Is the iToaster a Linux Box? Will there be Source?

Allright so several people have noted that the iToaster from Microworkz runs a "BeOS/Linux Hybrid". Sounds kinda crazy, but it was confirmd by (quoted on MSNBC and CNNfn as well as confirmed in an email from their sales dept.) So the question is when can we download their changes to the Linux kernel? Hit the link below to read more explanation on why the answer is never.

I was given several different answers from different people. Here is a reply to an email asking about the code I sent to (sales@microworkz.com)

• Mr. Malda,

  Thank you for your interest in Microworkz.com. The iToaster operating system is a hybrid between BeOs and Linux and is licensed and patented by Microworkz.com, Inc. The source code is therefore proprietary and not available for download.

  The Linux pure source code is however at www.linux.com.

  If you have any other questions or if you would like to place an order, please give our Sales Team a call at (888) 306-2044 from 7am - 8pm Monday through Friday and 10am - 5pm Saturday and Sunday PST. Or simply check out our web sites at www.microworkz.com.

So I called them and asked more. I talked to a very nice gentleman who put me on hold for awhile while he found answers. According to him, the iToaster does not run Linux (although according to the email posted above from the sales department, it runs "A Hybrid between BeOS and Linux". This is sorta what the MSNBC article said ("The way it was explained to me, BeOS handles the file system, while Linux does just about everything else.")

So I guess there are 2 possibilities here:

1. Microworkz messed up by using the word "Linux" when dealing with CNNfn and MSNBC, as their machine does not run Linux at all. This seems to be what I was told on the phone.
2. Microworkz is violating the GPL by making modifications to the Linux kernel and not releasing them.

At this point there really isn't much we can do about it since the iToaster isn't really out so we can't do any pounding on it to determine if their is something questionable going on.

Thanks to the many of you who wrote in to give us the heads up on this. We'll keep you posted if we figure out more.

Comments

That's not quite right

[Gleef]

luge wrote:

Not quite... while you are correct about the download issue, source must be available to anyone for whom binaries are available, in the same medium. I.E., if [GPL] binaries are *publicly* available on CDs, [GPL] source must also be *publicly* available on CDs- not just to those who pay for binaries, but also to others in the general public. If binaries are only available to your co-workers or people within your corporation, then you need only make source available within your corporation.

The GPL says no such thing. To summarize section 3, you can distribute binaries, provided you either:
* include source in the distribution
* include a written offer to send any third party the source in machine readable format for no more than the costs incurred in supplying the source
* pass on the above written offer from the person whom you got the GPL code from
It says later in the section that if you get the source by copying it from somewhere, you can "distribute" the source by giving them the same information and access to copy it that you have.

You do not need to make GPL source publically available, you can limit your distribution to just the people you do business with by shipping the source on the same CD as the binaries. If you do offer to ship source, you have to accept requests from anyone, but you don't need to tell everyone about it, merely the people you ship binaries to. Clearly the easiest way to comply is to make it publically available from a Web or FTP site, but it is by no means a requirement of the GPL.

Advocacy / flaming

[Erich]

Please, people, let's not flame these people for violating the GPL before we even see the product. It could be that they switched form one pure system to another, or it could be that they've ported GNU software to BeOS -- both of which are legal.

Don't flame these people, and read the Linux-Advocacy HOWTO.

All BeOS. Or so I was told.

[dougman]

I was told at the Be booth at PC Expo Tuesday that the iToaster is 100% BeOS with some modifications (custom desktop, etc). I specifically asked if there was any Linux code and was told "No, although marketing has led people to believe that there is (followed by a heavy sigh)".

I tried the iToaster proto at their booth. It was REALLY, really nice. It DID boot in less than 20 seconds. I would say, the prototype set-top Be demo'ed next to it (kinda going a step beyond into delivery of all kinds of multimedia content channels) really blew me away.

-DougMan, CEO tomorrowsounds Inc.
www.tomorrowsounds.com

Possibilities

[substrate]

Everybody is jumping on the conspiracy theory band wagon. Remember that marketing releases are generated by, well, marketing people. So for instance a statement from engineering such as: The iToaster runs the BeOS operating system and a core system of GPL'd utilities familiar to anybody who has used the Linux operating sytem. The marketing interpretation of the same statement: The iToaster runs a BeOS/Linux hybrid. It makes marketing people warm and fuzzy inside, its fully buzzword complient. It uses the word hybrid and thats a cool word.

Give the iToaster people the benefit of the doubt. If it turns out that they are violating GPL then voice your righteous indignation, but do it politely. Remember that the Open Source community is trying to gain acceptance. If you're a member of the mob mentality you're just another anchor around the neck of Open Source.

It's a cheap machine, 300 bucks, I'll buy one. If I find any code derived from Open Source code I'll make it known. I'm sure others will do the same.

GPL misunderstanding

[Ray Dassen]

So the question is when can we download their changes to the Linux kernel?

The GPL does not require someone using GPLed code to make their changes available for download. The GPL only requires that someone who distributes binaries built from GPLed code to make the source code available to those who received the binaries, upon their request under reasonable terms (only a copying fee).

Thus, the only way to determine whether there is an actual violation of the GPL in this case is to buy the product and check whether it is accompanied by the source or an offer for the source.