> someone made some libellous and presumably false allegation against H&P.
> Odd that it never went to court then if there was any substance to it.
> [...] Various such allegations are always floating around the community
> in regard to most Amiga-related companies. [...] I prefer to wait for
> hard evidence before jumping to conclusions.

Read there directly from the horse's mouth:

http://web.archive.org/web/20050221085432/http://www.guru-group.fi/~too/amitcp.txt
http://www.amigahistory.plus.com/amitcp392.txt
http://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2000-12-00114-EN.html

> Should I therefore believe the allegations floating around about
> Genesi stealing the AmigaOS 3.1 source code?

You can easily deduce these allegations as nonsense (unless they involve a time machine in Genesi's possession):
- MorphOS development start: 1998
- initial MorphOS release: 2000
- incorporation of Genesi: 2003

> Perhaps this explains the lack of OS3.5/3.9 support in MOS

There is an easier explanation:
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=9641&start=28

> it maybe be possible to acquire ReAction source from H&P or from the
> original developers. [...] there seem to be only minor improvements
> in the OS4 ReAction compared to the OS3.9 ReAction.

I don't know about the ReAction enhancements in OS4, but licensing an old ReAction version for MorphOS would surely result in a situation similar to the current MUI situation, only with the two operating systems reversed.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=38546&forum=14

Wow, MUI, Odyssey, a little more work and they'll have....a slightly slower version of our OS (without Reggae, TinyGL, etc.).

I thought we were the party accused of copying.

As far as I can tell, it is just a fork of MUI. Our MUI4 (I'd say, to avoid confusion, the only MUI4) is version 4.2, copyrighted 2012 by Stefan Stunz. Their is 4.0, copyrighted 2006 Stefan Stunz. I'd also say that the internals of MUI4, which were completely and heavily rewritten, are completely different for this release. As far as I can tell, these are most of the functionalities of MUI4 needed for Odyssey and MPlayer built on top of MUI 3.9.
As often happens, the usual inferior copy of MorphOS functionalities somebody else has to live with...

But feel free to correct me.

Kind regards,
Andrea

If this was Amiga.org or AmigaWorld someone would, then they would probably insult your penis size.
But we tend to be above such silliness.

Still, how is it again that we get accused of copying?

@Jim

I don't know about that. I think a lot of MorphOS users have a sadistic liking of downtalking AmigaOS 4 (like in the thread in question). You either keep pounding in your points to those people, or you try to be the bigger person. You can't have both.

Quote:

Becoz it teh reeel Jim! ;)

Quote:

The only public stable (non-beta) version of MUI that existed back in 2006 was MUI 3. A few (2?) public betas of MUI 4 was released after that over a few years before it formally arived in MorphOS 2.0 in mid-2008.

That the info screen of the OS4 "MUI4" says:
(C) 1992-2006 Stefan Stuntz
(C) 2006-2013 Thore Böckelmann, Jens Maus

...means that this is *NOT* the MUI4 that Stefan Stuntz spent a few years developing post 2006, it's something else, developed by some others. And to confirm this, itix heard from an OS4 beta tester that this is something Hyperion built themselves on top of the MUI3.9 they bundle with OS4.

Quote:

Of course, they are simply not there, since the internals in OS4 "MUI4" is MUI3.9!

Quote:

Indeed, that seems exactly how this is. It's MUI 3.9 with selected custom written third party classes added, and a "MUI4" sticker slapped on. A "bastard fork", that will (as itix says) always be a little left behind because Hyperion must wait new MorphOS SDK to be released in order to implement changes to their development tree.

Well ain't that gonna start a shit storm with the OS4 community.
Hey, they need to get over themselves.
So they copied something.
There's a long tradition of that in OS development, ask Bill Gates.

And we appear to be providing the bulk of the funding for the Odyssey port (which, come on, is the reason for this development in the first place).

Quote:
After some quick investigation, I have to say it appears code is based on an early snapshot of MUI4 beta rather than on MUI 3.9, so internals are less different than I originally thought. But for the rest it is still partially reverse engineering on top of old code.

Kind regards,
Andrea

In any case, it appears to have its primary purpose in allowing our community's developers to throw more pearls before swine.

Jim,
Quote:
...or alternatively, MorphOS developers get the blame for not "just handing over" the code, that OS4 developers promised to their users without having any access to it.

Hey, we could go RiscOS route here! MorphOS has MUI4, OS4 could set their version number as 5, while MorphOS team works on MUI6 etc.!

Or we could just let it go since the OS4 community will seek to turn this against us somehow.
Let them do as they will.
In order to continue to update, they will need to follow our lead.
And if its inferior to our implementation, that just leaves us looking all the better.

> A few (2?) public betas of MUI 4 was released after that over a few years

It were at least 19 public betas.

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=4756&forum=9&start=7
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=4383&forum=9
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=4660&forum=9
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=4992&forum=9
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5512&forum=9
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5554&forum=9
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6314&forum=9
http://www.pegasosforum.de/viewtopic.php?t=3241

MUI4 for AOS4 is like casting perls to the swines.
They should stick to their Reaction crap.

Really don't understand this hatred.
Mui was born on Commodore Amigas as an extension/enhancement to its operating system.
So what's the problem if it runs on Amiga Os4?
It runs, in an opensource-clone way in Aros, and I think it's a blessing the three camps share such a good framework!
Stuntz's idea was a great one, even after twenty years, and hyperion paid for it.
I own all three amigoid systems and it's a good thing to have a similar behaviour on all three platforms when you come to MUI.
You write once and use the same code (or very similar one) on three platforms. Great!

>"it's a good thing to have a similar behavior on all three platforms when you come to MUI."

I'd agree that it is not worth worrying about and will benefit all.

But our version has been enhanced since Stuntz worked on it.
Claiming you have the same thing with a crude hack is annoying.

@Jim

do we know for certain the level of compatibility between MUI4 on AOS4 and MUI4 on MOS? i realize thore and jens couldn't have had access to the MOS sources, but i wonder the degree of compatibility at the API level. i do think, though, it should be made clear to my fellow AOS4 users that, at best, we have MUI4 4.0, not version 4.2 which is what i have on my MOS 3.3 installation.

i will say i do like being able to configure things more easily under the "new" MUI4. i can make MUI applications "look" more like non-MUI applications on my AOS4 installation.

-- eliyahu

Quote:

That is out of our hands.
And really only concerns the users of OS4.
Plus, they don't need the source to re-create how it works.
Our developers didn't need OS3.1 source, just skill.

>> do we know for certain the level of compatibility between MUI4 on AOS4
>> and MUI4 on MOS?

> That [...] really only concerns the users of OS4.

...which eliyahu belongs to, which in turn might explain why he is concerned ;-)

> Plus, they don't need the source to re-create how it works.

You *can* reach 100% compatibility in a reimplementation, yes, but that doesn't mean it has actually been achieved with the OS4 version of MUI4. The question about the compatibility level is a valid one, I think.

Quote:

Even if compatibility would indeed be an exact 100%, it won't be the same product (as you said yourself), so let's call it OS4-MUI4 or whatever and hope that the compatibility *is* an exact 100% so that we won't have a new OS4-SFS "bastard fork" situation (although the effects of this should be far lesser when it comes to something like MUI than SFS, especially for end-users for which it should be close to non-existent). So while the naming can be a bit provoking and/or confusing, let's not exaggerate the implications of it. And who knows, maybe this could result in some OS4 developers finally forgetting about the "Reaction" abomination once and for all, which could possibly benefit the rest of the "NG" world by increasing the possibilities of cross-porting of their apps, who knows?

(Edit: Can't come to think of one single current OS4 Reaction app I'd want though, but maybe some future one? Perhaps?)

> hyperion paid for it

...or not:

http://www.amigans.net/modules/xforum/viewtopic.php?post_id=86246#forumpost86246
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.os4welt.de/viewtopic.php?p=20422%23p20422

Quote:

So if I understand this correctly (second link makes my brain ache!) Hyperion intentionally distributed a pirated copy of MUI4 to their customers just to provoke a reaction from Stuntzi?

Quote:

As much I like to nail something like that to Hyperion....

The guys maintaing the OS4-MUI did release that onw their own, maybe they just forgot to compile the keyfile-check, maybe they thought that Stuntzi was long gone, maybe that their contributions to the code ouweigh his and MUI so somehow became theirs,maybe....

Still quite a funny trainwreck.

Quote:

So the OS4 update mechanism isn't controlled by Hyperion? Interesting.....

Has Stuntzi made any public statements about this debacle?

I was previously under the impression that MUI4 had been bought by the MorphOS Team at some point and now belongs to them, but I'm not sure why I had this idea.