Ratatosk

gorski, to avoid any misunderstandings, all my questions and comments on Neutrino (HD) have been meant to refer to the firmware delivered with Coolstream machines — the main and original branch of HD capable Neutrino, it seems, the one primarily documented by the Tuxbox people in their wiki, and often (also by mohousch in your quote) called the "official" Neutrino HD.

A number of secondary branches off of this Neutrino HD evidently also exist. The ones I now know of are Aztrino for AzBox (displayed in the YouTube video earlier linked to by pop_eye), Neutrino MP for "Multiple Platforms", and, thanks to your notice, the Neutrino HD2 of mohousch, which he seems to have originally developed for various SH4-based, otherwise closed, boxes, though he has now apparently also ported it to the open boxes supported by PLi. This is all definitely well worth investigating, not only for its historical interest. (And the pioneer work of mohousch in the area of Neutrino multi-tuner support seems to be beyond question.)

My focus, however, is to find hardware from brands/manufacturers committed to open source and who play well with the open-source community — not only to improve my chances of actually getting a well-working machine, but also because my money might then do some good beyond that.
________________________________________

pop_eye, thanks for clearing that out. So it seems Coolstream is "still in the game" then.

Please, please, don't have my thread killed!    Please do as Frenske suggests.
________________________________________
 
pop_eye,
 

NeutrinoHD (open source) as presumming from the original posting request has not such "open" support as enigma2 receivers.
When I posted about it was hinting that dual, twin, burger combo "open source" support is currently not available.
 
http://www.dbox2worl...n-tuner-source/
 
You will be paying for semi-closed source Neutrino supported zapper.

 
You have got it entirely right that open source is important to me. So if Neutrino HD (for Coolstream) really is semi-closed, as you suggest, that would disqualify it in my eyes.
 
However, from what I now understand, multi-tuner support is a late addition to Neutrino HD. The very first Coolstream box to have it, it seems, is precisely the one I have been considering: the Neo². And the official release date for that box was apparently as late as 16 April 2012 (according to the Tuxbox wiki for instance). So Coolstream would have been under no obligation (under GPL and copyright law) to start distributing multi-tuner source code before that date.
 
(This also, of course, would explain why the AzBox in the YouTube video, from 24th of May 2012, doesn't have the twin-tuner functionality of the Coolstream Neo². Aztrino would have branched from Coolstream Neutrino HD long before that and wouldn't have had time to pick up any Coolstream multi-tuner functionaly, whether or not it's public. Whatever twin-tuner support the AzBox had would have had to be entirely of their own design.)
 
The discussion you are linking to took place in March 2012, still a couple of weeks before the Neo² release date. So I don't find anything particularly remarkable about it.
 
If, on the other hand, they kept the multi-tuner source code closed after the release date (despite the promises posted in that very thread) then we decidedly have an ugly situation. Would that even be possible without breaking GPL and copyright law? But I haven't so far found any indications that they did, and I would have expected some commotion and public debate in that case. (What I have found is talk last year of a move of the Neutrino HD source code repository from SVN to GIT, the idea being that the new code for the Neo² would be made available in the new repository.)
 
One way to check this for sure, I guess, would be to look through the (new GIT) public source code repository for Neutrino HD. Unfortunately I fear I am not competent or clever enough to figure out if the multi-tuner support is really there. Another possibility might be to put the question directly to the Neutrino HD developers (in the DBox2World forum), but I, at least, hesitate to do that without firm indication of foul play.