New G-Box Midnight MX2 Fully User Friendly Auto Update

  Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 3.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Post Reply
Segundus Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 0
Post: #16
I just got this device and it froze on me after a couple hours which required me to reset it to factory defaults using the toothpick method. After resetting it to factory defaults it seems to be working well so far. It's definitely a sweet device and the price was right. I just hope I don't encounter anymore freezes which require me to reset it again. It might have been due to a power glitch at my house. So far I am loving this GBox Midnight MX2. I recommend everyone buy one. I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars. Smile

Also, I got the Logitech K400 Wireless Keyboard with Touchpad and it works awesome with it. Only cost about $34 dollars from CompUSA. It's a really great setup when using this keyboard/touchpad. Highly recommended! Big Grin
(This post was last modified: 2013-05-08 18:27 by Segundus.)
find quote
CoolkcaH Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 0
Post: #17
They don't release a firmware image or sources, and didn't release the XBMC patches yet (afaik).
That's not the way to protect themselves from non-branded boxes from the same factory and clones.
They should differentiate by better service and warranty only.
find quote
solamnic Offline
Posting Freak
Posts: 820
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation: 4
Post: #18
about the G-box MX2 it think this is really enlighting

http://www.pivosforums.com/viewtopic.php...701#p31701

(davilla's post)
(This post was last modified: 2013-05-13 22:00 by solamnic.)
find quote
ciquta Offline
Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation: 0
Location: Carpi
Post: #19
(2013-05-13 21:56)solamnic Wrote:  about the G-box MX2 it think this is really enlighting

http://www.pivosforums.com/viewtopic.php...701#p31701

(davilla's post)
Nice to know, I don't want to give my money to people who violate the GPLv2 No

I don't care if they copied the source code from Pivos (this is why it's called "open"), but they must release it.
find quote
joelbaby Offline
Fan
Posts: 401
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 8
Location: Perth, Australia
Post: #20
I'm no fan of Pivos, but what is disgusting is GBox statement on their MX2 page:

"The MX2 comes loaded with a Special Edition superior fork of XBMC. This fork is commercially supported, which means real development effort is being put into this amazing software to better the product. The MX2 is capable of some pretty nifty feats, such as full HD 1080p streaming and decoding in this special edition."

Basically the took the Pivos Build, changed some logos and pretend that they are supporting the product.

http://matricom.net/products/g-box-midnight-mx2/


Conclusion:
I won't buy a Gbox Midnight. They are liars.
I might buy a Pivos product, but they desperately need to upgrade to a dual/quad core device, and make a good remote control.

Pivos XIOS Mark II is waaaaay overdue IMHO.
find quote
mockingbirdblue Offline
Senior Member
Posts: 107
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 1
Post: #21
Updated here**** http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid...pid1421885

I think its a push in the right direction, don't know whats going on but I am a happy owner and once was kind of "guilty" for being an early purchaser. Guess I can sleep at night now.
find quote
pcsirk Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 1
Post: #22
joelbaby, I dunno what they did to xbmc or their box's firmware but it runs as good as my $400 HTPC. Not sure what they're 'lying' about. Have you looked at their code and seen that it's exactly the same as Pivos or are you judging your opinions based on the likes of others such as j1nx and davilla? Obviously you don't own one. I ask this because there is something different, because no matter which xbmc I load on the mx2 - ive tried them all- the only one that a/v is synced perfectly and runs this smooth on it is g-box's version of it. And since there's clearly something different then I can't much say that they're lying about having an altered xbmc... at least for their own box. Who knows, could just be one line of code different. It's irrelevant if it works. And it definitely works. They have their source code available for download ciquta: http://www.scribd.com/doc/141620034/XBMC...load-Files

Im a customer of all of these companies, own all the boxes out there running android. As far as company morals goes g-box should be commended. They were the first to release the full source code for their m3 Midnight device which prompted Linux to be developed on every m3 out there. If anything they've contributed more to this scene, besides the xbmc foundation of course. Guess everybody forgot about this? or maybe they never knew about it. either way fact is fact. Smile
find quote
Robgue Offline
Senior Member
Posts: 118
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 1
Location: LA
Post: #23
I hope for a time when posting spam about random android boxes that violate the gpl will be banned from the xbmc forums.
find quote
pcsirk Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 1
Post: #24
I guess you didn't read the post very well. smh.
find quote
lolwatpear Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #25
does g-box mx2 run linux xbmc?
(This post was last modified: 2013-05-17 04:43 by lolwatpear.)
find quote
joelbaby Offline
Fan
Posts: 401
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 8
Location: Perth, Australia
Post: #26
Pcsirk..why do you ignore the facts in http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid...pid1421885
find quote
pcsirk Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 1
Post: #27
lolwatpear i dont think there's a linux for the mx2 yet. m3 devices work fine in linux from my experience for a simple xbmc linux build. joeybaby I have read everything i can find. This only shows that they had other priorities than packaging up their source code. I agree they should have made the source available before releasing their product to comply with GPL. But I can see why it wouldn't be a priority for a company to release source when they're just launching a product and have attention focused on other details. As soon as it was put on the market everybody started screaming for the source code and admittedly they took a few days but they ended up releasing it and being in compliance per the same thread that you linked. Youve got other companies like Geniatech that are probably much bigger than gbox that just say "oh we're using Pivos's source" but never actually release it... ever. Also noted in the same thread by Davilla. Is it because they have secrets or are they just admitting there's no reason to release the source since it's already there? maybe thats the case with gbox - everybody says its just the pivos code, including davilla himself. So if the source is already out there then it makes no sense that there should be a rush to publish source code that's already published which puts gbox even further into the green imho.
find quote
lolwatpear Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #28
(2013-05-24 17:37)pcsirk Wrote:  lolwatpear i dont think there's a linux for the mx2 yet. m3 devices work fine in linux from my experience for a simple xbmc linux build. joeybaby I have read everything i can find. This only shows that they had other priorities than packaging up their source code. I agree they should have made the source available before releasing their product to comply with GPL. But I can see why it wouldn't be a priority for a company to release source when they're just launching a product and have attention focused on other details. As soon as it was put on the market everybody started screaming for the source code and admittedly they took a few days but they ended up releasing it and being in compliance per the same thread that you linked. Youve got other companies like Geniatech that are probably much bigger than gbox that just say "oh we're using Pivos's source" but never actually release it... ever. Also noted in the same thread by Davilla. Is it because they have secrets or are they just admitting there's no reason to release the source since it's already there? maybe thats the case with gbox - everybody says its just the pivos code, including davilla himself. So if the source is already out there then it makes no sense that there should be a rush to publish source code that's already published which puts gbox even further into the green imho.

yeah I don't understand their problem. If that is indeed the source code, there should no longer be any controversy. Are they angry that the competition released a superior dual core box at the same price point as their hardware? That's what it sounds like.
find quote
davilla Offline
Retired-Team-XBMC Developer
Posts: 11,479
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 64
Post: #29
I read here that gbox invented m3 on linux... Interesting, before Pivos pushed out Pivos/Linux for the M1, no one ran Linux on an AMLogic M1 or M3. Please stop telling such fabricated stories Smile Look at the dates at github for the 1st commits and then come back and apologize for making such silly claims.

I authored the XBMC internal AMLPlayer, and I also authored the XBMC AMLCodec. From what I see, I'm also the only person that understand the AML hardware codecs enough to fix issues and improve the code base. Without AMLPlayer/AMLCodec, XBMC would never be capable of hardware video decode without the use of an external player. Period, end of discussion.

And through me, this code (and much, much more) was pushed public via Pivos. Again, check the dates at github if you disbelieve me. GBox had nothing to do but copy the source code and use it, same for others. But guess what, Pivos expected that and is perfectly ok with it. Pivos understands what it means for a commercial company to support and use GPL software. That is the whole purpose of OpenSource. To foster open interchange and improvement of the source code, ie XBMC. J1nx gets it, they have actually improved some things regarding Pivos/Linux that Pivos has brought into its source trees. GBox still does not get it, maybe they will, maybe they will not, only time will tell.

What I will not permit and as primary author of the AMLPlayer/AMLCodec source code, I have a very big hammer, is others using this source code and ignoring their GPL license requirements. GBox did this very thing with their MX2, and I 'corrected' their rude behavior. It's plain and simple, use XBMC on AMLogic platform and ignore your GPL license requirements and I'll get in your face about it. I'll start nice and polite but will not tolerate stalling games or delay tactics. If you try this, it will get ugly fast. This is not Pivos doing it but me, the author of large chunks of AML specific source code that runs under XBMC. The choice is simple, you don't like GPL license requirements, don't use the source code.

EDIT: I'm actually quite surprised that I have to continue to defend my actions with Gbox, XBMC is GPLv2 OpenSource, that means if you use it, you are bound by the GPLv2 license and its requirements, there are no exceptions to this. This is the XBMC forums, without the work that many, many people have done over years and years, under the GPLv2 license, XBMC would not exist, at all. As a commercial company, GBox is required to make sure they operate within the bounds of their licenses, pushing out a new hardware platform is no excuse for the missing GPL license requirements. Part of pushing out a new hardware platform is to make sure that your licensing is up to date and proper. GPL is real legally binding license and not fictitious license. What makes GBox so special that they get to be treated different than any other commercial company using XBMC ?


MediaInfo : http://mediainfo.sourceforge.net/
Do not e-mail XBMC-Team members directly asking for support. Read/follow the forum rules.
(This post was last modified: 2013-05-25 08:17 by davilla.)
find quote
mftvrocks Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #30
support davilla's defend

Made for TV that rocks - http://www.mftvrocks.org
find quote