11-Dec-2024 08:59 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 469 items in your selection (but only 119 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 400] [401 - 450] [451 - 469]
[News] Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4ANN.lu
Posted on 18-Jul-2004 12:20 GMT by Jens Schönfeld469 comments
View flat
View list
During the first months of this year, we were totally surprised by the overwhelming demand for Catweasel MK3. All stock has been sold, and even our retail partners do not have anything left in stock. The demand was so high that one controller even went for more than 150,- EUR on eBay!
Unfortunately, it turned out that a new production run of the existing MK3-design cannot be done for reasonable prices, so a re-design became necessary. The new controller is now in the first stage before mass production, so we're confident to be able to show the first controllers at the Amiwest show on july 24th and 25th in Sacramento, Califoria.

Many improvements have been made compared to the Catweasel MK3 that can be summarized under the headline "bigger, better, faster". The changes in detail

The most obvious change is the size of the card: With only 2.5 inch (63.5mm) height, it complies with the low-profile PCI standard that not only fits into any normal computer case, but also in flat models that are so famous among so-called "case-modders". The Flipper-interface will not be continued. Those who need a Catweasel for their classic Amiga can use the Catweasel Z-II S-Class, which is still availble.

Improvements on the floppy controller
Kylwalda built in
While the old Catweasel models always had their own floppy drives that were installed in addition to the existing controller and drives, the MK4 has the option of using the existing diskdrives. After the machine has started, th drives can be used just like before, and after the drivers have been loaded, the Catweasel can take control of these drives when necessary. This is especially useful for smaller cases with fewer drive bays.
We already addressed this problem earlier with an additional product called 'Kylwalda'.

Suppot for auto-eject drives
These drives without eject-button are well-known from Macintosh computers, and they're now fully supported by the Catweasel. You can also mix floppy types, one with an eject-button, and another from the Macintosh world on the same cable.

Hard-sectored disks supported
This kind of 5.25 and 8 inch disks were already readable with the previous Catweasel models, but writing was only possible with a high software effort, and it required a realtime operating system. This effort is not necessary any more with the new controller, because new options allow complete support of these disk types in hardware.

dual-ported memory
Contrary to it's predecessors, the new Catweasel MK4 can pass the data that it is currently reading from a disk to the computer while the read access is running. This allows realtime emulation, and errorfree function of copy-protected software on emulators.

more flexible read- and write operations
In addition to working on whole tracks, which made all previous Catweasel models so flexible, tracks can now also be accesed in part very precisely. Should this become necessary for compatibility or speed reasons, the Catweasel MK4 is perfectly prepared.

extensive timer-functions
Although most operating systems already offer timer-functions in software, you cannot always rely on them. The most recent example are the timing-problems that occur with Hyperthreading-processors and Windows operating systems. Since all timers are running independantly in the hardware of the Catweasel MK4, nothing can go wrong in this regard.

all events can trigger an interrupt (IRQ)
Together with the hardware-timer functions, this is the best solution for multitasking operating systems. The driver software does not have to check regularly if the controller needs attention, which reduces the processor load.

Improvements on the keyboard interface

In addition to Amiga-keyboards, PS/2 devices can now also be connected. Not only keyboards, but also PS/2 mice are supported. The keyboard controller can now trigger IRQs, and for those customers who want to continue using their favourite combination of PS/2 mouse and keyboard on USB-only computers, the Catweasel MK4 has two connectors of this kind.

Improvements on the joystick ports

Amiga mice supported in hardware
Amiga mice only have minimal electronics that always pass the movements of the device to the computer in realtime. Classic Amiga computers have hardware-support for interpretation of these signals in the chipset, and this support has now been added to the Catweasel. Theoretically, using Amiga mice was already possible with the Catweasel MK3, but this required a software effort that was not justifiable. With the new hardware, the software effort is reduced to a minimum.

every signal can be programmed as output
The digital joystick ports of the 8-bit computers of the 80s were mostly usable in two directions, they were not only inputs, but also programmable as data outputs. We're following this tradition, and also present this possibility for the Catweasel MK4.

compatible with CD32 pads
The game controllers of the Amiga CD32 can now also be used on the Catweasel. A special capability of the classic Amigas (and therefore also of the CD32) made these pads exclusive for this computer, if connected to other computers, not all buttons of the pad could be used. Technically speaking: Even the potentiometer-pins of the digital joystick ports can be programmed as outputs on the Catweasel MK4.

Improvements on the SID audio part

DC-DC converter eliminates noise
On the Catweasel MK3, it was possible that noises from 3D-graphics cards or high-speed harddrives were coupled into the 12V-power supply of the SID audio part. This cannot happen any more on the Catweasel MK4, because a DC-DC converter is an insuperable obstacle for such noises.

cycle-exact control
In addition to the known programming that's compatible with the Catweasel MK3, the MK4 has a sophisticated script-language for SID control. This lets the programmer define the exact time for data that's being written into the SID chips. To make sample playback sound exactly like on a real C64, the data rate to the SID chip must be kept at a constant rate. This is accomplished with Fifo memory that's big enough to maintain the datarate even under high processor load conditions.

Digiboost for new SID versions
As opposed to the 'classic SID' 6581, the newer SID-chips 8580 and 6582 cannot playback samples any more. This option, which is also called 'the fourth voice', is replaced by two sigma-delta converters on the Catweasel MK4, so the fourth channel is also audible with the newer SID versions. Since the filter properties and the sound of mixed waveforms of all SID versions have their supporters, this should make the decision for the right chip a little easier.

Filter capacitors selectable
Commodore has defined three different capacitor values for the filters of the SIDs during the years that this chip has been produced. The result was that the same chip sounded differently if used in different computers. To bring the sound as close as possible to what you are used to, the filter capacitors can be chosen with a few jumpers.

precise clocking
The Catweasel MK3 used the commodore-chip 8701 to recreate the exact same clock. Since our stock of this chip is empty with the Catweasel MK3 being sold out, we have cloned it on the main logic chip of the Catweasel MK4: The exact base frequency is generated with crystals that have been made especially for us. By division and multiplication according to the specifications of the C64 schematics from 1982, we managed to replace the 8701, which is not made any more. Even the slight difference between PAL and NTSC computers is software-selectable!

two SIDs for stereo sound
You'll have twice the SID pleaseure after installing a second SID chip. Every SID has it's own selection of filter capacitors, and SIDs of all versions can be mixed.

Technology improvements

compatible with 3.3V and 5V PCI slots
Even though PC boards with 3.3V PCI slots are not yet widely available, the Catweasel is prepared for it. The roadmap of the PCI special interst group plans to abandon 5V PCI slots within forseeable time, and the Catweasel is perfectly suited for that date. Local generation of the 3.3V power also ensures proper function on early PCI motherboards that do not comply with the ATX standard.

two DMA interfaces
In addition to processor-based data transfer, the Catweasel MK4 can excahnge data with the main system through two low-speed DMA channels: The first goes throught he PCI slot, and it has a capacity of about 8K per second and direction. The second uses the direct connection to the onboard-floppy controller, and the speed is up to 100K per second.

low power consumption
The Catweasel MK4 makes use of the latest FPGA technology with 2.5V core voltage. This reduces the power consumption of the new controller to a fraction of what the Catweasel MK3 used. This also reduces heat generation a lot.

re-configurable logic
The FPGA on the Catweasel MK4 is completely re-configurable by the drivers. This means that a hardware update can be done through the internet! Should we find a disk format that cannot be handled with the current hardware, the core of the Catweasel can be 're-wired' to address the problem. The controller doesn't even have to be taken out of the computer for ths update!

drivers for many operating systems
The Catweasel MK4 is delivered with drivers for Windows 98(se)/ME/XP/2000, Amiga OS4, and for Mac OS X at a later date. MorphOS drivers are available for a surcharge.

The Catweasel MK4 will be available starting october 2004.
The target retail price is 99,- EUR.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 351 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 15:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 342 (Fabio Alemagna):
Care to back up that claim?!
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 352 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 345 (Johan Rönnblom):
> Wrong. Not specifying a limit means "reasonable" support.

If I state that "Support will be provided for this product", without specifying for how long, then it means that as long as someone has that product, he's entitled to support.

I don't know the wording of the advertisement/license/contract, so that's why I asked.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 353 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 350 (Amon_Re):
> As for the questions you posed, no developer offers unlimited support,

It doesn't matter what other developers do, it matters what the contract between Adam and Jens states.

> and the statement was, according to Adam, that there was support for MOS.

Was the version specified? If not, then Jens is at fault.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 354 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 20-Jul-2004 15:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 333 (Peter Gordon):
When there's abusive comments, the best solution is to mail me - it might take the visitor a minute, but is usually much quicker than everyone waiting for me to read all comments.

On that topic, maybe it's time I found one or two additional moderators to get a better coverage throughout the timezones.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 355 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 351 (Amon_Re):
> Care to back up that claim?!

What claim, that if you sell a product which states it can do something, and then you discover it can't, then who sold you the product is at fault?

Do I need to back that up?
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 356 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Jul-2004 15:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 352 (Fabio Alemagna):
No, it doesn't. It's a very good idea to state these things when you
make a contract or when you advertise, but not stating it does not
mean that you have infinite responsibility. Instead, what happens in
case of a conflict, is that a court would establish a "reasonable"
time frame when support must be given, depending on what is considered
normal in the specific market.

My guess would be that this would be perhaps two years or a little
more in a case like this, and specified as support for the versions of
OS and hardware that were out at the time of the sale.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 357 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 353 (Fabio Alemagna):
> Was the version specified? If not, then Jens is at fault.

Or, let's put it in a more neutral way: if the version was not specified, it's disputable whether Jens is right. In other words, Adam has a case here.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 358 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 15:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 353 (Fabio Alemagna):
There is no contract between him & Jens, he didn't buy it from Jens, he bought it from a reseller
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 359 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 15:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 355 (Fabio Alemagna):
No, the one about unlimited support silly :P
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 360 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 15:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 354 (Christian Kemp):
Agreed, it's getting bad again :(
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 361 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 20-Jul-2004 15:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 347 (itix):
>Gimme break.

Sure. Arm? Leg? Neck? ;-)

I'm asking a serious question here because I'm interested. I want to know exactly what sort of drivers were supposed to be on offer at the time the board was purchased. I do mean "EXACTLY".

>MorphOS drivers were in works,

So there were no MorphOS drivers supplied? None at all? MorphOS was being advertise by the supplier as being catered for? Answer please.

> they were cancelled, Adam expected he gets a hardware with working drivers
>(68k or PPC).

Fine, but was Jens actually advertising the CW as coming with PPC MorphOS x.x drivers on his site at the time the board was purchased, did the supplier advertise the availability of such drivers or were they just "expected" to be in the package due to prior advertising which has then been amended?

Do you see what I'm getting at here?

> 68k drivers were not working particularly well on MorphOS 1.3 and in MorphOS
>1.4 they were not working at all. Now there is nothing to remedy this
>situation because Schönfeld sold his Peg long ago.

Whoopie do. If I had a PPC mobo then I wouldn't have wanted hardware that relied upon 68k emulation on an unfinished OS in order to run. At the very least, I wouldn't expect it to run perfectly.

>I'm not happy how he dealt this with MorphOS users and apparently he is not
>very warm towards MorphOS users.

Perhaps it wasn't his problem. If he had withdrawn support for MorphOS and wasn't advertising drivers for it then the users should not have bought the product. If the reseller was advertising the drivers then the products should ave been returned to them for a refund.

> I don't know why, I don't care why (anymore),

Take a look at some of the comments in this thread. That should explain everything.

> Catweasel is not the only SID card available and MorphOS users can buy something else.

So why did they buy an unsupported product instead? Strange.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 362 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 356 (Johan Rönnblom):
> No, it doesn't. It's a very good idea to state these things when you
> make a contract or when you advertise, but not stating it does not
> mean that you have infinite responsibility. Instead, what happens in
> case of a conflict, is that a court would establish a "reasonable"
> time frame when support must be given, depending on what is considered
> normal in the specific market.

Ok, that makes sense. Thanks.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 363 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 15:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 356 (Johan Rönnblom):
That's what i'd expect yea thx for the clear explication :P
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 364 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 356 (Johan Rönnblom):
> No, it doesn't. It's a very good idea to state these things when you
> make a contract or when you advertise, but not stating it does not
> mean that you have infinite responsibility.

Just asked to a relative of mine who is in the field. He said that, at least here in Italy, if the duration of the support is not specified, then it's quite possible to expect a life-long support, under determinate circumstances, like for example if the product was not modified, and this is why it's very dangerous not to specify such a duration.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 365 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 15:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 358 (Amon_Re):
> There is no contract between him & Jens, he didn't buy it from Jens, he bought
> it from a reseller

So there's no contract between me and Microsoft, if I buy a Microsoft product, because I bought it from a reseller. Right?
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 366 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 15:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 365 (Fabio Alemagna):
licence != contract, or that's how i understood it atleast
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 367 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Jul-2004 16:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 361 (Darrin):
Heh. Well read the press announcement in this very news item:
"MorphOS drivers are available for a surcharge."

However, as we have seen in the thread, no MorphOS drivers are
actually available, surcharge or not. :-P

Personally, I have no idea whether Adam has a case *legally*. However
it's pretty clear that MorphOS users have been left pretty much in the
cold by Jens. It's one thing what you can legally *demand*, but people
expect a bit more than that. Of course, as long as he stays within the
law, Jens can do whatever he likes. But if he treats some of his
customers badly, they will complain, like Adam does here, and that may
of course hurt sales also in other markets. Although maybe not, I
guess some people would think it's actually a good thing if Jens
pisses off MorphOS users, so who knows. :-)
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 368 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 16:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 367 (Johan Rönnblom):
" However, as we have seen in the thread, no MorphOS drivers are
actually available, surcharge or not. :-P "

The card isn't actually available neighter :P
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 369 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 16:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 366 (Amon_Re):
> licence != contract, or that's how i understood it atleast

Nope, it's not different. As an example, the Italian legislation considers the terms "Contract of use" and "License of use" to be the same.

A license is a legally binding contract, nothing more and nothing less.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 370 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by itix on 20-Jul-2004 16:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 361 (Darrin):
Native PPC drivers for MorphOS were in works (confirmed by Jens Schönfeld) in feb 2003 at least, Adam bought his card in april 2003 (IIRC). I don't even remember when Jens Schönfeld announced MorphOS drivers were cancelled. That would not be great problem if Schönfeld's attitute towards MorphOS users was better (we did not cause his harms).
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 371 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 16:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 369 (Fabio Alemagna):
Anyhave have the licence that comes with the Catweasel? What does it say?
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 372 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 20-Jul-2004 16:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 370 (itix):
>Native PPC drivers for MorphOS were in works (confirmed by Jens Schönfeld) in
>feb 2003 at least, Adam bought his card in april 2003 (IIRC). I don't even
>remember when Jens Schönfeld announced MorphOS drivers were cancelled.

Thanks for that info. I must admit, I would be upset if I bought a CW on the basis that the drivers would become available and then they never appeared, so it all boils down to the date when Jens stated they would not be developed.

Of course, in this market, I have learned not to buy anything now until it is produced and reviewed. I learned the hard way ;-)

> That would not be great problem if Schönfeld's attitute towards MorphOS users
> was better (we did not cause his harms).

There's two sides to every story. Jens may have a very good reason for his actions and some of the hatred shown towards him might be totally uncalled for and be result of "spin" from a handful of people with a vendetta against him. WHo knows for sure. One thing I am sure of is that this thread isn't going to make anyone hug and make up, and that some of the comments posted here are sick and unforgivable (and I'm not just talking about the lamer making the nazi/jew remarks either).
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 373 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 20-Jul-2004 16:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 371 (Amon_Re):
> Anyhave have the licence that comes with the Catweasel? What does it say?

That's what I'd like to know too.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 374 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Jul-2004 16:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 371 (Amon_Re):
anyhave > anyone has
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 375 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Waldenberg on 20-Jul-2004 17:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 372 (Darrin):
There is never an excuse to act as unprofessionaly as Jens has done regarding this matter.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 376 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 20-Jul-2004 17:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 375 (Adam Waldenberg):
>There is never an excuse to act as unprofessionaly as Jens has done regarding this matter.

The problem is that I've never met you and I've never met Jens. I don't know how your communications went.

As a business owner myself, I can tell you that I have "lost it" with customers because there are certain people that don't deserve the quality of my business in regards to the wy they behave. For example, if you come to me with a problem and you are polite then I'll usually help you with 200% effort even if I think I really don't need to. However, if you come to me with an attitude then expect the same back. No you say that Jens has the bad attitude and Jens says it's you. Put yourself in my shoes as someone that doesn't know either of you and then read the comments that have been posted and see who you think you'd side with.

Presentation is everything. :-)
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 377 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Stefan Burström on 20-Jul-2004 19:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 327 (Johan Rönnblom):
>> The production @ Taiwan should be far cheaper if the German
>> manufacturers are living to german standards, not Taiwanese.

>I think you've missed some basics here about how salaries work, sorry.
>:-)

Johan, don't get yourself into a discussion where you have no clie about the
facts!

>When did you last see someone in the street holding a sign "Willing to
>do advanced PCB design for food and shelter?"

Huh? What does that have to do with anything?

>Salaries are not determined by the cost of living, but rather by the
>availability of people able to do the work, vs the demand for such
>people. What this means is that for advanced tasks, a Taiwanese is not

Right. Now, I'd like you to do some research on ODM manufacturers in the
far east before you post these silly comments.

>likely to ask that much less in salary than a German. If that was the

Right, so how come I don't earn 1-2 MSEK a year doing the work I do
where I would easily earn that amount of money if I did the same work
in the US? After all, you said that salaries were equal for the same
type of work. Reality check anyone?

>case, those few Taiwanese would move to Germany, as we're talking

Rather easy, they will not get a work permit. Besides, ask yourself,
why don't you move to the US because you'd earn alot more money there
even if you did win the greencard lottery. (Speaking of experience since
I have been employed by Sun Microsystems but in the end made the choice
to stay in Sweden)

>cheaper in low income countries. But for small production runs of
>advanced electronics, I don't think the difference is big.

You don't 'think'. How about checking the facts first?

I must say that the first part of your post made more or less sense, but
when you entered a domain where you clearly have no knowledge at all,
the rest of what you wrote became alot less trustworthy too!

rgds,
Stefan
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 378 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Jul-2004 19:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 377 (Stefan Burström):
Stefan Burström wrote:
> After all, you said that salaries were equal for the same type of
> work.

Equal? Quote me, please. I'm also not sure here what you mean by "same
type of work".

Anyway what I'm claiming (quite clearly, don't know why I bother to
repeat this..) is that you can *not* do the same kind of savings when
employing a small number of very highly qualified people, that you can
when employing a large number of people who need no special training,
by doing the hiring in low income countries.

I don't think either you or I can find any statistics on average
salaries for PCB designers. For programmers, I've done some research
previously though, and found that the cost of employing a qualified
Indian programmer may be about one fifth to one third of employing one
in Western Europe or in the US. The trend is that this difference is
reducing. While this may seem like a big difference, it's not when you
relate this to the difference in salaries for menial jobs. Also, the
higher the qualification, the lower the difference, so I think it's
safe to say that the difference for a skilled PCB designer will
typically be lower than that for a qualified programmer.

> (Speaking of experience since I have been employed by Sun
> Microsystems but in the end made the choice to stay in Sweden).

Which only proves my point: For these kind of jobs, it's quite
possible to get work permits, which is *not* the case for less
qualified jobs. While developed states do their worst to keep out the
masses, they are quite happy to "harvest" the most talented and highly
educated individuals from lower income countries.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 379 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Mark on 20-Jul-2004 19:44 GMT
Like a sad bastard doing a whois on a IP address and trying to tell people to report them. no isp will ban a customer for free speech and you cum stains know it.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 380 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Stefan Burström on 20-Jul-2004 19:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 324 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Ok, sorry about that, but then I don't understand you here. If you don't
>know anything about the Pegasos 2, which is the only Pegasos product
>available, then why did you bring this up at all?

I brought it up simply because this 'subsidised' discussion has been here
before so I decided to do some homework. On _that_ board. I have no information
on the Pegasos II so I decided not to discus it. Simple eh?

>What does Genesi have to do with this? How did I defend Genesi here? Now
>please *you* don't put words in *my* mouth.

Genesi == the bPlan, Genesi, BBRV etc. constelation. Sorry if I used the
wrong word, but those entities somewhat lives in symbiosis.

> But really, we are splitting hair here. Even if the boards did break even
> as such they are still subsidised since someone else is paying all Genesis
> other costs.

>Ah, how convenient - so even if you're wrong, you're right. But I still

Since people have been claiming that the Pegasos boards made a profit, I
thought that barely break even would still prove the point. What if the board
made 10 USD + or 10 USD-? I'd still call it subsidiesed since you cannot
count on those margins on a 330 USD mainboard. Those 10 USD+ could be lost
in the next component sourcing. Either you choose to make a profit or not.
Either way you fix the price, but if you choose to make a profit, you need
to make the margin larger. Otherwise, in the long run you will still subsidise
the board even if you at one prototype run managed to make a profit
just because you were fortunate on component supply. (And as far as I know,
the Pegasos boards have been pretty constant in price even if there were
coming from several prototype runs)

>don't understand what Genesi has to do with this. They don't design or
>manufacture the Pegasos. As a consumer, you can buy your board from a
>reseller who get their boards directly from bPlan. Now if we were

Sigh! Would you believe me if I said that bPlan wouldn't exist if it wasn't
for Genesi? Genesi solved bPlan's cash flow problems, but now Genesi seem
to have their own cash flow problem.

>discussing the production costs of say, a Nokia telephone, would you bring
>up the costs involved for running, say, RadioShack?

I don't understand your analogy since I don't see the connection between
Nokia and RadioShack. But I do see the connection between bPlan and Genesi.
And I am quite sure you do it too, don't you?

> Johan Rönnblom wrote
>> Let's compare it to the A1 for example, which is a very similar product
>> technically and with regards to volumes.

> Well, as I said before, I don't care about the A1. Why do you insist on
> doing this?

How about reading before you reply? Because it is a very similar product
technically and with regards to volumes. Unless you want to make the claim

Sure, it is very similar. But it seem to be financed completely different.
However, I was looking at the total BOM of the product.

>that the AmigaOne too is subsidised, any reasoning explaining why the
>Pegasos can be much cheaper than the A1 will seriously undermine your
>claim.

Well, I'd say that the BOM of the AmigaOne board is smaller than the actual
resale price, but that still doesn't say if the board as a whole is subsidised
or not. However, I was still just looking at the BOM of the board.

>> Right but it is still a ~100 sq inch PCB.

>Well, 63.

Sorry, didn't know the size of the Pegasos board so I looked for some Micro ATX boards on the net and the first board I hit was 220mm x 240mm. And since I
thought it was the standard size then I came up with ~100 sq inch. (you do know
that you have some loss when you manufacture PCB's don't you, esp with "big"
boards when you cannot match the panel size. (I am used to sub 5 sq inch boards
where the losses are alot less since the pannels are alot easier to build)

>> 6 or 8 layers I'd guess.

> Six, I think it has been stated, at least not more.

Ok, say 6 then.

>> Microvias between layer 1-2 and 7-8 to be able to route the BGA's.

>There's no layer 7-8..

Duh! You don't understand how funny you are! If you have microvias between
layer 1 and 2 you need to put RCC between the outermost layers on the other
side of the PCB too, otherwise the board will bend when put through reflow.
Besides no PCB manufacturer will ever produce a board without a symetrical
build up. Before you make hilarious statements like that, please get some
education on the subject.

> A small scale production run of such a PCB easily reaches 100 USD per
> board.

>Less than that I'd say, seeing how you overestimated even the simplest
>factors by a wide margin.

Based on what prices. Did you actually check some prices? And did you
check what design rules you'd need to follow to get that price?

>> And that is before the startup costs for the PCB fab is
>> distributed on the boards.

>Yes, and here you really seem to be missing something. The equipment used

Now you are hilarious again. Startup cost for a PCB fab (PCB fabrication,
not PCB factory, sorry if I confused you) means the CAD/CAM work the PCB
manufacturer will do before actually feeding your gerber files to the
plotter. They do that to ensure that all tracks have sufficient width
and clearance and to make sure that the plotter will be able to print
your design properly.

>for this production was bought in 1997 or 1998 (my guess) for production of

Right! I have seen many pictures from Phase5 but I never saw that they
had their own PCB manufacturing too.

>phase5:s CyberStormPPC and subsequent products. Yes, it was quite expensive
>at the time, but that's some years ago now. I would expect that the
>equipment has already been amortised.

Yep, their pick-and-place machinery is most likely amortised. And so is their
reflow owen. Howeven, this is not a part of the BOM for a board. The PCB is.

>Now of course people can complain that they don't have access to equipment
>under such favourable terms. But that's just life. DCE wins, bPlan wins,
>everybody wins from this arrangement. There's nothing unsustainable or
>fishy about it. It just happens to be efficient.

Still, it does not affect the BOM of the board.

And before someone starts yelling about the so-called "convenient"
bankruptcy of phase5 all those years ago, we all know this bankruptcy
happened because phase5 failed with their plans for new products. The
liquidator decided to sell the stuff to DCE. Admittedly the market for such
high-tech stuff is probably not that big (and cost of transportation is
likely to reduce it even further), but again that's life. But in the end,
the people who made the biggest loss in that mess are certain to be the
owners of Phase5 who lost not only this expensive equipment but all of
phase5. Somehow I'd think it would have been more "convenient" to just keep
the stuff.

> Well, this isn't part of the BOM either but since you brought it up. PADS
> power logic will cost you around 5kUSD and PowerPCB incl BlazeRouter at
> least another 20kUSD. Quite 'moderate' cost, isn't it???

Yeah, in 1998. Well, maybe they upgraded - but maybe not, the CyberStormPPC

Seriously, I have been using PADS since 2000, and I wouldn't trust that
version for 133 MHz SDRAM designs.

>is technically more advanced (and thus more expensive to make) than the

Lol! Care to tell us why it is technically more advanced? For a start, it
doesn't contain a 133 MHz SDRAM bus which isn't childsplay to design.

>> Now, try to calculate the BOM given those figures. Do you still wonder why I
>> think that the boards were sold at loss?

>Yes, indeed I do.

Did you do a check on the BOM? If not, well, you cannot really reply until you
have some numbers to check with.

> Calling me a BAF? Just wondering because doing my homework wouldn't be
> that easy beeing blind...

As seen above, you didn't do it all that well. Certainly not well enough to
merit stating your rather bad guesswork as if it was facts.

'Rather bad guesswork?' Care to elaborate? Care to back your statements up
with some facts or numbers?

>I really think you come off sounding like those American car makers who
>were complaining that the Japanese couldn't possibly make their cars that
>cheap, that they must be government funded or something, some big fishy
>plot to destroy the American auto industry. Well, it turned out the
>Japanese were simply better at it. Just because *you* can't do something
>doesn't mean no one else can.

Reality check please! We are talking of the same components, the same PCBs,
the same connectors here. What the Japanses manufacturers managed to do was
to replace the whole BOM making it cheaper.

>> But I wouldn't run around telling people that production and sales of the
>> A1 is not commercially viable, as I really don't have any knowledge about
>> the matter.

>> Yes, but at the same time you still claim to have the knowledge to claim
>> the Pegasos is?

>When did I make such a claim? I'm saying that it seems very likely to me
>that the Pegasos 2 boards are profitable, even though the current volume is

As I said, the Pegasos 2 is another story and it has a different price. And
I only did some homework on the Peg1 design.

>not enough to fund R&D. I'm saying that your unconditioned statement of the
>reverse doesn't seem to be more than heavily biased guesswork.

Well, based on the above, isn't it rather obviuous that I have done my homework
alot more through than you? Whenever you are talking about techical details
you stumble over your own feet. Tell me, what kind of experience with
consumer electronics design do you have? Just out of interest. I mean, I'd trust
your word alot more if I knew that you had been in the business for 10 years,
but now you need to back up your statements abit more. They way you back them
up right now just shows that you don't have any experience of what you are
talking about.

>> Well, you are not really inclined to buy any story that puts Genesi in a
>> bad light but that has been rather obvious for quite some time...

>That's a pretty hilarious statement considering how I'm the *author* of
>several stories that put Genesi in a bad light.

Not really. I have read most of those stories. And they all end in
a way that makes it sounds like all is forgiven you are willing to give Genesi
yet another chance. Besides, if you did write those stories, why do you always
pop in here whenever someone is writing something bad about Genesi, like this
thread for example. When I first wrote my post I was about to put some money
on that you'd pop in here. Unfortunately no one was willing to take that bet.
When you do have something more solid than 'I think' and 'You overestimate'
please come back with it, but for now our argumentation feels based on beliefs
rather that facts.

rgds,
Stefan
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 381 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Waldenberg on 20-Jul-2004 20:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 376 (Darrin):
You think I'm talking about how he acted against me only? No, absolutely not. Just the fact that he began flaming and accusing Bill Buck for one thing after another is just one thing that shows what I mean.

Anyway .. Only thing I wanted to explain was how I FELT and how I THOUGHT that he had misstreated ME... And I guess he misstreated everyone else in the MorphOS community that bought a Catweasel also.

Other than that.. There isn't really much to say.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 382 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Stefan Burström on 20-Jul-2004 20:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 378 (Johan Rönnblom):
Stefan Burström wrote:
> After all, you said that salaries were equal for the same type of
> work.

>Equal? Quote me, please. I'm also not sure here what you mean by "same
>type of work".

Well, you were implying that the cost of designin a PCB in Taiwan would
be similar to Germany, wern't you? And if you design a PCB you design
a PCB regardless if you are sitting in Germany or Taiwan, hence 'same
type of work'

>Anyway what I'm claiming (quite clearly, don't know why I bother to
>repeat this..) is that you can *not* do the same kind of savings when
>employing a small number of very highly qualified people, that you can

Shall I give you a reality check? You employ the same people because those
design houses they do everything from complete designs to contract
manufacturing. How many times will you repeat statement without checking
your facts?

>when employing a large number of people who need no special training,
>by doing the hiring in low income countries.

>I don't think either you or I can find any statistics on average
>salaries for PCB designers. For programmers, I've done some research
>previously though, and found that the cost of employing a qualified

That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it. You cannot apply your 'programmers'
reasoning here because it is a completely different industry. I have
worked in it for 5 years, so at least give me the credit when I say
that it isn't the same.

Indian programmer may be about one fifth to one third of employing one
in Western Europe or in the US. The trend is that this difference is
reducing. While this may seem like a big difference, it's not when you
relate this to the difference in salaries for menial jobs. Also, the
higher the qualification, the lower the difference, so I think it's


>safe to say that the difference for a skilled PCB designer will
>typically be lower than that for a qualified programmer.

Sorry, but your 'safe to say' isn' based on facts. It is based on guesswork
without any knowledge at all of ODM and OEM.

> (Speaking of experience since I have been employed by Sun
> Microsystems but in the end made the choice to stay in Sweden).

>Which only proves my point: For these kind of jobs, it's quite
>possible to get work permits, which is *not* the case for less

You didn't bother to understand. I was trying to say that I chose to stay
in sweden even if I had a job with 2 times the salary waiting for me.
Yes, I did get the permit, but the salary wasn't all of the equation.

>qualified jobs. While developed states do their worst to keep out the
>masses, they are quite happy to "harvest" the most talented and highly
>educated individuals from lower income countries.

Right. Then how come all big companies are doing their ODM's in the far east?
Wíth your reasning, the optimum solution would be to do the design here
and manufacture in the far east. Reality check please!

rgds,
Stefan
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 383 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Kolbjørn Barmen on 20-Jul-2004 21:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 233 (Fabio Alemagna):
Jusy a quick reply.. been out drinking beer (again) and hence should not really reply, but heck, need to get this settled.. :)

English "race" is of italian origin (razza), via french (as always). From what you say, I undersant has the same meaning as "kind" (kin, from german kinder, child, offspring, ie family) and I also realiced that Norwegian too has the words "slag" which is used in similar way. So, I give you some credit.. obviously, the word race in english doesnt necessary have to reffer to the biological term "race" only (race has heckloads of meanings btw, many I had no knowledge of whatsoever)

However, that is just etymological detailiry. The word that triggered this discussion in the first place was "racism" - this is a much younger word, not even a century old (it replaced the slightly older term "racialism"). Racism is directly based on the idea that one can divide the human species into different categories based on physiological features. Racism is when this method of categorising is abused by giving them social, political and flawed "values" to discriminate groups and induviduals (clumsy formulated, but I hope my message got through)

Personally, deep down, my honoust oppinion is that all life forms, no matter what species, race, belief, background or political view, are all worth the same - that is nothing, and yet everything, both at once. :)

As for poodle variety, check out http://www.fpv.com/rescuedogs.html

Cheers!
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 384 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Jul-2004 22:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 380 (Stefan Burström):
Stefan Burström wrote:
> Genesi == the bPlan, Genesi, BBRV etc. constelation. Sorry if I used
> the wrong word, but those entities somewhat lives in symbiosis.

They do? Please be careful before someone lumps you together with Bill
McEwen just because you happened to make the browser that's shipped
with AmigaOS4.

> What if the board made 10 USD + or 10 USD-? I'd still call it
> subsidiesed since you cannot count on those margins on a 330 USD
> mainboard.

I agree, if we're talking about the average margin across the line.

> (And as far as I know, the Pegasos boards have been pretty constant in
> price even if there were coming from several prototype runs)

Well of course. This is not the type of product where you change the price
each month depending on currency fluctuations and the world market price of
silicon (yes, that's a joke :).

> I don't understand your analogy since I don't see the connection between
> Nokia and RadioShack. But I do see the connection between bPlan and
> Genesi. And I am quite sure you do it too, don't you?

Yes. RadioShack sell Nokia products. Genesi sell bPlan products. RadioShack
are not the only resellers of Nokia products for sure, but neither are
Genesi the only resellers for bPlan products.

So in a discussion about whether Pegasos production is subsidised or not, I
think we can leave Genesi out. It's a different topic, interesting as it
may be.

> Sigh! Would you believe me if I said that bPlan wouldn't exist if it
> wasn't for Genesi?

What do you base this on? We know that bPlan existed before Genesi. Of
course things would have been different without Genesi, that's for sure.

> Genesi solved bPlan's cash flow problems, but now Genesi seem to have
> their own cash flow problem.

And interestingly, bPlan start to ship directly to dealers, when previously
all resales went through Genesi. I don't really think this supports your
"symbiosis" theory.

[about the AmigaOne]
> Sure, it is very similar. But it seem to be financed completely
> different.

I don't see the relevance of how it is being financed, here. Neither do I
know very much about how the AmigaOne is financed. I know certain "red
camp" cheerleaders are more than hinting that MAI would have some
mysterious benefactor with bottomless pockets, but I'll consider that talk
smoke until someone presents a way to verify it.

> However, I was looking at the total BOM of the product.

Which I guess is a natural approach considering your field of expertise,
but it does have its weaknesses.

> (you do know that you have some loss when you manufacture PCB's don't
> you, esp with "big" boards when you cannot match the panel size.

Yes, but as we don't know this panel size, we can't tell whether this loss
is significant or not, or how well bPlan managed to match their design to
minimise loss.

>>> Microvias between layer 1-2 and 7-8 to be able to route the BGA's.

>> There's no layer 7-8..

> Duh! You don't understand how funny you are!

No. There is no layer 7-8, period. Obviously neither of us know the exact
design of this PCB. You made a guess, but you were wrong.

>> Less than that I'd say, seeing how you overestimated even the simplest
>> factors by a wide margin.

> Based on what prices. Did you actually check some prices? And did you
> check what design rules you'd need to follow to get that price?

Let's say I just took your word for it? You seem to consider yourself quite
an authority here, so I guess that should satisfy you?

> Now you are hilarious again. Startup cost for a PCB fab (PCB fabrication,
> not PCB factory, sorry if I confused you) means the CAD/CAM work the PCB
> manufacturer will do before actually feeding your gerber files to the
> plotter. They do that to ensure that all tracks have sufficient width and
> clearance and to make sure that the plotter will be able to print your
> design properly.

And why would you do this for each run? I was under the impression that you
were talking about per-unit costs rather than the entire investment.

Maybe we're talking about different subjects here, but from my perspective,
the interesting thing is the marginal profit/loss. That is, the profit/loss
of producing 1 extra board, given that everything else stays the same.

I mean, of course it's true that if the only Pegasos boards ever produced
are those made and sold for MorphOS users and the odd Linux geek hardware
fan, it's not going to repay the investment. To do that, they need higher
volumes, for sure. But to me at least, the suggestion that sales would be
"subsidised" means more than just that these sales are in a way riding on
the back of an antecipated larger production. The interesting question for
me is whether making these boards helps or hurts bPlans finances. I find it
more likely than not that it helps their finances, even if it cannot run
their business in the long run.

> Right! I have seen many pictures from Phase5 but I never saw that they
> had their own PCB manufacturing too.

No, indeed not, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do part or most of the
work of assuring the paths are ok etc themselves.

But anyway, do you know the cost of the other components involved, besides
the PCB? I do admit that I have no clue what PPC CPUs cost, for example. It
seems those who know aren't allowed to tell.

However, you haven't convinced me that the production cost of a Pegasos
board would make it unfeasible to sell a board at 300 EUR. I agree the
margins aren't likely to be wide, though.

And here's a bit of speculation: As we know, there are two versions of the
Pegasos II on sale (well, when they are available), the G3 and the G4
version. While the G3 version is remarkably cheap, the G4 version (without
knowing PPC prices, of course) seems more reasonable. Of course it's not
uncommon that high-end models are "taxed" a bit while margins are reduced
for low-end versions, but I think there may be another reason here.

Now this is *pure* speculation, I have absolutely *no* info about this
other than the respective pricing of the units and the well known history
of the Peg 1, but may it not be that a certain quantity of 600MHz G3 chips
were bought, intended for production of the Pegasos 1, before it was
discontinued due to the decision to change northbridge?

Now if this was the case, and I were them, I'd sure like to shift these
chips before they totally lose their value. So in such a situation, selling
it at a 10$ per unit profit, statistically, might actually make a lot of
sense.

Of course, if my theory is correct, we shouldn't see any more 600MHz G3
units made now, as in that case these chips are likely to be used up by
now.

[CyberstormPPC]
>> is technically more advanced (and thus more expensive to make) than the

> Lol! Care to tell us why it is technically more advanced? For a start, it
> doesn't contain a 133 MHz SDRAM bus which isn't childsplay to design.

More layers, higher component density. Well actually I intended to refer to
the BlizzardPPC, not the CyberStormPPC. You know, components on both sides,
etc. But I take your word that they probably aren't using exactly the same
software as in 1997. I certainly wouldn't have guessed on that anyway, I
just pointed out that none of us can accurately guess how much money that
would be needed for this. And anyway, we're talking about one-time
investments, not per-unit costs. You seem to like it both ways, whenever I
point to how margins can be cut, you insist on discussing only the BOM. But
when you find costs to add, you seem less strict. :-)

Anyway, what do we have now for the BOM? Say $80 + ?? + ?? + ??, or do you
have a better guess? Doesn't really allow us to draw any conclusions, now
does it?

I adopt a different strategy. I assume that the AmigaOne is not produced at
a loss. This may of course be wrong, who knows what MAI might do to keep
their only known customer. But really, I don't expect it to be sold below
production cost at any stage.

Now, without knowing about the details, we can easily see that the A1 will
be more expensive to produce. You're probably better than me at telling how
much. Then we need to add the higher cost due to licensing fees, MAI's
involvement, shipping them across the world, perhaps back and forth when
there are problems (these are not unknown for the A1..), and Eyetech. And
we also know (at least I do) that the dealers' margins are higher on the A1
- which IMO suggests that the margins are also higher upwards the chain.
Looking at it this way, The price difference between the A1 and the Pegasos
seems quite realistic to me.

Then of course there is a third way of looking at it. Personally, I would
be quite baffled if someone decided to sell boards below production cost at
these circumstances. I don't claim that everyone's rational, but when
things look just too crazy to be true, it is often the case that it's not
true.

> Reality check please! We are talking of the same components, the same
> PCBs, the same connectors here. What the Japanses manufacturers managed
> to do was to replace the whole BOM making it cheaper.

That is only part of the story. They also minimised spoilage, slimmed down
organisation, reduced storage time for parts, and made production more
efficient in many other ways. What must be noted here is that the materials
cost is not the only way to improve, rather I'd say it's the most difficult
area in most cases, probably including this one.


> As I said, the Pegasos 2 is another story and it has a different price.

Hmm, I think it's a very similar story, and it has a very similar price (G3
version).

> Well, based on the above, isn't it rather obviuous that I have done my
> homework alot more through than you?

Nope. Out of the two verifiable figures you gave (number of layers, and
size of the board) both were significantly wrong. And both these figures
shouldn't be too hard to find out, especially the board size should be easy
to find for anyone who's heard about google.

Based on these *verified* overestimates, and your general display of a bias
here, I don't give your overall guess much credit. And yes it can hardly be
called anything but a guess, because you've given only a small part of the
calculations necessary to employ your method in order to get a proper
estimate of the total price.

> And they all end in a way that makes it sounds like all is forgiven you
> are willing to give Genesi yet another chance.

Well of course I know you won't accept any story that does not condemn BBRV
as Satan incarnated as anything but apologism, but hey, that's the price of
being balanced.

Yes, I have "defended" Genesi against claims that they would be responsible
for the terrorist attack on the American Airways Paris-Miami flight. I have
"defended" them against other more modestly silly claims just as I in this
very thread "defended" Jens against the claim that he'd have infinite
support responsibility for his products. But I don't see anyone attacking
me for "defending" Jens in this way.

As for "giving Genesi another chance", well, depends on what you mean. My
recommendation to not take a position with them unless given payment in
advance still stands. That's a pretty stern warning, I'd say. If I said the
same about some company from the "other side" I'm sure I'd have to take a
lot of flames for it. And I'm sure people would bring it up again and again
to prove how pro-Genesi I was.

Despite my problems with Genesi however, there are obviously quite a few
cases where people have verifiably been paid as agreed, and their
cooperation with Freescale obviously involves physical Freescale
representatives rather than just unilateral press releases. So yes.. in
this market, comparatively, they seem to have some things pointing in their
favour.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 385 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Jul-2004 22:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 382 (Stefan Burström):
Stefan Burström wrote:
> Well, you were implying that the cost of designing a PCB in Taiwan
> would be similar to Germany, wern't you?

No. We were talking about production, not design. If there has been a
discussion about the, to me completely unknown, designer of the Terons
and/or AmigaOnes, then I have missed that.

Furthermore, I was not saying that the cost would be "similar", at
least not in the way you seem to imply. It's quite clear when your
talking about a possible doubling of your own salary as significant.
It's not. Yes, it might be possible to slash the cost of certain
salaries involved by a very significant percentage (say 70-80%
saving). But those costs are but a small fraction of the total cost,
and also have to make up for increased costs in logistics and
transportation.

After all, the question is whether it pays in total. And I'll say it
again: When you have a big production, involving lots of people where
most are unqualified workers, it pays off more to locate it in low
income countries. I've never even claimed that it couldn't possibly
save *some* money even in the AmigaOne case, all I've claimed is that
it woulnd't be as significant as whoever brought the topic up seemed
to suggest.

Oh and I forgot one additional claim that I made, which is that
salaries are *not* based upon the costs of living in the respective
countries. Well, there are exceptions, like Cuba and (I heard, but may
be wrong) Eritrea, but not in any normal market economy.


> Shall I give you a reality check? You employ the same people because
> those design houses they do everything from complete design to
> contract manufacturing.

Huh, bPlan are a design house? Not last I checked. Yes, that was the
comparison made. It wasn't between some average Taiwanese design house
and some average German one. But you do have a point (although for me
:), a third party design (or production) house located in Taiwan (or
anywhere else) is likely to have a capacity that is not tailor-made
for the specific requirements at hand, as bPlan do.

> You cannot apply your 'programmers' reasoning here because it is a
> completely different industry.

I beg to differ, and say that you cannot use your "personal
experience" reasoning here because we're really not talking about
exactly that, as proven by your switch from "production" over to
"design".

> You didn't bother to understand. I was trying to say that I chose to
> stay in sweden even if I had a job with 2 times the salary waiting
> for me. Yes, I did get the permit, but the salary wasn't all of the
> equation.

I understood you perfectly. But I don't think you understood me. When
did I claim that absolutely everyone would move, if the salaries were
different in various countries? Of course I didn't. But since work
permits are possible, a significant number of people do move. Even if
just for a limited time, like you did. And these movements rapidly
level the salaries. Not down to 1:1, but you are aware that people are
waiting in line every morning in India, for the mere *chance* of
getting less than necessary to feed yourself, nevermind your family,
doing extremely dangerous work scrapping poisonous debris or similar
tasks, are you?

> With your reasning, the optimum solution would be to do the design
> here and manufacture in the far east. Reality check please!

Optimum? Err, as a designer you should know the difference between the
statement "a is bigger than b" and "a is optimum".

I haven't talked about design at all. But as manufacturing generally
involves more people, and with lower qualifications, I guess my
reasoning does say that it there is generally more money to save by
locating manufacturing to low income countries, than there is to save
by locating design there.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 386 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by James Carroll on 20-Jul-2004 22:47 GMT
..another massive flamewar with Fabio leading the charge..
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 387 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Bernie Meyer on 20-Jul-2004 23:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 353 (Fabio Alemagna):
Interesting point here --- AFAICT, Adam bought his card from a local dealer. Which means there *is* no contract between Adam and Jens.Also, if someone says "it works" and then isn't heard from again for 14 months, it would appear reasonable to think that that person is indeed satisfied that the product, as sold, works as advertised.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 388 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Darth_X on 20-Jul-2004 23:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 272 (Amon_Re):
> You need to get your head examined, Bill Buck is screwing people over left right & in the center and you cheer for that guy? Hello? Is there a sence of decency or morals in that brain of yours?

Amon_Re, you conveniently forget the sins of Bill McEwen, Ben Hermans, and Garry Hare.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 389 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Bernie Meyer on 20-Jul-2004 23:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 365 (Fabio Alemagna):
You probably entered a (rather contestible) contract with Microsoft when you broke the shrinkwrap.Before then, unless you bought your stuff directly from Microsoft, there was no contract between you and the behemoth.I own a laptop that came bundled with two versions of Windows. Neither was ever installed, and I explicitly called H&P (who were acting as an agent for Microsoft) and declined the terms of the shrink wrap contract. So, no contract.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 390 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Waldenberg on 20-Jul-2004 23:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 387 (Bernie Meyer):
Get this into your head. IT NEVER EVEN WORKED CORRECTLY. THE DRIVER WAS UNDER DEVELOPMENT. Ask other morphos users using the catweasel and you'll see. And life isn't about contracts... And actually... When you sell a product as a company and say certain things.. You have certain obligations. Please dont tell me what is right and wrong here, because you clearly have no clue.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 391 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_NLI on 21-Jul-2004 01:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 390 (Adam Waldenberg):
Except you sent an e-mail back to Jens saying it worked correctly, according to him, and then you never said anything to him for 14 months until this thread.

Sorry. If there were problems, then you'd have contacted him again. Nothing you've said in this thread indicates that you ever contacted him again.

Fact is, right now CW3s are selling on EBay for more than the original selling price. Make the most of it whilst you can. And quit being suck a pissy whiner.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 392 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Olegil on 21-Jul-2004 04:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 380 (Stefan Burström):
Hehe, and for "some reason", 133MHz SDRAM is a total bitch to get working on the Peg I. See a pattern here?

I support you in this discussion, btw. I make software, firmware and hardware for the broadcast market, which is typically in the same volume range as the Peg and A1 so far has been. I am 100% certain that the Peg I with MOS and software bundle can be considered as selling at a loss. Designing hardware, firmware and software in that scale does not come for free. Now, this isn't unheard of in the business, rumour had it Intel was doing it to get rid of Cyrix and AMD back in the early Pentium days. But it really has to end with you getting a monopoly (or close to it, "everyone" has to want your product enough to purchase it once you're NOT selling at a loss) to be a success.

Oh, and btw. Seems these days it's a lot smarter to manufacture in Lituania than Taiwan/China if you are located in Europe because the difference in cost is marginal and you can actually send an engineer down to the manufacturing plant to oversee the startup or do QC. Companies in Japan still use Chinese mfgs, Americans should use Mexican and European companies should use Lituania. Shipping costs are also lower.

We manufacture most of our stuff in Norway, but some things that need to be cheap and high volume goes to Lituania.

Oh, and I don't make 1-2M SEK either, but I'm quite happy with my salary anyway.
I can't seem to figure out what I would spend that much money on. :-)
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 393 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 21-Jul-2004 05:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 392 (Olegil):
>Oh, and I don't make 1-2M SEK either, but I'm quite happy with my salary
>anyway. I can't seem to figure out what I would spend that much money on. :-)

Loose women and beer! The rest you can waste ;-)
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 394 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 21-Jul-2004 06:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 388 (Darth_X):
Bill Mcewan i can agree, but when did Ben Hermans screw over people? Or Garry Hare for that matter? The only thing the latter did was give a testimony & an interview.

Also, related to the "discussion" between me & Paul Gadd, those are irrelevant.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 395 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 21-Jul-2004 06:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 390 (Adam Waldenberg):
Considering Bernie's in the "biz" i'd say he's got a better clue then you Adam, he raised 2 intresting points, the local dealer issue (i also said that one earlier) and the fact that you went silent for 14 months, even if it never worked as you now claim, you *CAN NOT* prove it, had you sent Jens a mail stating "it works, but this & that is still problematic" you'd have had a case, but as it is now, you have no leg to stand on.

That, Adam, is reality
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 396 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Waldenberg on 21-Jul-2004 06:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 395 (Amon_Re):
I never said the driver worked fully... That's just him twisting my words.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 397 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Waldenberg on 21-Jul-2004 06:53 GMT
Here is something interesting! I checked my old backups of the emails I sent to Jens... I can't find a single mail where I wrote that it "works" .. He just gave me instructions on how to "solve" it.

Anyway .. I do have a case here whatever anyone may say. It's pretty obvious. I never said they worked... And clearly they don't work properly either.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 398 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Adam Waldenberg on 21-Jul-2004 06:58 GMT
Anyway .. Furthermore the discussion was the mounting of the catweasel.. Nothing less .. Nothing more... So please stop twisting my words... Jens should just take responsibilty for what you he has done; just like a decent human being would do.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 399 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 21-Jul-2004 07:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 389 (Bernie Meyer):
Of course, but I was talking about products you explicitely buy, and whose terms of use you agree with.
Announcement: Technical data of the new Catweasel MK4 : Comment 400 of 469ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 21-Jul-2004 07:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 387 (Bernie Meyer):
> Interesting point here --- AFAICT, Adam bought his card from a local dealer.
> Which means there *is* no contract between Adam and Jens.

There is a contract if the product has a license and you agree with that license. Of course the contract is with the license's holder, not with the reseller.

> Also, if someone says "it works" and then isn't heard from again for 14
> months, it would appear reasonable to think that that person is indeed
> satisfied that the product, as sold, works as advertised.

But that's got nothing to do with what the advertisement and license say. If after 14 months I come to you and say "hey, it doesn't work", if the contract I and you have entitles me to receive support even after 14 months, then you owe me support, no matter what.
Anonymous, there are 469 items in your selection (but only 119 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 400] [401 - 450] [451 - 469]
Back to Top