Thendic holding Amiga licence and patents?

[Senex]

@Ketzer:

Nitpicking. The OS is there, available for Joe Public. And the Q-Box stuff is equivalent to OS5, OS4 to the A-Box.

[Senex]

Neither can it be named AmigaOS nor does it contain parts of AmigaOS.

Sigh. So you really just want the name... Okay, your opinion, but in my opinion not rational.

The A-Box is as much "amithlon" as OS4 is.  And if you'd want, you could use parts of AmigaOS with it, it's just neither delivered with them nor are they needed.

[HyperionMP]

OS 4.0 does not use the "box technology" which can be found in Amithlon and MorphOS.

This has several technical advantages.

Please visit the Petunia website for additional technical information.

[Desler]

you'll see, if someone would have told you it'd be AmigaOS4, you would have believed it immediately.

Its not my point. As I stated before morphOS can be a great product, possibly even the best OS in the whole galaxy... ever. But it STILL doesnt change the fact that its not the amigaOS. The amigaOS are being built by Hyperion under license from amiga inc. Its an amiga because they OWN the name. Its their name, its their decisions.

But Amiga Inc. doesn't own us, the community - they just acquired the trademark. So it's absolutely legitimate for other companies to advertise towards us for buying or even developing for their products. As others - including Gateway, QNX, Be Inc. or the current Amiga Inc. with their totally unrelated Tao stuff - did before...

Quite right... But then advertise the morphos just as it is: morphOS.. Not a better version of amigaOS. If its a good enough product and there is enough developed for that platform, people will choose that platform.
Please dont misunderstand this. I have never tried neither Aos 4.0 nor morphOS. Its not my point to say one is better than the other. My point is that this is two seperate products and it annoys me when people tries to blur the destinction between the two

[System]

@Ben hermans

Yes but as you stated yourself in a not so far past, OS 4 will have a similar sandbox design in the future because it'd be needed for implementing the memory protection without breaking compatibility with lot of leagcy AmigaOS 3.x software.

MorphOS have this design already. And IMHO i'm not sure you'll have so much benefit to not use it for the first version of OS 4. I still wondering why you choose a design you claim to be better when you'll need to change it in the future anyway??? For me it's far from being rational.

[jedi]

"Neither can it be named AmigaOS nor does it contain parts of AmigaOS. At best it is an Amiga-like OS (well, it should be since it emulates an Amiga environment)."

@Ketzer

That's your personnal point of view.

And, have you already used/tested in live Pegasos/MorphOS ? I'm sure not.

"well, it should be since it emulates an Amiga environment" : that's not exact. MorphOS emulates only 68k and custom chips, but not other (i.e. PPC native and system apps).

And that will be EXACTLY the same with AmigaOS4. AmigaOS4 will emulate ALL the 68k (no 680x0 chip on AmigaOne) and custom chips (no AGA chip on AmigaOne) applications. So, by following your argument : "AmigaOne, at best it is an Amiga-like OS (well, it should be since it emulates an Amiga environment)."...

;-)

[System]

@Jedi

A little correction to what you said: MorphOS and AmigaOS 4 don't emulate the custom chips. They use them if they are present (so when running on a A1200, A4000 or A3000 with a PPC card).

[Desler]

If AmigaOS5 is supposed to be a magical merger of the OS4 and DE, why couldn't MorphOS and DE? Well, we do not really think this is a particularly useful direction, BUT we are willing to fund the development of this IF there is someone out there that can actually do it. Please send us an email.

This is a good example of blurring the destinctions. I have nothing but respect for the amount of work/money BB, his wife and the rest of the Genisis (is it spelled correct? new name - slow brain :-)) group have put into their project, but I have problems with their ways of promoting it

[jedi]

@Ben Hermans

"Please visit the Petunia website for additional technical information."

Petunia, the AmigaOS 68k emulator for AmigaOne ? lol.

Who said that an emulateur, or a "box", will never be an AmigaOS ?...

[Herewegoagain]

MorphOS have this design already. And IMHO i'm not sure you'll have so much benefit to not use it for the first version of OS 4. I still wondering why you choose a design you claim to be better when you'll need to change it in the future anyway??? For me it's far from being rational.

You know, for me it really doesn't matter alot about this.  What I want is PPC native apps for OS4 more than old apps that I can run under emu.  At some point, it makes sense for this to not even be in the OS. So ten years from now are you still going to be carrying around old code for AmigaOS 3.X compatability?  The big difference here is that Thendic/bPlan are trying to capture the Amiga community to run only up to OS3.x code.  Anything beyond 3.x is not going to run on Morphos.  That's not to say that they wont have anything to run on the native PPC side.  The only thing people can do is to look at the PPC native stuff for both Morphos and OS4 and see which one suits their tastes more.  The two will always be separate and incompatible products.  But for me, I will choose the official OS version.

[whabang]

*sigh*

[jedi]

@JoeAFUA

"A little correction to what you said: MorphOS and AmigaOS 4 don't emulate the custom chips. They use them if they are present (so when running on a A1200, A4000 or A3000 with a PPC card)."

Of course. I spoke on Pegasos and AmigaOne ;-)

[Herewegoagain]

And that will be EXACTLY the same with AmigaOS4. AmigaOS4 will emulate ALL the 68k (no 680x0 chip on AmigaOne) and custom chips (no AGA chip on AmigaOne) applications. So, by following your argument : "AmigaOne, at best it is an Amiga-like OS (well, it should be since it emulates an Amiga environment)."...

Also, it will not emulate the whole 68k OS.  Much of the ORIGINAL AMIGA OS is re-written in PPC native code.  That is what makes this The Official One.

[System]

@ JoeAFUA

Just by curiousity, i'd really want to know what is an "Amiga" for you?

To me the name "Amiga" is an exclusive brand/company name, similar to IBM, Atari, Sony or Philips.

A next generation Amiga computer I would see as a fully licensed computer running an official port of AmigaOS. The custom chips are IMO not necessary, but compatibility with them would be a great addition.

Let me explain my point of view with an example:  In 1994 my Amiga was equiped with a cool 4MB Retina BLT Z3 graphic board (1900×1426 8bit 70 Hz or 1024×768 24bit) and 16-bit Toccata soundcard (48KHz).

So the Amiga market was already moving towards 3rd party developed hardware solutions back then. Fellow Amiga users who only owned standard unexpanded Amigas drooled all over my machine, so I believe more people would have expanded their Amigas with 3rd party hardware solutions, if they could afford this at the time.

[System]

@jedi

Yes but as I said, if the chips are not present software that need them (AGA games or any software that use one of the AGA chips) simply don't run on a Pegasos or an AmigaOne. (Of course except if you use UAE).

[jedi]

@Herewegoagain

"Also, it will not emulate the whole 68k OS. Much of the ORIGINAL AMIGA OS is re-written in PPC native code. That is what makes this The Official One."

True.

But, for the moment AmigaOS4 is not here. And for the moment, when I use MorphOS on Pegasos it's like I use an AmigaOS on an Amiga, but better and more powerfull. Majority of the Amiga Classic applications runs (very fast) on MorphOS. That's give me, NOW, what we have waited for many years : a modern "AmigaOS" on a modern "Amiga". Of course, without the name. But is the name important when we have all we want ?...

(@JoeAFUA: of course ;-))