Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: Jose on August 18, 2003, 02:42:51 PM
-
I didn't knew about this info.
HERE (http://www.ann.lu/comments2.cgi?view=1061210784&category=unmoderated&start=1&5)
Interesting no?
Did people in general knew about that?
Keep the thread clean please (NO I'm serious).
-
I have great respect for Haynie, but in this case I think he's just conjecturing. He has no proof that the MOS sources are stolen from AmigaOS and never will have. And such a claim doesn't even make sense considering
1) The limited usefulness of the AOS sources;
2) The fact that MOS was begun with AROS sources, which are certainly not stolen;
3) MOS (or rather QBox) is very different structurally than AOS. It has AOS emulation using native code, called ABox. No more, no less.
-
It does sound vaguely familiar. But then, who cares anymore? As one anon put it, if an Amiga employee gave it away, they have only themselves to blame. Again, if it has been re-written in a different language (as Hyperion has done with 4.0), its relationship with the original is nebulous at best.
tony
-
Hey 8-)
"He has no proof that the MOS sources are stolen from AmigaOS and never will have."
But he did not say that.
"1) The limited usefulness of the AOS sources;"
Not quite. As an example, one of the Frieden brothers stated recently that AOS4 DOS library has ccmpatibility with even some very old code due to some issues that are not well documented in other "sources" (RKM etc.).
"2) The fact that MOS was begun with AROS sources, which are certainly not stolen;"
Well, what about the fact that some comments on the original source were found on that C rebuild?
It's impossible that they didn't use it. Even if they took off the parts that were used later, they allways used it cause they saw/studied the sources;)
"3) MOS (or rather QBox) is very different structurally than AOS. It has AOS emulation using native code, called ABox. No more, no less."
Wich is not very much "emulation" but API compatibility in the Amiga compatibility layer.
AInc. is probably so broke they can't even go to court about that.
-
@Jose
The C-exec was supossed to be used in a future revision of AmigaOS und AT/Escom,
so using "the sources" for that was 100% o.k (if they did).
What use would it be for MOS ?
Exec : 0.0 as the exec-library in MOS works completly different due to not
being the kernel of the OS.
GFX/Layers/Intui ? That has been done by building a replycement out of CGX, I rather
doubt that old 68k-chipset-hacking sources were of any use here ;-)
DOS ? Well casting that trash away and replacing it with something sane was more
than needed anyways.
WB ? Amibient works different.
CLI(commands) lots of free replacements to be found on Aminet or in AROS.
Need I go on ?
-
1) This is referencing an old post just for clarity.
2) Feel free to discuss but please keep this thread free from flamewars.
-
@tony
Legally they can probably get away with almost anything regarding that anyway.
The main point is that these people didn't want to cooperate with AInc in the past and now are using the sources that AInc payed millions for. Of course one can't judge without knowing the details, but they never wanted to show them anyway. Probably AInc wanted to control the OS and have big percentage of gains. Fair.
Some people will argue that they bought the sources, but this shouldnt be the way for AmigaOS, cause any company that bought it could do what wanted and screw it over. Unfortunately AmigaOS is not public property. I do agree that it's a shame if it got scewed like that and in the first days of Amino as AInc. they were doing just that. Ditch off AmigaOS. If their current intentions towards it are intended to benefit the communiny or just for their business sake, you can't know. But with Hyperion's work the community will benefit. It's not like "just the name", like when AmigaOS was gonna use QNX.
-
@Kronos
"@Jose
The C-exec was supossed to be used in a future revision of AmigaOS und AT/Escom,
so using "the sources" for that was 100% o.k (if they did)."
So why was Dave raising some doubtefullness about their actions?
Other points taken. True.
-
Jose: to me this looks like being part (or starting argument?) of that
"Get-legal" FUD-campaing AmigaInc+followers (especially Ben Hermans)
made year-year and half ago. At that time they could not show a thing,
nor they never got anything proven (or got into court) so I must
assume there really was no Case afterall.
And.. this mail is from closed mailing list.. Apparently other
mails on that list are not going to be published so it's a bit
selective isn't it? 8-)
-
So why was Dave raising some doubtefullness about their actions?
Without the full context of the conversation that is impossible to tell.
However it's interesting following this (I've been following it since the original ANN thread) because there is no proof of anything here, only something abut a piece of code written 7 years ago had similar comments and on the other threads a load of other unsubstantiated accusations.
Did you know if you get different groups of people to write code independantly you get the same errors? (this has been found in academic studies).
Ever consider that the comments are similar because the developers are writing similar things?
There are a lot more questions than there are answers and some people talk about further information but are not offering it up - this sounds suspiciously like FUD...
As far as I can tell, there doesn't appear to be any case to answer.
-
@Joanna
" At that time they could not show a thing, nor they never got anything proven (or got into court) so I must assume there really was no Case afterall."
Or no money?...
"And.. this mail is from closed mailing list.. Apparently other
mails on that list are not going to be published so it's a bit
selective isn't it? "
Selective, yeah, maybe yes maybe not. Like you said we don't know what was on the mailing list do we? 8-) But it's allways interesting to know insider information, whatever it is.
-
Isnt this old news now that has been forgoten . :-?
-
Interesting? No. Mike Bouma dredging up old crap cuz he is no longer moderating Amiga issues on OSNews (question has arisen if this was voluntary or forced) and wanted to strike out against Genesi on a MooBunny thread.
Back several months ago when the talk was about Buck eventually buying out the last of Amiga Inc's IP when they go bust (wonder if McEwen has had his house foreclosed on yet?), if Buch would turn over WB 3 to AROS. AROS stated they didn't want the source code because it was, more or less, useless to them. If WB 3 is useless to AROS, just how much use would it be to base any MOS on? Remember, a fair portion of MOS uses AROS code. It's not a huge step of faith to see there is no logical nor legal connection between MOS/AROS and WB3.
Can we now close the lid of this decaying old can of worms?
Dammy
-
@dammy
Back several months ago when the talk was about Buck eventually buying out the last of Amiga Inc's IP when they go bust (wonder if McEwen has had his house foreclosed on yet?),if Buch would turn over WB 3 to AROS. AROS stated they didn't want the source code because it was, more or less, useless to them. If WB 3 is useless to AROS, just how much use would it be to base any MOS on?
First of all these are all hypotheses. But the point you're trying to make doesn't have any sense : several months before, WB3 code would be useless to everybody, so this isn't a valid statement. The whole argument was based on a "old can of worms" several years before :-)
-
Sooo, this can be true... stolen code inside MorphOS!!
Oooo, Amiga Inc. would love to go after them again...
:-o
-
@Jose
Not really interesting, no. This is just a two year old quote about a 7 year old rumour that Mike Bouma dregded up in what looks like the start of another FUD offensive on behalf of Amiga Inc.
Two things to bear in mind:
(a) the person responsible for Amiga source code reaching all sorts of people was Petro, who was an Amiga employee at that time. It is unclear under what conditions he revealed or gave away the source code under, what permissions he gave to the recipients by doing so, and if he had the authority to do what he did in the first place.
(b) there is no evidence the code Dave Haynie is referring to was ever a part of MorphOS in any way.
All this really means is that Dave made a personal comment about his feelings regarding Ralph & Co, in a forum in which the audience is heavily prejudiced against Ralph & Co in the first place. There is no real evidence that Ralph knowingly did anything wrong at all.
-
Something I keep wondering about is timeline. Petro supposedly gave out the code round '97-'98 era, under Gateway. Dave's referring to a '95-'96 era source code, under Escom. The timelines don't synch up and something is rotten in the realm of denmark.
-
@downix
That's a fair comment, but does anybody really know what Petro did and when? It's not like he produced any documentation recording what he did.
-
If the sources were possessed illegally, then it does throw into question the legality of the whole MOS project. The problem is proving it.
-
Start tracing, investigators. I ---really--- want to know what's going on behind that MorphOS project!
-
Um, maybe I missed something, but when did this happen?
> Dave Haynie d.haynie@... http://www.merlancia.com
> Chief Technology Officer, Merlancia Industries
How did DH get hooked up with them? :-o
-
by Cass on 2003/8/18 13:04:55
First of all these are all hypotheses. But the point you're trying to make doesn't have any sense : several months before, WB3 code would be useless to everybody, so this isn't a valid statement. The whole argument was based on a "old can of worms" several years before
What doesn't make any sense is for Genesi to steal code that is outdated. What so "we got to have it" code is there that would work on a modern system? Bouma took swipes at MOS for AROS code, then he does this sad can of worms since the AROS linking didn't generate out outrage. So if they took from AROS, why would they bother with WB3 then?
I really can't see Genesi (well, Ralph's) motivation to steal code for MOS when that code is dated and ment for a custom hardware.
Dammy
-
That message is from when I was still on the TeamAmiga Mailing List. For a while I kept a log of a month or so of messages from that mailing list, at about that time, on my A1200. I don't know if it found it's way onto a backup CD-ROM or not. I could try digging it out if anyone is interested.
-
@Mike
That was from a bit ago. Back when RYan got the MCC rights from AInc, he hired Dave to design a PPC motherboard for Merlancia. That fell apart after Ryan neglected to pay him.
-
by Oldsmobile_Mike on 2003/8/18 13:35:18
How did DH get hooked up with them?
IIRC, alot of promises from Ryan and his mother plus a $10K initial paycheck. That's before it was wildly known about those two.
Dammy
-
Bilsey: yes.. and there has been No attempt on proving it at all. Just
this old heresay message recycled year after year.
So instead of sorting things out for good, they keep spreadign these
rumours and let followers do the dirty work. And year after year same
loyal followers obey and keep on posting and posting..
-
There is no AmigaOS source code in MorphOS.
I am simply amazed -- though I shouldn't be -- that you would go to such moronic lengths to bring up a 2001 posting by Dave (a person whose opinion most of us highly respect), when at that time, Dave might not have had any idea what is, or is not in MorphOS since MorphOS was not available.
That time period was also very ripe with accusation FROM AMIGA INC SUPPORTERS trying to spread FUD about this exact subject. Why not simply ASK his opinion now?
-
FYI:
1. This info is really old. I mean really old.
2. Dave Haynie, at the time, was using information provided to him by his insider friends at Amiga Inc. That information that was provided to him was faulty, but he didn't know it at the time. (Amiga Inc. was still pretending to be a real company then)
-
@Billsey
Sure, I'd like to see it.
-
> I ---really--- want to know what's going on behind that MorphOS project!
That's the easiest part, buy one and try one.
-
KennyR wrote:
I have great respect for Haynie, but in this case I think he's just conjecturing. He has no proof that the MOS sources are stolen from AmigaOS and never will have. And such a claim doesn't even make sense considering
1) The limited usefulness of the AOS sources;
2) The fact that MOS was begun with AROS sources, which are certainly not stolen;
3) MOS (or rather QBox) is very different structurally than AOS. It has AOS emulation using native code, called ABox. No more, no less.
1) 90% usefull for ABOX, perhaps.
2) ??? I thought AROS code was used only after it became apparenty that MOS could not use AOS as part of it.
3) But Commercial version of MOS (ships with every pegasos) is just ABOX.
I respect DH more than every other current AInc/Hyperion/Genesi kid all together.
argh.... I'm way too pissed off ...
-
Yeah lets all dig up years old posts and use them for some pathetic little agenda.
October 24, 2000
"Amiga's future, however, lies chiefly in its software, in particular its new Amiga Digital Environment software" McEwen said.
"The first partner, a British Amiga supporter called Eyetech, will sell Amiga circuit boards in the first quarter of 2001", McEwen and Eyetech said (refering to the AmigaONE)
Hmmm and not forgetting "Amiga as a platform is dead" and "on schedule and rocking"
If your going to dig up comments made years ago then why not do it properly.
-
"...when at that time, Dave might not have had any idea what is, or is not in MorphOS since MorphOS was not available. "
It's not might, he stated that himself in the message, and that part is available on ann's post. I can't believe people can be such morons that post without reading what they're posting to.
Don't talk to me about FUD. You've done your dirty work on it claiming to be neutral at the same time!! . People are still waiting to know "THE TRUTH", and why (if that's not the reason then what is it?) a company has to be bashed because of having financial problems. Haryy Garre CEO or who da hell was he, who cares? Facts on why is AInc so evil, where are they? I'll be the first to stone them 8-).
-
If your going to dig up comments made years ago then why not do it properly.
You mean like taking them out of context instead of trying to dig up the relevent context so we can maybe figure out what's really happening?
-
@Paul_Gadd
Let's pretend everything is all great and instantly forget about anything bad so that we can live all happey and all that....
What I'm trynna say is, I'm just curious to know stuff like this, and what really happened, and I'm not gonna stop posting it just because some paranoid peple will start screaming everytime the sole subject is mentioned. It was just a cross post actually.
-
@Jose
Let's pretend everything is all great and instantly forget about anything bad so that we can live all happey and all that....
Never said turn a blind eye etc, i am all for exposing scum but the mighty gods at Amiga Inc have done piss all about this magical stolen code in MorphOS which must tell ppl something.
This Morphos vs AmigaOS, Pegasos v AmigaOne, Amiga Inc vs Genesis is just bullshit with no facts whatsoever to backup each others claims and shows the world what a bunch of amateur twats are in control (note: all amiga/related companies).
Both sides are a joke and If this is the future of the Amiga then it is DOOMED.
Note: to below post, above is opinions not flame material as it is aimed at everyone :-)
-
this post is not intended to any one person, just in general.
This is slipping closer and closer to a flame fest. Please do not let that happen or it will go locky locky.
-
"This Morphos vs AmigaOS, Pegasos v AmigaOne, Amiga Inc vs Genesis is just bullshit with no facts whatsoever to backup each others claims and shows the world what a bunch of amateur twats are in control (note: all amiga/related companies)."
Agree on this one but, on the bigger world, much worse things happen, probably everyday...
-
@red
Lock it anyway. For a thread based on blatant FUD and ancient out-of-context quotes, the Red Trolls have got more than enough publicity out of it already.
I'd love to post some Gary Peake quotes from the same mailing list, just to watch Bouma and his mob squirm trying to explain them away.
:-P
...but I won't, because I don't want to sink to their level.
:-x