| [Rant] osopinion: Close That Open Hardware! | ANN.lu |
| Posted on 12-Jun-2002 00:21 GMT by sutro | 169 comments
View flat
View list | |
A rather unispired article at best. Read
here for more.
|
|
| List of all comments to this article |
| osopinion: Close That Open Hardware! : Comment 36 of 169 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Seehund on 12-Jun-2002 10:21 GMT | In reply to Comment 24 (Samface):
> 1. What you read at amiga.com is a statement explaining the license agreement
> terms, not the actual license. If you have concerns about it, contact Amiga Inc.
> for a clarification. Have you tried that yet? I didn't think so.
Once again, it is the basic principles of compulsory licensing, compulsory OS/hardware bundling and compulsory hardware-vendor provided hardware license verification means (a.k.a. "piracy-protection") as officially outlined by Amiga Inc. that we who signed the petition are disagreeing with. As for detailed clarification from Amiga Inc., Gary Peake didn't provide any when I asked him, I just got a repetition of the poor excuses in the "executive update", i.e. the policies would somehow be necessary for "anti-piracy" and "quality control" reasons.
Maybe you have been privy to seeing a license agreement document in its entirety and know that the details and technicalities change everything and they turn the publicly outlined basic principles into a meaningless pack of lies? If that's the case I just wonder why Amiga Inc. chose to present something that wouldn't be a result of those oh-so important details. Why did they do that? Come on Samface, tell us, you surely seem to have inside knowledge?
> 2. It's NOT restricting AmigaOS4 from running from running on specific
> hardware, it's *enabling* AmigaOS4 to run on whatever hardware. All it takes
> is an application sent in to Amiga Inc. for a license. Those NOT applying for
> a license is the ones restricting their hardware, not Amiga Inc. It's a
I'm breathless. Once again, it is up to the software developer to make his software run on as much hardware as possible. Hardware vendors not applying for a license are not restricting their hardware. It is their hardware and they sell it just like they've always done, without bothering about licenses, which OSs run on their hardware and without selling any little crazy sofwtare vendors' products together with their hardware.
Come on! If a software vendor sets up terms, any terms, governing which hardware is to be *allowed* to run their software product, then you can't seriously claim that it's the HARDWARE vendor who's restricting his hardware - it's not he who made up the terms in the first place.
> *fact* that they cannot make hardware support without cooperation from the
> hardware manufacturer. An "open hardware" OS based on POP is an impossible
> dream of yours.
You speak as if compulsory licensing is a prerequisite to get cooperation from hardware vendors. That's rediculous. If anything it's an obstacle against getting that cooperation. As for "open hardware OS based on POP" I'm not sure what you're talking about.
> 3. Please stop making up lies such as only one "new" hardware is supported, I
> thought you said you have read the announcement at Amiga.com? Get your facts
> straight...
If that's a lie then I'm not the one who made it up:
"As a result, AmigaOS4 and all future versions will ship only on those hardware products to which Amiga Inc has specifically granted a license [...]
Currently this hardware comprises:
* Eyetech's AmigaOne series of PPC motherboards
* Cyberstorm-PPC accelerators by phase 5/DCE
* Blizzard-PPC accelerators by phase5/DCE"
Spot the "new" hardware, Samface. Hint: You can count the number on my middle-finger. When accusing somebody of lying, make sure that you either can back up your accusations or that the facts aren't available in public. (BTW I didn't write "supported", I wrote "licensed")
> 4. Without the license, Amiga Inc. will have to make individual partnership
> agreements with each hardware manufacturer if they want AmigaOS4 to support
> (this is the way they made it before, remember?).
No! No! NO! I can't even imagine where you get these ideas from? The software developer sends an e-mail politely asking for software developer documentation for the hardware, just like things have always been. It's WITH the license that individual agreements are necessary. Sweet bejebus. |
|
| List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|
