On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:50:24AM +0300, Allan Mwenda wrote: > Indeed there is no need for royalties, and the lack of it is worth > advertising and will grab attention. > I also think you should advertise the low power of the standard that's a big > plus.
Which exposes one of the problems that Open Source/Spec/... projects have compared to Closed ones. Things like royalties do provide cash for things like marketing. How about adding to certification a marketing/... 'requirement'? Something about prominence on packaging/web-site/... of EOMA68. This would help the non technical public recognise what they were buying and give confidence that it would work with their existing kit. The cost of this to vendors will be minimal and will not be a barrier to true Open projects. One other thing that would help with this is an 'official' logo that certification would permit use of. Think the USB one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USB_Icon.svg Discuss. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php #include <std_disclaimer.h> _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list [email protected] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to [email protected]
