Slashdot Mirror


$2,000 Bounty For Open Source Xbox Kinect Drivers

ptorrone writes "Open source hardware company Adafruit Industries is offering a $2,000 bounty for the first person or group to upload driver code and examples under an open source license to GitHub for the Xbox Kinect released yesterday. The Kinect sensor outputs video at a frame rate of 30Hz, with the RGB video stream at 32-bit color VGA resolution (640×480 pixels), and the monochrome video stream used for depth sensing at 16-bit QVGA resolution (320×240 pixels with 65,536 levels of sensitivity). The open hardware group would like to see this camera used for education, robotics and fun outside the Xbox." The bounty was originally $1,000, but Microsoft's dour response induced Adafruit to double it. ("With Kinect, Microsoft built in numerous hardware and software safeguards designed to reduce the chances of product tampering. Microsoft will continue to make advances in these types of safeguards and work closely with law enforcement and product safety groups to keep Kinect tamper-resistant.") In addition, the Xbox 360 dashboard update that preceded Kinect's launch contains upgraded anti-piracy restrictions.

218 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. Is reverse engineering still legal ? by JonySuede · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is reverse engineering for interoperability purpose still legal ?

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    1. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by hedwards · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Depends how you do it. It's oddly ironic how now when it hurts MS they don't think reverse engineering is such a good idea. Especially since they made most of their money based upon IBM clones.

      Additionally, I like how they're claiming that this has something to do with product tampering.

    2. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Quantus347 · · Score: 1

      Well, in this case I'd think it would fall in the same category as jail-breaking your ipod/pad/phone. There is no theft, piracy, resale, or actual profit involved.

      Personally, I dont see why Microsoft would want to block it, considering all the mileage Nintendo got from the various educational and/or open-source wii-mote projects in the past.

      --
      Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
    3. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Yes, unless the technology contains any form of encryption or obfuscation, then it falls under the DMCA and is illegal.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    4. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by ByOhTek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Aye. A Kinect would be a great tool/controller for a computer.

      Then again, maybe that's it - they don't want the computer to have one more way to compete with the 360.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    5. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by kimvette · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wrong.

      Reverse engineering (section 1201(f)). This exception permits
      circumvention, and the development of technological means for such
      circumvention, by a person who has lawfully obtained a right to use a
      copy of a computer program for the sole purpose of identifying and
      analyzing elements of the program necessary to achieve interoperability
      with other programs, to the extent that such acts are permitted under
      copyright law.

      Source: http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    6. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by One+Louder · · Score: 1
      From the DMCA:

      (2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that— A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; M

      How is an image taken by this device a "protected work"? Is MS claiming to own the copyright on the images captured with this device?

    7. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by camperdave · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Did you miss the "to the extent that such acts are permitted under copyright law" clause in that citation?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    8. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by mikael_j · · Score: 4, Informative

      The BIOS wasn't, it was reverse engineered by clone makers.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    9. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They'll want it when it's ready, nicely integrated and a must-have feature of Win8.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    10. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      How is an image taken by this device a "protected work"? Is MS claiming to own the copyright on the images captured with this device?

      What? No. The image is not the interesting part, the conversion of the image to control data is the interesting part.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    11. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      No, it's the access controls that are the protected work. Microsoft effectively came out and said so in their response.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    12. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      http://www.joystiq.com/2010/11/04/kinect-teardown-two-cameras-four-microphones-12-watts-of-powe/

      "Something with two cameras and 4 microphones is the last thing from Microsoft I would allow in my house"

      Spyware?

    13. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Funny

      Winston, Inner Party members can turn it off - those propriety dictates that this be for no more than half-hour intervals.

      Signed, O'Brien.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    14. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by One+Louder · · Score: 1

      However, assuming someone decodes the format and meaning of the control data produced by conversion of the image, that data is not covered by copyright, let alone Microsoft's, and therefore not a protected work, and thus not covered by the DMCA. The code that does the conversion is protected, but not the data it inputs and outputs.

    15. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Exactly, which is why I can't see how the DMCA would apply to this.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    16. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by vux984 · · Score: 1, Troll

      Ironically Microsoft out of all of the companies out there right now is the MOST trustworthy.

      Microsoft just wants me to pay for it. They are annoying in the degree they go to make sure its paid for but for the most part if you bought it they're cool. You are still the customer when it comes to Microsoft.

      Apple? They want to sell things too, but they are also control freaks that would want to make sure you are using it the way they want you to.

      Google? They want to monitor and record everything I do and then sell that information to generate advertising revenue. Giving them a camera into your home and microphone.... "We saw you had trouble getting it up last night. Cialis can help with that..."

      I kid of course, but in a lot of respects I really am finding that Microsoft is becoming the least objectionable option out there. They haven't really changed, but they just want my money -- I can live with that. They aren't really interested in controlling my life or recording it and selling it to the highest bidder.

    17. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      Microsoft controls my MacBook?

      Who knew?

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    18. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      "reverse engineering for interoperability" is hacker-speak for tampering, right? Well, if tampering isn't illegal, it certainly should be! I don't want to buy a kinect and find out it doesn't work (or does something bad) because a hacker tampered with it!!!!11

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    19. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      The funny part is that this DOESN'T hurt Microsoft at all. If anything it would encourage more people to buy the kinekt (or whatever stupid ass name they gave it).
      The layman buys the device and doesn't care/know that they can use it in other applications. The geek buys it BECAUSE they can use it in other applications. There's no downside to Microsoft's profit here.... at all.

      Microsoft is just making the assumption that any changes hurt their revenue stream because they're too fucking stupid to think more than 10 seconds in front of their face.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    20. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 1

      The format used to encode a data stream isn't copyrightable? I'll easily grant you that user-generated data wouldn't be copyrightable by MS (eg the image of you jumping around), but the encoded stream would be if it used a proprietary, closed format, wouldn't it? If so, it' might break the US's DMCA just to try to read the data stream, no?

    21. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by HarvardAce · · Score: 1

      The funny part is that this DOESN'T hurt Microsoft at all. If anything it would encourage more people to buy the kinekt (or whatever stupid ass name they gave it). The layman buys the device and doesn't care/know that they can use it in other applications. The geek buys it BECAUSE they can use it in other applications. There's no downside to Microsoft's profit here.... at all.

      You are assuming that they are not selling the Kinect at a loss, subsidized by selling games that work with the hardware. I have no idea whether they are or not, but given Microsoft's history, I wouldn't make that assumption.

      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
    22. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by HazMathew · · Score: 1

      It's always been open.

    23. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Good thing the reverse engineering isn't being done on music DRM, otherwise I might agree with the person who modded you insightful.

    24. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      You can't copyright a file format. You may be able to patent it, though.

    25. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by BLKMGK · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design#Examples

      Not so fast, you might want to read up on a bit of history.

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    26. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by bdenton42 · · Score: 1

      I don't know about this particular piece of hardware, but generally video game hardware is sold at a loss which is eventually made up by software sales. If the Kinect is repurposed and is used by software which doesn't give Microsoft a cut (e.g. a PC or Mac application) then they would probably lose money.

    27. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by hawguy · · Score: 1

      IS MS's privacy policy so different from Google that it precludes them from selling my data? I always thought the difference between the two is that you *know* that Google is watching your emails, but MS isn't so overt about it.

      I can't believe that MS would not be pursuing that same revenue stream.

    28. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by MrMacman2u · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Microsoft controls my Ubuntu install?

      Who knew?

      --
      This signature is lame.
    29. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Admiral_Grinder · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but then again, Microsoft doesn't have to do it themselves. With their track record, it won't be long before the botnet is streaming you.....(might be the next 'In Soviet Russia' joke)

    30. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by samjam · · Score: 1

      they don't want to tamper with YOUR kinect, they want to tamper with THEIR kinect

    31. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by sznupi · · Score: 1
      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    32. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Optic7 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. That's how Compaq came to prominence - it made the first 100% IBM PC compatible computer by reverse engineering the BIOS. A sewing-machine sized portable computer!

      A little bit of the history is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_compatible

    33. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Considering some moderately decent processing and memory on the Kinect, but miniscule amount of flash, it appears the code is loaded each time from the console...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    34. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Why don't they have as much data?

      They've got millions of hotmail users, a large ad network centered on Bing that also spans many high volume sites like Facebook, Wall Street Journal, etc.

      Even if their search engine and email market share is a fraction of Google's, if you use their services, MS is still collecting your data.

    35. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They've got millions of hotmail users, a large ad network centered on Bing that also spans many high volume sites like Facebook, Wall Street Journal, etc.

      Google search backs 65% of US search. (Microsoft is pushing 11%.)

      Google controls 69%+ of the online advertising market.

      Microsoft doesn't have a copy of all your Microsoft Office documents. Google has a copy of all your googledocs documents.

      Google analytics infests more internet sites than i can count. Microsoft only gets analytics data for their own properties.

      if you use their services, MS is still collecting your data.

      Google gets *tons* of data on you even if you don't use there services thanks to adwords/advertising and google analytics.

      Microsoft's "large ad network" is just a little slice of the advertising market.

      Sure microsoft collects user data, but they aren't even in the same league.

    36. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the real irony is that Microsoft doesn't get any data collected by these devices. It remains the private data of the owner of the device.

    37. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

      Microsoft controls my stuffed otter?

      Who knew?

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    38. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by spauldo · · Score: 1

      My laptop has a camera?

      Who knew?

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    39. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by cynyr · · Score: 1

      what copyright? the picture on my wall it can see? if it spits out data it spits out data. What I do with the data MY device generates is my own damn business, and I would think my first amendment right lets me talk about it.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    40. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      Give it time

      At first we'll just start to see iMac like desktops but with restrictions and os akin to the iPad, because customers like the 'simplicity' etc.

      Then their mac pro line sales will shrink, and xcode etc will be available for these new restricted desktops (which will be cheaper than their mac pro cousins) however for a significant fee.

      Then once the sales of the mac pro line is more or less defunct like what these xserves are, they can discontinue them with only a few people making such a fuss.

      While there are many things that could stop this, you must admit it is in apples own interest to do it, and it does make sense. You would have to pay to be able to develop for your own devices, and the resulting binaries would only work on your device unless you get it approved through the app store.

    41. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      A hardware interface can have copyright protections? this is news to me, we'll have to get on to all those people who write open source drivers without specs and tell them they can't because the hardware is copyrighted /sarcasm

      Reverse engineering is legal, catch is of course almost anything can be deemed illegal when you face a company that is willing to spend billions on lawyers.

    42. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Yes, so long as the driver's function is not to circumvent a copy protection mechanism. For example, the purpose of an Xbox Kinect driver would be to allow you to use the Kinect device to homebrew Linux Xbox installs or to PC's, not to circumvent the copy protection MS may have put on their firmware.

      It can be tricky in some cases, but this one should be fine. As long as you aren't able to copy the firmware when it is finished the drivers should be legit. Reverse engineering in general is still perfectly legal.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    43. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      That's because it isn't Microsoft's business to collect data, but it definitely is Google's business.

      The collect it, but it's generally related to somehow improving how many products they can sell you - which often turns into producing more/better products for you to buy. They need to know a lot less to do this than Google does to tailor adds to your every need (and thereby maximize the success rate for their advertisers), and the data MS needs to collect is generally more mundane. They also allow you to opt out every single time, except for perhaps searches.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    44. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by waferhead · · Score: 1

      Aye. A Kinect would be a great tool/controller for a computer.

      Then again, maybe that's it - they don't want the computer to have one more way to compete with the 360.

      Aye. A Kinect would be a great tool/controller for a computer.

      Then again, maybe that's it - they don't want the computer to have one more way to compete with the 360.

      No, it may mean MS is subsidizing the units (at least initially) and doesn't want to lose money on extra sales that aren't linked to an XBox.

    45. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Which was precisely my point. Microsoft is far more respecting of your privacy. They do collect some data, and they run a search engine and do some advertising...but scope and reach is much smaller.

      And primarily their business is to make and sell software. With most of their products/platforms. You are the customer being served in exchange for money.

      With google you are almost always the product being served up to advertisers.

    46. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Peeteriz · · Score: 1

      Quite likely that's the point.

      Though in any case that's just their reason to be sad about it, not their legal or moral right to prevent it.

    47. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      oblig

      snarky pedantic comment about the meaning of irony, you're doing it wrong, etc even though irony is an incredibly flexible word.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    48. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 1

      D'oh! Thanks for the reminder!

    49. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      No, I did not. Unless they are copy & pasting code in a product for distribution they are not violating copyright, therefore it would be permitted under copyright law.

      The purest approach to avoid potential liability is to have one team reverse engineer it and write up an architectural document (and copying API class names and function names is not violating copyright btw) and then hand that over to a development team who in turn develops the interoperating or even competing product - but separate teams are not necessary. It's just a really great method because it removes not just the the temptation but also the ability to infringe upon copyright.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    50. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Microsoft controls my stuffed otter?

      Who knew?

      Microsoft controls my stuffed beaver?

    51. Re:Is reverse engineering still legal ? by ischorr · · Score: 1

      There just wouldn't be as many PCs. Something else would have emerged. Nothing that exists today, I'd say. Maybe better, maybe worse.

  2. Is there cryptographic authentication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Presumably there is cryptographic authentication here that needs to be broken. Sounds like some student's differential power analysis school project is about to get a bit more lucrative... and legally risky...

  3. Kinect for Robotics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    This would actually be excellent for robotics! Those specs are about on par with Point Grey's Bumblebee2 stereoscopic camera (the cheapest standalone stereoscopic camera for robotics), which retails at about $3,000! It would be great to be able to make cheap robots with that kind of stereoscopic imaging power.

    1. Re:Kinect for Robotics by BlueRaja · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course if this happened, sales of Kinect sensors would go up without sales of Kinect video games going up... and since MS is actually *losing* money on these sensors, suddenly the price of Kinect sensors would go up...

    2. Re:Kinect for Robotics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft profits on every sensor sold. www.gamesmantra.com/kinect-will-be-profitable-from-launch.htm

    3. Re:Kinect for Robotics by BlueRaja · · Score: 5, Informative

      What Microsoft said was they are "confident that every unit of Kinect sold to gamers will generate profit." That doesn't mean they are making a profit on each unit.

  4. Tampering by Shotgun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tamper-resistant? You mean, they're trying to stop me from using it the way I choose. Like how the screwdriver manufacturers add elements to the steel to make it so that I can't sharpen the end and make a pin-punch from it? Jeeesh!! What arrogance.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    1. Re:Tampering by robot256 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think the screwdriver manufacturers are worried about you making a pin-punch from it. I think they're worried about their screwdriver breaking. If you've ever had the tip on a screwdriver crack off you know what I'm talking about.

    2. Re:Tampering by countSudoku() · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And what a bad choice of language, not surprisingly from a MS spokesweasel. "Tamper-resistant" comes from the time when people were adding poison and other bad ingredients to Tylenol and other products which lacked the little foil "tamper-proof" seal on the package. Tamper-resistant should be protecting ME from something BAD, and NOT for assholes to lock down my new device to their RROD shitbox. Using this fucking hardware any goddamn way we see fit, even if it makes no sense, is what I demand. Crack open that fucking thing and fuck Microsoft in their stupid asses with a Sony Move stick!

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
    3. Re:Tampering by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Dunno. I have ex-screwdrivers that were handed down from my father which could be sharpened after they broke to punches. Today, I've broken more "high-quality" screwdrivers than I can shake my hands at, at least they have lifetime warranties on them. So I don't feel so bad getting a replacement for nothing.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:Tampering by name_already_taken · · Score: 1

      Using this fucking hardware any goddamn way we see fit, even if it makes no sense, is what I demand. Crack open that fucking thing and fuck Microsoft in their stupid asses with a Sony Move stick!

      You know somewhere in North Hollywood, they're making that porno right now.

      Of course, it'll be gay porn, but you weren't specific enough (assuming that's not what you're looking for, which I could be totally wrong about).

      --
      Putting moderation advice in your .sig lowers your karma!
    5. Re:Tampering by robot256 · · Score: 1

      Not that I don't believe you (it's happened to me too when using them correctly), but you don't happen to use them for chisels and crowbars a lot, do you?

    6. Re:Tampering by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      I suspect that you're trolling, but on the off chance that you're just a moron that doesn't know how to use a screwdriver, let me explain.

      You likely can't sharped the end because it's a somewhat more brittle material, because it's a harder material. They do this so that you can drive screws without having the tip wear off. Also, why the hell are you making screwdrivers into punches? GO BUY A PUNCH! They cost about $5 it'll last longer than a screwdriver-punch anyway.

      I also suspect you one of the people that complains about the poor quality of crescent wrenches after using them as a hammer.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    7. Re:Tampering by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      oh please. everyone knows that you don't own anything that is made by microsoft if YOU buy it. now owning something made by microsoft that someone else paid for; well, that is a different story. :P

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    8. Re:Tampering by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Using this fucking hardware any goddamn way we see fit, even if it makes no sense, is what I demand.

      Then don't buy it. Why support them if you disagree with what they're doing?

    9. Re:Tampering by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      listen, i'm all for bashing MS when its merited, but calling Bill Gates 'sterile and clueless' is just all kinds of inaccurate, hes got kids and pretty remarkable business sense.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    10. Re:Tampering by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine how bad it would be if someone developed an exploit that was "stealing" images from inside people's houses?

      When can we expect the schools systems to start passing these out?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  5. Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement?!? by noidentity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But Microsoft isn't taking kindly to the bounty offer. "Microsoft does not condone the modification of its products,"

    Once you sell one to me, it's my product, morons.

    With Kinect, Microsoft built in numerous hardware and software safeguards designed to reduce the chances of product tampering. Microsoft will continue to make advances in these types of safeguards and work closely with law enforcement and product safety groups to keep Kinect tamper-resistant.

    What the hell, are these X-ray machines or something with radioactive material in them that would sicken the user if he opened it up?!? I had better be sure thisn't some strange dream.

  6. Ah the good old days by Nursie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whatever happened to people selling devices to other people, so they could use them as they see fit?

    Not providing drivers fro other systems, fine, whatever you like, not your responsibility. Working with law enforcement to prevent 'product tampering?

    Screw you MS, really.

    1. Re:Ah the good old days by Bourdain · · Score: 1

      I bet the "working with law enforcement part" is not even true

    2. Re:Ah the good old days by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      People use product in an unintended manner and get hurt. Then they sue.

      Not that I think it is right, but companies have to cover their ass very carefully these days.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    3. Re:Ah the good old days by psithurism · · Score: 1

      I bet the "working with law enforcement part" is not even true

      How about "...unleashing our lawyers and lobbyists in attempt to legally coerce our customers..."

    4. Re:Ah the good old days by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      ask any ladder manufacturer what hell product liability has become...

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    5. Re:Ah the good old days by Fumus · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to people selling devices to other people, so they could use them as they see fit?

      It stopped being valid when manufacturers discovered they could sell one thing at a loss, but it needs another part to use it, thus generating profit. (Consoles and games, razors and blades)

    6. Re:Ah the good old days by westlake · · Score: 2, Informative

      Whatever happened to people selling devices to other people, so they could use them as they see fit?

      The HPC cluster that took 1,000 PS3s off retail shelves was of no benefit to Sony and a nail in the coffin for the OtherOS.

      As mentioned in an earlier post, the cheapest 3D robotic imaging system with capabilities similar to Kinect lists for $3000. The $150 Kinect is sold as a video game accessory - and it needs video game sales and rentals to be profitable.

      The geek who expects the mega corp to subsidize his high-tech hobbies is naive.

      No profit means no product - and everyone loses.

      The second problem is that on-line gaming and other services demand a level playing field.

      No cheating allowed.

      Show up at the ball park with a tricked-up ball or bat and you risk being banned from league play. The simplest way to avoid this kind of mischief has always been to set standards which begin with the hardware manufacturer.

      Regulation ball. Regulation bat. No excuses. No exceptions.
         

    7. Re:Ah the good old days by sjames · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's rather silly. If they don't want to subsidize other uses, I guess they should sell the product for a profitable retail price.

      They are free to police their online games as they like. There are even legitimate reasons to do so.

      Yes, tricked up balls and bats are not permitted in a regulation game. However, if you modify a baseball bat for home defense, propping up your hood, or any other purpose including looking really impressive in a non-regulation sandlot game, MLB will not try to stop you.

  7. bounty by DeadDecoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it me or is 2000$ kinda cheap to hire someone with the expertise required to extract out kinect's source?

    1. Re:bounty by godrik · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's what I thought at first. But then, I thought that people are likely to try to get a driver for that just for fun, and for free. Putting a bounty is a way to push people into doing it faster and releasing it publicly.

    2. Re:bounty by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

      True, but someone is gonna try to do it for free anyway. Now they have an extra incentive to keep going and to publish their results.

      --
      What?
    3. Re:bounty by rokstar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd say that Microsoft making a statement like that will push people into doing it faster. Seems like nothing motivates nerds more than being told that they can't do something by a large company or organization. Forget about money, this is now about ego.

    4. Re:bounty by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      How well did setting a bounty work for getting chat pad drivers?

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    5. Re:bounty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Extraordinarily cheap. Considering this will likely take several weeks of work, if not quite a bit more. I would guess around 200+ hours of time so you're basically getting paid $10/hr for extremely specialized knowledge... and that's if you're first so there's no guarantee you'll get paid at all.

      Not worth my time to even look at.

    6. Re:bounty by johngineer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Full disclosure: I write on the Adafruit blog, and I work with them, but I am not connected in any way with the OK Prize that they're offering. I just want to give my own perspective here.

      It's not about the $2000. Granted $2k isn't a fortune or anything, but it's significant. As many have said, there are quite a few people who would do this for free, just because it's a challenge. That said, it would be nice to get some shekels for your hard work too, wouldn't it?

      I personally feel that Adafruit did this as much to make a point as to provide a monetary reward. I think Phil and Limor both believe very strongly in the idea that if you purchase a product, you should be able to do whatever-the-hell you want with it. There are others who feel differently (particularly some manufacturers), and would seek to restrict the use of "their" products, even after they have been bought and paid for.

      I viewed this "bounty" more as a challenge to the idea of restricted products than as a reward for being clever, though that is an equally noble idea.

      They have "thrown down the gauntlet" so to speak, and I think it's pretty damn cool that they did. Of course, Microsoft just stamped their feet and pouted.

    7. Re:bounty by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      So you are saying someone in a low cost geography (like say North Korea where they get about $1 a month), or even a place like India where $10/hr is still decent will be the ones to work on this.

      I expect whoever does it will do it for the kudos (and possible job prospects), and the money will just be the bonus that makes them look at the Kinect rather than a phone, home cinema system, or whatever

  8. law enforcement by DarthVain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    BS.

    I am not licensing this product. Your not renting it to me. I am not leasing it. I am buying it, and I'll do with it what I damn well please.

    1. Re:law enforcement by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Informative

      MPEGLA would beg to differ. They can and DO dictate what is done with hardware after the sale. Even when the buying party has no formal contract with MPEGLA, they can restrict whatever you film with your equipment that you bought. Its wrong, it should be illegal, but so far they have been successful in cowing people.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:law enforcement by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      I can buy a Picasso and then burn it, but no one has to condone that course of action.

    3. Re:law enforcement by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      It is illegal just about everywhere, except I think the US. And in Canada it's illegal, and we have tougher copy protection and creation rights than the US.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:law enforcement by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      That's not the point.

      Can Picasso sue you or put you in jail for burning his painting after you paid him 10 million for it?

      Microsoft say yes you can. Which I disagree with. That is the point.

    5. Re:law enforcement by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Ye another reason I am happy to live in Canada not the US.

      BTW I had to actually Google who the hell "MPEGLA" was, and upon going to their website, and reading their about page I am no sooner closer to understanding who they are or what they do. However just looking at their website made me feel dirty and used all over. Excuse me while I go take a bleach bath...

    6. Re:law enforcement by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Where, precisely, are they saying that? Oh, they aren't ...

    7. Re:law enforcement by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      "Apparently you have not read the EULA. If you had, you'd realize that you are actually leasing a rented license."

      I certainly don't care about the EULA. They can say "we're just renting it to you" all they like, but it's still mine.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    8. Re:law enforcement by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Its a consortium of patent holders. Basically all the big video patent holders pooled all their patents into MPEGLA. THe specific part i was mentioning is that you can go buy a professional grade camera, but you can not use your video for commercial use without paying a licensing fee. The insidious part of all this is that you never enter into a contract with MPEGLA, its implied when you purchase a camera, even professional grade ones. THe takeaway is, a company you have never heard of can severely limit what you can do with equipment you own and video you shot because of a PATENT.

      --
      Good-bye
    9. Re:law enforcement by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Then what exactly are "law enforcement" for then?

    10. Re:law enforcement by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Lol oh wow what a racket!

      I wonder what the fee structure is like. AKA if I go out and make a film using my camcorder I just bought and want to sell it, what would be their take? A flat fee or a percentage? Is it scalable I wonder? Does this target low end movie makers?

      Also considering "Hollywood Accounting" define "commercial use". If I don't make any money at an endeavor and never intend to (on books) would the fee still be applicable? That would sure be a kick in the pants!

    11. Re:law enforcement by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      "Apparently you have not read the EULA. If you had, you'd realize that you are actually leasing a rented license."

      I certainly don't care about the EULA. They can say "we're just renting it to you" all they like, but it's still mine.

      At the point where you learned of the conditions and did not immediately demand a refund, you agreed to them. I don't think the courts would look kindly on your agreeing to only the parts of the agreement you like.

      Now, were you to claim that there was no agreement, that would be a completely different matter. But you're not saying that, are you?

    12. Re:law enforcement by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      That's not the point.

      Can Picasso sue you or put you in jail for burning his painting after you paid him 10 million for it?

      Microsoft say yes you can. Which I disagree with. That is the point.

      Did you enter into an agreement with Picasso not to do so?

      It isn't the art that matters, it is the terms at which it was transferred to you.

      I'm not saying that Kinect has such a creature, because I genuinely do not know. But if it did, and you didn't opt out of it, you really should be bound by it.

      And, again, I don't agree with the power these hold. I think there need to be more limits on what can be put in them. But currently, the sky is the limit, and we all know it.

    13. Re:law enforcement by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      "I don't think the courts would look kindly on your agreeing to only the parts of the agreement you like."

      I know they wouldn't. What I'm saying is that if you buy something, it should be yours whether or not some EULA tells you otherwise. Yes, I know this isn't how it currently works, but I'm just expressing my contempt towards the current system.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    14. Re:law enforcement by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      And by doing what I please, I mean "make the ultimate anime girlfriend experience"

      I don't see a problem here.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    15. Re:law enforcement by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Virtually NO-ONE SELLS software anymore. Whereas virtually EVERYONE licenses software.

      The software is what makes Kinnect unique, and you're not licensed to use it except in specific and prescribed ways. The hardware (as many have pointed out) is not especially unique in-and-of-itself, and I would imagine that the software is fully covered by as many Copyright, Patent, and DMCA protections as Microsoft could figure out a way to apply....

      -AC

      Yes, but if your intention is to replace said software (actually, firmware) then that really doesn't apply.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    16. Re:law enforcement by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      the EULA only applys to software, not hardware.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    17. Re:law enforcement by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      FUD. the whole letter is FUD. they use terms like "tamper-protection" because its the strongest thing they can say, they know they cant do anything about it... tis all posturing.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    18. Re:law enforcement by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      but anything with "blinky lights" has "software" somewhere.

    19. Re:law enforcement by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      right but the whole point of making open source drivers (or more accurately in this case open source firmware) is to bypass the need for the software license and therefore gain the ability to operate it with other electronics, to do this the product is reverse engineered and thats a perfectly legal process.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    20. Re:law enforcement by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      I can buy a Picasso and then burn it, but no one has to condone that course of action.

      Interestingly you could probably burn it but not necessarily export it from the country you buy it in,

  9. 16-bit monochrome? by Beardydog · · Score: 1

    My recollection is that it was a 15-bit number with a single-bit used as a "mask" to outline the players in front of the camera. The early demos treated the 15-bit number as RGB, 5 bits per channel.

  10. Mole hunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Twenty or thirty years ago these things were somewhat neat. Now they are corporate mole-hunts. The engineers who designed the platform already have plenty of drivers, written in ten different languages, and probably have software emulators to run in VMs with any of a dozen different kernels.

    What they are doing is mining the community. If anything _really_ good or novel comes up they'll just take it in house, sit on it for a few months, and promptly edge out the submitter--that is standard corporate policy and is the default game played against research associates in any field. As an added bonus if any of the submissions look, smell, feel, or even sound like anything even remotely related to one of those dozens of software drivers that they already have in house then all they need to do is look at friend-of-a-friend links to see who in the research teams is "taking the work home" with them.

    Reality 101.

  11. On What Grounds? by keytoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On what grounds can Microsoft even begin to claim any sort of right to restrict reverse engineering this product?

    If they are hoping to invoke the DMCA for circumventing a content protection mechanism, I'd like to point out that these things are essentially a couple of cameras and a mic shoved in a plastic housing. Any content captured by these cameras is, in no uncertain terms, mine as it is me 'performing' in front of them.

    1. Re:On What Grounds? by keytoe · · Score: 1

      If they are acting as expected that box contains some withering 20-page EULA that will land yer behind in a sling if you even breathe a word of the goodies contained therein.

      I've never seen the courts side in favor of an EULA - but I have seen them side based on DMCA violations (see Blizzard). They can scream all they want in the EULA and until I see a court uphold one, I don't consider them to be a barrier to reverse engineering the signal that comes out of the cable. Given that DMCA only applies to content protection - and the content is mine - I don't see the DMCA becoming involved.

      I understood that this is an intelligent peripheral which processes the inputs from the cameras into something the '360 can use as well as providing feeds of the camera images... Reverse-engineering on steroids will be required to crack that...

      No, it'll likely be very difficult. But legal.

  12. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by sheehaje · · Score: 1

    It is Microsoft using strong language to scare people.

    Reverse Engineering the product to then produce and sell a similar product is one thing, using it as an input device for other things that it was intended for is a totally different ball of wax.

  13. Microsoft's position is tricky by denobug · · Score: 4, Insightful

    On one hand, yes, it is a hardware. You are please to use it as you see fit.

    On the other hand, the key to Kinect is not the hardware components itself, rather it is the embedded code that brings everything together, process the data, and make the whole thing work. To that end they do have right to safeguard their code and software design to keep anyone from knowing exactly what they are doing, and how they are doing.

    So I think it is not wrong if someone figured it all out by themselves how to use those components or use Kinet in its entirety in other purpose besides connecting to XBox. But I would venture to guess that whoever attempts to extract the code internal to the device would be subject to legal action, and like it or not, Microsoft's litigation would be legitimate.

    1. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While it might smack of 1984 paranoia, we ARE talking about a motion tracking camera, attached to a closed architecture and DMCA protected computing platform, equipped with broadband internet capabilities, communicating in a DMCA protected communication protocol.

      No matter how "OMFG! AWESOME!" this thing is, unless I know for sure what software is being run, I consider it an unsafe product for my privacy.

      Just imagine the "Fun", should Microsoft decide to roll out an update that causes the camera to 'passively' track and analyze images of logos it sees, so they can datamine their gaming public for "enhanced products and services", such as "Value added partnerships with partner companies" to offer "Special product offers" to said people? Suddenly, your XBOX becomes the equivilent of a secret shopper in your home, suggesting more Hostess, Dolly Madison, and Pepsi products.

      Doesnt matter if the resolution is really crappy, grainy, and the framerate is slow-- it only needs to focus on what the person is wearing/doing in front of the TV. Even surreptitiously snapping and sending jpegs of "logo candidates" to microsoft for bulk processing once a week would be of IMMENSE value to advertising fuckwads. (of course, microsoft would make 'every effort' to prevent personally identifiable information, like your face, and to avoid capturing images of naked users of the Kinect motion controller for privacy reasons, and then trumpet these as being 'good faith'-- but they would still happily capture the logos on your shirt and pants, on the can of pop/beer you are sipping, and what bag of deep fried somethings you are snacking on for their "advertising partners")

      But why stop there? This thing has several acoustic microphones too! Just IMAGINE the fun, should this device get co-opted by law enforcement! Why, they wouldnt NEED to "Mandate" cameras be installed in your house-- Why, they stupid sheeple would BUY IT, and INSTALL IT themselves! Just imagine the fun that the security theater types in Great Britain would have with this! The "Full monitor" mode could be activated based on "excessive motion", and or "Highly variable sound input matching XX baseline", and suddenly you are on candid camera while you spank your naughty child's butt. Better have a good explanation when child protective services shows up. (etc.)

      So, simply because I have had my "healthy" distrust of corporations and their use of technology turn into a pathological paranoia, I GREATLY desire to see the ENTIRE kinect data stack and software algorithm tree reverse engineered like a Diebold voting machine. The problem is that I have a hard time convincing myself that this one is paranoia.

      I want to know EVERYTHING this device does, how it does it, when, and why-- before I would even consider buying one.

    2. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      (sorry to reply to my own post, but I have to add--)

      The REALLY sad part about the potential for use by law enforcement, is that it is practically an eventuality before some "PROTECT THE CHILDREN!" types latch on to a case of domestic child abuse (Most definitely some really raunchy one) in which a Kinect motion controller was scanning the room, but DIDNT record what was going on-- and lobbying/sueing to have that functionality incorporated/activated, so that law enforcement CAN (and will) use it.

      For the children.

      If not child abuse, some case of domestic violence-- Protecting women is almost as good as protecting children, you see.

      Trailing in at scenario #3, we have the run of the mill home-invasion-- where the 360 "sees" everything. See how much big brother loves you?

      Seriously-- tear this thing apart, and tear apart Microsoft's Live data protocols too. I don't care about implementing competing products, I want transparency on how THIS product operates, to protect my already small sliver of expected privacy.

    3. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      No you see, the Kinect Driver would be to access the data coming out of the Kinect hardware. It wouldn't be the Kinect software platform hijacked; it'd be something you plug into your kernel so when you plug in the hardware it exposes an API to userland to talk to the hardware. This is exactly NOT their code, because they didn't write it; they're threatening action against anyone who writes something that does the same thing their code does, not against anyone who copies their code.

    4. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      So if you are doing a lot of XXX rated things in front of the TV you are going to get more porn and lube ads?

    5. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Or you can just, you know, turn the device off instead of going overboard with paranoia. or even better - not buy it.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      I think that was the gist of my statement-- that I wont buy one until I know for sure--

      The issue I have here, is that many people will buy one without that consideration, and that in so doing, the expectation of privacy in the home will be greatly eroded.

    7. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by XLazarusX · · Score: 1

      My impression is the embedded code is just enough to handshake (with encryption?) and provide data to the 360.

      Articles give the impression that they initially put the smarts in Kinect, but moved it to the 360 hardware to reduce build cost.

    8. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      I would venture to guess that whoever attempts to extract the code internal to the device would be subject to legal action, and like it or not, Microsoft's litigation would be legitimate.

      On what grounds? Copyright and/or DMCA? (probably not.) Trade secret? (definitely not) Contract? (maybe, if these things are only sold with a purchase agreement)

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    9. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what exists for Windows or X-Box, but those of us that use OS X have Little Snitch.

      Little Snitch pops up an alert anytime an application attempts to access the Internet. No matter what app you may be using at the time, Little Snitch pops up that alert box.

      You then have the option to allow/deny either once, until you quit that particular app that triggered the alert, or forever.

      You can even get some more detailed info on the attempt via the alert box.

      If/when drivers for Kinect are available for OS X, having a Kinect atop my flatscreen TV, and the TV/Kinect hooked to the Mac/Skype/iChat/FaceTime would be insanely cool.

      And all watched over by Little Snitch, making sure that the only time I'm on an Internet video feed is when I decide.

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    10. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting but then if I were enforcement, I'd just use the millions of cellphones out there already like Batman. Really, how difficult could it be to remotely turn on a cellphone's microphone or camera?

    11. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Com2Kid · · Score: 2, Funny

      No matter how "OMFG! AWESOME!" this thing is, unless I know for sure what software is being run, I consider it an unsafe product for my privacy.

      Dude, it can't ID me if my glasses are on or if there is sunlight coming through any of the windows.

      For some reason I am not worried. :)

    12. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by 427_ci_505 · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you have a paysite.

    13. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Funny

      You are the most paranoid person on Earth. By a wide margin.

      If you're that opposed to it, why would you even buy it in the first place? Or, you know, leave your Xbox running all the time? (It has a power button, FYI.) Or is part of your paranoid conspiracy theory that the power button doesn't actually turn it off?

    14. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      You guessed wrong.

      Vanna has some LOVELY parting gifts for you!

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    15. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by gd23ka · · Score: 1

      No kinect for you bro, actually also no cell phone either you have just as little control over that thing. In fact it's 10pm, do you know what that root kit on your linux box is uploading?

    16. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      To that end they do have right to safeguard their code and software design to keep anyone from knowing exactly what they are doing, and how they are doing.

      They have the legal right to use any relevant copyrights and/or patents to protect themselves from illegal manufacture and sale of competing devices. They also have the right to use technological measures to keep their designs secret. But you have to realize that once someone figures out exactly how it works, the secret is out of the bag and that's that. So this is not, by definition, a "trade secrets" issue, because there are no secrets when you have a world of people just itching to reverse-engineer your product. What you have are the legal protections afforded you to prevent unauthorized competition and/or charge royalties. However, an individual who wants to hack or modify or re-purpose his purchase isn't in that category. So no, they don't have any right to tell me that I can't use that Kinect as a doorstop, a hat, or anything else for that matter. They may think they do, but then again Microsoft has always been a legend in its own collective mind.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    17. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Considering that the XBOX proudly proclaims "offline updates and downloads", which occur when the power is "Off", that latter statement is not unfounded.

      As for the former-- why do you think there are CCTV cameras installed in school buses, and in the hallways and cafeterias of public schools? "Somebody" thought they might be able to make things "More safe" if they can constantly monitor. ;) Also, Lower Marion school district, and the webcam BS ring any bells? Same mindset, more or less- That surveylance is A-OK, as long as it is to protect children and prevent theft.

    18. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      "To that end they do have right to safeguard their code and software design to keep anyone from knowing exactly what they are doing, and how they are doing. "

      that is where everybody has it wrong! The entire point of patents and copyright is to DOCUMENT and PUBLISH these methods so other people can build on them. If you are not PUBLISHING the source code, then it should not be subject to copyright protection. This is why the GPL is written the way it is... to be true to the spirit of copyright.

    19. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Considering that the XBOX proudly proclaims "offline updates and downloads", which occur when the power is "Off

      It does? Because it doesn't have that feature, so I don't know why it would "proudly proclaim" it did.

      Oh wait, you're just making up bullshit.

    20. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Just letting you know that I had to stop reading your post once you used the word "sheeple". Don't know why you stooped to a low like that, but oh well.

    21. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by LordAzuzu · · Score: 1

      This one was paranoid but...
      Damn shit, that's Orwell's nightmare coming true...

    22. Re:Microsoft's position is tricky by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      That's actually a good word to use in place of using "general public."

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  14. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

    It's the same business mode as a printer. Consumer printers are so cheap because they are sold at or near cost. They expect to make up the profits in ink sales, so there is motivation to intensely protect those ink sales. The Xbox 360 and PS3 were both sold well under production cost, with the expectation that they would make up for it in video game sales. People who bought Playstations, and ran Linux on them as part of a cluster, got their supercomputer subsidized by Sony.

    Microsoft is losing money on these Kinect units, with the hope they will move more units of video games. It is of no benefit to Microsoft if people start buying them up and using them for other purposes. Complain all you want about how that business model is stupid or retarded, but that's what we get.

  15. ::cue::cat i-opener KEKE KEKE KEKEKE!!! !!!!!!! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    "Nice business model you have there." not!
    "It'd be a shame if bad anything happened to it..."


    Maybe, you know, properly license the thing if you're not willing to sell it ala cart. You've got lawyers, have 'em look it over. Don't be a bunch of overpriced retards.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  16. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hardware-wise, Kinect isn't anything particularly special - basically few mics, simple visible light webcam, two stereoscopically arranged IR ones (take out IR filter from an ordinary webcam, replace it with non-exposed part of photographic film) capturing projected light pattern, very limited tilting.

    Everything very interesting and useful happens on the CPU of X360...

    It's not merely a case of drivers, you'd need highly specific software anyway. Might as well use 2 inexpensive webcams.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  17. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by timeOday · · Score: 1

    I'm sure Microsoft put somewhere in the fine print of the EULA they can do whatever they want, and you can't. You can be sure of that.

  18. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by spire3661 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Regardless of the business model, there is no place for this aggressive rhetoric. Microsoft needs to understand that when they sell someone a piece of hardware, it is no longer Microsoft's to control outside of allowing it on their network or not.

    --
    Good-bye
  19. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The razor and blade model works for razors and blades. Even if you want to repurpose them to slit your wrists, you have to buy the more profitable blades rather than the useless loss-leader razor.

    It doesn't work so great for anything actually interesting that people might buy for reasons other than subsidizing your business model.

  20. XNA Code? Quite possibly never... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    Funny, but I was just ranting to a friend about how MS seems to be dropping the fucking ball with Kinect driver support in XNA, too. A console lives or dies based on software titles, and they don't seem to be interested in letting developers write code for their brand new toy. I have asked people in the know who work at MS about timetables for an API or SDK for Kinect, but they give this bullshit line about not being able to discuss future releases (Yeah, like a release date for a Kinect dev kit is really going to give the competition a leg up on you, MS.)

    This is Microsoft giving developers the finger, yet again. If you aren't a 'preferred partner', you don't get to write code.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  21. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    I had better be sure th'isn't some strange dream.

    FTFY

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  22. Re:Is the camera the interesting part? by kurokame · · Score: 1

    More so since the "fancy camera" is all you'd get by hacking the Kinect's I/O.

    But you can buy RGB-D cameras separately. There are several about to be released in the $100-150 range (or maybe released by now, I'm lazy, YOU google it). Not vaporware either - these models have been used in the research community for a while now. It would probably be more beneficial to go to the effort of obtaining one of those then doing some useful software work.

  23. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft is losing money on these Kinect units

    ^this one is really one of those [citation needed] cases

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  24. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by coniferous · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not true at all. Look at the hardware spesification sheets... An arm processor and 512 megs of ram? Thats more then just a webcam and a couple of mics. There is some serious potential for having a hardware device that does some onboard processing.

  25. Mad, Mad World by psbrogna · · Score: 1

    I guess we should all consider ourselves fortunate to be enable to pay for the privilege of using their products. (Yeah right.) Either MS is truly delusional regarding their "Rights as Vendor" or somebody needs their bottom spanked over a poorly worded press release.

  26. Re:Is the camera the interesting part? by sznupi · · Score: 1

    The most interesting (and at the same time inexpensive) that I heard about, ZCam TOF camera, was essentially bought & killed by MS...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  27. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

    It's the same business mode as a cheap printer.

    FTFY. You can get printers that are not sold under that business model. Unsurprisingly, they cost more.

    Price the toner/ink and the printer together. If you just buy a cheap printer you’re only looking at half of the equation. Find out what it uses, and how much it costs.

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  28. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by wagnerrp · · Score: 2, Informative

    Back in June, a 'trusted source' reported that the Kinect cost $150 to manufacture. It seems they're selling at cost, with no profit per unit.

    http://www.develop-online.net/news/35198/Source-pins-Kinect-manufacturing-costs-to-150

  29. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

    You can do what you like with it, but Microsoft still doesn't have to condone your actions or even support them in any way. Their intention with this product is X while your intention is Y, but how you achieve Y is up to you.

  30. Re:Why do they care? by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How can it possibly hurt Microsoft if there are customers who want to purchase and repurpose their hardware for something other than playing a game?

    Which do you think is more in Microsoft’s best interests, selling a bunch of high-tech electronics in a molded plastic case for $150, or selling a piece of stamped plastic for $40?

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  31. Re:Is the camera the interesting part? by kurokame · · Score: 1

    I think most of the recent papers are associated with Intel. The models used there may actually be based on the same PrimeSense camera behind the Kinect. Ideally, this info should be in the paper using the camera. This isn't always the case, but someone who wanted to know badly could start flipping through papers until they find one which documents their equipment adequately.

    I'll try to find out more...availability to hobbyists is an important question.

  32. Howto : set up a clean-room project ? by Thud457 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This kind of situation comes up all the time in the FOSS world.
    Is there some sort of guide on how to structure a reverse-engineering project to ensure it's done properly?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:Howto : set up a clean-room project ? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Informative

      Reverse Engineering is fairly simple. It takes TWO teams completely separated and isolated from each other.

      Team one examines system, and describes all aspects (results) they can, without describing the mechanism for achieving those results.

      Team two takes the results and engineers a system that mimics all aspects described by team one.

      Whatever mechanisms team two creates to achieve are "reversed engineered". One cannot reverse engineer something that is patented, because the patent is supposed to describe the mechanisms. However Trade Secrets can be reversed engineered.

      However, in a sufficiently complex mechanism, all one needs to do is patent a key middle piece of the mechanism, so that even if you can reverse engineer the whole thing, you are still unable to create a marketable variation, without licensing / buying the key component. The easiest away around this is to patent another key piece after you reverse engineer it. But then things like "prior art" take effect, and so on.

      Reverse Engineering is easy to describe, but difficult to achieve. And reverse engineering a product of a litigious company is fraught with other perils. Doing so as a "bounty" for "open source" version is incredibly brilliant way around. No assets of a big company to go after, no way to stop it without looking like a complete and utter asshat, and even if you successfully sue whomever you can, the result is out in the open, much like DeCSS is. Once the cat is out of the bag, it is extremely difficult to put it back in.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:Howto : set up a clean-room project ? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Basically, if the end result is that you can copy something you couldn't copy before, it's probably illegal.

      Otherwise, go for it.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  33. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

    With that in mind, it seems probable that Microsoft is playing for time.

    It seems pretty well standard that manufacturing costs of just about everything video game hardware related go down over time, for various reasons. If they're selling the Kinect at cost right now, they won't be in a year -- so if they can push off people repurposing the unit a little down the road, they can get to a point in which they're making a profit even if someone buys a Kinect and no 360/games.

  34. Case study: The Wii remote drivers by Captain+Spam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Okay, I honestly forgot. Did Nintendo flip out when people started developing PC drivers for the Wii remote? I don't seem to recall them raising hell over someone making drivers for their controllers (and Nintendo WOULD be the ones to do so), but Microsoft is doing that for what is effectively a couple cameras?

    --
    Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
    1. Re:Case study: The Wii remote drivers by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      PC drivers for the Wii remote? It's exposed as a HID device over Bluetooth, you don't even /need/ drivers. Nintendo literally used the simplest method possible.

    2. Re:Case study: The Wii remote drivers by yeshuawatso · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes and no. The wii is seen as an hid device for the most part, but there are parts of it that don't work properly. For instance, the speaker on the wiimote can play 11Khz pcm audio when used by the wii, but can only play a single frequency at a time when used in conjunction with any other device. The power button also doesn't register any signals over Bluetooth either. So it's not just a simple hid profile, but just part of standards and part proprietary.

      The ps3 controllers on the other hand do require drivers to work properly. Drivers were made by a Chinese company and Sony didn't lose their cool and threaten legal action for developing and/or using the controller with the pc. This would be the relevant comparison you were looking for.

  35. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by sznupi · · Score: 1

    But the bulk of the interesting stuff happens on the X360 - ARM cpu and (mostly for large buffer, perhaps?) memory don't have to be very useful with 1 MiB of flash onboard... after all, everything beyond firmware (and still quite basic processing) can be loaded from X360.

    So, at best, there needs to be another machine loading the code anyway (OK, perhaps if one cares about the aesthetics it could be done even by some AVR & USB Flash, AVR acting also as I/O for the body...), and without the access to defining qualities of Kinect.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  36. Next Step by Musicologynut · · Score: 1

    I'll bet that MS's plan for this technology is to use it in the next itteration of Winsuck. They don't want people puzzling out something they plan to announce and market... that would lead to a loss of profits when they bring about "Windows 7: Motion Edition". It would be fun if "TuxMotion" was old news by then.

  37. I'm thinking spy device by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Imagine this:

    Someone, after the technical details are discovered, builds a very small box and slips it inline between the Kinect and the XBox360 as a kind of bridge. It is used to intercept, record and transmit the video data somewhere.

    Now, this could become "home surveillance" or "a way to spy on your girlfriend" or "how to stalk your hot dream girl who happens to be a gamer but doesn't know you're alive." The possibilities are endless.

    In the end, Microsoft made a thing and tried to lock it down. Problem is, if it is still useful to the XBox, then it can be used by other devices using the same techniques.

    I won't be getting a Kinect... nope... not ever. When I do games, it's because I don't want to get up to do anything.

    1. Re:I'm thinking spy device by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      How is this different to an ordinary USB webcam? Could slip an inline spy box on one of those much more easily, and they're far more common.

      But then, who needs a box? A hidden malware driver could do exactly the same thing, and be far easier to install remotely - any online computer is a far easier target than a proprietary game console. Are you using a laptop with a built-in webcam and mic to post on Slashdot? Do you have a smartphone in your pocket? How do you know you're not already being spied upon?

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    2. Re:I'm thinking spy device by erroneus · · Score: 1

      hidden malware on an xbox360? harder to imagine.

  38. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by sznupi · · Score: 1

    Even if $150 manufacturing cost is the case - don't forget how this "selling at cost" (not actually harmful in itself) will apply only in one market.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  39. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by rongage · · Score: 1

    OK, so here is how they can solve the problem...

    Since it is presumed that the Kinect will only "work" with Kinect enabled games, sell the Kinect at it's "discounted" price of $150 or whatever it's current sell price is when purchased with a Kinect enabled game. If the Kinect is sold stand alone (no game bought at the same time), then sell it for $50 more. Of course, you then have to make sure that all the Kinect enabled games are at least $50 to make sure that isn't an advantage route to getting just the Kinect for less.

    R

    --
    Ron Gage - Westland, MI
  40. Quick question... by calderra · · Score: 1

    How much different would these comments look if the article were about Apple and (new iDevice)? I'm guessing the f-bomb would be dropped much less frequently.

  41. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by coniferous · · Score: 1

    >But the bulk of the interesting stuff happens on the X360 What? That may be true, but you don't know that. Nobody knows that except microsoft. I kinda doubt it anyways. Microsoft has been going on and on about how it will only effect the Xbox 360s cpu in single diget numbers. > mostly for large buffer, perhaps What. 512 megs of memory is MORE then a buffer. That would be incredibly huge and totally useless. There is another purpose for that RAM. > So, at best, there needs to be another machine loading the code anyway Possibly. But there is that flash memory on the board as well.... Probably used for code. I have no way of confirming this of course.

  42. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by coniferous · · Score: 1

    Argh, Forgot my breaks.

    >But the bulk of the interesting stuff happens on the X360
    What? That may be true, but you don't know that. Nobody knows that except microsoft. I kinda doubt it anyways. Microsoft has been going on and on about how it will only effect the Xbox 360s cpu in single diget numbers.
    > mostly for large buffer, perhaps
    What. 512 megs of memory is MORE then a buffer. That would be incredibly huge and totally useless. There is another purpose for that RAM.
    > So, at best, there needs to be another machine loading the code anyway Possibly.
    But there is that flash memory on the board as well.... Probably used for code. I have no way of confirming this of course.

  43. Reverse engineering is legal if... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

    Reverse engineering is legal if you have deeper pocket than the plaintiff.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  44. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by Bieeanda · · Score: 1

    What the hell, are these X-ray machines or something with radioactive material in them that would sicken the user if he opened it up?!? I had better be sure thisn't some strange dream.

    If old peripheral commercials taught me anything as a child, it's that the Kinect is probably filled with PURE AWESOME and would cause a person's head to explode and/or melt like they'd been exposed to the opened Ark of the Covenant.

  45. And people wonder what I have no by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    MS, Sony or Apple products in my house and look at me weird when I tell them I run Linux Mint on my computers and not windows. You don't want me to do as I wish with the hardware I bought and now own, very well then you'd better be leasing it to me for 1/3 the price and you can have it after I'm finished with it.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  46. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by sznupi · · Score: 2, Informative

    MS said they dropped doing the heavy processing on Kinect itself... 1, 2, 3. What's left does at best "entry stages" of processing, which don't give you much... (especially since MS certainly keeps the juicy details of their approach secret, an approach to which entry stages are adapted).

    512 megabytes of ram would sound big, yes, so I just checked - it's 512 megabits. Nothing too unexpected for a device dealing with lots of images.

    And as I mentioned, the flash is 1 MiB; certainly nothing more than basic firmware.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  47. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by coniferous · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >MS said they dropped doing the heavy processing on Kinect itself...

    There is still that arm processor. It's being used for something. It could be used for something different.

    > so I just checked - it's 512 megabits

    Thats still too much for buffer. 512 megabits is 64 megabytes. Still more likely that it's for processing

    We are arguing about symantics. my point is: This is more then just a couple webcams and a couple of mics. We could debate about the symantics till the cows come home, but at the end of the day there are no hardware solutions that quite reproduce what the kinect does. It's worth hacking.

  48. They still sell Kinects... by hsoftdev17 · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that Microsoft should smile and nod about this, or embrace it. The Kinect is $150 piece of hardware. There are loads of the nearly 20 million Xbox 360 users that will buy one I'm sure. Imagine now if schools and companies and research firms and hobbyists that don't own a 360 could use it for other things (intact and untampered with.) That seems like a means of capturing $150 a pop from people that do not own (or intend to own for that matter) an Xbox 360.

  49. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by sznupi · · Score: 1

    Sure, it does and gives something...but nowhere near as attractive as its capabilities as a full product would suggest. Probably nothing too hot, especially with the amount of modifications and new software required (getting our hands on the basic processing Kinect does and sends (probably depthmap) should be hard enough considering it's certainly integrated with & code loaded from the X360 side - so, probably just a basic ARM board with slightly atypical webcams, in practice; which still needs new code loaded from somewhere)

    Generally, I'm also fed up that it turned out not to be a TOF camera (almost seems like MS bought ZCam only for their software & perhaps to kill off possibly competing product...)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  50. Anyone have a vague idea how it works? by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    Until someone reverse engineers it how do we know that it isn't just a few webcam chips connected via USB? Much of the clever stuff may actually be done in software? either on an embedded circuit (good) or on the XBox 360 (bad). I doubt Microsoft would release a hardware controller and not allow upgrades to fine tune it at a later date.

    If indeed the unit is just outputting motion data then it will be useful, but it will be a bit pointless if all you get is a few mono images. You could knock something up with a few webcams now that does it.

    1. Re:Anyone have a vague idea how it works? by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      it will be a bit pointless if all you get is a few mono images. You could knock something up with a few webcams now that does it.

      No that's exactly what they're trying to get, and no you can't do it with a few webcams. Kinect uses new hardware that isn't available anywhere else (at least not for anything like Kinect's price). Look it up.

  51. Open source alternative (without the hardware) by brunobg · · Score: 1

    There's an open source project called Skamleton (http://skamleton.sf.net/) that tries to track people using just common webcams. Though the project is fairly new (and full disclosure, I work on it), it is already working and we're improving it. This is one of the earlier videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snUgm8lNsaY We're looking for developers (who isn't?).

    1. Re:Open source alternative (without the hardware) by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      That's completely difference. Kinect produces an actual depth man (like a z-buffer) of what it sees using infra-red time-of-flight measurements (apparently). It's *not* stereoscopic, and I doubt the actual kinect hardware even does any people tracking (that is probably in the xbox).

  52. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by greenbird · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft needs to understand that when they sell someone a piece of hardware, it is no longer Microsoft's to control outside of allowing it on their network or not.

    That's just not true anymore. They've managed to pervert copyright law from the constitutional purpose of "to promote progress" to one of absolute control of anything, including ideas, anyone makes.

    --
    Who is John Galt?
  53. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by BobMcD · · Score: 1

    Microsoft needs to understand that when they sell someone a piece of hardware, it is no longer Microsoft's to control outside of allowing it on their network or not.

    Yes, please keep pointing this out to them until they realize they need to start licensing hardware to us. /sigh

  54. Instead of fighting your customers.... by iamhassi · · Score: 1

    Hey Microsoft, instead of fighting your customers like the RIAA (which has worked so well for them), why don't you just offer a version with drivers and charge double or triple?

    The Kinect is amazing, I'd easily pay $300-$450 for on if it meant I could control my PC like the Minority Report but I'm not paying $150 to dance in front of my Xbox

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  55. Unwarranted differentiation by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft just wants me to pay for it...
    Apple? They want to sell things too, but they are also control freaks that would want to make sure you are using it the way they want you to.

    I don't see how you come to that conclusion, at all.

    Apple is the one that doesn't really take many countermeasures against jailbreaking. They've not made a fuss about AppleTV or iPhone jailbreaking.

    Now here in this same story you find a dour letter from Microsoft about misusing the Kinect. And in Windows Phone 7, you have exactly the same degree of lockdown you do with the iPhone.

    I could see an argument for saying both companies are just as locked down, but to say Microsoft is substantially better just ignores what they are doing, in any space they compete in.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Unwarranted differentiation by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      don't forget Microsoft doesn't support Blu-ray either, even though Xbox 360 has the software to play HDVideo and they even offered an HD-DVD drive... that's politics too. Microsoft didn't INCLUDE a DVD player in Windows XP for 8 years(they didn't want to pay the $5 for a license), and they don't include a Blu-ray player either, the OEM has to add their own software.

    2. Re:Unwarranted differentiation by vux984 · · Score: 1

      don't forget Microsoft doesn't support Blu-ray either

      I haven't forgotten. The difference is you are at least allowed to add it on if you like. I don't object to MS or Apple not including. I object to it not be allowed at all.

  56. Only in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I once had an interesting conversation with one of the executives of Lappset ("Lappset Group Oy is one of the leading manufacturers of playground equipment worldwide. Our products bring joy to millions of children and adults in more than 40 countries."). If you look at the list of countries that they operate in you'll find out it contains nearly all European countries, Australia, Israel and several countries in Asia... But not USA. He explained to me that this is because Lappset prefers the situation where their marketing and engineering departments are larger than their legal department. They (as a large, multinational playground equipment manufacturer) fear that if they would go for the north american markets, the amount of lawsuits would skyrocket and it just isn't worth it for them.

    Another example is cosmetics. I recently happened to read some labels from my girlfriend's make up (I think they were eyeliners or such). The label had some general content and then something along the lines of "USA: Do not eat. If you consume this product, seek medical..." or something. Apparently the manufacturer felt that they had to warn against eating the cosmetics or they would be sued in USA but there wasn't risk of that in Europe... The warning was clearly labeled to be USA-specific.

    It always amuses me that in theory the American ideology is "Personal freedom! Personal responsibility! No nanny states!" but in practice, people try to blame everything on other people (and actually succesfully win lawsuits in such cases). In the rest of the world we think "It is not nice if a child falls down from the swings or such... But that can always happen, whether the child was especially reckless or just had some bad luck..." but I don't think that the thought of suing the swing manufacturer, the land owner, the city, etc. would ever even occur to people (unless, of course, the equipment would really have been very badly flawed).

    Now, obviously I realize that those stereotypes don't apply to all 3E8 americans. But they certainly seem to apply to quite a large portition of the people. I guess your system encourages to that: In most of the world, if you sue a large company, they are ordered to pay you a small compensation and a multimillion dollar fine to the government. In USA, they would be ordered to pay the multimillion dollar compensation to the person who sued them. Of course that encourages people to get greedy...

    1. Re:Only in the US by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      The label had some general content and then something along the lines of "USA: Do not eat.

      Americans must go around trying to eat everything (or at least manufacturers think so). I have seen labels saying "USA: do not eat" on packets of desiccant that are included in a box with a video recorder, on a polystyrene disk in the top of a cookie tin, and a statue packed with polystirene beads with "USA: do not eat the packing material"

  57. Microsoft deserve to fail by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >>> "Microsoft will continue to make advances in these types of safeguards and work closely with law enforcement and product safety groups to keep Kinect tamper-resistant."

    Law enforcement? Really? wow. Its just a game controller guys.

    Its great. Whenever I start getting tempted to spend money, somehow Microsoft always knows to say/do something extra stupid to re-strengthen my commitment to never buy any Microsoft or Microsoft-based products.

    I wonder if Microsoft even have a clue about how much damage their arrogant attitude is doing to their potential market?

    1. Re:Microsoft deserve to fail by spauldo · · Score: 1

      I wonder if Microsoft even have a clue about how much damage their arrogant attitude is doing to their potential market?

      Yes, they have a very good idea about how it's affecting their market. It's close to 0%, because the percentage of potential buyers who will find out about this and care enough to boycott it is so small as to have a negligible effect on sales.

      Consumer ignorance and apathy are the reasons companies get away with this type of thing. I think I'm the only person who is still boycotting Amazon over their 1-click patent.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    2. Re:Microsoft deserve to fail by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Kinect is not a games controler.
      Its a fancy camera system (that would normally cost a lot if you wanted it for robotics applications etc) wrapped up in a games controler along with microphones and a motor.

  58. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> Once you sell one to me, it's my product, morons.

    Are you _sure_ about that? Its certainly not true with their software (read the EULA).

  59. Dots by pgn674 · · Score: 1

    This video makes the prospect for an open source Kinect driver a little more exciting: YouTube - Kinect with nightshot

  60. Corrections by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apple is the only company that has locked those down in the first place. Microsoft just added a walled garden app store; historically it was pretty wide open.

    Yes and "historically" Apple has computers you can open and work on easier than PC's. Nothing really matters "historically", what matters is what they are doing NOW. And in that way Microsoft is just as closed as Apple.

    And comparing the AppleTV to an Xbox is a superficial comparison.

    It would have been had I compared an AppleTV to an XBox. Instead I was lumping it in with other IOS devices as things Apple doesn't really do much to stop jailbreaking on.

    Apple also doesn't doesn't support blue ray(sic) because Steve wants to push his online distribution model.

    Apple doesn't support blu-ray in part because of the licensing, although I'm sure the aspect of selling videos through other channels comes into play as well.

    Similarly, they disallow flash on their devices without valid reason.

    Well actually the reason is a dramatic drop in battery life. And Apple doesn't "disallow" Flash on anything except for iOS devices - they've just stopped including it by default in some computers. Which to bring the whole thing full circle, is exactly what Microsoft does with Flash...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Corrections by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't support blu-ray in part because of the licensing...

      OSX itself is HDCP compliant. The nvidia and intel video chipsets used are HDCP compliant. OSX can also read/write to blu-ray discs/drives (although you have to purchase them separately of course).

      There is no technical reason for OSX to fail at support. Its entirely political/business model.

      Instead I was lumping it in with other IOS devices as things Apple doesn't really do much to stop jailbreaking on.

      There really isn't much reason to stop jailbreaking on ios devices yet.

      The *only* device Microsoft has made at all difficult to jailbreak is the xbox, and they have MASSIVE pressure from game-studios on that.

      Well actually the reason is a dramatic drop in battery life

      There is a dramatic drop in battery life if I play "EA Sports NBA Elite 11" too. What has that got do with anything? So flash drinks battery life if its running... fine... so like EA Sports NBA Elite 11, let the customer decide if its installed and running.

      Android has the ability to have it installed, but not run unless you specically enable an object. So it only uses your batter when you want it to ... much like EA Sports NBA Elite 11.

      And Apple doesn't "disallow" Flash on anything except for iOS devices - they've just stopped including it by default in some computers. Which to bring the whole thing full circle, is exactly what Microsoft does with Flash...

      I'm not complaining and have never complained about Apple not including it by default. That is not a restriction. I am complaining about it be disallowed -- that is a restriction. And Adobe has already confirmed that Flash 10.1 is coming to Windows Phone 7, so again Apple is restricting where Microsoft is not.

    2. Re:Corrections by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Huh, I must have dreamed up all those thousands of jailbroken iPhones that were bricked with each new update of the iPhone a couple years ago.

      Thanks for fixing that particular mistaken memory!

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    3. Re:Corrections by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      There is no technical reason for OSX to fail at support. Its entirely political/business model.

      Yes, in other words - licensing. Apple does not like the licensing terms of including Blu-Ray. That is a business model/political thing.

      There really isn't much reason to stop jailbreaking on ios devices yet.

      The *only* device Microsoft has made at all difficult to jailbreak is the xbox, and they have MASSIVE pressure from game-studios on that.

      EA is producing games for the iPad/iPhone today, that jailbreaking allows you to easily pirate. There is the same degree of pressure, for the same reasons.

      so like EA Sports NBA Elite 11, let the customer decide if its installed and running.

      They do on the laptops. Apple may in the future on iOS when a really stable version of Flash comes out.

      There is value in not providing an option for a consumer to use that is overly harmful to them, for the same reason you wouldn't put an eject switch in a car even though technically it would be a customers "choice" to eject an annoying passenger.

      And Adobe has already confirmed that Flash 10.1 is coming to Windows Phone 7, so again Apple is restricting where Microsoft is not.

      We'll see when it arrives, who is doing what.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:Corrections by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Yes, in other words - licensing. Apple does not like the licensing terms of including Blu-Ray. That is a business model/political thing.

      Apple doesn't need to license squat. Its already licensed HDCP. Its already got support for blu-ray drives as storage devices.

      If Apple doesn't want to license playback, that's fine. Windows 7 doesn't license playback either. You have to purchase 3rd party software.

      But that is the point. YOU CAN. With OSX you can't.

      EA is producing games for the iPad/iPhone today, that jailbreaking allows you to easily pirate. There is the same degree of pressure, for the same reasons.

      There is nowhere near the same degree of pressure yet. EA's mobile iphone/ipad division might one day be as important to EA as its Xbox/PS3 divisions, but that day is not today.

      There is value in not providing an option for a consumer to use that is overly harmful to them

      And how exactly would having the option to run a flash object on your iphone be "overly harmful" to them?

      Do you think its going to result all sorts of highway mayhem? bodies slamming into the pavement at high speed while cars form pileups trying to avoid them?

      for the same reason you wouldn't put an eject switch in a car even though technically it would be a customers "choice" to eject an annoying passenger.

      Oh. I see. Apparently that's exactly what you think will happen. ;)

      Worst thing that happens is you activate the flash object and your phone crashes. WORST THING. Granted apple might want to shield people from that... but then lots of other apps already crash, so why single out flash?

      Hell, even the vaunted Apple apps crash the phone. I've personally crashed safari, itunes, and the camera apps on multiple occasions.

      We'll see when it arrives, who is doing what.

      Yep. We'll see flash on Windows Phone 7. The only question is whether consumer pressure forces Apple's hand or not.

    5. Re:Corrections by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't need to license squat. Its already licensed HDCP.

      There is a separate license for Blu-Ray playback and decoding. HDCP is only an output format.

      And how exactly would having the option to run a flash object on your iphone be "overly harmful" to them?

      Terrible battery life, crashing web browser, poor scrolling in browser, etc.

      Oh. I see. Apparently that's exactly what you think will happen.

      For the average user a mysterious 2x decrease in battery life they don't understand, is in fact equal to being ejected from a moving car. It basically stops working for them.

      Yep. We'll see flash on Windows Phone 7.

      And we might on the iPhone as well if they get it working well enough. In the meantime we have YET to see if the WP7 version of Flash will be delayed just like every other mobile version of Flash has been, ever.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    6. Re:Corrections by vux984 · · Score: 1

      There is a separate license for Blu-Ray playback and decoding. HDCP is only an output format.

      Windows doesn't include it either.

      But the difference is you CAN add suitably licensed software yourself. You CAN'T on a Mac.

      For the average user a mysterious 2x decrease in battery life they don't understand...

      How would having flash installed but only activated on flash objects explicitly activated by the user be *anything* approaching what you are suggesting?

    7. Re:Corrections by zeroshade · · Score: 1

      I just wanted to point out a couple things:

      1. All they would have to do is put a message when you install flash saying 'By the way, Flash can use up a lot of battery power quickly.' And viola mystery is gone, consumer keeps their experience AND keeps their choice. There is absolutely no reason to disallow the customer from installing Flash.
      2. The Android version of flash works quite well and due to the ability to have it only turned on when requested for specific objects does not take any more battery life than a battery heavy game, or watching a video, etc. Thus Flash mobile already works fine on at least one platform. Notice I said fine, not perfect. No software is perfect. Flash is not harmful in any way to Apple, except for being technology they want to eliminate to promote HTML5 because of their stake in it.
      3. Apple DOES prevent jailbreaking. They campaigned to prevent the exception to the DMCA that made jailbreaking legal, if Apple had its way, jailbreaking would be illegal and able to sue over. In addition, everytime a method of jailbreaking becomes popular, they work on a patch to 'plug the hole' as it were.

      Essentially, Apple has the most restrictive and locked down platform currently. Microsoft is looking at them and going "hey, that's a good idea!" and following them. Which just makes things even worse.

  61. Eeeewwww!?! by tqk · · Score: 1

    [I'm a Unix/FLOSS guy.]

    Damn, this reads like sado-masochistic self-mutilation. Why buy that crap when the manufacturer hates you?

    Damn.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  62. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by wall0159 · · Score: 1

    I shave with a double-edged razor. Blades are $25 for 100. Just so you know.

  63. Kinect for disabled communication (headtracking) by An+dochasac · · Score: 1

    The people working on projects such as Opengazer headtracking, use cheap commodity webcams to ehable communication and control (e.g. wheelchair) for people with spinal chord injuries and other conditions which prevent other input methods from being practical. The technology used inside Kinect would be ideal for this but if Microsoft insists on utilizing taxpayer funded law enforcement agencies so that they can profit from this device's gaming functionality, I guess the rest of us should just sit back and let them do that, right?

    After all, a device intended for gaming should be used only for that purpose and not for inappropriate and unprofitable activities such as enabling a disabled person to communicate and interact with their world.

  64. Re:Why do they care? by jonwil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its simple. This device costs a LOT less than a similar set of cameras+processing hardware from someone like PrimeSense (OEM for the kit in the Kinect). If you could use it for something other than playing games, there is suddenly a LOT less reason to buy the expensive kit.

  65. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

    Ok, the first link was a software case, and has nothing to do with this case. The second link is a technique whose sole purpose is to circumvent copy protection. This is illegal under the DMCA. Without the DMCA the activity would be perfectly legal.

    The drivers in this case would not be used to circumvent copy protection, so the DMCA would not apply.

    How, exactly, is reverse engineering (an activity proven legal with much case history) the Kinect illegal?

    --
    Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  66. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

    welcome to software. you do not *buy* software from Microsoft (or from most other vendors for that matter) you license it. Thats why the EULA stands for End User *License* Agreement. These are the sets of rules you agree to abide by if you wish to retain license of their product.

    OTOH, hardware cannot be licensed, only sold or leased, and no such terms can be placed on something that is sold.

    --
    i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
  67. Re:Kinect _SOFTWARE_ for Robotics by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

    There are some pretty low-end ARMs these days... Not sure where the Kinect's ARM falls.

    I'm having difficulty finding specs on either the Marvell AP102 or the PrimeSense SOC. Keep in mind there are now ARMs (LPC1111) that cost on the order of $1 each. The AP102 is probably much beefier, but not THAT beefy especially compared to the Xbox 360's host CPU.

    So having an ARM processor really means nothing these days in terms of how much processing is being done.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  68. You did by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Not one iPhone has been bricked from jailbreaking.

    There was one case where carrier unlocking had a bad reaction to one update from Apple. But as noted, that was a carrier unlock, not jailbreaking... and it has never happened again despite every model since having carrier unlocks eventually.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  69. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    Kinect has a processor and ram... which means it has firmware which you might want to copy, or at least used as a lock to prevent "unauthorized" use, like in the printer cartridges.

  70. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft is claiming they have some kind of liberal, new property right even after they sell something to you. Just like when the government tells companies what they have to do.

  71. The Xbox 360 Does Not Do Offline Updates by Blackwulf · · Score: 1

    Actually it's the PS3 that has offline updates and downloads, and even then, only when you buy the Playstation Plus service and activate the feature as it's disabled by default. (And, it only downloads the update, you still have to update it yourself.) The Wii checks for "messages" but does not download or update anything unless you're there at the machine. The Xbox 360 does not wake up to install or download things, it does it when you log into Xbox LIVE.

    Sorry for bringing facts into your rant, I know that's not what you're supposed to do on teh intarwebs. But it might be interesting information for someone who doesn't know anything about the wake up features of the current gen consoles.

  72. Why are the anti-privacy measures such a big deal? by Journe · · Score: 1

    The way I see it, whether your backups are legal or not - just pick up a second console, don't connect it to XBL. Granted, the only X360 I've owned was not hacked, so I don't know much about this, but it seems simple enough. Sure, it's a few hundred bucks, but new games will run you 50 to 60 bucks. So get yourself some (legal, mind you. Yep, definitely legal) backups of 5-10 games and it's paid for itself.

  73. That would be a loss by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

    Manufacturing costs are only part of it. You'll also need to add testing costs, packaging, shipping/insurance, the retailer's margin, and of course the amortised cost of development. If Kinect costs $150 to build, then MS are certainly taking a decent loss on each sale, and would be understandably unhappy if a buyer was unlikely to buy any games to go with it.

    From their perspective it's worth paying a little extra on security 'features' to lock in more buyers. I'm sure they've not forgotten the :CueCat. But of course, the extra challenge only gets more hackers interested...

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  74. Where is the fun in what you want? by Tordre · · Score: 1

    I noticed a common theme is the comments I can't say i disagree with it, but i also can't say i totally agree with it. That is considering what it seems is generally seen here as anti-consumer, From what i can gather the only bit of security (apart from the proprietary communication protocol) they added where security screws to take it apart, The summary did mention they update the dashboard software, but that is about software for the xbox 360 system and really has nothing to do with the Kinnect in the sense of getting an open source driver.

    Another way one can put your complains "Microsoft is using a weird screw for its Kinnect they must hate consumers" come one guys it is not like the only screwdriver for it is locked away in Microsoft's secret vault you can buy one as easily as they did, do you say the same thing about nintendo and the tri-wing.

    Also isn't part of the fun of these hacking challenges the fact that you are working through the puzzle that the producers hoped no one would try to or be able to break.

    Now if in the adventure figuring out this driver we find out that if you successfully connect this to a computer the built in arm chip stores it some where and then the next time you plug it into your xbox it flags your xbox as hacked and bans you from xbox live, then we have an issue which being consumer friendly.

  75. Microsoft should just give the driver away. by darkteal · · Score: 1

    Obviously, once such a free open driver becomes available, there's nothing technical stopping, for example, Sony from updating PS3 firmware to support the Kinect. Clearly, this would be bad for Microsoft. Microsoft should delay this problem by giving away enough driver code with an academic licence that academics can get the Kinect to play with their robots, before the people with the will and the means to develop their own code do so, and Microsoft loses their intellectual monopoly on the device. This could also easily solve the problem of Microsoft losing money on devices sold below cost to people who have no intention of connecting them to an Xbox and buying games, if any interesting applications are developed before production costs drop - they will own intellectual rights to key parts of the software. If they don't try to sell this to everyone and anyone before someone develops a copy-cat device in a year or two, they're making a huge mistake.

  76. EULA by Mista2 · · Score: 1

    The Licence applies only if you accept the EULA. If I dont, I can still hack the device OK can't I?

  77. Re:Safeguards, product tampering, law enforcement? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    Blades cost almost nothing to produce. I shave with a straight razor so fuck your blades, I found a smooth rock somewhere.