>But you expect others that they make their work available for free and invest this time? How charming...
Where have I said that I expect this? I don't want anything for free. All my programs are already open source freeware. I don't have unlimited time/motivation for coding, if I work on one thing, it comes at the expense of working on another thing.
I'm not an AROS developer and I don't want to be an AROS developer. Same goes for MOS and OS4. (I'm speaking of OS development here, not application development.) Reimplementing the same things 4 times for 4 similar-but-different OSes doesn't seem a very efficient way of moving things forwards.
>But then it's your turn to change it. Why don't you implement the missing bits and pieces, after all?
I suppose I could answer every bug report I get about my software in this manner: "It's open source, fix it yourself."
>No, by that logic you can either buy another product
Yes, I bought OS3.9.
>What's unreal about a re-implementation?
Neither the source nor the binary would be the same. The handling of undocumented functionality would also probably be erroneous. Unless one was to look at a disassembled AmigaOS to confirm, which is not allowed when reverse engineering. Additionally, a release of official AmigaOS source would be more likely to gain interest and/or attention from the wider (non-Amiga) community.
>Why would you want to do unpaid work on closed-source commercial software that runs on obsolete hardware? This is neither logical.
Well, not to get rich, that's for sure. But it makes more sense than working on OS4/MOS, at least no one would be making money off my hard work.
>If the makers of AROS prefer MUI, then that's it.
Fine, they should stop pretending it's somehow equivalent to the official AmigaOS though. And I certainly am not interested in using, let alone developing, such a program.
>none will open source amiga system, none will probably even answer to such enquiries, none will establish a bounty and almost none will contribute to it.
Why do you say this? There have been many successful bounties to open source Amiga applications, eg. DOpus. Surely it is at least worth making the attempt before giving up.
>But it is no option that Microsoft will release the windows source-code for free
Where did I suggest H&P release OS3.9 source for free? Obviously that would be a good outcome but hardly likely. Which is why I proposed a bounty. And yes, as I said, I'm willing to make a contribution to such a bounty. How is this wanting something for free?
>It is not devil, not "ugly" how you called it. I do not understand your attitude and why you do not react on other comments. You said everything is missing and I asked you to name a few of what is missing. I still await the answer.
Has someone redrawn those atrocious icons by now then? As for what's missing, the answer is most of OS3.5/3.9.
AROS is not the devil, just not something that is of any use to me. And I would not normally do development of software that I do not even use. Surely most contributors to open source projects are the same.
>if aros devs prefer zune you are still free to introduce reaction yourself,
Fork AROS? Then we have 5 Amiga-like OSes instead of 4, hardly an improvement.
>As far as Birdie is concerned: I don't have a contact to its author. Do you?
No, he doesn't seem to be active any more. This is probably a case where a Cosmos-style patch (to Birdie, not layers.library) would be useful.
