17-Aug-2022 23:12 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 629 items in your selection (but only 379 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 400] [401 - 450] [451 - 500] [More...]
[News] AFUA visited Thendic-FranceANN.lu
Posted on 24-Apr-2002 15:30 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä629 comments
View flat
View list
The French Amiga user group AFUA visited the Thendic-France headquarters and met with Bill Buck and the Coyote Flux guys. Read their report here.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 251 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 05:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 227 (Christophe Decanini):
Yet another myth. The law will tell you that it's not legal to make any kind of dump of your ROM/BIOS, not even for personal use. This is regardless if you bought that ROM/BIOS or not. An emulator requiring the original ROM/BIOS of the hardware it emulates is by definition illegal as well unless the author has a specific license for this from the license holder.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 252 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 05:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 229 (Don Cox):
UAE in itself is illegal as it depends on using an AmigaROM, regardless if it's shipped with a ROM or not.
You're right about Cloanto, though.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 253 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 05:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 230 (gz):
Please, I would NEVER be on the side of a lynch mob as they could NEVER have solid proof against the person they THINK is guilty. If they would have proof, it should be turned over to the police instead of some poeple trying to scare him off and making the police work even more difficult. If you find something wrong about the justice in your country, the only way of correcting this would be either joining the police force yourself or becoming a politician. Everything else would only make things worse and make it easier for a criminal to get away.
I still find my metaphor to suffice as my point is that taking things into your own hands is never a good thing. Even Robin Hodd himself realized this and instead he was forced to help Richard back to the throne in order to set things right. Do like a child and learn from the story.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 254 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 05:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 235 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
The law also states that an emulator must NOT require the original hardware's sytem ROM/BIOS in order to run which UAE does. Go ahead, look it up.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 255 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 05:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 236 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
I don't think you seem to realize how a ROM works. Only the hardware can read from it which it does when booting up, everything else rus ontop of it but that doesn't mean all applications has access directly to the information stored in the ROM directly. Only the ROM itself decides which information is available to the applications. In order to get the information in the ROM, the information needs to be dumped somewhere (normally in RAM or on the HD), accessing it directly is impossible.
Think of the ROM as when you launch an application, what is available to you is only the running process, not the actual ROM file.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 256 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 05:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 245 (gz):
If Phase5 had a license is irrelevant as a license simply can't just be passed on to someone else. The license Phase5 had died with them.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 257 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Denis Troller on 26-Apr-2002 05:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (justin):
A600 is very useful to output debug info through the serial port...
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 258 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 26-Apr-2002 05:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 255 (Samface):
>In order to get the information in the ROM, the information needs to be
>dumped somewhere (normally in RAM or on the HD), accessing it directly is
>impossible.
How can a piece of software dump this ROM as it appears to be "directly impossible" according to this post ?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 259 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Björn Hagström on 26-Apr-2002 06:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 255 (Samface):
Sorry to jump in like this, but the ROM in an Amiga is mapped into the memory space just like any other memory chip is. And it can be read by any software component at any time without restrictions.
If you were referring to some other platform then you might be correct, since it would be possible to lock out memory spaces once hardware bootup is done if you build the hardware that way. But on the Amiga that is not the case. It's just a read only space in the physical memory map.
/Björn
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 260 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 06:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 258 (Anders Kjeldsen):
Through some kind of special interface linked to the ROM itself whereby its internal code can then be "dumped".
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 261 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 06:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 259 (Björn Hagström):
So, just because it's easier than other systems, it has to be legal, right?
I think my point remains intact.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 262 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Björn Hagström on 26-Apr-2002 06:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 261 (Samface):
What?
I'm just corrected your statement about the ROM. What you guys are discussing beyond that is not of my concern.
/Björn
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 263 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 06:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 259 (Björn Hagström):
Besides, if this was true, that it's mapped into physical RAM, then why do applications like Blizzkick exist at all?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 264 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Björn Hagström on 26-Apr-2002 07:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 263 (Samface):
It is not mapped into physical RAM. It is mapped (by hardware) into to physical memory space. This does not mean that it is mapped into RAM. RAM is just one type of memory that is mapped into the physical memory space. Beside RAM and ROM mapped into it we have things like the paula/agnus/gary/CIA chipset registers.
A ROM/RAM/EPROM/EEPROM in it self is mapped over a fixed amount of address pins. And then these are mapped into the overall physical memory space which has even more address pins. That just means that when the CPU wants to read from a ROM the mobo logic decodes the requested memory adress and the depending on how things are organised uses higher bits to find out which chip is to be accessed and the lower bits to where inside the chip data is to be read or written.
Example. (Don't take these figures for real values, they are just set by me for illustrative purposes)
Chip RAM, 4 chips with 512kb each.
Each chip uses 0x00080000 bytes. Say that we map this into the memory space from adress 0x00000000 like this:
Chip 1, 0x00000000 - 0x00007ffff
Chip 2. 0x00080000 - 0x0000fffff
Chip 3. 0x00100000 - 0x00017ffff
Chip 4. 0x00180000 - 0x0001fffff
And then we have a ROM, 2 chip 256kb each which means 0x00040000 bytes for each chip.
And we map it in(by hardware) at 0x0E000000 like this:
ROM chip 1. 0x0E000000 - 0x0E03ffff
ROM chip 2. 0x0E040000 - 0x0E07ffff
Chipset Registers, 1 chip. 16 adress pins of Total space of 65kb
CS chip. 0x00DFF000 - 0x00DFFFFF
So we get a total physical memory space that looks like this:
0x00000000 - 0x0007FFFF RAM
0x00080000 - 0x000FFFFF RAM
0x00100000 - 0x0017FFFF RAM
0x00180000 - 0x001FFFFF RAM
0x0E000000 - 0x0E03FFFF ROM
0x0E040000 - 0x0E07FFFF ROM
0x00DFF000 - 0x00DFFFFF Chipset registers
So when we want to read from ROM we just read from adress 0xE0000000 to 0xE003FFFF. The hardware simply decodes the adress you are trying to access into which chip it is and what adress inside the chip you want to access all invisible to the software.
On some card for the Amiga the contents of the ROM is copied to RAM and any access to the ROM in the physical memory map is decoded by the MMU so that the software thinks it is reading from ROM but in reality it is reading from the copy in RAM.
Anyway, mapping into the physical memory space does not mean that it is copied by some means into RAM. It means that the components (like a ROM chip) internal memory map is available by reading/writing from a certain address in the overall scope of the address pins.
See the physical memory space as a window to what the processor can see. And that every component that the processor can see is exposed inside this window.
(I hope formattign doesn't kill everythign I've written :)
/Björn
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 265 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Björn Hagström on 26-Apr-2002 07:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 264 (Björn Hagström):
Argh, made some typos in there both on figures and words. Ohh well, ignore those typos :)
/Björn
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 266 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 26-Apr-2002 07:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 231 (Graham):
On the topic of the Pegasos's hiding ethernet MAC, Graham said,
>It is in the southbridge (VIA 8221).
Graham, can you elaborate a little? I'm having a hard time finding a quick speclist for the *8231* (which is what's listed on bPlan's speclist; there is no 8221 AFAIK); this JPEG was the reference I dug up:
http://www.via.com.tw/en/images/Products/ProSavage%20Chipsets/PL133BLOCK.gif
...call me stupid (I often am), but shouldn't that be showing MII lines if there's an integrated Rhine controller? Know where there's a better specsheet?
Strangely, http://www.realtek.com.tw/htm/products/cn/rtl8201l.asp has just disappeared from the net since last night.
I was squinting at the pics of the Pegasos prototypes (in bPlan's 'art gallery') then, and did notice what may have been an extraneous Via chip lurking somewhere on the layout. I was also having a hard time tracking down the familiar crab logo of Realtek on any chips, but I don't know if they've changed designs.
http://www.via.com.tw/en/Networking/vt6102.jsp is in the same package as the Firewire controller, so I could be mistaking one for the other..
..and something vaguely http://www.via.com.tw/en/Networking/vt6105lom.jsp shaped was lying near the jack..
Really, now I'm just curious. :) The Rhine seems like a a pretty decent architecture, whether fully integrated or kicking around on a seperate chip; I'm just wondering why I can't manage to confirm its existence!
Use of it would also explain any driver lag; in a world full of Tulip clones for US$9, and Realtek cards for $6, there probably wasn't much reason for anyone @MorphOS to track down a Rhine-based card when the Pegasos was on its way anyway. From what I can tell of FreeBSD's opinion (shake-shake the magic eight ball..), a Tulip driver would be easily modified to a Rhine driver, so if they hacked Tulip first, they're covering the most popular addon cards for a firewall/server, and the onboard NIC with a little more effort.
And.. *facepalms* - anyone want to remind me what the AmigaOne's U14 supposed to be? :}
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 267 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 08:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 265 (Björn Hagström):
Ok, I must admitt, you just taught me something I didn't know before. Thank you. :-)
To the rest of those still reading this thread; I don't have to point out that this of course doesn't affect the point I was trying to make, or do I?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 268 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 26-Apr-2002 09:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 267 (Samface):
I'm not sure if those laws of yours are actually covering "software dumping" of the ROM.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 269 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 268 (Anders Kjeldsen):
No, but the use of ROM's in general. Let's just quote once more:
"...but the final or public release version of that emulator cannot require its use in order to function."
So, the fact that it's easy to make use of the AmigaROM doesn't change the fact that it's illegal.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 270 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 09:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 269 (Samface):
So every hack and patch is illegal on Amiga? VisualPrefs, BlitzKick, MCP, all
of them illegal.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 271 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 270 (David Scheibler):
Doesn't running in circles like that make your head spin?
Like I said earlier; there's a difference between running an application ontop of the ROM and running it within an emulator.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 272 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 271 (Samface):
BTW: Yes, patching the ROM is illegal as well.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 273 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 09:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 271 (Samface):
So let's just hope for Hyperion that OS4 doesn't need the BPPC/CSPPC's ROM...
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 274 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 09:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 272 (Samface):
To bad that Commodore allowed it then...
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 275 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 270 (David Scheibler):
You seem to be one of those guys thinking that just because alot of other people got away with jumping the red light, it's got to be legal.
Newsflash: It's not.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 276 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 09:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 275 (Samface):
To bad for Hyperion then...
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 277 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 273 (David Scheibler):
Sometimes these kind of things just drives me mad and makes me want to just scream out loud...
Please understand that if you have a license from the license holder (Amiga Inc in this case) it's not illegal. Why wouldn't Hyperion have a license to use the AmigaOS3.1?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 278 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 276 (David Scheibler):
Just read the previous posts, this circle of arguments is making my head spin...
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 279 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 09:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 277 (Samface):
They have no licence to the BPPC/CSPPC ROM.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 280 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 26-Apr-2002 09:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 266 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
I meant 8231, just typed it wrong. It is in the southbridge, you just have to dredge through VIA's site looking at chipsets for the C3 platform until you find one that uses it, and then look at the features.


The MAI chipset only allows 6 PCI masters:


- MAI Chipset
- Southbridge
- 3 PCI Slots
- Onboard PCI chip (Firewire on Pegasos, Intel NIC on AmigaOne)
The MII lines must be on the 8231 somewhere, but I haven't looked at the docs for it. It is basically a PCI version of the 8233 if that is any help.
Graham

AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 281 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 09:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 279 (David Scheibler):
So? Who said they were going to use it?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 282 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 10:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 281 (Samface):
Who said they don't use it? Maybe laire should release a FlashUpdate that kills
the whole ROM. OS4 should still run on the card correctly then.
BTW: Who is the copyright holder of the AmigaOne OpenFirmware? :)
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 283 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 10:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 281 (Samface):
In contrary to the MorphOS, AmigaOS4 isn't about reverse engineering or emulating anything besides it's own precursors. You are not making sense with those arguments, I'm afraid.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 284 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 10:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 283 (Samface):
Last time you said that rewriting the ROM would be legal but using it would not.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 285 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by David Scheibler on 26-Apr-2002 10:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 283 (Samface):
>In Reply to Comment 281:
>You are not making sense with those arguments, I'm afraid
That's correct.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 286 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 10:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 282 (David Scheibler):
It won't be any more difficult than it was for H&P to make the WarpUP kernel, what are you on about? Hyperion won't use the original PowerUP kernel in any way as it's not even possible, AFAIK. All they have to do is replace that kernel with their own, now stop it already. You're not making any sense.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 287 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 10:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 284 (David Scheibler):
How many times do I have to say this; IT'S NOT ILLEGAL IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC LICENSE FROM THE LICENSE HOLDER.
Write it a hundred times on a paper and then have it as your night-reading for a week. Perhaps something will stick...
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 288 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Apr-2002 10:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 287 (Samface):
Samface, you really are getting yourself wound up over absolutely nothing.
Your waffle about illegal use of ROMs is all very entertaining, but as absolutely NONE of what you are claiming applies to MorphOS (can you PROVE they have a copy of the KS ROM somewhere in MorphOS, hmm? No, you can't), your waffling is irrelevant.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 289 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Thomas Frieden on 26-Apr-2002 11:27 GMT
[ABUSE]
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 290 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 26-Apr-2002 11:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 283 (Samface):
>In contrary to the MorphOS, AmigaOS4 isn't about reverse engineering or
>emulating anything besides it's own precursors. You are not making sense with
> those arguments, I'm afraid.
Oh, so suddenly we're talking about non-existing products again? :)
It appears to me that you have no idea what you're talking about.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 291 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 26-Apr-2002 11:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 289 (Thomas Frieden):
Wow.. that gotta be insulting.. :p
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 292 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Jon on 26-Apr-2002 11:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 291 (Anders Kjeldsen):
I would call that 'childish'. Don't MOS fanatics have ANY better doing, like learn coding for MOS or something?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 293 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 26-Apr-2002 13:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 256 (Samface):
>>If Phase5 had a license is irrelevant as a license simply can't just be passed on to someone else. The license Phase5 had died with them.
I know, this is not what I was saying. I was replying to a post by you where you said that MOS ppl should have acquired a licence for their project from the start and not just relying that it's ok for them to do it even if AI didn't seem to have a problem with them.
As you can see they actually did acquire a license for amigaos back then so they could start a ppc native os project for amigas. I know they fucked up by not approaching AI again after p5 and gateway deals went out of the window, but as you were thinking that AI don't have any part in this, is where I think you are wrong.
AI HAS a part in this too as they should have contacted the MOS team after they bought rights for the brand from gateway, and give them a clear legal status on their behalf instead of letting MOS be untill they noticed they couldn't ally with them. I believe AI did this on purpose hoping that they could watch how the mos project evolved and if it would survive far enough they could try and benefit out of it by licencing mos as THE amigaOS for ppc (ie. it would have been "OS4") As things didn't go AI's way they have now infected relations with the mos team and therefore a solution is hard to find.
So you see things aren't always that simple which I was trying to illustrate to you with my metaphor example. In the MOS issue both parties have a responsibility and both are right and wrong in different things. AI is right to defend their brand and rom's but wrong in not taking part with the legal issue a long time ago. MOS is wrong in being too proud and not seeing how it could benefit evryone if they would just sign a deal, but then on the other hand they are right defending the years and years of hard work they have put into their project without EVER receiving any help from AI for it. AI stepped in suddenly and demands control of their project. who would swallow that without taking an issue with it?
Also to reply on your post where you said that people who want to make a difference should join the police or take up on politics... Well I wonder what the author of prayer mp3 player Tamara Cjetinski would have to say about that.
Are you saying that if she want's to make a difference in her country she should apply to a taskforce or become a politician? Her hometown was bombarded by same people who live in that country with her. On top of that, the people who were supposed to be there helping (nato) bombarded them too. Would these things have stopped if she would think like you do? Not nececcarily by a longshot.
Things aren't black and white in this world and thinking black and white won't work because of that. We could very well see that in the sept.11 attacks in usa. Or better yet with the things ongoing between Israeli and the Palestinians. Can you tell me which one is the bad guy in there? Should they all aply to become politicians?
Wasn't communism originally a very nice and humane idea? Yes. Did it work in the real world? No. It didn't. It became quite the opposite because the world and people has rainbow colours instead of just 2.
Making things too simple is not a good idea, which is what you did when you were giving analogies like that.
To conclude things I seriously hope you didn't call me a child when you told me to "Do like a child and learn from the story of Robin Hood." I'm sure we could save the world if we all did that.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 294 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 26-Apr-2002 15:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 293 (gz):
"AI HAS a part in this too as they should have contacted the MOS team after they bought rights for the brand from gateway, and give them a clear legal status on their behalf instead of letting MOS be untill they noticed they couldn't ally with them."
Now, surely you can't mean that company X, buying certain parts of company Y should update each and every company (e.g. companies Z, P, Q, and R) that company Y USED to have deals with? It's clearly up to each and every company that used to deal with company Y to contact company X to sort out their contracts and deals. If company X in the above example wants to protect something it perceives as its IP, it may do so (or refrain from doing so) at any time. It's not like "you-haven't-said-anything-before-so-we're-home-free!", sorry things don't work that way.
If the MorphOS team didn't do their homework and made sure that they had some terra firma under the feet all the time, it's their fault and not Amiga Inc.'s.
In any case, it should be noted that MorphOS' legal status is questionable (as has been proven during the last few weeks of ANN ranting), whereas AmigaOS' is not.
NB: Do try hard to understand what 'questionable' means BEFORE you reply.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 295 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 16:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 293 (gz):
First of all, read Lennarts post above. Then I have a few points to add:
"AI is right to defend their brand and rom's but wrong in not taking part with the legal issue a long time ago."
I'm no BAF and don't simply believe in them because they have the name, be sure of it. But, you're not giving me a valid argument here. It's MorphOS duty to make sure their product is legal, not Amiga Inc.'s. Why is it so hard to understand that you as the developer of a product have to make sure that your product is legal before actually releasing it and preferably before developing it, as all of your work could just as well be for nought.
"MOS is wrong in being too proud and not seeing how it could benefit evryone if they would just sign a deal, but then on the other hand they are right defending the years and years of hard work they have put into their project without EVER receiving any help from AI for it."
Excuse me, but why should Amiga Inc help the MorphOS team? Why do you seem to think Amiga Inc. owes them something?
"AI stepped in suddenly and demands control of their project. who would swallow that without taking an issue with it?"
Well, tough for them. Like I've said earlier; they should've thought of these things before. The legal concerns for MorphOS is the responsibility of the MorphOS team, not Amiga Inc.
"Also to reply on your post where you said that people who want to make a difference should join the police or take up on politics... Well I wonder what the author of prayer mp3 player Tamara Cjetinski would have to say about that.
Are you saying that..." <snip>
You should know better than going into specific political matters like that. I won't even go into that argument and instead I'll simply tell you that the IP of Amiga Inc is hardly an evil regime bombarding civilians, ok? On the contrary, I could just as well compare the MorphOS team with a guerilla which tries to take over the power without the people's approval. We're not living in a third world country and the MorphOS team has the option of using the democratic system like everybody else.
"Wasn't communism originally a very nice and humane idea? Yes. Did it work in the real world? No. It didn't. It became quite the opposite because the world and people has rainbow colours instead of just 2."
>NIL:
"Making things too simple is not a good idea, which is what you did when you were giving analogies like that."
Yes, very much true. But then, complicating things more than necessary isn't a very good idea either. Like your political stuff, for example, what does it got to do with anything? It only stirs up things which isn't topical anyway.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 296 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 16:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 295 (Samface):
In case anybody was wondering, I'm typing behind Lennart's computer right now which explains why we have he same IP. No trolling, I promise. :-)
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 297 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 26-Apr-2002 18:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 294 (Lennart Fridén):
>In any case, it should be noted that MorphOS' legal status
>is questionable (as has been proven during the last few
>weeks of ANN ranting), whereas AmigaOS' is not.
Well afaik Ben still failed to explain why P96 (with CGX-emu)
on the A1 is legal and MOS not....
Also further down the line:
The only thing MOS0.4 is doing with the Kickstart is replacing
it with its own code (just like the BBs work). There is no ROM-
dump in MOS.
The only way AOS4 (or WarpUP) can be started on a P5-PPC is by
accessing the PowerUP-kernel, starting SW on it and removing
it. The only SW supported on these cards is PowerUP.
@Samface
Another one:
How do you know that Phase5s licence died with them ?
Have you seen it ? Or the one with MacroSystems (Draco) and
Villagetronic ?
There only two things that may AInc give a chance:
1. If they find AOS-sources in MOS.
Hard to proove and i'm sure if there were some R.S. would
have killed MOS by now.
2.SW-patents/reverse engeenering
SW-patents were introduced only year ago (in the EU) and
afaik that doesn't cover old SW (like AOS).
bPlan main market are industrial linux-costumers, but there
are allready a lot of firms developing for MOS (Titan/Epic/
Thendic/Vaporware/??) and these would sue their ass off if
MOS would be declared illegal. Therefore i'm absoluly sure
they checked it before with a real expert on this special
field of the law. Ben maybe a lawyer but i newer heard him
say he would be specialized in that field.
A trial against bPlan would have to happen in Frankfurt to
have any real affect. This means EU-laws and german court-
rules, and would make a major difference to U.S. laws and
may even make a (smaller) difference to belgian laws.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 298 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 19:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 297 (Kronos):
Sigh... Kronos, you seem to have a problem reading or understanding the facts pointed out to you. Read my reply and read it carefully:
>>In any case, it should be noted that MorphOS' legal status
>>is questionable (as has been proven during the last few
>>weeks of ANN ranting), whereas AmigaOS' is not.
>Well afaik Ben still failed to explain why P96 (with CGX-emu)
>on the A1 is legal and MOS not....
No, he made it perfectly clear that decompilation is allowed to ensure interoperability between software, not between software and hardware.
>The only thing MOS0.4 is doing with the Kickstart is replacing
>it with its own code (just like the BBs work). There is no ROM-
>dump in MOS.
Then why do I have to use the ROM file for AmigaOS3.9 in order to run it?
>The only way AOS4 (or WarpUP) can be started on a P5-PPC is by
>accessing the PowerUP-kernel, starting SW on it and removing
>it. The only SW supported on these cards is PowerUP.
If it was impossible to run nothing but PowerUP software, how come I can run the AmigaOS at all? Also, why would it be illegal to flush the powerup kernel out of memory?
>How do you know that Phase5s licence died with them ?
>Have you seen it ? Or the one with MacroSystems (Draco) and
>Villagetronic ?
Because when you get a license, YOU are the only one allowed to use it. Phase5 might have had (I'm not even sure about that) a license but that license died with them as it cannot be passed on to someone else unless the license specificly stated otherwise, which is very unlikely.
I can make a long list for why MorphOS legal status is questionable, can you say the same about AOS4? I didn't think so.
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 299 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 26-Apr-2002 19:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 297 (Kronos):
One more:
>SW-patents were introduced only year ago (in the EU) and
>afaik that doesn't cover old SW (like AOS).
>bPlan main market are industrial linux-costumers, but there
>are allready a lot of firms developing for MOS (Titan/Epic/
>Thendic/Vaporware/??) and these would sue their ass off if
>MOS would be declared illegal. Therefore i'm absoluly sure
>they checked it before with a real expert on this special
>field of the law.
With this statement you have basicly proved that it's all about you and your faith in the MorphOS team. Well, Ralph Schmidt has really proven to be a proffesional and honest project coordinator and business partner, now hasn't he?
AFUA visited Thendic-France : Comment 300 of 629ANN.lu
Posted by Frodon on 26-Apr-2002 20:11 GMT
Hello,
You said:
> SW-patents were introduced only year ago (in the EU) and
> afaik that doesn't cover old SW (like AOS).
In fact SW-Patents DON'T EXIST in European Union for now!!!!! And I don't think that they'll exist a day because it's too dangerous. I mean, when you want to register a patents you have to do the research of the already existence of what you want to register by yourself. And you know that software exist in many flavours like Freewares, Sharewares, Free-Softwares, OpenSource, Commercial...etc
And there is to much existing softwares to register a patents and be sure that you are the real inventor of the software technology.
If a day SW-Patents exists that will be very dangerous for the Freewares, sharewares, Opensource softwares, FreeSoftwares and all other non-commercial softwares because the developpers that chose this kind of distribution modes usually don't have enough money to register a patent and so don't have to money to support a lawsuit too. That's mean in that case that the software world will only be composed of commercial softwares and that would be a nightmare! I love sharewares, freewares...etc after all MUI is a shareware and what would be the Amiga without MUI???
Regards
Anonymous, there are 629 items in your selection (but only 379 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 400] [401 - 450] [451 - 500] [More...]
Back to Top