OGXbox Admin

I received a few PM's that could further the discussion. They certainly did not seem insulting or anything along those lines. I'm going to open this back up for those as well as any responses. I plan to close it again in about 12 hours time or if it goes off the rails.

I don't think we're going to come to a resolution. I'm going to lock this thread. If you have something else you want to add, pm me and we might open it back up. We've for the most part kept it productive. I think we've gone as far as we're going to go. I wish everyone well and hope this can reach an amicable conclusion somehow. Thanks to all.

As of right now the big questions I still have are those I don't think I'll be able to get answers to. Why? It would require exposing the very code in question in order to prove who created it. I DO NOT WANT THIS CODE. I don't want to be on the suspect list of a potential leak. Don't give it to me. Not that anyone would, but I just want to make that clear. If someone could figure out how to prove whether the above is true or not, it would end the entire thing... and that's what we should be looking for. It might be fun for everyone to be at each other's throats, but I've been following this for what? 2 days. I'm tired boss. lol I wish I had shut this site down years ago. These are the specific points I would need someone to provide proof of so I could gain any clarity. It seems the entire debate hinges here. Given the unlikely nature of anyone giving this up, I'm afraid I've arrived at the same stalemate everyone else has. I apologize if I've wasted time. I was overconfident in my ability to get to the bottom of things. All along I've wondered why everyone is so confident in their position. LMHz is confident his code was stolen. The people he has accused are confident in their positions based on their rebuttals. I have been unable to wrap my head around everyone being so confident in their position. Usually people consider all the negative ramifications of conflicts such as this EVEN IF THEY ARE RIGHT. That just doesn't seem to be happening here. Everyone believes they are the victim and nobody admits to any fault. Usually everyone has a little bit of fault even if they are mostly victims. Edit: I forgot to finish my thought in the final sentance: Which is why people COMPROMISE.

@LoveMHz Ok. Thank you for that clarification. Could you please detail with as much specificity as possible exactly what software you're alleging has been copied or parts of it have been copied? If I can narrow that down to a file or two (I don't need filename per se but just something that distinguishes it would suffice.) I could start to make sense of what is at issue. What I need is: Product name / Creation date of said code / software or firmware? (choose one) / entire code or partial code? (choose one) / How many lines are in the original work? / How many lines do we believe were copied? / To where was it copied? (Name of alleged "product" that contains alleged unauthorized code use.) / when this copy was done or when you discovered it. I am trying to piece this all together.

@LoveMHz Do you dispute the validity of the github link above? Help me understand your position better please.

After reading your entire post AND reading LMHZ comments regarding your project on this forum, it seems as though he is agreeing with you now. It seems in the past damage may have been done between you two, but from what I can tell right now, nobody disputes your work on OXHD being original. If I'm wrong then so be it but I don't see anything other than old things you provided. At this moment in time, I think your work regarding OXHD is unquestioned in its uniqueness and validity. As far as the screenshot you provided that said "everything would be open source at some point." I found that most interesting and thought about it for a long time. Then I did some research. Do you believe you or anyone else was deceived into collaborating with LMHZ at that time into providing work you believed would be open source, only to have it be closed source, used for an official product, and the contributor uncredited? If yes, that screenshot and said collaboration can be proven it has a LOT of merit. If no, it has none. Here's why: It doesn't give a firm commitment nor does it give a timeline. Everyone has the right to change their mind. If he were to wait until he was on his deathbed to make it open source, he has complied with that non-binding statement in his post. It just has no teeth unless someone can make the argument that their work was used for profit without their permission due to deceptive practices. It seems you want a public apology from LMHZ. I think if everything you say is true then that would be reasonable... however. Calling someone a liar repeatedly publicly won't help that. Few people in the world would do that. It could be seen as discrediting his other claims as though he could be wrong on them as well. (I would disagree. I think it would actually strengthen those claims because if you're willing to admit you're wrong when faced with proof, then when you won't admit you're wrong it is strong evidence that you are not wrong.) Extremely few people publicly apologize and admit they made a mistake.

I apologize if it seems like I'm attacking you. I'm NOT. Right now everyone feels that if you're not on their side then you are against them and siding with someone else. I don't side with anyone. Who has ever sided with me? Lol... I'm only trying to make this productive. If this were a trial and you were called to the stand, you can't just keep calling someone a liar. They won't allow it. You can have facts to back it up, but everyone else has to reach that conclusion on their own. That is ALL I'm taking issue with. Name-calling even if you believe it is justified only serves to ignite the fuel that is already abundant around this topic.

I don't mean to discount anything... but I'm trying to get to the bottom of this. I'm trying to (albeit with very limited knowledge) pretend as though I'm the judge in this case and how I might rule. (not outwardly. I know I have no authority in the grand scheme of things. I'm talking about in my mind to try to determine who is right.) The judge will view the case in the light most favorable to the plaintiff to test and see if it has merit. If I were that judge, I'd first ask for the timeline of when the code first existed and concrete PROOF of WHEN that was, then who created it. Only then is there a case. All of this he said/she said back and forth and character assaults don't matter. The ONLY thing that matters is the timeline and PROOF of it and who created what. Once that is established, this all becomes clear. Until then, it's just a mudslinging circle jerk... one that I'm attempting to avoid. @Harcroft - I can tell you feel passionate about what you say but given that this very easily could go to court I was hoping to keep all of the insulting remarks out of this and stick to JUST the facts. It can only cause the thread to devolve or become ignored. This is tearing up the community at present and it would be extremely beneficial to sort it all out and put it all to rest rather than continue character assaults etc. I understand that both sides feel as though character assaults are happening to them. It's happening to me too. We just have to stop caring about that. What other people think of any of us truly does not matter. Their opinions do not matter. The facts and the truth is what matters. Let's sort this out prior to any lives being needlessly ruined during litigation. If you've seen the leaked screenshots of my chat you know I cannot afford to be sued. I simply cannot afford the representation and even though I don't believe I have any liability to this point, I'd like to end this. So EVERYONE please, let's keep it civil. Let's get to the bottom of this once and for all. Establish your timeline and provide FACTS you created what you created since both parties are claiming credit. Whoever can PROVE what they say is the victor and gets their way. Whoever CANNOT or DOES not prove that, obviously cannot prove what they say and that also puts this whole thing to bed. Let's act like adults and get this over with once and for all.

I don't want this post to come off as argumentative. I just think the reason everyone is so divided over this is because while it might seem clear to you, it isn't clear to anyone else. Are your screenshots to show similarities between right and left? If so where? I don't see it. If I understand this correctly, the issue currently being discussed is that you believe your hdd unlocking code has been used without your permission. (I surmised that mainly from the screenshot above talking about hdd unlocking.) Did you write it from scratch or did Eaton provide anything? What is it based on? You must have been referencing something whether it be a bit of logic or... something. Since this (hard drive unlocking) has all been done for 20 years, nothing is truly new and unique anymore. We're not blazing new frontiers. Your code was based on something, so what was that thing? Is it possible someone else based theirs on the same thing and the end result looked the same? You say it's identical but different and that is very confusing to me. You say the differences actually confirm theft which is also extremely confusing to me. If I were to be trying to achieve the same result, wouldn't I need very similar code structures? In your example you say you added a delay because you observed a problem. (This implies that a common code was used if we assume someone else MUST have encountered the same problem you did.) Is it not possible someone else saw the same problem and came up with the same solution? The compiler would then change them to machine code and they would necessarily be very similar to identical. If all of this were made more clear, I think it would be MUCH easier for people to understand the concerns. If everyone is on the same page, it makes it far easier to put this all to rest.

I'm enabling post approval. I want people to be able to communicate but I don't want it to devolve into a completely unproductive flame war. I'm trying to get to the bottom of all of this but my understanding is pretty limited.

I have been made aware that these are contentious bits of software as well. Do not link on this site to where to download them. Do not upload them to your post if that's possible. If you find them here somewhere, report them. You can discuss them. You just can't provide them or links to them here. Why? I was contacted by someone from another site who was given a DMCA notice. It doesn't really make sense that only that site would get a DMCA notice and this one wouldn't. This person even went through our site and provided the relevant links to remove. This WAS NOT the person from the company you're thinking. It was a person from another site who received a DMCA notice giving me a heads up. I have received several hate messages since posting this one. To a certain degree I understand. Do what's best for you. I have to try to do what's best here. Life's decisions aren't always easy.

Edit: To clarify, while legal concerns were raised, we were not directly threatened. They have reached out professionally in the past to express their concerns without any DMCA or legal action. We have worked with them to resolve those issues. Due to ongoing disputes over IP infringement claims, we have decided to attempt to stop all discussion of Xbox HDMI HARD mods on this site. We will not be discriminating based on brand. All discussion is hereby banned in an effort to not be sued. The HDMI mods are really for people trying to build the ultimate modded Xbox. The results yielded by the HDMI mods are very slightly sharper than the component to HDMI converters by reputable brands. They are almost indistinguishable and so are hard to justify for many due to their expense and installation difficulty. If the truth were really told, the installation difficulty is the main reason anyone has them... so they can show off their skills. The quality of the video output simply isn't that much better than component. (These comments are specific to the Original Xbox. Other consoles can actually have a dramatic improvement.) Component to HDMI adapter discussions are allowed. Hard modded adapters that intercept the raw video signals prior to the built-in video encoder discussions are disallowed. The threat of lawsuit against us is that we allegedly choose what can and cannot be published on our site. We are actually protected by law as media and exempt from most litigation due to our First Amendment rights to publish whatever we want as long as we are not directly providing something unlawful. We aren't, but this is also a public forum. We don't have the time to constantly monitor it nor are we attorneys. We don't intend for anything unlawful to be published on this site or to allow it to remain, but we simply can't catch everything and even if we could we do not know what is in compliance with the law and what isn't. Quite frankly, if you're not an attorney, neither do you. I'm referencing section 230 here. Section 230 protects this site from most things third parties (people posting to this board) could expose us to. One thing it doesn't protect us from, are claims of intellectual property theft. I have no idea who owns what intellectually property, who may or may not have used it unlawfully, etc. So, we've had to look at what to do about this. We can't continue in the current state because I cannot afford to be sued simply because I chose to create a site covering a topic I once loved when the main site had gone offline or was about to. So since we have no protection from this specific claim and since there is no clear indication of what is right and what is wrong I have only this one option to protect this site. The only reasonable thing for this site to do is attempt to stop all discussion regarding the HDMI mods creating all of the controversy, the company threatening litigation, the main person behind said company, any products they offer, AND any competitors to those products. I don't know what HDMI HARD mod is legal and what isn't, so the best way to protect this site is to block discussion of all of them. If you can sue us for (passively or unintentionally) allowing certain discussion, then we will attempt to comply and attempt to disallow all of it. There is absolutely no way for us to find every mention of every HDMI device that happened in the past. Please report those if you find them and if they are indeed HDMI HARD mods we will take them out of public view after we see the report. There is a lot of content on here and we can only do so much. -HARD mod means some part of the adapter installation requires the original hardware be modified in some way. HARDware was added to the circuit board somewhere OTHER than a port designed for devices to be plugged into it in order to modify the behavior of the device. Usually this means soldering was required, or traces on the circuit board were cut in order to intercept or redirect certain signals to make that modified behavior possible. -HARD mods vs SOFT mods. Hard mods mean hardware was added. Soft mods mean the mod was achieved via some form of software exploit. Soft mods aren't relevant here, but to understand the term HARD MOD it's important to understand the distinction.

I actually disabled the downloads section. It may be temporary or may be permanent. People sometimes submit content that is against the rules. Normally a mod doesn't approve them and it goes nowhere. Sometimes mistakes are made. I work all the time and don't catch everything. When I get a chance I check and if I find something, I freak out because the very last thing I want to do is break the law. So, I disabled the downloads so I could go through them all and remove anything I find that is questionable. Why? There are other places those things are already hosted. They don't need to be hosted here. Then I asked myself... why have the downloads section at all? If this is why you or anyone has purchased a membership, PM me and we'll discuss our options for cancelling membership.

Lol so it "actually" IS a banned word. NOT because I don't want you to use it. It's because some spam bots were advertising casual encounters, casual hookups, casual meetups, casual ANYTHING and I banned all of the other terms but they kept circumventing those. So, I ended up solving the problem by banning the word casual. So... while I admit it DOES seem ridiculous, it has a purpose. For those of us that CAN post the words, we have paid subscriptions or are mods and can bypass the bad word filters and certain other things. If the spam bots start buying subscriptions I may have to rethink that but for now it needs to stay the way it is.

It was ~20 years ago. I'm afraid I don't remember exactly when it was.

I used a chameleon mod chip... but it shouldn't matter. To give a bit of background, we know that Xbox motherboards were assembled and the TSOP was programmed while in system. That's why the LPC is exposed in the first place. They would boot from lpc and then program the tsop from it. So that's how we knew it was possible. There was some talk about what effect D0 has on the MCPX and why it changes the address the Xbox boots from. It was then discovered that if the TSOP is blank the Xbox will boot from LPC. So MS didn't need to hold D0 low to boot from lpc. So that gave us some hope that if we time it right, we can boot from LPC and flash the TSOP. I knew that if I left the chip on the LPC, even if lifting D0 I would never be confident that I actually flashed the TSOP. I just soldered D0 to the chip's D0 point. (Any ground on the chip will work) Then when I lifted the chip from the lpc pins I knew D0 wasn't grounded and the chip wouldn't be detected/flashed. I tried several different timings. Lifting off too soon would result in FRAG. Lifting too late and the XDK hardware refresh disk just wouldn't flash anything. I timed it just right and it flashed the TSOP(as well as rewrote the hdd. You should probably put an empty one you don't care to overwrite in there for this process.) The only risk on this is putting the chip down on the wrong pins. Make sure you do that right every time and you really can't hurt anything.

Are you saying you moved the jumper while the Xbox was on? I don't understand what "turned the button" means. I'm guessing you're softmodded and you're trying to hot swap hard drives.

It shouldn't theoretically, but most of us have had it happen. It looks like it's working perfectly fine and then suddenly a partition is corrupt. You can format and start over and it happens again. Replace ONLY the stock 40 wire with an 80 wire and the problem goes away. It may not make any sense why it happens, but we know it CAN happen... so why not just take that problem out of the equation? Maybe if someone wants to get to the bottom of "why" we will have our answer, but for me it's so easy to avoid I just throw an 80 wire in and move on. It's like wondering why somebody keeps picking on you. Eventually you realize it makes more sense to just avoid the bully rather than continuing to get your ass beat while you investigate.

Since we know using a 40 wire can cause issues even if things seem to be working for the moment, why even waste your time with a 40 wire? Just use an 80 wire cable and remove those problems from the equation. Why introduce a new point of failure when you do not have to? This type of thinking will just never make sense to me.

What did you lock the hard drive with? You should be able to unlock it. They set known master passwords depending on what you used. Secondly, If you're capable of desoldering a capacitor and soldering in a new one, you're capable of soldering a modchip into the xbox. It's basically the easiest console to hard mod. Do that so you don't need to lock hard drives anymore.

Re-reading this after 3 years and I got a little bit angry. The "they lied to me that this was easy" thing is something I have no tolerance for. You're trying to make this do something it was never designed to do. With anything you may run the risk of having a different experience than everyone else. You work through it or if you're not capable you pay someone else to work through it for you. You don't just rage quit and blame everyone else for your own failure. How depressing!

Just trying to get some specifics on what I should cover. What gaps should I bridge if I do a video tutorial or something?

Ok I just looked for my schematic and a quick search came up empty so let me give you the quick hits. #1. These screens take 12v power in but that IMMEDIATELY runs into a 5v regulator that the rest of the screen runs off of. No matter the size, almost all of these LED backlit PORTABLE LCD's do that. (I'm quite certain a 70+ inch tv will use a higher voltage than that due to many more LED's in series BUT these portable LCD's tend to use 5V.) That is a requirement here since USB is 5V. Trying to run 12v to the screen will be a no-go as you also up the current drawn and you will be forced to compromise the design. Great news though, you don't have to. This was the only part that really took any soldering skill imo. My skills have come a long way since this video was made and now I feel a bit embarrassed by how badly I stressed that point. I still don't think MOST can pull this off, but we're not most here. #2. It's also important to know that usb 1.1 is usually about 500ma or half an amp for max current draw. This combined with required mount strength is why I used two ports as my draw ended up being around .8 amps for the screen. #3 You have to sacrifice the controller port 3 and 4 functionality if you want audio. You can try bluetooth(I did too) but you'll get lag that will make it a fail build. (You CAN make it better and you'll tell yourself the lag doesn't exist, then that it exists but you can live with it, then that it's balls and you've failed and need a better idea. These are the stages of modder grief.) The audio amplifier is installed into the xbox itself because of room (where would you install it if part of your screen?) AND because that puts us over the current limitations. So the USB data lines were cut and used as audio lines. I think L+R+ was port 3 and L-R- was port 4 but you can do what you want there. DO NOT common ground your amplifier returns. I know you think it will be fine. It won't. #4 The yellow wire of either (you only need 1) port will be composite video. If you get noise, you may need to use a scope to find the frequency of the noise and select the appropriate capacitor as a filter. If you route your wires properly though you can pretty well eliminate it as I show in this video. There is none perceptible in this particular build. #5 Ground is common.

There are decades of thermal pastes being used successfully, thus disproving your theory. You're refusing to blame yourself when you are your problem. If your cpu overheated after you applied thermal paste but did not after you used a thermal pad, and they were of similar w/mk ratings then the application was the problem. All you're doing is saying that applying thermal paste is too hard for you. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with that if thermal pads help you. Other people may not need training wheels on their bikes or bumpers at the bowling alley. Don't attempt to disparage them for not struggling with basic tasks or tell them they are "wrong" for being capable people.

"pump out". What? If you had better experience with a thermal pad (idiot proof) than thermal paste of the same or higher w/mk rating then you applied it incorrectly. Saying PTM7950 is "the best option" is like saying wearing a helmet and water wings is "the best way to walk".