|In reply to Comment 57 (Samface):|
> The Amiga market is not a freeware or open-source market, a commercial market
> depends on licensing and bundling issues in order to be user-friendly,
> competitive and above all; profitable.
I don't agree at all (unexpected, eh? ;))
OS/hardware bundling and licensing can be a good thing in this aspect, but not if it's compulsory. Distributors who wish to sell OS/hardware bundles to those who wish could very well be required to get a license to do so, but a software company trying to control the entire hardware market for its OS is plain evil.
What's the competitive advantage for AmigaOS, compared to other OSes, if it can only be sold bundled with licensed hardware from licensed dealers? What's not anti-competitive about forcing hardware distributors to modify the BIOS of their hardware, bundle a certain OS with their hardware and get a license just to be allowed to sell their hardware to a certain OS user market segment?
Will a piece of software sell in larger numbers if it's only available together with certain licensed hardware from certain licensed distributors than if it was available separately and could be installed on any hardware from any distributor of the user's choice? I think not. Common market economics sense says so too. Will a piece of hardware be more expensive if it has to get its BIOS modified, its distributor and his organisation licensed and it has to be separated from the rest of the market for the exact same hardware product? Of course. It's so blatantly obvious that it hurts.
> It's a common thing and an evil necessity on all major platforms out there.
Huh?? Like which major end-user/consumer platform? AFAIK, only Apple does something even remotely similar, but then again they make their living on designing, making and selling their own hardware.