28-Mar-2024 17:05 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 117 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 117]
[News] Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal?ANN.lu
Posted on 15-Nov-2000 22:54 GMT by Christian Kemp117 comments
View flat
View list
Andreas Meyer writes: According to a mail by Alexander Kneer, the main P96 author, the Voodoo driver from Elbox was created and distributed without permission from the P96 team and will not be supported in newer P96 releases.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 1 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by m0ns00n on 14-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!
One thing is that they didn't get the required authority, but heck, where is the new Picasso drivers anyway, and now someone makes an "update" themselves, and the author of P96 complains!!!??? And it is for Voodoo, which should set P96 in front of CGX, so what is this? Everyone-Attacking-ElBox-Month????? This really makes me angry! :o((((
What can we do in this community? Some developers just don't get it! We're not that large a market, and they keep punishing each others. Too bad. Elbox, go-go-go!
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 2 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 14-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
That's the last thing this world needs, MORE DISENT. Just stop it and work out some compromise deal. Sheesh.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 3 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Andreas Meyer on 14-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (m0ns00n):
In their new press release regarding this issue, Elbox promises to build their own
RTG system if P96 authors block Elbox driver development. I guess if the mediator
fails the AmigaDE approval, they will produce their own DE ? ;-) They should
learn to pay for their licenses else they will die quite fast.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 4 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 14-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
It's amazing how quick everything happens these days, isn't it? The controversy
on the the P96 Voodoo drivers appeared earlier today on the Amiga-Mediator
mailing list, and just as I was typing a moralizing lecture for you all to wait
and give Elbox a chance to respond before "taking sides", I get the news that
Elbox has already responded. Check out
http://www.vgr.com/mediator/Pressrelease8.txt
-
It seems to me that while Elbox has a valid enough point, that they are adding
value to a shareware package, the P96 developers are also in their full right
to decide what drivers are released for their system. I just hope that the P96
authors will be flexible enough, and that Elbox steers clear of arrogance, so
that this won't be a repeat of the VFD failure. My fingers are crossed. We don't
need another developer war.
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 5 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
I agree with Elbox on this. The release of the Voodoo3 driver for P96 only creates a larger market for the P96 authors from which to receive shareware payments. Let's face it, the only people at the moment who are likely to pay a royalty on P96 are those (very) few people who buy the 2 Zorro based cards which already have the royalty cost built in. The main users of P96 are UAE users and they're mainly a bunch of free-loaders (with the exception for those who bought their package from Cloanto) who just want to grab as many free ADF files as their PeeCee modems can download - so they're not going to send anyone $20 for using a shareware RTG package. It's pleasing to note that so far Elbox keep delivering what they promise and nomatter who tried to knock them down they simply overcome the problem and keep marching on. Well done guys.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 6 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by James on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
The authors of Piccaso96 are UAE loving f'ckheads anyhow. They dont DESERVE a Voodoo driver supporting their system, ungrateful losers. They havent updated their system in years except for supporting PC-loving UAE. CGFX deserves the drivers, not Picassh'le96.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 7 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Frank Mariak on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (James):
At least you see how easy it is to blame other people doing a "....clear-cut
breach of commercial law in any country in the world." (http://www.elbox.com/Press/Press20001017.html) and don't caring about it themselves ....
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 8 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Jonathan Adamczewski on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Frank Mariak):
At least you see how easy it is to blame other people doing a "....clear-cut
breach of commercial law in any country in the world." (http://www.elbox.com/Press/Press20001017.html) and don't caring about it themselves ....
How have they breached commercial law Frank? Does the Picasso96 system come with a prohibition on writing your own drivers?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 9 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Jonathan Adamczewski on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Jonathan Adamczewski):
In reply to my own query (*sigh*)
<Quick quote from Czech>
A quick look at the P96 homepage, on the Distribution page has the following information:
"Developing software for Picasso96 is free, development of Picasso96 hardware drivers is restricted to non-commercial projects, old hardware or - if a licence is obtained from the authors - new hardware products. We reserve the right to decide whether to provide support for a certain project or not. Writing and issuing hardware drivers without the written approval of the Picasso96 authors will not be tolerated. Licensing Companies that want to sell graphics cards or other products with Picasso96 as the core driver system must license Picasso96 from: Kneer & Abt GbR. Masurenweg 6a D-89233 Neu-Ulm Germany The licence fees are based on the complexity of the product and the number of units sold. We request about 3 to 5 per cent of the retail price with a minimum of about DM 10."
</Quick quote from Czech>
It seems that it's a matter of obtaining a license. (I could make a few comments about the author's of P96 presence in the Amiga marketplace and contactability over the past year+ but that would be childish. ;|
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 10 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Jonathan Adamczewski):
hey, ok, it's non free for new hardware projects, but do you really think the mediator is a new product which require P96??
no, that's why, the ONLY think the P96 team had to do id saying thx to ELBOX.
Users of voodoo cards have to register to P96, that's not elbox who have to do it for them.
I'm P96 registered, and i'm going to buy voodoo3 and mediator. dso if the next P96 is ocked, they'll get linux sources by mail...
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 11 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by joel ehret on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Jonathan Adamczewski):
hey, ok, it's non free for new hardware projects, but do you really think the mediator is a new product which require P96??
no, that's why, the ONLY think the P96 team had to do id saying thx to ELBOX.
Users of voodoo cards have to register to P96, that's not elbox who have to do it for them.
I'm P96 registered (bought a pixel64), and i'm going to buy voodoo3 and mediator. dso if the next P96 is ocked, they'll get linux sources by mail...
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 12 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Francisco Rafael Coves on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Jonathan Adamczewski):
well, the driver is writen for a card that not manofacturet elbox itself so is no
a propietari hardware.so is writen with no comercial.well indirectment is for sell the mediator
but not for sell the voodoo3 itself that is the driver written.
futhermore the voodoo3 can be considering and old harware (now that voodoo5 and 6 are avaliable).
conclusion:elbox not vilolate none of the stataments of the picasso96 software, and not have to pay none of the licencing rights of P96 because not are violated
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 13 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Nick on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Well what can I say.
You lot are all supposed to work to keep the Amiga going, and then we get another stupid petty war. Claim you are keeping the Amiga alive, hah! You're not. There's no more nails to go in the coffin - they're there already.
This community is the best asset the Amiga has, but it's also its worst enemy. Now will BOTH sides get a fu**ing grip, and talk sensibly and rationally, obtain the bleddy license and co-exist.
If you don't the community will keep on stabbing the life that Amiga is supposed to still have.
NOW GROW UP!
Can you see now why I lack apathy for this whole Amiga mess?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 14 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Nick):
Why should Amiga programmers work for free for Elbox who makes money from selling the Mediator hardware ?
I miss your logical progression there.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 15 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
This is not an easy one...They both have a point. But Elbox more then P96 authors.
P96 authors:
Elbox made a driver for they hardware and we want to see money!
Understandable, but NOT quite true.
Did commodore have to pay P96 authors while Villagetronic made a driver for the Picasso64 which fits into a commodore ZORROIII slot?
ELBOX: Hey...the voodoo3 isn't our gfx card, it's from 3DFX. So if 3dfx made the driver for their card they have to pay the licence. We are just busboard manufacturers and providing this FREE driver to anyone who can use it: the mediator owners. We wrote it, so it's our piece of code and there's no change of open source.
Futhemore you (the P96 team) should thank us for giving P96 a second change. The RTG war has ended so far in favour of Cybergfx. P96 was dead until now.
Now there are some new opportunities:
1) They can regain a market share which justifies futher developement
2) Discontinue the shareware version and make a improved commercial version (Picasso2k??) like VGR did with CGFX4.
Making versions which don't work with the mediator installed means only one thing: No more P96 users then before the P96 voodoo driver was released. -> No more money out of shareware payment or even commercial versions.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 16 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Lewis on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Amifan):
I agree with AmiFan's comment.
It is the best interests of all parties to sort this out quickly, and I have emailed Elbox to this effect.
I have yet to buy a mediator or any graphics card, (although I plan to buy a mediator and Voodoo!) but it seems to me from various reports that P96 is the better RTG software, which until now was loosing the race due to lack of recent publicity. Elbox have given P96 a bump start with the Voodoo drivers benefitting both parties. So I hope they can come to an agreement.
It does no good bad mouthing either group, we should be encouraging an agreement between the two. As I mentioned, I have emailed Elbox and the P96 authors. Maybe some others could as well (Please note we want encouraging emails not flame wars! :) )
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 17 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Have you read the newest press release from Elbox under www.vgr.com/cybergfx ?
All the things Elbox says are absolutely true. And hey! They will develop their
own RTG-System if P96 authors will not negociate with them. My repect to
them!!! Hope they read this. They the only company that keeps the Classic
alive. Keep up the good work!!!!
Now to the P96 issue:
Every time when someone develops something to keep the classic market alive
or even expand it, some people have to destroy it. First DCE, now the Picasso96
Team. There were no P96 updates for years and it was nearly dead and now there
is a chance for P96 to rise again. But no the Programmers don`t want it.
And hey, now they are developing an update! But what will it feature? It features
full incompatibility with VooDoo3. Isn`t that cool?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 18 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Amifan):
I think you hit the nail straight on there, Amifan. Elbox' action was almost
certainly in the best interest of P96. On the other hand, I'm not quite sure how
to read the terms for development of P96 drivers. Look at these lines:
"We reserve the right to decide whether to provide support for a certain project or not. Writing and issuing hardware drivers without the written approval of the Picasso96 authors will not be tolerated."
Does this go for commercial drivers only, or must the P96 authors authorize free
drivers as well?
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 19 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Buzzy):
Well..this case shows again that the amiga "community" only cares for
new stuff and doesn`t care if this new stuff violates somebody`s else
rights and if somebody has made his hands dirty to create it.
This isn`t about "when was the last p96 update or cool..Elbox
proves that they can resource P96 and/or organize some ""illegal""
srces to its driver interface and write a driver)
This is about the P96 team and also CyberGraphX *depending* on
OEM sales to amiga hw producers to make some money.
That's the reason why there is no real open driver SDK/licencee.
Writing a RTG framework takes a lot time and experience and it`s
only fair that the people doing this expect real money for it.
These circumstances were accepted by all Amiga gfxcard HW
producers the years before....
o GVP licenced EGS
o Villagetronic paid for the development for the rtg
of their Picasso2, then licenced P96 for their P4,
o Macrosystems licensed CyberGfx
o Helfrich licensed CyberGfx
o Phase5 licenced and paid develoment for a number
of gfxcards and CyberGfx V3 itself.
But Elbox now finally shows publicly that they don`t
have the slightest interest to *pay* the developers
which allow their HW to work at all.
They only try to profit from other people doing the
hard work.
That`s the perspective on this issue and anything about
"let`s be social to the community", "but they promote p96",
is the typical hypocratic crap to justify what only gains
you(the user) and Elbox but in no way the people which did
the real work over years.
P.S. Come on..let`s beat the 100 article border again for this
discussion thread:-)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 20 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
> Elbox' action was almost
> certainly in the best interest of P96.
If it was, why didn't they even contact Tobias and Alexander about that ?
Anyway, this whole discussion shows one thing. Most Amiga users don't care about political maters, licenses, rights and software's authors as long as there's software available for them for free.
Now P96's authors are being criticized for... being in their own rights. This can be considered either funny or sad, depending on the point of view but it's certainly not reasonable.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 21 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Ralph Schmidt):
I think I have to set some things straight. I care for the rights of
others and I would really like to pay for products that are worth it.
I also paid 49 DM for CyberGFX and would like to buy a
Mediator+Voodoo3. And I would pay up to 10 DM for a Voodoo3-CyberGFX
driver. But what happened? DCE bought the exclusive rights for this.
It is LEGAL, but it is a DIRTY trick. What does that mean? If people
want Voodoo3 (and they sure want) they have to buy the G-REX. What do
they need do plug the G-REX in? A BlizzPPC/NG or CyberstormPPC. And
that means they have to buy everything from DCE. These methods are
nearly equal to those from a company called Microsoft.
THe Elbox driver may not be 100% legal, but what great disadvantages
do the P96 People have? They didn`t care for P96 a long time. The
registrations for P96 must have gone against 0, cause you couldn`t
use it with B&CyberVisionPPC. So this is the chance to rise again.
They should talk to Elbox and negociate a deal. But their reaction
was over the top. VooDoo3 is a great chance for the Amiga that we
should not miss.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 22 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Buzzy):
Ahh...so you would pay 10DM for the driver. Great...
Do you have any idea how long it takes to develop a quality driver
and then the ongoing support time you have to invest ?
I`m quite sure that *you* wouldn`t invest the amount of time for
the little payback the people get.
The people in this market should wake up...either they have to pay
high prices or they won`t get anything real anymore.
The "make it as cheap as possible" strategy of the last 5 years
backfired a lot because whatever you do the number of sales doesn`t
rise significant to make up the lost money by the low prices.
This leads then to unprofessional products, no real good products,
old hw, the same HW sold for years.
All the things most people in this market don`t really want and
critizise but cause indirectly by their mindset.
A schizophrenic situation...
The scale of paying customers is just too low and trying to ""compete""
with PC prices by lowering the prices beyond pain was a big factor
in the decline of the market in the last 5 years.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 23 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Ralph Schmidt):
So, then tell me. How long does it take to develop a driver? I thing Elbox
needed about a month to release a stable working driver. And you think
10 DM is not enough for a simple driver. What do you have in mind? I doubt
that there are many people who would even pay 5 DM for a driver. And in this
case: Who has developed the driver? Who offers support for it? Elbox.
Nobody else. The P96 team has nothing to do with it. They can earn the money
for registration.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 24 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Buzzy):
Ahh.. Of course it`s "think" not "thing" :-)
And something else: Ralph you adr always complaining about the market, about
the users etc.. If everything is so bad why don`t you just leave it and
stop complaining about it?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 25 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Andrea Maniero on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Ralph Schmidt):
I don't think P96 developers should have upset this much for the developements Elbox made. Moreover I don't think Elbox should pay any fee at all, because their hardware works without the need for this driver. But I guess that P96 developers will have an hard time in trying to be paid by the makers of the VooDoo3 cards (I don't mean 3dfx, but those who actually build the PCI boards, because it's to them that the existance of this driver is a direct advantage). Why should Elbox pay for something they give FREE to the users?
Then there is the other point: those who sell P96 have now an extended user base. In this way they should receive a lot of registrations, and they haven't spent anything (money, time, efforts) in supporting directly those cards. Every registration that will furthermore come, will be a bonus to them.
Finally, how can they charge the money to Elbox? It can't be 10DM for every mediator sold (one can buy it and use a Virge card, or only a network card). So, how can they quantificate how much Elbox owe to them? (considering that the drivers itself is free of charge...)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 26 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Buzzy):
> The P96 team has nothing to do with it.
And what handles the driver ? What tells it to setup, what to do, when, arbitrates things, handle the calls, patches graphics.library, enhance picture.datatype, give true-color modes ..
Since you said you would pay 10DM for a driver, I take it you won't pay the 30 ones for the P96 RTG system (which is useless, just as you said: Elbox doesn't need them since they give support themselves) and probably neither the 49DM for the CyberGraphX RTG system. That's why the only viable way for RTG software authors is to get a share on products using it. And Elbox just broke that twice (giving out the alpha CGFX driver and now the P96 driver).
At least I'm surprised on how much people can be fooled with their "press release".
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 27 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (David Gerber):
>> Elbox' action was almost
>> certainly in the best interest of P96.
-
>If it was, why didn't they even contact Tobias and Alexander about that ?
-
The obvious answer would be that they didn't think it was necessary, because
they don't consider their driver to be a commercial product. Development of non-
commercial drivers for P96 is free.
-
>Anyway, this whole discussion shows one thing. Most Amiga users don't care
>about political maters, licenses, rights and software's authors as long as
>there's software available for them for free.
-
Now listen up: Over the last years I have payed very high prices for products
which would not be sellable on any other platform. I have payed for stuff like
printer and gfx card drivers, which is is free on any other platform. I have
preordered stuff just to get them developed and released. I have payed up front
for products before they were even in development. I have payed sky-high newsagent
prices for magazines in stead of a cheap subscription, just to have Amiga
magazines on the shelves. And there are more people like me. So don't give me any
crap that most Amiga users are immoral freebies, as you don't have any basis for such
a conclusion. And it is quite an insult.
-
>Now P96's authors are being criticized for... being in their own rights. This
>can be considered either funny or sad, depending on the point of view but it's
>certainly not reasonable.
-
Some of the arguments against the P96 authors are indeed irrelevant, such as the
lack of updates during the last year. The real question here, is if they are in
their own rights. This would depend on whether the Voodoo3 drivers are to be
considered as commercial or not.
-
A relevant point in favour of Elbox is that the driver, regardless of its legal
status, adds value to the P96 system, and offers it a second chance in the Amiga
marketplace. Of course, if it is indeed illegal, the P96 authors have full
rights to stop it, although that would reduce their own userbase.
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 28 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
I'd just like to add, that there have been no *official* statement from the P96
authors yet. All that has been released was a reply to an email from a mediator
user, which was then posted on the Amiga-Mediator mailing list. This might not
even be the opinion of the entire team, so just don't go too far with the
conclusions you draw...
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 29 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (David Gerber):
First, I HAVE paid for my CyberGFX-System. I said I would pay 10 DM for driver,
right? That means if they was a driver for CGFX I would buy it to use
a VooDoo 3 with my RTG-System I`ve paid for. I there`s only a driver for
P96 I would register P96 and use (and also pay for it if necessary) this
RTG-System.
The next thing is that I meant, Elbox offers support for the Voodoo3 driver
not for P96.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 30 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Buzzy):
Ooops. Too fast:
The correct sentence:
If there is only a driver for P96 I would register it und use (and also
pay for it if necessary) the driver for this RTG-System.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 31 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Bernd Meyer on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (Andrea Maniero):
I don't think the situation is all that complicated --- Elbox made use of the P96 framework for "their" driver. Judging from the benchmark results I have seen so far, the only hardware-accellerated functions in the V3 driver are block fills and block moves. Everything else uses the fallback routines, which, you guessed it, were written by the P96 authors.
Now, there is nothing wrong with standing on the shoulders of giants. But climbing up there, past a sign that says "thou shalt not climb here without explicit permission to do so", is not kosher. The P96 authors wrote their framework, and hold the copyright in it, and they are the only ones who do. So if you want to use their work, you need to abide by whatever rules they want you to abide by, or look for something else.
As to who should pay for what --- does it really matter? I don't think that is the issue. The way in which Elbox openly ignored the P96 authors' conditions is. It's time for Elbox to eat humble pie, and apologize.
And as for the silly argument of "the P96 team should be glad" --- this whole thing came to light because someone mailed them for support with a V3 problem. How would you feel if someone expected you to support the problems caused by someone else's code, which you didn't even know about, and which doesn't benefit you? How much time would you be willing to invest in such support?
Yes, Elbox delivered. How they did it, where they got the driver development kit from, well, better don't ask. But *what* did they deliver? The Voodoo3 is a great gfx card family. It is waaaaay more than a dumb framebuffer with a block-move engine. On other words --- the stuff Elbox delivered is a nice starting point, nothing more. Does it support YUV colour space? Does it support hardware scaling? Does it support the line drawing engine? Does it support *any* of the 3D functionality? Does it support drawing arcs? Does it support gfx-card-assisted P2C comversion? Does it support fast text rendering through off-screen font cache? Does it support simultaneous use with PCMCIA cards? Does it support using more than 8M of the gfx card's memory? The interesting features, in other words, the features you buy a $100 V3 for instead of a $10 Virge? If the answers are no, then why would one buy a V3?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 32 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
>>If it was, why didn't they even contact Tobias and Alexander about that ?
> The obvious answer would be that they didn't think it was necessary, because
> they don't consider their driver to be a commercial product. Development of
> non-commercial drivers for P96 is free.
Oh, the Mediator is non-commercial ? That's new. Tell me where I can get my free Mediator too.
>Now listen up: Over the last years I have payed very high prices for products
>which would not be sellable on any other platform. I have payed for stuff like
>printer and gfx card drivers, which is is free on any other platform.
On other platforms you pay for it too. It's called Windows and it comes with every PC for end-users. Even if you don't need it because you installe another OS, you pay for it.
>So don't give me any
>crap that most Amiga users are immoral freebies, as you don't have any basis >for such
>a conclusion. And it is quite an insult.
Of course I have a basis. I'm a programmer and I have quite a good estimation of the number of users registering our products and those using cracked versions. Many still think that if they can get something for free, they will. No matter what.
But when it comes to hardware it's all different. Since it's harder to "get it for free", everyone pay. That's how software authors can get money for the work they did.
>A relevant point in favour of Elbox is that the driver, regardless of its legal
>status, adds value to the P96 system
Sure, unfortunately it's all theory.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 33 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Lewis on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (David Gerber):
Your comment that the Mediator IS commercial is irrelevent because of the following paragraph from the pP96 homepage:
"Developing software for Picasso96 is free, development of Picasso96 hardware drivers is restricted to non-commercial projects, old hardware or - if a licence is obtained from the authors - new hardware products. We reserve the right to decide whether to provide support for a certain project or not. Writing and issuing hardware drivers without the written approval of the Picasso96 authors will not be tolerated."
It is a grey area, but Elbox have not developed a driver for THEIR product! Its as simple as that. The Voodoo boards are a commercial project but not elbox's. So Elbox do NOT directly benefit from Voodoo drivers. I will clarify that statement. When buying a mediator PCI expansion the consumer currently has a choice of two graphics baords. Neither of which is made by elbox. Elbox have done exactly the same as the P96 team. They have provided drivers for somebody elses product, in this case the Voodoo gfx boards.
So the outline of the situation is as follows:
P96 write drivers for various gfx cards : they do not pay royalties for this.
P96 write drivers for said cards that run on someone elses OS (Amiga Inc): they do not pay royalties for this.
Elbox write drivers for various gfx cards : they do not pay royalties for this.
Elbox write drivers for said cards that run on someone elses RTG drivers : They do not pay royalties for this.
So the situation is not at all illegal or unfair, in fact it is very similar.
The only mistake that Elbox made is that they did not seek approval from the P96 authors first. A problem which can hopefull be rectified.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 34 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (David Gerber):
>Oh, the Mediator is non-commercial ? That's new. Tell me where I can get my free Mediator too.
-
Why do you misunderstand on purpose? What kind of retorics is this? Trying to put
words into my mouth? The question is if the *driver* is commercial, and I think
that was pretty clear from my post.
-
>On other platforms you pay for it too. It's called Windows and it comes with every PC for end-users. Even if you don't need it because you installe another OS, you pay for it.
-
That's right: It is included in the OS. Which comes with every new PC sold. And whatever cost Windows adds to new PC's: It doesn't prevent them from being WAY cheaper than less powerful Amigas. You might think this is fine, but I don't. I think it is unfair.
-
>Of course I have a basis. I'm a programmer and I have quite a good estimation of the number of users registering our products and those using cracked versions. Many still think that if they can get something for free, they will. No matter what.
-
Well, I still don't think that this discussion shows that most Amiga users are
immoral freebies. That was what you were saying, wasn't it?
-
>But when it comes to hardware it's all different. Since it's harder to "get it for free", everyone pay. That's how software authors can get money for the work they did.
-
Okay, valid point.
-
>>A relevant point in favour of Elbox is that the driver, regardless of its legal
>>status, adds value to the P96 system
-
>Sure, unfortunately it's all theory.
-
It's a fact. Mediator Voodoo3 drivers, freely available for P96 only, will make
P96 more attractive. I certainly now that I will be getting P96 (and register it)
once I get my Mediator. BTW, I did add that if the driver is illegal, the P96
authors are free to disregard this.
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 35 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
You make the bogus assumption that significant people actually register
shareware. If a lot people would have registered P96 when they went
shareware i`m sure you would have also seen more development/support.
It all backfires....
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 36 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
I certainly *KNOW* that I will be getting P96, not "now". True proof that not even
a Logitech keyboard can improve your spelling...
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 37 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Lewis on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Lewis):
Just to clarify my last comment even more: Yes many people are buying the mediator so that they can use a Voodoo card, but this is not the only reason. If the mediator was unusable without the Voodoo driver then I would agree that Elbox should pay the P96 authors regardless of whether they own the Voodoo card.
But that is not the case.
So as I said previously P96 do not have to pay royalties to those companies that make gfx cards although their product is unsalable without the gfx cards. So why should Elbox whose product is sellable without said drivers have to pay a royalty.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 38 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Ralph Schmidt):
>You make the bogus assumption that significant people actually register
>shareware. If a lot people would have registered P96 when they went
>shareware i`m sure you would have also seen more development/support.
>It all backfires....
-
I was simply pointing out that his claim that Amiga users were generally
immoral cheapscates was not a reasonable conclusion to draw. The problem with
too few people registering shareware is mostly the fault of a too small
userbase, not of an "immoral" userbase, in my opinion.
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 39 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Buzzy):
>They can earn the money for registration.
Sorry..but that`s highly naive to expect that somebody earns enough
by "registrations" in the amiga market anymore...
afaik p96 doesn`t even have any limitation/protection.
This probably results into sub 100 registrations in x years for y
years of work+support. A *fair* deal...indeed.
Drivers are things people expect as "free". Though in reality
people pay for their development by buying Windows, the HW itself
(printer and so on).
On the amiga Commodore never did a RTG system, so other people
created such system which took many years to mature.
There is no other way to finance this as through OEM sales.
>And something else: Ralph you adr always complaining about the market, about
>the users etc.. If everything is so bad why don`t you just leave it and
>stop complaining about it?
I could ask the same...why don`t people leave which don`t wanna pay
anything anymore. Then the remaining developer can see who *really*
wanna see their system be developed further and pay for this.
Instead of trying to approach everybody with cut throat prices which
only work for the distributor/hw producer and give nothing to the
weak end...the sw developers.
The reason i always repeat this market talk is that i still have hope
that it sinks into some brains and lets them rethink the situation and
take the consequences....phase5's management and others made the big
mistake to go for low prices instead of argueing for higher prices and
better products like Apple did.
Apple created a mindset that exclusivity costs more and if people had
financed amiga development like the years before 1994-5 we would probably
have better products now and a more healthy market.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 40 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Lewis):
>P96 write drivers for various gfx cards : they do not pay royalties for this.
>P96 write drivers for said cards that run on someone elses OS (Amiga Inc): >they do not pay royalties for this.
Right.
>Elbox write drivers for various gfx cards : they do not pay royalties for >this.
>Elbox write drivers for said cards that run on someone elses RTG drivers : >They do not pay royalties for this.
Wrong. Those drivers only work with a Mediator. They have calls for this hardware only, thus they still fell under the Picasso96 license.
Otherwise, why would Ateo with their Ateobus have to pay a license ?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 41 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Anonymous):
Well..the number of sold visionppc`s by dce and the sales of
cgfx 4 since then were *disappointing*.
That says a lot. David Gerber/Vapor should also know about
their sales and the amount of pirate copies floating around.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 42 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Jerry Gibbons (Gerald) on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
I am not a pirate or a cheat - just an AMIGA user who wants the best AMIGA based system he can buy. Perhaps it is time for some "leadership" from the top of this organization! I guess if Bill needs to get into this one now would be the time! Lets take a breath and get some clarification before we all jump to the wrong conclusions.
-
Now listen up: Over the last years I have payed very high prices for products
which would not be sellable on any other platform. I have payed for stuff like
printer and gfx card drivers, which is is free on any other platform. I have
preordered stuff just to get them developed and released. I have payed up front
for products before they were even in development. I have payed sky-high newsagent
prices for magazines in stead of a cheap subscription, just to have Amiga
magazines on the shelves. And there are more people like me. So don't give me any
crap that most Amiga users are immoral freebies, as you don't have any basis for such
a conclusion. And it is quite an insult.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 43 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Ralph Schmidt):
Gee.....I wonder why he only shows up when he can flame ELBOX. Is it in his own (or DCEs) interest to do so? blabla payment...bla bla no respect...bla bla BUY THE G-REX FROM DCE!!!!!
Oh buy the way ralph...the Voodoo3 works perfectly with the Mediator...it needs some optimisation but it beats the Permedia2 by far (4 times faster) on some issues.
And guess what? no problems with PPC and 68k....so much for bankswitching......
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 44 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Ralph Schmidt):
Gee.....I wonder why he only shows up when he can flame ELBOX. Is it in his own (or DCEs) interest to do so? blabla payment...bla bla no respect...bla bla BUY THE G-REX FROM DCE!!!!!
Oh buy the way ralph...the Voodoo3 works perfectly with the Mediator...it needs some optimisation but it beats the Permedia2 by far (4 times faster) on some issues.
And guess what? no problems with PPC and 68k....so much for bankswitching......
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 45 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Ralph Schmidt):
Gee.....I wonder why he only shows up when he can flame ELBOX. Is it in his own (or DCEs) interest to do so? blabla payment...bla bla no respect...bla bla BUY THE G-REX FROM DCE!!!!!
Oh buy the way ralph...the Voodoo3 works perfectly with the Mediator...it needs some optimisation but it beats the Permedia2 by far (4 times faster) on some issues.
And guess what? no problems with PPC and 68k....so much for bankswitching......
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 46 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Ralph Schmidt):
Gee.....I wonder why he only shows up when he can flame ELBOX. Is it in his own (or DCEs) interest to do so? blabla payment...bla bla no respect...bla bla BUY THE G-REX FROM DCE!!!!!
Oh buy the way ralph...the Voodoo3 works perfectly with the Mediator...it needs some optimisation but it beats the Permedia2 by far (4 times faster) on some issues.
And guess what? no problems with PPC and 68k....so much for bankswitching......
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 47 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Lewis on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (David Gerber):
Fact - Elbox have written drivers for the Voodoo range of Graphics cards - This point has nothing to do with P96. They don't need to pay a royalty for this.
Fact - P96 Authors write gfx card drivers that will only run on AmigaOS - They don't need to pay a royalty.
Fact - Elbox have and are writing drivers for various gfx cards that will only run on P96. - Why do they need to pay a royalty (see P96 statement above) - They are not making money from the drivers, they are not ditributing them to just anyone.
P96 Only works on Workbench, with calls to that software and they don't pay a royalty.
Look I am not saying that the P96 authors are wrong, just that an agreement is what is in order here not royalties.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 48 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Amifan):
If you retry a bit you`ll easily beat the 100 articles/thread number
I gave as a goal. Come on...train a bit...show us your anger:-)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 49 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Amifan):
Thank you Amifan for saying that what I have in mind since this discussion
about Mediator, G-Rex, etc. started. Everytime when there is something
about Elbox, Ralph Schmidt is here to tell us whats right and whats wrong and
who bad Elbox is. When I read his comments I have the impression that he is omniscent and we
are only stupid users.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 50 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Andrea Maniero on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (Lewis):
I agree that an agreement has to be found.
Let's take the facts upside down. Did Elbox HURT P96 developers? NO, they gave free drivers for their system, which didn't cost anything to P96. If a single user of mediator+voodoo will register to P96, the fact that both firms had an advantage will be evident. Let alone if more than one user will register (which I think should be the case...)
Anonymous, there are 117 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 117]
Back to Top