Overview Features Instructions Performance Forum Downloads Products OrderV4 Reseller Contact

Welcome to the Apollo Forum

This forum is for people interested in the APOLLO CPU.
Please read the forum usage manual.



All TopicsNewsPerformanceGamesDemosApolloVampireAROSWorkbenchATARIReleases
Questions and Answers for AMIGA Workbench or Coffin

Coffin OS R56 - (30/04/2020)page  1 2 3 4 

Eric Gus

Posts 404
24 May 2020 06:30


Gernt Gerloff wrote:

  Which has the same legitimacy as encouraging people to use the pirated download.
  Its not very consistent to be annoyed about this and accept the existence of and support for Coffin in the first place. It annoys developer (especially the ones, which software is published there without consent) and regular Amiga user in the same way. And that it is sold here for money, it's just a cherry on top, not really worsen the situation by a large amount.
 
 

 
  I never claimed to be "consistent" .. and all I said was people could download it for themselves .. no need for the parasite middleman.
{I am no longer replying to this chain, you obviously have an agenda and I dont want to feed into it or continue, so have a great day..}
 


Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 4804
24 May 2020 07:42


Gernt Gerloff wrote:

Which has the same legitimacy as encouraging people to use the pirated download.

 
What is Coffin?
 
Technically Coffin is a collection of abandonware.
This means this is Software which is not sold anymore
and software of which the owner rights got lost long ago. (=Amiga OS)
 
 
Lets clarify this:
Please mind that sharing Abandon Ware is not "pirate".
Pirate software means that you share software which is sold and
therefore you create a virtual damage = lost income.
Sharing orphaned / abandoned software is legally different as this software is not sold anymore.

It is in many countries a legal gray zone,
but it is regarded as morally right.
Depending on the country the sharing abandoned software is only liable to the damage done which is done in lost sales.
This is zero in this case - as none of the software is sold.

 
 
 
Also let us question the status of OS 3.1.4:
Many people believe that the ownership of Amiga OS got long time ago  lost in all the chaos of companies going bankrupt - and that todays companies claiming to own AMIGA OS - actually not own anything.
 
I agree to this believe, and if this is correct then OS 3.1.4 is legally on the same level as Coffin.


Gernt Gerloff

Posts 49
24 May 2020 09:01


Gunnar von Boehn wrote:

  Technically Coffin is a collection of abandonware.
 

 
  There is a lot of software included which is actively currently developed! yes, these are not sold for money, still not allowed to distribute them without explicit permission, in some cases the developer even stated clearly they don't want to have the software to have distributed in Coffin. If it is some free licence like mpl, gpl or so, no problem, if not, YOU HAVE TO ASK THE DEVELOPER FOR PERMISSION BEFORE ANYTHING IS PUBLISHED. Just because the software is on Aminet/somewhere on the Internet you can't just get and distribute it for yourself, see also EXTERNAL LINK

And is it really to much to write an email to ask for permission?
 
  Of course you could ask, where is the crime, if no money is lost, but we are talking about respect for others people work and respecting their wishes OF CURRENT DEVELOPERS.


Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 4804
24 May 2020 09:30


Gernt Gerloff wrote:

  YOU HAVE TO ASK THE DEVELOPER FOR PERMISSION BEFORE ANYTHING IS PUBLISHED.
 

 
Why do you yell at me like this?
First of all I not create Coffin, and I'm not aware of any such software might be included or not.
Also I can not know whether the person who did assemble Coffin did ask people. Where can you know?
 
But what I see is that such collections as
Coffin, BetterWB, AmigainaBox or Amikit,
are in the interest and benefit of all Amiga users.


Ronnie Beck
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 178
24 May 2020 09:52


Gernt Gerloff wrote:

............YOU HAVE TO ASK THE DEVELOPER FOR PERMISSION BEFORE ANYTHING IS PUBLISHED. Just because the software is on Aminet/somewhere on the Internet you can't just get and distribute it for yourself, see also EXTERNAL LINK

Many people believe this, as you do.  Your link to aminet is just a generic spiel about the Aminet "collection".  Nothing to be gleaned from that. Your assumption that one MUST first ask before publishing is not true.  Sorry, but that is what the license text is for.  That is to make clear to all what the terms of the software are. You upload to Aminet/Internet your software with a text outlining the conditions under which the software can be used and distributed.  End of story.  If you, as the author, decide sometime later that you have some philosophical difference with Coffin, you need to re-upload your software with an updated licence.  But random forum statements or private emails do not a licence make.

Which authors specifically have software in Coffin where they have explicitly written in their license text that it isn't to be included in Coffin?  Can you list them along with proof of there wishes?  Some authors have written here and that software was removed by whoever makes coffin.  I don't see why they can't do that if they have a problem.

Gernt Gerloff wrote:

And is it really to much to write an email to ask for permission?

I guess you never did this on any scale.  It can be quite difficult.  Some email addresses are defunct.  I tried, with much effort to contact the author of PC-Task to see if he would collaborate with us to bring enhancements to PC-Task.  No email address is known.  I am not the first to try and contact him.  I enlisted the help of user groups in the author's region to put up an open letter.  No answer.  I found the authors home address and wrote a letter.  No answer.  I asked people who had his email address to contact him for us.  No answer.




Gernt Gerloff

Posts 49
24 May 2020 11:14


Gunnar von Boehn wrote:

  But what I see is that such collections as
  Coffin, BetterWB, AmigainaBox or Amikit,
  are in the interest and benefit of all Amiga users.

Except the one who write software. (btw. I know for example AmiKit asked for permission in some cases, in at least one case I talked to)



Gernt Gerloff

Posts 49
24 May 2020 11:28


Ronnie Beck wrote:

Gernt Gerloff wrote:

  ............YOU HAVE TO ASK THE DEVELOPER FOR PERMISSION BEFORE ANYTHING IS PUBLISHED. Just because the software is on Aminet/somewhere on the Internet you can't just get and distribute it for yourself, see also EXTERNAL LINK
 

 
  Many people believe this, as you do.  Your link to aminet is just a generic spiel about the Aminet "collection".  Nothing to be gleaned from that. Your assumption that one MUST first ask before publishing is not true.  Sorry, but that is what the license text is for.

Exactly... and when there is no License Text you have no License to publish it in any way or form and you have to contact the Author to get it. Point.
Private emails is the usual form of Licenses you recieve (for non opensource) Software. (especially in B2B, whats my business, to make NDAs and software licenses for companies) The copyright holder has no responsibility to give you a license text, it is your responsibility to present one to show that you have the legal right to use it, so you have to ask for.


I guess you never did this on any scale.  It can be quite difficult.

Just because it is difficult you should not even try? and therefore it's fine, very queer logic. I do this on a scale, but in a complete other setting (B2B, preservation of end-of-life products for further inhouse use)




Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 1697
24 May 2020 11:40


Gernt Gerloff wrote:

        There is a lot of software included which is actively currently developed!
     

     
      As far as I know, all actively developed software is freeware, shareware or included in such form (e.g. free to distribute unregistered Roadshow).
     
      So when giving such statements, examples would help.
     
      Idea of Coffin is not to hurt current Amiga market (in fact, it helps sales of Roadshow as example) but as said "to bring a pack of old" (and new but free updates), same as user would create with a lot of work.
     
      And in Amigaland, hunting authors can sometimes be Titans quest. Some people did it to some extent (AmiKit, some AROS distros) but I am quite sure they would include more ONLY IF they could contact authors. Problem is, Aminet uploader is not always author and even when he is, e-mails get change over decades.
     
      I will tell you other experience. When NG revival (OS4,MOS) started around 2003 I tried to contact most of "companies and authors of old" that existed. None or almost none were not interested in developing anything, but also did not want to distribute (sell) their old products. Simply "they moved on, long time ago" to mostly, developing something for Lin-Win, or exiting the business. So there I understand logic "no one to hurt".
 
  Some agree to in time publish on Aminet or elsewhere their last Amiga products for free, most did not care for use of "antiquated version of their product no longer on sale".
     
      There are very few real developed products left, sadly. And real Amiga coffin is compilation of old, not other way around. Its not a pirated group alive that does the cracking.
   
    Also, I see Coffin as stopgap solution. AmiKit for Vampire will succeed it, with all your "licences" provided.
 
  Only known example of developer complaining was Fusion, and it was removed. Sadly, it never went updated on sales, as developer promised.
     


Mark Pearson

Posts 22
24 May 2020 15:37


I Agree with Gunnar on this too.

Its all adandonware even the companies are all gone

if developers want to develop they should charge a fee to use their code or software if its still included in the software. My Call is dont write if your unhappy not to share or help others.

Also i have been attack by users on this who are nasty vindictive people on here themselves dont what they are doing and i say grow up.

Also I have only staed that Coffin is great for the novice who wants to get up and running quick.
All these other websites are not breaking any laws as gunnar stated and i agree with him it up the the person if they want to purchase an os of anykind then rather doing it by themselves as they are paying for a service like i did and did not want the hasle of messing around like others on here.

So Please USERS give some giveway with the noobies and please dont gang up on others who are on here to share knowledge REMEMBER share KNOWLEDGE and experiences

I thank Gunnar for his comments and if it was not for him and his team nobody would have a new amiga to play with.




Mark Pearson

Posts 22
24 May 2020 15:41


You are agreeing with Coffin now os whats your Argument matey Boy!

Its up to the End usr what they want to do

Thankyou




Ronnie Beck
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 178
24 May 2020 15:47


Gernt Gerloff wrote:

Ronnie Beck wrote:

Sorry, but that is what the license text is for.

Exactly... and when there is no License Text.........

.....then there is nothing to send by email.

In the end, if the author REALLY cares so much about protecting their software, then they will make an effort to create and include such texts.

Gernt Gerloff wrote:

Just because it is difficult you should not even try?

Funny, I thought the same thing about including a licence text with the software.

You could also try.  It is easy to sit back and write forum posts with "Person/Project X is doing it all wrong."  Contributing in a constructive way is much more rewarding and makes one look less like a jerk.  Even small contributions help.  Maybe you are a really nice guy with lots of great skills that can help.  Why not start simple by constructing a list of games and programs which you know would be ok to distribute.  We have "Caffeine" which is an AROS based Amiga distribution.  Pedro Cotter has put a lot of time perfecting that.  It could also be a great help to have someone take care of contacting software authors and dealing with this topic.  If you are already experienced in this area, you will find it much easier.


Ronnie Beck
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 178
24 May 2020 15:56


mark pearson wrote:

You are agreeing with Coffin now os whats your Argument matey Boy!

I deleted, again, one of your posts.  Vojin did not invent any story about you posting porn links here.  A user, with the same name but I suspect was someone else trying to impersonate you, posted links to PornHub.    Vojin didn't lie, those posts were deleted by me.  That is why you don't see them any more.


Michal Pietal

Posts 108
24 May 2020 16:21


Guys,

Why quarrel any yell, quoting numerous mis-readings out there on Amiga forums?

Let us make Coffin 100% legal!

If the Coffin Curators tailor the OS technical-wise, they also ought to do this kind of clean-up.  Only what needs be done is:

- Coffin software list (a txt file)
- excluding all freeware software (putting justification to the text as one-two rows each)
- excluding all shareware software which work as non-cracked binary
- wipe all cracked shareware and/or replace with non-cracked version
- the remaining ones (not sure how many would remain out): search > contact > permission to free OR license

Having all costs (if any would ultimately exist) would top up to the price of "Coffin KeySet Legalizing pack".

Apollo Team (or Coffin Curators) can sell these keys with some overhead contributing Coffin and/or AROS Vision.

And lastly,

- making Coffin require OS3.9 iso to install (exactly what Jan Zahurancik is doing with his AmiKit).

Ultimately, we would have all situation 100% clear.

I paid for my last V4SA (which is gone now) ca. 600 EUR yet in October, added price tag ca. 35 EUR for a single stupid 32 GB CF card, I really am eager to pay EUR 10 - EUR 50 for making Coffin legal, proud and great!!!

Let us not behave like this thrash Linux community back then 20 years ago, that were spending $ 2000 on a desktop but couldn't pay EUR 1 for a piece of software...

One more.  There's no such thing as "abandonware", its a "fact statement", not by any means a "legal statement".  Legally, all software is copyrighted per se, unless

- the author(s) releases it in the public domain
- the author(s) dies and 70 years passes (most EU / Polish copyright)

There's NO other actual event that might cause a copyrighted works stops being such.  Neither Coronavirus, not shutting down yet another company or e-commerce software store...


Renaud Schweingruber
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 330
25 May 2020 09:07


One could even avoid such requirement of contacting hundreds of (dead/uninterested/unreachable) authors by removing all software and just using wget scripts to pull them all from Aminet or their respective website.
   
At the end, users will end up with the same set-up, it will just please some wannabe-lawyers and add a connectivity requirement.


Olaf Schoenweiss

Posts 646
25 May 2020 09:58


most software on aminet was legal to distribute (with conditions) as long no money was asked for it.
 
  Free distributions have more freedom
 
  if you make a commercial project and preinstall it and sell the software as part of it, it is more complicated. You normally need permission to do that (mostly impossible today)
 
  Distributing something like coffin in its current form is of course not legal because it depends on 3.1 and 3.9 (I do not know what else is in it)
 
  It would be possible to do something based on 3.1 of course (it would need work to get all needed permissions and of course 3.1 roms would have to be acquired for every vampire). As I understand it vampires will be distributed with aros roms and there 3.1 would not work so you can only distribute aros with it (of course users can do something different themselves).

As Michal said it would be possible of course to create a solution like amikit requiring original CDs (3.5/3.). Or you expect plain 3.1 installation and make a installer. In both cases it is up to the user to comply to the laws.




Ray Couzens

Posts 67
25 May 2020 10:03


Not being well versed in either Coffin OS or AROS, (I come from original OS3.1 on my A1200) could someone outline the advantages of one over the other?  I'm not talking about legal comparisons, just on things like performance, Vampire V4 support, and any other pros and cons. Maybe, they are equal, and it would be good to use both?

That would be very useful information for me and potentially others. 


Mike Kopack

Posts 268
26 May 2020 21:44


Anybody else having problems with this version? I just imaged it to a 32gb card, Flashed my core to the 2.12 gold, first boot.  Did the mouse settings and locale stuff, went through selecting network device, set up, netmask and gateway and then get an error message from PFS-III - Device DH0: Alert: wring dirblock Id 00000000 block 10802.
 
  Go to put in the dns (8.8.8.8) and get another saying Volume System is write protected. ??????
 
  V2.2 A500

Seems like after I reboot everything is ok but Iíll have to manually config the network. Drives are read/write again.


Vojin Vidanovic

Posts 1697
27 May 2020 21:22


Ray Couzens wrote:

Not being well versed in either Coffin OS or AROS, (I come from original OS3.1 on my A1200) could someone outline the advantages of one over the other?  I'm not talking about legal comparisons, just on things like performance, Vampire V4 support, and any other pros and cons. Maybe, they are equal, and it would be good to use both?
 
  That would be very useful information for me and potentially others. 

In short:

OS 3.1. +: Plain, simple, fast, avail to any past Amiga user
        -: Very bare - needs lot of upgrades
        V: Can work with Vamp drivers added

OS 3.1.4 is significant paid improvement to OS 3.1, lacking most of OS 3.5 to OS 3.9 features. However, can be installed on top via Aminet tool keeping best of both. Paid upgrade. Can work with Vamp drivers added, but introduces sometimes new incompatibilities. Only AmigaOS in development (beside AROS).

OS 3.5-3.9: +: Still fast, AmigaOS look and feel
            -: Still needs a bit of upgrades, paid upgrade
        V: Can work with Vamp drivers added

ApolloOS:  +: Vastly improved OS 3.9, very updated
            - like users hdd clone or Linux distro
            -: Needs at least 040,060, Vampire and lots of RAM
            V: Only one to include full Vamp support

AROS:      +: Only one to be free and open source,
            comes with lot of improvements and fixes to OS 3.1
            -: Deadly slow below 040 with lost of RAM
            V: Vampire support in progress       


Sean Sk

Posts 371
28 May 2020 00:12


Vojin Vidanovic wrote:

but introduces sometimes new incompatibilities.

What incompatibilities are these Vojin? I've been using OS 3.1.4 for a year and a half now and I haven't come across any.


Michael AMike

Posts 132
28 May 2020 08:18


Vojin Vidanovic wrote:

  Can work with Vamp drivers added, but introduces sometimes new incompatibilities.
 

 
I remember a bug on the SA with Kick3.1 which was gone with the 3.1.4 kickstart. Would be interesting which incompatibilities these are?


posts 65page  1 2 3 4