The AmigaOne is NOT "just a Teron board"!

[Loki1]

I love a good pissing contest!

This is like which came first the chicken or the egg!

Who gives a ####!

Loki

[Tigger]

Glaucus wrote:

I must ask how you are so confident about the above quote.  Just because a MB has the same chipset and feature set does not mean it's the same MB.  Unless you've had all the MBs side by side and performed exhaustive tests to compare their performance and reliability then you really can't say what you are saying above.

You dont have to compare them with exhaustive testing when they are the same board/artwork.   The press release from Teron is pretty cut and dry.   The board shown at Linuxworld is the same shown as an "Amiga One" at WOASE, they may have different BIOS/Bootprom (Fleecy says it does, but I trust fleecy less then the distance I can throw his punk ass around), but Eyetech didnt design or manufacture the board.      Buy them, change proms (maybe) sell them, thats what they do.  
     -Tig

[Tigger]

samface wrote:

Which part has confused you into thinking differently? The part where it says that they will distribute boards *based* on the Teron CX/PX design?

Hint: When something is "based" on another, it's actually indicating that it's not entirely the same.

Double Hint, it doesnt say that it says:

"...distribute production systems based on the Teron CX and PX designs to the Amiga market worldwide."

triple hint, it says production systems not boards.  
       -Tig
 

[samface]

Eyetech is "just" a distributor of Mai Logic's products. Eyetech, or other distributors, have nothing at all to do with design, development or upgrading of the boards.

Explain to me this:

1. How come the improved revision of the MAI Teron CX design didn't show up on MAI's homepage until 2 months after the Teron CX *based* AmigaOne design?

2. How come MAI accepts Eyetech giving out this as official information on their website? I mean, they even has links to Eyetech's website on their own, don't tell me they haven't noticed.

3. Hasn't even Bill McEwan himself declared you a liar already? I read three or four "untrue" statements from him as a reply to your FUD about them and their licensing policies in an interview on ExtremeTech recently. He also said that he will "set the record straight" and reply to that statement you made in their forums. Perhaps you should stay low for a while before you have that reply? I mean, atleast you know that they've heard you now so there's no need to keep shouting about it anymore.

[samface]

it says production systems not boards.

..and the difference is? Meaning?

[Seehund]

ksk wrote:

If TeronCX specs have changed to meet AmigaOneG3-SE specs ... it just shows that AmigaOne is a evolution of the original TeronCX and MAI decided to produce only the improved version in the future...

"Old" TeronCX = "Old" AmigaOne G3SE
"New" TeronCX = "New" A1 G3SE, as per the specs officially listed by Eyetech

And?
"AmigaOne" is a trademark used by one distributor for his dongled Teron boards. There's no  evolution one way or the other. Back when Redhouse said that people should check out Mai's site, then the site still listed the specs of the "evaluation" ("old") Teron CX, and naturally not the not-yet-released-at-that-time "commercial" ("new") TeronCX that Eyetech will be distributing.

Again, it seems like Eyetech somehow feels they have to be ashamed or something over distributing somebody else's stuff, and it seems like some people feel they need something "special."

"It's not the same - it's special - lalalala I can't hear you lalala"

WTF, it's GOOD that the hardware is the same. That's about the only thing that's still good in the current hardware situation, despite this compulsory licensing crap, that nothing has to be changed on third party hardware design-wise. Remove that compulsory licensing crap, and things would even start to make sense.

see samface it comes down to you taking the words of one man over the logic of many others... he said alot of things.. he may not directly lie but he sure spins truth... for example

ET: After our news story, we had a pretty strong posting on our website. Our member said that Amiga OS "will apply some form of hardware-license mechanism, a dongle to his hardware."

Bill McEwen: That's untrue.

ET: And that if you want AmigaOS, "you're not allowed to buy it. You have to buy a new Teron board."

Bill McEwen: That's untrue.

ET: and that "Amiga Inc. has nothing to do with AmigaOS"

Bill McEwen: That's untrue.

if you take that verbatim you wind up with some fairly twisted ideas.... IE:that AOS4 isnt bound to the A1/the you dont need an A1 to run AOS4/that it has no rom/dongle/etc/
and also that A.inc develops AOS4... all of wich are arguably untrue...

claiming some sort of twisted 'retrospective' TeronCX isnt A1 is defying logic... that right on Mia's website they sell 'the TerconCX" wich is identical to 'AmigaOne' ... wich is the basic point of this...but i guess that slipped by...
running around calling everyone else liars and trying to make them look stupid through trickery dosent change this... it's a writtin in stone fact that the TeronCX (current model) is the 'amigaone'...

I once read about a company that trumped itself up via preemtive suggestions to hardware vendors IE: hey motorola why dont you make a 100mhz PPC chip.... then a few months later.. going by moores law...motorola makes a 100mhz PPC chip... so the company can declare 'they made it to our specs!!!' even though the product was entirely agnostic of the company and it's bearing had not been effected by them whatsoever..

..and the difference is? Meaning?

do you understand prototype .v. production?... like when they make watches...they do models of them first then they produce a handful of 'very expensive' prototypes IE:TeronCX's thousands of dollars pricetag.

it's in production... thats what companys do when they make something in 'mass' and save money on it... IE:Intel processors..

If intel ran a whole facility to make 1 chip it would cost alot more then if they make 100.000 chips or a million chips...the prices goes down as the volume goes up....

and it's kinda funny how the 'non-prototype' TeronCX is going into production.

I hope you grasp the idea of volume production .v. prototype.

[Tigger]

samface wrote:

it says production systems not boards.

..and the difference is? Meaning?

Do you really not know???    A system includes a whole lot more then a motherboard, or are you just argueing to argue???     Samface the two boards are the same, they may have different BIOS/PROMS, but the board that Eyetech has on there website, the board at WOASE, and the one shown at LinuxWorld  are the same PCB, same part load (sans processor) etc.    Do you honestly believe that by amazing coincidence, R565 is next to pin 1 of the processor on both boards???   That seems a pretty big coincidence, what do you think.    Eyetech is distributing (you do know what that means right) products for Mai, that by definition means they dont MAKE those products they buy them and then sell them to end users and resellers.   Eyetech and Amiga are talking around the board being different (ie though its only a different BIOS) because they dont want people to buy much cheaper MAI systems and convert them into Amiga One's.
         -Tig

[Seehund]

samface wrote:

Explain to me this:

1. How come the improved revision of the MAI Teron CX design didn't show up on MAI's homepage until 2 months after the Teron CX *based* AmigaOne design?

A distributor announces that they will distribute a newer revision of a board which the designer has not yet presented on his own site. So? Why are you wondering? Why Mai waited to present it until LinuxWorld? Ask Mai's marketing people, I have only asked they guy who designed all Mai boards.

2. How come MAI accepts Eyetech giving out this as official information on their website? I mean, they even has links to Eyetech's website on their own, don't tell me they haven't noticed.

Technically, Eyetech wasn't outright lying on their site. When they wrote "this is not the TeronCX," Mai had not yet started distribution of the "commercial" TeronCX (and neither had Eyetech or anyone else, and only a few people in "the community" had even heard of Mai and the Terons, it was easy to get away with for the time being). It might also be that Eyetech thought that their dongle ROM disqualified the board from being a TeronCX any longer. It was just bending the truth a bit here and a bit there. An "Amiga" trademark apparently makes a whole lot of people swallow a whole lot of things

3. Hasn't even Bill McEwan himself declared you a liar already? I read three or four "untrue" statements from him as a reply to your FUD about them and their licensing policies in an interview on ExtremeTech recently. He also said that he will "set the record straight" and reply to that statement you made in their forums. Perhaps you should stay low for a while before you have that reply? I mean, atleast you know that they've heard you now so there's no need to keep shouting about it anymore.

Ah, yes the ET.com interview! That was a riot!

Seriously, you apparently being a proponent of the compulsory licensing/dongling/bundling restrictions should be having problems with McEwen stating that they don't exist. I also wonder what both Eyetech and Mai say about having the Teron/"AmigaOne" boards suddenly declared an AInc design and spec.
That interview was an embarrassment to the interviewer and the interviewee, nobody else, and I honestly expect you to agree with me on that point. One has to look hard to find anything in there that has any connection to reality.

agreed that interview was just out and out funny... sad thing is some people with low IQ's in the PC general computing world might believe it and try to buy an A1 based upon what was said there...only to find it is ROM/Dongled..AOS4 wasnt made by A.inc... and the board is a generic TeronCX and dosent say Ainc/Eyetech anywhere on it....

[THEONE]

mips_proc wrote:
agreed that interview was just out and out funny... sad thing is some people with low IQ's in the PC general computing world might believe it and try to buy an A1 based upon what was said there...only to find it is ROM/Dongled..AOS4 wasnt made by A.inc... and the board is a generic TeronCX and dosent say Ainc/Eyetech anywhere on it....

I own the name  AmigaOne so what do they own that is the real question. :-D

[samface]

"Old" TeronCX = "Old" AmigaOne G3SE
"New" TeronCX = "New" A1 G3SE, as per the specs officially listed by Eyetech

"Old" AmigaOne G3SE??? Please share whatever you're smokin'...

Again, there was no revision 2 of the Teron CX when the A1 G3SE was announced and the specifications for the two boards did not match back then. Now MAI has a revised version which matches the one of the A1 G3SE (which has had no changes to the specs since then), what makes you think the A1 was based on that revised version???

Proof it or stop trolling, Seehund.

prototype .v. production samface... you obviousely dont get it though... the old A1 was the prototype TeronCX...the new A1 is the production TeronCX

[joemango]

So I wonder what it is that would make all of these "It's not really an amiga!!!!" people happy?

Let me imagine...

-A new AMIGA video chipset with all of the best features of NV20+ and Radeon 9xxx, plus BACKWARD AGA COMPATIBILITY!!!
-some bus more advanced/faster than PCI-X, that transmits 40 GB/s
-Audigy+ level audio,
-Optical chip interconnects,  
-USB 2.0, Firewire  
-Amiga-specific keyboards and mice,  
-A new, incompatible DVD/RW format (which would be faster and more 'elegant'), so we can be different and better
-Brainwave detection software so you can think instead of type

In short, (mostly)stuff that you can't buy on a PC Motherboard, but would be so frickin' cool that no PC user would be able to resist buying... if the price were anywhere near reasonable.  

Unfortunately it wouldn't be, because AMIGA would have to do all of the R&D, engineering, production ramp-up, marketing, sales and support.  Which means that they'd have to price the board at TWICE (or more) the price of an A1.  Not to mention the fact that such an effort costs HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, which Amiga has a mere sub-fraction of in the bank.

I cherish the idea of Amiga hardware being different, but not at the cost of being able to buy one.  This isn't 1985 anymore, kids.

If amiga wants to control their platform and keep it consistent(one of the aims of making a "custom" MB in the first place), they don't need to build a motherboard that has every possible unique feature on it.  They need to spec one that works well and has acceptable speed and features.  THEN, when they have a little more money in their pocketses (sorry, J.R.R.), they can design something more like what the naysayers are looking for.

Remember, the idea for OS5 is to be hardware-independent so you can use whatever type of motherboard you like.  Be happy that you can buy something called an Amiga, and not a windows box that you run an emulation on.

Don't like it?  Build your own and find out how difficult/expensive  it is to create a hardware platform from scratch like you suggest Amiga Inc. do.  Then come back and let us all know how far you got.

[pioneer]

Here's an interesting question for you. In these days of game systems with 60-frame animation and surround sound, what would it take to impress people -- 3D? For something to be as far ahead of everything else as the original Amiga was when it was introduced would take something truly fantastic, something not invented yet. Is it really even reasonable to expect such a thing from any computer?