26-Apr-2024 01:37 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 381 items in your selection (but only 231 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 381]
[News] MorphOS 1.4ANN.lu
Posted on 27-Jul-2003 15:28 GMT by takemehomegrandma381 comments
View flat
View list
BBRV talked very briefly about MorphOS 1.4 on #MorphOS today ...

"yesterday we played a movie, then we open FIVE "Zoom" windows (new 1.4 feature) at differnt zoom levels and then we moved the curser around...alll this while the second desktop was running ImageFX...then we launched the CPU meter [also a new 1.4 feature] and it read between 70 and 95% -- flashing for a second sometimes at 100%...that was all done on a G3"

I asked: "Did TCP and JIT make it into the 1.4 release?"

"JIT yes, TCP/IP no, but license is signed and integration is being done" ... "we might release it without the GUI...we will think about it"

Apparently, there will be a demonstration of MorphOS 1.4 around 11:30 local time. Now, where were those streaming servers again ... ;-)

MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 151 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 14:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 68 (samface):
"I can run M$ Internet Explorer on a Mac with MacOSX, does that make the Mac User a Windows user?"

I'd like to see you run a Windows x86 version of MSIE nativly on a MacOSX system, Spamface.

Go on, show us.

Oh, sure, you can run it on VirtualPC, wen you woudl be running it under Windows so you WOULD be running it under Windows and hence be using Windows.

But there is no way you can run the x86 version of MSIE nativly on MacOSX.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 152 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by DaveP on 28-Jul-2003 14:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 147 (Anonymous):
>>Samface, are you a real person? Or are you a bot?
> Should be interesting to see if they (samface, DaveP) notice mindless Eliza chatter or not

Well I noticed yours, so I suspect the answer is yes. If you are suggesting the discussion so far has been mindless I would hazard a guess you have not read it thoroughly.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 153 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 28-Jul-2003 15:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 150 (Janne):
> Hey, we've all been mistaken. Here is the official definition of Amiga,
> straight from the horse's mouth!
>
> http://amiga.org/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=378
>
> ;-)

LOL! :-D

That's very good! :-)
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 154 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 15:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 139 (samface):
But what if some other company, lets say Genesi Foobar GmbH, obtained rights for Amiga and defines Pegasos as an official Amiga platform and MorphOS as an official continuation for AmigaOS? Would you go for Pegasos then because it is an official Amiga solution? I really hope you prefer AmigaOne and AmigaOS4 for other reasons (like superb features).
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 155 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 28-Jul-2003 15:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 154 (Anonymous):
Well, since the name (and the name alone) seems to be the only thing that matters to Samface, I guess he would! But that would certainly shake his world order, wouldn't it? Suddenly the black turns white, and the white turns black. But hey, as long as there is a flag to follow, right ...?

:-P
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 156 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 28-Jul-2003 15:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 57 (samface):
>Similar does not make it equal

Well for once I agree with DaveP. We are a broad church. Lots of people with lots of different viewpoints about different things.

But I think there is another category that an Amigan could fit into:

5. A person who takes an active interest in Amiga stuff - visiting sites, particiapting in discussions on sites such as ANN, even though they may not use an Amiga anymore, but are waiting for the new generation of Amiga-like systems.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 157 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Steve Hodson on 28-Jul-2003 15:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Sjoerd):
Sjoerd,
which is great if you want to run OS4 on your Classic Amiga. Please speperate in your mind current state of OS4 and OS4 on new hardware. You forget MOS runs native on non-Amiga hardware.

I would judge the 'on paper' feature status of OS4 / MOS1.4 to be around the same level...in practice MOS1.x series has had much more testing, 1.4 already has JIT release..OS4 does not.

MOS1.4 looks and feels in use better than OS4..until OS4 is released for the A1 this is not too fair a comparison though.

MOS1.4 could be released very soon, it is capable and stable...but there are very few Pegasos I left in stock.

OS4.....well, everytime there is status it's nearly ready.....but PLEASE DON'T FORGET that is only the CSPPC release.

Cheers,

Steve
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 158 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 16:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 156 (smithy):
'5. A person who takes an active interest in Amiga stuff - visiting sites, particiapting in discussions on sites such as ANN, even though they may not use an Amiga anymore, but are waiting for the new generation of Amiga-like systems. '

An Amiga User -- no since they don't use any Amiga related stuff. An Amiga Community Member -- definitely since they are active in the group of people devoted to the continuation of the Amiga system.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 159 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 16:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 139 (samface):
"1. Current versions of MorphOS does not run on classic Amiga hardware."

Liar. It's running just fine.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 160 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 17:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 159 (Anonymous):
Version 0.1?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 161 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 17:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 139 (samface):
Want to hear the facts? Here's the facts for you:

1. Current versions of MorphOS does not run on classic Amiga hardware.
** This is partially true. Assuming you disregard CSPPC as classic Amiga hardware then this is true. However, you state that the CSPPC is an accelerator for classic Amiga Hardware and part of the Amiga platform then this statement is closer to being false as MorphOS does have a version that runs on CSPPC accelerators.

2. The original AmigaOS runs on the classic Amiga 68k processor computers and does not require any third party hardware addons.
You're statement is partially true. But, the original AmigaOS also runs on PC's via Amiga Forever and Amithlon. This could be consider a 3rd party hardware solution.

3. Current versions of MorphOS does not run on the AmigaOne.
Current versions of AmigaOS doesn't run on the AmigaOne either... What's the point?


4. AmigaOS4 has the AmigaOne as it's primary hardware target just like MorphOS has the Pegasos as it's primary hardware target.
This is not true. Over the weekend Amiga Inc. displayed AmigaOS4 in it's current state and listed out the objects that have been migrated to PPC. The primary hardware target is CSPPC followed closely by the AmigaOne.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 162 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-Jul-2003 18:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Anonymous):
No, 1.4.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 163 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 28-Jul-2003 19:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 144 (Anonymous):
Strange, *I* didn't have problems with reading that I wrote "...as in using Amiga products, then of course you are an Amiga user". How you turn that into "only if you are using the AmigaOS only" beats me. You see, those two sentences has two entirely different meanings. I'm tired of people with reading problems so, YOU figure it out.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 164 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 28-Jul-2003 20:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 148 (Jupp3):
>>1. Current versions of MorphOS does not run on classic Amiga hardware
>
>Wrong answer!
>
>What you MIGHT have meant, is:
>
>Current _public_ versions of MorphOS does not run on classic Amiga hardware

...unless the beta tester dropped the install CD for this version into the town river or if his cat scratched it... Get real, it's impossible to include all possible scenarios about some super secret versions, etc. It's rather self-evident that we are only talking about what is available to the public. Furthermore, I've never heard of any 68k versions of MorphOS, are you sure that it won't require any third party hardware products and run natively on the classic 68k Amiga computers?

>2. The original AmigaOS runs on classic Amiga 68k processor computers and does
>not require any third party hardware addons.
>
>That's partly true, yes.
>
>Some OS versions (namely 3.5/3.9) have too high requirements for some Amigas,
>and they must be (spit!) upgraded with Evil 3rd Party Hardware

ALL versions of AmigaOS has different hardware requirements (kickstart version, cd-rom, extra memory, etc.), but no version so far has a specific third party hardware product such as the PPC boards from Phase5 as a requirement.

BTW, why would third party products be evil?

>>3. Current versions of MorphOS does not run on the AmigaOne
>
>There are rumours about that, don't know for sure...
>
>Becouse of that, I _NEVER_ made that claim...

Perhaps if you remove the U-Boot firmware, but then you won't be able to run AmigaOS4 when it arrives...

>4. AmigaOS4 has the AmigaOne as it's primary hardware target just like MorphOS
>has the Pegasos as it's primary hardware target.
>
>CSPPC is first target, but yes, A1 is most likely "primary" target.

Primary target != first in order of release

What I mean by "primary target" is that the AmigaOS4 in combination with the AmigaOne is their key product while the CSPPC & the BPPC versions are just a matter of supporting the classic Amiga users. The AmigaOne is even a requirement if you want to make use of the full potential of AmigaOS4.

>But that does _NOT_ mean, there couldn't be "secondary targets"
>(as there obviously are for both, and THOSE are very similar)

The CSPPC & BPPC support for AmigaOS4 is their "secondary targets".

>MorphOS: "Requires Pegasos, BPPC or CSPPC"
>AmigaOS: "Requires AmigaOne, CSPPC or *BPPC"

That depends on what version of AmigaOS you are refering two, but I'm not going to make things more complicated for you than they already are...

>So, you claim, there's NOTHING similar there?
>(*Not confirmed)

That's NOT what I said. I said that there are different hardware requirements for AmigaOS4 and MorphOS. Even the slightest little difference makes the statement correct, you know.

>Face it - statement above IS true, and you must admit it.

I'm sorry to disappoint you.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 165 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 28-Jul-2003 20:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 158 (Anonymous):
Exactly. 100% agreed.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 166 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 28-Jul-2003 20:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 154 (Anonymous):
No, but I would accept it as the official Amiga. The fact that I respect the Amiga label as a trademark does not mean that I have to love everything they put the label onto. That's where most people in here seems to differ from me, they have some kind of obsession that everything they like must be an Amiga simply because they like it or because it fits their own view of what an Amiga is, while I respect the trademark and it's owners regardless if I like the product or not.

But then, I'm just another BAF, right?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 167 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 28-Jul-2003 20:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 155 (takemehomegrandma):
See comment #166.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 168 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 28-Jul-2003 23:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (samface):
Samface, we are *hundreds* of Pegasos (that's right, not "Amiga") users that uses the Pegasos as our primary/only Amiga, today, in a daily manner. We use it pretty much as we allways used our "Classic" Amigas, we run pretty much the same applications and programs, we use the same filesystems (unfortunately), we write our assigns etc in s:user-startup, we download software from Aminet, etc, etc, etc. In practice, the fact that it lacks an "Amiga"-sticker on the front is *totally unimportant*. The only thing that *really* matters to us is that it looks like an Amiga, it feels like an Amiga, it is operated like an Amiga, it runs Amiga applications, you program it like an Amiga, etc. It has the Amiga spirit in *every single aspect*, and it gives you the same Amiga experience when you use it. But it's better looking, it's faster, and it's improved in a lot of ways comparing to the original Classic Amiga. With that in mind, let me tell you that there are many hundreds of us that laughs at your constant blatant and desperate efforts to tell people how our systems are as little connected to Amiga as Linux, BeOS, Windows or whatever. When making such statements you only show the world how clueless you really are. Your obsession with the trademark and the trademark owners is either hilarious or sad (I really can't decide). And while it is annoying that you keep flooding thread after thread with blatant trollings on this subject, it is not important. You obviously live in your own copyrighted little reality. We others knows better. Well, while you keep kneeling in front of your trademark poster, I'll see if I can install SongPlayer 1.60, on my Pegasos with MorphOS, the computer I have used as my only Amiga since MorphOS 1.2. Have a nice day!
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 169 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 29-Jul-2003 01:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 163 (samface):
'Strange, *I* didn't have problems with reading that I wrote "...as in using Amiga products, then of course you are an Amiga user". How you turn that into "only if you are using the AmigaOS only" beats me. You see, those two sentences has two entirely different meanings. I'm tired of people with reading problems so, YOU figure it out.'

----
Thus, your contention is as long as it has the Amiga name associated with it then they are an Amiga user?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 170 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Cecilia on 29-Jul-2003 04:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 111 (samface):
> PC is not a registered trademark but a term for a common hardware standard,
> while the term Amiga is a registered trademark of Amiga Inc.

Beeeep! Wrong.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22pc+trademark%22+ibm&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=0
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 171 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 05:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 168 (takemehomegrandma):
No, YOU are the ones obsessed with the trademark. It even goes to the point where you incorrectly label everything that fits your own subjective view of what an Amiga is as Amiga. Furthermore, if anyone would dare telling you that you are wrong, you call him obsessed with the name. I'm sorry but you need to wake up; Amiga(TM) IS a brand and just because I seperate the real brand name products from the fakes, that doesn't make me "obsessed" by the brand.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 172 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 05:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 170 (Cecilia):
I believe IBM-PC is their trademark rather than just PC. However, I might be wrong. Anyway, that still doesn't justify why we should name anything "alike" as Amiga computers. The Pegasos and the AmigaOne is not compatible and does not comply to a common hardware standard, PC's do. So, why should we confuse customers into thinking that these computers would be compatible which using the Amiga as a common label would imply? It's not very honest, you know.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 173 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 06:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 169 (Anonymous):
CORRECTO MUNDO! Give this man a hand, folks!
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 174 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Janne on 29-Jul-2003 07:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 171 (samface):
>No, YOU are the ones obsessed with the trademark. It even goes to the point
>where you incorrectly label everything that fits your own subjective view of
>what an Amiga is as Amiga.

No Sammy, that is just the way the world outside zealot fans, overly brand conscious consumers and corporate marketing departments works. You never call Pepsi yourself Coke? I'm sure you would never use the word "xerox" of copying paper on a Canon machine (if you were a native English speaker)? ;-)

Hey, ordinary folk call it like they see it. And that is probably why trademarks are defined as they are. It is not up to the market to uphold the trademark, it is up to its owners. Common people will do with the word what they please and nobody can really control that. What they can try to control are the circumstances that lead to people using a word in one way or the other. Hence the challenge.

You know, just like people calling Pepsi Coke (or not caring at a restaurant whether or not you actually get Coke when ordering one, Pepsi usually suffices just fine), people using their Pegasos as an "Amiga" really may not make the distinction unless explicitly asked. If it looks like one, feels like one, that will be enough for those not obsessed with brand loyalty.

In this regard the word "Amiga" is getting a generic meaning. I don't know what we should call it. Just amiga in lower case? They use their Pegasos to fullfil the role of the Amiga in the house. They don't use it to replace the PC or the Mac. They use it to replace the Amiga, because for all intents and purposes, for the moment it is one.

No, the Pegasos is not an Amiga, but for the person using it, it may very well feel like it is. And for them, that is the only thing that counts.

Now obviously that has nothing to do with brands, or trademarks or whatever. It simply has to do with the connotation of the word - what it means to each and everyone of us. We have come to perceive the Amiga as a certain kind of computer, working in a certain way and running certain software. Pegasos with MorphOS really just fits that perception for many people.

Subjective? For sure. But then that's how the world works. Take any computer novice that knows Amiga somewhate, have them play around with MorphOS and they will tell you it is an Amiga. They probably will refer it to as an Amiga or "the thing that was like Amiga". Because Amiga is the reference-point to them. Just like Coke is. Or UNIX. When someone calls Linux UNIX, they'll be sure to get the zealots on their case, but for the rest of the world... Well, call Linux UNIX and everyone will still know what you're talking about.

So yes Sammy, you are the one obsessed with the trademark. The rest of the world is just using plain old common sense. For them, if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck... it is a duck - no matter how wrong that may be in brand terms or technical details.

Or are you really the kind of person that bugs his friends when they call Pepsi Coke? :-) We both know they taste different, but even then people really generally do not care.

Just like they didn't care when IBM PC compatibles hit the market.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 175 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Janne on 29-Jul-2003 07:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 172 (samface):
You know Sammy, it might do you and your case a world of good if you'd just drop the trademark act. Many people find it petty and irrelevant.

If you really think you want to support the AmigaOS path (we can all make the distinction) and have your reasons, as you have stated many times, for believing a single, separate path is the way forward, couldn't you do that without calling the trademark card all the time?

Debating people who feel like their Pegasos is the new Amiga in the house really gets you nowhere. Do you honestly think the Pegasos will feel less like an Amiga after that?

You have a far more merited case in advocating a single path for a community like ours than you have trying to convince people not to feel the way they do. Saying that the current split will cause havoc in development resources and irrevocably hurt the market is one thing, who knows maybe you are right and we all should just go our separate ways. That I love to discuss more with you anytime. But you have far less of a case in my mind trying to convince people that the trademark is the only acceptable definition of a word.

The history has clearly shown, outside our community, that that is not the case. In the end, people will define a word and the identity of a brand too.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 176 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 07:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 174 (Janne):
See comment #172.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 177 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 07:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 175 (Janne):
See comment #172.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 178 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Blah on 29-Jul-2003 07:38 GMT
Divide and rule.
Teile und herrsche.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 179 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 07:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 175 (Janne):
What you fail to grasp is that this is about so much more than Amiga Inc.'s IP. This parasitic marketing of Genesi's products is false marketing and fooling people that they are buying an Amiga when neither the hardware and the software is compatible. Even WinUAE on a PC is more compatible, you know. As a long time Amiga hobbyist, I'm insulted by some people's insolence to label this wannabe computer as an Amiga.

Is it really too much to ask for Amiga compatibility before you call it an Amiga? I really don't think so. Until then, it will remain as an alternative platform that has nothing to do with the Amiga besides the looks and the ability to run classic Amiga applications through 68k emulation. That does not in any way make it an Amiga, period.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 180 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 29-Jul-2003 08:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (samface):
Man, there is really no point in arguing with you, whatever argument is put up in front of you, you just close your eyes, put your hands to your ears, and keep repeating the same nonsense. Don't you see you are talking in cicles? Repeating the same mantra over, and over, and over again?

OK, you have made your point to everyone that you will never use a Pegasos with MorphOS as your only Amiga. Fine! Why can't we just let it end there? Can you please quit disturbing us who DO use our Pegasos with MorphOS as our Amiga, and is happy with that?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 181 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by DaveP on 29-Jul-2003 08:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (samface):
Why has this degenerated into an argument about whether or not the Pegasos/MorphOS is an Amiga? It clearly is not.

We started by talking about whether or not the Amiga community encompasses those that use A/Box or UAE on Pegasos/MorphOS. It clearly does.

Technical definitions fine, Sammy, but you are a little bit to hardline.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 182 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 08:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 175 (Janne):
Furthermore, the Amiga never has been and never will be an open standard like the PC. Both the hardware and the software standards used by the Amiga is and always has been an intellectual property. Not even the Draco was refered to as an Amiga, perhaps an Amiga compatible at the most. There simply is no reason for why this would have suddenly changed, because it hasn't. For example; I will not refer to the Pegasos as a Mac even if/when they get MacOSX running on it because it simply isn't a Mac, just like it is no Amiga regardless if you can run classic Amiga applications with it. End of story.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 183 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 08:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 181 (DaveP):
The Amiga community, perhaps. However, you're still no Amiga user for the sole reason of running Amiga applications. That makes you an Amiga application user, no more, no less.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 184 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 08:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 180 (takemehomegrandma):
I have the same right to be here as you. Besides, didn't you notice the posts where I refer to my previous posts? Of course I'm aware that the discussion is going in circles, that is why I use this kind of referers in order to avoid repeating myself. Can't you get a hint?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 185 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 29-Jul-2003 08:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 181 (DaveP):
> Why has this degenerated into an argument about whether or not the
> Pegasos/MorphOS is an Amiga? It clearly is not.

*EXACTLY*! It does NOT wear the Amiga TM sticker on the front. Nobody is arguing that!
:-)

But (doing a samface mantra thingy here ;-)):

"We use it pretty much as we allways used our "Classic" Amigas, we run pretty much the same applications and programs, we use the same filesystems (unfortunately), we write our assigns etc in s:user-startup, we download software from Aminet, etc, etc, etc. ... it looks like an Amiga, it feels like an Amiga, it is operated like an Amiga, it runs Amiga applications, you program it like an Amiga, etc. It has the Amiga spirit in *every single aspect*, and it gives you the same Amiga experience when you use it. But it's better looking, it's faster, and it's improved in a lot of ways comparing to the original Classic Amiga".

Hence there are hundreds of us who *use* it like Amiga. Some of us because there simply is no other "NG" alternative available. Others because we like the Philosophy of the MorphOS design better, we like the MorphOS vision better, we think it has a greater chance of success in creating a sustainable future, or many other reasons.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 186 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 08:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 180 (takemehomegrandma):
Anyway, YOU are the one who asked me to drop the issue, now you claim that I'm the one not listening to the arguments put up against me? Talk about the cat calling the kettle black...
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 187 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 29-Jul-2003 08:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 186 (samface):
Samface, the comment I am replying to now is #186!! The first 11 comments in this thread was on topic. A great deal of the others are simply you talking in circles. And since many thinks this blatant flooding is a little tiresome, I must ask you to stop.

What are you trying to achieve? Do you think you will succeed? What is the point?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 188 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 08:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 185 (takemehomegrandma):
So, if I think a Ferrari would be better than an Amiga, would that make my Ferrari an Amiga? Your arguments are beyond FLAWED, grandma. It is completely *irrelevant* if you hate Amiga Inc., think that this alternative would be better, or how unavailable the AmigaOne is, etc. It does NOT change anything and does NOT make a valid argument to begin with. The facts remain:

1. Amiga IS a trademark rather than a term for a software or hardware standard.

2. The standards used by the Amiga is an intellectual property rather than open standards.

2. The Pegasos is not compatible with Amiga software.

3. MorphOS is not compatible with Amiga hardware.

Still refering to the Pegasos or MorphOS as Amiga or the usage of this products as using an Amiga despite knowing the above is either deluding yourself and/or pure ignorance.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 189 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 08:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 187 (takemehomegrandma):
I will go on as long as I can see flaws in your arguments, and I will never stop simply because you say so.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 190 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 09:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 185 (takemehomegrandma):
Maybe driving my Volvo like a Ferrari would make my Volvo a Ferrari? That must have been the worst argument yet...
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 191 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by Jupp3 on 29-Jul-2003 09:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 189 (samface):
samface: It's really hard to do a simple conversation with you...

As you somehow turn every single based fact into FUD or whatever...

I'm getting bored...

In fact, I'll be going for a holiday, I really need it, won't have even Internet connection

(No doubt, you'll turn even that statement to FUD in your mind...)
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 192 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 09:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 191 (Jupp3):
FUD? Who talked about FUD?

/me shrugs
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 193 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 09:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 187 (takemehomegrandma):
>What are you trying to achieve? Do you think you will succeed? What is the
>point?

See comment #36 and then my reply comment #40.

Buying a Lindows machine would not be supporting Microsoft, the Windows market, nor the Windows user community. The Pegasos with MorphOS is no different. That is my point and what some people has such a hard time grasping.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 194 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by cahva on 29-Jul-2003 09:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 192 (samface):
Have a nice cup of STFU!
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 195 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 09:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 194 (cahva):
I'm sorry but I have the same right to be here as you and I will not shut up simply because you don't agree with what I have to say.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 196 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 29-Jul-2003 09:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 188 (samface):
> So, if I think a Ferrari would be better than an Amiga, would that make my
> Ferrari an Amiga?

I like to have a hamburger once in a while. To that burger, I like to drink a cola. Some restaurants serve Coca Cola (TM), some serve Pepsi Cola (TM). To me, when enjoying my burger, the only thing that really matters is the cola look, the cola feel, the cola taste, etc, that is - I think the "cola experience" suits fine to hamburgers. I know that there exists "cola fanatics" that don't put their foot in in restaurants that only serve Pepsi Cola, because that is not "the original" (and there could be no other cola than the original). Fine! As long as they are happy in their narrow, limited, perception of the world. I respect that. But I will react if someone try to argue with me *not to drink Pepsi Cola*, with *the only* arguments that it is not branded "Coca Cola", and it's not "the original". The only thing I am really interested in is the "experience" I get from that cold, brown, refreshing beverage. I couldn't care less about the brand, the logo, the original recipe of Coca Cola.

That's the difference between you and me, samface. You only drink Coca Cola because of it's "the original", it has the trademark and the Coke logo, while all I am interested in is the "cola experience".

1. The Pegasos is *NOT* branded "AmigaOne". Everyone knows that.
2. The MorphOS is *NOT* branded "Amiga OS". Everyone knows that.
3. The Pegasos + MorphOS combo is *NOT* branded "Amiga" in any way. Everyone knows that.

4. ... but I (and several hundred others) don't care about that, we use our Pegasos + MorphOS combo as our main/only Amiga anyway, because (doing a SMT again (Samface Mantra Thingy ;-)):

"We use it pretty much as we allways used our "Classic" Amigas, we run pretty much the same applications and programs, we use the same filesystems (unfortunately), we write our assigns etc in s:user-startup, we download software from Aminet, etc, etc, etc. ... it looks like an Amiga, it feels like an Amiga, it is operated like an Amiga, it runs Amiga applications, you program it like an Amiga, etc. It has the Amiga spirit in *every single aspect*, and it gives you the same Amiga experience when you use it. But it's better looking, it's faster, and it's improved in a lot of ways comparing to the original Classic Amiga".
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 197 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by cahva on 29-Jul-2003 09:43 GMT
...Aaaaand we are back to square one..
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 198 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 09:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 196 (takemehomegrandma):
The cola analogy doesn't work since we're talking about systems that functions completely differently rather than the cola alternatives which few consumers can actually tell the difference between. I've already explained this but since you didn't get it the first time, once more:

The Amiga is NOT an open standard and the MorphOS nor the Pegasos is compatible with it. No, the ability to run classic Amiga 68k applications through emulation does NOT make it compatible.

In order for your analogy to work, I would have to be able to walk into an Amiga store and combine MorphOS with Amiga hardware or Pegasos with the AmigaOS without having to worry about compatibility issues. You see, the fact that people can't tell the difference between a Pepsi and a Coca-Cola is the sole reason for why people use the term cola as a common denominator. That's why I keep repeating that the Pegasos/MorphOS and the Amiga is not compatible and therefore shouldn't be refered to by the same label. You with me yet?
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 199 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by DaveP on 29-Jul-2003 10:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 185 (takemehomegrandma):
Amusing, but not peritinent takemehomegrandma.
MorphOS 1.4 : Comment 200 of 381ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 29-Jul-2003 10:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 196 (takemehomegrandma):
>We use it pretty much as we allways used our "Classic" Amigas, we run pretty
>much the same applications and programs, we use the same filesystems
>(unfortunately), we write our assigns etc in s:user-startup, we download
>software from Aminet, etc, etc, etc. ... it looks like an Amiga, it feels like
>an Amiga, it is operated like an Amiga, it runs Amiga applications, you
>program it like an Amiga, etc. It has the Amiga spirit in *every single
>aspect*, and it gives you the same Amiga experience when you use it. But it's
>better looking, it's faster, and it's improved in a lot of ways comparing to >the original Classic Amiga".

You're talking about the A/Box, the AmigaOS alike "sandbox" running ontop of the Quark kernel. The sandbox is not an OS on it's own and it's only there for backwards compatibility. The fact that MorphOS as an OS operates nowhere near the way of the original AmigaOS and is not compatible with Amiga hardware nor Amiga applications remains. The Amiga application compatibility is flawed (as in won't run all Amiga applications) and virtual (as in will not run Amiga applications natively, only emulated). Keep repeating the above if you like, it's not going to change anything.
Anonymous, there are 381 items in your selection (but only 231 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 381]
Back to Top