| From: | Matt Sealey |
| Date: | 23 Apr 2001 at 01:22:45 |
| Subject: | Re: Common misconception (was Re: Voyager Image Decoders) |
Hello Andy
On 22-Apr-01, you wrote:
> Lets look at the facts. Straight after the St. louis announcement before
> MorphOS had even been mentioned, Ralph Schmidt jumps in to slag off Amiga
> Inc. and contiued to do so for a long time afterward. As yet I've yet to
> see Fleecy Moss be anything other than complementary towards Ralph and the
> MorphOS project.
The fact is you don't have a clue what the real story behind that is. There's
a perfectly, PERFECTLY good reason why Ralph started slagging them off.
> David Gerber jumps on the band wagon, with Amiga Inc bashing in all areas.
> It's ther in black and white on the V3 portal. This is three days after he
> throws a paddy over some article about flash on amiga that doesn't mention
> Voyager. How childish.
That's because it's INCREDIBLY short-sighted of a site like that to shrug off
the hard work he put into that plugin. A site saying "wow, I wish someone
would make a better flash, it's a shame only IBrowse and this lame standalone
thing works" when V has had Flash for some years now had better go for
an eye test.
>> Just ask yourself.. who ripped off Ralph Schmidt's kernel and leveraged it
>> to create a new solution in an attempt to gain control over a software
>> market?
>
> If it's ripped off then why doesn't he take legal action?
You think they didn't? Just because you didn't hear about it..
>> Who managed to buy distribution rights to NetConnect without consent
>> from the people who wrote and own 99.9% of the software? The same
>
> The only shouting I saw was from the Vapour team and you. If I remember
> correctly you wanted to kick in Chris wiles didn't you?
Oliver Wagner wants to kick in Chris Wiles :P
>> What backstabbing and politics? When someone is offering you a solution,
>> you do not say "oh, we'll test it and support it" and then write your OWN
>> solution that replaces their's using their development hardware.
>
> Maybe they thought they could do better? If they've done something illeagal
> then sue them. IIRC German law is very strict over IP.
I seem to remember phase5 went bankrupt before anything came of it.
>> Because - and this is the truth - H&P took Amiga to one side and
>> convinced them otherwise. Amiga asked MorphOS if they'd consider
>> it, but they'd have to work with H&P. MorphOS refused in the grounds
>> that they couldn't work with H&P under any circumstances.
>
> Serious alligations, which I've heard before form Ralph, is there proof?
Proof? Ask Jurgen Haage, ask Fleecy, ask Ralph.. they'll all tell you some
version of the story (we don't like Ralph, we think they're both unprofessional
arrogant pricks, we don't like H&P respectively) but the gist of it - and
the facts behind it (Amiga did approach MorphOS, and then ran off to a
meeting with H&P afterwards)
> AOS has become an important part of Amiga Inc.'s stratagy why would they
> leave a superiour solution for a mickey mouse software house (no offence to
> Disney Interactive(tm) employees!), it just does not make sense.
It does. Amiga don't know what they're doing.
>> If someone stole your puppy a few years back, then made friends
>> with your wife, they ran off together, and then said "you can have
>> the puppy back as long as I get to keep boning the wife", you'd
>> find it unacceptable too.
>
> Nice analogy, but it doesn't fit. Because there is no "wife" invloved Amiga
> (in any form) has never worked with the morphOS team.
Ralph Schmidt's wife and puppy, the puppy being the standard PowerUP
ppc.library, the wife being it being the standard, which all migrates to
MorphOS. Basically H&P are saying "we've got you by the balls, and
now WE'RE going to make the PPC OS! We're bestfriends wth Fleeeeky,
and yoOOOuur NOOoot... Nyah!"
>> The fact is: H&P don't do any work on the OS that isn't inherently
>> replacable by any other developer on the planet, or actually DONE
>> by some other developer. Why do Amiga need them? Friendship, they
>> think keeping the linchpins of the market (developers) close to them
>> should they slip.
>
> If H&P are so bad then this wouldn't fit. You'd want better developers
> close to you. I actually asked Fleecy why they bother to stick with H&P,
> and he was quite open about how the OS was dump on them and that they
> weren't really suited to it. Is it only H&P that is the problem or was
> Ralph not allowed enough control (i.e. my way or the highway)?
As I've been explained it by Fleecy, Ralph explained it - that he would do
it as long as H&P has nothing to do with it, and Hyperion at a pinch too
(problems with Steffen Haeusser). Fleecy asked H&P their position. He
chose H&P. The gist of it are that they'd rather have more people
working together (H&P/Hyperion et al.) and getting on and a lot of work
ahead and a potentially inferior product, than less people getting on
with 75% of the work already done.
It's no secret Fleecy's university degree is in philosophy and sociology
or something just as daft. He's more a people person than a technology
person. Hence this Community thing.
>> The phase5 G4's and AmiJoe cards were apparently going to run something in
>> the vein of MorphOS - either an AmigaOS clone outright coded in-house
>> (like a commercial AROS), or some kind of emulation layer.. but nothing to
>> do with Haage & Partner. Remember MorphOS has been in development since
>> before Gateway even rumoured OS3.5.
>
> They never would have been relased then! Maybe that's why they went with
> QNX.
They would have been released. Software development works in tandem with
hardware. Consider no prototypes of the G4 cards were ever really made
that ever really worked. MorphOS is working in tandem with the bPlan
Pegasos board now, with groundwork leveraged on the original PPC systems,
the DCE G-Rex board (PCI is PCI is PCI, drivers can be easily ported). Hence
certain allegiances - to get work done.
>> ExecPPC has not been "running for some time" in any form except WarpOS
>> which has enough patches to exec.library to make a difference. The 68k
>> emulator is known to be lacklustre in performance terms compared to that
>> of MorphOS (which can hit 68060 speeds if it tries, H&P were going
>> on about how a G4 would be required to make that cmfortable level)
>
> How are you so certain about all this then? What (or who) do you know that
> we don't.
I know, talk to, and work for, people you *certainly* don't :)
Thanks
Quote carefully and read all ADMIN:README mails
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/