|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

By Jonathan Corbet
October 20, 2012
It may still be difficult to wander into a local electronics retailer and come away with a desktop system running Linux. But there is likely no shortage of Linux-based devices on sale in that store; one needs only wander past the Linux-based phones and cameras to the shelf where the networked video players live. Linux dominates on such devices, but, as the recent history of the Boxee Box shows, "Linux inside" does not necessarily mean "free" or that the device has a future.

The Boxee Box is based on the Boxee software which, in turn, is based on the XBMC media player. It gained an enthusiastic early following as the result of its open-source roots and the device's plugin infrastructure. The Boxee Box handled a wide variety of media types from the outset; in places where it fell short, others could easily provide plugins to fill in the gaps. So the Boxee Box became known as a device that could play almost anything.

Boxee Box users lost some of their enthusiasm over time. Early versions could be "unboxed" and made to run arbitrary software, but the company closed that hole in 2010 and it does not appear that anybody has figured out how to break newer versions. Bug fixes and improvements from Boxee slowed down over time, leading to user frustration. And now those users, the people who have supported Boxee to this point, have been informed that Boxee is abandoning the device in favor of its upcoming, USA-only "Boxee TV" product.

One can maybe understand a company that feels the need to declare end-of-life for a two-year-old consumer electronics product; such offerings often don't last anywhere near that long. But Boxee has not just left a product behind; it also left the entire community that had embraced that product. The new "Boxee TV" is a clear step backward in a number of regards: no plugin support, no support for arbitrary file formats, and a highly proprietary architecture throughout. It now features a new deal with US cable provider Comcast (ensuring that Boxee will not be blocked by the just-allowed encryption of basic cable content in the US) and features designed to warm the entertainment industry's heart. This article in The Verge describes the situation clearly:

Boxee’s gone from hated pirate outsider to shaper of telecom policy, and it’s done it by extending an olive branch to the largest and most entrenched interests in the business. XBMC and open source are gone now, replaced by a proprietary OS that’s built to support end-to-end content encryption and a policy compromise [Boxee CEO Avner Ronen] describes as “very reasonable.” And Boxee’s deemphasized its famously comprehensive support for weird video files as well — weird video files that generally come from torrent sites.

What has happened here is clear: Boxee has gone from trying to make its customers happy to making the entertainment industry happy instead. If that meant dumping its old customers and the development community that had built itself around the older product, then so be it. As XBMC developer Nathan Betzen put it, Boxee has moved from trying to expand its users' rights under copyright law to actively restricting those rights. In a sense, Boxee is telling us that we cannot have a box with plugin support and the ability to play "weird video files" — much less a truly open system — under the current copyright regime.

Boxee has also driven home a lesson we've heard many times before: just putting free software onto a device does not make the device free. Most of what is in the Boxee Box is freely licensed, but, without the ability to replace the software, the Boxee Box itself is not under its owner's control. It can have features taken away, contain evil software, or be turned into an obsolete, unsupported paperweight at a corporation's whim. Purchasing such a device may or may not be a rational decision, depending on what the purchaser's goals are. Developing for this kind of device seems like a mistake; one is working to improve an edifice whose foundation can be yanked out at any time.

Suitably skilled users who are aware of these issues will, of course, have avoided a device like the Boxee Box from the outset. It is certainly possible to put XBMC onto a properly equipped computer and have a truly free device to feed one's video consumption habits. That option has not gone away, but the world has still gotten a little worse; from Nathan's post again:

Most frustrating of all is the fact that, as an XBMC team member facing yet another rush of ex-Boxee users, I should be very pleased with this decision, but honestly, I’m not. Boxee, Plex, and XBMC have all been pushing each other to advance over the past four years. The competition for eyeballs has led to some incredible software (and a few stinging words). With Boxee’s decision to go down the Boxee TV road, I’m afraid the world will be left with one less competitor dedicated to true innovation for the sake of the media consumer.

Without an off-the-shelf open system, most viewers are going to be stuck with whatever the entertainment industry is willing to let them to have. Those who want something more flexible will need to build their own systems, run into all kinds of issues trying to access content that is rightfully available to them, and live under the assumption that their primary motivation is piracy.

Version 3 of the GPL will not save us here; manufacturers have shown every sign of being willing to dump software when its licensing gets in the way of their business objectives. Boxee went from being "passionate about open source software" to embracing a fully proprietary solution even without the extra requirements found in GPLv3 to worry about. Solutions to this problem, if they exist, will have to come from elsewhere.

What is needed is a combination of truly free alternatives, a willingness among buyers to insist on free devices, and copyright reform. In the handset market, buyers have begun to understand how nice it is to have alternatives like CyanogenMod — and to not have to go through a scary "jailbreaking" process to install it. As the content industry tries to tighten its grip on what our systems can do, awareness of the value of freedom may grow in this market as well. But it will be too late for Boxee Box owners who are now discovering that they lack the freedom to improve a device after its manufacturer has lost interest.


to post comments

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 20, 2012 19:04 UTC (Sat) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link]

It would also help that people making buying decisions know what it really costs to make said device and keep it going. Most of the corporation or owner decisions are going to be driven by that and how much they can make off a product for themselves, their debts, stockholders etc. Even a non-profit is going to need to make more money than it puts into the product if it wants to continue to exist and invest in further development.

Many of the times what I run into is that people want X but they want it cheap or don't want to know why an open version costs more.. they see the other product costs 30% less and don't know that they are paying for it with invisible freedom. As they say "Freedom is never free."

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 20, 2012 19:55 UTC (Sat) by spaetz (guest, #32870) [Link] (21 responses)

a raspberry pi $35 and a 2gb sd card make a beautiful xmbc box. How much was boxee?

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 20, 2012 20:00 UTC (Sat) by arekm (guest, #4846) [Link] (20 responses)

raspberry pi is not powerful enough to handle 1080p video and menus at the same time. Jerky, display "hangs" for few seconds etc. Tested on my unit.

No idea about Boxee Box but above problems make raspberry pi not that good for "beautiful xbmc box".

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 20, 2012 20:41 UTC (Sat) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (16 responses)

Is your experience with the pi at 700MHz or at the higher (now supported) speeds? Since the higher speeds also increase the memory speed, you actually tend to get more performance than the clock increase alone would suggest.

Also, did your tests use the hardware accelerated video?

It will also be interesting to see what difference the added memory of the new version will make. Since most xbmc distros allocate 128M for video, this takes the memory available for the rest of the system from 128M to 384M.

It's nice to see what economies of scale can do for the costs of components :-)

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 20, 2012 20:51 UTC (Sat) by arekm (guest, #4846) [Link] (15 responses)

Tested on 256MB version of raspbbery pi in june using openelec. Video was accelerated back then, not sure about menus and such.

I guess I should test it again.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 20, 2012 22:28 UTC (Sat) by arekm (guest, #4846) [Link] (14 responses)

Made a test again with fresh Raspbmc distribution. My opinion still stands - raspberry pi is unusable as a generic (video especially) xbmc media player. It can't handle 1080p properly.

Full HD

Posted Oct 21, 2012 16:41 UTC (Sun) by man_ls (guest, #15091) [Link] (8 responses)

Is that for Blu-ray movies? To be honest, my monitor doesn't have 1080 vertical pixels anyway (it's 1680x1050).

Full HD

Posted Oct 21, 2012 16:47 UTC (Sun) by arekm (guest, #4846) [Link] (7 responses)

mkv file:

Format : Matroska
Format version : Version 2
File size : 8.74 GiB
Duration : 1h 37mn
Overall bit rate : 12.8 Mbp

Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.1
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 5 frames
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 1h 37mn
Bit rate : 11.3 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 816 pixels

Audio
ID : 2
Format : DTS
Format/Info : Digital Theater Systems
Codec ID : A_DTS
Duration : 1h 37mn
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 510 Kbps
Channel(s) : 6 channels
Channel positions : Front: L C R, Side: L R, LFE
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 24 bits

Full HD

Posted Oct 21, 2012 16:56 UTC (Sun) by GhePeU (subscriber, #56133) [Link] (6 responses)

It's probably not 1080p video's fault but a DTS audio issue: http://www.memetic.org/raspberry-pi-xbmc-and-dts-audio/

Latest Raspbmc should already use hard-float, so probably you'll need to overclock, which is now officially supported: http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/2008

Full HD

Posted Oct 21, 2012 17:40 UTC (Sun) by arekm (guest, #4846) [Link] (5 responses)

Previous testing was done with 5.0 audio and DTS enabled settings. Receiver is capable of DTS of course (Pioneer VSX-920), so this isn't DTS issue.

I don't want to overclock pi. If I had to then it would be another reason to say that raspberry pi isn't good solution for home video player.

My popcornhour C-200 works much better (in terms of 'user experience') than xbmc on raspberry pi. The price range is very different though.

Full HD

Posted Oct 21, 2012 21:28 UTC (Sun) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (4 responses)

> I don't want to overclock pi.

Overclocking beyond the manufacturers spec is a problem.

But the manufacturers have said that as long as the temp doesn't get too high, these clock rates are safe.

At that point, what's the difference between "overclocking" and the "turbo mode" that the latest Intel chips have where they can shut down some cores to run other cores at a higher clock rate and still keep within the thermal limits?

XBian mildly overclocks the pi in this safe, manufacturer approved way, and is significantly snappier than raspbmc.

That said, even Raspbmc is not significantly less responsive than my DVR when navigating around. I haven't tried doing so while a video is playing.

Full HD

Posted Oct 21, 2012 21:35 UTC (Sun) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (3 responses)

putting it another way, if the timeing had been slightly different and the pi folks had released the pi as a 1GHz system with thermal limiting that would drop it's speed down to 700MHz if it got too hot instead of listing it as a 700MHz system that could be overclocked up to 1GHz as long as you didn't let it get too hot would you still feel the same way?

what's the difference between the two?

Full HD

Posted Oct 22, 2012 18:34 UTC (Mon) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link] (2 responses)

> what's the difference between the two?

Overclocking is by definition not supported by the manufacturer.

I freely admit that I have not done any research on it, but just based on your comment, it sounds like the pi folks were having thermal dissipation issues at the higher frequencies. You can feel free to second-guess the engineers, but only at the risk of significant problems-- like melting the device, starting a fire, etc.

Full HD

Posted Oct 22, 2012 18:48 UTC (Mon) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

> Overclocking is by definition not supported by the manufacturer.

This is supported by the manufacturer

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/2008

Introducing turbo mode: up to 50% more performance for free
Posted on September 19, 2012 by eben

Since launch, we’ve supported overclocking and overvolting your Raspberry Pi by editing config.txt. Overvolting provided more overclocking headroom, but voided your warranty because we were concerned it would decrease the lifetime of the SoC; we set a sticky bit inside BCM2835 to allow us to spot boards which have been overvolted.

We’ve been doing a lot of work to understand the impact of voltage and temperature on lifetime, and are now able to offer a “turbo mode”, which dynamically enables overclock and overvolt under the control of a cpufreq driver, without affecting your warranty. We are happy that the combination of only applying turbo when busy, and limiting turbo when the BCM2835′s internal temperature reaches 85°C, means there will be no measurable reduction in the lifetime of your Raspberry Pi.

You can now choose from one of five overclock presets in raspi-config, the highest of which runs the ARM at 1GHz. The level of stable overclock you can achieve will depend on your specific Pi and on the quality of your power supply; we suggest that Quake 3 is a good stress test for checking if a particular level is completely stable. If you choose too high an overclock, your Pi may fail to boot, in which case holding down the shift key during boot up will disable the overclock for that boot, allowing you to select a lower level.

What does this mean? Comparing the new image with 1GHz turbo enabled, against the previous image at 700MHz, nbench reports 52% faster on integer, 64% faster on floating point and 55% faster on memory.

Full HD

Posted Oct 23, 2012 22:51 UTC (Tue) by Lennie (subscriber, #49641) [Link]

Overclocking the Raspberry Pi is not only supported by the manufacturer, I believe they even have a driver which keeps an eye on the builtin temp. sensor.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 22, 2012 15:35 UTC (Mon) by dashesy (guest, #74652) [Link] (4 responses)

What about BeagleBoard or a variant (it is open hardware BTW)? It is cheap, and sure is much more powerful than pi.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 22, 2012 19:00 UTC (Mon) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (3 responses)

Beagleboard $150

600MHz Cortex A8 chip
128M ram
256M flash
SD card

Raspberry Pi $35

700-1000MHz ARM6 chip
512M ram (new version, old one was 256M)
SD card storage

are you sure the beagleboard is 'much more powerful' than the pi?

it's possible that the video acceleration of the beagleboard is better than the pi. I don't know a good way to look that up.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 22, 2012 19:30 UTC (Mon) by dashesy (guest, #74652) [Link] (1 responses)

Maybe the additional DSP+GPU may help:
TMS320C64x+ DSP for accelerated video and audio decoding, and an Imagination Technologies PowerVR SGX530 GPU. It also says (520 MHz up to 720p @30 fps) for DSP but then a combination of CPU+DSP maybe able to handle higher resolutions.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 22, 2012 20:26 UTC (Mon) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

The GPU on the pi is able to drive a 1080p@60hz display. You can play video at this resolution if you are using the hardware codec support.

Unfortunantly this does require a binary blob driver loaded by the boot process to work, but while this isn't good, it's no worse than anything else in the space.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 22, 2012 20:06 UTC (Mon) by GhePeU (subscriber, #56133) [Link]

IIRC the original BeagleBoard can't even drive a monitor at that resolution. There's a newer Beagleboard version, the BeagleBoard XM (149 USD):

1 GHz Cortex A8
512 MB LP-DDR
microSD card storage
C64x+ DSP

And it still doesn't support 1080p video, at best it can do 720p.

A Pandaboard ES can play 1080p video (I've got one on my desktop now), but it costs ~180USD. It's a wholly different board, however, dual-core Cortex A9 1.2GHz with 1 GB LP-DDR2, 802.11 b/g/n, 10/100 Ethernet, Bluetooth v2.1 EDR, HDMI, DVI-D... it's also very well supported for now, the latest drivers release supports Wayland (!).

The Odroid-X is another alternative, it costs about 50 USD less than a Pandaboard (no WiFi or Bluetooth however) and has a quad-core Exynos4412 Cortex A9 1.4 GHz, but I don't think HD video acceleration is working on Linux at the moment.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 21, 2012 8:08 UTC (Sun) by spaetz (guest, #32870) [Link]

It works well enough to display the videos I have (I purchased the additional 2.5£ hardware decoder license. Fortunately, I don't have the urge to do video and menus at the same time.

1080p requirements

Posted Oct 22, 2012 5:11 UTC (Mon) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] (1 responses)

Actually I found, after buying a Canon compact that shoots HD, that even my few-years old Pentium D@3.4Ghz, (video: Radeon 9200) was not able to smoothly play 1080p with common F/OSS players. So I took to shooting 720p, which looks about as good, at least when shot by that not-so-high-end camera, and the files are smaller.

I wonder where the problem was. Nonoptimal codecs? Display? How much does modern 1080p playing rely on the video card smarts?

1080p requirements

Posted Oct 22, 2012 10:18 UTC (Mon) by etienne (guest, #25256) [Link]

It is not the 1080p that you should look at but the "Overall bit rate : 12.8 Mbps/s".
Depending on compression, you can have a wide range of bit rates for the same definition, I have an old/cheap camcorder which does 25 Mbps/s at 1080p in its maximum setting (at 60 images/seconds).
Not a lot of PC can play 25 Mbps/s (whatever the OS), even set-top box and MPEG4 hand-held video player have major problems...

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 23, 2012 9:01 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

Good article. But the funny line there is: Boxee has gone from trying to make its customers happy to making the entertainment industry happy instead.

Of course nothing like this happened. Companies which abandons customers don't survive. They just compared number of customers who want to view torrent-downloaded files and number of customers who want to see Comcast-provided shows and found that (at least in US) most customers prefer Comcast.

Which nicely shows that torrents are not such a huge deal as MPAA likes to portray. At least in US.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 25, 2012 8:56 UTC (Thu) by ortalo (guest, #4654) [Link]

XBMC&co. needs to partner with Project Mango (from Blender ecosystem) now I guess. And I am sure many projects can fill the gaps between them if needed.

Yes, ok, building an entire production/distribution/display system for a nice small catalogue of four 10 min. movies content may sound silly for a while but let's face it: maybe shortcutting the entire entertainment industry altogether is the most *sensible* thing to do from the technical, legal and economical point of view.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 25, 2012 9:55 UTC (Thu) by rwmj (subscriber, #5474) [Link] (1 responses)

Maybe I'm unclear what I should be angry about.

Boxee have dropped one product and developed (from scratch?) a completely different product. It's their prerogative to do that. No one who cares about freedom will want to use the replacement product. All the original software exists and can be run quite easily on cheap and readily available ARM and x86 hardware, and if that is too hard to set up maybe an entrepreneur can fill the gap in the market vacated by Boxee?

Rich.

The Boxee Box: too free to live?

Posted Oct 27, 2012 18:31 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

You're supposed to be angry that Boxee will no longer provide fixes, enhancements, and other support for a product you want. It will cost you more (perhaps in your own time) to do that yourself. And you shouldn't expect any entrepreneur to take over, because he would find the same unprofitability Boxee did.

Now, many people believe in situations like this Boxee has no moral obligation to provide those services to them, so there would be no cause for anger. But it's apparent that many others don't see it that way. I know this because I see the angry rants when e.g. the cable company decides to stop providing analog cable service.

Another reason to be angry is at being misled into believing you would have something for years to come only to have it taken away after two. I don't know if that's happened, or is at all reasonable, in this case, but I come back to another TV cable analogy, and remember a guy ranting about the evil cable company taking away all his HD channels and demanding more money to get them back. He had never paid for them, but until recently, the cable company didn't have the means to disable them. So this "I was used to it and you took it away" effect does exist.


Copyright © 2012, Eklektix, Inc.
This article may be redistributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 license
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds