24-Apr-2024 23:28 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
[News] Amiga Inc Exec Sept 02 UpdateANN.lu
Posted on 06-Sep-2002 00:56 GMT by Loki91 comments
View flat
View list
Amiga Inc has a new Executive Update! Check oout the exec update: Click!
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1JoannaK06-Sep-2002 00:24 GMT
Comment 2the man in the shadows06-Sep-2002 02:33 GMT
Comment 3cheesegrate06-Sep-2002 03:43 GMT
Comment 4NihilVor06-Sep-2002 03:55 GMT
Comment 5dammy06-Sep-2002 04:00 GMT
Comment 6cheesegrate06-Sep-2002 04:06 GMT
Comment 7Björn Hagström06-Sep-2002 04:35 GMT
Comment 8Don Cox06-Sep-2002 05:30 GMT
Comment 9Don Cox06-Sep-2002 05:32 GMT
Comment 10Desmon06-Sep-2002 06:26 GMT
Comment 11cheesegrate06-Sep-2002 06:35 GMT
Comment 12Ole-Egil06-Sep-2002 06:35 GMT
Comment 13derf06-Sep-2002 06:38 GMT
Comment 14Anonymous06-Sep-2002 06:41 GMT
Comment 15Mikey C06-Sep-2002 07:39 GMT
Comment 16Don Cox06-Sep-2002 07:41 GMT
Comment 17Radfoo06-Sep-2002 07:44 GMT
Comment 18JoannaK06-Sep-2002 08:24 GMT
Comment 19priest06-Sep-2002 08:31 GMT
Comment 20Anonymous06-Sep-2002 08:34 GMT
Comment 21Budda06-Sep-2002 08:35 GMT
Comment 22Mikey C06-Sep-2002 08:46 GMT
Comment 23JoannaK06-Sep-2002 09:23 GMT
Comment 24Anonymous06-Sep-2002 09:36 GMT
Comment 25takemehomegrandma06-Sep-2002 09:50 GMT
Comment 26Johan "Graak" Forsberg06-Sep-2002 09:54 GMT
Comment 27Jon06-Sep-2002 09:55 GMT
Comment 28koan06-Sep-2002 10:03 GMT
Comment 29dammy06-Sep-2002 11:14 GMT
Comment 30dammy06-Sep-2002 11:25 GMT
Comment 31Anonymous06-Sep-2002 12:06 GMT
Comment 32Christophe Decanini06-Sep-2002 14:07 GMT
Comment 33Anonymous06-Sep-2002 14:13 GMT
Comment 34Joe Vidueira06-Sep-2002 14:24 GMT
Comment 35Anonymous06-Sep-2002 14:43 GMT
Comment 36SlimJim06-Sep-2002 14:51 GMT
Comment 37Christophe Decanini06-Sep-2002 14:52 GMT
Comment 38MIKE06-Sep-2002 15:49 GMT
Comment 39MIKE06-Sep-2002 15:52 GMT
Comment 40MIKE06-Sep-2002 16:08 GMT
Comment 41Bandaren06-Sep-2002 16:33 GMT
Comment 42Christophe Decanini06-Sep-2002 17:05 GMT
Amiga Inc Exec Sept 02 Update : Comment 43 of 91ANN.lu
Posted by dammy on 06-Sep-2002 18:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (SlimJim):
Posted by SlimJim (130.235.59.132) on 06-Sep-2002 16:51:23
> Who is most the most blind follower of the name I wonder, - those accepting
> that paying money for a brand means ownership of it,
> or those refusing to call the company anything else but 'Amino' because its
> policies doesn't fit with their own personal vision of what the name 'Amiga'
> should mean?
Except of course, it wasn't a noble cause of buying the Amiga name for the community, to support the community. It was clearly a vehicle for them to establish themselves in a marketplace as "existing" entity that could bring in (and failed) developers by the loads and Venture Capital based on the Fanatics coding night and day for a decent JAVA OS. Once you admit to yourself, it has been about them (Billed&Fleeced), and only about them and their thirst for VC, you can realise that this who "Amiga Kommunity" has been a scam over the easily duped. As the VC funds get tapped out, here comes a new methods of raising capital (coupons) for basically them doing nothing but allowing someone else to take risk.
>Or at least, who is the least childish?
Once you can pry those rose tinted glasses off your face, you may come to understand what I and others have been saying for awhile. But I suppose that's figting some sort of addiction of self delusion so I doubt many of the Faithful Followers Of The Name Cult can do that.
> Most of us that are left are hobbyists.
I'd say most of the hobbiest, the ones without such emotional attachement to the leadership of the current owners of the Amiga trademark, can see just how far so many people have gone off the reservation while following Billed&Fleeced. Those of left on the reservation are either looking at which is best for PPC (HYPEOS4 vs MOS) or opting for AROS and or Bernithlon.
> Sure, we cling to this particular old computer because we like it and hope
> that the new Amiga will be as good. The people that control this future is the
> owners of the brand Amiga, a brand that actually IS worth something -
Worth what and what does this POP Box have to do with Amigas more then a Intel laptop running Berniethlon does? All in all, the laptop sounds like a MUCH better deal.
> it has a reputation that gives a slightly better chance of this thing becoming > at least semi-popular again one day than if we would call it something like - > oh 'Morph' to grab an example from the blue.
I'd say either have about the same chance. Amiga is mostly remembered as a game machine, and that is not going to happen again. If anything, Amiga is a negative as it is associated with annoying fanatics who still think their box is better then a multi GHz x86 box. I'm not saying MOS has any better chance either. I rate both pretty low in survivaliability.
> You may dislike those owners or not, but the fact is that it is not OUR money
> on the line here.
This is entirely true. I just don't like the wave after wave of BS being thrown at the Amiga Community (spelled with a C, not a K) by the current trademark holders nor their subcontracting henchmen.
> We risk nothing but a failure in satisfying our sentimental ambitions. They
> do. (Writing this I realize that those paying the club fee of $50 might not
> agree ;-)
What did PT Barnem say, "There is a sucker born every minute."
> Most accept that this is how it is. AInc can -and will - do whatever they like > to 'our' Amiga, since they have paid for 'the Name' (and some other things)
> and we haven't.
They certainly can do what they wish to do with the name. That does not, nor has it ever, mean they have bought my loyality by purchasing a mear trademark. I'm not plastic enough to accept that arguement. The only product I will purchase that they will see a small royality from is Berniethlon. Other then that, they can go take a long walk off a short pear that is in the middle of shark infested waters.
> The will do what they can to survive.
Again, if they were doing so by what most accept as fair game rules, very few would be bitching. But of course, playing by such socially accepted rules won't generate VC funding for them either.
> Some accept this fact, because it's the only way it can be done.Some don't,
> because of some personal notion of 'Amiga' being a higher etheric notion of
> pure and good and not a piece of ancient computer hardware.
Pity there can't be divorces in such situations as the community now finds itself in with the current owners of the Amiga name. Tao has nothing to do with Amiga nor it's OS. POP mobos have nothing to do with Amiga design and principals. HYPEOS4 and MOS should be compared to on a point by point basis and then allow individuals to decide which they want to buy. Amiga Community wins this way, they get choices. Of course, FFOTNC think such choices are harmfull and only the one true Boing way is acceptable for every true Amiga user.
> So who really comprise the "Name cult" in that crowd?
Go ask to see a raise of hands who bought the $50 coupon...
Dammy
Jump...
#52 SlimJim
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 44JoannaK06-Sep-2002 18:34 GMT
Comment 45derf06-Sep-2002 19:51 GMT
Comment 46Amon_Re06-Sep-2002 20:00 GMT
Comment 47Daniel Miller06-Sep-2002 22:01 GMT
Comment 48Darrin06-Sep-2002 23:44 GMT
Comment 49Mike Veroukis07-Sep-2002 04:44 GMT
Comment 50Anonymous07-Sep-2002 08:15 GMT
Comment 51Keith Blakemore-Noble07-Sep-2002 08:16 GMT
Comment 52SlimJim07-Sep-2002 10:32 GMT
Comment 53Mike Veroukis07-Sep-2002 12:01 GMT
Comment 54Darrin07-Sep-2002 12:42 GMT
Comment 55Anonymous07-Sep-2002 13:45 GMT
Comment 56Keith Blakemore-Noble07-Sep-2002 13:49 GMT
Comment 57Mike Veroukis07-Sep-2002 14:06 GMT
Comment 58anonymous07-Sep-2002 15:09 GMT
Comment 59anonymous07-Sep-2002 15:14 GMT
Comment 60Donovan Reeve07-Sep-2002 16:48 GMT
Comment 61Christophe Decanini07-Sep-2002 16:57 GMT
Comment 62Keith Blakemore-Noble07-Sep-2002 17:23 GMT
Comment 63Donovan Reeve07-Sep-2002 18:31 GMT
Comment 64Anonymous07-Sep-2002 23:08 GMT
Comment 65dammy08-Sep-2002 03:50 GMT
Comment 66Daniel Miller08-Sep-2002 05:11 GMT
Comment 67Don Cox08-Sep-2002 07:28 GMT
Comment 68Johan Rönnblom08-Sep-2002 07:43 GMT
Comment 69dammy08-Sep-2002 08:09 GMT
Comment 70Bill Hoggett08-Sep-2002 08:51 GMT
Comment 71Amon_Re08-Sep-2002 10:01 GMT
Comment 72Bill Hoggett08-Sep-2002 10:18 GMT
Comment 73Darrin08-Sep-2002 12:21 GMT
Comment 74dammy08-Sep-2002 12:23 GMT
Comment 75Darrin08-Sep-2002 12:38 GMT
Comment 76Mike Veroukis08-Sep-2002 13:30 GMT
Comment 77dammy08-Sep-2002 15:37 GMT
Comment 78dammy08-Sep-2002 15:48 GMT
Comment 79Darrin08-Sep-2002 17:48 GMT
Comment 80Darrin08-Sep-2002 18:00 GMT
Comment 81Bill Hoggett08-Sep-2002 18:01 GMT
Comment 82dammy08-Sep-2002 18:16 GMT
Comment 83Darrin08-Sep-2002 18:19 GMT
Comment 84Darrin08-Sep-2002 18:25 GMT
Comment 85Bill Hoggett08-Sep-2002 18:44 GMT
Comment 86Alkis Tsapanidis08-Sep-2002 19:07 GMT
Comment 87Darrin08-Sep-2002 20:03 GMT
Comment 88Mike Veroukis08-Sep-2002 21:02 GMT
Comment 89Anonymous09-Sep-2002 06:17 GMT
Comment 90SlimJim09-Sep-2002 08:06 GMT
Comment 91Darrin09-Sep-2002 12:20 GMT
Back to Top