In reply to:

---

Some of us are simple consumers here and merely want to have the same level of support as other platforms.

---

Why do you press and punish empeg for something that they don't HAVE to do? They have fulfilled their obligation to release the GPL'd code already. The rest is their own and they can do with it however the hell they want.

I'd fair say that the community has gotten far more than empeg has really HAD to do. You aren't in any position to demand anything. If you think you can do it better, well, as you put it... "that's YOU". This is empeg's baby and they'll run the show however they like it.

I think it is gracious of them to even consider open sourcing this in the first place. In the market of car stereo's this is the first that you even have a chance at getting dirty with. Now stop whining before they change their minds.

Kureg

In reply to:

---

Why do you press and punish empeg for something that they don't HAVE to do? They have fulfilled their obligation to release the GPL'd code already. The rest is their own and they can do with it however the hell they want.

---

This isn't about open source at all... go back, re-read what I've said on this topic. I'd agree to sign an NDA to help develop cross-platform tools, I've said that already.

To put it bluntly: I don't care about open source on this topic, I care about it being able to work on my platform without me having to keep a Windows machine hanging around my house taking up space SOLELY for the purpose of talking to my Empeg (which is really the way it currently is).

In reply to:

---

You aren't in any position to demand anything. If you think you can do it better, well, as you put it... "that's YOU". This is empeg's baby and they'll run the show however they like it

---

First off, I haven't "demanded" anything. I've asked, I've questioned the logic of NOT letting empeg customers do empeg's work for them. Yes, this is "empeg's show", but let's not forget that Empeg DOESN'T want to just retreat into a "this is our way, bite us!" shell... a certain Redmond-based company has that mindset and it doesn't set well with the consumers.

I won't even address your third paragraph because it falls back to the same ill-conceived notions of the first. I don't necessarily want the code open-sourced, but if you have people who are saying "give me the work, I'll do it for free", and they're willing to sign the necessary paperwork so that you can give them the source code legally and still within your closed-source business model, then you frankly have to be an idiot NOT to let someone take things off your plate.

D

In reply to:

---

What you fail to realise is that, if emplode is talking to the empeg via ethernet, then the empeg is now a black box. You don't need to know anything about the player, you just need to know how emplode BEHAVES.

---

I agree that the empeg is a black box, and you could produce a tool if you know how emptool / emplode behaves etc...

However (and I speculate at this point) I've written a few messaging protocols, and you normally use the same library code at both ends (less work, right) which abstracts the protocol.
empeg have specific stuff in the protocol code (or emptool code, I don't know) that they can't release at this time, so they have to spend effort to clean that up...
That effort is probably less than documenting how emptool / emplode behaves at a low level (because using protocol objects both ends removes the need to document the actual protocol to the detail you would need to create a compatible tool.)

Anyway, as I said, that is speculation... We know empeg are very busy, and if cleaning up the code for release is going to be done, and documenting the protocol isn't, then you'll have to wait for the code...

Jazz
(List 112, Mk2 12 gig #40. Mk1 for sale 4 gig #30, apply within)

In reply to:

---

I don't necessarily want the code open-sourced, but if you have people who are saying "give me the work, I'll do it for free", and they're willing to sign the necessary paperwork so that you can give them the source code legally and still within your closed-source business model, then you frankly have to be an idiot NOT to let someone take things off your plate.

---

I don't know. I've been in the software development business long enough to know that this is often not "good business" sense. And go to just about any other software development company out there. They'll say the same thing. That's not how businesses work. Yes, they like they're customers, but in a world with billions of people, it is accepted that you can't make EVERYONE happy, and that sometimes other things are more important.

They are running the show as a business. There are other things they have to take into account. Let them run the show they want to run it. They've given their answer, and I think it's safe to say that nothing will change their minds. Constant nagging will probably change their minds.... but in a negative way!

I for one am very excited about the empeg. This may sound mean, but I don't want people in the minority whining to the point where it may ruin my experience (or potential thereof). This is truely a remarkable product. They may not have all the bases covered, but they also don't have the long-life business experience to cover all the bases anyway (economically speaking).

Kureg

In reply to:

---

What problems remain?

---

I'd say the "NDA or no NDA... disclosing this information to a complete stranger with no displayed credentials is a bad thing" problem. Why don't you just apply for a job with empeg, supply them a complete resume and credentials... tell them you'll work for free.

Just for a second, lets just drop the technical side of this argument. This is a business we're talking about. To a complete stranger, what's an NDA? If you for a moment slip the code out to a friend, the potential magnitute of disruption to empeg's viable revenue is hard to predict let alone compensate. Would they sue you? How much can they take from you? Would it be the same as the amount the hard to predict financial losses from indiscrete disclosure of intellectual property?

It is just not good business sense to trust a complete stranger... NDA or no NDA.

And now take into account the investors... and the OEM contracts. How would empeg's reputation hold in their other commitments with knowledge of this kind of "stranger association"?

There are a lot of business factors involved. Maybe it's not all that bad.

At the same time, is it really worth it for them to take that chance? Do they have the time to think of all the possible outcomes? Do they have the time to worry about the NDA and stranger relationship?

I just can't see it being as easy as signing a piece of paper and saying, "good luck and have fun".

Kureg

Edited by Kureg on 10/7/00 05:39 PM.

In reply to:

---

I've been in the software development business long enough to know that this is often not "good business" sense.

---

Can you cite, specifically, what the problem is? You have a customer who CANNOT do anything with the source code you've given him and maybe can't even release the code he writes except through you (depends on how restrictive the NDA is), the customer is willing to do that for free and without any support from you except for keeping his codebase current (a fair and easy thing to do).

In reply to:

---

They are running the show as a business. There are other things they have to take into account. Let them run the show they want to run it. They've given their answer, and I think it's safe to say that nothing will change their minds. Constant nagging will probably change their minds.... but in a negative way!

---

You can't have it both ways. If they're running the show as a business, then they'll be professional at all times and "someone's nagging" would not change their business model. There have been a number of times where things which seemed fairly firm got changed mainly through constructive criticism and vocal objection by the masses. (the most recent example of this is the ISO plug-to-wires deal).

In reply to:

---

There have been a number of times where things which seemed fairly firm got changed mainly through constructive criticism and vocal objection by the masses. (the most recent example of this is the ISO plug-to-wires deal).

---

True, but I'm not convinced that continuing this argument in this fashion is constructive. Afterall, empeg has said that they want to provide support for the empeg. It isn't as if they said "screw you". They have their own internal solution for the problem. It may not be one you like, but they aren't ignoring the issue. It just isn't a high priority.

Truthfully, the ISO plug-to-wires deal will more likely have a bigger impact on customers than the "MacOS" issue right now (AFIAK).

Kureg

In reply to:

---

To a complete stranger, what's an NDA?

---

A legally binding contract, one with penalties for breaking.

In reply to:

---

If you for a moment slip the code out to a friend, the potential magnitute of disruption to empeg's viable revenue is hard to predict let alone compensate. Would they sue you? How much can they take from you? Would it be the same as the amount the hard to predict financial losses from indiscrete disclosure of intellectual property?

---

They would (should) sue, for copious amounts of cash (8-9 digits mininum) and kick my said ass around the planet. That's what NDA's are for, and that's why very rarely are they broken.

In reply to:

---

I'm just growing accustomed now to having to spend and extra couple hundred dollars on windows-emulation software for my mac so that my mac can talk to the empeg via the emulator (albeit significantly slower), since I don't see any native support forthcoming any time soon.

---

I'll have to admit, I'd put money on you seeing the code before they developed the Mac side themselves. And I do agree that the question is when? It does make a big purchasing difference to know that by the time the source code does open up will the player be obsolete or not .

Kureg

In reply to:

---

They would (should) sue, for copious amounts of cash (8-9 digits mininum) and kick my said ass around the planet. That's what NDA's are for, and that's why very rarely are they broken.

---

Except that you might only have $100 bucks + maybe $50000 in assets. So they drain you for $50100 and you declare bankruptcy. Maybe end up in jail.

empeg still gets screwed in the end, since $50100 is only 5 digits, not 8 or 9. That's why I said "NDA to a complete stranger". NDA's work great for beta-testing... that's a substantially lower risk. NDA's and source code usually only happen between full-fledged businesses, not with strangers.

Kureg

In reply to:

---

they CAN'T do it because they have signed an NDA

---

Their NDA probably covers themselves and their contractors. Fine, they can cut me (or anyone else) a check for one pound, and I'm now a paid contractor covered by their internal NDA. (admittedly, I've never seen their NDA, but if it limits them to internal, the "employees and contractors" language is fairly common).

In reply to:

---

all this... this.... discussion (to put it politely) is not because you won't be able to send the occasional software update to an empeg, but because you'd rather use your onion... no, cabbage... no, rutabaga... Oh! Got it! ...your Apple to do it instead?

---

Yes, because the MP3's I own all sit on the DVD-RAM discs that my Mac will happily read but which my windows machine won't read for [censored]. Now since the naming conventions on a mac differ from that of the windows machine, getting the long-filenames back and forth between the two units is a bit of a nightmare, and "one-box" support would be VERY nice, thankyouverymuch.

In reply to:

---

but since you don't even have your empeg yet...

---

Actually, I own two...Mk.I # 249, Mk.II # 25 ....

I wasn't trying to start a flame-war either, it just amazes me the amount of people whose response to the mere possibility that someone was unhappy with some aspect of the Empeg was to tell them to "stop whining".

I agree that, if the NDA Empeg signed literally forbids contractors from seeing the code, then everyone is screwed (although it is fairly easily gotten around... becoming an extremely-low-salaried person is always a possibility ) My contention was always "there's got to be a better way to do this that let's the masses who are willing to do the work for free.. do the work for free." The reactions to that possibility ranged from people claiming I was an open-source-zealot (which was funny because I didn't care what the license was, just the availability of working code ) to people claiming I wanted to change Empeg's whole business model (which couldn't be farther from the truth).

It was a bit of a sad commentary on the people how quick they were to jump all over me for suggesting the mere possibility that "there might be other ways to do something."

*sigh*

D