Talk:AmigaOne

My recent changes nad suggestions for future

In last days I added references for most informations on AmigaOne page. I think this article needs even more care, but I don´t want to make any sustantial changes without approval of other editors. What changes I have in mind:

1. Structure and basic conception. Article is split in to "History" and "Current Status" sections. I assume this is based on status prior to 2009 Settlement Agreement (when AmigaOnes weren´t in productions), this Settlement Agreement - important for AmigaOne license - is also not mentioned in current article. See my sandobox page for possible new structure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pavlor/sandbox

2. Lead. X1000 announcement should by replaced by more general informations (eg. about outcome of 2009 Settlement Agreement etc.).

3. Models and variants. I think table could be upgraded with more informations (like tables in articles of various Apple computers). Is it necessary to list also still not-released computers (like X5000/X3500)? We did that mistake with AmigaOne netbook. Maybe it would be better to wait for actual release. Edit: My idea of new table is now on my sandbox page.Pavlor (talk) 11:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

4. Language. Article is in most cases written in austere style (in year this, in year that...). Rewording - with maintaining of current NPOV - would for sure improve quality of this page. However, native English speeker is preferred for such task - my skills are rather weak.

Your opinion? Pavlor (talk) 08:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Nobody responded, so I did that change (1.; 2.; 3. - removed X3500/X5000 models, we can add them when released, I have their entries in my Sandbox page). Still to do: 4. and pictures (uA1 was removed, we need to find suitable image for original AmigaOne series).Pavlor (talk) 10:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

fights for "Amiga" vs "computer" in the summary

I see there were (are) some fights for the very first words of this article. Although AmigaOne was (according to Bill McEwen in 2002) intended for "rebirth of the Amiga desktop platform", I think it would be better to use plain word "computer" for the initial description - it really is not necessary to repeat what is obvious (AmigaOne is now de facto PowerPC Amiga desktop platform). For the AmigaOne article I used "series of Amiga branded computers", but there are some people reverting it to "Amiga" without any discussion. Your opinions?--Pavlor (talk) 07:45, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I propose we revert back to April 2011 version. Is it a "computer platform" or "Amiga" or what is only minor detail and we should be able to find concensus. Xorxos (talk) 19:53, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

How Eyetech called it? Did they market it as Amiga platform, PowerPC platform or what? Xorxos (talk) 19:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I fear "Amiga" vs "computer" is not minor detail - number of edits on this field is really big. Eyetech never marketed its computer as "Amiga", it wasn´t even necessary, because AmigaOne was then sole new desktop platform for AmigaOS. It ever was computer intended to run AmigaOS. For someone it was Amiga, but this word is full of meanings and thus (in my point of view) unsuitable for article in encyclopedia.--Pavlor (talk) 20:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

AmigaOne X1000 page is blatant marketing

The AmigaOne X1000 page should be deleted or at the very least merged into the AmigaOne page. The AmigaOne X1000 is not available for sale, and only a handful of prototypes exist. It's manufacturer, A-eon, has not even determined the specifications of such primary system components as the CPU. When A-eon first appeared they claimed the product would be released before Summer 2010, no product was released. No new release date has been provided. For all practical purposes the AmigaOne X1000 does not yet exist and has had no meaningful impact in the world of computing.

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Edarticle (talk • contribs) 20:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Deletion? Don't be silly!

AmigaONE is a brand of computer on the market since two years ago.

you can't cancelt his evidence and if you consider Wikipedia a serious Encyclopedia then start deleting all invoices of:

Apple Lisa

Acorn BBC

Sinclair QL

Commodore 65

...And so, and more, and so on...

The fact that these computers had a little market, and had just little/medium/great impact in the history of computing does not prevent they have not existed for real and should to be mentioned into an Encyclopedia. Even if they had poor userbase.

By the way it si not the first pirating attempt to delete Amiga invoices here on Wikipedia, or worst to modify in order to let it be underestimated or keep it away from the eyes of readers.

Sure it seems that just to hear the soud of "Amiga" name makes many people crazy.

Prevent these morons to subvert history.

Keep Amiga invioces safe to let Wikipedia be a honest serious and well balanced Encyclopedia letting all voices to speak with democracy, and keeping a decent point of view, preserving the history. Even big/little phenomena as AmigaONE.

3000 AmigaONE happy users, who use their machines with profict ask this to you all.

By the way check just the thousands of occurrences of AmigaONE in google:

[1]

With respect:

--Raffaele Megabyte 03:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Marketing and its inclusion in Wiki articles

I reverted Lumpbucket's edit.

The purpose of the "AmigaOne" trademark is obviously not "running the upcoming AmigaOS 4 operating system". The purpose of a trademark is to market something, in this case various third party hardware to AmigaOS 4 users.

The failure of the "original" "AmigaOne" project deserved a much less dishonest and more thorough explanation than "due to problems and delays from Escena". I didn't include the 12/17/04 version's mention of Amiga, Inc's deceit about AmigaOS being under development as one contributing cause. While the software + hardware depend on eachother to varying degrees, this specific software wasn't necessary for hardware development.

No hardware has been "modified" to get "new boards" (implying exclusively for or by Eyetech, or any other Teron reseller for that matter). Eyetech originally lied about this in their marketing, but copypasting marketing material against better knowledge to a Wiki article is always wrong. Eyetech having licensed any designs is wishful(?) thinking at best, though it's unlikely since it's not required or even desirable for this sort of production. Either way, that sort of guesswork does not belong stated as facts in an encyclopaedic article.

Both the "AmigaOne SE" and "XE" are discontinued products. Since the "XE" made the "SE" redundant, only the "XE" is now listed here as still having a chance of being a sold again. Of course at least the main reasons for its (otherwise enigmatic) discontinuation must be included.

"Eyetech's official site for AmigaOne support" as description for the link to amigaworld.net. This makes it appear like it's a site owned by Eyetech, and/or that the entire site's purpose is Eyetech customer support.

I kindly request that people stay away from editing wikipedia articles if they only see it as a means to spread marketing material and/or try to hide facts that in their view might reflect poorly on their idols. You may think that you're doing well, forwarding the fanboy views despite their blatant falsities, but you're just sabotaging an encyclopaedia. To speak Slashdot language: we're only supposed to be "Informative" here, not "Insightful" or anything else.

I think that any page referring to the A1 will be liable to editwar issues given the current state of the Amiga "community" - I'm amazed that there haven't been problems already. I'm not going to edit the page as I simply don't think that I can keep to a true NPOV. I don't think that user at 82.46.194.21 can entirely as well though - for instance changing the description to the AW.net link on the main "Amiga" page to "Amiga, Inc. corporate fan site" hardly seems to follow the Wiki's rules...

Of course, it's the content that matters here, not who writes it. However I don't, for instance, see the point in removing the link to the table at AW.net (http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=8&rev_id=67&sort_by) which offered informative details not included in the Wiki page. Perhaps it should have been moved to "external links"? Maybe there's some wikipedia policy about not linking to data like that - but if so, couldn't it have been moved across to the wikipedia article in some form? Other than some vague vendetta against AW.net I simply cannot fathom the reasoning behind this. By the way, the A1 forums on AW.net are officially sanctioned by Eyetech - "Fan-site" conveys the exact opposite meaning. Perhaps a compromise could simply be to remove the description altogether?

I think that you're forgetting that a trademark can also refer to the product itself. Yes - the "AmigaONE" is a trademark used to sell computers. But what of the actual computer itself - what the users actually use? That's an AmigaONE. It's primary purpose is to run AmigaOS. Take a look at the Subway (sandwich) article. It doesn't start by saying that "Subway is a trademark licensed by Doctor's Associates Inc to various franchisees for the purpose of reselling sandwiches made with third party ingredients". This article, if written like the Subway one, should start "AmigaONE is the name of a computer platform, licensed from Amiga inc, running AmigaOS4" (sounds strikingly like the original version) or something. I realise that there are obvious differences between the subject of these articles, but I don't think that you should rubbish the original version as mere "marketing". I think there's a subtle semantic difference here between a trademark and what it represents, but I'm not going to edit and start a war over this - instead I hope that someone without any attatchment to either Amiga "camp" will manage it...

...yeah, right!

What AmigaOne means

I've made a couple of minor edits. I think that it is fair enough to refer to AmigaOne as a computer platform. A Google will reveal definition is more widespread than 'trademark'. People prefer the concrete to the abstract. The trademark stuff is still there. Apple is a word used to refer to a sweet fruit of the Apple tree. Sounds silly, yeah?

Probably it will need a bit of a tidy up. Given the strength of emotion in the fan base, NPOV issues are bound to come up. Edit away, I say. Try to have NPOV, and if people disagree they will edit you. Fortunately, the fan base is small, and wiki can't be edited from iBrowse :)

Perhaps mention is needed of the original spec which defined an Intel box with matrox video or some such. It would put the "trademark" into perspective. Something like "AmigaOne" is the name given by Amiga, Inc to several next generation Amiga platforms designed to run AmigaOS 4 and beyond. The first of these platforms was a specification for an Intel Box, later the PPC based Escena design, and then finally the Teron based (the firmware is different from Terons) AmigaOne series sold by Eyetech and manufactured by MAI. 58.107.87.183 20:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your changes. There are all sorts of terms which are trademarks, whether it's Amiga, Macintosh, Windows, or something non-computing related like car names - but none of those articles start off saying "X is a trademark used for such-and-such"; that sounds silly. It's factual to state that the AmigaOne computers use a Teron motherboard, but there was something about the way it was worded that seemed to suggest this is a bad thing, like they're ripping off another company's work. Mdwh 21:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

--

"AmigaOne" simply is not a specific "computer platform" (such as Mac, Amiga, et c.), it is a trademark which is or was used by one vendor for the marketing of various computer hardware from third parties to users of AmigaOS4.

The "Zico spec" (Intel, Matrox et c.) was not related to anything sold or planned to be sold with the "AmigaOne" moniker.

"AmigaOne" is not a name given by AInc to any hardware. They don't have or control any hardware which they can name. It's an Eyetech-specific (and Eyetech-owned, if one is to believe fleecy moss) trademark.

The firmware of Terons sold using the "AmigaOne" trademark is not different in any meaningful way from Terons sold by anyone else. There are textual references to "AmigaOne" instead of "Teron", and that's it. The "dongle code" which AInc required has so far not been implemented in the firmware shipped with "AmigaOnes". The firmware that comes flashed by default wouldn't define a "computer platform" anyway. Hyperion were contracted by Mai to patch the U-Boot firmware to work with Terons, and since then this firmware has shipped by default with all Terons regardless of resellers and 3rd party trademarks. 81.216.214.13

---

I found a link here, with overlap from Zico to PPC: http://www.thecryptmag.com/Online/18/faq.html The AmigaOne has a long history, and digging up good factual references is hard. I think though, that at the moment, most Amiganuts would say that the AmigaOne is a computer (or three models of computer) with a PPC and made to run OS4. There may or may not be other PPC based machines running OS4, and if they aren't made by Eyetech, it is unlikely that they will be called AmigaOnes. Perhaps it needs re-editing to say something that reflects this, and underline the Eyetech connection. I strongly suspect that even if Eyetech owns the 'Amigaone' name, that they would have needed permission from the Amiga trademark holders. This is normal practice in IP law.

So, the AmigaOne is Eyetechs line of PPC based POP specification boards made to run AmigaOS4. The boards are rebadged MAI Terons built by ???.

I am under the impression that MAI did the design, but had the boards built by another company. But all this is fairly typical of the IT industry these days. Fabless design houses, third party vendors etc. Perhaps in terms of 'platform' not much more than POP with UBoot is needed as a description. I think that the historical reference to the Escena design is important. More info on Zico, and perhaps linkings to POP and Uboot would be good 58.107.87.183 02:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Another thought I had - is there actually a computer platform named the "Teron"? Their website [2] suggests this is just a motherboard. In which case, it is misleading to suggest that the AmigaOne is just a trademark used to sell motherboards made by someone else - the AmigaOne is a complete computer system. And this isn't really any different to say Apple using 3rd party graphics cards, or a PC manufacturer using 3rd party motherboards. Mdwh 23:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I came to this entry after I read a news article about AmigaOS4, and there's one main question I have: Why was the platform built and what can it offer? Ben Di Luca 10:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

AmigaOne 500 CR

Is there any source for such new AmigaOne model? Source EVIL-MCDUCK linked is for SAM460CR motherboard, not AmigaOne. I will look for more informations, but without reliable support for "AmigaOne 500 CR" model, entire entry will be removed.Pavlor (talk) 06:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, I see "AmigaOne 500 CR" is called by ACube simply "AmigaOne 500" and uses SAM460CR motherboard. Source for availability date is still missing.Pavlor (talk) 19:17, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

AmigaOne by Hyperion Entertainment (2009- )

I see an unregistred editor changed title of this section to "AmigaOne by A-Eon Technology (2010- )". I think such title is not right:

1) AmigaOne licence belongs to Hyperion as part of 2009 Settlement Agreement with Amiga.Inc.

2) A-Eon is not sole company marketing AmigaOne computers. To be even more precise - AmigaOne 500 from ACube entered marked even before X1000.

3) Both ACube and A-Eon have rights to AmigaOne name from the very same source - Hyperion.

4) I wonder why dating this section since 2010 (X1000 announcement), why not 2011 (A1-500 release) or 2012 (X1000 release)... Better to stay by 2009 - year when AmigaOne licence was granted to Hyperion creating legal basis for all subsequent AmigaOne computers.

I reverted back to original wording, but I´m open to any change, if explained properly.Pavlor (talk) 18:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

MorphOS as supported OS

MorphOS 3.8 is not yet released and reference is nearly 3 years old. There is no public version of MorphOS for any AmigaOne board. Better to wait for actual release, but I will not remove this information.Pavlor (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

You are right. I was mistaken when I saw MorphOS 3.8 running on new AmigaOne. Edited... Xorxos (talk) 13:11, 29 March 2015 (UTC)