Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62
  1.    #41  
    Originally posted by AJB


    I'm impressed. Many would have dug in rather than acknowledge this. Kudos to you.
    And he's not alone. I respect the development of the WirelessModem driver for Mac, and would be happy to purchase a license if it were to become a for-profit product. However, I am not willing to pay $37.50 for software I'm not going to use, and functionality that Handspring saw it fit to bundle with the Treo 600.
    PhoneNews.com - Complete Wireless Industry Coverage
    ChristopherPrice.net
  2. #42  
    The first run-in with sgruby for me was when he impulsively pulled his Wireless modem off the market and whined about how mean everybody was being to him...

    Never have I seen such a thin skinned, cranky developer.

    I deleted all traces of his product...

    I'm now a happy customer of PDAnet by...
    Here, here! Let me first say I don't condone software piracy, but when I read that it was Scott who was doing the accusing I just had to laugh! It was a wonderful day when June Fabrics came to the floor with an alternative product. Scott has whined, and *****ed about everything from day one. As others worked to develop similar products he went on and on about how they "just had to charge for it", and how his product was so much better then everything else. Personally, I don't care if PDANet is better or not (it is though - it whoops his software's ****) I would use anything other then WirelessModem.
  3. #43  
    Sorry to have to continue this crapfest of a thread, but I have to point out something that has been overlooked here:


    Hatoncat is in the wrong.


    As soon as Scott wrote the driver, it immediately became copywritten by him. Copyright law holds that a work is automatically copywritten as soon as it is fixed in a medium.

    As the copyright holder, he has the right to say how his work may or may not be distributed. If he deems that it may not be distributed without the application, that's his right. If he says that I can distribute it but hatoncat cannot, that is his right. No one else can take that work and give it away without his say-so without running afoul of the law.

    So, hatoncat, no matter what the license DOESN'T say about expiration periods, if he says it cannot be distributed apart from a licensed copy of his software, or used without a licensed copy of the laptop piece, you can't do it.


    As far as Scott getting paid for his work.. Well.. My company developed a low-level comms driver for PalmOS and I can tell you two things:

    1. It is extremely difficult to write non-application-space code for PalmOS.

    2. Palm(Source) will give you very very little help if any at all.


    Palm's developer support is unbeatable if you are writing high-level, application-space code. Once you go under the hood, however, you are on your own and in the cold without a map or jacket.

    IMHO, if he wants $30, he's earned it, just as JuneFabrics has. If you don't like what he charges, you don't have to buy his product, but you are not legally permitted to use it for free if he does not allow it. In fact, I highly suspect that he could bring the crappy sledgehammer known as the DCMA to bear against you if he wanted to.


    I found this in the documentation for WirelessModem:

    "WirelessModem and all components that are included with the package that was downloaded are hereby referred to as "The Software". Scott Gruby hereby grants you a license to use the demonstration version of The Software for up to 14 (fourteen one) days. After purchasing The Software, you will be granted a license to use The Software on as many machines as you purchased licenses for. If, after purchasing the software, you determine that the software does not operate to your satisfaction, Scott Gruby may, at his discretion, refund all or part of the money you paid, but is under no obligation to do so. You are encouraged to make full use of the evaluation before purchasing.

    No component of the software may be used beyond the twenty one day demonstration period without purchasing a license. "


    Seems like the driver is quite well covered here. I am assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that Scott hasn't modified this specifically over this incident and that it was in this form when Hatoncat downloaded the software.


    - Joe
    Highly Mobile iPhone User

    Palm Pilot -> Palm Pilot Pro -> HP 620LX -> Palm VII -> Palm VIIx -> Ipaq 3270 -> Treo 300 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 700p - iPhone - iPhone 3G
  4.    #44  
    Double post...
    PhoneNews.com - Complete Wireless Industry Coverage
    ChristopherPrice.net
  5.    #45  
    You may have something there with those last sentences...

    Scott changed the terms on the page after all this began. You are basing your argument on the new terms, and not the ones as they were when I posted the instructions.

    At the time I posted the instructions, the licensing agreement was very different.
    PhoneNews.com - Complete Wireless Industry Coverage
    ChristopherPrice.net
  6. #46  
    before anyone rushes to take scott grubys side.. do your own reasearch.

    search ALL old threads. not just recent ones... search all old threads.

    sgruby used to use every chance he got to **** on PalmNET (later PDANet) because PDANet began to emerge as a better, faster (and -gasp!- semi-open source!!!) alternative to his hack-o-the-day-pay-me-now WirelessModem. The author for PDANet was also much more involeved in the community, and , god forbid, he gave us 51% of his code so we could mess with it for our own desires, while sgruby greedily refused to give us ANYTHING, even if we paid (as I did)

    look through the history. search far back.
    Last edited by crazyray; 11/30/2003 at 02:16 AM.
  7. #47  
    Originally posted by JoeTampa

    In fact, I highly suspect that he could bring the crappy sledgehammer known as the DCMA to bear against you if he wanted to.


    - Joe
    No offense, JoeTampa, but the DMCA doesn't apply if you don't believe in the "crappy sledgehammer" (your words not mine) to begin with, because the last time I checked we still live under the freedom we believe in rather than the untested laws we didn't sign up for, nor are tested through the due process of all three branches of govenment.

    The DMCA is NOT law. not yet. But that's besides the point, eh?
  8. #48  
    <ThreadCrapApology>

    Did I sleep through some new-age civics class?

    Bill Clinton signed the DCMA in 1998 after it passed through Congress. That makes it a law, like it or not. Is has not been repealed, nor modified by later legislation, nor stricken down by the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is still in force.

    Your political views notwithstanding, we don't get to follow only the laws we "believe in". We follow the laws that big business buys... errrr.... that Congress passes and that the President signs.

    What are you getting at?! Can I commit armed robbery if I don't believe in the legislation that outlaws it?

    </ThreadCrapApology>
    Highly Mobile iPhone User

    Palm Pilot -> Palm Pilot Pro -> HP 620LX -> Palm VII -> Palm VIIx -> Ipaq 3270 -> Treo 300 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 700p - iPhone - iPhone 3G
  9. #49  
    Originally posted by JoeTampa
    <ThreadCrapApology>
    Bill Clinton signed the DCMA in 1998 after it passed through Congress. That makes it a law, like it or not. Is has not been repealed, nor modified by later legislation, nor stricken down by the Supreme Court. Therefore, it is still in force.

    Your political views notwithstanding, we don't get to follow only the laws we "believe in". We follow the laws that big business buys... errrr.... that Congress passes and that the President signs. (EDITED FOR CLARITY)

    Yes, sir, we do get to follow the laws we "believe in". (see Ghandi or MLK if you need history) I follow the murder laws and even the speed laws because they are real laws that apply to me, which I sanctioned through my social contract.

    Futhermore, parts of the DMCA were in fact strucken down, but thats not the point(!) The point is that this guy, that guy, the guy who tries to slyly advertise his sh1tty a$$ notifymail and wirelAssmodem all over this site, which is not his site to begin with, that sgruby guy is an... well, lets just admit it, that guy is an a$$hole.

    I've never liked, or even respected, sgrUby. An its not because I don't like his software- which I think is OK- but because he publicly ripped all over the developer of pdanet because pdanet meant sgruby would be threatened. The pdanet guy was just tring to get feedback, and that gruby guy went ballistic on him, all because he is greedy and an ahole. so f him.

    But back to your point... no I don't believe in the DMCA. but neither do you, as you have admitted.

    so can we just agree that this gruby guy is an ahole? I'm so glad we found a happy place together.


    p.s.- the DMCA does not rule me until the Supreme Court says it does. repeat after me: "the DMCA does not rule me until the Supreme Court explicitly says it does. "

    p.p.s.- repeat after me: "the DMCA does not rule me until the Supreme Court explicitly says it does. "
  10. #50  
    Originally posted by freedomnow


    I've never liked, or even respected, sgrUby. An its not because I don't like his software- which I think is OK- but because he publicly ripped all over the developer of pdanet because pdanet meant sgruby would be threatened. The pdanet guy was just tring to get feedback, and that gruby guy went ballistic on him, all because he is greedy and an ahole. so f him.


    all politics aside...

    freedomnow, you can say whatever you want, but you do not necessarily speak for me, especially with regard to whether or not someone is an "ahole"! I would never call someone an a**hole, ever, especially since I bought the product and am still hoping for some kind of support going forward!

    just out of curioisity, where is the thread where NotifyMail supposedly went "ballistic" ??
    Last edited by crazyray; 11/30/2003 at 04:46 AM.
  11. #51  


    Yes, sir, we do get to follow the laws we "believe in". (see Ghandi or MLK if you need history) I follow the murder laws and even the speed laws because they are real laws that apply to me, which I sanctioned through my social contract.


    Jeez. Hope you keep a good lawyer on retainer.

    Social contract? I don't recall that in the Constitution. I have no "social contract" with society. I don't have to believe in a law to follow it or to accept the penalty if I break it. Once you start deciding that you can simply ignore any law, thus begins the teardown of the social structure in which you express this freedom you believe in. MLK and Ghandi got involved in issues much more weighty than the DCMA.

    You know what? Neither one of us is going to do much more than crap this thread beyond comprehension, so I'll drop this here. We'll have to agree to disagree.
    Highly Mobile iPhone User

    Palm Pilot -> Palm Pilot Pro -> HP 620LX -> Palm VII -> Palm VIIx -> Ipaq 3270 -> Treo 300 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 700p - iPhone - iPhone 3G
  12. #52  
    ok a few things after reading thru this thread:

    1) hatonacat was definitely wrong for posting the instructions, but at the time he didnt realize how wrong it was. he didnt know how difficult it is to write drivers like that and how important the custom driver is to the rest of the wireless modem program. as far as i can tell he didn't think he was doing anything wrong by posting the instructions to something he figured out on his own, as he was just trying to help some others.

    2) and by the way, the DMCA is already law (someone said it isnt law yet), but i dont think anyone thats made comments about it actually understands how it can be applied... the part of it that's relavant deals with the circumventing of copyright protection, and that it is illegal to do so. the DMCA says you can't break copy protection even if you own the item you are trying to make a copy of, to get access to whatever content the copy protection is protecting. (an example is copying a dvd since they have copyright protection to avoid you doing so)

    in this particular case nothing has been circumvented to use the driver, so nothing is illegal. using the driver doesn't violate anything because there isn't any protection on it (and the DMCA is a ridiculous law that if you dont know about it, you should and you should write to your congressmen and tell them how stupid you think the law is... checkout eff.org for more info)
    Last edited by wahooka; 11/30/2003 at 04:37 AM.
  13. #53  
    Originally posted by JoeTampa

    You know what? Neither one of us is going to do much more than crap this thread beyond comprehension, so I'll drop this here. We'll have to agree to disagree.
    I am absolutely amazed that you concede this, so, despite the fact that I want to remind you that the DMCA is quite possibly much bigger and more dangerous than anything MLK ever saw in his lifetime, I will give up this argument entirely, solely because I am humbled that you have gallantly asked me to lay down arms and walk away, as you do before me.

    That being said, I invite others who read this thread to check out www.eff.org if your curiousity is piqued by the DMCA and it's implications on your own lives.

    And to you, JoeTampa, I say this: I'll see you next time :-)

    p.s.- neither side ever actually agreed with scott, by the way. He may have been right, but he coulda (shoulda?) done it differently.
  14. #54  
    I'm glad that you kids have learned not to flame each other to death and you seem to be singing KOOM-by-Yah while you dance around the fire, but can we get back to the friggin point of this thread, please?

    We had one kid trying to liberate information while another adult tried to quash it because of his insecurity about the origin of his semi- software.

    Or is that not the point of the thread to begin with?

    EDIT: or more to the point, I ask again:


    just out of curioisity, where is the thread where NotifyMail supposedly went "ballistic" ??
  15. #55  
    Actually, the point of this thread is that Scott, love him or hate him, has the right to determine how the driver he wrote is used.

    I'm self-quashing what would be an interesting debate on the freedom of information simply because this is not the right place for it - it has nothing (really) to do with the Treo in general and the T600 in particular.

    Bottom line, Scott's original license (I have received a copy of it) allows you to use WirelessModem (which I think he can successfully argue includes all components) for 21 days without purchase. After that time, you must destroy all copies. Therefore, Hatoncat's information, while perhaps not actionable itself, is legally rendered moot since one must commit software piracy to make use of it beyond 21 days.

    I will not comment any further in this thread; I've had my say.

    And just so everyone's clear, I neither use nor have ever purchased any of Scott's products, and take no position on how good/bad either they or he are.
    Highly Mobile iPhone User

    Palm Pilot -> Palm Pilot Pro -> HP 620LX -> Palm VII -> Palm VIIx -> Ipaq 3270 -> Treo 300 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 700p - iPhone - iPhone 3G
  16. #56  
    Back to the topic of this thread for a minute:

    If the phone can go into a modem-mode, why do I need any software for my PC? I use Windows XP and a serial cable. I use Scott's software on my t300. It seems like if the t600 will go into a modem mode, I should be able to connect without using any additional software.

    What am I missing?
  17. #57  
    I think that software licenses should be respected, particularly for software from independent developers like Scott.

    However, let's be realistic about what the software in question is. It's a generic serial driver for USB, which should be available as part of the basic operating system, and is on Linux and other free operating systems. It's a very simple piece of software written to well-documented interfaces.

    In other words, on Linux, it's not required to have ANY third-party software on the Treo or the PC to use the Treo as a wireless modem in tethered mode. I would guess that Mac OS X also has a built-in USB serial driver, but I'm not sure. This isn't some special piece of software specific to WirelessModem; it's just a generic piece of operating system driver code that should have been provided by Handspring or the OS vendor.

    I don't know about other operating systems, but on Linux at least you can't even sync the Treo without the equivalent of this driver, and I would guess that the Palm Desktop on every OS works the same way. Which means that the equivalent of Scott's PC-side driver is included with the Palm Desktop on every operating system that Handspring supports.

    This doesn't make it right to abuse Scott's license terms, because he wrote the WirelessModem code (both PC and Palm side) and he is the only one that has the right to determine the terms under which it is distributed. But the truth is that this is a pretty trivial piece of software, probably duplicating functions that are already distributed by Handspring, and if folks want to create an alternative to it that's distributed under a free license it shouldn't be hard to do.

    Good luck to all! And thanks to Scott Gruby for creating WirelessModem and the other great software he has written. It just so happens that Handspring more-or-less made WirelessModem obsolete with the Tethered Mode, but that's the way software development happens.
  18. #58  
    Originally posted by WFTarHeel
    Back to the topic of this thread for a minute:

    If the phone can go into a modem-mode, why do I need any software for my PC? I use Windows XP and a serial cable. I use Scott's software on my t300. It seems like if the t600 will go into a modem mode, I should be able to connect without using any additional software.

    What am I missing?
    I second that! Anyone have Instructions as how how to use your Treo600 in Linux natively as a modem? Can it be done using the existing USB cable? Do we need to get a serial cable (if so where can one pick one up).
  19. #59  
    Anyone have Instructions as how how to use your Treo600 in Linux natively as a modem? Can it be done using the existing USB cable? Do we need to get a serial cable (if so where can one pick one up).
    On Linux, it's easy.

    Connect the Treo to the Linux box using the USB cable, then dial ##TETHERED on the Treo (##83843733). The Treo screen should say "Tethered mode on". If it flashes that screen and then back to the dialer, you may need to soft-reset first. I'm not 100% sure what the required state is to get Tethered mode to work, but soft-reset before dialing ##TETHERED definitely is sufficient.

    Voila. Whatever port you use on the Linux box to sync with the Treo is now a modem (unless you have other USB serial devices, it's /dev/ttyUSB1 or /dev/usb/tts/1).

    You can connect directly to it with a serial-port communication program like Minicom, or set up a network connection using pppd to your Treo network service provider. The number to dial for Sprint PCS Vision is #777. ATDT#777 issued to the modem will get you a CONNECT message followed by PPP connection packets.

    BTW, I've read reports that the Treo's modem does not support fax sending or receiving. Here's what the modem says:

    at+FCLASS=?
    0,2.0

    This means that the modem CLAIMS to support Class 2 fax operation. I haven't tried it yet but I will soon (using tethered mode and some Linux fax send/receive programs).

    BTW, I tried assigning ##TETHERED to a speed dial Favorite and it didn't work (dialing it gets a Sprint error message). It appears the ## codes must be entered directly into the dialer in the Phone app. Anybody know a way around this?
  20. #60  
    This means that the modem CLAIMS to support Class 2 fax operation. I haven't tried it yet but I will soon (using tethered mode and some Linux fax send/receive programs).
    Just to follow myself up, I have tried faxing using tethered mode with mixed results.

    Receiving faxes is right out, because even in tethered mode, the phone rings through to the voice-call handler and there's no RING indicator issued by the Treo modem. I may be wrong but it looks like the modem is only capable of initiating outgoing connections.

    However, sending faxes shows some promise. Using the "sendfax" program on Linux, I was able to use the Treo in tethered mode along with the claimed Class 2.0 fax support to connect to a fax machine and start sending a G3 fax page. The fax transmissio crapped out, with sendfax reporting:

    Transmission error: +FHNG:43 (DTE to DCE data underflow)

    that looks like something that could be fixed up with the proper init strings sent to the modem and/or options to sendfax, so I'll probably fool with it some more to see if I can get fax sending to work.

    Anyway. There you have it. The Treo modem appears to be capable of sending faxes but needs some tweaking.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions