(2014-12-05, 10:30)j1nx Wrote: (2014-12-05, 08:24)VidOn.me-Wolly Wrote: It's the chipset limitation, not software limitation. If we want to support 1080p UI, we need Allwinner's help, they need to modify the code.
You see it?
@ VidOn.me-Wolly, "code" is software, not hardware. Reading all what you write I think you must be a reseller of marketing person, not a developer at all, you look to have no clue here.
(2014-12-05, 08:24)VidOn.me-Wolly Wrote: We designed the UI at 1080p, but due to the limitation of the chipset, it can only output at 720p, and in order to fill your whole screen, the 720p UI will be stretched to 1080p, the so called upscale. All apps will run at 720p including VidOn XBMC. That's the UI.
You're plain wrong here, as what you describe there is clearly not a chipset (hardware) limitation but a Android OS kernel or firmware image (both of which are software limitations, not hardware limitations). (As
nghiadhd proved with his firmware image out, it is technically possible to hack around such software limitations like those if you are just skilled in both Android OS firmware/kernel development). Sad when none of your own 50+ developers can not even hack a few
Fex (ini) files to get something as simple as this to work.
There is probably nothing wrong with the actual SoC-chipset or board-hardware in any case, instead what you are saying is that it is not be a software limitation in YOUR application software but a software limitation in the current stock Android OS kernel and firmware image from Allwinner which I guess you simply use without any modifications.
Hardware limitations means that they can't be fixed other than replacing the physical hardware, which is not the case here as all those issues could be solved in Android OS kernel or firmware image (again which is all software, not hardware). Thus if you just just had your own skilled Android OS kernel and firmware developers then they would surely be capable to either fix or at least workaround those issues without the help from Allwinner. Pivos is an example of a company that have developers that are skilled in both Android OS firmware/kernel development and application software development.
Regardless, all I hear is a bunch of excuses that Vidon do not have own developers that are skilled in Android OS firmware development, only developers working on your applications. For all Android OS firmware and kernel development you are fully dependent and under the mercy of Allwinner.
My tip to VidOn would be to hire some better Android OS firmware and kernel developers as well, that way you would not have to rely on Allwinner as much as it sounds you currently do.
(2014-12-05, 12:37)VidOn.me-Wolly Wrote: (2014-12-05, 12:05)RockerC Wrote: @VidOn.me-Wolly, seriously, VidOn needs to release all the source code for all public builds, not just the ones that you choose.
GPL is very black and white in that area, not a gray area at all as you might think, and ignoring this will make it worse.
Please stay tuned Github, the code will be submitted from next week.
Please stop releasing builds of Alpha/Beta and test versions to the public then if you won't release the source code to those too, otherwise you are indeed in violation of the GPL for Kodi.
That is what I think all sponsors should do on pure principle and in the spirit of open source. Also, start working with upstream more, and actively submit patches to the official mainline version of Kodi as then you would not have many of these problems with updating to newer. How hard can that really be for a company with 50+ developers?
http://kodi.wiki/view/HOW-TO:Submit_a_patch
If not you then you have completely missed the point with open source should not even be using XBMC/Kodi. Here is some homework for you to read and show the management, product managers, and developers at VidOn:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_cl...m_projects
(2014-12-05, 10:37)nickr Wrote: doesn't the android kernel get covered by gpl too?
Android (and Linux) kernels also goes under GPLv2, but not the rest of the "firmware image", as some of those parts goes under either open source licenses and other modules like device drivers are often close sourced. There are some great and less good articles about these misconceptions and wrong assumptions online, like example:
http://www.zdnet.com/article/debunking-f...en-source/
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/g...necessary/
http://www.eweek.com/blogs/first-read/is...ource.html
Allwinner and many other Chinese SoC and box manufacturers does however not give a sh*t about any open source licensees, whether it be GPL or Apache licensed, just as j1nx noted. Tough with it now soon being the year 2015 I feel there is no longer any excuses from them not to comply with licenses like GPL when targeting global markets when does so benefits everyone.