Amiga, Inc: Close That Open Hardware!

[Alkemyst]

@Kronos still you made your choice now live with it.

I also don't worry bout anything, I just can't stand it when people try to
blame Genesi for something decided by AInc/Hyperion.

It takes 2 to tango.

Its Genesi's fault for deciding not to apply for a license.

But the point stands: Hyperion is loosing potential buyers for their OS
every day Genesi sells one board, and they will loose alot more before
they even have somthing to sell.

Dont worry your self about it OK .
You & others have gotten what you payed for so be happy & stop worrying about Aos4 & the Aone.

[zacman]

This whole thread makes at this time actually no
sense. Hyperion doesn't even have OS4 out for
Classic Amiga (which was reported to have top
priority - however I think that has changed because
OS4 for AmigaOne has been announced to be
launched at Cebit, which doesn't mean that it will not
be sold before according to most people - so the top
priority is now AmigaOne if you ask me when they
want to have it out before March) nor for AmigaOne
at the moment. So I really doubt they have much
time for any other hardware ATM.

[The_Editor]

Yeah ...But 2 pci slots ?...NO AGP ?


YUCK

The_Editor


its got a fare share of onboard amenities... sound/video/dual gigabit ethernet/dual ide raid/etc... 2 pci slots could add a better video card and a firewire card.
It could be fine.

[ackcontrols]

    What would drive someone to buy the Barbie and not the Teron board or the Pegasos?  The price would have to be incredibly appealing to accept the lack of an AGP slot and only 2 PCI slots.  Is it really for sale?  Software sells hardware....people keep forgetting this.  I know a lot of people that bought the Xbox to play Halo.  
   
    What I find hilarious is that people have professed that the Pegasos is so much more superior to the AmigaOne when in reality their specifications are very close.  Given that, the Barbie doesn't look like a viable contender in this market.  
   
     Oddly enough....I'm sure people would buy it if it ran OS4.0 and the price was right.  So here's a case where maybe the board designer should consider a license...unless the demand for the Barbie is already so high that a  few more sales to Amiga customers isn't worth the hassle.

See I would buy Barbie ...its got many features that would make it nice for a little toy/server... actually its perfect for a server... its PPC so it would run quiet/cool and be reliable...its got IDE raid... it can be put into a 1U easily... and its got dual gigabit nic's...I considerd Barbie a long time ago as a cheap integrated server box for my home LAN...but it isnt out yet...if it ran AOS4 I'd consider it again... of course it wouldnt be ideal for a desktop but for a server it would be just fine...and it would be cool to see what a company like Merlancia/extreme-computing/etc could do to make a nice case for a board like that?... I mean you could cram that board into a very small space and maybe market it as a 0-footprint? I dunno...we may never find out ... but I agree we need to wait because its possible AOS4 might be released retail someday and make its way onto this board... it has a niche...it could be exploited and used for the benefit of the community...

[ackcontrols]

So the Barbie isn't available and noone really has an idea of what it would cost.  It does look more for the server market as I agree that this is where the PPC has a larger application.  I could also point you to a board that is for sale that is based on the PPC8245 from ArtisMicro.  Ironically, it's an A3000  

[Damion]

Samface wrote:

>The Barbie? I'm sorry but that Linux dude is the
>kind of guy that expects others to create software
>specificly for his hardware on their own initiative.
>That's not how it works. If he gets a userbase for
>his hardware than maybe, but that on the other hand
>requires software for it.

Once again here you're completely missing (or dodging?)
the point again...remember you telling us about how
the software defined the platform? How you can use this
ghetto argument to justify the license scenario is
not only silly, but once again contradicts your own
definition of 'platform'.:-P The hardware is just as
important as the software, and has equal defining
imperative, just read your definition if you don't
believe me. This being the case, to unnecessarily
force this decision upon the users is questionable,
considering that even Microsoft allows its users
to choose their hardware (because Microsoft is a
software company, like A - Inc) and also makes the
platform less appealing to new users, observing
especially the social paramemters of the capitalist
'ethos'.

@Rogue

Nobody said that OS4 would just fire up and run
perfect on anything 'pop 3', you kind of missed it
there. The issue was that the ability for the
OS to run on anything but the special Teron (I'm
not counting those old - ass p5 PPC boards, and the
Sharks aren't here yet, 'if' the Sharks run it)
is now not possible due to the license scenario...
if necessary, drivers could be written to adapt
the OS to different hardware configurations, just
like Linux/Windows.

@Madgun

So....why not have both options available?  
If those hubcaps had to go only on an '86 escort,
how many people would still buy them, even if they
were totally slick? :-P

Just a general question, is there anybody here
who would totally support a license campaign if
there wasn't one? Since it's been proved that
piracy is not the real issue, would you actually
want to limit the OS instead of allowing the
possibility for different hardware options,
provided the support for drivers?

[420Dude]

Yo -D-!
not only are your views of knowledgable content and wisely versed,
           i also dig your avata (tell that aint a J)
blaze one for the nation! :-D  :-D

[Damion]

LOL! Thanks, 420Dude!:-) It's my version of LX -8,
with a little help from mips_proc and amigaguy's
versions...

hehehe

[DaveP]

"This being the case, to unnecessarily
force this decision upon the users is questionable,
considering that even Microsoft allows its users
to choose their hardware."

This was not through their own choice, in fact comparing Microsoft with Amiga Inc is erroneous in the extreme. Microsoft NEVER OWNED the rights the hardware - the bundle was IBM PCs with MSDOS and then IBM struck a deal with Amstrad to produce
compatibles and the whole thing evolved from there.

In fact with XP MicroSoft limits your choice by only
allowing a certain number of hardware changes per
non OEM copy of the OS before a re-registration has to take place.

The starting premise is in fact totally different. The Amiga has come from a closed system and is in a tiny market wheras MicroSoft has been able to capitalise on top of a market that was diverse through (originally) a licensing scheme that was not of its own writing.

You see I don't mind this licensing scheme firstly because moving an OS between different hardware platforms is more than a matter ( same chipset and BIOS aside ) of just drivers.

But the main reason I don't mind it is because it pulled the rug from under BPlan/MorphOS's feet when their advocates were going on about how you would be able to buy a Pegasos *THAT BOOTED BY DEFAULT INTO MORPHOS* and later install AmigaOS if you found that MorphOS was not for you. The marketing slant being similar of course to bundling IE with Windows 9x.

The whole situation exposed what is now Genesi as a business that wanted to use the Pegasos to sell MorphOS and had no interest in selling Pegasos as "Amigas" that shipped with AmigaOS at the exclusion of MorphOS if the consumer so wished.

In fact when I made a formal enquiry about reselling Pegasos boards as AmigaONEs I was told that as a vendor I would not be allowed to unbundle MorphOS and put it through the Amiga Inc. licensing scheme as part of the conditions of a volume purchase.

So, for exposing the anti-competative practices of Genesi alone I think the licensing scheme is worth it.

So, Genesi - CLOSE THAT OPEN HARDWARE eh?

Now, why should Amiga Inc weaken its position and not Genesi hmmmm? Who would possibly want that? Seehund, yes but who is behind him apart from a screaming bunch of MorphOS fanatics and a smaller bunch of AmigaOS fanatics that see the word "open" and worship it like a god.

There are too many business interests thinking they
are being oh-so-clever by only talking about the real deal via e-mail and hiding behind zealouts who spread their marketing propaganda for them ( in the process recruiting others that haven't grown up one bit since being in playground gangs ).

Sure the licensing scheme is there to piss of Genesi and do unto Genesi what Genesi wanted to do unto Amiga Inc with its own bundling scheme.

Good.  :-D

[420Dude]

Back@-D-
did you see (by the way) L8-x's megacool photo of himself, in the parking lot at the end of another workday? its worth a view, i already e-mailed it to several freinds.. Peace@ya God loves you

ps
its in the thread allegedly associating me with drugs (all fiction imaginings of a confessed boring person)
                                          ;-)
                  ;-)                     ;-)                       ;-)
                                      :-D  :-D  :-D  :
                                                      :-D
                                                         :-D

[Kronos]

@DaveP

What are you on ?

Yes any Pegasos will ship with MorphOS, just like any Mac
ships with MacOS and every A1 is gonna ship with OS4.

But thats NOT the point of the petition, it is about OS4 being
sold without the HW, to use it on a Pegasos or Mac.

And remember it was Hyperion who talked about running OS4 on Macs
and Pegasos before April. BPlan haven't changed their stance a bit:

If they want to sell their SW for our HW, than they are free to do
it, but we won't give them any special treatment.

Both A1 and Pegasos are NOT closed, it is the OSes that are, and
Genesi atleast haven't ruled out selling MorphOS shrink-wrapped for
A1 or Mac.

[DaveP]

"Just a general question, is there anybody here
who would totally support a license campaign if
there wasn't one?"

Yep.

" Since it's been proved that
piracy is not the real issue, "
Has anyone *proven* that? I see a lot of speculation. Frankly I don't really care if it is.

"would you actually
want to limit the OS instead of allowing the
possibility for different hardware options,
provided the support for drivers? "

The only limit is the motherboard and chipsets supported. You are not limited ( unlike with MicroSoft ) by third party cards and not even in processor.

Here is the real question, given the Amiga "community" can't even muster the enthusiasm for porting browers and the like and Genesi is terrified of Open Hardware ( Bill Bucks fear of PPC Linux sales of the Teron CX and call
for Amiga Inc to abandon the AmigaONE to close
the marketplace to custom ( Pegasos ) solutions) do you think the availability of AmigaOS would increase on different platforms?

You see insufficient Mac users use Linux to even get Mandrake upgraded from 8.2 or to even port it themselves. Average Joes buy Macs to use MacOS not to install an OS that has less support and has less exposure as a brand than MacOS. Those that want free beer buy cheap PC hardware and either run the OEM OS ( Windows ) or download and install Linux.

There is this mythical market that Seehund and the MOS fanatics seem to pluck out of thin air to support their arguments every time someone criticises the petition or the PR damage that it is doing to Amiga Inc.

Call me a cynic but I think Seehund just wanted to cause maximum PR damage to Amiga Inc in favour of Genesi and not for the "open" reasons that he states but I don't expect him to admit it for at least a year has gone by.

Where was he complaining about Genesi when Bill Buck made his infamous anti-Linux and anti-open PPC public plea?

DaveP it isnt a matter of 'Genesi' its a matter of AOS not bieng retail...and limiting the solutions to just the AmigaOne G3/G4 models.....I dont want an AmigaOne I'd prefer a Pegasos or Barbie to the A1.... and AOS4 could easily have gotten onto those two boards....I'm not gonna sit and say that Genesi wanted to sacrifice MOS to make A.inc happy...of course not...they want their OS to succeed and with good reason they actually put hard work into it... so they care about it...