Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Rockbox Digest, Vol 10, Issue 19
Re: Rockbox Digest, Vol 10, Issue 19
From: [IDC]Dragon <idc-dragon_at_gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:30:43 +0100 (MET)
> If you look at the source code you see that most of the heavy lifting is
> done in the TI proprietary libraries. That is fine, perhaps even great,
> for a commercial product but unacceptable for an open source project.
I disagree. On the Archos, the "heavy lifting" is done by the MAS codec and
the USB bridge. We live quite well with it. These parts are black boxes to
us, in effect similar to those libraries.
> is having to buy VERY expensive commercial tools. An eval version with a
> 90 day time bomb is unacceptable too.
But you can't blame Meuros for that. It was started as a commercial design,
free compilers are no prerequisite to that. It's togh luck that their
platform is not suitable for our development style, but not their fault.
Btw, open source means that you're free to compile your own variant. It
doesn't mean the compiler has to be free, too.
> As one of the first people who tried to get Neuros to quit lying and live
> up to their open source claims, I have a very bad taste in my mouth and
> probably would never consider ANY products from that company. I'm sure
> that distaste is shared by the guys who sling the code.
I don't know the first part of the story, but from the IRC chats with these
guys they seem nice and helpful, doing what they could, under the
circumstances. They have given away what they have (schematics may be
missing yet), not necessarily a common move in the corporate world. The TI
libraries are 3rd party, closed source to them, too. I see no reason to be
angry about them.
-- NEU +++ DSL Komplett von GMX +++ http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl GMX DSL-Netzanschluss + Tarif zum supergünstigen Komplett-Preis! _______________________________________________ http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockboxReceived on 2004-11-15