Talk:CherryOS

Corrobation of the claim that 600+ functions were stolen from PearPC

An older version of the article referenced the legal kerfuffle that erupted in 2005, and specifically the situation where (a) a lot of undeniable evidence was found for code theft and (b) Maui-X-Stream threatening to sue Kristian Hermannsen. These references were removed since no public corrobation of the issue could be found. I was the reverse engineering expert that performed the analysis, so I had a front-row seat -- how do I confirm what happened? Should I write a public article somewhere? After looking at the "reliable sources" guideline, the only way would be to get a reporter to write write about it a decade later? --ThomasDullien (talk) 21:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

It's a Pear PC code?

Wasn't CherryOS released in March 2005, not March 2004?

Announced in October 2004 and programed to released in first quarter 2005

Where's the irony?

3rd paragraph of Legal Threats opens: "In an ironic twist to the story, the CherryOS lawyers threatened to take action against Kristian in his home state of Massachusetts."

And the next paragraph starts: "Since the Software Freedom Law Center would not do actions pro-bono, if made in Hawai'i,"

Maybe my legal bones aren't up to snuff, but why is this ironic? I'm not exacting sure what's going on.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.25.201.1 (talk) 07:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 

For anyone who cares to know, the SFLC would have covered pro bono work anywhere in the contiguous US states, but for Hawaiʻi since it would require travel to the islands, they would not be able to automatically cover legal costs. --Puellanivis (talk) 15:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

From their site

Due to Overwhelming Demand

Cherry Open Source Project

Launches 5.1.2005

So who hacked them? --Terrible Tim 00:14, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well I put in that the front page has changed, but I'm not sure if they were hacked or bowed out to pressure. --Bash 03:53, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Move a Page

Can Be This Move Cherry OS To Cherry OS (Windows)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FamdomFom76 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

"Alleged" violations?

Why are all GPL violations in this article "alleged"? Was it not proven that CherryOS and VX30 had GPL'ed code? Roger 06:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Not in a court of law, or in any way that is damaging to their image which would allow us to say that they did do it. If we say they did, and don't say alleged, wikipedia and the authors of this article open themselves up to lawsuit for Defamation. So, since there was no settlement, no admission of guilt, and no finding against them, it's just "alleged". That being said, as someone very close to the case, I can say that they did do it, and if they want to sue me for defamation, I can prove it. However, due to CoI, I can't add that to the article, nor can anyone else really use me as a source... well except to say "she says..." but then that doesn't look particularly exciting... --Puellanivis 19:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

We're not a court we don't have to give such a benefit of doubt. It's obvious that CherryOS contained GPLd code. :D\=< (talk) 10:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Unrelated, untrue and offensive information

Surprisingly, my name (Vladimir Bickov) is appeared in this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CherryOS

You can see it at the end under the new section: "Later trade-secret lawsuit involving Arben Kryeziu".

I find this info untrue and offensive because:

- The lawsuit "Aqua Connect vs Coderebel" is still in progress and actually AQC has very weak and doubtful position in this lawsuit.

- I've never had any connection to "Cherry OS" and I have no idea what is this.

- Coderebel company never had any connection to "Cherry OS" and all developers who is working on iRAPP have no idea about "Cherry OS" as well.

Since I'm an active and thankful customer of wikipedia for many years, I hope you guys will not allow to use this great resource for dirty marketing games.

Thank You, Vladimir Bickov

P.S. I see it is fixed. Thank you again.

Vladimir Bickov

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on CherryOS. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.macworld.com/article/39930/2004/10/cherryos.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,65437,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:20, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

It’s been a long time, and probably no one care, but…

It’s Easter, and some 15 years later, but no one ever found my favorite Easter egg. So, I thought I would finally share it somewhere: if you look through the source code of PearPC, you might come across this, which is not where the vpkpx instruction is supposed to be in the decoding tables. It’s supposed to be (and is) at 391, but it was duplicated at 42 as a copyright trap, which I inserted at the same time that I upgraded the performance of PearPC’s vector code significantly. This left CherryOS behind in the benchmarks that they were using as marketing materials, and in their rushed next release, not only did it have equivalent performance… it also implemented this entirely arbitrary invalid opcode. There’s zero reason why CherryOS should have ever implemented this invalid opcode, unless they were copying source code. Those of us who knew about it kept all this secret and never ended up spilling the beans, because things never got to an actual lawsuit. But if you still have a later version of CherryOS laying around, you can test it yourself. Nothing was “alleged”, we had incontrovertible proof that they copied our source code. --Puellanivis (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)