10-Dec-2023 17:13 GMT.
[Rant] The current situation..ANN.lu
Posted on 13-Feb-2003 14:17 GMT by AdmV99 comments
View flat
View list
What is the current overview. I am not sure I have all the information, but what is now clear is that all the current amiga projects have hit the rocks, and there is little sign of a long term improvement. Perhaps its just me. But maybe not. I'll just go over the various forces at work here for a moment:

Amiga, Hyperion, Eyetech

External forces:


External development team


Customer pressures

Current status: After a difficult road on the hardware front, and now a failure of supply on the part of MAI, the hardware side is at a standstill. The operating system development we are told continues. Now a lawsuit threatens both of these teams with a drain upon already limited resources. How very self destructive.

Genesi, MorphOS

External forces:


Internal pressures

Internal testing of hardware changes

Customer pressures

OS development lagging behind release standard.

I would regard both of these camps now as the primary projects that occur in the amiga 'sphere'. Both are now badly hampered by a single source supplier, and a lack of parts. It seems that despite both camps making claims, the production aims were always tiny (and thus you have to question some parts of the projects, but back to that in a moment) and production must have been small not to hit shortages earlier.

This does highlight the huge hit both groups are taking in development costs. Whatever the basis of their refusal to work together on their hardware, and thus the reduced possibility of producing in volume, buying parts in volume, and forming strong relations with suppliers, the true folly and stupidity of the selfish interests at work in the amiga 'sphere' are clearly at the fore.

While neither party has enough weight with their supply partner (MAI) it is far more uncertain as to the future supply of chips to either project. The inability to talk to suppliers in terms of bulk unit purchase and volume is and will remain a 'turn off' to suppliers. There is no chance whatsoever of being a tier one style customer if the most units you purchase are in the tens or perhaps hundreds.

In addition, my understanding (and I may be totally wrong on this..) is that MAI are less than happy with what their customers have published and squabbled over. Having your faulty product outed by a supplier is a less than ideal way of keeping good relations. Even now as I type, in every area of the amiga 'sphere' MAI are being universally blamed. Yet, perhaps its not quite true that this is all MAI's fault.

If the original orders were weak or small, its not possible for MAI to do correct production. They may have to work on guaranteed orders or limited FAB production time, and other factors.

Further to this, the (MAI) chip/set has had problems. Now these problems are well documented. But again, having seperate small projects posting information that is broken, or bit part shows the weakness of having the smaller weaker hardware development teams and all the limits that entails.

One simple suggestion to the two projects would be to work together on ordering with MAI if nothing else. By placing the bigger order you guys might get MAI to actually start treating you properly. Even then your orders may not be big enough to bring you to a sensible level.

Now, that aside, both projects are now being hurt badly by several aspects. These vary from customer let-down. Project time line failures, and lack of delivery.

The hopes of many a user were based on an idea that finally after a long time, two groups (wether you prefer one group, or another, or if like me you have some interest in general) was based on a premise that both were built and aimed (at least thats a public perception) on an ideal of being big enough to get something done, both in the OS sense, and the hardware sense.

Sadly we again have ego success over logic. None of the participants was capable of such a project. Both OS teams have pretty vast projects, that are in truth more than they can complete, at least in the short time-frame suggested publicly at the start of the projects.

Both hardware teams had large projects and limited resources. To be fair, both teams have produced, but look at what they are now working under. Due to the limited sizes of their production runs, the supply is at a trickle for key components. Neither party has enough weight to work with the key supplier to make things happen, and both parties are suffering badly as all the development is now not getting return investment via sales.

Further, consumer confidence is being annihilated by a lack of trust, and failures to deliver that is hurting both parties very badly. What is certain is that a lack of willingness to work together has caused part of this. The other downside is that to a large degree, production costs are far higher on both sides when refusing to work together. Its commercial suicide. What is worse is that with relations all around, MAI are or at least seem to be in no hurry to assist, and these parties continued war amongst themselves there looks to be little sign that a long term answer to increased production, supply and reduced purchasing costs for the end customer will be found.

And my thinking here, is that as an untimate cost to this, is that this factor leaves all the OS development shattered upon the broken landscapes of the amiga wars from the past. With now real hardware base, there is no software base. Even if there were, what is even worse is that both parties have been so stupid in terms of collaboration, that even if you did get a hardware base, that base is split due to differences about the OS. Show me a company anywhere in the world that activly looks to cull its possible customer base by 50%.

*Only in the amiga 'sphere' is it likely people can be so stupid.*

Right about now, both parties are, or will soon enough come to reason that they have or are failing, or will fail longterm. One escapee MIGHT be the ex Visicorp and phase 5 inspired people/project with a set top box style project that is there real focus anyway (or so they make out.)

You could see long term after the whole thing breaks one party taking most of whats left of the IP and using it elsewhere. But the likelyhood of an amiga desktop system will never ever return based on the current projects progress, and its all down to people having too much ego, and a refusal to work together for the benefit of even themselves(not just the end customer) is reaping the whirlwind.

It remains inconceivable to me that OS development and costs will be supported without hardware options, and sales. Therefore, some things MUST occur or this will mean the end:

1. The hardware teams/companies begin to work co-operatively (at least in supply of some parts and working with a supplier).

2. OS development dovetails into a cross hardware end user satisfying conclusion, and thus opens each vendor up into a 50% prospective larger market.

3. Customer care and general information is both more forthcoming and has a higher level of honesty, and a lower level of deceit, lies, fud, claim and counter claim. Also a keener understanding that even despite the cloud cookoo land mentality that they can do things by themselves, the amiga 'sphere' is as are all spheres, a sim-biotic sphere.

4. Competition can be healthy if its end product is the market 'sphere' growth. Competition that is damaging or causes shrinkage or damage to the market sphere is self defeating long term. Co-operation between competitors is _NOT_ALWAYS_BAD.

5. Customers, and potential customers ideally need to impress upon these teams/projects, that they MUST work together. They must demand hardware and software that both works, and is built with a level of co-operation and compatability. No developer in their right mind is going to double every area of work to try and sell their products on TWO OS systems, and different disperate hardware, dongles, DRM and protection rackets.

6. Longer term production, supply and end customer satisfaction must be renewed.

I would urge any customer who is interested in any or several projects to make it clear to these teams and projects that certain criteria has to exist, for them to be acceptable.

Unless the customers are more savvy than in the past, the customer will be a loser, as well as these project teams. You will again see the days of money being handed over to suppliers and non delivery/companies going bust, and all that goes with it.

Lastly, as I have recently said 'Trust no one' at least until they show why they are worth you trust, money or concern.

Kind Regards


List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Bernd Meyer13-Feb-2003 13:57 GMT
Comment 2Darren Eveland13-Feb-2003 14:12 GMT
Comment 3dammy13-Feb-2003 14:13 GMT
Comment 4Anonymous13-Feb-2003 14:17 GMT
Comment 5Bernd Meyer13-Feb-2003 14:23 GMT
Comment 6Sam Smith13-Feb-2003 14:32 GMT
Comment 7Sam Smith13-Feb-2003 14:33 GMT
Comment 8Sam Smith13-Feb-2003 14:35 GMT
Comment 9Anonymous13-Feb-2003 14:36 GMT
Comment 10dammy13-Feb-2003 14:37 GMT
Comment 11Don Cox13-Feb-2003 14:50 GMT
Comment 12Christoph Gutjahr13-Feb-2003 14:50 GMT
Comment 13David Scheibler13-Feb-2003 14:56 GMT
Comment 14logain13-Feb-2003 15:07 GMT
Comment 15Andrea Maniero13-Feb-2003 15:09 GMT
Comment 16o1i13-Feb-2003 15:16 GMT
Comment 17cheesee13-Feb-2003 15:16 GMT
Comment 18Mirror13-Feb-2003 15:38 GMT
Comment 19Mekanix13-Feb-2003 15:41 GMT
Comment 20Anonymous13-Feb-2003 15:42 GMT
Comment 21Darren Eveland13-Feb-2003 15:49 GMT
Comment 22David Scheibler13-Feb-2003 15:57 GMT
Comment 23takemehomegrandma13-Feb-2003 15:58 GMT
Comment 24DaveP13-Feb-2003 16:04 GMT
Comment 25MarkTime13-Feb-2003 16:06 GMT
Comment 26Christoph Gutjahr13-Feb-2003 16:06 GMT
Comment 27David Scheibler13-Feb-2003 16:10 GMT
Comment 28takemehomegrandma13-Feb-2003 16:20 GMT
Comment 29Jürgen Schober13-Feb-2003 16:44 GMT
Comment 30itix13-Feb-2003 16:44 GMT
Comment 31Leo13-Feb-2003 17:18 GMT
Comment 32The Zeer13-Feb-2003 17:31 GMT
Comment 33MIKE13-Feb-2003 17:53 GMT
Comment 34priest13-Feb-2003 18:22 GMT
Comment 35Don Cox13-Feb-2003 18:28 GMT
Comment 36priest13-Feb-2003 18:30 GMT
Comment 37priest13-Feb-2003 18:33 GMT
Comment 38priest13-Feb-2003 18:35 GMT
Comment 39priest13-Feb-2003 18:45 GMT
Comment 40MarkTime13-Feb-2003 18:48 GMT
Comment 41Marktime13-Feb-2003 18:49 GMT
Comment 42Darren Eveland13-Feb-2003 18:52 GMT
Comment 43priest13-Feb-2003 18:58 GMT
Comment 44marktime13-Feb-2003 19:09 GMT
Comment 45priest13-Feb-2003 19:27 GMT
Comment 46priest13-Feb-2003 19:28 GMT
Comment 47logain13-Feb-2003 19:31 GMT
Comment 48alan buxey13-Feb-2003 20:19 GMT
Comment 49MIKE13-Feb-2003 20:41 GMT
Comment 50krize13-Feb-2003 21:24 GMT
Comment 51Anonymous13-Feb-2003 21:46 GMT
Comment 52priest13-Feb-2003 22:05 GMT
Comment 53Troels Ersking13-Feb-2003 22:20 GMT
Comment 54Anonymous13-Feb-2003 22:24 GMT
Comment 55Daniel Miller13-Feb-2003 22:50 GMT
Comment 56Atheist213-Feb-2003 23:10 GMT
Comment 57Chris Allen13-Feb-2003 23:15 GMT
Comment 58MarkTime13-Feb-2003 23:30 GMT
Comment 59JoannaK14-Feb-2003 00:51 GMT
Comment 60annonum14-Feb-2003 03:21 GMT
Comment 61AdmV14-Feb-2003 07:12 GMT
Comment 62Don Cox14-Feb-2003 08:02 GMT
Comment 63Don Cox14-Feb-2003 08:07 GMT
Comment 64Don Cox14-Feb-2003 08:10 GMT
Comment 65Lennart Fridén14-Feb-2003 08:13 GMT
Comment 66AdmV14-Feb-2003 08:44 GMT
Comment 67Andy14-Feb-2003 08:49 GMT
Comment 68Daniel Miller14-Feb-2003 09:50 GMT
Comment 69Don Cox14-Feb-2003 09:59 GMT
Comment 70priest14-Feb-2003 10:19 GMT
Comment 71AdmV14-Feb-2003 10:58 GMT
Comment 72Anonymous14-Feb-2003 11:17 GMT
Comment 73AdmV14-Feb-2003 11:34 GMT
Comment 74Johan Rönnblom14-Feb-2003 12:44 GMT
Comment 75Anonymous14-Feb-2003 13:34 GMT
Comment 76AdmV14-Feb-2003 13:51 GMT
Comment 77Anonymous14-Feb-2003 14:14 GMT
Comment 78takemehomegrandma14-Feb-2003 15:22 GMT
Comment 79Anonymous14-Feb-2003 15:35 GMT
Comment 80takemehomegrandma14-Feb-2003 15:52 GMT
Comment 81Alkemyst14-Feb-2003 18:34 GMT
Comment 82Xeyes14-Feb-2003 20:36 GMT
Comment 83Daniel Miller14-Feb-2003 21:09 GMT
Comment 84Alkemyst15-Feb-2003 02:41 GMT
Comment 85KenH15-Feb-2003 17:12 GMT
Comment 86KenH15-Feb-2003 17:20 GMT
Comment 87AdmV15-Feb-2003 20:52 GMT
Comment 88Daniel Miller15-Feb-2003 21:09 GMT
Comment 89AdmV15-Feb-2003 21:55 GMT
Comment 90priest17-Feb-2003 06:11 GMT
Comment 91Daniel Miller17-Feb-2003 11:20 GMT
Comment 92priest17-Feb-2003 13:07 GMT
Comment 93Daniel Miller17-Feb-2003 13:15 GMT
Comment 94priest18-Feb-2003 06:01 GMT
Comment 95priest18-Feb-2003 08:53 GMT
Comment 96Daniel Miller18-Feb-2003 13:37 GMT
Comment 97priest18-Feb-2003 19:55 GMT
Comment 98Daniel Miller18-Feb-2003 20:49 GMT
Comment 99AdmV0rl0n20-Feb-2003 11:51 GMT
Back to Top