Nucore software license?

Talk about anything PB2K related.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

I've been following the development for a while and put some personal skin in the game last weekend by picking up a SWE1 in anticipation of the Nucore release.

My question deals with the licensing and source code for the Nucore system once it has been released. Myself and several others that I know are knowledgeable enough and interested enough to contribute, but thus far the development is closed.

I am pleading the case that the software/hardware should be open sourced.

1. The hardware is the money maker. Sure, someone could use your software and reverse engineer the hardware to produce their own for sale, but why? For such a small market, they couldn't do it any cheaper then Nucore, and couldn't support the product properly. Nobody is stealing WPC board design and trying to sell it as their own.

2. Project abandonment. So you guys get tired of Nucore after the money drys up (and it will, only 10,403 pin2k machines were produced, a small percentage of owners would be interested in an emulation system). Not saying that you will tire of it in a year, but what about 5 years from now? That would leave us in the same situation that we are in now, unobtainable parts for our machines. After sales of X months, after everyone has bought one that wants one (yea I know, there will be a flood of orders on release and then ones and two for ever after that), release a Gerber file for the hardware so that someone else can redo the entire thing in 10 years if you guys are not around.

3. Community contribution. I write software and bug hunt for a living, several others I know do the same. I *want* you guys to make lots of money off this product, but as a consumer, I also want it to work flawlessly. We can help with that, you retain control, and it doesn't cost a dime. Linux works the same way right?

4. More ideas and more code written. All the requests from users, leave that to the community, or simply tell people, "You want that feature? Here's the code go at it". Amazing things have been done with this development model. Hell, give me source code or an API and I'll have a perl library written for it in a week.


Anyway, looking forward to your reply and *really* looking forward to the product release.


Sincerely,

Michael Osten
mjocean
member
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 1:29 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mjocean »

Hey man, as a fellow potential user of this project to another, I couldn't disagree more...
mosten wrote: My question deals with the licensing and source code for the Nucore system once it has been released. Myself and several others that I know are knowledgeable enough and interested enough to contribute, but thus far the development is closed.

I am pleading the case that the software/hardware should be open sourced.
I'm a very competent developer, with some serious "certification" and experience to back that up. Meanwhile, look at Steve's background and credentials. I don't think I have the same game programming experience that he does and I doubt there are many others who are willing to donate their time that do.
mosten wrote: 1. The hardware is the money maker. Sure, someone could use your software and reverse engineer the hardware to produce their own for sale, but why? For such a small market, they couldn't do it any cheaper then Nucore, and couldn't support the product properly. Nobody is stealing WPC board design and trying to sell it as their own.
The whole point of the project is to run the software on generic PC hardware. How can the hardware be the money maker..?
mosten wrote: 2. Project abandonment. So you guys get tired of Nucore after the money drys up (and it will, only 10,403 pin2k machines were produced, a small percentage of owners would be interested in an emulation system). Not saying that you will tire of it in a year, but what about 5 years from now? That would leave us in the same situation that we are in now, unobtainable parts for our machines. After sales of X months, after everyone has bought one that wants one (yea I know, there will be a flood of orders on release and then ones and two for ever after that), release a Gerber file for the hardware so that someone else can redo the entire thing in 10 years if you guys are not around.
The trouble is, we still don't know if we can run the software on other hardware or not. I assume the answer is yes (and that should be clear from all of my remarks) but if the answer is no, well...then, yes, we're in potential trouble in the long haul.

If the answer is yes, then how much support does NuCore need once it's released and works? As an emulator, once it runs 100% on the "entire software library" (read: two games, alternatively read: small, well known API) my guess is that the support work would likely be updates to support, say, new linux kernel versions. What I'm looking forward to (and you should be too) is their second release which is not the hardware/software but the API to let development on Wizard Blocks, or some other new pin-logic proceed with ease. That will be a community effort, not the EMU itself.

Moreover, I want these guys to make a ton of money. Why? So they can further their momentum into building new playfields and writing new game logic. Yes, you are absolutely right, there are only 10k machines out there right now, but think about where the growth is? It's in new games, new machines. Think about how hard it would be for you or I to mass produce a new playfield and software for it. Now consider the possibility/hope that the NuCore guys could do this (with their intricate knowledge of XINA and P2K and some large cash infusion from our purchases). That's my hope anyway, and that's why I want these guys to make a fortune.
mosten wrote: 3. Community contribution. I write software and bug hunt for a living, several others I know do the same. I *want* you guys to make lots of money off this product, but as a consumer, I also want it to work flawlessly. We can help with that, you retain control, and it doesn't cost a dime. Linux works the same way right?
Open source isn't as cut and dry as you portray it here. Let's not have this long debate, but my guess is that the company for which you write source for and hunt bugs for is closed source -- after all, they pay you, yes?
mosten wrote: 4. More ideas and more code written. All the requests from users, leave that to the community, or simply tell people, "You want that feature? Here's the code go at it". Amazing things have been done with this development model. Hell, give me source code or an API and I'll have a perl library written for it in a week.
One word: Emulator. What is a request or a feature of an emulator? You do everything the original hardware/software interface did. People need to better understand that there are two distinct potential projects here from the NuCore guys. One is the emulator that will let us run P2K roms on Linux (if not generic hardware) and the other is the API by which we (and their own emulator) can communicate with the WPC P2K driver board to control lights and solenoids and read switches. Features that some have asked for on the forums don't even make sense, as these would just be "off-the-shelf" Linux utilities (e.g., temperature monitoring).
mosten wrote: Anyway, looking forward to your reply and *really* looking forward to the product release.
I agree with this 100% !
User avatar
Chuck
Site Admin
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:34 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by Chuck »

Good thread, smart debate by smart people ;-)

Let me clear up a couple of misconceptions.

1) Hardware is necessary for us to support the software and not a profit center. Frankly we would rather not use hardware but we have to. Also our first true desire is to get this product in people's hands. We believe to get this into people's hand we need to price it very agressively. We will never recover the money we have invested in the project. If we tried to the project would be too expensive for our target customer and we really don't want that. We would like to make enough money to cover our hard goods costs and to keep us interested in further developing the product ;-)

2) Given our reason for doing this in the first place I don't think you'll have to worry about this issue. If we ever decided to stop developing nucore we would do something to ensure it's longevity.

3) Too many cooks in the kitchen is the issue at hand here (my opinion.) We have the perfect chemistry between the three of us. We talked about adding more people to the project and saw no benefit to doing so. So far we have been able to keep up with new requests and great ideas that have been suggested to us. I feel more resources would slow the project not help it. It's not always about programming or hardware design. Good teamwork is also an issue and you have to remember we're not getting paid to do this right now so it's tricky sometimes to manage this project. Steve has a ton of experience in the open-source community and he will most likely give you his feelings on this issue too.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

"I'm a very competent developer, with some serious "certification" and experience to back that up. Meanwhile, look at Steve's background and credentials. I don't think I have the same game programming experience that he does and I doubt there are many others who are willing to donate their time that do."

Really??? And what would make you think that? Do you have any experience with open source software? For example the Linux kernel alone is 294Mb of user contributed software (that no one paid for exclusive rights). This doesn't take into account the tens of thousands of user-space software that has been written and source code released (that no one paid for exclusive rights). In fact, Nucore is BASED on the work of open source developers (Linux, libraries, compiler, etc).

"The whole point of the project is to run the software on generic PC hardware. How can the hardware be the money maker..?"

Something has to take the place of the prism card.

"Moreover, I want these guys to make a ton of money. Why? So they can further their momentum into building new playfields and writing new game logic. Yes, you are absolutely right, there are only 10k machines out there right now, but think about where the growth is? It's in new games, new machines. Think about how hard it would be for you or I to mass produce a new playfield and software for it. Now consider the possibility/hope that the NuCore guys could do this (with their intricate knowledge of XINA and P2K and some large cash infusion from our purchases). That's my hope anyway, and that's why I want these guys to make a fortune."

Making a fortune is NOT going to happen. They will be luck to break even as evidenced by the reply below.

"Open source isn't as cut and dry as you portray it here. Let's not have this long debate, but my guess is that the company for which you write source for and hunt bugs for is closed source -- after all, they pay you, yes?"

It is cut and dry. The project leads accept patches and code from the community, it is included or it isn't. It's not up to me if the code makes it into the base, but if it's good it should. I don't write code for sale. All code that I write is for use in the company I work for, and then released into the community if useful. It's simple.


"One word: Emulator. What is a request or a feature of an emulator? You do everything the original hardware/software interface did. People need to better understand that there are two distinct potential projects here from the NuCore guys. One is the emulator that will let us run P2K roms on Linux (if not generic hardware) and the other is the API by which we (and their own emulator) can communicate with the WPC P2K driver board to control lights and solenoids and read switches. Features that some have asked for on the forums don't even make sense, as these would just be "off-the-shelf" Linux utilities (e.g., temperature monitoring)."

Yea, sort of like MAME? Oh yea, that's open sourced.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

"2) Given our reason for doing this in the first place I don't think you'll have to worry about this issue. If we ever decided to stop developing nucore we would do something to ensure it's longevity."

But we do. I certainly trust your intentions and applaud the work that you have done, but....I have seen in many instances where people take their ball and go home. In fact, look at the state of pinball parts today. We have two people doing just that. C&D letters all over the place, ego's unchecked., nobody making the parts that used to be made in someone's garage because of need, people leaving the hobby because of ill will, etc.

"3) Too many cooks in the kitchen is the issue at hand here (my opinion.) We have the perfect chemistry between the three of us. We talked about adding more people to the project and saw no benefit to doing so. So far we have been able to keep up with new requests and great ideas that have been suggested to us. I feel more resources would slow the project not help it. It's not always about programming or hardware design. Good teamwork is also an issue and you have to remember we're not getting paid to do this right now so it's tricky sometimes to manage this project. Steve has a ton of experience in the open-source community and he will most likely give you his feelings on this issue too."

I totally understand why you feel this way. Development should be closed until launch. After that, you could release the code, set up a mailing list, and accept patches (or not if they sucked). Some of the features that would be requested of you, would just show up as a scratch to someones personal itch. Honestly, you don't have to even communicate with contributors, just accept the patch or userland application and move on.

Certainly, I can't convince people that do not believe in open source software to release their code, or convince them of the fact that it will work, and be better in the long run. It's your baby, you do what you want. I do however believe that it would be the right decision.
mjocean
member
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 1:29 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mjocean »

Well, this is disappointing. I wish you had read what I had written without being so defensive. I responded to technical issues as well, but you are clearly focused on the open-source issue.

Sure, the points you make about the benefits of open source are largely correct, but it is complicated and intricate to me (heck, just choosing one of several open source licensing models has potential negative implications). I should also apologize for being somewhat dismissive of the number of highly talented people who write open-source software. You right to bring up MAME, which Steve Ellenoff (one of the NuCore devs) has worked on actively. Still, the licensing is a tricky thing and has many implications (good and bad).

To be honest, I don't care to argue the licensing issue. This is the least interesting point to me (technical perspective). I will withdraw myself from this aspect of the thread.

As not even end users, what right do we have to even request for the project to be open source? Personally I feel proceeding along these lines is ultimately rude to the developers. It's their work and it seems very premature to worry about pricing, licenses and the end-of-life support issues as nothing has been released yet and neither of us is a customer as of yet. These guys are working hard and doing so in a pioneering way. I think they deserve to be paid for their efforts. Sure, there are donations and the entire NPR model of pricing, but ... well, I just don't care about any of this. These are issues for people with MBAs. Not me.

I really don't want a flame war to grow out of this. I'm sorry if you took my message to be antagonistic, this was not, and is not, my intent.
Something has to take the place of the prism card.
There is no shortage of solid-state storage options at the moment.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

"Well, this is disappointing. I wish you had read what I had written without being so defensive. I responded to technical issues and you responded with open-source rhetoric. The points you make about the benefits of open source are largely correct."

I apologies if it sounded defensive. I did read your reply. In fact I quoted it. My original post was concerning licensing, not technical issues. The technical issue your brought up were incorrect anyway:

"The whole point of the project is to run the software on generic PC hardware. How can the hardware be the money maker..?"

Requires something to take the place of the prism card. It's more than just a "PC".

"The trouble is, we still don't know if we can run the software on other hardware or not. I assume the answer is yes (and that should be clear from all of my remarks) but if the answer is no, well...then, yes, we're in potential trouble in the long haul."

Nucore has publicly stated that they have the ability to run on generic hardware (with the addition of the prism replacement). I believe dual-core was the only requirement. If they decide to sell this way is yet to be seen. Personally, I think it would be a support nightmare, but I'll but it that way if available.

"It's in new games, new machines. Think about how hard it would be for you or I to mass produce a new playfield and software for it."

I hate to squash dreams, but it's not happening. At least not to the level that you are hopeful. We can hardly get anything made for games that had production levels in the 20,000 level. We'll see *maybe* one, and it won't be just the Nucore guys doing it (unless they own CNC routers, TIG welders, plastic injection, etc).

"One word: Emulator. What is a request or a feature of an emulator? You do everything the original hardware/software interface did."

I think the MAME guys would disagree with that.

I believe that from your statements:

"I'm a very competent developer, with some serious "certification" and experience to back that up. Meanwhile, look at Steve's background and credentials. I don't think I have the same game programming experience that he does and I doubt there are many others who are willing to donate their time that do."

and

"Open source isn't as cut and dry as you portray it here. Let's not have this long debate, but my guess is that the company for which you write source for and hunt bugs for is closed source -- after all, they pay you, yes?"

leads me to believe that you do not have much experience with open source other than to "consume" without thinking about where it comes from. There are lots (tens of thousands) of people that "donate" their time for meaningful software development, and lots of people that get paid to develop software that is ultimately open sourced. I couldn't write this software from the ground up in any reasonable amount of time (nor do I have the motivation), but I can spot a race condition, or help with documentation, write external applications or help optimize code. It's not the same as writing the whole thing.

"That said, it is complicated and intricate (heck, just choosing one of several open source licensing models has potential negative implications)."

Not really. Your license can be as simple as "Free for non-commercial use. Australians by the name of Wayne are not allowed to use this software in any way, whisky tango foxtrot".

"As not even end users, what right do we have to even request for the project to be open source? It's their work and it seems very premature to worry about pricing, licenses and the end-of-life support issues as nothing has been released yet and neither of us is a customer as of yet."

I'm interested and was trying to ask a legitimate question of the developers. You responded with your own opinion, which was wrong in several places.

"These guys are working hard and doing so in a pioneering way. I think they deserve to be paid for their efforts. Sure, there are donations and the entire NPR model of pricing, but ... well, I just don't care about any of this. These are issues for people with MBAs. Not me."

Nobody is suggesting that they shouldn't be paid. In fact I suggested that the money is in the effort. You could give the IP away with licensing that protects it from other commercial entities and people WILL buy it because no one else will make it. The software is useless without it and the hardware is useless without the software. Nothing about this project is free. Even if I had the source code and the gerber file, I'd still have to pay to have the prism replacement produced and purchase the computer hardware. It would be easier to to get it from Nucore.

"I'm out of this as it's not technical in any way, shape or form. Personally I feel proceeding along these lines is ultimately rude to the developers. I really don't want a flame war to grow out of this. I'm sorry if you took my message to be antagonistic."

It didn't start out as a technical conversation. It started as a licensing question.
mjocean
member
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 1:29 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mjocean »

mosten wrote: I'm interested and was trying to ask a legitimate question of the developers. You responded with your own opinion, which was wrong in several places.
How can an opinion be wrong?
mosten wrote: It didn't start out as a technical conversation. It started as a licensing question.
Fair enough.
User avatar
Chuck
Site Admin
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:34 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by Chuck »

I take no offense to someone requesting we release this as an open source project. For reasons listed above and some reasons we aren't willing to share at this time the project won't be released as open source.

Also, there are a whole lot of people wrongly assuming a whole lot of things about nucore. I would love to release more details on this project but can't at this point for very good reasons. We are working in the best interest of getting this product out.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

"I take no offense to someone requesting we release this as an open source project. For reasons listed above and some reasons we aren't willing to share at this time the project won't be released as open source.
Also, there are a whole lot of people wrongly assuming a whole lot of things about nucore. I would love to release more details on this project but can't at this point for very good reasons. We are working in the best interest of getting this product out."

We can really only speak to the details that you have posted publicly.

Perhaps someone could speak as to the need for secrecy? Is there some sort of pin2k cabal waiting to steal your ideas? Pinball is bizarre like this, everything is a secret with it's fair share of comic book villians.

I would like to point out the obvious in that what you are producing will be proprietary in nature, and subject to the same supply issues as the OEM equipment eventually. I think it will be cool, and it will help keep a lot of pin2k's going for a few years, but I don't think I should be selling off my prism card yet.
User avatar
Chuck
Site Admin
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:34 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by Chuck »

mosten wrote:I think it will be cool, and it will help keep a lot of pin2k's going for a few years, but I don't think I should be selling off my prism card yet.
I wouldn't suggest you ever sell your main prism card. I just suggested selling spares if people had them.
destruk
member
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:28 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by destruk »

If it was open source, that means it could be added to MAME and/or run on Windows for FREE! I know of hundreds of millions of people who would love that. It already will work with generic hardware, so what more could anyone want? ( /sarcastic truth off ) btw I want Windows Seven - the new version microsoft is working on, and Duke Nuke'em Forever to be open source too. Paying for stuff sucks.... ( sarcastic sarcasm off )

Most people would just be pleased to wait and hold questions of this nature until there is some tangible product readily available.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

"If it was open source, that means it could be added to MAME and/or run on Windows for FREE! I know of hundreds of millions of people who would love that. It already will work with generic hardware, so what more could anyone want? ( /sarcastic truth off ) btw I want Windows Seven - the new version microsoft is working on, and Duke Nuke'em Forever to be open source too. Paying for stuff sucks.... ( sarcastic sarcasm off )"


Nice troll. Open source = Software for cheap people!!! Dumbass.

"Most people would just be pleased to wait and hold questions of this nature until there is some tangible product readily available."

Why?
destruk
member
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:28 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by destruk »

If showing respect and patience makes me a Troll, I'd like to be one with a big club. It's just sadistically humorous that people will work on a program for 2+ years, and when they want to make it available some people demand all their work for free.
mosten
member
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Nucore software license?

Post by mosten »

"If showing respect and patience makes me a Troll, I'd like to be one with a big club. It's just sadistically humorous that people will work on a program for 2+ years, and when they want to make it available some people demand all their work for free."


No one is asking for anything for "free". Re-read the thread.
Post Reply