Price of MorphOS license
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    amigadave
    Posts: 2794 from 2006/3/21
    From: Northern Calif...
    Quote:

    Andreas_Wolf wrote:

    > I don't know what state of completion MorphOS was in, when talks with McBill took place.

    It was the time of MorphOS 0.4 to 0.8.

    http://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2001-02-00161-EN.html
    http://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2001-10-00203-EN.html


    Thanks for supplying that bit of info, as it is probably important for understanding what was presented, and how Amiga Inc. thought about it as a possible continuation of AmigaOS.

    Quote:

    > Amiga Inc.'s position of wanting to contract people to create something
    > for a price, and to then own what Amiga Inc. had paid for

    According to what is known about those discussions, they were never about Amiga Inc. paying for the development but about Amiga Inc. merely throwing in the "Amiga" naming rights and maybe a Workbench license (Ambient came only later).


    That doesn't make sense, unless the information I have heard or read is incorrect. What I and others have heard or read is that McBill & Amiga Inc., wanted control of MorphOS, after it would be renamed AmigaOS4. Surely he could not expect to obtain control of MorphOS/AmigaOS4 without paying for it, and using the sales revenue to continue developing it into the future. If the discussions never mentioned any payment from Amiga Inc. to Ralph Schmidt & the rest of the MorphOS Dev. Team members, and as you wrote, the discussion was about Ralph and the MorphOS Dev. Team members being granted a license to use the name AmigaOS4, plus perhaps also a license for the desktop name of Workbench (and I assume the use of all AmigaOS3.x source code, to assist in making MorphOS behave more like 3.1, or 3.9, on a fast Commodore Amiga computer with accelerator, except faster and with some new features). It would seem very strange to me if Amiga Inc. and McBill were trying to charge the MorphOS team a license fee for the name and maybe using any of the source code, but maybe it could have worked, if there were little or no money required to be sent to Amiga Inc. in the beginning, and only a percentage of the sales amount were promised to Amiga Inc., with the majority going straight to Ralph Schmidt and the rest of the MorphOS Dev. Team. Going back to the wide spread belief that McBill wanted control of the OS, which seems to be believed by many/most AmigaOS & MorphOS users I have talked to, or read forum posts from, just does not sense with no payment for the work done, even for a con man like McBill??? Granting a license to use the nave "AmigaOS", seems to me that Amiga Inc. would have been giving away the only valuable part of their IP rights that they still owned, which would require a high price for the license, or a very high percentage of all sales of AmigaOS4.x. Maybe I am misunderstanding something about the situation and the people involved, including the purpose and goals of Ralph Schmidt and the rest of the MorphOS Dev. Team members. McBill's intentions and goals have always been transparent and obvious, as simply a tool to drain investor's bank accounts with false promises and unrealistic expectations, and to somehow keep Amiga users hoping for something McBill was never going to be able to produce and deliver, an upgraded version of AmigaOS, without using outside contractors, or buying someone else's similar OS design and adapt it to some cheap hardware, that he could sell for a high (and disappointing to buyers) profit mark-up.

    Do you know who, or which party that participated in those discussions, initiated the first contact between MorphOS Dev. Team, and McBill of Amiga Inc.?

    Quote:

    > at the time we still had several hundred thousand users willing to buy AmigaOS4.x

    I think it was one order of magnitude less.


    Yes, perhaps you are correct regarding how many active AmigaOS/AROS/MorphOS users there were during the time those discussion were going on, but I guess my number was the remaining users at that time, plus many users who had only recently become former users of Classic & NG Amiga systems. It is my belief that if the right decision had been made at that time (meaning that MorphOS had become the new AmigaOS4.x, and enough word of mouthy promotion of the new AmigaOS4 was done, we might have seen many of those former Amiga users come back, at least to see what was being offered, and how well it worked. Of course, a lot would have hinged on the reliability and performance without crashing or locking up, any new PPC based hardware would have been. If the early AmigaOne hardware problems repeated them selves exactly as the past played out, then the resulting harm might have been even worse that it was in our past history, and may have done even more harm to Amiga Inc. and the MorphOS Dev. Team, who would have shared some of the blame, even if they had nothing to do with the decisions about what hardware to use. Not until version 2.0, and the first release that would run on the PPC Mac Mini and beyond, would we have a low cost, relatively high performance AmigaOS4.x system that almost everyone could find and afford to buy.

    Maybe we could then return to a number close to hundreds of thousands, instead of tens of thousands back then, or perhaps 3,000 to 5,000 users we probably have today using MorphOS3.9. One thing I am certain of is that if MorphOS would have been purchased to give it the name "AmigaOS4.x", or if Amiga Inc. had granted the MorphOS Dev. Team a license to use the name AmigaOS4, then there would never have been all the mud slinging and destructive talk about MorphOS being illegal, and we would have had many more users, including perhaps some of the current AROS users and all of the current AmigaOS4.x users. Development would have been much faster, and by this time today, we would already have all the features promised for AmigaOS4.2 (except the promises that don't make sense, or the ones which will produce less that satisfactory results, no matter how many development hours and/or dollars are thrown at the problem.

    Things would definitely be different, and I choose to believe that any changes from the way it is now, would make this alternate reality, of the history of the last 10 to 15 years, immensely better than the way things are now, with AmigaOS4.x users currently depending on Hyperion's false promises, and suffering with their inability to produce timely and effective results. A-eon's attempts to make things better for AmigaOS4.x users is admirable, but they are not in control of AmigaOS4.x, so they can only do so much with their hands tied, and they too are at the mercy of the (often bad) decisions made by Hyperion's owner(s)/manager(s).
    MorphOS - The best Next Gen Amiga choice.
  • »24.06.16 - 07:51
    Profile
  • Moderator
    Kronos
    Posts: 2240 from 2003/2/24
    @amigadave

    Neverever put "common sense" and "McBill" in the same sentence.

    Cos that guy was not only a scammer but also so full of himself that he really believed buying Amiga with borrowed money would put him on the same level of importance as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.


    Think of him as a non-orange-skinned Donald Trump and he get an idea.
  • »24.06.16 - 09:13
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    ppcamiga1
    Posts: 215 from 2015/8/23
    Fast real 68k not exist.
    After many years of lies and cheating gunnar von boehn and his followers still doesn't provide fast 68k.
    Vampire/natami crap is still slower than 68060 80 MHz and even slower than some Commodore prototypes.

    Real Amiga OS on x86 not exist.
    There is not something like amiga gui and graphics on top unix.
    Aros x86 is not worth of use crap which is not modern and not compatible.
    MOS team since 2011 try to made something like aros which will be also not worth of use crap.

    What left?

    Amiga NG. Something hundred times faster than real 68k and still compatible with old software.

    Some idiots has problems with existence of Amiga NG.
    They have to accept that as long as there will be not fast 68k or real Amiga Os on x86, we Amiga users will be still using better amiga than these made by commodore.
  • »24.06.16 - 11:04
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 12080 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    >> According to what is known about those discussions, they were never about
    >> Amiga Inc. paying for the development but about Amiga Inc. merely throwing
    >> in the "Amiga" naming rights and maybe a Workbench license

    > That doesn't make sense, unless the information I have heard or read is incorrect.
    > What I and others have heard or read is that McBill & Amiga Inc., wanted control
    > of MorphOS, after it would be renamed AmigaOS4.

    Yes, control in the sense of having decisional power over certain technical aspects of the OS, not control in the sense of getting ownership of the OS. That's no contradiction to what I wrote. I never said Amiga Inc's demands were appropriate.

    > Surely he could not expect to obtain control of MorphOS/AmigaOS4 without paying for it

    Depends on what exactly "control" means in this context. I guess Amiga Inc. thought that contributing the "Amiga" name was worth enough to justify demand of certain control over the OS.

    > and using the sales revenue to continue developing it into the future.

    Amiga Inc. developing an OS? For real?

    > If the discussions never mentioned any payment from Amiga Inc. to Ralph Schmidt
    > & the rest of the MorphOS Dev. Team members, and as you wrote, the discussion
    > was about Ralph and the MorphOS Dev. Team members being granted a license to use
    > the name AmigaOS4, plus perhaps also a license for the desktop name of Workbench

    I mean a binary or object code license for the Workbench of AmigaOS 3.1, not a name license. Ambient didn't exist yet, as I wrote.

    > and I assume the use of all AmigaOS3.x source code

    I don't remember having read this was part of the plan.

    > It would seem very strange to me if Amiga Inc. and McBill were trying to
    > charge the MorphOS team a license fee for the name

    Why? That's what they did with Hyperion after all. Note that I didn't even claim Amiga Inc. were trying to do this with MorphOS. There are other ways both Amiga Inc. and the MorphOS team could have benefited financially from cooperation regarding the OS.

    > the wide spread belief that McBill wanted control of the OS, which seems
    > to be believed by many/most AmigaOS & MorphOS users I have talked to, or
    > read forum posts from, just does not sense with no payment for the work done

    As said, I think there may have been some misinterpretations regarding the meaning of the word "control" in this specific context.

    > Granting a license to use the nave "AmigaOS", seems to me that Amiga Inc. would
    > have been giving away the only valuable part of their IP rights that they still
    > owned, which would require a high price for the license

    ...which could include granting Amiga Inc. a say over technical aspects :-)

    > McBill's intentions and goals have always been transparent and obvious, as simply a
    > tool to drain investor's bank accounts with false promises and unrealistic expectations

    If this really was true, he wouldn't have found even one single investor :-)

    > and to somehow keep Amiga users hoping for [...] an upgraded version of AmigaOS,
    > without using outside contractors

    Weren't Hyperion just that, and also Haage&Partner, the P96 team and Olaf "olsen" Barthel in the original OS4 project before Hyperion took over?

    http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=9360&start=45

    Or do you mean the 15 months before the original OS4 project was announced in March/April 2001?

    > Do you know who, or which party that participated in those discussions, initiated
    > the first contact between MorphOS Dev. Team, and McBill of Amiga Inc.?

    As I wrote, it was Olaf "olsen" Barthel who presented MorphOS to Amiga Inc. From this I conclude it was Amiga Inc. who first contacted Ralph Schmidt, either directly or via Olaf Barthel.

    > If the early AmigaOne hardware problems repeated them selves exactly as
    > the past played out, then the resulting harm might have been even worse
    > that it was in our past history, and may have done even more harm to
    > Amiga Inc. and the MorphOS Dev. Team

    The Pegasos was already announced and in development back then, and Amiga Inc. was openly fond of it. Eyetech was not aware of the Teron boards yet and was still fully promoting the Escena-AmigaOne project. Of course, as it turned out, also the Pegasos was plagued by the problems of the Articia S.
  • »24.06.16 - 11:08
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    ppcamiga1
    Posts: 215 from 2015/8/23
    Commodore before bankruptcy working on hombre based on good old HP PA-RISC 7100 100 MHz.
    Vampire/natami crap is still slower than good old HP PA-RISC 7100 100 MHz.

    AROS x86 is not binary and source compatible with amiga os.
    ZUNE is still not working crap.

    Quote:


    No, what has been talked about since 2011 is something that does *not* have the same restrictions as AROS.



    As long as future MOS x86 will be not unix based it will be not good enough to justify resignation from windows on pc and will be not worth of use crap.
  • »24.06.16 - 11:38
    Profile
  • Priest of the Order of the Butterfly
    Priest of the Order of the Butterfly
    ernsteiswuerfel
    Posts: 545 from 2015/6/18
    From: Funeralopolis
    Funny how these "Price/AROS/AOS/68k/MorphOS"-Threads end in debating the same arguments over and over. Not to mention the Red vs. Blue story from many years ago...

    Never saw the need to decide between them and use one of the OSes exclusively.

    The only thing which prevents me from using OS 4 is missing hardware & "classic Amiga only"-performance on WinUAE.
    Talos II. [Gentoo Linux] | PMac G5 11,2. PMac G4 3,6. PBook G4 5,8. [MorphOS 3.18 / Gentoo Linux] | Vampire V4 SA [ApolloOS / Amiga OS 3.2.2]
  • »24.06.16 - 11:55
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    ppcamiga1 wrote:

    As long as future MOS x86 will be not unix based it will be not good enough to justify resignation from windows on pc and will be not worth of use crap.



    While I rather liked the PA-RISC comment, this part of your diatribe is getting old.

    Why UNIX? Will you at least justify your argument? It is, and has always been, a bloated mess.

    And your preference, it aint gonna happen.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »24.06.16 - 13:20
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    ppcamiga1
    Posts: 215 from 2015/8/23
    Porting os course. It takes too much time to port various stuff from rest of world.
    It takes too much time to prepare software env. before You can start coding.
    OWB for example.
    You can't just take sources and start playing with code.
    To compile it You need more than ten addidtional libraries.
    Disk space is cheap today.
    Even if unix is bloated so what?
    This "bloat" saves developers time.
    Going to x86 should fix this problem.
    MOS/Amiga Os on x86 should be based on unix.
  • »24.06.16 - 17:19
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    ppcamiga1
    Posts: 215 from 2015/8/23
    Quote:


    It claims 82% source compatibility.



    This 18% especialy in gui makes big difference.
  • »24.06.16 - 17:20
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    ppcamiga1 wrote:
    Quote:


    It claims 82% source compatibility.



    This 18% especialy in gui makes big difference.





    And the next generation of MorphOS will be far less compatible (out side of emulation software) and won't be based on UNIX.

    So as far as I can see our desires in this matter are diametrically opposed.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »24.06.16 - 19:41
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    Intuition
    Posts: 1110 from 2013/5/24
    From: Nederland
    Quote:

    ppcamiga1 wrote:
    Quote:


    It claims 82% source compatibility.



    This 18% especialy in gui makes big difference.





    Please list the API calls that this 18% consists of.
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.15

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »24.06.16 - 21:28
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    amigadave
    Posts: 2794 from 2006/3/21
    From: Northern Calif...
    Quote:

    ppcamiga1 wrote:
    Porting os course. It takes too much time to port various stuff from rest of world.
    It takes too much time to prepare software env. before You can start coding.
    OWB for example.
    You can't just take sources and start playing with code.
    To compile it You need more than ten addidtional libraries.
    Disk space is cheap today.
    Even if unix is bloated so what?
    This "bloat" saves developers time.
    Going to x86 should fix this problem.
    MOS/Amiga Os on x86 should be based on unix.




    What the hell are you doing on this forum site, if all you want is Unix, or a clone of Unix/Linux?

    Amiga users want an Amiga experience, and now that MorphOS has evolved beyond the original Amiga under pinnings, MorphOS users want a MorphOS experience on x64.

    I don't understand why you are wasting your time, and our bandwidth here, if all you want to do is try to convince us to abandon MorphOS and switch to Unix/Linux?
    MorphOS - The best Next Gen Amiga choice.
  • »24.06.16 - 23:26
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    ppcamiga1
    Posts: 215 from 2015/8/23
    I don't get why so many idiots want us amiga users to suport crap which is not binary compatible and has all drawback of orginal amiga os.
    It is very simple - change to cpu which is unable to work in 32 bit big endian mode changes everything, there will be no longer binary compatybility, and all problems of orginal amiga os like lack of resource trackig, memory protection, multicore suport, drvivers, too much time on porting,
    should be solved at time of ISA change.
    MOS/Amiga OS on x86 should be just amiga gui i graphics on unix, everything below should be cut off.




    [ Edited by ppcamiga1 25.06.2016 - 15:46 ]
  • »25.06.16 - 13:41
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    ppcamiga1
    Posts: 215 from 2015/8/23
    Of course most important part of AROS - ZUNE is not working not compatible crap.
  • »25.06.16 - 13:42
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    Intuition
    Posts: 1110 from 2013/5/24
    From: Nederland
    Quote:

    ppcamiga1 wrote:
    Of course most important part of AROS - ZUNE is not working not compatible crap.




    MUI isn't part of AmigaOS so your claim that "AROS isn't source compatible with AmigaOS" is nonsense for the most part.
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.15

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »25.06.16 - 13:54
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    ppcamiga1 wrote:
    I don't get why so many idiots want us amiga users to suport crap which is not binary compatible and has all drawback of orginal amiga os.
    It is very simple - change to cpu which is unable to work in 32 bit big endian mode changes everything, there will be no longer binary compatybility, and all problems of orginal amiga os like lack of resource trackig, memory protection, multicore suport, drvivers, too much time on porting,
    should be solved at time of ISA change.
    MOS/Amiga OS on x86 should be just amiga gui i graphics on unix, everything below should be cut off.





    Idiots?
    I could not care less about Amiga users.
    Generally they are a foaming at the mouth pack of fanatics with a higher percentage of mental disfunction than the general population.
    Your fixations are good proof of this.

    The next move for MorphOS is about MorphOS, not Amiga OS.
    Why don't you go back to playing with your toys.

    And as to Linux, when I use it (and I have two Ununtu Mate systems), I use it for its inhetent advantages.
    Not for anything related to the Amiga.

    Whether or not you have noticed it, not a single statement in favor of your ideas has been posted.

    So...who is the idiot?
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »25.06.16 - 16:49
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    redrumloa
    Posts: 1424 from 2003/4/13
    Quote:

    Jim wrote:
    Idiots?
    I could not care less about Amiga users.
    Generally they are a foaming at the mouth pack of fanatics with a higher percentage of mental disfunction than the general population.
    Your fixations are good proof of this.

    The next move for MorphOS is about MorphOS, not Amiga OS.


    Exactly. The further MorphOS can distance itself from the ridiculous train wreck that was the "Amiga" post-Commodore the better. There is zero advantage in even considering backwards compatibility these days. Jettison it and don't look back, even if it means losing 100% chance of any source compatibility. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
  • »25.06.16 - 19:05
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    Intuition
    Posts: 1110 from 2013/5/24
    From: Nederland
    Quote:

    redrumloa wrote:
    Quote:

    Jim wrote:
    Idiots?
    I could not care less about Amiga users.
    Generally they are a foaming at the mouth pack of fanatics with a higher percentage of mental disfunction than the general population.
    Your fixations are good proof of this.

    The next move for MorphOS is about MorphOS, not Amiga OS.


    Exactly. The further MorphOS can distance itself from the ridiculous train wreck that was the "Amiga" post-Commodore the better. There is zero advantage in even considering backwards compatibility these days. Jettison it and don't look back, even if it means losing 100% chance of any source compatibility. Good riddance to bad rubbish.


    Geit once said that most existing code should recompile with minimal changes but I can't find it right now.

    Andreas might have the link maybe?
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.15

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »25.06.16 - 22:12
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    As long as it doesn't rely on AmigaOS systems calls, why wouldn't it?
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »26.06.16 - 01:10
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    Intuition
    Posts: 1110 from 2013/5/24
    From: Nederland
    Quote:

    Jim wrote:
    As long as it doesn't rely on AmigaOS systems calls, why wouldn't it?


    All Amiga/MorphOS specific software relys on AmigaOS system calls Jim.
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.15

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »26.06.16 - 10:36
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 12080 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > Geit once said that most existing code should recompile with minimal
    > changes but I can't find it right now. Andreas might have the link maybe?

    http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11382&start=51
  • »26.06.16 - 11:08
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    Intuition
    Posts: 1110 from 2013/5/24
    From: Nederland
    Quote:

    Andreas_Wolf wrote:
    > Geit once said that most existing code should recompile with minimal
    > changes but I can't find it right now. Andreas might have the link maybe?

    http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11382&start=51


    Cheers Andreas! :)
    1.67GHz 15" PowerBook G4, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9700M Pro, 64GB SSD, MorphOS 3.15

    2.7GHz DP G5, 4GB RAM, 512MB Radeon X1950 Pro, 500GB SSHD, MorphOS 3.9
  • »26.06.16 - 11:46
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4977 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    Intuition wrote:
    Quote:

    Jim wrote:
    As long as it doesn't rely on AmigaOS systems calls, why wouldn't it?


    All Amiga/MorphOS specific software relys on AmigaOS system calls Jim.


    Actually, that is not true.
    Software can be written to run under MorphOS that completely ignores Amiga system calls.
    Certainly you must deal with MUI, but all of the game ports that rely on OpenGL use virtually no Amiga calls what so ever.
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »26.06.16 - 15:43
    Profile