I was searching for an IPTV box today, and the research itself has given me some infos, I'd like to share with who ever finds it relevant.
We know Netflix and PS4 use BSD to broadcast IPTV/access internet, yet BSD itself can't use Netflix or PS4 content.
This means, with any BSD-based OS it is impossible to get PS4 content or watch Netflix correspondingly.
The real-world example why GPL brings more real freedom into the world than BSD license in regard to consoles is obviously - SteamOS & Steambox - with ability to install Steam on Linux and access Steam content on "normal" Linux machine, as well as complete separation of software. Thus whole ecosystem can profit from Valve and Valve can profit from Linux. Win-win.
Now the Netflix issue is still open. But today in a search of IPTV, I discovered that most IPTV providers of at least russian TV use Linux-based boxes. Aaand -..
Linux is supported standalone. That means, you can take "normal" Linux box, install their program and watch IPTV. Or you can buy their Linux-based box and watch the same IPTV. Choice is yours. Funny enough, BSD is not supported by them. This is a direct link to the FAQ of one of the providers via g translate.
Which means, I can directly purchase a subscription ignoring purchase of extra-unnecessary box, then get software and enjoy IPTV on any Linux box I have.I save the unnecessary equipment (++ to flexibility and my wallet) and they purchase a happy customer. And the DRM is not spread everywhere. Win-Win.
Would it be done with BSD ... its unlikely to happen, as they won't be obligated at all, .. and BSD market share is.. I think I can predict what bosses would say to that, as they tend to cut costs.
That leads me into the theory that other IPTV providers, like Sky (previously Premier) use BSD on their boxes. That would explain why there is simply no Sky client for BSD-OS, or in fact any other OS.
So is it good to deny right to close software code as a necessity to have right to freedom of it? I think it really proves it, in a real world.
We know Netflix and PS4 use BSD to broadcast IPTV/access internet, yet BSD itself can't use Netflix or PS4 content.
This means, with any BSD-based OS it is impossible to get PS4 content or watch Netflix correspondingly.
The real-world example why GPL brings more real freedom into the world than BSD license in regard to consoles is obviously - SteamOS & Steambox - with ability to install Steam on Linux and access Steam content on "normal" Linux machine, as well as complete separation of software. Thus whole ecosystem can profit from Valve and Valve can profit from Linux. Win-win.
Now the Netflix issue is still open. But today in a search of IPTV, I discovered that most IPTV providers of at least russian TV use Linux-based boxes. Aaand -..
Linux is supported standalone. That means, you can take "normal" Linux box, install their program and watch IPTV. Or you can buy their Linux-based box and watch the same IPTV. Choice is yours. Funny enough, BSD is not supported by them. This is a direct link to the FAQ of one of the providers via g translate.
Which means, I can directly purchase a subscription ignoring purchase of extra-unnecessary box, then get software and enjoy IPTV on any Linux box I have.I save the unnecessary equipment (++ to flexibility and my wallet) and they purchase a happy customer. And the DRM is not spread everywhere. Win-Win.
Would it be done with BSD ... its unlikely to happen, as they won't be obligated at all, .. and BSD market share is.. I think I can predict what bosses would say to that, as they tend to cut costs.
That leads me into the theory that other IPTV providers, like Sky (previously Premier) use BSD on their boxes. That would explain why there is simply no Sky client for BSD-OS, or in fact any other OS.
So is it good to deny right to close software code as a necessity to have right to freedom of it? I think it really proves it, in a real world.
Comment