|[News] Amiga vs Thendic Update: Genesi fights back!||ANN.lu|
|Posted on 27-Mar-2004 18:34 GMT by samface (Edited on 2004-03-29 02:28:03 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä)||143 comments|
REPLY in Support of Motion filed by Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl, Thendic Electronics Components re 49 MOTION to Modify the Order Granting Specific Performance, (LT, ) (Entered: 03/25/2004)
Richard Hughes, Attorney for "Thendic", accuses Bill McEwen of perjury, refering to Bill McEwen's deposition taken on August 14, 2003, nearly four months following the sale Amiga's OS system to Itec wherein he testifies that Amiga's assets included its Intellectual Property Rights to AmigaOS.
Bill Buck testifies as a person with "'a unique knowledge base regarding Amiga'", refering to the days of when he was the CEO of a company that was partnered with ESCOM to develop and promote The Amiga Operating System through a hardware platform, claiming that "'applications such as a web-browser, an MP3 player, and a mail client are application programs that adhere to an operating system just as Microsoft Outlook Express is an e-mail application that works with Windows'". Furthermore, he concludes that "'If the Amiga DE Operating System did not include an operating system and was touted as beeing only an "application" as Amiga now contends, it could not have been promised or discussed integration of Java, MP3 and mail client as stated in the ("Agreement")'".
Bill Buck claims that he was the one who suggested that the Amiga Operating system and the AmigaDE should be seperate enteties as an explanation to his "'Amiga OS is an operating system, DE is something different that makes alot of things work in other than Amiga operating system environments'" statement.
Bill Bucks states: "'I believe the mail attributed to 'Fleecy Moss' was and still is from Fleecy Moss"'.
|List of all comments to this article|
|Amiga vs Thendic Update: Genesi fights back! : Comment 46 of 143||ANN.lu|
|Posted by Bill Toner on 28-Mar-2004 06:31 GMT|
|>Furthermore, he concludes that "'If the Amiga DE Operating System did not include |
>an operating system and was touted as beeing only an "application" as Amiga now
>contends, it could not have been promised or discussed integration of Java, MP3
>and mail client as stated in the ("Agreement")'".
Because we know it is not possible to develop an application that runs inside of a Java VM, whre the Java VM is an application running on top of Windows, Linux, MacOS, Intent, or whatever. Or to write an application that runs inside of a Flash web browser plugin, which is an application that runs inside of a web browser, which itself is an application running on Windows or Linux or MacOS or Intent or whatever. (And I've seen more than just animations in Flash, I've used image manipulation tools on web sites made in Flash... As in me as a web browser finding a neat tool on someone else's web site, not as in me using Flash on my own web site, as I don't use it on my own site.)
DE is just another level of abstraction. It could have become an "Operating System" on it's own. That product interpretation failed to appear, just as the CashBoy failed to appear, as well as any other product specified by name in the "Thendic" agreement. Running DE on top of LinuxPPC is probably technically enough to satisfy the agreement as I understand the agreement. Amiga could sell their own branded distro of LinuxPPC even, bundled with DE. Perhaps doing something similar to the Amithlon product, specializing a LinuxPPC distro specifically for the sole purpose of running DE as Amithlon did to run an Amiga emulation, and throw out or hide the rest from the user... Do you consider Amithon to be an emulation integrated with Linux, or to be an emulation application which runs on top of Linux? It's all fun with semantics. ;)
Microsoft calls it's web browser an integrated component of the Windows Operating System. They say it's not possible to remove it, as Windows could not possibly work without it. So... How did versions of Windows previous to the "integration" step possibly exist? They're trying to do the same with Media Player. I consider both to be application level products that Microsoft puts in the same box on the same CD, and I consider them to be playing marketing games with their definition of "OS" and "application". This part of the lawsuit, I consider it to be just like what Microsoft says about it's stuff...
DE, as it is, is an application, just like a JVM is, and just as I see the Amithlon emulation as being on top of the Linux core. It perhaps fits between the JVM and the host OS, creating yet another level of heirarchy. It's not an "OS", and it is an application. It doesn't matter which of these two it is in order to be able to run Java or MP3 or email client on top of DE. Just as I don't need to know or care if Amithlon's emulation, MSIE, MSMP, or ANY JVM is an "Operating System" in and of itself, or "just an application" running on top of any "Operating System", I don't need to know or care if DE is an app or an OS, or if it is an app which OS I'm running on. The apps that run on top of DE certainly don't care which way it is, they just do what they do regardless... This just seems odd to me to be the key point in these arguments.
|List of all comments to this article (continued)||