Brano
I hate Vogons
Premium,MVM
join:2002-06-25
Burlington, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to viper54g
Re: Sveasoft defamation
I seriously doubt that they're compiling firmware for each client ...
I'm not their subscriber but from what I hear and read to subscribers they're giving for download latest development snapshot. The one which is on P2P may be simple just older date (but maybe not and it's a modified one  ) |
|
viper54g
join:2004-07-16 | Firmware version is the same. Custom firmware for each subscriber can be easely made with a PHP script.
I'm just curious if it's a username tag by sveasoft or a backdoor... |
|
pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
 ·ooma
·Future Nine Corpor..
 ·Comcast
| reply to Brano
said by Brano  :
I seriously doubt that they're compiling firmware for each client ...
I'm not their subscriber but from what I hear and read to subscribers they're giving for download latest development snapshot. The one which is on P2P may be simple just older date (but maybe not and it's a modified one )
Undoubtedly the safest place to acquire a Sveasoft version is from Sveasoft. However, there seem way too many dead threads requesting Sveasoft firmware on the board here, and the Sveasoft reply seems at least at first glance inconsistent with a discussion I had with a moderator on dslreports yesterday... my questions weren't all directly answered (though the first was). It'll be up to the community now, to post if they've had difficulty redistributing code or binaries, or had anything pulled. Part of the "freedom" of GPL requires the community to act as one... it'd be nice to read of peoples experiences redistributing Sveasoft firmware as we have a claim here that people are free to do so per GPL directly from Sveasoft.
 |
|
linksysOLD
join:2002-03-15
NI
| said by pandora :
Undoubtedly the safest place to acquire a Sveasoft version is from Sveasoft. However, there seem way too many dead threads requesting Sveasoft firmware on the board here, and the Sveasoft reply seems at least at first glance inconsistent with a discussion I had with a moderator on dslreports yesterday... my questions weren't all directly answered (though the first was). It'll be up to the community now, to post if they've had difficulty redistributing code or binaries, or had anything pulled. Part of the "freedom" of GPL requires the community to act as one... it'd be nice to read of peoples experiences redistributing Sveasoft firmware as we have a claim here that people are free to do so per GPL directly from Sveasoft.
you all seem to miss the point. redistribution IS allowed HOWEVER... you must distribute both binary and source code together. just showing a binary is in violation of GPL licensing and this guy who hides behind a false ID only allowed Binary to be downloaded. HE is in violation not SVEASOFT. so why not target him.
can we now quit this saga to sveasofts blood.
--
Regards, Simon
www.linksysinfo.org
WRT54G v1.0 (Satori-v4.0 v2.07.1.7sv Firmware)
|
|
MrMoke
join:2002-06-06
Austin, TX
1 edit | reply to pandora
Get a Life!
Really- If anyone wants to complain, then complain to Linksys. They were the ones forced to release the source code for their products due to their violation of the GPL contract in the first place. This, combined with the lack luster performance of the bargain-basement native firmware, led people like Wi-Fi and Sveasoft to build something better.
It's bad enough that users are forced to use third-party firmware just get functionality, and now they complain when the creators no longer wish to enhance & maintain it for free.
This is really terrible. Instead of complaining to the company that caused the problem, you complain to the guys who are trying to fix it.
The next time you get hit by a car, DON'T yell at the EMT who is trying to restart your heart because he cracked a rib. It won't go well for you. |
|
tdb
join:2002-05-30
Concord, NC
·CT Communications
1 edit | said by MrMoke :
It's bad enough that users are forced to use third-party firmware just get functionality, and now they complain when the creators no longer wish to enhance & maintain it for free.
Actually, my beef, along with several others, has always been with the way Sveasoft overreacts to things. One person puts up a website allegedly fabricating an email conversation and binaries w/o code, and James now banns EVERYONE who hasn't paid money from his boards. In the beginning, James insisted this was just a hobby and that he wasn't making money from it. A few people request source for his releases, one or two start demanding it. His reaction; to go to this whole subscription model and bash those he perceives as "freeloaders" for taking food out of the mouths of his family. This whole thing now becomes a business which he makes money from. I would post links to the threads on his board to back all this up, but I can't do that anymore sonce he deleted some of them and we now can't access the rest. This whole thing could have been avoided with a public CVS server. He, however, refused to do it citing a conflict with his business model. (he tried to claim bandwidth as an issue too, but several people immediately pointed to sourceforge.) Since when does a hobby or project need a business model to protect a revenue stream? If James had said from the beginning that he was in this for the money; then all this would probably have been avoided.
--
Linux, it's what's for dinner. |
|
MrMoke
join:2002-06-06
Austin, TX
| Keeping in mind that James is the focal point of everyones misplaced anger, and has every right to be angry if he wishes, I can only suggest the following:
1) If you don't like it, don't use it!
2) If you don't pay for it, don't complain unless you want to join the development team.
3) Go back to Linksys and wait for firmware 'til the hot place freezes;) |
|
viper54g
join:2004-07-16
| reply to tdb
said by tdb :
said by MrMoke :
It's bad enough that users are forced to use third-party firmware just get functionality, and now they complain when the creators no longer wish to enhance & maintain it for free.
Actually, my beef, along with several others, has always been with the way Sveasoft overreacts to things. One person puts up a website allegedly fabricating an email conversation and binaries w/o code, and James now banns EVERYONE who hasn't paid money from his boards. In the beginning, James insisted this was just a hobby and that he wasn't making money from it. A few people request source for his releases, one or two start demanding it. His reaction; to go to this whole subscription model and bash those he perceives as "freeloaders" for taking food out of the mouths of his family. This whole thing now becomes a business which he makes money from. I would post links to the threads on his board to back all this up, but I can't do that anymore sonce he deleted some of them and we now can't access the rest. This whole thing could have been avoided with a public CVS server. He, however, refused to do it citing a conflict with his business model. (he tried to claim bandwidth as an issue too, but several people immediately pointed to sourceforge.) Since when does a hobby or project need a business model to protect a revenue stream? If James had said from the beginning that he was in this for the money; then all this would probably have been avoided.
Sveasoft has 3280 subscribers.
3280 * $20 = $65500 in only a half year...
Good hobby  |
|
tdb
join:2002-05-30
Concord, NC
·CT Communications
| reply to MrMoke
said by MrMoke :
Keeping in mind that James is the focal point of everyones misplaced anger,
How is everyones' anger at him misplaced? It's his own actions that have made people angry at him.
quote:
and has every right to be angry if he wishes,
He has every right to do whatever he wants to. Just as I have every right to point out how he is overreacting.
--
Linux, it's what's for dinner. |
|
pcscdma
Chocobo Chocobo Random Battle
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
clubs:
| reply to tdb
said by tdb :
... Since when does a hobby or project need a business model to protect a revenue stream? If James had said from the beginning that he was in this for the money; then all this would probably have been avoided.
The bait and switch scheme sure looks like it hit a bump.
--
The Intel Prescott. One step closer to 50,000 watts of clear channel power! |
|
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26 | reply to MrMoke
Seems simple to me: given the muddy water, steer clear of either company. |
|
TLS2000
Crazy Canuck
Premium
join:2004-02-24
Mississauga, ON
·Shaw
2 edits | Firmware Alchemy Pre5.1 available right now!
As soon as I get the source, I will release that as well. Given that it is protected under the GPL, I will be sending an e-mail to busybox to request formal permission to redistribute this, since they own the original code, just in case someone tries to get my hosting provider to shut it down.
I signed up earlier than the 17th, but it was this month or last month. I signed up before the Satori firmware was made public.
--
Tom Murdoch |
|
