Why ISN'T Sagetv open source?

[matterofrecord]

Why is the source code (as it stood just before Google's take over) NOT open source?

Google has a good track record on open source software with large parts of "android", "chrome Web-browser" and "chromium OS" being open source.

Google is offering a tv component to google fibre with some channels on offer for an extra $50. So it is possible that Sagetv might become a competitor to Googletv BUT that assumes that a Sagetv would become more popular that a commercial "under the television" box that's easy to setup and just works. It also assumes that there will be some way of delivering pay tv channels through sagetv both now and in the future. When you consider that Googletv extenders are $120 the advantages of ease of use, cost, and channel access really go with Googletv.

The upside to making Sagetv opensource is a community of technically literate users that would develop new features for Sagetv. The best of these features could be incorporated in to Googletv. These features would be ideas from a wide range of users and would be tested in a group of enthusiastic users that would give helpful and technically literate feedback . It looks like a win-win to me.

So why hasn't Google made Sagetv open source?

[Skirge01]

First off, you could be a bit mistaken with your assessment of Google's OSS record. Ars wrote a pretty in-depth article about the "open source" Android last year.

Second, building on the above, what motivation does Google have to make Sage open source? What would they get out of it? There's no way they're going to incorporate any features created for the open source version, at least, not without stealing the idea and then writing their own code to implement it. Plus, if they have a product in the works (their fiber project) which is based on large portions of SageTV, why would they want to give competitors access to it? As much as I'd love to see it happen, that just isn't smart business. You even said this is a possibility, so if there's even an infinitesimal chance, there's no good reason to do so. Therefore, there's your answer as to why. Google didn't get where they are by being stupid.

[wayner]

My hope as been that the TV piece of Google Fiber will fail, or they will move away from SageTV and then release the source, or Narflex et al will be able to take the old Sage code and create the successor to Sage.

[david1234]

Originally Posted by wayner

Narflex et al will be able to take the old Sage code and create the successor to Sage.

That would be awesome.

At one point Jeff was saying to keep watching for the good things were coming, but that was a long time ago, and before google fiber took off.

[emveepee]

I don't see it happening. I expect a lot of the capture card interfaces were developed under NDA which if taken out would mean developing the recording componet from scratch. Taking out the "free" licensed EPG updates and mpeg2 decoder would be a other big losses Finally there must be some info in wiz.bin that they didn't want exposed or that would have already happened.

What's left at the end would be a pretty basic media player and other then serving the existing users I don't see a lot of reason it would attract new users in the years it would take to get back to status quo.

Martin

[nycjoe]

Originally Posted by wayner

Narflex et al will be able to take the old Sage code and create the successor to Sage.

I think Jeff's a pretty sharp guy - if (and when) Google fiber does get terminated (or sold off to some other company), I'm sure Google can find other projects for him (and the sagetv crew) to move on to. The transcoding pipeline at YouTube alone could probably keep them busy indefinitely. Why would they go back to the niche market of homebrew DVR?

[wayner]

Originally Posted by nycjoe

I think Jeff's a pretty sharp guy - if (and when) Google fiber does get terminated (or sold off to some other company), I'm sure Google can find other projects for him (and the sagetv crew) to move on to. The transcoding pipeline at YouTube alone could probably keep them busy indefinitely. Why would they go back to the niche market of homebrew DVR?

Because they now have FU money and they enjoy the nostalgia and the fun that they had in the old days when they were building SageTV? That's in an ideal world of course.

[tmiranda]

Originally Posted by emveepee

I don't see it happening. I expect a lot of the capture card interfaces were developed under NDA which if taken out would mean developing the recording componet from scratch. Taking out the "free" licensed EPG updates and mpeg2 decoder would be a other big losses Finally there must be some info in wiz.bin that they didn't want exposed or that would have already happened.

What's left at the end would be a pretty basic media player and other then serving the existing users I don't see a lot of reason it would attract new users in the years it would take to get back to status quo.

Martin

Unfortunately I agree with this

[Thomas Wischgol]

Originally Posted by emveepee

I don't see it happening. I expect a lot of the capture card interfaces were developed under NDA which if taken out would mean developing the recording componet from scratch. Taking out the "free" licensed EPG updates and mpeg2 decoder would be a other big losses Finally there must be some info in wiz.bin that they didn't want exposed or that would have already happened.

What's left at the end would be a pretty basic media player and other then serving the existing users I don't see a lot of reason it would attract new users in the years it would take to get back to status quo.

I agree, this is probably true unfortunately. And the media player itself is already open source as it is based on mplayer.

[7up]

Given the existing competition for Google as it attempts to re-enter the home environment with Android TV, a good argument could be made that releasing a SageTV/Google DVR app could create a lot of interest for a device entering a crowded market. Google needs to create some excitement for Android TV and a DVR app might just be feature to create interest to the growing "cord cutting" market.