6.3 undocumented (?) features/system info

[TyroneShoes]

I stumbled on something interesting in the system info page. I have two HR10s, one at 6.3 and one still at 3.1.

I'll get the one negative out of the way first. The 3.1 version lists 83 hours HD and 559 hours SD. The 6.3 box also listed the hours the same under 3.1, but now it lists the hours as 83 HD and 548 SD. I find that curious, if not just a tad alarming.

OK, shifting gears:

There is a bunch of new stuff in the info, including a dozen or so patent numbers not listed before, a statement regarding the Linux source code and a contact for obtaining it for the cost of distribution, and a similar statement about Apple Computer's Bonjour network discovery protocol and a contact for obtaining the source code for that. It states that the box now contains Bonjour, but maybe that's old news, I don't know.

So what do we think this means? My best guess is that it means a movement towards Tivo being even more of an open platform than it has been historically, which seems to me like a good thing. It might also portend a iTunes store or Apple connection yet to come, but then that might be reading too much into things. Again, I don't know. But I sure am curious.

Speculation is good, but facts are better. Anyone with a little of either, please post back. Thanks.

Tom. errr...Ty.

[TheMerk]

SA Tivos have had the same licensing verbage on them for quite awhile now. The Bonjour architecture is used by the Tivos to find other Tivos for MRV and Tivo2Go. No, this does not mean that D* would ever enable those features, just that they're still in the code that Tivo handed over to D*.

[TyroneShoes]

So, of course, it may mean nothing for the HR10 (and who could imagine yet another significant up rev beyond 6.3/6.3a for it, anyway) and yet it doesn't rule anything out.

But I would think if they did not want the HR10 to eventually have these capabilities, that they would have simply commented out any code lines that refer to it (and the actual code could be currently commented out, I guess) just as a matter of SOP. So I find it curious that they would leave the verbiage in the system info, or actually add it there for the first time, for this box. It seems like a true invitation to 3rd-party developers, to me.

I'm sure that there is a lot of dormant code in every Tivo model, much of which will never see the light of day. I still believe there is dormant code in HR10s designed for possible life beyond DTV, that will allow folks after 2010 (and after the end of all business with DTV) to subscribe them directly to Tivo as a ATSC standalone. Some folks think I'm wrong about that, but as wild-haired as it may sound, no one has been able to even begin to prove this concept wrong, so far.

[cheer]

But I would think if they did not want the HR10 to eventually have these capabilities, that they would have simply commented out any code lines that refer to it (and the actual code could be currently commented out, I guess) just as a matter of SOP. So I find it curious that they would leave the verbiage in the system info, or actually add it there for the first time, for this box. It seems like a true invitation to 3rd-party developers, to me.
This is not new -- for sake of simplicity Tivo simply doesn't enable the features in Tivoapp and/or doesn't issue the certs necessary to enable the features. This is how 6.2 was hacked to enable HMO/MRV/etc. 6.3 appears to have the code for (at the very least) HMO and HME, which again might be enabled via a hack of some type, but I wouldn't expect any official support.

[wmcbrine]

I'll get the one negative out of the way first. The 3.1 version lists 83 hours HD and 559 hours SD. The 6.3 box also listed the hours the same under 3.1, but now it lists the hours as 83 HD and 548 SD. I find that curious, if not just a tad alarming.I see no cause for alarm there. They probably just revised the algorithm that estimates free space; I doubt there's actually less space available (especially since the HD number is unchanged). It's not a particularly accurate estimate, anyway.

[TyroneShoes]

This is not new -- for sake of simplicity Tivo simply doesn't enable the features in Tivoapp and/or doesn't issue the certs necessary to enable the features. This is how 6.2 was hacked to enable HMO/MRV/etc. 6.3 appears to have the code for (at the very least) HMO and HME, which again might be enabled via a hack of some type, but I wouldn't expect any official support.
I get it. Really, I do.

But the point I was trying to make is that placing this in the system info seems like a direct invitation to 3rd-party developers. Them reaching out is probably a good thing, in my view.

[dmurphy]

I get it. Really, I do.

But the point I was trying to make is that placing this in the system info seems like a direct invitation to 3rd-party developers. Them reaching out is probably a good thing, in my view.

It's not that they're reaching out, but it's required by Apple's agreements. :)

http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/guidelinesfor3rdparties.html


Proper Trademark Notice and Attribution

1. Distribution Within the United States Only

a. On product, product documentation, or other product communications that will be distributed only in the United States, use the appropriate trademark symbol (TM, SM, ®) the first time the Apple trademark appears in the text of the advertisement, brochure, or other material.

b. Refer to the Apple Trademark List for the correct trademark symbol, spelling of the trademark, and generic term to use with the trademark. Generaly, the symbol appears at the right shoulder of the trademark (except the Apple Logo, where the logo appears at the right foot).

c. Include an attribution of Apple's ownership of its trademarks within the credit notice section of your product, product documentation, or other product communication.

Following are the correct formats:

_________ and _______ are registered trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc.

_________ and _______ are trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc.

[TyroneShoes]

It's not that they're reaching out, but it's required by Apple's agreements. :)

http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/guidelinesfor3rdparties.html
Maybe so, but that would run counter to the claim posted earlier that Bonjour has been there for a long time. Sorry, but both of you can't be right.

[dmurphy]

Maybe so, but that would run counter to the claim posted earlier that Bonjour has been there for a long time. Sorry, but both of you can't be right.

It has indeed been there for a long time; I know it has, because my Zippered HDVR2 responds to mDNS queries (that's Bonjour in action).

Maybe Apple called TiVo on it?

[drjjr]

Sorry, but both of you can't be right.

Sure they can. It works like this. Company A uses technology that Company B has a patent for.
Company B finds out about it and their legal departments chat.
Company A either pays a license fee or cross-licenses patents or some other agreement.
Company B stipulates that Company A must display its copyright information in future releases.
Company A complies.

Happens all the time. And you better believe that legal process takes much longer than the software development cycle.

[Aquatic]

I worked on an interesting case once upon a time that might be similar. The premise of the action was that patented processes were included in source code that was being used in a product. Those processes were unlicensed, etc. etc. My job, as the "expert witness" software engineer, was to determine if that code was actually in the released product, and if so, what release of software had it in.

Turns out that today's compilers are pretty efficient, and the patented algorithms/processes WERE embedded in the original source code, but had been commented out. When the source was compiled, the commented lines of code do not compile into the executable, so, although the patented stuff was there, it was NOT in the object code--which is what actually runs on systems.

Dunno what the final outcome was, but it's entirely possible a copyright notice was posted anyway, even though the source wasn't used--but it's technically in there. Easier to put up the copyright notice rather than remove a ton of code maybe?