28-Apr-2024 09:59 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 117 items in your selection (but only 67 shown due to limitation) [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 51 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 49 (Buzzy):
Imagine i hadn`t posted, this thread would have been full of
boring "cool...new warez" postings in the 2x count area.
But we`re already at count 50 in a few hours and ann got
exciting again:-)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 52 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 50 (Andrea Maniero):
Of course they hurt them. Ex ante someone develops software to be sold in the
future. The way P96 is supposed to pay off is through licenses to hardware
manufacurers.
If these companies refuse to pay, it will of course hurt the
software developers. The problem is that ex post, when the gfx system is available,
companies like elbox will have incentives to use the product without paying.
This is called freeriding. While this might be a reasonable way for Elbox maximize
profits in the short run, nobody can argue that it is good for the market in
the longer run.
The license paragraph on the p96 homepage was a try to protect themselves from
situations like this one. Unfortunately there are small possibilies for enforcement.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 53 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Steffen Haeuser on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (Lewis):
Hi!
Let me name a different example... you are having a Cyberstorm PPC, let us imagine...
now these Boards come with a slot for Cybervision PPC and with a UW SCSI...
now surely not all people out there need these two pieces of hardware...
isnt it unfair that they still have to pay for them ? :)
Well, of *course* they have to pay for them... and as to payment for Graphics Drivers...
I am of the opinion that software licenses for a hardware product is fpr a company a part
of the product like a CPU or a resistor... and it is acceptable that it should
cost money.
I do not want to screw Elbox here who did a nice job in bringing the first
PCI Expansion to the Amiga (they have enough arguments to handle, both
silly arguments and arguments where was some truth in - no need that I
add to these arguments more).
But they could do a nicer job - and clear up the
confusion about to start - if they would do things right about the software
also. And this is not the last time they will have to deal with software.
Their PPC Board also requires Drivers, right ?
And like someone else pointed out in a different thread: Their product
can only win, if they do things decent (and more people buy their hardware)
instead of some confusion happening. Everybody involved (Elbox, P96 guys)
could only win, if they try to cooperate (cooperation? On the Amiga market ?
Impossible !!!)... surely it is not the last time the Elbox people might
need drivers... and if they start a cooperating way on this now, they know
whom they can ask to do drivers for them next time...
Some argued that as Elbox developed the Drivers themselves they would be
free of any license-fee. But they still use the core system of P96...
if they would be independent of this, their point might come true. But
if they would, then it is possible, that a new driver system - not as
tested as long-time-developed P96 or CGX - would break programs relying
on internals of the existing Driver systems (Think of Mac Emulator Drivers,
think of Warp3D, think of rtgmaster,...). Licensing P96 (or CGX) might
be - strange like this sounds - the "cheaper" way and the way selling
more Mediators...
Steffen
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 54 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 48 (Ralph Schmidt):
Uhm....well......doh....NO!
Because you're making a fool of yourself. I don't need to "unlash" my anger :)
<sarcasm>
Go on, amuse me, flame ELBOX more.
Why not tell us something about that it's vapourware afterall and that the G-REX is llready available in stores fo more then a month.
Come on mighty king Ralph speak to your people!
</sarcasm>
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 55 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Robert Habkirk on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Ralph Schmidt):
How long does it take!!! Irelavent if P96 people want 30DM for the driver no
one will buy it so they will not produce it. If Elbox adss a P96 driver and you
can get it free if you buy the mediator, You would still have to purchase
P96 shareware or P96 could make thier dist. commercial as CGX did and take advantage
of people buying the mediator ( if any one would pay 30 DM for the driver ).
I will not buy the DCE solution as it forces people to buy accelorators from them
to even use thier card. 900 dollars US for PCI extender is stupid ( Hal Greenely has
a DKB 060 accelorator with PCI header (a standard one) already built in for 699 dollars,
if you had the driver the actual slots would cost you under $20 flat cable to
4 to 6 PCI slot board.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 56 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Biffo the Bastard on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 51 (Ralph Schmidt):
Hey Mr Schmidt,
I didn't know you had humour? It's never reflected
in your postings.
Biffo the Big
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 57 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 54 (Amifan):
Can you elaborate why i make a fool out of myself when i argue
in favour of paying the sw developers and fullfilling their
licence rules ?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 58 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by SoT on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Elbox gives Amiga live back.
Thanks all Elbox guys for that.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 59 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 55 (Robert Habkirk):
The DKB 68060 card for the 2000 was definitely the best one from the
HW viewpoint from what i knew about it.
Well..didn`t know that somebody develop/s/ed a bridgeboard for its
pci bus.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 60 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 57 (Ralph Schmidt):
sorry, but I really need to reply on this one :)
<sarcasm>
yes...YES!!!!! O mighty god of the amiga software protectors. THE personification of fairness. Your words are so wise
We ll know that you want to protect the P96 team. And no...NOOOO!!! we really don't think that might be other reasons for your postings.
Like stopping sales of the mediator in favour of G-REX which still has to hit the shelves.
Tell us more of your wisdom please!!
</sarcasm>
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 61 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by its about time on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (David Gerber):
> Wrong. Those drivers only work with a Mediator. They have calls for
> this hardware only, thus they still fell under the Picasso96 license.
Perhaps because the Mediator is the only busboard on sale in which
a PCI card can be connected?
> Otherwise, why would Ateo with their Ateobus have to pay a license
> ?
Wrong, the only gfx card that can be connected to the Ateobus was
the Pixel64, which "coincidentally" was made by Ateo tehmselves.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 62 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 60 (Amifan):
Ahh..because you think you know what i secretly think while
writing my articles here renders the content as wrong ?
I just wish that Amiga companies *pay* sw developers for their work,
because everything else will speed up the death spirale even more.
One pissed off developer means xyz disappointed users not getting the
sw/hw they want.
If Elbox pays p96 people for the usage of their system...the better for
the whole market. Equal business condition and continued financing of
developers.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 63 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 62 (Ralph Schmidt):
True, it's the best for all, if elbox pays this money...cooperate with P96 and work together for the best optimized voodoo and cgfx/DCE beating RTG system. That's what we all want :)
But the fact remains that we may only see your wise words when ELBOX is involved.
Strange isn't it.....
Can't remember that you placed a comment on the announcement of the mediator like "Yes, this is a great idea, offering th communitie some cheap expansion possibilities.
Instead DCE announcd it's G-REX and you stared the discussion about bankswitching.....and PPC 68K/ppc collisions etc...
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 64 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 63 (Amifan):
Well, perhaps he's mostly entering discussions when they're about Elbox and Mediator, but that doesn't mean that he's telling only bullshit. Now, I really want to know as much as possible about the products I'm buying, and that also means that I don't just want to hear the GOOD stuff. To me, it seems like that's what you want to hear.. the good stuff.. and forget all about disadvantages etc.. (you=amifan, he=schmidt)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 65 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 63 (Amifan):
I discussed the bank switching/bandwidth issue months before DCE announced
anything but well..if you only wanna see what fits into your viewpoint
so be it.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 66 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Homer on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
I seem to remember the Villagetronic/P96 getting into an argument with the Phase/CGX developers. P96 can emulate CGX, did P96 license or get permission to from CGX to do this? If not what is the difference from Elbox extending the abilities of P96. This is same thing that P96 does for my Amiga, it adds rtg to my 2000 and Picasso and extends the Amiga graphic system. I don't recall Commodore or Amiga complaining about it.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 67 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by paul@heams.freeserve.co.uk on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Sigh, what a big mess.... How on earth can we sort all this out?
Elbox, please speak to the P96 guys.
P96 guys, please speak to the Elbox guys.
..and please sort something out..
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 68 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Georg Steger on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 66 (Homer):
I think that in fact it is not possible to write an RTG system like
Picasso96 or CyberGraphX without breaking the law/license/ (reverse
engineering , etc.) Thanks god Commodore did not really care about
this (I guess because it was good for them).
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 69 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Vernaeve on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Only one word for these kind of market (Classic amiga is SMALL),
Just cooperate or by the end you will invest money for nothing.
Choose only one RTG (or maybe two, i have buy cgx :) ) and pay for it.
It means Elbox too. P96 man have worked for that, It is their software,
without these, no drivers...
The REST fuck off, you want something in amiga market, pay for it.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 70 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Jonny Johansson on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Heh, imagine that: Schmidt and Haeusser agreeing on something...;)))
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 71 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
So ELBOX completely ignore the P96 license, make use of P96 underlying software, and then bitch when the P96 authors get upset?
Look, Elbox - quit acting the innocent martyr here, admit you screwed up, and negotiate a license (like you shoul dhave done to start with), and GROW UP.
*sigh*
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 72 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Paul McCord on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Doh, Doh and double Doh!!!
It would appear that an almighty goof has taken place. Elbox seem to stepped on P96's toes big style, and P96 who are not going to make a penny from this have then succeeded in alienating all Mediator owners. I must point out that when the Mediator was announced, P96 stayed quiet until now. They could have jumped on the same boat as CGX, but have been caught sleeping.
However, the magnitude of Elbox's boob cannot be underestimated. They have not considered the obvious response from P96 and have some major backpedalling to do.
Once again folks, it is you and I who suffer for this. Just like the schoolyard saga between Eyetech and Elbox before, the Frank Mariak debacle. Please, for the sake of the rest of us, get a grip and stop killing the Amiga with petty stupidity.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 73 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Chris on 15-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Why should Elbox pay the P96 authors? Why not authors of P96 pay Elbox for
licence writing P96 drivers for Mediator? Picasso want from users to pay for
its shareware, right?
Maybe Elbox should behave same as Picasso and propose conditions like they:
"Developing software for Mediator is free, development of Mediator
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 Mediator pci.library authors will not be tolerated.
Licensing Companies that want to sell his software or other products
for Meditor as the busboard system must license Mediator pci.library
from:
Elbox, ...
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."
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 74 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Veraneve on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Sure, try to use for instance a motorengine (P96) to your new
brand car (voodoo 3 driver) without buying the motor, (by building
yourself for instance) and sell it.....
Sure the motorengine company would surely accept that. :))
Elbox use P96 (even if they add value to the product), they must pay for
the work of p96 team.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 75 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Mickael Cromer on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 73 (Chris):
Hey Ralph,
Ever thought of leaving your keyboard, gasping some fresh air outside, stare at people
then realize that life is not that negative and the future not that screwed up. We don't
have to be demoralized reading your mumbling.
Mickael,
One guy who gave 900 pounds to phase5 and wants to get rid off his ppc.library in his flashrom.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 76 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Bernd Meyer on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 73 (Chris):
>>>>Maybe Elbox should behave same as Picasso and propose conditions like
they:
"Developing software for Mediator is free, development of Mediator
hardware drivers is restricted to non-commercial projects[...]<<<<
"Maybe"? What do you mean? I most certainly don't see Elbox handing out development information for *their* product, or allowing anyone but those who *they* choose to develop drivers for it.
If I were to write a driver for TV overlay cards for their hardware, how do you think they would react? How do you think they would react to suggestions that they should pay me, as I am adding value to their product? What if my new driver is shoddy, causes random crashes, only works for PAL, doesn't allow video capture and doesn't work at all in quite a few Mediator setups?
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 77 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ian Kennedy on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
One thing you can be sure of with Amiga developers is that they're behind the times when it comes to "the business." Since ELBOX doesn't acutally make or sell Voodoo3 based cards their driver is not in violation of the marginally legal P96 license agreement. They are not selling nor distributing P96. The P96 guys have no basis for their claim. None. The most p96 can do is refuse to support any users who employ the Elbox driver. Should they (P96 wankers) actually intentionally update p96 to fail on this driver or on a system with the Elbox bus card in it then they would probably be in violation of the law themselves in relation to restraint of trade. The contents of the P96 license are questionable. They published a public API and provided tools to use it. Elbox did this and provides it free to PCI V3 users. The ONLY way that Elbox could possibly get in trouble is if another company came out with a PCI adapter and Elbox took actions to prevent their V3 driver from working on it or charged the users of the compeeting product a fee for a driver that their own users got for free. But this is not the case.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 78 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 75 (Mickael Cromer):
Mhh..i probably could send you a flash cleaner...then you`re
rescued from the demoralizing sw:-)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 79 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Bernd Meyer on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 77 (Ian Kennedy):
Two points --- the P96 *driver* API was not published, nor is it public. It says so quite clearly on the P96 web site. The *application* API was, but Elbox didn't write an application, they wrote a driver.
Also, Elbox *does* prevent users of other PCI adapters from using the "free" drivers. Such users simply cannot get their hands on the drivers in the first place, because to get them, you need to be a registered Mediator user. Now if that isn't "preventing", then what is? And yes, there *is* at least one other PCI solution for AmigaOS ;-)
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 80 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by NeRP on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
So, add 10DM to the price of the mediator and pay P96 the 10DM. It's called 'forced registration'. At least then P96 *is* going to get it's money. AFAIK Ateo Concepts did it with their Pixel64 Why is Elbox the exception? What the hell is 10DM anyways? $4US.. $6CAD.. wow. I might not buy mediator now, that 10DM pushed it out of my price range... HAHAHAHAH
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 81 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Frederik Yssing on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
I think this would only help the P96 team.
But why the h..l can't ppl cooporate ?
This would really strenghten the whole AMiGA market...
And ofsourse Elbox needs drivers (WarpOS) for there Shark PPC, and will the make those them selfe ?
Well.. coorporation is the answer...
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 82 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 80 (NeRP):
>So, add 10DM to the price of the mediator and pay P96 the 10DM. It's >called 'forced registration'. At least then P96 *is* going to get it's money. >AFAIK Ateo Concepts did it with their Pixel64 Why is Elbox the exception? What >the hell is 10DM anyways? $4US.. $6CAD.. wow.
Apparently, Elbox does not want to pay anything. No matter what.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 83 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Marco Ridoni on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
It seems to me that this discussion could go on forever... Actually the facts are very straightforward: P96 license says that to develop drivers for P96 you need a license. Elbox doesn't have any, so their behaviour is highly suspect. The problem we have here is that the Elbox driver relies on P96 and is totally useless without it. Of course we can discuss with Elbox issues like "I only want to use an IDE controller or a sound card, why should I pay a higher price tag on the Mediator?", bu that's a different point. Also remember: Elbox says that they're helping the P96 team to sell registrations to more people. The fact is: if you want to use a Mediator with a graphic card you NEED P96 (or another RTG system). But this means that if you (Elbox) want to SELL Mediators you have to provide users with a RTG system, be it P96, CGX or anything. Otherwise we (users) can start using Mediators as rather expensive doorstops...
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 84 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Buzzy on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 80 (NeRP):
So and if we have ten drivers for ten GFXCards you would pay 100 DM extra?
I don`t think so. Your model won`t work. You should only have to pay for
drivers you actually use. If I use VooDoo3 I won`t pay for Virge, V4, V5 etc..
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 85 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Steffen Haeuser on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 70 (Jonny Johansson):
Hi!
Yes, I found that funny too :)
Still I am not interested in Elbox-bashing out of principle (like Ralph probably is), but
on the other side the P96 people are in the right in this specific case...
Steffen
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 86 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Andrzej J. Debicki on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
Guys, please understand one. Elbox provide driver compatible with
Picasso96 not the Picasso96 driver. So P96 boys have no right to
receive fee for this job.
Another example. Did Mr Smith pay fee to Amiga Inc. for developing
MorphOS? Or maybe he is real God Over All Gods. When Ralph can develop
operatin system which is compatible to AmigaOS and not pay for the job
why he don't allow Elbox to make driver which is compatible with
Picasso96 for free?
And about adding any amount of money to retail proce of Mediator. Why
shoul I pay for software (P96) which I may never use? Can I buy
Mediator to use it with sound or network card only or not? Maybe Elbox
should include Miami, Genesis (for network), AHI (and other sound
stuff) and all graphics software and sell Mediator for $2000 (or maybe
much more) to be fair with all programers whose software can be run
with Mediator ADDON cards NOT made by Elbox?
IIRC Elbox provides only necessary files for Voodoo3 (voodo.card file
or something). If you want to use it you HAVE to get Picasso96 right?
If you want to use P96 you have to register it right? So whats the
problem with Picasso guys? Isn't it Elbox who should care about
demanding users to buy another software to use their beloved Voodoo3?
Why then Picasso96 team cries? They have nothing to loose, they only
can earna money - Elbox is the one who can lose.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 87 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by John Millington on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
It is an outrage that _anyone_ should need to purchase a license in order to
write software that is interoperable with someone else's. Copyrights
should cover code and other expressions, NOT INTERFACES!
IMHO, anyone who tries to use their IP to protect an interface, is working
against the best interests of the users. This is the very reason that the
open source & free software movement is gaining such strength: the price of
HAVING to depend on someone else, of HAVING to get permission to write
software, is intolerably high.
I'm sorry that P96's business model is so flawed. They should be selling
software to end users (or perhaps indirectly by making bundling deals with
hardware manufacturers), NOT selling development licenses to hardware
manufacturers. And if Amiga users pirate (or fail to register shareware) P96
so much that selling to users isn't profitable, then we really _should_ die
off; we're just not worthy.
This is ultimately a failing of Amiga (both the past and present owners)
for not establishing real interface standards and letting developers implement
those standards freely. It caused immense damage in the PowerPC side of
things, and now it's going to cause another RTG schism, as if the P96/CGX
one wasn't enough. RTG is way too basic and necessary to Amiga users, for
those users to have to depend on a 3rd party.
I've had it. If Amiga is really serious about Classic Amiga OS (and I know
they're not, so this is just wishful thinking) then they should outright _buy_
(not just license) either P96 or CGX (or write their own, as the _final_
schism), and then either:
1) make it an "official" part of Amiga OS 3.9, so that anyone who buys
the SDK can write graphics drivers
or
2) Release it under an open source license
If they do not do one or the other, then Amiga hardware expansion manufacturers
will always be at someone's mercy, and these types of wars will continue forever
and ever, until there are no more Amiga users. I am not going to buy any more
Amiga classic stuff (including OS 3.9) unless this happens, because a platform
without real standards (that EVERYONE is allowed to use), is no platform at all.
BTW, the same goes for PowerPC libraries.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 88 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ian Shurmer on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
My first ever comment on ANN!! Just to add my two pence... (with my 16 yr old student, uneducated views... Im sure you'll all be quick to tell me where Im going wrong)...
The Mediator - Has its well documented problems, but is the first and the only *currently* available PCI card system for A1200... I mean, I could actually BUY one of these, unlike many vaporware products of recent years. So the Elbox guys (who happen to have made many excellent Amiga products, like my Flyer!) deserve congratulations for doing something that has been spoken about for many years, but that no one has had the guts to actually create.
But now come the problems... there obviously aren't many drivers available for the Mediator at the moment, and cash is very scarce for myself, so I simply could not afford to spend £100+ on a card so that I could use only a £10 Virge card on my Amiga. However, now the Voodoo 3 driver has appeared (even if it is in its infancy) I am seriously considering purchasing Mediator ... therefore adding my support.
However, the P96 issue.... :( From my point of view, Elbox are doing P96 team a big favour. There is no way that I would have any use for P96 unless it was for the Elbox/Mediator Voodoo3 driver. Therefore, if I do get a Voodoo3 and Mediator, I will pay the registration fee to P96 ppl that I would never have paid otherwise. So this is an obvious benefit to the P96 team. But... as far as I can see, Elbox have broken the terms of P96 developers agreement (no matter whether the agreement was 'barely legal' or 'fully legal') and I can understand why P96 would be p*ssed about this. However, was it really neccessary for P96 to flame Elbox... why not just contact Elbox directly and sort things out rather than making all this fuss and alienating so many possible new Mediator users?!?
It seems to me as if P96 really aren't interested in supporting the Amiga community as a whole and are just in it for their personal gain -- after all, why else would they threaten to block a driver that has been developed for *FREE* by Elbox and is in fact bringing themselves extra benefits in the registration fees!!! Were the P96 team planning to support Voodoo3/Mediator themselves? I sincerely doubt it. I havent seen an update (apart from UAE) for a while.... so it seems as if they are simply trying to milk money out of Elbox even tho they had no plans to continue *proper* development of P96.
If an agreement cant be found, I look forward to abandoning P96 completely and using the new Elbox RTG system if it emerges.
IMHO it is this sort of bitchy attitude between Amiga companies that has put pay to many freeware projects in the past. It seems there is argument between two companies whenever a new product is released -- WHY THE HELL CANT PEOPLE STOP THINKING ABOUT THEIR OWN BENEFIT AND START THINKING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE -- SUCH AS THE (STRUGGLING) AMIGA COMMUNITY IN GENERAL!!
Being the season of goodwill, it would be a great Christmas present if the two companies could resolve their differences and I could be sure that I can get a Mediator card that will have future support for modern graphics and other PCI cards.
Cheers,
Ian
(Okay -- so it was more like 20 pence!!! But thats a lot for a poor student like me (c: )
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 89 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Alcemyst on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Ralph Schmidt):
lol higer prices. i think they were high enough as they were.
by the time ppl could save up for them they went bust.
anyway the could barelly make enough for the ppl who did buy there
stuff
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 90 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 88 (Ian Shurmer):
I mostly agree with what you said here, but there is one thing I'd just like to clarify to everybody posting on this thread:
The P96 authors haven't made any official statements on this matter whatsoever. They have not flamed Elbox, and the war is fought by the Amiga community, along with possibly Elbox, who seem to be very quick to defend themselves these days. The P96 team are not participating. The only statement from the P96 authors was a reply one of them made to a private email, which was then posted on the Amiga-Mediator mailing list, then posted on vgr.com, and then finally on ANN. From then on the entire issue has grown out of proportion.
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 91 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Alcemyst on 16-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Ralph Schmidt):
lol higer prices. i think they were high enough as they were.
by the time ppl could save up for them they went bust.
anyway the could barelly make enough for the ppl who did buy there
stuff
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 92 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Pika on 17-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
I'm glade to announce the soon to be available powerfull PikachuPPC board, with an onboard pci/agp bus controler.
At the same time, there will be the PikachuRTG software, and his specific drivers. First for Voodoo3, then for GeForce and G800.
All this will be released under the free Pikachu licence.
You can already make your preorder.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 93 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Steffen Haeuser on 17-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 87 (John Millington):
Hi!
To clean up with a common misconception... the
P96 Driver for Mediator is not a "own Driver
with identical interface to P96". It *is* a
P96 Driver, which means either Elbox got
information from somewhere which is normally
only available against *paying* a license.
Or they reengineered it.
Steffen
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 94 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by its about time on 17-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 92 (Pika):
I hope you have a license from Nintendo, otherwise Nintendo will not support
your card and they can release a new version of Pokemon which will not be
compatible with Pikachu XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 95 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 84 (Buzzy):
> So and if we have ten drivers for ten GFXCards you would pay 100 DM extra?
You on glue? Hell no. People who use the Ateo Bus got p96 drivers and AFAIK were registered users after that. That same person could use any of the drivers included in the p96 archives, or any other updated driver released later. Besides, Elbox would pay nothing... just pass on 10DM from the price onto the newly registered mediator owner. I absolutely guarantee you that ANY A1200 owner who has mediator is going to use it for gfx card, so saying you are going to buy it for a frikkin sound card is a moot point. AGA just slightly sucks even when compared to a slow zorro2 card.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 96 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Kay Are Ulvestad on 18-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 95 (Anonymous):
It doesn't really matter if every A1200 owner who gets a Mediator gets it to use
graphics card. It still isn't a mere Voodoo3 interface. It's a PCI interface.
Elbox don't sell or distribute Voodoo3 cards. The driver in question is a Voodoo3
driver. P96's distribution/development conditions don't apply to a free
driver developed for a product not sold or developed by the driver's authors
themselves. It's a gray area, and although Elbox hasn't handled this as well as
they should, they have not broken any laws by making and distributing this
driver. If there are any lawyers here who can tell me that I am wrong on this point,
I will be willing to reevaluate my view.
-
Kay
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 97 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Alcemyst on 18-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 96 (Kay Are Ulvestad):
lets say i made a G-Force2 driver for the Mediator useing p96 &
put it on Aminet then what..i will have to pay P96 ppl for doing so.
but im not making a penny...
the users useing my driver will pay p96 ppl by registering p96
simple
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 98 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Alcemyst on 19-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Ralph Schmidt):
Ralph ..its not Elbox fault that ppl dont register shareware stuff.
if u want to make sure u get more for the work u do you criple it or
you dont make it shareware & make ppl buy it
then if Elbox want to make drivers for it them all u can ask for is permission
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 99 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by John Millington on 19-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 93 (Steffen Haeuser):
Yes, I understand that they use an internal P96 interface.
And that's what's wrong: that anyone should have to pay money (or reverse
engineer) in order to write drivers for the Amiga platform. Amiga should
purchase P96 (or CGX) and then publish enough information so that anyone
can write whatever drivers they want to.
The owner of a platform should whatever it can to remove barriers that
hinder development. You don't have to buy a license or do any skullduggery
to write a disk driver; it should be just as easy to write a graphics
driver.
Voodoo driver from Elbox illegal? : Comment 100 of 117ANN.lu
Posted by Ralph Schmidt on 19-Nov-2000 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 98 (Alcemyst):
I didn`t say that....i only explained why RTG driver interfaces
aren`t public documented and that it`s hishonest and pure
hypocrisy to come up with these cheesy excuses of
"but it benefits p96 as it gives them more registrations"
Elbox just either "organized" the not publicly available DDK or
resourced the driver API to work around the licence and do a
freeriding of somebody else`s (p96 developers) work as they
clearly profit on this as they marketed their product with
"Voodoo" support.
And then dozens of amigans here showed the mindset known for
years and which is imho the main deseases in this market.
"If something benefits the ""amigan"" every action is excused
may it be plain dirty and unfair. Who the hell cares...get
*over* it and *cooperate*"
That`s the issue....nothing else.
And as i predicted...this thread has reached 100 articles..together
with the other one we`re almost at 200.
Anonymous, there are 117 items in your selection (but only 67 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 117]
Back to Top