@Samwell,

Because of a clear answer and no word games. The rest is besides the point.

Now either somebody from Hyperion thinks that is worth answering or not and decide to comment on it or not, but let the rest of the members leave it at this.

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

@Samwel

Quote:

He states things like he has the very contract in his hands, which I'm quite sure he doesn't. He knows exactly the same the rest does.. Nothing! It's only speculation, with that silly draft of a contract that was (is) floating around a while back, backing his statements.

I have the "draft" that has been in the public for a year or so. Unlike the brief quotes above (in text form), the document is 17 pages long and the pages are scanned from a paper original. I see no reasons whatsoever to believe that this would be some kind of a "hoax", rather the opposite. It lacks the signatures, so we can call it a "draft" if you like.

But when it comes to the quotes I wrote above (as well as for a great deal of the rest of the contents in the contract) *all* essential info *has been confirmed* in public forums (both on ann.lu and on this very site) during the years by scattered posts in various threads made by people like Ben Hermans and the Friedens. Confirmed!

So it would be interesting to hear why you so quickly dismiss this as a "silly draft of a contract", especially the above mentioned quotes? Do you have any arguments to why this draft wouldn't be exactly the same thing as was signed by the parties?

@tmhg

Quote:

So it would be interesting to hear why you so quickly dismiss this as a "silly draft of a contract", especially the above mentioned quotes? Do you have any arguments to why this draft wouldn't be exactly the same thing as was signed by the parties?

I dismiss it just because it lacks signatures and because the source of this draft is unkown.
Nobody (involved) has confirmed this. If their contract would have become public I guess
someone would have been sued.

Then of course I have the same right as the rest of you guys to have my POV about these
things. Just the same as when you shout hoax about everything (just for the sake of it), no?

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@Seer

Yes, I have no problem with that nor the question itself, but rather the statements called
as facts when it's just a guesstimate at best.

_________________
/Harry

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

Avatar by HNL_DK!

Quote:

I dismiss it just because it lacks signatures and because the source of this draft is unkown.

It sounds like you haven't seen it? The legal part (pages 1-8) goes pretty much hand in hand with everything Ben Hermans, Alan Redhouse, the Friedens (and maybe even Fleecy) said during the last years in regards to the OS4/AmigaOne contract in public discussions. There has been quite a few scattered posts in various threads on several discussion boards during this time, as you may recall (long before the contract was leaked). Then follows the OS4 Schedule and Feature List and the Design Goals of OS4, written by Hans-Jörg Frieden. It lists the tasks that needs to be done, who will do it, their priorities (essential/OS4.0, OS4.2, etc), prerequisites, estimated work time (ranging from "already in beta-test" to "2 months", and also a lot of question marks), who will do it (Alexander Lohrmann, Almos Rajnai, Ignatios Souvatzis, Mark Olsen, Alexander Kneer, Tobias Abt, Olaf Barthel, Hans-Jörg Frieden, Thomas Frieden, Oliver Roberts, Andrea Vallinotto, Martin Blom, Philippe Ferrucci, and even Haage&Partner - obviously, the cooperation didn't work out with a few of them), etc, followed by comments. BTW, this was at the time where OS4.0 would be released within less than half a year (and be specced accordingly).

All in such detail, *making so much sense*, that I have very difficult to see how it would be a hoax. Maybe I'm fooled, but I very much doubt it. I would bet a hundred to one that this is a genuine draft, and I would say that it's almost as high probability that it actually is what they signed. Everything I see from the developments of AmigaInc/Eyetech/Hyperion, every single sign, points that way.

When you read it (together with other known parts from OS4's history and present), you realize that it is a roadmap to the current OS4 situation. It explains it all, with such detail. I simply cant see how it could possibly be a fake.

Quote:

Nobody (involved) has confirmed this.

The existance of a buyback clause has been confirmed, the time period of six months has been confirmed, I'm pretty sure I remember the sum being confirmed and discussed (and laughed at), and I am sure I recall Ben Hermans saying that if Amiga Inc does not use this option (or if they goes bankrupt, which is described in the pretty much useless 2.07 section BTW) then OS4.0 will fall into Hyperion's hands forever. The links are out there. In the jungle. Maybe someone can hunt them down?

All in all - to return to the subject for just a second - I think it now should be clear to why the question "when was OS4.0 really released" was asked. And that was all I wanted to say with that post, really.

Quote:

If their contract would have become public I guess someone would have been sued.

Really? And who BTW? And that hasn't happened?

Quote:

Then of course I have the same right as the rest of you guys to have my POV about these things.

Of course, I merely asked for counter arguments, that's all! Peace!

Quote:

Just the same as when you shout hoax about everything (just for the sake of it), no?

Eh, I do what, for the sake of what?

That was pretty much un-called for IMHO.

Quote:

I can see why others decided not to answer it because of the wording used. (like "just to make the whole thing even juicier" makes the reason for replying nice a bit hard).

Why?

There are two timeouts started at completion of OS4.0; Now it certainly does appear as if someone at Hyperion is trying to put the starts of those timeouts at May 04. The implications would be that (a) no buyback has been possible since November 04, and (b) Hyperion and Eyetech have unlimited license to do what they want with the OS3 and OS4 sources and call it "AmigaOS".
On the other hand, Amiga Inc seems to be of the opinion that they DID do a buyback at some point, so if OS4 .0 was completed in December 06, then, according to AI, Hyperion owns nothing, and has no further rights to do anything with OS4. Not develop it, not sell it, nothing. "All interest and title" ever held by Hyperion would then be Amiga Inc's.

If that isn't "juicy", then what the heck is? Or call it "vital", or "crucial". The whole future of OS4 would appear to hinge on the answer to this particular question. It doesn't get juicier than that at awnet....

And anyway, no *nice* answer was needed, or asked for. Just a straightforward one. The unwillingness by Hyperion to state a completion date for OS4.0 (or to state that it is not yet completed), and the silly dance Fabio and Hans-Joerg were doing were what prompted me to ask the question and provide a justification in the first place.

Quote:

End of discussion about this. Free for all might make a nice place to keep going on about it if anybody wants to discuss this further.

Nonsense. "End of discussion" was stated once before, a week ago, by wegster, on boxing day. Various people almost immediately chose to ignore it, and even though I, for the first time ever, hit the "report" button on one of those posts, they still stand unmoderated. Furthermore, following this end of discussion, there was discussion, including by you.

Either "end of discussion" means what it says, or it doesn't. If you actually intend to mean it this time (and that would mean end of all discussion on the subject, right?), then may I humbly suggest to originate a new thread not in free-for-all (i.e. "the well hidden forum that nobody is ever exposed to"), but instead in the OS4 forum --- after all, the question of whether OS4 is owned by Hyperion, owned by AI, or bound to be deadlocked in legal threats for the next decade should be at least as relevant as what cover the OS4.0 CD will/may/could have, if such a CD ever comes to be....

Quote:

Yes, I have no problem with that nor the question itself, but rather the statements called as facts when it's just a guesstimate at best.

Well, at lest you know *why* the *very simple but still un-answered* question "when was OS4.0 released?" was asked? Good, that was the point!

You don't want the contract to be real, for some reason. I don't know why, and I don't really care, but the argumentation seems very similar to "No, MAI only has some problems with their web-server" we saw on this site back when a whole group of companies (including MAI) went MIA. I mean no harm to anyone, I am only curious about how Hyperion is going to solve the situation. I wish them (and OS4) the best of luck. IMHO, OS4 belongs more to those who made it, than it belongs to Amiga Inc.

Now, let's drop the contract. It's off topic.

Wow.. really didnt see this until now.. great work, and i can download faster to.. no cue on hyperions server

Yes Yes Yes . . . .

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@Fraggel

Where have you been?

_________________
Site admins are people too..pooff!

Wohoo

The nasty reception that takemehomegrandma/umisef/falemagn/etc have received from some people is obviously because (a) they don't want to know about the very real & worrying situation that OS4 is probably in, which is fair enough - but others do like to discuss it, and (b) they have (wrongly) learnt from past flame wars that anyone saying anything unpleasant must be a troll (with ulterior motives, probably blue ones).

Sometimes I think that some even think *I'm* a blue troll (but they never use names, so I never know), which is ridiculous given that I've never even used MOS for more than a few seconds. I really wish that people would just stop trying to read (bad) intentions into words & actions, and just deal with the actual words & actions themselves. Don't like someone questioning something? Then say so, rather than accusing them of nasty intentions. You might be surprised - they might offer to move the discussion to elsewhere, rather than (correctly) deny having any nasty intentions.

OTOH, I can understand that (mainly) falemagn can drive some people loopy, because he just doesn't know when to drop a subject. i.e. when a discussion has become too heated for rational discussion to be understood, and carrying the subject on just makes things worse. Falemagn, a bit of advice: Trying to be super-rational in these situations is the worst possible thing, because it comes across as being pedantic & nit-picking to some people.

Last edited by ChrisH on 03-Jan-2007 at 09:35 AM.

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

[WILD SPECULATION]

I guess the problem is also that AmigaOS4 *now* is apparently much more than what was planned at the time The Contract was made.

So if there was no subsequent contract, then one may have a valid point in saying that the "Actual OS4 pre-release" is more or less equivalent to the "Originally Envisioned OS4 release". Especially as the $$$ amount specified in The Contract seems to be ok for the amount of development work covered in this case.

On the other hand, one may say that Hyperion failed to renegotiate The Contract under the new circumstances of the Actual OS4 development path, and that's now their problem. Also, Amiga has said they paid them some money along the way..

[/WILD SPECULATION]

p.s. After this slightly long post, Just-In-Time pizza removal from the oven..

Last edited by dirigent on 03-Jan-2007 at 12:44 PM.
Last edited by dirigent on 03-Jan-2007 at 12:41 PM.

@dirigent

Quote:

I guess the problem is also that AmigaOS4 *now* is apparently much more than what was planned at the time The Contract was made.

Indeed that is the case.

Link 1, Link 2

(Edit: Regarding Rogue's end comment in the second link, well, I guess he kept track of the Christmas this time! )

Quote:

p.s. After this slightly long post, Just-In-Time pizza removal from the oven..

Hope it tastes good!

Last edited by takemehomegrandma on 03-Jan-2007 at 03:23 PM.

Yeah, I know the somewhat tragic MorphOS story. They demanded (and with good reason probably) more than Amiga Inc. was really willing (I guess, able) to give them.

But The Contract was made and signed afterwards, wasn't it? When it was already clear Hyperion would do it.

@dirigent

Ignore the MorphOS part of link 1, that wasn't my point at all (it isn't in any way tragic BTW, I believe the MorphOS team are quite happy today that they didn't agree to Amiga Inc's terms).

The *second half* of link 1 gives the background to link 2, where Hans-Jörg Frieden confirms your "wild speculations" above, that OS4 from the beginning was meant to be something else than what it has become today, and that the specs indeed slided away gradually from what was originally outlined. *That* was the point with my post.

@kgrach

Quote:

Simply put a bad/improper PSU and/or bad/improper Memory will KO ANY MACHINE!!!!!! Change Memory and or PSU that should fix your problem.

Thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious. Seeing as this was no only tested with the 256MB memory module that shipped with the board, but also later with another approved 512MB memory module without any difference, and seeing as there was no documentation to depend on and few people had had enough good experience with various cases and PSUs for the MicroA1, I was pretty much on my own. The Teron docs were not available, and even when these docs came to light, they did not point to suitable PSUs.

Adam from ACK Controls, the guy who sourced the first few Micro AmigaONE boards for the Amiga Show in Ottawa, Canada at the end of 2004 where I bought mine, even sent me a PSU known to work with these boards, which also did not correct the problem.

Last edited by elatour on 03-Jan-2007 at 07:35 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@Rogue
Quote:

I haven't expected anything better from you.

Nor have I, at least not regarding your post on this site, which are often quite hostile and of a personal nature. So at least we've not let each other down in this respect.

Last edited by elatour on 03-Jan-2007 at 06:59 PM.
Last edited by elatour on 03-Jan-2007 at 06:59 PM.
Last edited by elatour on 03-Jan-2007 at 06:44 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@tmhg

Well, if the MorphOS team and Amiga Inc. had been in a position to reach an agreement which for both sides would have been acceptable, there would at least have been a solution more quickly it seems. And MorphOS, under the name of Amiga, would probably enjoy more prominence today than it actually does at the moment, well, but that's all history now.

The "speculation" was not so much regarding the well-known fact that AmigaOS 4 has become more than what was originally planned, it was rather about the guess that the Final Update of The Contract was still as unspecific about just what would define AmigaOS 4 and a "release" thereof as the Unofficial Prerelease of The Contract seems to have been (btw thanks for the quotes, I had not seen them before), and that there had not been a Boing Bag #1 for The Contract which would have adjusted the respective sums and timespans for the final development path and timeframe that was eventually taken for the OS...

@tomazkid

Lost.. in the tango.. and in celebrating christmas.. several days of drunkeness, not to talk about the well filled stomack with way to much food.. sending up some rockets.. before i tumbled in here again