MorphOS Milestone: 2000+ licenses sold

[OlafS3]

Sure, I didnt mean to suggest that the MOS developers shouldnt be making a few dollars back for their efforts, but nonetheless it is a lot of money for a license, which is a bit of a barrier for many people. It was intended more as a positive in regards to users though. There's more users (albiet some casual due to lack of a license) than the "number of registrations/2.5-ish" formula people seem to be using.

Also, not important, and I dont mean to instigate any sort of vs. nonsense, but the slight OCD in me cant refrain,.....



Thats stretching it a bit. AROS "wins" in terms of available hardware, performance, and prices. It also has some nice features thus far lacking in MOS, so "best features" is in the eye of the beholder.

+1

We should not play the "my choice is the best in everything" game because finally people could realize that this is not the case. I could then talk about a platform that is dependent on PPC or it would loose many of its advantages (when it is ported to another hardware platform). I am excited to see what the MOS team decides, staying on a aging hardware or port it to ARM or X86/X64 (with all problems that this causes including the huge needed efforts to do it). Lets say MorphOS might be (I cannot judge that) best platform on PPC.

[OlafS3]

While I'm sure AROS is nice and fun (especially for its developers), it's fundamentally different from both MorphOS and OS4, and obviously not really what the majority of the people who opts for either MorphOS or OS4 are looking for (had it been, then they simply would have used AROS instead).

Perhaps a bit off topic also...

Perhaps might be that they have decided for one platform and stick to it (MorphOS or AmigaOS). The most users have left all platforms over the years, the remainders have their favorite.

[OlafS3]

Exactly, I use Windows for work as many I suppose, Mac at home and while I did all the settings you spoke about in the old days (I even wrote the first program that remove borders around icons, because I didn't like them, check Aminet). Now I'm maybe too old to do that kind of things, it's the same as configuring computers, repairing them, same for the OS, I'm kind of lazy today, it doesn't interest me anymore. I just expect things to work well. Even a friend of mine tried the Amiga recently using a Raspberry PI and he didn't remember how to use one and was surprised that the UI didn't evolved since 3.1. (again first contact). One thing also that make me hold back buying Morphos and I can't explain it, is the fact that AmigaOS 4 is an evolution of the "real" Amiga OS. It's kind of important to me that code and design from Mike Sinz, RJ Mical, Andy Finkel, Dale Luck, Randell Jesup etc is present there because they were our gods.  You tend to minimize the importance of the first impression.   One more thing, developers are vital and good documentation is the first step, wiki.amigaos.net seems to be the way to go, it seems that http://library.morphzone.info/Main_Page is not as complete but I might be wrong. Kamelito

that kind of "heritage" seems to be important to the "AmigaOS" community, as the used themes, icons and naming. But it is not important to the outside. I had contact to former amiga developers who were very disappointed about the direction AmigaOS took and left the community (one even warned me to start with amiga and said he is more happy now without). If these visual elements and old sources are all AmigaOS will have no future.

[OlafS3]

Go MorphOS! The Amiga solution hobbyists can actually afford!

(And this is not a slam against AROS, as I have machines for both.) But profit is incentive for work to progress and AROS, as an open source solution, has less reason to move forward.

Keep up the good work, guys.

I gratulate MorphOS team too

(I take it as sign of honor that people now all the time compare it to AROS :-) ).

[OlafS3]

Well, to be honest, AROS' greatest strength is it's wealth of available platforms. It's greatest weakness, OTOH, is that it is open source. MHO, of course. To me, the difference is that open source gets done it gets done, whereas for profit gets done _when it's needed,_ although not always as well as open source. Now, not to dis MorphOS, but if AROS were for profit, we'd probably have as good a solution -- including 68k compatibility-- as MorphOS and many more licenses...

that is offtopic again

but to respond... to say that AROS is less advanced/progressed as MorphOS is generally said not true. It is true that both OSs have their strength and weaknesses and there are differences regarding 68k integration (that are unavoidable). What the MorphOS team members always understood is that it is more important to have a stable, bugfree OS with a decent desktop to "sell" it (motivate people to use it). On Opensource "selling" it is not that important, instead people implemented features they wanted to have like MESA/Gallium. Desktop was always the weakest point but that will be solved with Magellan. So we should talk again after Magellan used as base for the distributions in a couple of months.