who does make conclusions about things we don't know should "shut up" about it, how is it possible for me to make myself understood?

No, I don't think that is a way to "win" the argument and quite frankly, after all the things Fabio has said to me during the years, I don't give a **** about wether he is offended or not either. I'm simply concluding it as a matter of fact that he obviously doesn't understand what I'm trying to tell him and that it seems rather futile to continue trying to explain the same thing over and over again.

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

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

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

@samface

You know, tho the both of you debate the same topic it always seems you're not..

You (both) argue about different things within the argument, going in circles and never comming to agreement. Not just because you don't disagree persee but because you're arguing about different things with wordgames making it even worse.

(So, how's that for making it even more confusing)

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@jtsiren

I agree with you completely, including the part where you say that we don't agree. I don't think there is some law or any kind of enforcement that conclusions has to be made regardless if we know all the relevant facts or not. This isn't a case where someone is screaming that the sky is falling as Fabio used as a metaphor earlier. Nothing will happen and we're perfectly able to continue our lives as before without having to find someone to blame the failed negotiations between AHT and Amiga Inc. for. It is in my opinion that It is especially when we're talking about finding someone to blame something for that we need to *know* before concluding. Innocent until proven otherwise, remember?

Besides that, I thank you for a refreshingly well reasoned post.

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

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

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

@polka.

Quote:

They do? Cool! So they must have changed their business objectives.

@Darth_X

Quote:

I disagree with some of your comments here. It appears you do not understand how things got to the situation they are today. Perhaps it would benefit you to do reseach on the history of how things got to be the way they are.

You may disagree as you see fit.However, not knowing what you disagree with precisely makes it kind of difficult to recheck things, there is an aweful alot of history there to go back through.Perhaps it would benefit you to go back tell me what you disagree with and why and provide links to the relevant information which shows just why or what I am "not understanding"

That aside, it remains that there is bad blood between Genesi and Amiga Inc. and experience tells me that before that can be gotten past and apology needs to be issued.It has absolutely nothing to do with blame or fault, but everything to do with desire and pride.

Of course if you do not agree with me that there is bad blood there, then perhaps I understand what you are on about and will respectfully disagree with you on that point.

_________________

@IonMane

Well in this thread there's some information which maybe could be useful.
Just send Amiga Inc 20 questions and they will disappear apparantly

_________________
/Harry

[SOLD] µA1-C - 750GX 800MHz - 512MB - Antec Aria case

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@samface

Well, I'll only make one post on this matter:

AHT claims that some last minute changes Amiga Inc. made to the deal, made THEM (AHT), refuse to sign it.

Now, the choice here is binary. Either the statement is true or false. Either they are saying the truth or they are liars. Amiga Inc didn't "kill the deal" (which, for example, could happen if they had foreseen something others didn't), they just asked for thing that were deemed unreasonable by AHT, who, in turn, terminated the deal as a direct consequence of this, ACCORDING TO AHT.

Either they are saying the truth or they are lying. It's that simple.

Have fun!

_________________

@_Steve_

Quote:

...some of the reports we have received.

You've received reports? That's kind of sad. Although there have been strong differences of opinion here, I don't recall anything out of line or violating the site rules. If some people have thin skins, I wonder why they don't just skip the thread.

@Samface
Quote:

I have no interest in digging for proof of your claims. Since it is your claim, the burden of proof is yours.

I totally agree, it is my responsibility. So if you don't want to do the search, and don't want to accept my interpretation, please just disregard it as unsubstantiated opinion. That's fine with me.

Quote:

EnthilZa's expression of miscontent about the affair does by no means imply that it would be Amiga Inc.'s fault nor that Amiga Inc. would be more thrilled about the matter than Hyperion. EnthilZa wasn't even speaking on the behalf of Hyperion, mind you.

Well, I don't think we're going to read a Hyperion press release about the negotiations, so the word of EnthilZa (and other individuals involved, albeit with some bias) is all we have for a clue. Is there some reason that matters, anyway? -- Nevermind, I don't want to go down that road.

Anyway, sure, it's not explicit that his feelings are directly due to Amiga, Inc. making last minute demands. Maybe the room was too hot or too cold. Maybe the AHT negotiators were drunk and rude. It could have been many things. I was perhaps rash to think it might be Amiga, Inc. getting involved and making demands at the last minute. Sorry.

Quote:

Try using e-prime sometime, it would probably help alot.

Maybe it would, but their web site's java applets killed my browser (rather weak Winbox at work) before I could find out much about it. It looked interesting, what I saw of it.

Quote:

There is a business strategy in the works, let's see how it unfolds before we start jumping to such conclusions.

I'm simply extrapolating from what can be seen (through my warped lenses, if you like ). If there is a business strategy unfolding, that's terrific and I wish it the best. I'm not directly affected, as fortunately I'm in good shape in terms of PowerPC hardware and software, but as an observer I'm very curious what sort of strategy would underlie the AOS/hardware decisions made by Amiga, Inc. that we've seen so far, so I wait along with everyone else for the grand unveiling.

-- gary_c

_________________
zukakakina.com - themes.tikiwiki.org

@gary_c

Quote:

Quote: When you generally speak about something "not materializing" it would mean the end product not being released. Please keep in mind that we are talking about Amiga, Inc.'s reasons for not allowing AOS4 to be used for the Ariana at the time their decision was made. Discussions in hindsite of "Ariana+AROS" or anything else that might have followed the licensing decision chronologically is not relevant to that, obviously.

Yes I got that. My comment was just about the silly semantic argument with samface.
I'm not saying that I agree with samface on anything else but the comment he made
about "not materializing" I agree with him. End products is what counts and IMO he
meant it just like he has been trying to explain.
Yes you can interpret it the way you like but that's possible with anything anyone says.
IMHO this just got silly because it was samface. If anyone else had said the same
nothing would have happened.

As I understand this subject.. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

* AHT talks to Hyperion about licencing OS4 for Ariana.
* Amiga Inc is OK with everything.
* When the deal is just about to be signed Amiga Inc comes with some "demand".
* AHT can't accept this "demand" and therefore declines the use of OS4.
* AHT then contacts AROS team and asks them if they're willing to do a port.
* AROS team recieves beta boards and does the port for it.
* Later AHT change the board (another CPU?!) and asks AROS team if they can make
another port.
* AROS team declines (as Fabio said)
* AROS+Ariana does not materialize as an end product.

Last edited by Samwel on 23-May-2006 at 03:40 AM.

_________________
/Harry

[SOLD] µA1-C - 750GX 800MHz - 512MB - Antec Aria case

Avatar by HNL_DK!