Pegasos Gothenburg Show 2002 announced

[Seehund]

"This is a first announcement of the first showplace of the Pegasos-computer in Sweden and in Scandinavia.

Pegasos Gothenburg Show 2002 will be held on Sunday 22 September. On the show you will se Pegasos demonstrated and working for the first time here. Pegasos is a dual G3/G4/G5 MicroATX computer. At the moment it is possible to run either MorphOS or Linux operating system on it. Organizer of the event is GGS-Data in co-operation with Thendic-France and betatesters of Pegasos from Sweden. Thendic as well as other important persons behind the Pegasos will join the show. More information will follow soon. Welcome !

Gunne Steen for GGS-Data"

Source: ANN.lu

[Seehund]

samface:

The Pegasos is delivered with an OS that runs AmigaOS applications. It's also a POP-based piece of hardware that would be able to run new versions of AmigaOS.

The demo is organised/sponsored by an Amiga dealer (and possibly an Amiga user group? Hey AmiGBG, what's the deal?)

It's Amiga news plain and simple. No, it's not Amiga Inc. news, but only allowing that would make for a damn boring web site, there's already http://www.amiga.com for that. Just posting news about software and hardware that is using an Amiga trademark would be equally boring.

This is interesting to more Amiga/AmigaOS users than news about bugs in CDE, Zaurus reviews, yet another MSIE bug and things like that which have been posted during the last couple of days without you complaining.

But then, my opinion is that the Pegasos is a parasite on the Amiga market and only does damage to the *real* attempt to revive the Amiga.

There is no attempt to revive the Amiga. Thank heavens! The Amiga is dead. The only Amiga computer market there is is the one for used machines. AmigaOS will run on whatever third party hardware that gets distributed by a vendor who is interested in a license. You can't have missed this, can you? The "AmigaOne G3SE" board is such a  piece of hardware and Eyetech is such a distributor (notwithstanding that with the compulsory licensing/bundling lunacy the prospects of seeing other hardware and vendors are unfortunately bleak).

My suggestion is try doing it like the professionals, like the webmaster of Microsoft.com would have done. It's simple logic, two competing products trying to reach the very same market segment is bound to cause a conflict of interest.

If Wayne would ever decide to only allow news and discussion about one of the two competing products (which there are not two of, the number is theoretically infinite, it's just hardware, maybe you're referring to the tired old "AmigaOS versus MorphOS" thing?), then amiga.org no longer serves as a community forum and news site, then it's a marketing channel for one company. So far this is amiga.org - not amigainc.org, mai.org, eyetech.org or bplan.org.

Microsoft.com might be a "professional" web site, but it's a corporate web site, this is not.

Besides, I'm also interested in Playstation2 games, should I post the latest news from Sony here as well?

Go ahead. If the moderators think that people would be interested, so be it.

[Seehund]

Sharakmir:

The demo is organised/sponsored by an Amiga dealer (and possibly an Amiga user group? Hey AmiGBG, what's the deal?)

Seehund: AmiGBG has nothing to do with the Pegasos event on the 22nd of September in Gothenburg.

Nothing at all.

Thanks for the clarification. I just wondered since GGS cooperates on the A1 demo at the same place the day before.

[Seehund]

samface:

1:
a) AmigaOS has nothing to do with the POP standard? No sh!t, here I was thinking that AmigaOS was hardware! I had even planned to buy a new case for my AmigaOS. Thanks for straightening that out.
b) The mobo Eyetech is buying has everything to do with POP.
c) There is no hardware standard defined by Amiga Inc. Zico? Hah! "Ummm, it's like... like a computer, y'know. CPUs and stuff. And a next generation Matrox card, that's mighty important."

2:
No, MorphOS is not AmigaOS. Did I say that? I said that it runs AmigaOS apps, and this is one of the reasons to why AmigaOS users could be interested in news about the Pegasos, as that happens to run MorphOS.

3:
Yes the Amiga came from one company that made both the hardware and the software, and now there will be no more Amiga computers. Get over it and be happy that AmigaOS has finally thrown away its custom-made hardware shackles that dragged it down into computer oblivion. (It's just too damn bad that the shackles are being put back again, but not for technical reasons this time.)
What, are there Evil People Out There illegally labelling their hardware "Amiga" without anyone but you knowing about it? Have you told Amiga Inc. about this?


An offensive comparison for the "trademarkists" maybe, but totally unscientifically I think there are more people in the community who are interested in news about desktop PPC hardware and associated OSs, using The Trademark or not, than there are people interested in news about a "content layer" using The Trademark for handheld devices. Just a wild guess, based on that the community consists of people running desktop computers, not handheld devices.

[Seehund]

NEWS ITEM UPDATE

If anyone is still reading this, there's now a web site set up about this show/demo:

www.pegasos.org

[Seehund]

samface:

He, he... This will be almost too easy... >

What do you mean? It sounds like you're more interested in a quarrel or some kind of competition than a discussion.

Of course I was referring to the fact that just because AmigaOS supports one certain piece of hardware that is *based* on a POP design, that doesn't mean AmigaOS is an OS made for running POP hardware.

Not necessarily, no. Evidently it'll run on as diverse hardware as a POP board, two kinds of PPC-68k hacks for Amigas and possibly a modified Mac accelerator PCI card. But it still means that it runs on a piece of POP hardware, and thus there are no particular technical difficulties to make it run on other POP based hardware. Ignoring the licensing and so on, we all know that AmigaOS is not being tied to any special piece of hardware, one of the goals with OS4 is to make the OS as abstracted from hardware as possible and instead have it targeting an easily portable HAL, how else are new licensees supposed to be attracted...
We also already know that there would be no technical problems to have AmigaOS run on a Pegasos, or at least that is what whoeveritwas from Hyperion said. Add to that T Frieden's words about expecting a porting time of the HAL to new hardware to be a week to a week and a half.

But anyway, Pegasos news belong on amiga.org.

They bought a design and modified it on order to suit their purposes, the fact that it is originally a POP design is irrelevant and still doesn't turn the AmigaOS into a POP OS.

No, they buy ready-made boards. I don't even want to think of the end-customer price if that hadn't been the case! Eyetech has nothing to do with any hardware design on a scale larger than little solderjobs like a PS/2 mouse adapter and an IDE-splitter for Amigas. And who says AmigaOS or any other OS is a "POP OS"? AmigaOS will run on whatever potentially compatible hardware there is that becomes licensed.

But anyway, Pegasos news belong on amiga.org.

Of course I wasn't refering to the Zico specification. I was talking about their AmigaOne licensing scheme

Then you should have written that, instead of "...does NOT mean that the AmigaOne standard specified by Amiga Inc. has anything to do with the POP standard.". The licensing has nothing to do with standards, why would you even think of comparing a SW-distribution/trademark licensing scheme with a hardware design standard?

Can you see the difference between AmigaOS and *an* Amiga OS? Yet another pathetic attempt to make me look stupid by implying that I'm saying something completely different...

Well, I can see the textual difference, but would you care to explain what you mean by "an Amiga OS"? An OS running on Amigas? Well, both AmigaOS, Linux and MorphOS run natively on Amigas. But what does that have to do with new hardware? I'm not implying or attempting anything regarding yourself, I'm saying that Pegasos news are interesting to many people reading amiga.org.

No but for compatibility and hardware partnership reasons, you know those boring little details every OS developer must go through in order to be a complete platform instead of just software...

There is no need for hardware "partnerships", and compatibility is up to the software developer to ensure. And yes, by all means, sell licensed hardware, but it's embarrassingly stupid to make compulsory licensing and bundling a requirement to have your software running on a piece of hardware. There is no "complete platform" anymore. There is AmigaOS and there is hardware.

But anyway, Pegasos news belong on amiga.org.

Good thing the new Amiga will be a combination of both then since that will satisfy everyone, right?

There will be no new Amiga.
AmigaOS 4 will not have a DE-player/AA/AACE.
AmigaOS 5, which is a hypothetical paper concept at the moment, will and can not be based on the DE or anything from Tao.
The DE (no, not the DE-player/AA/AACE) is an even more vaguely defined hypothetical concept.




But anyway, Pegasos news belong on amiga.org.

[Seehund]

@samface:

Why would you have a petition about the new Amiga if there won't be one?

I don't know of any such petition. There is however a petition about the distribution policies for future versions of AmigaOS.

Why do you claim that there won't be any AmigaDE for the AmigaOS?

(I said AmigaOS 4.) *I* wasn't claiming that, Bill McEwen is. I based my statement on that.

Why do you keep saying things that only an employee of Amiga Inc. could possibly know, such as the AmigaOS5/DE beeing just a vague concept?

AmigaOS 5 does not exist and is most likely not in development yet (apart from the DE components, if such indeed will be included), as that would require at least a finished AmigaOS 4, more likely 4.5. OS5 is a hypothetical concept, and until it's in development it's a hypothetical concept on paper.

The DE is a concept, and IMO it's extremely vaguely defined.

Simple as that. You didn't read any of the links?

What you can't see doesn't exist, right?

Whatever you can't see but can read announcements about its planning in marketing must be tangible reality or even feasible, right?  :- P

why does it "belong" on Amiga news sites

A bunch of people have repeatedly told you their arguments for this. Scroll around.

why would I not consider them an enemy of Amiga?

I assume you mean Amiga Inc.
Well, it's up to you of course. It's just that it generally makes people queasy to see someone muster all his/her might to fight what s/he feels is an "enemy" of a commercial entity. Others usually say "competition" and "options", even if they're economically affiliated with either commercial entity.

No, they buy ready-made boards. [...] Eyetech has nothing to do with any hardware design [...]

Stop making up lies about the AmigaOne, from Eyetech's AmigaOne FAQ:

[snip: Eyetech says the A1G3SE is not 100% identical to the TeronCX]

That's official.

What are you trying to say? I never said the "AmigaOne G3SE" was identical to the TeronCX. I said the A1 is not designed by Eyetech, and that they buy a ready-made board. Where's the lie, and what's this got to do with the newsworthiness of Pegasos or any potentially AmigaOS compatible hardware for that matter?

Amiga Inc. wants to create a new platform they call the AmigaOne.

I don't know what they want other than what they have announced publicly, and that does not include any plans for an "AmigaOne platform", unless you refer to the old "AmigaOne/Zico" crap. "AmigaOne" is a trademark used by one licensed distributor for the piece of hardware it's distributing. Nothing more and nothing less.

They want to be able to provide their customers with a complete product, not just the software. They do this by cooperating with hardware manufacturers and *anyone* is free to apply for an AmigaOne distribution license, hardware manufacturers as well as dealers. They think that this will bring the customer a certain quality experience adding more value to the name "Amiga".

The only product provided (well, marketed) by Amiga Inc. is AmigaOS (ignoring the DEAAAACE stuff).
Funny choice of words there, "cooperating". There's a marketing director position open in Snoqualmie...
AmigaOS is dependent on hardware. If you sell a piece of software like AmigaOS you cannot under any present circumstance impose any restrictions on its possible hardware base. As I said before, go ahead with licensing, but it simply MUST NOT be a requirement for seeing absolutely essential ports of AmigaOS to more hardware. There is no need for any compulsory licensing/bundling/dongling requirements to get the little "cooperation" (a hardware sample and documentation) you need to make your software running on a piece of hardware. The compulsory licensing et c. is an obstacle against such "cooperation".
"Free to apply for a license"? Well, anyone is free to put their hands into a meatgrinder too, that doesn't mean anyone is going to do it without a sufficiently large incentive.
Even if someone came along and licensed some new hardware, it would still mean that only the licensed version of this hardware would be available only via this licensed channel for AmigaOS users. All this is in effect a very serious flaw in AmigaOS - not for technical reasons, but because of short-sighted greed and politics.
If they want to add "value" from hardware to the Amiga brand, they'd better start making their own hardware, and then it must be cheaper, better and faster than other desktop consumer hardware. This is not happening. The Amiga brand isn't gaining anything, AmigaOS is instead once again becoming known as "that dinky little OS that only runs on special hardware from special vendors", even though there is no technical reason for this. Sure, sell licensed hardware using the "AmigaOne" trademark, only the licensed hardware would be connected to the precious "Amiga" name, but it's insanity to NOT have the OS ported to as much hardware as possible and sell separate copies as well.


But anyway, Pegasos stories have their place on amiga.org.

[Seehund]

samface wrote:

It's just so sad to see how the Amiga community has become such an easy victim for this kind of marketing scam...

[Seehund]

samface:

Repeat after me: Buying a motherboard design from a hardware designing company and then modifying it for your purposes is not the same thing as bying a ready made board.

I'd gladly repeat that, since it's a true logical relation. It is however not what Eyetech has done and it has no bearing on anything that we're "discussing" here... :- P

You know, the one Eyetech made on their own but couldn't use because Escena blahblahblah

Please. That's a "severely contrafactual description of history", to put it mildly! I see that AmiGR is trying to help you get it straight in another post.

Furthermore, drop this whole "Bill McEwen said" crap, you know just as well as I that his reply wouldn't be the same today.

I thought they only changed directions every six months or so? McEwen said this 3 weeks ago. Or are you saying that he 1. didn't know what he was talking about, 2. misspoke, or 3. lied? I see no reason for alternative 3 at least, so I suppose you once again feel it's your duty to make up excuses on the fly for the blunders of a commercial company and its executive employees.

And then, stop speculating about the AmigaOS5 and the AmigaDE. Just because they haven't told *you* about the details yet, does that mean that their plans in their office in Snowqualmie has to be "vague"? No.

No, but they have had since January 3rd, 2000 (or rather, since when they discovered that Elate could not be used as a basis for a desktop computer, let alone server, OS)  to explain in a less vague way what they will be doing and selling One Of These Days. I say that what's been presented so far regarding the DE is a vague concoction of virtually meaningless buzzwords aimed at .com investors. My opinion. Unless I have misunderstood you, you personally put your full trust to this marketing and thinks of it as the future for AmigaOS? When were you told all the "details"? My "speculations" are based on what's been publicly announced and said, what are your "speculations" based on? Hope? The belief of the inherent supernatural powers of a certain trademark and the competence, capabilities and Good Intentions(TM) that this trademark automatically brings to whomever that happens to own it at a certain time?

The "AmigaOne" trademark is a property of Amiga Inc. and they have defined it as hardware that has been ensured to run AmigaOS. Your definition mentioned in your post simply isn't true.

OK then,  "'AmigaOne' is a trademark currently used by one licensed distributor for the piece of hardware it's distributing. Nothing more and nothing less." It has nothing to do with hardware design, standards or specifications.

They've decided to only make support for the hardware manufacturers willing to cooperate ...

There you go with that damn "cooperate" again. It's not healthy to swallow marketing that uncritically. Compulsory licensing/bundling/dongling is not a prerequisite for cooperation, it's EVIDENTLY an obstacle against cooperation.

You obviously don't have the capacity to comprehend their motive for this but yet you seem to be confident enough to challange their decission.

How utterly sad and embarrassing. I can imagine the fit of blinding trademark-induced rage you were in when you wrote that.

Aren't we lucky then that you are around to parrot press releases and marketing so we know everyone's true motives.

"Microsoft innovates. Mac users think different. Read my lips: no new taxes. Compulsory hardware licensing/bundling/dongling protects us, stops piracy and is necessary for cooperation." What a simple world we live in, where we don't have to think by ourselves, never read between the lines, believe all marketing and never have to form our own opinions and come to our own conclusions.

F*ck, that trademark is truely powerful.

Tell me, how come you think you know these things better than them? I've asked you this so many times without getting even as much an attempt to reply as you prefer to ramble on about your own vision on how you would have done things if you were the owner of the Amiga. Please, can't you even try giving me a reason for why I should listen to you at all?

WTF??? What the heck does it matter to you whether I'm a truck driver and a fired marketing executive or a Harvard MBA and a MIT CS PhD? Read or don't read what I say and judge BY YOURSELF damnit! There's no "impartial" force out there that will tell you whether anyone is right or wrong. If you want to listen to me is entirely up to you, although I'd appreciate if you'd do it if you're going to bother replying. I don't care who you are (unless you're affiliated with any of the discussed parties), I judge your(?) ideas after what you write and say and compare it to my own ideas.
By your odd reasoning we should ask why anyone should listen to you? Because you can repeat marketing material? I'm not asking, I don't care. I already listen to you, as I'm replying to what you say.

But anyway, Pegasos is not an Amiga computer.

Amiga computers: A1000, A500, A2000, A1500, A3000, A600, A4000, A1200... - Requiescat In Pace, damnit!

(Edit: misc. )

[Seehund]

1. You claim that Eyetech only buys ready made boards for redistribution as AmigaOne computers. Their official FAQ says differently and therefore I find your statement to be of little credibility.

The link/quote you provided said that the A1 is not identical to the TeronCX. I AM NOT ARGUING WITH THAT. Eyetech are buying boards from the same manufacturer that supplies Mai with theirs. JUST AS ALAN REDHOUSE HIMSELF HAS SAID SEVERAL TIME IN PUBLIC BOTH ON THE A1 MAILINGLIST AND ELSEWHERE.

I just can't understand why you're so pathologically fixated with this. There's nothing "ugly" about buying ready-made boards you know. It's just hardware, a commodity, like a Pegasos or a Mac or a ASUS mobo or WHATEVER. Get over it, please!

2. You claim to know unofficial secrets about Amiga Inc.'s AmigaDE plans, supposedly told to you by Bill McEwan in person just three weeks ago.

What the F*CK are you BABBLING about? I never made any such claims! Stop reading what you THINK people say and instead read what they say.

Bill McEwen said this in the interview held at AmiWest on July 27th and the whole damn Internet had the possibility to hear it, I spent several hours typing out transcripts of what was being said partially to avoid idiocy like this, I gave you the link in a post above, and you come with crap like this?

You don't read or absorb what anyone writes but you gladly reply anyway, you don't read the news and public statements you talk about, you can't be bothered to follow provided links to those statements, regarding both technical and legal issues you repeatedly appear to be less than clued-in, you uncritically repeat marketing material instead of providing reasoning of your own as arguments, you throw around childish Slashdot-like or Amiga-vs.-Atari-in-1987 crap like "the enemy", "parasite on the Amiga market"... All THIS actually makes the question "why the hell should anyone listen to you?" quite valid.

3. You also claim that the AmigaOne license has nothing to do with hardware design, standards or specifications. Once more that is untrue since a piece of hardware must be *ensured* to be AmigaOS4 compatible before beeing able to label itself as an AmigaOne computer.

BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HARDWARE DESIGN, STANDARDS OR SPECIFICATIONS! I don't claim that, it's just the way it is. "AmigaOne" is a trademark. If someone licenses a PowerMac G4 and gets to use the "AmigaOne" trademark, this changes nothing about the hardware. You want that in bold and pretty colours too? One person says one thing and you start arguing about something completely different, it never fails, and it's getting damn tiresome.
AmigaOS 4 or even Exec for PPC did not exist in any executable shape or form when the "AmigaOne G3SE" was announced as being licensed hardware, neither did it exist during the "AmigaOne-1200/4000" fiasco, and neither did it exist when the "forthcoming" "AmigaOne XE" was announced, and now it also appears like the Open Firmware in the TeronCX/A1 "has" to be replaced by a version of PPCBoot.

The trademark has sweet f*ck all to do with anything relevant regarding hardware functionality.

OK, go ahead and waffle about lies or whatever. I don't care anymore and this thread is finished as far as I'm concerned. At least don't hold your personal credibility and integrity in lower regard than your imagined duty to provide excuses for and defense of some marketing. It's sickening and humiliating.

[Seehund]

According to the U.S. law, that would be true if it wasn't for the fact that it's use is infringing on Amiga Inc.'s IP. Don't believe me? I'll give you a court case for reference, if you like.

Please do! Please do! PLEEEASE! You won't find anything like that even in an atrocity like the DMCA, let alone in US Code, let alone in any EU legislation.

It could be stated in a contract like an EULA, but it isn't.

Oh well, maybe it'll keep you busy for a while.