@ z5

My comment was meant for everyone here, including you.

Quote:

That's why i am asking a lot of questions, on which nobody has ever been able to respond, either pro or contra.

If they are questions you know beforehand that nobody will answer then they are not constructive. BTW Amiga Inc was well represented at AmiWest, I know the reason why Bill did not attend AmiWest and I understand his decision. However you will just have to accept that you don't need to know everything.

Of course having Bill at AmiWest would have been great, but why would the show all of the sudden have become a disaster? AFAIK AmigaOS4 and AmigaDE technologies were excellently demonstrated and presented at this event.

Quote:

It all sounds a little bit contradictory.

Not at all. There are no contradictions anywhere what so ever. Let me explain it to you:

Quote:

You say that morphos is no Amiga because it is other OS/hardware.

Yes, different OS and hardware from what is actually labled as Amiga OS and hardware. "Amiga" is not some form of common term for anything compatible with the AmigaOS3.x API, not something looking or operating alike, nor a certain "spirit", it's a trademark.

Quote:

Yet you say that if MS would buy Amiga and rename Windows into Workbench, then it would be an Amiga?

Well, if this would be the case, I do believe they would probably label Windows as AmigaOS and the Windows desktop (explorer.exe) as Workbench. Workbench is just the AmigaOS "Desktop", remember?

Anyway, as I explained above, "Amiga" is a trademark. A trademark may be associated with any product that it's owner decides as long as it's not infringing on anyone else trademark or intellectual property. If Microsoft would buy the Amiga trademark and relabel Windows as an Amiga product, Windows would then be an official "Amiga", regardless if we would like it or not. I would probably hate Microsoft for it, but also have no other choice but to distance myself from anything Amiga related. I mean, if Windows would become known as an Amiga, would YOU say to everyone that you are an Amiga user?

Quote:

Going even further into your logic, if AmigaInc had chosen morphOs as the new workbench, then it would have been an Amiga? Right?

If Amiga Inc. would have decided that MorphOS would be the next AmigaOS, yes.

What some people seem to have forgotten during all these years of bancrupcies and failed promises is that the Amiga always was and still is as of today a trademark and an intellectal property 100% controlled by it's owner. Noone but the owner of the brand has always been the one deciding what an Amiga is just like noone but Apple decides what a Mac is. You as a user simply cannot apply your own definition and let's say for example, point at a Mac and call it an Amiga because that's what you would've wanted an Amiga to be.

Quote:

Amiga users and morphOS users have everything in common, because they are the same.

I disagree because:

Quote:

They run the same software,

Incorrect. There already are several MorphOS native applications that will NOT run on any Amiga OS nor hardware. Those applications require nothing but MorphOS and is (or should be) refered to as MorphOS applications rather than Amiga applications.

Again, all they have in common is the backwards compatibility. If you don't run anything besides classic Amiga software on MorphOS, there would be no speed nor functionality benefits what so ever. Like I said before, even WinUAE could do that better. You see, the whole idea behind a system like MorphOS is NOT to run classic Amiga software through emulation, but to go from 68k based software to PPC and offer more advanced OS functionality than the classic Amiga OS. As soon as you do that, you break both the AmigaOS AND Amiga hardware compatibility. That, my friend, makes MorphOS an alternative platform with it's own hardware and software standards rather than just an Amiga clone.

Quote:

they are interested in the same feel,

Well, I'm not so sure about that either. I mean, there is a reason for why Hyperion went for a task based emulation solution rather than the sandbox approach by the MorphOS team. However, for some reason I don't think it would be very meaningful to discuss this issue at this level with you. But then, you are of course free to prove me wrong.

Quote:

simplicity and ease of use that made the only REAL amiga so good all those years ago. The only difference is that they don't have the name Amiga, which is just a paper.

I'm sorry but in the world we live in, papers are NOTHING but "just". I mean, would you say the same to the police when they ask you for the papers on your car? Or a bit more appropriately, could I occupy your legally owned house as my own because it fits my view of what a house should look like? No, YOU would be the one showing up papers and laughing about my "but that's just a paper" remark.

Quote:

Fact is that it is very compatible with the real Amiga. I would even go as far as to say that it will be AS compatible as OS4 will be.

Hardly. AmigaOS4 = "The real Amiga". How could MorphOS possibly be more compatible than that?

Quote:

And OS4 not being available is not a lie. Sorry. Or you tell me a store where i can buy it.

Either you are a complete and utter illiterate or you are just acting stupid on purpose. You said that *NOTHING* *EXISTS*, which I disputed by saying that the AmigaOne is available in stores today and that AmigaOS4 may perhaps not be available yet but has been proven to exist through public demonstrations all over the world. Your statement that nothing would even as much as exist is nothing but a lie. I know you didn't mean it as such, but that's the words you used.

Quote:

The Amiga history of past 8 years should have learned that something isn't out until it is in the shops.

There is NOTHING in Amiga's history to compare the AmigaOS4 situation with. You see, this is the first time ever in Amiga's history that the AmigaOS has had such a major rewrite and never before has the owner of the brand let their customers be able to follow the course of the progress to the extent where we can read articles written by the developers themselves and be able to see and touch beta versions for ourselves. Even the most sceptic Amiga user should be able to tell that these guys do not intend to repeat anything of the past.

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

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

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

Quote:

People please no AOS4 vs MOS flames here at AmigaWorld!

Sorry, Mike. I simply couldn't restrain myself from correcting a few misconceptions on the behalf of z5. Furthermore, I didn't mean to flame MorphOS or the Pegasos, only point out the fact that it isn't Amiga products and indeed very different from actual Amiga products. Of course that doesn't neccessarily mean that the Pegasos and MorphOS would be less qualitative products.

Anyway, that's it for me in this thread. Keep up the good work with the AmigaWorld.net website! It will always be that nice breath of fresh air in the troll infected land of Amiga.

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

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

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

Quote:

"Amiga" is not some form of common term for anything compatible with the AmigaOS3.x API, not something looking or operating alike, nor a certain "spirit", it's a trademark.

So Amiga was a success because it was a trademark? Not because it was easy to use, fast, stylish, very small and efficient, coupled with great advanced hardware, ... Ok, everyone is entitled to their views ofcourse

Quote:

If Microsoft would buy the Amiga trademark and relabel Windows as an Amiga product, Windows would then be an official "Amiga", regardless if we would like it or not.

Then you have not understood anything of what Amiga was about. But again, everyone has his own opinion.

Quote:

I mean, if Windows would become known as an Amiga, would YOU say to everyone that you are an Amiga user?

No, because Windows is not what i define Amiga spirit.

Quote:

If Amiga Inc. would have decided that MorphOS would be the next AmigaOS, yes

No comment needed

Quote:

You as a user simply cannot apply your own definition and let's say for example, point at a Mac and call it an Amiga because that's what you would've wanted an Amiga to be.

I can define whatever i like to be an Amiga. But i will rephrase: morphOS is amiga "alike".

Quote:

Well, I'm not so sure about that either. I mean, there is a reason for why Hyperion went for a task based emulation solution rather than the sandbox approach by the MorphOS team. However, for some reason I don't think it would be very meaningful to discuss this issue at this level with you. But then, you are of course free to prove me wrong.

To cut a long story short, no there is no point in discussing this with me as a user will feel nothing different from both approaches.

Quote:

Or a bit more appropriately, could I occupy your legally owned house as my own because it fits my view of what a house should look like? No, YOU would be the one showing up papers and laughing about my "but that's just a paper" remark

Nope, but you could build a house that looks like this from the start, improve on it and maybe you will like it more than your own.

Quote:

I know you didn't mean it as such, but that's the words you used.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Quote:

Either you are a complete and utter illiterate or you are just acting stupid on purpose.

There really is no need to go down to that level, you know. As you pointed out yourself, it is only a computer.

But to cut a long story short, you believe that Amiga = trademark. I bought my first A1000 in 1986 and after all these years Amiga still means beauty, style, simplicity, fast boot times, cool software, ease of use, fab hardware, cool users, cool demos, spirit, doing things the right way and doing things different and the list goes on and on. A different view.

_________________
A.miga D.emoscene A.rchive

Quote:

I simply couldn't restrain myself from correcting a few misconceptions on the behalf of z5.

But people will want to counter argument, but that's not actually the problem, they key is to argue with respect for the other person's opinion. Mentioning "whinging twat" or "stupid", nomatter how sugar coated should be avoided.

To add to the discussion, yes "Amiga" is factually a brandname. Just like there is only one "Coca Cola". "Pepsi Cola" may come close to "Coca Cola" but the exact "Coca Cola" recipe is a trade secret owned by "Coca Cola". "Pepsi Cola" being similar will not make them "Coca Cola".

The two new platforms have many similarities and many differences. The term "spirit" with regard to a computer is very subjective and therefor is rather strange to argue in depth about. There is no way to prove what the "spirit" of the Amiga is and will mean something different to everyone.

Quote:

I simply couldn't restrain myself from correcting a few misconceptions on the behalf of z5

Glad to hear that your conceptions are the correct ones (especially if you say so yourself)

_________________
A.miga D.emoscene A.rchive

Quote:

To add to the discussion, yes "Amiga" is factually a brandname. Just like there is only one "Coca Cola". "Pepsi Cola" may come close to "Coca Cola" but the exact "Coca Cola" recipe is a trade secret owned by "Coca Cola". "Pepsi Cola" being similar will not make them "Coca Cola".

So you drink Coca Cola because it's Coca Cola, not because it tastes good. So if anybody comes a long that makes something as good as Coca Cola or better, you will not try / drink it because it's not Coca Cola. Right?

_________________
A.miga D.emoscene A.rchive

Quote:

So you drink Coca Cola because it's Coca Cola, not because it tastes good.

I dont drink any Cola at all.

But some other Cola producing company cannot pretend to be "Coca Cola". The are dozens of small Cola companies. Similarly Philips and Sony both produce VCRs and TVs, all very similar with regard to functionality. But these similarities will not make Sony, Sharp or Panasonic the same as Philips.

And BTW I do check out MOS and will continue to do so. My preferences go towards AmigaOS4 mainly because I like its features and general approach better, as well as having much faith in the people/companies involved.

@Mike

heh, at least this thread didn´t reach in excess of 150 posts .

Cheers

>Setbacks on OS4 and anything AmigaInc related have >learned me not to believe until i can buy the product (which i >will). In the meantime, morphOS is getting more and more >impressive, so PegII with morpOS becomes really >interesting as well.

At least apply the same standards that you apply to us.

It's hilarious that you are so skeptical about OS 4 whilst you accept without any discussion that there will be a Pegasos 2.

Remember the A-Box, Pre-Box, Caipirinha, AmiRage, Cybervision NG and Cyberstorm NG from the same engineers?

All announced and never happened.

Nobody has even seen a prototype of the Pegasos 2 and there you are ready to accept its existence.

OS 4 OTOH was shown all over the world, people played around with it in France, Sweden, Italy, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Austria, Slovenia, Switzerland, Canada and the United States.

We have demonstrated that the functionality set out in the Features document is there barring some items on which we have been absolutely upfront (Warp3D Nova).

We won't sell beta software with key functionality such as a TCP/IP stack or a decent harddisk partitioning tool missing.

That's a decision we have made.

Feel free to be skeptical but at least apply the same standards to everyone.

_________________

>Fact is that it is very compatible with the real Amiga. I would even go as far as to say that it will be AS compatible as OS4 will be.
>
MOS might be "compatible" with AmigaOS3.1 it wont be compatible with AmigaOS4.0

Then again if you don´t want to move the platform forward from a AmigaOS3.1 compatible system why buy anything when you can download UAE and run that on cheaper/faster/better alternatives.

Heck while I´m at it why don´t people move backwards instead, Amiga OS 1.3 is way faster than the resource hog called Amiga OS 3.1

@Messiah

Quote:

So Amiga was a success because it was a trademark? Not because it was easy to use, fast, stylish, very small and efficient, coupled with great advanced hardware, ...

Please don't change the subject. The question was not about what made the Amiga a success nor what caused it to fail. The question was about what is and what isn't Amiga. Fact is that Amiga, just like Sony or Philips or any other manufacturer, has a sole right to their trademark. You seem to think of "Amiga" as some form of common term for anything "in the spirit of Amiga", which is an opinion you are of course entitled to, but far from a fact.

Consider this; the name was invented by the original trademark owners. There would be no such thing as an "Amiga spirit" if it wasn't for the trademark and it's owners. Why should we not respect the trademark owners and redefine the trademark in any way we want?

Again, Amiga is not some form of a common term for a computer standard, it's a trademark and a brand. There is no such thing as a Mac that isn't made or licensed by Apple, the same goes for the Amiga. I don't know if it's possible to be more clear about this, but to make a metaphor; you're not saying that a Pepsi is a Coke, you are saying that a Pepsi is a Coca-Cola. You with me yet?

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

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

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

Quote:

Then you have not understood anything of what Amiga was about. But again, everyone has his own opinion.

Again, the computer term "Amiga" wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the trademark and it's owners. Noone but the trademark owners and the products the trademark was associated with gave the trademark and the term "Amiga" it's original meaning. That is not an opinion but a fact.

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

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

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

I am getting quite fed up of telling MorphOS and Pegasos users that they are not Amiga users. They are Pegasos/MorphOS users.

The funniest part is that most of them call me a fanatic and a "blind follower of the name". I mean, I wonder who's the one actually having problems with letting go of the name...

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

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

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

Quote:

The funniest part is that most of them call me a fanatic and a "blind follower of the name".

That really is strange Glad to hear that most do. An impression is an impression, but if most of them call you this, then it get a bit closer to being reality...

But everyone is entitled to his/her opinion ofcourse.

_________________
A.miga D.emoscene A.rchive

I believe among very specific groups of people they may actually 'believe' this to be true or at least pretend this to be so. That of course does not make it one inch more true. It's normal to get homogenous statements from similarly (narrow-)minded people.

Labelling someone to be a BAF is very childish and I am sure most people of interest to us will recognize this and IMO such extremist will only degrade themselves to the general public. So IMO people shouldn't counter with "your a BMF yourself" (no you are, no you are, .....), but show that Amiga users stand above this childish behaviour.

No, they are not. People who use AMIGAs are Amiga users...

_________________
--
-=#Val#=-
Valiant@Camelot


Amiga 1000; Amiga 2000; Amiga 3000T; CD-TV; CD32;
AmigaOne-XE 800Mhz G4;Sam400ep 666Mhz;
AmigaOne X-1000 1.8Ghz PA6T-1682M