Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Amiga Emulation => Topic started by: spider on June 17, 2003, 03:22:16 PM
-
HEllo!,
Since the OS4 introduction tour ends on July 5, 2003, I suppose we won't see the official introduction until after July 5, 2003, Any comments? :-) :-D :-? :pint: ;-)
-
Were you really expecting it before then?!
-
Perhaps after July 5th on the classic PPC accelerated Amiga. I still put money on 2004 before it's available on the AmigaOne.
-
Wayne wrote:
Perhaps after July 5th on the classic PPC accelerated Amiga. I still put money on 2004 before it's available on the AmigaOne.
You always were the optimist :-D
-
I'm sure you have heard of the Draco?
Frankly, to get OS 4 to run on a chipsetless system is really not that much of a problem.
Otherwise things like Amithlon and the Draco could never have existed.
-
HyperionMP wrote:
I'm sure you have heard of the Draco?
Frankly, to get OS 4 to run on a chipsetless system is really not that much of a problem.
Otherwise things like Amithlon and the Draco could never have existed.
Go on then, I dare ya!!!! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
-Edit- Easy eh? lets see AOS4 on a Peg then... now I double dare ya!!! :-o
Question: How much of OS4 has been written? From what I can gather only exec and maybe dos and intuition have been "ported" to the PPC... at what point does this become an OS one asks? The implication is that the original AmigaOS is required to boot and provide a significant amount of functionality... if this is the case then quite a bit more work will be required to make the A1 boot.
Note: This is a genuine question not flame bait.
-
Ahhh... Bash them HyperionMP! =)
That's the comments I like to hear!
Especially since i will receive my AmigaOne XE in the mailbox tomorrow!!! Weee! Can't wait!
This AmigaOne sucker has kept me sleepless for
two long nights now, I just can't sleep, heheh, I lie awake and daydream (nightdream?) about all the
cool things I will do with it! Not only with OS4 as I
don't think it will be ready this week, but also with
Linux but especially with Mac On Linux! =) The joy!
-
@Bloodline
wouldn't only the chipset bashing parts need to be rewritten? That and the 68K emu. ... Just an assumption but that would be my guess. as I'm not much of a programmer nor have I seen the source I wouldn't have a clue. Just a guess.
-
@HyperionMP,
Not trying to bash you there Ben, just pointing out my personal opinion regarding the timeline for OS4 on the AmigaOne. Feel free to prove me wrong.
Wayne
-
Terminills wrote:
@Bloodline
wouldn't only the chipset bashing parts need to be rewritten? That and the 68K emu. ... Just an assumption but that would be my guess. as I'm not much of a programmer nor have I seen the source I wouldn't have a clue. Just a guess.
Well, if they wanted to use the original OS to boot the A1, the A1 would have to look like an Amiga... that would mean getting a 68kemulator and some CIA emulation etc... not worth it...
And if the only parts of OS4 which are PPC are just a few core libraries It is going to take quite a bit of work to get them to boot an A1, quite a bit of missing functionality, there...
Still, I don't know, and they haven't told me so we will have to wait and see.
-
>Since the OS4 introduction tour ends on July 5,
>2003, I suppose we won't see the official
>introduction until after July 5, 2003, Any comments?
Juergen Schober said in the interview made by
AmigaArena that it is planned for July 5th to show
the first version of OS4 with a native version of
intuition.library.
He also said that OS4 will be released end of
summer for CybPPC and end of the year for the
AmigaOne (maybe an early preview version of OS4
for AmigaOne at the end of September/early October
at the OASE fair).
-
zacman wrote:
>Since the OS4 introduction tour ends on July 5,
>2003, I suppose we won't see the official
>introduction until after July 5, 2003, Any comments?
Juergen Schober said in the interview made by
AmigaArena that it is planned for July 5th to show
the first version of OS4 with a native version of
intuition.library.
He also said that OS4 will be released end of
summer for CybPPC and end of the year for the
AmigaOne (maybe an early preview version of OS4
for AmigaOne at the end of September/early October
at the OASE fair).
given the amount of work required to make a PPC native AmigaOS (believe me, just look at AROS...) I would say end of this year and beinging of next is a good guess for an A1 release date.
-
@Ben
The Draco has real CIAs, and Amithlon has a (minimal) CIA-emu.
Thats enough to start Kick3.1, but both still needed lots of extra drivers
and patches before they could even boot into WB.
-
HyperionMP wrote:
I'm sure you have heard of the Draco?
Frankly, to get OS 4 to run on a chipsetless system is really not that much of a problem.
Otherwise things like Amithlon and the Draco could never have existed.
So what's preventing Hyperion from porting OS4 to the pegasos? Hyperion was offered a FREE Pegasos board, correct?
Is there a contract with AmigaInc to limit OS4 to MAI manufactured AmigaOne's?
-
And if the only parts of OS4 which are PPC are just a few core libraries It is going to take quite a bit of work to get them to boot an A1
Let me remember, how many time was needed to convert xxx.device ?
A few minutes...
Wow it rocks !
-
The chipset dependencies of AmigaOS are located in three areas of the OS and nowhere else (anymore):
1. Exec
2. Certain device drivers & resources (timer, cia, IDE, gameport, keyboard, serial, parallel, audio etc.).
3. graphics.library
1) As you know we already have ExecSG running on the A1 hardware so this not an issue.
2) Most of the device drivers need to be re-implemented. This is gruntwork but luckily highly modular. You don't need a serial device before you can start on a parallel device etc. This work is already under way but the main developers are still on OS 4 itself rather than the devices.
3) graphics.library contains hardware banging start-up code. This would need to be replaced or patched out by Picasso 96.
The chipset dependency issue is really overrated.
-
Well, you are referring to the conversion of a 68K device to a PPC device using the same underlying hardware.
This is ofcourse relatively straightforward, especially with the toolkit we have developed.
What I was referring to was reimplementation for different hardware.
-
@HyperionMP:
A couple of comments above say that 68K emulation needs to be completed. I was under the impression that OS4 will not use the 68K CPU at all, just the PPC emulating the 68K as necessary (hence no context switches etc). Which is it?
-
You are seriously mixed up here.
I'm sure you are aware that we want to be able to run 68K applications on OS 4?
How do you propose we do this without an emulation layer?
Besides, why would be waste our time to reimplement certain 68K ASM modules in C when there is no need because 1) they are not particularly performance critical or 2) they are intended for the old hardware.
There is very little 68K ASM code left in OS 4 but we have no particular desire to for instance replace the 68K ASM code in graphics.library dealing with AGA with C code.
Or to reimplement SCSI.device when the real bottleneck is the throughput of the IDE controller.
Waste of time if you ask me.
-
>So what's preventing Hyperion from porting OS4 to the pegasos?
why do pegasos need OS4 ? Morphos isn't enough ?
plus, of the 600 morphos users out there, how many percent would run/buy OS4 ? most people seems happy with morphos, so why pay 50-100 $ or
whatever the price might be for OS4 ?
morphos is free, linux is free, Aros is free
openBE(?) is free, on pegasos everything is free :-D
so why should anyone pay for an OS ? :)
-
>plus, of the 600 morphos users out there
600 is two times more than 300 isn't it?
-
Darth_X wrote:
So what's preventing Hyperion from porting OS4 to the pegasos?
Genesi's unwillingness to obtain the proper license from Amiga Inc, AFAIK.
-
>600 is two times more than 300 isn't it?
yes, your math is correct :)
and this math fit into this discussion because ?
-
catohagen wrote:
>600 is two times more than 300 isn't it?
yes, your math is correct :)
and this math fit into this discussion because ?
300 users on the devlist I think, but not everyone who has an A1 is on the dev list.
Its upto dealers to add people. I beleive Eyetech add people as an when people request to be on it.
As for 600 users I thought that was the total number or Pegasos's
But people in other threads are saying their are pegasos still available for sale even for $299
so who is lying
600 users or 600 boards (Not all sold which doesnt make 600 users)
??????????????
-
Of course, everything depends on timer.device. So it's _highly_ modular, but not completely.
-
$299 for a Pegosos mb? I looked at magnetic systems site, and they dont even have a way to buy online? Where CAN you buy one of these boards? $299 sounds good to me!
-
why do pegasos need OS4 ? Morphos isn't enough ?
Why are some people so driven to create flamefests? I will repeat, what is wrong with people wanting options? Don't tell me you really think OS4 will be the ultimate end all OS, even Hyperion wont tell you that.
-
I've heard the number 600 when referring to Articia chips, so I think the 600 users bit is a bit of a lie. But there's still more Pegasos boards out in the field than AmigaOnes, afaik. However, at the current rate of shipping, this won't last for long.
-
do you se any flamefest here ? if so, didnt mean to start one, but seriously why do people still asking Hyperion/Hermans for a OS4 port, when they should be asking and paying Amiga Inc for that. Everyone knows this by now ?
so stop with the stupid questions already.
-
Hahahaha!
Even as the eternal optimist here (that glass is ALWAYS half full), I can't see OS4 anytime in the next few months. That doesn't mean that I'd feel bad about being proved wrong!
-
The Draco has real CIAs
The absense of CIA's is no problem when you have the actual OS source code and can compile appropriate replacements.
Of course, you won't get cia.resource.
-
DarthX wrote:
So what's preventing Hyperion from porting OS4 to the pegasos? Hyperion was offered a FREE Pegasos board, correct?
Is there a contract with AmigaInc to limit OS4 to MAI manufactured AmigaOne's?
Oh, boy.
There is no contract to limit to a certain hardware, otherwise there wouldn't be a CyberStormPPC version now would it?
It wouldn't have been a problem to actually buy a Pegasos if we want to port OS 4 to it.
All that is required to get OS 4 on the Pegasos is a proper licence. Why do people think that licencing schemes are so much of a problem? They're in place everywhere. If you want a port of, say, Heretic II, you don't send a free Amiga to Activision. You obtain a licence. What's so strange about this concept?
-
PMC wrote:
Hahahaha!
Even as the eternal optimist here (that glass is ALWAYS half full), I can't see OS4 anytime in the next few months. That doesn't mean that I'd feel bad about being proved wrong!
Well.. In my eyes this entire discussion reminds me too much of last year.. then there were a lot speculations when OS4 is ready and when it'll be delivered.
So.. This Year.. I'll try to avoid commenting too much.
-
I wish I had the money for and AOne. Would be nice to have a real computer again.
Hopefully OS4 will be here soon, so that I can try it out before I start saving money.
-
Rouge:
All that is required to get OS 4 on the Pegasos is a proper licence. Why do people think that licencing schemes are so much of a problem? They're in place everywhere. If you want a port of, say, Heretic II, you don't send a free Amiga to Activision. You obtain a licence. What's so strange about this concept?
Based on previous comments from bbrv, it seems to me that they think they can get OS4 on the pegasos for free.
One in particular I recall he even encouraged it (say stuff like "I`m sure some of you tech heads will sort that [reliance on dongle] out" IIRC). Somebody must have the quote.
Edit: Ok found it click (http://www.ann.lu/comments2.cgi?show=1046272707&category=news&number=5#comment).
One part I forgot was he even suggested somewhere for the 'smart gals or guys' to discuss it. It seems to me they are actively encouraging piracy of Hyperion and Amiga`s IP??
-
> If you want a port of, say, Heretic II, you don't send a free Amiga to Activision. You obtain a licence. What's so strange about this concept?
What is strange with this concept is that normally, mainboard manufacturers don't have to purchase permission for running an OS. The user purchases the OS and a mainboard and that's the end of it. It's a fair situation, with mutual benefits: both have their development costs, the OS manufaturer sells the OS software, and the mainboard manufacturer sells mainboards, everybody wins. Not exactly rocket science, is it ?
A license requirement on top of the OS price looks like a thinly veiled attempt to milk money out of the hardware manufacturer.
-
@Dietmar
Companies need to make money, and in a market where we can't count on mass sales (unlike the PC clone and Microsoft markets) there has to be some give. The license fee for a hardware producer to run an OS is perfectly viable. I'm sure hardware phone manufacturers have to pay certain royalties for using an OS on their system.
At the end of the day the only current license for new PPC based OS4 systems is Eyetech's Amiga One. If YOUR REQUIRED OS wont run on on your PREFERRED hardware then I can only say that you purchased the wrong board.
If you bought a board to run operating system X, and then Y comes out requiring the manufacturer to pay a fee for use on the system, then you need to talk to the hardware manufacturer. If this cannot be resolved then you need to rethink, or hope that the manufacturer comes to some agreement (ie: pays the fee).
Don't get me wrong I want to see AOS everywhere, but business is money and without money we won't see AOS anywhere.
-
The license is not only about extracting money from the hardware manufacturers.
If hardware manufacturer x wants to bundle its hardware with operating y whichi s proprietary, he needs to charge his customers.
Again, there is no requirement to ship every Pegasos with OS 4, there is only a requirement to ship certain Pegasos machines with OS 4 when customers have indicated that is their OS of choice.
The second reason for the license is to have a contractual mechanism in place to protect consumers from the quite frankly criminal behavior of certain companies who defrauded customers through lack of legally required repairs and total neglect of warranty obligations.
There is ample evidence of that to be found on this very site of people who send it very expensive hardware over 2 years ago for repair and never saw it back.
Sure, if you are a hotshot developer, BBRV can pull some strings for you and you'll get your board repaired or replaced but other than that, you can forget about it.
How can we ask people to return to the platform when companies like that prey on the userbase in violation of countless consumer laws?
-
@TheMagicM
Try looking on the reseller list at the pegasosppc site.
-
@Dietmar
I don't think Hyperion was asking any one to "purchase permission" as you say, just that they uphold their copy protection scheme as it were.
What if the Pegasos had the ability to bypass the Windows copy protection scheme? Do you think that if they sent a free board to Microsoft that would give Microsoft any incentive to port it? No. I'm guessing Bill Gates would be like,"You want me to port my OS and anyone can copy it because your board doesn't allow my software to be protected. Wouldn't that mean I'll sell exactlly 1 copy? Suuurrrreee....I'll get my people right on that."
Peg users,"Yep that's right, but what if we promise no one will pirate it?"
In the background- BBRV yelling,"Tell Gates if he doesn't port it we'll find someone to get that WinXP running on this thing with out that stupid key code or product registration crap!"
But since BBRV wants the Pegasos to have the ablity to run OS4 with out a copy protection scheme, Hyperion should gladly do it?
Sure.
AmigaGuy
-
Please stick to the truth Ben about why this
dingle-dongle found its way on the AmigaOne.
The excuses sound already rubbishy back in time
and they do nowadays even more.
I think its really about time to think about how
jumping on the Pegasos instead to still trying
to make these license restrictions look
reasonable and good.
-
@logain
The way I see it there are 2 choices Hyperion could use for their copy protection.
1. A Key that is written on a piece of paper distributed with each copy of OS4
or
2. A hardware key that is distributed on the motherboard with each copy of OS4.(motherboards that don't come with OS4 don't have to have it)
Genisi isn't willing to include the key as they want it to run with out the key. How is that ANY different (if OS4 used the 1st method of protection) then them just sending out a piece of paper with ONE key code on it to everyone buying a Peg that doesn't even come with OS4, just so people can pirate it?
AmigaGuy
-
An USB-dongle could do the trick and i suggested this
solution to Ben over a year ago..he wasnt uninterested
and said he'll look into it but then it became clear
that this initiative was started mainly for other reasons
(everybody can think of).
-
does not even need to be visible, as the Peg has an internal USB port.
-
@logain et al
Yes, but somebody still has to pay for the development of AOS4 on Pegasos, Macintosh, and/or . AFAIK, neither Amiga Inc. nor Hyperion have that kind of capital. Nor do either have the resources to support Pegasos owners using a retail AOS4 package. Does anyone dispute this?!?!?!
Lets please stop rehashing the 'AOS4 on Pegasos' argument. It's not going to happen unless Genesi obtain an OEM license from Amiga Inc. Genesi have stated they will not obtain an OEM license from Amiga Inc. (well at least under the current terms). So, what do you think the likely hood is that Amiga Inc (and/or Eyetech/Hyperion) would allow Hyperion (err... themselves) to bring AOS4 to the Pegasos?
[PLEASE NOTE: The preceding comments were made from a 'neutral' point of view. Neutral, in so much as they are not intentionally biased toward either the pro-Amiga/Eytech/Hyperion or pro-Genesi factions. PLEASE DO NOT TWIST MY WORDS TO THAT END!
This was simply an argument, based on presently available facts, that we (the users of Amiga.org) should just drop the 'AOS4 on Pegasos' topic --- Edit --- until Amiga Inc./Hyperion start selling retail packages of AOS 4 (excluding AOS4 for PPC enabled 'Classic' systems). --- Edit ---. It only creates a vicious cycle of flame wars and FUD. Something that I could most certainly live without.]
-
@ShadesofGrey
No, you seem to not grasp the intent of the question.
It was not that Genesi wanted AOS4 on the Pegasos for AOS4's sake, but the Pegasos's sake. Frankly, paying to have it ported then having the Pegasos's customers have to pay again per-copy sounds rather foolish to me, does it not to you? Hyperion has stated that they are charging per-copy of AOS4, so they should not be then discussing charging the hardware manufacturer for the port as well.
Unless you're saying that Hyperion recieved monies from Eyetech and DCE for the ports to their respective hardware platforms (The A1 and Cyberstorm/Blizzard, respectively).
-
Imagine you start a company, build a computer system of whatever type and want to have a Operating System on it that you have NOT created yourself.
Do any of you imagine that this is free for an OS that is not Open Source in itself.
Here (http://www.lindows.com/builder/lindows_builder_info.php)is one example of an OS company that even based their product on open-source, built some own stuff ontop of it, and even they will charge you if you want to sell the OS with the computer you build.
Do anyone expect them to besides this, also spend days and weeks to make changes in their operation system for free so that it run on a couple of hundreds boards more.
It must be in the interest of the inventor/manufacturer of the computer/mainboard to have software for it. Especially if the manufacturers customers wants it.
As a business, there is no cost-free way of pleasing customers. You just gotta decide what is worth what. Apparently there is a company talked about here who just don't think it's worth it.
This can be hurtful for their business since there seems to be in peoples interest to get this software with their hardware.
Oh well, they can always try and distribute their board with native Apple OS X. I am sure Apple software developers will spend time porting the nessary parts and require notthing in return. They wouldn't even want any insurance that the customers even purchase a single copy if the port which is a possible scenario.
Spend a year using money to build houses, if no-one wants to move in/buy them later your screwed. No return for your effort, just unpayed bills.
There are risks involved in any undertaking. But to delibrietly expose yourself to these risks would be kindof stupid.
Why don't people in the OS4 on [insert platform here] try and become a Microsoft OEM System Builder and examine that cost.
If you build a car and want leather seating in it. Who will pay for all that leather and also pay to make the leather company sew it to fit your seats? Well, You first, when you build that car. Then, when you sell that car you can charge your customer extra for it. It's as simple as that.
-
@Hans:
(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/617.jpg)
:-D Thats a great new avatar, but isn't the light sabre the wrong colour? ;-) :-P
Heres a couple of ideas:
Red
(http://www.pgordon.clara.net/redsabre.jpg)
"Boing"
(http://www.pgordon.clara.net/boingsabre.jpg)
:-D
-
You skillfully avoided my Question about the OS, there Ben (you could be a politician). Ok fine I imagine there are some things you don't want to talk about. We wil let the individual make his/her own conclusions then.
But this Licence argument is stupid.
You make a product (costs you money)... you sell this product (makes you money)... so why would you consider limiting your market (reducing possible income)?
Unless there is some ultra sick hardcore deal going on (read sums of money) between you and Eyetech, your position just seems to be one of a spoilt little child.
Frankly, I don't care if we ever see OS4 legally running on a Pegasos. But I don't understand your position, and it is things like this in the Amiga Market that seriously wind me up.
The only other reason I can see for this stance is that you don't have enough faith in OS4 to put it head to head against the Free MOS and AROS on the Peg?
-
@HyperionMP
I cant believe you would say that about an other party, when your magical partner or whatever twisted arrangement you have for OS4 with amiga.inc has so many rumors,nonsense yet you slam on the other side like that? ....looks a bit hipocritical...but maybe I'm wrong on all counts..and Hyperion the game porting house gone OS developers is just showing the characteristic AI camp honesty. ..
-
The Draco has no CIAs by default.
But there are two chip sockets on the board to install CIAs manually by the user. (In case you want to use the Lightwave Donge, for instance)
I
-
Free OS and Free Sw.
I ahve had these discussing over and over again on other forums.
It seems to me, that those people who want free this and that SW, are the same people who are outrages when ever RIAA or similar sues them for copying and spreading MP3, movies and similar things.
Note, the above is just a general thing, and thus it cam not be aplied to every one who think thing should be free.
But anyway in the world I live in, I would have to charge for whatever I make.
I still have bills to pay, food to buy and so on.
I am pretty sure the good folks of Hyperion have bills to, and I am sure the would want to eat some times.
-
Dietmar wrote:
A license requirement on top of the OS price looks like a thinly veiled attempt to milk money out of the hardware manufacturer.
It doesn't exactly take rocket science to figure out that an OS doesn't port itself to a different platform. It might be easy to get a prototype of some sort running on a Pegasos, but nothing can remain at prototye status. Yes, the northbridge is similar, but what about different mainboard components that require additional drivers.
Furthermore, do you actually know what such a licence would cost, if at all?
The second thing is that a licenced hardware will take part of the support problem away from us. If this wasn't the case, Hyperion/Amiga would need to exclusively take care about support, which would also mean having access to all hardware platforms it is supposed to run on (if we're talking about the Pegasos, this doesn't seem to be the problem although you would need at least one Arpil1 and one April2 machine, pluse a Peg II if available). Add to that Apple hardware (everybody's screaming for Apple hardware)...
Finally, what is wrong about extracting some money from it? After all, it might be a selling argument for the hardware manufacturer too. Obviously there are people that want OS 4 on the Pegasos.
-
Tickly wrote:
Thats a great new avatar, but isn't the light sabre the wrong colour?
No, you need to see the Avatar of my brother.. HINT: people have been asking me about T-Shirt colors... This is the answer :-)
-
>Frankly, I don't care if we ever see OS4 legally running on a >Pegasos. But I don't understand your position, and it is >things like this in the Amiga Market that seriously wind me >up.
I can't say I'm surprised. You are involved in a open-source project with people developing in their spare time and without any significant commercial incentive nor pressure.
Hyperion is allocating significant resources to have full-time professional developers working on OS 4.
We cannot afford the glacial speed at which AROS is being developed. People are already slamming us for taking around 18 months now to deliver OS 4.
As a result, we want to make sure we extract a reasonable compensation for our work to ensure continued development of the OS.
This means that any party wanting to offer OS 4 FOR THOSE CUSTOMERS THAT WANT IT must be willing to enter into a license scheme that at least somewhat guarantees a return on investment for us.
If a customer specifically asks for OS 4, why is it so hard for a hardware producer to agree to the license terms and ship that specific board with an OEM version of AmigaOS?
Let me tell you why: because the same hardware producer is pushing an alternative operating system and has a vested intrest in that.
It is a conflict of intrest.
Plus if they would enter into the license agreement, they would be required to cough up all hardware and firmware specifications in order for OS 4 to happen.
-
Let me tell you why: because the same hardware producer is pushing an alternative operating system and has a vested intrest in that.
It is a conflict of intrest.
So how do you explain that fact that Genesi are sponsoring the development of OpenBEOS, NewOS, AROS and a few other OS's to be ported to Pegasos?
Wouldn't they be confilts of interests too? Especially AROS?
-
bloodline wrote:
You skillfully avoided my Question about the OS, there Ben (you could be a politician). Ok fine I imagine there are some things you don't want to talk about. We wil let the individual make his/her own conclusions then.
I did?
You mean this question:
"Question: How much of OS4 has been written? From what I can gather only exec and maybe dos and intuition have been "ported" to the PPC... at what point does this become an OS one asks? The implication is that the original AmigaOS is required to boot and provide a significant amount of functionality... if this is the case then quite a bit more work will be required to make the A1 boot. "
I had hoped that my subsequent posts would have cleared up the misconceptions underlying your question.
OS 4 has an inbuilt emulation layer and the difference between 68K and PPC code is minimal.
There is no sandbox involved.
As a result, you cannot distinguish between OS 4 in its current status (with quite a number of modules still in 68K but very few original 3.1/3.5/3.9 modules) and its final status (with those same modules recompiled for PPC).
The only difference is speed, not functionality.
I quite frankly don't have a clue as to what this has to do with booting on the AmigaOne other than that the devices need to be reimplemented, an issue which I discussed already quite extensively.
-
meerschaum wrote:
@HyperionMP
>I cant believe you would say that about an other party, when >your magical partner or whatever twisted arrangement you >have for OS4 with amiga.inc has so many rumors,nonsense >yet you slam on the other side like that? ....looks a bit >hipocritical...but maybe I'm wrong on all counts..and >Hyperion the game porting house gone OS developers is >just showing the characteristic AI camp honesty. ..
Our hardware partner is Eyetech and no-one else.
I have no reason to believe that Eyetech will not comply with all relevant consumer legislation with respect to the AmigaOne including warrzanty obligations and after sales service.
They have been in business for many years now.
-
Just a thought. The OS4 68K emulation is JIT based. I'd expect, therefore that 68K code runs at speeds not far short of native.
-edit-
Native as in PPC code, I meant
-end edit-
For many IO device drivers, wouldn't the emulated 68K code already be faster than the hardware could keep up with anyway? I'd imagine stuff like graphics hardware drivers and the like would benefit most from 100% PPC native code.
Still a 100% PPC native OS should be the overall goal ;-)
-
Sorry if thats been aswered already, I wasn't paying a lot of attention - thought this would just be another flame fest ;-)
-edit-
@Rouge,
LMAO, that's one funny avatar!
-
So how do you explain that fact that Genesi are sponsoring the development of OpenBEOS, NewOS, AROS and a few other OS's to be ported to Pegasos?
These products are not directly competitive to MorphOS unlike AmigaOS 4.
They do not run 68K legacy software transparently.
Not even AROS. And let's face it, both MorphOS and OS 4 have a hell of a lot more to offer in terms of functionality than AROS.
AROS simply is not a competitor to MorphOS and OS 4 unless it catches up in the field of functionality and offers transparent binary compatibility with OS 3.x applications.
-
AROS simply is not a competitor to MorphOS and OS 4 unless it catches up in the field of functionality and offers transparent binary compatibility with OS 3.x applications.
When bernie releases his PPC 68k JIT source, then AROS WILL have binary compatibility with OS 3.x
That's the beauty of open source.
Anyway, Apple Mac support. I would presume that te subject has been discussed quite considerably at Hyperion. I know that the main problem would be supporting several models etc, but couldn't you just say AOS4 will run on these 3 models of mac only, and then release it? Or would Apple have to pay you a license fee to allow your OS to run on their hardware too?
I really would love to run OS4 on an Mac laptop, and would pay upto US$100 for the priveledge.
-
Reading this thread, I'm seems to me that all Gensei want to to is take a slice of a very small cake.
I agree with everything that Hyperion say, it seems that Gensei and anyone else who's appears to be an advocate of them would go to great lengths to tarnish/destory Amiga Inc/Hyperion etc... Are you actually Amiga enthusiasts or just a bunch of trouble makers who want a new system but are unwilling to pay licence fees and bide by terms and conditions of an agreement.
There's nowt wrong with the licence/dongle that is being proposed. There's no point having sh1t load of boards and 'hope' OS4 will run. You have to start with a list of known and working components and work with that, hence A1 board. From here and once A1+OS4 is out other boards could be catered for like Pegasos. Although if they're not willing to negotiate or pay licence fees, then WTF should Amiga Inc/Hyperion take them seriously or adhear to their demands.
I've never had MorphOS running on my BPPC, just seems a arse on to get running. So I couldn't really care less for it. I want OS4 on my BPPC and if it seems good, I will consider investing in a A1 motherboard. So CPPC and BPPC are giving us a preview of what's to come and an incentive to migrate to A1+OS4. that what Amiga Inc/Hyperion's plans are and are sound.
So Gensei, pay the licence fee if you want support for Pegasos, work hand in hand... no wonder the Amiga keeps getting screwed up, too many people wanting a slice of the action instead of working together. Stop being selfish...
Perhaps your only goal is to destroy Amiga etc cos you can't have it your own way ?
Well, I'll get back to my Spectrums until you lot sort out what you really want. I'm waiting for OS4 for my BPPC, and WILL purchase it. I will then purchase an A1 if OS4 satisfies what I'm looking for.
Thanks for listening.. probably just made things worse, although I don't see how as you're already hot under the collar.
Good luck Hyperion, looking forward to OS4, don't give a sh1t about Pegasos/Gensei etc.....
Cheers.......
-
1. Ben claims that the license scheme is to protect customers from fraudulent mainboard manufactures. Ignoring for a second the inherent below-the-belt quality of this justification, what makes a group of developers the court and judge of the market? Next thing that might happen is that developer x is unsatisfied with the ethics of Hyperion and blocks his software to run on the A1. I don't think we should enter the road of judging competitor's ethics.
2. It was claimed that the scheme is used to protect IP by complicating piracy with a hardware device. That's a perfectly valid approach but it is just unreasonable to charge the mainboard manufacturer for a service that primiarily benefits Hyperion. Many of us are developers, none of us requests special chips on mainboards. If we feel the need to protect our software, we use cheaper methods that work reasonably well. In the case of A1 and Pegasos mainboards, the unique MAC address of the built-in ethernet controller would be a good hook for an unlocking procedure.
3. Some claim that Hyperion has to cover high development costs, in a small market, and that justifies milking money from the mainboard manufacturer, on top of charging customers for supplying the OS. Considering that the mainboard manufacturer has had considerably higher development costs, I don't see the moral justification for the software side charging the hardware side. One side gets an OS, the other side gets a platform, costs and benefits are evenly split, and the money comes from the customers alone.
-
specfreak wrote:
Reading this thread, I'm seems to me that all Gensei want to to is take a slice of a very small cake.
I agree with everything that Hyperion say, it seems that Gensei and anyone else who's appears to be an advocate of them would go to great lengths to tarnish/destory Amiga Inc/Hyperion etc... Are you actually Amiga enthusiasts or just a bunch of trouble makers who want a new system but are unwilling to pay licence fees and bide by terms and conditions of an agreement.
There's nowt wrong with the licence/dongle that is being proposed. There's no point having sh1t load of boards and 'hope' OS4 will run. You have to start with a list of known and working components and work with that, hence A1 board. From here and once A1+OS4 is out other boards could be catered for like Pegasos. Although if they're not willing to negotiate or pay licence fees, then WTF should Amiga Inc/Hyperion take them seriously or adhear to their demands.
I've never had MorphOS running on my BPPC, just seems a arse on to get running. So I couldn't really care less for it. I want OS4 on my BPPC and if it seems good, I will consider investing in a A1 motherboard. So CPPC and BPPC are giving us a preview of what's to come and an incentive to migrate to A1+OS4. that what Amiga Inc/Hyperion's plans are and are sound.
So Gensei, pay the licence fee if you want support for Pegasos, work hand in hand... no wonder the Amiga keeps getting screwed up, too many people wanting a slice of the action instead of working together. Stop being selfish...
Perhaps your only goal is to destroy Amiga etc cos you can't have it your own way ?
Well, I'll get back to my Spectrums until you lot sort out what you really want. I'm waiting for OS4 for my BPPC, and WILL purchase it. I will then purchase an A1 if OS4 satisfies what I'm looking for.
Thanks for listening.. probably just made things worse, although I don't see how as you're already hot under the collar.
Good luck Hyperion, looking forward to OS4, don't give a sh1t about Pegasos/Gensei etc.....
Cheers.......
I WILL buy OS4 also, but i would also like to buy it for the PPC board of my choice, not some overpriced under powered heap of junk.
-
and Hyperion the game porting house gone OS developers is just showing the characteristic AI camp honesty. ..
What a nice comment.
FYI, when I was attending university one of the courses I did was Operating Systems design. I'm afraid that games programming was not offered at our university.
-
Plus if they would enter into the license agreement, they would be required to cough up all hardware and firmware specifications in order for OS 4 to happen.
Do you mean the ZICO specs?
-
HyperionMP wrote:
bloodline wrote:
You skillfully avoided my Question about the OS, there Ben (you could be a politician). Ok fine I imagine there are some things you don't want to talk about. We wil let the individual make his/her own conclusions then.
I did?
You mean this question:
"Question: How much of OS4 has been written? From what I can gather only exec and maybe dos and intuition have been "ported" to the PPC... at what point does this become an OS one asks? The implication is that the original AmigaOS is required to boot and provide a significant amount of functionality... if this is the case then quite a bit more work will be required to make the A1 boot. "
I had hoped that my subsequent posts would have cleared up the misconceptions underlying your question.
OS 4 has an inbuilt emulation layer and the difference between 68K and PPC code is minimal.
There is no sandbox involved.
As a result, you cannot distinguish between OS 4 in its current status (with quite a number of modules still in 68K but very few original 3.1/3.5/3.9 modules) and its final status (with those same modules recompiled for PPC).
The only difference is speed, not functionality.
I quite frankly don't have a clue as to what this has to do with booting on the AmigaOne other than that the devices need to be reimplemented, an issue which I discussed already quite extensively.
Ok, fair point. I did not mean to discredit you or the tremedous effort that is going into AOS4.
My point was, AOS4 needs AOS3.1(?) to boot the Amiga and then the new subsystems come into play.
That's fine, if you recal that's exactly how the old Amiga version of AROS functioned.
Now that's fine and good, and is a great way to boot up the old Cyberstorm.
My question was relating to exactly how much of AOS4 has been written, and that my point was from what I can tell, a serious amount of work will be required before enough of AOS4 is PCC to allow it to boot the A1, regardless of the "68K emulation" (which would have to be started very early if you want to use 68k subsystems to boot the machine).
Again this is not an attack on either you or Hyperion but simply an observation. I would also appreciate that you probably can't and don't want to answer that. I will not hold that against you.
PS. I'd like to keep AROS out of this, as these are my personal observations and have nothing to do with AROS (for a change :-D ) :-)
-
what makes a group of developers the court and judge of the market?
What makes anyone judge of the market? Do you want to say that a group of developers should no longer be in control of their product? Like, that I have any sort of obligation to write my software for a specific set of hardware?
Next thing that might happen is that developer x is unsatisfied with the ethics of Hyperion and blocks his software to run on the A1
Hyperion has never done anything like that, a claim easily proven by the fact that our 68k software runs on Amithlon/XL and our PPC software runs on MorphOS to a certain degree. We didn't ever block anything, and we don't do so on OS 4. However, as I already stated, OSes don't port themselves.
It was claimed that the scheme is used to protect IP by complicating piracy with a hardware device.
Among other things, yes. Surely you will agree that piracy on the Amiga tends to be a problem when you can find rips of Heretic II 12 hours after the game was released.
However, as has been mentioned before too, taking away the burden of support from us to the respective hardware vendor is also part of the scheme. That is because the mainboard vendor knows his mainboard better than we do, and unless the problem is more general in nature, the mainboard vendor would know the answer to the problem better. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Some claim that Hyperion has to cover high development costs, in a small market, and that justifies milking money from the mainboard manufacturer, on top of charging customers for supplying the OS
I am highly offended by your use of the word "milking". It suggests something illegal. There is nothing illegal going on. You don't happen to agree to the licencing, but that doesn't mean we're milking anyone. Again, do you have any idea about what amount of money we're talking here? I don't think so, so your term "milking" is at least as offensive as what you suggested about Ben's comment.
Considering that the mainboard manufacturer has had considerably higher development costs, I don't see the moral justification for the software side charging the hardware side.
You don't know our expenses on OS 4. You don't know how much the software side would charge the hardware side. Yet, you take it upon yourself to judge us as "milking" hardware developers.
-
My point was, AOS4 needs AOS3.1(?) to boot the Amiga and then the new subsystems come into play.
No it doesn't. Thats a strange conclusion. OS4 is based on OS3.1 sources, and some parts of those won't be changed, but that doesn't mean it NEEDS OS3.1 to boot the Amiga. Thats like saying Photoshop 7 needs Photoshop 6 to start up, then 7 takes over, because they took the Photoshop 6 code and updated it. Its simply not true; Photoshop 7 is just Photoshop 7. OS4 is just OS4.
-
The 68K interpretive emulator is integrated with the kernel and is hence available at boot-time on the A1 once the U Boot firmware has successfully obtained the kernel image.
-
>1. Ben claims that the license scheme is to protect >customers from fraudulent mainboard >manufactures. Ignoring for a second the inherent >below-the-belt quality of this justification, what >makes a group of developers the court and judge >of the market?
First of all, you are ignoring the facts. Are you denying that there have been hardware companies past and present who have failed to live up to their legally defined warranty obligations?
Is it below the belt to ensure that our customers do not fall victim to this in the face of overwhelming evidence?
Secondly, the warranty and support obligations are a legal standard set by the European and national legislators, not by Hyperion.
All we want is to make sure that a hardware manufacturer or reseller is equipped to handle support and warranty repairs as required by the law.
-
Tickly wrote:
My point was, AOS4 needs AOS3.1(?) to boot the Amiga and then the new subsystems come into play.
No it doesn't. Thats a strange conclusion. OS4 is based on OS3.1 sources, and some parts of those won't be changed, but that doesn't mean it NEEDS OS3.1 to boot the Amiga. Thats like saying Photoshop 7 needs Photoshop 6 to start up, then 7 takes over, because they took the Photoshop 6 code and updated it. Its simply not true; Photoshop 7 is just Photoshop 7. OS4 is just OS4.
ok... bad turn of phrase... but you're a clever bloke you must know what I was saying....
anyway, I'm a little bored of this thread now :-D and since I have no intention of bashing AOS4 or Hyperion, I'm gonna leave this alone :-P
-Edit- I'm sure everything is on Schedule and Rockin' :-)
-
2. It was claimed that the scheme is used to protect IP by complicating piracy with a hardware device. That's a perfectly valid approach but it is just unreasonable to charge the mainboard manufacturer for a service that primiarily benefits Hyperion. Many of us are developers, none of us requests special chips on mainboards.
Another misconception. There never has been talk of "adding" chips on the mainboard. This is something some MorphOS enthusiasts came up with.
We either require access to the already present flashrom or are willing to consider some kind of external dongle like a USB token.
Furthermore, we are not charging the hardware manfucturer as such but only a per unit royalty for every copy of OS 4 sold.
-
3. Some claim that Hyperion has to cover high development costs, in a small market, and that justifies milking money from the mainboard manufacturer, on top of charging customers for supplying the OS. Considering that the mainboard manufacturer has had considerably higher development costs, I don't see the moral justification for the software side charging the hardware side. One side gets an OS, the other side gets a platform, costs and benefits are evenly split, and the money comes from the customers alone.
First of all, your statement is erroneous in the sense that we are only charging a per unit OEM royalty. We will determine whether or not it is economically feasible to undertake support of a given platform and a manufacturer might or might not want to induce us by guaranteeing a minimum number of sold copies.
Furthermore, your statement betrays a lack of insight into commercial policy and economics. The consumer always ends up paying the bill whatever license scheme is put in place. The distinction between what the hardware manufacturer pays and what the consumer pays is therefore completely artificial.
Let's not fall victim to the same delusions that have people claiming MSN messenger and IE are free of charge. The consumer ends up paying for it through other products.
-
HyperionMP wrote:
2. It was claimed that the scheme is used to protect IP by complicating piracy with a hardware device. That's a perfectly valid approach but it is just unreasonable to charge the mainboard manufacturer for a service that primiarily benefits Hyperion. Many of us are developers, none of us requests special chips on mainboards.
Another misconception. There never has been talk of "adding" chips on the mainboard. This is something some MorphOS enthusiasts came up with.
We either require access to the already present flashrom or are willing to consider some kind of external dongle like a USB token.
Furthermore, we are not charging the hardware manfucturer as such but only a per unit royalty for every copy of OS 4 sold.
So the manufacturer gets OS4 OEM for free, sells the board + OS to end user and pay you a fee for the copy of OS4 they sold? Is that right? Sounds fair to me.
-
That about sums it up, yes.
I honestly cannot see what is so terrible about this.
We don't want to be involved in shipping end-user copies to dealers for several reasons:
1. This would put a strain on us as we would need to put into place an infrastructure for shipping, warehousing and distribution which goes beyond what we have now for selling our games.
Obviously a manufacturer already has this infrastructure in place.
2. We would end up at the losing end of all the piracy. At least with the OEM scheme we'd be reasonably sure that every board sold for the explicit purpose of running OS 4, would actually have a paid for copy of OS 4.
-
So when I buy myself an A1 I get AOS4 for free? cool... that clears that up.
-
bloodline wrote:
ok... bad turn of phrase... but you're a clever bloke you must know what I was saying....
Well, I wasn't meaning to imply that you were bashing OS4, it just seemed like a strange conclusion to draw. When you said "...like AROS did in the early Amiga version", i figured you meant like it actually needed components from OS3.1 to be installed on top of OS4, which would be strange ;-)
-
HyperionMP wrote:
That about sums it up, yes.
I honestly cannot see what is so terrible about this.
We don't want to be involved in shipping end-user copies to dealers for several reasons:
1. This would put a strain on us as we would need to put into place an infrastructure for shipping, warehousing and distribution which goes beyond what we have now for selling our games.
Obviously a manufacturer already has this infrastructure in place.
2. We would end up at the losing end of all the piracy. At least with the OEM scheme we'd be reasonably sure that every board sold for the explicit purpose of running OS 4, would actually have a paid for copy of OS 4.
Does the manufacturer HAVE to ship OS4 with the board or can the end user say "I don't want OS4 thanks" and therefore pay less? Or is it a Microsoft style scheme where manufacturers have to sell their PC's with an OEM copy of Windows? Option 1 is fine, Option 2 is arrogance.
-
The answer is obvious from 1) the fact that Eyetech also sells boards in the Linux market 2) my post above.
Only customers that explicitly want OS 4 will need to pay for it.
-
Does the manufacturer HAVE to ship OS4 with the board or can the end user say "I don't want OS4 thanks" and therefore pay less?
Hasn't Ben already said, in many places, that if a customer asks for OS4 they ship a board with OS4, otherwise they get a board that can't run OS4?
-
Ehm, Am I the only one here that is actually happy that we GET an OS4 at all?
Too many complaints about this and that and "this person said that so it must be true" chitchatting IMHO.
All my respect and support to the Hyperion guys that continues to create a great OS even if half the comunity play inquisitors on them. :)
-
HyperionMP wrote:
The answer is obvious from 1) the fact that Eyetech also sells boards in the Linux market 2) my post above.
Only customers that explicitly want OS 4 will need to pay for it.
And the manufacturer definately only has to pay you for each copy of OS4 they ship? No up front fee or anything like that?
Can't see why theres a problem shipping it. The only problem I can see is having to pay you to do a port. Do eyetech pay you to write OS4 for Teron boards?
Also, what about CSPPC/BPPC Amigas? Who paid for that port?
-
We will determine whether or not it is economically feasible to undertake support of a given platform and a manufacturer might or might not want to induce us by guaranteeing a minimum number of sold copies.
What is the "minimum number of sold copies" required for a platform to have OS4?
-
HyperionMP wrote:
That about sums it up, yes.
Ben, you have lost me now. Taking this statement alone, it appears that Hyperion will give the OS to the mainboard distributors for a bundled sale, and take royalties for sold units? That would be a perfectly normal scheme. Until now, I was under the impression that Hyperion plans a certified-hardware licensing scheme (on top of selling the OS and taking royalties).
But that begs the questions: why? Bundling normally is used as an alternative distribution path, not as sole distribution path. If you don't sell the OS as standalone product, won't you be shooting yourself into your feet? Everybody already using a Pegasos and everybody deciding to skip the bundle offer (when purchasing the mainboard) would be a customer lost forever.
-
@Desolator
Ehm, Am I the only one here that is actually happy that we GET an OS4 at all?
Nope. But as you can see, the FACT that Hyperion actually have done something that has been shown, has got certain people rattled. OK, the OS has not FULLY got to a releaseable state, but Hyperion (and their co-programmers) are reaching the final lap (so to speak).
The closer they get, the more the 'noise to truth' ratio will change. Those with agenda's outside of OS4 will raise their volume, in order to (fruitlessly) try and take emphasis away from their efforts.
@anyone
Why, BTW, are so many people clamouring for OS4 to be released on a Pegasos? Surely, if MOS is so good, another "technically inferior" OS would not be needed? Or are the 'powers that be' who are central to the marketing the MOS/Pegasos efforts, worried that that it's their product that will be shown to be the technically inferior one?
Just a passing thought................
:-P :-P
-john
-
Why bundle?
For the reasons outlined above: to cut down on piracy and to reduce distribution related expenses. Again, we do not have an infrastructure in place to handle distrubution on this scale. You cannot compare an OS release for several hardware platforms with an AmigaOS game of which maybe a few hundred get sold.
The hardware certification as you call it is also necessary to ensure proper cooperation and disclosure of the hardware manufacturer.
How does the firmware operate especially when it contains proprietary extensions? We also require chipset documentation of all onboard chipsets etc.
-
jd997uk wrote:
@Desolator
Ehm, Am I the only one here that is actually happy that we GET an OS4 at all?
Nope. But as you can see, the FACT that Hyperion actually have done something that has been shown, has got certain people rattled. OK, the OS has not FULLY got to a releaseable state, but Hyperion (and their co-programmers) are reaching the final lap (so to speak).
The closer they get, the more the 'noise to truth' ratio will change. Those with agenda's outside of OS4 will raise their volume, in order to (fruitlessly) try and take emphasis away from their efforts.
@anyone
Why, BTW, are so many people clamouring for OS4 to be released on a Pegasos? Surely, if MOS is so good, another "technically inferior" OS would not be needed? Or are the 'powers that be' who are central to the marketing the MOS/Pegasos efforts, worried that that it's their product that will be shown to be the technically inferior one?
Just a passing thought................
:-P :-P
-john
"Technically inferior" is a stupid statement (Both solutions have their own merits and limitations)... But some people, myself included, liek choice... Why do I like having a Multiboot machine at home? So I can run a technically inferior OS?
I like Choice... I want Choice... Give me choice. please ;-)
-
This thread and some other threads could be summorized into a "ask Hyperion" article with alot of answers...
Just a thought (of filtering out the noise...)
-
>Ben, you have lost me now. Taking this statement >alone, it appears that Hyperion will give the OS to >the mainboard distributors for a bundled sale, and >take royalties for sold units? That would be a >perfectly normal scheme. Until now, I was under >the impression that Hyperion plans a certified->hardware licensing scheme (on top of selling the >OS and taking royalties).
No. That was never the intention.
It must be recognised however that such a scheme also means that we need to consider carefully whether or not a platform is actually worth supporting or not from a purely economic standpoint unless the producer is willing to guarantee a certain number of sales.
Currently, with the Pegasos I, I cannot see it. It is a discontinued product of which only 600 units were built, quite a few of which are still in the dealer-channel or were handed out for free.
Many of these Pegasos owners might not at all be intrested in OS 4 and the upper limit for sales is 600.
People point to the Cyberstorm PPC version.
The Cyberstorm PPC version of OS 4 was developed for several reasons.
1) it provides a platform for development with all the custom chipsets still in place. Results are obtained faster this way. Proof of concept is important due to the pervasive but understandable skepticism.
2) a lot of people paid good money for this hardware and these people are our customers: they bought games like Shogo, Heretic 2 etc. We want to support them.
3) there is no point in replacing a small PPC market (Cyberstorm PPC and BlizzardPPC) with an even smaller market of more powerful machines (A1).
This will not benefit software developers wishing to target OS 4.
-
How many people want OS4 on peg anyway? Must be only a few...
-
Elektro wrote:
How many people want OS4 on peg anyway? Must be only a few...
How many want an Amigoid at all? Must be only a f.... :-)
-
>What is the "minimum number of sold copies" >required for a platform to have OS4?
It is very hard to answer this question in abstracto.
This would depend on the amount of work that would need to go into developing a version of OS 4 for a specific hardware platform.
When the used chipsets are significantly different, this would entail rewriting the device drivers again: USB support, IDE, ethernet, floppy etc. and even simple things like RTC support.
Now obviously the hardware producer could do this inhouse to some extend thus cutting down on our development cost.
It would obviously also depend on the price we would charge per unit but it is clear that you cannot ask for 300 USD per copy otherwise you won't find anybody willing to buy it.
-
Amigoid?
-
Elektro wrote:
Amigoid?
Sorry that should be Amigoid (TM) :-)
Basicly:
Amiga+ AmigaOS
AROS
Pegasos + MOS
AmigaOS4 + AmigaONE
It's my expression, and this is how I use it. :-P
-
@anyone
Why, BTW, are so many people clamouring for OS4 to be released on a Pegasos? Surely, if MOS is so good, another "technically inferior" OS would not be needed? Or are the 'powers that be' who are central to the marketing the MOS/Pegasos efforts, worried that that it's their product that will be shown to be the technically inferior one?
Just a passing thought................
-john
IMO It has little to do with the superiority/inferiority of MOS versus OS4. On the Pegasos you can use pretty many operating systems, not only MOS.
I never pondered over how superior/inferior MOS vs Linux vs MacOS vs anything. All have their weaknesses and strong sides as well.
I use MorphOS as it is nice and fast. Sometimes when I find some anim files with extreme weird codecs I go to linux, and use mplayer. Need applications as Lightwave, Photoshop, Dreamweaver? MacOS is the choice.
I'd like to have OS4 as part of the collection. Not as an exclusive/have it at all costs operating system, but like the many others. I'd gladly pay for it even a reasonable price. And I bet many Pegasos users will agree with me.
It's not about OS4 is so fantastic, I will instantly drop MOS away for it's sake. I plan to use all for what they do best. Just as I bet many AmigaONE users, who got used to Linux will time to time boot into linux to do things in which Linux is better. Will it mean that Linux is superior to OS4 in all areas? I doubt that.
-
Warface wrote:
@anyone
Why, BTW, are so many people clamouring for OS4 to be released on a Pegasos? Surely, if MOS is so good, another "technically inferior" OS would not be needed? Or are the 'powers that be' who are central to the marketing the MOS/Pegasos efforts, worried that that it's their product that will be shown to be the technically inferior one?
Just a passing thought................
-john
IMO It has little to do with the superiority/inferiority of MOS versus OS4. On the Pegasos you can use pretty many operating systems, not only MOS.
I never pondered over how superior/inferior MOS vs Linux vs MacOS vs anything. All have their weaknesses and strong sides as well.
I use MorphOS as it is nice and fast. Sometimes when I find some anim files with extreme weird codecs I go to linux, and use mplayer. Need applications as Lightwave, Photoshop, Dreamweaver? MacOS is the choice.
I'd like to have OS4 as part of the collection. Not as an exclusive/have it at all costs operating system, but like the many others. I'd gladly pay for it even a reasonable price. And I bet many Pegasos users will agree with me.
It's not about OS4 is so fantastic, I will instantly drop MOS away for it's sake. I plan to use all for what they do best. Just as I bet many AmigaONE users, who got used to Linux will time to time boot into linux to do things in which Linux is better. Will it mean that Linux is superior to OS4 in all areas? I doubt that.
Well said Warface.
I think the kind of people that would even ask such a question are the people that will never use Linux on their A1 so they really can't comprehend why anyone woud want to use more than one OS on their Pegasos. IMNSHO they're the same kind of people that go to the same barber for 50 years. ;-)
-
@downix
>does not even need to be visible, as the Peg has an
internal USB port.
And most cases have a frontside usb, which makes
it possible to also use this protection against
unauthorized use (children etc)
Its not a bug (in its true sense), its a feature :-D
@ShadesofGrey
>Yes, but somebody still has to pay for the
development of AOS4 on Pegasos, Macintosh,
and/or .
There are not many other platform which could be
inserted there and the Pegasos is (without doubt)
the most interesting one, since many experienced
Amigans already chose this platform as their new
base and theres a growing interest.
>neither Amiga Inc. nor Hyperion have that kind of
capital. Nor do either have the resources to support
Pegasos owners using a retail AOS4 package
Thanks to the HAL of AOS4 this is neither a time nor
much money consumpting task i guess and the
package remains very much the same. Since
Hyperion develops the OS to the AOne anyways, its
easy to do a Pegasos version which will bring in
additional money and especially developers who
already chose or have a keen interest in the Pegasos
and dont have the intention to buy another (even
more expensive) Platform just for supporting OS 4
too.
>So, what do you think the likely hood is that Amiga
Inc (and/or Eyetech/Hyperion) would allow Hyperion
(err... themselves) to bring AOS4 to the Pegasos?
Amiga Inc. (and Eyetech) have no chance to do
anything by themself in the so-called Classic
market.
The future of this platform depends on Hyperion
alone and i dont think that anyone thinks that the
remaining 3 employees of Amiga break with
Hyperion, when they would emerge the need
of a Pegasos version.
Hyperion big announced OS 4 for "any suitable
hardware" in April 2002 and just some days later (!)
Amiga introduced the license scheme which even
got updated twice. And suddently it was very good
and clever as it is now (with shifting arguments from
that date on).
As for the disclaimer: I respect this but have to say
that i´m not single sided too. I am a MorphOS
supporter thats for sure but first of all i´m an
Amigan, who wants every development in this tiny
market be it free or comercial, hardware or software,
´classic´ or future to suceed. There are just a lot of
things going on for more than a year now, which
could leed to a catasthropical result in the end,
which need to be avoided. And at least the "splitting
the market and hope for the best"-mentality can be
easily avoided just by realising the situation and
finally jump own imaginary fences to find an
agreement which is equally good for both and the
whole community.
It would be possible i´m sure..
-
I really dont think many people will want OS4 on Peg anyway... not now... MorphOS looks better and we can only guesstimate if it will perform better... one thing is for sure.... Genesi wants to push MorphOS onto more then just this community in the future... AOS4 seems to be only aiming at a niche portion of this community...
-
If I may be permitted the indulgence of adding my thoughts to an already tired topic, I'd say that Hyperion have every right to protect their investment.
One of the reasons why the Mac is so damned expensive is that you're paying for both software AND hardware development without the economies of scale that Microsoft/AMD/Intel all enjoy. Fact is that Hyperion don't need to be in the Amiga market to survive, but I'm damn glad that they - together with those behind MorphOS too - have decided to turn their back on the profitability of the x86 market and do something a little different. However, to re-write an entire operating system takes time and programmers need to be paid. I'm sure there's many programmers out there who'd love to have played a part in OS4, but they've got bills to pay too.
Although I'm quite cynical about things in this so called community of ours, I'm grateful that there are still companies who see a future in it (Hyperion) and individuals who'll try and act to bring something new (MorphOS).
-
@ HyperionMP (and catohagen et al)
About the OS4 on Pegasos issue; IMO, it's in Hyperions interest to get the OS running on interesting hardware. Vesalia is selling the A1 G3 motherboards for €800 and the G4 version for €880. And that is a 133MHz bus, SDR motherboard, without memory, HD, case or the rest of the stuff you need to get going. Sorry, but that's simply not appealing. Some hundred die-hard enthusiast has lined up (not because it's a good deal, but because it's the *only* way to get OS4 running at a fast speed, in a way the entire A1 mobo is a big dongle), but you won't get much more sales of your OS than that.
The Pegasos 1 has pretty much the same specs as the A1 mobo, except it has a smaller form factor, firewire, a digital audio optical connector, etc. But the biggest differense is it's price. The people who simply can not afford the A1 could still afford a Peg1.
The Pegasos 2 will propably be much the same as the Pegasos 1, but it has another Northbridge which supports higher bus speeds and DDR memory. The form factor will propably be the same, and the prices are really attractive. Again, the people who simply can not afford the A1 could still afford a Peg2.
Here is where you want to be! *You* will miss a lot of potential buyers by being tied to the A1 mobo, but it's of course your decision.
To sum it up, the issue is not about whether todays Pegasos owners will be interested in OS4 or not. The issue is about finding decent, good priced hardware for the future OS4 users.
Some questions for you Ben:
From your comments in this thread I get the impression that you (by your AInc deal) are entitled to bring the OS to any kind of hardware of your choice. Is that really true? I was under the impression that you got the exclusive right to develop the OS part of the A1 product, and that Eyetech has the exclusive right to the Hardware part of the product?
Has Eyetech the right to bring another OS to its hardware and use the Amiga brand for that product?
Has Hyperion the right to bring the OS to another hardware and use the Amiga brand for that (note, you mentioned your OS release for classic Amigas as an example, but IMO that is a bad example, since they allready are amigas from the beginning)?
Regards,
-
meerschaum wrote:
AOS4 seems to be only aiming at a niche portion of this community...
A niche portion of a niche market, that's ... not big! :-P
-
@grandma
It's a starting point.
-
SidMan wrote:
@grandma
It's a starting point.
And where does it go from there? How many people do you really think is interested in paying €800+ for that kind of motherboard just to be able to use OS4? Some hundred people have (?) obviously bought an A1 mobo, but that is the little niche within the community. Who else? Where is the future for OS4?
I mean this as a serious question; I have asked about the future for the OS4 platform many times, but nobody seems willing to talk about it. Why is that?
OS4 is only one part of a whole; OS4 can not run without hardware. There are some ancient CSPPC cards for even older classic Amigas. There is this A1 mobo that can't be sold to anyone else than those die-hard enthusiasts that has allready bought them. But there is also this Pegasos hardware, good price, interesting features. Affordable and appealing. This could mean that Hyperion reaches a lot more of all the Amigans that are interested in OS4 but doesn't fancy (or can't afford) to put up some good €800 just to be able to run it. So Ben, instead of saying things like "OK, here we go again, Genesi perfectly knows what they have to do in order to get OS4 on to their hardware", perhaps *you* should get a license in order to reach the rest of the Amiga community (and soon also outside). There are/will be lots of OS'es running on Pegasos. There is no reason to why OS4 couldn't be one of them. It's in your own interest Hyperion!
-
@TMHGrandma
I suggest you listen to Alan Redhouse's (Eyetech) latest presentation he did, the link was posted here again some days ago. He has plans for pushing OS4 with existing and future boards into certain market areas, thus expanding the user base. It's all in the presentation - well worth a good look / listen.
Mirrors of downloads here : http://paula.tidstrand.com/
Regarding the second half of your post my views were expressed near the beginning of this Topic (Page 1 or 2).
-
Rogue wrote:
DarthX wrote:
So what's preventing Hyperion from porting OS4 to the pegasos? Hyperion was offered a FREE Pegasos board, correct?
Is there a contract with AmigaInc to limit OS4 to MAI manufactured AmigaOne's?
Oh, boy.
There is no contract to limit to a certain hardware, otherwise there wouldn't be a CyberStormPPC version now would it?
It wouldn't have been a problem to actually buy a Pegasos if we want to port OS 4 to it.
All that is required to get OS 4 on the Pegasos is a proper licence. Why do people think that licencing schemes are so much of a problem? They're in place everywhere. If you want a port of, say, Heretic II, you don't send a free Amiga to Activision. You obtain a licence. What's so strange about this concept?
Hi Rogue! Cool Avatar! :-D
Sometimes giving away free boards helps. In the early days of the Amiga, giving away FREE Amigas helped seed software development and launch several companies, look here: Peter Molyneux (http://www.gamespot.com/features/petermolyneux/) & wired article (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39359,00.html)
Did a company or individual come forward representing the CyberstormPPC and acquire a license, or was the decision to develop AmigaOS4 for CyberstormPPC come from Hyperion 'in-house' because of the installed base of users? :-D
If developing OS4 for CyberstormPPC was 'for the users' why not do a version of AmigaOS4 on Pegasos 'for the users' as well?
So consider this...
AmigaOS4 for Pegasos2...
=Genesi has more hardware sales
=Hyperion have more copies of OS4 sold.
=Amiga fans get new OS and cool new hardware solution, Pegasos2
= Pegasos users get a lot more choice of operating systems.
= EVERYONE IS INCLUDED!!! :-D
Isn't that a much brighter future for the Amiga market than what we have now? :-D
-
HyperionMP wrote:
I'm sure you have heard of the Draco?
Frankly, to get OS 4 to run on a chipsetless system is really not that much of a problem.
Otherwise things like Amithlon and the Draco could never have existed.
Which reminds me, will Hyperion be at AmiWest demoing AmigaOS4 on AmigaOne?
-
@TMHG:
I agree with pretty much all you're saying, I think that AmigaOS4 on the Peg would be a Good Thing (tm). I also think that a port to the Peg 1 at least should not be too hard (Peg 2 could be a completely different beast though). The biggest problem is one of licensing. If Hyperion sells OS4 for the Peg, they will be in breach of contract with AInc, who says that they are only allowed to sell OS4 to ppl who signed up for a license. I think that BenH probably wants to sell as many copies of OS4 as possible, but I doubt he'll willingly breach his contract to do so.
-
CodeSmith wrote:
@TMHG:
I agree with pretty much all you're saying, I think that AmigaOS4 on the Peg would be a Good Thing (tm). I also think that a port to the Peg 1 at least should not be too hard (Peg 2 could be a completely different beast though). The biggest problem is one of licensing. If Hyperion sells OS4 for the Peg, they will be in breach of contract with AInc, who says that they are only allowed to sell OS4 to ppl who signed up for a license. I think that BenH probably wants to sell as many copies of OS4 as possible, but I doubt he'll willingly breach his contract to do so.
If I was Hyperion I would go for it (Though I know they have their reasons expalined earlier in this tread).
As for a contract with A Inc., I imagine that's worth only slightly less than my Toilet paper (used). :-P
-
@CodeSmth
If Hyperion were foolish enough to sign an agreement that forbade them from selling an OS they're developing, then they are fools.
-
As for a contract with A Inc., I imagine that's worth only slightly less than my Toilet paper (used).
It will be even more useless in the near future, don´t they have a line of lawsuits coming their way and no money to pay lawyer with! :lol:
-
Maybe I've missed something in the extensive messages regarding all of this Amiga, Genesi stuff, but I was just curious...if Amiga Inc. collapses, does Hyperion have a plan in motion for updating and continuing the AmigaOS line?? or do we get 4.0, maybe 4.1, and then it's all over?? What happens to Amiga DE, and OS 5??
-
Ben Hermans has already said that they have set things up so that if AInc goes under, they automatically get the rights to AmigaOS (or rather, they get the exclusive right to call any OS they make "AmigaOS"). If Bill Buck really wants OS4 on the Pegasus, then a good litmus test for AInc's imminent death will probably be him making friendly gestures towards Hyperion.
-
downix wrote:
@ShadesofGrey
No, you seem to not grasp the intent of the question.
It was not that Genesi wanted AOS4 on the Pegasos for AOS4's sake, but the Pegasos's sake. Frankly, paying to have it ported then having the Pegasos's customers have to pay again per-copy sounds rather foolish to me, does it not to you? Hyperion has stated that they are charging per-copy of AOS4, so they should not be then discussing charging the hardware manufacturer for the port as well.
Unless you're saying that Hyperion recieved monies from Eyetech and DCE for the ports to their respective hardware platforms (The A1 and Cyberstorm/Blizzard, respectively).
Please don't take that the wrong way, but I don't think it's as simple as you put it. Or rather it can't be as simplified as you put it. It's just that most of the pro-Genesi camp have discounted the reasoning behind the licensing scheme that Amiga Inc. and Hyperion have hammered out and to which Eyech has agreed.
[Now, before anyone with conspiracy theories implying Eyetech's involvement in setting the OEM licensing terms, I'll agree that Eyetech may have had a hand in specifying a ROM dongle... But I suspect it was more Amiga Inc.'s idea to have a dongle rather than Eyetech specifying a ROM dongle. It's called negotiation.]
We have a situation where Hyperion, as an "Amiga" partner, is under contract to produce AOS4 and subsequent updates. They must do this for any hardware manufacturer or vendor who has agreed to the terms of the OEM license. This could include the Pegasos if Genesi or a Pegasos vendor were willing to agree to the terms of the OEM license (read about Eyetech's obligations below). Personally I think this is quite reasonable, but that's just me. Anyway, Amiga Inc. retains the right to 'buy back' all rights and IP associated with AOS 4 from Hyperion at just about anytime. In return, Hyperion was provided the source to AOS 3.1 as a basis for AOS 4. Hyperion get to determine the pricing of each OEM copy (if I've read the comments made here by Hyperion correctly). Hyperion will not be responsible for end user support, hence they have more resources for their 'own' projects (AOS 4 games) and to further develop AOS 4 (4.1, 4.2, etc.) Hyperion also retains the right to continue development of AOS 4 if Amiga Inc. should go out of business.
Likewise Eyetech, as an "Amiga" partner, is under contract to produce the AmigaOne. They're also obligated to provide end user to support for AOS 4 and institute some form of copy protection scheme (i.e. ROM dongle). Oh and Eyetech is obligated to bundle AOS 4 with all AmigaOne systems. As to what Eyetech gets out of the deal... Well, that's a bit harder to gauge. The certainly get to use the "Amiga" trademark. They also get 'exclusive' rights to 'distribute' AOS 4... But that's only because no other PPC platform manufacturer/vendor has agreed to the OEM license. So they know that those users interested in AOS 4 will have to buy their hardware. I also suppose this gives them the right to leverage AOS 4 to produce turn-key systems/devices in other markets (i.e. STBs. Kiosks, game consoles, etc., etc.). But that's just speculation on my part.
So, agreeing to the license and paying A 'nominal' (in Hyperion's opinion) fee is the 'incentive' for Hyperion to port AOS 4. It does not cover all development costs, or provide Hyperion with profit on AOS 4 development. Hyperion then expects to collect royalties based on each unit sold to recoup actual development costs and make some profit. I don't see what makes this a bad thing. And I don't see how this cam be viewed as unsual... Ideally, this is how Microsoft's OEM licensing is supposed to work. I'd also venture to guess this is how Apple's OEM licensing worked back during the Mac clones.
As for The CyberStorm/Blizzard PPC. Well, Hyperion has already stated that this is something of a 'freebie'. After all, they developed AOS 4 on Cyberstorm PPC cards, so why not allow Cyberstorm users to benefit. And even though the Blizzard is reportedly (I don't have either, so I only know what I hear) a less reliable sibling to the Cyberstorm, Hyperion have considered; are considering; will consider supporting them as well.
[If any representative form Amiga Inc., Eyetech, or Hyperion find fault with any of my observations, please correct them.]
-
logain wrote:
@ShadesofGrey
>Yes, but somebody still has to pay for the
development of AOS4 on Pegasos, Macintosh,
and/or .
There are not many other platform which could be
inserted there and the Pegasos is (without doubt)
the most interesting one, since many experienced
Amigans already chose this platform as their new
base and theres a growing interest.
I'm sorry, but I fail to see what makes the Pegasos I more interesting than the AmigaOne --- Edit --- (or conversley the Aimage One better than the Pegasos) --- Edit --- . After all "many experienced Amigans" have chosen the A1 as "their new base and there's a growing interest" in it as well. Technically they are more similar than dissimilar, yet the pro-Genesi camp insists that the P1 is infinitely superior to the A1.
--- Edit --- I said "" just to cover all the bases. ---Edit ---
[ --- Edit --- Before the mud starts flying... I am again looking at both the A1 and P1 from a 'neutral' point of view. I sincerely believe that both the A1 and P1 are not that radically different. So can we please tone down the 'my-hardware-is-better-than your-hardware' rhetoric? --- Edit --- ]
>neither Amiga Inc. nor Hyperion have that kind of
capital. Nor do either have the resources to support
Pegasos owners using a retail AOS4 package
Thanks to the HAL of AOS4 this is neither a time nor
much money consumpting task i guess and the
package remains very much the same. Since
Hyperion develops the OS to the AOne anyways, its
easy to do a Pegasos version which will bring in
additional money and especially developers who
already chose or have a keen interest in the Pegasos
and dont have the intention to buy another (even
more expensive) Platform just for supporting OS 4
too.
First of all, this assumes that Hyperion will make a profit on AOS 4 on the P1. Yet how many P1 users can Hyperion be sure will purchase AOS 4? We all know that there are roughly 600 P1 motherboards. But what percentage pf those would run AOS 4 if it were available? 75%? 50%? 25? Or perhaps only 5%?
Second, who will provide tech support for these P1+AOS 4 end users? Genesi might, but then again, they might not. After all, AOS 4 is not there product. AOS 4 a third party product P1 users have decided to install on their systems. My guess is the OEM license for AOS 4 guarantees cooperation between Hyperion and Genesi with respect to providing end user support.
Third, if Hyperion where to support the P1, they would then be expected to support the P2. Which will be drastically different from the A1 and the P1. How much of AOS 4 would have to be re-written to support P2? Enough so as to push back the release of AOS 4.1??? Quite probably. Considering the amount of flack they have received for taking this long to produce AOS 4, I can just imagine what will happen if AOS 4.1 were delayed.
Lastly, if Hyperion were to port AOS 4 to the P1 (and maybe the P2) and have to support it themselves, how much would they have to charge for each retail package? So far AOS 4 for the A1 has been said to cost $50 per copy. Even if we assume that cost were to go up slightly, it's very reasonable... But I doubt that would be the case for the P1. I could speculate... But I don't know enough about software publishing and support to make a credible guess...
>So, what do you think the likely hood is that Amiga
Inc (and/or Eyetech/Hyperion) would allow Hyperion
(err... themselves) to bring AOS4 to the Pegasos?
Amiga Inc. (and Eyetech) have no chance to do
anything by themself in the so-called Classic
market.
The future of this platform depends on Hyperion
alone and i dont think that anyone thinks that the
remaining 3 employees of Amiga break with
Hyperion, when they would emerge the need
of a Pegasos version.
Hyperion big announced OS 4 for "any suitable
hardware" in April 2002 and just some days later (!)
Amiga introduced the license scheme which even
got updated twice. And suddently it was very good
and clever as it is now (with shifting arguments from
that date on).
Obviously English is not your primary language, so please don't take offense if I misinterpret what you're trying to say.
"Amiga Inc. (and Eyetech) have no chance"...
I can understand, to an extent, the animosity toward Amiga Inc. I'm not happy with many of there decision and have been disheartened by their many blunders (although I still afford them the benefit of the doubt). But I'm a bit surprised at your negative appraisal of Eyetech. From what I've gathered Eyetech have done the best they can to produce the AmigaOne. Perhaps they didn't design it, but then their original plans hinged on Escena (now defunct?). They had to come up with something, and settled on MAI Teron chip and motherboard reference design. To what extent Eyetech did or did not improve the Teron design, I'll leave up Eyetech to clarify, but they did bring something to the AmigaOne/AOS 4 table.
"The future of this platform depends on Hyperion"...
As flattering as that is, I'm sure even Hyperion would disagree with you there. Hyperion needed Amiga Inc. to provide the AOS 3.1 source. Hyperion needed Eyetech to produce the hardware AOS 4 would run on.
..."when they would emerge the need of a Pegasos version."
Even if Amiga Inc. were to fold in the near future, I doubt that Hyperion would automatically jump to the Pegasos. I'm pretty sure Hyperion would still have some obligation to Eyetech. Or at the very least, Eyetech would still be looking to support AOS 4 on the A1 (even if both AOS4 and the A1 had to have their names changed). I'm also pretty sure Hyperion would still want Genesi (or Pegasos vendors) to enter into some kind of OEM licensing deal. One that would very likely look very much like the existing license. After all, if Amiga Inc. is only a 3 man show, Hyperion is not much more than that. I don't think the Frieden's and Mr. Hermans would relish the idea of sitting at the help desk.
"Hyperion big announced OS 4 for 'any suitable hardware'"
I think I'll have to leave this to Hyperion to clarify. It's possible to read the statement "suitable hardware" to mean any PPC hardware meeting the "Zico" spec, or any hardware meeting the "Zico" spec and whose manufacturer/vendor has agreed to the terms of the Amiga Inc./Hyperion OEM license. I just don't want to speak for Hyperion here.
As for the disclaimer: I respect this but have to say
that i´m not single sided too. I am a MorphOS
supporter thats for sure but first of all i´m an
Amigan, who wants every development in this tiny
market be it free or comercial, hardware or software,
´classic´ or future to suceed. There are just a lot of
things going on for more than a year now, which
could leed to a catasthropical result in the end,
which need to be avoided. And at least the "splitting
the market and hope for the best"-mentality can be
easily avoided just by realising the situation and
finally jump own imaginary fences to find an
agreement which is equally good for both and the
whole community.
It would be possible i´m sure..
Please understand that my disclaimer was not specifically directed at you. Rather it was meant for the larger audience of Amiga.org. Due to the hostility rampant in the 'Amiga' Community, I have taken to placing disclaimers (when and where I perceive the necessity) in order to curb the amount of trolling, flame wars, and FUD some of my comments might attract.
On to your specific comments...
I also agree that it would be beneficial, for all concerned, that some fences get mended. Unfortunately I don't think this is very realistic. The best I can hope for is an 'end to hostilities', if you will. Or at the very least, a 'cease fire'. That way each camp can sink or swim on their own merits.
-
@Wain
Should AInc collapse, Hyperion is supposed to have the rights to Amiga's Operation System. Both Ben Hermans of Hyperion and Bill McEwen of Amiga Inc have stated this. The other question is insinuated, "Are there plans for anything beyond OS4?" That is a question I can not answer; only the parties signing the contract know that answer.
-
Is there a contract with AmigaInc to limit OS4 to MAI manufactured AmigaOne's?
Bingo
ups I didn't read the word "Limit" :-D If a hardware producer wants to get a license he can get it
-
Erm.. Because they will be free with no license scheme? The developers working on all these operating systems are doing it in their spare time. They are NOT commercial entities.
-
As flattering as that is, I'm sure even Hyperion would disagree with you there. Hyperion needed Amiga Inc. to provide the AOS 3.1 source. Hyperion needed Eyetech to produce the hardware AOS 4 would run on.
Nah, Hyperion are welcome to use AROS code if they need it (just as long as they stick to the licence :-D ), and Genesi would be happy to provide the Hardware.
-
bloodline wrote:
As flattering as that is, I'm sure even Hyperion would disagree with you there. Hyperion needed Amiga Inc. to provide the AOS 3.1 source. Hyperion needed Eyetech to produce the hardware AOS 4 would run on.
Nah, Hyperion are welcome to use AROS code if they need it (just as long as they stick to the licence :-D ), and Genesi would be happy to provide the Hardware.
Methinks we would have had OS4 a long time ago if they had used some AROS code.
-
You are obviously not familiar with the cuurent state of AROS.
One of the main problems is that they are shooting for 3.1 compatibility whilst we were aiming for 3.9.
Moreover, some of the AROS work is not entirely compatible with OS 3.1. DOS and Intuition come to mind.
-
HyperionMP wrote:
You are obviously not familiar with the cuurent state of AROS.
One of the main problems is that they are shooting for 3.1 compatibility whilst we were aiming for 3.9.
Moreover, some of the AROS work is not entirely compatible with OS 3.1. DOS and Intuition come to mind.
Well intuition isn't too bad, MOS have helped us make it compatible, but yes our DOS library is really incompatibile becuase we didn't want to implement that nasty Tripos packet stuff, wrappers exist though.
3.9... wouldn't really be much not than adding a few function here and there (I only know of a few functions that were added in Exec..., which we do plan to implement), maybe you didn't want to implemtn these features and then be bound to the licence and allow AROS to gain that functionality? But that is just a possibility ;-)
-
HyperionMP wrote:
You are obviously not familiar with the cuurent state of AROS.
One of the main problems is that they are shooting for 3.1 compatibility whilst we were aiming for 3.9.
Moreover, some of the AROS work is not entirely compatible with OS 3.1. DOS and Intuition come to mind.
erm.... I'm very familar with the current state of AROS thank you Ben.
What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.
As matt points out above, maybe you don't want to be bound by the AROS licence for the parts you could have used for free, which is fair enough. The MorphOS guys don't seem to mind though, and they released their product a long time ago. Maybe you would have had a head start on them if you'd used some AROS bits to get you going after all the unadvoidable setbacks and delays you had to endure during OS4's development cycle.
-
Is it just me or have many discussions lately have reverted by to the 'Hyperion vs. AROS vs Genesi/MorphOS*' subject?
* - If it's not Genesi, whoever is developing MorphOS.
-
What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.
As has been said, there are compatibility issues. DOS is a good example. I'm sure there are others. We might have taken a slow route, but I think that the result is worth it. We already have a high degree of compatibility now, and are improving it
-
mdma wrote:
What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.
You're assuming that using AROS code would have saved them time; but just because AROS fairly compatible to AmigaOS, doesn't mean that modules from its source code would slot easily into the actual AmigaOS source tree. This is not necessarily the case.
The fact is that all the people on these forums saying "Hyperion could have done this to save time", or "I expect OS4 will be out by xyz" really have no clue because they AREN'T involved with the project, they have NO access to the sourcecode repositry, they don't know exactly what Hyperion have done, plan to do, or are in the process of doing, and therefore might as well pick their estimates entirely at random...
-
Darth_X wrote:
Hi Rogue! Cool Avatar!
Hehe, thanks. The dual-bladed saber didn't fit into the picture, so I had to dig out that old one ;-)
Sometimes giving away free boards helps.
Well, that was a different time. That trick doesn't work anymore. Not yet at any rate.
Did a company or individual come forward representing the CyberstormPPC and acquire a license, or was the decision to develop AmigaOS4 for CyberstormPPC come from Hyperion 'in-house' because of the installed base of users?
Work was simply started on the Cyberstorm because the AmigaOne wasn't available at that time, and because it is easier to do it on a hardware that is already supported by the 68k components. The installed user base is also a factor, which is still higher than for AmigaOne and/or Pegasos.
Isn't that a much brighter future for the Amiga market than what we have now?
There is no reason why this shouldn't work out, however, see Ben's explanation for the licencing scheme. I say again, I don't think it is in any way unreasonable, and from the replies I've seen I can only conclude that most people didn't know the details, or had a wrong perception about it.
-
Rogue wrote:
What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.
As has been said, there are compatibility issues. DOS is a good example. I'm sure there are others. We might have taken a slow route, but I think that the result is worth it. We already have a high degree of compatibility now, and are improving it
Hi Rogue,
My post wasn't meant as an insult, just an observation. I think Ben read my post in the wrong context.
Considering English is my native tongue, I'm not very good at conveying what I mean clearly! Numbers are my thing! ;-)
And you are correct, I wasn't aware of the licencing model. I am now. :-)
-edit-
Is that you in your avatar?
It's not the image I had in my head of you! I had this "Teutonic twins" image of you and your brother in my head! ;-)
-
@ Bloodline
> "Technically inferior" is a stupid statement
Totally agreed. Funny thing is, it's a term used by anybody to describe the "others". I've seen exactly the same phrase being used (I think it was even in this thread) for the AmigaOne hardware.
Isn't it funny that it seems nobody can really blame the other for trolling or calling somebody names ? :-D
-
What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.
As matt points out above, maybe you don't want to be bound by the AROS licence for the parts you could have used for free, which is fair enough.
---
Believe me, we looked at that initially, especially for DOS.
Gary Peake introduced us to Aaron and we were on friendly terms.
The license wasn't so much of an issue but rather the fact that subtle but sometimes far-reaching incompatibilities existed and still exist to this date.
-
My post wasn't meant as an insult, just an observation.
I didn't take it as such. I just tried to explain why we did what we did.
Is that you in your avatar?
Yes, it's me, although I must admit that the lightsaber is a special effect (courtesy of Photogenics) - my real lightsaber is purple, but since there was the question about the t-shirt color on the Augsburg shots, I repainted it blue ;-)
It's not the image I had in my head of you! I had this "Teutonic twins" image of you and your brother in my head!
I hope that doesn't include leather pants and a hat. :-) Even folks down in bavaria don't really look like that - not all the time at any rate ;-)
(No offense to Bavaria intended)
-
EntilZha wrote:
@ Bloodline
> "Technically inferior" is a stupid statement
Totally agreed. Funny thing is, it's a term used by anybody to describe the "others". I've seen exactly the same phrase being used (I think it was even in this thread) for the AmigaOne hardware.
Isn't it funny that it seems nobody can really blame the other for trolling or calling somebody names ? :-D
I believe it was me who called the A1 board "overpriced and underpowered". I stand by that too.
For the price, it IS underpowered. I can't afford to buy an A1. If the Pegasos was the same price i'd call that "overpriced and underpowered" too, and stick with UAE on my superfast Athlon. If the A1 was cheaper than a Pegasos, I'd by an A1. It'snothing to do with being on one side or the other, it's purely a financial decision. I have a family to support, and can't waste money on an A1 just for emotional reasons. I'm a pragmatist not an idealist, and I'm sure that's the case with most others who aren't going to buy an A1. It's a shame, as I really do want OS4, so I'll look into buying a BlizzPPC second hand if the price of OS4 is realistically affordable, but then MorphOS may be given away free for classic ppc Amiga's, or so i've seen rumoured.
It's all down to money in the end. For Hyperion, for Amiga Inc and for me as an end user and father with responsibilities.
-
Mind you, a new conspiracy theory forms in my head.
Is it possible that those favoured the Imperial side in Star Wars went for the Pegasos, and those who favoured the Rebels for OS4? :-)
I must confess I was a fan of Darth Vader :-)
-
Rogue wrote:
My post wasn't meant as an insult, just an observation.
I didn't take it as such. I just tried to explain why we did what we did.
I thought Ben sounded insulted not you. My terrible grammar at work yet again! ;-)
It's not the image I had in my head of you! I had this "Teutonic twins" image of you and your brother in my head!
I hope that doesn't include leather pants and a hat. :-) Even folks down in bavaria don't really look like that - not all the time at any rate ;-)
(No offense to Bavaria intended)
I thought, "Six foot 5 inch tall, golden blonde 'mullet' haircut, and very muscular" or as we say in England "Built like a brick sh!t house!" :-D
-
Warface wrote:
Mind you, a new conspiracy theory forms in my head.
Is it possible that those favoured the Imperial side in Star Wars went for the Pegasos, and those who favoured the Rebels for OS4? :-)
I must confess I was a fan of Darth Vader :-)
Yeah, long live the imperial Army... Black is way sexier than white :-)
-
I thought, "Six foot 5 inch tall, golden blonde 'mullet' haircut, and very muscular" or as we say in England "Built like a brick sh!t house!"
By all means, no! :-)
-
Yeah, long live the imperial Army... Black is way sexier than white
Cough...
I don't need to remind you what happened at the end of "Return of the Jedi", do I :-)
-
Stormtoopers were clad in white armor.
Besides, if the analogy holds, you know is going to prevail.
-
Rogue wrote:
Yeah, long live the imperial Army... Black is way sexier than white
Cough...
I don't need to remind you what happened at the end of "Return of the Jedi", do I :-)
Empire strikes back... much better :-D Even goody goody Luke S. goes for the Black garb... nice...
-
HyperionMP wrote:
Stormtoopers were clad in white armor.
Besides, if the analogy holds, you know is going to prevail.
Yeah, LucasFilm ;-)
-
Rogue wrote:
Yeah, long live the imperial Army... Black is way sexier than white
Cough...
I don't need to remind you what happened at the end of "Return of the Jedi", do I :-)
Luke. I am your father. And your mother as well. And your nine sisters and twentyfour brother. Join the blue side :-D
-
@ Ben Hermans
Hi. Feel free to answer my questions! :-)
(PS, when do we see *your* avatar?)
-
Can you maybe start another thread then?
Quite frankly, I've lost track.
-
@ mdma
>I believe it was me who called the A1 board "overpriced and underpowered". I stand by that too.
Yes, it was your post I was refering to.
Don't get me wrong, I wasn't insulting you (At least I tried not to :-D ). I just thought it was funny to see the same from both sides...
-
Stormtoopers were clad in white armor.
Besides, if the analogy holds, you know is going to prevail.
-
HyperionMP wrote:
Stormtoopers were clad in white armor.
Besides, if the analogy holds, you know is going to prevail.
Also, the beutiful ones were clad in red :-D :
(http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/7852/slaveLeia.jpg)
-
This was/is is very good thread, without people of either side
bursting out in any harsh words or insults. A good read! And it
just keeps going and going and going ... :-D
(Bobba Fett was clad in green armour.
Bobba Fett rules.
Ergo -
... hmm ...
now where does that put us in the analogy really?)
.
SlimJim
-
The Amiga world isn't anything like the Star Wars world; in Star Wars there are lots of walkers, in the Amiga world, the walker was scrapped :-D
-
Isn´t there an old amiga game called Walker?
-
SlimJim wrote:
This was/is is very good thread, without people of either side
bursting out in any harsh words or insults. A good read! And it
just keeps going and going and going ... :-D
(Bobba Fett was clad in green armour.
Bobba Fett rules.
Ergo -
... hmm ...
now where does that put us in the analogy really?)
.
SlimJim
Bobba was a bounty hunter... then I guess that is sort of where AROS is :-?
-
Isn´t there an old amiga game called Walker?
Yep - I've got a demo of it on an old CU Amiga coverdisk:
"Get ready for some serious blasting in this huge playable demo of Psygnosis' excellent shoot-em-up. Take control of the world's most advanced killing machine! (1Mb required)."
-
bloodline wrote:
SlimJim wrote:
This was/is is very good thread, without people of either side
bursting out in any harsh words or insults. A good read! And it
just keeps going and going and going ... :-D
(Bobba Fett was clad in green armour.
Bobba Fett rules.
Ergo -
... hmm ...
now where does that put us in the analogy really?)
.
SlimJim
Bobba was a bounty hunter... then I guess that is sort of where AROS is :-?
Bobba Fett was also swallowed by a hungry hole with teeth
... So perhaps it's not a very good role model.
Not to mention his father getting decapitated by a Jedi
master!
.
SlimJim
-
EntilZha wrote:
@ mdma
>I believe it was me who called the A1 board "overpriced and underpowered". I stand by that too.
Yes, it was your post I was refering to.
Don't get me wrong, I wasn't insulting you (At least I tried not to :-D ). I just thought it was funny to see the same from both sides...
Don't worry, I didn't take offence! :-)
I was merely trying to point out that it is a small minority that are "On a particular side". Most people who buy a Pegasos do so because of the price not because of some idealogical allegiance. Now I wish I could say that for some of the people who buy the AmigOne board. A certain Dutchman comes to mind. ;-)
-
@EntilZha
Judging from your 'nick I would have thought you to be
dressed in a robe and having a weird bone
ornament on your head. Or at least be portrayed at the
controls of a White star.
No, I have it - touting one of those combat staffs the Rangers
have! You can pin a red flag on it if you like. :-D
.
SlimJim
-
SlimJim wrote:
bloodline wrote:
SlimJim wrote:
This was/is is very good thread, without people of either side
bursting out in any harsh words or insults. A good read! And it
just keeps going and going and going ... :-D
(Bobba Fett was clad in green armour.
Bobba Fett rules.
Ergo -
... hmm ...
now where does that put us in the analogy really?)
.
SlimJim
Bobba was a bounty hunter... then I guess that is sort of where AROS is :-?
Bobba Fett was also swallowed by a hungry hole with teeth
... So perhaps it's not a very good role model.
Not to mention his father getting decapitated by a Jedi
master!
.
SlimJim
This analagy sucks :boohoo:
hmmm, ok then AROS is the Emperior, ok who's ya daddy :-)
-
hmmm, ok then AROS is the Emperior, ok who's ya daddy :-)
Just remember that right at the end, Vader (MOS) will change sides and help the rebels (AOS) by killing the emperor (AROS), before dying himself :-P
-
alx wrote:
hmmm, ok then AROS is the Emperior, ok who's ya daddy :-)
Just remember that right at the end, Vader (MOS) will change sides and help the rebels (AOS) by killing the emperor (AROS), before dying himself :-P
Aggghhhhh, What have we done!!!!!! :-o
-
bloodline wrote:
alx wrote:
hmmm, ok then AROS is the Emperior, ok who's ya daddy :-)
Just remember that right at the end, Vader (MOS) will change sides and help the rebels (AOS) by killing the emperor (AROS), before dying himself :-P
Aggghhhhh, What have we done!!!!!! :-o
Bloody Sci-Fi freaks ruining a thread! :-P
-
@ Ben Hermans
Hi Ben, I´m happy with the progress of OS4. I hope that finally you decide to do the BPPC version, and SharkPPC too. :-)
-
But the parallels are spooky!!!
Vader (MOS) needs the Emperor (AROS) for his "darkside force" (source code).
see!!!! see!!!!
-
bloodline wrote:
But the parallels are spooky!!!
Vader (MOS) needs the Emperor (AROS) for his "darkside force" (source code).
see!!!! see!!!!
Tinfoil hat time methinks!!! ;-)
-
mdma wrote:
bloodline wrote:
But the parallels are spooky!!!
Vader (MOS) needs the Emperor (AROS) for his "darkside force" (source code).
see!!!! see!!!!
Tinfoil hat time methinks!!! ;-)
One step ahead of you there!!! I've got two already ;-)
To make matters worse hyperion have already said on this list they were considering AOS4 (Luke S.) to have some of AROS (Emperor's) source code (Dark side force)!!!
CAn't you see what is happening here!!!! You're all mad each one of you , I tell you hahahah, don't laugh :boohoo:
-
bloodline wrote:
mdma wrote:
bloodline wrote:
But the parallels are spooky!!!
Vader (MOS) needs the Emperor (AROS) for his "darkside force" (source code).
see!!!! see!!!!
Tinfoil hat time methinks!!! ;-)
One step ahead of you there!!! I've got two already ;-)
To make matters worse hyperion have already said on this list they were considering AOS4 (Luke S.) to have some of AROS (Emperor's) source code (Dark side force)!!!
CAn't you see what is happening here!!!! You're all mad each one of you , I tell you hahahah, don't laugh :boohoo:
Phone the samaritans ASAP Matt! ;-)
-
mdma wrote:
bloodline wrote:
mdma wrote:
bloodline wrote:
But the parallels are spooky!!!
Vader (MOS) needs the Emperor (AROS) for his "darkside force" (source code).
see!!!! see!!!!
Tinfoil hat time methinks!!! ;-)
One step ahead of you there!!! I've got two already ;-)
To make matters worse hyperion have already said on this list they were considering AOS4 (Luke S.) to have some of AROS (Emperor's) source code (Dark side force)!!!
CAn't you see what is happening here!!!! You're all mad each one of you , I tell you hahahah, don't laugh :boohoo:
Phone the samaritans ASAP Matt! ;-)
No way man!!! THey can't help me... now where did I put my Lightsabre... don't come any closer!!! I know the Vulcan nerve pinch!!!
-Edit- Oops clasic SCi-Fi blunder there, mentioning a StarTrek referance and a StarWars refrence in the same post!!! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
-
@ SlimJim
> Judging from your 'nick I would have thought you to be
> dressed in a robe and having a weird bone
> ornament on your head.
In that case, I would be grey ;-)
> No, I have it - touting one of those combat staffs the
> Rangers have! You can pin a red flag on it if you like.
Well, I thought the lightsaber was cooler :-)
-
With all the banter going around in this thread it's interesting to note that so many of Hyperion's key characters are lurking around.
This in itself is an encouraging sign. Nice to see you guys back in the forums!
-
With all the banter going around in this thread it's interesting to note that so many of Hyperion's key characters are lurking around.
Hehe, a conpiracy theorist like myself might add that the Hyperion Boys have done most of the hard work, and are now free to chat on Amiga.org and torment us poor lost souls with juicy bits of dripfed information.
I can just see Ben cackling evilly right now......
:-D
-
@ Ben Hermans
HyperionMP wrote:
Can you maybe start another thread then?
Quite frankly, I've lost track.
Now I got a little disappointed. I spent some time to write these posts with the hope of getting some comments from you. It's there. You can read it now. I am not writing it again.
I think my points are valid. So are my questions. But for some reason it seems to be very difficult to get them answered. Why is that? I wonder why it's more interesting to discuss the color of the storm troopers armor than the future of your OS4 platform? Well, no answer is also a kind of an answer I guess ...
-
@EntilZha
Um, shouldn't you be using one of those nifty Ranger Staffs?
P.S. Since you have a RED Lightsabre, Does that mean you are the evil twin?
-
@ takemehomegrandma
Dont be dissapointed - answers are coming, and at least the banter is a sign of everyone getting along - which in itself is an important development. Its fun. Makes me want to start posting here again :-D :-)
What I want to know is where does Yoda fit into all this :-) :pint:
-
Argo wrote:
@EntilZha
Um, shouldn't you be using one of those nifty Ranger Staffs?
P.S. Since you have a RED Lightsabre, Does that mean you are the evil twin?
My biggest problem with Twins is I can never tell which is which.... A mate of mine used to date a Twin.. he also couldnt tell which was which.. it caused problems ;-)
-
Oh, and I forgot to mention - I work with SpecFreak. Our Boss is getting really pissed off about Amiga's. We actually have one on the bench in work as well...
Three posts - am I coming back? :-)
-
Yoda ???
Now that is easy ...
Who talks in riddles, making sure that you won't understand until it is tolate (if ever) ?
Who can't form a single correct sentence ?
Who lives in a world of his own, only slightly connected to reality ?
Who allways pops ups when you don't need him ?
Who is praising and helping the "real dark side" with his babble about the Hombre ?
Yes, you gueesed it, it is :
:roll: :roll: :roll:
SHAWN_THE_BUS_ARCH_TROLL
:roll: :roll: :roll:
-
Bobsonsirjonny wrote:
Oh, and I forgot to mention - I work with SpecFreak. Our Boss is getting really pissed off about Amiga's. We actually have one on the bench in work as well...
Three posts - am I coming back? :-)
Hey Rob!
Great to see you about again! Hope this becomes a regular thing :-)
P.S. Any chance of seeing you about on the Flying Paper lists?
-
Ah the flying paper lists... I must apologose about that. I got that busy, that I havnt been following whats going on. The only email address I ever check now is my work account. But I just got a new account sorted out :
sirjonny@bobson.co.uk
So flyingpaper stuff could be sent there instead :-)
The account that i used to get flying paper stuff at is so old now, that its expired...
-
SlimJim wrote:
Judging from your 'nick I would have thought you to be
dressed in a robe and having a weird bone
ornament on your head. .
SlimJim
That would be me, right? :pint:
-
HyperionMP wrote:
Stormtoopers were clad in white armor.
Besides, if the analogy holds, you know is going to prevail.
I am curious what you'd choose for an avatar! :pint:
-
Rogue wrote:
Work was simply started on the Cyberstorm because the AmigaOne wasn't available at that time, and because it is easier to do it on a hardware that is already supported by the 68k components. The installed user base is also a factor, which is still higher than for AmigaOne and/or Pegasos.
Isn't that a much brighter future for the Amiga market than what we have now?
There is no reason why this shouldn't work out, however, see Ben's explanation for the licencing scheme. I say again, I don't think it is in any way unreasonable, and from the replies I've seen I can only conclude that most people didn't know the details, or had a wrong perception about it.
Licensing SCHEME? :-?
Anyway, most people don't know the details or have a very good perception of it.
-
@ Argo
> Um, shouldn't you be using one of those nifty Ranger Staffs?
Yeah, but they aren't really that cool on pictures ;-)
> P.S. Since you have a RED Lightsabre, Does that mean you are the evil twin?
Yesssssss ..
-
Bobsonsirjonny wrote:
Argo wrote:
@EntilZha
Um, shouldn't you be using one of those nifty Ranger Staffs?
P.S. Since you have a RED Lightsabre, Does that mean you are the evil twin?
My biggest problem with Twins is I can never tell which is which.... A mate of mine used to date a Twin.. he also couldnt tell which was which.. it caused problems ;-)
My mum is an identical twin, and my dad has a twin sister.
My younger sister is sh!tting herself that she'll have twins when she starts a family! :-D
-
Kronos wrote:
:roll: :roll: :roll:
SHAWN_THE_BUS_ARCH_TROLL
:roll: :roll: :roll:
Speak not his name so loud, lest he awakens ;-)
-
bloodline wrote:
As flattering as that is, I'm sure even Hyperion would disagree with you there. Hyperion needed Amiga Inc. to provide the AOS 3.1 source. Hyperion needed Eyetech to produce the hardware AOS 4 would run on.
Nah, Hyperion are welcome to use AROS code if they need it (just as long as they stick to the licence :-D ), and Genesi would be happy to provide the Hardware.
Which of course means that Hyperion would make no profit on the endeavor... So, AROS would be a 'hobby' to them (if they decided to help code AROS). I suspect then that it would take Hyperion 54 or more months to reach the same level of development they have in 18 months with AOS 4... I'm sure everybody would be happy with that.
--- Edit --- AROS does use the GPL, right??? I probably should've double checked before I wrote my missive... But before I read some of the other messages in the thread, I was configdent my recollection was accurate. --- Edit ---
-
Yeah, long live the imperial Army... Black is way sexier than white
@bloodline
But wasn't the Imperial Army made up mostly of white shock troops???
-
AROS does use the GPL, right??? I probably should've double checked before I wrote my missive... But before I read some of the other messages in the thread, I was configdent my recollection was accurate.
It actually uses the APL (Aros Public License), but it looks fairly similar to the GPL - it's not like the BSD license which is a bit more free.
-
First: GPL does not prevent you from making profit.
Second: AROS is not GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html), but APL (http://www.aros.org/license.html).
-
APL (AROS Public Lincence) was created so that while AROS is and will remain Opensource and free, it can also be used in comercial projects... MOS for example :-D
-
You're right... I just don't happen to believe that any commercial 'Amiga' entity could expect to make a profit on open source software. The platform has not reached the 'critical mass' necessary for the various open source models to be profitiable... I mean even in the x86 world (which most certainly has achieved 'critical mass') many a firm latching on to the open source craze have withdrawn, are dying, or dead. Few actually are turning a profit.
For those groups expecting no profit, well they are flourishing... But only becuase they are willing to donate their time, or a commercial entity is sponsoring them for a tax write off (or a group og f die hards are interested enough to donate their own cash for a project, ala AROS and Amizilla).