Hi CISC,

Quote:

Silly it may be but Dave's quite right. That's exactly how the law treats it.

I work at an IP vendor and we get this sort of thing all the time. Some people sometimes get access to 3rd party code but they then have to be *very* careful what they do and what projects they work on.

humantarget
Damn, the secret is out.... I do intend to Mayor of Mr. D's Pub, one of these days. ,

Sorry Dave, I usually don't troll.
Glad to see the "I believe Ralph" comments after the long hashed "What Andy says he saw" story.

Did you ever consider that you anti-MorphOS bias might be based in previous work for competing endeavors?

After all "MorphOS is slow", but it is faster than OPS4 and you've made positive statements about that product.

And the
Maybe MorphOS made a little better approach out of this by supporting used Macs, but really, neither was a "way forward", except for hobbyists. "Runs on old Macs" is hardly a business model
is more insightful then you realize. I think the development team stopped pushing this as a business enterprise several years ago. Now they're just improving and expanding the original product to appeal to the hobbyist base.



[ Edited by Jim 05.06.2011 - 02:05 ]

Quote:

It really is not, if that was the case there would never be the need for an NDA.

Quote:

That is just because they want to make sure there will never ever be any reasonable doubt as to whether code has been tainted or not, it is not a direct legal concern, but rather an indirect one.


- CISC

Quote:

An NDA does not change the license that code is held in. With regards to source code, an NDA gives you some level of access to code without giving you permission to share your access with anyone else.

Let's say you gave out an NDA to a new MorphOS developer over MorphOS code. That new MorphOS developer would now have access to the MorphOS source code, but the NDA does not give them permission to alter the license. If the new developer released a competing product based on MorphOS code then you'd legally be able to stop them, regardless of the existence of an NDA.

In summary, an NDA is irrelevant when it comes to licensing, they are separate concepts.

Quote:

Wasn't that my point exactly?

NDAs are about knowledge, copyright is about produced content. NDAs exist because you can freely apply knowledge without breaking any copyright (though there is a third domain called patents which try to curtail that).


- CISC

Quote:

Quote:

Thanks itix ... i would love to see this attitude (which i totally share), on others fora as well

ps- or even as a TAG/signature ... if i have your permission of course.

@Framiga

You have my permission to quote my posting or use parts as a tag/signature

Thank you!

@humantarget

Dave,

I read your insinuations on the recent AmigaWorld thread that MorphOS is based on stolen sources. I read the same in the 2003 Moobunny thread that you commented on.

After several years of these allegations, you don't have any evidence. Your basis for making this claim is that Andy Finkel once told you in a personal conversation that he saw some code supposedly from Phase 5 that had comments similar to his comments. That does not even come close to hearsay.

This thread is 6 pages long now and you've posted 10 times, changing the subject to reflect negatively on MorphOS performance. Don't you agree that it's time you put your hands up and admit that you have nothing to back up your claims ?

If Andy Finkel wants to come forward and say something to the contrary, then let him do so.



Edit: correction about Moobunny link

[ Edited by koan 07.06.2011 - 21:38 ]

> the 2003 Moobunny thread that you posted the link for.

Actually, I posted that link. He just quoted me on it ;-)

@Andreas

Thank you for your correction.

You know Andreas, koan has a point. Dave hasn't really addressed Harry's point and you haven't been holding his feet to the fire like you would with the rest us.

So Dave, how about it? Any proof other than several year old hearsay?

> You know Andreas, koan has a point.

I never denied that but merely told him that it's been me who posted said MooBunny link here in this thread.

> Dave hasn't really addressed Harry's point and you haven't been
> holding his feet to the fire like you would with the rest us.

I'm really just an onlooker to this "stolen source code" affair and can't be arsed to put myself on the line here ;-)

>I'm really just an onlooker to this "stolen source code" affair and can't be arsed to put myself on the line here

That's curiously conservative of you.

Dave's not likely to respond to me.
And apparently koan's post hasn't drawn a response.
But he was responding to your posts, even if he wasn't directly addressing the thread topic.

> That's curiously conservative of you.

Really? What would you've expected me to do or write then?

itix,
Quote:

The problem here was that some of us accepted the end of development and just made do. Things of course wouldn't have been moving fast enough for people who wanted to use there machine for making money or providing services for other things in there lives etc, I am not disputing this. The thing that annoys me about MorphOS is THOSE who choose MorphOS DIDN'T choose to also LEAVE the Amiga world.

If I had been brave enough to walk a new path I would have also had the courage and willingness to create something completely new and seperate, so from my point of view I really don't get you MorphOS types. Don't get me wrong, I know exactly why you didn't leave, I just don't understand why you'd want to do that to the very thing you loved?

I never gave up on AmigaOS and I've never owned anything else but Amiga machines. I've been an owner since day 1, well, very late 1985 anyway. You'd probably label me an OS4 fanboy today but I'm just passionate about AmigaOS and nothing (for me anyway) has changed e.g. AmigaOS + Custom Hardware has always been the Amiga way. (btw, for the sake of nitpicking, when I say Custom I will endorse the all in one solution aspect, just try and remember evolution to help calm any other aspects)

I already own 3 SAM boards and am expecting my first X1000 relatively soon. I really need to start selling some of my older machnes!

Quote:

I actually disagree with both of you here and for different reasons. But I won't elaborate on things that have been hashed many times over. I will say this though, at least give some of us the respect we deserve for staying with the girl 100%. Afterall, deep down, it's probably what some of you would have preferred for yourselves and some probably hung out longer than others.

Quote:

@DH
not sure why it had to be a false promise? and all the other associated questions relevant to this topic etc etc etc, but yes, nevermind

@itix
That is what you should have done, not worried about the Amiga. Amiga doesn't need people who don't need her. And today, this should be considerably clearer than ever.

I'm somewhat elitest when it comes to the Amiga but not in an over bearing way more of a protective way and everyone surely must realise that that has basically completely gone from the so called Amiga boards today, it won't return until someone like me opens there own forum.

Anyway, I am not here to start trouble, just touching on a few things I've wanted to say from time to time but never bothered. There are a couple of other posts further down I'd like to reply to too.

Don't go away

Crumb,
Quote:

MorphOS wasn't a future for AmigaOS, it was simply another choice OS. When I first heard about MorphOS I just thought why. But there wasn't any negative feeling about it. I just carried on doing my own thing.

Quote:

Yes, I have some mixed feelings about what you're suggesting here. I mean, I might even feel sorry for you if you had all gotten up and left the Amiga Boards and created your own havens and stayed there, somehow I don't think that happened though nor has it ever happened. Nope if anything AmigaOS has suffered because of the MorphOS and perhaps somewhat from AROS coming in to being because there very existance tugged on the pool of Amiga people, that is what I think would be a fairer overview, and generally makes up part of the reason MorphOS users didn't leave the Amiga boards entirely. I didn't say it didn't make some sense from a certain point of view I'm just saying.

But in saying all that, it ain't going to matter much

[ Edited by Slayer 11.06.2011 - 23:09 ]

HenryCase,
Quote:

This could still happen? Just leave the AmigaOS out of it please! And no, I won't be running it.

Quote:

This speculation made me laugh some. I won't touch the Amiga fan thing. But I will say this, this still wouldn't have prevented a genuine AmigaOS release and I doubt very much it would have prevented Trevor realising his dream or my vision for that matter.

Quote:

That might be so but it does seem to be very typical of you, thing is, why can't it still work? I mean, I'm not interested and leave me out of it but we're talking about your happiness

Be careful with your learn lessons, is the world really a better place because everything is getting re-hashed based on this better idea concept?

[ Edited by Slayer 11.06.2011 - 23:19 ]

When someone signs up to a forum with a username of "humantarget" to respond to one particular thread then it is very clear that they are expecting to receive some tough questions.

The reason why I say that Dave's "evidence" is not hearsay is because according to the story, Andy does not say that he did a code review of MorphOS. The only person claiming that MorphOS is based on stolen sources is Dave.

Frankly, the difficulty in converting asm to C and doing a good job of it leads me to believe Ralph's story more.

I started to do a little research into this. In a 1996 interview, Dave said

Quote:

So even before Phase 5 released a finished PPC accelerator board or MorphOS was launched, Dave had the idea that Phase 5 were going to steal AmigaOS.

@Slayer

Quote:

Isn't this hypocritical ?

You are a self confessed OS4 fanboy with several SAMs, planning to buy an X1000.... what are you doing posting on a MorphOS forum ?

Personally, I blame the fragmentation of Amiga on people like you, who promoted this red vs blue thing. Why is it a surprise that when people bought a Pegasos or ran MorphOS on their Amigas they didn't throw away their Amiga hardware ?

@slayer

I think would you (and some others) fail to realize that there are people who define "Amiga" not by some trademarks so deeply hidden in a pile of conflicting licences and ownerships that not even Perry Mason could cut through and also not by some long obsoleted sourcecodes but by the way it was used.

Also "deserving respect" ?? For what ? Cos you stayed with a dead system ? There is a word for that but it doesn't even rhyme to "respect".

@ koan,
>Personally, I blame the fragmentation of Amiga on people like you, who promoted this red vs blue thing. Why is it a surprise that when people bought a Pegasos or ran MorphOS on their Amigas they didn't throw away their Amiga hardware ?

>>The thing that annoys me about MorphOS is THOSE who choose MorphOS DIDN'T choose to also LEAVE the Amiga world.

Koan, I'm with your assessment of this sentiment. MorphOS was the first to move beyond AOS. Why would we abandon compatibility (and why should we)? Why do OS4 users presume the right to suggest such an ideas?
We don't root for OS4's failure. Frankly, this red vs. blue friction is fiction.

>Just leave the AmigaOS out of it please!

AOS4, I personally will leave out of it. It did not exist when MorphOS was created and my interest lays solely in 3.1 and MOS.

@ Andreas_Wolf

>> That's curiously conservative of you.

>Really? What would you've expected me to do or write then?Andreas_Wolf,

Pretty much what Koan and I have posted.
Basically, "Dave, why haven't you addressed the point of this thread?"
In other words, I expected you to hold his feet to the fire like you would any of us for making unsupported statements.

"Where's your evidence, Dave?"

@Slayer

Trademarks (more or less "robbed") aside, AROS, MorphOS and OS4 are *all* re-implementations of Amiga OS, and they are all *equally real*. One of the most prominent development goals of *all three of them* was to *break free* from the Amiga hardware but still provide Amiga compatibility, while trying to evolve things to a modern level (being able to use modern hardware, use the Internet in a modern way, play modern media files, etc). MorphOS does this the best of all three. In that sense, MorphOS represents the very peak of Amiga NG evolution.

But then there is a fourth (or maybe I should say *the first*? ) "Amiga OS", and that is simply *Amiga OS*, the one that runs on *Amigas*! The one that was here first, has been here all along (now used by "Retro fans"), and possibly will be here in the future as well, maybe even in an *evolved* ("Amiga OS +") version for evolved Amiga Hardware (the Natami). And no, this this is *not* the same thing as "OS4". Sorry! The most prominent goal here is to *not* "break free" from Amiga hardware, but to capitalize the most on it!

5795704853_b722d5d487_b.jpg

I respect your choice of NG OS (a decision you most certainly made solely because of *the Trademark*, and *not* based upon technological reasons like "Features", "Level of Amiga Compatibility" and "Performance"), but please don't come here proclaiming that OS4 would be "more real" than AROS and MorphOS! All three are *re-implementations* for "alien" hardware, with various pros and various cons!





[ Edited by takemehomegrandma 11.06.2011 - 20:53 ]

Quote:
You do realize that Sam boards are NOT amiga branded products, and also then-valid at the times of 440 (of course things have changed since then) license of AmigaOS4 explicitly forbid running AmigaOS4 on anything else but AmigaOne branded systems (or classics with PPC)?

Those terms coming from the then-rightsholders of "The Name", as holy entity as one can be.

Personally I can't understand why some people insist on calling Sam boards "Amigas", when they clearly are "common use" PPC boards, and manufacturers have even often stated their primary target market is for embedded systems, nothing Amiga related.

-EDIT-

The point being, this "calling product something that it doesn't have rights to" (indirect labeling of MorphOS as Amiga) happens a lot on AmigaOS4 side too.

[ Edited by Jupp3 13.06.2011 - 16:52 ]

It is people like Slayer and a few other AOS4.x users that are really giving me a bad taste for all things AOS4.x. I used to be very tolerant and did not understand all the bickering between MorphOS and AOS4.x users, but now that I know more, and have witnessed so much blind stupidity by the many vocal AOS4.x fanboys, plus having learned more about the past statements and actions of certain Hyperion employees/owners, I am developing a strong dislike toward AOS4.x and thinking that it might be better to have it fail completely and disappear. Actually, my dislike is toward the fanboy idiots and Hyperion, as I am really indifferent toward AOS4.x. It is an inferior product that I have no interest in using.

AOS4.x (or HyperionOS, as I prefer to call it) is obviously inferior to MorphOS2.7 and is a less deserving successor to AmigaOS3.x than MorphOS2.7 is. Hyperion won the right to use the name AmigaOS using questionable tactics, and they have done their best to keep a few Amiga-Like features in their HyperionOS to fool the name junkie fanboys into staying in their cult, but HyperionOS is no more an AmigaOS than AROS or MorphOS.

I still maintain my view that if HyperionOS were to ever improve and surpass MorphOS2.x, I would consider running it, if it also ran on reasonable priced hardware that was the same, or more powerful than my current G4 Mac models, but I seriously doubt that will ever happen.

Hyperion do not appear to have the talent, or money to purchase the talent, to improve their crippled OS, and I don't see that changing in the future.

I also don't see their user base growing. The existing AOS4.x users are mostly people that are too embarrassed to admit that they made a bad choice and wasted too much money on inferior products and OS, when confronted with the reality of the other two choices, or three choices, if you consider staying with AmigaOS3.x & 68k based systems.

End Rant: