Merger between AmigaOne and Pegasos dev teams

[meerschaum]

HMetal its basically like this... people dont want to run ther risk that every word they say will be  vomited back up into web forums and whatnot... I understand perfectly well why he didnt want YOU(or any other upper echelon amiga camper)  there, and I think he was right... as people like to talk freely without pressure from amiga.inc zealots  bieng brought onto them in a Morph channel... I dont see why it would be wrong if I was banned from an amiga  channel for sitting there lurking or asking timid/pointless questions as an excuse to linger... I think I'd deserve a proper kicking/banning post haste for that... and in my opinon the same goes for the other side..

now remember it all comes down to opinon...and we all have one...so before you say 'I wasnt trying to linger, whatever' I'm not saying you where... I'm saying what I saw... as I was in the channel when you where asked to leave....and this all my opinon

[iamaboringperson]

Does anyone believe opening up the source under the GNU General Purpose Licence (GPL) Agreement would benefit AmigaOS?

and who is going to do that? amiga inc.? genesi?? you???
are you going to break into the offices at night and (physically)steal the source code you you may release it as open source?

It could drastically speed up the development, and help the followers of Amiga to feel more involved - so that it becomes their AmigaOS, rather than a corporate thang.

im not the first to mention AROS, if you dont like the corporate thng(what ever that is supposed to mean) you can get stuck into the code of your own damn os, base it on AROS if you like

[iamaboringperson]

What about convincing developers to leave their current projects, instead using their valuable skills on an open source project that could be available for ever?

convice them to leave their current (reletivly)stable jobs and then what? you will pay them??
how will they get paid for an open source project
where does the money come from?

Samuar you come up with all these ideas, none of them practical

[meerschaum]

I agree about AmigaOS bieng open sourced..from what I've heard the source isnt good for much aside from making emulators run better... if you want a community project I advise AROS or MorphOS...as they both came from this community...

[iamaboringperson]

im not saying opensourced amigaos is such a bad idea
i would love to get hold of the amigaos source
but its amiga inc.'s choice, therefore there is no point saying "i think amigaos should be made open source"
who is going to do it?
no sane person would pay millions of dollars for a company, only to give(or throw)away its IP

[meerschaum]

there is no point saying "i think amigaos should be made open source"

its an opinon... I think it should.. I'm not saying 'obey me' or some nonsense... I just think it wouldnt hurt... I mean its useless source aside from making emulators run better from what I've heard anyway...

no sane person would pay millions of dollars for a company, only to give(or throw)away its IP

apperantly Amiga.inc would... they apperantly abandoned their own trademark name 'Amiga' ... there was a thread about...

[dammy]

by iamaboringperson on 2003/6/27 22:24:30

im not saying opensourced amigaos is such a bad idea

Question is, who would want it (well, besides you;)?  AROS doesn't want it.  I doubt MOS crew wants it.  That leaves Hyperion and they already have it.  I see no reason in the world to Open Source it, just let it die a peaceful death.

Dammy

[Samuar]

Fair comment.

However, unlike x86 and MacPPC communities, the members of the Amiga community, in my opinion, (given that it is smaller and has probably kept only the most hardcore amiga users from the old days) is probably perfectly capable of doing something with that source code, whether its producing applications that work better because they work with the OS better, or its producing patches to problems, bugs and (hopefully there wont be any) security problems.

I mean, nowadays, people who still use Amigas know how to get the most from them. They arent a stupid bunch, and I think they all deserve to play a bigger role in the development if they want to.

Samuar wrote:
Fair comment.

However, unlike x86 and MacPPC communities, the members of the Amiga community, in my opinion, (given that it is smaller and has probably kept only the most hardcore amiga users from the old days) is probably perfectly capable of doing something with that source code, whether its producing applications that work better because they work with the OS better, or its producing patches to problems, bugs and (hopefully there wont be any) security problems.

I mean, nowadays, people who still use Amigas know how to get the most from them. They arent a stupid bunch, and I think they all deserve to play a bigger role in the development if they want to.

AROS it is then. ;-)

[uncharted]

downix wrote:
From my angle (mind you, I work for Genesi) I see resistance, and fear, regarding our products.  Resistance because we lack the name.  Fear because, from my observation and opinion, we have the superior product.  

Don't agree with this totally, while there are people out there who may be like this, I don't think it's the main bulk of people.  From what I have seen of your postings you have totally dismissed AmigaOS out of hand, I don't think you have been objective about it (comments about the new amidock spring to mind).  I haven't had chance to try out OS 4 yet, but I don't think from experience that MOS is the superior product (Cue 10 of the most hardcore to tell me how wrong I am)

However, I see it from the other viewpoint as well.  Genesi is the upstart, the new kid on the block.  It is taking away mindshare and loyalty from AInc's solutions.  From their angle, this is a low-blow, and cheating ones way to the top.  Add on top of it announcments that hurt your products or those of your licensees.  It seems Genesi is going for an all-out war, so you retaliate in kind.  

Again I think you're half right.  But to be honest it it's not about Genesi's existance, but rather their attitude and public behaviour.  

But this schism goes deeper than just Genesi/AInc.  I saw it during the GateMiga days, with competing vendors kept pushing their own, proprietory API's on the market.  Over time, these API's consolidated into 2 groups, the MorphOS and the AmigaOS4 camps.  MorphOS gained the CyberGFX, MUI, PowerUP, AROS strengths while AOS4 gained the Picasso96, ReAction/ClassAct, WarpUP and AmigaOS strengths.  This polarization of the community is difficult to heal, and is only a direct result of ignorance by those that have held the trademark in the past to define a STANDARD.  This resulted in a splitting of the community, and the situation we have today, with 2 OS's, 2 motherboards, 2 solutions to everything.

I think this is pretty much as close to the truth as you can get, obviously it's a bit more complex than this, but that's the general gist of it.  Really when you look at it it's quite pathetic. :-(

I'd point out, an attempt to correct this has begun, with the openamiga project at:  http://www.openamiga.org

If you really want to see this community heal, that's where to look, in my personal opinion.

At least one other Genesi empolyee dissagrees with you there, calling it "A joke"

[uncharted]

Open sourcing would have worked 5 years ago, but it's too late now.  If Gateway would have released the sources (although they'd be incomplete due to licences and trademark issues) I think the community (back then) could of made it work.

The thing is I could see that we'd end up with a similar situation as today with several different vesion due to the fact that you'd still get differnt people wanting to take the OS in different directions.

Downix was right, it has been the lack of leadership since '95 that has led to the current situation (although saying that some people have always pushed to go in thier own direction anyway).  TBH though I don't see anyone here who is suitable to lead the community, not Amiga Inc., not Hyperion, and not Genesi

[downix]

uncharted wrote:

downix wrote:
From my angle (mind you, I work for Genesi) I see resistance, and fear, regarding our products.  Resistance because we lack the name.  Fear because, from my observation and opinion, we have the superior product.  

Don't agree with this totally, while there are people out there who may be like this, I don't think it's the main bulk of people.  From what I have seen of your postings you have totally dismissed AmigaOS out of hand, I don't think you have been objective about it (comments about the new amidock spring to mind).  I haven't had chance to try out OS 4 yet, but I don't think from experience that MOS is the superior product (Cue 10 of the most hardcore to tell me how wrong I am)

So, have I dismissed it?  Yes, I have.  Not as an OS, but as a step forward, much like WinME.  Even the screenshots and data given show nothing of the necessary evolution, nor even the framework *for* an evolution of the platform.  It is a very tough world out there, and if AOS4 is not ready to tackle MacOS X or Windows XP, it will not survive.

This industry is brutal, it is only a matter of time before both AOS4 and MOS have to go head to head against companies with billion dollar budgets and a userbase that makes ours look like a mere speck.  What gives AOS4 or MOS a chance here is their sheer stubborness and willingness to rip into each other.  This guarantees that at least one, if not both, will be strong enough to at least stand a chance against the other predators out there.  And possibly grow into giants themselves.

I think, in the end, AmigaOS's biggest problem is overoptimism.  They misjudged timelines, they misjudged the marketplace, they misjudged their customers.  All due to overoptimistic feelings and lack of business skill.  This, more than anything, makes me dismiss it as the solution for the market.  Unless Amiga gains some real management, this will remain so.

As for OpenAmiga, I stated my personal opinion, as well as other Genesi employees have done.  I would note, the "a joke" comment was with the discussion of 68k binaries, not the idea itself.

[redfox]

Getting back to the original topic ...

Merger between AmigaOne and Pegasos dev teams

Very simply ... ... there is not a chance.

It is simply the way things worked out.

IMHO I wish it had worked out differently, ... but that is life.

Perhaps, individual developers who are offering applications might be willing to support both products.

-------------
redfox

[uncharted]

downix wrote:
So, have I dismissed it?  Yes, I have.  Not as an OS, but as a step forward, much like WinME.  Even the screenshots and data given show nothing of the necessary evolution, nor even the framework *for* an evolution of the platform.  It is a very tough world out there, and if AOS4 is not ready to tackle MacOS X or Windows XP, it will not survive.

This is where I'd disagree.  From what I've read OS 4.0 is very forward looking, and with some of the things hinted at in future revisions 4.1 4.2 etc. (not counting "OS 5") it's looking very good indeed.  

While I like the philosophies behind MOS, as it stands it's just an sandbox emulation, not VM no MP no other wizbang enhancements, just AmigaOS 3.1 on speed.  Everything depends upon the mythical "Q box" which is apparently "years away".

I think, in the end, AmigaOS's biggest problem is overoptimism.  They misjudged timelines, they misjudged the marketplace, they misjudged their customers.  All due to overoptimistic feelings and lack of business skill.  This, more than anything, makes me dismiss it as the solution for the market.  Unless Amiga gains some real management, this will remain so.

I think the real problem is that fact that until Hyperion picked up the baton there was zero development (discounting the minor changes from 3.5 and 3.9) since '94.  A PPC port of amigaOS should of happened in '97 we should be up to OS 5 or 6 by now, but Gateway/Amiga, then Amino/Amiga were too busy trying something new with the name rather than capitalising on the assests they already had.

While it would of been good for Amiga inc and MOS/bplan to hook up for OS 4 way back when (at least there wouldn't be this split to this degree), in some ways i'm glad that MOS didn't become AmigaOS 4, because I don't think I'd get the kind of AmigaOS I'd want.  

Who knows perhaps the co-operation would of made something different to MOS as it stands today a halfway house between MOS and OS 4. But as it stands while I like the look of the Peg and Peg 2,  I'd only ever buy one to run AOS 4.x or AROS 1.0.  I simply don't like MOS.

As for OpenAmiga, I stated my personal opinion, as well as other Genesi employees have done.  I would note, the "a joke" comment was with the discussion of 68k binaries, not the idea itself.

That's not what was actually said -

But because they have nothing to do. Can you imagine anyone's Amiga system NOT having the features as above? AROS is about a week away from matching most of it already, OS3.9 matches and therefore AmigaOSXL and Amithlon match, AmigaOS 4.x is based on 3.9 so automatically matches, and MorphOS has had the features of the list since the year 2000.

So what are they enforcing here? Are they expecting a new project to pop up that they can encourage to use this standard? I seriously doubt this will happen

Again we have another bunch of Amiga users trying to make a name for themselves by doing something in the public eye. Now, if they were offering money like DiscreetFX, then it'd be interesting, but they're not, so it's actually just redundant.

[downix]

@uncharted

Huh?  Where the heck are you getting this stuff on the OS's design?  BOTH OS's are using a sandbox technique here.  The only difference is that one seperates the new MP-enabled kernel from the old non-MP kernel.  This way, should a non-MP app kill itself, you don't loose the entire system, just the non-MP protected section.

-EDIT-
And MOS has VM.

[uncharted]

downix wrote:
@uncharted

Huh?  Where the heck are you getting this stuff on the OS's design?  BOTH OS's are using a sandbox technique here.  The only difference is that one seperates the new MP-enabled kernel from the old non-MP kernel.  This way, should a non-MP app kill itself, you don't loose the entire system, just the non-MP protected section.

The OS 4 feature list it explains that it does not use a Sandbox approach.  I mean before you started slagging it off you did actually READ the information available on it didn't you?

So you are saying that I can write an application for MOS that makes use of all the advanced features of Quark including MP?
That's either great news or total rubbish.

-EDIT-
And MOS has VM.

Available to the applications written for ABox?