Paid Object Exchange?
Delus
Posts: 79
As a software developer myself I’m curious to see if anyone else would be interested in seeing a paid object exchange with the release of the propeller II. I haven’t given this too much thought yet and can see many technical issues regarding code security but giving developers the ability to sell their well refined code could encourage the undertaking of more time intensive projects which would simply take too long to consider for interests sake alone.
I am not an advocate of removing the free object exchange we all know and love and I imagine there would be a fee for developers wishing to use a paid service giving parallax the resources to manage and maintain it well.
In addition to objects this could also be used for distributing compilers, debuggers, simulators.
Any way this is just a thought and I’m interested to see what others think of this idea.
David
I am not an advocate of removing the free object exchange we all know and love and I imagine there would be a fee for developers wishing to use a paid service giving parallax the resources to manage and maintain it well.
In addition to objects this could also be used for distributing compilers, debuggers, simulators.
Any way this is just a thought and I’m interested to see what others think of this idea.
David
Comments
The problem with the pay for model that I see as a developer is that I can't optimize that code base like you can with the MIT based code. For example, look at what has been done with the graphics drivers (and TV/VGA as well) to support the new types of displays out there. If it was a closed model, that would never have happened. If someone developed a display driver for Ray's 4.3" displays that was closed, I wouldn't use it... simply because I needed to modify his drivers to suit my own needs.
I think this resource is way to valuable in other ways than the monetary. Personally, I thrive on the knowledge and challenge in learning and understanding the code. I'd never buy code for the Prop unless I also got the source.
Yeah, I know, this coming from a Microsoft guy, but I think that the closed model of Windows works because of all the published APIs that MS has developed. Parallax doesn't have the resources to do all that work, so we need to take that responsibility on.
Bill
This benefits both users and developers, unless as a developer you are under the impression that nobody in the world can do a better job than you can.
This (Open Source) does not preclude making money, just that you also need to make source available. Normally the money part comes from packaging and/or support (Think Red Hat and DotNetNuke).
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
John R.
Click here to see my Nomad Build Log
Post Edited (John R.) : 2/14/2010 8:11:49 PM GMT
You may have a point there, I'm not sure such a system could work very well without some way of still sharing source code which could make a mess of things. One thought I did have was still submitting the source and having other's who use/improve your code pay for the use. This however wouldn't prevent someone from being less than honest... I'm still interested in the idea but it would be quite the challenge to get right.
Oh wait...Let's try that again.
Paid for commercial code for the Propeller won't work. Bill Gates tried it with the Intel 8080 back in the 1970's and see what bondage, expense and misery that got the rest of us.
Parallax has a business model based on shipping hardware. All the software available for free from OBEX and elsewhere which is open source and constantly being adapted, tweaked and improved by the community of Parallax users is of great benefit to that business model.
It's hard to see how a closed source commercial software supply has much to offer in this space.
Bottom line: If you think you have something for the Propeller that you can exchange for money then by all means try to do so. If you have money to pay for some closed development then perhaps I can help[noparse]:)[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Of course there is always someone or some reason to disagree with anything [noparse]:)[/noparse]
I currently don't have any code I would exchange for money for the propeller chip but the possibility to do so easily would be nice.
Again I am not sure this could work and it would not have to be through Parallax but that would simplify things for people both developing and using the code.
BUT! I have never downloaded an obex item that did not need pretty significant adjustment to my problem.
I think I've talked myself into advocating open source.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Signature space for rent!
Send $1 to CannibalRobotics.com.
-Phil
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Not the fish.
sites.google.com/site/bitwinproject/
I don't think charging for code use violates openness necessarily. I do think objects should be available as source not binaries and would not discourage use of others code so long as others are given credit where they are due it.
I don't see why rewarding the hard work of people who contribute their code, financially, is simply out of the question.
David
I don't believe that charging the users directly is in anyone's best interest, however. That's not to say, though, that if company A approached you to customize object B for them for a fee that you shouldn't do it. But a non-free marketplace, where code is licensed for a fee and protected against copying (and all the legal Smile that entails) is, as I stated before, a non-starter. It's antithetical to everything the Propeller stands for.
-Phil
Hmm, just a couple line changes and it will work for me... Am I allowed to modify it? And when I do, who owns the modifications now? Can I sell my mods as a value added supplement to your sale? Or do you own the rights to my mods?
This is quickly getting messy...
..steve
and a place to put the "batteries not included".
Here, have ALL the POSSIBLE Code (and music too) in the universe for FREE!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLyLxvFxHbU
As a one-man business, I pay thousands of dollars every month in developing hardware+software solutions for various
customer projects (for example public transport CCTV). It's not the particular 'objects' that are relevant here, but the complete program of software that controls the custom hardware/MMI.
There's no contradiction, because one can judge the background and competence of the various candidates from their forum/obex contributions; then commission them for particular project work.
For example, I approached Leon to develop and integrate a complex Propeller application, agreed the rate and worked with him to devise and test the solution. We used some obex code, contributed our discoveries back to the forum and ended up with new product and expertise.
I'm actively seeking more jobs along these lines: moreover, as they come to completion I shall send unsolicited payments to some of the folks who have put particular objects in the public domain, because it pleases me to do so! This is not a naive business practice either: respect and trust are priceless but very real commodities.
Regards,
T o n y
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Here it comes, Ill be nice "NO".
I am sure you can do that if you would like, you can open you own web site for that, I don't think many users would pay for code.
Why, would you ?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Chip Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
Post Edited (Chip Gracey (Parallax)) : 2/15/2010 7:49:13 PM GMT
It should be fast enough to use the vast C libraries out there for things
like jpeg graphics and mp3 audio...
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
My Prop Info&Apps: ·http://www.rayslogic.com/propeller/propeller.htm
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Chip Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
[noparse][[/noparse]Climbs on soapbox]
The one thing I don't like about the OBEX is that I cannot restrict my code from being used for certain things (like weapons for example).
This really rubs me the wrong way. I don't like the idea of others to using my code for things I morally don't agree with.
A person with a hobby, I'm not worried about. But if a military company (making mega bucks from my taxes) would use my code to develope something that kills people, and I couldn't do anything to prevent it. I don't think I could sleep at night.
[noparse][[/noparse]Climbs down from soapbox]
Bean
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Use BASIC on the Propeller with the speed of assembly language.
PropBASIC thread http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?p=867134
March 2010 Nuts and Volts article·http://www.parallax.com/Portals/0/Downloads/docs/cols/nv/prop/col/nvp5.pdf
·
In another forum, if users want software developed, they put a bounty on a project. They contribute money to a cause and when a programmer takes the job, he gets the money when he completes the work.
Valid observation for sure. I wonder how much ANSI C (non-GNU) source is available for such applications? Now if we could only finish that native GNU tool-chain (which would be worth Parallax or someone paying for especially since it's such a PITA for mere mortals). ZOG would be a good intermediary but being able to execute LMM C would allow a good showcase of potential.
@Chip, all I've managed to grow so far is weeds [noparse]:)[/noparse] It's definitely spring time in San Jose. Weeds *spring* up here and there over night.
The point is that nearly any innocent product can be used for nefarious purposes. But they are the perps who use them this way who are responsible for the evil they spread, not the designers of the products themselves. If we had to worry about every little thing we design or write being misused for nefarious purposes, we'd never do anything.
-Phil
How about ogg vorbis and theora. It is nominated as the free alternative to mpeg formats in HTML5,
and it's GNU, and supported on all platforms except maybe Mac. Is it too hard for the Propeller?
We really need to figure out how to make a useable FFT filter, as all these formats use FFT variants.
As for free code being used for destructive purposes, being compelled to pay for the destructive
action is a million times more offensive to me.
FPGA modular virtual circuits (or whatever they are called) are called "IP", as in copyrighted, and
have time bombs in them? That is a disgusting technology then! HDTV has that feature, and as
long as it does, I will not buy it. Why would I "buy" what I can't own, because of that ?
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
[noparse][[/noparse]color=#008000>http://designedbymemicros.blogspot.com/