21-Oct-2021 07:38 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 187 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 187]
[News] Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardwareANN.lu
Posted on 25-May-2002 20:50 GMT by Seehund187 comments
View flat
View list
There's a petition aimed at Amiga Inc. set up at http://www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/ for all those who disagree with Amiga Inc's presented plans regarding compulsory OS/hardware bundling and licensing. An excerpt from the petition:

On April 12th, 2002, you, Amiga Inc., published your plans regarding distribution policies for the forthcoming AmigaOS4 in an "Executive Update" on your web site.

In short, what you say and what we the undersigned object against is this:

* Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS.

* Such hardware and its distributors must be approved and licensed by Amiga Inc. and the hardware distributors must also sell and support AmigaOS4.

* AmigaOS will only be available bundled with such hardware.

We think that the above will seriously hurt AmigaOS users, the POP/PPC hardware market and thus ultimately you, Amiga Inc., yourselves.

To read the entire petition and sign it, please click here.

Before those imagining sides, factions, camps and personal enemies everywhere start commenting, it must be emphasised that this poll is not intended to "promote" anything else than the success of AmigaOS, the POP/PPC hardware market, free choice and ethical business practices.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 1 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil Hvitmyren on 25-May-2002 18:56 GMT
Is it possible to disagree? Where do I sign up if I think AI is on the right track? ;)
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 2 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by JoBBo on 25-May-2002 19:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Ole-Egil Hvitmyren):
"Where do I sign up if I think AI is on the right track? ;)"
Your local mental hospital?
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 3 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Jürgen on 25-May-2002 19:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Ole-Egil Hvitmyren):
Didn't want to be the first one, but that was exactly what I though when reading this "proposal".
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 4 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Jack Me on 25-May-2002 19:15 GMT
Shall we start a petition to say we think Amiga are on the right track?
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 5 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Prang on 25-May-2002 19:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Jack Me):
No petition needed, buying the properly licensed products when available will suffice.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 6 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 25-May-2002 19:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Prang):
Well said.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 7 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 25-May-2002 20:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Prang):
I've said it before; buying the product if you want it but feel the protection scheme is unfounded will get more recognition than any boycott. It's counterintuitive, but the way to get through is to pony up the cash and demonstrate that there *will* be a profitable majority of paying customers who want to see saner licensing terms.
(More specifically, I've already said I'm a fan of per-seat, home/SOHO, and corporate licensing tiers. The obvious problem is that AI has per-seat obligations to Tao- and perhaps Hyperion?- so the more sales made, the better the position they're in to renegotiate terms... and the more *friendly* pressure kept up, the more they'll consider improving customer satisfaction.)
If you could care less about OS4/AA/DE, there's not much sense complaining. If you do care- you want to see AI make some cash and move forward, you want to run the software, you want to try to build the whole community/job market surrounding the software so you won't be forced into work as an MCSE or Perl monkey, whatever- then you need to prove you *will* exchange your money for goods and services, and speak loudly (and reasonably; a GPLed OS4 isn't going to happen any more than ditching 'bus arch' ;)) about what you will be willing to buy in the future.
More succinctly: boycotting Amiga in its current state is like lecturing a starving man on veganism. Give the company some time to ascend the class hierarchy...
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 8 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Leif on 25-May-2002 20:09 GMT
Poor Amiga. Cant ya just leave em alone to do their thing ? :)
I think thid community is full of backseat-drivers..
But from another angle, its a good thing, it shows
users care.... :))
Ah, wtf.. going to drink some more beer.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 9 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Kowalczyk on 25-May-2002 20:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Well said Floid. It's pretty obvious to me that the people that are against Amiga's policies concerning licensing and the copy protection want to run OS 4.x on the Pegasos. The petition might be more productive if it was directed towards bPlan and their unwillingness to accept Amiga Inc.'s terms. These people have to start voicing their frustration at the people who could allow OS 4.0 to be a reality on the Pegasos. Somebody is going to have to eat some crow, and I don't think it's going to be Amiga Inc.
Seehund, I think you're barking up the wrong tree to get the results you are looking for.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 10 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Troels E on 25-May-2002 20:20 GMT
I thought it was a joke, but after I visited the page i saw that 3 (three!!) people had allready signed :0)
Where are those POP boards they talk about? Why do they use Bplan as an example when they know conflicting interests between Amiga and Bplan/morefuss is the reason OS4 probably wont be available for PegaSOS?
And stating this as a fact is not to clever. Guess Hyperion know more about the Amiga market situation than you (whoever you are??) do!
"Amiga Inc. will lose revenue since you'll only make money on the very few hard-core AmigaOS users who can be expected to buy bundled and licensed hardware together with AmigaOS at premium prices."
This is just as laughable as the boycotts.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 11 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by KenH on 25-May-2002 20:29 GMT
The petition is flawed to begin with. It states that Amiga Inc themselves will be hurt by their actions. Could someone tell me a good reason for a company wanting to destroy itself? I know to some that their previous decisions have been insane, but come on, this is basic stuff and they aren't going do things without good reason.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 12 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Seehund on 25-May-2002 20:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Adam Kowalczyk):
Adam Kowalczyk:
> It's pretty obvious to me that the people that are against Amiga's
> policies concerning licensing and the copy protection want to run OS 4.x
> on the Pegasos.
The Pegasos is just one example. It's a perfect illustration of what *compulsory* restrictions imposed by a software company on hardware distributors can lead to. I think it ought to be totally irrelevant if the sticker on my hardware says "Pegasos", "A1G3-SE" or "Oink".
BTW, you sound like it's a bad thing to want to run AmigaOS on a Pegasos or whatever hardware of your choice?
> The petition might be more productive if it was directed towards bPlan
> and their unwillingness to accept Amiga Inc.'s terms.
The point is that no hardware manufacturer/distributor should have to apply for a license and start selling someone else's software in the first place, not if the software company in question wishes that their OS should be at least moderately successful. Amiga Inc. are in no position to demand anything from hardware distributors. They don't have a market dominating OS (if they did I'm sure the US DOJ would have a thing or two to say about their policies) and they don't design, make or distribute any hardware of their own.
Even if a petition aimed at bplan to make them accept another company's licensing conditions would succeed, you'd still have to repeat that petition for any other current or future POP mobo distributor. The obstacle needs to be removed. Also, if the obstacle isn't removed the chances of seeing future POP designs and distributors to petition are reduced. There is a POP market already, albeit small. That could grow much faster if AmigaOS was allowed to share the exact same hardware as other PPC OSes and became an addition to that POP market.
Stop thinking "bplan... Eyetech... bplan... Eyetech...".
Think "AmigaOS... PPC hardware... AmigaOS... PPC hardware...".
Once again, this petition is NOT pro- or anti- to any of the current one or two mobos. The idea is to GET AWAY from thinking about specific distributors and labels.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 13 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Troels E on 25-May-2002 20:50 GMT
"Amiga Inc. will lose revenue since you'll only make money on the very few hard-core AmigaOS users who can be expected to buy bundled and licensed hardware together with AmigaOS at premium prices."
You have no idea if Amiga/Hyperion will loose money!
You mention something about premium prices: OS4 costs what Amiga/Hyperion decide it will cost, the mentioned prices have been quite fair. Eyetechs hardware are also priced reasonably, I can't find a cheaper PPC mobo anywhere but maybe you can show me one there's currently available?
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 14 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by KenH on 25-May-2002 21:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Seehund):
>That could grow much faster if AmigaOS was allowed to share the exact same hardware as other PPC OSes and became an addition to that POP market.
There is nothing stopping this. Amiga's plan does NOT restrict it to Eyetech.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 15 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Clousseau on 25-May-2002 21:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Seehund):
"The point is that no hardware manufacturer/distributor should have to apply for a license and start selling someone else's software in the first place, not if the software company in question wishes that their OS should be at least moderately successful."
1. Amiga Inc. is not forcing anyone to apply for a license!
2. Hardware companies can apply for a license if they want to be Amiga certified.
3. It is good for the end users to know that the product and the producer meets the quality aspects associated with an Amiga.
4. Imaging AmigaOS being sold separatly and a company X started to sell POP-board-X, claiming to be a Amiga computer. If this computer has bad quality, who will be blamed... most likely Amiga. That is one scenario that can be avoided with a quality certification for hardware.
5. Imagin that company X has really lousy support for their 'Amiga' - Yepp, Amiga would not look good in the eyes of the public.
I think Amiga Inc.'s policy is great!
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 16 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 25-May-2002 21:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Adam Kowalczyk):
Adam said,
>It's pretty obvious to me that the people that are against
>Amiga's policies concerning licensing and the copy protection want to run OS
>4.x on the Pegasos.
Hey, technically I'd want to run OS4 on the Pegasos, if I ended up with a Pegasos to run it on. The 'problem' I'm reacting to is people being vocal for the sake of being vocal (you say you want a revolution... well, y'know...) without thinking through a game-plan to actually achieve their goal. (Of course, given my dozen insomniac posts today, I'm vocal for the sake of it as well, but I like to think I'm Mostly Harmless.) It's like seeing a "Save the Whales, Down With Exxon!" bumper sticker on an SUV. (No, the SUV isn't to represent either company, it's an analogy for human ignorance...)
I do feel that less effort should be spent on figuring out how to keep the system from running, and more spent on actually making it run so I have something to buy! That's obvious; nobody asks for a kick to the head, but they might take it in favor of having their knees broken, insert comment about Microsoft's auditing initiative here.
...
As to eating crow, this particular chapter in Amiga history will be the one that gets written differently in each side's memoirs, if they ever get to the point of having an audience to read them. Hopefully both will contain the story of some heroic hackers making a midnight run to the local dealership, buying the "competition's" hardware, and facing management with running product. That seems to have been the Amiga spirit, in practice. ;)
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 17 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Kowalczyk on 25-May-2002 22:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Seehund):
Seehund wrote:
> BTW, you sound like it's a bad thing to want to run AmigaOS on a Pegasos or
> whatever hardware of your choice?
I'm not opposed to seeing AmigaOS on the Pegasos or any other PPC hardware for that matter. Frankly, I'd like to see OS 4.x run on Powermacs as Ebay can supply all the used PPC's the Amiga market could consume. I don't see companies lining up to make PPC motherboards either. Reference designs have been available for years, yet it's only now that MAI/Eyetech and the Far East manufacturer are putting a PPC board out for general market consumption. Even in this case, MAI needed a product to sell it's product and Eyetech needed a PPC solution for an Amiga. Everything just fell in place.
> The point is that no hardware manufacturer/distributor should have to apply
> for a license and start selling someone else's software in the first place,
> not if the software company in question wishes that their OS should be at
> least moderately successful. Amiga Inc. are in no position to demand anything
> from hardware distributors.
Amiga is in a position where it needs to protect its partners and its' IP. The relatively fragile nature of the company warrants the protection that they are putting into the boot ROMs. Hardware cannot be easily or readily duplicated whereas software can. The licensing issue is to protect Amiga, Hyperion, and other players from people going out and buying a non-licensed board and snagging a copy of the OS off the internet or their buddy. If a portion of your business makes an OS as a saleable product, wouldn't you want to protect it? It's just too easy to copy software.
> Even if a petition aimed at bplan to make them accept another company's
> licensing conditions would succeed, you'd still have to repeat that petition ?> for any other current or future POP mobo distributor. The obstacle needs to ?> be removed. Also, if the obstacle isn't removed the chances of seeing future > POP designs and distributors to petition are reduced. There is a POP market
> already, albeit small. That could grow much faster if AmigaOS was allowed to > share the exact same hardware as other PPC OSes and became an addition to
> that POP market.
There is a POP market, I agree. Most of them are lining up to buy the AmigaOne or the so-called LinuxOne and possibly the Pegasos. I'm not convinced they are thinking "AmigaOS". I'm pretty confident they are thinking "LinuxPPC" and they are willing to buy a board capable of running Linux if sold at a reasonable price. So again, I get back to the previous point I've made about directing your petition at bPlan. If enough people want the AmigaOS on the Pegasos, then bPlan should have the sense to agree to the licensing terms. If they don't, they'll lose a customer. That is how the free-market works. You can't walk into a GM dealer and scream and jump up and down and demand a Ford engine.
> Stop thinking "bplan... Eyetech... bplan... Eyetech...".
> Think "AmigaOS... PPC hardware... AmigaOS... PPC hardware...".
I am thinking AmigaOS and PPC hardware. It's just that I support the licensing agreement and have no problem with purchasing an AmigaOne. When Matay delivers the SharkPPC, I'm sure I'll put one of those into my Amiga Classic as well.
> Once again, this petition is NOT pro- or anti- to any of the current one or
> two mobos. The idea is to GET AWAY from thinking about specific distributors > and labels.
Come on now, do you believe that you're petition is truly for the good of the Amiga community? I see it as another stake being driven into the heart of the community to accomplish the idealist dream of a few people that want to run AmigaOS on the Pegasos. I keep pointing this out because there aren't any other POP/PPC motherboard makers out there making motherboard in sufficient numbers. Why else would you start the petition? If there were a half dozen or so companies making absolutely compatible PPC hardware, it might make sense. Even if the AmigaOS was available for free, do you think somebody would step up to the plate and say "Amiga OS is free, let's make a PPC motherboard!" Linux is free and there are some excellent distributions out there, YellowDogLinux being my personal favourite, and there are not PPC vendors lined up around the corner to provide us with a workable solution.
Again, if you want AmigaOS on the Pegasos, petition them.
Adam
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 18 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Douglas McLaughlin on 25-May-2002 22:33 GMT
Is there a "I agree" petition? Perhaps I should make one.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 19 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Douglas McLaughlin on 25-May-2002 22:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Douglas McLaughlin):
I've changed my mind, I will just boycott this petition.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 20 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by TimeWillTell on 25-May-2002 23:13 GMT
The thing that confuses me about all this is who thinks that Amiga would be
doing something to limit their software sales. This is obviously neccessary in
their estimation to protect against piracy and for quality control. There is no
other sensible reason for doing this.
It has been explained that there is no cost to Bplan except the ROM dongle
(how ever implemented). And MOS users would be able to run both OSes. This
harms nobody and protects Amiga.
On another note I want to thank everybody for their civility in dealing with
this volatile issue,
TmeWillTell
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 21 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Dagon on 26-May-2002 01:57 GMT
FREE AMIGA! We must not accept these terms...
What happens if some companies begin to release more powerful and cheaper PPC hardware solutions than the AmigaOne-Pegasos for the linux market?
Whould you expect them to pay money to Amiga Inc. for a small market that they don't even care?
'
The only loosers with that terms will be us that we will have once again limited hardware choices... It is sad :/
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 22 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Dagon on 26-May-2002 02:04 GMT
or even worse to modify their hardware lol
Think Big, not just the Amiga related companies.
It is not about the AmigaOS-MorphOS war.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 23 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-May-2002 03:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Dagon):
" What happens if some companies begin to release more powerful and cheaper PPC hardware solutions than the AmigaOne-Pegasos for the linux market?"
Don't know about cheaper but there is more powerfull hardware coming out. Or have you not heard - Not specifically for Linux. http://www.mai.com/product/TeronPX.html
I understand that Eyetech is planning on producing a higher end followup to the A1 using this technology.
The resulting board will have to pass the muster to be certified for OS4 just like the A1.
That is what happens when new hardware comes out. Amiga protects it's customers with a certification process.
Amiga does not control what Bplan does. Pegasos could be OS4 certified also. The terms are same that Eyetech has work with.
You get what you pay for. Amiga is doing a great job.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 24 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Juzz on 26-May-2002 04:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Anonymous):
Very nicely put :-)
Short and on the point.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 25 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by André Siegel on 26-May-2002 05:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (TimeWillTell):
"It has been explained that there is no cost to Bplan except the ROM dongle
(how ever implemented). And MOS users would be able to run both OSes. This
harms nobody and protects Amiga."
Wrong. Amiga's/Hyperion's OEM license says that one is not allowed to sell certified hardware with any other OS besides of AmigaOS4. (No MorphOS, no LinuxPPC, no AROS PPC, no OpenBEOS PPC, ... you get the picture)
Ben Hermanns: [QUOTE]By definition, if a dealer or third party goes to the trouble of getting an OEM version of OS 4 for certain hardware, he will want to ship it with OS 4 and not with anything else.
I fail to see how this affects users not interested in OS 4.[END QUOTE
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 26 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 26-May-2002 05:09 GMT
I think it's ok that they bundle AmigaOS4 with AmigaOne. That's what Commodore always did. And it will also be more secure for the AmigaOS4 sales, which is good for further development I guess.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 27 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil Hvitmyren on 26-May-2002 05:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (Anders Kjeldsen):
Well, yes. It does somewhat limit the possibilities for piracy. And, if some yet unknown PPC motherboard maker suddenly pops out of the woodwork it's no more problem than someone buying a batch of their boards, submitting one to Hyperion to make sure the OS runs on it, strike a deal with AI to get the name "Amiga" stamped on it, and sell it to the Amiga crowd. They would have to do submit one to Hyperion anyway, so I'm guessing this won't be much of a problem if you really expect to sell a lot of boards... And if you don't expect to sell a lot of boards, why would you go that route in the first place?
This doesn't have to involve the company who MAKES the board in any way, just someone who is willing to follow up his customers (good point, as we have seen these last years with companies popping up and vanishing after a few quick sales...) and has the cash to buy a batch of boards or at least enough boards at a time to satisfy both the board maker, Hyperion (not much point in porting an OS to a platform consisting of 4 boards, is there?) and the market. This is a not-so-good point, as this someone must take a financial risk.
It's nice to see people showing interest, but flogging this dead horse any further doesn't (to me) seem like much of an idea.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 28 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Sam Dunham on 26-May-2002 05:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Seehund):
The simple fact of the matter is that unless Amiga put some sort of copy protection in place, they (and the AmigaOS) will surely fail. By tieing the OS to authorized hardware (or a specific ROM), they can rest assured that 99.9% of the people running the OS have paid for it. The reasons I have no problems with this are twofold:
1. They are an extremely young company with not a lot of operating capitol. Piracy is rampant in the computer industry and hurts small fries like Amiga more harshly than the Microsofts of the world.
2. I personaly cannot think of a more solid copy protection scheme than dongling the OS with a ROM. It's easy to impliment and almost impossible to circumvent. Even if you could get around it by burning your own ROMs, it would probably not be cost effective.
Amigas have always been tied to hardware in one way or another, at least this way, the tieing is minimal and doesn't effect the operation of the machine past boot (ie. you can add any cards you want to your heart's content).
I say huzzah to Amiga for going this route. Heck, in the future, they may be able to release just the ROMs in a bundle with the OS (see, by still tieing the OS and ROMs together, copying the OS would be silly because you've already got it when you buy the ROM).
-Sam
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 29 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Sam Dunham on 26-May-2002 05:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Seehund):
Why should software manufacturers not be able to demand licensing terms for their software, but hardware manufacturers can?!?! Granted, AOS4 would not get very far without hardware to run on, but, on the other hand, the A1 board wouldn't get very far without the OS. Sure you could run Linux on it, but you can run Linux on almost anything. If bPlan want in on the party, they should have to adhere to the rules of the party. If they don't care, if they think they can make a run at it with MorphOS, then let 'em. And if they think they can, why all the whining about not getting AOS4 on it? IIRC, the map for AOS has it sitting hardware independent by version 5, so all of this is eventually moot.
-Sam
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 30 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Sam Dunham on 26-May-2002 05:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (André Siegel):
"Wrong. Amiga's/Hyperion's OEM license says that one is not allowed to sell certified hardware with any other OS besides of AmigaOS4. (No MorphOS, no LinuxPPC, no AROS PPC, no OpenBEOS PPC, ... you get the picture)
Ben Hermanns: [QUOTE]By definition, if a dealer or third party goes to the trouble of getting an OEM version of OS 4 for certain hardware, he will want to ship it with OS 4 and not with anything else.
I fail to see how this affects users not interested in OS 4.[END QUOTE"
Which does not disallow the hardware manufacturer from selling one machine with MOS and an exact replica with AOS. They just can't be on the same box AT THE TIME OF SALE... which I highlight because I also don't see anything keeping them from selling the system with AOS preinstalled and then selling MOS seperately to install later.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 31 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Remco Komduur on 26-May-2002 06:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Jack Me):
Yes, start one!
I'm all for Amiga's plans. The only reason those persons don't want OS 4 bundled with the AmigaOne is because they don't want to buy it. THEY WANT IT ILLEGAL.
And don't start with "I allready bought it for my BlizzardPPC" because you are allowed use of it on 1 computer. I have a BPPC too and will buy it for that and later on I will just buy an AOne with OS 4.
Quit nagging!!
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 32 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 06:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Sam Dunham):
No matter how many times you say this some on here WANT to believe that this is the case and they will hang onto their mythology as long as they can - and worse attempt indoctrinate others.
It is so pathetic.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 33 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by guido on 26-May-2002 07:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (André Siegel):
> Wrong. Amiga's/Hyperion's OEM license says that one is not allowed to sell
> certified hardware with any other OS besides of AmigaOS4. (No MorphOS, no
AFAIK, you must sell OS4 with any board if that board has the OS4 "ROM" extension. The hardware manufactor/dealer is still allowed to make/sell boards without OS4 as the board comes without the "ROM" extension.
So, no problems there, just leave the disputed dongle out..
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 34 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Mendoza on 26-May-2002 07:35 GMT
I'm proud of you guys. Look at that, a calm and sane discussion with various views on the subject on ANN. Amazing!
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 35 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by yoodoo on 26-May-2002 07:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (guido):
Surely the biggest market for OS4 is for current CPPC/BPPC owners. How are they going to implement the ROM dongle on those? There is a much greater risk of piracy here, but it will be much more difficult to prevent too. Are they are going to insist on people reflashing phase5 hardware with OS4 extensions?
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 36 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 07:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (yoodoo):
As stated in the executive update, those cards have an exemption from the scheme.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 37 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 26-May-2002 07:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (yoodoo):
Everybody is entitled to their opinion but how can you run a serious petition when you misunderstand the very thing you are objecting to?
*" Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS
specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS."
This blatantly wrong.
First of all, it does NOT apply to the Cyberstorm and BlizzardPPC.
Secondly, other schemes to distinguish approved hardware from unapproved hardware are possible.
A USB token for instance.
With the AmigaOne, the route chosen was to have ROM extensions.
This need not be the case for other hardware.
Bottomline: the petition's very foundation is wrong.
Result: garbage in, garbage out.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 38 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by SlimJim on 26-May-2002 08:07 GMT
It has to be said that I think Seehund /is/ going about this the right way. He
feels very strongly about this. Instead of jabbing on and on about it in
public forums to no end, he creates this sensibly phrased petition. No trolling,
no flaming, just the possibility for those agreeing with him to actually get
through the noice and tell what they think to AInc. Got to respect that attitude.
That I don't agree with him, is another matter entirely. Some people here have already
phrased my arguments far better than I ever could.
For the petition's sake, it is somewhat sad that several of those signing it, (35 when
I checked) makes so in a loud-mouthed and abusive manner. Some also express their /support/
for AInc:s policies (?) in their comments...?!
What I'm trying to say, is that whatever I might think of the arguments, this is a good
way to try to get your point across to those in power, and Seehund should have credit for
not becoming a shouting troll in the process.
.
SlimJim
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 39 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil Hvitmyren on 26-May-2002 08:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (yoodoo):
The 3.1 ROM will be used as check for valid hardware. Myself, I wouldn't mind getting a new ROM for my Amiga, with execSG in it, but as I don't have a ppc amiga from before...
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 40 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 08:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Whilst I agree that the foundation is wrong I agree with Slimjim too.
>Thank you Amiga INC for all you have done. Bill, I have met you personally and actually gave you an Amiga tie at one of the shows. MorphOS and other projects should be able to go, it only helps the community, thus helping Amiga.
Secondly what the HELL has this got to do with the legal situation between MorphOS and AmigaInc?
It seems to me that some who signed have NOT read what they are signing. Some seem to think its a petition about calling Amiga Inc "sucky", others seem to think its a "Legal action against MorphOS is wrong" petition and others are just stoopid kidz posters.
Seehund deserves every credit for setting this up and running, others are not doing him justice.
Besides Ben did you think that maybe some of the incorrect assumptions in the petition just reflect how confused these people are? I realise we have all had a go at explaining it but clearly we have not explained sufficiently and succinctly enough.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 41 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 08:29 GMT
Another go at explaining it:
"week ago we shared with you our joy as we move towards the rebirth of the Amiga desktop platform. The AmigaOne and AmigaOS4 are projects that have occupied almost every day of our lives for the last two years. For the community, the wait and the false dawns have been unbearable."
Pfff. Some of yours lives. Eyetech, Hyperion, BPlan and MorphOS perhaps... ...whoops was that a sideswipe? I think it was!
"Contrary to the rumours spread in some circles, we have spent considerable time and resources in creating a strategy that will see the Amiga desktop platform move back into the mainstream and take its proper place in the market. The AmigaOne and AmigaOS4 are just the first and most visible signs of this strategy. It is very important to us that we provide a total and compelling Amiga experience to future customers."
Well good. About bleeding time guvnor.
"The first measure we are announcing is that we have pledged ourselves to the production and development of a platform where both users and developers are guaranteed not just a quality product but a total quality experience as well. This will be achieved through a combination of a strict set of Quality Assurance certifications and the AmigaOS only being available to licensed solution providers for the shipping of combined hardware and software solutions."
OK so here it sayes its main purpose is Quality Control. The bundle that is shipped has to be hardware and software.
"From the top of the company to the bottom, we are committed to championing the cause of quality for the consumer and will ensure that substandard products do not make it into the Amiga market where they can do irreparable damage to the reputation of the platform."
Good. "I bought this PPC box from Alive Mediahard and it doesnt work - its AIncs fault waaaahaaaa". Sound unlikely? No.
"Licencees will have to develop and resource a full customer solution, with guarantees on product quality, delivery, and most important of all post sales support, with firm commitments to repair, replacement and turnaround, elements that have blighted the platform over the last five years."
How can you argue with that? The Amiga platform needs credibility and quality not fly by night rubber desk johnnies like I-Win.
"In addition, the close co-operation between Amiga Inc and solution licencees will ensure the tightest binding of the software to the hardware, providing the highest possible performance and providing the basis for rapid development as we move forwards together."
Still good stuff.
"As a result, AmigaOS4 and all future versions will ship only on those hardware products to which Amiga Inc has specifically granted a license after reviewing the capabilities of both the solution provider and their product."
Sounds logical. How else would you do it?
"The only exclusion to this policy is a temporary measure to support the community members who have invested heavily in existing PPC accelerators and will cover products where an Amiga manufactured or licenced Kickstart ROM is present (for instance A1200/A3000/A4000)."
Ahh so there you have it for existing PPC. If you have a kickstart ROM on the original Amiga branded mobos its going to work.
"Currently this hardware comprises:
Eyetech's AmigaOne series of PPC motherboards
Cyberstorm-PPC accelerators by phase 5/DCE
Blizzard-PPC accelerators by phase5/DCE"
Good.
"We have also been approached by and are currently in negotiation with the following companies for the licencing of the AmigaOS to allow for a combined hardware and software solution:
The Shark card by Elbox
PPC accelerator cards for the Prometheus by Matay
Merlancia Industries MMC Toro Series "
So there you have it. Others are interested. Theres nothing stopping Merlancia buying a bucketload of Pegasos boards and licensing a bundle with those and AmigaOS4. Is there? NO!!!!!!!!!!
"In the case of newly available hardware, including the Eyetech, Elbox and Matay products above, the licence requires that OS4-specific extensions are included in the hardware's boot ROM as an anti-piracy measure. For hardware which is not capable of being used in conjunction with Amiga WB 3.1 (such as the AmigaOne) we will require, as part of the licence conditions, that a copy of Amiga OS is purchased with all boards sold that are capable of running it."
Note. The hardware's boot ROM. No were does it say that a NEW ROM must be fitted, just an existing one modified. It also sayes that if a board is capable of running it ( HAS THE OS4 SPECIFIC EXTENSIONS IN IT ) it MUST have a copy of OS4 with it. If a board does NOT have the OS4 specific extensions then it doesnt have to have a copy of AOS4. CLEAR? SAVVY?
"The measures identified above have been put into place after consultation with our partners, developers, dealers and users, and represents a recognition that if the Amiga platform is to become successful again, it needs to exude professionalism and responsibility where the needs of the customer are paramount. With these measures, AmigaOS4 and the new hardware solutions, the Amiga desktop platform is primed to move forwards."
Well faboo.
Pretty f?cking clear to me daddy-o.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 42 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 08:52 GMT
And heres the key misunderstanding:
* Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS.
When what it really is:
* In order to be considered "hardware capable of running AmigaOS" the hardare must first be modified with AmigaOS specific extensions to its "boot ROM". All hardware that is considered "hardware capable of running AmigaOS" MUST ship with AmigaOS4.
Therefore.
If you produce a POP board then it is NOT automatically "hardware capable of running AmigaOS" and therefore does not come under the policy.
Once the board has the AmigaOS specific extensions added it DOES come under the policy.
One wonders why a third party would then add those AmigaOS specific extensions if they didnt want to be subjected to quality control or ship AOS with it?????
I really suspect part of the problem is translation. The other part of the problem is the three wise monkey syndrome, or should that be two wise monkey syndrome because they havent half been verbal for a group of people that have refused to understand this.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 43 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-May-2002 09:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (DaveW):
"I really suspect part of the problem is translation. The other part of the problem is the three wise monkey syndrome, or should that be two wise monkey syndrome because they havent half been verbal for a group of people that have refused to understand this."
ROFL!
I guess part of the problem also is that some people still insist that there is an hidden agenda behind this from AI about controlling the huge Amiga market to suck up the billions of dollars we spend on Amiga hardware each year, and some people who just do not believe that text you just quoted to be true. Retelling the same thing won't help, as these people are so sure it's all a lie. Unless you're right, and they just don't know how to read... ;)
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 44 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 09:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Anonymous):
Its the same people that failed to read this before signing that get me:
"Before those imagining sides, factions, camps and personal enemies everywhere start commenting, it must be emphasised that this poll is not intended to "promote" anything else than the success of AmigaOS, the POP/PPC hardware market, free choice and ethical business practices. "
Besides you have to be careful with that anyway. It is close to alleging that AInc is not following ethical business practices, that would be a very very serious allegation indeed.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 45 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by André Siegel on 26-May-2002 09:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (DaveW):
"Theres nothing stopping Merlancia buying a bucketload of Pegasos boards and licensing a bundle with those and AmigaOS4. Is there? NO!!!!!!!!!!"
This is not true, Dave. As far as I know, the PEGASOS board is delivered with YellowDogLinux and MorphOS being a *part of the whole package*. While dealers are allowed to sell it along with *additional* software (such as operating systems) and/or hardware, they _must not_ remove any parts of the original product (ie. MorphOS and YDLinux).
But as AmigaOS4 may only be sold with machines that _are not_ delivered with any other operating system as an addition, it is safe to say that OS4.0 will NEVER... I repeat... NEVER run on bPlan's Pegasos. Unless Amiga/Hyperion are smart enough to change their OEM license, of course.
I seriously doubt that they'll do that, though.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 46 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil Hvitmyren on 26-May-2002 09:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Anonymous):
Number 43 was me... :)
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 47 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 09:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (André Siegel):
>This is not true, Dave. As far as I know, the PEGASOS board is delivered with YellowDogLinux and MorphOS being a *part of the whole package*. While dealers are allowed to sell it along with *additional* software (such as operating systems) and/or hardware, they _must not_ remove any parts of the original product (ie. MorphOS and YDLinux).
So the thing that is stopping someone else bunding AOS4 with the PEGASOS is BPlans "bundling" license?
So BPlans bundling mechanism == good and AIncs bundling mechanism == bad.
Bundling was a practice that IBM and Microsoft both got into trouble with.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 48 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil Hvitmyren on 26-May-2002 09:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (André Siegel):
"This is not true, Dave. As far as I know, the PEGASOS board is delivered with YellowDogLinux and MorphOS being a *part of the whole package*. While dealers are allowed to sell it along with *additional* software (such as operating systems) and/or hardware, they _must not_ remove any parts of the original product (ie. MorphOS and YDLinux)."
Uhm, now _that's_ what I call unfair bundling and Microsoft tactics. And it's still Amiga Inc's fault?
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 49 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 09:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (DaveW):
Oh and unless I have misread it I see nothing in *THAT* executive update that sayes ONLY AOS4 must be shipped with those boards.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 50 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 26-May-2002 09:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (DaveW):
Oh and unless I have misread it I see nothing in *THAT* executive update that sayes ONLY AOS4 must be shipped with those boards.
Dave.
Anonymous, there are 187 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 187]
Back to Top