Hey! Sorry for the delayed response - I'm still here and still reading the posts, and I want to give this a proper response.
> I also need to address some misconceptions I have found out there on > the Internet regarding our work: > https://www.reddit.com/r/ZeroPhone/comments/9rsukp/how_can_the_zerophone_owners_take_advantage_of/ > specifically this paragraph: >> In the future, it's possible they will have an "embedded" modem offering - >> I did read that idea on their mailing list some time ago, though it seems >> to died down in the last half a year (IIRC there was an old chipset- >> compatible Benq modem that could've been a target, but it turned out to >> not be compatible enough). > Here is the situation with those BenQ M32 modems: taking the existing > historical hw that was made by BenQ over a decade ago and trying to > run FreeCalypso on it would be a non-starter, as they use a non-TI > (looks like Silabs maybe) RF section behind our familiar Calypso+Iota > baseband chipset. Instead my idea was different from the beginning: > my idea is to produce our own newly-made modem modules in the same or > similar form factor, but using our choice of chipset including memory > and RF, i.e., take *our* modem as implemented on the FCDEV3B and > repackage it into a form factor copied from that old BenQ modem. Yep, that's what I remember from the ML, so I tried to condense it down into a short answer - sorry if it misrepresents the project in any way, let me know if you want me to make any edits to the message > Right now we have an awesome libre GSM+GPRS modem solution in the form > of our FCDEV3B running fully source-enabled firmware, but the problem > is its size: a whopping 90x50 mm. Meanwhile, our proprietary > competitors very successfully seduce the public into accepting locked- > down and backdoored proprietary solutions with their sleek small > packages: for example, the popular SIM800 module is only 24x24 mm. Even smaller - the SIM800L we use is 16x18mm. > I don't think we can ever make our FreeCalypso solution as small as > 24x24 mm: [...explanation...possible solutions...] > As the situation stands presently, I believe that the > shortest way to put a FreeCalypso phone into the hands of an end user > would be to make a hacked-up version of the ZeroPhone with our current > 90x50 mm modem board (FCDEV3B) hacked in. That's what I think, too. the 30mm*30mm project you've described is quite an undertaking, and 2G is running away at the speed of, well, planned obsolescence. > As I understand it, the main "sandwich" structure of the ZP has 4x10 cm > overall dimensions and is very tightly packed. Trying to squeeze our > FCDEV3B somewhere in there would involve two problems: our board is a > centimeter wider than the main ZP sandwich, and there is no designated > place in that structure to fit an "alien" board like ours. > But here > is what I am thinking: if you are going to use your ZeroPhone as an > actual carry-around phone, you will need to make some custom case for > it, right? You are not going to try to carry a complete bare board > stack of the ZP in your pocket, are you? Yes and yes. > If a custom case is required, > perhaps someone who desires a Libre Phone badly enough would be willing > to build a custom case that accommodates both the regular ZP sandwich > and an FCDEV3B underneath? That's what I was thinking, too. For example, it's not unimaginable that someone could start with this: http://meetthebrick.com/eu/ > In order to increase the chance of someone stepping up to do what I > just suggested above, I plan on doing the following: if the first > batch of 8 FCDEV3B V2 boards which is supposed to be done in January > turns out good, with all 8 boards (or least most of them) working, I > am going to offer one fully subsidized board completely free of cost > to the recipient (with the actual production cost of about $500 > covered by me) to anyone who steps forth to couple it with a ZeroPhone, > and who would be willing to commit to aggressively promoting the > resulting solution in various "free my phone" communities, spreading > awareness of the existence, availability and viability of this > solution. From my side, I offer a fully-assembled ZeroPhone, with any hardware addons that could aid in the development of such a project. > Hasta la Victoria, Siempre, > Mychaela aka The Mother Cheers, Arsenijs 10.12.2018, 02:05, "Mychaela Falconia" <mychaela.falco...@gmail.com>: > Hello FreeCalypso community, > > This is a periodic update to keep everyone in the loop as to what I am > doing with regard to our family of projects and what my planned > upcoming steps are. > > 1) The first development which is expected to happen before all others > is that about a month from now, in early to mid-January, we should be > getting our first assembled FCDEV3B V2 boards from Technotronix, and > it will be a moment of truth: will they work as expected? If the > boards work as expected, I am going to make a few minor improvements > to the firmware regarding sleep mode handling (hw with working sleep > is a prerequisite for these minor fw changes), and I will start > sending out subsidized boards to those FreeCalypso supporters who > deserve them. The boards will also become available to commercial > customers at the same time. > > 2) Assuming that the previous milestone happens without problems, my > next step will be my long-planned experiment of connecting Calypso MCSI > from our board to an off-the-shelf OMAP board (BeagleBoard-xM) by way > of a small custom adapter which I still need to make. There are two > fundamental ways in which a GSM modem can bring out the voice audio > interface, analog or digital, some applications use or desire modems > with analog voice interfaces (example: ZeroPhone), others use or > desire modems with digital voice interfaces (examples: Neo900, other > "modern" smartphone designs like Librem 5, and various GSM gateway > applications), hence we need to offer both options. The GSM solution > we've inherited from TI supports analog voice audio as its native way, > whereas adding a digital voice interface option is a job they left for > us to do. There are two entirely different ways in which one could > bring out digital voice from a Calypso+Iota modem: one way is via MCSI, > the other way is by tapping into VSP. MCSI is already brought out on > our current FCDEV3B hardware, whereas playing with VSP would require > taking the cost hit and adding the time delay of yet another board > spin (quantitatively speaking, many thousands of dollars plus many > months of time delay), hence I am going to make an all-out effort to > get digital voice over MCSI working. But in order to test MCSI, I > need to connect it to something, the McBSP on OMAP on the BeageBoard > is the most practical thing I could find to which I can connect our > MCSI for testing, but there is still that hurdle of having to make a > little custom adapter. > > I also need to address some misconceptions I have found out there on > the Internet regarding our work: > > https://www.reddit.com/r/ZeroPhone/comments/9rsukp/how_can_the_zerophone_owners_take_advantage_of/ > > specifically this paragraph: > >> In the future, it's possible they will have an "embedded" modem offering - >> I did read that idea on their mailing list some time ago, though it seems >> to died down in the last half a year (IIRC there was an old chipset- >> compatible Benq modem that could've been a target, but it turned out to >> not be compatible enough). > > Here is the situation with those BenQ M32 modems: taking the existing > historical hw that was made by BenQ over a decade ago and trying to > run FreeCalypso on it would be a non-starter, as they use a non-TI > (looks like Silabs maybe) RF section behind our familiar Calypso+Iota > baseband chipset. Instead my idea was different from the beginning: > my idea is to produce our own newly-made modem modules in the same or > similar form factor, but using our choice of chipset including memory > and RF, i.e., take *our* modem as implemented on the FCDEV3B and > repackage it into a form factor copied from that old BenQ modem. > > Why do it, what is the rationale? The answer is that in electronics, > size matters, it matters a lot, but in the opposite way from how > humans tend to think of it: the general dictum in the electronics > industry is the smaller, the better. The imperative is to make all of > our electronic components as small as possible; components of large > bulky size are obstacles. > > Right now we have an awesome libre GSM+GPRS modem solution in the form > of our FCDEV3B running fully source-enabled firmware, but the problem > is its size: a whopping 90x50 mm. Meanwhile, our proprietary > competitors very successfully seduce the public into accepting locked- > down and backdoored proprietary solutions with their sleek small > packages: for example, the popular SIM800 module is only 24x24 mm. > > I don't think we can ever make our FreeCalypso solution as small as > 24x24 mm: SimCom were able to do it because they use much newer chips > from MTK which are much more integrated (fewer discrete components), > but the available documentation for these newer MTK chips is hopelessly > inferior compared to what we got for our TI chipset, and in the case > of MTK's reference fw for their chips, almost all of the interesting > bits are binary-only, nothing like the quality of source leaks we got > from TI. If anyone is thinking about taking our FreeCalypso fw and > porting it to an MTK chip, what are you going to do with L1? Our L1 > talks to TI's Calypso DSP, and you would need to replace it with a > very different L1 that talks to MTK's very different DSP. But there > is absolutely zero documentation for that DSP or the interface to it; > in the case of TI chipsets we don't have any real documentation for > this part either, but we got TI's L1 code in full source form, whereas > MTK's counterpart is a solid binary blob. > > But there is one possible compromise: we *can* make a FreeCalypso > modem module that isn't as small as the MTK-based SIM800, but still a > lot smaller than our current 90x50 mm: if we repackage our FreeCalypso > Modem Solution into a form factor copied from BenQ's old M32 module, > we will measure 33.8x36.8 mm. However, before we seriously pursue > this idea, two prerequisites have to happen first: > > 1) We need to get our FCDEV3B V2 boards working and thereby prove that > my approach for satisfying the reset timing requirements of Spansion > flash chips actually works. If this approach turns out to not work, > we have plenty of other alternatives, the simplest being to use one of > the smaller flash+RAM chips which work fine with TI's classic approach > - the huge flash and RAM capacity on our FCDEV3B is only needed for > development and can easily be downsized in a production modem - but it > would be much more comfortable to know for sure if our FCDEV3B V2 > approach works or not before jumping to any decisions. Just one more > month of waiting left. > > 2) We need to come to a resolution on the digital voice issue before > we start seriously thinking about the embedded modem module idea. > Such a module would absolutely need to provide both analog and digital > voice interface options - omitting either of them would be completely > unacceptable. Fortunately no extra components will need to be added > inside the module for either interface, it is only a matter of bringing > out the right pins from the existing chips of our core modem chipset. > For the analog voice interface we need to bring out EARN&EARP and > MICIN&MICIP from the Iota ABB (and optionally the other less important > analog signals from the same Iota ABB that were brought out on BenQ's > module, if we are going to be copying their pinout with only minor > changes), whereas for the digital voice interface we will need to > decide between MCSI vs. VSP tap. MCSI is 4 signals, whereas my idea > of tapping VSP would involve 5 signals. The decision will be pinned > on the outcome of my MCSI-to-BeagleBoard experiment: if we can get > MCSI to work reliably, it would make the most sense in terms of cost > reduction to go into the embedded module phase with this MCSI approach, > otherwise we would have to do another very slow and expensive > development board spin with the VSP tap before we can come back to the > embedded module idea - which is why I am pursuing the MCSI approach so > vigorously. > > And then, after we resolve the two points above (hopefully in 2019Q1), > comes the most unpleasant part of all: cost. Arsenijs wrote in that > Reddit comment: > >> Maybe if someone throws enough money at Mychaela, we'll have something >> small enough to fit inside the ZP =) > > As far as fitting inside the ZeroPhone, I remember you saying somewhere > that it would have to fit within 24x24 mm or something similar to that > - if your space constraints are that tight, then even my proposed > 33.6x36.8 mm module wouldn't be good enough for you. However, for > those who do like my 33.8x36.8 mm module idea, let me give you the > cost figures: my estimate for the total project cost from the start to > the point of having the first batch of modules produced and brought up > to fully working state is about 30 kUSD. The following major cost > steps will be involved: > > * Sending a sacrificial BenQ M32 module to a professional PCB reverser > to slice it and image its inner layers - I will need to have a good > idea of BenQ's layout before starting our own module layout using a > similar (but not identical) chipset in the same form factor following > the same floorplan or with only minor changes. > > * Finding and hiring a GSM cellphone RF design expert to provide some > vital advice and guidance for some parts in our new RF section. > Copying the RF section verbatim from BenQ won't work because we need > to use TI's Rita transceiver (the one for which we have documentation > and firmware driver code), and copying it verbatim from our current > FCDEV3B (originally from Openmoko) won't work either because we would > need a very different floorplan (one like BenQ's) to fit into that > module form factor - hence we would have to bite the bullet and do our > own RF layout. There is a little bit of silver lining though: because > BenQ's floorplan matches TI's Leonardo, we should be able to make our > new modem module quadband - in contrast, both our FCDEV3B and BenQ's > original are triband. But there is no way to bypass the requirement > of finding and hiring a GSM cellphone RF design expert. > > * After we get the key bits of advice and specific RF layout > instructions from the to-be-hired GSM RF expert, we would need to hire > someone to do the main bulk of the PCB layout job. Such PCB layout > labor does not come cheap, and I would not feel comfortable entrusting > this job to anyone other than my established PCB layout contractor > with whom I have a good working relationship. > > * Once we have the PCB layout done for our new module, simply getting > those module PCBs made and populated won't be enough - we will also > need to design and build a special test fixture (a test board with a > special custom-made spring socket for the modem modules to go into) > for bring-up and RF calibration. > > Summing up all of the above is how I arrive at my rough order-of- > magnitude estimate of about 30 kUSD for the whole venture. Needless > to say, I am not in any position to cover such a cost myself, thus > unless we get some sponsor or investor for it, this whole idea will > forever remain nothing but a pipe dream. > > In the absence of a sponsor or investor giving us 30 kUSD to produce a > modem module in this proposed 33.8x36.8 mm form factor, what can we do > on our own? As the situation stands presently, I believe that the > shortest way to put a FreeCalypso phone into the hands of an end user > would be to make a hacked-up version of the ZeroPhone with our current > 90x50 mm modem board (FCDEV3B) hacked in. > > As I understand it, the main "sandwich" structure of the ZP has 4x10 cm > overall dimensions and is very tightly packed. Trying to squeeze our > FCDEV3B somewhere in there would involve two problems: our board is a > centimeter wider than the main ZP sandwich, and there is no designated > place in that structure to fit an "alien" board like ours. But here > is what I am thinking: if you are going to use your ZeroPhone as an > actual carry-around phone, you will need to make some custom case for > it, right? You are not going to try to carry a complete bare board > stack of the ZP in your pocket, are you? If a custom case is required, > perhaps someone who desires a Libre Phone badly enough would be willing > to build a custom case that accommodates both the regular ZP sandwich > and an FCDEV3B underneath? > > In order to increase the chance of someone stepping up to do what I > just suggested above, I plan on doing the following: if the first > batch of 8 FCDEV3B V2 boards which is supposed to be done in January > turns out good, with all 8 boards (or least most of them) working, I > am going to offer one fully subsidized board completely free of cost > to the recipient (with the actual production cost of about $500 > covered by me) to anyone who steps forth to couple it with a ZeroPhone, > and who would be willing to commit to aggressively promoting the > resulting solution in various "free my phone" communities, spreading > awareness of the existence, availability and viability of this > solution. > > Finally, it would be rightful to ask why do we need a ZeroPhone or > similar component in the first place, why can't we produce a complete > FreeCalypso end user phone (a libre dumbphone) entirely on our own, > without putting ourselves at the mercy of other people and their > capriciousness? The answer is that we very much *can* produce our own > complete FreeCalypso phone handset, and that idea is still very much > in the plans, but it will be a very very slow journey, which is why I > believe that the ZeroPhone approach would be much faster *if* we can > get someone to do it. For those who are interested in the Calypso-only > handset idea (no pies or other application processors), my current > estimate of the timeline looks like this: > > * Absolutely nothing at all will happen between now and the big day in > January when I get our first FCDEV3B V2 boards; > > * I will probably spend January fully testing these boards and getting > our firmware and documentation updated for the new state of the project; > > * The rest of 2019Q1 and possibly going into 2019Q2 will be spent > experimenting with MCSI and getting digital voice to work, using a > BeagleBoard-xM for the other end of the interface. > > * Once I get MCSI fully working, I will need to spend more time and > effort on documentation updates and aggressive marketing, spreading > awareness of our fully complete modem solution and trying to find a > sponsor or investor for my 33.8x36.8 mm modem module idea. This work > will probably go till the end of 2019Q2. > > * Unless a miracle happens and I find someone to fund my modem module > idea, in 2019Q3 I will finally switch my attention to the FreeCalypso > handset project. I will then start working on some preliminaries for > that project, but don't expect anything fast - it will probably be > another year or two from that point before we will have our first > prototype of my desired handset motherboard. > > Needless to say, all of these timelines can be sped up by at least an > order of magnitude if someone were to throw a lot of money at me, as > Arsenijs put it in his Reddit comment. But in order to *really* speed > up the timelines, it would need to be a *frigging lot* of money, even > more than the ~30 kUSD cost of the modem module idea, hence I am not > holding my breath. > > Hasta la Victoria, Siempre, > Mychaela aka The Mother > _______________________________________________ > Community mailing list > Community@freecalypso.org > https://www.freecalypso.org/mailman/listinfo/community _______________________________________________ Community mailing list Community@freecalypso.org https://www.freecalypso.org/mailman/listinfo/community