Amiga.org

Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => General Internet News => Topic started by: Seehund on May 26, 2002, 05:50:39 AM

Title: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 26, 2002, 05:50:39 AM

 There's a petition aimed at Amiga Inc. set up at www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/ (http://www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/) for all those who disagree with Amiga Inc's presented plans (http://os.amiga.com/corporate/041202-mcewen.shtml) regarding compulsory OS/hardware bundling and licensing.

An excerpt from the petition:

Quote

On April 12th, 2002, you, Amiga Inc., published your plans regarding distribution policies for the forthcoming AmigaOS4 in an "Executive Update" on your web site.

In short, what you say and what we the undersigned object against is this:

* Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS.

* Such hardware and its distributors must be approved and licensed by Amiga Inc. and the hardware distributors must also sell and support AmigaOS4.

* AmigaOS will only be available bundled with such hardware.

We think that the above will seriously hurt AmigaOS users, the POP/PPC hardware market and thus ultimately you, Amiga Inc., yourselves.

To read the entire petition and sign it, please click here (http://www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/).

Before those imagining sides, factions, camps and personal enemies everywhere start commenting, it must be emphasised that this poll is not intended to "promote" anything else than the success of AmigaOS, the POP/PPC hardware market, free choice and ethical business practices

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Crispy_Beef on May 26, 2002, 05:58:39 AM

Well I ain't signing it.  I think what Amiga is doing is absolutely fine.  They are protecting themselves.

Having the AOS extensions in the BIOS doesn't stop people from running other OS's, it just stops AOS running on boards that aren't approved.  And a manufacturer can't expect to use the Amiga name if they haven't applied for a licence.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 06:15:20 AM

I concur with CB. If you want to market your product under the Amiga name then you have to follow Amiga, Inc.'s guidlines and policies. There's nothing stoping a manufacturer or retailer from producing or selling a POP board and selling two different versions of it. One under the Amiga name with the specified bios hooks and the same board with a different bios. It's just that the board sold under the Amiga name has to licenced by Amiga, Inc.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Elektro on May 26, 2002, 06:46:00 AM

As far as I understand this licensing business this is not at all about selling boards under Amiga's name. It is about EVERY amiga os capable board having to have a license.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 06:59:49 AM

Obviously, that can't be right. You can't force someone to licence your product from you.
oh, If the board has a ROM on it that doesn't have the OS4.0 hooks in it, guess what? It's not an Amiga OS capable board as the OS won't boot due to the hooks it's looking for won't be there.
Eyetech can take the A1G3SE board with a plain Power Rom (by Softex, Inc.) and sell it whatever way they want, call it anything but Amiga Whatever. If the put the BIOS with the AOS 4.0 hooks in it, then they have to have a licence from Amiga, Inc. Though, anyone selling an Amiga branded board would have to get the licence first to get access to the special BIOS. It's not like that can just run out and get a copy then sell boards with that special BIOS. They have to get the licence first. That the point they have to want to sell an Amiga branded board.
Admitiedly, the Amiga, Inc. statement about their licencing is abit confusing, if you take it literally.
Not to mention that a two sentance long paragraph is rather insuffient to describe the complexity of thier licencing. As it covers classic Amigas, Classic Amiga PPC addons, new boards, etc.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 26, 2002, 07:16:14 AM

Crispy_Beef:

Quote

it just stops AOS running on boards that aren't approved.

Exactly. That's not "just", that's a software company trying to tell hardware distributors and users what to do. Amiga Inc. do not have the weight to throw around to do such a thing successfully. It's an unnecessary obstacle without technological relevance against having AmigaOS running on as many hardware products as possible available from as many distributors as possible.

Quote

And a manufacturer can't expect to use the Amiga name if they haven't applied for a licence.

Well, of course not! The point is that nobody should have to license and use this name to begin with in order to sell their own hardware, regardless of what OS the buyers are using. If someone wants to use the Amiga trademark or sell OS/hardware bundles they should of course have to get a license, but not just to sell their hardware, regardless if their customer uses OS X, Y or Z. Please read the petition before you decide to sign it or not.

Please STOP thinking about only two pieces of hardware called Pegasos and AmigaOne. If there was no compulsory licensing, no compulsory BIOS modifications, and no compulsory OS/hardware bundling,  you could choose unrestricted between these two and whatever other POP mobos there are and might be.
 Before someone comes along and says "but AOS must still be compatible with the hardware...", yes of course. But if a hardware distributor must modify potentially compatible hardware, get a license and start selling OS4, then the chances that OS4 will ever run on that hardware are drastically reduced before any compatibility work can even be planned for OS4.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: hnl_dk on May 26, 2002, 07:29:31 AM

I will not do anything against Amiga! I trust Amiga, untill they fail!

I will not do anything against Hyperion! I trust Hyperion, and I trust them to bring AmigaOS to the PowerPC platform! They have made grade things for the Amgia platform "in the past", and with their knowledge with other operationg systems give them a basis for porting the AmigaOS! I trust Hyperion "Totally"!

I will not do anything against Eyetech! I trust Eyetech. Eyetech has made grade tnings for the Amiga and could make some great hardware - I hope they will ;o)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: System on May 26, 2002, 08:05:26 AM

Amiga OS should be sold separately. Who cares if it runs on machines some other company is saying is 'Amiga compatible'? That translates into Amiga OS boxes--UNITS--being sold.

Of course, Amiga should cover themselves, insofar  as  warranties go with the software. If the hardware that is 'Amiga compatible' runs the Amiga OS but the hardware vendor doesn't have the stickers and license...say, 'powered by Amiga' logo, then Amiga isn't obligated to make sure the OS runs on that hardware and the hardware vendor is responsible... Amiga can't mother every piece of hardware out there; but they can examine and approve  and ordain with licenses those hardware vendors which approach them and want the OS to run on their machine--and thereby provide a better sense of stability and assurances.

I don't see benefit of Amiga being against Amiga clones (on PPC or x86); but I have said before they should have a focal Flagship. They can set the minimum specs (as I thought the Zico specs were), and greater support/warranties/distribution could be given to those who obtain licenses and so forth from Amiga.

The Amiga OS box should list minimum required hardware--it's no longer a case of someone buying the Amiga OS and thinking it is only  going to go on an 'Amiga'.

I just have this idea of being able to buy Amiga OS (thinking  5.0 here, so don't have a cow) and it says on the box 'installable on PPC, x86.." etc. and proceeds to  list minimum specs.  It says it includes an embedded AmigaAnywhere  module (which will already  exist on other platforms and such as an interesting 'lure' and 'programming target' that will bring back other software), and says about an emulation module that it 'can run almost all previous Classic Amiga programs' and recognize Amiga  floppies on a regular PC disk drive (or be able to use real Amiga floppies with optional PCI card or something)... :-)

Anyway, I think that would be the ballpark.

If someone wanted to make a deal with Abit for a  batch of KR7A-133 motherboards, and build an 'Amiga' by adding a Matrox G550 video card, Creative SoundBlaster Audigy Platinum sound card, and a few other things...and call it 'Amiga compatible' in advertising, there shouldn't be anything wrong with that (if the new Amiga OS will run on that hardware)... but if they're selling the Amiga OS with it, surely they'd have have a license, unless they just happened to be carrying the OS as  part of their stock. But if they're pushing an 'Amiga clone', I'd think they'd need a license from Amiga to be a vendor, etc.

I don't think I'll sign the petition. I do agree with somee things in it, though--Amiga shouldn't close itself off to some things that will get it more sales where there is no harm to it.

I thought Merlancia were producing systems that could run Amiga OS, BeOS, Linux, QNX, etc. Sort of OS-agnostic systems.

Amiga OS is supposed to be CPU-agnostic...at least in its eventual incarnation.

--EyeAm
"Sir, I beg you...don't do this. The catapult didn't work and, well, you've got your arm in a sling and your head is all in bandages. This rocket is simply out of the question. Surely, there are better ways to obtain our goal of getting the secret Amiga plans."
"Soldier, I've come too far to let technicalities get in the way. Any and all means necessary will be employed to stop those Amigans from producing. Now stand back..."
{{{click}}} [hummm] {{{click}}}}...
WHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSHHHHHH!!!
{{{BOOM!}}}
"Ooo, pretty... It's a shame he didnt' wait til 4th of July. Greater shame he forgot this parachute."

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: 4pLaY on May 26, 2002, 08:28:41 AM

man how much more is this community going to sink? im so sick of all this anti this and that crap it makes me puke! grow up kids.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 09:00:28 AM

How do we then certify that said software and hardware are going to work together? People like to know that what they buy is going to work. From the software producers POV they want to make sure that more than a few people buy it only to share it with the rest of the world. I don't think anyone would like Microsoft style software audits.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 09:02:51 AM

I believe it's the OS that's claiming to be "Amiga OS compatable" this other companies machine only claims to run it.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: System on May 26, 2002, 09:22:16 AM

All this whining about something that, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't even exist yet.  Jeez...  Just shut up and wait until there's something tangible.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 26, 2002, 09:23:08 AM

I'm hoping that pretty much what you've described will eventually happen.  For right now though I'm going to give Amiga Inc. the benefit of the doubt.  I believe Amiga and Hyperion need the current license to protect themselves.  I would think it irresponsible of Amiga/Hyperion to not insure that a hardware vendors products designed and licensed to run Amiga OS will support Amiga OS.  I also don't think it utterly unreasonable for Amiga Inc. to ask a hardware vendor, initially, to bundle AOS with their hardware product.

I expect that by AOS version 4.5-4.6 Amiga/Hyperion will include support for non-Amiga branded hardware with OEM licensed copies of Amiga OS with hardware dongle.  By AOS version 4.7-4.8 there should be a retail copy that allows users to install AOS on any PPC hardware meeting the "zico" spec with or without hardware dongle.

If Amiga OS 5 is the AA/DE enabled version of AOS (who knows, we may not see AA/DE integration 'til 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, or X - diez - 0x000A - 1010, or whatever).   Then I suspect x.0 will have full PPC support, partial (beta) X86 support, experimental (post-alpha/pre-beta) MIPS, SH4 and StrongARM support.  Later revisions would of course providing greater support based on which CPU platforms are in most demand...

If this doesn't come to pass and Amiga Inc. shows no signs of relaxing their license(s).  Then I'll sign a petition, join a mail campaign, or whatever it takes to make Amiga Inc. change its license.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: reticuli on May 26, 2002, 09:26:27 AM

I'm not going to sign this and I urge everyone else with a positive
interest in the official AmigaOS to abstain too.

Amiga, Inc. are enforcing the inclusion of the ROM to ensure only
certain systems are able to use AmigaOS. But it seems some people
aren't thinking too much about as to why.

There are numerous reasons, many of which have been mentioned in the
past. However, has anyone even thought about the issue of quality
control?

If a board hasn't been officially endorsed by Amiga, Inc. how can we,
as users, expect a board, developed by a third party with absolutely
no involvement with Amiga, Inc. whatsoever, to be completely 100%
AmigaOS compatible?

Answer: We can't.

The model adopted by Amiga, Inc. may seem draconian but it ensures
they don't fall into the same trap that other OS developers have
fallen into in the past who have had no control over the quality of
machines their products get used on. The result, in theory, is that
the situation where the OS works fine on some machines and falls over
regularly on others should never occur. Therefore if something claims
to be an AmigaOS compatible machine... it'll be an AmigaOS compatible
machine.

The inclusion of the ROM is the ONLY way Amiga, Inc. can ensure a
machine that claims to be AmigaOS compatible is exactly that and 100%
compatibility should be in every future AmigaOS users interest - as
it'll ensure the AmigaOS acquires a reputation of being reliable and
who want's to use an unreliable machine that fall over all the time?

Of course there will inevitably be ways around this. Crackers will
invariably crack it in no time. However, any board manufacturer worth
their salt would be insane to release a machine claiming to be
AmigaOS compatible with an illegal copy of the OS and the only people
left are those who will quite happily go to the trouble of installing
pirate versions of the OS themselves on whatever 3rd party PowerPC
boards they find and quite frankly, they deserve everything they
get... including an uncertified crappy machine upon which the OS may
fall over all the time.

The question you should ask yourself before signing this is: Would
YOU be happy to buy a machine that can not be guaranteed to any
degree of certainty to be AmigaOS compatible?

I know I'm not!

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: asian1 on May 26, 2002, 09:57:59 AM

>Piracy problem - machine certification.

Hi
I think it is better to use APPLE approach, but with hardware outsourcing.

1. User can run AMIGA OS on emulator / other hardware, but there is no support for them. To track which customer had bought the AMIGA OS , perhaps Amiga Inc can use serial number, password and online registration.

2. Although 3rd party can sell machine that can run AMIGA OS, they cann't advertise this feature or mention AMIGA OS / applications on their brochure / manual. They cann't sell their machine bundled with AMIGA OS.

3. On each box of AMIGA OS, they should mention list of compatible / certified machine, with a warning to customer that using AMIGA OS with uncertified machine is illegal.

4. Post announcement / advertisement about the name of illegal vendors and their machines.

AMIGA Inc should have a good legal team / lawyers to protect their IP / against pirates.

There is no need to modify ROM, install new ROM etc, as long as the above rules are used.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Snuden on May 26, 2002, 10:16:54 AM

Oh, for heavens sake grow up kids!

This won't happen, not ever hopefully.

I have not signed, and I will not. This is why:

The current licensing scheme'll insure that AOS4 won't be pirated as every piece of hardware capable of running AOS4 will be sold with a copy of it.

If it becomes possible to buy a separate copy of AOS4, some idiot'll surely start churning out piratecopies of it. This'll result in a salesdrop of AOS4 and Amiga Inc. will propably soon go out of buisness because of it.

I ask you now, is this what you want to happen?

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: System on May 26, 2002, 10:20:38 AM

I'm certainly not signing that rubbish! My company stands behind Amiga 100%.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 11:32:18 AM

yeah, but what would be do in the mean time. Twiddling our thumbs is kinda boring.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 11:34:04 AM

Wasn't the Zico spec just for DE?

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Revener on May 26, 2002, 11:36:00 AM

I ain't signing either.

A nice short statement that is not full of crap talk ;-)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Elektro on May 26, 2002, 12:03:47 PM

POP? CHRP?

Nah...

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Dagon on May 26, 2002, 12:42:53 PM

As I said somewhere else... what if some companies begin to produce more powerful and cheaper PPC motherboards than AmigaOne-Pegasos for Linux?
Would you expect them to pay money to Amiga Inc or modify their hardware for a small market like ours that they don't even care?

You all have let this AmigaOS-MorphOS war to influence your decision about this petition.
Can we have the luxury of the freedom of choice?

Free Amiga! :-)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: CyberViking2000 on May 26, 2002, 01:11:19 PM

:hammer: I'm not signing on either.  I think they've been doing very well, and their plans have been very thoughtful. :idea:

Also, remember,  some things have to remain under wraps at various stages of the business plan, so there cannot be an argument until you know absolutely everthing. :-P

Thumbs up, AMIGA!

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: System on May 26, 2002, 01:22:19 PM

I think people need to get used to change.

Change is good, many times.
And this is one of those times.

Bill McEwin is not a stupid buisness man.
He knows what he is doing.
One can tell that he has studied his plans well.

The only people that are complaining are the ones who are stuck in yesterday...
Forever struggling in their own minds to make sense of something that makes perfect sense.

And at this, they stumble.

Way to go Amiga Inc.

and keep up the good work :-o

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Kronos on May 26, 2002, 01:36:26 PM

Guess what I'm not signing !!

Wanna know why ?

If AInc wants to dig their own grave and give the competition
an advantage, then for heavens sake let them do it.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: tonyw on May 26, 2002, 02:47:10 PM

It's all rather academic, anyway - he's only got 28 signatures so far. We must have at least 56 Amiga fans left, haven't we? In which case, it's not a majority.

tony

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 26, 2002, 03:17:15 PM

I think Seehund should be applauded for this because its a constructive way of getting opinion
across. The petition is articulate and is a good way of allowing people to say what they thing /on the petition/ and not waste any more time saying it to each other.

I am not signing it because I think the branding scheme is the right thing and AmigaOS should not yet be a run anywhere OS like Linux ( not strong enough ).

Eventually Amiga Inc will HAVE to losen the reigns if AmigaOS becomes a MacOS like success.

Dave.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 26, 2002, 03:21:38 PM

Zico WAS AmigaDE compliance no more no less. I got caught out with that one too.

As we have found out, even with Linux you cant just up and run the OS on any hardware even if the CPU is the same architecture so some level of spec would be needed.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 26, 2002, 03:26:26 PM

Well what will reduce the credibility of the petition is some of the language on it. :-(

As usual Cheesegrate loses it. Is there any way of editing out those comments? It would make Amiga Inc take one look at it and say so we lose 15 trolls and 15 sensible people. Hmmmm......

Rather than 31 sensible people.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Kay on May 26, 2002, 05:15:07 PM

No way am I signing that. I don't feel strongly either way
about their licensing policy, as it is way outside my field
of expertise. What I do know, however, is that I'd look a
bit like an imbecile if my name was associated with those
comments. The top 5 comments I don't want listed near my
name:
1."sue bplan and die amino clowns" -5, troll
2."DIE AMIGA!!! MORPHOS 0Wnz j00000" -5, deranged or not serious
3."Yes, It's time for competitive mind, not closed ONE!" -2, confusing
4."To be rude; what's with the Microsoft tactics, huh?" -2, clearly doesn't know much about MS tactics, yet he talks about it
5."BTW soldered CPU SuXX big time" -1, seems to have misunderstood what the petition is about an who it is targetted at

Kay

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: jumpship on May 26, 2002, 06:04:53 PM

I won't be signing either.

The one big advantage of this system is that Amiga have the chance of making sure that the new H/W is 100% compatable and that the correct system compliant drivers are writen (OK maybe not Amiga themselves but Hyperion)

What is the one thing Amigans preach about our machines? Stability. The only way to get a very stable maching is to know excatly what H/W it is going to be running on. Take Windoze, one of the reasons it is likely to crash often is because M$ have to account for the almost limitless amount of H/W there is out there. They can't controll who makes all the drivers so you have some compaines taking shortcuts that the system doesn't like and the machine crashes.

This may well be a simplified way of putting it, but it is how I uderstand it and have been told.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: jumpship on May 26, 2002, 06:07:35 PM

Oh and BTW the use of italics makes it very hard to read in AWEB :-)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Rodney on May 26, 2002, 06:30:37 PM

I will not sign this petition untill the method Amiga Inc is showing is seriously hurting on niche market...

I dont see these licencing terms as a bad thing. They will not limit quality hardware in the Amiga market, only limit hardware that isnt up to their standards and only limit hardware that comes from shops/manufactorers that cant provide the level of support specified in the licenece. This is as i see it, a brilliant way of doing things because we are garrenteed quality hardware and quality support whilst also having a great range of hardware.

The classic Amigas always gaves us great hardware and we had pretty good support, but now, with anyone allowed to make Amiga boards, we have that great range of hardware.

I dont no understand the constant bashing of this licence. I will only sign this petition when it seems like it isnt doing any good. Right now, i dont see that, we have AmigaOne, Cyberstorm, Shark and Blizzard PPC cards for our taking. Thats a great range of hardware.

If these guys can put up with going through an Amiga Inc quality audit then, any suitable hardware vender can. If they cant, i wont be buying hardware form them :P.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Rodney on May 26, 2002, 06:41:45 PM

Quote

Please STOP thinking about only two pieces of hardware called Pegasos and AmigaOne. If there was no compulsory licensing, no compulsory BIOS modifications, and no compulsory OS/hardware bundling, you could choose unrestricted between these two and whatever other POP mobos there are and might be.

I understand what your saying, and this is certainly a downside to the Amiga Inc licence. I too would like to be able to buy whatever board i see fit.

However, with the licence Amiga Inc makes the hardware suppliers go through to be able to sell their boards as OS4 compatible, it gives the community both garrenteed quality products and quality support which is a brilliant thing to have.

If you also think about this from Amgia Inc perspective, they are going to be well known from here on for selling or being associated with a quality product. Once this has been astablished, people will remember the name Amgia when ever they hear the word quality. This will surly work in their direction. This polly isnt just to get quality hardware and support into the community, but put a picture in the minds of everyone that Amiga Inc can provide quality software and hardware solutions for customers.

So while having a licence has its good and bad bits as done not having a licence, ill still have to say , not to signing it, and see what happens. If things do indeed seemto be going backwards well, hopfully by then Amiga Inc have forseen the danger and are ready do what ever needs to be done to reverse this trend.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 26, 2002, 06:45:55 PM

Wise words.

Note that at time of following up only 37 people had signed the petition. This might grow next week but look at it this way.

(rumour stats)
200 developers managed to get an A1 board on order with tenfold that *requesting* a board. Therefore we have nearly 10-1 willing to vote with their wallet FOR A1 and therefore the branding scheme.
(/rumour)

If you take out some of the clueless signatures on the petition which I seriously hopes that Seehund has the ability to clean up....

(opinion)
The petition itself seems to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding - or miscommunication on AIncs part.
(/opinion)

This is discussed on a thread on ANN if anyones interested.

I appear to have an amusing namesake on ANN. Well close enough.

 wise monkeys  (http://www.ann.lu/comments2.cgi?view=1022359854&category=unmoderated&42#message43)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Alkemyst on May 26, 2002, 07:51:33 PM

oh & who says that a SW firm cant put there name to HW.
 
ever seen Mircrosoft on joysticks,mouses,rollerballs,stearingwheels ?
 
they had to go to MS to get aproval & so that MS could make sure it worked right with windows & then pay MS for ever bit of HW that was sold with the Mircrosoft stamped on it.
there is nothing wrong with that, but in Amiga.inc case you only have to pay for AmigaOs & the roms.
 
& for a SW firm making there own HW, do you think that MS made the Xbox them selfs, do you think that all inventors make the products then selfs, no they just give the HW specs to the HW firm to make on there behalf, its normal.

look at the GF green lean grilling machine or the tony little fitness range of products they dont make them, a HW firm makes them on there behalf.
 
it would be silly for an inventor to be hampered by having to get the £ to set up his own firm cos the ppl buying the product would moan that the inventor did not make the HW him selfs.
 
90% of inventors go to existing HW firm to get there invention on the market.
 
& i think what Amiga.inc is doing right now is the safest thing to do At this moment intime.
 
some ppl forget that 90% of the the pc world is not that savy about a wide aspect of SW & HW they just use it for the task at hand & when things go wrong they call for help.
 
if amiga.inc had a licenced & a open version & told that only ppl who go licenced can get AmigaOs help support do you real think that ppl who bought open would not try & still email/ring the amigaOs support system.
 
ofcorse they would as some ppl are stupid, just like what happned with the AOS4 screen shots even tho it clearly states that this is not final look on the page, ppl still talked as if it was.
 
i see loads of ppl haveing problems in totally opens platform lots of PC related problem with HW & SW even tho windows XP is running fine on there setup an apps or game is not cos of HW issues
 
you dont see that kind of problem so much in the Mac world.

& even having totaly open SW can lead to problems as well, linux is forking & the only reason why that is useable to alot of ppl is cos the bistros go out of there way to put things together for you that work, STRICO,YAM problems on the amiga you get a really stable version then the next version has 1001 bugs.

 
anyway we dont want to see ppl going & getting a non aproved ppcmobo buying Aos4 then emailing/phoneing for help then not getting any then saying AmigaOs is crap & unstable when infact its the crap ppc mobo at fault then throwing Aos in then bin & telling his mates & everyone eles that AmigaOs is crap.
 
but thats not Seehounds problem tho is it. im all right jack.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Oli_hd on May 26, 2002, 07:59:46 PM

Hmmm, I will say that the letter posted on amiga.com is not nice for hardware developers,

Quote

AmigaOS4 and all future versions will ship only on those hardware products to which Amiga Inc has specifically granted a license after reviewing the capabilities of both the solution provider and their product.

Ermm, Not your place to do that, Now yes a "seal of approval" sceme could be implemented but making it madatory? I think you wont get many developers that way.

Quote

Currently this hardware comprises: Cyberstorm-PPC accelerators by phase 5/DCE.

Did DCE pay for the licence? I dont think they would have, If they didnt OS4.0 would have been in trouble from the start.

Quote

have also been approached by and are currently in negotiation with the following companies for the licencing: Elbox, Matay & Merlancia

Again you will anger a lot of people if teh Shark wont run OS4.0, It does seem a very "up them selves" attitude.

Quote

I  concur with CB. If you want to market your product under the Amiga name then you have to follow Amiga, Inc.'s

(amiga.org)
Yes but what if you dont want to use the name?
As long as you run the OS you have to pay for a licence and get all of your hardware vetted by Amiga (USA), Then if they like your hardware they will let you buy the OS off them, Ermm not worth it guys, They will just install OS3.9.

Quote

It's just that the board sold under the Amiga name

And an Amiga PPC upgrade? Should they have to pay just so there card can have a licence to run Os4.0? Now the Amiga one boards yes, If they carry the word Amiga then fine, the Cyberstorm never, The Shark wont, Matay`s PPC card wont but they still have to have it vetted by Amiga, There is a CE mark you get hardware tested to, Thats all that is needed, Large companys trying to get the smaller ones to pay them money each time a card for the Amiga is releaced is stupid, Its like the Microsoft licenced software drivers (I hate them to)

Quote

Obviously, that can't be right.

From the post it really does look that way.

Quote

You can't force someone to licence your product from you.

No but if you wont sell them the OS until they pay you for a licence?

Quote

I will not do anything against Amiga! I trust Amiga, untill they fail!

Quote

im so sick of all this anti

What would have happened if your Cyberstorm or Blizzard would have needed a licence before you can install OS4.0? still wouldnt do anything?
As for the trust, Well I am happy Amiga are still making Workbench (Well not Amiga but then have Amiga actually made anything?) and it is always an improvement but there is something up.
PS: To they fall? MMmmm positive, The wont fail, They have gone to far, Its just how many customers they get from OS4.0 and the Amiga DE.

Quote

How do we then certify that said software and hardware are going to work together?

Thats the job of the developers, If the product doesnt do what it says everyone are in there rights

Quote

All this whining about something that, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't even exist yet.

OS4.0 isnt far away, Screen shots are out, The Amiga one is shipping (Well its ment to be) but thats already got a licence (I wonder if Eyetech paid for it?) So everyone who put a deposit on a shark are going to get one major shock when they get it and no OS makes use of it, Not because it wont run but because Amiga have made it so it will only run on Amiga licenced cards. Anyone remember the posts about Microsoft stopping Windows running on Sun machines (It was sun wasnt it?)
If your talking about the licence not existing then wrong, It already does, Amiga say that people are already talking to them about getting a licence.

Quote

I'm not going to sign this and I urge everyone else with a positive

But what happens if they start licencing software programs too? I am unsure if I should sign or not but I dont think what Amiga are doing is right

Quote

If a board hasn't been officially endorsed by Amiga, Inc. how can we, as users, expect a board, developed by a third party with absolutely no involvement with Amiga, Inc. whatsoever, to be completely 100% AmigaOS compatible?

Because if its sold for a task then it must do it otherwise you can send it back. We have lived without this for so long why do we need it now?

Quote

The model adopted by Amiga, Inc. may seem draconian but it ensures they don't fall into the the same trap that other OS developers

It will stop people developing for the Amiga,
And if Amiga licence the Cyberstorm which people really find a poor card then whats stopping them licencing really bad cards, Its just pay me for your hard work.  :-?

Quote

Oh, for heavens sake grow up kids! This won't happen, not ever hopefully.

Ermm, Like the Amiga.com site says, eyetech and DCE already have a licence, Elbox and Matay have applied for it, Its very much happening.

Anyway I think it is happening, It is bad and I hope people do sign the poll, Not sure if I will yet, Have to read a bit more into it, Dont want to cast the wrong vote but Amiga`s web page is not nice reading. :(

Oliver Hannaford-Day

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 26, 2002, 08:04:34 PM

It has been stated elsewhere that it is not a *fee*
based branding scheme.

If you dont agree with 100% of what the petition sayes then dont sign.

If you have different views to the petition create a different one and sign that.

If you want to sell a board that is capable of running AmigaOS it has to have hardware modifications made ( not a generic PPC board ) and then it has to be branded.

I dont agree with your points though. :-)

Dave

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: System on May 26, 2002, 08:08:27 PM

Thank God 90% of the comments here are from people with common sense
so I won't repeat them. But in addition, you've never been able to buy
an Amiga without the OS, Commadore never sold an A1200 without OS3.X.
All they are saying is if you are selling an Amiga system that means
hardware and software. Who would want to buy an "Amiga" without the
OS! Oh yes, pirating scum that have done nothing to further the
communitites fortunes!

Regards
James

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Alkemyst on May 26, 2002, 08:26:02 PM

Poster: Oli_hd Date: 2002/5/26 17:59:46

Hmmm, I will say that the letter posted on amiga.com is not nice for hardware developers,


Quote:
 
i say at first reading it could look bad as its not that clear.
 
but to ppl who have been following up regualy on amiga news would of seen the replys by fleecy & hyperion & eyetech about the letter on amiga.com
 
stating what it realy ment.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Herewegoagain on May 26, 2002, 08:55:56 PM

Well, I have to say that I have mixed feelings about the whole "must sell one with the other" but I do understand why they are doing it.  

Even when Apple was allowing Mac clones, there were about a half dozen or so clone vendors, and they all had to sell a copy of MacOS with thier hardware.  It was part of the licensing agreement.

The only thing I have a concern about is this:  If you have a board that is just out of warranty and it dies; You want to buy a replacement board to put back into the same machine.  Should you also incur the cost of the OS yet again?  I don't think so.  There will have to be a way of tracking registered users so that this will not happen.

I still will not sign a petition against the licensing.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: seer on May 26, 2002, 09:08:22 PM

Ok, I have posted on ANN (Under my real name Guido if anyone is interested) but here's how I see the license from A Inc,

Every PPC made board that is to be sold with OS4 must have the boot extension (otherwise OS4 wont boot  :-) )

Every PPC made board (with or without boot extension) can be sold with any other OS out there.

Every PPC board WITH OS4 boot extension MUST be sold with OS4;

PPC with boot ext. but no OS4 = no
PPC with boot ext. and OS 4 = ok
PPC with boot ext. and OS 4 and some other OS= ok
PPC without boot ext. and OS 4 = no
PPC without boot ext. other OS = ok

Did I forget someting ?

Well, I have no problems with this scheme  :-)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Ivan on May 26, 2002, 09:08:50 PM

Seehund:
You suffer from a number of misconceptions here. The major one being that this announcement is the actuall licensing agreement. I dont mean to ridicule you but you must have realised this is not a contract posted to the net. It's an announcement to the public and eliminates a number of the finer legal points for simplicitys sake.

>Exactly. That's not "just", that's a software company trying to tell hardware distributors and users what to do. Amiga Inc. do not have the weight to throw around to do such a thing successfully. It's an unnecessary obstacle without technological relevance against having AmigaOS running on as many hardware products as possible available from as many distributors as possible.
>Well, of course not! The point is that nobody should have to license and use this name to begin with in order to sell their own hardware, regardless of what OS the buyers are using. If someone wants to use the Amiga trademark or sell OS/hardware bundles they should of course have to get a license, but not just to sell their hardware, regardless if their customer uses OS X, Y or Z. Please read the petition before you decide to sign it or not.

You sound as if Amiga is declaring that all manufacturers of POP based boards around the planet need to sell AmigaOS or they can't make hardware at all. Firstly, Amiga isn't telling any hardware company or the users what to do. They are only requireing a hardware based dongle to be present on any hardware sold with the Amiga in mind. This is not about technical relevence but solely for the purpose of eliminating priacy of the OS and its something i agree with 100%. Take Eyetech as an example. The Eyetech motherboard can be sold without the rom dongle as a PPC linux machine. If you buy a board from them to run AmigaOS you get the OS packed up with the board. The OS bundle of course will add maybe $50-$100. Worth every penny to me but if you choose not to run AmigaOS on your Eyetech board they wont charge you for it and you wont be forced to have it. Amiga DOES NOT require that the OEM sell the OS with every product the OEM manufactures, only with Amiga based motherboards. There is still as much of a choice as ever. Any other OEM making a POP based board would loose the Amiga market by not supporting the anti-piracy measures and good riddance to them.

>Please STOP thinking about only two pieces of hardware called Pegasos and AmigaOne.

Good point, but then i'm not thinking of that either.

>If there was no compulsory licensing, no compulsory BIOS modifications, and no compulsory OS/hardware bundling, you could choose unrestricted between these two and whatever other POP mobos there are and might be.

There would also be rampant piracy of the OS.

>Before someone comes along and says "but AOS must still be compatible with the hardware...", yes of course. But if a hardware distributor must modify potentially compatible hardware, get a license and start selling OS4, then the chances that OS4 will ever run on that hardware are drastically reduced before any compatibility work can even be planned for OS4.

The form of the dongle doesnt have to be a bios extension. The dongle itself can take many forms. ROM, USB, etc. Hyperion have stated before that the bios extension to the Eyetech motherboard was chosen by all parties as the best possible method to make that board an Amiga board. Other manufactuers will undoubtedly choose other soultions and with no need to redesign thier motherboards to gain AmigaOS support for thier hardware. bPlan for example could go with a USB based dongle. IBM (yeah keep dreaming) could design a board and go with yet another hardware solution. There are no restrictions other than there must be something on or with the hardware to keep the OS from being spread illegaly. The additional costs will only be for the Amiga based systems and the only people who will be charged for the protection are the users who buy AmigaOS and nobody else. I don't mind a bit and i won't sign your petition. :)
 
 
Ivan

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Herewegoagain on May 26, 2002, 09:34:49 PM

Quote

IBM (yeah keep dreaming) could design a board and go with yet another hardware solution.

I would think IBM or Motorola either one would be happy to have another "Consumer Level" OS to run on thier PPC systems.  They don't have one as it is and it would give them another market.  A simple license with Amiga could give them just that!

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 26, 2002, 09:45:16 PM

While it's nice to see that people are being generally civil, it's sad to see that so few seem to even have read the petition or tried to understand it before coming to a decision.

No, for hopefully the last time, this is not for or against any company, product or entity. Read the petition. Someone for some utterly odd reason even found it relevant to write that he wouldn't want to "hurt" Amiga Inc. and a bunch of other companies. Well, I have no idea how you can come up with the notion that the petition is meant to hurt anyone. Read the petition, think for yourself and for once try to forget about labels, camps and factions.

I see a whole lot of people merely repeating what's said in the April executive update. Hey, guess what, the undersigned don't agree with that. Duh. That's why there's a petition. If you feel the need to argue against the petition, at least provide your own arguments or try to explain WHY you agree with the compulsory bundling and licensing and WHY you think the arguments you're reusing are valid or relevant. There is no point of mere repetition.
Most of my arguments and reasoning are there to read in the petition.

I'll provide a simple step by step instruction:

1: Read the petition and read the April executive update. Compare what's being said.

2: Think. For yourself. This can be difficult, we're all flock animals. If names like MorphOS, AmigaOne, bplan etc. pop up, then clear your mind and start over. This is not about old flamewars and imagined factions. There is no "Amiga" anymore. There is AmigaOS and there is hardware. The company behind AmigaOS has nothing to do with hardware. The companies behind the hardware have nothing to do with AmigaOS.

3: Read the petition and the executive update again and try to think forward, imagining consequenses.

4: Come to a decision. Sign or don't sign. Simple as that. Noone but moron zealots who invent factions and see "the competition" as personal enemies are going to hold your decision against you, whatever it may be. Just make sure you have read and understood for yourself.

Regarding the fsckwits who post abuse in the comments to the petition - the obvious abuse will of course be removed before it's all handed over. Noone has to worry about ending up in "bad company". Whenever you sign a petition you naturally only agree with what's said in the petition, not with any of the personal comments from the undersigned. I'm not gonna censor anything based on if it's "stupid" or ill-informed or just not exactly what I think.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: seer on May 26, 2002, 09:52:03 PM

Hello Seehund,

it's sad to see that so few seem to even have read the petition or tried to understand it before coming to a decision.

I admit I didn't read all of the petition, but I did read the comments made by a few of the signers.. Sorry, they destroyed the petition for me..

(Tho, I don't think I would have signed it anyway)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 26, 2002, 10:00:43 PM

Seehund

Those that have posted the exec update and compared it with the petition are basically pointing out that they cannot see where the petition relates to the executive update.

I realise you are probably feeling annoyed at the moment because you have done something good and some are trying to ruin it for you.

Oh and as has been pointed out before there are people that have not tried to understand it who have made decisions both ways. There are some that seem to think its an anti-Amiga Inc petition and it is those that have damaged the credibility of what you have achieved.

I still dont really see what you are petitioning against, ergo I dont think the petition is something I can sign.

I would happily sign against something that was say bundling hardware and OS together and you could not buy hardware without the OS. However that is not what AInc is doing as far as I can make out.

It *is* apparently what BPlan are thinkin of doing with Pegasos so I am thinking about putting a petition together against that bundling practise because it is typical of the Microsoft Windows and IE bundling.

(fact)
I can buy PPC hardware without AmigaOS 4.
I can buy PPC hardware with AmigaOS 4 IF it has been through the OEM scheme.
I can buy PPC hardware without MorphOS.
(/fact)
(rumour)
I cannot buy a Pegasos without MorphOS and YDL and nor can any reseller. Anyone who OEMs Pegasos is not allowed to modify the "bundle" on resale.
(/rumour)

However I want to see what BPlan have to say about the rumour before setting up a petition. I want to make sure I truly understand what it is they are trying to achieve with this.

No I dont see this as A1 vs Pegasos but I do see the rumoured BPlan move as being far more restrictive than the AInc move.

Dave.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 26, 2002, 10:09:08 PM

Actually, if you take a look at this Technical Update (http://www.amiga.com/corporate/041201-techupdate-B.shtml#OS4), you'll find that the "zico" spec is now specifically for Amiga OS 4.  

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: redrumloa on May 26, 2002, 10:35:05 PM

@Sehund

I read the petition and I don't believe I will sign it right now. Constructive and well thought out, however I feel current market conditions dictate the need for such a policy.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 26, 2002, 10:40:53 PM

Only thing is, Moto got burned by Apple during the whole Mac clone fiasco and are really only focusing cell phones these days.  And IBM is happy turning out Wintel boxes.  Tthe only place you find PPC is in their high end servers (if at all).  

It also doesn't help that the Amiga desktop market is currently like a rain drop in a vast ocean.  Or rather a single H2O molocule in a vast ocean.  Even if they are interested in a alternative PPC desktop platform and are secretely rooting for any of the many alternative OS'es.  They'll wait for smaller firms like Eyetech or bPlan to get the ball rolling.  

It would be nice to see Amiga Inc. working harder to promote the Amiga OS and Amiga One initiatives instead of the AA Entertainment Pack.  So far everytime Bill McEwen shows up on TeccTV's Screen Savers he only really mentions AOS and A1 as an afterthought or as an answer to a direct question.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: KennyR on May 26, 2002, 10:49:23 PM

I'm not signing this dumb petition. Amiga Inc. aren't doing anything illegal, which is more than I can say of the 3rd party AmigaOS code use (whether reverse-engineered or otherwise) of Amithlon, MOS or AROS. Open software is a pirates paradise. If you want to be open, get Linux - and be used to always having to survive on handouts.

Just as well petitions are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard, eh?

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 11:40:04 PM

or certification.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 26, 2002, 11:41:36 PM

Wow, a troll magnet....

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 26, 2002, 11:50:29 PM

First off, we have no idea of what the cost is to a hardware vendor/manufacturer.  So we cannot speculate as to whether or not any manufacturer/vendor would find this cost exorbitant.  

Second, if the only necessary change to their hardware is a change to a systems firmware, I don't see how or why this would be terribly expensive.  This isn't taking into consideration other means of hardware based copy protection like a USB or serial port dongle.  I would suspect if any such dongle were required, Amiga Inc. would be responsible for their manufacture.

I most assuredly believe in the freedom of choice.  But one thing you may not recognize is that besides Eyetech and bPlan, I have found no other manufacturers of open PPC desktop systems.  I did find these three manufacturers, Total Impact (http://www.totalimpact.com/), SBS Technologies Inc. (http://www.sbs.com/index_f.asp), and AG Electronics (http://www.agelectronics.co.uk/index.html) on the OpenPPC Project (http://www.openppc.org/) web site.  They all make interesting stuff, but none are desktop solutions...  Not unless you count SBC's as desktop solutions.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Fats on May 27, 2002, 12:10:28 AM

Quote

I'm not signing this dumb petition. Amiga Inc. aren't doing anything illegal, which is more than I can say of the 3rd party AmigaOS code use (whether reverse-engineered or otherwise) of Amithlon, MOS or AROS. Open software is a pirates paradise. If you want to be open, get Linux - and be used to always having to survive on handouts.

Piracy is not more related to open source software then proprietary software. Both have a license and if you violate them you are a pirate. Then it doesn't matter if it is a proprietary or an open source license. Only it is much easier to violate a proprietary license then an open source license.

Secondly, I am an AROS developer and I don't like it to be compared to a pirate. The AROS developers are very concerned about intellectual property so tell me what we are doing legally wrong and I'm sure it will be corrected in no time.

Staf.

PS: To get back to the original topic. In an ideal world people would not use software they haven't paid for. Unfortunately this is not the case and the only way to survive as a new OS software company is to be sure that your software is delivered with the hardware. So I think Amiga Inc. had to do the necessary evil with their licensing.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 27, 2002, 12:15:59 AM

As I said earlier in a response (http://amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=42843) to comments made by EyeAm.

Quote

If this doesn't come to pass and Amiga Inc. shows no signs of relaxing their license(s).  Then I'll sign a petition, join a mail campaign, or whatever it takes to make Amiga Inc. change its license.

But for right now, I don't believe Amiga Inc. is being unfair or unreasonable.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: blubbe on May 27, 2002, 04:57:45 AM

@Shades of Gray

Could you please shut up about OS5 this OS5 that.
I nkow about nothing about it and would be surprised if you know more. not even Amiga
knows for sure. Hasnt history proven time after time
that theese things evolve over time and may take any
direction (hopefully a good one).  And why do you
put = between AA and DE, they are not the same thing. I belive the DE is described in the Amiga World
aticles.. its quite a bit to go yet. From my understanding, the DE = OS5. If OS4 even will be
used as basis for this or not, we dont know.
it could be somethng completely different.
Nothing against that if that should proove
necessary (how is that word spelled ?)

So why not just enjoy the ride. The future will take
mysterious ways anyway :)

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: hnl_dk on May 27, 2002, 05:35:22 AM

@blubbe

I think you got something wrong!

Amiga Anywhere is the new name for AmigaDE, so it's realy AA=DE :o)

AmigaDE is not the same as AmigaOS 5, but will be part of the operating system!
I see AmigaOS 5 as a symbiosis of Amiga Anywhere/AmigaDE and AmigaOS 4.x + lots of extra goodies :o)

This is just my own hypothesis, I don't think anyone realy knows yet ;o) But thats also just my own hypothesis  :-D

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Argo on May 27, 2002, 06:25:43 AM

I thought AmigaAnywhere was the DEplayer...

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Hammer on May 27, 2002, 07:52:13 AM

Using a mainstream board manufacturer as an example, refer to http://www.msi.com.tw/certificate/main.htm (http://MSI's certifications logos).

As one can see MSI has the following certification
1. “Designed for Window” certification logo.
2. .“Designed for Window XP” certification logo.
3. “nVidia Certified” logo.
4. ISO-9001 logo
5. “Linux Tested” logo.
6. ISO-14001 logo.

I don’t see Amiga Inc straying from this standard practice.

It would be good IF Amiga Inc can attract some mainstream Mobo manufactures....

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: blubbe on May 27, 2002, 09:11:36 AM

> I thought AmigaAnywhere was the DEplayer...

Yeah, thats about what it is.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 27, 2002, 02:00:57 PM

 

Quote

Could you please shut up about OS5 this OS5 that.
I nkow about nothing about it and would be surprised if you know more. not even Amiga
knows for sure. Hasnt history proven time after time
that theese things evolve over time and may take any
direction (hopefully a good one). And why do you
put = between AA and DE, they are not the same thing. I belive the DE is described in the Amiga World
aticles.. its quite a bit to go yet. From my understanding, the DE = OS5. If OS4 even will be
used as basis for this or not, we dont know.
it could be somethng completely different.
Nothing against that if that should proove
necessary (how is that word spelled ?)

No I don't know anything more about Amiga OS 5 than anyone else.  I only have what Amiga Inc. have said they will do.  If Amiga Inc fully integrate or combine AA/DE into Amiga OS 5, then I have to assume that they will also have to relax their OEM license and include a retail copy (and license) for Amiga OS 5.  As for how Amiga OS 4 will play a role in Amiga OS 5.  As you say, AOS 4 may be part of AOS 5 or Amiga Inc. may choose to do something completely different.  It's happened before and anything is possible.

But I can speculate and voice my opinion.  I personally believe that AOS 4 will play a greater role in AOS 5 then Bill or Fleecy may currently believe.  Lets face it, the real reason AOS 4 exists is because elate just doesn't have what it takes to be a full fledged desktop or server OS.  We could very well see ExecSG from AOS 4.x rewritten in VP and become a processor agnostic kernel for delivering intent.

In my response to EyeAm, I acknowledged that Amiga OS 5 may not actually result in the full integration of AA/DE.  In fact I personally am doubtful Amiga Inc. will achieve such a goal.

Quote

If Amiga OS 5 is the AA/DE enabled version of AOS (who knows, we may not see AA/DE integration 'til 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, or X - diez - 0x000A - 1010, or whatever).

Why do I put a "=" between AA and DE?  Actually I put a "/", but that is beside the point.  As far as I understand it, Amiga DE has become Amiga Anywhere or AA now encompasses DE.  I'm not sure anymore...  That's why I refer to AA and/or DE as AA/DE.  They certainly are related and if AA is DE or DE is AA, mentioning both covers all bases.

Quote

So why not just enjoy the ride. The future will take
mysterious ways anyway :)

Yes, but what fun is simply waiting for the future to become merely the present?  Using the past and present to imagine the future is what makes the ride fun.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on May 27, 2002, 02:14:13 PM

Quote

> I thought AmigaAnywhere was the DEplayer...

Yeah, thats about what it is.

The Amiga DE Player is still called the Amiga DE Player on the Amiga Anywhere site.  

Whether this means that Amiga DE is Amiga Anywhere or that Amiga Anywhere is Amiga DE.  I have no idea.  But it would be nice to know for certain which is which.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 27, 2002, 02:27:06 PM

I doubt they would need to relax their "rules" for server or desktop
code if it was x86 as well as PPC based.

This is interesting

Quote

We could very well see ExecSG from AOS 4.x rewritten in VP and become a processor agnostic kernel for delivering intent.

What a very interesting idea.

My main beef with intent is the package delivery and filesystem
 its very PDA oriented and not at all nice to me. This obviously
would not be changed by an ExecSG kernel in the intent sandbox
but its a ( to me ) revolutionary thought of yours.

Good one!


 :-D

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: MoribundToot on May 27, 2002, 07:14:16 PM

For the past 4 years I have worked in the scanner market where there is a standard called TWAIN.  This standard is not enforced so scanner manufacturers can release product onto the market that doesn`t properly adhere to the standard defined by the TWAIN organisation.  And guess what?  It`s not the scanner manufacturers that get it in the neck when their scanner fails, it`s the software developer and the people that maintain the standard.  So from my point of view what Amiga Inc are doing is perfectly fine.  Leave it up to the industry to voluntarily follow a standard and they wont.   They need their arms twisted into doing things.  Just look at the difference in font handling between Netscape and Internet Explorer.  Then there are the differences in CSS handling.  Then there are the subtle differences in JavaScript.  The list goes on and on.   This is just my opinion from observations in the industry.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: blubbe on May 27, 2002, 10:21:45 PM

@shades of gray

Quote

But I can speculate and voice my opinion. I personally believe that AOS 4 will play a greater role in AOS 5 then Bill or Fleecy may currently believe. Lets face it, the real reason AOS 4 exists is because elate just doesn't have what it takes to be a full fledged desktop or server OS. We could very well see ExecSG from AOS 4.x rewritten in VP and become a processor agnostic kernel for delivering intent.

Yes, OS4 may play a bigger role, IF it turns out successful and Amiga realises they will need
to stay on the "classic" Amiga way of things.
(cause OS4 is more or less classic but for PPC).
There are lots of other kernels out htere, that they could use othewise.

Quote

Why do I put a "=" between AA and DE? Actually I put a "/", but that is beside the point. As far as I understand it, Amiga DE has become Amiga Anywhere or AA now encompasses DE. I'm not sure anymore... That's why I refer to AA and/or DE as AA/DE. They certainly are related and if AA is DE or DE is AA, mentioning both covers all bases

My take:
They realised AmigaDE was years ahead in time
for completition and not at all around the corner..
So instead of showing a tiny unfinnished DE lets
take the little part of it that is ready now and rename
it to AA. (The Player).

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: anarchic_teapot on May 27, 2002, 10:28:54 PM

Just had a look  at the petition. The list of signatures reads like an ann.lu flamefest.

Many of those who've signed are either MorphOS trolls, or people who just don't understand what's going on. For pete's sake guys, it's not Amiga Inc who can make the Pegasos AOS compatible, it's bPlan. :roll:

I was saddened to see several good friends' names in there, though I do wonder if a few names haven't been forged...

OTOH, a goodly number of the currently 219 signees actually did it to protest against the petition itself.

I'm going to ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, the Pegasos has too uncertain a release date to be taken into account, and I have no desire to shift to MorphOS. The name Amiga belongs to Amiga Inc, and they have every right to specify in what way it will be protected, and what form the licensing may take. It's not as though it's particularly convoluted, it doesn't prevent people selling dual-boot systems (as MicroShaft do), and it makes sense to have a mobo that can recognise an AOS-formatted hard disk to boot from.

Storm in a bloody teacup. All these hysterics are beginning to disgust me. No wonder so many people have left the Amiga scene and retain such a poor opinion of those that are left. It's frankly pitiful.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: pixie on May 27, 2002, 11:55:02 PM

Quote

Amiga Inc. aren't doing anything illegal, which is more than I can say of the 3rd party AmigaOS code use (whether reverse-engineered or otherwise) of Amithlon, MOS or AROS

Amithlon and AROS definitely aren't doing anything illegal, as for MOS I'm not shure, get ur facts straight, because reverse-engeneering is not illegal...

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 28, 2002, 01:05:18 AM

Are people still arguing over those two POP mobos over here? Sheesh.
 And some people even seem to think that one somehow is "more Amiga" than the other, ain't that cuuute. Aren't trademarks and licensing a wonderful thing? :-P

To the ones still asleep; wake up! There still isn't any one out there making any "Amigas". Nothing has changed. You'll get AmigaOS4, be happy. If you're lucky you'll even be able to choose which POP mobo you want to buy.

Quote

anarchic_teapot wrote:

Just had a look at the petition. The list of signatures reads like an ann.lu flamefest.

What, the names? How many flamewarriors (regardless of imagined "side") are known by nick/name on ANN? 3? 5? 10?
I'm sure it's not 230.

Quote

Many of those who've signed are either MorphOS trolls, or people who just don't understand what's going on.

I suppose they're no better than the rest who can't stop forming their every opinion based on labels, "camps", trademarks and licenses.
BTW, right now I count to 1 abusive "pro-MorphOS" (sigh) comment. There's also 1 faked "pro-MorphOS troll" from someone pretending to be Brecht Machiels ("darklite").

Quote

For pete's sake guys, it's not Amiga Inc who can make the Pegasos AOS compatible, it's bPlan.

Pardon?
[color=0000FF]Q:[/color] "There's this software company with a new OS. Who's responsible to make it compatible with as much hardware as possible? The hardware companies or the software company developing/selling the OS?"
[color=FF0000]A:[/color] "Huh? The software company of course. Just like any other software company. Is this a trick question?"

Quote

I was saddened to see several good friends' names in there, though I do wonder if a few names haven't been forged...

OTOH, a goodly number of the currently 219 signees actually did it to protest against the petition itself.

Oh, God no! Truly saddening. What ever shall you do? Cut all ties to your former friends or just look angrily at them?
All over a petition trying to change a software company's business practices...

Yeah, there are 4 people who either didn't understand that a button saying "Sign the petition" actually will "Sign the petition", or are trying some kind of sabotage. It's kind of funny either way.

Quote

I'm going to ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, the Pegasos has too uncertain a release date to be taken into account, and I have no desire to shift to MorphOS.

MorphOS, the Pegasos and the A1G3-SE aren't the point of all this. The point is that it shouldn't matter to you what label there is on a POP mobo or who's selling it to you. No software company has anything to do with that.

Quote

 The name Amiga belongs to Amiga Inc, and they have every right to specify in what way it will be protected, and what form the licensing may take.

I thought it was obvious that the world actually contains a couple of companies who have no desire to use the Amiga trademark. Regardless of whether a hardware distributor has that desire, and the desire to get themselves and their hardware licensed and modified and on top of it all sell another companiy's OS bundled with it, we - the users and customers - should have the right to buy our hardware from those companies to run whatever OS we like. Amiga Inc. should try to sell us *their own* product, AmigaOS.

Quote

 It's not as though it's particularly convoluted, it doesn't prevent people selling dual-boot systems (as MicroShaft do),

It is convoluted, but that doesn't really matter. A software company of Amiga Inc's caliber CANNOT make ANY demands or put any restrictions on hardware and hardware distributors if they have any intention of maximising their number of sales and get their product running on as much hardware as possible.

Quote

and it makes sense to have a mobo that can recognise an AOS-formatted hard disk to boot from.

What has a license, OS/hardware bundling and anti-piracy extensions in the BIOS or elsewhere to do with your harddisk, its MBR and filesystems? Would a POP mobo stop booting from some harddisks if you peeled off the Amiga sticker?

Quote

All these hysterics are beginning to disgust me.

Yeah, those damn hysterics. BTW, did you lose many friends in the Great Petition Horror of 2002? Sheesh...

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 28, 2002, 01:16:54 AM

BTW...

@anarchic_teapot

Quote

though I do wonder if a few names haven't been forged...

Could you please list those names (unless it's the darklite spoofer which I already know about). If it's true it's of course unacceptable.

Abuse and sabotage won't get anyone anywhere. Do people seriously believe that the crap won't be removed when it's compiled (if not before)?

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: KennyR on May 28, 2002, 02:54:44 AM

Rapidly sliding OT here, but reverse engineering *is* very illegal - look at any of the legal mush that comes with most (all?) commercial software! And what did you think the legal problems with Amithlon were about then? Parking tickets?

Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because a law is unenforcable that it is non-existent. After all, AInc caught out Amithlon on a technicality, and there's always the chance MOS or AROS might get the same treatment.

I'm beginning to think some people think the Amiga belongs to them. Wrong! It belongs to AInc, not the "community". They paid for it and can do anything they like with it regardless of petitions or protests or flames. None of us can change that. Just get over it.

If they let us down, we don't have to follow them, do we?

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DarkHawke on May 28, 2002, 08:57:07 AM

Okay,  I read the petition.  Why does it seem like it doesn't  have a rhetorical leg to stand on?  The update makes it plain that what AInc wants is a quality user experience for OS 4 users from stem to stern, something that hasn't existed since C= went tits up.

[Some might say that it didn't exist even when C= was still on its feet, but that's another story!  :-) ]

 I think that's a laudable goal and it doesn't seem like they're asking anything either extreme or exhorbitant from the hardware folks to meet that goal.  Piracy is a vailid concern, and although folks like M$ have Net/software ways around that, AInc may just not be able to do that kind of thing. . . yet! :-D

In fact, close examination of the petition shows that it partially misrepresents AInc policy.  AInc only wants the hardware manufacturer to stand behind and support THEIR product, not OS 4.  And the sale of OS 4 by that hardware company look to be restricted to only those products that are intended to RUN OS 4.  If they want to strip out the hardware "dongle" and sell the thing as a PPC box, they seem to be more than welcome to do so, so long as it's not promoted as an "Amiga compatible" box.

Quite frankly, this nascent PPC market is NONE of AInc's concern, and there's no good reason it should be.  They're trying to make money off of THEIR products, and not facilitate the development of a market in which they may or may not have a stake.   Yes, a more liberal distributon policy for OS 4 might make it an attractive alternative for current PPC users.  Then again, why stop there?  Why not unify the best of OS 4 and AA, allow everyone to put it on the computer they ALREADY have and make it an attractive alternative to everyone?  Seehund has encouraged us to look beyond the Amiga market infighting to see his petition clearly.  I wonder if he's ever looked beyond the tiny Amiga and PPC markets to see the current state of the entire computer marketplace clearly.

MY only big concern is that judging by the update, it seems like Bill Mc. & Co.  are concentrating TOO much on the OS 4/hardware solution!  Granted, OS 5, if it does turn out to be the happy marriage of AA and OS 4, could have Win XP-style activation to foil piracy and STILL be hardware independant.  But the update seems to imply that they've put a lot on the A1/OS 4 thing, and if too much is invested in that path they may be reticent to pursue AA to its best and most logical extent.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DanDude on May 28, 2002, 12:45:03 PM

Sorry, I'm not signing this lousy petition just to open more doors to crackers.    Yes, I did read both sites.

reticuli made some strong statements and I honor him for that.

As for the Microsoft tactics, ---limiting--- one browser and ---paying--- to have it registered into a stupid list is a perfect example, not Amiga Inc.'s plan!

Dumb dongles can be easily copied no matter what tactic you use.

I don't trust Apple or any of their tactics as well.   :roll:

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: DaveP on May 28, 2002, 02:24:10 PM

Notice that someone has spoofed Wayne on the petition:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?amigaos&1

comment 264.

Seehund you have said that you are going to clean up the comments
are you going to check that these people are genuine?

Shame the idiots have to spoil it for you!

Dave

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: System on May 29, 2002, 05:28:48 PM

I don't think this petition will have much clout because of whats been said above. Can all of these be verified? can they really be taken notice of? Anyone can post under more than one name and email address. Theres nothing stopping people from spoofing other peoples interest, it doesn't have enough legitimacy.

I think the mechanics of signing the petition need to be considered properly and it done again.

Perhaps each signee should have to register properly,  if someone really cares they would be willing to give 5 minutes of their time.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: HeUnique on May 30, 2002, 12:35:13 AM

People, some history lesson..

Few years ago, before Steve Jobs went back to Apple and made it a very successful company after lots of failures, Apple has opened the market for Apple clones - and there were many of them. I do sys admin sometime for a small Ad Agency and I've seen few of those Apple clones - they're pretty nice, although very underpowered by today's Apple machines..

Bottom line for that Apple deal - did they make lots of money? no they didn't because there wasn't actually a good certification program! you could just submit some docs, pay some money - and Apple would have (back then) be happy to cut a deal with you to sell you ROMS + OS images.

Do I plan to sign this petition? absolutly not.

Do I want to see Amiga succseeds? yes, yes, and yes..

I belive Bill's way is a very good way - if a company wants to sell their boards to run Amiga OS 4.x and future versions - then they have to pass a board (or series of boards) to Amiga Inc for testing and verifications, and both sides win - Amiga Inc get some money from the verification procedures, royalties for using the Amiga Inc, and some sales of ROM chip + Amiga OS 4.0, Hyperion will get some money from the AOS 4.0 + ROM Sales (to get some money from their investment in the development of AOS 4.0), and the motherboard vendors can get some money by selling those boards...

It's not like Amiga is trying to force prices around.. If a board manufacturer can sell a G4 or G3 board very cheaply and the board is approved by Amiga Inc. - then users are winning! you'll pay less for a good board - it's just math.

I wish Amiga Inc and other parties will do well. I loved Amiga and I would love to buy it again as soon as something stable comes out..

One more issue that people do forget - since these boards are based on PowerPC - there's (almost) nothing stopping you from running Mac OS 8.X (and 9.x if I'm not mistaken) - all it takes is few hacks to use an image of a NewWorld ROM of Apple's PPC machines...

Regarding the Shark board - I belive that people should complain to the Shark manufacturer and encourage him to do some deal with Amiga so their board could be certified - it's for the users and for their business.

Hetz

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 30, 2002, 09:59:31 AM

DaveP:

Quote

Seehund you have said that you are going to clean up the comments
are you going to check that these people are genuine?

Yes. As soon as the damn petitiononline.com admin feels like answering my requests. Otherwise when the list is compiled before it's sent off.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 30, 2002, 10:20:14 AM

Akaru:

Quote

I don't think this petition will have much clout because of whats been said above. Can all of these be verified? can they really be taken notice of? Anyone can post under more than one name and email address. Theres nothing stopping people from spoofing other peoples interest, it doesn't have enough legitimacy.

It's an online petition, not an election to parliament or a scientific study. Registration wouldn't stop abuse, someone with his/her mind set on abuse and being an asshole could still register multiple times with different e-mail addresses. I'm happy to see that over 300 people so far have taken a chance to easily voice their opinion. All these people writing individual e-mails/letters would have been the alternative, but that's unlikely to happen.
A petition hanging on a billboard is just as open to abuse. Still, all the obvious crap and sabotage attempts will be removed.

If anybody knows of a better place than petitiononline.com you're welcome to share. If Amiga Inc. doesn't listen this time and it gets away with killing off AmigaOS, we could host the petition to make it open source there. :-P

Edit: Sorry, forgot to turn off the damn GIF smileys. The ":-P" was turned into a laughing Down's syndrome patient.

Title: Re: Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware
Post by: Seehund on May 30, 2002, 11:35:10 AM

HeUnique:

Quote

People, some history lesson..

It seems you need to go back to history class, sorry. ;)

Quote

Bottom line for that Apple deal - did they make lots of money? no they didn't because there wasn't actually a good certification program!

It failed because people wanted "a Macintosh". Apple couldn't survive on licensing money, neither can Amiga Inc. - and Apple had a larger market than Amiga Inc. Not to mention that Apple designed and sold their own hardware and provided specifications for clone makers. People seem to totally overlook the fact that Amiga Inc. is a software company and that they DON'T design, make, provide specs for or sell any hardware of their own. The "Amiga" as a piece of hardware is officially dead, gestorben, mort, död, shmersh, mors, but AmigaOS is what lives on and it will run on PPC-expanded old Amigas and on POP motherboards. There will be no more "Amigas" made.
Perhaps people are confused because one distributor is selling a POP motherboard under the label "AmigaOne", and this makes people connect it with the Amiga Inc company and either defend or attack this particular POP mobo so vehemently.

Quote

I belive Bill's way is a very good way - if a company wants to sell their boards to run Amiga OS 4.x and future versions - then they have to pass a board (or series of boards) to Amiga Inc for testing and verifications,

I remember a quote from a developer in #ppclinux; "Amiga Inc. is a speck on the windshield of the POP market". Or as Ross Heinlein, developer of the Barbie POP board said next to his signature on the petition; "You need to realise that as Hardware manufacturers, your OS licensing is NOT our concern, we just build hardware, we don't play games and tailor separate product lines for every 'niche-OS' who has crazy ideas, you should rethink yours." That's how the entire third party consumer hardware market works, PPC or not.
Unless Amiga Inc. are planning to exclusively live on AmigaDE/AA in the future, then they're actively committing suicide.
By the way, when was the single currently licensed POP mobo tested by Amiga Inc. for ensured compatibility with AmigaOS4, when did it pass the "strict set of Quality Assurance certifications"?

Quote

and both sides win - Amiga Inc get some money from the verification procedures, royalties for using the Amiga Inc, and some sales of ROM chip + Amiga OS 4.0, Hyperion will get some money from the AOS 4.0 + ROM Sales

Both Amiga Inc. and Hyperion are software companies. They CAN NOT expect and certainly NOT DEPEND on earning money on anything other than sales of their software, but still they won't sell their software. They expect 3rd party hardware vendors to sell their software for them. It will not work.
They should sell OS4 separately, and they could still make money on licensing if there were any company like Eyetech who'd want to use the "Amiga" trademark and sell bundled computers.

Quote

If a board manufacturer can sell a G4 or G3 board very cheaply and the board is approved by Amiga Inc. - then users are winning!

If someone bothers to become licensees and dealers for Amiga Inc.'s products, yes. Even if someone is insane enough to do that, those licensed boards will still be separated for no technical reason from the rest of the POP market. Instead of one POP market you get two smaller "POP" and "POP for AmigaOS" markets. Smaller markets = higher prices and slower development. Everybody loses.

Quote

you'll pay less for a good board - it's just math.

Really, what the hell are you talking about?

Quote

I loved Amiga and I would love to buy it again as soon as something stable comes out..

Listen: You will never be able to buy a new Amiga because there will be no more Amigas. There will be AmigaOS and there are and will be POP motherboards. (But for some reason Amiga Inc. thinks we are too stupid to choose our own POP motherboards.)

Quote

One more issue that people do forget - since these boards are based on PowerPC - there's (almost) nothing stopping you from running Mac OS 8.X (and 9.x if I'm not mistaken) - all it takes is few hacks to use an image of a NewWorld ROM of Apple's PPC machines...

Huh? First, you can't buy MacOS separately, second, don't you think people would already be running MacOS (I presume you mean natively) on POP motherboards if this was possible or even attractive? Or are you saying that a license will magically change a POP mobo's capabilities? Well, reading the marketing in the executive update it almost sounds as if that was the case...

Quote

Regarding the Shark board - I belive that people should complain to the Shark manufacturer and encourage him to do some deal with Amiga so their board could be certified - it's for the users and for their business.

You just provided YET ANOTHER example to why Amiga Inc.'s plans are so harmful.
Look, you have a link to a petition right in front of you that if it was considered by Amiga Inc. (THAT is the company setting the restrictions in the first place remember) would remove any need to complain to any hardware distributor, be it concerning Pegasos, Barbie, Shark or whatever the heck else.
The Shark is not a POP mobo, which would make Amiga Inc.'s/Hyperion's porting efforts (which are the SOFTWARE company's responsibility) more than negible, but the ridiculous non-technical obstacles would be removed.