Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.  (Read 105209 times)

Description:

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline OlafS3

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #344 on: March 03, 2016, 01:01:51 PM »
Quote from: kolla;805286
How is one supposed to prove this? Send photos of the motherboards with something that looks like genuine 3.1 kickstart ROMs on them?

(btw - it is "to prove" and "a proof")

thanx... as i understand it you have to read it out and upload it. But better to ask kipper there directly about the details

I am personal not interested in that anyway

from someone already done it:
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=81535&page=9

You grab an image of your Amiga ROM (along with a checksum) with a utility you can download on Aminet.
You then upload to Kippers  FTP server where it get validated.
Just for the record, I did this a while ago and it seems my image is in the "valid" folder.
 

Offline AJCopland

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #345 on: March 03, 2016, 01:06:10 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805276
Yes, it does. P96 support for a commercial platform requires a license. Is the P96 driver licensed? No, it's not.

Oh, wait, and P96 is "just there" and "nobody developed it", and "nobody deserves money for it"? I'm not demanding money for my pocket, remember? I'm asking for money for the original developers that also spend a lot of time - probably more than 7 years - to develop it.

You're saying this is worth nothing, and the work can just be taken?


The important part is that P96 is optional, the driver is a separate download, it does not *come-with* the Vampire so it does not require a license.

You can argue that someone who does download it, and does use it with AOS3.1, and does use all of the free (from the developers) tools might want to give them something but as Nicholas pointed out, and as we discussed earlier there's no actual license required here.

It's reverse engineered interface, you dislike that, but that doesn't change it's legality, it is legal.

Quote from: Thomas Richter;805276

Apparently, you don't understand a thing here. It's about honesty and ethnics. If my product depends on somebody else's product to enable its full functionality, and this other product requires licensing, I need to get this license. And no, I don't attempt to simply work around that, I tackle the problem honestly.

If I don't want to pay for the license for P96, I cannot simply provide the P96 driver for AmigaOs. For AROS, the situation might be different because AROS does not use P96, but for AmigaOs, it does.

Try to understand the situation for just a moment from the perspective of the P96 developers, please.


I am a software developer, I've seen every game that I've ever worked on pirated.
I understand that frustration, but here we're talking about very different things.
All computer hardware depends on other peoples products to "enable its full functionality" to varying degrees. In this case you could use something other than P96 but that doesn't seem necessary.

Your argument here is still spurious, reverse engineering is legal, if they had used the Picasso SDK to develop it then they would have required a license. However they used a reverse engineered interface and so they do not.

If it was easy (or even possible) to contact the original P96 developers, to get that SDK at all, to negotiate with them then maybe that would be a viable route but the case here is that it isn't necessary or legally required.

Why we're having to dispute it is bizarre, we're talking about long established legal facts with every precedent imaginable going for it that is widely done on a daily basis.

The driver can be written without violating the license, and it has been. The tools themselves are freely available from AmiNet. That's both end of the puzzle, the legal tools, the legal driver for it.
Be Positive towards the Amiga community!
 

Offline wawrzon

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #346 on: March 03, 2016, 01:06:31 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805276
Yes, it does. P96 support for a commercial platform requires a license. Is the P96 driver licensed? No, it's not.
...
Try to understand the situation for just a moment from the perspective of the P96 developers, please.


please be clear.
are you talking on behalf of p96 developers?  have they entiteled you to defend their rights in public? have they in person informed you that gunnar is acting illegally.

or are you just depending on statements from someone from hyperion and actually arguing on their behalf? if the  latter is the case, you might actually not know the whole truth, since the source you would be relaying on has proven not to be completely trustworthy.

i as kagain. why do you take issue with gunnar, but dont bother with anybody else developing third party drivers or depending on such without actual p96 license. i mean a number of a1k projects (at least three come to mind), elbox drivers, fpgaarcade and mist and so on..
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #347 on: March 03, 2016, 01:08:57 PM »
Quote from: Niding;805280
And I guess thats one of the reasons why  they are looking hard at AROS, cause it removes all the headaches of "if, but, maybe" scenarios, and deals with open source only.
Indeed it does. P96 licences should likely not apply here since AROS comes with its own implementation. Kickstart licenses do not apply because AROS is not dependent on AmigaOs either.

So in a sense, this works. The big question really is whether users have really understood this consequence and are also willing to follow the road towards AROS.

This is precisely why I'm asking so many stupid questions whether there is interest in AmigaOs or not. Because if there is, you'll run into trouble with the lack of proper licensing with the Vampire. So in a sense, you need to decide: Vampire with AROS, or AmigaOs without the Vampire.

I personally consider this a very hard decision to make.
 

Offline AJCopland

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #348 on: March 03, 2016, 01:09:00 PM »
Quote from: OlafS3;805287
thanx... as i understand it you have to read it out and upload it. But better to ask kipper there directly about the details


Yep, you have to prove that you have a legal ROM image. It's so they can give you "back" a modified version.

I don't understand the reasoning or why they didn't just make it work with any existing 3.1 ROM but then I'm not the one developing the hardware :)
Be Positive towards the Amiga community!
 

Offline AJCopland

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #349 on: March 03, 2016, 01:11:46 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805290
So in a sense, you need to decide: Vampire with AROS, or AmigaOs without the Vampire.


But this is false, even if (and most ppl argue it isn't) the P96 driver is a problem you can still use Vampire with AmigaOS just fine, just in that case without P96. It might need something else or maybe the AROS version needs porting to AmigaOS.

Either way everyone's points still stand that you seem to be arguing against something that the developers (P96) themselves don't have a case for.
Be Positive towards the Amiga community!
 

Offline OlafS3

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #350 on: March 03, 2016, 01:16:29 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805290
Indeed it does. P96 licences should likely not apply here since AROS comes with its own implementation. Kickstart licenses do not apply because AROS is not dependent on AmigaOs either.

So in a sense, this works. The big question really is whether users have really understood this consequence and are also willing to follow the road towards AROS.

This is precisely why I'm asking so many stupid questions whether there is interest in AmigaOs or not. Because if there is, you'll run into trouble with the lack of proper licensing with the Vampire. So in a sense, you need to decide: Vampire with AROS, or AmigaOs without the Vampire.

I personally consider this a very hard decision to make.

Neither 3.1 nor P96 are preinstalled. The only thing preinstalled is 3.1 kickstart if customer proves that he owns a license already. P96 driver is based on WinUAE implementation and also seperat. The user has to download it when he wants to use and he has to install both 3.1 and P96 on its own. There is no preinstalled configuration with 3.1 and P96. The driver is for Aros and only "accidently" working with P96 like "4.X classic" accidently works with UAE
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #351 on: March 03, 2016, 01:26:16 PM »
Quote from: wawrzon;805289
please be clear.
are you talking on behalf of p96 developers?  have they entiteled you to defend their rights in public? have they in person informed you that gunnar is acting illegally.

or are you just depending on statements from someone from hyperion and actually arguing on their behalf? if the  latter is the case, you might actually not know the whole truth, since the source you would be relaying on has proven not to be completely trustworthy.
Neither - nor. Again, I'm not under NDA from Hyperion, we have no contract. Neither am I under NDA from T&A, nor do I have a contract in this direction. Nobody is paying me, and these are all my sole and only personal opinions.

Call this my personal view on the affairs as an developer who helped once in P96 development, and a developer who saw the demise of P96 due to a dishonest company (Elbox, namely) simply using P96 for their commercial products. I also see that this history just repeats.

Quote from: wawrzon;805289
i as kagain. why do you take issue with gunnar, but dont bother with anybody else developing third party drivers or depending on such without actual p96 license.
Don't worry, I've made my points more than clear with Gunnar already.


Quote from: wawrzon;805289
i mean a number of a1k projects (at least three come to mind), elbox drivers, fpgaarcade and mist and so on..
Indeed, same problems all again.

If you ask me where to make the cut (personal opinion): As long as I have a hobby project, and develop a driver for a low-volume series for a couple of friends in a non-profit way, I'll believe I as a developer would be fine. No harm done.

As soon, however, as I sell a product for a commercial interest, I personally see problems. Elbox is such a candidate for sure. They sold products to end-users, including drivers, hence created products for money that clearly depended on third party work, yet didn't want to pay for this third party work.

About the two other products I do not know enough to state a clear position.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show only replies by grond
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #352 on: March 03, 2016, 01:45:46 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805193
It's not developed because everybody here tells me "go away, we have no interest in it".

Nobody said that. If you want and can develop OS3.1 further, it would sure be of interest to many people. But why does this depend on the kickstart decision done by the apollo team?

I have seen discussions about morals but nonetheless I wonder what really makes you so angry as to repeat the same points all the time that were already proven to be moot several times.


Quote
Again, I've no problem if people prefer AROS - that's a choice everybody can make

And all hardware manufacturers can make their own decisions about which kickstart to include, none, a licensed 3.1 or a free AROS kickstart.


Quote
they would be most certainly be used if there would be interest in a - albeit closed source, paid - development.
What would the economical and legal model be for such paid development? So far I have gathered that somebody outside Hyperion would do it. I conclude that this would involve money going from Hyperion to the developer. For the developer the motivation would be clear. For Hyperion the hope would be that money finds its way to them. Where would that money come from and at what point in time?


Quote from: Thomas Richter;805197
There's a new interesting product on the market that triggers interest in users investing into the classics.

The new product triggers a lot of interest. Interests that the creators of the product may not share. E.g. people approached BigGun advising him to stop cooperating with Igor and Brian and instead work with somebody more professional. People come and create FPGA accelerator boards nobody had asked them for hoping that the apollo core might become available to them.  People come and want to create (and lead?) a committee that decides on the extensions to the 68k ISA. People come and want to bundle an OS yet to be created with the vampire.

What the f***?!?


Quote
Of course that also means that now the owner of the Os sees some interest in investing into the classics.
They explicitly said that they had NO interest at all in the classics. They only have interest in PPC. They said that they would use any money they get from the apollo team for their PPC business. Gunnar offered them 10,000€ for the rights to develop 3.1 further but they were not willing to grant any rights or give guaranties about the status of the outcome of this development. There simply was no basis for an agreement nor even preliminary negotiations.


Quote
Of course, nobody would be getting rich by this development, but in end, everybody could have had what wasn't possible before , a renovated Os, a renovated hardware, new software.
The problem with this is that we came to the conclusion that a renovated OS seems to be more likely to happen based on AROS than on OS3.1. We'd appreciate either, though.


Quote
You cannot first negotiate with the owners on licensing the rtg graphics interface, and later on work around this negotiations and ignore the owners and forget the negotiations just because it now suddenly fits better to the plan to do so.
Well, as a matter of fact you can. If you go to a car dealer and start negotiating with him, you are still free to leave the shop without a new car...

The funny thing is that it isn't even clear who the owners of the RTG interface actually are today. Hey, psst, I sell licenses to walking on the precinct in front of your house! They are cheap but the price will double tomorrow! :roflmao:


Quote from: Thomas Richter;805200
I *personally* believe [closed-source OS3.1 development] stops making sense at this time. There is a clear indication now, and a clear decision has been made that this is not wanted nor desired.

Clear indication by whom? OS 3.5 and 3.9 have been sold. I have no idea whether actual money was gained that justified the investment but this isn't changed by the fact that the vampire will be shipped including an AROS kickstart rom. After all the AROS rom does not exclude OS 3.5 and 3.9 from running AFAIK. And if it does, it can and should be changed to be more compatible.


Quote
The only thing I know is that it cannot work without them, so I personally considered it would be at least worth a try. Unfortunately, as it seems, it neither can work with them.
Again, why would future development of OS3.1 depend on the vampire?


Quote from: Aegis;805202
Honest question here - not trying to be snarky or incite a flame war: do people honestly believe that potential Vampire 2 owners are more interested in running AROS on their Amigas than 3.x?
I think that most people are interested in being able to run both. It will most probably be possible to flash user kickstarts alongside the AROS kickstart and select the rom to be used from an early startup menu. But that needs some work and has relatively low priority.


Quote
I've tinkered with AROS (68k and x86) out of curiosity and I commend the devs for their dedication to the OS and the countless hours they've invested in making it *but* from my perspective the user-base seems tiny even in comparison to OS4 and MorphOS - having used it, I can't think of a single reason to run it on a classic Amiga - even one accelerated by a Vampire.
You must not mix up AROS and the AROS kickstart. While we also believe that AROS is an interesting opportunity, all this discussion is mostly about the kickstart to ship with the vampire.


Quote from: Thomas Richter;805256
All I can say is the following: Whenever I mention "closed source commercial software" in this forum, I get an uproar as if this would be something morally wrong, undesired.

That may be your personal perception. Or you oversimplify other peoples' statements.


Quote
Unfortunately, "closed source commerical software" is the only option for AmigaOs, due to the contracts of Hyperion with Amiga, Inc, and Hyperion is the only option as far as advancing the classic Os is. Yes, Cloanto has a license for 3.1, but no license to extend upon it
Has anybody seen any of those license contracts (except for some judges)? It's clear that a licensee empowered to sublicense may not grant more rights than he himself enjoys but I wouldn't sign a contract with any party anyway without actually seeing proof of their rights. In this case the proof would have to be a gapless chain of contracts reaching back to Commodore.


Quote
I believe the community made a decision, or at least Gunnar made a decision for the community. The signal is quite clear "Avoid AmigaOs classic, go AROS, ditch Hyperion."
That may be his preference. But who do you believe him to be that you think he could make such a decision for "the community"?


Quote
Why? Because the unwillingness to pay for the closed source licenses that go with the closed source development model. And, that in the end, pay development hours.
So your grudge is that Gunnar decided to not pay the bill for closed-source development of OS3.1?


Quote
Unfortunately, that's what the legal situation is with AmigaOs classic, and there are no means to fix it.
We could wait until Hyperion finally bites the dust and buy the relevant rights out of the bankruptcy assets. We might even be able to open-source it at last.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show only replies by grond
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #353 on: March 03, 2016, 01:46:17 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805262
The vampire should be developed such that  it runs under an unmodified AmigaOs and P96. This being said, there is  of course the opportunity to add hooks to profit from the extra features  it has.

Then Hyperion can go about and develop and sell an OS3.10 that supports the apollo's 64 bit mode. We are not going to stop them.


Quote
And my observation is: "There has been so much uproar against  closed source development that I don't see this makes sense, and that  the decision of the vampire against AmigaOs and for AROS sends a clear  signal, so I don't bother to waste my time with it".

Do you or don't you agree with that?
I can only answer for  myself: I legally own OS 3.1 and I never considered nor will I consider  buying OS 3.5 or 3.9. It would have to be a really attractive update in  order to make be buy that closed-source 3.10.


Quote from: Thomas Richter;805267
Essentially, it means that despite the lack  of proper licensing, a group (majority? minority?) of vampire users  will use the P96 rtg driver on P96 and not AROS. This is a commercial  use and a breach of the P96 license.

It is not. I have explained this several times and will not repeat it.  If you don't stop this, I might create a textblock to copy'n'paste each  time you bring this up...

What's so ridiculous about your ostentatious indignation is this: the  authors of Picasso told Gunnar to just go use picasso and in case some  serious money is made from it, they could talk again.

That's how much they care. So all your comments about this issue merely serve to show how much you care.


Quote from: kolla;805274
Really? Licensed by whom? If I was to buy a Vampire  at some point, I would want to use my own kickstart. Is this possible  too?

In fact it is. You will be able to get a vampire with an AROS kickstart.  You will also be able to have your personal copy of kick 3.1 patched  and flashed to the vampire for you. Eventually you will be able to flash  any kickstart you want alongside the AROS kickstart. You can also order  a vampire from kipper2k and buy a license for the kick 3.1 if you  haven't got it already. Brian bought a bunch of 3.1 rom licenses weeks  if not months ago.

I still don't get what all the uproar is about.


Quote from: Thomas Richter;805276
I'm asking for money for the original  developers that also spend a lot of time - probably more than 7 years -  to develop it.

Are you sure you are asking the money for them? They themselves didn't seem to be as interested in it as you are.


Quote
But please, then also share parts of the income to the people  that make this product possible (namely, Vampire on AmigaOs, to be  precise!), and that are *also* software developers that build the  original software stack.
OK. But first explain again why that  money would have to go through Hyperion in order to reach the picasso  authors. I think you mentioned that it was too much hassle for them to  accept money personally?


Quote
Apparently, you don't understand a thing here. It's about honesty  and ethnics.
Sorry, but I just haven't got enough trust in me to  still believe it's about ethics.


Quote
If I don't want to pay for the license for P96, I cannot simply  provide the P96 driver for AmigaOs.
Yes, I can if I wrote it  without using copyrighted IP which is the case with the apollo RTG  driver written by Jason McMullan.

Since you are so much about honesty, why should I license a product that  uses the cybergraphics API without a license? Wouldn't that make me  infringe the cybergraphics rights?


Quote
Try to understand the situation for just a moment from the  perspective of the P96 developers, please.
We do. It looks like  you don't. If any money will go from apollo/vampire to the picasso  authors, it will be by direct payment.
 

Offline AJCopland

Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #354 on: March 03, 2016, 01:46:22 PM »
Thomas I thought I should make clear that I'm not against you here, just arguing against you conflating unrelated things namely AmigaOS+Vampire+P96.

These are 3 separate items.

You can buy the Vampie2 for your A600 and use it with AmigaOS or AROS perfectly legally - the totally separate, optional, download of the P96 driver has no bearing on that.

If you want too then you can download the shareware (http://aminet.net/package/driver/video/Picasso96) Picasso96 from AmiNet and use that with the driver.

The driver is an open source, clean room, implementation using reversed engineered headers and so is legal in much the way that AMD cloned x86, or Apollo/TG86k/etc replicates the 680x0 ISA.

The only thing that would need paying for is Picasso96 from AmiNet as it's Shareware and the requested amount is $20... if anyone knows how to pay, or indeed how to contact someone in order too pay them, then that's the only part that needs any money to exchange hands.

I'd be happy to pay that, if there's a way to do so. Paypal? To whom?
Be Positive towards the Amiga community!
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show only replies by grond
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #355 on: March 03, 2016, 01:56:14 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805295
Neither - nor. Again, I'm not under NDA from Hyperion, we have no contract. Neither am I under NDA from T&A, nor do I have a contract in this direction. Nobody is paying me, and these are all my sole and only personal opinions.

We have understood your personal opinions. We have explained our opinion. I guess it's pointless to continue the discussion about this subject.


Quote
Call this my personal view on the affairs as an developer who helped once in P96 development,

I didn't know you were involved in P96 development.


Quote
and a developer who saw the demise of P96 due to a dishonest company (Elbox, namely) simply using P96 for their commercial products. I also see that this history just repeats.

What's to be learned from this? Don't be cheap and save the money for legal advise. The picasso license model just doesn't work legally.
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show only replies by grond
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #356 on: March 03, 2016, 02:01:41 PM »
Quote from: AJCopland;805288
The important part is that P96 is optional, the driver is a separate download, it does not *come-with* the Vampire so it does not require a license.

You can argue that someone who does download it, and does use it with AOS3.1, and does use all of the free (from the developers) tools might want to give them something but as Nicholas pointed out, and as we discussed earlier there's no actual license required here.

As a matter of fact, the picasso software available for download from aminet was published by the picasso authors as shareware. Clearly hardware manufacturers may either pay a license fee and include the software with their product or may leave it to their customer to collect the software themselves and pay the shareware fee.

EDIT: I just saw you mentioned the shareware issue in another posting. Anyway, as this cannot be pointed out often enough, I just leave this here...
« Last Edit: March 03, 2016, 02:14:30 PM by grond »
 

Offline grond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 154
    • Show only replies by grond
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #357 on: March 03, 2016, 02:13:18 PM »
Quote from: Thomas Richter;805295
I'm not under NDA from Hyperion, we have no contract. Neither am I under NDA from T&A, nor do I have a contract in this direction. Nobody is paying me

BTW, why aren't you taking part in the effort to make AROS a worthy replacement of AOS3.1?
 

guest11527

  • Guest
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #358 on: March 03, 2016, 02:13:31 PM »
Quote from: grond;805300
I can only answer for  myself: I legally own OS 3.1 and I never considered nor will I consider  buying OS 3.5 or 3.9. It would have to be a really attractive update in  order to make be buy that closed-source 3.10.
With the given resources, I doubt anyone can create something "really attractive". What I had in mind was mostly a really cleaned up version with some improvements here and there. It never got far enough to give you a price point.

Quote from: grond;805300
What's so ridiculous about your ostentatious indignation is this: the  authors of Picasso told Gunnar to just go use picasso and in case some  serious money is made from it, they could talk again.
Correct. Which happens at this point. It is sold to end users and now a commercial product. It has left the hobby-project development route.


Quote from: grond;805300
That's how much they care. So all your comments about this issue merely serve to show how much you care.
Which I understand. If you run the hardware as a hobby project on a non-profit basis, this is one thing. If you sell the hardware, this is another thing.


Quote from: grond;805300
Are you sure you are asking the money for them? They themselves didn't seem to be as interested in it as you are.
Part of the discussion was that P96 was to be bought completely by Hyerion (they currently only have a license). This money goes from Hyperion to T&A. Where is this money supposed to come from?



Quote from: grond;805300
OK. But first explain again why that  money would have to go through Hyperion in order to reach the picasso  authors. I think you mentioned that it was too much hassle for them to  accept money personally?
I do not know. They do not seem to be interested in making business with Gunnar directly. I can only speculate why.


Quote from: grond;805300
Since you are so much about honesty, why should I license a product that  uses the cybergraphics API without a license? Wouldn't that make me  infringe the cybergraphics rights?
That was what I understood as well. Then Kolla came along, was making again big noise and saying "I must be living under a rock, and everything should be fine with CGfx".

So in the end, all I can say is that I do not know. *If* CGfx requires a development licence, yes, indeed, the problem is right the same. If not, then even better, and just go ahead.


Quote from: grond;805300
We do. It looks like  you don't. If any money will go from apollo/vampire to the picasso  authors, it will be by direct payment.
If that would be case, everything would be fine. Maybe the question would arise how to organize then P96 updates, but that's then a secondary question which could be clarified then.

Look, I have little problem excluding Hyperion if T&A are paid directly. I'm not exactly a fan of them either. However, it seems that there is currently no ongoing negotiations between Gunnar and T&A whatsoever. My understanding of the situation is that P96 has been or will be sold in total to Hyperion (by money, of course), in which case T&A would be no longer part of the game because they no longer want to be part of the game. Negotiations are then to be made with Hyperion.

Unfortunately, as long as T&A are the authors and owners of P96, they are part of the story, and you simply cannot ignore license conditions because they don't want to negotiate with you directly. To whom they sell under which conditions is entirely their choice.

The license conditions of P96 do not suddenly disappear. It seemed to me that there were negitations between Hyperion and the P96 authors, so *that* part of the story should have worked, at least. What the outcome of this is I cannot answer because I do not know at present time. It's not my business either.
 

Offline Niding

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2004
  • Posts: 566
    • Show only replies by Niding
Re: [UserReview] Vampire V2-128 received and it's just pure p0rn.
« Reply #359 from previous page: March 03, 2016, 02:44:02 PM »
@Thomas

I think many Amiga users are more than willing to pay a decent amount for improved OS, soft/hardware.
Its why we have "harassed" AeonKit about Prisma soundcard. Ofcourse, now they have waited so long that I fear they get stuck with the hardware since "everybody" is using Vampire to play sound since CPU can easily take the load.
Question is ofcourse if Prisma can offload the Vampire freeing it up to get even better performance while multitasking other programs/games.

People bought AOS4.1FE just to emulate it, and from what I understand it sold in relativly good quantities.
Wether or not the "potential" sales due to Vampire is enough for developers to update their software/drivers...Who knows...

But it seems Apollo Team is quite open with information, so if they keep updating us with salesfigures, the potential can be somewhat calculated.
People buying Vampire are of the more active members of this community, and I would expect a share of them are willing to pay a few bucks here and there for new software.

And getting offended by Kolla seems like setting yourself up for constant grief. Hes a loose cannon on deck, shooting at everybody ;) (eg veit du har mykje kunnskap kolla, men du liker å ..diskutere.. franko style :) )
« Last Edit: March 03, 2016, 02:48:03 PM by Niding »