I have spent five years coordinating the Enhancer Softwsre project and I will always ensure that the bugs are eliminated and users get regular updates. The quality of the software is advancing every week an I will continue to drive that forward.
The benefit of having our own software base is clear:
- we can release software when we want to and do not have to wait for others
- we can listen to users and add the features that they ask for
- we can coordinate our Classic and Next Generation software developments in one code base advancing both platforms in unison.
- our software is created from scratch by our own developers it may be different in functionality but it rapidly grows into powerful and useful software. This is a journey and we haven't yet reached our destination.
@redfox
The great thing about the Enhancer Software is customers have the choice to install it or not. It is up to the user if they want to install it over OS4.1 or not.
We will have a new update to Ringhio Notifications soon and this is a great part of the Enhancer Software. Expect updates to other A-EON software such as MediaToolBox in future too.
The enhancer software is great, however would you consider renaming the components that have the same name as the OS ones like the sound datatype, etc? That's really problematic to juggle whether it's the OS one or your one that we have installed. Especially now that the OS updates are re-emerging. With the latest OS update, I've just had to go through and individually install the different enhancer components to make sure I don't overwrite the OS ones.
but sound.datatype can only really be called sound.datatype esle the subclasses like wav.datatype et al wouldn't be able to find it.
Sounds (no pun intended ) like you need a system, like an env variable to say which sound.datatype to use for the sound child classes like WAV, etc. Having two different components with the same name but differing functionality seems like a recipe for disaster!
Don't forget to include ogles3.1 to the next enhancer beta plz (not 3.0 now, but 3.1). We all remind you many times, but for unknown reasons, you always forget it.
The Enhancer Software Install, although verbose, gives you individual choice to install as little or as much as you want. It is flexible.
The Enhancer Software Sound datatype is more advanced than the OS4.1 version so you may or may not want to upgrade to it. The choice again is yours.
Absolutely. Like I said the software is great.
So sound datatype got updated in the latest OS update, do I go with it as it is newer than the enhancer one? Has it got bugs fixed that the Enhancer one hasn't? You've set the enhancer version numbers higher even though it's now older that the OS one. Do you see the dilemma?
Quote:
You should be aware that some users have an alternative view and want to install everything from the Enhancer Software.
Sure! I'm not claiming to speak for the masses. However surely you can see that having two sets of identically-named components with different functionality is not ideal?
How about something like you could install all of the files with identical names, like sound datatype, to a separate location? You can then run adddatatypes for that location from user-startup or something similar? That way you're not overwriting the original files, but you're still giving people the choice.
Quote:
This is not new concept: go to Aminet and you will find a plethora of third party direct replacement of system components.
Just to clarify, the software is great, But overwriting named OS files, when you could name them differently like you did for multiviewer and multiedit, feels really odd to me.
You should be aware that some users have an alternative view and want to install everything from the Enhancer Software.
You are wrong there. Almost everyone keeps saying that replacing system components is the wrong idea. Almost EVERYONE. Beta testers, your developers, all users. But you keep repeating the same and the same like a mantra. Like no one saying it, just a few.
NO! ALMOST EVERYONE SAYING REPLACING SYSTEM COMPONENT IS WRONG. Ok, you made a replacement, but call it different! Make your OWN versioning numbers. Why you stole names and versioning way?
Not only you steal names of already exciting components, but you for some reason continue their version theme! And I am not just about the mess you create for users by this, but, what about decent morale there? I.e. those 53.x / 54.x numbers ! Like, you update exactly THAT CODE. But it really likes stealing stuff.
Why don't be just unique, and make YOUR OWN components with NEW NAMES. With new versioning way? Why you steal things? It is just bad and wrong.
Quote:
This is not new concept: go to Aminet and you will find a plethora of third party direct replacement of system components.
Right. If we go to jail, there are many people doing rob, kill, and stuff. So why not copy that too then?
What I mean, if you find some 3d party little hacks on Aminet which aim to replace os components, it's all just hacks, from bedroom coders. You as a "software company" can't act like this! It's just really stealing stuff, smells bad, making a mess, and probably just non-legal.
If Hyperion wishes, they surely can sue for stealing names and versioning theme. They just have enough already to do so, but just you should have decent morale. No?
Yeah, now you can say that you "register" some rights on some names and all that crap, but damn, aren't we should be of decent morale there ?
@billifish
Quote:
feels really odd to me.
Not only for you but FOR EVERYONE except Mattew. You can be sure we as beta testers and developers ALL saying to him that this is wrong, and he all the time ignore us.
Almost EVERYONE. Beta testers, your developers, all users.
As a Hyperion beta tester, I understand your passion. However I will point out that this statement is a huge exaggeration. It maybe your personal view and a few others in your social circle which perpetuate the echo chamber, it does not make it everyone's view.
Quote:
Why you steal things? It is just bad and wrong.
No code has been stolen and your public accusations are serious. Enhancer Software programmers are employed to create components from scratch and have no access to any third party code that does the same purpose. No copyright infringement has taken place.
Quote:
, what about decent morale there? I.e. those 53.x / 54.x numbers
As you maybe aware that there are several A-EON “third party” components that OS4.1 relies on with this versioning format, for example: MediaToolBox, ATIRadeon.chip. PCIgraphics.card, Ringhio
So sound datatype got updated in the latest OS update, do I go with it as it is newer than the enhancer one? Has it got bugs fixed that the Enhancer one hasn't?
You have to consider that "Update 2" contains around 4-5 years worth of maintenance updates that have finally made it to the public. Some of the files contained in the update maybe very old from some years ago and now they are finally seeing the light of day.
The Enhancer Software Sound Datatype has had several recent updates and development is ongoing with some exciting new features to be added. It works in a very different way to other sound datatypes as it is structured for streaming and a few new concepts for future enhancement.
Quote:
How about something like you could install all of the files with identical names, like sound datatype, to a separate location?
You can do this now with the current installer by specifying alternative install locations for the files. Some users have already done that. It is your choice.
You can also opt to install specific files and not install others. That is your choice too.
The Enhancer Software is flexible, you can take as much, or as little from it as you wish.
@amigakit Is it possible to have an example of an installation with alternative paths such as the audio configuration program? it would be very useful. I would like to continue using Enhancer Thanks.
You write some software to serve some purpose and sell it. You let it rest there for years to come without updates or fixes to known bugs (hey, it's probably even the only program that serves this specific purpose, so you don't have to care).
Then someone else steps in and rewrites your software (without access to your source code) with the exact same purpose, puts it into some package (to disguise it as not to be seen as a sole program), enhances it, fixes known bugs, and even gives it the same exact name than your program and ... sells it aswell.
I don't think you would be happy with that? If something smells like a copyright infringement, looks and feels like one it's probbaly not a fish...hey, but what do i know?
@amigakit you are wrong, kas1e and billyfish are right. Notice how there's no one here or on any other forum defending your way of doing it? But lots of people criticizing it. That means, you're wrong and you should acknowledge that. There's no shame, just accept it and move on.
Stop naming replacement apps with the same name. Especially critical system apps like Format.
You are expressing your opinion and preference. Lots of others have differing opinion and the choice is in there for the user to decide whether to install Format or other components or not. It is not up to anyone to dictate what users do and whether or not they support a software package or development with their hard earned cash.
The name "Format" is not the preserve of anyone.
Format and similar components have been inside the Enhancer Software for approximately five years and upgraded steadily. Many users have freely decided to use these and had great satisfaction for the steady stream of updates our team has provided over a long period of time when no OS updates were forthcoming.
The Enhancer Software was borne from the slow pace of software development in the Next Generation niche. A-EON's software is principally developed to support users of A-EON's hardware platforms. It has plugged the gaps for customers and will continue to progress for those same customers who expect something more than maintenance update every 5 years.
I am sure you agree that it's A-EON's right and discretion to supply any software it develops in-house on it's own hardware platform in the efforts to enhance the product experience for it's customer base.
Edited by amigakit on 2021/1/20 14:50:03 Edited by amigakit on 2021/1/20 14:54:59 Edited by amigakit on 2021/1/20 14:56:58
You are expressing your opinion and preference. Lots of others have differing opinion and the choice is in there for the user to decide whether to install Format or other components or not. It is not up to anyone to dictate what users do and whether or not they support a software package or development with their hard earned cash.
No-one is saying that users cannot install stuff if they want so I think that's talking at cross purposes
Quote:
The name "Format" is not the preserve of anyone.
Really? So to check can I, as a user who can do what I want, rename it as formatter to stop the name clash so I, with my freedom to choose, can have both AEON and OS tools? Would the Updater program be ok with that?
Quote:
Format and similar components have been inside the Enhancer Software for approximately five years and upgraded steadily. Many users have freely decided to use these and had great satisfaction for the steady stream of updates our team has provided over a long period of time when no OS updates were forthcoming.
The Enhancer Software was borne from the slow pace of software development in the Next Generation niche. A-EON's software is principally developed to support users of A-EON's hardware platforms. It has plugged the gaps for customers and will continue to progress for those same customers who expect something more than maintenance update every 5 years.
I don't think anyone disputes that you plugged gaps and given the apparent stasis of the OS, it's great that you developed stuff.
Quote:
I am sure you agree that it's A-EON's right and discretion to supply any software it develops in-house on it's own hardware platform in the efforts to enhance the product experience for it's customer base.
No-one as far as I can see is disputing that. As I keep mentioning, I think the software is great. It's literally just the naming/versioning that is problematic.
Maybe I'm doing a really bad job of trying to explain my point, in which case apologies to all! So I'll give it another go. Let me try and describe a situation from a developer point of view.
Say I create a tool that uses some functionality from something that exists with the same name from both AEON and the OS, format for example. Now imagine that these two versions of the program diverge in their functionality due to priorities for the teams developing them. Which is completely fair enough. Now I, writing my program, want to check what version is installed so I can offer different features to different versions of the OS. Can you see that as they're effectively forked and using the same versioning scheme, I'm going to have a nightmare determining whether it's AEON's v54.xx of Hyperion's V54.xx tool.
Now imagine users, like me with my small brain getting confused between whose fork I have installed, etc. I don't think you'll have any less sales, or have a lower level of customer satisfaction, if they had non-clashing names?
Does this make sense?
Something as simple as changing the name makes the problem go away.
Yep, everyone can for sure agree that there hasn't been any copyright infringement, that's not the point.. The point is only organizational .. it doesn't make a ANY sense and ONLY causes confusion to users in rewriting system components by even giving them the exact same name! Not to mention that some of these components were certainly never been abandoned .. it's a fact, so that they have been updated recently and bundled in update 2!
The only exception that had to keep their name obviously were the programs that was ALREADY existed and your team just updated from the original source (like Tunenet, Notification etc.)
Really? So to check can I, as a user who can do what I want, rename it as formatter to stop the name clash so I, with my freedom to choose, can have both AEON and OS tools? Would the Updater program be ok with that?
No problem, you can rename Format to anything you want on your own computer. It is your personal choice.
Updater is used to update only Enhancer Software components. However when you download a component you can tell Updater to install that file to any location of your choosing. Updater is very flexible for user's preferences.
There is nothing stopping you from installing any of the components on a completely different partition or assign if you so wish.
Quote:
I think the software is great. It's literally just the naming/versioning that is problematic.
A few here will agree with your point of view and others will not see it as a problem.
In Summary:
* The Enhancer Software from A-EON is an independent package designed to be bundled on A-EON's own hardware platforms.
* Users can freely decide to install it in it's entirety or opt for parts of it. They may decide to not install any of it. It is their choice. I respect the end-users decision. We actively develop for the users that want to use components.
* Users can freely decide to rename some Enhancer Software components on their system. That is the great thing about our platform and that is their choice.
The user is in charge of how they configure their system and what software to support and we should respect that. The verbose Enhancer Software Installation process provides so many options for users to configure the bespoke install that they want.
As a long standing Amiga user, I have always configured my own system configuration using a plethora of third party components often replacing and enhancing the standard ones. This product is cut from the same cloth.
About replacing system files with others with same name I have no doubt it needs to be avoided for next future. Not for legal/copyright reasons but simply for the best user experience and OS integrity/stability. Really there is no reason to overwrite system files when you have infinite choices to name your new programs/apps.
Someone could feel this practice even as politically not correct vs Hyperion guys.
On some other OS this kind of practice is avoided and system files are always preserved.
I mean, if i go and make a movie, call it "Frozen" with the exact same storyline of the well-known kids movie, but with "updated" actors (probably make them fuzzies to not get called a thief) and sell it, do you really think Disney will NOT drag me to court because of copyright?
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
) like you need a system, like an env variable to say which sound.datatype to use for the sound child classes like WAV, etc. Having two different components with the same name but differing functionality seems like a recipe for disaster! 
