> Early on they thought of a potential two-chip solution (or even three-chip) based
> on the 5200B.

Yes, besides the obvious one-chip solution (MPC5200B), which made it as the only one, it were a two-chip solution (MPC5200B + FPGA) and a three-chip solution (MPC5200B + FPGA + Volari GPU) they thought of.

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6305&forum=11&post_id=63099#63099

> the result became known as "LimePC", a cooperation which crashed
> and burned later on.

It seems the LimePC survived this crash and burn:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6726&forum=11&post_id=77244#77244

> Pegatron [...] (Asus development company).

Not any more. It was spun off in June.

>> http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2006/10/wanting-what-you-have.html

> Which is the 5121e

Yes, obviously. But still the first samples of that chip were 8 months away back then.

> I never claimed that MorphOS was realized for LimePC

And I never claimed you did. I just wanted to outline that BBRV and Neko contradicted each other regarding the role of MorphOS in LimePC.

> this was [...] possibly also a reason (aside from a porting fee) to why RS agreed

Maybe, or maybe not.

> the MorphOS team releasing it for the *efika* two years after the agreement was done

More like 1.5 years.

> Go back in the thread and read the posts talking about
> business, volume, revenue, payment from Genesi, etc.

I did and I still can't find any posting saying something to the effect of "that *revenue* is their biggest motivation for MorphOS development". Firstly there's a difference between "biggest motivation" and just "motivation", and secondly there's probably a difference in intrinsic motivation between porting MorphOS to a desktop-worthy and mass-produced hardware like PPC Macs and porting it to something like the 128 MiB RAM Efika 5200B or the 2000+ EUR X1000, where some kind of additional motivation (read: payment) may be needed to start the porting.

> you will see that there isn't really a business going here

Yes, and even without you telling me. It's you who claims that others in this thread would see a business going here.

> Had *business* been the biggest motivator for MorphOS development

Again: Nobody said that. It's a straw man argument.

> then the OS would have been ported to a different architecture a long time ago

A backwards compatible MorphOS on PPC may still have a better chance to be used by anyone than a non-backwards compatible MorphOS on another architecture.

> and/or niched differently than a general desktop OS.

You mean embedded? That's even harder to gain a foothold.