On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Nils Faerber
nils.faer...@kernelconcepts.de wrote:
Werner Almesberger schrieb:
Nils Faerber wrote:
Wouldn't it be more fruitful to create a project that is only concerned
about providing the best possible tools, hardware and software, for
braking into and
Sean Moss-Pultz wrote:
For sure. When you guys get ready for the first build, I'll find a way
to help. I'm open to donating some parts and time. This is a great
project!
Wonderful, thanks a lot ! Access to parts is probably the single
most important condition for the success of this project.
Nils Faerber wrote:
Wouldn't it be more fruitful to create a project that is only concerned
about providing the best possible tools, hardware and software, for
braking into and reverse engineering existing devices?
There are already a number of projects that do exactly this, such
as OpenEZX
Wang
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/New-Life-in-Openmoko-Phones-tp2934354p2955538.html
Sent from
Great news indeed!
Are there plans to change uSD placeholder?
Every single person I showed my phone to said that it's the most idiotic
(that one of the most calm of used words :) design he\she ever saw.
Personally I completely agree with that - making uSD unaccessible
without disassembling half
Nils Faerber wrote:
I also know from experience that some parts are really nasty to get -
either you do not get them at all or you have to buy large quantaties of
them.
Oh yes. You wouldn't believe just how often we had that sort of thing
happen to Openmoko. I've learned to treat sourcing with
Max wrote:
Are there plans to change uSD placeholder?
No - changing uSD holder isn't part of the GTA02-core plans.
In GTA02-core the intention is that the uSD card contains the full OS
image including kernel. The NAND will only contain QI, and the
expectation is that QI won't need to be
Dave Ball wrote:
Max wrote:
Are there plans to change uSD placeholder?
No - changing uSD holder isn't part of the GTA02-core plans.
In GTA02-core the intention is that the uSD card contains the full OS
image including kernel. The NAND will only contain QI, and the
expectation is that
Am Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2009 schrieb Dave Ball:
No - changing uSD holder isn't part of the GTA02-core plans.
In GTA02-core the intention is that the uSD card contains the full OS
image including kernel. The NAND will only contain QI, and the
expectation is that QI won't need to be
Martin Bernreuther wrote:
One thought is that future phones should include two uSD cards - one
'internal' for OS/kernel etc. and one that is 'removable' for data
storage/exchange - although this is out of scope for GTA02-core.
s/should/could.
Obviously there isn't any commitment to future
If you want any FPGA or CPLD work doing, I will do it.
Been doing this kind of stuff since fuse blown devices with Palasm. (20
years!)
Any glue logic, hardware acceleration, bus interfaces etc.
If anyone has ideas about what we could put in a low powered CPLD/FPGA,
please come forward, will
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 3:35 AM, Werner Almesberger wer...@openmoko.org wrote:
Q3) What is role of OpenMoko organization now? Sell remaining GTA02s?
As far as I know, Openmoko is selling GTA02s and, besides that,
concentrating on the project B. Openmoko is friendly towards the
gta02-core
Nils Faerber nils.faer...@kernelconcepts.de writes:
Wolfgang Spraul schrieb:
Today Openmoko released additional pieces of documentation about
Freerunner hardware: board outline, footprints and netlist.
Same as all other releases before - under Creative Commons Share-Alike
license.
For me, I think you've hit the nail on the head. We're trying something
new with gta02-core, and by working on the small changes we've proposed
we can focus on the tools that we use, the organisation of individual
contributors and the stages we need to go through to get functional
hardware.
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:52:22AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That still doesn't explain why removing one of the two accelerometers is
a good idea. What is the benefit? Why not remove them both?
Is it that all the programs that use the accelerometers (as of now) only
use one of the two?
I
The wiki says:
# Remove one accelerometer and connect both interrupts of the remaining one
Is connecting both interrupts of the remaining one an expected
benefit? Do both current accelerometers only have one interrupt
connected? What does that even mean?
Cheers, Joseph
2009/5/19 Rui Miguel
Nils Faerber wrote:
This would be one of the details I am interested in, i.e. would OpenMoko
Inc. help in making (read as producing) this new design? With its part
stock, manufacturing capabilities, etc.?
Access to components is currently under discussion, yes. There are
at least some
Nils Faerber nils.faer...@kernelconcepts.de writes:
He ;)
Many of the parts in the GTA02 cannot be reasonably placed by hand.
There are almost a dozen (or more?) BGA chips which are extremely hard
to handle (you do not see if the balls match the pads). Then there are
almost microscopic
Ron K. Jeffries wrote:
Q1) So, OpenMoko has not committed to building the 10-20 protos?
No, and Openmoko wasn't actually asked for such a commitment, as
it would not fit with the current focus of Openmoko. If Openmoko
or some other company might be interested at some point in time
to produce
Hi,
On Tue, 19.05.2009 at 17:02:52 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra r...@1407.org
wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:52:22AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That still doesn't explain why removing one of the two accelerometers is
a good idea. What is the benefit? Why not remove them both?
Is
On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 19.05.2009 at 17:02:52 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra r...@1407.org
wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:52:22AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That still doesn't explain why removing one of the two accelerometers
is a good idea. What
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:52:22AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That still doesn't explain why removing one of the two accelerometers is
a good idea. What is the benefit? Why not remove them both?
Is it that all the programs that use the accelerometers (as of now) only
use one of the two?
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 02:11 +0200, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:52:22AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That still doesn't explain why removing one of the two accelerometers is
a good idea. What is the benefit? Why not remove them both?
Is it that all the
GNUtoo wrote:
*will the sound quality be ok(is there a plan to correct the problematic
capacitor that is between the sound card and the audio connector)? and
will it fit into the same case than the GTA02...because if I understood
well the sound problem can't or is too difficult to fix
Hi everybody,
(sorry for the cross-posting, I thought spreading the word about
gta02-core and new stuff from Openmoko was worth it...)
Today Openmoko released additional pieces of documentation about
Freerunner hardware: board outline, footprints and netlist.
Same as all other releases before -
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Gta02-core
sounds interesting.
could someone add background information why parts change?
removing the glamo seems pretty plausible, but why removing one of the
accelerometers? audio amp? nor? ...
___
Openmoko community
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 07:20:13PM +0200, arne anka wrote:
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Gta02-core
sounds interesting.
could someone add background information why parts change?
removing the glamo seems pretty plausible, but why removing one of the
accelerometers? audio amp? nor? ...
I
Hi,
On Tue, 19.05.2009 at 01:01:43 +0800, Wolfgang Spraul wolfg...@openmoko.com
wrote:
(sorry for the cross-posting, I thought spreading the word about
gta02-core and new stuff from Openmoko was worth it...)
much appreciated. I don't understand nor agree to all stated goals,
however. If you
Wolfgang Spraul wrote:
Today Openmoko released additional pieces of documentation about
Freerunner hardware: board outline, footprints and netlist.
This is great. Thanks a lot to you and everyone in Openmoko who has
helped to make this happen !
With these files, we'll be able to make a
2009/5/18 Rui Miguel Silva Seabra r...@1407.org:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 07:20:13PM +0200, arne anka wrote:
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Gta02-core
sounds interesting.
could someone add background information why parts change?
removing the glamo seems pretty plausible, but why removing one
Werner Almesberger wrote:
Wolfgang Spraul wrote:
Today Openmoko released additional pieces of documentation about
Freerunner hardware: board outline, footprints and netlist.
This is great. Thanks a lot to you and everyone in Openmoko who has
helped to make this happen !
Ack -
On Monday 18 May 2009, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
I don't see why to remove one of the accelerometers and have added so to
the Discussion tab.
Is the second accelerometer genuinely useful? IIRC due to the small distance
between the accels it can only be used to measure large angular
David Reyes Samblas Martinez wrote:
2009/5/18 Rui Miguel Silva Seabra r...@1407.org:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 07:20:13PM +0200, arne anka wrote:
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Gta02-core
sounds interesting.
could someone add background information why parts change?
removing
Toni Mueller wrote:
They chose a 100% GPL layout tool, KiCAD
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kicad), which uses only text-based
files
This sounds good, but you seem to require a certain minimum version of
Kicad, right? Checking out from OM and running Lenny's Kicad produced
34 matches
Mail list logo
