RetroN 77

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

 

Nice feature and didn't realize that of the subscription. Hmmm...

 

 

You saying that because the one that it has currently is not up to snuff (like the Atari Flashbacks) or that this needs to have better emulation than someone can cobble together on a home computer at home?

 

Yeah one of many perks of being a subscriber. I'm kind of OCD about editing my posts but knowbody knows that!

 

Just for clarification, the Flashback (Atgames) or the software it uses has no relation to Stella or Hyperkin. And flashback emulation kind of blows. See also Flashback Portable.

 

One more thing (look ma, I can add stuff without the "edited by" tag), it would make me a very sad panda if Retron77 fails to materialize simply because Hyperkin and Stella could not negotiate a deal.

[up2knowgood]

Yeah one of many perks of being a subscriber. I'm kind of OCD about editing my posts but knowbody knows that!

 

Just for clarification, the Flashback (Atgames) or the software it uses has no relation to Stella or Hyperkin. And flashback emulation kind of blows. See also Flashback Portable.

 

One more thing (look ma, I can add stuff without the "edited by" tag), it would make me a very sad panda if Retron77 fails to materialize simply because Hyperkin and Stella could not negotiate a deal.

Wouldn't be the first time something cool never happened because two companies couldn't agree. In fact, it wouldn't be the first time in Atari's history either.

[0078265317]

Pics

 

Sweet. Now we just need a 5200 version. And maybe 7800. Or if this did both even better.

[TokyoBatman]

it would make me a very sad panda if Retron77 fails to materialize simply because Hyperkin and Stella could not negotiate a deal.

 

Wait...? Here is what I read:

 

"What we initially plan to offer is basically a convenient piece of hardware, with a properly configured and licensed Stella (early version). It will not include any other proprietary parts of Stella code from further revisions (unless we negotiate that with Stefan). That build is expected to have the full set of features I listed in my previous post, and hopefully some more.

As an additional tinker-friendly feature, we expect to leave an opportunity (for example in a form of a service port) to install other versions of Stella -- we honor everyone's IP rights, but since it's open-source, I believe users are free to rebuild and deploy any build of Stella they want. "

It seems like the initial license is set. If they can't get an updated deal worked out... They will just put a service port on so users can do it themselves.

Is there new information out there I have missed?

Edited August 29, 2017 by TokyoBatman

[Atariboy]

I think people read too much into this thread.

 

I can't imagine they'd kill the project off just because people in this thread encouraged them to use a newer version of Stella that they perhaps feel has too many strings attached to want to bother with. They're not going to release a clone system just to sell it to perhaps 100-200 interested people that are registered at AtariAge.

 

This will be more for the casual fan that is intrigued at the thought of a clone that could work with those old cartridges in their attic or up on Ebay, allowing them to relive some childhood memories. It doesn't need to be perfection, work with every homebrew like Space Rocks, etc. If it doesn't end up happening, it's going to be because of factors like their perception of the potential size of the market rather than a thread at AtariAge, since it simply doesn't need the newest build of Stella to accomplish the essentials.

 

As one of those 100-200 interested people that have noticed this thread and would want a clone that does much more than just the bare essentials, I sure hope it's the latest version of Stella. But I really doubt that I represent the customer that they're most concerned about wooing. There just aren't enough of us to build a business case around to justify designing and manufacturing a mass produced clone system at a modest $50-$75 price point.

 

And I doubt they'd leave a backdoor open for users to install a newer Stella build. Demand probably wouldn't justify it, the hardware requirements are likely significantly higher for more modern Stella builds (accuracy doesn't come cheap), and I presume that the "hooks" to interface Stella with their OS require modification to Stella in some way which brings us right back to what we seem to be viewing as a major issue.

Edited August 29, 2017 by Atariboy

[TokyoBatman]

 

And I doubt they'd leave a backdoor open for users to install a newer Stella build. Demand probably wouldn't justify it, the hardware requirements are likely significantly higher for more modern Stella builds (accuracy doesn't come cheap), and I presume that the "hooks" to interface Stella with their OS require modification to Stella in some way which brings us right back to what we seem to be viewing as a major issue.

 

 

Well there are 2 things going for that idea:

 

1. They actually said it.

2. I may be wrong, but it looks like it'll be powered micro usb to usb like the nes classic. If that's the case, that's the backdoor.

[atarifan88]

 

 

Wait...? Here is what I read:

 

"What we initially plan to offer is basically a convenient piece of hardware, with a properly configured and licensed Stella (early version). It will not include any other proprietary parts of Stella code from further revisions (unless we negotiate that with Stefan). That build is expected to have the full set of features I listed in my previous post, and hopefully some more.

As an additional tinker-friendly feature, we expect to leave an opportunity (for example in a form of a service port) to install other versions of Stella -- we honor everyone's IP rights, but since it's open-source, I believe users are free to rebuild and deploy any build of Stella they want. "

It seems like the initial license is set. If they can't get an updated deal worked out... They will just put a service port on so users can do it themselves.

Is there new information out there I have missed?

 

 

Where did you get that info from? That's the first I've heard of it.

Edited August 29, 2017 by atarifan88

[TokyoBatman]

 

Where did you get that info from? That's the first I've heard of it.

Read it here:

http://forums.atari.io/index.php/topic/3267-hyperkin-retron-77-hd-atari-2600/page-3

 

I haven't read anything new from hyperkin suggesting this has changed.

 

I may have missed something though. Please let me know if you have new details released from them.

[+stephena]

A few items from my POV:

• The 'negotiations' on my end (if you can call it that) are very much non-negotiable and not really up to me; they simply have to release the source under the GPLv2. No money is involved, or anything else like that. Just obey the licensing (and since I am only one contributor of many, I can't change the licensing).
• The potential issue of the hardware not being fast enough for newer Stella releases is very possible; I have run into this with other similar hardware and platforms. Accuracy does indeed have a price. We're currently adding threading to Stella to take advantage of multiple cores, but it won't be finished for some time. And I suspect once we add a cycle-exact sound core, the requirements will increase again.
• I personally don't see how having a user-port will help, if they even have one. If you are enabling upload of custom versions of Stella, then we also need the source for the cart-reader portion of the hardware. And if that source is available, then they can use newer versions of Stella right now. But if that source won't be available, then user-modified versions of Stella won't work on the hardware anyway.

Or to sum up:

• If the issue is hardware not being fast enough, then that's that; we just can't use newer versions of Stella until we get more optimizations, and perhaps this will never happen sufficiently to run the app on this hardware
• If the issue is licensing, then again, we are at an impasse.

Long story short; the fact that they haven't committed to using a later version of Stella now means that something is stopping them from doing it, and I don't see how that something will no longer be an issue later.

[TokyoBatman]

A few items from my POV:

• The 'negotiations' on my end (if you can call it that) are very much non-negotiable and not really up to me; they simply have to release the source under the GPLv2. No money is involved, or anything else like that. Just obey the licensing (and since I am only one contributor of many, I can't change the licensing).
• The potential issue of the hardware not being fast enough for newer Stella releases is very possible; I have run into this with other similar hardware and platforms. Accuracy does indeed have a price. We're currently adding threading to Stella to take advantage of multiple cores, but it won't be finished for some time. And I suspect once we add a cycle-exact sound core, the requirements will increase again.
• I personally don't see how having a user-port will help, if they even have one. If you are enabling upload of custom versions of Stella, then we also need the source for the cart-reader portion of the hardware. And if that source is available, then they can use newer versions of Stella right now. But if that source won't be available, then user-modified versions of Stella won't work on the hardware anyway.

Or to sum up:

• If the issue is hardware not being fast enough, then that's that; we just can't use newer versions of Stella until we get more optimizations, and perhaps this will never happen sufficiently to run the app on this hardware
• If the issue is licensing, then again, we are at an impasse.

Long story short; the fact that they haven't committed to using a later version of Stella now means that something is stopping them from doing it, and I don't see how that something will no longer be an issue later.

I'm not an expert in this area. It seems like and would make sense for them to not want to release the source on their cart reader. If they did that, it would be like giving away time, money, and r/d for any company to come along and run with it (atgames?)

 

Is this a fair assumtion to make or am I way off base with this.

 

As for the user port. They are developing the early license of Stella they obtained and making it work on their system. Why couldn't they develop the newer version of Stella to work with their hardware and make it available for download, just not under their name?

 

As far as something stopping them from using the later version of Stella... Isnt that just negotiating the license?

 

I may be way off on everything here so please fill me in.

Edited August 29, 2017 by TokyoBatman

[+Karl G]

Could the cart reader dump the entire rom into memory, then pass that off to Stella? That way, Stella wouldn't need to know about the cart reader hardware at all, thus avoiding the licensing issues?

[+stephena]

Separating the dumping from the emulation would be the best way for licensing to be satisfied, if it is indeed the licensing that is an issue. My point was that if licensing is the issue (and they don't want to release the source for their cart reader), then having a user port to upload other versions of Stella is pointless (since without the source to the cart reader, you can't get any ROMs into the system).

 

Note that I have no ill-will towards the developers on this. If it is indeed that they want to keep the source for their cart-reader closed, I respect their choice (and licensing).

[+stephena]

As far as something stopping them from using the later version of Stella... Isnt that just negotiating the license?

 

Negotiating implies that there is some give and take, and an agreement/compromise can be reached (or at least is possible). For the GPLv2, there is only one requirement; the source must be released. That part is non-negotiable; it is the main purpose and intent of the license.

 

The only other possible way would be to relicense the app under a different license. For that to happen, all parties that have contributed code over the past 17 years would have to be contacted, and they all would have to agree to it. If any of them doesn't, then that part of the code would have to be removed and rewritten. And I just don't see that happening. Personally, the amount of work on my end wouldn't be justified.

 

I suspect that's why they went with the Stella 1.1 release. That version was created before Stella was relicensed under the GPLv2. So the licensor (Brad Mott) is free to choose any license and terms he wants for that release. I understand from a business POV why they may want to do that. But I also understand that it won't result in the best possible emulation. But maybe @Atariboy is correct, in that they're more concerned with the general user, who wouldn't really mind/not notice inaccurate emulation.

 

Also, it just occurred to me that although Stella 1.1 was not under the GPLv2, its sound code was. So that means they can't use the sound code either ...

[TokyoBatman]

My point was that if licensing is the issue (and they don't want to release the source for their cart reader), then having a user port to upload other versions of Stella is pointless (since without the source to the cart reader, you can't get any ROMs into the system).

 

First of all, thanks for all of the clarification. It's making a lot of sense now.

 

I'm a little lost on this point you've made.

 

Say they, behind closed doors, take a newer version of Stella, develop it so it can work with the cart reader... and leak it on the net.

 

Or provide you with links to these private users, "not connected to hyperkin", with the updated software. Or something of this nature avoiding legal issues.

 

Any user that is beyond casual and not satisfied with what is on the system could just upload it "at their own risk".

 

So isn't having a user port useful? Am I missing something else?

[Flojomojo]

I'll try.

 

So isn't having a user port useful? Am I missing something else?

 

There are two pieces of software needed for a device like this to work.

 

1. Atari emulator.

2. Software to read the cartridge and stick the resulting file into the emulator. The cartridge dumper, if you will.

 

The emulator is not the problem. Stella 5 is the best Atari emulator, and it's freely available to use or modify, so long as the source code is publicly available so everyone can check your work or make their own.

 

The cartridge dumper is the unique thing that Hyperkin would bring to the table. If they were to use Stella 5 alongside this software, they would be obliged to release the source code of this part in order to meet the license requirements. They can use an older version of Stella that doesn't have these requirements, and it appears that is what they mean to do.

 

To release something that's wide open would be to shoot themselves in the foot commercially speaking, as any competitor could make their own Atari cartridge-playing clone. As I type that, it seems stupid, because who really wants an Atari cartridge-playing clone? Damn few, I'd think ... but why do all the research and development just to have someone else try to make money from it?

 

I think most of this is speculative, but it certainly adds up from where I sit on the outside.

[TokyoBatman]

I'll try.

 

 

There are two pieces of software needed for a device like this to work.

 

1. Atari emulator.

2. Software to read the cartridge and stick the resulting file into the emulator. The cartridge dumper, if you will.

 

The emulator is not the problem. Stella 5 is the best Atari emulator, and it's freely available to use or modify, so long as the source code is publicly available so everyone can check your work or make their own.

 

The cartridge dumper is the unique thing that Hyperkin would bring to the table. If they were to use Stella 5 alongside this software, they would be obliged to release the source code of this part in order to meet the license requirements. They can use an older version of Stella that doesn't have these requirements, and it appears that is what they mean to do.

 

To release something that's wide open would be to shoot themselves in the foot commercially speaking, as any competitor could make their own Atari cartridge-playing clone. As I type that, it seems stupid, because who really wants an Atari cartridge-playing clone? Damn few, I'd think ... but why do all the research and development just to have someone else try to make money from it?

 

I think most of this is speculative, but it certainly adds up from where I sit on the outside.

Stephena said,

"Separating the dumping from the emulation would be the best way for licensing to be satisfied"

 

So basically use the cart reader to dump the rom to ram. And have Stella read the rom from ram.

 

I feel that the software they are developing, the early license of Stella plus coding for the cart reader, is all together... Not separated.

 

If this is the case, they could, as I've mentioned develop a better software with the newer version of Stella that is coded with the cart reader... And get it leaked on the net and available at the users risk.

 

Am I off base on this?

Edited August 29, 2017 by TokyoBatman

[Flojomojo]

Could be. It's all pure speculation until their engineer comes back here or someone else has inside information.

 

Anyone else get the feeling that just when we think we have all our old systems on "modern" HDMI, the spec will be changed? I wouldn't mind a symmetrical connector like USB C, which can also carry a high definition video signal.

[atarifan88]

It sounds like if the Retron 77 is released using the older version of Stella, then many of the homebrew games that have been made recently won't work on the system (i.e. Scramble, Juno First, Space Rocks, etc)?

[TokyoBatman]

Could be. It's all pure speculation until their engineer comes back here or someone else has inside information.

 

They did actually say it though. This is the full post:

 

"ANDREW STEEL from HYPERKIN -

 

I want to thank everyone for their input and warm welcome. Your opinions are truly important, both personally for me and for our company.

 

We licensed an early version of Stella, and being fully aware of its certain technological issues, our software developers continue working hard to implement the promised features. We at Hyperkin fully understand that all the newer versions are subject to different license terms, and therefore plan to ship the product with our own build. Stefan, please contact us at developer@hyperkin.com, hopefully we can negotiate the opportunity to use your newer builds, for the sake of making the product better.

 

What we initially plan to offer is basically a convenient piece of hardware, with a properly configured and licensed Stella (early version). It will not include any other proprietary parts of Stella code from further revisions (unless we negotiate that with Stefan). That build is expected to have the full set of features I listed in my previous post, and hopefully some more.

 

As an additional tinker-friendly feature, we expect to leave an opportunity (for example in a form of a service port) to install other versions of Stella -- we honor everyone's IP rights, but since it's open-source, I believe users are free to rebuild and deploy any build of Stella they want.

 

Also, many of you requested 7800 compatibility. I cannot really promise that at the moment, but we are working on it.

 

Thanks again for your support!"

Edited August 29, 2017 by TokyoBatman

[Flojomojo]

This is the part that is speculation.

 

Stephena said,
"Separating the dumping from the emulation would be the best way for licensing to be satisfied"

So basically use the cart reader to dump the rom to ram. And have Stella read the rom from ram.

I feel that the software they are developing, the early license of Stella plus coding for the cart reader, is all together... Not separated.

If this is the case, they could, as I've mentioned develop a better software with the newer version of Stella that is coded with the cart reader... And get it leaked on the net and available at the users risk.

Am I off base on this?

 

 

Sure, they said that, a while ago, before radio silence. There have been a lot of assumptions in this thread about what happens next.

They did actually say it though. This is the full post:

"ANDREW STEEL from HYPERKIN -

I want to thank everyone for their input and warm welcome. Your opinions are truly important, both personally for me and for our company.

We licensed an early version of Stella, and being fully aware of its certain technological issues, our software developers continue working hard to implement the promised features. We at Hyperkin fully understand that all the newer versions are subject to different license terms, and therefore plan to ship the product with our own build. Stefan, please contact us at developer@hyperkin.com, hopefully we can negotiate the opportunity to use your newer builds, for the sake of making the product better.

What we initially plan to offer is basically a convenient piece of hardware, with a properly configured and licensed Stella (early version). It will not include any other proprietary parts of Stella code from further revisions (unless we negotiate that with Stefan). That build is expected to have the full set of features I listed in my previous post, and hopefully some more.

As an additional tinker-friendly feature, we expect to leave an opportunity (for example in a form of a service port) to install other versions of Stella -- we honor everyone's IP rights, but since it's open-source, I believe users are free to rebuild and deploy any build of Stella they want.

Also, many of you requested 7800 compatibility. I cannot really promise that at the moment, but we are working on it.

Thanks again for your support!"

[TokyoBatman]

Sure, they said that, a while ago, before radio silence. There have been a lot of assumptions in this thread about what happens next.

 

I guess you can only go off of what they've said so far. If there isn't anything past this... I will take it for that.

 

They will produce the retron 77 in a stable way to play most games with the option to upgrade to more accurate emulation.

 

If something new comes out, I'm all ears. I will be getting one of these to play my childhood carts Nostalgia

[DirtyHairy]

I feel that the software they are developing, the early license of Stella plus coding for the cart reader, is all together... Not separated.

 

If this is the case, they could, as I've mentioned develop a better software with the newer version of Stella that is coded with the cart reader... And get it leaked on the net and available at the users risk.

 

Am I off base on this?

 

Yes, you are Any modifications to Stella that are not released under the GPLv2 (or a compatible license) are a violation of the GPL and, as such, illegal. Even compiling Stella as a library and linking from non-GPLed code would violate the license. The mode of distribution is irrelevant.

 

Also, to reiterate, as Stephen mentioned, the licensing terms are not negotiable for any single individual; each and every contributor to Stella would have to agree to the new licensing model, or Hyperkin would have to either remove the respective code parts or replace them with a cleanroom reimplementation. This is arguably not feasible.

Edited August 29, 2017 by DirtyHairy

[+stephena]

Just one final thought on this. Since we haven't heard anything back, we don't really know what's going on (as others have said). That doesn't mean that something nefarious is happening. I've been involved with commercial projects in the past, and they often keep tight-lipped on certain things (for reasons that are valid only once you know the background). In any event, I wish the project well. As long as all licensing is satisfied, I am happy. But I still extend an offer of advice/help if needed. I feel I have much experience which would be beneficial if they wish to avail of it.

[TokyoBatman]

 

Yes, you are Any modifications to Stella that are not released under the GPLv2 (or a compatible license) are a violation of the GPL and, as such, illegal. Even compiling Stella as a library and linking from non-GPLed code would violate the license. The mode of distribution is irrelevant.

 

Not trying to play devil's advocate or be divisive here.

 

It seems that in this day and age... This type of thing, especially when it's related to emulation of old consoles, wouldn't necessarily be considered illegal by a lot of everyday people. Not saying it isn't, as you've stated.

 

Months after the NES mini was released, thousands of people were updating the emulation to Nestopia or Fceux.

 

So hyperkin can put a user portal on the device and say it's for good, legal intentions... But also open the door for people who want to risk their warranty being void by putting on something better.

 

I hope I'm not way off in saying this as well.

[TokyoBatman]

Just one final thought on this. Since we haven't heard anything back, we don't really know what's going on (as others have said). That doesn't mean that something nefarious is happening. I've been involved with commercial projects in the past, and they often keep tight-lipped on certain things (for reasons that are valid only once you know the background). In any event, I wish the project well. As long as all licensing is satisfied, I am happy. But I still extend an offer of advice/help if needed. I feel I have much experience which would be beneficial if they wish to avail of it.

Those are kind words as many old school gamers would love to pop in their old carts to easily connect to newer TVs.

 

I'm quite excited for this product and hope it comes out well too.

 

Cheers and thanks for your comments. It's interesting to hear technical "talk" as sometimes it can be like learning a new foreign language.