Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Main Menu
Who's Online
1 user(s) are online (1 user(s) are browsing Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 1

more...
   All Posts (Fats)


(1) 2 3 4 ... 54 »


Re: [off-topic]Chips4Makers

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Quote:

aha wrote:
I think the 68k crowd would be very happy, if it happens that Aros68k would be more optimized to run usable on classic Amigas.


I think one of the things that is non-optimal are the graphics driver(s) for OCS/ECS/AGA. As my microcontroller won't have gfx output it's not something I will be working on.

Posted on: 9/17 12:43
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


[off-topic]Chips4Makers

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline

As a long time member of the AROS community I would like to present my newest project: Chips4Makers.

It was presented @ORConf (slides) and it is a crowdfunding for a fully open source microcontroller with a Z80, MOS6502 and M68K core. To not fill this forum with off-topic rumblings please follow the project on crowdsupply, hackaday.io or on gitlab if you are interested.

This post is maybe not fully off-topic as it can be that some text-only heavily reduced AROS version may pop up on the M68K side in the future; no promise though.

Wish me succes.


Posted on: 9/14 14:44
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: AROS homepage down?

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Neil and me now managed to admin sourceforge.net and change the DNS so http://www.aros.org works again. May need to wait a little bit for the DNS information to propagate.

Posted on: 6/13 12:10
_________________
......
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: AROS homepage down?

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Nothing has been changed on DNS setup for www.aros.org

Posted on: 5/24 12:25
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Reverse-engineering & AROS license

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Quote:

A patent costs A LOT of money, and generates more money due to licensing and/or patent-exchange.


Sure but that's their business, not mine. I don't force people to use my code, I just put some conditions on the use of my code and it's not even monetary.

Quote:

AROS generates... how much? Is it interesting for being adopted by some company (to make profits)?


I don't mind companies using my code for monetary gains but also don't mind no company doing that. I just enjoy writing the code and some retro fanatics getting their fix when using AROS.

Quote:

Between losing its IP and the rights to use AROS' sources, I don't think that a company can even doubt about what choice to make.


I don't see what is wrong with companies having to make a choice for using the code I put on the net for free. It's just the requirement I put on my code; take it or leave it.

Quote:

Maybe you don't know how the real world works, and the interests which are around patents and IPs.


You shouldn't make assumptions on other people. As inventor on a patent or three I unfortunately know how the system works. A system that was originally meant to encourage inventors to work on ideas and be sure to not starve to death but evolved to big company patent portfolio's used to crush competition and startups and for patent trolls for pure monetary gain and not doing anything productive themselves.

Quote:

At least the change that I've exposed before can lead to an opportunity for fixing the breach: reading the APL, the owner can decide to contact the contributor, instead of proceeding with a lawsuit.


I does not solve anything it's just an encouragement to bother a guy with legal matters that puts his free code in the world.
Anyway, the base for patent infringement lawsuits are the monetary gains from using the patent unlicensed. For a guy putting his source code in a public repository this is near zero. That's why the patent owners and trolls will go after the companies who sell product that use the code. And anyway code in itself is not patentable, it's ideas/processes that are patentable.
We already have copyright to protect the hard work of programming and patents are not needed for software.

Posted on: 5/18 13:20
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Reverse-engineering & AROS license

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Quote:

cdimauro wrote:

IMO a better compromise, respectful of all parties' work, would have been the following:
- if a patent owner finds a breach inside AROS code which is pertinent to its IP, it contacts the AROS Participant (if possible. Or any other maintainer), asking to rewrite or remove that specific part of the code.
If an agreement isn't found in 60 days, the patent owner can file a lawsuit against the Participant, but he continues to retain the right to use the AROS sources, since the missed agreement it's not its fault (he gave enough time to fix the breach);
- if a patent owner sues immediately the AROS Participant, without any agreement tentative (see above), then it applies the current Termination section of APL.


I would never have contributed to AROS if such a clause was in it's license.

Posted on: 5/17 11:41
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Mutiny on the Bounty

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Quote:

RC_tech wrote:

What do you think, is the 'Bounty' system, combined with the fact that only a few programmers in the Amiga scene are existing, a reason for the lack of software? Would it be an advantage to get programmers think the idea of 'making the OS more useful' is better than getting money?


I guess you are not an old timer in this scene. The lack of new software was already there before the bounty systems. Actually the bounty system were set up to try to get more software developed again for Amiga-like systems.

greets,
Staf.

Posted on: 4/12 9:57
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: there is a plan for the transition to abiv1 for i386 platform?

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Quote:

I personaly don't see benefits of having i386 ABIv1. It has simply taken too much time for it to be relevant anymore.


Personally I don't see the logic of supporting old m68k computers but not 32 bit x86 computers. To me having AROS runnable on old computers including 32 bit x86 is a wanted feature. But from dev resource point of view I think we should not do it by having to support two ABIs.

Posted on: 1/28 4:54
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: there is a plan for the transition to abiv1 for i386 platform?

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Quote:

paolone wrote:

IMHO an ABIv1 32bit distribution for i386 is completely pointless. We already have a quite nice software base running on ABIv0 which will be only partially available on ABIv1 once switch will be done.


IMO you make the wrong assumption that changes done to AROS in ABIv1 will always be backported to v0 to eternity.

Posted on: 1/24 11:03
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: Imagine 3d disponible for purchase

Joined:
2004/4/12 13:07
Group:
Member
Posts: 531
Offline
Are they still active ?

Quote:
Copyright © 1998-2008 CAD Technologies


Quote:
Site modified:
13 May 2010


Posted on: 2016/10/24 11:13
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer



 Top
(1) 2 3 4 ... 54 »




Search
Top Posters
1 paolone
paolone
4364
2 magorium
magorium
4095
3 phoenixkonsole
phoenixkonsole
3892
4 nikolaos
nikolaos
3694
5 deadwood
deadwood
2923
6 ncafferkey
ncafferkey
2648
7 mazze
mazze
2214
8 clusteruk
clusteruk
2111
9 Kalamatee
Kalamatee
2024
10 damocles
damocles
1789
© 2004-2017 AROS Exec