28-Mar-2024 19:16 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
[Rant] osopinion: Close That Open Hardware!ANN.lu
Posted on 12-Jun-2002 00:21 GMT by sutro169 comments
View flat
View list
A rather unispired article at best. Read here for more.
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Alkis Tsapanidis11-Jun-2002 22:36 GMT
Comment 2TBone11-Jun-2002 23:31 GMT
Comment 3[JC]11-Jun-2002 23:31 GMT
Comment 4gz12-Jun-2002 00:16 GMT
Comment 5Adam Kowalczyk12-Jun-2002 00:24 GMT
Comment 6Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 00:51 GMT
Comment 7Björn Hagström12-Jun-2002 02:59 GMT
Comment 8Adam Kowalczyk12-Jun-2002 03:00 GMT
Comment 9gz12-Jun-2002 04:27 GMT
Comment 10Bill Hoggett12-Jun-2002 05:23 GMT
Comment 11Samface12-Jun-2002 05:31 GMT
Comment 12Casper12-Jun-2002 05:40 GMT
Comment 13kjetil12-Jun-2002 05:50 GMT
Comment 14Seehund12-Jun-2002 07:03 GMT
Comment 15Jack Me12-Jun-2002 07:25 GMT
Comment 16MadGun6812-Jun-2002 07:47 GMT
Comment 17Seehund12-Jun-2002 07:52 GMT
Comment 18Treke12-Jun-2002 07:57 GMT
Comment 19tinman12-Jun-2002 07:59 GMT
Comment 20Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 08:01 GMT
Comment 21Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 08:10 GMT
Comment 22Björn Hagström12-Jun-2002 08:30 GMT
Comment 23Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 08:42 GMT
Comment 24Samface12-Jun-2002 09:11 GMT
Comment 25adavidm12-Jun-2002 09:35 GMT
Comment 26DaveW12-Jun-2002 09:37 GMT
Comment 27Henning Nielsen Lund12-Jun-2002 09:42 GMT
Comment 28Tbone12-Jun-2002 09:43 GMT
Comment 29Henning Lund12-Jun-2002 09:47 GMT
Comment 30adavidm12-Jun-2002 09:48 GMT
Comment 31Tbone12-Jun-2002 10:05 GMT
Comment 32TBone12-Jun-2002 10:08 GMT
Comment 33Björn Hagström12-Jun-2002 10:17 GMT
Comment 34Samface12-Jun-2002 10:20 GMT
Comment 35Henning Lund12-Jun-2002 10:20 GMT
Comment 36Seehund12-Jun-2002 10:21 GMT
Comment 37Janne Sirén12-Jun-2002 10:35 GMT
Comment 38Samface12-Jun-2002 10:42 GMT
Comment 39Janne Sirén12-Jun-2002 10:43 GMT
Comment 40Samface12-Jun-2002 10:47 GMT
Comment 41Seehund12-Jun-2002 10:47 GMT
Comment 42Seehund12-Jun-2002 10:53 GMT
Comment 43TBone12-Jun-2002 10:53 GMT
Comment 44Samface12-Jun-2002 10:56 GMT
Comment 45Samface12-Jun-2002 10:58 GMT
Comment 46Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 10:58 GMT
Comment 47TBone12-Jun-2002 11:01 GMT
Comment 48Janne Sirén12-Jun-2002 11:04 GMT
Comment 49Janne Sirén12-Jun-2002 11:07 GMT
Comment 50Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 11:12 GMT
Comment 51TBone12-Jun-2002 11:14 GMT
Comment 52Samface12-Jun-2002 11:50 GMT
Comment 53Adam Kowalczyk12-Jun-2002 11:55 GMT
Comment 54Samface12-Jun-2002 12:14 GMT
Comment 55Bill Hoggett12-Jun-2002 12:21 GMT
Comment 56dammy12-Jun-2002 12:35 GMT
Comment 57Björn Hagström12-Jun-2002 12:46 GMT
Comment 58Jeff12-Jun-2002 12:51 GMT
Comment 59Janne Sirén12-Jun-2002 12:59 GMT
Comment 60Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 13:06 GMT
Comment 61Janne Sirén12-Jun-2002 13:18 GMT
Comment 62[JC]12-Jun-2002 13:23 GMT
Comment 63Troels Ersking12-Jun-2002 13:31 GMT
Comment 64Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 13:34 GMT
Comment 65DaveW12-Jun-2002 13:56 GMT
Comment 66|Lando|12-Jun-2002 13:57 GMT
Comment 67Don Cox12-Jun-2002 14:10 GMT
Comment 68Adam Kowalczyk12-Jun-2002 14:11 GMT
Comment 69DaveW12-Jun-2002 14:18 GMT
Comment 70DaveW12-Jun-2002 14:35 GMT
Comment 71Anonymous12-Jun-2002 16:30 GMT
Comment 72Anonymous12-Jun-2002 16:35 GMT
Comment 73anonymous12-Jun-2002 17:52 GMT
Comment 743seas12-Jun-2002 18:17 GMT
Comment 75Marcus Sundman12-Jun-2002 19:13 GMT
Comment 76Mikael Burman12-Jun-2002 20:55 GMT
Comment 77Samface13-Jun-2002 06:03 GMT
Comment 78Samface13-Jun-2002 07:26 GMT
Comment 79Solar13-Jun-2002 07:35 GMT
Comment 80Samface13-Jun-2002 07:52 GMT
Comment 81Akaru13-Jun-2002 08:01 GMT
Comment 82Anonymous13-Jun-2002 08:07 GMT
Comment 83Solar13-Jun-2002 08:35 GMT
Comment 84Seehund13-Jun-2002 09:04 GMT
Comment 85Akaru13-Jun-2002 09:10 GMT
Comment 86Seehund13-Jun-2002 09:15 GMT
Comment 87Seehund13-Jun-2002 09:21 GMT
Comment 88Samface13-Jun-2002 10:11 GMT
Comment 89Samface13-Jun-2002 10:28 GMT
Comment 90Janne Sirén13-Jun-2002 10:56 GMT
Comment 91Seehund13-Jun-2002 11:07 GMT
Comment 92Seehund13-Jun-2002 11:18 GMT
Comment 93Janne Sirén13-Jun-2002 11:22 GMT
Comment 94Samface13-Jun-2002 11:23 GMT
Comment 95Samface13-Jun-2002 11:34 GMT
Comment 96Samface13-Jun-2002 11:45 GMT
Comment 97Marcus Sundman13-Jun-2002 11:58 GMT
Comment 98Samface13-Jun-2002 12:09 GMT
Comment 99Marcus Sundman13-Jun-2002 12:24 GMT
Comment 100Henning Nielsen Lund13-Jun-2002 12:27 GMT
Comment 101Samface13-Jun-2002 12:29 GMT
Comment 102Marcus Sundman13-Jun-2002 12:32 GMT
Comment 103Chisholm13-Jun-2002 13:56 GMT
Comment 104Charlie13-Jun-2002 14:28 GMT
Comment 105[JC]13-Jun-2002 15:27 GMT
Comment 106Charlie13-Jun-2002 18:33 GMT
Comment 107Brad13-Jun-2002 21:28 GMT
Comment 108[JC]14-Jun-2002 01:26 GMT
Comment 109Marcus Sundman14-Jun-2002 06:04 GMT
Comment 110Marcus Sundman14-Jun-2002 06:13 GMT
Comment 111Solar14-Jun-2002 07:26 GMT
Comment 112Seehund14-Jun-2002 09:07 GMT
Comment 113hgm14-Jun-2002 10:05 GMT
Comment 114DaveW14-Jun-2002 10:07 GMT
Comment 115Janne Sirén14-Jun-2002 11:40 GMT
Comment 116Adam Kowalczyk14-Jun-2002 12:01 GMT
Comment 117Janne Sirén14-Jun-2002 12:09 GMT
Comment 118hgm14-Jun-2002 14:16 GMT
Comment 119Adam Kowalczyk14-Jun-2002 14:40 GMT
Comment 120Adam Kowalczyk14-Jun-2002 14:44 GMT
Comment 121Marcus Sundman14-Jun-2002 16:17 GMT
Comment 122Adam Kowalczyk14-Jun-2002 16:56 GMT
Comment 123Seehund14-Jun-2002 17:20 GMT
Comment 124Adam Kowalczyk14-Jun-2002 17:48 GMT
Comment 125Alkis Tsapanidis14-Jun-2002 22:26 GMT
Comment 126Adam Kowalczyk14-Jun-2002 23:49 GMT
Comment 127Alkis Tsapanidis15-Jun-2002 00:07 GMT
Comment 128Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 00:39 GMT
Comment 129DDiehl15-Jun-2002 02:45 GMT
Comment 130Samface15-Jun-2002 05:37 GMT
Comment 131Samface15-Jun-2002 05:39 GMT
Comment 132Samface15-Jun-2002 06:01 GMT
Comment 133gz15-Jun-2002 07:23 GMT
Comment 134Samface15-Jun-2002 07:40 GMT
Comment 135Alkis Tsapanidis15-Jun-2002 08:09 GMT
Comment 136Samface15-Jun-2002 08:20 GMT
Comment 137hgm15-Jun-2002 08:23 GMT
Comment 138Samface15-Jun-2002 09:14 GMT
Comment 139Alkis Tsapanidis15-Jun-2002 09:26 GMT
Comment 140Samface15-Jun-2002 09:58 GMT
Comment 141Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 12:26 GMT
Comment 142Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 12:36 GMT
Comment 143Janne Sirén15-Jun-2002 15:00 GMT
Comment 144Janne Sirén15-Jun-2002 15:36 GMT
Comment 145Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 16:21 GMT
Comment 146Janne Sirén15-Jun-2002 18:42 GMT
Comment 147Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 19:51 GMT
Comment 148Janne Sirén15-Jun-2002 20:47 GMT
Comment 149TBone15-Jun-2002 21:03 GMT
Comment 150Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 21:53 GMT
Comment 151Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 22:32 GMT
Comment 152Alkis Tsapanidis15-Jun-2002 23:23 GMT
Comment 153Adam Kowalczyk15-Jun-2002 23:29 GMT
Comment 154Alkis Tsapanidis16-Jun-2002 00:07 GMT
Comment 155Adam Kowalczyk16-Jun-2002 00:24 GMT
Comment 156DDiehl16-Jun-2002 05:03 GMT
Comment 157Samface16-Jun-2002 05:56 GMT
Comment 158hgm16-Jun-2002 07:39 GMT
Comment 159Janne Sirén16-Jun-2002 14:25 GMT
Comment 160Janne Sirén16-Jun-2002 14:31 GMT
Comment 161Janne Sirén16-Jun-2002 14:42 GMT
Comment 162Janne Sirén16-Jun-2002 15:04 GMT
Comment 163DDiehl16-Jun-2002 21:44 GMT
Comment 164Samface17-Jun-2002 08:16 GMT
osopinion: Close That Open Hardware! : Comment 165 of 169ANN.lu
Posted by Janne Sirén on 17-Jun-2002 16:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 164 (Samface):
Samface, since we are obviously getting nowhere, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I still think the petition has its rightful place amongst us, no matter its shortcomings.
>But, it's still based on innaccurate facts which he tells everyone about while
>trying to convince us about his opinion.
I believe the relevant facts to be accurate, namely those listed by Bill McEwen in his executive update. You seem to disagree.
>Hrm... He's complaining about the AmigaOS beeing tied to propriety hardware
>(such as the AmigaOne) while at the same time claiming there is no Amiga
>specific hardware?
Again, you see it differently. I see it as standard hardware with a dongle and licensed badge. Sure, Eyetech played a vital role in getting it to us. Kudos to them, really. But it is still a far cry from the custom Amigas of the past. I see this part of the article and petition reflecting this view on the matter. You obviously see it differently.
>Why do you constantly deny it's existence?
I do not deny the existence of AmigaOne. I just believe the assertion made in the petition about no new "Amigas" existing anymore to be accurate at this time. It is made to separate the past situation from the present, and I respect that - and do feel it is sufficiently accurate.
Also, I don't think this is relevant for the main point of the petition. You obviously disagree and I doubt there is much left we can work from in this discussion.
>> Well, even myself thought we'd be getting an open hardware platform. I was
>Where did you get this idea from? Noone *ever* said that the AmigaOS4
Actually, I don't know. I never claimed anyone said so, I'm not sure whether anyone did or didn't. I do not know. Perhaps it was Ben Hermans comments about different platforms like exploring the possibility of Macintosh, bPlan support requiring only that dev board - that led me to think in such a way, perhaps it was the logic in it, given that the hardware is pretty much standard. But I still perceived it that way, and I doubt I was alone.
I was merely defending the one part of the article or the petition were former beliefs of the Amiga community were discussed. I certainly felt some of the same stuff the petition's writer seems to have gone through. I do follow these forums, news and other Amiga sources intensely but I was still lead to that conclusion. Whether or not it was because plans changed or I was simply wrong to assume such a thing, I don't know.
>Just face it, you jumped into conclusions and you got nobody but yourselves
>to blame for this.
Perhaps, in that sense, I did. Perhaps, considering the way Ben Hermans and Hyperion discussed some of these issues, I did not. Perhaps the people who wrote the petition did so or didn't, as well. Hey, I never said otherwise. I don't know whether or not plans really changed, just that I felt my expectations based on past knowledge differed from the plans laid out in the executive update.
I'm not going to blame anyone for it, not even myself, since it is not anywhere near relevant or important. If indeed myself and others were simply mistaken and no such plans were really in the works at any time, perhaps this part of the article deserves some kind of a retraction. (The comments by Hyperion should be explained, though.) Nevertheless, I still do find it a quite minor detail when compared to the main point in the petition.
You talk as if this fact that a bunch of people (okay, perhaps just the two of us, me and Seehund, no matter how unlikely that may be) were mistaken in their expectations somehow invalidates the actual meat in the petition. I hope this is not really what you are saying.
>They are still the ones to decide which hardware they will support.
Sure, they are. The thing is, with the license, they add the requirement that someone else has to decide - and more than just send out a dev CD - as well. It is an added obstacle. Whether or not you believe that obstacle to be necessary or not is your cue to sign or not to sign. I still have not.
>Also, Amiga owns the brand and that's why they get to decide what is
>the "Amiga" platform, noone but Amiga Inc. is entitled to this.
We are hardly disputing their claim to the Amiga name, or their right to dictate its fate (within the boundaries of their ownership). The people who signed the petition are just expressing an opinion. They are entitled to, and nobody is entitled to take that right away from them.
>None of *us* paid $5 million for the brand and therefore it's not "our"
>platform.
I never said it was. But nobody paid $5 for us either. Nor could anyone. We are still individuals with a right to make up our own minds and express our opinions. And feedback is still valuable to any company.
I have already admitted that there are flaws in the petition. I think discussing them is good. But there are still strong points, and no evidence of bad faith has been proven, so I still find it a respectable effort to voice ones concerns. I hope it does well.
So, in case you have nothing to add (if you do, I will still check in to reply), I'll just have to agree to disagree with you. Thank you for the discussion, all.
Jump...
#168 Samface
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 166hgm18-Jun-2002 08:40 GMT
Comment 167Adam Kowalczyk18-Jun-2002 11:59 GMT
Comment 168Samface20-Jun-2002 16:07 GMT
Comment 169Janne Sirén21-Jun-2002 11:55 GMT
Back to Top