#244992 - 03/01/2005 00:12
Re: Money
[Re: schofiel]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
Quote:
I have to confess to being somewhat disappointed in your post. First off: I organise the Amersfoort events for fun, plain and simple. In order to make it sucessful, I have to make it attractive enough for people to want to attend. Don't forget, I am in competition with TV, football matches, F1 races, and, believe it or not, exams and even national holidays!
Rob, I'm truly sorry my post upset you. I had not intended to make it seem as if I was slamming the Amersfoort meets, nor do I believe anything I said in my post should lead one to believe that was my intention. Even though I've not been, I can tell from the posts / stories how much fun they are....
Quote:
Thanks to the good graces of the empeg team, one of the pulling points so far has been new builds of software for the player.
Of course. And that has been appropriate.
Quote:
However - and bear this in mind - this is software produced in their own time, for an unsupported product.
This is, of course, a well understood fact.
Quote:
I rather resent the imputation that you feel that the people who come here have formed a cliquey "club" just because they can afford the ticket price and the cost: that's not the case.
And I rather resent having it implied that I said things I did not. What I said was:
Quote:
Quote:
First, the "circle-of-friends" thing would have to come to a dead stop. If I put down currency to help development, I wouldn't want to be told "well, you weren't at the meet, so ha ha ha. Just wait 6 months." Yes, I know it was to keep peoples decks from getting pooched. Yes, I know nobody was paying at the time. My point is that if I do pay, I want to get releases (alphas, too) as soon as anyone else. Period. I'm a big boy and can take responsibility for screwing up my player if it comes to that. But I won't pay to be made feel like I'm second tier because I can't afford to take time off of school and fly to Europe for fun.
Nowhere there do I make mention of a "cliquey club". Perhaps I was not clear enough, but the "circle-of-friends" comment referred to Rob's order that the Amersfoort Alpha could be shared with your friends in person, but not online. So I'm sorry if you're upset by my pointing it out, but it did indeed become a "circle-of-friends" thing, in the form of PM'd download locations, etc. The threads are there to back up what I'm saying. And my whole point was not arguing about what has happened, but instead detailing as what I could see as issues with paid development.
Quote:
You are also quite welcome to come as well. If you have problems with the date of the 2005 event (are you looking at the calender?) due to exams, then let me know NOW and I'll see if I can adjust it - I have done this for several people several times now to make sure that as many people as want to come, can come. Money a problem? Well, I can't help much with that I'm afraid - but I do try to make it fun for everyone who can't attend, even going so far as trying to arrange webcams at the event, and this year an attempt was made at videoing it for a limited "Best of..". For various reasons this hasn't happened - sorry.
No apology necessary. And thank you for the invitation, though I never felt like I was unwelcome. Finances and schedule simply do not allow it. But my point was that with paid development, I think that "Meet Only" releases would have to stop. While making attending a meet a requirement to get early access to an Alpha works in the unpaid model, it becomes harder to convince people that they should wait longer than others for something they've also paid for.
Quote:
I realise that at each event, there has been a fair amount of post-event ragging about these releases with an "We know something you don't know!" element to it. Perhaps this is a mistake - but it's only ragging, nothing else! There's nothing intentionally nasty about it!
This is exactly what I was talking about. No, it wasn't nasty, but it got pretty old after a month or two. And if people are paying, it would have to stop.
Quote:
To labour this point somewhat - when I made this current proposal, I was NOT proposing that partially-directed versions be released to a limited crowd who have paid to "join the club". This was the last thing on my mind. The proposal was going to be firmed up along the lines that the people who paid up front would be entitled to regular updates during development, intermediate test builds, so forth - to act as a kind of voluntary A-test team, much the way as I did with the original release test team.
I agree, 100%. And it's exactly what I said in my post, admittedly not as clearly. I was trying to get across the idea that the determiner would now have to be did you pay for development rather than did you attend Amersfoort.
Quote:
Then eventually, everyone - having paid or not - would benefit from a free, Beta upgrade. So why pay at all, then? Why not just sit back and wait for a new sausage to pop out of the pipe? Well, that's what's been happeniing so far (with diminishing frequency), in case you haven't noticed - and the people who have benefitted from this approach have been ...
...yup, you guessed it, the people who came to the Amersfoort meets. And yes, some of them DID pay - like Rob Riccardelli who paid a h*** of a lot in air fare to come over for what was, in the end, just a boozy party with a few hamburgers thrown in for good measure! Does that not sound like "paying" for a priviledged release? It was his choice to do so, nicht wahr?
Indeed it does. Ibid.
Quote:
I am also a little bothered that you have attached conditions to what you are prepared to contribute to. While I understand why you want what you want, you are - as other posters here are also doing - Completely Missing The Point. I am Not talking about, nor am I interested in doing, (in a limited time with limited funds) adding new functionality , only making what has been described as an unstable release into a Stable one, with a pre-selected list of fixes to certain bugs that will provide the maximum benefit to the entire user community. If you wish to be partial, and only contribute to directed development that benefits only yourself and no-one else (I don't see anyone else clamouring for Japanese ID3 support here - do you?), then I would prefer that you withdrew and did not offer funds as I will not be able to do what you ask - there won't be the opportunity. Sure, there are about a dozen new things I would like to build into the the player software but I will have neither the time, nor funds to do this.
I'm sorry if it bothers you that I don't feel like paying for a lot of features I don't have a need for out of some altruistic sense of community duty. And I'm sorry I've missed the point. If fixing bugs in 3.0 is the key, I'm out; I don't listen to the radio, and it's not worth a lot of money to me to have crossfading. And I'm also sorry for wanting something that's very important to me added in. But me being sorry isn't going to make me stop wanting it, especially given the rumors, as I said, of it having already been done before.
Quote:
I suspect saying it this way will upset you: I sincerely hope not, as I do not wish for this to happen - your posts and contributions on this board are enjoyable and I enjoy reading your thoughts. But as you say yourself - I have to be brutal about this: I will have very little time to do what I propose. I am not even sure I will be able to do enough: I will be taking a huge financial risk on your behalf and to be anything less than totally focussed on what is practically achievable is without any doubt in my mind, POINTLESS.
Not upset at all, and thank you very much for the kind words. But as I said, bug fixes to correct problems with something I don't use is a bit of a hard sell.
Quote:
If you all want this to happen, then you have a very small window of opportunity to consider what you want, pool your funds, and make a concrete contribution, for which I promise you will be rewarded with my greatest efforts. But if it's not important enough for you - well, why should I commit to the risk?
I think you're 100% right. I think now is the time for everyone to put up or shut up. Perhaps Drakino could set something up so that the next time each member visits the boards, they first have to vote at to whether or not they would be interested in contributing. Then there will be no more question.
Rob, just let me say that I have a great deal of respect for you, both in general as well as for what you are attempting to do. As I'm sure everybody here does as well. Please don't forget that. And thank you for all the effort. I sincerely hope my comments didn't imply anything different.
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244993 - 03/01/2005 00:12
Re: Money
[Re: rob]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 27/06/1999
Posts: 7058
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
Here are my thoughts on the "what shall we do now?" issue...
First off, let's all keep our credit cards and checkbooks sheathed. Any time you introduce money into the equation, good things can happen, but bad things can also happen. Very few requests are as simple as Dave's "I'll give you 350 bucks if you can provide Japanese tag support." As an example, If I opened a PayPal account tonight to fund a 3rd party empeg player project, and people started donating to it, they'd want to know where their money is going, and every one of them would have a different idea of what the priorities should be. Doing it the capitalist way, the people who donated the most money would have the greatest proprotion of say in the direction of the player, and those who "only" chipped in $50 or $100 would feel like their donation was wasted.
This could lead to all sorts of bad blood between those who are funding the effort and those who are trying to make the project work, especially if the project slows down... Remember, no matter how much money is donated, most of us have other priorities that are going to get in the way. The great thing about not making any money on my empeg projects is that I don't have to answer to anyone if things aren't done a certain way, or if they're not done quickly enough. Software guys get enough of that type of stress in their real jobs, and developing pet projects like emphatic is a way to do all the things you can't do at work. Once the money starts coming in, as great of an incentive as it is, I don't think it's healthy in the long run.
Ultimately, my enjoyment of this BBS and the empeg community is more important than the cash I could potentially make from my development efforts. That's not to say I'm into doing charity work, far from it... Who wouldn't want to make some money off of something they do for fun? The thing is, before I signed onto such an effort, I'd need to feel like getting involved in it wouldn't ruin the good will and fun atmosphere that has always existed around these parts. I'd also need to be confident that there's a very solid understanding of the expectations on both sides (the buyers and the sellers) such that the workload and the project schedule don't encroach on my real responsibility to my employer.
Now, putting those more "abstract" issues to the side for a moment, the next question is how would we proceed? Upon first glance, the FireFox31/drakino "closed source core player build with bolt-on 3rd party functionality" sounds like a wonderful idea. However, as someone who knows a little bit about the player/app interface from the app side, I would imagine it would take a lot of work from our "empeg insiders" to bring about anything that would work. You don't just take an application and throw in some "hooks." You first need to unhook the hooks that are already there between your own components, then you need to know EXACTLY what the 3rd party developers want from their interface.
Furthermore, with empeg officially involved, there will be all sorts of red tape to clear before anyone can get started. It took me a couple months just to get official approval to use a couple player fonts in emphatic -- imagine what it'd take to get them to do the work it'd take to make the player extensible? Try to sell that one to management.
So, ultimately, if we really want this, I think it's on our time, and our dime. We'd not only need developers, we'd need testers, documentation writers, and the like. While the community is remarkably strong for an EOL product, I don't know if we're strong enough to sustain the momentum it'd require. If someone can make a good case to the contrary, I'm all ears.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244994 - 03/01/2005 00:55
Re: Money
[Re: rob]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 05/01/2001
Posts: 4903
Loc: Detroit, MI USA
|
Quote:
At one time job satisfaction and a few pizzas would generate sufficient motivation for this, but these days I suspect it may take something more tangible.
I remember the days when many of us would call the local pub and start a drinking fund for you guys for this very purpose. Has the environment changed in such a way that even if some key people wanted to stay after a few weekends (after being enticed by us owners) that they would not even have the permission to do this work - not on company time? Even though the company would still own the finished product?
From reading Hugo's post, it seemed to me that more builds coming out of empeg were not unrealistic. I know that everyone got excited about hints of a future product, but I also saw hints of future builds. Is there some way we can "wet the wheels"? I know John G. and others are not very active on these message boards, but they have been very responsive in email when I contacted them about my "empeg sound" web site.
I much as I love Rob S's original post, I don't know if we'd be able to raise enough funds to get him to eat. And if more builds can come from empeg, would it even be the best way to go?
Fixing bugs should be the priority. There are so many cool features built into alpha 3 (auto EQ, auto volume adjust, CROSSFADING, pitch bending, etc) that I'd settle for bug fixes and no new features.
Did I mis-read Hugo's post?
I just don't see the point in reinventing the wheel. It would take so long just to get to 1.3 functionality that we'd be going backwards to do this. If we're serious about an opensource movement, maybe it'd be best to see what "empeg 4" Hugo has up his sleeve and work on an open source player for that.
Edited by SE_Sport_Driver (03/01/2005 00:57)
_________________________
Brad B.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244995 - 03/01/2005 01:30
Re: Money
[Re: schofiel]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 31/08/1999
Posts: 1649
Loc: San Carlos, CA
|
Quote:
Not a bad summary, but the idea of Modularity is just not achieveable due to practical aspects of how the player actually works in normal operation.
Bummer, but to be honest that is basically the answer I was expecting. It reinforces my original gut feeling which is essentially that I would throw in a few bucks for bug fixes, but for me to put in any significant resources (money or time) we need to start seriously talking about an open source, community driven effort. Which is too bad because I do appreciate what you are tying to do here, but it doesn't seem like there is enough potential benefits for most of us to get that excited about it
-Mike
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244996 - 03/01/2005 08:21
Re: Money
[Re: SE_Sport_Driver]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
Quote:
At one time job satisfaction and a few pizzas would generate sufficient motivation for this, but these days I suspect it may take something more tangible.
I remember the days when many of us would call the local pub and start a drinking fund for you guys for this very purpose. Has the environment changed in such a way that even if some key people wanted to stay after a few weekends (after being enticed by us owners) that they would not even have the permission to do this work - not on company time? Even though the company would still own the finished product?
I think one of the things to bear in mind is that as people get older, they generally have less time. I have a pile of things that need doing at home (paperwork, tidying, cleaning - some of which dates back to the earlier empeg times when I deferred it all and hoped it'd go away  ), I'd like to see Claire, etc etc. It's like looking back on university days, where there appeared to be limitless time to hack on random things as well as drink heavily and occasionally turn up to a lecture. Weekends get booked up pretty quickly. People now have kids to look after.
Quote:
I just don't see the point in reinventing the wheel. It would take so long just to get to 1.3 functionality that we'd be going backwards to do this. If we're serious about an opensource movement, maybe it'd be best to see what "empeg 4" Hugo has up his sleeve and work on an open source player for that.
The new thing wouldn't be open enough to be able to write 3rd party code for I'm afraid - the reality of supporting DRM means that's not on the menu. It'd be more functional than v3, though.
As for players - open source does have the advantage that if you don't like something (or it's broken) you fix it yourself, and this will be possible forever. I suspect that somewhere out there is an open source project that is going in vaguely the right direction which could be used as a base - maybe one of the open source receiver clients? That'd have an audio path and some sort of UI at least.
Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244997 - 03/01/2005 09:45
Re: Money
[Re: altman]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
I suspect that somewhere out there is an open source project that is going in vaguely the right direction which could be used as a base - maybe one of the open source receiver clients?
It might be useful at this point to generate a list of the software components in the MK2A, including whether they are open or closed and if the later, whether they are still considered as important intellectual property.
In particular, would it be feasible to, say, release the source for a really old version of the actual player program (before stuff like gapless playback was added)?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244998 - 03/01/2005 10:55
Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: bonzi]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
the fact that all nice add-ons we have have been single-developer efforts (I think that only Hijack got some patches by somebody other than 'lead developer'). We simply don't have very good 'bazaar' development track record 
I think there are a number of reasons for this, and they would all need to be addressed for the record to be changed:
- the source release from Empeg (as it was then) and the sources to hijack and jemplode aren't in a public CVS repository
- we don't have a wiki or similar collaborative way to document stuff and collect documentation together
- we don't have a big enough community - bazaars follow the 10% rule*
- it is way more difficult to build a development community around a product that is partly closed-source (and thus could be halted at any time) than a product that is open-source.**
- the community doesn't have access to the issue tracking tool used by the developers
- the feedback loop hasn't been closed - the developers don't use public mailing lists, bug track tools, cvs and wiki to the exclusion of internal alternatives. Simply put, they don't wash their laundry in public.
The lack of the above makes it hard for community members to make tiny contributions (which is how new committers get hooked on open source) and makes it virtually impossible for the community to help the developers in any meaningful way.
Back when Empeg started, a closed source product made sense. Empeg was first to market and so keeping the barriers to entry high was a sound strategic move. But the market has moved on now. There are masses of car, home and portable digital audio products on the market from loads of manufacturers. Making a Rio Karma or an Apple iPod isn't considered particularly hard any more.
The thing is, most of the organizations in this market already have products and in typical corporate mentality, most of them think their product is best. Hugo has already indicated that there is no one person in DNNA that knows how the software works anymore and that RobS would need help in understanding it - this is a key reason why companies do release their code as open-source: they realise that their biggest competitors would either simply ignore the code, or waste lots of man-hours trying to understand the code and always be playing catch-up.
By using an appropriate license, DNNA could force competitors to carry an indeliable "powered by RIO Engine" or similar mark on the outside of the product (and even feature the mark in their adverts). The really big boys might choose to take a risk in stealthily using the code (but see the previous paragraph), and the tiny companies may do the same, but most will play ball: your smaller competitors now have a similar feature set to your own products, but carry your brand.
Of course, we know most of the benefits of open source: better quality product with better testing, improved user acceptance and market applicability. So, it really comes down to a simple choice over priorities: revenue from direct sales or improved visibility, ubiquity and the opportunities those might bring.
DNNA seem to be loosing the ubiquity game at the moment. It may be that creating a licensing programme and opening the source to the player would be a far more effective way to win market share from Apple than spending money on TV adverts.
--
Michael
* 4000 users generates 400 active BBS or mailing list lurkers, 40 regular contributors, 4 hackers and 0.4 lead developers or community leaders on average. This community probably does rather better than the average but still has a very long way to go to get to a healthy development community.
** In places where a community has succeeded, it is invariably because they have organised around one or more independent open-source components of the larger project.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#244999 - 03/01/2005 13:53
Re: Money
[Re: mdavey]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
It might be useful at this point to generate a list of the software components in the MK2A, including whether they are open or closed and if the later, whether they are still considered as important intellectual property.
In particular, would it be feasible to, say, release the source for a really old version of the actual player program (before stuff like gapless playback was added)?
None of the source is going to be released at all I'm afraid; this has been gone over many times before. Everything is proprietary apart from the kernel, basically, which provides your hardware drivers.
The player is monolithic (for various reasons) and is built on top of a number of libraries which are used on current and future products - hence it's still all commercially important. Remember that even the v1 carplayer software is better at lots of things than a lot of mp3 players you can buy today.
Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245000 - 03/01/2005 14:43
Re: Money
[Re: SE_Sport_Driver]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
Has the environment changed in such a way that even if some key people wanted to stay after a few weekends (after being enticed by us owners) that they would not even have the permission to do this work - not on company time?
No car-player work after the Sonicblue takeover was done on company time. Much as I like the spirit of Rob Schofield's suggestion, I can't see it being either politically or financially feasible. The only scenarios as I see them are:
- The most likely outcome: v3alpha8 is the final, summit release of the car-player firmware. Don't forget that this is itself a good result, as there was widespread fear that the D&M takeover would halt all firmware development (at 2.00).
- Next most likely: a new v3 alpha is released following spare-time work by Rio employees, like the previous ones -- but this time, as a bug-fix-only release from the v3alpha8 branch. This would have to happen at the right sort of time in Rio's commercial development cycle, which is not right now, and possibly not until the autumn (or winter). That would then almost certainly be the summit release.
- Least likely outcome: a new player is written as open-source by "the community". This is appealing to me as a car-player user, as it would put car-player development beyond the whims of a commodity flash-player company and the developers it has jaded. In a sense, a lot of the hard bits are done: madplay, tremor, vfdlib, libdaap. But you still get to rewrite the UI, the database, the cache, the USB client code (hint: 2.6 has USB mass-storage target support built-in), and, unless you can live without them, the visuals. It's a lot of work for a tiny hardware population (at least two orders of magnitude smaller than RiscOS).
But what keeps at least this jaded developer hanging around in this commodity flash-player company is the thought that one day we might get to do our H4. That will only make sense to those of you who know about John Harrison's marine chronometers (or have read Longitude), but after having built the amazing pieces of engineering that were the car-player and Rio Central, and despite none of it having the success we'd hoped, there is still honour in building the same thing all over again but this time the size of a pocket-watch. Karma could've been the H4, but never quite measured up (not least because we didn't do the 40Gb one).
If Rio succeed in giving you a car-player the size of a big pocket-watch -- and in 2005 Rio just might -- then all of a sudden you might not feel you need your bulky old marine chronometers.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245001 - 03/01/2005 14:49
Re: Money
[Re: peter]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
No car-player work after the Sonicblue takeover was done on company time.
You mean D&M, not SB? Plenty of work after the SB takeover as that was when the mk2a came out...
Quote:
If Rio succeed in giving you a car-player the size of a big pocket-watch -- and in 2005 Rio just might -- then all of a sudden you might not feel you need your bulky old marine chronometers.
You may have to shrink your fingers, though 
Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245002 - 03/01/2005 14:54
Re: Money
[Re: bonzi]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
I would like to see addition of Latin2
Version 3alpha8 supports ISO 8859-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -7, -9, -10, -13, -15 and -16 (except possibly in the search screens).
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245003 - 03/01/2005 15:03
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: mdavey]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Give me one example of a product that is a market leader that is currently based on opened-source (in a category that is at least as mass-market as a portable MP3 player). Now how about oen that turned around their market position by moving from closed to open?
I can't think of any. I believe having an open-source player on the empeg would be a wonderful thing. Generally, I think an open-source foundation never establishes a market leader and can't see any good reason for trying to come to market with anything that's open. Unless making any money isn't your goal.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245004 - 03/01/2005 15:04
Re: Money
[Re: altman]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
You mean D&M, not SB? Plenty of work after the SB takeover as that was when the mk2a came out...
Oops, you're right about the 2a, of course; I'd forgotten about that. But the car-player had already become a skunkworks project a long time before the D&M takeover. The v2final firmware wasn't, in any real sense, done on company time.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245005 - 03/01/2005 15:10
Re: Money
[Re: peter]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 21/05/1999
Posts: 5335
Loc: Cambridge UK
|
Quote:
If Rio succeed in giving you a car-player the size of a big pocket-watch -- and in 2005 Rio just might -- then all of a sudden you might not feel you need your bulky old marine chronometers.
After all the effort I went to installing my Mk.2, it is *not* coming out again!
I'd buy a connected portable though, if that's what you have in mind. Is there an ex-staff discount?
Rob
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245006 - 03/01/2005 15:16
Re: Money
[Re: peter]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
Quote:
You mean D&M, not SB? Plenty of work after the SB takeover as that was when the mk2a came out...
Oops, you're right about the 2a, of course; I'd forgotten about that. But the car-player had already become a skunkworks project a long time before the D&M takeover. The v2final firmware wasn't, in any real sense, done on company time.
ISTR 1.03 was the one that had mk2a support in it (ie a few kernel mods and 16MB support in the player), and the one that the SB-branded manuals documented.
v2 wasn't really done on company time though, as you say, and though most of v3's meat came from the work on the Karma, none of the carplayer targetting was on company time.
The biggest issue with v3 for me is the memory usage - I wish we'd left the pads for the 2nd and 3rd ram banks on the board when deciding what was going on the mk2a... all that strife from stacking ram chips could have been avoided. Sigh. So speaks a mk2 owner
You can never have enough memory. Never.
Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245007 - 03/01/2005 15:32
Re: Money
[Re: altman]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 21/05/1999
Posts: 5335
Loc: Cambridge UK
|
Quote:
You can never have enough memory. Never.
..so that's one order for Patrick's memory board?
Rob
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245009 - 03/01/2005 15:39
Re: Money
[Re: rob]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
Quote:
You can never have enough memory. Never.
..so that's one order for Patrick's memory board?
Rather possibly, though I can't remember if what was worked out as a solution would work well on mk2s (ISTR it may require desoldering some of the 16MBit DRAMs so those banks would be remapped as 64MBit banks). It was a lot cleaner for mk2a's....
Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245010 - 03/01/2005 15:44
Re: Money
[Re: SE_Sport_Driver]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Quote:
With the amount of money being suggested by some of the owners here, I'm beginning to think the best solution would be to use that money to buy some of the developers at Rio a few RioCars! Who wants to spend time developing software or firmware for a product you'll never get to use?
They get them for free if they want them - most developers have at least one empeg-car/rio-car. eg, Neil, who started here after the D&M purchase, already has a rio-car fitted in his Golf along with a bargain-of-the-century Genesis Profile Two amp that I spotted in cash converters (for £29!)
We still have a few units about for giving to insiders - including management, if it helps
Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245011 - 03/01/2005 16:03
Re: Money
[Re: altman]
|
addict
Registered: 29/06/2002
Posts: 531
Loc: Triangle, VA
|
Man it would be nice to be an insider Free Empeg/Rio-Cars
_________________________
-D
Modifying and Tweaking is a journey,
not a destination................................
MKIIa : 60gig - 040103286 - Blue - v2 + PCATS tuner
MKIIa : 20gig - 040103260 - Blue - v3a8 + Mark Lord Special Edition Cherry Dock
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245012 - 03/01/2005 16:13
Re: Money
[Re: SonicSnoop]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 19/05/1999
Posts: 3457
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
...and free fixing if you blow them up, too... within reason, at least Hugo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245013 - 03/01/2005 16:47
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: hybrid8]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
Give me one example of a product that is a market leader that is currently based on opened-source (in a category that is at least as mass-market as a portable MP3 player).
NetBeans (#1 platform independent IDE framework)
Apache WebServer (66% market share, 53% of secure installations).
Sendmail (#1, 42% share over Exchange 18%)
BIND (over 95% of reverse DNS lookups)
PHP (#1 server-side scripting language)
Quote:
Now how about one that turned around their market position by moving from closed to open?
Mozilla webclient. OpenOffice/StarOffice productivity suite.
I'm not claiming that simply opening the source will launch a product into a market leader position, but it certainly can work as a strategy to reverse a downwards trend: it can improve visibility and ubiquity especially when there are no other open-source products in the same space or the company considering opening the source already has a well-known brand.
The source for NetBeans and OpenOffice were both opened with the primary goal of image management (consisting of four sub-goals: improving ubiquity, visibility, corporate image and relations with developers).
NetBeans suffered a setback when IBM later put their PR machine into overdrive to get massive coverage for their open-source announcement for the Eclipse IDE, but continues to claw market share from Eclipse (in large part because it is technically better).
There is one overriding reason to do open-source: to level the playing field, to get the entire market to play on your terms. DNNA probably can't win against Apple using a closed source model because Apple has more money available to spend on advertising than DNNA does. By going open-source, DNNA force Apple (and everyone else) to focus on technical features, pre-sales and after-sales service, and price (rather than who can get the most marketing coverage). Plus, DNNA get to talk to lots of companies about collaborating on products that they probably wouldn't have otherwise.
Now, I'm not saying that DNNA should definately open-source their player - I'm simply suggesting that the original reason for not opening it is no longer valid and so the question should be re-evaluated. Now, it may be that DNNA have done this, came to the same conclusion for a different reason, and simply chosen not to tell us* - it doesn't really matter because my original post wasn't intended for Hugo and Co. but rather to try to get the community to think about what strategy is best for DNNA rather than what strategy is best for the community.
--
Michael
* heck, it may even be somthing they are constanly re-evaluating - and we certainly don't have any rights to be told the outcome of internal business decicions.
Edited by mdavey (03/01/2005 16:57)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245014 - 03/01/2005 17:01
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: mdavey]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
|
Quote:
NetBeans (#1 platform independent IDE framework)
Apache WebServer (66% market share, 53% of secure installations).
Sendmail (#1, 42% share over Exchange 18%)
BIND (over 95% of reverse DNS lookups)
PHP (#1 server-side scripting language)
But of course you can't describe any of those as being mass market in the same way as a hardware MP3 player. In the grand scheme of things very few people ever buy a webserver, email server, name server or programming language. These could just as easily be considered niche market products.
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245015 - 03/01/2005 17:01
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245016 - 03/01/2005 17:52
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: andy]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
But of course you can't describe any of those as being mass market in the same way as a hardware MP3 player. In the grand scheme of things very few people ever buy a webserver, email server, name server or programming language. These could just as easily be considered niche market products.
You are kidding, right? There are an order of magnitude more servers running Apache than there are MP3 players. Heck, you are using Apache right now. If you want examples of things that consumers buy, try Mark's suggestion or Symbian (an OS used in mobile 'phones and PDAs).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245017 - 03/01/2005 17:52
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Linksys routers is about the best example I've been able to think about as well. But I wouldn't say they're the market leader because of the Linux-based firmware.
I just can't see this model being applied to Apple's iPod at this time for instance. Nor can I see it working for Rio. I don't think it would buy them even a single percentage point of market share.
The server software example is completely invalid - those installations are available for free. I'd also hardly call Star Office a leader at anything. In any case, those are software solutions that can be, but aren't generally the vital core of a specific product. At least not a consumer nor mass-market good. Sure, company X's server comes with all this built in. But it could have been built with something else. And company X may have had nothing to do with contributing to any of the software on said machine. Too far out to left field.
So we have one valid example right now: Linksys Routers
The reason I see an open player working well for the empeg is specifically because it's EOL. This is from a consumer perspective. I see it as good for us. I don't see it as good for Rio.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245018 - 03/01/2005 17:55
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: andy]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 06/02/2002
Posts: 1904
Loc: Leeds, UK
|
Quote:
But of course you can't describe any of those as being mass market in the same way as a hardware MP3 player. In the grand scheme of things very few people ever buy a webserver, email server, name server or programming language. These could just as easily be considered niche market products.
LOL
I think there are more Webservers in the world than In-Car mp3 players, now that is what I can niche! Even in todays iPod world I still have problems getting people to understand what the empeg does, and why I want it in the car!!!
Edit - DOH! Beaten to the point again
Cheers
Cris.
Edited by Cris (03/01/2005 17:56)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245020 - 03/01/2005 19:02
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: hybrid8]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
I've changed the order a bit to keep the flow...
Quote:
I'd also hardly call Star Office a leader at anything.
It isn't the market leader productivity suite yet, but that is Sun's hope and part of their motivation for opening the source.
Quote:
In any case, those are software solutions that can be, but aren't generally the vital core of a specific product.
OpenOffice is the core of StarOffice and StarOffice is offered as a individual product by Sun. More importantly, Microsoft Office is the single product that generates the most revenue for Microsoft - more than any other product including the OS itself. A 10% loss of market share of the office productivity suite market would not go unnoticed at Redmond.
Quote:
Linksys routers is about the best example I've been able to think about as well. But I wouldn't say they're the market leader because of the Linux-based firmware.
Neither would I. However, the enthusiasts have clearly helped the sales of both the NSLU2 and the WRT54G. Also, it clearly influenced Buffalo - who saw a market opportunity to get rid of old circuit boards while building rapport with expert customers (the same group that were being stonewalled by Linksys).
Quote:
I just can't see this model being applied to Apple's iPod at this time for instance.
Absolutely. The market leader only has something to gain by going open-source if they are hemorrhaging market share (and even then you have to first answer the question of why are they loosing market share). That is why Sun doesn't open-source Java.
Quote:
Nor can I see it working for Rio. I don't think it would buy them even a single percentage point of market share.
Not significantly on its own*, but if done as part of a licensing programme. The mobile 'phone and digital radio manufacturers seem to be particularly eager to incorporate iPOD-like features into their products.
Sooner or later, someone will open-source their digital-audio player (it almost certainly won't be Apple - see above) and whoever it is, will likely take a nice chunk of the market leaders' segment and pretty much kill off all the other niche companies. From the C|Net article, it would seem to be a straight gun duel between Creative and DNNA. Fastest hand wins.
--
Michael
* DNNA would likely get many of the expert customers (who currently buy iPOD because they like Apple Macs) - but that is a tiny market as we know all too well.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#245021 - 03/01/2005 21:17
Re: Money vs Ubiquity
[Re: mdavey]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Symbian? By that example, Rio is already there, using Linux as its OS on a number of devices. However, neither Rio nor the partner companies using the Symbian OS created that software from scratch. They're both open platforms chosen by those companies to develop on. This isn't what we're discussing here. We're talking about a company with valuable IP built on whatever OS, deciding to open everything up. I don't see how that will have any meaningful effect on their market share. In some industries and with some partnerships, perhaps (or at least closed licencing), but most sectors have a lot more variables involved. Not Rio nor Creative will topple Apple's market lead, even if they sold their (comparable) players at HALF the cost of an iPod. As a developer I also don't see the incentive to develop something I will open source as a marketing strategy. I can see plenty of reasons for building on existing open source platforms, but if I'm planning to differentiate my product, the best way to do that is through software. And you don't give that away is you plan to make money. Hardware is complicated if you're not into hardware. But most designs can be replicated quite easily. Now try duplicating the software. That's where we are with the empeg (and Rio's other products). The software, not the hardware, is just about the most valuable asset. DNNA know this. Sun have nothing to lose with OpenOffice. It's just a loss-leader to try and chip away at MS Office. Same goes for Netscape/Mozilla. Just trying to chip a little away at MS while trying to cross-promote other goods/services. Funny that MS practically wiped NS off the face of the Earth with closed-source software just by giving it away. If I was independently weathly I'd offer DNNA to pay for a contractor to work on new player software. Or pay a couple of other people to develop a new player application. Money isn't a solution for everything, but in this case it seems to be the only solution. Hey, here's $500,000, get to work. Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index