Possible to make Custom OS (3rd party "firmware"

[apex]

is this possible? i saw a thread about this concept on the Motif forum. They "say" it's not possible for them because the OS is not really open source, but if you have ideas or suggestions about the development (about actually programming it), to just contact Yamaha.

Is it possible with FG.

[Astrotaz]

This should be possible, but time consuming. You would have to reverse engineer the .bin file, not to mention it's against the law.

[apex]

is it really against the law? even if you don't sell it?

if so my bad.

[madAhorn]

I thought of the this on the opening day of Namm myself.

I heard of someone re-working some other gear a while back, but I think it was discontinued stuff, If I am not mistaken.

[Flumpster]

Reverse engineering has never been illegal. That's the whole point of it.

It is illegal to use any of the existing code or any of their source.

"In the United States and many other countries, even if an artifact or process is protected by trade secrets, reverse-engineering the artifact or process is often lawful as long as it is obtained legitimately. Patents, on the other hand, need a public disclosure of an invention, and therefore, patented items do not necessarily have to be reverse-engineered to be studied. One common motivation of reverse engineers is to determine whether a competitor's product contains patent infringements or copyright infringements.

Reverse engineering software or hardware systems which is done for the purposes of interoperability (for example, to support undocumented file formats or undocumented hardware peripherals) is mostly believed to be legal, though patent owners often contest this and attempt to stifle any reverse engineering of their products for any reason."

[rbarkhouse]

It would be awesome if you could (imagine if it turned out to be some form of Linux underneath, oh what fun could be had), but I don't think it's possible. Reverse engineering the bin file would be pretty brutal I bet. But then again I'm no hacker

- Rick

[Astrotaz]

yes without specific permission from Roland (which you have like 0 chance of getting), they are not going to allow you to legally use their code and modify it.

So yeah to reiterate, without permission reverse engineering and using other companies software is illegal.

To think you can without asking and be ok is just stupid.


ps : anyone can copy and paste from a wiki

Don't believe me?... go try it. I deal with this stuff.

[Flumpster]

Who said anything about using their code?

Reverse engineering normal involves one team who would disasemble the code or a product and then write a brief which would be passed onto team 2 to recreate.

Which part do you deal with?

[Astrotaz]

Their code is the source code that you start with, that is the part that gets you in trouble

[derek_]

It is probably impossible. I'm assuming a lot of the G has proprietary DSP chips and other components that would you need thorough documentation for. I don't know what CPU the FG uses, but if it's an off-the-shelf model, then you already have all the documentation and development tools you need to develop for the CPU. You would also need to figure out the address space so you can write the code to scan the keys, buttons, knobs, etc as well as address the DSP chips and DAC's.

So, it is theoretically possible, but would be an enormously challenging endeavor without proper documentation on the proprietary components.

[nav_]

As derek sais, it is possible, but a bunch of work. Take the Xbox360, Wii or PS3 as an example. They are all working more or less like a PC, theyve been sold a LOT more than the G and it tough took a lot of time to make it possible to run alternative software on them, at least, software that deserves to be called so. Also, consoles are kind of primary hacking targets. For the G, this is going to be much complexer, as it has many controllers and interfaces and less people who own one, could do the job and want to do the job. Even from the point, we have a linux running, it would take years to write working software.

The much better solution would be, to provide an official plugin interface and SDK from roland. Just like most opensource-software or facebook etc. do. This would give us the possibility to extend our workstation and roland would get new new software for their workstation for free, including new ideas and features. Just imagine the first open workstation, everybody with a bit knowhow would buy it, to do his own software, plugins etc. Well.. just daydreamin again..

[cyclops]

All Fantom-G really needs is to be bought/adopted from another manufacturer.
Only then it will be treated like it deserves.
Roland has decided to condemn it to martyric death and to punish it with extinction from the market ...

[nav_]

if its already dead, there is no reason why it isnt open sourced by now. oh. .thats the other thing i forgot to mention. that would also be great and a big advantage over all othermanifactures.

[special-k]

Just because Roland hasn't released any OS updates in 6 months does not mean that they have stopped working on the Fantom G development. It would be in Roland's best interest to release the firmware for open development because there are hardware geeks who may be able to add some features missing or make things work better without having to spend a dime. IF roland has delegated the G to legacy status, then I will do what I can to pester them to release the source code. If Roland has no G replacement in the works, then it shouldn't hurt their bottom line to release it.

[derek_]

I can't really see Roland open-sourcing any code. I could see some justification for an SDK or open API but even that could potentially cannibalize future sales.

The main reason not to open source it is that it's their IP. The source code for their reverb algorithms, their supersaw waveform, or their filters is all proprietary. It does not make good business sense to give that away. Of course, it's not like there isn't other code available that's probably as good or superior, but I just can't see Roland giving that away.

I'm also sure that their code is broken out into libraries for re-use across product lines. I doubt they would want to share these valuable libraries.

Also consider that the FG probably has numerous "code bases" besides just the CPU. There is code for the DSP's that handle the MFX, code for the sound generation DSP's, FPGA configurations, display drivers, etc.

If the main CPU code is just features (the sequencer, patch storage, the UI, etc) then you could potentially just open source that. There is nothing innovative in the core function of the machine and so Roland isn't really giving away anything special there. That would allow a skilled programmer to write a new OS/UI/feature set but not tamper with the DSP (FX, sound generators, etc).