Picasso96 sold...

[Schoenfeld]

Originally Posted by wXR

Jens, thanks for your efforts, but proprietary software is not helpful, especially for a hobbyist platform. Can we just crowdfund-purchase the whole of P96 back from you, to be *entirely* released as GPL? I offer the first USD $10,000.

I am evaluating the possibility. In essence, we need to make sure that commercial projects based on P96 (such as OS4 and another, not yet disclosed project) are still possible. This comes down to releasing P96 under two licenses, and by that, creating two forks; one open-source that no commercial developer should look at in order not to "infect" the commercial code he's writing, and another open-source fork that does not have anyone "in charge". So maybe the choice of GPLv2 is not compatible with the plans we have. A BSD license may, though, but it'll take a lot more than $10k.

Originally Posted by grond

I doubt very much that the sum was much higher than thousand euros. After all Hyperion are part of the deal and notorious for being bankrupt. And I never considered Jens Schönfeld to be a person willing to spend more than necessary and justified by the expected return on investment.

Badmouthing does not help. Especially not your own reputation.

Jens

[matthey]

Originally Posted by Zippy Zapp

Define around here. Kansas? I am in California and there is quite an active Amiga user base here. And I don't know anyone that gets ridiculed over using a classic computer! People I talk to about it have fond memories and think it is cool. Even some in the younger generation. I have several icomp hardware add-ons including an ACA500, ACA500+, ACA1220 and others. And yes so do some around me even just around the corner in my own town. I am not the only one that prefers actual hardware to software emulation.

I am talking about Kansas City area which is less people and less density of people. There are people here who have fond memories if you bring up the Amiga. Don't tell anyone you still have and use them and don't mention anything about improving them. I get gossip about being the guy "who still uses an Amiga". It is usually not to my face but sometimes I receive derogatory remarks and jokes about the Amiga. I usually happily ignore such remarks but I was set back when I gave an Ethernet card to an Amiga friend who ran an Ethernet cable up to his computer room where he put his now online Amiga 2000. His wife approached me and told me "don't encourage him" before his Amiga was moved back into the basement. The ridicule is not going to come from people in Amiga user groups or retro computer gatherings but they are only a handful of people around here.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by matthey

His wife approached me and told me "don't encourage him"

hah! lets not be getting paranoid. that comment was pretty expectable from some guys wife, wasnt it?

[alpine9000]

Originally Posted by Schoenfeld

I am evaluating the possibility. In essence, we need to make sure that commercial projects based on P96 (such as OS4 and another, not yet disclosed project) are still possible. This comes down to releasing P96 under two licenses, and by that, creating two forks; one open-source that no commercial developer should look at in order not to "infect" the commercial code he's writing, and another open-source fork that does not have anyone "in charge". So maybe the choice of GPLv2 is not compatible with the plans we have. A BSD license may, though, but it'll take a lot more than $10k.


Badmouthing does not help. Especially not your own reputation.

Jens

Have a look at what Trolltech does with QT.

Dual licenses - GPL and commercial.

In a way it is better commercially for the current license holders as they essentially have a monopoly on the commercial exploitation of the product.

[wXR]

Jens, thank you for stopping by to discuss it. And this is quite positive news actually. Is it possible to give some sort of insight into how much you think it will take? My offer of the first $10K stands, and I suspect we could pass the tin can around here to collect whatever else may be needed.

[Acill]

Dual should work fine Jens, just as many of the larger companies do with educational and hobby use. One for hobby use and no commercial gain and another for commercial gain with products to be sold ready to use.

[grelbfarlk]

And Jens what about the issues I'd like fixed is $15 not enough? I'd be willing to go as high as $30. If Jens won't fix the couple little things I'll give THIRTY USD to anyone who does.

Personally I prefer P96 over CGX, and I would suggest to anyone who is daunted by P96Mode to try using umc.lha on Aminet. Ceaich from the Vampire team turned me on to it and makes defining new screenmodes so incredibly easy. Basically you just say 800x480@60hz and it spits out the numbers to put into P96mode, maybe some very minor tweaks like position need adjusting but mostly you don't have to.

Of course you have the couple boards that CGX supports that P96 doesn't like Cybervision and Bvision PPC (maybe others) would be nice if they were supported in P96 not that I think this would happen or is practical. Also screen-dragging in CGX is a feature I haven't used in so long I forgot it existed it would be nice if someone added this to P96 but I'm not holding my breath.

Also Picasso 96 is one of the worst names imaginable which needs to be replaced with something that is timeless and describes the thing that it is supposed to be. List of possible ideas:
Trumped Display System
Miley Cyrus Graphics
Thing for making Workbench look better (TFMWLB)
CustomChipsetExit (CCExit)
Progressive Retargetable Graphics System (PRTG)

I'll think of five more tomorrow.

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by Zetr0

2 & 3:
Hmmm I am unsure of this my friend, because that places the payment of the product squarely to the consumer and P96 2.x essentially free to the consumer at the moment. It would require time and investment to bring it up to a version with additional features worth paying for.

Indeed it would, and the commercial model isn't totally sound if
a) Picasso96 was the main source of income for the owners
unless
b) said owners were to try to revoke the old P96 distribution agreements

Originally Posted by Zetr0

My line of thinking is that commercial software that use P96 will be charged a license to use it in the future. I am curious to know about how this might effect non commercial software such as demo's / free to play games

Well, demos and free to play games that use a public API can't be charged by anyone. The API for programs is well-documented, freely published and is basically a copy of CyberGraphX.

What wasn't public until now was the driver SDK, which means that non-licenced drivers such as the Elbox ones were based on reverse engineering, and one reason why work on Picasso96 by its original authors was stopped.

Now that the driver SDK (or something analogous) is to be published, and the current Picasso96 version still is available, this means that you or I may make a card and an accompanying driver without paying anything. Not that it would look like a nice thing to do, but possible and most likely legal – it's doubtful that even the original P96 authors had a case against Elbox since reverse engineering by itself isn't illegal.

One could add that each Vampire sold contains a payment to Cloanto for the included Kickstart (even though the buyer already owns a Kickstart), so paying a licence fee for P96 wouldn't come off as new or odd.

Originally Posted by Zetr0

Come on buddy, this is quite a combative statement - issuing a fellow member with only three options that you deem is disingenuous at best my friend. Of course there are other things that could be done if you don't like the status quo and would like to change - telling them to "shut up" is some what flame baiting and troll-ish.

I gave him the choice to either be constructive or keep his thoughts to himself. You have posted valid concerns regarding the facts we have and those we have not. WXR has repeatedly posted his private thoughts about how he would have handled this, or why someone else's actions aren't acceptable according to his morals. Not only once, but on several occasions in this thread as well as starting several other threads on the same topic (which is his full right to do), thereby derailing a thread which could, perhaps, be about the realities of Picasso96. But if wRX is going to tell others what to do with software they've paid real money for, he's got to handle others telling him what to do with his money and time as well.

Originally Posted by wXR

It is my intention to buy Picasso96 in order to release it under the GPL. I don't want anyone to have to pay even a single cent in license fees to use it or modify it. If you also would like to see that reality, please encourage Jens to discuss it with me.

How far along were you in your negotiations with Abt and Kneer when Individual and Hyperion outbid you? Wouldn't it have been cheaper to buy it directly from them in 2004, 2007, 2009 or 2015 instead of buying it from someone who's just paid money for it and therefore must have business needs for Picasso96? They won't sell it any cheaper.

[grond]

Originally Posted by Schoenfeld

I am evaluating the possibility. In essence, we need to make sure that commercial projects based on P96 (such as OS4 and another, not yet disclosed project) are still possible.

Why should there be a problem? I do software license compatibility checks in my work. The GPL is not infective (the infamous "copyleft effect") as long as you are linking dynamically (otherwise you couldn't run ANY closed-source software on a Linux system because of the glibc).

Dynamic linking is the absolute norm for Amiga software. I don't see why a card driver interfacing the P96 core or a program calling rtg-functions should be at the risk of being infected by the GPL. This is all dynamically linked.

This comes down to releasing P96 under two licenses, and by that, creating two forks; one open-source that no commercial developer should look at in order not to "infect" the commercial code he's writing, and another open-source fork that does not have anyone "in charge".

Sounds like selling the cake and still have it...

Badmouthing does not help. Especially not your own reputation.

If you read more carefully, you'd notice that I said something positive about you.

[wXR]

@idrougge

I think you are right in your criticism of the style and content of my posts. They do often have a derailing effect, which is understantably contentious. Perhaps I am also moralizing to people whom I have no real right to moralize. I hope you can see however, that these actions are borne out of a certain empassioned frustration. I have had countless years with this community, and I have reached a breaking point regarding certain aspects of it which seem self-destructive and problematic (to say the very least). Now I have some resources and some motivation to perhaps help guide things to a better place, and I simply want to do that. As silly, hopeless, or even misguided as this may seem to you, I would like to leave the house in a better condition than I found it.

So yeah, why didn't I step in at any point before and attempt to acquire Picasso96? Why didn't I do so many things that I should have done in this life. But here we are in the present moment, and I present to you what I can offer now. You may not agree that my comments are "constructive", and you may be right, but I am attempting to lend you a bit of my passion here, strongly suggesting that there is a better way overall.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by grond

If you read more carefully, you'd notice that I said something positive about you.

actually i thought the same, reading the comment. at least being considered reasonable should be a compliment for a businessman.

[Schoenfeld]

I did read Grond's complete posting, and I did understand that he was not just talking about me, but also Hyperion. Ranting about the financial situation of any entity (person or company) without any secured knowledge can be considered badmouthing.

More diplomatic terms would be "un-educated guess" or "speculation" - none of them helping the discussion in any way.

Jens

[grond]

Originally Posted by Schoenfeld

IRanting about the financial situation of any entity (person or company) without any secured knowledge can be considered badmouthing.

It's a fact that Hyperion are notorious for being bankrupt.

In any case, I don't believe they put any money into the deal. As I already said, I believe that their consent was required which caused money to go into their direction and not the opposite. This is, of course, speculative but it makes sense and fits the different pieces of information, rumours and informed opinions about the subject much better than the hilarious idea that Hyperion would spend any money (let alone a significant sum that you couldn't afford) for P96 sources they don't need and that according to you yourself are not likely to return any profits in the near future.

Is this clear enough about the speculative nature of what I'm writing?

[matthey]

Originally Posted by grond

It's a fact that Hyperion are notorious for being bankrupt.

Be careful what you say or it may be slander. You are already walking a fine line as the bankruptcy was reversed so it never happened. Perhaps more accurately would be to state, "Hyperion is notorious for having been declared bankrupt."

Originally Posted by grond

In any case, I don't believe they put any money into the deal. As I already said, I believe that their consent was required which caused money to go into their direction and not the opposite. This is, of course, speculative but it makes sense and fits the different pieces of information, rumours and informed opinions about the subject much better than the hilarious idea that Hyperion would spend any money (let alone a significant sum that you couldn't afford) for P96 sources they don't need and that according to you yourself are not likely to return any profits in the near future.

Is this clear enough about the speculative nature of what I'm writing?

It's very similar to speculation of my own that A-Eon now controls (as majority shareholder) Hyperion. The Hyperion business was necessary to continue by name because of the Amiga Inc. contract so they could have just become a software house for A-Eon.

[Schoenfeld]

Originally Posted by grond

It's a fact that Hyperion are notorious for being bankrupt.

And you are notorious for drawing the wrong conclusions due to false information, or at least putting the wrong weight on the number of rumors you're falsely taking as information.

As Matthey already pointed out, bankruptcy did not happen. It was an administrative mishap that - within Belgian legislation - automatically starts a bankruptcy case. This is first-hand information.

Originally Posted by grond

In any case, I don't believe they put any money into the deal.

(...)

Originally Posted by grond

Is this clear enough about the speculative nature of what I'm writing?

Clear enough that you are playing the game "I want to know something, but can't get the answer, so I state something ridiculous, and someone will put it right, then I have my answer".

This is not working. Stop speculating, start respecting all parties involved in the deal.

Jens

[E-Penguin]

Perhaps the complexities are lost on me, but I can only see positives to the sale of what was practically abandonware that is critical to new Amiga RTG developments. Freeing up the API is good, having a possibility for users to buy licences at reasonable cost is fair, the possibility of new releases... what's not to like?

[wXR]

That it isn't completely free to use and modify as one pleases.

[wawa]

Originally Posted by Schoenfeld

This is first-hand information.

likely this first hand information comes from an interested party, though? we have heard that explanation before

[E-Penguin]

Originally Posted by wXR

That it isn't completely free to use and modify as one pleases.

I get that in an ideal world all software would be free, but until the military industrial complex is overturned and capitalism crushed, it's not unreasonable to expect programmers to work for free, or to not place a monetary value on their output.

Other than being free and open sourced, this is a step up from abandoned proprietary commercial software.

[chiark]

Originally Posted by E-Penguin

Perhaps the complexities are lost on me, but I can only see positives to the sale of what was practically abandonware that is critical to new Amiga RTG developments. Freeing up the API is good, having a possibility for users to buy licences at reasonable cost is fair, the possibility of new releases... what's not to like?

You're new around here, aren't you?

I agree, I think this is a Good Thing.

And many thanks Jens, really good to see the commitment to open the API which will help many projects. I am fascinated to see what you're going to do with this beyond that commitment, and really look forward to seeing what's next.

Just make it elegant . That's the thing that, on reflection, I still appreciate about the Amiga from the mid-80s