Missing peripheral's support in RB?

[Parasite1111]

Hi folks.

I've discovered that using iPod Video 80Gb + RB 3.4, it is difficult to use ipod's attacheable peripherals:

1. Wired Apple's radio remote: http://www.mobilewhack.com/images/apple_ipod_radio_remote_1.jpg
It is just not working - for all buttons. All the button's presses being completely ignored by RB.
Also, no any Radio application has been found on RB (while on Apple's FW, it is built-in and works like a charm).

2. Motorola Bluetooth adapter for iPod: http://www.msgdigital.com/images/products/46006_B.jpg
It is working in general (transmit music to BT handfree headphones), but RB completely ignores all navigation commands from the blluetooth remote control except commands PREV/NEXT TRACK (these two are working). No PLAY/PAUSE, no FF/FW, no ON/OFF iPOD, no MUTE, and volume change on Ipod does nothing on the remote headphones (I must use headphones built-in volume buttons instead)...
On Apple FW, all of them are working except FF/FW (Apple's confirmed limitation in their BTControl profile).

It would be nice to see RB supporting all of these in the next releases.

Thanks,
A.

[Chronon]

I don't think this is considered a top priority because Rockbox generally aims to be a replacement firmware rather than to emulate the functionality of the original firmwares.  However, some people have done some work to add the existing functionality for this. 

Patches are always welcome. 

[Parasite1111]

I don't think this is considered a top priority because Rockbox generally aims to be a replacement firmware rather than to emulate the functionality of the original firmwares. 

Sure it is not on a first priority.

But I think that have your attacheable H/W working with RB is much better than have not... as far as all of those H/W use standart iPod's in/out port only, and thus must be follow kinda of "comminication standarts" through it. Teach RB to speak this on/out "language" just once - means make RB supporting ALL of those H/Ws at once, in general. At least on ipod's case (where there are many many devices might be attached to this port - but ALL of them able to work immediately, without patching/resetting/reloading the original f/w nor installing any external "hw drivers").
Correct me if I am wrong.

Patches are always welcome. 

Could you point me to The One Patch which I need (if any)?

Thanks,
A.

[torne]

Correct me if I am wrong.

Unfortunately you are indeed wrong: there is not one dock communication protocol but several, and we *do* support some of them (at least partially). The specifications for the dock protocol are only available by paying Apple a lot of money and signing a lot of agreements that undoubtedly includes non-disclosure, so we can only do this by reverse engineering, which is difficult.

Could you point me to The One Patch which I need (if any)?

He means *you* are welcome to write a patch
FS#10623 and various others may help some accessories to work, though.

[Parasite1111]

we *do* support some of them (at least partially).

Yes yes. I just wrote the hw which is *not* yet supported in my case. Maybe that will help someone while developing next versions of RB. At least I will be very glad to see that supported...one day, in the future.
As I said, it is not on a 1st priority at all.

only available by paying Apple a lot of money and signing a lot of agreements that undoubtedly includes non-disclosure, so we can only do this by reverse engineering, which is difficult.

Don't you afraid to sound the words "reverse engineering Apple's things"? In case their officials reading this forum...

He means *you* are welcome to write a patch

Unfortunately, I am not a programmer. At least not a *modern* programmer - the last programmer's things I make were in time of no Windows (yet). 
That was a good time, indeed...when computers were huge, and software - so small...  ASM (for non-PC), Fortran, Lisp/Cobol...

[torne]

Well, we just meant that a more helpful thing to do would be to test with FS#10623 or other patches which are related to accessory support, and to report your findings on the bugtracker for those patches. There *are* people interested in fixing this stuff, and they may not be reading the forums (also they may have already fixed your accessory!). The way you posted it sounded a bit more like a feature request, which are discouraged unless there's something useful to discuss about it...

And no, I'm not afraid to talk about reverse engineering, it's a perfectly legitimate thing to be doing.

[AlexP]

Reverse engineering is perfectly legal etc., even in the US believe it or not, and is how a lot of the information needed to write Rockbox was discovered.

[Parasite1111]

The way you posted it sounded a bit more like a feature request

No, I did not *request* you to halt what you are doing - and run to your desktop to program some extra features for me right this evening. I beg your pardon if it sounded like that to you - but I really did not mean that. Please forgive my poor English, it isnt my native language. Be sure, I know about principes of free software - and wish to offer some help indeed, but my knowledge of C is equal to ground level.

I just post a report about some h/w which is *not* currenttly supported in my case, and will be glad to see it working, oneday. Who knows, maybe direct developers have not such of h/w just to test it - so I can give my hand in that, somehow - as a beta tester or whatever. Who knows.

And no, I'm not afraid to talk about reverse engineering, it's a perfectly legitimate thing to be doing.

It might be not my business at all, but how do you deal with this:
---------------
(c) Except as and only to the extent expressly permitted in this License or by applicable law, you may not copy, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code of, decrypt, modify, or create derivative works of the iPod Software, iPod Software Updates, or any part thereof. Any attempt to do so is a violation of the rights of Apple and its licensors of the iPod Software and iPod Software Updates. If you breach this restriction, you may be subject to prosecution and damages.

http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/ipod.pdf , page 1
---------------
 

[saratoga]

I can say you owe me a million dollars for tying your shoes in a license.  Doesn't make it so.

[Llorean]

The first part "Except as and only to the extent expressly permitted in this License or by applicable law, " is the important part.

[Parasite1111]

I can say you owe me a million dollars for tying your shoes in a license.  Doesn't make it so.

But...how?? Here in my country you will be facing serious troubles if you get caught on reversing licence-protected proprietary piece of code. Especially so "well-protected" by the well-known giant names such as MS, Apple, IBM/HP etc. Yes, they are not our brands, and they are residing at another side of Earth, but it will be YOUR problem to "wash yourself" from all of this. Yes, our laws protecting THEIR interests - sad but true.
This is why I am asking your way, guys. Yes, I am too reversing something sometimes (of course they are a pieces of free software - and I do that only for fun ).

PS: sorry for a little offtop - pls feel free to PM me...

[Chronon]

That language is just a fancy way of reserving all rights allowed to them by the law.  It doesn't restrict anything more than the laws in your country already restrict.

[torne]

As well as the above-mentioned points, I note that I've never even seen that license agreement, let alone agreed to it. I bought my iPod on ebay, unboxed, and nothing has ever asked me to agree to their terms. Why on earth would I be bound by a contract I am not aware of? I can do whatever is legal in the country I live in: I can't make copies of their software because it is copyrighted, but nothing says I can't read it if I want to.

[Parasite1111]

As well as the above-mentioned points, I note that I've never even seen that license agreement, let alone agreed to it. I bought my iPod on ebay, unboxed, and nothing has ever asked me to agree to their terms. Why on earth would I be bound by a contract I am not aware of?

Wrong.

USING an iPod means you have read, understand and agreed with all of that piece of paper (whenever you have/read/understand it or not):
----------------
BY USING YOUR IPOD OR DOWNLOADING THE SOFTWARE UPDATE ACCOMPANYING THIS LICENSE, AS APPLICABLE, YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT USE THE IPOD OR DOWNLOAD THIS SOFTWARE UPDATE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE LICENSE AND HAVE NOT USED, THE IPOD YOU MAY RETURN THE IPOD TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU OBTAINED IT FOR A REFUND.

<same URL, same page>
----------------
As a quick sample - you can always buy a dose of cocaine somewhere on the streets, and you can always say that you HAVE NEVER EVER SEE\READ\UNDERSTAND the drug-trafficing laws as they are written on old dusty papers somewhere far away from you...but even screaming that will not save you from a monkey-house if you get caught with the white-powdered nose. Yes, you can tell them whatever you want - but "Dura lex, sed lex" ("The law is harsh, but it is the law").

Correct me if I am wrong. Here at least - things are like I said above. Have no idea about USA side, but it should be not much different I think.

[Chronon]

Bottom line: The legality is defined by the laws in your country.  The license does not change that.

It is legal in the USA.  Others can chime in about the legality where they live, but it seems like a not-useful exercise. 

Why the sudden concern about this?