Xbox 2 Specs Leaked *Update*

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zackman
  • Start date Start date
That is illegal because one needs to use illegal software to do that
(xbox's hacked bios). It is wrong thing to do. Software is not like
hardware. Software is 100% knowledge and intellectual work it doesn't
belong to one who bought a cd with software on it.
Click to expand...

It may be legally wrong, but it's definitely not morally wrong. By
playing your own games copied to HD doesn't take anything away from
anybody, it does not reduce the value of anything, nobody is hurt by
it, directly or indirectly. Therefore, it's not wrong IMHO even if it
is against copyright law. I mean, using (modified) MS software that
MS refuses to sell on device manufactured by MS, why not? Buying or
selling an "illegal" BIOS would be wrong, that involves profiting on
somebody elses work. Downloading it for free IMHO is not.
Currently I am not concern with this because I am can get any game
fully legal and for free. Ideal isn't it? Unfortunately I don't play
much. During last year I accumulated maybe about 150 hours of
playing on my xbox.
Click to expand...

That's quite a lot, equal to about a month of work on salary...
Running Linux on current xbox can be done without breaking any law.
Click to expand...

Laws do not have intrinsic value, it's possible to have a law that is
wrong too. What's right or wrong is defined by economy, society and
people in it, and laws should just make it formal. Not the other way
around. Of course if the law is wrong too much, it becomes hard to
draw the line between "illegal but ok" and "illegal and NOT ok", but
then that's really a problem with the law...
 
That is illegal because one needs to use illegal software to do that
(xbox's hacked bios). It is wrong thing to do. Software is not like
hardware. Software is 100% knowledge and intellectual work it doesn't
belong to one who bought a cd with software on it.
Click to expand...

PC software generally is sold under a license where console games are
actually purchased. The owner of an X-Box game can do as they please with
it, such as run it under an emulator or run it under a hacked X-Box. PC
software can come with such strings as running it on certain hardware ect.

As far as pure copyrights are concerned in the US, PC software with or
without a license and console games are treated equally as general
software. It is still illegal to make a copy of said software with a few
minor exceptions.
However if somebody wrights bios which can boot xbox's games and that
bios is not related to MS's it would be OK to do such things from my
point of view. But even then it would be mostly used for illegal
actions.
Click to expand...

The majority of cases, yes, chances are that a clean room engineered BIOS
would be used for illegal activities. There are more options for
perfectly legal activities on an X-Box with a new BIOS. For example,
inceasing the size of the hard drive for more storage of software and
music. An X-Box is still a cheap Linux machine (try and configure a PC
of similar specs for less than $180).
Currently I am not concern with this because I am can get any game fully
legal and for free. Ideal isn't it? Unfortunately I don't play much.
During last year I accumulated maybe about 150 hours of playing on my
xbox.

Running Linux on current xbox can be done without breaking any law.
However actual use of that Linux is limited.
Click to expand...

Linux on an X-box (with a few X-Box to USB adapters) is just as limited as
Linux on a PC using USB ports. The big disadvantage of an X-Box is its TV
centric display output.
 
kevin said:
PC software generally is sold under a license where console games are
actually purchased.
Click to expand...

In all but the rarest of occasions software is licensed, not sold.

If you contract me to write you some software, I will likely grant you a
licence to use it, not sell it to you... if I sell you the software, I sell
you the IP and as a programmer I am unlikely to do that. You may specify
that I cannot work for a competitor on a similar product for a certain term
(1-2 years), that's quite usual.

Ben
 
Ben said:
In all but the rarest of occasions software is licensed, not sold.

If you contract me to write you some software, I will likely grant you a
licence to use it, not sell it to you... if I sell you the software, I
sell
you the IP and as a programmer I am unlikely to do that. You may specify
that I cannot work for a competitor on a similar product for a certain
term (1-2 years), that's quite usual.
Click to expand...

Regardless of any of this, it is lawful in the US to make one (note _one_)
copy of any piece of software (let's not go into whether music or video
recordings are "software"--I really don't feel like digging into the
statute and the case law surrounding it this morning) for backup purposes
and it is lawful to possess anything you need in order to do that.
Congress worded that in such a way that it appears to override the DMCA and
the like.

Copying a game onto your hard disk, including possession of the hacked BIOS
necessary to allow it, would then appear to be lawful in the US under that
statute. It _might_ also be lawful under the "fair use" doctrine. Since
it is not depriving anybody of work or of income I don't see any moral
objection to it either.

Now, whether Microsoft will honor your warranty on a hacked machine is
another story.
 
John said:
They apparently purchased it for the PC version of Virtual PC (I shit
you not!) This allows you to run multiple PC OS's without rebooting and
was suggested for their server market.
Make you wonder about MS if they have to buy a small Mac-based company
to try and get their OS stable.........
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with "getting their OS stable"--the reason they wanted it
was to have the ability to support non-windows applications on Windows
boxen--on the same box you can run several versions of Windows, Novell,
Linux, BSD, OS/2, and so on all at the same time. This is important in the
corporate world where they often have legacy applications that require a
non-Microsoft operating system and porting the application would be
prohibitively expensive. It does absolutely nothing to make the OS more
stabel.

And the reason they bought Connectix was that vmWare was not vulnerable to a
takeover.

Further, it's debatable how "Mac-based" Connectix has been in recent
years--they seemed to be branching out--even have a copy of Virtual PC for
OS/2 although Microsoft has discontinued that product.
Anyway I used to run the Mac version of Virtual PC and while it was
fine for "work" apps it was of no use whatsover for action games of any
kind. Games usually make low-lovel hardware calls and VPC could NOT
emulate this as the chip was fundamentally different. This may of
course change when they migrate to the G5.
Click to expand...

That is VPC on the _Mac_. On the PC it runs the application directly on the
hardware, using the memory manager and other protection featuers to make it
appear to the program as it if has its own PC. The Intel hardware has had
this capability ever since the 80386 was introduced.
 
Virtual PC does it acceptable and given that they will only have a
limited number of programs (games) to work with it might be okay. That
and the fact Microsoft acquired Connectix makes you wonder...
Click to expand...

There is fsk all chance. If they are using bigendian that pretty much
nails it. IMHO It would be a _big_ mistake to keep compatibility. Its
almost certainly going to add $50 or more to the final cost of the
console even if they can crack the Nivdia microcode emulation by autum
2005.
I'm not an expert on this but how important is it to emulate them
properly? As long as you can emulate it acceptable might be enough.
Bear in mind it's still DirectX.
Click to expand...

Its not DirectX though its Nvidia microcode.
Also, interestingly, they might be able to get help from their
developers who have ported Xbox games to the PC (and ATI who have had
to help developers with problems).
Click to expand...

ATI will not support Nvidia microcode it will be too expensive to
redesign the chip architecture. Even NVidia say there is **** all
chance. Its not about Direct X its about the Nividia microcode (that
you upload via Direct X to perform shader functions). That _is_
hardware specific. Currently Nvidia have a higher level version called
CGI, ATI have IIRC Rendermonkey, but they are still compiled to
microcode specific to the chip set.

Some games will work as long as they don't use shaders, so count any
good games out.
 
In all but the rarest of occasions software is licensed, not sold.

If you contract me to write you some software, I will likely grant you a
licence to use it, not sell it to you... if I sell you the software, I sell
you the IP and as a programmer I am unlikely to do that. You may specify
that I cannot work for a competitor on a similar product for a certain term
(1-2 years), that's quite usual.
Click to expand...

In the PC world, what you stated is generally true. Commercial software
has an end user licensing agreement that appears either during the
installing or when the application is first launched. It informs the user
on possible distribution restrictions, limitations on its use, warranty
and copyright amoung other things.

Console games generally lack licensing at the user end meaning that there
is no end user licensing agreement to confirm to use the software. When
you buy console software, you actually purchase the game. The only
restrictions that apply are copyright laws.

A handful of console games do have a licensing agreement. Phantasy Star
Online (I forget which versions) have an end user agreement.
 
In alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati kevin getting said:
PPC chips can be either big or little endian.
Click to expand...

Depends on the implementation. As stated earlier, the G5 does not
implement little-endian mode (Apple didn't need it, so why waste silicon
on it?)

-a
 
Depends on the implementation. As stated earlier, the G5 does not
implement little-endian mode (Apple didn't need it, so why waste silicon
on it?)
Click to expand...

Correction: Apple does need it (or at least uses it on the G3s
and G4s). IBM didn't need it on the Power4 and the PPC970 is a
derivative of the Power4. It wouldn't be a big thing to put back
in. It's not a lot of silicon.
 
Back
Top