Looks like iRex is leaking out the first details of the iLiad SDK. And - the big shocking news of the day - they are going to release two different SDKs: one is "free" and one is "extended".

According to them, the "free" version is available to any ‘private’ developer that shares our passion for electronic reading, whereas the "extended" version contains additional hardware and technical support for third parties who wish to develop an own viewer on the iLiad platform to support their own content offerings.

Do you buy this? To me this sounds as if the free SDK is basically useless as it does not allow you to develop your own iLiad tools (otherwise how would it be different from the "extended" version?).

I know we had a discussion earlier that according to GPL principles, they have to supply us with the tools required to build your own software and/or even rebuild the entire OS. I hope they don't try to get around "this problem" by releasing a stripped-down SDK.

http://developer.irexnet.com/sdk

It sounds pretty reasonable for me. The "extended SDK" contains a lot of support - possibly even hardware, like a caseless iliad with jtag adapter or something, plus technical support. That is, the developers at some company can call up the irex developers and ask questions. They will probably also get internal design documents and such.

On the other hand, the free one could be simply a tutorial how to set up OpenEmbedded, how to export a filesystem to the Iliad via NFS, and a bunch of header files and libraries. The description sounds like you'll get an sshd on the Iliad via iDS so you have {full|crippled} access to the device. Which is perfectly sufficient.

I see how you read this. Yes, that's possible - as long as it's possible to work with the free SDK without the additional hardware and technical support (support could mean text documents, but it could also mean binary code).

> whereas the "extended" version contains additional hardware

So, whatever this additional hardware might be, I doubt that iRex could afford giving it away for free.

So they have exactly these options:

1) scrap the additional hardware -> nobody wins
2) provide us* with a free (as in beer) SDK and non-free additional Hardware
3) provide us* with a free (as in beer) SDK and a non-free pro-SDK containing this additional hardware and additional support and stuff
4) provide us* only with a non-free pro-SDK

If the free (as in beer) SDK is usable I don't see a problem in them choosing option 3.


k2r

(* neither you nor me own an iLiad, yet?

Free beer is good! ;)

One thing you guys didn't mention yet:

In order to become a "private" developer for the iLiad platform (and receive the SDK), you need to register with them and own an iLiad device, where the "development environment" is being downloaded from.

So if you don't have an iLiad, you won't get to see the SDK. Bad luck, guess we have to stick to our free beer. The big question: is this way of releasing the sources and development tools in compliance with GPL?

I recommended this link (http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html) for what is and what is not allowed according to GPL.

Does the GPL allow me to distribute a modified or beta version under a nondisclosure agreement?
No. The GPL says that anyone who receives a copy of your version from you has the right to redistribute copies (modified or not) of that version. It does not give you permission to distribute the work on any more restrictive basis.

So everyone will eventually have access to the source and documentation, one way or the other.

> is this way of releasing the sources and development tools
> in compliance with GPL?

AFAIK it wouldn't if this meant that the only way to get hold of the sourcecode of the GPL'd applications they give away was buying an iLiad-device.

If you give away GPL'd applications the GPL asks you to provide anybody with the sourcecode.
You wouldn't have to put it online but could send it on CD on request for a reasonable amount of money that covers your expenses for the CD and postage, though.

But I really doubt that being a GPL-bending-weasel would be a good decision for iRex businesswise - their market at the moment is very small and GPL-aware.

Let's don't beat them up before they really enter our playground and we started playing togeter...

Actually they have an interesting product we've been waiting for for a long time. Of course, having been trated like idiots and lemmings by so many other companys doesn't help much...

k2r

So everyone will eventually have access to the source and documentation, one way or the other.

Not necessarily. If they wrote, say, pageBar from scratch (that's the program that displays the page numbers), they don't have to publish the source. Only where they use and modify a GPL'ed program such requirements apply.

And no, linking gtk libs is no derivative work. It really is possible to develop closed-source commercial programs in an open source environment.

Let's just hope they give us a lot of stuff.

The next thing is that non-developers (in the sense of an irex registration) can only get new software through iDS. Apparently they plan to let people add viewers to iDS, but we know nothing definite. Especially whether we have to hand over the copyright to irex or something.


Oh - and we still don't know about a reinstall possibility (note to self: go to the irex forum for that).

So if you don't have an iLiad, you won't get to see the SDK. Bad luck, guess we have to stick to our free beer. The big question: is this way of releasing the sources and development tools in compliance with GPL?

Seems fine... Why would you want to develop fot the illiad if you didn't want to see your application working...? :blink:

And how would you debug it or check to see if it works as intended...? :blink:

Free beer is good! ;)

One thing you guys didn't mention yet:

In order to become a "private" developer for the iLiad platform (and receive the SDK), you need to register with them and own an iLiad device, where the "development environment" is being downloaded from.

So if you don't have an iLiad, you won't get to see the SDK. Bad luck, guess we have to stick to our free beer. The big question: is this way of releasing the sources and development tools in compliance with GPL?This assumes that the sources and development tools are, in fact, licensed under the GPL -- a common assumption here that I don't share. I don't see anything on the linked Irex developer page that indicates that the SDK itself is free or open source. They even put "free" in quotes to blunt the implication that with SDK will be anything more than proprietary freeware, "free beer."

Irex does have to release the source code for any modified Linux kernel used by the iLiad, but not any propriety middleware or toolkits (TiVo, for instance, discreetly makes its modified Linux kernel available, but not the middleware developed separately, in-house). We'll have to wait and see how these are licensed.

Seems fine... Why would you want to develop fot the illiad if you didn't want to see your application working...? :blink:

And how would you debug it or check to see if it works as intended...? :blink:
You would have to use cross-comiling development environments. Antartica posted more about this:

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7077

This assumes that the sources and development tools are, in fact, licensed under the GPL -- a common assumption here that I don't share.
True, I think it's important to differentiate here between the OS sources and the development tools. While the code contained within might be released under the GPL (original code and modifications), iRex is under no obligation to release the underlying details of the iLiad. However, they need to supply you with enough information to enable you to recompile the sources yourself. And these information (header files, libraries) should be sufficient for every hacker to work out how to code and build his own iLiad tools.

An iRex employee must have followed this because they revised their Website, clearifying the difference between free and extended:

Free: Developers can connect to the iLiad using a SSH connection over TCP/IP and logon to a development account where they can add additional executables (format viewers) on the iLiad.

Extended: With direct iRex support which will come at a cost, for companies that are in need for a full development support tool. Next to a specially prepared iLiad the SDK contains a professional JTAG probe allowing advanced debug options and a full engineering staff is available for technical support.

So free should be sufficient for our "needs" :D

but it doesn't say anything about the OS installation.

Gameboy70 was right to differentiate between SDK and sources. iRex expressed their intention to fully comply with GPL, so I assume they will release the OS sources in a way that it can be recompiled and put back on the device.

@doctorow
> Free: Developers can [...]logon to a development account [...]

Hm, if that means that we will not get root privileges say goodbye to a lot of fun stuff (eg.: USB keyboards etc pp).
That would not exactly make the iLiad more attractive to a lot of people.
I don't like the idea of having to hack into a device that I OWN.
Trying to restrict my access to a device that I OWN wouldn't make the company exactly trustworthy and is one of the reasons I absolutely don't intend to buy any Sony products in the forseeable future.

But let's see...

Even shell access could open us new doors to gain root.

Let's hope they'll soon release the sources which might prove very useful, too.

Even shell access could open us new doors to gain root.

The question is which privileges the account will have.
If we only got non-root access to the device we could try to find some local exploit on the particular device with the particular system configuration to get root-access.

Press the button, install security update - be locked out of your device, have to hack it again.

I'd consider this being highly annoying and I don't see why I should buy a device I don't have full access to.

Of course I see some difficulties in keeping a person who has complete root-access from getting access to the former DRM-encrypted content that has been prepared for the presentation layer.
If iLiad trys to go the sony way to ensure that there is absolutely no way to convert DRM-content, it will fail as Sony did with their mobile audio devices.

If iLiad goes the Apple/iTunes/iPod way (do some DRM encumbering but in a more sane way), which is what I hope, it might become the iPod (or at least the wrt54g) of eBooks within years.

If they lock owners into userspace, the iLiad will fail because iRex does not have the ressources to make this expensive device appealing to regular people fast enough.

If they lock owners into userspace, the iLiad will fail because iRex does not have the ressources to make this expensive device appealing to regular people fast enough.

Why do you think iRex was marketing this device to B2B customers first? That's where the expected sales will come from. I'd suspect iRex will leave the entire contents delivery part to others, if they at all can.

You're right ath. Good thing is that B2B customers often need more control over a device to "OEM"-brand it - hence still the need for a usable SDK.

Why do you think iRex was marketing this device to B2B customers first?

I'm aware if it but I don't think that the B2B market is big enough for iRex to sell a significant volume of iLiads yet.

Most high-volume content is not expensive enough to justify a dedicated reading device.
So it makes more sense to let the customer pay for the device.
If the customer pays €600 for the device, he might want to do more with it than reading only a single newspaper or books from a single publisher.

I'm aware if it but I don't think that the B2B market is big enough for iRex to sell a significant volume of iLiads yet.
Then, we don't know much about who the iRex B2B customers are. That air chart company ... that's probably one of them. Newspapers ... there have been several tests with e-Paper over the past year, some of which use/used the iLiad. Maps in general, perhaps ... they need high quality presentation (though they typically need colour, as well) ... and there are GPS receivers for CF: so isGarmin or Tomtom going to be first? (Or is colour so important that they'll wait until eInk launches colour ePaper?)

Books ... I'd be willing to bet that someone is doing e-Books on the iLiad. But not for general reading: books and documentation of reference. There are many cases where plain documentation is so voluminous that you need bookshelves on wheels (telecom industry, and probably aeronautics as well). Replace those with iLiads, and you have something. Or computers: would you buy an iLiad stocked with the full Windows reference documentation, and with the option of adding new volumes as they are published, for ... well, a fourth of the paper book price doesn't seem impossible? The cost of the device would be unimportant in such context. (This kind of scenario is partly where I think the current size of the screen comes from ...)

Or perhaps an alternative to those UPS thingies they want us to sign on?

If the customer pays €600 for the device, he might want to do more with it than reading only a single newspaper or books from a single publisher.

Probably. But that's what early adopters are for: they are the people who ask to buy the device for the price. Would be silly to refuse'em. They are usually also few enough to be abandoned if it doesn't work out.

The current device doesn't make full sense to me except as an evaluation platform: Ethernet and WiFi, SD and MMC, and Wacom stylus to boot? Far too expensive for end-user units. So ... my guess is that there's a new and cheaper iLiad (or perhaps two) coming in about 12 months of the right size, and that have only the devices that it/they need. Only one of them will have WiFi -- probably the one with CF (or equivalent). All current owners will be invited to buy one for 2/3 of the list price, which will be approximately 1/3 of the price we paid now :-)

I'm just guessing, of course. It will be very interesting to see what applications based on the iLiad that will turn up over the next year or so.

Then, we don't know much about who the iRex B2B customers are. That air chart company... that's probably one of them. Yes, but how many iLiads are they going to sell? Not enough to keep iRex afloat.Newspapers ... Yes, but a newspaper publisher who gives away iLiads that can only access his newspapers has to make the customer subscribe for 5 years or so. The device is expensive.Maps in generalOne dedicated iLiad for the maps, one dedicated iLiad for the newspaper, one dedicated iLiad for the Windows Reference Manuals, one dedicated iLiad for books from Sams publishing and an iLiad for the o'Reilly books.
That does not make sense to me.Or perhaps an alternative to those UPS thingies they want us to sign on?Makes a lot of sense, this is a market I didn't think of.
But on the other hand, these UPS-scanner-thingies seem to work okay, why would they deploy ten thousands of iLiad based devices?All current owners will be invited to buy one for 2/3 of the list price, which will be approximately 1/3 of the price we paid now :-) "Ho! ho! miracles! I do not believe in miracles. I have seen too many."

I think the iLiad - and E Ink devices in general so far - are too fragile for hard-core use such being scanner devices for UPS ground personell. Think of the additional costs that would incur not only from replacing all existing scanner devices (hardware + software), but also from sending back all broken iLiads.