Find all your DIY electronics in the MakerShed. 3D Printing, Kits, Arduino, Raspberry Pi, Books & more!

Hero

So close, but so far :(

I know that other drivers and development software for Kinect are available on the Web. Can I use the Kinect sensor device with these other drivers or software instead of the SDK Beta?

No. Use of the Kinect sensor device is subject to its own warranty and software license agreement that allow you to use it solely in connection with an Xbox 360 or Xbox 360 S console. Only Microsoft can grant you the additional rights that you need to use the Kinect sensor device with a personal computer. Microsoft grants these additional rights in the SDK Beta license, but only for uses of the Kinect sensor device in connection with the SDK Beta. If you use the Kinect sensor with a platform other than Xbox 360, Xbox 360 S, or Windows (with the SDK Beta), you void the warranty you received when you purchased the Kinect sensor device.

Microsoft will void your warranty if you use open source drivers, Microsoft has been responsive about all the wonderful Kinect hacks and community – let’s hope they change this. Right now I don’t see why most folks would use the Micrsoft SDK, you can only have non-commercial use and it’s silly to say the warranty is void if you use(d) other drivers. It’s like saying my Microsoft mouse is voided because it’s plugged in to a linux box.

Phillip Torrone

Editor at large – Make magazine. Creative director – Adafruit Industries, contributing editor – Popular Science. Previously: Founded – Hack-a-Day, how-to editor – Engadget, Director of product development – Fallon Worldwide, Technology Director – Braincraft.


Related

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    I wonder if this is just Microsoft’s way of protecting themselves if you use 3rd party software and it damages the device.

    1. Tyr Grisfal says:

      I think it’s more likely Microsoft’s way of trying to make people use their toolchain instead of doing it by making the one that’s most useful and accessible. They’re cute and controlling like that.

    2. Anonymous says:

      Pretty much. At MIX, there was a lot of excitement about the community stuff, but there were a lot of things being done that the Kinect guys never thought of. While I’m sure there will be a lot of “evil empire” conspiracy BS about this, it really comes down to Microsoft trying to protect themselves from unexpected consequences.

      If you read the terms closely on most of your hardware, you will see that most peripherals have a similar clause regarding 3rd party drivers.

      1. Anonymous says:

        @woogychuck:disqus the “unexpected consequence” was 6 months of amazing projects from the open source community, microsoft should embrace this – not just have a super-restrictive license, at least make it as compelling as what we’ve all built so far right?

        1. Anonymous says:

          This license applies to the SDK that Microsoft provides, so there isn’t anything stopping the current amazing projects. I doubt a team with an almost complete project wants to start over anyway.

          I can see your point, but I think the real world impact of this will be negligible. There are a lot of open source projects going on that are unlikely to change. This SDK provides another option for those that don’t want to write drivers and need support.

          1. Anonymous says:

            @woogychuck:disqus you wrote “I can see your point, but I think the real world impact of this will be negligible” – it does matter, when microsoft comes in the open source community and slaps on a non-commercial use EULA it’s not moving forward, it’s moving backwards.

            of course i know they will not actually sue people, they’re trying to figure out how much they can charge for the commercial use SDK – do you really think it will be free, because i will bet you it will not be completely free like the open source drivers.

            if you’re willing to make a bet let me know :)

    3. Anonymous says:

      Pretty much. At MIX, there was a lot of excitement about the community stuff, but there were a lot of things being done that the Kinect guys never thought of. While I’m sure there will be a lot of “evil empire” conspiracy BS about this, it really comes down to Microsoft trying to protect themselves from unexpected consequences.

      If you read the terms closely on most of your hardware, you will see that most peripherals have a similar clause regarding 3rd party drivers.

    4. Drew Harwell says:

      It clearly is.  It would be absolutely moronic for them to not make this their policy.  If it wasn’t, they would be honoring warranty claims for stupid people who mess up custom firmware installation, or anything else that could go wrong.

      It’s just like “warranty void if removed” stickers; if you open it up, and you mess it up, we’re not going to replace it for you.  I don’t see a problem with that.

    5. Drew Harwell says:

      It clearly is.  It would be absolutely moronic for them to not make this their policy.  If it wasn’t, they would be honoring warranty claims for stupid people who mess up custom firmware installation, or anything else that could go wrong.

      It’s just like “warranty void if removed” stickers; if you open it up, and you mess it up, we’re not going to replace it for you.  I don’t see a problem with that.

  2. Most likely, yes.  Among other things, the Microsoft documents note that the tilt motor isn’t designed for constant use and in fact the SDK limits your ability to use it. An open-source driver might not do so, resulting in damage.  If you then submitted the unit for repair under warranty, how should Microsoft treat it?

    Similarly, the issue of overheating with an open-source driver that allowed you to circumvent the auto-shutoff above or below certain temperatures might cause the same sort of issue.

    Perhaps they should word it differently, but it’s a reasonable concession.

  3. “It’s like saying my Microsoft mouse is voided because it’s plugged in to a linux box.”

    Shhhhhh, don’t jinx it ;-)

  4. Adnan says:

    It should be welcome to reality to all those new kids who don’t know the history of Microsoft.

  5. Sam Ley says:

    IANAL, but here is my understanding of the situation. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (for people in the US) covers when companies can void the warranties on consumer products. Specifically, the use of aftermarket parts or software cannot be used to void product warranties unless the company can show that the aftermarket part or software caused the problem, and the burden of proof is on the company, not the consumer.

    If you had a problem with your Kinect, they would have to honor the warranty unless they found that it had overheated or damaged the tilt motor due to bad software (as noted in the comments). If something else is wrong, for instance, the lens housing came loose, or an internal connector went bad or something, they would still have to honor the warranty, regardless of the software used. The important thing to note is that they have to demonstrate that the problem was caused by the modification – they will always try to get you to prove a negative “Prove that the software DIDN’T cause the problem” but that is just them messing with you. Push on it, and you’ll get satisfaction, particularly when you pass the “cost to replace part is less than cost to keep dragging this situation through the mud, and possibly to court” threshold.

  6. Rahere says:

    It’s still quite some chutzpah given the birth of that company. For those who weren’t around, research QDOS – the heritage questions still bug Windows to this day.

  7. AndrewS says:

    you people amaze me seriously
    where do you get this false sense of entitlement to everything like the world owes you every favour under the sun.
    if i were you i would be glad they released any kind of sdk whatsoever.
    they arent stopping you use it, they just dont want to have to fix units YOU broke because you were tinkering about with the gubbins that make it tick, and why should they?
    If you dont want to use it then dont use it, its just two cameras in a stick anyway. Hardly worth the hype you people seem to think it deserves.

    1. Anonymous says:

      @yahoo-3X4RESQP6C4YYIFQMYU2Q63ZB4:disqus that’s silly thing to say, microsoft is doing this *because* of all the work the open source community did so of course we should be able to make suggestions on how they can release a SDK better.

      the kinect is more than “two cameras in a stick” – you know that right?

      1. AndrewS says:

        Yes yes phil we all know your point of view, everything in the world should be open source, there should be no such thing as money, except when its being used to buy “artistic” and “creative” things like grafitti machines and tvbgones and everyone should live in a hackerspace and teach their children how to solder by the age of 3.
        Well guess what companies need to make money or else you wouldn’t have a job so i’m afraid you will just have to live with it.
        Sorry, you are right, kinect is revolutionary new device, and is the first 3d imaging tool ever made my bad.

        1. Anonymous says:

          @yahoo-3X4RESQP6C4YYIFQMYU2Q63ZB4:disqus that’s a stupid comment. i run a business, i want commercial use for kinect so people can make (more) money. i sent the $3k to the developer who open sourced the kinect drivers (i did the bounty with johnny lee and limor fried). there are now companies built around using the kinect. i’m positive i’m more of a capitalist than you are, but feel free to prove me wrong and tell me how non-commercial use makes developers money. microsoft specifically states you can’t in the EULA and SDK. the open source drivers specifically say you can.

          i’ve never purchased a graffiti machine, can you tell me where i could buy one :)

    2. Anonymous says:

      What false sense of entitlement? I only see a perfectly legitimate sense of entitlement. With the full weight of the law on our side.

      A product is supposed to be fit for purpose. This means that it will perform within the specifications listed. So a USB device will not burn out if connected to a USB socket.
      A product is supposed to be of merchantable quality. This means it is working when I get it. Any derfects will be the responsibility of the seller to sort out.

      Microsoft owes nobody any favours. They do however, have to comply with laws pertaining to the sale of goods. And that is all anybody asks or expects.

      If it breaks in use, through no fault of mine, then I expect a warranty repair.
      If I break it, then I have no expectation of a repair. And that includes over stressing any part due to using non OEM drivers.

      But hey.. Trolls will be trolls.

      1. AndrewS says:

        If you bought new tyres for your car and then used them in a way they weren’t designed for like putting them on a monster truck or a bicycle would you expect new tyres when they broke?
        of course not.
        Microsoft actually take a step TOWARDS making the kinect more open and what do you people do?
        moan its not good enough
        what a great hacker spirit

        1. Anonymous says:

          @yahoo-3X4RESQP6C4YYIFQMYU2Q63ZB4:disqus since you brought up a flawed car analogy, i’ll give you one too.

          let’s say you modded your chevy’s engine firmware to get 100mpg range and published how to it online for free and for anyone to make a business around it if they want to perform the mod.

          the world rejoices, you did something amazing. people are now able to travel for cheaper and they’re creating communities around making better cars with these engines (and mods).

          after 6 months and thousands of people making these amazing mods chevy decides to offer the engine firmware at their dealerships but only if you promise never to sell your car, you also can’t use your car as a taxi, or take pictures of your car and sell them.

          but if you get the engine firmware and improve it, chevy can take it and commercialize it (but you still can’t).

          and to make sure you don’t use your firmware, they warn you, if you do or did, no more warranty for you. even if it didn’t do anything.

          but don’t worry, a final chevy firmware is coming “one day” and you’ll be able to sell your car and use it how you like, really.

          car analogies are always flawed, don’t use them :)

          1. AndrewS says:

            Yep your analogy is flawed, if you replaced your cars firmware i would say it would be completley reasonable to void the warranty
            “even if it didn’t do anything.” is moot, if it didn’t do anything you wouldn’t need the warranty anyway

          2. Anonymous says:

            @yahoo-3X4RESQP6C4YYIFQMYU2Q63ZB4:disqus every car=software analogy is flawed, that’s the point. you need to stick to the specifics with microsoft and the kinect. there isn’t any reason for them to 1) scare people by saying they will void the warranty and 2) not allow commercial use

            be sure to read the other comments re: warranties:

            “The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (for people in the US) covers when companies can void the warranties on consumer products. Specifically, the use of aftermarket parts or software cannot be used to void product warranties unless the company can show that the aftermarket part or software caused the problem, and the burden of proof is on the company, not the consumer.”

        2. Anonymous says:

          Tyres are designed to fit on a wheel of given dimensions, rotate around a central axis, and carry a given maximum load. Thus, they are being used as designed. Using them on a monster truck or a bicycle is not going to void the warranty. Exceeding the maximum load would. But my hypothetical monster truck is within that, and a bicycle heavier than a car.. Not gonna happen. Do try harder. Car analogies really do suck when used in non car instances.

          Despite what you have been convinced of, companies do not get to decide what is and is not covered by a warranty. And it is their responsibility to prove improper use caused the fault, not the customer. Sadly, this is not enforced before the fact, but after the fact. So they make unsupportable unenforceable claims, and foolish people abide by them. Smart people demand the case goes to court, and the company backs down.

          “Microsoft actually take a step TOWARDS making the kinect more open and what do you people do?
          moan its not good enough
          what a great hacker spirit ”

          Actually.. We buy kinects, with no expectation of Microsoft support, do interesting things that give Microsoft lots of free publicity, and go on with our lives.

          Microsoft did what any company with a PR department does when they know full well they haven’t got a leg to stand on. They claim that they welcome the new use for the widget. Which they did, after a few standard grumbles and boiler plate veiled threats. Because admitting there isn’t a damn thing they can do to stop it is not really the message they want to send.

          They didn’t sue anybody. Not because they chose not to, but because they had nothing to sue over.

          And as far as moaning.. Most of it seems to be from the peanut gallery complaining people are misusing kinects, by not using them with MS approved equipment.

          Simply put..
          Warranty void if some twit decides to see if he can force a servo to go 360 degrees. Fair enough.
          Warranty void if someone takes the case off, and builds the camera unit into an HTPC case.. Absolutely.
           
          Warranty void if the gizmo was connected to a Linux box when the camera broke down. Hell no. 

          End of story.

    3. Anonymous says:

      What false sense of entitlement? I only see a perfectly legitimate sense of entitlement. With the full weight of the law on our side.

      A product is supposed to be fit for purpose. This means that it will perform within the specifications listed. So a USB device will not burn out if connected to a USB socket.
      A product is supposed to be of merchantable quality. This means it is working when I get it. Any derfects will be the responsibility of the seller to sort out.

      Microsoft owes nobody any favours. They do however, have to comply with laws pertaining to the sale of goods. And that is all anybody asks or expects.

      If it breaks in use, through no fault of mine, then I expect a warranty repair.
      If I break it, then I have no expectation of a repair. And that includes over stressing any part due to using non OEM drivers.

      But hey.. Trolls will be trolls.

  8. Bill Porter says:

    I’m with a few other people here, this is OK.

    Most products say “Warranty void if opened” to protect the company from having to foot the bill for damage done by people poking their hands into the sensitive bits.

    The Kinect was design under the assumption that only one ‘host’ would be using the device, so logically it made sense to have the overheat / overuse protection schemes in the software of that host. Kept cost down compared to implementing the same protection scheme in hardware and allowed MS to tweak the limits (just by pushing Live updates) before shutdown if too many units started failing.

    Then the assumption of a single host turned out to be flawed, and no longer can MS be guaranteed that the device was regulated properly to guard against damage. Just like no company can be guaranteed that their sensitive internal hardware was properly handled when it’s external casing was broken into.

    So Phillip, what’s you stance on all the companies that have the “Warranty void if removed/broken” stickers on their products? Because this is the same thing.

    1. Anonymous says:

      @twitter-222854927:disqus you asked “So Phillip, what’s you stance on all the companies that have the
      “Warranty void if removed/broken” stickers on their products? Because
      this is the same thing.”

      i don’t think it’s the same thing, microsoft wants to capitalize on the open source community which made all the hacks, they really shouldn’t specifically scare people about using any open source drivers, and they should also allow commercial use, that’s how open source works, commercial use is allowed, it’s why we all have a thriving internet.

      1. Bill Porter says:

        Phillip, did you read my whole post?

        If using the non-MS drivers presents a risk for hardware failure just as much as breaking the warranty seal and gaining access to the sensative inards of most consumer devices, how is it different?

        I don’t see this as a scare tactic, you are interpreting it that way.

        They are releasing (for free!) an SDK with proper protections originally designed for the hardware so we can play with the toys we buy in new and different ways. For them to add the legal mumbo-jumbo to cover usage with possibly dangerous and reckless (to the hardware) drivers makes perfect sense.

        And how many projects featured by MAKE have the CC Non-Commercial license attached? Why should MS be held to a different standard?

        Now granted, there’s no concrete evidence the drivers do offer protections the kinect hardware needs, this is speculation. About the same amount of speculation and proof you have that this was a greedy and evil plot.

        And I’m still super confused with this post in the first place. Isn’t it the Makezine credo to “Void your warranty, violate a user agreement, fry a circuit, blow a fuse or poke an eye out”? Has that changed? Why is this $150 widget any different?

        1. Anonymous says:

          @twitter-222854927:disqus microsoft is smart and is trying to capitalize on all the work from the last 6+ months from the open source community by saying “don’t use any other driver, or else” and “commercial use not allowed”. they did not need to specifically call out the open source driver in their FAQ for the SDK, it’s a “jerk move” as one commenter pointed out.

          i’m thrilled there is a SDK but let’s be real, MS would have never done this unless we did it open source’d first.

          if ms wants to come to the world that *we* created, they need to know we’ll make useful suggestions like making the SDK with an OS license and not to scare people away from the OS drivers.

          as another commenter said, it would impossible for MS to prove an OS driver damaged a kinect, so why even put that in there? it’s not needed.

          as far as a different standard, MAKE features all sorts of projects, i tend to celebrate the open source, commercial use ones since i do open source hardware. i was involved with the OS drivers — disclosure: i was one of the people behind the kinect bounty (johnny lee, limor fried and myself) – so i’ve been part of this for half of a year. just search around and you can see the timeline and all the stuff that has happened, it’s good stuff.

          look, MS was practically threatening to sue reverse engineering of the kinect, and later loved the hacks, said it was great on NPR and now there is a SDK, they are responsive so why not make suggestions?

          1. Bill Porter says:

            “they did not need to specifically call out the open source driver in
            their FAQ for the SDK, it’s a “jerk move” as one commenter pointed out.”

            Again, more speculation. You have no idea of the real reason they did that, you are just assuming.

            If I wrote an open source driver for a industrial robot that hammered it’s servos against their endstops till they burnt out, I wouldn’t expect it to be covered under a warranty.

            Improperly written drivers can cause damage to hardware. Yes, it’s hard to prove so most companies don’t add the legal mumbo jumbo to cover that. But hard to prove doesn’t stop most laws from being written.

            Using a ‘non-authorized’ driver is effectively mistreating the device. Whatever precautions and safety checks the developers intended the ‘host’ to deploy may or may not be implemented. Why should MS be on the hook for mistreatment?

            And again, who cares? Everything we do around here voids warranties.

          2. Anonymous says:

            @twitter-222854927:disqus again, *microsoft* in entering in to the community *we* created, they need to take suggestions and think about them. specifically noting that using another driver that voids the warranty is just a scare tactic to keep people away from building and making businesses.

            microsoft has a long history of exec/pr/legal people saying really stupid things.

            remember when they tried to scare people away from linux because it was “communist”?

            http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/07/31/ms_ballmer_linux_is_communism/

            why would anyone want to use a non-commercial only driver? did you read the EULA?

            ============================

            I saw the clever use of the Kinect sensor with a PC in a department
            store window. Can I create an application to use as a showpiece for
            customers who visit my store?
            You may publicly display
            applications you create with the SDK Beta so long as it otherwise
            complies with the terms of the SDK Beta license agreement, including its
            restrictions on commercial use. Under the terms of the SDK Beta
            license, you cannot receive payment in connection with your application,
            use your application for advertising, use your application to solicit
            donations, or use your application in your internal business operations.
            Also, because this is a free, public beta, and it is broadly available,
            Microsoft is not necessarily aware of all uses that licensees are
            making of the the SDK Beta. Accordingly, you should not assume that any
            particular use you see is allowed under the SDK Beta license.
            ============================

            this is a dead end for anyone.

            all those cool kinect projects and people building businesses around? they can’t use the SDK from microsoft.

            they need to re-word the EULA/FAQ and embrace the open source community they want to be part of.

          3. Anonymous says:

            @twitter-222854927:disqus again, *microsoft* in entering in to the community *we* created, they need to take suggestions and think about them. specifically noting that using another driver that voids the warranty is just a scare tactic to keep people away from building and making businesses.

            microsoft has a long history of exec/pr/legal people saying really stupid things.

            remember when they tried to scare people away from linux because it was “communist”?

            http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/07/31/ms_ballmer_linux_is_communism/

            why would anyone want to use a non-commercial only driver? did you read the EULA?

            ============================

            I saw the clever use of the Kinect sensor with a PC in a department
            store window. Can I create an application to use as a showpiece for
            customers who visit my store?
            You may publicly display
            applications you create with the SDK Beta so long as it otherwise
            complies with the terms of the SDK Beta license agreement, including its
            restrictions on commercial use. Under the terms of the SDK Beta
            license, you cannot receive payment in connection with your application,
            use your application for advertising, use your application to solicit
            donations, or use your application in your internal business operations.
            Also, because this is a free, public beta, and it is broadly available,
            Microsoft is not necessarily aware of all uses that licensees are
            making of the the SDK Beta. Accordingly, you should not assume that any
            particular use you see is allowed under the SDK Beta license.
            ============================

            this is a dead end for anyone.

            all those cool kinect projects and people building businesses around? they can’t use the SDK from microsoft.

            they need to re-word the EULA/FAQ and embrace the open source community they want to be part of.

  9. At first glance this does sound like a jerk move, but there is the possibility that the firmware might be able to be reprogrammed accidentally and might brick the device or mess up the software based hardware limits and cause the device to move past the end stops and break something physically. In short it might be possible to use software to physically break the device. When I worked at a computer store building computers, we had a problem of people buying the first Intel 300Mhz Celeron slot 1 processors. This Celeron was well known for being able to be easily overclocked by the bios in some MB, but you had to be very careful with cooling and to do plenty of testing. We would have people buy the CPU, put it in their MB, overclock it ’till it blew, and then ask for replacement. Dead Celerons became such a problem that every order was delayed 1 week so we could burn test the CPU in a test machine. If someone wanted a 300 Celeron machine built, we would build it but limit MB choices to ones that prevented overclocking.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Wow, you anti-Microsoft folks sure do like to ignore things. Read through the EULA on just about any peripheral or hardware component and you will see that this 3rd party driver clause is standard and common. You’re just pissed because it’s Microsoft.

    Also, the issue is 100% legit. At MIX, the Kinect guys were a concerned over the motor in the sensor. It was designed to move once when the unit powers on to adjust, but many community projects have been hacking it to move constantly and some have already seen the motors wear out. The official driver protects the motor by limiting motion, the open source drivers don’t. Using a driver that bypasses hardware protection features seems like a good reason to void a warranty.

    1. Anonymous says:

      @woogychuck what does that have to do with microsoft not allow commercial use?

      1. Anonymous says:

        The commercial use clause is something Microsoft sometimes has in place for beta toolkits. If you look at ASP.NET MVC and other dev frameworks provided by Microsoft, they generally have a non-commercial license during beta and CTP phases, then they provide commercial licensing options when the tools hit RC or release.

        At MIX this year, they announced that commercial licensing would be available once the SDK was ready for release.

      2. Anonymous says:

        The commercial use clause is something Microsoft sometimes has in place for beta toolkits. If you look at ASP.NET MVC and other dev frameworks provided by Microsoft, they generally have a non-commercial license during beta and CTP phases, then they provide commercial licensing options when the tools hit RC or release.

        At MIX this year, they announced that commercial licensing would be available once the SDK was ready for release.

      3. Anonymous says:

        The commercial use clause is something Microsoft sometimes has in place for beta toolkits. If you look at ASP.NET MVC and other dev frameworks provided by Microsoft, they generally have a non-commercial license during beta and CTP phases, then they provide commercial licensing options when the tools hit RC or release.

        At MIX this year, they announced that commercial licensing would be available once the SDK was ready for release.

        1. Anonymous says:

          @woogychuck:disqus did you read the EULA?

          ——————-

          d.    License to Modifications. If you make modifications to the Sample
          Code and make those modifications public in source code, text, or any
          other descriptive (non-binary) format, you give to Microsoft, without
          charge, the right to use, share, and commercialize those modifications
          in any way and for any purpose.

          ——————–

          why would anyone agree to this?

          microsoft can do anything for their .NET stuff, etc – but they’re entering a fairly solid open source world built around kinect hacks, they should really consider being less restrictive if they want to attract developers.

          1. Anonymous says:

            Yeah, that part sucks, I didn’t see that. However, that’s not much different than most open source licenses. Many open source licenses similarly required that any code added or modified is under the same license and the original license holder has rights to it.

            I’m not saying that this is a good practice. I’m pointing out that it’s hardly unique to this product or unique to Microsoft. In fact, just about anybody who hacks hardware expects the warranty to be voided. Also, I believe this EULA applies to the .NET SDK for Kinect, so people who write their own drivers aren’t required to give up their code. If you don’t like the EULA, don’t use the SDK, it’s that simple. Like any project, you have to weight the pros and cons of the tools you use. The SDK saves a lot of coding and you can get support, but it has a restrictive license. That’s the cost of using it.

            This is a post that wouldn’t even have been written if this product was made by anybody other than Microsoft. People jailbreak iPhones and hack Apple TV, and they don’t complain about the lack of warranty. It seems like you have a distinct agenda and are attempting to make this pretty standard EULA fit into your argument.

          2. Anonymous says:

            @woogychuck:disqus  you wrote “Yeah, that part sucks, I didn’t see that. However, that’s not much
            different than most open source licenses. Many open source licenses
            similarly required that any code added or modified is under the same
            license and the original license holder has rights to it. ”

            not correct, OSS allows *you* to commercialize your work, the MS license for the MS kinect SDK does not. this is the opposite of open source, they get everything, you get nothing.

            if you don’t think it’s good, say so – this is how companies change. don’t soft-apologize for and defend a bad practice.

            why would anyone want to use the microsoft SDK when the open source  drivers are out there and you can build a business and company around  them?

          3. Anonymous says:

            The final SDK will allow you to commercialize your work. You can watch the Kinect Keynote from MIX or any of the Kinect sessions from MIX. They are all online and almost everyone has people from Microsoft stating that the released version will have a commercial license available. This is standard practice for many companies. They rarely give a commercial license with the support that goes along with it unless the code is released.

            Also, I don’t agree with that clause, but that doesn’t mean I have the right to tell people how to license their code any more than I want people to tell me how to license my code.

          4. Anonymous says:

            @woogychuck:disqus you wrote “I don’t agree with that clause, but that doesn’t mean I have the right
            to tell people how to license their code any more than I want people to
            tell me how to license my code.”

            if you released your own kinect SDK and required everyone to pay you $5k for commercial use you could of course expect people to make comments on this.

            if you don’t agree with it, tell them – that’s how change happens :)

            seriously, you’ve posted more here than emailing microsoft! send them an email, it’s just takes 5 minutes and who knows what can happen.

            look what happened when we made our own drivers for the kinect, magic!

            that’s how it works, more so when microsoft is entering a clearly open source community that has built amazing things in the last 6 months.

            what is the EULA for the “final SDK” who knows? all we can comment on is what is out now, a non-commercial (and dead-end) for most people.

            again, i keep asking… why would anyone want to use the microsoft SDK when the open source
            drivers are out there and you can build a business and company around
            them?

          5. Ryan Foster says:

            Is this true?  Can you use the open source drivers for commercial products? I thought it was illegal to use the kinect hardware for any commercial purposes?

            Anyone know if it was legal for the department store to use the kinect in their advertising?

  11. Adam Ödlund says:

    Dude honestly… just realize that your point of view is (obviously, judging by the comments) not shared by everyone else, instead of trying prove ur point whenever anyone happens to disagree with you.

  12. archive says:

    Food for thought: Accessing the kinect elevation motor more than 1 time per second or more than 15 times per second has been shown to damage the kinect device ( from MS SDK documentation ). MS drivers have a limit on access time, open source drivers may not.

In the Maker Shed