Angepinnt Nano SwinSID upgrades (paddles, etc...)

  • As said it before, there are seller on ebay and amibay who sells SwinSID, built, programmed .... i doubt they have any more permissions to do so.
    ReSID-fp is only the foundation and not the source!! The code Hermit wrote is 100% avr assmebly, with tricks and shortcuts to be able to handle the task in this puny uC (mostly the comments in resid-fp has been used)

    My device has a lot more components, needed a lot more time to even laid out the PCB, so for assembly alone would grant it's price!

    1ras schrieb:

    But as I said, how would you blame the clone sellers that they "steal" something which is freely available, if your approach isn't better?
    Maybe because after long years of no progress, Hermit and I have increased the compatibility and quality to an unimaginable level? We did WORK on this (not just cosmetic)?
    They can sell whatever they want but I would like to get something back for my work too.

    And for hobby builders -- can you really put two QFN16, an SOP8, a TQFP44, a TQFP32 a dozen of resistors and half a dozen capacitor to a PCB the size of a DIP28; program a Xilinx CPLD and two AVR uC ?
    Not to mention, if you could design and make your own PCB...

    And for last -- even IF the Atmega code is not clean, the CPLD and the Attiny(paddle) are, and w/o those, the Atmega can't work properly...

    Also look at how many products has gone from open source to closed -- not only to hide from hobbyist but to protect themselves from cheap knock-offs or because the complexity is now beyond the average hobby builders.

    The code is not completely blocked off from people, because Hermit made the jsSID based on the code he written for the SwinSID Ultimate: csdb.dk/release/?id=145523
  • CodeKiller schrieb:

    As said it before, there are seller on ebay and amibay who sells SwinSID, built, programmed .... i doubt they have any more permissions to do so.
    1) Two wrongs don't make a right!
    Just because others are stealing, does this make it okay for you to do the same?

    CodeKiller schrieb:

    And for hobby builders -- can you really put two QFN16, an SOP8, a TQFP44, a TQFP32 a dozen of resistors and half a dozen capacitor to a PCB the size of a DIP28; program a Xilinx CPLD and two AVR uC ?

    Not to mention, if you could design and make your own PCB...
    2) Why yes, yes I can thanks - and I'm far from an SMD or electronics expert. I'm a perfectionist who has learnt that I can create anything, given enough time and dedication.

    Soldering SMD circuits is becoming cheaper and easier all the time - hot-air re-work stations are available from just over $100 now. For circuit board layout there is the free and open-source KiCad. To etch DIY circuits I use the crude but effective Hydrogen Peroxide + Muriatic Acid (H²O2+Hcl) method. Decent microprocessor/Eeprom programmers can be bought ready-made for under $100.

    Just because something is not easy does not make it impossible for hobbyists. That is a lame excuse!

    CodeKiller schrieb:

    Also look at how many products has gone from open source to closed -- not only to hide from hobbyist but to protect themselves from cheap knock-offs or because the complexity is now beyond the average hobby builders.
    3) Corporations have gotten into the same argument, but always lose in court. Many businesses have tried to take non-profit open-source software such as Linux, alter it for themselves and then make a profit on it. The problem is they have to abide by the original license of the works they are basing their improvements on - only separate applications, utilities or drivers can be sold for profit in such cases... not their "improvements" or extensions on the core system.

    You appear to have made something useful, but even if you only used the original SwinSID for reverse-engineering reference, then you are still basing your device on the works of others.
  • steveday72 schrieb:

    Just because others are stealing, does this make it okay for you to do the same?
    You clearly miss the point -- I DID a lot of effort to improve unlike these copycats.


    steveday72 schrieb:

    Just because something is not easy does not make it impossible for hobbyists. That is a lame excuse!
    Okay, there is the most of the process in this very forum (up to Hermit's rework) -- please follow then (disasm and fix sh!t)


    steveday72 schrieb:

    You appear to have made something useful, but even if you only used the original SwinSID for reverse-engineering reference, then you are still basing your device on the works of others.
    The original project was never GPL-ed (or any other licensed), the later FWs didn't even had source code available so there is no excuse. I respect Swinkels for the original work, but my (or in the sound-gen code Hermit's) work is well beyond that.

    Now the SwinSID Ultimate does not share any code from the original, so how could you call it derivative work?!
    Your argument is totally false: WE ALL base our works on the the work of others!! If not, then we could not write, or speak, everybody should reinvent the wheel all the time!
    And for example have you heard about the JiffyDos??

    steveday72 schrieb:

    not their "improvements" or extensions on the core system.
    What do you call it? A new commodore64? Clearly not as those are only ROMs. Still sold if you want them legally!


    In summary: You require info about a project you never contributed, helped, or even promoted, just because there was a roughly similar project in the past that has the designs available?? And all of it for free of course?! Are you serious??

    You can still use the orig--- i mean my improved fw (lazy fix) -- but if you need better, then you can do it better and show, how to be open-source!
  • Benutzer online 2

    2 Besucher