Slashdot Mirror

No, I think you (and the FSF) are confusing the issue. We were talking about users of software.

I use Ubuntu on my machines. That means I'm an Ubuntu user. I have the right to run 'sudo rm -rf /' on those machines if I want to. Let's say you install Ubuntu on your machine. We are both Ubuntu users now, but that does not give you the right to 'sudo rm -rf /' on my machine. Your user rights are not violated by this restriction because your user rights only pertain to the property you have the right to use.

If you want to talk about the manufacturer in the capacity that they are a user, it can only refer to the hardware that is still theirs. When they sell a hardware/software combo, that is distribution, not use, and from that point on, they cease to be the user of both the device AND the copy of the software on that device, even if they still have an identical device in their possession that they ARE a user of.

Now you're bringing in hardware, and trying to control how some software users design their hardware.

I guess Microsoft is trying to stop everyone from even making hardware at all, then, considering that their software can't even be used or distributed for free.

Reality check: All manufacturers can design their hardware however the hell they want. They aren't bound by the GPL until they distribute the software. Distribution carries certain responsibilities under GPL. Always has and always will. One such responsibility is the requirement to hand over the source code. New to GPL3 is the requirement to hand over the key to unlock the device.

You're taking away a freedom to protect a freedom that isn't really being threatened by the hardware makers.

Are you opposed to copyright in general? At this point, you have to be to stay consistent, because the sole purpose of copyright is to allow authors of creative works to put conditions on their use and distribution, which takes away freedom. GPL is very liberal in that there are practically no restrictions on use, and distribution is restricted as minimally as possible. The only requirements for distribution that do exist were designed specifically to maximize what the end user can do as a user.

There is nothing physically stopping you from using a device as you see fit, assuming you have the desire, the time, and the technical ability to do so. The argument that all device makers must make it easy for anyone to do so just doesn't fly.

But there is something physically stopping me: the design of the device! Now, it may ultimately be possible, with great effort, to unlock most devices available today, but there's no reason that will remain true. With further miniaturization, devices could be made completely unhackable, and be designed so that any attempt to open them up destroys them. Would you then say "nothing is physically stopping you from modifying the device's software, it just happens to be physically impossible"?

If the DCMA is your problem, then you should address that by changing the law or committing civil disobedience or just ignoring the law.

How do you feel about the DMCA? I think by now, you have to be opposed to it. Then are you OK at least with the clause in the GPL3 that requires the distributor to waive the right to sue users for DMCA violations? Or is blocking an unjust lawsuit another restriction on freedom?

On top of that, if you really want to hack your DVR, you can choose to buy an open DVR, such as products from Neuros. You're actually doing a disservice to open hardware makers by choosing a Tivo and hacking (or attempting to hack) it, because you're not supporting them with your dollars.

And I wouldn't want a Tivo (I'm already using my desktop PC as a DVR anyway). But I also don't want any software I write to be distributed w

No, I think you (and the FSF) are confusing the issue. We were talking about users of software. Now you're bringing in hardware, and trying to control how some software users design their hardware. You're taking away a freedom to protect a freedom that isn't really being threatened by the hardware makers.

There is nothing physically stopping you from using a device as you see fit, assuming you have the desire, the time, and the technical ability to do so. The argument that all device makers must make it easy for anyone to do so just doesn't fly. If the DCMA is your problem, then you should address that by changing the law or committing civil disobedience or just ignoring the law.

On top of that, if you really want to hack your DVR, you can choose to buy an open DVR, such as products from Neuros. You're actually doing a disservice to open hardware makers by choosing a Tivo and hacking (or attempting to hack) it, because you're not supporting them with your dollars.

I'm starting to think that the FSF doesn't really think that open platforms are superior to closed ones and that open ones have no chance of success. Otherwise, why would they seek to cripple closed platforms instead of putting all their energy into supporting the open ones? I suspect that this has to do with RMS's socialist anti-property bias. Under a socialist system of the sort we saw in the Soviet Union, competition is bad. Choice is bad. You take what the state gives you and you better like it if you know what's good for you. Oh, yeah, let a thousand flowers bloom! (OK, that's Maoist rather than Stalinist, but it's the same principle.)

How is this insightful? Did you even spend 10 seconds looking at the article or the device?

sounds like a worse combo as the software is windows only.

No, the product is Linux based, as in:

The world's first open source Linux-based embedded media center

Why dont they stop the silly special software crap and simply make the dang things play from a SMB share

Here's the awesome thing about open source. You want it to play from an SMB share? Go ahead and write it or ask someone to! I know, I know. Linux is obviously "silly special software crap" to you. Fair enough.

And... guess what? Someone did.

Now, why would you not want it to only play from SMB shares? Other people may want to be able to plug in their iPods, or FAT32-flash cards, or whatever. Personally, having to dump all my holiday photos to a remote server in some other room to have a slideshow is annoying for me; I'd much rather just plug in my camera or its memory card.

Indeed, other people may want to hook up to youtube without requiring other specialized hardware in the house.

I am so tired of this media appliances that require "special" software or use the stupid Upnp protocols that simply suck to high heaven.

OK. You're tired of open source linux, because that's "silly special software". Fair enough. You're tired of any custom firmware in general. If I'm to take you at your word, you're tired of media PC's, ApplesTVs, iPods, MP-3 players, TV's (they have firmware too), PVR's, modern stereos. Sorry about "special software". Again, if you're really being sincere, I suggest you try an old TV from the 1970's; it might not have any software in it. Add an 8-track player and a sweet 60's solid-state amp, and you'll have no "silly special software" to worry about.

As for UPnP protocols, I can cheerfully agree with you there.

Is SMB that fricking hard?

For you? I'd have to say yes, based on the above.

Now, to other readers (and sorry, perhaps I should have ignored the guy, but when someone was modding him insightful and others were replying in the same tone... well, it made the discussion worse than useless)... He was saying stuff that was flatly false and being applauded for it.

Back to the general concept: does this device actually make sense? A $249 embedded Linux device with some nice features that is upgradeable and open-sourced (on the software side)?

Maybe. It probably doesn't make sense if you have a MythTV device hooked up. Or a Tivo/really good PVR. Or, as others have mentioned, an XBMC (Xbox Media Center). Or are HD.

Personally, I'm intrigued, but a potential deal breaker for me is the presumed lack of upscaling in the device. It's doubtful it has the spare cpu capacity to process that in software. Apart from that, with the network connectivity, and extendability, it's tempting.

I just have to admit I'm a bit dismayed. We all talk about Open Source here and slam MS (often rightly so). When a company comes out that is Open Source and is doing something rather unique and interesting -- not just letting its users hack the hardware, but inviting them to, guys like this jump up and down about "silly special software" and get modded insightful.

http://www.neurosaudio.com/

Oh yea, and the Neuros website uses 'open' far too many times.

But what's this? http://www.neurosaudio.com/is/spreadtheneuroslove. asp = "Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0"

Hmm, an open web server..

Not to mention, what makes them think any self-respecting Apple TV hacker would be caught dead with such an example of tasteless undesign as the Neuros? I mean, just look at that remote. My God.

Let's not forget the Neuros OSD which does the same thing, and more, and has open source firmware!

I'm a bit more excited about the OSD because of its hackability factor. It runs Linux - I've got the source and am working on building my own software for it.

http://www.neurosaudio.com/

The Neuros and any player that supports Rockbox (which includes iPods, incidentally).

Nice attempt at a troll.

I've never owned a portable music player, nor do I have an plans to own one in the near future, but If I even did own one, it would be one that does support ogg vorbis (and FLAC too), like the Neuros audio player, which btw can transmit music to your car stereo via FM, so your point is...rather pointless.

The OSD is already out, which you can see at their homepage.

So I suppose even if you're not a hacker, you can still buy one...

Sorry to self-reply, but I figured I'd head off any flames claiming I wanted the impossible (since HD-based players seem to be moving out of vogue).

I found one. All the reviews say it's got great quality and the bang for the buck is impressive (Just above $3/gb), but it's bulky and heavy (iPod fashion whores need not apply).

Neuros II 80GB for $250

Maybe not as sexy as an iPod, but surely more surely more open. It does support OGG Vorbis! You can download new firmware or do it yourself, you got the spec.
Hack your devices people, ask for openness!

Are you sure it's all about the storage?

(It's a little dated, but that's still a damned good music player, in my opinion. I loved mine, 'til it got ripped off.)

Sounds kinda like Relatable's TRM fingerprints, which are used by MusicBrainz and in the Neuros audio player.

IIRC, the fingerprints don't have any actual content in them, but instead describe the characteristics of the audio. So it's plausible, at least, that they can't listen in on your conversations, but could still uniquely identify what you're listening to.

The only downsides are:

• they are discontinuing the Neuros II
• Neuros III may not be out for a while.. :-(
• they are a little bunky :-S

I will stick with my Neuros.

It even plays Ogg Vorbix files.

Thats a must-have for me, since I ripped all my CD's using Linux, which doesn't include a legal MP3 encoder (not that this matters much, since ripping my own music for my own use is illegal.

Yup. http://www.neurosaudio.com/

There is no bigger threat to technical innovation than this bill presents
http://www.house.gov/writerep/

There is a great imbalance in the corporate interested regarding fair use rights, and citizens need to make up the difference if we're going to keep this kind of legislation at bay, see below for our take on why digital rights have been steadily eroding recently.
http://www.neurosaudio.com/press/freedom.asp

Another device that'll record to PSP video is the Neuros Recorder2.

It doesn't have the wide array of Tivolike features, but if you just want to convert analog video to digital for your PSP, this should work well.

If I had the cash allocated for an mp3 or ogg player right now I would go with the Neuros 442. It's got a 40 GB drive, lets you record audio and video from numerous sources, tonnes of features. Plus the company supports open source development. Shouldn't we all be supporting a company like this? Or has someone here had bad experience with Neuros?

If I had the cash allocated for an mp3 or ogg player right now I would go with the Neuros 442. It's got a 40 GB drive, lets you record audio and video from numerous sources, tonnes of features. Plus the company supports open source development. Shouldn't we all be supporting a company like this? Or has someone here had bad experience with Neuros?

I just treated myself to one for those reasons, I can afford and I'm sorry if you think that's weird but it's my choice.

My post was half just kidding with you, half substance. Here's the substance:

The submitter of the story wanted to know how Slashdotters avoid vendor lock-in when it comes to music. Your economic decisions are, of course, up to you, but you appear to be locked in tight with Apple. You may not find that to be a problem, but it is exactly the situation that the submitter is trying to avoid.

Personally, my tendencies lie with the submitter; I greatly dislike vendor lock-in. I don't have an iPod or any portable music player for that matter, but if I did want one, I would try to reward vendors who, unlike Apple, encourage you to have a freedom of choices. One such vendor that comes to mind is Neuros, whose players are among the few that let you play Ogg Vorbis files and also sponsors open source development. Apple's practices, with DRM and so forth, appear quite different.

So, my point is that your recommendation is precisely what the submitter doesn't want. IMHO, the submitter's "best bet" is not with MP3, which in my view is one of the ISO's biggest blunders ever, but with Ogg and players that support it, such as Neuros.

Neuros Audio is very community oriented and has been mentioned quite a bit on Slashdot recently, and are known as being very friendly to open source.

IAudio isn't quite as friendly to open source as Neuros, but having a player that had USB Host functionality and would play OGG, FM stereo, Video, and (if I feel the urge) WMA 10 based files from Rhapsody or Napster was too good to pass up.

Bottom line, if there is any music I hear and want to keep, I go to the used CD store, buy it, rip it, and move it to my player. No DRM, no loss of audio quality as part of a conversion, and, since both players report as mass storage devices, OS compatibility is not a problem.

Its simple:

1.)Buy from sites like www.audiolunchbox.com, or www.allofmp3.com.

2) If thats not possible, make use of DVD Jon's pymusic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PyMusique

3) Buy an audio player, that plays all of the good formats such as ogg, flac or musepack:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Subm it=GO&Range=1&bop=and&description=Jetaudio&InnerCa ta=23 [JetAudio]

http://www.neurosaudio.com/

Both of these brands produce players far superior (IMHO) than any ipod or creative player, and both manufacturers support Open Source Ideals, and work on Operating Systems other than Microsoft windows.

4) Enjoy your new music, knowing you're not being controlled by DRM.

I have no idea where you got the idea that Neuros isn't doing anything for ogg support. They were the first portable player to support ogg vorbis. I can't imagine that the N3 will ship without ogg support.

Also, Digital Innovations has been open with their source code since their original Neuros audio player. Unfortunately, the code for that player had to be compiled with a proprietary DSP compiler.

Personally, my Neuros just died last month, and I really miss it, but I decided to go with an iPod to replace it, mainly because DI didn't really have a direct replacement available. The 442 is physically bigger, has a smaller HD, and costs the same as the largest iPod now available, plus you can't buy accessories at every store in the world like with an iPod. Neuros did support Ogg Vorbis, and had several features better than Apple did (like FM transmitter built-in, presets, and some nice third-party open-source sync software). But it's hard to be counterculture all the time; all I really want to do is listen to my music on the go, not fight a culture war. Pity...

You really think they're not planning on selling this, or a derivative of it? Neuros is an LLC -- a for-profit company. They will make money from contributed suggestions.

At least my contributions to OSS still allow me to get free copies of the improved software. Hardware is not open source. Hardware plans may be, and perhaps Neuros will release the specs for free so hardware geeks can assemble their own. But Neuros is still going to SELL A DEVICE.

(disclaimer: I do not work for, nor benefit from, Neuros Audio. I just like their products and their business ethic.)

I purchased a beta model of the 442. The software is still in very early stages of development; except for the main menu, most functions are still file-system based. This means no shuffle for music playing; you go into a directory and press "play" from where you want to start. Keep in mind, this is a very early release of the software; the goal is to upgrade the firmware with features the community wants.

The video player will play back MPEG4/DivX 3.11/4.0/5.0/WMV v9 (from the the specs). It will record MPEG SP with G.726 audio 30fps@704x240resolution, MS ASF format (also from the specs). It'll play back to a TV in NTSC or PAL.

I had to transcode my MST3k videos to a supported DivX resolution, but otherwise everything works beautifully. The playback was superb, and the sound output is better than my TV (exactly what you'd expect).

The unit is a little large (and at 325g, very solid), especially compared to the iPOD, but *extremely* stylish, with an excellent screen.

The really excellent news is this: Joe Born and his crew are producing dev boards, which they will sell to the community for cost. They are actively supporting a Linux port to the device.

Anyway, I love this device. A lot. A whole lot. I pack it wherever I go-- 9 hours audio playback, 5 hours video. Not great, but it'll last a plane ride and a couple of movies. And I'm patiently waiting for the dev board spec to get finalized so I can help with porting Linux to this device. The only thing I'm really missing on this device is Nethack.

I should point out that Archos has been selling devices that do just that, for quite some time now. I'm sure there are other companies that do this, as well.

Yup, I can name another one. Neuros has had multimedia player with PVR abilities for a while as well now. Better yet they have exceptionally good OSS support, including open source firmware on many of their devices, and an open development process.

Jedidiah.

You mean like the Open Source friendly Neuros 442 Digital Media Player/Recorder?

How about a device that 'does video' via tv-out, rather than on a tiny little lcd screen? It could even have tv-IN as well - a mobile tivo kinda thing. That'd be real useful. Now go ahead and post links to the already existing devices that do this, but that I am unaware of :)

How about Neuros? They have built in FM tuners and firmware (available from official site) you can play OGG. Currently looks like they are out of the 2nd gen players from their site and the third gens are coming out next year. You may be able to find a 2nd gen from one of the retailers. Cost is generally not to bad either. Most are hard drive based, as opposed to flash based. Just depends on how much storage you want I guess.

For all the talk about open source stuff around here, it's surprising that nobody ever mentions the Neuros anymore. Name one other MP3 player that actually has an (encouraged) open source alternative to it's proprietary firmware and native ogg support (I know others have this, but I belive Neuros was the first).

For all the talk about open source stuff around here, it's surprising that nobody ever mentions the Neuros anymore. Name one other MP3 player that actually has an (encouraged) open source alternative to it's proprietary firmware and native ogg support (I know others have this, but I belive Neuros was the first).

The Neuros (audio computer) will do it for you. When you listen to radio on it, hit the record button. When you sync it'll id the song for you (using MusicBrainz or something similar).

cl

The Neuros II player has a feature called (I think) HiSi which does this for free. And it plays oggs. And it's entirely open source, firmware and hardware included. (except I think they are having some troubles with TI at the moment, and the firmware source is temporarily unavailable for download.)

Don't know whether HiSi actually works, because I never use my player to listen to the radio, but it's still kind of cool if you want it.

And no, I don't work for them. I'm just a pleased owner.

In a word: I wouldn't worry about it.

How about the Neuros Audio Computer? Now that's one slick piece of tech... and it records audio, unlike the iPod which needs third-party hardware.

My Neuros does! http://www.neurosaudio.com/

Neuros Maybe?

http://www.neurosaudio.com/

If you arn't overly concerned with size (it uses a laptop hard drive) then a neuros is definately the way to go.
Open source hardware and software, suports most formats including ogg, comes significantly cheaper than the ipod and has models right up to 80gigs (admitedly not cheaper than an ipod generally).
I certainly plan to buy one of these.

People are complaining about this off the bat.

1) Yeah, you have to own a Neuros first to even develop this.

2) Yeah, you could look at this like Neuros is changing contract pay to a prize.

But ...

A) No one said you personally must participate -and- the neuros community has alot of developers. This was targetted as a bonus for existing Neuros owners who develop, not to try and snooker a bunch of non-Neuros-owning people. Face it, it got put on /. "Developers", so it gets about 1% the traffic of a normal post, its not exactly a marketing coup.

B) Which is better ... a developer doing this on their own (which likely would have happened eventually assuming Neuros users care about podcasting) for nothing or have the company say "hey, while you're doing all this free stuff, try this and if it works we'll pay ya for it"?

NOTE: Yes, I own a Neuros (had 2 until one was stolen) and yes I know the owners of Digital Innovations which created the Neuros and when I had the time I was even helping them start to open source parts of the Neuros. However, I don't use my Neuros right now (when the other got stolen they got my upgraded drive and both sync cables and ... well .. I'm procastinating because I'm still pissed). I have never worked for DI nor have I developed anything for it (I'm thinking of getting back into it, but my SqueezeBox is also a tempting hack target). Point is ... I know the product and the company. Those who don't shouldn't make comments about things they don't know about.

People are complaining about this off the bat.

1) Yeah, you have to own a Neuros first to even develop this.

2) Yeah, you could look at this like Neuros is changing contract pay to a prize.

But ...

A) No one said you personally must participate -and- the neuros community has alot of developers. This was targetted as a bonus for existing Neuros owners who develop, not to try and snooker a bunch of non-Neuros-owning people. Face it, it got put on /. "Developers", so it gets about 1% the traffic of a normal post, its not exactly a marketing coup.

B) Which is better ... a developer doing this on their own (which likely would have happened eventually assuming Neuros users care about podcasting) for nothing or have the company say "hey, while you're doing all this free stuff, try this and if it works we'll pay ya for it"?

NOTE: Yes, I own a Neuros (had 2 until one was stolen) and yes I know the owners of Digital Innovations which created the Neuros and when I had the time I was even helping them start to open source parts of the Neuros. However, I don't use my Neuros right now (when the other got stolen they got my upgraded drive and both sync cables and ... well .. I'm procastinating because I'm still pissed). I have never worked for DI nor have I developed anything for it (I'm thinking of getting back into it, but my SqueezeBox is also a tempting hack target). Point is ... I know the product and the company. Those who don't shouldn't make comments about things they don't know about.

check out the Neuros

Actually the open source part isn't currently available.

http://www.neurosaudio.com/is/tempunavail.html

yeah...screw the iPod, get a Neuros!

Free Software is not Open Source. Do I want an Open Source system? Hell no! I want an entirely Free system from software down to the hardware! I use GNU/Linux because I support the idea of Free Software, not because it doesn't cost me money to use. In fact, it does cost me to not use non-Free software; some of it isn't as usable as the proprietary counterpart and may require me to work on the code itself to make it do what I need.

But I have the freedom to modify the code if I want to. I'd like this with my firmware too. OpenBIOS is promising for the firmware replacement. The Open Graphics Card project is progressing and will finally give me a decent graphics card that is well supported and documented (I have a Radeon 9100; it is the last ATi card I will purchase since they to have gone down the path of not even providing specs to the DRI developers...so no more Matrox, ATi, nVidia, ...).

The graphics card thing is a really good example of why we should demand Free Hardware. Unless you give up your Freedom and use proprietary drivers, you no longer can use a modern graphics card and get 3d acceleration under X. Printers are another good example; look at how many printers have no Ghostscript backend because the manufacturers refuse to provide specifications for their proprietary protocols. Specs are nice but open hardware documentation would be nicer since we could then e.g. reprogram the printer's firmware to support PostScript (or if it is too slow for that, something like PPA that we have decent drivers for).

The Neuros has had its firmware and even full hardware specs released! Neuros Audio isn't going out of business; not even close to it. The hardware schematics release may not be immediately useful but the firmware release is; things are progressive with FLAC support and soon MPC, things that never would have happened if the firmware had remain non-free software. Look at Rockbox too. The Rockbox firmware is far superior to the stock firmware.

Free Software needs to run on a system that is Free down to its lowest level. We live in a world now where everyone is trying to kill us with things like hardware-based Digital Restrictions Management. We must demand at the very least Free firmware for the hardware and good enough hardware interface specs to actually do something with the firmware (stuff like e.g. the Verilog for the ASIC doesn't matter so much when you have that, but it would be nice to have).

Free Software is not Open Source. Do I want an Open Source system? Hell no! I want an entirely Free system from software down to the hardware! I use GNU/Linux because I support the idea of Free Software, not because it doesn't cost me money to use. In fact, it does cost me to not use non-Free software; some of it isn't as usable as the proprietary counterpart and may require me to work on the code itself to make it do what I need.

But I have the freedom to modify the code if I want to. I'd like this with my firmware too. OpenBIOS is promising for the firmware replacement. The Open Graphics Card project is progressing and will finally give me a decent graphics card that is well supported and documented (I have a Radeon 9100; it is the last ATi card I will purchase since they to have gone down the path of not even providing specs to the DRI developers...so no more Matrox, ATi, nVidia, ...).

The graphics card thing is a really good example of why we should demand Free Hardware. Unless you give up your Freedom and use proprietary drivers, you no longer can use a modern graphics card and get 3d acceleration under X. Printers are another good example; look at how many printers have no Ghostscript backend because the manufacturers refuse to provide specifications for their proprietary protocols. Specs are nice but open hardware documentation would be nicer since we could then e.g. reprogram the printer's firmware to support PostScript (or if it is too slow for that, something like PPA that we have decent drivers for).

The Neuros has had its firmware and even full hardware specs released! Neuros Audio isn't going out of business; not even close to it. The hardware schematics release may not be immediately useful but the firmware release is; things are progressive with FLAC support and soon MPC, things that never would have happened if the firmware had remain non-free software. Look at Rockbox too. The Rockbox firmware is far superior to the stock firmware.

Free Software needs to run on a system that is Free down to its lowest level. We live in a world now where everyone is trying to kill us with things like hardware-based Digital Restrictions Management. We must demand at the very least Free firmware for the hardware and good enough hardware interface specs to actually do something with the firmware (stuff like e.g. the Verilog for the ASIC doesn't matter so much when you have that, but it would be nice to have).

I think the FM broadcast ability of the Neuros is super-cool. Makes it easy to listen to one's collection in the car, or on a boom-box while working, or carry to someone's house and jam on their stereo. Plays oggs, of course.