Anonymous Will Award $200,000 for Xbox Linux

An anonymous reader writes: "The X-box Linux Project at Sourceforge reports today that an anonymous donor will award nearly a quarter of a million dollars to the individuals responsible for the completion of a two-phased effort to run Linux on the Xbox. One can't help but wonder if this will help or hurt the community. On one hand, it is likely to generate additional interest in the project, on the other, some people may be less inclinded to share their discoveries with money on the line. Then again, getting both Money and Glory sounds pretty good."

M$ will love this

[RealisticWeb.com]

The basic goal of the project is to find a simple and completely legal way to run Linux on the Microsoft Xbox.

Yes, and the basic goal of the MS XBox team will be to find any way possible to prevent it.

legal expenses

[xavii]

is $200,000 going to be enough for legal expenses when you accept the prize and Microsoft comes at you with all their legal guns ablazing?

xavii aka bob

Re:weird way of saying $200,00

[CmdrTaco (troll)]

they should have said "a fifth of a million dollars."

The donor could easily recoup his costs...

[zulux]

... if he/she purchased 1000 XBoxes and used them for something that would normally require a $400 Intel based computer.

Xboxes are are priced at $200, but really contain the guts of a typical $450 PC.

A cluster of 1000 Xboxes would be mighty cheap computing power.

And MS will reward..

[YahoKa]

$200,000 from him if you can run linux on it, but them MS will probably pay you $400,000 to keep it hush.

marketing lesson

[lingqi]

nearly a quarter of a million dollars

sigh... i guess 1/5 of a million dollars just don't have that "zing" or "cha-chin!" to it...
hell... this is why we have enron scandals... 50 grand short and we are calling it "nearly"

Re:It's all a plot...

[kwishot]

Microsoft takes a monetary hit on each Xbox sold ($150+ I believe ?), so that would be a really bad idea, because people would be buying them without the intention of using them for games, but rather for porting linux. If people don't buy the games, Microsoft doesn't make back the money it lost on the unit.
I would guess that it's not Bill Gates (at least not for the reasons you gave)
-kwishot

Odds on whether they'll pay?

[Wanker]

I'd like to see that cash in escrow before I believed anything this "anonymous" donor said.

Is Microsoft Behind This?

[MBCook]

So far I've seen comments suggesting Larry Ellison and such, but what about this: could M$ themselves be behind this? Here's my theory:

• Item: xbox sales have been falling and M$ is losing something like $125 per box (ouch).
• Significance: There are alot of people out there who would like to help with this and now with this prize, they are probably more likely. This could spurr xbox sales (a little bit). Even if they don't succede, they may now buy games.

• Item: It's not in the interest of MS to have modchipped xboxes become popular, because that would allow piracy easier. And the people who would want to run Linux on their xbox are some of the most likely to have many of the tools they'd need (DVD-R drive, broadband, etc).
• Significance: Note that to get the full money, you have to make a copy of Linux that will run on an UNMODIFIED BOX. This would spurr sales, and give them a bigger installed base, but would still MAKR PIRACY HARD because there is no modchip. If Linux was put on the xbox, this would probably be the ideal case for MS.

• Item: Now with a prize, this likely won't take terribly long, it will definatly speed things up. That's free press for MS if it get's hacked (and they don't act like idiots about this which they wouldn't if they are posting the prize $$$).
• Significance: While chalenging hackers to port Linux to the PS/2 would have been very hard because of it's architecture, the xbox is made of mostly PC innards. Compilers and such are easily available. Hackers would already know about the CPU, hard drive, etc. inside out, and the grpahics chip/etc couldn't be too far from an nForce, etc.

• Item: Even if many xboxes get sold to put Linux on, it's still a good thing for MS.
• Significance: Not only would MS be able to claim a more significant install base to potential developers, but it would also allow them to buy the parts for the xbox cheaper and therefor lower their cost, improving their profitability (or as things are now, CREATING profitability).

This is just some speculation on my part. But let's face it, it does make a little sense.

Re:Odds on who the anonymous donor is?

[MyHair]

Maybe even a potential coup by Sony or Nintendo?

I was thinking of Sony.

Many people are still saying everyone loses money on consoles, but my perception from my readings is that only Microsoft is losing money on console sales right now.

If Linux could run on XBox, Linux games could be developed for it, and they should be easily ported to/from PS2 Linux, right? But PS2 will run Linux without hardware modification.

So an XBox version of Linux (GNU/XBox?) would increase the perceived market penetration of Linux-capable consoles, therefore increasing developer interest, therefore encouraging more console Linux games.

However, since the XBox needs a hardware mod, an end user who wants the new killer Linux console game will be more inclined to buy a PS2.

Plus, if my perception that XBox is the only console still bleeding cash at each sale, this would further hurt Microsoft and benefit Sony.

(Customary IANAL declaration) Since Sony is based in Japan, wouldn't it be more difficult for Microsoft to find a reason and venue sue them if/when it is revealed they are the money source?

Re:Is Microsoft Behind This?

[phriedom]

"Even if many xboxes get sold to put Linux on, it's still a good thing for MS. Significance: Not only would MS be able to claim a more significant install base to potential developers, but it would also allow them to buy the parts for the xbox cheaper..."

Wrong. First, X-Box Software Developers are slightly interested in the number of consoles sold, but they are a lot more interested in the number of X-Box software titles sold. X-box crackers are not going to be helping that number. Second, Microsoft already has all their supplier contracts worked out with fixed prices, so more units sold isn't goint to lower their price for parts. In fact, Microsoft is buying so few parts, that they are a long way from having leverage with their suppliers. I think there are already disputes with suppliers because Microsoft has locked themselves into contracts that they would like to get out of now.

All things considered, I think it is paranoia to think that Microsoft is offering this reward.

On the other hand, I fail to see much significance to users in the X-box being hacked, other than businesses losing faith in Palladium. IIRC, the Dreamcast was hacked and yet they still sat on shelves at $100, because people would rather just buy a real computer. When the X-Box gets broken, I doubt there will be much impact on sales. Lets face the facts, Microsoft will make darn sure that it is very difficult for anyone to buy 100 of these for any kind of cluster, unless retail stores are already sitting on large inventories.

Re:M$ will love this

[spongman]

yup, you can be sure that games released for the xbox in the future will not run on modded boxen.

Re:M$ will love this

[Fat Casper]

yup, you can be sure that games released for the xbox in the future will not run on modded boxen.

If you mod the xbox to run Linux, you're doing it because MS loses money on the hardware. Buying the games that let them make their money back isn't really on your List of Things To Do Today.

This sounds like a federal program; if MS subsidizes the purchase of your new (Linu)Xbox, then you'll subsidize their silly business plan?

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

This one is easy.

They are anonymous because it is probably id software, or some agent of another big gaming house that is Linux-friendly. They want to run their games on the XBox, but don't want to pay the licensing fees to MS. Instead, he will pay a one-time pop it to some geek, and then make self-booting quake-on-linux-on-xbox
dvds, and do an end-run around Microsoft and their licensing.

Re:It's all a plot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes but each XBox purchased is another tally to the install base to tought to potential developers. Look guys, we sold 10 million XBoxes, thats 10 million potential customers for your deer fucker, er, hunter game.

Oh for crying out loud.

[dmaxwell]

THIS again? I've got karma to burn so why not. He who writes the code chooses the license. Get over it. Don't like GPLed code? Don't use it. There are strings attached to commercial SDKs and libraries that are far more obnoxious than the GPL. And I don't see you charging any of Microsoft's windmills.

Most of us here are fully capable of seeing when the GPL is appropriate and when it isn't. For that matter, many of us don't give a crap about RMS' polemics either. The GPL is an often useful tool. Yes it is for some people. Get over it. The last time I checked, I didn't start hemorraging internally the last time I fired up a shell linked against readline. So much for the viral thing.

And no whinging about how it hurts somebody's development business. That is sooo annoying. Any idiot who can't be bothered to read COPYING should be canned anyway. You want the functionality of some GPLed code? Don't like the terms? Tough. Find or write a replacement. This is no worse than the terms on the commercial code you seem so concerned about.

Oh yeah, in case anybody missed it. Not all GPLed code is owned or controlled by the FSF. The GPL lends itself to agendas other than theirs. So spare us the stuff about RMS' integrity or lack thereof. It's a non-issue when one chooses a licence whose properties are certainly well understood by now.

As for that hurt coming to Linux you're so pleased about, do you think that if Microsoft somehow succeeds in driving a stake through Linux' heart that it will cause a migration to BSD code? I doubt it. Once Microsoft scavenges all of the BSD code they have a use for, that development model will be targeted next. That's right. Once target numero uno is taken out (if they can that is), they will come for BSD. Better watch out for the frag damage. Sheesh! RMS is justifiably a target of derision. You don't have to be as well.

Oh yeah, the main point of all this. He who writes the code chooses the license. Licences are merely tools. Can we expect polemics against chainsaws just becuase some psychotics like the mess they can make?

Re:legal expenses

[jfunk]

From the page:

Everything done on this project is for the sole purpose of writing interoperable software under Sect. 1201 (f) Reverse Engineering exception of the DMCA.

Furthermore, these guys are in Germany, not the US.

This is the third time I quoted from the page, and I did it the first time entirely to encourage reading before writing.

Maybe I was too subtle...

Re:weird way of saying $200,00

[(H)elix1]

That's a really weird way of saying $200,000: "nearly a quarter of a million dollar"

Damn the hard drive marketing folks. If you figure 1024 rather than 1000, it comes much closer...

Re:Bad news for Linux?

[flacco]

There will be numerous sourceforge projects started, only to be abandoned when no one is skilled enough with GIMP to create themselves an icon.

And this is different from the current state of sourceforge how?

Re:This will hurt Open Source developers

[ryanvm]

Won't the $200K reward encourage greedy developers to hide their work and end up reducing the amount of sharing that goes on?

I'm not so sure about that. It's been my experience that the majority of open source projects are actually coded by a very small number of developers. Projects with widely dispersed development such as Linux or Samba seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

I think $200K could certainly inspire a dozen or so individuals to do what they are already day-dreaming about doing.

Re:M$ will love this

[Anonymous Coward]

It isnt a silly business plan, it is standard practice, which you would know if you put in the slightest bit of research into the subject (CNet must mention it every article, for goodness sake)

All console systems have historically taken a loss, and make it up by licensing on the software. That is why console makers are against any unlicensed software in general, not just an OS like Linux. This has been true of consoles dating, to my knowledge, from the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES). Not sure if it was true before that, because I was too young to care about the economics of it.

That was the main reason 3DO failed; the consoles were too high of a price point for the consumer, thus didnt sell, thus causing software makers not to make a return on the games, thus causing them to stop making games for that platform.

NeoGeo was around so long because they could just convert their arcade games to the home player format, but they were still the victim of economics, and lost a great deal of money on the console.

So MS is actually using the correct business plan, and you dont know what you are talking about.

The money is from a game developer

[jmorris42]

Think it through people. Independent game devs are reported to be paying $10 per shipped game in royalties for games developed with the the official XDK. There is plenty of settled case law saying you CAN release a title without paying up and that you can break any obstacles the console vendor throws up, including adding the trademarked Nintindo logo if it is required to get the machine to execute your code. Since it IS settled case law I can think of a few game shops who might be tempted to add that $10 to their bottom line instead of Microsoft. A $200K inventment goes into the black when unit #20,000 of the first title goes out the door, which will be in the initial production run.

Wanna bet BioWare had a secret reason for doing a Linux port of Neverwinter Nights? Or if not them there are a dozen or so equally good suspects. It probably isn't a huge shop that does a lot of console biz though. Screwing M$ out of their royalties would scare Sony & Nintendo that they might be next so there is enough risk that I'd doubt it is somebody on the scale of EA and such.
The big shops need the good relationship with the hardware vendors as new hardware comes down the pipe.

Re:Hmm

[rjamestaylor]

Regarding your sig: do you really believe that the phrase "one nation, under God", accurately describes the country you're pledging your allegiance to? Or is the pledge for you simply an expression of an ideal state that we may all aspire to, even if it has yet to be established?

Do you believe subscribing to a lesser ideal will help the the state of our Republic?

When I gave my wedding vows I did not hesitate to pledge my allegience to an imperfect person (as an imperfect person). Nor did I consider that we were imperfect. Rather, I was honoring the covenant of marriage.

When St. Paul called the wayward church in Corinth "the church of God which is at Corinth" was he forgetting that they were divided, litigious, adulterous, gluttonous, etc.? No, but he spoke concerning something higher than their condition: he spoke concerning their position.

Regardless if we live like it or not, whether we believe it or not, we are a nation under God's sovereignty. Saying we are a nation under God is not a reflection of our condition, but of our position.