Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => General Internet News => Topic started by: Seehund on July 19, 2002, 10:28:40 PM
-
As it's a cloudy summer day here today, I took the time to do some updating of the information site (http://amigapop.8bit.co.uk/news.html) for the AmigaOS Distribution Policies petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/). If you have not signed the petition yet, please do so here (http://www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/petition-sign.html).
Since a couple of days we are over 700 people who publicly express our wish that Amiga Inc. should not apply any artificial and unnecessary chains restricting future versions of our favourite OS and its market by only letting it run on licensed versions of third party hardware from licensed distributors.
The first batch of signatures was sent off to Amiga Inc. almost one month ago by now, but we have yet to hear a reply from the company.
I have also added a new selection of comments (http://amigapop.8bit.co.uk/comments.html) from disappointed users and developers.
(While I'm at it, I'd like to ask new signatories to please use their full names when signing. If you wish to use an alias/nickname, please check the box to make your e-mail address "available to the petition author". It's been quite a chore to bug PetitionOnline to track some people down to verify/delete signatures.)
-
I still think this petition is a waste of time. What's the point? Amiga Inc. are protecting themselves and the consumer against dodgy companies producing dodgy products with the Amiga name, it's as simple as that.
If a company wants to use the Amiga brand (owned by Amiga Inc.), they have to adhere to the terms, and that's fact, and the way it should be.
And I still ain't signing :-P
-
The first batch of signatures was sent off to Amiga Inc. almost one month ago by now, but we have yet to hear a reply from the company.
why you and your 700 friends don't reach in your pokets, pay amiga inc or hyperion for amigaos rights and do whatever you want with it?!
As far as i am concerned, I like amigaOS but i don't allow my self to judge what amiga does. I know we are all stakeholders of this company, but hey they're not mama-amiga!
-
Ehm no crispy this ain't about making 'amiga' branded mobos and not paying amiga inc. its royalties. That's a completely diff. matter.
-
Crispy_Beef wrote:
If a company wants to use the Amiga brand (owned by Amiga Inc.), they have to adhere to the terms, and that's fact, and the way it should be.
Of course they should, but you're completely missing the point if you think that's what this is about.
(One of) The issue(s) is that they shouldn't have to become licensees for anyone if customers wish to use their hardware to run whatever OS they bloody well like. The petition is against the compulsory licensing/bundling/dongling required to let companies sell their own products to AmigaOS users. Hardware companies don't want to limit their hardware and become licensees of a tiny software/licensing company. The trademark has to be guaranteed or necessary to attract a huge amount of customers (à la "Made for Windows") for anyone to bother..
And I still ain't signing
Fine, but I wish you'd at least bother reading the petition (and preferrably the introduction (http://amigapop.8bit.co.uk/intro.html) and the FAQ (http://amigapop.8bit.co.uk/faq.html) as well) before coming to any decision.
[edit: forgot to attribute the quotes...]
-
Ehm no crispy this ain't about making 'amiga' branded mobos and not paying amiga inc. its royalties. That's a completely diff. matter.
Your correct, it's not. It's about making sure that the hardware is up to spec and is up to the job, it's about making sure there is a quality product that works, and if there is a problem it can be supported, it's about stopping pirated copies of the OS being run.
The last point being quite important, it's fine for Linux/Unix and other 'free' OSs, but I don't think Amiga Inc. could survive a lot of piracy of the OS.
It's all about protecting interests, which seeing as the patents etc. are theirs they have every right to do.
Nothing is stopping any other company getting and license distributing the OS with their hardware.
-
Seehund spouted blithely:
Hardware companies don't want to limit their hardware and become licensees of a tiny software/licensing company.
In what way is the Amiga-enabling ROM a limitation on the hardware?
Unless you can successfully answer this question with only hard facts and logical reasoning, you are going to be written off as an Idiot by many who up to now merely considered you a bit thoughtless.
Remember, you are speaking to someone currently running Linux on the AmigaOne with the ROM already in place.
Limited hardware, my backside cache.
-
ilgulamc wrote:
why you and your 700 friends don't reach in your pokets, pay amiga inc or hyperion for amigaos rights and do whatever you want with it?!
That's exactly what I want myself and others to be able to do. Pay AI/Hyperion for AmigaOS and pay any hardware vendor/maker I prefer for the hardware of my choice (it might even be a licensed piece of hardware, but I want to be able to make that decision by myself, thankyouverymuch).
I want my choice of hardware to be decided by compatibility issues and my personal preferences alone, not by licensed trademarks and petty political wars.
I want AmigaOS to be allowed to be made to run on any potentially compatible hardware, not only licensed, dongled and bundled hardware.
I want AmigaOS to have a fair chance at even a moderate success, not being limited and chained to a niche market even tinier and more pathetic than when "Amiga" used to be a proprietary computer with no development abandoned by its bankrupted manufacturer.
There's this new OS. What's the best way to get as many users as possible? Totally unnecessarily restricting its hardware base and hardware market and not selling it separate from chosen hardware, or make it run on as much hardware as possible and sell, sell, sell to anyone who's interested?
As far as i am concerned, I like amigaOS but i don't allow my self to judge what amiga does.
It's a commercial company, or so it says, not a deity for crying out loud! A commercial company ought to be interested in maximising market penetration and making its product commercially attractive.
-
@Seehund
Actually I have bothered to read the petition and FAQ, and I still think there is now point in signing.
Every copy of AmigaOS needs to count, every time a pirated copy is run it damages the platforms future.
There is nothing to stop a dongled version of the OS (USB) becoming available later on so users can run on unlicensed hardware if they want to, but if a company wants to sell the OS with their board, then they are going to need a license as they are actively putting the combo together.
What happens when the OS doesn't run on an uncertified bit of hardware, your average Joe will say, "This OS is crap, it doesn't even run on the board I bought it with."
-
It is quite unfortunate that someone is doing such a "petition" without trying to understand Amiga's position quite well (or so the petition author seems to mis-understand).
Amiga Inc. wants to be back in life, and prefferable - back in business. A business is created for profit. By allowing anyone under the sun to ship boards with Amiga OS without any qualifications - you'll get tons of nightmares in terms of support. I'm sure that if Amiga will give up their requirment for qualifications and approval - there will be hardware vendors which will supply either bad parts or partially compatible boards which the user won't know about them until the user will have a problem - and point the finger to Amiga Inc.
Amiga Inc. doesn't want much - all they want to do is to have a formal licenseing program which the vendor submits his board for approval that it works with Amiga OS 4. This is exactly the same thing that graphics card manufacturers doing today to get an "OpenGL approved" qualifications (from SGI) or to get "DirectX approved" from Microsoft. Do you see a petition to refuse those qualifications from users? I don't.
Amiga Inc. wants to have this approval procedure - and it's not about the money (trust me - I've been at the business of qualifying boards for industrial use) - the money that a hardware vendor needs to pay is pretty small actually - something like few thousand dollars - which needs to cover the costs of testing, and red-tape.
Amiga Inc. also stated clearly that they are supporting MORE then EyeTech's boards! go look at Bill's latest executive update and see that he names 2 more names other then Eyetech's. If your preffered hardware vendor wants to play cheap and refuse to work with Amiga - then you should consider email him and ask him to talk to Amiga. Of course, if your hardware vendor belives that MorphOS or other OS is better then the upcoming AOS 4.0 and your vendor (which you already purchased a board from) doesn't want to qualify his hardware - then it's really a problem for you and him.
If I was a PPC board hardware vendor, I would be happy to be an Amiga OS licensee - after all, if I set my price competitivly with EyeTech (and lets face it - 800$ for a PPC board with upgradable CPU socket and G4 processor is very profitable to them) - then I could sell quite a lot of those boards! I'm pretty sure that Amiga Inc. won't sell the AOS for $50 for the OEM - which is a nice (although small) additional profit to me - whats wrong with that? and all I need to do (if I was a motherboard vendor ) is to pay some money to Amiga for test passing - and it's worth it! it's called "business"..
Lets not forget one more thing - if Amiga will start selling AOS 4.0 with the plug to anyone - then maybe 50 people will buy - and the rest will copy it! I really don't think that it will be that hard to hack AOS 4.0 to work without the Amiga Inc's special ROM - so 50 will buy it, and 5000 people will copy it. See the newsgroups messages with AOS 3.5 went out.
I really hope that Amiga Inc. will start selling AOS 4.0 soon (and I hope Hyperion will finish AOS 4.0 development soon - guys, some news from you about status update will help a bit) and we can prove to the world - Amiga is back, and it's in the stores!
Thanks,
Hetz Ben Hamo
heunique@slashdot.org
-
Assuming your scenario, What our your choices other than the AmigaOne G3 SE?
-
You wrote:
"(One of) The issue(s) is that they shouldn't have to become licensees for anyone if customers wish to use their hardware to run whatever OS they bloody well like. The petition is against the compulsory licensing/bundling/dongling required to let companies sell their own products to AmigaOS users."
Excuse me - signing with Amiga DOES NOT limit the vendor to anything! for all they care - the vendor can sell competing OS's as well - be it MorphOS, SuSE, Debian, Mandrake, or anything your vendor want!
Nothing really stops you from buying a board from a non licensed company and buy AOS 4.0 seperately - it's just that your hardware will not be supported by Amiga. Got AGP/Gart problems? USB problems with AOS 4.0? call your vendor, Amiga won't help you.
Hetz
-
@HeUnique
This is exactly what I have been saying, Amiga Inc. would end up in a support nightmare, and gain a bad reputation from it.
I really do think this is a good choice, and will benefit both the company and the end users.
-
Nothing really stops you from buying a board from a non licensed company and buy AOS 4.0 seperately
The OS4-version that will be available seperatly will ONLY run on the
old Phase5-card, and thats what the whole petition is about.
-
The OS4-version that will be available seperatly will ONLY run on the
old Phase5-card, and thats what the whole petition is about.
Well technically that's not entirely true. It could also run on the Shark if they they pulled their finger out and sent Hyperion some hardware to work with. Same goes for Pegasos too.
-
In what way is the Amiga-enabling ROM a limitation on the hardware?
Hardware X: This can be sold to anyone, regardless of OS. It doesn't come with any OS bundled, it doesn't license any software company's trademarks, it doesn't have any hardware license verification mechanism (in marketing a.k.a. "anti-piracy measures" or "Amiga-enabling ROM").
Hardware X, but in its licensed (per)version: This has to be sold bundled with AmigaOS after having been modified in "any way which the vendor chooses" (to paraphrase Ben Hermans attempt at "clarification") and after the vendor has become an Amiga Inc. licensee. Of course this also has to be more expensive than the same hardware in its normal shape, due to the licensing process and the following limited market size.
Which board is limited in the eyes of the consumer who doesn't give a crap about AmigaOS? And why shouldn't he have the possibility to buy AmigaOS separately to install on his hardware if he so chooses at a later time? Is his money less worth to Amiga Inc. because he cares more about the capabilities and price of his hardware than what comes bundled with it at the time of purchase?
The very essence of all this is that the hardware market for AmigaOS users is unnecessarily (as in: for no technical reasons) limited.
Are you saying that an abolishment of the compulsory dongling/bundling/licensing idea would be any more limiting?
Unless you can successfully answer this question with only hard facts and logical reasoning, you are going to be written off as an Idiot by many who up to now merely considered you a bit thoughtless.
That's alright, you should be used to insulting me by now... ;)
Remember, you are speaking to someone currently running Linux on the AmigaOne with the ROM already in place.
Oh really!? Well, I have a black bicycle with red stripes!! So what? :-P
-
@Crispy_Beef
Please reread the ExecUP on this !!
OS4 will ONLY be sold bundled with the HW !!
The P5-cards, and the A1-dev are the only execptions to this rule !
-
HeUnique wrote:
It is quite unfortunate that someone is doing such a "petition" without trying to understand Amiga's position quite well (or so the petition author seems to mis-understand).
Why the quotation marks?
By allowing anyone under the sun to ship boards with Amiga OS without any qualifications - you'll get tons of nightmares in terms of support.
But once again, that's not at all what this is about! Of course someone wanting to sell his h/w bundled with AmigaOS or use an Amiga trademark should have to get a license!
It's about allowing "anyone under the sun" to sell their hardware just as they've always done not bothering about what OS the end user uses. It's about selling AmigaOS separately from hardware for the end-user to install on any compatible hardware he likes from whomever he chooses (and it's of course up to AI/Hyperion to make the OS compatible with as much h/w as possible and announce this hardware in a HCL, it's not up to anyone else) or to nail to the wall as decoration if that's what the end user prefers!
Lets not forget one more thing - if Amiga will start selling AOS 4.0 with the plug to anyone - then maybe 50 people will buy - and the rest will copy it! I really don't think that it will be that hard to hack AOS 4.0 to work without the Amiga Inc's special ROM - so 50 will buy it, and 5000 people will copy it.
Which is exactly why the official "anti-piracy" argument is totally bogus. There's no need for the hardware vendor to provide somebody else's software protection, it'll be cracked anyway, all it does is restricting the hardware market for AmigaOS, making it a shunned curiosity, "that OS which only runs on perverted hardware". A USB dongle or whatever delivered in a separately sold AmigaOS carton would be just as good/bad protection, but it wouldn't affect our hardware choice and the market of hardware vendors.
Also, AmigaOS will actually be sold separately but only for ancient PPC accelerators for Amiga computers. How come there's no need to protect that software from piracy at all?
I really hope that Amiga Inc. will start selling AOS 4.0 soon
They won't. You'll have to buy it bundled with licensed and modified third party hardware from licensed vendors.
HeUnique eh, are you the one who rejected all stories people say they've submitted about this to /., while publishing nonsense stories about "new Amiga computers" and free pre-order/coupon/membership advertising? ;)
-
@Kronos
This is from the latest Exec. Update, direct quote including typo:
"With regards to OS 4.0, you may purchase this product separately from the AmigaOne, and it can be loaded and used on other Amiga PPC products and systems and are certified for OS 4.0"
So I think that's that then. :-P
[edit]
Oops, not quite. They clarify at the end of it too:
AmigaOS 4.0 will run on the AmigaOne and other Amiga PPC certified products... :-P
[/edit]
-
Seehund, bidding for the Tim Rue Award, wrote:
Hardware X, but in its licensed (per)version: This has to be sold bundled with AmigaOS after having been modified in "any way which the vendor chooses" (to paraphrase Ben Hermans attempt at "clarification") and after the vendor has become an Amiga Inc. licensee. Of course this also has to be more expensive than the same hardware in its normal shape, due to the licensing process and the following limited market size.
You're doing it again. You assume that if the hardware has an Amiga ROM it can only be sold to Amiga users. Apparently you also seem to think that the licensing process also increases the price of the board by a significant amount. I wonder how much
Which board is limited in the eyes of the consumer who doesn't give a crap about AmigaOS?
BEEEEPPPP! Stop right there. Who mentioned the consumer? You stated that the material was limited, not that it might be perceived as limited. Incidentally, it will only be perceived as limited if the potential purchaser can't run the software he wants on it. This has nothing to do with the OS bundled with the board. Especially at the price of the damn OS. We're not talking Microsoft pricing here, you know.
Are you saying that an abolishment of the compulsory dongling/bundling/licensing idea would be any more limiting?
WTF did you get that from? You're the one that wants the - pretty minor - copy protection scheme abolished. Abolition of any form of copy protection would lead to two things: widespread casual software theft, through recopying, and vast amounts of bad publicity for Amiga because people are trying and failing to run the OS on hardware it was never designed to run on, be it of very poor quality or quite simply never made available for testing by the OS development team.
Unless you can successfully answer this question with only hard facts and logical reasoning, you are going to bewritten off as an Idiot by many who up to now merely considered you a bit thoughtless.
That's alright, you should be used to insulting me by now... ;)
It can only be an insult if it's not true.
Remember, you are speaking to someone currently running Linux on the AmigaOne with the ROM already in place.
Oh really!? Well, I have a black bicycle with red stripes!! So what?
Ah, please make note of this, Nurse: "Refuses to understand statements which refute his own beliefs".
Alright, in words of as few syllables as possible: HOW CAN THE HARDWARE BE LIMITED IF YOU CAN RUN MORE THAN ONE OS ON IT?
Incidentally, when are you going to set up the same petition for MorphOS? So far it looks as if it will 'only' run on PPC accelerator cards and the one motherboard designed specifically to run that OS (I deduce this from the screenshots showing the words 'Pegasos BIOS extensions' in the OF screenshots from that recent demo.
Or are you prepared to concede them the right to protect their work: the same right you won't grant to Amiga/Eyetech/Hyperion?
proc PLONK_WASTER
DEFINE seehund =
SET verify = TRUE
SET ignore = ON
endproc
-
Crispy_Beef:
"it can be loaded and used on other Amiga PPC products and systems [that] are certified for OS 4.0"
AmigaOS 4.0 will run on the AmigaOne and other Amiga PPC certified products...
Which is... tadaaa! The board Eyetech will be distributing.
AmigaOS is only allowed to run on licensed hardware from licensed vendors. That sounds familiar somehow... :-P
-
anarchic_teapot:
Rose, if you can't behave like a civilised adult I don't see why you're trying to participate in discussions where people's opinions can be expected to differ from those of your own.
Being buddy with Alan Redhouse could maybe be overlooked when assessing your credibility in this particular issue, but throwing insults and ad hominem attacks over something that doesn't even concern your person removes any shred of credibility that could have remained.
I'm not biting. Take a deep breath. Read a book. If you still feel the need to spew insults, don't bother replying to the subject that somehow bothers you so much.
-
@Seehund
Read it again
...and other Amiga PPC certified products...
Yes currently only Eyetech have a license, and well done to them, but nobody is stopping any company from submitting hardware for evaluation, are they?
-
(http://www.plauder-smilies.de/krach.gif)
Getting a little out of hand, let's not get personal.
Yes there was some editing done here. :-x
-
@Seehund
I know where you are coming from, but I have to disagree. I wish you'd use your energy on a more constructive cause.
-
Getting a little out of hand, let's not get personal.
Yes, sorry about that, was considering to remove that part in hindsight anyway.
I don't normally get annoyed, but I am really wound up by people ignoring the facts.
-
Not just you, actually yours was a bit more tame than a few others:-) I just don't want this to get out of hand.
-
Seehund thinks this isn't ad hominem
Being buddy with Alan Redhouse could maybe be overlooked when assessing your credibility in this particular issue, but throwing insults and ad hominem attacks over something that doesn't even concern your person removes any shred of credibility that could have remained.
I'm sorry, but until such time as you actually answer the questions you're asked, stop trying to infer people have said things they haven't, and show some proof of logical thought, I shall continue to consider you an idiot.
Thank you for the patronising attack. It is not to your credit.
-
Allow me to reply shortly...
1. about the quotation marks in the "petition" - because IMHO it's a stupid petition - again, it's my personal opinion only.
2. As for the slashdot stories - it's not my own decision wether to post a story or not. Some times when some of the crew can post - he posts, while other times, many of the slashdot authors refuse to post stories about Amiga until some stuff will be out..
We did posted Amiga stories. Some examples:
* the Amiga screenshots
* the Amiga DE
* Review about Amiga DE
* Eyetech offer for developer boards
and quite few others - so you cannot say we ignore the Amiga.
Rest assure that once AOS 4.0 will be out - I will see that it will be posted slashdot and Hyperion and Amiga Inc's web sites will be slashdotted. be warned ;)
Hetz Ben Hamo
heunique@slashdot.org
-
Kronos dear,
May I point you to Bill's latest executive update and I quote: "With regards to OS 4.0, you may purchase this product separately from the AmigaOne, and it can be loaded and used on other Amiga PPC products and systems and are certified for OS 4.0."
As for the certification stuff - I run Office 2000 under Linux on my X86 using CrossOver office. Has it been certified by MS to run on this configuration? nope, but it runs - same thing with AOS 4.0 - you can buy it, but they're not responsible if it will run on unsupported hardware.
As for the hardware that AOS can be running - I qoute: "OS 4.0 will run on other PPC products besides the AmigaOne, like the CyberStorm and Blizzard PPC accelerator cards. That's because you, the members of The Community, with many and varied needs, wanted this support."
Got that? :)
Hetz Ben Hamo
-
Seehund, one thing that bothers me about you, is that you pretend to do something for the sake of AmigaOS. While in fact you try to destroy the reputation of the Amiga community, Amiga Inc and partners. You clearly demonstrated this with your: Proud Amiga Tradition: "Death By Mismanagement" article on OSNews.com Why else would you like to spread such an article on a general tech related website?
Personally I believe you want to weaken our oppertunity to enable a competitor to offer more competition. I believe your FUD only helps weaken the outlook for everyone within the Amiga community!
-
MikeB:
Allow me to cut'n'paste my reply to a similar post of yours on ANN:
Although admittedly a harsh wording of a headline, there's nothing FUD about it. The article wasn't demoting any product, only pointing out the flaws in the business decisions behind its future distribution, and I'm no competitor trying to promote my own product by doing so. "I am an independent AmigaOS fan and a member of the Amiga community." [As you described yourself on ANN.]
The product AmigaOS != Amiga Inc's corporate planning.
Once again: The product AmigaOS != Amiga Inc's corporate planning. The merits of AmigaOS are not those of the company named Amiga Inc. and the business decisions made in Snoqualmie, and vice versa.
A computer/software user community is not defined by the opinions on any corporate decisions that each individual in the community might have. I doubt that many people would willingly want to be part of such a "community". That wouldn't be a community, that would be a dogmatic sect founded on homogenicity by brain-washing.
"I am Amiga" indeed. :-P
Personally I believe you want to weaken our oppertunity to enable a competitor to offer more competition.
:-D
If you weren't joking, that's plain ridiculous.
Also, "we"/"our" != the commercial entity Amiga Incorporated (or any other company for that matter).
-
HeUnique:
many of the slashdot authors refuse to post stories about Amiga until some stuff will be out..
LOL! In that case the Boing-ball wouldn't have been seen on the Slashdot frontpage since OS 3.9 was released. :)
so you cannot say we ignore the Amiga.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm merely wondering why most of the later Amiga stories have been either about having a laugh at vapourware or uncritical forwarding of transparent marketing material, like all the silliness lately about "new Amiga hardware". It's not surprising that your readers bitch about vapourware and "let it die already" when they're only fed stuff like that. FYI, AmigaOS is supposed to be running on third party hardware, which unfortunately has to be distributed by licensed vendors only. There aren't and most likely will never be any plans, designs, specifications, manufacturing or sales of any hardware specifically made for AmigaOS. (And unless someone with resources like Sony or nVidia buys the Amiga trademarks, releases a cheap killer machine once again revolutionising personal computing and KEEPS it ahead of the rest, I doubt that many people actually would want a custom made "Amiga".)
-
HeUnique:
As for the certification stuff - I run Office 2000 under Linux on my X86 using CrossOver office. Has it been certified by MS to run on this configuration? nope, but it runs - same thing with AOS 4.0 - you can buy it, but they're not responsible if it will run on unsupported hardware.
Micros~1 haven't built in any code in Office that checks for hardware-license verification means in your machine. AmigaOS will be restricted to hardware that is tainted with such a mechanism.
If it weren't, then you just described what we're yearning for - sell the OS bundled with certified/licensed hardware, but for chrissake sell it separately for users to install on "unlicensed" hardware of our choice as well! We're mostly geeks, remember? Let us decide if we want the "protection" of Amiga Inc. when it comes to our hardware choices.
"OS 4.0 will run on other PPC products besides the AmigaOne, like the CyberStorm and Blizzard PPC accelerator cards. That's because you, the members of The Community, with many and varied needs, wanted this support."
Who gives a crap about ancient hacks on ancient machines? Well, many give a crap (including me ;)), but that stuff is totally irrelevant to a future for AmigaOS. And why is there apparently no need at all for any copy-protection whatsoever when the hardware isn't for sale by Eyetech?
Over 700 members of the community and newcomers publicly say they want to have the option to buy AmigaOS separately and buy whatever hardware they want from whomever they want. The way things look today, that appears to be a significant amount of potential customers for Amiga Inc.
-
We did posted Amiga stories. Some examples:
BTW, don't forget the latest embarrassing "news" item about "Linux on POP board runs Mac-On-Linux! Whoop Whoop!" (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/05/0626205) (but it was described as "New Amiga Hardware Runs Mac OS" :-D )
Now what was the purpose of that? :)
-
I used to think that nothing in this world should be nuked, and then I saw this petition. :-D
Bad petition! Baaad petition!! :hammer:
-
I think if you do a WHOIS on the ip of the petition organiser you'll see it's located at an american mental ward.
This is my indirect way of saying how much I think this Petition sux.
GO AMIGA INC !!!!!! GREAT JOB ATM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-)
-
createcoms:
I think if you do a WHOIS on the ip of the petition organiser you'll see it's located at an american mental ward.
y00 = da funney man111!!1!!
:-P
193.11.228.9
h4xx0r away.
plz fix k thx.
This is my indirect way of saying how much I think this Petition sux.
Oh. For a minute I almost thought you were talking about the petition organiser. Silly me. I guess I shouldn't ask about your feelings about all the people who endorse it, or even ask why you think it "sux".
-
Hey, It's HOT enough outside. Could we please not flame....
-
@HeUnique
Question:
If I were on of the lucky few that have a Pegasos now, would I ever
be allowed to run OS4 on it, even if bPlan sends a board to Hyperion ?
Current politics say NO !!
Even if bPlan had a licence, I still wouldn't buy the dongled version because:
It would be only available after the initial port is finished.
Or it would be the same deal like the A1-dev: "Buy HW now , MUST buy OS4
later " and I never buy anything I haven't seen/tested before.
Therefore I won't be able to run OS4.
No I haven't signed the petition, because I don't believe AInc have enough
common sense to understand what those who signed want.
If AInc/Hyperion insist that I'm not good enough to buy their SW .....
well who am I to argue ;-)
About /.
I'm really sick and tired of all these "Hyped-vapor" article I see all
over the place, and I think they are the main reason why most of your
readers tend to disbelieve everything with an Amiga-connection.
The latest OSNews-article was on of the worsts examples:
Lots of wishful thinking, (allmost) no hard facts.
Yes I know the reactions on the side were somewhat positiv, but
what will those people think when they recheck in a month or two and
find out that there still isn't anything available ?
What will they think when the next "article" is written next year, but
still nothing available ? (I would be more than suprised if OS/ A1 cames this year)
Some may even remember last years "will be there this summer", "will be there
in October","buy Party-Pack now" stuff and just say "forget it I'll get a Mac"
-
:-o
Before anybody starts... I'm not slamming MorphOS! I don't really know all that much about MorphOS. I don't have any interest in learning more unless Amiga OS 4 should fail. I am also not a member of the 'cult-of-the-name' or whatever. The fact that I support Amiga Inc.'s efforts does not mean I believe the people running the AI show can turn water into wine (I'm an atheist BTW, I only use 'biblical' references to illustrate my point). There are, I am sure, MorphOS supporters out there who do not believe Ralph Schmidt (or any of the other former phase 5 employees working on MorphOS) can walk on water.
I'm posing a hypothetical argument using some very big assumptions based on what I currently know about the MorphOS project. I could be right about these assumptions, but I could also be very wrong. It's the question that is important here and not necessarily the assumptions or implications supporting it.
:-o
Incidentally, when are you going to set up the same petition for MorphOS? So far it looks as if it will 'only' run on PPC accelerator cards and the one motherboard designed specifically to run that OS (I deduce this from the screenshots showing the words 'Pegasos BIOS extensions' in the OF screenshots from that recent demo.
anarchic_teapot raises an interesting question about the validity of Seehund's petition with regards to the "abolishment of the compulsory dongling/bundling/licensing".
AFAIK bPlan have not announced any licensing terms, OEM or retail. But it could be inferred, due to no solid information to the contrary, that the MOS crew intend MOS to run on legacy PPC accelerators and a 'proprietary' POP based PPC motherboard.
Q: Will MorphOS support any other hardware?
A: MorphOS is open to any new platform or hardware. To have support it
requires complete specs of the hardware to port the low level
hardware code.
I can see the "low level hardware code" as being a dongle. No less than that of the A1's BIOS extension. And if anarchic_teapot's observation about "Pegasos BIOS extensions" are true. This to me could further imply pBlan are no more 'open' than Amiga Inc.
IF that were true. Would the petition be changed to include the bPlan/MorphOS combination?
-
AFAIK the bPlan-BIOS-extensions only include FFS-support at boot-up
and the possibility to boot from a "disk_on_chip".
-
@Seehund
There's nothing wrong with certification.
Let’s take an example of a mainstream x86 motherboard manufacture with certification logos (my current x86 motherboard manufacture).
MSI example (http://www.msi.com.tw/html/products/certificate/main.htm)
MSI’s certification includes
1. nVidia Certified
2. MS Windows XP Certified
3. Linux Tested Certified
4. MS Windows Certified
5. ISO 14001 Certified
6. ISO 9001 Certified
Since Bill McEwen. was from Gateway, He may follow industry standard practises.
Refer
http://www.gateway.com/work/gov/resources/certs.shtml
Example of lack certification.
Apparently, my old Lucktech mobo (intel ZX440/100 chipset based) doesn’t have nVidia certification thus it doesn’t work with my old TNT2 card at X2 AGP mode (causes a driver stall while doing 3Dstuff).
(It's power brick is rated at 250 Watts.)
It also failed to run with my old Geforce 2 at X2 AGP mode (i.e. causes a stall while doing 3D stuff).
I haven’t tried it with my newer Geforce 3 128DDR...
-
There's nothing wrong with certification.
I go along with Hammer. Certification is good.
However, this isn't about certification as such. It's not even about copy-protection via the dongle. What it is about is the licensing condition that means you can't sell AOS4 separately from the hardware (with the express exceptions of the Phase5/DCE PPC boards and the A1-dev board). This licensing condition has no other purpose except to control the market and thus ensure that there is protection from competition for favoured parties.
Having said that, I'm still against the petition. I think it's pointless and counter-productive, and the only way to get bad decisions changed is to vote with the wallet.
(I think I said that before... :-P )
-
Hi,
IMO, if Amiga Inc. relied on the community to make their decisions for them, nothing would ever get done. Right now everyone would still be passionately arguing their conflicted opinions and refusing to hear anyone elses side. There would be no AmigaDE and no AmigaOne/OS4 in the pipeline. Actually, Amiga Inc. would probably of thrown in the towel by now and left us to it.
They are a small company, this is a small community. Everyone is suffering from the same desire to see the Amiga back at the top... Especially the guys at Amiga Inc. Let them do things the way they want, because hey, they're gonna anyway. There simply isn't time to listen to the ranting and raving of people that hate them for having a go. And they haven't got the funds/resources to please everyone.
Apologies to anyone who doesn't like what I've said.
-zudo
-
Hammer:
There's nothing wrong with certification.
I agree, certification is good. The petition isn't about that.
-
ShadesOfGrey:
AFAIK bPlan have not announced any licensing terms, OEM or retail.
Not AFAIK either.
And why would we who want to buy AmigaOS and want to see changed distribution policies for AmigaOS start a petition to the MorphOS team, because they might or might not do something more or less similar to what Amiga Inc. has announced? If fans of a certain model of car were to petition the manufacturer of that car to prevent the model to be discontinued, would they be obliged to start petitioning every other car manufacturer to prevent the discontinuation of every other car model in order to keep the "validity" of their original petition?
Q: Will MorphOS support any other hardware?
A: MorphOS is open to any new platform or hardware. To have support it
requires complete specs of the hardware to port the low level
hardware code.
I can see the "low level hardware code" as being a dongle. No less than that of the A1's BIOS extension.
I can see the "low level hardware code" as being just that; functional firmware code, code for handling chipsets et c., rather than hardware vendor provided extensions without a practical purpose for the functioning of the OS and hardware, like a serial number or whatnot, with no other purpose than sitting statically to be checked up on by license verification code in the OS.
But I don't know.
I doubt that MorphOS, which probably will have an even smaller initial userbase than AmigaOS, would even be considered to be limited in the AmigaOS way. If things turned out like that I could very well consider signing a petition to the MorphOS team, but that's all unlikely speculation so far. Although I'm of course open to alternatives and hope to get a chance to try e.g. MorphOS, I'm personally more interested in AmigaOS ATM, and that's what this petition is about - the announced distribution policies are for all future versions of AmigaOS.
-
zudobug:
There simply isn't time to listen to the ranting and raving of people that hate them for having a go.
I realise you're generalising, but after that I think I might have to clarify for others that I don't "hate" any company and the petition is most certainly NOT about anything even remotely like that. This is all about one issue, one single corporate decision, a stroke of the pen, that the petitioners as potential AmigaOS4+ users / Amiga Inc. customers wish to see changed to make AmigaOS a better, more attractive product and with that getting at least a chance to be successful.
AmigaOS != Amiga Inc. != the announced distribution policies for AmigaOS
I'd like to think at least that is clear by now.
Apologies to anyone who doesn't like what I've said.
Don't apologise for your opinion! :)
-
Seehund,
You're right, I was generalising. I guess it was a little unfair to post that message here as it looks like an attack on you personally, and I didn't mean that.
However, it was something I though of when reading some of the other flames and attacks (before they were edited) here.
On the subject of the petition, I haven't made a final decision one way or the other because I personally feel it is too early to tell what's really happening. At this stage I can't see Amiga Inc.'s protection system doing too much damage. It's probably best that the range of hardware available to OS4 is kept to a minimum to begin with anyway. By the time OS5 comes out and a realistic demand for hardware choice is there, a new approach may have to be adopted.
Thanks for your comments. A bit of healthy criticism never does any halm and it's good to listen to (and try to respect) contrasting opinions. And that goes for both sides. I guess that's what I've been trying to say.
All the best,
-zudo
-
Your response helps clarify the intent of the petition. I was never sure if the thrust of the petition was dealing with maintaining an 'open' POP platform or that AmigOS 4 would not run on non-certified, non-licensed, hardware.
If you are interested in keeping one, unified POP/PPC market open to all users and operating systems, with competition on equal terms, then please join us and sign the petition!
If you are interested in helping AmigaOS survive beyond a short period of license-money income and to keep AmigaOS users from being unnecessarily deprived of hardware options, then please join us and sign the petition!
I take it you're more interested in the latter goal? If so, I'm still a bit confused about the petition. Everything I know about OEM licenses (incl. The OEM Software Licensing Site (http://www.stromian.com/)) indicates that Amiga Inc.'s position is not unreasonable giiven what we know about the OEM license's terms. We haven't seen any specifics about an end user (EU) license, which is not the same as an OEM license. We can only speculate about a retail license based on what Amiga Inc. and Eyetech have said about existing and pending 'Classic' PPC solutions and the A1 (Linux boards if released and A1 dev boards). I would be willing to sign your petition if Amiga Inc.'s retail and EU licenses were unreasonable. But as I see it, the OEM license is reasonable.
I had thought your primary goal was the former. So I wanted to see if you would apply the same petition to bPlan/MorphOS IF their licensing were as 'restrictive' as Amiga Inc.'s.
You state in the introduction that you do not endorse any particular solution. But to be honest, I did retain some skepticism the petition might just be a ploy to discredit Amiga Inc. and its efforts.
Thank you Seehund for clarifying your position.
:-o
Just so I'm properly understood. I would be as skeptical of a similar petition regarding MorphOS, x86 AOS, etc. I really don't like the way the Amiga Community has become splintered by extreme factions supporting one solution to the exclusion of another. I want to avoid coming under fire from such groups and so the constant disclaimers.
-
ShadesOfGrey:
I had thought your primary goal was the former. So I wanted to see if you would apply the same petition to bPlan/MorphOS IF their licensing were as 'restrictive' as Amiga Inc.'s.
IF that indeed would be the case I would support a similar petition. But as far as we know today, and to judge from the Q/A quote you provided, no demands are to be made on hardware vendors (regardless of whether the hardware is "open" or "closed") in order to have MorphOS run on their products other than that specifications are supplied.
I'm not even sure of the relationship between bplan and the MorphOS team, and what kind of commercial entity that is. "MorphOS AG"? "MorphOS GmbH"? Is MorphOS the property of bplan? If MorphOS/bplan can be seen as one entity it would even make some kind of sense if they made Amiga Inc-like demands since they actually would be selling their own hardware in an Apple kind of way.
But again, the plans for distributing MorphOS have not been publicly presented AFAIK, and I have no reason to believe that they would do anything like this.
Amiga Inc. on the other hand has no hardware of its own, yet third party hardware vendors are expected to get licenses, provide license verification mechanisms and bundle AmigaOS. Of course that means that this "licensed" hardware is branched off from the rest of the market for the same hardware in its normal form.
Yes, you're right in that personally I'm primarily interested in AmigaOS, but naturally the size and development of and pricing in the hardware market which AmigaOS is dependent on affects AmigaOS and its users.
Thank you Seehund for clarifying your position.
No problem. :)
But OTOH, my personal opinions on anything aren't all that important in this case. I might think that AmigaOS should run on Zilog CPUs or that the Vatican should be sold to Uzbekistan. All that the petitioners have in common is that we publicly endorse only what is said in the petition. Nothing more, nothing less. That's the essence of a petition.
-
I'm not even sure of the relationship between bplan and the MorphOS team, and what kind of commercial entity that is. "MorphOS AG"? "MorphOS GmbH"? Is MorphOS the property of bplan?
R.S. owns a part of bPlan, so yes MorphOS = bPlan, but according
to the MOS-faq, they are planning to run it on the A1, and rumours
say that it allready runs on the (old version of the) TeronCX :-o :-D
The only question that remains is if the Phase5/A1-versions will
come out at the same time as the Pegasos and if they will be free
for download.
-
Yeah.... Things were so much better back in the CBM days... we could run our OS on whatever hardware we wanted to....
/sarcasm
To me, at least.... ROMS are not a problem.