Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
Android - Cheap Android boxes
#31
By sending out "some" sources, does not mean that you comply. you need THE sources they used to create the released binary.

The sources they sent to Davilla (which is actually one of the holders of the copyrighted material), where incomplete.

Let me share the first couple of lines of some source analysis;

Quote:$ git status
# On branch master
# Your branch is behind 'origin/master' by 18 commits, and can be fast-forwarded.
#
# Changes not staged for commit:
# (use "git add/rm <file>..." to update what will be committed)
# (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory)
#
# deleted: CONTRIBUTORS
# deleted: LICENSE.GPL

# deleted: Makefile.in
# deleted: Makefile.include.in
# deleted: README
# modified: addons/metadata.album.universal/addon.xml
# modified: addons/metadata.album.universal/albumuniversal.xml
# modified: addons/metadata.album.universal/changelog.txt
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Belarusian/strings.po
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Bulgarian/strings.po
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Catalan/strings.po
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Chinese (Simple)/strings.po
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Czech/strings.po
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Danish/strings.po
# deleted: addons/metadata.album.universal/resources/language/Dutch/strings.po

... <more> ...

Now, if you ever had the best intention in mind to share the sources. Then why on earth did you ever wanted to delete those two bolded filesHuh? Putting those back and stuff is possible the reason why they need time to "prepare the sources".

so ....
Reply
#32
I got the MX2 last week and though it works I am all for XBMC not some hit and run product. I got the device from the reading the reviews and got excited....it works as advertised - but didn't carefully research before seeing all the notations on their forums and here on GPL. As noted before in another post - as long as XBMC has a donate button I am satisfied but the I am glad you guys are locking down on Geniatech, G-Box, Tronsmart, MyGica, and others putting the truth out there. Tronsmart publicly said no to source release like they own it, Geniatech doesn't even consider anything nor responds, Gbox 1 was open not the MX2 they are pulling a fast one noted above, and Mygica is doing nothing but following Geniatech footsteps.

I think there should be a standard and make them be "XBMC certified", before they can deem it on their products. Even the ones with the official support are getting a little outrageous using it as a advertising ploy (reason why I even reserved the damn OUYA, got excited on the marketing and false dedication). I think XBMC.org needs to go ahead and make some standards before they can deem it as XBMC on their product.....it sickens me - know its not a reality but there has to be something done here before it gets way out of hand. I am all about a low powered device with some great decoding capabilities but not at the sacrifice of the most perfect software I have been using since I can remember.
Reply
#33
I guess they got tired of emailing the source to everybody. Just to test whether g-box is playing by the rules or not I had a random friend email them today asking for the source and they gave them this link almost immediately which seems a little more comprehensive than what I was given:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/141620034/XBMC...load-Files

I haven't had time to check it out myself but it looks legit. I honestly don't think they're intentionally violating GPL otherwise they would do just as the others and deny source altogether. I have not had a problem between myself and a friend getting source from this company for their xbmc build. I seriously dont think they have anything special to hide here. I do recall when they released the full source for their Midnight which I sat back and watched the linux version be built out of. I don't know the legalities of any of this stuff but I can imagine there's probably some red tape involved that delays things with these companies. I take in everything I hear and see and formulate an opinion based on facts. A lot of people probably don't pay as close of attention to details but I have been. J1nx, I still applaud you for developing Linux for the m3 devices. I understand that everybody needs to make a living and I believe in a free market, but I definitely don't agree with dirty competition. I do agree that you haven't been blasting your product all over the place, however it would explain why you and the others that have a product to sell would want to take down the competition but using this method is really heinous. That's the type of stuff that's been going on against this company and that's the only place where I've had to draw the line and finally get involved. If I honestly believed g-box was being dirty I'd be the first to speak up and expose them as well. But I can't find anywhere that they're making stabs at anybody or hiding source code and that defines true character in a company to me. Maybe nobody else shares this view but it's certainly how I feel. I apologize if I hurt anybody's feelings, that isn't my intention with any of this. But I will definitely stick up for what I believe is just, and what Ive seen against them is certainly unjust.
Reply
#34
(2013-05-15, 17:21)pcsirk Wrote: I do agree that you haven't been blasting your product all over the place, however it would explain why you and the others that have a product to sell would want to take down the competition but using this method is really heinous.

But that's the thing, I am not pissed because of the competition, I am pissed because we could both develop twice as fast by obeying the license !

I almost know for sure Pivos feels the same. By releasing the source code, you know other people will pick it up, hence that is what's opensource is all about. But because of the license you also know you will get development back into return. By not obeying the license you will only take, while yet not giving back anything.

That feels like stabbing in the back.


They can keep digging that hole, but if it was indeed there intention to comply, they would not have deleted those files. They would have prepared for pushing the sources along the binary and they would not have needed any time "to prepare"the sources.

No, they are only pushing sources, because people are throwing dirt at them, if it would have not for the dirt, this so called Special Release would have been "their's", stabing all those enthousiastic developers, now and in the past in the back and twisting the knife.

Once more, this has nothing to do with competition as that is all according the opensource plan.
Reply
#35
They're not trying to be "evil", but the culture of manufacturing and software development in China, by far and large, is that the GPL simply isn't important and can be ignored when it suits them. This is like saying it's okay for someone to break the law because they didn't think it was a big deal. That completely undermines the spirit of the GPL.

It's a cultural gap that is slowly mending itself, but it's still a very real problem today, and it's only getting better because people are speaking up about it.

EDIT: And for the record, with the falling prices of desktop CPUs, like the Intel Celeron, I have a very hard time recommending any ARM box. Conflict of interest my ass.
Reply
#36
I do agree with you Ned, other than that; they are a US company, pulling in by US released sources. Being used by US paid salary developer Wink
Reply
#37
@Ned your on your own there, lol - I will recommend ARM any day. On the other end I don't know where all of these stories are coming from but first experience I was given a link that was dead (11th) - this update works on the download files though (will confirm them when I get home). I can say that I am with J1nx until we can confirm their intention point blank but I am not overreacting over the stories.....too many now. I will give them the benefit of the doubt unlike others, only because reading their statements on wanting the help in any way on their forums is saying something beyond the arguments. They may not have been so fast on complying from the start but the past says it all with their history as pcsirk pointed out. I have a good device in the MX2 I have to admit, its pretty nice minus the few issues - and they are at least trying to deliver on the support end for the device and from what it seems to XBMC. I think this is what we all wanted in the first place in whatever spice or flavor. Yes, there should be some more stern rules held up to stop all the nonsense but if they are pushing in the right direction for whatever reason, its good in my book.
Reply
#38
(2013-05-15, 20:34)mockingbirdblue Wrote: ..... but if they are pushing in the right direction for whatever reason, its good in my book.

Please define right direction.... Confused
Reply
#39
Allow me to chine in even though I have left the public XBMC forums and have not posted anything for well over a month...

Gbox sold their MX2 box with XBMC bundled yet they forgot all about their duty for license compliance. The MX2 box was out for two weeks, then I bought one. I looked over the paperwork and there was nothing about XBMC's license. This was unacceptable as any fool knows what GPL means and these fools actually sold a box with XBMC pre-installed and did nothing to prep for their GPL license compliance.

I ask gbox for the source, they 1st said they would post it but they had to prepare it 1st. I called bull*** on that and pushed their feet into the fire. Then I got a tarball that was incomplete and had not only the gpl license deleted but the configure and makefiles. This was unacceptable. I then tossed a nuke and they (after a few days) pushed out http://www.scribd.com/doc/141620034/XBMC...load-Files and said the 1st was a mistake. They are now in compliance.

Note that this 'special' source code is a direct pull from Pivos source code at github with a few addon/splash tweaks. There are a few code changes that are Pivos commits after the pulled version. Someone needs to learn git... Apparently Pivos code is good enough to use but not good enough to admit using Smile

This is what pisses me off about gbox and not j1nx. J1nx has joined the XBMC eco-system in the back and forth contribution of discussion, source code and fixes. GBox has not and they would rather have their users believe that XBMC devs contribute directly to them (not true) and that their XBMC is much better than anyone else because it has XBMC experts coding for them exclusively (also not true). So they would rather lie than just join the XBMC eco-system and let the market decide which box is 'better' or 'worse'. Until they change, they are just a bunch of Android re-packers, without a clue as to how the real code works and even less of a clue as to how to fix things.

Also note that I work for Pivos and not Geniatech, Pivos is very unhappy about Geniatech pushing out a binary of Pivos/Linux without source code but they (Geniatech) says it's a straight build from Pivos buildroot on github. Pivos is busy holding Geniatech's feet to the fire right now.

PPS, GBox MX2 has the well known MX disappearing wired ethernet issue.
MediaInfo : http://mediainfo.sourceforge.net/
Do not e-mail XBMC-Team members directly asking for support. Read/follow the forum rules.
Reply
#40
noted above from davilla @solamnic - like I said before, it seems like they are getting it together unlike the other companies that are here and don't even comply at all. You may want to update davilla.....I got 4.2.2 and its working great here under eth0 and wifi using upnp via XBMC.
Reply
#41
4.2.2 ethernet is working fine for me. Haven't had any issues with being wired and that's the only way ive been using it now. I've seen where people have complained about other MX devices though. Either they got this fixed or I'm just lucky. I also will never consider x86 for a HTPC. I've built enough of them. Good luck building an x86 for $100 that has a tiny footprint and runs Android.
Reply
#42
Hey your crazy, HTPC is still superior far beyond just XBMC pcsirk - but overall the power of ARM is growing and prices are dropping so I guess its all about time but not just yet.
Reply
#43
Agreed 100%. Superior, but I was referring specifically to the footprint (size) and price. There's no doubt that a properly built x86 is more powerful. I have 3 x86 rigs. Maybe I'm a little obsessed with this stuff? lol. Granted, they're a little older - but the cheapest of them was around $400 to build, and it's not as user-friendly as the mx2 in my opinion. And it's a noisy beast for the most part that I dont like to run unless I have to. I was formulating my opinion based on size vs. price instead of vs. power.
Reply
#44
I'm not sure why anyone would want to run Android on a STB if they didn't have to (besides some possible app integration with XBMC, but that hasn't happened yet), but sub $100 x86 builds are floating around this very forum. I was all in on ARM until I saw some of these deals, and a lot of them give me pause.
Reply
#45
I am using the MK808B and the XAF build of XMBC. I had to flash the ROM to the Finless 1.7 to get the speed I wanted for HD, but @ $39.00 US you can't beat it.

http://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-MK808B-A...B00ALSZNLW
Reply



Cheap Android boxes52