Linux-based Handheld to Sell 200,000 Units in Europe this Christmas

[nonchalance]

From AustralianIT (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0%2C7204%2C17167386%255E15338%255E%255Enbv%255E153 06%252D15321%2C00.html).

BRITISH toy sellers have tipped the Australian-developed digiBLAST game console as the "most significant new product entry in Britain's toy market this year" following a deal by its Melbourne developer to sell 200,000 units into Europe this Christmas season.
The console is aimed at the kids market, plays proprietary cartridges (games, music, video), and retails at US $89.95.

[m0nk3yb0y]

Fuck that, the GP2x is Linux based and supports homebrew and emulators.

[Deathbane27]

Open-source OS, proprietary hardware.

I don't think I'm getting the picture, Picasso.

[nonchalance]

Open-source OS, proprietary hardware.
And software.
And video.

Funny, wot?

[gojira]

Yeah, why Linux but not *BSD? BSD is basically public domain, you can modify it and you don't have to give the changes back.

But if they can make money, more power to 'em.

[moron]

Hey gojira. The reason why Linux is that Linux encourages good manners while FreeBSD encourages typical selfish greedy behaviour like that from, say. . . Microsoft (the first Windows NT net stack was lifted from BSD for example, Apple's lack of contributions back to FreeBSD, etc.). Linux helps create a pool everyone can draw from. FreeBSD unforunately tends to subsidize those who would keep all the gold for themselves.

GPL is where it's at man. Propietary leads to crap like horrific EULA agreements, DRM and monopolies.

Cheers

[saneman]

nice post, moron.

[ChumLord]

Hey gojira. The reason why Linux is that Linux encourages good manners while FreeBSD encourages typical selfish greedy behaviour like that from, say. . . Microsoft (the first Windows NT net stack was lifted from BSD for example, Apple's lack of contributions back to FreeBSD, etc.). Linux helps create a pool everyone can draw from. FreeBSD unforunately tends to subsidize those who would keep all the gold for themselves.


Personally, I appreciate both licenses but, I do prefer the new BSD license to the GPL for it's simplistic beauty. Both the GPL and the new BSD license have their places. Semantic arguments about 'freedom' aside, this is the opinion that I tend to favor (lifted from here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_and_GPL_licensing)):
Proponents of copyleft-style software licenses such as the GPL argue that the non-copyleft nature of the BSD license becomes detrimental to open source in general, as it does not expressly require that users who extend BSD-licensed software must openly release their modifications. However, it is counter-argued that the non-copyleft nature of the BSD license encourages inclusion of well-developed standard code into closed source projects, and it is further argued that licenses such as the GPL discourages this, forcing people who wish to develop closed source projects to reinvent the wheel to maintain their ability to keep the project closed source, doing it in possibly a less-efficient way than the open source version does it (as it has been open to more scrutiny and patching).
I'll give the classic OpenSSH example here for why it is a good thing to allow 'free' code to be included in commercial products with minimal licensing hassles. Do greedy fucks get to ass rape the system? Sure. At least they are using solid code instead of hiring a 6 year old 'programmer' (an exaggeration) to write some bug-ridden, unstable, steaming pile of crap that 'gets the job done', security and stability be damned. But that's just me. Opinions are like assholes to quote the old saying, everybody has one. In the *NIX world we have ample amounts of both opinions and assholes.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

I kinda doubt that a toy company is using Linux simply because they want to open their platform to everyone.

[nonchalance]

nice post, moron.
I bet that was really fun to say. :D

[saneman]

damn straight.

[Sl1pstream]

DigiBLAST is crap though. At the store where I work we have one for about a month now. The screen was too bright too really see the video and the controls are too weird to actually play the games. Toy of the year nominee over here though.

[m0nk3yb0y]

Personally, I appreciate both licenses but, I do prefer the new BSD license to the GPL for it's simplistic beauty. Both the GPL and the new BSD license have their places. Semantic arguments about 'freedom' aside, this is the opinion that I tend to favor (lifted from here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_and_GPL_licensing)):

I'll give the classic OpenSSH example here for why it is a good thing to allow 'free' code to be included in commercial products with minimal licensing hassles. Do greedy fucks get to ass rape the system? Sure. At least they are using solid code instead of hiring a 6 year old 'programmer' (an exaggeration) to write some bug-ridden, unstable, steaming pile of crap that 'gets the job done', security and stability be damned. But that's just me. Opinions are like assholes to quote the old saying, everybody has one. In the *NIX world we have ample amounts of both opinions and assholes.

That makes sense, but it would be nice if they were required to put something back into BSD, whether it be code or donating money somehow. If there's good code to be used, then they should be able to use it, but they shouldn't be greedy fuckers.

[Serapth]

Jesus Christ! Who turned EA into Slashdot?!?!?!

Really, who gives a fuck what OS your console runs? Half the time its burned into ROM's so you cant change it anyways, the other half it ships on the CD/DVD with the game, so really, its whatever OS the game maker used ( although 99.9% of the time its the one the console maker provided for obvious reasons ).

[m0nk3yb0y]

Jesus Christ! Who turned EA into Slashdot?!?!?!

Really, who gives a fuck what OS your console runs? Half the time its burned into ROM's so you cant change it anyways, the other half it ships on the CD/DVD with the game, so really, its whatever OS the game maker used ( although 99.9% of the time its the one the console maker provided for obvious reasons ).

In the case of the GP2X, it's open to people programming stuff for it, so yes it is a big deal. There aren't going to be many commercial games for it I believe.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

The GP32 didn't have many commercial games, so I doubt the 2X will be any different. But damn, I still want one...

[ChumLord]

That makes sense, but it would be nice if they were required to put something back into BSD, whether it be code or donating money somehow. If there's good code to be used, then they should be able to use it, but they shouldn't be greedy fuckers.
Indeed, it is ideal when code gets contributed back and I'll never argue that. I also wish that more of the folks that use the code in a commercial product would donate funds to the developers of said code in the very least (yeah, right, I know).

Edit: If you want to get into semantics, free should be 'free' with no restrictions. You GPL folks, it would seem, want your cake and eat it too. Either give the code up or restrict it, it is your choice after all, but for the love of GOD don't try to play the middle ground (i.e., this code is 'free' but subject to these 'restrictions'.). The moment that you impose restrictions is the moment that 'it' ceases to be 'free'. See here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom):
Freedom refers, in a very general sense, to the state of being free (i.e. unrestricted, unconfined or unfettered).
and here (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/freedom):
Main Entry: free·dom
Pronunciation: 'frE-d&m
Function: noun
1 : the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : INDEPENDENCE c : the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous <freedom from care>