CGX 4 and P96 SDK

[wawrzon]

@fats: thats actually four words.
but yes, i suppose so. dont know much of aros but the cgx system is said to be api compatible. i do not understand why none takes look at it.

[wawrzon]

RTG on 68k is at a dead end.

neither you will convince me on this nor i will try to prove the contrary. improving 68k may be a objectively a waste of time yet some are interested in this. you will have to live with it.


and i do not believe the former amiga devs are ars*s jusst because theý refuse to release something for free. it is their good right to do so. even now there might be interested parties who would like to license from them for money although not very likely so why are they not allowed to stick to their ip?

anyway cooperation between aros and 68k might be fruitful for both, not to mention other branches.

[wawrzon]

Why is everything so closed ?
Most stuff haven't been used for 10 years, isn't used anymore... but still, it must be kept secret

I guess I'll never understand... I know it's their IP and they can do whatever they want. But since it could help and interest people I don't get why it's not released for free... They'd have nothing to lose by doing so.

ok. right, but lets stop blaming people. this will not change their minds. this way is closed. better think of constructive ideas.

@karlos: exactly.

[wawrzon]

@karlos: isnt it how aros handle it? if you mention its gfx systeb above hal?

the reason of this thread if im not mistaken is that over at eab cosmos puts together his graphics.library replacement. he intends to incorporate gfx support directly into it. i dont know if this is a good idea in first place. i also do not know how he wants to accomplish it. one library for all seems a little bloathed idea. hardware and hw acceleration should be specifically handled by system specific drivers i believe. but i have actually no knowledge of this.

[wawrzon]

It's because they are arses, that's what I'm saying :laughing:

please go ahead, yourself.

[wawrzon]

Exactly, this is also why I suggest not supporting any of them.

 Not quite correct. There's a trade-off since lots of software doesn't work on RTG, and also because many got graphics card in order to run certain software.

 Yes, so someone has to reinvent the wheel yet again, since the two previous wheel inventors are such arses :laughing:

wasnt there something like that certain company, product of which i use, have incorporated p96 into support of their product without paying licences in the end? if so i could actually understand tobias alone because of that. since giving away his ip might be used for further support of the product in question and thereby justify injustice that happend to him.

[wawrzon]

well, not likely but lets assume some third party mad activist like cosmos suddenly issued a proper driver?

[wawrzon]

open pci?

[wawrzon]

according to this thread openpci supports mediator at least partly:
http://www.a1k.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18257

(the thread is in german but note benjamins quotes are in english if you scroll down)

i ve nerver seriously tried it but there should be several drivers that work, but no gfx card.

also i know at least one 3rd party developing (experimental) drivers for mediator like for scsi adapter and such. ive ben asked to test it although have had no time yet. i dont know what agreement this is based on.

[wawrzon]

OpenPCI doesn't support mediator.




The obvious reason Elbox doesn't want this is that they sell expensive kits of (modified) common PC hardware and drivers tied to this hardware. OpenPCI would kill this market for them.

this is dumb tactics of course, they most likely would sell much more units if there were more pci drivers for different extentions writen by 3rd party devs

[wawrzon]

they might be selling rebranded microwaves as we speak

(dont underestimate us, polish people)

[wawrzon]

@arnljot: the thing is that chris has set this bounty himself. and it was wegetating for quite some time filled to one fourth or so and if not deadwood's initiative and the current of hype it generated for its crazyness it woulddnt probably be met till today.

it doesnt seem that p96 or cgx ip holders are ready to accept such a bounty. most possibly for the reasons karlos was already talking about.

nevertheless i would support such a bounty (if it was sure to be fulfilled, like in chris' case), i think.

[wawrzon]

yet again karlos is completely right

[wawrzon]

@platon42: cool idea, but is there anyone who knows him personally?

otherwise, gulliver, while you are at it..