#239820 - 02/11/2004 15:26
Let's talk money... For software.
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Ok, all sorts of side-projects have emerged for anything from buttons to replacement aluminum fascias to digital output boards. I'm talking of course of projects that have a monetary value associated with them. There have also been countless software projects, such as the excellent Hijack and other programs, but they've (thankfully) been kindly offered up for free by their creators.
Many of us have spent some extra money on these projects or other tweaks for our players. I don't think I'm alone in my willingness to give some (additional) direct compensation back to Rio for a few feature additions. The larger the company, the more complicated proposals like this can get, so I'm hoping there's someone open to developing this idea into a reality.
The simple take: get some additional development time to have builds of carplayer software made from the ever-growing software trunk to add some long-requested functionality and get us out of the alpha stages. Release this software as a paid upgrade. Price TBD. Implement a licencing agreement that does not bind (condemn) Rio or its development staff to an unrealistic support structure (support can often be the killer even if development is a near freebie).
I haven't figured out how much I'd be willing to pay, but from the top of my head, US$50 would be a no brainer.
Thoughts? Think it would be likely we could have 1000 "buyers" at that price?
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239821 - 02/11/2004 15:36
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31600
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Unfortunately, the people on this BBS aren't the ones you need to talk to.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239822 - 02/11/2004 15:44
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
Thoughts? Think it would be likely we could have 1000 "buyers" at that price?
OK, so that's $50,000. That's not gonna be anywhere near enough.
To put it into perspective: at minimal consultancy rates, that's about 2-3 man-months work.
You could just about hire a single programmer to work on something for a year for that, but the overhead involved would be prohibitive.
It ain't gonna happen. Sorry.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239823 - 02/11/2004 15:53
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
I suspect that the reason that 3.00 final hasn't been released is more to do with the boys in blue being far too busy with real work and less to do with lack of monetary resources. One possibility might be to permit certain 3rd parties (say, mlord and tfabris) access to internal version control and bug tracking systems under NDA agreements. This would allow them to report on, update and close bug reports, checkout, edit, commit code and finally tag the repository ready for a release. This model is used by a number of the big ICT players including Nokia, Motorola and Sun Microsystems. Of course, mlord and tfabris might not be interested in playing release manager or sustaining engineer, even if the community paid them  .
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239824 - 02/11/2004 20:17
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 06/02/2002
Posts: 1904
Loc: Leeds, UK
|
I would pay $100 just for Empeg support in Rio Music Manager, my world would then be complete, I have a dream people to bung all my music in a dir on my PC and RioMM sorts the rest out, it does that for everything apart from the Empeg. Cheers Cris.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239825 - 02/11/2004 22:45
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 05/01/2001
Posts: 4903
Loc: Detroit, MI USA
|
I think this is worth talking about.. at least to get us out of the alpha stage. Hasn't picking up the tab at the local pub worked in the past?  Or was that prior to Rio?
_________________________
Brad B.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239826 - 02/11/2004 23:52
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: SE_Sport_Driver]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 30/10/2000
Posts: 4931
Loc: New Jersey, USA
|
Quote:
Hasn't picking up the tab at the local pub worked in the past?
Quick! What's the closest pub to the new office?
_________________________
-Rob Riccardelli
80GB 16MB MK2 090000736
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239827 - 03/11/2004 00:59
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 21/05/1999
Posts: 5335
Loc: Cambridge UK
|
Quote:
Think it would be likely we could have 1000 "buyers" at that price?
No, I don't think there's any chance of that. It would be more feasible to reach the figure with a smaller number of people paying a higher price (that's the empeg enthusiast demographic to a tee).
Rio probably wouldn't turn down $50K NRE for a well defined project that wasn't going to detract from other business - but that's the problem. The opportunity cost is likely to be high if the team are busy with other far less cool projects that are core to the business.
Rob
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239828 - 03/11/2004 01:04
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 19/09/2002
Posts: 2494
Loc: East Coast, USA
|
A very interesting idea. So, if $50k would only buy a few months of consultant time, what could be done in that time? empeg for RioMM? ::insane laugh and a twitch:: VR? Or maybe we could pay Patrick to create something new and cool... box under the seat to bluetooth our Karma's into our factory head units. I know, I know, $50k could never afford that.
Hm.... my first thought was, "Save development cost by not paying for support; let us support it." But then, who would debug the closed source program when weird bugs came up. Or would it have to be closed source? Could it be like HiJack and emphatic, providing lots of functionality but still open for (at least someone in) the community to modify?
_________________________
- FireFox31 110gig MKIIa (30+80), Eutronix lights, 32 meg stacked RAM, Filener orange gel lens, Greenlights Lit Buttons green set
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239829 - 03/11/2004 03:25
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: FireFox31]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 31/08/1999
Posts: 1649
Loc: San Carlos, CA
|
$50k or some such to simply open source the player software might be interesting. I don't see Rio going for it though.
-Mike
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239830 - 03/11/2004 05:03
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: rob]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Quote:
Think it would be likely we could have 1000 "buyers" at that price?
No, I don't think there's any chance of that. It would be more feasible to reach the figure with a smaller number of people paying a higher price (that's the empeg enthusiast demographic to a tee).
Agreed. Especially when you consider the number of folks (such as myself) that are reasonably happy with the feature set as it is. My wishlist is slim enough that I probably wouldn't consider it worth the money to accelerate their addition. Paying for Patrick's upcoming memory expansion kit would take priority for me.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239831 - 03/11/2004 05:07
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: Roger]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
I wasn't proposing bringing in a new contractor nor dedicating anyone to this goal. Just adding some money to the bottom line for a few extra time slices that would be necessary to deliver a certain feature set within a reasonable time period.
It can certainly be done. Opportunity cost as Rob pointed out would also be my guess for biggest concern. How much $$ would it take for someone at Rio/DNNA to entertain the idea of a paid release. Having a specific feature list and a defined schedule is just more comforting. I'm not made of money, but that comfort is worth a few bucks to me. Starting at $50 and moving upward depending on the details of the proposal.
Giving access to an outside party that already has some vested interest in the empeg, under NDA (and likely anti-competetive contract) of course, is also something interesting I hadn't thought of.
I also bring this to this forum where I believe it's as good a place as any for initial exploration. Might as well find out if people would have any interest parting with money while taking some time to find out who would be the right contact at Rio/DNNA to propose the idea to.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239832 - 03/11/2004 11:19
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mcomb]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/12/2001
Posts: 5528
|
$50k for the source code is way too cheap. Think about how many years worth of work has gone into it and also the fact that it's still being used in the Karma and other players. I'm pretty sure the let a third party have access to the code under NDA has come up several times before as well. Oddly I can't find the specific search terms to get the posts back.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239833 - 03/11/2004 11:35
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: canuckInOR]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
Especially when you consider the number of folks (such as myself) that are reasonably happy with the feature set as it is.
Indeed. People on this BBS are unrepresentative, don't forget; unrepresentative even among Empeg owners. Of the Empeg owners I know IRL, one runs 2.0 and the rest are all sufficiently happy with 1.0 not to upgrade. And that's a free upgrade.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239834 - 03/11/2004 12:21
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: FireFox31]
|
old hand
Registered: 20/07/1999
Posts: 1102
Loc: UK
|
Well, I'd do quite a lot for $50k That said, the design and prototyping is only half the battle, the manufacture is the other half, and the software is the other other half if not three quarters  pca
_________________________
Experience is what you get just after it would have helped...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239835 - 03/11/2004 14:08
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: canuckInOR]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
Especially when you consider the number of folks (such as myself) that are reasonably happy with the feature set as it is.
Yup. About the only thing I really want that I don't have is the ability to play drm files, and that isn't going to happen.
As far as a solution to the "I want more software" problem, I suppose you could always try to drum up enough money to hire some programmers to create new, totally open source code for the empeg. I don't know what the guys would say to that, but I'm guessing it'd cost a LOT more than 50K. Besides, in the end it'd problably end up being a lot of work to get just a little bit more than we already have, and there's no guarantee that the new software would do a good job of implementing the features we already have.
I think we just have to suck up the limitations of the current solution and be happy. And I am happy when I think that the sfotware I'm running (2.0) still kicks the tail of any other mp3 player out there.
[blasphemy]
You know, at some point someone IS going to come out with a better way than the empeg for listening to digital audio in your car, especially with the exporuse iPods have been getting recently in the media.
[/blasphemy]
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239836 - 03/11/2004 14:36
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 27/06/1999
Posts: 7058
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
Quote:
You know, at some point someone IS going to come out with a better way than the empeg for listening to digital audio in your car
Yeah, I'm sure my grandchildren will enjoy that player.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239837 - 03/11/2004 15:58
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 21/05/1999
Posts: 5335
Loc: Cambridge UK
|
Quote:
As far as a solution to the "I want more software" problem, I suppose you could always try to drum up enough money to hire some programmers to create new, totally open source code for the empeg. I don't know what the guys would say to that, but I'm guessing it'd cost a LOT more than 50K.
To pay for this to be done commercially would certainly cost a lot more. You'd need a team about the size of empeg in days gone by (say 8 - 10) working for a year or so to come up with something useful. That's about £2m at market contract rates, or you could hire the team and run it as an entity for about £1m per year.
I've no doubt that good open source player software could be developed by the open source community, but I don't believe there are near enough players in use to reach a sufficiently large audience (of both contributors and users) for such a project to gain impetus.
Rob
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239838 - 03/11/2004 16:08
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: rob]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31600
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Personally, I'd be happy with the current V3 but merely bugfixed...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239839 - 03/11/2004 16:09
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tonyc]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
I started this thread on the premise of paying for 3.0, not new (ie. different) player application.
The money would be "padding" aka sweetener. You're not going to hire anyone full-time for $50K. And anyone capable of writing a good replacement player isn't going to do it for that price unless it's also a labour of love for them.
Speaking specifically (because some people are happy with the way it is), I'd really like to have a final/stable release with cross-fading, full soup support (with the ability to opt-out certain criteria, like 1-track artists from the artists list), the concept of an "album" if not already inherent to the soup implementation and the ability for emplode to edit the ID3 data of tracks already on the player (modify player DB, sync and offer the option to update ID3). If I want to get Fancy, I'd LOVE to see some of what Tonyc has provided in Emphatic (custom info screens) built into the player. But that's already doable, so I wouldn't ask for that over the abobve and/or what's already on the table with 3.0 (including features that are being exposed from other projects).
Access by a third party to the source looks like the most interesting, even if not possible, idea. Hey, maybe someone that works for Rio right now would be interested in doing this on their "off" time. Though I imagine that would be a stretch and leave very little time for things like sleep or a life outside work.
If I was independently wealthy I'd bite the bullet, propose this myself, bank-roll it myself and give it to everyone else for free. Or hell, sink a few million into just coming up with a completely new design and then sell it to the board members for the price of a hamburger. It would be money-losing, but would leave some satisfaction for me.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239840 - 03/11/2004 17:07
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tman]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 31/08/1999
Posts: 1649
Loc: San Carlos, CA
|
Quote:
$50k for the source code is way too cheap.
Oh, I agree completely and that is why I wouldn't expect them to go for it and I'm not convinced the community would come up with the money for it if they did. FWIW, I wasn't suggesting a buyout of the source, just an open source branch that we could do what we want with. It wouldn't prevent dnna from continuing to use it in other projects.
Anyway, I'd be happy just to see a stable, v3 build. If I say visual 3 times fast do you suppose Toby will pop in and fix that one visual that always crashes?
-Mike
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239841 - 03/11/2004 17:17
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mcomb]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/12/2001
Posts: 5528
|
Quote:
It wouldn't prevent dnna from continuing to use it in other projects.
That's not the issue. The problem is that making an open source branch would mean releasing huge portions of their IP. It's all commercially viable technology still. If all of the car player code was no longer used in any current and future products then maybe.
It all depends on the corporate policy I guess. Some companies are trying the open source model and earning money by selling a complete package or support.
Releasing just the car player specific parts wouldn't be any use either as the core would have to be rewritten. Might as well start from scratch at that point.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239842 - 03/11/2004 17:40
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14496
Loc: Canada
|
I think this is a great idea. It'd be interesting to see how much moola could be raised. I think that if the money actually existed, the fixes would get done, somehow.
In practice, I think there are perhaps 200 people on this BBS who might contribute some amount of money up to US$100 or so for this, maybe averaging around US$75. That would give around US$15000 to work with, I think.
Cheers
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239843 - 03/11/2004 18:10
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tman]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
It all depends on the corporate policy I guess. Some companies are trying the open source model and earning money by selling a complete package or support.
Corporate, once convinced of the merits of strategic open source, tends to follow the advice of the product development team when considering what and when to open source bits of their software, in my experience. Rob has already indicated that he believes the player gives Rio a strategic advantage. Clearly, Ogg and Flac and good ID tag support are currently useful differentiators right now (but these alone aren't the reason that the player is important IP).
Permitting the guys in blue to spend more time on Empeg would hurt Rio. Open Sourcing the code would hurt Rio. Open Sourcing some other minor bits and pieces wouldn't help get 3.00 final. Providing a couple of trusted individuals with access to internal code and tools might be viable. What other options are there?
Well, one option might be to form an Empeg Foundation Ltd and seek a source-code license (for the player software including Receiver Edition branch, and Emplode) and trademark use rights from DNNA. Those that remember Acorn will recall that this is effectively what RiscOS Ltd agreed with Pace Micro. The real question is whether the community is willing to pay $50 per year for updated software, a magazine, T-shirt and regular meet-events.
There are probably other options of which I haven't thought.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239844 - 03/11/2004 21:14
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mdavey]
|
veteran
Registered: 21/01/2002
Posts: 1380
Loc: Erie, CO
|
Quote:
The real question is whether the community is willing to pay $50 per year for updated software, a magazine, T-shirt and regular meet-events.
Wow, you haven't been around here long, have you?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239845 - 03/11/2004 23:02
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: cushman]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Thinking about this some more, a licensing agreement would likely have to also include the ability to sub-license the resulting software to markets outside the car player / portable player / home receiver / non-competitive-with-DNNA markets to qualify as a viable business case. I'd hope that RISCOS Ltd get a significant revenue stream from somewhere other than sales of 3900 upgrades that they quote in their end of year 4 press release (they currently charge ~£85 for the ROM).
I'm finding it difficult to think of something that could benefit from a neat embedded player that DNNA isn't already selling or likely to be working hard to license its technology. DAB / HD Radio player? Unless a significant revenue stream could be made by sub-licensing in-car entertainment solutions.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239846 - 03/11/2004 23:09
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mdavey]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Why? I think many of us would be happy to have someone with some free time hacking at the empeg codebase with the only intent being to make the empeg software better. I think it would be cool if that group of people could have access to it and allow Rio to utilize thier upgrades, if any. That could conceivably lower the cost. Maybe.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239848 - 04/11/2004 03:46
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tonyc]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
But did the subject of money come up right from the start? And did it get taken to the next level? (ie. proposed to Rio) I didn't initially think about someone else (outside of Rio emploees) providing coding services because of their unfamiliarity with the project - I'm sure it's a fairly big deal to get familiar enough with the player software to become productive quickly.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239849 - 04/11/2004 07:29
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: wfaulk]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
Why?
I have made two distinct proposals.
First: a small select group of individuals be given access to the internal codebase and tools. These individuals would not be DNNA employees and would work on the codebase in their free time.
Second: a company is set up to acquire a license to the Empeg codebase, including trademark and sub-licensing agreements. The company employs staff and generates revenue streams to cover wages, licensing and overheads.
My first proposal is better for the community (assuming we can find willing volunteers that DNNA are happy with). I'd expect DNNA management to find it much easier to understand the value proposition of my second proposal.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239850 - 04/11/2004 07:36
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
old hand
Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
|
I'd be more than willing to pay for a V3 final. And other stuff. Let the bidding begin. I'll start. $350 for a patch allowing Japanese tags using one of the available freeware fonts. Custom info mode is fine (ie. just artist & track, album if it can be fit). Paid by whatever means the supplier prefers. 
_________________________
Dave
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239851 - 04/11/2004 09:32
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: webroach]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
Let the bidding begin.
We need a mechanism first. I'd pay $100 for stable Flac and Ogg support and a further $100 for Flac and MP3 cue sheet support, but who is going to do the work? Let's concentrate on the mechanism.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239853 - 04/11/2004 15:02
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 27/06/1999
Posts: 7058
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
Quote:
I'm sure it's a fairly big deal to get familiar enough with the player software to become productive quickly.
A big deal, yes, but not an insurmountable one. One that would, frankly, be a lot of fun.
Besides, who said quickly? The alternative is the current speed of empeg development, which has been squeezed down to near zero over the years. Were the empeg development community able to get their hands on the source code, I'd estimate a few months of a learning curve before things could really start churning out at a nice rate. Efficiently organized, that could probably be made even less, but these types of projects are rarely efficiently organized, so we'd all probably be duplicating each others' work for awhile.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239854 - 04/11/2004 15:26
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tonyc]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Closed-source access would likely sound more appetizing to DNNA than open. With only a few people signing up for NDA access and development. A subscription-based model might also be workable for a number of empegBBS readers. I'd be into it at $50 or even $100 per year.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239855 - 04/11/2004 15:35
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tonyc]
|
addict
Registered: 29/06/2002
Posts: 531
Loc: Triangle, VA
|
Also, wouldnt having the empeg community working on it making it better also make their current products better? Dont they still use it on something? I would definitly be willing to pay a yearly subscription for it.
_________________________
-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
|
|
|
|
|
#239856 - 04/11/2004 15:51
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tonyc]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 15/01/2002
Posts: 1866
Loc: Austin
|
perhaps this is the wrong place to bring this up, but why not start from scratch? we could write an alternative player app. a few key people could take on lead development roles and others could add changes. we could ask the people in blue for pointers, as they are the most familiar with the hardware. sure, nothing will happen for a few months. but, nothing is going to happen for a few months, anyway. weve got the talent in this community to do this, and i think it is entirely possible.
discuss
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239857 - 04/11/2004 16:09
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31600
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
You guys are all forgetting something important:
Even if DNNA was willing to release their mission-critical core codebase to a select few (I suspect they're not), it would require a significant amount of work and a large chunk of support time from the people who wrote it. Releasing a piece of internal code isn't as simple as zipping up a directory and emailing it to someone.
Right now, the Cambridge guys are busy working on Rio's core business... portables. I don't think they've got the time to do that kind of thing.
I think the best we can hope for is that their new manager follows in Rob's footsteps and lets them occasionally have a "pizza night" and do bugfix passes on the carplayer 3.0 code.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239858 - 04/11/2004 16:21
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
Releasing a piece of internal code isn't as simple as zipping up a directory and emailing it to someone.
It is if you want it to be. If IBM had simply dropped us a copy of AFS as was it would have taken no longer to bootstrap than the modified copy they passed us. Most of their modifications? Stripping names of people out of comments.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239859 - 04/11/2004 16:25
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: Daria]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
And that was for an open-source project. None of us, I think, really think that'll happen here. We're just talking about a set of developers who would be under NDA to not reveal the code.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239860 - 04/11/2004 16:39
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: tfabris]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 06/03/2003
Posts: 269
Loc: Wellingborough, UK
|
Quote:
Even if DNNA was willing to release their mission-critical core codebase to a select few (I suspect they're not), it would require a significant amount of work and a large chunk of support time from the people who wrote it.
The significant amout of work would relate to putting the (software and process) systems in place to make such access possible.
I disagree with regard to support time - it is unlikely to be significantly more than now for two reasons. Firstly, anyone given access will be expected to support themselves (in fact, probably mlord is the only person likely to be admitted so if he doesn't step up to the plate this is probably a non-starter).
Secondly I suspect that the code still closed accounts for less than 50% of the total and we get on okay with the stuff that is open.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239861 - 04/11/2004 16:43
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mdavey]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
I seriously doubt they don't already have a remote-access version control system in place. It oughtn't take a lot of work to insert a read-only account.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239862 - 04/11/2004 16:51
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: RobotCaleb]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
why not start from scratch? we could write an alternative player app.
Because this would cost a LOT of money for someone to do this any way except in their spare time (see Rob's earlier post), and I doubt it could be undertaken in anyone's spare time and yield anything close to the quality and feature set we already have. And I wonder if things like wma support are even dooable from scratch (ie: do you have to have some kind of agreement with microsoft?)
All that being said, writing mp3 player software would be a heck of a lot more fun than what I'm doing now. . .
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239863 - 04/11/2004 17:21
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: JeffS]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 15/01/2002
Posts: 1866
Loc: Austin
|
exactly. spare time, for free. lrcdb, emphatic, hijack, etc all came about because people thought it would be neat and took it upon themselves to do it. as to the other things you mentioned, its only what you make of it. the quality and feature set comes in time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239864 - 04/11/2004 19:58
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: RobotCaleb]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 05/01/2001
Posts: 4903
Loc: Detroit, MI USA
|
Quote:
why not start from scratch?
All of this stuff is way out of my league, but as a "user", the reason I'd not like things to start from scratch is that the empeg software is what makes the empeg so great. It'd be a shame to discard all of that. I think what most people are itching for is bug fixes, working "hacks" into the main software and an odd feature here and there. No sense in reinventing the wheel (if we have a choice).
_________________________
Brad B.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239865 - 04/11/2004 20:28
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: SE_Sport_Driver]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Assuming that we can't get access to the existing code, and assuming that we're unhappy with the current release schedule (two assumptions that are not necessarily true), my preference would be to create something like "openEmpeg" which would mimic the current UI, but provide source access for improvement. I'm still of the opinion that UI design is one of the hardest parts of this (not to say that the other parts aren't also hard) and that's been done for us.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239866 - 05/11/2004 00:23
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14496
Loc: Canada
|
I think the UI is one of the *easiest* parts -- now that I've implemented Hijack from scratch (including the font, and rendering thereof). Sure, there's a lot more to the player UI, but then we have a lot more memory to play with there as well. Piece-o-cake.
But the sound part.. very very difficult. And don't even mention the visuals!
Cheers
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239867 - 05/11/2004 00:30
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Not implementing the UI. Designing the UI. It has to be attractive and useful for in-car use. No offense, but Hijack's UI is neither.
Visuals. Good point. I forget since I don't really use them.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239868 - 05/11/2004 00:37
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14496
Loc: Canada
|
You did say something about mimic'ing the current UI, in which case our design is already there.
cheers
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239869 - 05/11/2004 00:39
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
Not implementing the UI. Designing the UI. It has to be attractive and useful for in-car use. No offense, but Hijack's UI is neither.
Visuals. Good point. I forget since I don't really use them.
Visuals are one reason that the more advanced of the open source players never made it into my daily life... but a bad one, seeing as I use "now&next" most of the time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239870 - 05/11/2004 01:00
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Thus my point.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#239871 - 05/11/2004 23:23
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: wfaulk]
|
addict
Registered: 29/06/2002
Posts: 531
Loc: Triangle, VA
|
I'm far from having a clue what it takes to write anything in linux, or windows for that matter, but one thing I have always wanted for the empeg was for the visuals to be plug-ins. That way you could create your own so you're never stuck with the same set.
_________________________
-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
|
|
|
|
|
#239872 - 06/11/2004 01:30
Re: Let's talk money... For software.
[Re: SonicSnoop]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
I think that the entire software should be that way, so that you have plugins for visuals, codecs, UI, etc. It is significantly more difficult to do.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index