Database Info

{Make Sticky} We need Source

Dear Forums,
As we all know, the key to having a truly customizable device is having the source for their builds, and as we also all know, Viewsonic has not released the source code for their Gtablet.
If we all find the correct email to contact, much like all other companies they will be pressured into releasing the source to the community.
Let's get this done.
LETTER
Dear Viewsonic,
We are aware your company has directed many customers calling for technical support to the gTablet sub-forum of xda-developers
http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=841
Please consider listening to what the community as asking for.
By using the Linux Kernel in your device you are required by the Free Software Foundation's General Public License (GPLv2) to release the source code for the kernel. If there is any proprietary software involved in said code, then you have the right to protect your investment, and not include that with the source release.
We are entitled to the source to change our tablets in the way we see fit with the full understanding that when we modify our tablets software we remove ourselves from any sort of warranty you may offer.
Furthermore, we would like an open dialog between with your developers concerning the software which is shipped with the gTablet. It well known among the community that the return rate for the gTablet is unnaturally high. The version of Android developed by Tap n Tap does not provide a positive user experience for the average user. By this time you should be aware of such feedback coming from the main distributors of the gTablet, Sears and Staples. This situation will only continue to get worse as detailed professional reviews of this product begin to circulate around the Internet. One such review I am referring to will be posted to Anandtech.com in the next few days.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4054/first-look-viewsonic-gtablet-and-tegra-2-performance-preview
Barnes and Noble has released a Software Development Kit as well as source code to enable the community to make the Nook Color the best product it can be.
http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com/press_releases/2010_oct_26_nook_developer.html
Please follow their example. By working together we can make the gTablet a real competitor in the burgeoning tablet marketplace.
Sincerely,
The gTablet Community from xda-developers.com

I'll second that. Not sure what we can do, but they should be reminded.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App

Viewsonic's main website has a support tab that you can send inquiries. Do you think it would get to the right place if we used that?

The email avenue did not work for me
xmr405o said:
Viewsonic's main website has a support tab that you can send inquiries. Do you think it would get to the right place if we used that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried using the email tech support method for the web site; got this response back:
Dear Mr. Walker,
Thank you for contacting ViewSonic Technical Support.
I apologize but as much as I wanted to assist you with it, the product that you are inquiring about is handled by a different technical department.
You may contact them by calling 1-866-501-6405 between 8am-5pm PST, Monday through Friday.
If you have other technical concerns, feel free to contact us again. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to assist you.
Sincerely,
Josef
ViewSonic Technical Support
(800) 688-6688 (USA)
(866) 463-4775(Canada)

[email protected] said:
I tried using the email tech support method for the web site; got this response back:
Dear Mr. Walker,
Thank you for contacting ViewSonic Technical Support.
I apologize but as much as I wanted to assist you with it, the product that you are inquiring about is handled by a different technical department.
You may contact them by calling 1-866-501-6405 between 8am-5pm PST, Monday through Friday.
If you have other technical concerns, feel free to contact us again. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to assist you.
Sincerely,
Josef
ViewSonic Technical Support
(800) 688-6688 (USA)
(866) 463-4775(Canada)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go for it. it has to drop sooner or later. the more pressure from the community, the better. I'll drop them a line as well.

I get the feeling that instead of taking the time to lock the device down like is done with phones and other android devices, they decided they will just not release the code and hope to stall out mods that way.

TheMongol said:
I get the feeling that instead of taking the time to lock the device down like is done with phones and other android devices, they decided they will just not release the code and hope to stall out mods that way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That'd work, except for the fact that it's against the GPL, and that'd be breaking the law. They have to make it available, it's just a matter of pressuring them into doing so sooner than later.

just sent off my second email to viewsonic regarding the gtablet (along with a note telling them to fwd the email accordingly). i will let you guys know if i get a response.

Just called in. They are taking people's contact info that say they are android developers (they started doing that today) and they said they are not doing it to track us or anything like that, but to contact us...like say...when the source is released.
Everybody, call. Emailing isn't going to get you anywhere.
I informed them that they will legally have to release source under GPL, he said he will be passing that up to the developers. It sounds like we may be getting somewhere, but we need to call...the more the merrier. It sounds like they have a small call center so its not how many times you call, but how many different people call at this point.

myndwire said:
That'd work, except for the fact that it's against the GPL, and that'd be breaking the law. They have to make it available, it's just a matter of pressuring them into doing so sooner than later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh yes indeed. But that doesn't mean people won't try to get away with things from time to time. Perhaps they are not even aware. I know I am going to call and ask soon even though I just started developing on android.

I called them today, as well - good bunch of people over there and a pleasure to talk with them.
I'm serious - in a world of reps in third world countries speaking broken english and working off a script, the VS reps are a breath of fresh air and Viewsonic should be commended for that alone. I put in my usual request to please release the source and I was told that they will pass it onto the development team.
I don't expect anything to come from it, but they do know who I am and who we are, so I'm hoping that VS management throws us a bone once they realize what a mistake it was adding that TnT layer.

roebeet said:
I called them today, as well - good bunch of people over there and a pleasure to talk with them.
I'm serious - in a world of reps in third world countries speaking broken english and working off a script, the VS reps are a breath of fresh air and Viewsonic should be commented for that alone. I put in my usual request to please release the source and I was told that they will pass it onto the development team.
I don't expect anything to come from it, but they do know who I am and who we are, so I'm hoping that VS management throws us a bone once they realize what a mistake it was adding that TnT layer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. The guy I talked to was pretty cool. He also said that the developers are being very persistent about keeping TnT in place. Very nice to talk to someone that can actually speak English

scsione889 said:
I agree. The guy I talked to was pretty cool, and even he came out and said xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. He also said that the developers are being very persistent about keeping TnT in place. Very nice to talk to someone that can actually speak English
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Watch out, they read these forums, don't want to get the poor guy fired!

jacindc said:
Watch out, they read these forums, don't want to get the poor guy fired!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
x2 on that! Rule of thumb - if you write something here about a conversation with CS, assume that their management might read it and how that would look.

Just spoke with Mike @ Viewsonic gtablet support. First, they are very nice! Second, Mike said that they are working on a release, but no date yet. Finally, Mike said that they would be posting it to viewsonic.com/gtablet website (and to also check xda-developers.com for other updates).
They also took my e-mail address - hopefully to send out a blast when they are finally able to post it.
BTW, Mike - thanks!
I also have to echo others who have posted here - Thank you, Viewsonic, for having people who can speak English!!

I figured I would do my part as well. I called & spoke to a tech who said they were not releasing it & have no plans to do so. I said its linux based & the GPL says they have to release the source by law. He said they dont support changing the operating system. I said Android is linux based & falls under the GPL. He then transfered me to a senior tech who said:
Tap n tap is proprietary & therefore it doesn’t fall in the GPL. He said the TNT is also horrendous & they want to protect the tap n tap ‘investment’ which is why the source wont be released. They did not ask for my information aside from my first name for the conversation we had. He basically said they were not going to release the source regardless of how many people called. The only way to get it is to sue the company & force them to do so. Obviously, I am not looking to spend more money just to get the source. He knows that, the company knows that & until someone bucks up & hires an attorney, viewsonic doesn’t care.
He did say that they did get a number of calls, he feels for me, he said others have rooted it but tough titties (my summary).

RichTJ99 said:
He basically said they were not going to release the source regardless of how many people called. The only way to get it is to sue the company & force them to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Boy, did my blood pressure just skyrocket.

RichTJ99 said:
I figured I would do my part as well. I called & spoke to a tech who said they were not releasing it & have no plans to do so. I said its linux based & the GPL says they have to release the source by law. He said they dont support changing the operating system. I said Android is linux based & falls under the GPL. He then transfered me to a senior tech who said:
Tap n tap is proprietary & therefore it doesn’t fall in the GPL. He said the TNT is also horrendous & they want to protect the tap n tap ‘investment’ which is why the source wont be released. They did not ask for my information aside from my first name for the conversation we had. He basically said they were not going to release the source regardless of how many people called. The only way to get it is to sue the company & force them to do so. Obviously, I am not looking to spend more money just to get the source. He knows that, the company knows that & until someone bucks up & hires an attorney, viewsonic doesn’t care.
He did say that they did get a number of calls, he feels for me, he said others have rooted it but tough titties (my summary).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info.
What I don't understand is why is it that HTC is bound to GPL in that it must release source for its devices even though the majority of HTC devices has the proprietary software, Sense?
I don't think having proprietary software on a device exempts a company from conforming to GPL.

i think they must be new to linux or HTC is very used to dealing with Linux.
The senior tech was sympathetic but was firm in repeating the company plans. Heck their twitter page sais the same exact thing.
It makes me wonder if I should return it.

RichTJ99 said:
i think they must be new to linux or HTC is very used to dealing with Linux.
The senior tech was sympathetic but was firm in repeating the company plans. Heck their twitter page sais the same exact thing.
It makes me wonder if I should return it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree- without source, the gtab won't be able to experience its full potential especially if Viewsonic thinks anyone likes tapntap. Makes me wonder if I should return mine even though (outside of a few annoyances) I really like the device.
Viewsonic has to release source. Their device is Linux based with a proprietary software user interface just like HTC devices. This is ridiculous.

Some Entertaining reading. GO XDA DEVs.

please try not to shoot the messenger here. Thought this may be of interest to some here.
Class Action
Also a Plausible explanation for the Delay...

Sighcosis said:
please try not to shoot the messenger here. Thought this may be of interest to some here.
Class Action
Also a Plausible explanation for the Delay...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The second article, if true, is what pisses me off.. Good job Samsung, you may be deceptively inflating the value of your Vibrant 4G, but, at the cost of the PR of thousands of customers who've already put value into your company.. brilliant!
Let's watch all those Fascinate owners hop over to the iPhone 4 on Febuary 10th because we STILL won't have OTA Froyo by then!!..

The lawsuit will fail. We are not guaranteed any updates, read the contract you signed when you got your phone.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App

not sure about if there is a case there or not.
But its is not all about updates.
I understand that to be a small part of it.
Apparently more to do with the GPS not working and basically not following in the Android Open Source Project scheme. I was reading up on that and from what I can understand of it their source should be available to Devs *hence the Open Source*.
Personally it costs me nothing and if it helps in getting the message out that as customers we are unhappy.. I am all in..
Twitter something to @SamsungMobileUS with #NeverAgain tag. That is another "movement" started by DEVs here at XDA.
this was mine
@SamsungMobileUS I have been a user of your fine video and audio devices for years. #NeverAgain will I purchase a Samsung device.
I am but one voice and can not be heard in the masses. But if I join the masses we can become a Shout or a Deafening Roar

Well let me go read the AOSP license..
and that aside.. who knows what license agreement Google and Samsung made? It is not necessarily the one on the code.
Here's the corporate license: http://source.android.com/source/cla-corporate.html
Well.. as far as I can tell (I'm no lawyer..) Samsung is not doing anything illegal:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
The are not required to redistribute their source at all for user space applications.. they are only required to retain the license and make sure they note where they have made changes. Code, however, may be distributed in source OR object format.
As far as the kernel (which is what we really need) they are only required to redistribute the source of any linux kernel they have in turn modified and then DISTRIBUTED. Key word distributed, and let me assure you, this has been done. The source for the current kernel on our device can be obtained from Samsung's open source website (albeit at obnoxiously throttled DL speeds.. ~70kb/s). I have it . Once they push 2.2 they will [have to] make the source available. I'm sure they will.

skitzo_inc said:
The lawsuit will fail. We are not guaranteed any updates, read the contract you signed when you got your phone.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also don't the lawsuit will succeed, but from what I gather its not about the update itself, its about them all saying we would get it and never getting it. The whole "false advertising" thing. Think about what kind of legal staff a multinational conglomerate like Samsung could put together. I love the fact that he is speaking out and getting a decent amount of attention, but in the long run will it do anything? Unfortunately I doubt it. I do not hate Samsung or US Cellular for that matter, in fact I love my Mez way better than my crapberry curve

droidzach said:
I also don't the lawsuit will succeed, but from what I gather its not about the update itself, its about them all saying we would get it and never getting it. The whole "false advertising" thing. Think about what kind of legal staff a multinational conglomerate like Samsung could put together. I love the fact that he is speaking out and getting a decent amount of attention, but in the long run will it do anything? Unfortunately I doubt it. I do not hate Samsung or US Cellular for that matter, in fact I love my Mez way better than my crapberry curve
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the business word the only promise is a contract. And even those can be broken..

I know this, if I worked at Verizon I would hold off the 2.2 update until after the Iphone4 is launched to beef up the sales of the new product. Then release 2.2 after sales have leveled out.

News about upgrading from 2.x to Honeycreams

http://androidcommunity.com/google-blocking-android-2-x-to-3-0-updates-for-tablets-20110328/
Just read the above article, wanted to see what other people thought about it. It seems like kind of a kick-in-the-balls plan from google, but then again, I'm not really worried about the G-tab getting an official 3.0 release. Since were using most of the base hardware that 3.0 was designed around, I'm sure someone will get a port eventually, it would just be nice to get a bit more support from the big G.

Well there's always ice cream comb

Ok. Google taking the right steps to be a real threat for mac.
I thought we prefered android because of its differences from mac and not their similarities.

Et tu, Goggle?

And 10.000 Gtabs has been sold at a very big discount one day before this new is made public. Business is business
BR

well this news has a huge suck factor.

Keep in mind that this "news" is just an unsubstantiated rumor. Nothing to see here. Move along.

jsrF1 said:
Keep in mind that this "news" is just an unsubstantiated rumor. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope it stays unsubstantiated. Otherwise, ginormous suck factor.

As much as I love the honeycomb UI, there is really nothing wrong with 2.2 and 2.3. In fact, to make myself feel better, I just think of honeycomb as android with additional bloatware...which I'm sure is true to a point.

TheFlyingPig said:
As much as I love the honeycomb UI, there is really nothing wrong with 2.2 and 2.3. In fact, to make myself feel better, I just think of honeycomb as android with additional bloatware...which I'm sure is true to a point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care for the UI too but I do care about the Honeycomb optimized apps. This is really the only reason why I wanted Honeycomb.

This is not surprising.
On ZDNET (slash) blog (slash) google (slash) google-android-30-honeycomb-open-source-no-more (slash) 2845
They had to take a lot of shortcuts and strip things down for XOOM to meet the deadline. Just wait for 3.1 when they Open Source it again.

xmr405o said:
I don't care for the UI too but I do care about the Honeycomb optimized apps. This is really the only reason why I wanted Honeycomb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here -- it's a waste to not use that increased resolution and screen size on tablet-optimized apps.

beebop483 said:
http://androidcommunity.com/google-blocking-android-2-x-to-3-0-updates-for-tablets-20110328/
Just read the above article, wanted to see what other people thought about it. It seems like kind of a kick-in-the-balls plan from google, but then again, I'm not really worried about the G-tab getting an official 3.0 release. Since were using most of the base hardware that 3.0 was designed around, I'm sure someone will get a port eventually, it would just be nice to get a bit more support from the big G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are delaying because the source code isn't ready it will remain open source and available to all devices. Google made that statement 3 days ago. Would post the article but I am on gtab. Either it was on market watch, wall street journal, new York times, eweek, infoworld of another site I frequent.
It is however old news.

I put a post in the one of the threads about the release delay on honeycomb. Google partnered up with LG for doing a Nexus Tablet (supposed to out ~July) and Google will not release honeycomb source till after the release of the Nexus Tab, (~Aug)
Also it mentioned that something about the licensing agreement needed for using 3.x that it cannot be put on a device running 2.x.

lol, like many ppl here are actually waiting for an "official" version.

lordgodgeneral said:
I put a post in the one of the threads about the release delay on honeycomb. Google partnered up with LG for doing a Nexus Tablet (supposed to out ~July) and Google will not release honeycomb source till after the release of the Nexus Tab, (~Aug)
Also it mentioned that something about the licensing agreement needed for using 3.x that it cannot be put on a device running 2.x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And would you mind sharing the source of these stated facts, or are you merely speculating?

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=12457747&postcount=8
Here's the link to my response in the other honeycomb thread.
Here's the link to the actual article
http://thenextweb.com/google/2011/0...-partners-with-lg-to-launch-new-nexus-tablet/
Also anyone should know that until there is an official announcement anything being discussed is speculation, so get off your high horse.

I read that as Google not allowing manufacturers to upgrade 2.x tablets, not they the would not release it to the community until after the Nexus tablet launch.
Also included in Murtazin’s report was the suggestion that Google will not allow tablets running Android 2.x to receive a Honeycomb upgrade in the future. Apparently, if a hardware partner releases a tablet on an older version of Android, the Honeycomb licensing agreement will not allow them to be updated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

this seems to be the Google official position about HC:
Google has decided to delay the release of the Honeycomb source-code to the general public for now. If you are a member of the Open Handset Alliance you can get access to 3.0. Also, other manufacturers are able to get access to the source-code upon request, but only for use on tablets. Ultimately, Google wants to avoid contaminating Android's marketing image because some low-end device makers forced out buggy "Honeycomb phones". Here's what Andy Rubin, CEO of Google had to say on the matter,
Android 3.0, Honeycomb, was designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes and improves on Android favorites such as widgets, multi-tasking, browsing, notifications and customization…We didn’t want to think about what it would take for the same software to run on phones. It would have required a lot of additional resources and extended our schedule beyond what we thought was reasonable. So we took a shortcut. While we’re excited to offer these new features to Android tablets, we have more work to do before we can deliver them to other device types including phones… Until then, we’ve decided not to release Honeycomb to open source.
Before anyone could cry foul and compare Google to Apple, Mr. Rubin added,
"[Google is] committed to providing Android as an open platform across many device types and will publish the source as soon as it’s ready."
It is probably a bit nerve racking for developers and enthusiasts that Google has taken this step. It's easy to jump to the conclusion that they intend to begin "locking down" the product, but one could also look at it from the standpoint that Google is serious about protecting 'Andy' from being "dumbed-down" too much. Also, this fine-tuning process will help them nail-down extra security measures to help reduce malware issues in the future. What do you guys think? Is this a signal of sad times for Android, or just smart business strategy?
Source: AndroidTablets.net via AndroidPolice

Its simple really- for any android tablet to compete with the ipad it needs to be semi bulletproof as far as stability goes and quality of UI etc. This is the only way google is going to be able achieve this. They will release it. When they choose is going to be carefully timed.

Lets put the pressure on nVidia [UPDATED 10/07]

Hy guys and gals, i have done some digging on the nVidia developers forums and have found a thread requesting info on if/when nVidia plans to drop the source for the HAL that we need so our amazing developers can get A2DP working
I'm posting the link below, maybe if enough of us go into the thread requesting this info nVidia will comply
EDIT: nVidia updated their forum and our topic was tossed into the archive and not brought over, to remind them that this is still a valid issue I have re-created the thread, please if you want to try at getting A2DP to work with non OTA based rom's go voice your opinion
New nVidia developers Forum
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA Premium App

Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.

This would be great! Then I could finally buy a Bluetooth Stereo Headset.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App

I'd love to see this happen, but I don't see it anytime soon. Nvidia has been historically bad at releasing their source code.

fcisco13 said:
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link worked perfectly fine for me, both on my TF101 earlier and just now on my g2x.....not sure why it didn't work for u
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App

Lets get this moving

Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.

lawsuit??? Lol worked for lg...

It'll never work. You can't sue them because they won't release their source code. That's like saying "Hey let's sue microsoft because they won't release the source to their kernel." It's their property, and they can do what they like with it. If android didn't run on top of the linux kernel, which is gpl licensed, I'd almost guarantee that no vendor would ever release the source for it.
Not trying to be a buzz-kill or anything, I want the source code as much as anyone else. But no amount of threatening lawsuits, bugging them through email, forums, or phone calls will change their minds. If they intend on releasing the source, they'll do it in their own time, if not, we're SOL.

mstrk242 said:
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...

I was kidding about it, we can wait for 2.3.4-5 ota...

It may be Nvidia's right to keep it's code proprietary, but I can't imagine buying another Android device with one of their chips in it unless something changes.
We are evolving very fast, I don't know if nVidia can assume the Windows GPU market will always be there for them. If Android dominates the next decade or so the way that Windows did the last then manufacturers are obviously going to have to adapt or perish.

No way, there will always be a market for high end video cards on windows, simply for gaming if nothing else. Sure, they may not make it in the cell phone market (although I doubt that too, just because they are very good with hardware, they'll work out the kinks.)
You have to remember, the vast majority of people who buy these phones don't even know what a rom is, let alone the fact that they can customize it. The modding community is a small (albeit very vocal,) minority.
Also, please no one read between the lines on these posts I've made. I'm no insider, I have no information what so ever from nvidia. I'm really only basing these educated guesses based on my experience with nvidia and linux drivers. They may very well open the source, but I'm just trying to say don't hold your breath, and screaming at nvidia is absolutely pointless.

bump for updated link

None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.

Spyvie said:
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.

gaww said:
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then you want to get the MI Millet MIUI phone when it is available in your country. It is a dual core 1.5Ghz Scorpion processor and they expect you to update it weekly with new MIUI builds. It is an awesome device for the low price point (1,999 Chinese Yuan or about $300.00 US).
http://product.xiaomi.com/features.html
Go salivate.

jboxer said:
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium

They deleted my account. WTF?

xsteven77x said:
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd imagine its for the same reason our devices and other tegra devices can only play the tegra games hence incentive tobuy a tegra phone. I think if they released code then any dev could hack their phone and play tegra games without having a tegra chip. Just a hunch.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App

annoying samsung...

I'm trying to get Samsung to release the source for their ar6000.ko ethernet kernel module as well as the source they used for wpa_supplicant (which contains extensions to wpa_supplicant.) To that end, I've sent them a few messages making those requests. Here was their reply (edited)
1. about 'ar6000.ko'
: source code of atheros chip set is not GPL.
We get BSD/GPL dual license from Atheros company.
We choose BSD license, so we do not have any obligation to publish source codeof it.
2. wpa_supplicant
Wpa_supplicant is also BSD/GPL dual license. (and we also choose BSD license)
________________________________________________________________
WPA Supplicant
==============
Copyright (c) 2003-2008, Jouni Malinen and contributors
All Rights Reserved.
This program is dual-licensed under both the GPL version 2 and BSD
license. Either license may be used at your option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sadly, they seem to have failed to meet the conditions of the BSD licensing as well. I've sent them another message stating this:
Concerning the atheros AR6000 driver and the wpa_supplicant binary. In denying the making available source for both the ar6000 module and the wpa_supplicant binary, you state that you get both of these with dual GPL/BSD licensing and choose the BSD license. That is fine, however you failed to meet the terms of the BSD license. In particular, for both items, the BSD license states: " Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution." You have failed to state your licensing terms and this disclaimer in reference to the above stated items in either the printed documentation or the legal licensing screen embedded within the settings app on the device. As a matter of fact, you've failed to provide any licensing notice for GPL or BSD licensing for either item.
Regardless, I'm asking for these items in order to attempt to FIX BUGS that have been left in the device. It's been well documented in the forums for users of these devices that the wifi chipset drivers are causing crashes, freezes, "sleep of death" situations, etc. Samsung's support has been EXTREMELY unresponsive in attempting to resolve these issue, and I'd be willing to bet that reports of these issue aren't even getting through to your development teams.
Therefore, I once again ask that you release the source for the ar6000 module and wpa_supplicant binary that you have NOT followed the licensing terms of (regardless of which license you've chosen.) Oh, and there's no licensing string embedded in the ar6000.ko module either. modinfo ar6000.ko reveals nothing (for the ar6000.ko module on the GT-P6210 with KL1 firmware.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, I don't expect for Samsung to be responsive and/or helpful. I think the best that anyone can expect is that they release an updated firmware that includes the proper licensing information.
Gary

Check and mate Sir. I despise these OEMs. You GO gary. Whatever happened to opensource? What are they so afraid of?
Anything we can do to help, let us know. Even if it means just spamming their inbox.

It's not like I buy the tablet because it has such an epic driver....
I buy it for the hardware...
When your entire OS is practically open source... not open sourcing the drivers for the wireless chip seems like shooting yourself in the foot just because you can.

Thanks garyd9 for fighting the good fight.

When companies do stuff like this for critical things, it _really_ makes me want to spend my money elsewhere.
In regards to the SOD issue, I've noticed that quite a few honeycomb tablets have this issue or something similar to it. I've only personally seen it with Samsung branded ones (10.1 and 7.0+), but have heard similar issues with asus and and acer.
Perhaps its a honeycomb issue?
Gary

give em hell!

If you'd like to help, please click the link near the top of the OP to submit the article to the XDA portal. Perhaps if this issue is shown on the front page, and enough people notice, Samsung could be convinced to "choose" GPL over BSD.
Thank you
Gary

Did you get any useful /proc/last_kmsg dumps of SoDs? Enabling wifi may only be making a difference because of the wakeups.
That said - I am completely shocked that Broadcom's drivers are open source and the ar6000 driver isn't. I've lost a lot of respect for Atheros AND for Samsung over this. I can understand if it's BSD - but seriously, what trade secrets could Samsung have in a freaking Atheros driver, and for something like this, what possible business reason could they have for witholding source for that ONE module? It's freaking stupid.
I was hoping that they'd start becoming more developer-friendly as a result of hiring Cyanogen, but they're being asshats at this point. They donated a device to Codeworkx (or someone else on Teamhacksung) to get CM7 ported, but have not given him a shred of assistance with the porting effort. Basically, trying to get "Supported by CyanogenMod" credits without ANY significant effort.
As much as I hate Sony - SE seems to be doing the best of any manufacturer in terms of supporting people doing platform-level development.
Edits:
You know, this is proving to be a clear and recurring pattern. I have never seen XDA get anything useful out of SamsungJohn for example, all he does is come over, tease us with something, and never follow up.
Over in the Captivate forums - he came in and posted that source code was out, then left without any followup - by the time he made this announcement, people had already found the source and were working with it - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=997098
He then came and teased us with the Samsung Developer Program - guess what, it provides NOTHING for developers doing platform work - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1392847 - John also didn't come and respond to any of the feedback
Prior to that there was the Samsung Developers Conference tease - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1291758 - nothing useful came out of this for anyone doing platform work. In fact, John just dropped off the face of the earth, I'm assuming that not a single person from XDA actually was brought by Samsung to the event, otherwise there would've been a followup/debrief post. Anyway, the "big announcement" was just the Galaxy Nexus release announcement. Big deal - that's a dev phone because Google forces it to be one, it's more of a Google product than a Samsung one.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=954896 (and many similar posts) - He just crossposted to a ton of forums saying something awesome was coming. Something awesome never came. The linked thread from many of his posts doesn't even exist. Actually, most of his 67 posts are just crossposting this tease - NOTHING ever came out of it.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/08/samsung-shows-affection-to-cyanogenmod-gives-its-devs-a-free-ga/ - As a PR stunt, Samsung threw a Galaxy S II over the wall to one of the CM developers. Without a doubt, Dan Hillenbrand (codeworkx) and Atin Malvaya (atinm) have not received any support from Samsung since Sammy threw a device over to them. The GSII is likely to be codeworkx's last Samsung device, he has become so frustrated with Samsung (Check his posts in the CM9 thread for I9100). Compare this to Sony Ericsson's effort here - http://blogs.sonyericsson.com/wp/2011/09/28/sony-ericsson-supports-independent-developers/ - They have given FreeXperia MASSIVE amounts of support, and it shows - http://www.cyanogenmod.com/blog/sony-ericsson-xperia-support
imnuts07 asked for some help regarding Droid Charge kernel source issues - https://twitter.com/#!/SamsungJohn/status/152835654303236097 - All he responded with was "how can we help" - no further response, imnuts07 didn't get anywhere until jt1134 gave him some pointers. (It turned out to be more proprietary module vermagic bull****...)
After all this, it's clear that with regards to platform developers, Samsung's intent is to do the bare minimum to meet their legal obligations with the GPL and no more. Even source code which they COULD release and have no valid reason for withholding is withheld if they are able to (such as the ar6000 module source code). I thought that the Galaxy S II was a step forward towards devices with 100% open source kernels, however it is clear that the GSII was just a fluke. I'm getting sick and tired of dealing with module vermagic headaches. I've spent at this point a few hundred hours of my spare time working on improvements to various products of theirs(maintaining kernels for three different products - Samsung Infuse, AT&T Galaxy S II, and Galaxy Player 5.0), and their consistent message back has been "go away, screw you, stop bothering us".

There may be a small bit of hope - I've been contacted by someone at samsung (perhaps due to your rant combined with my constant pestering on their open source website.) It isn't much, but the first line of collaborating is communication. They seem more interested in fixing the bugs than sharing code, but I'll take what I can get.
Oh, and the last_ksmg memory was corrupted when the one person who had adb, my kernel and root installed was able to check it. (As you know, the file won't be generated if header area for the ram console can't be found or is in bad shape.)
We'll see what happens, but I'm not going to hold my breath with the lunar new year coming up.
Take care
Gary

so how many people do we need to sue??

chrisrotolo said:
so how many people do we need to sue??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No lawsuits required. Although... that might explain the poor customer support from Samsung. Perhaps they've been afraid that Apple will sue them for patent infringement if they help a customer?
Not that I've ever had any GOOD support from Apple... mostly just clueless kids taking guesses. Even their so-called "geniuses" are mostly clueless.
In typing that, I realized that I'm probably one of the hardest people in the world to provide technical support to. When I have a question, it's only after I've exhausted the combined knowledge of myself and whatever google can provide... meaning the only good response from phone support would be "Would you like to cross-ship an exchange or wait for the repair?"

can we spook them with a (legal)letter they are in violation of the GPL/BSD agreement, and If it isnt provided in X amount of time, we will be forced to escalate?
I like to annoy people to (;

Speaking from personal experience ,when dealing (even on corporate high level) with Samsung there is nothing to gain but some weight due to stress.
They do care( up to a degree) about some customer relations and I've seen very nice, honest and helpful people there. But this is where it all ends.
The farther you go the worse it gets. Somehow they got this Apple attitude of profit and secrecy all over their structure. Apple calls themselves "innovators" to reason the secrecy, but Sammy are nowhere near. If I was to say they do act like copycat killers I risk getting called names- though they "adapt" almost everything, from design to business models. The Korean HQ has drawn quite strict regulations for the rest of the world.
We should remember that Samsung is a HUGE corporation. Android devices D&R is a tiny faction, ruled like in Middle Ages. They have the road map and they ever raise the stake every time. From my point of view, I sincerely understand those people for not jumping out with the source code. If you get paid 100k+, you don't help anyone but yourself. The decisions are not theirs. The people taking decisions don't give a rat's a55 about GNU or Linux, Minux or whatever. On top of that, there are some people that MIGHT have some influence in changing this policy ( the brown bearded, we call them) but those are the pride ridden SOBs.
You can read this from their mobile device history. They had to go into that, given the fact they build everything, from ships to home furniture. They got a share of the market because they were big and had some bright minds there. I know for a fact that, at the beginning, working @ cell phone dept was like sentenced to prison, only the undesirable but indispensable were sent there. Huh, those people left, some for Apple and some for others ( LG,Sony and Hyundai). Panasonic and Toshiba flops are some examples of how, in a degree, cultural burdens lead to a fail. HTC, a mobile phone company, depends on how much stir dev's can produce. On the other hand, Samsung can get a write-off for their mobile dept. without a blink. Bada is a perfect example. It was close to write off so they decided to make it open- see HP. They are too big to follow rules and beside being big, they hold the power few have- the power TO BEND rules, that is.
Getting any serious, development like help from Samsung is close to what ''Acts of God" are described in car insurance.

htc9420 said:
HTC, a mobile phone company, depends on how much stir dev's can produce.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are, obviously, an HTC fan or employee. Well, I have a samsung tablet, so I'm developing on a samsung tablet. At least the device was unlocked when I bought it and I didn't have to petition on facebook/twitter/etc just to be able to root it.
Unless you have something to contribute to solving a problem, please go elsewhere.

garyd9 said:
You are, obviously, an HTC fan or employee. Well, I have a samsung tablet, so I'm developing on a samsung tablet. At least the device was unlocked when I bought it and I didn't have to petition on facebook/twitter/etc just to be able to root it.
Unless you have something to contribute to solving a problem, please go elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't be so quick to judge him...

I just got the impression that the point of the post was to promote HTC while bashing everyone else.
Perhaps I spoke (typed) too soon. If so, I apologize.

No, the HTC thing was just one line, and what I perceived as some general comments on why some manufacturers (Panasonic, Toshiba) seem to have kind of flopped in the market.
There was definitive Samsung-bashing - but he's just joining with us in frustration.
Check PMs gary.

garyd9 said:
I'm trying to get Samsung to release the source for their ar6000.ko ethernet kernel module as well as the source they used for wpa_supplicant (which contains extensions to wpa_supplicant.) To that end, I've sent them a few messages making those requests. Here was their reply (edited)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey Gary,
I'm the developer for a CyanogenMod port for the Samsung phone (GT-I5500). Samsung have released their source for an older version of the AR6kSDK, which I have put on github here: https://github.com/psyke83/AR6kSDK.3.0. This source is quite old, and doesn't support combo scanning, but it's newer than the ath6kl source release contained in the 2.6.35 kernel.
Last night I scoured the internet trying to find some newer source, and came across a release by Sony for one of their e-book reader products. I have uploaded the source onto github which you can check here: https://github.com/psyke83/AR6kSDK.3.1
The above git's description links to the location of the original source tarball on Sony's server, but if you prefer, just clone the git and checkout the first commit, as it's the unmodified source.
I have made some changes already to get the module to initialize properly, but at present it's not even scanning properly. Perhaps it will work better for you without modifications, especially if your device is not AR6003_REV2 (which is the revision on my phone).

chrisrotolo said:
can we spook them with a (legal)letter they are in violation of the GPL/BSD agreement, and If it isnt provided in X amount of time, we will be forced to escalate?
I like to annoy people to (;
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my friend mat has done this for me as he knows his stuff. it was a very powerful letter i must say haha. just waiting for a response

gary, thanks for all your efforts man! this is my first samsung android device, have they always been this bad in witholding source?