Opinion Article : Amiga DE a Good Idea, Poor Execution

[bhoggett]

@JetRacer

I must congratulate you for writing the biggest pile of #?@$ I've read in a long time.

Your points have everything to do with the custom and proprietary subsystems that have been the norm on most platforms, and absolutely nothing to do with the language employed to access them.

@all

AmigaDE is dead. It looks dead. It smells dead. It's a Norwegian Blue.

This is not to say the original concept was a bad one - it wasn't - or that TAO's intent is dead - it isn't.

Disclaimer: Yes, I realise there will be people saying "how would you know? You haven't seen the confidential info regarding development", and this is true. Then again, those who do have access have signed NDAs which prevent them saying how little is actually happening. Does anyone really believe that AmigaDE development is continuing at a reasonable pace, or that you can fund and resource development on fresh air?

[bhoggett]

@Wayne

Actually, it was very clear early on that Amiga Inc. were making completely differing claims with regard to TAO's product than TAO themselves were.  I remember Francis Charig having to intervene quite early in the story to basically correct the Amiga Inc. claim that they would support 'feature X'[1] by basically saying "we don't support 'feature X' and have no plans to do so in the future".

I think it's quite clear that Bill's claim that TAO somehow misled them is a smokescreen for the fact that Amiga Inc. only understood half of what they were told, so they went ahead and made the other half up themselves. The "rift" with TAO probably started right there, long before AI ran out of funds.

[1] - 'feature X' was memory protection IIRC

[bhoggett]

@Ohno

Tao doesn't HAVE to support memory protection for it to become a reality. Amiga Inc. could still build their own OS on top of this virtual machine, which does support memory protection. Not that I think they are... but they COULD

Well, yes, but we're getting off the beaten track here. At the time we're talking about, there was no suggestion of Amiga Inc. writing their own OS from scratch, only building features on top of TAO's existing and future base. Memory protection was just something they assumed TAO would add.

@TimeWillTell

Panic is a mistake creating environment.

I think you've just summed up Amiga Inc's entire existence from inception to present day.

I have actually been amazed at Amiga's ability to survive...

They've done it by essentially hibernating. The trouble with hibernation is that it's not a productive time (by definition) and yet it still consumes available reserves, albeit at a much reduced rate.  Animals that hibernate for too long never wake up. I fear that Amiga Inc. have long since passed into a vegetative state, with recovery highly unlikely.

It's probably kinder to switch off the life support and let them pass away with whatever little dignity they have left.

[bhoggett]

@koan

Maybe AI should have concentrated on OS4.

They couldn't. OS4 was never going to attract any investment, so it was a non-starter as a business proposition.

It still is.

So, will AI only survive if DE is a success ?

It's hard to see any scenario in which AI would survive. Their goose is cooked, I fear.

Or do AI get money from Hyperion for OS4 licences;

Theoretically, they do, but they have probably already collected most of it in advance via the coupon/club/t-shirt silliness.  It's unlikely OS4 will ever sell many more copies than the number of coupons bought. In fact, I seriously doubt AI's share per copy of OS4 comes anywhere near $50, but that's just me speculating.

(Apologies to those who read my comment before I edited it. I had spelt "t-shirt" without the 'r'. A freudian slip, I assure you.)
 ;-)

[bhoggett]

@koan

If Genesi managed to make a go of it then maybe AI could have done or are you suggesting that it's a totally non viable business model and Genesi are on borrowed time too ?

That question would require a two-part answer:

(1) My opinion: both AOS4 and MOS face bleak futures as self-financing projects. If Genesi were to rely on the sales of MorphOS, I would say their future was likely to be spectacularly short.

(2) AFAIK, Genesi are nowhere near as reliant on VC for their financing. so they don't have to persuade as many people that their business model is a profitable one. I believe they are basing most of their optimism on the STB market, but in my experience that's a volatile and changeable area, where it's equally as easy to get dumped as it is to find potential partners. With STBs, not only is the equipment largely disposable, so is the software base and the partnerships involved.

There's at least one person who would consider buying OS4 who didn't get a t-shirt (or not as it turned out).

Sure, and I know there are a few who bought the coupons but have no interest in OS4. We're talking about a bigger picture than that though.

[bhoggett]

@YttriumOx

I find it interesting noone has answered AmiMonkey's question - who has actually used it?

I have two copies of the SDK, one for Windows and one for Linux. I've certainly spent some time 'using' it, but found nothing to get all that excited about. It was the concept that was more interesting than the actual implementation at this stage.

However, I refused to sign either an NDA or an SDA on the principle that I was not informed these were required until after I had parted with my money, and so in consequence I have received neither updates nor support despite being a fully registered user.  The result of that is that the two boxes have become doorstops, and the only copy of intent on my system comes from TAO - though I don't have much use for it anyway.

The question should not be how many of use have used it, but what do you use it for? What do you run on it? What does it do better than the alternatives? What real use is it to anyone?

[bhoggett]

@Ohno

Everyone is free to choose wether they sign the NDA & SDA. Personally I didn't regret my choice for a second so far. But I can understand people objecting to it and I also think Amiga Inc. could have been much clearer on what their NDA/SDA-demands before people would purchase the SDK.

My opinion of AmigaDE is not based on my beef about the NDA/SDA. It's based on my assessment of the situation, bearing in mind the information available to me.

The reason AI weren't clear about the NDA/SDA requirements is simple: they hadn't even formulated them. These were things that were made up as they went along, which is why they have given me at least four different stories about their policy at various times, pretty much all of which turned out to be BS.

However, I've noticed that everyone who says how cool AmigaDE is fails to come up with any real reason why it is cool or why it's better than any alternatives. Since I'm on the outside and will stay that way, I'd be interested to know.