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."
>in which he explains how the company relies on open >source technologies to create a closed-source product ... but haven't Microsoft been doing this for years with the BSD source code?
--
Craig
Quick, someone erase this article, BEFORE SCO SEES IT! (yes, its a joke)
"Sorry Im not more user-friendly."
I applaud Tivo for showing such appreciation for open source publically. As more and more companies hail the benifits of open source we might see even more developers do so, both lowering development costs and supporting more platforms. Both which are good for consumers. I myself am wedged so far into Microsoft territory that I cannot budge and every application we use for our industry is 100% Microsoft product requirements, whether it be windows or internet explorer. Hopefully continued publicity like this will improve the knowledge of alternative solutions.
Maybe now they'll sue the people who wrote the code they used!
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
Why do they have any incentive to be "careful" about their use of open-source? Why not just paste it into your proprietary, closed-source application? It's closed-source, so the chances that anyone finds out are slim to nil. Of course, you have to maintain that as the company line...
Indeed, given the "business ethics? we've heard of 'em" nature of business these days, carefully shepherding one's source code to respect open-source rights is a losing value proposition. It takes resources - time, employees' attention, assignment of responsibility, meetings - while helping the company avoid a terrifically small chance of a lawsuit. Not the *right* thing to do, by any means, but probably the *customary* thing to do.
I've been wondering quite a lot recently just how much respect closed-source developers typically afford to open-source code. I think the answer is a dirty little secret of the software biz.
- David Stein
Computer over. Virus = very yes.
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
It's true that Microsoft has been using non-copylefted open source code for years, but it's a greater accomplishment to segregate copylefted programs from proprietary programs.
Will I retire or break 10K?
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?
You see, in web design, the goal is to make your type as small as possible.
CSS provides an EM unit, which one could use to display text in the user's font size of choice, but this is considered bad design.
For an example of extremely good design, see my website, which I will reproduce here to avoide slashdotting:
.
Just look at all that information crammed into such a small area!
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
was jsut browsing though dishnetwork.com and saw that they offer the software(minus some prop. stuff) fro thier PVR model
http://208.45.37.181/
selling hardware that forces you to pay monthly fees for unnecessary service, and leaving you with a useless piece of garbage when they finally die
I believe that TiVo has stated that if they do go out of business, they'll open the scheduling code so that users aren't left with useless pieces of garbage.
"My God...It's full of ads!" -Fry, about the Internet, Futurama
Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
rather than sending jobs to india, lowering TCO is the way to go. as more companies--ie, ernie ball and now tivo--hail the benefits of open source the movement gains momenteum. eventually there will be a[nother] tech revolution......
bring it on.
!(^((ri)|(mp))aa$)
You are aware that there's a lifetime-service option, aren't you? I figure I got my money's worth out of that a year or so ago. If TiVo does go tango-uniform at some point, there are ways to keep the machine going without having it "phone home"...it's what TiVo owners in Canada and Australia are already doing.
(Yes, IHBT. BFD.)
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Can anyone tell me... If they are going to create a closed-source product, why did they go the Linux route, instead of using (Free/Net/Open)BSD?
I am at a real loss to tell what the advantage is... In a non-embedded environment, it's reasonable, because you want to support the greatest ammount of hardware as possible. But with an embedded system, they only need support for one TV-capture card, one video card, one network card, etc. They aren't using any stock Linux software, it's all custom.
In fact, the things they say were needed in the article, (performance, stability, good vm) are unarguable better in the BSDs.
So why do they use Linux? Not trying to troll, just wondering what advantage it really has in such an embedded system.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
My TivO -- One more machine I better make sure I write that $699.00 check to SCO for.
Damn there goes next weeks lunch money.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
"Between their broken business model (selling hardware that forces you to pay monthly fees for unnecessary service, and leaving you with a useless piece of garbage when they finally die), and cable and satellite providers coming up with PVR hardware for free plus a monthly fee that's cheaper than TIVOs, I'm surprised they still exist."
They provide a kick ass service and you're surprised they still exist?
"Derp de derp."
I think it is interesting that TiVo says they pay a lot of attention to the security of the device. That is true now, but with the first TiVo devices, getting a BASH prompt on the device turned out to be relatively easy. On boot a menu was available on the serial port with a hardcoded password. Using that password you could make all kinds of changes to the way the machine started up.
He also metions talks about people getting around using the service. For years, the TiVo hacking community has known how to partially emulate the service by creating slice files and manually loading them onto the device. Recently hackers have figured out how to get an unmodified TiVo to use a service emulator. What's interesting about these development efforts is that they are not putting TiVo out of business.
In the article, he makes no mention of the goodwill that TiVo has fostered with their users, even their hackers. Soon after TiVo was created, Richard Bullwinkle, their former "Chief Evangelist" started talking to people on bulletin boards. He was always very helpful and forthcoming, with only minor exceptions. He wouldn't talk about bypassing the TiVo service and he wouldn't talk about extracting video from the device. If you didn't talk about those things, he was perfectly happy to help out. Although TiVo was in business to make money through their service, they didn't screw over people who didn't want to subscribe. That's such a treat from a for-profit company. Imagine Microsoft, who also sells their set-top device at a loss, treating customers who don't want to use theirs for gaming without hostility.
When Andrew Tridgell, (the same guy who created Samba and rsync) figured out how to create TiVo slice files so he could use the machine in Australia, it was probably this goodwill which made him choose to not release the info to the general public. Instead, it remained a closely guarded secret.
Today, years later, the people who have followed in Tridge's footsteps, have refused to destroy TiVo's revenue stream. They have been very careful to try to make sure that only people who can't get TiVo service in their area are allowed to get around it.
I think the goodwill that TiVo has is partly because of their general attitude towards their customers (and towards the hacker community) and partly the fact they used open-source software, and followed the license requirements. And, it is this, not their security measures, which have ensured that they've maintained a revenue stream -- despite using the "razor and razor blades" pricing model.
I just wish Mr. Barton hadn't used a loaded term "service theft" to describe people who are using their TiVos without subscribing to the service. That term would be appropriate if people were downloading TiVo data without having a subscription, but not people who are simply choosing not to subscribe and are finding alternatives.
I'm not RMS, nor do I speak for him, the FSF, or any of the Linux kernel copyright holders. However, you appear to misunderstand a significant point about the development of the GNU Project and GNU/Linux in particular. There's nothing foolish about requiring compliance with the generous GNU General Public License, particularly nothing foolish about insisting that people cooperate in the commons the GNU GPL builds for us all. Nobody is more important than anyone else in this partnership (including Tivo). It is Tivo's job, not ours, to find a way to make money with GPL-covered programs if that is their desire.
Perhaps you aren't aware that the GNU Project (and the continued development of the GNU/Linux operating system in particular) is not about achieving mere popularity at the expense of user's freedom to share and modify. From this essay:
And this essay:
Digital Citizen
>> "13$ a month is more than fair to watch tv on their own schedule, as opposed to having to sit down at prime time"
Gee, I've been doing that with my VCR since 1984.
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
" The fact that it requires service destroys any value. "
Right.
"Derp de derp."
More on point:
MS has been talking about getting into computerized TV for, I dunno, at least six years. Yeah, I remember them talking about it in 1997. Started with thoughts of interactive TV - embedding HTML in the portion of a TV broadcast signal that carries hearing-impaired subtitles. But they couldn't find any killer app for that package, so it got scrapped.
But now we have the whole Tablet PC thing. The tablet is a commercial flop (not really MS's fault; the technology's just not there yet - e.g., battery life) - but profit, actually, wasn't its prime goal. Tablet PC is a proving-ground that Windows XP and Windows CE can overlap into something called Windows Media Center. It's been a successful push, so expect to see Windows trying to take a more central role in your home theater setup in the near future.
Further evidence: Windows Media Player.
Look at how much attention MS has placed on WMP. WMP is free and has no commercial value to Microsoft; and yet it's heavily supported. WMP version 9, people. That's impressive, for a free product made by a rabidly for-profit company.
Now - what's the point of that? MS is taking the software world from the core outward - so it loves owning the heart of the market. Look at history:
The company's past actions reveal its intentions. Tomorrow's home theater systems will feature streaming media, PVR-time-shifting, adaptive algorithms for predicting users' viewing preferences... in short, it needs lots of software at its core. Microsoft intends to occupy that spot, and is going in with guns blazing.
- David Stein
Computer over. Virus = very yes.