Anonymous Will Award $200,000 for Xbox Linux

An anonymous reader writes: "The X-box Linux Project at Sourceforge reports today that an anonymous donor will award nearly a quarter of a million dollars to the individuals responsible for the completion of a two-phased effort to run Linux on the Xbox. One can't help but wonder if this will help or hurt the community. On one hand, it is likely to generate additional interest in the project, on the other, some people may be less inclinded to share their discoveries with money on the line. Then again, getting both Money and Glory sounds pretty good."

Comments

marketing lesson

[lingqi]

nearly a quarter of a million dollars

sigh... i guess 1/5 of a million dollars just don't have that "zing" or "cha-chin!" to it...
hell... this is why we have enron scandals... 50 grand short and we are calling it "nearly"

Re:It's all a plot...

[kwishot]

Microsoft takes a monetary hit on each Xbox sold ($150+ I believe ?), so that would be a really bad idea, because people would be buying them without the intention of using them for games, but rather for porting linux. If people don't buy the games, Microsoft doesn't make back the money it lost on the unit.
I would guess that it's not Bill Gates (at least not for the reasons you gave)
-kwishot

Odds on whether they'll pay?

[Wanker]

I'd like to see that cash in escrow before I believed anything this "anonymous" donor said.

Is Microsoft Behind This?

[MBCook]

So far I've seen comments suggesting Larry Ellison and such, but what about this: could M$ themselves be behind this? Here's my theory:

• Item: xbox sales have been falling and M$ is losing something like $125 per box (ouch).
• Significance: There are alot of people out there who would like to help with this and now with this prize, they are probably more likely. This could spurr xbox sales (a little bit). Even if they don't succede, they may now buy games.

• Item: It's not in the interest of MS to have modchipped xboxes become popular, because that would allow piracy easier. And the people who would want to run Linux on their xbox are some of the most likely to have many of the tools they'd need (DVD-R drive, broadband, etc).
• Significance: Note that to get the full money, you have to make a copy of Linux that will run on an UNMODIFIED BOX. This would spurr sales, and give them a bigger installed base, but would still MAKR PIRACY HARD because there is no modchip. If Linux was put on the xbox, this would probably be the ideal case for MS.

• Item: Now with a prize, this likely won't take terribly long, it will definatly speed things up. That's free press for MS if it get's hacked (and they don't act like idiots about this which they wouldn't if they are posting the prize $$$).
• Significance: While chalenging hackers to port Linux to the PS/2 would have been very hard because of it's architecture, the xbox is made of mostly PC innards. Compilers and such are easily available. Hackers would already know about the CPU, hard drive, etc. inside out, and the grpahics chip/etc couldn't be too far from an nForce, etc.

• Item: Even if many xboxes get sold to put Linux on, it's still a good thing for MS.
• Significance: Not only would MS be able to claim a more significant install base to potential developers, but it would also allow them to buy the parts for the xbox cheaper and therefor lower their cost, improving their profitability (or as things are now, CREATING profitability).

This is just some speculation on my part. But let's face it, it does make a little sense.

Re:M$ will love this

[Fat Casper]

yup, you can be sure that games released for the xbox in the future will not run on modded boxen.

If you mod the xbox to run Linux, you're doing it because MS loses money on the hardware. Buying the games that let them make their money back isn't really on your List of Things To Do Today.

This sounds like a federal program; if MS subsidizes the purchase of your new (Linu)Xbox, then you'll subsidize their silly business plan?

Oh for crying out loud.

[dmaxwell]

THIS again? I've got karma to burn so why not. He who writes the code chooses the license. Get over it. Don't like GPLed code? Don't use it. There are strings attached to commercial SDKs and libraries that are far more obnoxious than the GPL. And I don't see you charging any of Microsoft's windmills.

Most of us here are fully capable of seeing when the GPL is appropriate and when it isn't. For that matter, many of us don't give a crap about RMS' polemics either. The GPL is an often useful tool. Yes it is for some people. Get over it. The last time I checked, I didn't start hemorraging internally the last time I fired up a shell linked against readline. So much for the viral thing.

And no whinging about how it hurts somebody's development business. That is sooo annoying. Any idiot who can't be bothered to read COPYING should be canned anyway. You want the functionality of some GPLed code? Don't like the terms? Tough. Find or write a replacement. This is no worse than the terms on the commercial code you seem so concerned about.

Oh yeah, in case anybody missed it. Not all GPLed code is owned or controlled by the FSF. The GPL lends itself to agendas other than theirs. So spare us the stuff about RMS' integrity or lack thereof. It's a non-issue when one chooses a licence whose properties are certainly well understood by now.

As for that hurt coming to Linux you're so pleased about, do you think that if Microsoft somehow succeeds in driving a stake through Linux' heart that it will cause a migration to BSD code? I doubt it. Once Microsoft scavenges all of the BSD code they have a use for, that development model will be targeted next. That's right. Once target numero uno is taken out (if they can that is), they will come for BSD. Better watch out for the frag damage. Sheesh! RMS is justifiably a target of derision. You don't have to be as well.

Oh yeah, the main point of all this. He who writes the code chooses the license. Licences are merely tools. Can we expect polemics against chainsaws just becuase some psychotics like the mess they can make?

Re:legal expenses

[jfunk]

From the page:

Everything done on this project is for the sole purpose of writing interoperable software under Sect. 1201 (f) Reverse Engineering exception of the DMCA.

Furthermore, these guys are in Germany, not the US.

This is the third time I quoted from the page, and I did it the first time entirely to encourage reading before writing.

Maybe I was too subtle...