Last comment added 07-Nov-2001 09:11 GMT.
There are 147 comments.Article Comment Navigation List
[Forum] Ralph Schmidt comments on deal with Amiga IncLink
Posted on 04-Nov-2001 05:00 GMT by Adam Cheesegrate147 comments (127k)
View flat (1, 2, 3)
View list
Add comment
On the 'fleecy comments on morphos' thread Ralph responds to the following
questions about the frequently mentioned
unsigned contract with Amiga Inc
-Did the morphos team revise the contract proposal
and fax it back to fleecy?
-What was the response from amiga inc?
- did the morphos team treat amiga inc with some respect?

1. It contained unacceptable paragraphs.
These paragraphs would have led to devide the licence sums to
almost nothing depending on a short amount of "amigaos" releases
which Amiga Inc. *decided*. That would have meant a complete
loss of "control" about the sources and its wealth.
They would have also meant that Amiga Inc. could control bplan's
product not releasing anything at time..demanding
"extra special hw support licences" and so on.
To make it simple..the contract was an unprofessional joke.
2. The previous agreed sum between me and fleecy were "cutted" by 80%
in the "final" contract.
Fine if they wanna play sandbox games they can choose other
people...the 5 months wasted on communication with Fleecy Moss
were enough.
3. The contract came after about 8 weeks "delay" and only because i
gave fleecy a deadline from that day we will concentrate on our
own business to get the job done.
This means we can't wait and wait for a "deal" while we actually
need to port other modules to get a product done.
Therefore i set a deadline..and since then we port the remaining
important AROS and own technology which is needed.
Otherwise we would still wait until judgement day while real
work could be done.
4. The contract was written by B. Hermans which makes the contract
invalid automaticly for this break of trust.
I heard this some time afterwards through several sources.
That`s like letting Mr. Haage writing our contracts with Amiga.
An absolute *inacceptable* issue.
5. We saw that Amiga Inc. was not able to do any project management.
o As i`ve said before..Hyperion didn`t want to support MorphOS
as AmigaOS when Fleecy told them so.
Conclusion fleecy had no control about them.
o Absolutely *nothing* happened for 4.0 development *besides*
Olaf Barthels doing TCP/IP and FFS development for *him*.
o Absolutely *no* time real work responsibilities.
Though asking about these issues i've *never* got a sufficient
o Amiga Inc. has no access to the OS 3.5/3.9 sources and though
i asked fleecy *several* times about this i never got a sufficient
answer. But planning for a new OS release the knowledge on what
you can base your work on is *crucial*.
It was also common agreement between Olaf Barthels and us that
the WB needs a *major* overhaul and that it would be best to
base it on some previous 3.5 work..asl/amigaguide/icon..stuff
which has some worth. But as Amiga Inc. is locked about these
sources they would only have 3.1 (rom and wb) left.
As we're quite close to a complete rom replacement and the
wb needs a complete rewrite anyway there was nothing left
they could offer besides the name.
o Though after several tries to discuss the RTG problem with
Fleecy Moss his standard answer`re not in the gfx team,
you may be allowed to give some suggestions but that`s it.
While we knew that *nothing* really went on about "their"
fantasy gfx team P96 which didn`t even know in april what
they should do at all. Maybe the Friedens did some 3d
be it..but that is *NOT* what i understand as RTG.
But as a graphics.library replacement is a *MUST HAVE* option
to even get a non amiga hw up we did our own graphics.library
replacement with cybergraphx. It would have been unacceptable
to "wait" for fleecy's fantasy team to get a graphics.library
replacement working while we wait 6-12 months until we can
get the pegasos working.
o Amiga Inc. *USA* was informed that the AmigaOne hw won`t come
in time(if ever) and that there's no real 4.0 work at
H&P by some Amiga Inc. employee which came to the IFA in
germany end august and found an obvious project GAU.
(Note..the AmigaOS project manager Fleecy Moss has obviously
never ever *checked* the project`s progress though i`ve
warned him several times about certain issue...he never
But while all this has happened i still get an email from
Fleecy Moss where he asked me where the problem is in
these special clauses....
This contract had some paragraph like...
"You must support the 4.0 VM API" while *everybody* involved
knew there *is* no 4.0. So how can we support an API for an
not existing product ? Nuts..
To me this was another sign that the guy somehow lives in
a fantasy world..argueing with fantasy work groups.
BTW..also for my friends at that time we already
had our own VM we only added for your "future" games.
->`s *impossible* that amiga inc. could organize
any amigaos development and that this development would be
ready for our HW. Then we decided to continue on our own
with our partners and focus on our own product.
6. Early September Olaf Barthel(in the name of Amiga Inc.) saw the
Pegasos running here in an early beta and we discussed the whole
situation with him and told him our opinion of the situation.
He mostly agreed about the project management issue and that
*nobody* is even close to our state.
He also thinks that the whole situation is just plain ridiculous.
He informed Amiga Inc. *USA* about it and our opinions of the
situation but we haven't heard anything about them until sometime
mid October. Then it was clear that B. Hermans talked Fleecy into
that he is able to fix his AmigaOS PPC "problem" to safe both
people's faces. Now it`s only a farce...
A lot things have already been said...some may be new to you but
this should be enough for now and at least clear up a lot of issues
concerning our decision. And before the name believes attack me
again, better read this *twice*.

 Ralph Schmidt comments on deal with Amiga Inc : Comment 23 of 147
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion ( on 04-Nov-2001 13:34:28
In Reply to Comment 19 (Johan Rönnblom):
6. Ben Hermans/Hyperion (not sure how to differentiate this really)

>When AInc proved unwilling/unable to provide the project coordination
>necessary for 4.0, Hermans stepped in. Since he has successfully lead
>some other projects, he feels he's the right person for the job.

I certainly don't plan to do this alone. It's simply that I have tremendous faith in the abilities of the Hyperion coders and the rest of the highly skilled OS 4.0 team.

It has to be realised that Amiga doesn't have anyone as familiar with the shortcomings of the current OS and the dual CPU architecture than the Hyperion coders who struggle with these limitations every day when they bring demanding games like Shogo, Heretic 2 and Freespace to the Amiga.

We know what the problems are and how to fix them.

>Hermans doesn't trust the MorphOS team and is unwilling to share any
>decision power with them.

This isn't a question of trust but rather a difference of opinion about two fundamental issues:

1) In my opinion a a lawyer, MorphOS violates the intellectual property of Amiga Inc for which they paid 4.5 million dollar. It's a well known fact that the MorphOS people are using the OS 3.1 source-code.

This would be okay provided bPlan gets the blessing from Amiga and licenses the intellectual property or otherwise becomes the officially sanctioned OS release.

The fact that Amiga has paid for and owns the IP also entails that Amiga and Amiga alone can decide what to do with it and what parts they want to be developed by whomever.

If Fleecy wants the P96 authors to do the RTG system and Ralph objects and wants to push Cybergraphix, at the end of the day, Fleecy should decide because his company owns the IP.

If that's considered an unacceptable condition by the MorphOS people (and it was!), they should have acquired Amiga themselves from Gateway.

2) Any arrangement whereby both hardware and software come from the same source (=bPlan) is unworkable because other hardware vendors (Eyetech, Elbox, Matay) will not receive the same software support as bPlan and are hence placed at a disadvantage.

There is a clear conflict of interest because members of the MorphOS team have a financial stake in a competing hardware producer.

The only way to get around that problem is a strict contract and a separate legal entity.

None of this was acceptable to the MorphOS team.

Reply to this comment | Top

Previous commentNext comment
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1HammerD04-Nov-2001 07:34:17
Comment 2EyeAm04-Nov-2001 07:49:36
Comment 3Ben Hermans/Hyperion04-Nov-2001 08:08:06
Comment 4Sinan Gurkan04-Nov-2001 09:12:53
Comment 5Dave04-Nov-2001 09:34:09
Comment 6Don Cox04-Nov-2001 10:14:34
Comment 7Don Cox04-Nov-2001 10:16:47
Comment 8George Kaliviotis (StormLord)04-Nov-2001 10:21:47
Comment 9Dave04-Nov-2001 10:22:08
Comment 10Amifan04-Nov-2001 10:59:08
Comment 11Brecht04-Nov-2001 11:01:37
Comment 12Brecht04-Nov-2001 11:06:17
Comment 13Mart04-Nov-2001 11:13:56
Comment 14Dave04-Nov-2001 11:32:09
Comment 15adam ceremuga04-Nov-2001 11:54:41
Comment 16Alex Klauke04-Nov-2001 12:17:28
Comment 17Frederik Yssing04-Nov-2001 12:40:08
Comment 18Chris Roccati04-Nov-2001 12:44:39
Comment 19Johan Rönnblom04-Nov-2001 12:53:39
Comment 20StormLord04-Nov-2001 13:03:45
Comment 21Fabian Jimenez04-Nov-2001 13:24:58
Comment 22Ralph Schmidt04-Nov-2001 13:27:34
Comment 23Ben Hermans/Hyperion04-Nov-2001 13:34:28
Comment 24Mekanix04-Nov-2001 13:40:02
Comment 25Mekanix04-Nov-2001 13:44:26
Comment 26adam ceremuga04-Nov-2001 13:55:53
Comment 27Mekanix04-Nov-2001 14:02:07
Comment 28Sinan Gürkan04-Nov-2001 14:02:41
Comment 29Dagon HELLAS :-)04-Nov-2001 14:06:06
Comment 30Dave04-Nov-2001 14:20:18
Comment 31Dagon04-Nov-2001 14:23:09
Comment 32redrumloa04-Nov-2001 14:23:28
Comment 33Dave04-Nov-2001 14:29:34
Comment 34adam ceremuga04-Nov-2001 14:32:13
Comment 35adam ceremuga04-Nov-2001 14:32:14
Comment 36Mekanix04-Nov-2001 14:49:30
Comment 37Insider04-Nov-2001 15:00:54
Comment 38Mahendra Tallur04-Nov-2001 15:05:37
Comment 39Ben Hermans/Hyperion04-Nov-2001 15:07:13
Comment 40Insider04-Nov-2001 15:15:09
Comment 41Brecht04-Nov-2001 15:16:09
Comment 42adam ceremuga04-Nov-2001 15:20:47
Comment 43Insider04-Nov-2001 15:25:27
Comment 44Alkis Tsapanidis04-Nov-2001 15:28:29
Comment 45Brecht04-Nov-2001 15:30:39
Comment 46Insider04-Nov-2001 15:33:44
Comment 47adam ceremuga04-Nov-2001 15:37:01
Comment 48David Scheibler04-Nov-2001 15:41:14
Comment 49Mekanix04-Nov-2001 15:41:39
Comment 50Alkis Tsapanidis04-Nov-2001 15:46:12
Comment 51Emmanuel Lesueur04-Nov-2001 15:50:55
Comment 52Emmanuel Lesueur04-Nov-2001 15:55:34
Comment 53NihilVor04-Nov-2001 15:57:36
Comment 54Nicolas Sallin04-Nov-2001 16:36:59
Comment 55Frank04-Nov-2001 16:40:20
Comment 56Graham04-Nov-2001 16:45:18
Comment 57adam04-Nov-2001 16:46:04
Comment 58TimeWillTell04-Nov-2001 16:50:40
Comment 59Johan Rönnblom04-Nov-2001 16:55:43
Comment 60Ben Hermans/Hyperion04-Nov-2001 16:55:49
Comment 61Graham04-Nov-2001 16:58:57
Comment 62Janne04-Nov-2001 16:59:06
Comment 63Brecht04-Nov-2001 17:00:36
Comment 64Frank04-Nov-2001 17:10:49
Comment 65Frank04-Nov-2001 17:13:05
Comment 66Ben Hermans/Hyperion04-Nov-2001 17:15:33
Comment 67Anonymous04-Nov-2001 17:17:25
Comment 68Hans-Joerg Frieden04-Nov-2001 17:20:12
Comment 69Thomas Frieden04-Nov-2001 17:21:11
Comment 70Hans-Joerg Frieden04-Nov-2001 17:27:38
Comment 71Hans-Joerg Frieden04-Nov-2001 17:28:43
Comment 72Thomas Frieden04-Nov-2001 17:29:31
Comment 73David Scheibler04-Nov-2001 17:37:02
Comment 74anon04-Nov-2001 17:42:31
Comment 75Emmanuel Lesueur04-Nov-2001 17:48:19
Comment 76PEACE04-Nov-2001 17:54:29
Comment 77Dagon04-Nov-2001 17:58:59
Comment 78U.Beckers04-Nov-2001 18:04:31
Comment 79Sinan Gürkan04-Nov-2001 18:08:14
Comment 80a04-Nov-2001 18:11:02
Comment 81David Scheibler04-Nov-2001 18:12:50
Comment 82a04-Nov-2001 18:18:56
Comment 83jools04-Nov-2001 18:28:19
Comment 84Sinan04-Nov-2001 18:29:16
Comment 85AlBolone04-Nov-2001 18:48:31
Comment 86Nicolas Sallin04-Nov-2001 18:49:17
Comment 87Nicolas Sallin04-Nov-2001 18:58:35
Comment 88Troels Ersking04-Nov-2001 19:08:04
Comment 89Dave04-Nov-2001 19:26:53
Comment 90Matt Parsons04-Nov-2001 19:37:16
Comment 91Dave04-Nov-2001 19:54:33
Comment 92Alkis Tsapanidis04-Nov-2001 20:03:53
Comment 93Johan Rönnblom04-Nov-2001 21:07:18
Comment 94Johan Rönnblom04-Nov-2001 21:17:33
Comment 95Smithy04-Nov-2001 21:19:54
Comment 96Ville Sarell04-Nov-2001 21:39:35
Comment 97Smithy04-Nov-2001 21:42:39
Comment 98Amifan04-Nov-2001 21:51:46
Comment 99Thomas Frieden04-Nov-2001 21:56:41
Comment 100Nicolas Sallin04-Nov-2001 22:07:44
Comment 101Brecht [darklite]04-Nov-2001 22:10:04
Comment 102Brecht [darklite]04-Nov-2001 22:12:53
Comment 103-pekr-04-Nov-2001 22:16:15
Comment 104Brecht [darklite]04-Nov-2001 22:22:05
Comment 105SimplePPC04-Nov-2001 22:42:58
Comment 106Johan Rönnblom04-Nov-2001 23:19:49
Comment 107Ruben Monteiro05-Nov-2001 01:01:08
Comment 108Insider05-Nov-2001 01:18:09
Comment 109dennis05-Nov-2001 01:51:40
Comment 110Samface05-Nov-2001 02:44:23
Comment 111Anonymous05-Nov-2001 03:32:17
Comment 112Hagge05-Nov-2001 03:38:24
Comment 113Anonymous05-Nov-2001 03:57:33
Comment 114Doktor Edward Eville05-Nov-2001 04:59:52
Comment 115priest05-Nov-2001 06:35:08
Comment 116Insider05-Nov-2001 06:37:29
Comment 117Amifan05-Nov-2001 08:33:31
Comment 118Amifan05-Nov-2001 08:38:23
Comment 119Dave05-Nov-2001 08:58:36
Comment 120Dave05-Nov-2001 09:01:45
Comment 121Dave05-Nov-2001 09:04:30
Comment 122Dave05-Nov-2001 09:10:29
Comment 123SixK05-Nov-2001 09:32:06
Comment 124Anonymous05-Nov-2001 09:42:24
Comment 125Anonymous05-Nov-2001 10:07:20
Comment 126Anders Kjeldsen05-Nov-2001 10:56:31
Comment 127Anonymous05-Nov-2001 11:19:49
Comment 128Anonymous05-Nov-2001 11:24:29
Comment 129Anders Kjeldsen05-Nov-2001 11:36:01
Comment 130Thomas Frieden05-Nov-2001 11:57:19
Comment 131Johan Rönnblom05-Nov-2001 13:40:23
Comment 132Martin Norman05-Nov-2001 13:50:20
Comment 133Dave05-Nov-2001 14:13:46
Comment 134djnick05-Nov-2001 16:09:52
Comment 135Dave05-Nov-2001 16:30:55
Comment 136Brecht05-Nov-2001 19:57:42
Comment 137Fulvio Peruggi05-Nov-2001 22:32:51
Comment 138SteveW05-Nov-2001 22:45:45
Comment 139Nicolas Sallin05-Nov-2001 23:33:50
Comment 140Nicolas Mendoza06-Nov-2001 08:24:04
Comment 141De Meerleer06-Nov-2001 09:06:38
Comment 142Dave06-Nov-2001 09:08:24
Comment 143Karoly 'Chain|Q' Balogh06-Nov-2001 09:48:13
Comment 144JoeAFUA06-Nov-2001 11:51:51
Comment 145Fulvio Peruggi06-Nov-2001 20:52:32
Comment 146smithy06-Nov-2001 22:33:30
Comment 147Dave07-Nov-2001 09:11:05

Add comments

Neither the staff nor owners of this site are responsible for the content of posts by visitors. If you find someone being intentionally abusive of the rules, let us know immediately (email abuse AT ann DOT lu) and we'll take the appropriate action.

All code is © 1996-2004 Christian Kemp.

Back to Top | Add News Item