AmigaOS 3.1.4 withdrawn from market after Amiga

[DamienD]

This thread is really going around in circles now...

Personally I haven't purchased 3.1.4 as I have no use via emulation... but I do really admire people like Thomas who are trying to bring new updates.

As we all know, he's not getting paid, he's doing this for the community and because he cares about the Amiga platform.

Ok, yes, Hyperion are making money from hsi / the teams' efforts but I guess this was the only way in which it could have been released.

kolla / Gorf / others with the same viewpoint; Thomas has said that fixes / updates will occur in future.

Please stop banging on with the same critism, over and over again in forum after forum... we've all heard it 100 times now and it's getting old.

Just let him / the team get on with fixing the *new* so called bugs instead of having to defend himself on a forum.

If you're not happy with 3.1.4, ask Hyperon for a refund and be done with it.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by Minuous

@Steril707:

In my case I'd be happy to work on improving OS3.9

Oh, probably a tiny list for you:

asl.library, diskfont.library, sound.datatype, picture.datatype, animation.datatype, anim.datatype, ilbm.datatype, printer.device, parallel.device, serial.device, fast file system, console.device, scsi.device, bootmenu, bullet.library, iff.library, datatypes.library, the shell, the workbench.library, the icon.library and numerous other components I have forgotten *ARE* actually based on their 3.9 counterparts, or are particularly updated versions thereof, with many, many bugs fixed.

I really do not have the list right handy, but, in fact, there are more updates in 3.1.4 than they were in 3.9, and I would believe that the majority of the updates was carried over. I took really care of getting the latest and best working components I could find.

The only thing we miss from 3.9 was the reaction eye-candy, and components that depend on the 3.9 eye-candy.

It's always so easy to complain if you don't know any better, right?

So, quite frankly: If reaction is all you miss, you can certainly install those from 3.9.
And if you get hold of their sources - in a legally proper way that is - I am certainly more than happy to update them as well.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by Minuous

@Steril707:

No, it's not enough. I have zero interest in OS3.1 or any clone of it.

Then 3.1.4 should be right for you. Because it's not a clone of 3.1. The name started as a pun (actually, Olaf made it up), because initially, this was only about releasing an HDToolBox with a 4GB "safety switch" so that you couldn't create partitions beyond "the magic wall".

Then I started fixing FFS.

Then things got out of hand.

I really suggest - really - to read the 3.1.4 thread on AmigaOrg. I put down a list of what all changed there. Be ensured that it is more than 3.1 + 0.04. It is more 3.9 plus a lot minus reaction.

Just the name stuck. Actually, I still like the name. If you ask me, the update will be 3.1.4.1 (of course).

[SpeedGeek]

Originally Posted by malko

You substitute yourself for the judge with this statement. It's a step I wouldn't take, nor comment.

This case will be decided by a jury, not a judge and I feel perfectly well qualified to be a substitute juror in this case.

Originally Posted by malko

As vocabulary is a field we are all concerned (and there is no need to substitute to anybody ) we can argue a bit. But, as I don't like the term you use (dubious), let's use instead "unclear". Here is my understanding :

My dictionary lists "Unclear" as one of the words which define "Dubious". Perhaps your understanding of English is not so good.

You can ignore my (jurors) opinion, and the lawyer's representing the Amiga parties and Cloanto but what about Hyperion's own press release?

Hyperion Entertainment CVBA is pleased to announce that on September 30, 2009, it has reached a comprehensive settlement agreement with Amiga, Inc., Itec LLC and Amino Development Corporation, Inc. [sic] to bring all ongoing litigation and worldwide pending procedures between the parties to an end.
As part of the settlement agreement, the Amiga Parties acknowledge that Hyperion is the sole owner of AmigaOS 4 without prejudice to any third party rights.
Within the framework of the settlement agreement Hyperion is granted an exclusive perpetual, worldwide right to AmigaOS 3.1 in order to use, develop, modify, commercialize, distribute and market AmigaOS 4.x (and subsequent versions of the AmigaOS including without limitation AmigaOS 5) in any form, on any medium and for any current or future hardware platform under the exclusive trademark “AmigaOS” (Amiga operating system) and using other associated trademarks (such as the “BoingBall” logo).
Hyperion will continue development and distribution of AmigaOS 4.x (and beyond) as it has done since November of 2001.
We wish to thank our loyal customers who have supported us through the judicial procedures and especially the AmigaOS 4.x development team for their continued efforts and at the request of whom this official announcement was made.
As Hyperion Entertainment’s most ambitious project to date is drawing to a close in collaboration with our partners, we invite our current and prospective customers to watch this space for further updates on Hyperion’s continued efforts to revive the Amiga platform.

[grond]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

What I meant is really that: "What did you actually develop." As in "you, yourself, personally". In case this wasn't clear to begin with:

*THIS* is what open source is about. Doing the work yourself. You, actually, personally.

I'm no programmer but I fixed a linux hardware driver for an embedded device to keep it from crashing reproducibly and I made a contribution to the linux NTSC driver. Is that good enough?

[Minuous]

@Thomas Richter:

I don't recall complaining about OS3.1.4 and I appreciate the effort you have gone to. It's not for me, at least not in its entirety, but clearly it is the best OS for 68000/68010-based Amigas. And I understand the situation with the availability of sources.

>And if you get hold of their sources - in a legally proper way that is - I am certainly more than happy to update them as well.

That would be great. I have a copy of the contract here somewhere, I will have to check who has the rights now.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by grond

I'm no programmer but I fixed a linux hardware driver for an embedded device to keep it from crashing reproducibly and I made a contribution to the linux NTSC driver. Is that good enough?

Good enough for what? For moving AROS forward? I don't think so, no.

Actually, you find my name in the Linux sources as well. Now what?

[grond]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Good enough for what?

For you to acknowledge that an open-sourced AmigaOS would get improvements from others who don't want to tie themselves to Hyperion via NDA. I understand that open-sourcing AmigaOS is entirely hypothetical at the time being but you seem to repeatedly make the point that open-sourcing it wouldn't make any difference for the better.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

That is why there will be an update. I do not have a problem with releasing updates as well.

Hyperion (and you?) might not be allowed to do so in near future - so this is not a matter of good will but of legal status.

Should we write "Open AmigaOs 3.2" on the next package to satisfy you, then? And call it a "bounty" instead of "a price"? Would that work for you any better?

If it is really "open" and not just a label: yes please!
Much better of course!

What I meant is really that: "What did you actually develop." As in "you, yourself, personally".

As I wrote: I did and do my commits to various open source projects.
(FreeBSD NIC, a FEM simulator, now it is mostly databases)

I did that because *I WANTED THAT THING TO HAPPEN*. Not because I was paid for it.
So, who is really supporting things here, eh?

It that "thing" is called "Hyperion" - yes you are supporting it. To what end ... we will see.

[Tigerskunk]

What I don't get is: You don't need to have the sources of AOS to code something useful and beneficial for it.

PeterK and his Icon-Library are the biggest proof of that.

Sorry guys, all I read is a whole lot of "Mi Mi Mi" in this thread and lame excuses of not being able to directly work on those stone age old sources for not taking action.

Be the change you want to see or stop complaining.

No one keeps you from implementing a better Library or HD-Toolbox from scratch if the one supplied by the OS doesn't suffice for you.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by Steril707

You are hitting the nail on the head here, Thomas..

Otherwise we would have hundreds of people working on AROS in their free time.

The truth is, the actual count is more akin to zero..

and how do you know? you keeping eye on daily commits to aros repo or chatting with the devs? just as example as you guys were arguing here yesterday evening, there was at least three notable individuals from aros team and two vampire users except of me working on aros68k in order to deliver it also to other vampire users. you may have noticed the complaint thread on a1k, concerning that, but as soon as proper testing is required the posters got silent for the most part. now, even if i dont want to pick on this, but i wonder how many people are currently actively working on 3.1.4 for comparison, if this is what you consider an only worthy effort.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by Minuous

@Steril707:

No, it's not enough. I have zero interest in OS3.1 or any clone of it.

im kind of tired of you puting down aros as being featurewise on pair with vanilla amiga 3.1 kickstart. even if it suits your agenda it isnt. considering the content in a completely different class. and your constant bickering is simply an attempt at disinformation.

[Minuous]

OK, found the contract for OS3.5 ReAction here:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxlY...yY2JhZWQ2/edit

Seems H&P didn't have the source code at that time and Final Development kept rights to it. But judging from the release notes in the 3.9 NDK, H&P were the ones to make the improvements for OS3.9. So probably some deal would have to be reached with both H&P and Final Development.

Originally Posted by Steril707

What I don't get is: You don't need to have the sources of AOS to code something useful and beneficial for it.

Well, I did make a commented disassembly/decompilation of OS3.9 bitmap.image which is on my site at http://amigan.1emu.net/aw/bitmap.image-src.lha but it is not feasible for a single dev to disassemble the entire OS, I'm sure you'd agree, it needs more manpower.

@wawa:

It implements only 82% of OS3.1 after 24 years of development, according to the official site at www.aros.org, so on par with 3.1 would be a generous interpretation. If that's disinformation, you should take it up with the ones who run that site.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by grond

For you to acknowledge that an open-sourced AmigaOS would get improvements from others who don't want to tie themselves to Hyperion via NDA. I understand that open-sourcing AmigaOS is entirely hypothetical at the time being but you seem to repeatedly make the point that open-sourcing it wouldn't make any difference for the better.

Indeed, it wouldn't. There wouldn't be more people that actually do something, and there would be an equal or larger amount of complainers because - whatever anyone would do -somebody else would complain about it. As it happens here. Everything you do is wrong for someone.

In fact, the whole process would be just more complicated because everyone has an opinon, and everyone would be discussing, and the work would not move forward to any particular goal because noone would do the actual work - or only few people.

Coordination and direction is a must-have with so little resources to spare, and so much work ahead.

Frankly, I see where Linux stands. We have a gazillon different flavours of desktops. Yet none that is really complete and competative - what is the market share of linux? Next to nothing. Having so many different flavours of "almost ready" kind-of works if you have sufficient development resources. We don't.

But, for AmigaOs, we don't even have enough for one release, leave alone several. Where would things go if there wouldn't be a clear direction at least at some point?

Open source is a nice idea if there is sufficient mass, and sufficient good will. I see neither here in Amiga-land. Little mass, massive complainers.

[Marlon_]

Originally Posted by Steril707

Otherwise we would have hundreds of people working on AROS in their free time.
...
if you can't handle that, code for AROS or pay some money to the devs who do. Oh, you didn't and that's why nobody is left there to code on it anymore?

Too bad.

The main issue here is that "AROS is not AmigaOS/Workbench" mentality going around in the Amiga community.

Also the point of open sourcing AmigaOS would be to stop the endless bickering between parties holding the OS hostage.

I'm personally following AROS 68k development very closely and help where I can.

[Romanujan]

Originally Posted by Marlon_

The main issue here is that "AROS is not AmigaOS/Workbench" mentality going around in the Amiga community.

True. I have tried AROS some time ago. Holy crap, it was unusable... it couldn't even render text on the console with acceptable performance :/ I definitely prefer AmigaOS, especially if it is still being developed.

[Marlon_]

Originally Posted by Romanujan

True. I have tried AROS some time ago. Holy crap, it was unusable... it couldn't even render text on the console with acceptable performance :/ I definitely prefer AmigaOS, especially if it is still being developed.

There are issues with the 68k branch of AROS, but that's being worked on, alongside a native port for Raspberry Pi boards. The main issues with AROS on 68k is the graphics rendering and the ata.device/scsi.device, but that's currently being worked on.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Steril707

No one keeps you from implementing a better Library or HD-Toolbox from scratch if the one supplied by the OS doesn't suffice for you.

That is exactly the point ... on closed source you need to reinvent the wheel over and over

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Originally Posted by Romanujan

True. I have tried AROS some time ago. Holy crap, it was unusable....

Where and what you have tested Aros 68k, there are only small problems already mentioned by Marlon for the rest is already a usable system, see video.

[ Show youtube player ]

[ Show youtube player ]

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by AMIGASYSTEM

Where and what you have tested Aros 68k, there are only small problems already mentioned by Marlon for the rest is already a usable system, see video.

You did select "JIT" there in the WinUEA prefs - so this is no measurement for real Amiga hardware.

(And why did you choose 68060? On WinUEA this is slower than 020+FPU and JIT)