| [News] Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. | ANN.lu |
| Posted on 16-Nov-2003 08:23 GMT by Rich Woods | 263 comments
View flat
View list | |
Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003 in Washington Federal District Court.
Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003 in Washington Federal District Court.
It also looks like Amiga is again without counsel.
"This matter comes before the Court on "Plantiffs' Motion for Judgement and dismissal of Counter Claims for Lack of Representation." Although corporations must be represented by counsel, defendant's failure to retain new counsel has not yet been given rise to a sanctionable failure to prosecute. Plantiff's motion for judgement and dismissal of the counterclaims is DENIED. Defendant must, however, obtain counsel to defend this litigation if it hopes to avoid an adverse ruling on plaantiff's pending motion for summary judgement.
DATED this 7th day of November,2003.
/s/
robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge
Get it here .
|
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 151 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Rich Woods on 18-Nov-2003 06:08 GMT | In reply to Comment 128 (Matt Parsons):
I prefer to have two sources of info ;-)
Can't argue with that type of thinking! |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 152 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Rich Woods on 18-Nov-2003 06:15 GMT | In reply to Comment 139 (samface):
Posted by samface (131.116.254.199) on 17-Nov-2003 19:17:19
In Reply to Comment 135:
>Rich is providing a service bringing to light news which we would otherwise
>not have known about.
It's not so much about what he is doing, it's more about how he is doing it. That's why I chose to not depend on his "services".
-------------------
OK samface - you convientantly forgot to mention you DID have access to the Thendic-Amiga password protected session for many months - you got so out of control and rodiculous I cut off your access.
You whined and cried and then started saying I "left out" pages etc on documents. And you questioned the authenticity of these documents.
There was NO WAY for you to verify anything except for you to get the docs yourself - which I told you to do - it took you 6 months or so but I congratulate you on doing so.
Notwithstanding the fact you have no idea of what the court docs mean.
You still have problems with "left out" and "altered". I guess it depends on how you define "left out" and "altered".
Apparently most here understand the difference. I certainly fdon't expect you too with your hair splitting and mind games.
but then at least we know where you are coming from. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 153 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2003 07:03 GMT | In reply to Comment 18 (bbrv):
@bbrv>You are right smithy.
Didn't I saw you treating someone of a troll?
Aren't ya one so? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 154 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 07:15 GMT | In reply to Comment 152 (Rich Woods):
I never discussed anything inside the password protected web directory in public nor in private, we had not even communicated for months when you all of a sudden decided to cut off my access. I have not even the slightest idea of what you're talking about when you say that I got "rodiculous". Last time we spoke you accused me of passign the documents around and even hinted that I would have some form of affiliation with Amiga Inc, another time you told me that I was too much of a blind Amiga Inc. follower, what's next?
Well, I don't care anymore. Everyone has access to the court documents now, completely without your help. Now start digging someone else trash or whatever you do for a hobby. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 155 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by greenboy on 18-Nov-2003 07:22 GMT | In reply to Comment 131 (samface):
>Now tell me if you notice any differences in Rich Wood's and my way of handling people's request for verification of the documents authenticity.
Yeah. You spent many months in denial. Meanwhile Rich got the news out and people were free to verify it for themselves or use their common sense. And those who thought these documents were real took the heat from people like you, who just wouldn't believe that court documents are court documents ; }
When people urged you time and again to FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF, first-hand - since you seemed to believe everything BUT what was most likely, you vacillated, prevaricated, ran crazy scenarios, and continued to speculate on authenticity, and on the meaning of the content (which kind of shows a funny irony).
Meanwhile, because Rich Woods made it easier for many, the documents were read by just about anybody who had any interest the matter.
But WOW - it finally appears like some simple advice to you was heeded. you actually LOOKED for yourself after all your bluster about PROOF and PROVING. But it looks like you are many months late ; } |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 156 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2003 07:22 GMT | In reply to Comment 154 (samface):
I have to agree with Sammy on this one. He's obviously got his own thing going, but he is not arbitrarily putting restrictions on access to information. Instead, he's got everything available for anyone to look at, not only people who stroke his ego. Even if both him and Rich have exactly the same info, I would find Sam to be the more credible of the two, if only because he's being open about everything. Whether you agree with his interpretation of the evidence or not, you can't argue with the fact that Rich is withholding some of the documents and Sam is not. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 157 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2003 07:23 GMT | In reply to Comment 155 (greenboy):
Ooh look, the Genesi fanboys have arrived. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 158 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 07:45 GMT | In reply to Comment 155 (greenboy):
Again, questioning the documents authenticity is not the same thing as denying their authenticity. It's perfectly normal practise, especially when it comes to law related matters, to question the authenticity of everything presented as proof or evidence. I asked Rich wether he was prepared to atleast make his documents available to everyone so that their authenticity could easily be verified. Rich wouldn't even give me his permission to pass the documents to someone who could help me verify them and insisted on keeping them private. At several occasions, he even asked me to get the court documents myself.
If you don't need anything besides Rich Wood's word for it, good for you. I on the other hand, just ended the discussion about the documents authenticity. Some people appreciate that, you know. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 159 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 07:56 GMT | In reply to Comment 155 (greenboy):
>When people urged you time and again to FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF, first-hand -
>since you seemed to believe everything BUT what was most likely, you
>vacillated, prevaricated, ran crazy scenarios, and continued to speculate on
>authenticity, and on the meaning of the content (which kind of shows a funny
>irony).
Well, that's one way to look at it. I prefer to look at it like I was making it clear how ambiguous Rich Wood's so called proof was as long as the authenticity had not been verified and as long as they were kept private and only accessible by a few arbitrary chosen individuals. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 160 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Gunne Steen on 18-Nov-2003 09:32 GMT | In reply to Comment 158 (samface):
Hi
# Rich wouldn't even give me his permission to pass the documents to someone who could help me verify them and insisted on keeping them private. At several occasions, he even asked me to get the court documents myself.
------------
Yes, why dont you get this documents by yourself if you are so interrested in them ? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 161 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 09:42 GMT | In reply to Comment 160 (Gunne Steen):
Hi Gunne. I already did as announced on ANN.lu at http://www.ann.lu/detail.cgi?category=news&file=1068843774.msg. You can find the complete civil docket here:
http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/
Or, since there seems to be some DNS related problems, here's an alternate URL for the same directory:
http://mindrelease.mine.nu/amiga-thendic/ |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 162 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Gunne Steen on 18-Nov-2003 11:11 GMT | In reply to Comment 161 (samface):
Good ! :-)
Then we can just stop this discussion here and see what the outcome will be.
I cant read through to all that text. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 163 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Jupp3 on 18-Nov-2003 11:41 GMT | In reply to Comment 157 (Anonymous):
>Ooh look, the Genesi fanboys have arrived.
Anonymous people, however, have been here right from the beginning - Just like on every thread. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 164 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Jupp3 on 18-Nov-2003 11:50 GMT | In reply to Comment 158 (samface):
samface:
>It's perfectly normal practise, especially when it comes to law related matters, to question the authenticity of everything presented as proof or evidence.
However, it's also perfectly normal practice (on any matter) to either:
a) Stop complaining about missing proof
or...
b) Do something about getting that proof
After months, you finally chose option "b"
>At several occasions, he even asked me to get the court documents myself.
See? Doing it "at seweral occasions" finally had some outcome, as you finally did it! Congratulations! |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 165 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 15:38 GMT | In reply to Comment 164 (Jupp3):
I don't know what they teach the kids in shools of other nationalities, but I know that atleast they teach swedish kids at the age of somewhere between 13-15 the practise of always providing a reference to your source when publishing. To me, it's perfectly natural to turn to the publisher when wanting to verify the source of something published. That's what I did but all I got was a "get it yourself" without any help what so ever of how and where to look. It was pure luck that I found the PACER system which gave me this ability, but it took me more than a month, almost two before I finally got what I wanted (I didn't even know the case number and searching the online archives costs 7 cents per try).
You know, I find it difficult to understand that some people actually have the insolence to complain at me for not doing this sooner instead of turning to Rich Woods for a simple reference to his sources. It's not very polite, nor rational behaviour, I'm afraid. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 166 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Tigger on 18-Nov-2003 17:28 GMT | In reply to Comment 165 (samface):
>>>>
You know, I find it difficult to understand that some people actually have the insolence to complain at me for not doing this sooner instead of turning to Rich Woods for a simple reference to his sources. It's not very polite, nor rational behaviour, I'm afraid.
>>>>
I'm sorry Samface, Rich never made it a secret that all of the documents were from the court house, in fact he provided that info to you multiple times, since you were accussing him of altering the documents and removing pages, I'm not sure what else he could have done, since you didnt believe his copies and he told you where and how to get your own copies. Sorry you wasted your money Sam, but I did tell you that you were going to find out the documents were unaltered, so frankly you were told it was going to be a waste of money on your part.
-Tig |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 167 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Rich Woods on 18-Nov-2003 17:29 GMT | In reply to Comment 165 (samface):
Posted by samface (131.116.254.198) on 18-Nov-2003 16:38:49
In Reply to Comment 164:
I don't know what they teach the kids in shools of other nationalities, but I know that atleast they teach swedish kids at the age of somewhere between 13-15 the practise of always providing a reference to your source when publishing. To
-----------
Hurrah - so you say my documents are not verifiable but since I won't give you continued access you cannot verify the documents?
You had access for MANY months, you had the court clerk stamp on the documents, you had the court info on the documents, you had the lawyers contact info on the documents, you had the court clerk's phone number on the documents.
and now you whine that I didn't give you continued access to verify documents that you said I left out info.
More samface logic - point is you were too lazy to do anything yourself except after 6 months or so. Finally you were able to verify the documents (as others did) and now have admitted (in a round about way) my documents were correct and true - I can at least thank you for that.
The password protected directory contained other documents not related to the Thenid case - only TRUSTED individuals were given access - THAT is the reason I cut off your access. Your logic and unrational thinking did not want me to let you have access to Amiga's D&B report, Gary peake's bankruptcy filings and other sensitive documents.
Thendic docs were placed in the amigabk directory which is/was open to all.
me, it's perfectly natural to turn to the publisher when wanting to verify the source of something published. That's what I did but all I got was a "get it
Samface - if my documents were verifiable to your liking then you go to the SOURCE the courts - which you finally did after 6+ months.
yourself" without any help what so ever of how and where to look. It was pure luck that I found the PACER system which gave me this ability, but it took me more than a month, almost two before I finally got what I wanted (I didn't even know the case number and searching the online archives costs 7 cents per try)
Congratulations. We'll put a gold star next to your name.
.
You know, I find it difficult to understand that some people actually have the insolence to complain at me for not doing this sooner instead of turning to Rich Woods for a simple reference to his sources. It's not very polite, nor rational behaviour, I'm afraid.
You had a reference to my sources - the actual COURT DOCS itself which you had for 6+ months - verifiable contact info was on EVERY page of the court documents.
This hair-splitting and obvious falsified thinking shows that my decision to NOT allow you access to sensitive NON-Thendic documentation was correct.
You have "VERIFIED" my actions as correct - and you thankfully continue to do so in each and every post. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 168 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Gregg on 18-Nov-2003 18:44 GMT | In reply to Comment 147 (Darrin):
> Coming from a total twat like you, that can only be a complement.
"compliment"
> Crawl back under your rock Gregg.
You know, there's some absolutely fascinating life underneath rocks - do have a look for yourself sometime.
> You've never managed to provide anything worthwhile to any thread in your
> whole sorry existance.
Yes, well, "pearls before swine" and that sort of thing, you know...
> You have my pity.
Why, thank you.
Gregg |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 169 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Vexar on 18-Nov-2003 18:50 GMT | In reply to Comment 12 (Matt Parsons):
In response to Matt Parsons' question regarding taxpayer's costs,
The summary judgement does save money; rather than ruling on X,Y, and Z, the judge would just make an overall decision. In Washington State, the "court costs" typically don't cover law enforcement. That'd be the salaries of the Judges, I think. It covers processing costs, etc.
Considering we haven't heard a productive peep out of McEwen, I'd have to think these times are dire for Amiga, Inc. but then, with all the "spirit of Amiga" efforts going on, it is really just Amiga as usual. Folks are still working on their various projects, demo parties are going on, a few brave vendors are making software for the Amiga and its sibling platforms, but most of all, the computers we own haven't stopped working all of the sudden.
-Vexar, the original (All others are imitators) |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 170 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Matt Parsons on 18-Nov-2003 19:52 GMT | In reply to Comment 169 (Vexar):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'd have to think these times are dire for Amiga, Inc. but then, with all the "spirit of Amiga" efforts going on, it is really just Amiga as usual. Folks are still working on their various projects, demo parties are going on, a few brave vendors are making software for the Amiga and its sibling platforms, but most of all, the computers we own haven't stopped working all of the sudden.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The loss of Amiga Inc. as we know it would not be a bad thing! In fact it would be a massive boost to the community... sadly there are some on these boards that can't see that! |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 171 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Matt Parsons on 18-Nov-2003 19:52 GMT | In reply to Comment 169 (Vexar):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'd have to think these times are dire for Amiga, Inc. but then, with all the "spirit of Amiga" efforts going on, it is really just Amiga as usual. Folks are still working on their various projects, demo parties are going on, a few brave vendors are making software for the Amiga and its sibling platforms, but most of all, the computers we own haven't stopped working all of the sudden.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The loss of Amiga Inc. as we know it would not be a bad thing! In fact it would be a massive boost to the community... sadly there are some on these boards that can't see that! |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 172 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Neko on 18-Nov-2003 19:53 GMT | In reply to Comment 35 (Rich Woods):
> > What that means for Amiga is up to the judge. They could just be ordered
> > to say sorry, shake hands and make up :D
>
> Actually the judge's order was quite specific. If Amiga has no legal
> represenatation come Friday a summary judgement will be issued.
I meant the judge's summary judgement. It's totally up to him what happens to
Amiga and what they have to do to placate Thendic in this matter.
If the judge thinks that the judgement is that Amiga were bad, can't defend
themselves, and need to do something world-changing, then so be it.
But as I said.. he could just order Bill & Bill to shake hands as the final
outcome. Totally unknown at this point. We'll see what happens.
=Neko= |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 173 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Neko on 18-Nov-2003 19:54 GMT | In reply to Comment 33 (TheRealNapster):
> You guys never LIVED up the to the contract in the first place
The contract doesn't state which devices we had to deliver first, which
specific order, and what doesn't count as a device.
Fact is.. we produced Pegasos, expected a port, Amiga steadfastly refused and
ignored the issue, which is against the contract.
=Neko= |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 174 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Jupp3 on 18-Nov-2003 20:14 GMT | In reply to Comment 165 (samface):
@samface
>To me, it's perfectly natural to turn to the publisher when wanting to verify the source of something published.
Well, but question is, what should he have done?
If he had said "I swear in the name of God that these documents are genuine", would you have believed him more? Or what could he have done to make you (and some others) believe?
Checking the papers yourself (as you finally did) is "the ultimate proof" of their genuity. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 175 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 21:11 GMT | In reply to Comment 166 (Tigger):
>since you were accussing him of altering the documents and removing pages
Please stop repeating that lie. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 176 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 18-Nov-2003 21:20 GMT | In reply to Comment 174 (Jupp3):
>Well, but question is, what should he have done?
I thought I made that clear in post #131. Rich could have done the same but chose to not cooperate in any way and instead he decided to removed my access to the passsword protected file archive on his website. Am I beeing clear enough yet? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 177 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by - on 18-Nov-2003 22:34 GMT | In reply to Comment 175 (samface):
>>since you were accussing him of altering the documents and removing pages
>Please stop repeating that lie.
I guess if I rip pages out of a book I haven't altered it, at least according to Samface.
Stew |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 178 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2003 04:28 GMT | In reply to Comment 171 (Matt Parsons):
The loss of Amiga Inc would be the loss of the only real competition Bill Buck &co have. They would use every means at their disposal to make sure they have exclusive access to "the name", and would start charging "amiga pricing" for hardware and software. Do you seriously think Bill would have been handing out free Pegasos systems if he was the only game in town? It's not like the amiga hardware his previous ventures sold was particularly cheap either, and he needs to recover the costs of all the R&D he's been doing on the Pegasos and Morphos. 600 $300 motherboards (at least a couple dozen of which were freebies to key members of the community) are not going to cover a few hundred thousand that it cost to develop the Pegasos. The ones who'll pay for that will be the suckers that are left behind after Bill becomes a monopoly. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 179 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Nate Downes on 19-Nov-2003 04:34 GMT | In reply to Comment 178 (Anonymous):
LOL!
Good one.
Also shows that you have no grasp of reality.
Amiga Inc dies, so what? It doesn't mean that there is no competition. Or have you forgotten Macintosh and Windows?
With Amiga, Inc out of the picture all you get is less noise. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 180 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2003 04:50 GMT | In reply to Comment 179 (Nate Downes):
Sorry Downix, but you know as well as I do that you're not competing with Windows, and your toy motherboard that needs to be mix'n'matched before it will even take a G4 is no competition for a Powerbook or a G5. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 181 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by acg on 19-Nov-2003 04:53 GMT | I'm not a lawyer, but somethings sounds fishy.....I mean if you sue someone in a federal court who has no money, and they cannot get "official" counsel....then
they lose? This sounds like a recipe for bigger companies who have larger
resources picking on a smaller company and sue them till they go bankrupt.
It could be corporation takeoever without buying it out...you just sue it out
of existence....a really smart guy could try and make contracts a with small
struggling company, and go for the throat if that small company did something
that could be construed as a breach of contract buy suing them until they went
bankrupt. Then the smart guy could get assets in return for payment.
In a criminal court of law, one can get a "public" defender for free.. Are there any "public" defenders in a federal court of law?
The whole thing is a terrible affair. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 182 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2003 05:02 GMT | In reply to Comment 181 (acg):
Nope. Welcome to the mess that is the US legal system, where the lawsuit is just another tool of corporate power. Genesi has more money than amiga inc, so they can (and will) sue them back to the stone age, and it's all 100% legal. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 183 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 19-Nov-2003 05:40 GMT | In reply to Comment 177 (-):
>I guess if I rip pages out of a book I haven't altered it, at least according
>to Samface.
Oh come on! Twisting my words into something I clearly did not intend is not somehow going to make it true. When I said that he was leaving parts of it out I was of course refering to the fact that he kept some of the documents password protected, not that he would have removed parts from what he had made public. Is this really that hard to comprehend or are you just playing dumb on purpose? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 184 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by gary_c on 19-Nov-2003 06:48 GMT | In reply to Comment 180 (Anonymous):
> Sorry Downix, but you know as well as I do that you're not competing with Windows, and your toy motherboard that needs to be mix'n'matched before it will even take a G4 is no competition for a Powerbook or a G5.
Downix is right. Why would Genesi compete with Amiga, Inc. solely within the "Amiga market" when there aren't enough potential customers remaining here to justify the investment? Why do you think Genesi is talking about other OSs so much and investing to get them ported to Pegasos? Of course Genesi wants to sell to people who are already aware of them and Amiga -- basically a no-cost sale as far as marketing is concerned -- but that's just the first stage, and not a sufficient one. The competition that will make or break the Pegasos lies outside the Amiga market, just as the viability of the AmigaOne doesn't depend on current users (whose numbers are too few to support the product alone) but on how well the product can attract new users.
You could say that both Genesi and Amiga will be in competition for those new users, but this will depend on the specific match-up of their products. As long as AmigaOne is primarily targetted at current, returning and new AmigaOS users, and the Pegasos is pushed as a multi-OS platform as well as a follow-on to the classic Amiga platform, there's only a subset of customers in contention. And that's in addition to any hardware differentiation or service tie-ins, etc. up the road.
-- gary_c |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 185 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by gary_c on 19-Nov-2003 06:58 GMT | In reply to Comment 184 (gary_c):
I forgot to add that the "mix and match" G4 problem is only on the original Pegasos, not the Pegasos II. Also note that Genesi wants to market a G5 Pegasos next year, which should improve their chances against those Apple machines. Anyway, if you call it a toy motherboard, I guess you've never used or seen a Pegasos board in person. It's actually a very nicely designed and built piece of hardware.
-- gary_c |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 186 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 19-Nov-2003 07:07 GMT | In reply to Comment 184 (gary_c):
>You could say that both Genesi and Amiga will be in competition for those new
>users, but this will depend on the specific match-up of their products. As
>long as AmigaOne is primarily targetted at current, returning and new AmigaOS
>users, and the Pegasos is pushed as a multi-OS platform as well as a follow-on
>to the classic Amiga platform, there's only a subset of customers in
>contention. And that's in addition to any hardware differentiation or service
>tie-ins, etc. up the road.
Or, one could turn what you just said completely up side down:
As long as MorphOS is targetted at current, returning and new AmigaPPC/Pegasos users, and the AmigaOS is pushed as a multi-platform OS as well as follow-on to the classic AmigaOS, there's only a subset of customers in contention. And that's in addition to any OS differentiation or service tie-ins, etc. up the road.
:-P |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 187 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2003 07:08 GMT | In reply to Comment 185 (gary_c):
I'm sorry, but is this the Pegasos2 that only seems to exist in promo pictures? I better not hear you dismiss the AmigaOne Lite as nonexistent, I might have to accuse you of hypocrisy... |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 188 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2003 07:10 GMT | In reply to Comment 185 (gary_c):
> I guess you've never used or seen a Pegasos board in person. It's actually a
> very nicely designed and built piece of hardware
I have a Gameboy Advance that works a lot better than all Pegasos I've been exposed to; I've yet to see it crash and it's very responsive. The GBA is a toy, and yet it works better than a Peg. Hmmm. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 189 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by gary_c on 19-Nov-2003 10:36 GMT | In reply to Comment 186 (samface):
Samface wrote:
> Or, one could turn what you just said completely up side down:
As long as MorphOS is targetted at current, returning and new AmigaPPC/Pegasos users, and the AmigaOS is pushed as a multi-platform OS as well as follow-on to the classic AmigaOS, there's only a subset of customers in contention. And that's in addition to any OS differentiation or service tie-ins, etc. up the road.
I don't see how that fits. I didn't describe Pegasos and Amiga as I did arbitrarily, but because that seems to be their focuses so far. Can you turn the descriptions around? There is plenty of activity getting Pegasos ports of various operating systems. Is there equivalent activity on the AmigaOne side? No. The AmigaOne comes with Linux so far, and AmigaOS4 scheduled. Is the Pegasos limited to two OSs? No. Genesi is actively pursuing various OEM deals and service tie-in, such as Crunchbox. Is there any documentation of either Amiga, Inc., Hyperion or Eyetech involved in such deals? As far as I know, no, so actually you can't turn it around and still reflect reality. Of course, as always, I'd like to be educated if my ideas are missing something.
-- gary_c |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 190 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by gary_c on 19-Nov-2003 10:39 GMT | In reply to Comment 187 (Anonymous):
> I'm sorry, but is this the Pegasos2 that only seems to exist in promo pictures? I better not hear you dismiss the AmigaOne Lite as nonexistent, I might have to accuse you of hypocrisy...
I expect both the AmigaOne Lite and the Pegasos II to be shipping to customers before long (the Pegasos quite soon; don't know about the A1 Lite schedule). :-)
-- gary_c |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 191 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by gary_c on 19-Nov-2003 10:50 GMT | In reply to Comment 188 (Anonymous):
> > I guess you've never used or seen a Pegasos board in person. It's actually a
> > very nicely designed and built piece of hardware
> I have a Gameboy Advance that works a lot better than all Pegasos I've been exposed to; I've yet to see it crash and it's very responsive. The GBA is a toy, and yet it works better than a Peg. Hmmm.
The Gameboy Advance is a mature product with lots of development hours and yen behind it, and is a rather specialized, closed system. Yes, I'd expect a Gameboy this far along in the product cycle to work pretty flawlessly. (The fact that it's a "toy" is beside the point, really. The label is arbitrary, but calling a computer motherboard a "toy" suggests that it's somehow substandard -- you'll have to be more specific about that if you want the idea to be taken seriously.) The Pegasos is a new product; more to the point MorphOS is still early in its development. What are you trying to say, that a relatively complex product at an early stage in its life cycle should be as solid as a simpler mature product? Hmm.
-- gary_c |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 192 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 19-Nov-2003 11:18 GMT | In reply to Comment 189 (gary_c):
Still caught up in the hardware oriented thinking, I see. Well, I thought I could get you to see things out of a more software oriented view. You see, while Genesi seems to be focused on creating this new OS independant hardware, Amiga seems to focus a bit more on creating a hardware independant OS. So, while the Pegasos seems to be more attractive from a PPC hardware oriented user's point of view (more OS's to choose from on the same platform), the AmigaOS seems to be more attractive from a OS oriented user's point of view (more hardware to choose from for the same OS). Many people choose the x86 platform because of the cheap and fast performing hardware, but there is also alot of people choosing the x86 platform because they want Windows (I know, people are stupid ;-)). It all depends on what type of users you target and which strategy that is going to be the most successful one remains to be seen. You with me yet? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 193 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2003 12:20 GMT | In reply to Comment 192 (samface):
>Amiga seems to focus a bit more on creating a hardware independant OS.
>the AmigaOS seems to be more attractive from a OS oriented user's point of
>view (more hardware to choose from for the same OS).
What?????? AmigaOS doesn't run on plenty hardware, it's not hardware independent! It runs on the Teron board, and maybe the Cyberstorm... and that's it. Who's told you it runs on anything else?!
Secondly, this isn't "Amiga seems to be focus....". We all know that Amiga Inc has nothing to do with OS4. We all also know that they are insolvent, millions of dollars in debt and have no employees. We also know that no new DE products have been announced by Amiga Inc for a very long time. Maybe you were referring to OS5... well do you honestly believe Amiga Inc has done any coding on this? (Answer yes or no). Remember that Amiga Inc have no employees, no money, no clue, and no DE development for a long time. If there is no development of DE, why do you think there is any of OS5?
You are trying to turn Amiga Inc's complete failure and lack of focus into a strategy! Interesting spin... |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 194 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 19-Nov-2003 12:35 GMT | In reply to Comment 193 (Anonymous):
> Who's told you it runs on anything else?!
Noone, nor did I claim that it would. What I was talking about was the aim for the future of Genesi's and Amiga Inc.'s products. Please re-read what I wrote with this in mind. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 195 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 19-Nov-2003 13:06 GMT | In reply to Comment 165 (samface):
I don't know what they taught you at school and I really don't care.
In case you missed it, he told you a much easier way to verify the documents,
by counting the clerk... Others, including me had already verified them
in other ways that we're not going to discuss here (like asking for someone
else got them elsewhere, probably? :-)). |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 196 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 19-Nov-2003 13:07 GMT | In reply to Comment 193 (Anonymous):
>Secondly, this isn't "Amiga seems to be focus....". We all know that Amiga Inc
>has nothing to do with OS4.
You know, I'm getting rather fed up with this bullsh*t. Amiga Inc. is just as involved with AmigaOS4 as Genesi is with bPlan's Pegasos and MorphOS. I mean, do you really think Bill Buck or Raquel Velasco ever lifted a finger to create the Pegasos design or programmed a single line of code on MorphOS? The only difference between Amiga Inc. and the former Thendic-France (Genesi) is that Thendic-France and bPlan merged into one company while Amiga Inc. and Hyperion chose to remain as seperate companies. There are just about as much advantages as disadvantages with both strategies but little differences when it comes to what it means for the end user.
>We all also know that they are insolvent, millions of dollars in debt and have
>no employees.
Check your facts, I have court documents prooving they do have employees, atleast according to Bill McEwen's testimony under oath.
>We also know that no new DE products have been announced by Amiga Inc for a
>very long time.
Just like we have yet to see the Pegasos2. You know, I believe Amiga Inc. has actually sold more products than Genesi if you count all AmigaDE products, the AmigaDE SDK, AmigaOS3.9, etc.
>Maybe you were referring to OS5... well do you honestly believe Amiga Inc has
>done any coding on this? (Answer yes or no).
Yes. Amiga2D is already available for the AmigaDE and will be a part of the AmigaOS5. I'm sure there are more examples, I'm just not that much into AmigaDE development.
>Remember that Amiga Inc have no employees, no money, no clue, and no DE
>development for a long time. If there is no development of DE, why do you
>think there is any of OS5?
How come you think you know this as facts when you are only assuming this based on the little information you have? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 197 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by samface on 19-Nov-2003 13:09 GMT | In reply to Comment 195 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
>like asking for someone else got them elsewhere, probably?
Then people who have not had the time, interest or ability to do this will thank me for helping them. See? |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 198 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 19-Nov-2003 13:12 GMT | In reply to Comment 178 (Anonymous):
It won't... Genesi's competition in the Amiga market is NOT Amiga Inc...
It's Eyetech on HW and Hyperion on SW... |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 199 of 263 | ANN.lu |
| Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 19-Nov-2003 13:14 GMT | In reply to Comment 183 (samface):
Dunno about you but most people here accused him for removing pages.
"Hey, where are the pages between #? and #? !?"
That kind of stuff. Even if you meant what you said here, it was interpretted
differently. |
|
| Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 200 of 263 | ANN.lu |
|
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|
