Post by: Xustu on May 11, 2003, 01:49:00 PM
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 11, 2003, 04:50:00 PM
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 11, 2003, 04:50:00 PM
Post by: PeteBernert on May 11, 2003, 08:53:00 PM
If that port is using the P.E.Op.S. gpu and spu sources, which are protected by the GPL, that sources have to get released as well.
If this port is violating the GPL in any way, than I have zero respect for 'xport'.
The nice little statement "Many thanks go out to the authors of the above emulators for making them open-source" on the xport homepage would be like spitting into the faces of all that authors.
CyRUS64, I didn't find any real 'xport' mail address, but I will try to send 'xport' a mail through this messageboard.
Post by: MissSplitch on May 11, 2003, 09:00:00 PM
I agree completely, though I don't know whether or not the code is available (I assume it is) I must say if it's not that's not very kosher.
Then again, I'm sure Xport would be a better person than that, and has the code readily available. I can't see doing a port of something, having everyone know its a port, doing it for free, and then trying to keep the code to yourself as though you had something to lose by releasing it.
Here's to further work from Xport.
-Splitch
Post by: Banacek on May 11, 2003, 11:14:00 PM
| QUOTE (PeteBernert @ May 12 2003, 05:15 AM) |
| >and has the code readily available sorry, but that's not good enough. If he releases a port of a GPL protected software, he has either to bundle the complete source codes with the binaries, or he has to point out to the public where to get this sources. GPL'd Open Source software is not _free to use for whatever comes into your mind_. There are several rules behind it, and either you follow them, or you break them illegaly. And if 'xport' is breaking them, than I don't care if the xbox scene is hailing him as Jesus reborn, and legal actions could be taken. |
Kind of judging him before he even gets a chance to defend himself.
From the GPL:
| QUOTE |
| If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author to ask for permission. |
And according to LumbraX: (who's post can be found here)
| QUOTE |
| (At a Friends House) For those who were wondering what happen to our port, we were stuck on something (forgot what it was) so we asked XPort for help, XPort replied back in 3 days saying that he had taken over the project and ported pcsx himself, so we kept that to ourself until he released it today. You may even find some games working in the pcsx port XPort did, when our team started the port we got support from the original Author and he gave us a source code for pcsx that hadnt been released yet. (And I sent that source to XPort through PM, not sure if he used it but it looked like he did)..... Awsome work though XPort, C Everyone when I get back in like 6 days... |
So am I missing something here?
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 11, 2003, 11:23:00 PM
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 11, 2003, 11:40:00 PM
http://homebrew.dcem...evo/xport.shtml
Specifically:
| QUOTE |
| When I decide for certain that I don't want to do any more updates, I'll just dump the source and people can do whatever they want with it. It will most likely be dumped at http://xport.xb-power.com Don't ask for the source on the message boards there. Be happy with what you have. As an aside (since I'm thinking of it and since I'm on the soapbox), let me just say that I simply cannot fathom the arrogance and ingratitude of the individuals pestering the XBox Media Player authors to release source under the duress of their interpretation of the GPL. Amazing...the community gains a useful product and the authors gain nothing (except perhaps a little fame). One would think that the normal response to such an act would be to thank them. Never underestimate the power of greed. Gimme, gimme gimme. |
Hrm, I don't see how wanting someone to conform to a gpl license is greed
Post by: MissSplitch on May 12, 2003, 03:14:00 AM
I'm not seeing who's at a loss here. If the original author gave out the source to someone,
and they used it with his/her permission, who's to say who "should" get what in what way? This isn't a Rachellian question, so much as someone wanting something just for the sake of having it open.
As for "legal actions," I'm sure the question of whoever's intellectual property rights will go over real well when in order to exercise those rights you had to step on the intellectual property rights of another (the emulator won't even run unless you've either changed the xbox's bios to run unsigned code and hence, infringed upon the manufacturer/developer's rights, or changed the box to use a different bios, and thus questionably did the same thing, as your ability to do so could be linked intrinsically to others' infringement-based research.)
Once again a question of the slippery slope arises. There's a reason we don't know what Mengele found out.
-Splitch
Post by: MissSplitch on May 12, 2003, 04:44:00 AM
-Splitch
Post by: MissSplitch on May 12, 2003, 05:13:00 AM
The "scene" (I use quotes nonpatronizingly, as I just don't like using that word) benefits more from not having to deal with myriad different versions of the same product at this moment more than the benefits of rapid advancement would aid the cause.
Not to harp too much on my Mengele analogy; but the same ideal is case-in-point here:
if advancement comes at too large a cost it's no longer advancement. We'd be winning $20 on the nickel slots after blowing our whole paycheck.
It's irrelevant that the point of the GPL is to make better software and the point of MS' license is to make money. Altruism is subjective; to the Nazi's Mengele was doing the right thing by experimenting on Jews in the hopes of gaining knowledge that would aid the Nazi's cause. Now that that knowledge is obtained, what is worse; using it knowing that the ends would justify the means, and thus allow for anyone who happened to be on top at the time to do anything they saw fit to those they felt were inferior, or to have all of the people who were tortured, maimed and killed to gain that knowledge die without it being used?
The source isn't the issue, it's everyone feeling as though this apparent violation has somehow violated their inalienable right to possess shit to dick around with. Let's be honest, even if the source code to this thing never gets released the GPL's basis won't have suffered at all.
I fI might add another obscure analogy to my pile;
if you died tomorrow, how many people would cry?
-Splitch
Post by: linuzappz on May 12, 2003, 05:27:00 AM
linuzappz
Post by: MissSplitch on May 12, 2003, 05:30:00 AM
However I would appeal to people more on the level of "hey, I'm the programmer of those wrappers, why not release the source for the thing like we agreed upon when we made it GPL" rather than "I won't state who I am, but I will come onto a forum and threaten legal action as part of my 3rd post."
Then again the 2 games I worked on never got released thanks to the company, so I guess I've got a bit of a different attitude as to who gets what in the way of source.
-Splitch
Post by: luma on May 12, 2003, 06:49:00 AM
a) compile them yourself using your own licensed copy of the xdk
b) compile them yourself using your p1r4te copy of the xdk
c) download the compiled binaries from somebody else
anything outside of option a is illegal, and as such the xbox media player developers do not make compiled binaries available (not that you have to look to hard to find daily cvs builds).
now, xport hasn't really made the compiled binaries available any moreso than the xbox media player developers have. you can get the binaries, but you're running through questionable channels to do so, so you'd have to assume some of the risk here.
however, pcsx is licensed under the gpl, which clearly states any derivative software must come with published source, or directions on how to get the source. i think it's offensive to the original authors that somebody would use their work on an open source and gpl protected project as a foundation for their own work without releasing the source as required by the terms of the license under which the source was released. i really think xport should step up to the plate and comply with the terms that he agreed to by using the GPLd sources.
on the other hand, he may not care a whit about the legality involved, and would just rather dump working emulators on the scene and hide behind his handle while pissing off the original authors of the emulators that he's using. while a part of me appreciates this desire, i think it's counter productive in the long run. the original authors can provide a lot of support for future porting efforts if they have trust in xport (and whomever else) complying with the terms of the source license. xport has done a tremendous job porting these emulators, but i somehow don't believe that he's an emulator author himself. as such, his continued access to current and future emulators to port to the xbox relies on the good faith of the original authors. if he continues pissing in this pot, i think the whole emulation scene (on all platforms) may suffer by destroying the good faith that exists within the emulator community.
edited to remove the damn smiles
Post by: ruffles_x on May 12, 2003, 07:52:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Yes, I know - I need to truly update the webpage. In the meantime, some important things: Right click here and select "Save as..." to download the PCSX source changes for XBox. Rename the JPG file to a ZIP file. Right click here and select "Save as..." to download the Peops GPU source changes for XBox. Rename the JPG file to a ZIP file. Right click here and select "Save as..." to download the Peops SPU source changes for XBox. Rename the JPG file to a ZIP file. I wish to express apologies to Peter Bernert because I completely forgot to mention that I used his plugins in the XBox port of PCSX. At the very least I should have mentioned that in the NFO file. If anyone feels they have been wronged by previous unavailability of the above source code, then I apologize for that, too. In response to the flurry of message activity - I simply don't have the time to address the insanity on the forums right now. I'm listening, but that's all I'm doing for the moment. |
From the Xport Webpage
There you have it, the guy finally apologised, now everybody be happy
Post by: Banacek on May 12, 2003, 08:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (ruffles_x @ May 12 2003, 03:52 PM) | ||
From the Xport Webpage There you have it, the guy finally apologised, now everybody be happy |
Yay, he's done what he was supposed to. So no more problems.
Post by: spaceboy on May 12, 2003, 08:26:00 AM
Sound of shit hitting fan......
Phew! Hope this dont get tooo serious!
Post by: luma on May 12, 2003, 08:36:00 AM
Post by: boo_se on May 12, 2003, 08:36:00 AM
Post by: PeteBernert on May 12, 2003, 10:15:00 AM
On a sidenote: I like ports. There are many ports for my psx plugins available, for all kind of systems and operating systems. But usually I get asked before someone is releasing binaries from my GPL'd work. And this didn't happen at all this time, so of course I started to wonder what the hack is going on.
So, as long as only the plain sources are available to the public, without 'bundled' XDK libraries, or illegal compiled binaries, I think the GPL is fulfilled.
Nevertheless I will not get tired to mention that the xbox scene would be a much more comfortable place for hobby coders, if the scene would stop to press on illegal binaries (using the XDK), and concentrate on a free and legal XDK alternative first.
Last but not least: imho, a xbox is not fast enough (cpu-wise) to run all psx games at full speed with a soft gpu plugin like the P.E.Op.S. one. And activated frameskipping will cause jumpier displays and compatibility issues like missing battle screens or other glitches.
So, without an hw/accel gpu plugin (which, of course also has its compatibility issues, but a much better speed and improved graphics), the xbox psx emu will be not a real replacement for a PC psx emu (or, of course, a real psx console), I think.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 12, 2003, 11:10:00 AM
On top of this, although I may be wrong, but doesn't the gpl state that he needs to release a fully compilable source set (ie: including his gui code/etc - everything to let someone compile it for themselves and run their own binaries on the x-box) and not just pull the standard 'gpl violator' trick of releasing 'source diffs' to the original code only.
Post by: SweeneyTodd on May 12, 2003, 11:16:00 AM
It protects GPLed code from getting incorporated into commercial products. XPort's work is along the line of 'hobby coding'. He is not beholden upon you to do a damn thing.
To be clear, I'm referring to Cyrus64 above me, and his brilliant idea that using GPL code in your project 'infects' it such that you must release all sources, even those that aren't derivative. This kind of thing was settled five years ago, man.
He did the right thing by properly crediting the plugin creator and releasing source diffs, but he doesn't owe anyone the ability to compile his entire application from raw source.
Post by: guile on May 12, 2003, 11:23:00 AM
| QUOTE (CyRUS64 @ May 12 2003, 08:10 PM) |
| On top of this, although I may be wrong, but doesn't the gpl state that he needs to release a fully compilable source set (ie: including his gui code/etc - everything to let someone compile it for themselves and run their own binaries on the x-box) and not just pull the standard 'gpl violator' trick of releasing 'source diffs' to the original code only. |
I'm starting to think you REALLY have a problem now.
g
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 12, 2003, 11:33:00 AM
Anyhow Pete seems happy so as long as Linuzappz is too then so am I.
However ALL his other gpl'd ports need source release too. I know the xbox scene may see this as being harsh but you must adhere to license agreements unless you get express permission to do otherwise from each of the contributors to the original source. Period.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 12, 2003, 12:02:00 PM
I hate the way this is seen as being petty by some who have no concern for these clear legal and moral issues. In the dc scene when on the rare occasion that someone did violate the gpl their binary-only release would NOT be supported or posted by any of the news sites until they honoured the gpl license, and thats how it should be.
Post by: Iriez on May 12, 2003, 12:12:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| As for "legal actions," I'm sure the question of whoever's intellectual property rights will go over real well when in order to exercise those rights you had to step on the intellectual property rights of another (the emulator won't even run unless you've either changed the xbox's bios to run unsigned code and hence, infringed upon the manufacturer/developer's rights, or changed the box to use a different bios, and thus questionably did the same thing, as your ability to do so could be linked intrinsically to others' infringement-based research.) |
Which shortened down, equals... (edit - lol i speelled it 'shorted')
| QUOTE |
| The source isn't the issue, it's everyone feeling as though this apparent violation has somehow violated their inalienable right to possess shit to dick around with. Let's be honest, even if the source code to this thing never gets released the GPL's basis won't have suffered at all. |
Which is a point i've tried to make in the past, but couldnt quite spit out = ) You stole the thought from my brain and typed it correctly, yay
I think its a excellent point, but definitly not the whole agenda. Really, it all comes down to respect. The legal battles will never happen, and its just empty bullshit theats anyhow. Until a OpenXDK with controller input support appears, it will stay this way.
It all comes down too...
Is Author A pissed ?
Does Author B agree with Author A ?
Does Author C instigate a huge developer rage against XPort or whoever, because of a disrespect issue?
Does anyone really give a fuck? I mean seriously, it all comes down to whether the original author cries about it. What XPort has done, very few current xbox developers will or can do. Theres not alot of fish in this sea. People like lantus and XPort have alot of experience working on the xbox platform, but theres not alot of people like XPort and lantus =)Releasing his source, quite honestly, i dont think will add to the development. The only case i can see where it will help the scene, is if he entirely quits the project and leaves large issues left.
Im not trying to say he shouldnt release the sources. I would like it if all authors did. Im just trying to say the whole issue is nulled. Theres nothing to argue. Points have been made, and clarified. These being..
A. Its illegal to release a port based on GPL protected sources, without releaseing the sources with it.
B. It really doesnt matter, because its ran on a DCMA illegal xbox, with a illegally obtained developement kit (unless XPort is a official developer, but then im sure theres some contract agreement that would prevent him from doing so). What does it matter when you grab a pack of gum when your already stealing some skittles? Its already illegal.
C. No one is going to take legal action against anyone from porting their code over and not releasing their sources. They can threaten all they want, but to just level with the world, and to step into reality for a moment (yea, i know its hard guys), no one is going to sue anyone over it.
D. I like pie
Please note that my opinions are from a personal standpoint, and to not take what i say, against the scene, or XPort, or anyone else. If you got beef with what i say, direct your anger towards me, and dont cry about how im the devil and how people like me ruin everything for everyone else. Remember, im joe dick, im nobody, im the guy just posting my opinion on this forum.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 12, 2003, 01:03:00 PM
For the third time the pcsx case is besides the point since the authors can speak for themselves here, but in general if you use a gpl codebase then you must release your source.
Iriez: one case is where I might not want to go onto illegal irc channels to download binaries from and instead having legal access to an xdk would like to compile them for myself.. consequently since the code is gpl I have the RIGHT to request source and be in a position to compile it myself - I can't email xport personally so my only way is to request it here.
You may think it has just gotten stupid Guile but we are continuing a discussion on the gpl and it shows a severe lack of respect for the orig.authors if he just ignores there licenses. I'm 100% sure Pete and others would agree with me.
Post by: Iriez on May 12, 2003, 01:59:00 PM
| QUOTE (CyRUS64 @ May 12 2003, 03:03 PM) |
| Iriez: one case is where I might not want to go onto illegal irc channels to download binaries from and instead having legal access to an xdk would like to compile them for myself.. consequently since the code is gpl I have the RIGHT to request source and be in a position to compile it myself - I can't email xport personally so my only way is to request it here. |
To argue a finer point, yes, that is a perfectly legitamite reason. However, i doubt your scarred about the legal issues, as im sure being into emu you have played many games you dont own ; ) I also doubt its a lazyness thing, since getting the bin off irc is faster than downloading the sources and compiling.
| QUOTE |
| You may think it has just gotten stupid Guile but we are continuing a discussion on the gpl and it shows a severe lack of respect for the orig.authors if he just ignores there licenses. I'm 100% sure Pete and others would agree with me. |
I would like to specify that argument.
I dont think its general disrespect to not release the sources in this situation, as the facts lie that, A. - It is already illegally compiled, B. you need a illegally modified xbox to run it. It is obviously a underground scene. Up until this point, *no one* has gotten ants in their pants about sources. Since there is no request for them, there is really no hurt done (disregarding the whole legal issues...we already know its illegal).
However, when a author specifically requests that the sources are made public, it would be complete disrespect not to release them.
I know, he should do it in the first place, GPL license, blah blah..etc etc. But you have to admit when there is no demand for it (it being underground anyways) that there is no hurt done. It did not hurt the GPL, it did not hurt the author(s), it did not hurt anyone, until ya guys got your feelings hurt over the morality issue because recent events came to light.
Post by: kaioshade on May 12, 2003, 02:30:00 PM
yes its gpl'ed but who cares?
what are half of you who are asking for the source going to do with it? not a damn thing.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 12, 2003, 02:37:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I totally understand what the problem is. Only thing is, it seems like the ONLY one with the problem is you |
Ok fine, i'm not going to bother pursuing this then but just so long as you see my point-of-view.
Post by: guile on May 12, 2003, 03:06:00 PM
| QUOTE (CyRUS64 @ May 12 2003, 11:37 PM) | ||
Ok fine, i'm not going to bother pursuing this then but just so long as you see my point-of-view. |
????? Now I'm REALLY confused!! Bother pursuing?? Wtf does that mean? I know there are quite a few people hear who
"see" your point of view, but I still don't get it. Was that the main intent here??...to "help" us see your point of view? Please,
I'm not trying to start shit with you. Your last post threw me for a loop
g
Post by: MethiusHasTheAIDSPassItOn on May 12, 2003, 03:57:00 PM
Cyrus says that he wants source for sources sake.
The rest of you say OMG LOL U WANT SORCE WUT WUD U DO WID IT? YOUR ALREADY COMMITTING A CRIME BY USING EMULATERS U DON' T NEED SORCE FAGET.
The fact is this: criminality aside Xport is breaking an agreement because he feels like it. We, the public, not only have the RIGHT to ask for it, but Xport is OBLIGATED to supply it.
Why would we want this? Some of us aren't as dumb as the rest of you blockheads. Some of us would like to look at optimizing it. Some of us would like to replace the ass ugly GUI with something that doesn't make baby Jesus cry. Some of us would just like to look.
Why would Xport deny us that? Is he that fearful that someone will see what he's done and possibly steal his thunder? I think so. With so little evidence to sway my opinion any other way, I'm left to think that Xport cares less about completely free software, and more about his rep. If he were a decent coder, in ethics, not technique, then he'd offer these up for everybody. Instead he wants to wallow in his little cave with his thousands of pimpled followers worshipping the ground that he walks on. Typical of a one man warez group in the most pathetic of warez scenes.
Make no mistake about it. While at least some of you may have the morality to not rent, rip, and return, you're still supporting warez line of thought by not only condoning but worshipping Xport's efforts.
Post by: guile on May 12, 2003, 04:00:00 PM
| QUOTE (MethiusHasTheAIDSPassItOn @ May 13 2003, 12:57 AM) |
| What a retarded arguement. Cyrus says that he wants source for sources sake. The rest of you say OMG LOL U WANT SORCE WUT WUD U DO WID IT? YOUR ALREADY COMMITTING A CRIME BY USING EMULATERS U DON' T NEED SORCE FAGET. The fact is this: criminality aside Xport is breaking an agreement because he feels like it. We, the public, not only have the RIGHT to ask for it, but Xport is OBLIGATED to supply it. Why would we want this? Some of us aren't as dumb as the rest of you blockheads. Some of us would like to look at optimizing it. Some of us would like to replace the ass ugly GUI with something that doesn't make baby Jesus cry. Some of us would just like to look. Why would Xport deny us that? Is he that fearful that someone will see what he's done and possibly steal his thunder? I think so. With so little evidence to sway my opinion any other way, I'm left to think that Xport cares less about completely free software, and more about his rep. If he were a decent coder, in ethics, not technique, then he'd offer these up for everybody. Instead he wants to wallow in his little cave with his thousands of pimpled followers worshipping the ground that he walks on. Typical of a one man warez group in the most pathetic of warez scenes. Make no mistake about it. While at least some of you may have the morality to not rent, rip, and return, you're still supporting warez line of thought by not only condoning but worshipping Xport's efforts. |
God I miss the ol Methius
g
Post by: MethiusHasTheAIDSPassItOn on May 12, 2003, 04:11:00 PM
| QUOTE (guile @ May 13 2003, 01:00 AM) | ||
God I miss the ol Methius g |
Way to make a contribution there, faghat.
Post by: guile on May 12, 2003, 04:17:00 PM
| QUOTE (MethiusHasTheAIDSPassItOn @ May 13 2003, 01:11 AM) | ||||
Way to make a contribution there, faghat. |
It was better then yours. Please kid don't start shit with me I'm not in the mood for a flame way. OK?
g
Post by: Iriez on May 12, 2003, 04:44:00 PM
| QUOTE (MethiusHasTheAIDSPassItOn @ May 12 2003, 05:57 PM) |
| Why would Xport deny us that? Is he that fearful that someone will see what he's done and possibly steal his thunder? I think so. With so little evidence to sway my opinion any other way, I'm left to think that Xport cares less about completely free software, and more about his rep. If he were a decent coder, in ethics, not technique, then he'd offer these up for everybody. Instead he wants to wallow in his little cave with his thousands of pimpled followers worshipping the ground that he walks on. Typical of a one man warez group in the most pathetic of warez scenes. Make no mistake about it. While at least some of you may have the morality to not rent, rip, and return, you're still supporting warez line of thought by not only condoning but worshipping Xport's efforts. |
Lame, really really lame.
I've never heard such unfounded bullshit.
Quite frankly, you couldnt be more off base. That guy has alot of respect for developers, and wouldnt want to piss anyone off.
I find it ridiculously pathetic how you call it a warez scene. It may be not the most legal thing in the world, but claiming its warez because he happened to compile it with the xdk is a far far leap.
lol, yea! Your supporting warez by thanking someone for porting a open source emulator to the xbox.
Makes quite alot of sense buddy.
I find it really funny how you are sitting here posting on xbox-scene, when you've got nothing good to say.
Post by: mr jones on May 13, 2003, 12:50:00 PM
Peace...
Post by: Iriez on May 13, 2003, 02:01:00 PM
| QUOTE (PeteBernert @ May 12 2003, 11:26 PM) |
| Sorry to say, but the more I see how Iriez (and lotta more people around here) is thinking about emu authors and their works, and how easily he could ignore their rights, the less I like this scene. Of course at first glance it will not be important for Iriez and alike how I (or other emu coders) feel about it, but in the long run it will hurt the xbox scene a lot. You think you have now a psx emu for xbox? Sure, a slow one, with compatibility problems if you try to speed it up with simple techniques like frame skipping. Will Xport be able to fix that? I dare to say: no. The psx tends to be a small beast, so if he wants to go after hw/accel rendering, for example, he will need a lotta psx emu experience. Years of experience. Or the support of experienced emu coders. Good that you have pissed them off (sarcasm). You think you will get epsxe, for example, as Open Source with such an attitude? Think again. Wanna play Zinc games on xbox? Forget it. Sad, sad. |
No, i think you've missed a point (which is my fault), because i've not really expanded on it much.
Alot of the point of my argument is to clarify that this scene is changing. In the past people like XPort didnt feel the need to release his sources. He didnt have people like Pete (you) and linuzappz getting a little upset over the whole opensource issue.
Since you broght it up, he has kindly fully complied with your guys requests. I am 100% sure that if the neopop guy *really* gave two bits about whether the sources to a xbox port were released or not, and cared enough to ask, he would gladly satisfy that author.
I never ignore your (or anyone elses) rights. Your rights to your emu is in your license. If i were a developer, i would comply with anything in your license. The N64 contest satisifies the license agreement, which should atleast satisify *some* of the original authors quarells.
I think you guys coming over and bitching might have done something good for this scene. It might take it one step closer to atleast *trying* to satisfy the legal aspects, even though it will not be possible until the openxdk gets controller input.
I apologize if i have offended you, i have handled some things badly, mainly because my knowledge on the matter was minimal, and my opinions not fully forumlated.
I hope things can change in the future for the better.
PS- To clarify a point, i never intended to imply that a author should not release his sources of a port, because its already illegal in the first place. I was referring to the past (of this scene) and how no one ever made a issue about the sources before this point.
Post by: Iriez on May 13, 2003, 02:03:00 PM
| QUOTE (lucas @ May 13 2003, 03:51 AM) |
| i love your way of thinking. i people like you ran the world, we would all still have negro slaves, since no one up until a point thought it was a bad thing. moron |
Uh, aside from the slaves themselves?
Quite a ridiculous anology. It has no effect whatsoever in a comparison upon my thoughts.
Might want to re-think your insult.
Post by: Eldorado on May 13, 2003, 02:20:00 PM
| QUOTE (nx-neon @ May 13 2003, 04:53 PM) |
| First off, great post. Second off, i'm not being ignorant, just getting tired of people ranting about how people arent getting credit. IMHO the name of the port being PCSXbox basically states in the NAME of the emu that it is a PORT of PCSX for the XBOX. So obviously was originally PCSX written by so-and-so that XPort ported to the xbox. I think people whining about how he hasn't mentioned someones name and released all of the code is pointless. I realize it is difficult to make an emulator for any system. Irregardless on this FORUM, correct me if i'm wrong, it matters if it works on the xbox or not. Not whether it works on a fuckin PC for christs sakes. you need to realize this is not a PC forum, yet an XBOX forum. If you want to rant about how great the EMU's are on a PC find a PC forum. Yeah there are laws being broken, hell it's illegal to mod an xbox period in the US as far as i understand. You guys just need to ease up a bit. There are a bunch of tards on here and there are people that understand and just really dont care. I don't care simple as that. Yeah the original authors did great and THANK YOU!!! But XPort made it work for me and i also thank him. i never posted on here PRAISING any of these people porting emu's, infact most of my time on this site was to learn about modding my xbox. when i first got my xbox i had no friggin clue how to do anything. now i can safely say i got a pretty good grip on things thanks to you guys here. I'm just sick and tired of these lame as posts that are all nothing but flame wars. Yes i am guilty myself and i appologize, however just get off your high horse and reallize we are all on the same team in some way or another. And i can't stand grown men whining about being recognized. We all know who you are and what you did in some way or another, but most here just want xbox tools(obviously its a FUCKING XBOX FORUM). well i'm done, flame away, i think its hillarious d |
Good reply, glad you showed you have thought of the whole issue.. and no I'm not into flaming, just trying to get my point accross, gotta stop this flaming on these forums, horrible for others to read
Pete himself comes into this thread, reads the complete disregard everyone has for him and his source. Not quoting you or anyone in specific, just the vibe that comes from everyone lately in these forums - "who cares, just port it and let me play it, I don't care about anything else, and stop bitching about the authors rights". Everyone has lost sight of the original authors wishes.
I'm not saying to bow and kiss their asses, just follow the rules they ask everyone else to follow when dealing with their source code. Is it really that hard? Is it really out of someone's way to do that? Kiss the ass of the guy who just ported it for sure, It's nice to see everyone thanking Xport on every release he has done for his hard work.
And I'm glad Xport did what Pete had asked, shows Xport is a respectable guy! Maybe if they clear up any other issues the two sides can get along and maybe help one another?
That's the main point I'm trying to make, isn't that the best thing for all of us? You, me, joe-porter? Have the help from the original author to make the Xbox ports that much better? All of us are happy, you and me have a sweet updated emulator, joe-porter guy gets to learn a shit load about the emulator and make it great.. everyones happy right? Just look at the great work on the SNES9X port! If I'm not mistaken, they have the help from the original authors (?)
Those who don't care, should cause it's in all our best interests.. look what we just lost in the possibilities with the PSCX port!
guile, glad you liked the sig
Fighting on the internet is like running a race in the special olympics, even if you win you're still a retard!
Post by: Iriez on May 13, 2003, 02:27:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Just look at the great work on the SNES9X port! If I'm not mistaken, they have the help from the original authors (?) |
Im not too sure, but i believe lantus did it all himself.
On a side note, with regards to a previous comment somewhere among all the trash, was about the GPL, and giving back, etc etc.
Superfr0 helped correct some core(?) issues on mame when he did his ports. So, i think its unfair to say that these guys are not giving anything back, because some certianlly have.