20 May 2016, 21:26 | #61 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 50
Posts: 2,946
|
Quote:
Anyway, I feel we're drifting off topic now, so Ill stop talking about this :-) In any case, I'm hopeful this P96 drama will get sorted out sooner rather than later. |
|
20 May 2016, 22:26 | #62 |
BoingBagged
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 46
Posts: 2,358
|
@ThomasCGX
You could probably come to an easy agreement with Frank Mariak: You get hold of the entire 68k Amiga sourcecode and binaries and the right to do with it whatever you want. And you could offer him the same deal in regards of the MorphOS development and binaries stuff. So it would be mutually exclusive and beneficial. You keep ownership of 68k Amiga stuff exclusively. Frank Mariak keeps exclusive ownership of the MorphOS stuff. |
21 May 2016, 02:09 | #63 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Lake Havasu City, AZ
Posts: 741
|
Hi Thomas - welcome to the drama!
The Picasso96 system that we are talking about is the code likely derived from your original work. I know the stuff you have done, because we had a few conversations long ago when I made video drivers for EMPLANT's Mac emulation for the Domino and other cards of that era. The recent level of interest in the Picasso96 system has to do with several FPGA based Amiga emulators. I am working with MikeJ on the FPGA Arcade Replay, and we have a Picasso96 compatible RTG driver. However, it is very limited compared to what it could be - only supporting the hardware sprite, and a few basic blitter replacements. What everyone is after is the driver source code, or at least some detailed documentation about how the system replacements are done. The PicassoIV board has a Cirrus chip that is used to handle quite a few of the system drawing (blits) and so the acceleration is quite fast. If we knew exactly what to patch and what is to be expected, we can make similar improvements to our drivers. Now... having said that, if there is information about the Cybergraphics system I am all for jumping ship and switch to it. I am just looking for the fastest possible RTG. Jim Drew - EMPLANT/FUSION/PCx/etc. Utilities Unlimited |
21 May 2016, 05:12 | #64 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Worksop/UK
Age: 59
Posts: 1,328
|
Quote:
He could have done the same but I'm not sure he has the required skill to make a 040/060 card anyway. They are definitely a lot different and harder to design than a 030 accelerator. He could have chosen to work with people like these and take the platform forward, but no, he would rather buy ALL the remaining supplies of Amiga custom chips and attempt to make himself a monopoly in the 68k market and put a stranglehold on the community. |
|
21 May 2016, 09:22 | #65 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 387
|
Quote:
I see refrences to issues being mentioned here and there etc. BUT, Ive purchased hardware from Jens that I couldnt really get anywhere else. USB addons used to be "Out of stock" in every amigashop. Individual Computers? Readily available. Same for a few other things. Then you have accelerators with more memory. I want a faster Amiga with more memory, and was looking at the 030 ACA with 128megs, but since I already had Blizzard 030/50, I just ended up purchasing memory from Ebay. But noone else had accelerators for sale. Where I agree with you, there is a market for 060. I would probarly have purchased a 060 accelerator if it was available 2 years ago from IC. Not anymore due to Vampire. But I was thankful for the hardware I could purchase from Jens when I wanted it. Again, Ive been gone for over a decade, only to return relativly recently, and not knowing all the players in the current market. I just find the outrage a bit odd, unless Im missing something really nasty. |
|
21 May 2016, 09:43 | #66 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 795
|
Quote:
|
|
21 May 2016, 13:53 | #67 | |
Registered User
|
Quote:
|
|
21 May 2016, 14:37 | #68 |
Zone Friend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Belgium
Age: 51
Posts: 1,296
|
there is not really enough information to judge things the right way here (it looks like we're missing a lot of the picture and almost looks like only a little piece was put on twitter to encourage speculation and flame wars) but it is really a pity these battles over the Amiga keep on going on 20 years after its demise, whether it is because of ego, money or simply patent trolling.
For me personally, the older my systems become, the cheaper it must be to maintain it (repair/upgrade). It costs already a fair deal of money these days if you want to put some fresh live in these 20-30 year old machines, and I did buy from virtually all existing shops/vendors out there and multiple individual hobbyists, because I have no problem to support them. But there are limits of course. Now in the worst case, if 1 supplier takes over the whole market (by killing off all competitors + killing any incentive for innovation alongside), and then overcharge users to buy his software/hardware products (in fact this is how every monopolist works), that would really mean the end of my nostalgic love for Amiga, and sell everything and never look back. Same would apply if a handful of people/companies form a cartel, make sure the prices are always inflated wherever you buy, and send out cease and desist messages to anyone trying to start up something that may harm their self-esteemed acceptable profit margins. ps: now the wickedest thing would be the twitter thing was a pure hoax just to start a war against a certain 'individual'! |
21 May 2016, 14:47 | #69 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,893
|
Almost nobody used P96 back then, CyberGraphX was standard and P96 was an oddball piece of software needed for certain Picasso cards. It was not a competing product, because almost nobody used it. Later on CyberGraphX became bluecamp and in lack of alternatives, P96 was grabbed for redcamp, and suddenly became "official" Amiga RTG. Personally, I find P96 utterly cumbersome and clumsy to use and configure.
|
21 May 2016, 15:21 | #70 |
Registered User
|
@kolla
LOL, almost nobody used P96? i hope you have something to back that up with. I can only agree on that P96 have a strange preference program with a gui that are not standard anywhere, But even a retarded person should be able to learn how to use it and then it's easy and powerfull to work with it. |
21 May 2016, 16:30 | #71 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,893
|
P96 came late in the game (1996, duh) and CyberGraphX had already been around for a while, I can merely back up my statement with my own experiences from being quite active in the 90ies. Having a graphics card was in itself rather rare, and the big player was Phase5 with the various Cybervision cards, the only Picasso card that was "current" was the Picasso-IV card. All Phase5 cards came with CyberGraphX, and it supported older Picasso cards well. It wasn't until Elbox came around with Mediator that p96 picked up. Biggest user base of P96 has probably always been UAE, but it allows much simpler implementation.
|
21 May 2016, 16:55 | #72 |
Registered User
|
@Kolla
Yeah that sounds quite likely that the userbase for a new software starts at 0 and then increases. But it's still quite unlikely that Frank & Thomas was so blind that they didn't notice a new competitior. |
21 May 2016, 17:15 | #73 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,893
|
Except that it never really was a competition.
|
21 May 2016, 17:21 | #74 |
Registered User
|
@Kolla
Do you also deny the holocaust? They were both operating on a shrinking market, the p5 produced cards lasted a little longer then the rest but then eventually we had the pci bussboards and the mediator turned out as the winner. Last edited by SMF; 21 May 2016 at 17:37. |
21 May 2016, 17:37 | #75 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 4,332
|
Because they (Elbox) were bloody pirates, that's why. The P96 developers were very upset, as anyone who read the Mediator mailing list or amiga-news remembers.
|
21 May 2016, 17:46 | #76 |
Registered User
|
But nothing really bad happend in the end except that the p96 guys didn't get any money. So i see no reasons for the new greedy HW producers to pay for other peoples work. Just opensource it!
|
21 May 2016, 18:00 | #77 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 4,332
|
The way I see it: If you don't want to pay for a 060, make your own 060 in an FPGA. If you don't want to pay for the drivers, make your own bloody drivers.
|
21 May 2016, 18:06 | #78 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 795
|
in this case (it seems) that someone wants to monopolise the market through buying a specific software. So what is your strange posting about?
|
21 May 2016, 18:20 | #79 |
Registered User
|
@OlafSch
ThomasCGFX will opensource cgfx so don't worry! Unless the morphos bastards gets in the way. |
21 May 2016, 18:24 | #80 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 795
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
C64 Forever ROM licensing | Rixa | Retrogaming General Discussion | 15 | 12 December 2019 19:12 |
Status of 5x A4000. | Turran | Hardware pics | 7 | 06 January 2014 13:05 |
Status LEDs | xArtx | support.WinUAE | 4 | 14 June 2013 11:08 |
Poseidon Licensing | paulo_becas | support.Apps | 6 | 18 April 2013 08:12 |
CARE status | AmiGer | project.CARE | 11 | 28 August 2006 10:47 |
|
|