Dave Haynie Talks About Developing The Commodore Amiga

[matthey]

Dave's done plenty of talking about software, which might be the core of why I resent his opinions.
Although the point about being negative about negativity sounds pretty valid.

As far as there not being any new Amiga hardware...
What's the stuff the runs OS4 (when you're not running it on modified legacy hardware)?
Then again, I don't feel like arguing that point yet again.

So you think Dave has an arrogant attitude toward AmigaOS 4 because he doesn't recognize it as a true successor to the Amiga? He has a history in and a connection to what once was a big technology leading achievement in computing. Even though the Amiga is rarely recognized, it was an early innovation in multimedia computing that sold millions. Dave has no connection to AmigaOS 4. What did AmigaOS 4 achieve? How many hundred active users are there? You have a right to your opinion but I don't agree. Dave Haynie and Bil Herd are both really kool and nice guys. It's not like they are getting rich going to these shows.

[matthey]

I could be wrong, but if I recall what I've read in the past accurately I don't think Dave doubts OS4 is a true successor. I think he just doesn't really see the point of the current path OS4 and related hardware are taking. Not that it matters, but I agree.

I also think it was the wrong path but that is easier to say now that PPC is becoming less competitive and new AmigaOS 4 hardware costs thousands of dollars and sells in the hundreds of units. Ironically, it was the arrogance of some of the people behind AmigaOS 4 that turned me off to going that route. The AmigaOS 4/MOS split and the high price of hardware also turned me off. It was never the choice of PPC although I do like 68k better.

I also think he has made comments in the past indicating that he suspects MorphOS uses or used illegally obtained AmigaOS source code, which may be Iggy's big issue with him.

I could very well be wrong however, so if anyone can correct me please do.

I heard the same. I recall that Piru challenged him on it which he basically ignored. Dave may have regretted he said it but everyone listens to a celebrity. It's not like it matters at this point anyway.

I do have this to say - I have never thought he was one to run his mouth or lie or even exaggerate. He seems very down to earth, very nice, and very well informed. If he has an issue with something I think there's probably something there.

I agree again .

[matthey]

While you all seem enamored by the "huge" developments of the past (none of which were particularly original), I stay in the present.

BTW - Maybe its just that I was never that impressed with Commodore, its hardware, or its engineers.

Those who don't learn from the past end up repeating the same mistakes. The Amiga was very innovative out of the box. The technology was amazing in 1985. The Amiga had high resolution blitter (Amiga coined the term and had patents) accelerated gfx with 4096 colors possible on screen, 4 voice stereo sound which still sounds good today and pre-emptive multitasking in a near real time OS with bitmapped graphical GUI in color. Compare this to the 1st Macintosh which came out less than a year earlier and the PC of the time.

Dave talks about the Amiga 3000+ with AGA, 68040 and AT&T DSP the engineers had ready in 1991 but C= management killed it. The Amiga engineers approached AT&T and added the DSP before Apple or Atari but C= management killed it. The AAA chip set would have been industry leading but C= management delayed it by being cheap before they killed it. Dave and another engineer were able to slip a few extra lines for video in the expansion/video slot of the Amiga 2000 fortunately as that allowed the Video Toaster to happen which C= management had nothing to do with and couldn't even figure out what kind of machine to sell for it (they cut SCSI from the 4000 which was commonly used for video hard drives and it barely had a big enough power supply). C= engineers were able to slip a few ideas past the incompetent management. The initial Jay Miner Amiga was tremendously innovative before C= bought them. What has AmigaOS 4/Hyperion innovated? What patents do they hold? What OS features have never been done before?

[matthey]

"with little or no serious upgrades" - funny, most A.org posters would object to that, but I'd agree. Dave and company's enhancements were minor.

I agree with that and I think Dave Haynie would also. C= management had their heads somewhere in a dark place that doesn't smell good. They didn't understand the technology they bought and owned. They didn't know what to do with it. Computers before that were generally created and then upgraded and/or cost reduced and then went on to a whole new design. Many of the engineers did see the potential though. They created the hardware of the future in many cases only to have it stopped by management and budget shortfalls (also management's fault). The engineers were frustrated. Jay Miner was not happy with what happened to the Amiga either. He wanted to make upgrades. Very few of the original engineers survived the C= purchase and relocation. Dave doesn't talk about this because he wasn't there yet. I wish Bil Herd would have given some more C= history before Dave and the reasons why he left when he did.

Edit - Then again, looking back over my posts, my attitude in this thread has been pretty fecal eyed.
I like old Sun systems for similar reasons, and they didn't invent a great deal of their earlier technology either.

The Amiga is pretty special even it ultimately did not live up to it's potential. Don't blame the Amiga/C= engineers for it's failures though.

[matthey]

It is worth noting, though, that he didn't address Piru's post.

Dave Haynie didn't address Piru's post on amiga.org but he did make some follow up statements on amigaworld.net:

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=33564&forum=25&start=540&viewmode=flat&order=0#611325

hazydave wrote:

More importantly, the MorphOS guys have always vehemently denied that they stole any code.

The MorphOS project came from Phase V... after Phase V ended, former employees started up BPlan (eg, "Plan B"), who eventually merged with a couple folks from Thendic France to form Genesi.

Now, I do not have direct personal knowledge of all MorphOS sources. But back when Phase 5 was working on their "C Exec" and other things, starting to re-create AmigaOS themselves in the mid-1990s, I was working with Andy Finkel at Amiga Technologies. The Phase 5 guys were really after AT to use tome of their stuff (and pay them, natch). Andy did a code review of the C Kernel, and found it was copied from AmigaOS source code. In fact, even the comments were copied, assembler to C.

Maybe MorphOS is clean, maybe not. Maybe no one actually knows. But that's such a transgression, I wouldn't trust anyone involved in Phase 5, or any code that can be traced back to Phase 5.

And:

hazydave wrote:
@itix
They still don't understand clean room development. If you have seen the Amiga source code, you cannot produce a legally separate work-alike. So any copied comments are absolute proof that the code is dirty. And they're not rejecting my claim, if you go back into those linked documents, that the comments were copied.

Point in fact -- I just don't care about MorphOS. It's not AmigaOS, it might as well be Windows for all I care. If you like it, I'm pretty certain at this point no new legal entanglements are going to happen.  If the MorphOS people would like to swear in public that not a line of code or comment is copied from the AmigaOS sources or derived from the Phase 5 code (fruits of a poisonous tree, in legal terms), I will not mention MorphOS again.

Personally, it doesn't matter as whoever owns the Amiga technology isn't using it (was the Amiga Inc. transfer quid pro quo?). Even if the MOS developers did copy the sources, it's like stealing from a dumpster. I hope they make good use of anything they have been able to save.

It is not always so simple. A failed research project could drain all money out of the company and Amiga didnt boom until Amiga 500 was launched in 1987. In Amiga history 1987 is quite late.

It did take a while for the Amiga to become popular as the price was high but C= was still making a lot of money off the C64 and paying it's high level executives millions as Haynie mentioned in the speech.

[matthey]

By the way... AmigaOS 4 is toxic. AmigaOS 4 is poisoned by developers who have seen MorphOS and AROS source code. I dont know if any of MorphOS developers have seen AmigaOS source code but I know that RJ Mical has seen AmigaOS source code and did consult MorphOS developers long ago. But it doesnt end there. AmigaOS developed at Commodore was poisoned by developers who had seen source code from other operating systems and ideas were adopted to AmigaOS.

But hazydave's view are understandable. He is not a software guy and he is just wrong about everything software related.

I wouldn't say Dave is wrong about everything software related but his comment was ill advised because:

1) he is not a lawyer
2) he probably didn't really know
3) he doesn't seem to really care

It's not his legal battle. The Amiga is already dead in his eyes. As Bil said, "The dead may never die." In my eyes, any companies or individuals that loot the dead C= and try to do something good with what they salvage are much better than scum companies like Amiga Inc. that try to make as much money as possible and care nothing about the intellectual property. I wish there was a law that any software that is not updated in 7 years would become free.

But Amiga had not been proven successful.

True, but I believe the Amiga sales were increasing at least (with very little advertising). It was a tough economy to sell a high priced home computer into. The video game industry had recently collapsed and the price of computer hardware had plummeted. Early Macintosh sales were not good either. Many users stayed with the cheap old 8 bitters that had an abundance of cheap software and waited for the prices to fall and new software for the next generation computers. There was a question at the time whether high end computers were viable and could be profitable at all. C= was better at cost reducing the cheaper designs like the C64. They put Atari out of business (no bankruptcy but it was sold cheap). Apple was saved by a niche in education with the Apple II. The Apple IIgs outsold the Macintosh despite being released in September 1986.