Where Is The Firmware

[Alpha2]

I think most people are of the mond set that they want the system to succeed but the constant specter of the GPL is the one blemish on the whole shebang, but only because people keep mentioning it.

As a non-coder (and for most people in the same boat) I think it would hardly matter if they did or didn't as long as the thing works. Heck If the Source ever is released will anyone really step up to improve the thing anyway?

Personally I have a feeling that if the source was released the edits to the kernal that would probably be made wouldnt have much effect for the end user/non-coder. I could be wrong of course but that's just my impression... it's like the people complaining about the GPL don't really care because they want to get a hold of the source to modify it, just because it's a GPL violation not to.

 

[Winterkid]

Yes, Shane, if the GP2X had been delayed as long as they needed to completely stabilize the firmware AND comply with the GPL and only given it to developers in kits in advance, there would be complaining still.. Probably as much complaining, if not, MORE.

People seem happiest when making others miserable. I could list a long list of names from this thread alone who fit into that category. I won't say I've been blameless, cause I've done my own share of support fire in this combat.

Everyone who's posted, had good intentions when they posted it, no matter for what side. However, the "road to hell" is supposedly "paved with good intentions".

The GPL was conceived, believing code should be shared openly and fairly with no costly licences or major corporate "entities" to tangle with
The Roman Empire crucified Jesus, believing he was a radical and a criminal
Napolean thought his actions were for the good of all the French
The Hindenburg was built believing a Hydrogen Blimp would be an excellent way to fly casually across the countryside in luxury
The Titanic was built as a fast unsinkable way to cross the Atlantic
Hitler thought his actions were for the greater good of humanity

 

[DijiTao]

I really appreciate everyone's time laying things out and explaining things - and I understand the points all around (would take me forever to address them all).

I'm just pleased it seems your understanding, I hope while me may disagree on the methods of how to enforce compliance we should all be able to agree on the importance of compliance.

So let me summarize to make sure I'm clear and I can stop starting crap

1) GPH shouldn't have shipped the GP2x until the source code was done, complete, and in a tar ball somewhere for download ... BECAUSE ...
2) While they didn't write it, they (as a company) DISTRIBUTED it, which makes them just as accountable as Digisys under GPL

Correct and Correct.

3) While many of you will do something with the source code to try and improve the product, its more of a legal issue than a practical one (and there is nothing wrong with that - esp. if you contributed to OSS that was used in the GP2x ... which by the way, does that fit anyone here? Has anyone here actually contributed to any of the source code used in the GP2x firmware?)

I wouldn't downplay the pratical side of the equation, but yes the legal issue is pressing. The rights of the developers should be respected, after all they don't ask for much in return.

I do wonder, though, if the GP2x hadn't shipped ... STILL ... because of the Digisys hold up ... would we all be complaining in ANOTHER post about how long its taking the units to ship?

O people would have thrown a fit, but at least GPH wouldn't have done anything illegal. It also seems to me that the publicity damage done by a delayed release would have been much smaller then the damage done from this debacle. The damage from this GPL violation isn't just counted in terms of lost sales, but in terms of lost developers. The people most upset by this are the very developers who the GP2X needs for it's survival.

Again, thanks for everyone for taking a lot of time and a lot of posting. I DO appreciate it.

I'm trying to be less militant and more educational, hopefully this approach will be more effective.

 

[Muncher666]

Again, thanks for everyone for taking a lot of time and a lot of posting. I DO appreciate it.

I'm trying to be less militant and more educational, hopefully this approach will be more effective.

​

DT, it's a nice change.

This thread seems like a neverending spiral. Come on guys, the least we can do is wait until tommorow. (speaking of which, what sort of time difference is there between korea and say.. Australia? )

Allan.

 

[GeminiDomino]

Again, thanks for everyone for taking a lot of time and a lot of posting. I DO appreciate it.

I'm trying to be less militant and more educational, hopefully this approach will be more effective.

​

DT, it's a nice change.

This thread seems like a neverending spiral. Come on guys, the least we can do is wait until tommorow. (speaking of which, what sort of time difference is there between korea and say.. Australia? )

Allan.

​

A Few hours at most, I think. I know at least one part of .au is 16 hours ahead of Eastern time

 

[Muncher666]

That's strange, I'd normally get responses from Dignsys from 11:00pm to 2:00am..

Allan.

 

[Dingo_aus]

So, getting back to the title of the thread.......
Has anyone got any news about when the release might happen? Or really any other news about the firmeware release?

 

[Muncher666]

A probable tommorow, according to craig. Apparently they're just clearing the code with Magiceyes.

Allan.

 

[evening2005]

I really appreciate everyone's time laying things out and explaining things - and I understand the points all around (would take me forever to address them all).

So let me summarize to make sure I'm clear and I can stop starting crap

1) GPH shouldn't have shipped the GP2x until the source code was done, complete, and in a tar ball somewhere for download ... BECAUSE ...
2) While they didn't write it, they (as a company) DISTRIBUTED it, which makes them just as accountable as Digisys under GPL
3) While many of you will do something with the source code to try and improve the product, its more of a legal issue than a practical one (and there is nothing wrong with that - esp. if you contributed to OSS that was used in the GP2x ... which by the way, does that fit anyone here? Has anyone here actually contributed to any of the source code used in the GP2x firmware?)

I do wonder, though, if the GP2x hadn't shipped ... STILL ... because of the Digisys hold up ... would we all be complaining in ANOTHER post about how long its taking the units to ship?

Again, thanks for everyone for taking a lot of time and a lot of posting. I DO appreciate it.

​

Your three-point summary is correct. There is absolutely no doubt that people would have complained if units had been delayed. But I think that not being able to sell the thing until the source was available would have concentrated minds wonderfully at GPH and all this would have been resolved ages ago.

 

[WrongEyedJesus]

I think that not being able to sell the thing until the source was available would have concentrated minds wonderfully at GPH and all this would have been resolved ages ago.

​

Good point.

 

[FluffyPanda]

Just out of curiousity, how many actual Linux coders have contacted Digisys for the GP2X Kernal source?

​

A quick answer here, I don't know, but at least one. (http://www.gp32x.de/board/index.php?showtopic=22311&hl=barak)

It's a good point. Having bought the device I can expect the GPLed source, but only someone with standing (i.e. someone who holds copyright on some of the infringed code) can initiate legal matters.

Barak Pearlmutter does have standing with the linux kernal and has bought a GP2x and could therefore take GPH to court, possibly with the assistance of the FSF. He probably won't, but it is a risk if the code doesn't turn up soon.

I really don't want to see that happen.

 

[timbobsteve]

Heck If the Source ever is released will anyone really step up to improve the thing anyway?

Yes, there are many ppl lined up to start modding the source and releasing custom FW versions.

Personally I have a feeling that if the source was released the edits to the kernal that would probably be made wouldnt have much effect for the end user/non-coder. I could be wrong of course but that's just my impression...

No offense, but you are wrong. The simple list of bugs in the current FW can and will be fixed by the many devs already willing to mod the source. The end user would benefit from it directly, if they chose to run the community FW. Of course you are entitled to your impression, but doesn't the other eight pages of this thread prove that there is more than a little interest in actually editing this code.

... it's like the people complaining about the GPL don't really care because they want to get a hold of the source to modify it, just because it's a GPL violation not to.

This statement only speaks for the non gp2x devs/owners that were brought to into this discussion because of the /. posts. Everyone else here is fully interested in using and modifying the source, when it is released.

I just felt I needed to adress your post directly. There was a number of things that I don't agree with, and with proper searching/reading of this thread, you would have came across the real situation.

 

[GeminiDomino]

Heck If the Source ever is released will anyone really step up to improve the thing anyway?

Yes, there are many ppl lined up to start modding the source and releasing custom FW versions.

Not to mention the advantage to people who aren't up to editing the firmware directly, but still want to develop. The ability to make a GP2X "sandbox" would make things much easier as far as libraries and the like are concerned.

 

[peter.stegemann]

It's a good point. Having bought the device I can expect the GPLed source, but only someone with standing (i.e. someone who holds copyright on some of the infringed code) can initiate legal matters.

That's not correct. Your vendor has sold you some software he has no licence for. This _is_ a legal issue, every buyer of a gp2x could make lots of troubles to the person who sold him the device. You just need an unpleased customer and the game could start...

 

[Rayek]

Well, as things are starting to wrap up this time around *looks around for another thread like this to join* I will say that this GPL issue is a double-edged sword. It's in our best interest to get it, either because;
a. What modifications interested devs might make will benefit the end users, and if not, a few end users.
-and/or-
b. It gets GPH and GBAX and GP32Z and DigiSys out of the 'legal limelight', thus making the GP2X both legal to procure and sell.

But the way in which we go about getting it is definitely a major issue. I vote that if the source isn't released with the next firmware, no matter how risky it is, getting some enforcement group involved is ideal. Enforcement groups aren't out there for compensation, they want compliance; any and all possible peaceful ways of sorting this out must fail before they go legal on GPH. This is another double-edged sword, because, while it is arguably ideal in many eyes to get the source for the end user's benefit, it may give GPH a bad name to the real 'GPL Zealots' out there in the OSS community, and a possible disenfranchisement of would-be devs.

Unless anyone wants to disagree here, this discussion is mostly over, because of this:

Hitler thought his actions were for the greater good of humanity

Whether or not this is an official invocation of Godwin's Law, most of the parties have cooled down, until next time .

edit: my sometimes dumbass spelling needs to be fixed

 

[NinjaFae]

I agree, I'd rather have a good firmware that fixes the bugs in my GP2X, than have to wait for the NEXT release for them to get fixed. I don't care about the open source myself, I can't develop a thing, only compile whats already there, and I can't even do that right for GP2x, only OSX. -_-

But also, I agree, a simple note saying 'Please be aware, firmware release has been delayed' would've been nice, don't even need to say for how long.

 

[FluffyPanda]

It's a good point.  Having bought the device I can expect the GPLed source, but only someone with standing (i.e. someone who holds copyright on some of the infringed code) can initiate legal matters.

That's not correct. Your vendor has sold you some software he has no licence for. This _is_ a legal issue, every buyer of a gp2x could make lots of troubles to the person who sold him the device. You just need an unpleased customer and the game could start...

​

It was correct. Since I have no claim to the copyright on the Linux kernal or mplayer I can't start any legal proceedings against GPH myself. (Please don't flame me, I wouldn't even if I could...)

Quite simply, they haven't actually done anything against me personally. They haven't infringed on my rights. A lot of other people's, but not mine.

Please see http://gnu.org

 

[Mr Doctor]

Technically they are since they sold you a product thats clearly been advertised to do more than it can.

 

[Muncher666]

But the way in which we go about getting it is definitely a major issue. I vote that if the source isn't released with the next firmware, no matter how risky it is, getting some enforcement group involved is ideal. Enforcement groups aren't out there for compensation, they want compliance; any and all possible peaceful ways of sorting this out must fail before they go legal on GPH. This is another double-edged sword, because, while it is arguably ideal in many eyes to get the source for the end user's benefit, it may give GPH a bad name to the real 'GPL Zealots' out there in the OSS community, and a possible disenfranchisement of would-be devs.

​

I think this paragraph says it all. Friday is and will be an exciting day.. i hope.

Allan.

 

[craigix]

DIVX have now put a stop on the code, more work to be done.