Slashdot Mirror
Upping The Softmodem Code Bounty -- To $20,000
Alex Pilosov writes: "I've announced a bounty for completion of softmodem code (20k$) on linmodems-discuss list. If this is successfully completed, we'll have a completely universal driver for any kind of winmodem without any proprietary code which result in all sorts of kernel version problems." Here's the full text of the announcement and conditions.
If this trend continues, and we have enough generous donors, we might end up having a whole lot of very interesting stuff out really really soon...
Can't people figure out the following reasons for such a project being interesting ?
- Low cost internet station for places out of reach of xDSL / cable modem connections.
- Viable internet connection for legacy hardware / second hand hardware
- Excellent solution for development countries where xDSL is faar away yet.
The keywords here are LOW and COST.. Did you ever consider that Linux and second hand hardware might be the ultimate combination for places where they don't have as much cash as yourselves ?
d9s
life+universe+everything=42
think laptops...
I have a thinkpad t21, and from what I have read, one of the common linux problems with this laptop is bad modem support. As I use this machine on the road from time to time, I want that modem to work (hotels, friends house etc.) and if it doesn't it will be a deterrent to install linux.
I do think you are right in suposing that many linux fans are early adopters, but what I find interesting is the possibility of more "regular" users switching to linux, because of proper hardware support and thus: ease of use.
-Kraft
Live and let live
You MUST have background in signal processing
Dear Mr. Torvalds,
We could not permit your so-called "operating system" to use GNU license because you do not have proven experience in the operating system design and your background is not sufficient. In order to satisfy our customers,
and maintain high project code quiality, we accept contributions only from candidates who have experience in the particular area and passed interview with some of our managers.
(signed)
Free Software Foundaiton
I'm just wondering if perhaps someone has patented the algorithms used to drive these soft modems. A Free Software implementation of a soft modem driver will thus be in violation of the patent then. As far as I can tell the ITU, the standards body that defines these modem standards, allows what the W3C calls RAND licensing, as they state in patent policy (excerpt):
It's paragraph 2.2 that worries me. If any patents exist on the modem standards implemented by soft modems that are thus RAND-licensable, any GPL implementation is impossible. I believe some of the compression algorithms used in some of the modem standards are already known to be patented, such as the infamous LZW compression algorithm held by Unisys that has caused the huge flap over GIF's a couple of years back.
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
No, you're getting it wrong. The code must not rely on the onboard DSP-chip that some modems hade, rather do all the signal-processing in software. If you don't process the signals, you can't have a modem, duh...
Unarguably required? That's stupid.
Understanding DSP is what is required. Experience helps but some of us are capable of learning new things and being productive out-of-the-box.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
As far as I can tell, this project doesn't solve the problem of winmodem manufacturers not releasing hardware specs. In other words, you'd have a driver that can tell a DAC/ADC driver what to squirt down the line and work out what the stuff that comes back means, but you still wouldn't be able to use the actual winmodem; you'd have to use a DAC/ADC for which you have drivers. This means either buying a supported modem or a separate DAC, or trying to figure out how to drive the winmodem's DAC and ADC directly.
Of course, persuading manufacturers to release one or two port adresses and a little info on how to use them may be easier than getting them to release full Linux drivers or complete DSP specs. Likewise, working out how to access the DAC/ADC on a winmodem is probably easier than trying to figure out its DSP (although the DAC/ADC may be only accessible to the DSP, which may make things hairy).
No serious developer is going to go after a bounty, because you only have a 1/N chance of getting the prize if there are N other contenders. The person who finishes first is going to be the one who cuts the most corners and spends the least amount of time on design and documentation, so you'll end up rewarding the person who can produces the crappiest software to a minimum standard faster than anyone else!
The competitive aspect also makes people keep their work secret, preventing peer review and feedback.
Sheesh, if someone has $20,000 to spend on software development they should just HIRE a skilled person who will get the job done properly. It's not like there's a shortage of skilled software developers at the moment! They don't even have to be a free software developer because if you're hiring them you call the shots and choose whatever license you want.
Not only you are right, but also any communication equipment connected to the phone network must be licensed by the local communications agency. This happens in many countries. Most of them will never bother to go after people connecting linmodems on the phone network, but some countries are very rigid in this control. This licensing, or approvement, must apply to the communication equipment as a whole. You can't license only the hardware part of software modems, since many times is the software that will decide the line levels to be used. (In Lucent winmodems, these levels are selected via AT commands, when you select the country you are in. This is done via software). This process is necessary to avoid people connecting devices to the phone network that could ruin the network.
So, in short, even if we don't worry with the patent issues of v.xx, we still have to worry on licensing the linmodem software, but since free software can always be modified, there will always have a non-approved version of it, which can cause legal problems.
I doubt you can implement those ITU standards without infringing on a couple of patents (at least a few companies will claim infringement as soon as you publish the code).
If you have to pay the lawyers from your $20,000, this doesn't appear to be a fair deal.
I've often thought that it is in many companies interests to find ways to screw over Microsoft, even in ways that are apparently not directly beneficial to them. I've always thought that this is probably one of the main motivating factors behind openoffice.org - it might not generate much profit for Sun, but it has the potential to kick Microsoft where it hurts, as the cream of their profits come from Office. Similarly with IBM's support and nurturing of SUSE, Mandrake and Redhat.
Of course there many be companies that have identified places they want to kick Microsoft but don't want to do it publicly. Take Intel for instance - despite their long-term relationship with Microsoft I'm sure they would prefer to drive sales of their processors by releasing open source developers toolkits that exploit new features they add to their processors. So its in their interest to promote the uptake of Linux, but without risking the wrath of Bill. This is one way they could do it - give bounties via a third party for development that they see as strategic for the wider uptake of Linux.
And not just Intel - there are many other companies that have the motivation to do this type of thing but don't want attention drawn their way.
Perhaps if he placed a deposit with some trusted third party (Mad Dog, Eric Raymond etc) people might be happier to devote the time.
This may not true. When we tested the H8800-1 for FCC part 68 compliance, the test was for the whole system. We had to provide ways for them to access the modem to test both originate and answer modes (though the H8800-1 only answers and never originates). We had to do this, despite the fact that the signals were all generated by the Rockwell chip.
However, the majority of the trouble with FCC part 68 is the surge tests. The basic idea behind these tests is to apply a massive surge on the line which is certain to destroy the modem. The modem is required to fail in a manner where it does not conduct, so it looks like it's on-hook (not in use) to the phone network. This is purely a function of the hardware. The lab we sent the prototypes to did many other tests, but they were all pretty easy to pass (using the rockwell chip).
Reading through these regularity requirement documents is a mind-numbing experience (if you can stay awake). If you're feeling maschoistic, here is the page for requesting the Part 68 technical requirements. If anyone takes the time to actually read and make some sense out of this stuff, please post your informed opinions. Part 68 applies only to the US, so repeat for whatever other countries you're interested in...
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
"so you'll end up rewarding the person who can produces the crappiest software to a minimum standard faster than anyone else! "
Isn't that how most commercial software is created??! - I think that once complete, the software should be vetted by a third party, who can establish if the program is written to pre-agreed standards. If a program that bairly meets the spec, is released then the chances are that the authors wont see a dime.
V.42bis and MNP5 should be optional.
As long as the software is able to properly negotiate no compression with the other modem, requiring Compression adds a substanial amount of work that can be post-poned or have another person work on it.
Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com
If any company wanted to hire contractors or special consultants to do all this work (which seems like couple hundred man hours), the bill would run about 5 times that here in the US. That amount, though seeingly large, is like paying a half-assed programmer for 2 months work, once you consider all the associates business expenses (taxes, facilities, benefits, etc.).
In my estimation, this company is getting the deal of a lifetime. I currently work for a company that is considering buying an enterprise LDAP server (like iPlanet) to the tune of hundreds of thousands (up to millions) of dollars. I am sure if we set up a similar "bounty" to cover extensions to OpenLDAP our ROI would be about 20-to-1. This is basic business to me, and a great step forward. This is a perfect example of open source being a win-win.
----- Refactoring is the reason why man does not mistake himself for a god.
M$ has convinced many hardware makers that M$'s method of code breaking and bloat are the only way to drive new hardware sales.
I think this probably underestimates the sophistication of thinking at hardware manufacturers, and the diversity of the market.
Take, for instance, the 3D computer graphics sector. I am sure Intel was very pleased when Microsoft started to make a big drive to get NT used by companies in the 3D graphics production/rendering market, because they regularly buy lots of boxes. However, I bet they are even happier now that NT/Windows is no longer seen as attractive in this sector, and everyone is moving to Linux. Why? Because now they can add features to their chips that make them more attractive to this sector, and release the code as Open Source to stimulate need and uptake. They tried to do something similar before with Windows, but MS firmly stamped on their efforts.
Except, of course, that a metric fuckload of people do use Linux, and other free or open source software, every day. Hell, you used Slashcode to send your message, and you're using it to read this one now.
And free/open source software has nothing to do with communism.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
> > The reason why nobody uses Linux...
> Except, of course, that a metric fuckload of people do use
> Linux, and other free or open source software, every day.
You literally can't give it away for free, but there's nothing wrong with it? Someone's in denial.
Linux is good for what it does, but it sucks for the AVERAGE USER. You are not probably not an average user. Find one and try to get them to use Linux.
> Hell,
> you used Slashcode to send your message, and
> you're using it to read this one now.
Did I say all Open Source sucks? No. I use the Gimp for windows and...well, it sucks. But there are Open Source projects out there that are good.
What I'm saying is that with proper funds the programs would be better because companies or organizations could actually pay the people who work on it.
> And free/open source software has nothing to do with communism.
Comparing Open Source to the business model is remarkably similar to comparing communism to capitalism.
-All your base are belong to the man.
Darnit guys. Find an average computer user and start talking to the guy. Every time there's a Linux vs Windows debate, everyone on the Linux team tends to start talking about how good the kernel is or whatever.
Who cares how good the kernel is if the UI blows? Or if you can never install the darn thing? Linux has great potential, the only problem is that nobody cares about tweaking a version so that people other than the coders can enjoy it.
"Nobody uses Linux because MS has a monopoly." BS on a stick buddy. People install programs and games on their computers. If Linux didn't blow for home use by average people, more people would be installing it on their computers the same way they install other programs.
> Do you honestly think Linux is any harder to
> use than Windows? You really musn't know a lot
> about Linux. Much simpler and easier to use
> than Windows.
Manually mounting your drives before you use them is easier than automounting. Yep. Oh wait, that problem got fixed...years after it was fixed in windows.
It only took me six hours to install my copy of Linux! Ohayo!
Oh look, the GUI doesn't work...
Cool! By default it's butt ugly!
Oh boy! Oh boy! I have to drop to the command line to do anything remotely usefull!
> But the opposite is not true. Can you name me
> one decent closed-source typesetting engine to
> rival LaTeX? How about a closed-source browser
> to rival Galeon? How about a closed-source
> mailer to rival mutt? Can't be done.
Er...name an open source Photoshop. Open source Word. Open source Excel. Open source Quake3.
And if you say "Staroffice" or "Gimp" I hope a business user or graphics designer smacks you.
> What difference would it make? Linux is good
> enough as it is.
Except that it sucks, of course.
> All that needs to be done is to make transition
> easier, i.e. removing barriers such as MS-
> Office document formats, Ms-only hardware, MS-
> only software etc. The only reason MS is more
> succesful is because it was here first.
All that needs to be done is to find out why Linux sucks and fix the frizzgikin problems.
MS is partially successful because they were there first, but they also find out what the customer wants and gives it to them. The Linux team could learn a lot from them.
> Sorry to disappoint you, but Open Source is
> irrelevent to communism or capitalism.
Except that it's relevant. Capitalism is forced to give the consumer what they want (sort of...). Communism can sit on it's @$$ and wait in bread lines. Microsoft must give the customer more or less what they want, or they will die out. Linux is not bound by that restriction. Also, M$ has enough money to pay it's programmers. If there was open competition in the OS industry we'd see some real innovation.
> I think for absolutely ignorant computer users
> there will be no problems with Unix/KDE. These
> users couldn't install Unix, or Windows, or any
> software. They can click on their webbrowser
> and click OK and read their email and use a
> word processor. Hardware support isn't an issue
> as they can't install hardware anyway. IMO Most
> users are like this and Linux is perfectly
> suited.
Darnit freakin darnit. Find a computer user different than you and TALK TO THE DAM GUY! Not all people who don't want to install Linux are complete idiots. They just don't want to deal with the hassle. Think of it this way: Imaging you buy a car and it stalls as you drive it out. In order to start it up again, you have to press twenty levers in a certain manner. Because of this you're late to work and you get fired. Then the engine explodes. This is what Linux looks like to many normal computer users. Normal computer users don't use the computer because they like fixing problems. They use it to accomplish a goal. The computer is a tool. They don't want the tool to sit there and break, they want it to be transparent so they can do their work.
Suggestion: Talk to:
-a computer newbie.
-a business computer user.
-a graphics designer.
-a gamer.
Find out what they're like. Linux could meet their needs if only the Linux community realized that the needs existed.
> For expert computer users a Unix wins over
> windows for remote administration and
> stability. Windows may win in the future but I
> doubt it.
Unix: better as server/programming.
Windows: better at gaming/newbies/home use.
Macintosh: better at graphics.
With a few changes, Linux could rock at home use.
> What kind of problems are you having with GIMP
> 1.2 for Win32?
The user-interface was designed by either a sadist or a masochist. Or both. Aside from that it's a pretty good program, despite the occaisional glitch and crash.
Note:
The reason why I'm so pissed with Linux is, ironically, because it's so good. It IS an excellent operating system...the only problem is that the people designing it either don't know or don't care about what normal computer users want. Microsoft does. That's why they're kicking Linux's @$$ on the desktop. Having a monopoly doesn't hurt too.
Aside from that, I've been trying to get the GUI working properly for the past two freaking years. I installed mandrake n.n and everything seemed ok...until I saw that by default it couldn't read windows drives. At this point I was just so disgusted at the shortsightedness of whoever designed the darn thing that I installed cygwin under windows and used that to do most of the work. Bleah. At one point in my life I was a Linux zealot...but then I found out what Linux was really like. Now I try to admit it's good points and point out it's flaws. At the current point in time, Linux truly does suck for the average user.
Hint to Linux designers: talk to people who are NOT computer programmers. Talk to newbies. Talk to graphics designers. Talk to gamers. Find out what they want in an operating system. Don't assume that everyone who doesn't use Linux does so because they are at fault. They aren't - Linux is. Don't assume that everyone who hates Linux because they can't get it to work or because it doesn't work they way they expect it to is an idiot. They're not. Whoever designed the thing is an idiot for not designing it properly. And the sooner people admit that, the sooner they'll start fixing the problems. And the sooner Linux will stop sucking.
Hooboy. Look at that karma plummet.
-All your base are belong to the man.