06-Dec-2022 13:21 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 37 items in your selection
[Web] If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read thisANN.lu
Posted on 24-Jun-2004 10:05 GMT by Bill Panagouleas (Edited on 2004-06-26 15:28:29 GMT by Christian Kemp)37 comments
View flat
View list
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this story about the development nightmare of the game Daikatana. It makes you not feel so bad about OS 4.0 delays.

www.gamespot.com/features/btg-daikatana/index.html

If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 1 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by hooligan/dcs on 24-Jun-2004 08:13 GMT
... or Duke Nukem: Forever
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 2 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by RIk Sweeney on 24-Jun-2004 08:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (hooligan/dcs):
It'll come out one day.

Some day.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 3 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Peter Gordon on 24-Jun-2004 08:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (RIk Sweeney):
Its almost time to kick ass and chew bubblegum. Well... maybe. Give us a few more months.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 4 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by itix on 24-Jun-2004 12:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (hooligan/dcs):
Who wants it when there are better alternatives around? ;)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 5 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by kalmar on 24-Jun-2004 12:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Peter Gordon):
Heheh,.. who are "They" in this analogy? :)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 6 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Peter Gordon on 24-Jun-2004 14:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (kalmar):
3DRealms
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 7 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 24-Jun-2004 15:48 GMT
Noone was critiquing how long OS4 took to come out. What was being critiqued was the overoptimism of the developers, the management, and the general staff involved. An OS is a complex beast, and it takes a lot of work to do even rudementary upgrades to one. (look at what the "bug-fixes" for Windows 95 took, they ended up being named Windows 98) What was also being critiqued was the fact that whenever someone stepped up to poke holes in the obvious over-optimism, they were attacked, flamed, trolled, etc.

Now that OS4 has reached public beta, and we look at the long road, noone will begrudge the length of time, nor the determination it took to reach here. For that dogfastness, the OS4 team deserves a measure of success.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 8 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Thomas Frieden on 24-Jun-2004 20:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Nate Downes):
> Noone was critiquing how long OS4 took to come out.

Naawww, of course not ;)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 9 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 24-Jun-2004 23:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Thomas Frieden):
Of course you know, the next roasting will have to be for you two. 8)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 10 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 25-Jun-2004 05:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Thomas Frieden):
"> Noone was critiquing how long OS4 took to come out.

Naawww, of course not ;)"

If it had been announced at the start that it would take several years (like any other OS), there would have been far fewer complaints. Likewise if people had realised that the last person to ask when a program will be finished is the programmer - they live in a dream world where, once they are in front of the screen, years pass like minutes. ;-)


I think some non-programmers involved made deliberately misleading announcements, in the hope of holding on to customers.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 11 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Darth_X on 25-Jun-2004 16:51 GMT
Its not the length of time it is taking for OS4 to be developed, but the behavior of key people involved in the project.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 12 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 25-Jun-2004 18:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Darth_X):
And they did what ?
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 13 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Chris Roccati on 25-Jun-2004 18:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Anonymous):
Well, for example they started to say the OS was almost complete two years ago...
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 14 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 25-Jun-2004 19:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Chris Roccati):
Big Deal.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 15 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jun-2004 02:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Chris Roccati):
It's a well-known fact of software engineering that the first 90% of the program takes 10% of the time, and the remaining 10% of the program takes the remaining 90% of the time. So, two years ago they were probably 80% done :)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 16 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by ikir on 26-Jun-2004 06:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Chris Roccati):
An Amiga inc fault..... not Hyperion or Eyetech one.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 17 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Janne on 26-Jun-2004 07:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (ikir):
>An Amiga inc fault..... not Hyperion or Eyetech one.

Well, that would be using pretty selective memory. I'm quite sure e.g. Ben Hermans made many overly positive statements that resulted in criticism. I find it hard to forget how Ben Yoris' estimate on OS4 release schedule was chastised (his estimate was late 2003 the earliest at a time when Hyperion said summer 2003 the latest) by Hermans as being overly pessimistic and here we are in middle of 2004 with only a pre-release just out the door...

However, that latter bit is certainly something to appreciate and thank Hyperion and the rest of the team for. So, thank you. However, one should not just go ahead and forget history, but also learn from it. Companies pursuing a future within and beyond this market would do well to look at the failures and successes of the past few years and take serious note.

While there was unwarranted criticism and unreasonable reactions (let us not forget them either), there was also a lot of warranted criticism that wasn't really appreciated when it should have been.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 18 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Terry on 26-Jun-2004 13:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (ikir):
Eyetech and Hyperion are to blame aswell. Ben Hermans and Alan Redhouse made some stupid claims aswell, but Ikir you can sweep it under the carpet if that turns you on. keep on telling lies if you want but that will not change history.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 19 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by minator on 26-Jun-2004 18:03 GMT
Was OS 4.0 actually delayed? ...or was it just announced early to take business away from MOS?
OSs take a long time to develop, especially it involves as big a change as switching away from the CPU and chipset. AROS or MOS weren't done overnight either.


Anyway, very long but very interesting article.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 20 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Dan on 26-Jun-2004 18:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (minator):
The liars (Ben Hermans, Bill McEwen and chums) just lied to the Amiga community about release dates (OS4 in 2001 eh McEwen?), 3 years later a POS pre-dev or whatever is out when Ben Hermans said OS4 would be here in 2002/2003.

Just look and you will see that everyone involved has lied to the Amiga users and they deserve no customers for what they have done.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 21 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Akiko on 27-Jun-2004 08:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Dan):
The Liars !?!.. I think if Ben Hermans and chums are guilty of anything it was of being simply unrealistic about the work still required.
Hyperian did later acknowledge this criticism and moved to their current stance which is "When it's done!"

I rather suspect the frustration shown by some individual's on this forum is not due to Hyperion taken so long to deliver, but most likely due to the fact OS 4.0 is now actually here! Please save us your crocodile tears ...
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 22 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 27-Jun-2004 11:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (minator):
"Was OS 4.0 actually delayed? ...or was it just announced early to take business away from MOS?"

Or to stop people from simply giving up and buying a PC.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 23 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 27-Jun-2004 11:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Akiko):
"The Liars !?!.. I think if Ben Hermans and chums are guilty of anything it was of being simply unrealistic about the work still required."

I think deliberate falsehoods were uttered, especially by Bill McEwen.

However, it is all water under the bridge now. Amiga Inc has for practical purposes disappeared, Ben Hermanns is no longer at Hyperion, and the project is slowly moving forward.

We do know now not to believe any statements about the future made by anyone involved in the AOS4 project. Whatever is said, it really means "When it's done".
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 24 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Akiko on 27-Jun-2004 12:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Don Cox):
"However, it is all water under the bridge now"

Yes true, but unfortunately some trolls and butterfly's live under that bridge. ;)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 25 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 29-Jun-2004 06:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Janne):
> I find it hard to forget how Ben Yoris' estimate on OS4 release schedule was chastised...

What Ben Yoris did was ethically wrong. He was in a position not to give any OS4 release schedule estimates in public forums.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 26 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 29-Jun-2004 08:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (Analnymous):
weither you like his statements or not, or his moral or ethical viewpoints is really irrelevent. Any discussion as to weither his making the statements was the right or wrong thing to do is really academic. Fact is, he did make them. Fact is, his timeline brought huge criticisms and personal attacks against his character, moral fiber, and even a few questions about his personal habits. Fact is, he turned out to have overestimated the development capabilities.

So, this attack on his character really is a sign of moronicy.

However, OS4 is now out and is able to be enjoyed. I've even considered buying a copy for my A4000 when one is available. The cost of the A1 is too great for a working stiff like myself.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 27 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 29-Jun-2004 12:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (Nate Downes):
> So, this attack on his character really is a sign of moronicy.

What attack? I'm just tired of Janne's repeative attempts to make Ben Yoris to look like some kind of innocent martyr in this case. Ben f**ked himself up and thanks to the ones who forwarded his message to ann and other messageboards he f**ked up big time. Sure he didn't deserve the crap he got, but was Ben Hermans and Hyperion the bad guys? I don't think so.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 28 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 29-Jun-2004 13:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Analnymous):
Ahem, so you are saying that Ben Yoris deserved being called a liar by Mr. Hermans, despite the fact that history has exonerated Mr. Yoris?

Pardon me, but you are not making a strong case for your position.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 29 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 29-Jun-2004 14:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Nate Downes):
I said what I said and I didn't say what I didn't say. Anyway, I don't think that history has necessarily exonerated Mr. Yoris, but any discussion on this is "really academic". And of course I'm not making a strong case if I have to correct your misapprehensions all the time. ;-)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 30 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 29-Jun-2004 16:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Analnymous):
Misapprehention? You're the one claiming that Ben Hermans was not the "bad guy" when, in fact, he was attacking the man which was in the end telling the truth. Attacking an honest person really does not seem like a "good guy" tactic.

And this is coming from a guy that *likes* Ben Hermans. It really was a foolish manuver and just hurt Hyperions reputation. Will the damage be too great to overcome is something we will see in the future. Personally, I hope Hyperion does overcome their trials and tribulations, just as I wish the MorphOS team the same. We are one big Amiga family in the end, and the sooner we come to accept that, the sooner we can get back to the issue at hand... the lack of CSS in Amiga web browsers.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 31 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 29-Jun-2004 19:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Nate Downes):
All I say is that what Ben Yoris did was ethically wrong. Here's two (badly) translated excerpts from his message: "I am on ml OS4, I see the advance of the project." "Some will rot me for this comment. But my love for the truth is too extremely sorry." Also it is good to remember that he was known as a former PR person of Hyperion and he had a good reputation. He should have known that his opinion had weight, but at least he did knew that he was doing something he should not do.

Was Mr. Hermans and Hyperion the good guys or the bad guys? I rather say they were the casualties of Mr. Yoris' love for the truth. :-)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 32 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 29-Jun-2004 22:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Analnymous):
So the true villan here was the truth in and of itself, is that what you are saying? By Ben Yoris stating the truth you claim he is the villan. But he was but a messenger of this greater evil in your mind, the truth in and of itself.

What problem do you have with the truth, anyways?
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 33 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 30-Jun-2004 06:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Nate Downes):
Still trying to get me to say something I didn't mean in the first place and end up defending something I don't believe? Also, wouldn't it be more logical for you to question if I claimed love to be the true villain? ;-D

I'm not telling you but have you considered in your hunt for villains, that there doesn't always have to be a villain behind a unfortunate happening?

> What problem do you have with the truth, anyways?

(rhetorical question:) Whose truth? ;-)
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 34 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 01-Jul-2004 16:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Analnymous):
Jumping to a conclusion by claiming other folk have jumped to conclusions sounds like a badly thought out strategy. I poked holes in your statements by pointing out how they come across and the logical conclusion of your thought process. Now you're coming at me claiming I stated the opposite of what you intended. So please, if what you intended was opposite of "Ben Yoris told the truth" then please, clarify which one of your statements stated that, because so far you've done nothing to make this statement with any backing up using facts. In fact, so far your attack on Mr. Yoris has been a dismal failure. I'm actually enjoying this verbal fencing match, but honestly in a battle of wits, you are quite unarmed.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 35 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 01-Jul-2004 21:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Nate Downes):
I'm puzzled with your latest message. Are you concentrating at all or is my english really that bad? You seem to be still obsessed with me attacing on Mr. Yoris. Get rid of that silly idea and read my messages again and be enlightened. :-) Look, I replied to Janne's post. He finds hard to forget what happened to Ben Yoris but had again forgotten how Ben ended up into that situation. Selective memory? - I don't know. Anyway, I replied. IMO Ben should not have sent that message. He was in exclusive mailing list and gave a statement basing on information he got from that list. Or at least he said so in his message (first excerpt in message 31). In fact, my opinion in this is irrelevant. More important is that I believe that people at Hyperion thought this way too and it was the reason and stamina for their actions. Of course I might be wrong in this but did you question it? No, you were busy poking holes in my statements. Actually, Mr. Yoris' action to be ethically wrong is a matter of drawing a line but did you question it? No, you were busy poking holes in my statements. I'm sorry but you are not poking at holes - You are poking at full air. :-D So, I was not opposing Janne's message - I was complementing it. Sure, someone might now end up thinking that Ben Yoris deserved what he got. Well, it's up to him, not me. I'm not interested in it. I only told what I thought to be relevant and true. Do you have any problems with truth? ;-D

> Now you're coming at me claiming I stated the opposite of what you intended.

No, I was worried about your attempts to get this discussion out of focus (I did not claim what ever you say here).

> In fact, so far your attack on Mr. Yoris has been a dismal failure.

Again. Of course it has been dismal failure, because this attack is only happening in your mind. Get rid of that "greater evil" in your mind! ;-)

> So please, if what you intended was opposite of "Ben Yoris told the truth" then...

What is this? Jump into a utter nonsense strategy? ;-D Seriously, I have no idea how you ended up into this (too).
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 36 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 02-Jul-2004 11:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Analnymous):
Perhaps it is your english that is at fault, but your messages can be interpreted in a few manners, none of them really flattering. You are of course free to your opinion, but by the same light you need to let others be free in theirs. I would also note that stating ones opinion also opens that opinion up for debate, which is what I chimed in to do.
If you think OS 4.0 took too long then read this : Comment 37 of 37ANN.lu
Posted by Analnymous on 03-Jul-2004 14:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Nate Downes):
Ok, I give up. It's no use to continue this discussion. Bye
Anonymous, there are 37 items in your selection
Back to Top