|[Forum] We should all stand tougether!||ANN.lu|
|Posted on 16-Jul-2004 11:56 GMT by Michal (Edited on 2004-07-17 14:23:44 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä)||76 comments|
Amiga is now so divided that groups is threaten its reputation. More and more people which I try to sell MorphOS or AmigaOS4 to, says that the war/etc discussions between this groups kills the platform. Amiga needs a good reputation and it wont have that before we all agree on that going on with both under one name. Which is AMIGA as PC is in the other side of computing. Amiga is a strong word. People remember it,.. but with Amiga showing off that we have AmigaOne, Pegasos etc++ That the community is running PPC motherboard components. That this community is about beein our self. To show that we are different.
This is good! And we need to turn the negative words against each other over to positive words. We as the Amiga community controlled lots of it, when everything seemed lost. And now were splitted for nothing? Who's to blame? No one! Its about time, its about the time we all have waited. That users, etc companies have found out how good AmigaOS code is. That it is revolutionary in many ways, but it dosen't help when this community trhows snowballs on each sides when actually both sides is fighting for the same thing. To be the next generation Amiga.|
But as Classic Amiga was and is the real Amiga. This new PPC motherboards is not Amiga at all. But they are choices. They have become new choices for everyone. And now we need to rebuild it all. We need to focus on getting Amiga reputation back. And that Amiga as from now on stands for what we all was and are. A userbase that is different and that we really care about each others.
Let us be the Spirit Of Amiga. Let us give Amiga a new life, a community that cares and that wants support from other big companies etc. Medias have allways been overwhelming positive over us. We cannot destroy it now. We need to focus on beeing an alternative platform to Linux, BeOS, Windows, MacOS etc.
Spirit Of Amiga logo
Now lets start to be what Amiga is allways been. The personal computer for home and entertainment areas!
|List of all comments to this article|
|We should all stand tougether! : Comment 72 of 76||ANN.lu|
|Posted by Sammy Nordström on 21-Jul-2004 10:31 GMT|
|In reply to Comment 67 (Janne):|
>I'll make the bold claim that without MorphOS there
>might not be AmigaOS 4.
Bullocks. MorphOS existed prior to the day Amiga Inc. decided to drop the classic AmigaOS product line and Amiga Inc. only changed their minds because they realized that they will need a traditional desktop OS as a foundation/host for the AmigaDE. Amiga Inc. even proposed to bPlan that MorphOS could become the official next generation OS, but we all know how that went.
I know this might provoce some people that didn't like the bold plans of Amiga Inc., but it's more accurate to say that AmigaOS4 wouldn't have been if it wasn't for Amiga Inc.'s plans for the AmigaDE, while MorphOS is just something that "could have been" but decided to be in opposition instead.
>I'm not saying this is necessarily so, but I am saying
>that MorphOS has kept the momentum going on a market that was stagnated for a
Well, I'd rather say they provided us with an alternative. Linux is hardly keeping the "momentum" of UNIX alive.
>These things were claimed impossible or too impractical for years.
Or, atleast not feasible without making it a joint effort, supported by the industry as well as the community. The problem for the Amiga never was a technical one, you know.
>After MorphOS proved them possible, we have seen a steady stream of PPC native
>applications enter the market and both AmigaOS and AROS development have
>gained a lot of momentum. Would that momentum have been there if no MorphOS
>existed? Maybe. But then again, maybe not. If anything, I think MorphOS kept
>some of the Amiga enthusiasts around a bit longer - and some of those who
>stayed on because MorphOS gave them something to do are nowadays developing
>for AmigaOS 4 as well.
MorphOS is not keeping anyone around in the Amiga community anymore than Linux. Perhaps it may have been a toy to play around with while waiting for the real thing for some people, but MorphOS has always been about providing Amiga users with a transition to the Pegasos platform rather than to rebuild the Amiga market, just like the rest of the operating systems that the Pegasos is capapble of running. This is what Genesi's "operating system independant hardware platform" strategy is all about. I even remember Bill Buck talking about "expanding" the API compatibility of MorphOS into encompassing more than just AmigaOS.
>Which brings be to a). There, really, is nothing we can do about the division.
>It is real, it is here, and it shall exist for the foreseeable future. I
>believe we, as a community, will do better by cooperating than trying to
>alienate each other. You think otherwise. Fine. That is where we disagree,
I see how developers can increase their targeted market segment by cross-compiling their productions that doesn't require any next-generation OS features, but that's just business without having to interact with anyone. In what way are you suggesting that we should cooperate other than be polite against each other and talk about good old times?
>>Forgive me for beeing such a pessimist, but there is simply too much emotions
>>involved in this community, not just among us users. No logo nor forum post
>>will ever be able to change that.
>On this, we mostly agree. With the exception that I believe, at least in the
>possibility, that new people flowing in to the extended Amiga community may be
>able to change that - not change the old bitter people like you and me, but
Again, the lack of a unified standard and the different paths for the future is quite discouraging for a newbie. Furthermore, none of the alternatives in this community has anything to offer for anyone not already interested in Amiga computers. For the time beeing, anyone wanting to try out an Amiga for the first time would be much better off with a PC with WinUAE.
>Are you familiar with the words nylon or röntgen? Both are generic terms
>nowadays, but both used to be trademarks.
Amiga is NOT a generic term for a computer. For example, we know that atleast a million people have heard of the term in association with a *specific* computer, namely the Amiga 500, but only a few thousands have heard of such thing as an Amiga alternative or clone. You have a long way to go before you will be able to convince the rest of the world, you know.
>Discussing about trademark laws and
>company policies aside, I am of the opinion that the meaning of words is
>defined by their use rather than trademark owner's policy (and, a bit about
>laws, trademark laws agree with me to an extent). I'm not in any way
>advocating or condoning commercial misuse of trademarks, but I am saying that
>everyday talk can and sometimes does expand the meaning of words beyond their
>brand scope. When I invoke the word UNIX in any discussion with regular
>computer folk, the word, for most people, covers Linux, NetBSD, Solaris...
>Some even think MacOS X, even though only one of the mentioned operating
>systems is really UNIX(R).
Thank you for pointing out the problem of using such generic meaning of a product label. Ever wondered what the GNU part in GNU/Linux stands for? You see, it has actually become a problem for UNIX derivates since it makes them less unique and treated as a part of a group rather than different operating systems with it's own set of unique features.
Imagine if the Amiga market would get labeled as a group of various AmigaOS3.1 compatible alternatives rather than a retro computer trying to make a comeback with updated hardware as well as operating system, do you really think it would benefit any of the alternatives? I don't think so. A better approach would be making the original a success first, then open up for competition (the IBM-PC approach), or simply license the alternatives as official Amiga computers (the current AmigaOS4 licensing policy).
>You often like to use your Ford car analogy. I do think it is a misplaced
>analogy, because cars are cars and operating systems are operating systems. I
>think UNIX is a far better analogy. But for the fun of it, I'll play along.
>You say only Ford can build Ford cars. Sure. But what if I build spare parts
>for a Ford car? Are they not Ford parts? Sure, they are not Ford(R) parts. But
>they are still spare parts for a Ford car. People discuss them as Ford parts,
>even when they are not Ford(R) parts. What if that spare part would happen to
>be the computer of the car with compatible logic and all? What if I were to
>continue replacing parts in the Ford with my clone parts until nothing
>original remained... What is my car now? Where would you draw the line - when
>does the car cease to be a Ford?
When it has been demolished beyond recognition on a scrapyard.
But then, if you make use of those spare parts for assembling complete cars and sell them as Ford cars, expect Ford's lawyers knocking on your door.
>Luckily in most civilized countries trademarks are there to protect commercial
>interests against commercial misuse, not to impose limitations on what regular
>folk can or can not say in the street. People still shape the language as they
>see fit, like it should be.
Due to my interest in the Amiga computer and neverdying wish for it's comeback, I prioritize the value of the Amiga's brand recognition over the "need" to redefine the word as a generic term for anything resembles the real thing. Furthermore, 99% of the people in the streets has not even heard of the Amiga, much less the alternatives.
|List of all comments to this article (continued)|
|Comment 73||Nate Downes||Registered user||21-Jul-2004 13:37 GMT|
|Comment 74||Sammy Nordström||21-Jul-2004 15:22 GMT|
|Comment 75||Nate Downes||Registered user||22-Jul-2004 14:01 GMT|
|Comment 76||Sammy Nordström||23-Jul-2004 09:46 GMT||