Kodi Community Forum

Full Version: Open Spec Hardware
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Disclaimer * This is just an idea I had. I just want other's opinions. I know it might end up being a sensitive subject, but please keep it civil. Hearing both sides is welcomed. *

Once the time is right (months away), and the true hardware requirements are more apparent. What do people think about creating an Open Hardware Spec based around one specific platform and building a community supported image tailored to the Spec? The image would be designed with the bare minimum necessary to run XBMC and require no Linux knowledge.

Once this Open Spec has been defined, people could go out and purchase the hardware, assemble, install the custom tailored image, and have a community supported XBMC platform similar to the original Xbox. I don't think this would deter people from using other hardware, specifically more advanced users, but just give people an easy way to get into XBMC for Linux.

There could possibly be a XBMC sponsored store which sold a Spec Compliant hardware kit and a preconfigured machine. A portion of these sales would be donated to XBMC developers. There would be no profit on the kit although assembly cost would have to be accounted for in the preconfigured machine’s cost.

My personal opinion is that once XBMC Linux has reached some level of maturity, it could be a real competitor to the mainstream media centers available currently. However, without a fixed platform, like the original Xbox, achieving any sort of real penetration will never happen, and it will only be an option for more experienced users. I would love to see XBMC take aim at Vista Media Center, and I think it can happen.

What we do not want is to have many "Prebuilt XBMC Machines" floating around the internet with people paying money for these machines that all have different specifications and no support. People would go crazy and XBMC could never see real market growth.

I am not asking that we discuss in detail the hardware choices or image customization. I just want to see if end users and developers alike are open to an idea like this. Thanks.

Dustin
I dont like the idea unless the developers are the ones controlling the images, this is exactly what happened with the tivo groups and why we lost some of the top tivo hackers. Their work was starting to be sold by others and started showing up on ebay, the only people making money were the a few script kiddies who knew how to throw together an installer script with all the developers hard work and code.

I understand the want and desire to have such a option but i think it will be the death of xbmc development as we know it.

If you can find a fair and equitable way of doing this and keep all the developers happy then im all for it, until then i think its a bad idea.

my $ .02
I see this kind of thing as inevitable, and as a good thing to boot. But that platform will be be the mac mini and the OSX port. Seems like the OSX port already has a great deal more buzz than the linux port. The users are enthusiastic, the platform is user-friendly, the mac mini itself is a perfect fit for a media center, it's all coming together there.
Well i see the OS X port and the Linux port as 2 totally different animals. I also think the ports are a good thing but what happens when someone starts to profit from the ports? That's where i see a problem.

I don't see that as much of an issue with the OS X port because the hardware is proprietary and you wont see many people going out and buying mac mini's, loading xbmc then reselling the units.
I'm skeptical about the mini as the (sole) reference platform, and here's why:
  1. It's pretty overpriced for what you get. The basic unit goes for $599, but I just built a complete machine that's better than the mini in almost every way for about $350.
  2. Sure it's small, looks good, and fits into a media center, but your expansion options are severely limited. Want a bigger hard drive, more memory, a TV tuner or a beefier GPU? You're in for some heartache. My microATX case will fit in a component rack, and looks pretty decent, too.
  3. The GPU is crap. I know that the devs did some optimizing for the 965, but even among integrated solutions, it's not much to talk about.
  4. The primary advantage of the mini is that it runs OS X, but I think most people are running their machines as dedicated systems in the media centers, so it seems like extra overhead and expense, for no real payoff. (Just my sense, could be totally wrong.)

This is coming from someone who owns a Mac Pro and a Macbook Pro, and who uses OS X almost exclusively. And while I pretty much hate linux (at least as a desktop OS), it seems like the best fit for this application.

It seems like I read a thread awhile back where the idea was to have a few reference platforms. In my view, while it totally makes sense to support the mini, it seems like the main focus should be on a platform that supports the power to provide good HD playback, and eye candy (like the stuff in the aeon skin). I know what drew me in was the amazing codec support, the cool features, and the eye candy.
I agree that the Mac Mini, while it is a very attractive solution, it does not offer the level of integration as a Linux system would. I also agree that the price is a large deterent as a lot of the cost of the Mac Mini is profit.

I feel that people selling preconfigured systems is inevitable. I think that it would be wise if the XBMC community/devs started something before private parties jump on the bandwagon.
rodalpho Wrote:I see this kind of thing as inevitable, and as a good thing to boot. But that platform will be be the mac mini and the OSX port. Seems like the OSX port already has a great deal more buzz than the linux port. The users are enthusiastic, the platform is user-friendly, the mac mini itself is a perfect fit for a media center, it's all coming together there.

I think the question in the end will be - does the Mini have enough horsepower? Right now I think the answer is no.

The form factor is great although there are also a few XPC that would be damned nice. Had I spotted one of them in particular that's the way I'd have gone and been better off fiscally for it. There's a Windows XBMC port too, not sure where it's at just now. Folks I talk to are plenty excited about a Linux port, especially if it's not too hard to build. At least two people I know are playing with this having followed the Wiki to build it and I can now build it from scratch in less than 2 hours from a bare drive. When it works it works GREAT!

As for selling a system pre-built. That sounds like a can of worms and something up to the devs to decide. As it stands now the plan is apparently to build a release disk aimed at a specific platform that will be supported. Yeah that means someone may have to put something together and so perhaps less people using it. I do not think that's a bad plan honestly, crawl before walking maybe...

I agree that I do not want to see this go the way that some of the TIVO tools did. I have little doubt that a great deal of really good TIVO stuff never saw the light of day because devs kept it to themselves having been burned on eBay. Development here though seems much more open and people aren't trying to crack some black box which I think helps. Lastly I'll say that there don't appear to be Prima Donna here the way there was in that community (grumpy I can live with!). The day that some users began caling some of those devs "Tivo Gods" was a sad day indeed IMO.
The 2Ghz mac mini can play most 1080p with the latest ffmpeg multicore-optimized pull, and of course CPU speeds will only continue to improve and computers will only get cheaper as time passes. The mac mini is just a perfect solution.

With the linux build every time I upgrade my kernel (with standard apt-get upgrade) I need to redownload and build the nvidia kernel modules, etc, or I get a 640x480 desktop with no acceleration. That's no big deal for me, but linux simply isn't a friendly OS yet.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure that the XBMC team will publish a standard configuration for XBMC/linux once it gets to milestones 2 or 3, and that platform will work great, etc. But in the end, I see OSXBMC as the most popular platform.

And why shouldn't people profit? If some OEM wants to put together that standard configuration, load up XBMC on boot, and sell it for a premium including support more power to them. Any action that gets people using XBMC is a good thing. The more popularity the better, because it'll entice more developers, grow the user community (which is already at a great start here for XBMC/linux) and improve the product.
BLKMGK,

I agree with almost everything you said including the part where you say development is much more open, the one thing that will inevitably happen is developers getting pissed when others start profiting from their work. If I wrote a few hundred thousand lines of code and people enjoyed using my code I would be happy but if i spent that much time on development and someone started selling my code I would be absolutely incensed.

Everyone could argue semantics all day long but the fact that we are even having this discussion means
1. There is a desire for this type of product.
2. Someone is thinking about doing this.
and
3. People who develop this product will be pissed and stop devoting most of their free time to the project.

I think the concept is a good one, i think trying to implement it fairly is nearly impossible.
I think the problem with OEMs selling pre-configured systems comes down to the users that will be looking to their OEMs for support and the devs as Weez mentioned. Most likely the OEM won't be willing to offer support, or will be incapable of offering this support and they will tell the end user to come here and ask for support. This may work, it may not. But I think it could turn into a nightmare and also gives very little incentive to the devs. I really like the idea that every system/kit sold would kick back some money to keep the devs working.

I think trying to figure something out is very important, or else it will backfire.
rodalpho Wrote:And why shouldn't people profit? If some OEM wants to put together that standard configuration, load up XBMC on boot, and sell it for a premium including support more power to them.

Because the OEM didnt spend hundreds or thousands of hours coding xbmc.

Quote:Any action that gets people using XBMC is a good thing. The more popularity the better, because it'll entice more developers, grow the user community (which is already at a great start here for XBMC/linux) and improve the product.

Better for who? The end user? sure it is. Im guessing there are 31 others that dont quite share that same point of view.

If you can find a way to compensate the developers fairly I would agree with it.
dustobub Wrote:I really like the idea that every system/kit sold would kick back some money to keep the devs working.

I think trying to figure something out is very important, or else it will backfire.

Agreed, then your faced with the problem of creating discontent between the coders. ie: who gets compensated the most? Let's justrun through this for a second and see the problems it presents.


Dev1 codes 700,000 lines
Dev2 codes 700,000 lines
Dev3 codes 700,000 lines
and 28 other coders code 400,000 lines (Im using lines of code, it could be time it could be any number of items that are used to calculate the compensation) now what happens to guys that help in porting xbmc over? are they compensated the same as the original developers? what about the guys who spent years developing xbmc who have now stepped back and are retired or semi retired?

As you can see this will get real messy real fast.
I think that would have to be handled amongst the devs. They have a system in place now, I guess it could just be a modified version of the current system. I agree that the past devs shouldn't be left out. I however, think that a system could be created that would work fairly. As far as donations from the "Store", they would go into a fund, and then the devs would decide how to dispurse/spend.
Weez Wrote:Because the OEM didnt spend hundreds or thousands of hours coding xbmc.
Umm, I think there's an essential disconnect here. XBMC is open source software, which means it's entirely free. If the devs want to make money off their work, they should either change to a commercial license or figure out some other way to monetize it, like Redhat does by charging for support.

OEMs can't legally charge for the software either, but if they want to sell a standard config and/or support, they are free to do so. That's what the GPL means.
rodalpho Wrote:Umm, I think there's an essential disconnect here. XBMC is open source software, which means it's entirely free. If the devs want to make money off their work, they should either change to a commercial license or figure out some other way to monetize it, like Redhat does by charging for support.

OEMs can't legally charge for the software either, but if they want to sell a standard config and/or support, they are free to do so. That's what the GPL means.

I will admit I've not looked closely at the license in use. If it is indeed GPL, as I suspect it is (2 or 3?) considering the other code pulled into it then yes this will work itself out. I do still have concerns though in that if an OEM decides to use code I'd like to see folks see something from it. Yes, GPL spells this out but my gut still wants to see people who work hard rewarded.

I think a difference in the TIVO world was that it was many people working on various parallel projects and there was competition to do things as opposed to people all pulling together sharing. Licenses in that world were all over the place and to this day if I were to sell my DTIVO I'd have issues because of the software loaded on it that can only be distributed from one place. <sigh>

As for the Mini, is the dual core code helping on that platform as well, if so AWESOME!Cool Don't get me wrong, I like the little box and might like an excuse to get one someday. But FrontRow doesn't do it for me, I want XBMC. I'd really have to see that play one of the heavier HD encodes I've been doing. The VC-1 stuff I've got put a hurt on my CPU at 2.66Ghz, it took 3Ghz to be smooth and that with the new code I believe. I have weird Xrand issues now and cannot play at full rez but the H.264 stuf is playing GREAT on both cores and could play at stock speed I'm sure. The VC-1 looks to be tougher now for some reason.:confused2: Heh, how about Linux on the Mini? :p