Quote:

Ralph isn't active on MorphOS. The closest thing to a project lead has been Frank Mariak, for several years now. Frank has decades of experience in both coding and in commercial companies, so it's not exactly in unsafe hands.

Quote:

You already know what Stefan said. He said that notAmigaOS4 was free to develop its own derivative notMUI4, as long as they paid the shareware fee, since on MorphOS it isn't shareware. That's it. He didn't give permission for credits to be changed or other people's work to be poached. Once he made his demands and they apparently were met, he went back to biking and ignoring MUI again.

We also all know that MUI4 was only partly developed by Stefan Stuntz. Many others in the MorphOS team also contributed their code. (Piru has already objected to his files being pirated. The MP of Hyperion apologised for this, only to have that piece of arrogant horse shit Ben Hermans speak over him.) It is now impossible to ever delineate where Stefan's code ends and MorphOS code begins.

Taking other people's work without their permission is theft. Taking credit for other people's work (i.e. by removing their names or implying a reversed-engineered version is the original) is theft. I don't think we need Stuntzi to define theft for us.

[ Edited by KennyR 03.10.2015 - 22:15 ]

Thanks Kenny,
I can be a little slow on the uptake, but I am quite aware of the integral role Frank has played in recent years.

And for that matter Mark, Harry, Fab, Andre and Jacek.
I'm just not sure who "the others" are that I shouldn't slight by omission.

We do seem to have the core of the best programmers left creating in the Amiga community.

BTW if MUI for AmigaOS is not supposed to be called MUI4, why IS it?

Oh, and my fascination with Ralph, that looks like one cool kernel they won't give us any documentation on.
I've never used another OS where I have felt this frustrated over the lack of documentation for specific components.

> Ralph isn't active on MorphOS.

When did he stop? Mid-2012?

> Stefan [...] said that notAmigaOS4 was free to develop its own derivative notMUI4

So I guess it was him who he gave the 2006 MUI4 source code to them and there was nothing illegal in developing the derivative per se, opposed to what some claim in this thread.

> Once he made his demands and they apparently were met, he went back to biking
> and ignoring MUI again.

"Stefan Stuntz >>is<< still part of the MorphOS team. No just as a name in some about window."
Source: geit in comment #23

> Piru has already objected to his files being pirated. The MP of Hyperion apologised
> for this, only to have that piece of arrogant horse shit Ben Hermans speak over him.

Mincea is technical director, while Hermans is legal director *and* co-owner.

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11342&start=38

> I'm just not sure who "the others" are that I shouldn't slight by omission.

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11372&start=22 ;-)

> if MUI for AmigaOS is not supposed to be called MUI4, why IS it?

I guess because it is based on 2006 MUI4 source code and the maintainers think it is supposed to be called MUI4 ;-)

>So I guess it was him who he gave the 2006 MUI4 source code to them and there was nothing illegal in developing the derivative per se, opposed to what some claim in this thread.

So, in the end it would appear that the only real impropriety is the numbering scheme AND the borrowing of code.

Which takes us back to the question of why they would want MUI compatibility (specially MUI4 compatibility) and that is obviously to run software written for MorphOS.

Flattering AND troubling.

Ah well, soon two out of three available new AmigaOne systems will be supported by MorphOS.
So...maybe the users should just switch.

Quote:

He is active in the mailing list...

Quote:

"Stefan Stuntz >>is<< still part of the MorphOS team. No just as a name in some about window. You can turn facts as often as you want on this."

Is it possible to highlight the "is" part some more?

Quote:

MUI4 was a prerequisite for an easy Odyssey port to AmigaOS, the same for Fab's MPlayer. I personally don't see the problem with MUI on OS4.1 per se, but the initial 'no keyfile required' release and subsequent documentation copying fiasco suggests a lack of diligence and/or respect for licensing by the MUI developers, sadly.

> in the end it would appear that the only real impropriety is the numbering scheme

Both MUI4.0 and MUI4.2 are MUI4 :-)

> AND the borrowing of code.

Which code?

> why they would want [...] MUI4 compatibility

Isn't the accusation that they're making their MUI4 incompatible with MorphOS MUI4+ on purpose? :-)

>Which code?

Oh I'm not getting involved in that one. ;)

>Isn't the accusation that they're making their MUI4 incompatible with MorphOS MUI4+ on purpose?

Yes..isn't THAT particularly silly?

>>> AND the borrowing of code.

>> Which code?

> I'm not getting involved in that one. ;)

You already are with your claim that code has been "borrowed" in the case of MUI4. I'm not aware of this and haven't read of this in this thread so far, hence my question.

Quote:

I like good suspense, by language you mean for country support or computer language ?

Kamelito

Computer language.

Quote:

C# would be really cool. :)

Quote:

Could you switch to a single quote post for that first one Andreas?
I'm not seeing it.

As to the second, I guess we can thank the individual who provided the source code, which brings us back to the question Andre found "bizarre".

Quote:

We known by his posts that Itix like C#. is Morphos moving to an OOP APIs?
Kamelito

Quote:

Not to my knowledge. MUI4 on OS4 seems entirely reverse-engineered from the same developer materials that they were replacing everyone's names on. I haven't heard anything about Stuntzi handing out code. Stuntzi only became aware some weeks after they released their hack, having had no idea of it beforehand.

Stunzi therefore not wanting to become involved in another Amigaish race to the bottom, told them they'd have to use MUI3's registration system, and was content (if not happy) when they agreed.

Quote:

Well that, and blatant theft.

Quote:

Early in OS4 development, it still had the strong Hague&Partner/StormC brainwashing going on. Hence, it was believed, MUI was buggy crap and ClassAct/ReAction was truly the gadtools successor. Problem about ReAction though was that it was quite a lot more buggy than MUI, since it was a hell of a lot less real-world tested than MUI. It is also a lot more difficult to use in coding than MUI. Finally, it is feature-poor compared to MUI. There were a few very limited apps early on (such as Docky), but they petered out fast.

Now, add this to the fact that OS4 has had very few people with any coding skill for a decade now, so covetous eyes have turned to MorphOS apps like Odyssey. How do you port these without rewriting them? Oh... MUI4.

Quote:

If the users were that adept at logic, they would have abandoned ship when Eyetech fausted some broken evaluation board on them and buggered off. They prefer just to leech - that way they don't have to face reality. It is the only computing platform that unashamedly steals ideas and code from every other one and yet returns nothing but hate for it.


[ Edited by KennyR 04.10.2015 - 16:46 ]

Quote:

He never stopped, he just did less and less. Don't forget the guy has been working on it since 1997. I don't expect someone to give their whole working life to a computer platform and neither should anyone else.

Quote:

Mincea is a technical director, but also the only named managing partner, AFAIK. Hermans was "supposed" to have stepped down as MP several times, most recently when the company didn't file its documents in time and almost went bankrupt. In reality we know who pulls the string at Hyperion, and is responsible for every one of its crappy decisions and 100% of the hate and bad faith towards it.

Quote:

Yes, but it would be true to form. Well, at least, it would be true to form that they would be making it incompatible... just not on purpose.

That's if OS4 itself is anything to go by. It rapidly became less and less compatible with the original AmigaOS from 4.0 to 4.1. This was not all due to intent. But, when questioned, they said that compatibility was never the target and that people should move on.

Anyway, the irony is that they think because they signed a bad contract with money launderers that they are somehow the authoritative platform. Therefore, they way they see it, MUI4 on OS4 is now *the* MUI4, and it's now MorphOS that is incompatible. And I only wish I was joking.

"TD64 is a bug." - Joerg Stroehmeyer

>>> I'm just not sure who "the others" are that I shouldn't slight by omission.

>> https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=11372&start=22 ;-)

> Could you switch to a single quote post for that first one Andreas? I'm not seeing it.

I'm referring to posting #23 and the line "MorphOS Developer" below the poster's name.

Thanks, that is crystal clear.

[ Edited by Jim 04.10.2015 - 15:57 ]

>> So I guess it was him who he gave the 2006 MUI4 source code to them

> Not to my knowledge.

What's your knowledge based on? Hearsay or first-hand info directly from Stuntz?

> MUI4 on OS4 seems entirely reverse-engineered

Seems or is?

> I haven't heard anything about Stuntzi handing out code.

Me neither, but that's the only reasonable explanation as to how they could have ended up with 2006 MUI4 source code, which is what had been established as alleged fact in the old "MUI4 for OS4?" thread here on MorphZone.

> Stuntzi only became aware some weeks after they released their hack, having had no idea
> of it beforehand.

Is that first-hand info?

> it was believed, MUI was buggy crap

As far as I remember, the main argument against MUI (true or not) was that it was slow, not buggy.

> How do you port these without rewriting them?

How do you port something and rewrite it at the same time? ;-)

Thanks Andreas.
Which again brings us back to "bizarre" questions.

Is Stuntz responsible for the release of those sources?

And just how "friendly" is he feeling towards us these days?

Quote:

When Piru first discovered what they were doing, he contacted Stuntzi directly. Apparently, he [Stuntzi] was surprised to hear about it. I wasn't told if he was angry or not, but he responded quickly.

Quote:

If you want an authoritative answer to that, you should ask its developers. They won't tell you of course; they'd rather hide behind a cloud of mistruths and misunderstandings to avoid looking like the villains. Especially after 15 years of calling MorphOS a "pirate OS".

Quote:

Not really the *only* reasonable explanation, and indeed far down in the list of reasonable explanations. Occam's Razor would assume someone had been naughty and leaked the source, as several developers did work on OS4 and MorphOS alike. If Stuntzi gave them the source, wouldn't he have given something a bit more up to date? Wouldn't he have made sure to add the shareware registration in that source, or at least stipulated that it should have one?

Quote:

No, but it is directly second hand, while the first hand was still warm.

Quote:

Slow, buggy, and a memory hog. Quite ironic really, given the nature of the GUIs people used to get away from it (BGUI, Wizard, ReAction, etc).

Quote:

When all you get is old source and you want to make it compile with apps meant for a version eight years newer, that would be exactly what you have to do.

>> Mincea is technical director, while Hermans is legal director *and* co-owner.

> Mincea is a technical director

He is *the* technical director of Hyperion Entertainment CVBA.

> but also the only named managing partner, AFAIK.

Huh? Where do you have that from? As is required for a CVBA, Hyperion Entertainment CVBA has three or more co-owners (aka shareholders), one of which is Hermans. And according to public record, Hyperion Entertainment CVBA has three directors, two of which are Hermans and Mincea.
The managing partner title is obsolete since the inception of Hyperion Entertainment CVBA in 2009 and a remnant from the old Hyperion Entertainment VOF days where both Hermans and Carton were managing partners.

> Hermans was "supposed" to have stepped down as MP several times

Hyperion Entertainment CVBA never had any MP. Hermans has been co-owner (aka shareholder) and director of Hyperion Entertainment CVBA since its inception in 2009. He stepped down as MP of Hyperion Entertainment VOF in 2003, once.

> most recently when the company didn't file its documents in time and almost went bankrupt.

Do you have any proof that "Hermans was "supposed" to have stepped down" when that happened?

> In reality we know who pulls the string at Hyperion

Of course, it's the owners (aka shareholders), one of which is Hermans.

> it would be true to form that they would be making it incompatible... just not on purpose.

"FrankenMUI was intentional made incompatible to not support porting stuff from AmigaOS to MorphOS. So from day one there was no will to keep FrankenMUI kompatible for multi platform coding on AmigaOS4 side."
Source: geit in comment 35

> they way they see it, MUI4 on OS4 is now *the* MUI4, and it's now MorphOS that is incompatible.

They released their MUI4 also for OS3. Maybe the MorphOS team should release MUI5 for OS3 as well :-)