Slashdot Mirror
Open Source at TiVo
CowboyRobot writes "ACM Queue has an article by TiVo co-founder Jim Barton, in which he explains how the company relies on open source technologies to create a closed-source product. A good lesson in how other companies can do the same. From the article: Careful management of our sources to abide by the terms of the GNU General Public License while protecting our proprietary developments is a small price to pay for this benefit."
Maybe it's just MSIE being wierd, but the story appeared in a really small font.
The "printable version" is far easier to read.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
There is a licence difference to consider here. GPL _requires_ the changes be made available in source form if the binary is distributed. BSD licences pretty much allows any company to take code, make proprietary changes to it and doesn't require distribution of those changes.
Most companies, if they can, will use 100% open source to create totally closed-source solutions. The exceptions being the 100% microsoft shops, and those guy have all their profits eaten up by licenses, and "of course" they won't open source anything because the licenses restrict that they "can't". (I at one time worked as an ASP programmer and am happily a three-years now PHP programmer).
The old point was, pay for a product, you pay for support; however, this is not true anymore (just try and call MS technical support without having a license you pay $1000 for).. But something like MySQL or PHP you can easily and quickly get help in any forum..
But I digress.. the point is, most "smart" companies do this to keep costs down.
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
TiVo runs a modified version of Linux, which is protected by the GPL. Therefore, legally they have always been required to release their source.
TiVo has distributed source code for the version of the Linux kernel included in the devices for as long as I can remember.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I don't know why we let them get away with it all this time. For those who don't know, TiVo runs a modified version of Linux, which is protected by the GPL. Therefore, legally they have always been required to release their source. I guess the Slashdot crowd has always let them slide because they're jizzing their tighty whities over being able to watch 20 hours of Simpson's episodes in an afternoon. If we don't look out for our rights, no one will. Let's give 'em hell.
What are you talking about?
If you visit kernel.org you'll find the following license (the COPYING file) in /pub/linux/kernel.
It is the GPL v2 with the following preamble:
NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".
Also note that the GPL below is copyrighted by the Free Software
Foundation, but the instance of code that it refers to (the linux
kernel) is copyrighted by me and others who actually wrote it.
Linus Torvalds
Doesn't seem to be anything other than user level code mentioned here, I guess we must assume that TiVo's modifications are user level.
John.
Real Estate. The local MLS (Multiple Listing Service) is web based and for some god aweful reason they think it's a good idea to make the main navigation menu require IE 5.x or better. So if I ever want to see what is on the market or input a listing i need to do so with windows. On top of that our major contact management and scheduling program (www.topproduceronlin.com) requires Windows and Internet Explorer. Tried it on Linux and Apple platforms with no luck. I myself have developed some applications using a universal application like PHP, but I don't have the time to devote to development of solutions expecially when the most important tool I use I have no control over development besides bitching and complaining. I'd say 98% of people in the Real Estate industry know nothing aside from Windows, and those whom do are stuck because of that market share :(
Having signed for more than my fair share of VA Linux hardware deliveries, I can confirm that they did, indeeed, have their own distribution (in the loosest sense).
The distro was based off of RedHat, carried the same revision numbers as RedHat, but came on VA-labeled media with VA-specific software for server administration.
% cat
VA Linux Release 6.2.4 02/21/01
I said it in 1996, I'll say it again:
"Keep the tools open and free: Make your money from developing applications."
Mr. Butler and company have done well following this philosophy.
Great article too.
Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
Have you tried Internet Explorer on Wine? This site has a large list of instructions on how to get different "windows only" applications running with Wine (including IE).
I just had blazing success with Paltalk. The harder it is for you to use Linux in your niche, the more significant an accompolishment it will be when you are finally able to go 100% Windows free.
Best of luck!
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
The article gets some concepts profoundly wrong when it comes to discussing licensing (which is at the heart of the article). These items may confuse readers not already familiar with copyright law and the Free Software community.
Toward the bottom of the article "Public domain soft-ware [sic]" is mentioned and the "X Window System and BSD operating system" are cited as "notable" examples. Then the article mentions a "license limitation" that is only true for the old BSD license. This clearly illustrates the author is confused about what the public domain is and that works cannot be both licensed (as these examples are, under different but largely similar licenses) and in the public domain. Placing a work in the public domain is not a license, no matter how liberal the license's terms may be. Putting a work into the public domain is the irrevocable abdication of all copyright power over the work.
The terms "Linux" and "GNU/Linux" are used interchangeably, as if they both refer to the same thing (early in the article "Linux" is meant to refer to an operating system, later on "GNU/Linux" refers to an operating system). The GNU Project asks (and simple fairness requires) that we give GNU a fair share of the credit for their work in the GNU/Linux operating system. Technical precision requires us to distinguish between the Linux kernel and a GNU/Linux operating system. To these ends, the GNU Project publishes a FAQ on the issue of naming GNU/Linux, and an older essay.
Finally, just to be clear, the Open Source and Free Software movements are not the same. They have different philosophies, they began at different times, they were started by different people, and they speak to different audiences. The GNU Project's essay on the two movements and their social implications is helpful.
Digital Citizen
Tivo uses modules and signatures to protect their IP.
binary modules are allowed; and by using a boot PROM which verifies the kernel has a valid signature they can be sure the kernel is approved by them. (Series 2 units with the latest kernels are extreemly difficult to hack in the same way as the first units.).
Linus at some point specificly mentioned that doing a signature check was outside of the scope of the Linux kernel copyright and GPL license. So Tivo is on the up-and-up. Even if it upsets some people.
Go to this site and install the Mozilla evangelism sidebar. Set your user agent string to something IE5ish. I'll bet that a recent Mozilla will work just fine. After all, the sign says ``IE5 or better''!
I've done this on several IE-only sites, and had great results.
See what I've been reading.
actually, you only owe $32...SCO wants to charge $32 per device using embedded Linux. Surely you cannot count a TiVo Series2 system as an actual computer that requires a $699 IP license...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*