>> I can't answer for MorphOS users who paid cash for their MorphOS
>> registration in person to a MorphOS Dev. Team member, at some event.

> Handling is the same as for paying via paypal.

Thanks for confirming what I've been suspecting.

> this value says nothing about the number of licences

I think it determines an upper limit for the current value, as the latter must be below the value that is discussed in this thread.

> because you need to subtract beta and other keys made for free.

Keyfiles issued for free (for whatever reason) are valid keyfiles nonetheless, so I don't think they should be subtracted when talking about the amount of existing licenses (i.e. existing licensed machines).

> Also keys get purged and reregistered.

By that, I guess you mean the process of "transferring" a keyfile from a broken machine to another machine, correct?
So we now know for sure that the value getting reported in this thread incorporates any of the following groups:

1. users paying via PayPal
2. users paying cash at events
3. users having their paid keyfile transferred from a broken machine to another machine for free
4. developers/betatesters receiving free keyfiles
5. people attempting to register but then for whatever reason not making the final step to perform the actual payment

> The number of users makes this value even lower

Errm, the number of users cannot in any way make the number of licenses any lower. What's true though is that the number of users is lower than the number of valid licenses, which in turn is again lower than the value getting reported in this thread (due to above-mentioned groups #3 and #5).

I have a ODW that I never registered MOS on, and I just registered my 17" Powerbook.

Number 1541! That is good news, we need the date of your email so the graph can be updated.

> Number 1541! [...] we need the date of your email so the graph
> can be updated.

I'm quite confident that in "20120723 1541 Powerbook G4", the first part is the date in ISO 8601 basic format.

Quote:

Exactly
Same rule apply for every key.

I sold the Efika to get the Mini, so there are from this point of view three activly used maschines and at least two users out there.

I really should read things more thoroughly before I post replies on forums. Maybe it was another post which did not include the date of the registration I was thinking of?

I don't care enough to look it up.

Thanks for your numbers. Both .png and .pdf versions have just been updated.

Thanks a lot Kosner for this new update.

Is it not possible to do a graph updated automaticaly ?

Every weeks or every months for exemple ?

[ Edité par Papiosaur 26.07.2012 - 13:43 ]

> Is it not possible to do a graph updated automaticaly ?

I don't think it is.

It is possible, just not probable

Someone should automatically give their new license number every week or every month. It... hmm... could be done, why not? And then someone should write a smart web-based script to process all the given data and make a nice graph out of it. I... hmm... can imagine that... I just fail to imagine anyone willing to do all that :)

>>> Is it not possible to do a graph updated automaticaly ?

>> I don't think it is.

> It is possible

I was referring to the present situation where whoever can be bothered to do so posts his registration number with date into this thread in whatever format he feels like posting. In this situation, automatic updating of the graph would require periodically parsing this thread and the postings within, which I think is not likely to work given the known problems of having natural language processed algorithmically.

If it's the invoice number, mine is #1557 Got it today, and VERY quickly.

And the graph update (or at least the .pdf version) comes really quickly too :)

The line seems to be getting a bit flatter, doesn't it?

EDIT: Ah, what the hell, the .png version got updated too...

[ Edited by koszer 08.08.2012 - 18:27 ]

Seems pretty much the same curve as after the Mini (2.4) release.

@koszer,
Quote:


Yes, the line is starting to flatten out (as expected). It looks very similar to the jump in registrations right after MorphOS2.4 was released for the first Mac models, when support for the G4 MacMini was introduced, but the 3.0 jump in registrations is obviously a little larger than the jump at the 2.4 release of MorphOS. (also as expected)

What puzzles me is the size and relative steepness of the small bump that occurred after support for the 1.25GHz G4 eMac was released? Can anyone remember what might have been included with that release which might have resulted in such a jump in registrations? Was there a price drop with that release? I know that at some point the price of registration was lowered from 150 Euros, to 111.11 Euros, which was the introductory price for a short period when MorphOS2.0 was first released. Or was there some other factor that could explain that small bump in registrations?

Not that it matters, but I am just curious about that small bump upward at a release for a model of Mac computers that almost NO ONE would want to own, because of it's heavy weight and bulky size, but most importantly because of it's poor video quality on the small (by today's standards) 17" CRT monitor. The fact that many of those model eMac's can be found for free, or at very low cost as they have been retired from many businesses, and schools, or training facilities. But there is no similar bump in registrations shown in the graph when MorphOS2.6 was released with support for the much more desirable and similarly easily available G4 PowerMac models.

Personally, I would have thought that there would have been a small bump up in registrations when support for the many different G4 PowerMac models was released, instead of any bump upward in registrations when support for the undesirable 1.25GHz G4 eMac was released.

> What puzzles me is the size and relative steepness of the small bump that
> occurred after support for the 1.25GHz G4 eMac was released? [...] Was there
> a price drop with that release?

Yes, as indicated by the change of background colour in the graph.

I see that now that you mention what the color changes are for, but I never saw any explanation for the color changes before (probably missed that post).

If I had looked at the graph longer and thought about it, I probably could have figured out what the color changes were for (eventually).

I am glad the MorphOS Dev. Team has lowered the price of registering license keys. It makes the decision to register much easier, specially for non-PowerBook users.

bought keyfile for powerbook, number 1550

> I never saw any explanation for the color changes before (probably missed that post).

It was there:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=14&topic_id=5875&start=201

Quote:

and the date would be... something between 23rd July and 8th August?

@amigadave:

Furthermore, the second price reduction (or rather new price range) has been marked with another colour. I could add an on-graph explanation... some time in the future.

[ Edited by koszer 09.08.2012 - 17:39 ]

koszer,
Quote:


No need for my benefit, but it might be helpful for others who have not read through all of the posts in this thread, or miss this post and the couple before it, a month or two from now, or for those who see this graph if I decide to enlarge a print of it to display at the Oct. AmiWest Show with my MorphOS presentation.

There are some (at least one or two) people who are against the idea of me using your graph at the AmiWest Show to represent the number of MorphOS registered computers there, as it has been pointed out in this thread that there are some license registration numbers which may not have resulted in any actual license keyfile being created and sent to anyone, as it the case of someone who starts the registration process, but never completes it by sending in the money to receive their keyfile.

Personally, I don't think there are more than a handful of registration numbers like that, which do not have keyfiles sent out to someone. I believe that the registration numbers reported in this thread are a fairly accurate count of the actual number of computers that are running MorphOS2.x, or 3.x.

My personal prediction of how many MorphOS users there are is still only somewhere around 500 to 750, as I believe that most MorphOS users have 2 to 3 registered MorphOS computers, and the number of MorphOS users with only 1 registered MorphOS computer is probably equal to, or less than, the number of MorphOS users who have 3 or more registered MorphOS computers.

To ease anyone's concerns, I will not be using this graph to try to convince anyone that this is the absolute number of actual registered MorphOS computers out in the wild, but just as a general indication of the current and past registration patterns.

> it has been pointed out in this thread that there are some license registration
> numbers which may not have resulted in any actual license keyfile being created
> and sent to anyone, as it the case of someone who starts the registration process,
> but never completes it by sending in the money to receive their keyfile.

Add to them the users who have/had their paid keyfile transferred from a broken machine to another machine for free.

1573 just in

Quote:

We don't want to forget the 3 to 5 users who have turned their licenses for broken computers into keyfiles for replacement computers.

Even if it is more like 20 broken computers that have been converted to new registration numbers, and even if there are another 20 people who have started the registration process, but decided not to pay for it and never got a license keyfile, the number of MorphOS computers out there is still over 1,500 machines, probably being used by about 550 to 750 MorphOS users and developers.

That is an improvement over the approx. 400 to 475 MorphOS users that registered the first MorphOS computers shortly after MorphOS2.0 was released.

Damn shame there are not at least double or triple that number of MorphOS3.1 users, considering how excellent MorphOS3.1 is at being a Next Gen Amiga system.

#1611 for my Powerbook :)