GP2X [rant] Why Isn't Gph Embracing The Dev Community?


I am here as a result of the /. post.

At first I was excited about buying a GP2X, now I'm not.

If this is a niche market, and that market happens to be OSS enthusiasts The had better shape up and comply with the GPL or they are shooting themselves in the foot. It will not be an "Open" handheld until they comply with the GPL, and until that point I doubt their intended market ("whiny linux geeks") will be intrested in purchasing it. The negative press alone on a high trtaffic site like /. could end up killing them. Whoever is at fault for this blunder 1. has their head up their ass. and 2. deserves to be fired for laying the framework for their companies eventual doom. With luck they will realize their blunder and comply quickly, and get re-/.ed, otherwise my hunch is that this is a good idea ruined by the people responsible for the idea's complete lack of understanding of their target demographic.


As a side note, why no mini HD like ipod? 64MB of memory seems like such a waste, can't even fit a singel episode of the simpsons on it out of the box. I understand it's a pda, but why the distinction? The lack of memory in my old ipaq 3635 was the biggest annoyance I had with it.
 
As a side note, why no mini HD like ipod? 64MB of memory seems like such a waste, can't even fit a singel episode of the simpsons on it out of the box. I understand it's a pda, but why the distinction? The lack of memory in my old ipaq 3635 was the biggest annoyance I had with it.

In a word: Price. The object was to have a unit that was a lot more powerful than the old GP32 BLU, but actually costed less. This didn;t quite happen due to everyone demanding an additional 32Mb of RAM (original plan was 32Mb instead of 64 - not the Nand, idd), but Nand is somewhat more pricey. Also bear in mind that, unlike other classical pricing models where a company loses money on the hardware and makes it back on games, software, or presumably in Apple's case iTunes, GPH had to make a profit on the hardware itself.

SDs on the other hand, whilst a tadge on the pricey side, are perfectly affordable, and, when considering that the GP32 had been limited to 128Mb, positively roomy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Personally I can't see how you can release a handheld console in this day and age that caters for both commercial and homebrew alike. It would be a nightmare to administer.

Why would a commercial company want to sell you a game when you can download a bunch of other similar(ish) games for free?

Or more likely, what would all the homebrew people do if commercial companies did release a whole load of top quality software. Would you prefer to play pong in an EMU (thanks to homebrew), or a clone of the PSP's Ridge Racer?

If I wanted commercial games, I'd have bought a PSP.

Also, if you think about it, GPH are losing out on a chunk of the $16Billion-a-year games market by just making their money on the hardware.

Is this them being greedy?

For the most part, I just think they haven't got their act together. Whether they ever will or not is another question.

As for releasing different firmware and then commercial games not working on it, will this be the case? You just need to look back at the dawn of PC games to see that games catered for a myriad of audio and video cards. I'm sure the commercial games will take the homebrew firmware into account.

But then what do I know. My GP2X has just blown up on me.
 
There is little chance of that happening. Even if the FSF (copyright owner for linux) does step up to the plate, they tend to go for compliance rather than damages.
Please do not spread this mistake. The Linux kernel is not copyrighted by the FSF. The kernels copyright is held by everyone who participated in its development.

The only thing the kernel has to do with the FSF is that the vast majority of the kernel's source code is licensed under the GPL 2.1 whose author is the founder of the foundation and its advocate: RMS and Eben Moglen.

Said that. There *IS* software on the GP2X which is copyrighted by the FSF: GNU Bash.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gnu bash isn't on the gp2x, it uses busybox's sh.

I don't think that's correct. /bin/bash is not a softlink, and I get the following on my USB Gadget terminal:

Code:
bash-2.05a# bash --version
GNU bash, version 2.05a.0(1)-release (arm-unknown-linux-gnu)
Copyright 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
bash-2.05a#
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, you're right. The pre-released stuff I had just used busybox's ash, but the retail units are definitely using bash.

Code:
-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root       563888 Sep 30  2005 bash
lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root            4 Oct  5  2005 sh -> bash
lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root            0 Jan  1 00:02 exe -> /bin/bash
 
http://www.gbax.com/gplgp2x.html
Hello everyone, Craig here,

Due to some inaccurate internet reporting, I will clarify what on earth all this GPL business is about.

Firstly its pointless phoning up my staff or writing emails and giving abuse about the fact the latest source of the GP2X firmware has not been released, we didn't make the firmware, nor did Gamepark Korea, it was made by DignSys and I as well as several people from the GP2X scene have been working hard to make them comply with the GPL.

We did succeed in getting them to release incomplete source code, and were days away from getting everything sorted out. We are now trying to patch up the damage done by idiots who read the slashdot post and decided the best course of action was to write childish abusive emails to various people not even connected with the software development. Smooth guys, real smooth.

Anyway, that aside, we hope to have all source by next week, either that or a new solution.

-Craig
 
http://www.gbax.com/gplgp2x.html
Hello everyone, Craig here,

Due to some inaccurate internet reporting, I will clarify what on earth all this GPL business is about.

Firstly its pointless phoning up my staff or writing emails and giving abuse about the fact the latest source of the GP2X firmware has not been released, we didn't make the firmware, nor did Gamepark Korea, it was made by DignSys and I as well as several people from the GP2X scene have been working hard to make them comply with the GPL.

We did succeed in getting them to release incomplete source code, and were days away from getting everything sorted out. We are now trying to patch up the damage done by idiots who read the slashdot post and decided the best course of action was to write childish abusive emails to various people not even connected with the software development. Smooth guys, real smooth.

Anyway, that aside, we hope to have all source by next week, either that or a new solution.

-Craig

Well this is an offensive little letter.

Has he not thought that people are ringing his staff because the users consider his company the eyes and ears of gph in the west and he is, or that they spent £200 at his store.

This its not us its them rubbish is really annoying. Considering them keeps shifting. is it Gbax, Magiceyes,DignSys, MesDigital.??,Gamepark Korea.

Then the inevitable happens and people after months don't get the source when they have the right;been patient; lied to, surprise surprise are chastised like little children.

And again the “new” solution is mentioned my personal belief of why this charade had continued as long as it has. Well at least DaveC will be happy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.gbax.com/gplgp2x.html
We did succeed in getting them to release incomplete source code, and were days away from getting everything sorted out. We are now trying to patch up the damage done by idiots who read the slashdot post and decided the best course of action was to write childish abusive emails to various people not even connected with the software development. Smooth guys, real smooth.

Anyway, that aside, we hope to have all source by next week, either that or a new solution.

-Craig

So let me get this right,

No firmware source is available and no information about it.

It gets shashdotted and dugg

There is "childish" "damage done by idiots...." asking for compliance.

GPH are getting the source from Digisys and releasing it next week.

What damage was done??? It looks like the "smooth guys, real smooth" approach worked - it was a last resort for crying out loud. It was mooted that this would happen right here in this forum. GPH didn't lean on Digisys. It happened and GPH leant sufficiently.

I'm still at a huge loss as to what "damage" was done by "idiots". I think you'll find some of those "idiots" and actually the target market for the GP2x. But by all means lets create a label for them...... customer or idiot? I think customer is the more constructive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What Craig is saying is that tons of rampaging GPL nuts started sending less-than-formal (read: childish) emails to GPH/Gp2x.co.uk/other distributors demanding that they release the source, even though Dig were the weak link. And funnily enough, a couple of polite emails from one or two people to Dig seem to have done the trick, almost completely unrelated to the huge GPL debate that went on the other day. Nothing to do with your 'smooth, real smooth' approach. My god I'm doing my best not to flame you to the sky. Craig, ED and co do a really great job of being GPH contacts and getting back to us about even minor issues, and they don't deserve this sort of shit.

Allan.
 
What Craig is saying is that tons of rampaging GPL nuts started sending less-than-formal (read: childish) emails to GPH/Gp2x.co.uk/other distributors demanding that they release the source, even though Dig were the weak link. And funnily enough, a couple of polite emails from one or two people to Dig seem to have done the trick, almost completely unrelated to the huge GPL debate that went on the other day. Nothing to do with your 'smooth, real smooth' approach. My god I'm doing my best not to flame you to the sky. Craig, ED and co do a really great job of being GPH contacts and getting back to us about even minor issues, and they don't deserve this sort of shit.

Allan.

Add to that the amount of "less then pleasant" (read: childish, insulting rants) e-mails I got via Open2x about releasing the source from people who don’t seem to be able to tell production company, supplier and "open source project" apart and the fact this has shot to hell the more collaborative approach we where trying to achieve with GPH/DignSys.

I think this approach may well deliver results but it's a long way from ideal (IMHO) and there may be some long term fall-out. Still, with everybody so keen to shout how important the kernel source is to improve the device I look forward to working with the team to sort tons of patches for the Open2x kernel in the near future :) ;).

My only wish is that a bit more background research had been put into the blog entry that started the ball rolling, whist it’s not a criticism (blogs are all about personal opinions and I respect that) but a little more research and a few targeted e-mails would have at least given an understanding of the work that was going on behind the scenes to resolve the issue and may have lead to a more balanced article that at least highlighted efforts to resolve the issue or pointed to further reading.

Getting the source and complying with licences IS a very big deal and I guess it is “different spokes for different folks” when it comes to approaches to deal with issues.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What Craig is saying is that tons of rampaging GPL nuts started sending less-than-formal (read: childish) emails to GPH/Gp2x.co.uk/other distributors demanding that they release the source, even though Dig were the weak link. And funnily enough, a couple of polite emails from one or two people to Dig seem to have done the trick, almost completely unrelated to the huge GPL debate that went on the other day. Nothing to do with your 'smooth, real smooth' approach. My god I'm doing my best not to flame you to the sky. Craig, ED and co do a really great job of being GPH contacts and getting back to us about even minor issues, and they don't deserve this sort of shit.

Allan.

Where are these GPL nuts your talking about, show me. If people buy linux they expect linux. Not propriatry software. Again its been out months *and* so should the source its been shameful how this has been handled.

A couple of polite e-mails do *not* take months look through the GPH suggestions see how many times the source has been mentioned, asked *begged* for, see how early polite posts get increasingly hostile, or *worse* people get give up. If this lie is true I'm really upset as this would be proof of being lied to closer to home.

Incomplete source, Bandwidth Limitations(becuase bandwidth on a kernel patch clearly is enormous), another week, and suddenly its not GPH its Digisys who cares.

Giving somthing a name like "GPL nut" *IS* offensive when I suspect 100% of the people don't care about the licence. I centainly don't. I care that I bought something with the spirit of Linux/GNU/BSD about sharing code ideas(well not really I got it becuase its fun). Your hatred of others is not appreciated by myself. Its nice to see others stand up for themselves esp considering those who are more able/better placed have been pretty much absent, *read Craig*

From what I've read into Craigs comments and *others*. He's not interested in linux. Then the second he mentioned commercial games. I knew it was game over from him.

The "in a week" is to douse the flames when *everybody* knows that today such things take seconds. Do I belive in a week. Next week there will be another reason(read lie). This weeks reason(lie) people asked for the code, and that is what is most shameful of Craig and the others involved in this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well lets all get our trumpets out and hail the fanfare for king Craig
Sorry Craig but when you go into the supply business you tend to have to deal with customers, Cant say i would bother ringing you because you have no control over the situation but if you can't handle complaints from customers why retail ?
However if these people where just ringing to be offensive then shame on them(If this is the case you have legal case for mental abuse, Follow it up or shut up) but you did advertise GP2X as one thing and then sell as another.

No matter what anybody says here about some nice emails doing the job and no matter who has what standing in this community the fact remains, Somebody took the piss with the GPL and it didn't get sorted until it got "childish" now then lets think about this
Who exactly is the most childish here
1 Those acting childish
2 Those who only react to childish behaviour
???

The fact of the matter remains that around the web on computer sites of all platforms the GP2X has been getting a lot of good free press and some people just don't like it when the turns around and bites em in the ass (GPH)

Sorry DJWillis i kow "It's not allowed" to argue with guys like you and Craig but you are talking rubbish, There can be no long term fall out end of story, GPH supplied software that has to comply to the GPL, It really is that simple no fallout can ever happen, They release the code or get lost, No one wants to see GPH out of business but i know a lot of people that are quite willing to put them there if they don't comply.

This is all moot now really but it pisses me off that you and Craig have come on here whining and groaning that "Oh it's been sorted out now but some other people got envolved" which was"Smooth, Real smooth"
That comes across as total elitism and very very childish.

I know we are gamers but damn Grow up guys ?
 
Sorry DJWillis i kow "It's not allowed" to argue with guys like you and Craig but you are talking rubbish, There can be no long term fall out end of story, GPH supplied software that has to comply to the GPL, It really is that simple no fallout can ever happen, They release the code or get lost, No one wants to see GPH out of business but i know a lot of people that are quite willing to put them there if they don't comply.

Flexinoodle,

While you post does annoy me ;) you make some valid points.

Anyway, argue away, who put me on a fecking podium ;).

Let's put this in perspective,

I have no commercial arrangement with anything to do with the GP2X (Other then a free development kit, given to me by CraigX at his expense (Not GPH) and support from GBAX and GP32x.de in various endeavours to do with source).

I hack on the GP2X (and GP32, and may other things :D) for fun, I set Open2x up for fun (before I realised what I was letting myself in for) and I worked with DignSys and MagicEyes to get the original MMSP2 Linux kernel and U-Boot source so that people could hack around with it and review it for fun, to get a feel for the hardware etc., the same applies for the GP2X Linux source that is currently out in the wild. This device has cost me an ungodly amount of time, heartache and no small amount of cash in pursuing that ‘fun’.

I have, with others (Including GBAX and GP32x.de), been trying to get DignSys (and it is DignSys who hold all the GPL code in question after all) to comply with the GPL in a more pro-active manor. Anybody who has taken the time to ask me about this has got full, detailed mails about the situation and my personal feelings on the matter.

Again this is all in my own free time and going to the effort to get Korean friends helping me with document translations (both ways), making calls at 4am in the morning to Korea and speaking at length with lawyers. I know Craig, ED and others have been very much in the same boat and it is why I have nothing but praise for them (and can emphasise), they are both suppliers and are to varying degrees at the mercy of GPH and co. and in turn (in this case) GPH’s suppliers.

I am not for one minute defending DignSys and co. in the matter, it’s wrong, I have big problems with it and I feel very uncomfortable supporting it (why do you think there are no Open2x kernels to test things like USB host on the EXT and such, it does not seem ‘right’ to support the device in that way in the current climate). If it’s open source then it’s open source, not ‘yes, but, hmmm, nope, maybe, can we check with legal’ source ;).

For some background information just to put the current position in context. I have been contacting and negotiating with a number of people with standing (in the GPL sense, i.e. a claim to copyright) on all the GPL connected items that ship on a stock GP2X, this is not just the kernel but libs, U-Boot, SDL, mplayer, tools etc. the list goes on. The reason for requesting support from people with standing is simple. They are the only people who have legal recourse to enforce the GPL on there individual items of copyright.

To that end there are legal ‘cease and desist’ notices being drawn up to be served on GPH, DignSys and potentially suppliers if it came to that. All of these people with standing are prepared to put there names to these letters and GPH, DignSys and co. where recently warned about there impending dispatch. The next stage after that would be a timescale for compliance and then seeking a judgment to enforce the letters if needed and believe me when I say that these people are very passionate about protecting there copyright and would not have any problems with killing GPH/DignSys and co. over this (and frankly if it got/gets to that stage then I am all for sitting back and watching the show). You would have to go a long way to get to the last point and the whole process is set against dialogue and there is an overriding feeling among people (not all) who contribute to big GPL projects that education and ongoing compliance is better then law suits and bankruptcy.

As for me being elitist or not, I don't really care and I apologise if I come across that way. I just like people to be more pro-active rather then jumping on there soap-box to have a good rant without anything helpful to add. With that in mind my recent frustration is perhaps tainted by the number of e-mails Open2x have (and it’s a fair few) on the back of that Slashdot article and others that are unpleasant rants, rude and in some cases seek to accuse me of withholding source (and worse) falsely assuming Open2x have a commercial connection with GPH and co..

It always amazes me how many people can write War and Peace on a subject but can’t chuck a few line e-mail asking if anybody knows the current score or if there is anything they can help with. I know full well not everybody is so inclined and I have received some invaluable help with parts of this process. I do apologise for maybe not making the whole process more public but once to start talking to lawyers and gathering material like that above it can become a little sensitive.

This is all moot now really but it pisses me off that you and Craig have come on here whining and groaning that "Oh it's been sorted out now but some other people got envolved" which was"Smooth, Real smooth"
That comes across as total elitism and very very childish.

I know we are gamers but damn Grow up guys ?

Craig’s quotes, not mine but I can see (and appreciate) where Craig’s frustration comes from.

I try and take a pragmatic view to all of this. What is done is done and nothing can really change that. Lets all hope that DignSys commit the source to the web space ED has given them and make a conscious effort to keep it current from here on out. That is by far the most desirable result and puts the matter to bed (at long last).

Anyway, my short reply has turned into a rant and I need more coffee :D.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well said, maybe if you had let people know where things were standing then it would not have happened this way.
 
Well said, maybe if you had let people know where things were standing then it would not have happened this way.

Agreed, life is wonderful in hindsight ;). Not always so easy and straight forward in the moment so to speak.

My drive I guess, is my genuine belief that a good relationship with DignSys is a lot more valuable than a bad one where they grudgingly provide source and do the bare minimum, the SlashDot effect and it’s hit on relations and dialogue makes that result look more distant then ever in my eyes :(. I hope I am wrong.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well said, maybe if you had let people know where things were standing then it would not have happened this way.
I do apologise for maybe not making the whole process more public but once to start talking to lawyers and gathering material like that above it can become a little sensitive.

It is not like it was a secret anyway - from the 'Splash Screen Petition To Get Our Way' thread :
I don't think antagonising them is going to improve the situation. If anything it could undermine the efforts of DJWillis et al.
I guess they think if they release a bit of source once, then they're done with it.
It could also mean DJ has got through to them and they will comply from now on.

Thanks DJWillis, Craigix and ED for your efforts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top