OS4 rollout schedule

[bloodline]

As flattering as that is, I'm sure even Hyperion would disagree with you there. Hyperion needed Amiga Inc. to provide the AOS 3.1 source. Hyperion needed Eyetech to produce the hardware AOS 4 would run on.

Nah, Hyperion are welcome to use AROS code if they need it (just as long as they stick to the licence :-D ), and Genesi would be happy to provide the Hardware.

bloodline wrote:

As flattering as that is, I'm sure even Hyperion would disagree with you there. Hyperion needed Amiga Inc. to provide the AOS 3.1 source. Hyperion needed Eyetech to produce the hardware AOS 4 would run on.

Nah, Hyperion are welcome to use AROS code if they need it (just as long as they stick to the licence :-D ), and Genesi would be happy to provide the Hardware.

Methinks we would have had OS4 a long time ago if they had used some AROS code.

[HyperionMP]

You are obviously not familiar with the cuurent state of AROS.

One of the main problems is that they are shooting for 3.1 compatibility whilst we were aiming for 3.9.

Moreover, some of the AROS work is not entirely compatible with OS 3.1. DOS and Intuition come to mind.

[bloodline]

HyperionMP wrote:
You are obviously not familiar with the cuurent state of AROS.

One of the main problems is that they are shooting for 3.1 compatibility whilst we were aiming for 3.9.

Moreover, some of the AROS work is not entirely compatible with OS 3.1. DOS and Intuition come to mind.

Well intuition isn't too bad, MOS have helped us make it compatible, but yes our DOS library is really incompatibile becuase we didn't want to implement that nasty Tripos packet stuff, wrappers exist though.

3.9... wouldn't really be much not than adding a few function here and there (I only know of a few functions that were added in Exec..., which we do plan to implement), maybe you didn't want to implemtn these features and then be bound to the licence and allow AROS to gain that functionality? But that is just a possibility ;-)

HyperionMP wrote:
You are obviously not familiar with the cuurent state of AROS.

One of the main problems is that they are shooting for 3.1 compatibility whilst we were aiming for 3.9.

Moreover, some of the AROS work is not entirely compatible with OS 3.1. DOS and Intuition come to mind.

erm.... I'm very familar with the current state of AROS thank you Ben.

What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.

As matt points out above, maybe you don't want to be bound by the AROS licence for the parts you could have used for free, which is fair enough.  The MorphOS guys don't seem to mind though, and they released their product a long time ago.  Maybe you would have had a head start on them if you'd used some AROS bits to get you going after all the unadvoidable setbacks and delays you had to endure during OS4's development cycle.

[mikeymike]

Is it just me or have many discussions lately have reverted by to the 'Hyperion vs. AROS vs Genesi/MorphOS*' subject?


* - If it's not Genesi, whoever is developing MorphOS.

[Rogue]

What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.

As has been said, there are compatibility issues. DOS is a good example. I'm sure there are others. We might have taken a slow route, but I think that the result is worth it. We already have a high degree of compatibility now, and are improving it

[xeron]

mdma wrote:
What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.

You're assuming that using AROS code would have saved them time; but just because AROS fairly compatible to AmigaOS, doesn't mean that modules from its source code would slot easily into the actual AmigaOS source tree. This is not necessarily the case.

The fact is that all the people on these forums saying "Hyperion could have done this to save time", or "I expect OS4 will be out by xyz" really have no clue because they AREN'T involved with the project, they have NO access to the sourcecode repositry, they don't know exactly what Hyperion have done, plan to do, or are in the process of doing, and therefore might as well pick their estimates entirely at random...

[Rogue]

Darth_X wrote:
Hi Rogue! Cool Avatar!

Hehe, thanks. The dual-bladed saber didn't fit into the picture, so I had to dig out that old one ;-)

Sometimes giving away free boards helps.

Well, that was a different time. That trick doesn't work anymore. Not yet at any rate.

Did a company or individual come forward representing the CyberstormPPC and acquire a license, or was the decision to develop AmigaOS4 for CyberstormPPC come from Hyperion 'in-house' because of the installed base of users?

Work was simply started on the Cyberstorm because the AmigaOne wasn't available at that time, and because it is easier to do it on a hardware that is already supported by the 68k components. The installed user base is also a factor, which is still higher than for AmigaOne and/or Pegasos.

Isn't that a much brighter future for the Amiga market than what we have now?

There is no reason why this shouldn't work out, however, see Ben's explanation for the licencing scheme. I say again, I don't think it is in any way unreasonable, and from the replies I've seen I can only conclude that most people didn't know the details, or had a wrong perception about it.

Rogue wrote:

What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.

As has been said, there are compatibility issues. DOS is a good example. I'm sure there are others. We might have taken a slow route, but I think that the result is worth it. We already have a high degree of compatibility now, and are improving it

Hi Rogue,

My post wasn't meant as an insult, just an observation.  I think Ben read my post in the wrong context.

Considering English is my native tongue, I'm not very good at conveying what I mean clearly! Numbers are my thing! ;-)

And you are correct, I wasn't aware of the licencing model.  I am now. :-)

-edit-

Is that you in your avatar?

It's not the image I had in my head of you!  I had this "Teutonic twins" image of you and your brother in my head! ;-)

[EntilZha]

@ Bloodline

> "Technically inferior" is a stupid statement

Totally agreed. Funny thing is, it's a term used by anybody to describe the "others". I've seen exactly the same phrase being used (I think it was even in this thread) for the AmigaOne hardware.

Isn't it funny that it seems nobody can really blame the other for trolling or calling somebody names ?  :-D

[HyperionMP]

What I meant in my previous post, was that the 68k ASM stuff that you had to rewrite in C, could have been taken from the AROS code to be used as a base and modified until it suited you.
As matt points out above, maybe you don't want to be bound by the AROS licence for the parts you could have used for free, which is fair enough.

---

Believe me, we looked at that initially, especially for DOS.

Gary Peake introduced us to Aaron and we were on friendly terms.

The license wasn't so much of an issue but rather the fact that subtle but sometimes far-reaching incompatibilities existed and still exist to this date.

[Rogue]

My post wasn't meant as an insult, just an observation.

I didn't take it as such. I just tried to explain why we did what we did.

Is that you in your avatar?

Yes, it's me, although I must admit that the lightsaber is a special effect (courtesy of Photogenics) - my real lightsaber is purple, but since there was the question about the t-shirt color on the Augsburg shots, I repainted it blue ;-)

It's not the image I had in my head of you! I had this "Teutonic twins" image of you and your brother in my head!

I hope that doesn't include leather pants and a hat.  :-) Even folks down in bavaria don't really look like that - not all the time at any rate ;-)
(No offense to Bavaria intended)

EntilZha wrote:
@ Bloodline

> "Technically inferior" is a stupid statement

Totally agreed. Funny thing is, it's a term used by anybody to describe the "others". I've seen exactly the same phrase being used (I think it was even in this thread) for the AmigaOne hardware.

Isn't it funny that it seems nobody can really blame the other for trolling or calling somebody names ?  :-D

I believe it was me who called the A1 board  "overpriced and underpowered".  I stand by that too.

For the price, it IS underpowered.  I can't afford to buy an A1. If the Pegasos was the same price i'd call that "overpriced and underpowered" too, and stick with UAE on my superfast Athlon.  If the A1 was cheaper than a Pegasos, I'd by an A1. It'snothing to do with being on one side or the other, it's purely a financial decision.  I have a family to support, and can't waste money on an A1 just for emotional reasons.  I'm a pragmatist not an idealist, and I'm sure that's the case with most others who aren't going to buy an A1.  It's a shame, as I really do want OS4, so I'll look into buying a BlizzPPC second hand if the price of OS4 is realistically affordable, but then MorphOS may be given away free for classic ppc Amiga's, or so i've seen rumoured.

It's all down to money in the end. For Hyperion, for Amiga Inc and for me as an end user and father with responsibilities.

[Warface]

Mind you, a new conspiracy theory forms in my head.

Is it possible that those favoured the Imperial side in Star Wars went for the Pegasos, and those who favoured the Rebels for OS4? :-)

I must confess I was a fan of Darth Vader :-)

Rogue wrote:

My post wasn't meant as an insult, just an observation.

I didn't take it as such. I just tried to explain why we did what we did.

I thought Ben sounded insulted not you.  My terrible grammar at work yet again! ;-)

It's not the image I had in my head of you! I had this "Teutonic twins" image of you and your brother in my head!

I hope that doesn't include leather pants and a hat.  :-) Even folks down in bavaria don't really look like that - not all the time at any rate ;-)
(No offense to Bavaria intended)

I thought, "Six foot 5 inch tall, golden blonde 'mullet' haircut, and very muscular" or as we say in England "Built like a brick sh!t house!" :-D