Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On 10/09/2013 08:10 PM, Bob Ham wrote: On Sun, 2013-10-06 at 08:42 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: 1. you are talking about "open SOURCE hardware" (which I call "free hardware") No. I've explicitly refrained from distinguishing between such labels because I'm aware that they are not as well defined in the domain of hardware as they are in the domain of software. As far as I have been able to tell, you have been arguing the entire time from the position that the terms *are* well defined, and that therefore the project should be using those definitions. Now you are suddenly saying that the terms *aren't* well defined, which is a contradiction of that position. This appears to me to be either an admission that your position is incorrect, or an admission that you are being hypocritical (like you accused Nikolaus of being). (Note also that you just admitted that you can't use arguments from the software domain, since you said that it has different definitions of the terms than the hardware domain does (even if they're similar). This holds even if you argue that the "as" in "as well" is important.) On 10/09/2013 08:23 PM, Bob Ham wrote: And the next day, when you've found an old definition that accords with your view, suddenly that one definition would have obviated any discussion. I understood that as being not because *he* needed such a definition to follow, but because it appears that *you* do. Basically, that you apparently want everybody to follow a known definition, and this shows that they are - which could have saved us a lot of this thread (assuming you accepted the definition as a valid one, and aren't arguing just to argue). (Disclaimer: I haven't actually read that definition (yet), just going by what I've seen in this thread.) I also don't really see the contradiction you claim is present in the out-of-context snippets you posted, but that might just be me. -- Regards, Frode Austvik ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
# settrans r...@settrans.net -f -R -S Or, The thread is very interesting, but it seems that's Bob will never change is point of view. Nicolas is open to discussion, and is also working on the Gta project, I don't think that Bob is ready to do one step forward before having all the spec, plans, pdfs, cad files in the format he want, and working on the projects, just telling is point of view by mail. But before winning the "Godwin point" in this thread, perhaps the best solution is to organise a face to face meeting between Bob and Nikolaus to discuss. A mail thread is never a discussion, but the explanation of points of view. Crownfunding a meeting between Bob and Nikolaus can be a solution? Maelvon HAWK ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
I'm sorry to interrupt, but this is getting extremely boring and totally off-topic. For a week or more the same things are repeated again and again for no reason. This leads nowhere. I would kindly ask you to continue in private, if you want to philosophize about linguistics and etymology. Let us keep this mailing list technical, please. Thank you, Balint On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:23:31 + Bob Ham wrote: > On Sun, 2013-10-06 at 08:48 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > > PS: I have found an old definition of "Open Hardware" from 1999. > > IMHO well thought and interesting to read... > > > > http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/definitions.html > > http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/ > > > > If we had known this before, we could have saved this long flamewar. > > I find this extraordinarily hypocritical. One day you say this: > > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 20:52 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > > And, please give me the officially approved definition of "Open > > Hardware" by ISO or some other official standardization body. If > > that exists, I will follow it. Otherwise there are several personal > > definitions. > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 22:00 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > And I claim the right to have another idea. We are not in "1984". > > > It now looks to me as some group of people tries to capture the term > > "open hardware" (althoug they mean "free hardware") and that is > > something we have to fight against - in the name of freedom... > > > > Well, then the open hardware movement you are representing isn't > > open to other opinions and definitions (e.g. difference between > > "open" and "free"). > > > > Sorry, but in summary your argumentations looks quite like a > > dictatorship to me and not an area of freedom (hiding behind the > > word "open"). > > > And the next day, when you've found an old definition that accords > with your view, suddenly that one definition would have obviated any > discussion. > > ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Wed 09 October 2013 20:47:01 Fernando Martins wrote: > It is laudable to have more hardware open and it would be "nice" if > goldelico would release the schematics in source. But I don't see them > has having such obligation neither I see any inconsistence in their > actions or words. Goldelico has certainly contributed to the cause of > open hardware and you are merely trying to put shame on them by > rhetorical manipulation to force them to do something they obviously > don't have to. It is your actions I don't find laudable. ANd causing a > lot of wasted energy. +1 thanks! /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On 10/09/2013 08:23 PM, Bob Ham wrote: And the next day, when you've found an old definition that accords with your view, suddenly that one definition would have obviated any discussion. The meaning of the words are defined by the communities that use it and different communities can have different understandings. And license definitions don't mean much until people in general have accepted it. You are merely trying to impose your interpretation on other people. For me, the meaning of open hardware was defined by the introduction of the IBM PC (which did not include open source schematics). This is the meaning I know about and I believe it is still the reference most people have. It is laudable to have more hardware open and it would be "nice" if goldelico would release the schematics in source. But I don't see them has having such obligation neither I see any inconsistence in their actions or words. Goldelico has certainly contributed to the cause of open hardware and you are merely trying to put shame on them by rhetorical manipulation to force them to do something they obviously don't have to. It is your actions I don't find laudable. ANd causing a lot of wasted energy. Fernando Martins ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sun, 2013-10-06 at 08:48 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > PS: I have found an old definition of "Open Hardware" from 1999. > IMHO well thought and interesting to read... > > http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/definitions.html > http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/ > > If we had known this before, we could have saved this long flamewar. I find this extraordinarily hypocritical. One day you say this: On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 20:52 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > And, please give me the officially approved definition of "Open Hardware" > by ISO or some other official standardization body. If that exists, I will > follow it. > Otherwise there are several personal definitions. On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 22:00 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > And I claim the right to have another idea. We are not in "1984". > It now looks to me as some group of people tries to capture the term > "open hardware" (althoug they mean "free hardware") and that is > something we have to fight against - in the name of freedom... > Well, then the open hardware movement you are representing isn't open > to other opinions and definitions (e.g. difference between "open" and "free"). > > Sorry, but in summary your argumentations looks quite like a dictatorship > to me and not an area of freedom (hiding behind the word "open"). And the next day, when you've found an old definition that accords with your view, suddenly that one definition would have obviated any discussion. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sun, 2013-10-06 at 08:42 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Can you agree on the following? > > 1. you are talking about "open SOURCE hardware" (which I call "free hardware") No. I've explicitly refrained from distinguishing between such labels because I'm aware that they are not as well defined in the domain of hardware as they are in the domain of software. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 06.10.2013 um 08:42 schrieb Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller: > Hi Bob, > > Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: > >> On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> >>> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are >>> "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. >> >> That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: >> >> "Open Hardware Devices. >> >> Letux 2804 / GTA04 Smartphone" >> >> http://www.openphoenux.org/ > > Am 05.10.2013 um 20:10 schrieb Martin Jansa: > >> Using "open-hardware-but-without-CAD-files" is maybe less misleading for >> people who has great understanding of all free/open definitions used in >> the world (and wikipedia), but also more misleading for "normal" people. > > Can you agree on the following? > > 1. you are talking about "open SOURCE hardware" (which I call "free hardware") > >http://www.ohanda.org/ = "Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance" > > 2. OpenPhoenux was and is never claiming to be open SOURCE hardware >(like Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, RasPi [1], ... never did) > > And some organizations fostering open SOURCE hardware and free hardware > are falsely recognized (e.g. by media) to cover ANY open hardware? > > -- hns > > [1]: http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=45583&p=360559 PS: I have found an old definition of "Open Hardware" from 1999. IMHO well thought and interesting to read... http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/definitions.html http://www.opencollector.org/Whyfree/ If we had known this before, we could have saved this long flamewar. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hi Bob, Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > >> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are >> "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. > > That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: > > "Open Hardware Devices. > > Letux 2804 / GTA04 Smartphone" > > http://www.openphoenux.org/ Am 05.10.2013 um 20:10 schrieb Martin Jansa: > Using "open-hardware-but-without-CAD-files" is maybe less misleading for > people who has great understanding of all free/open definitions used in > the world (and wikipedia), but also more misleading for "normal" people. Can you agree on the following? 1. you are talking about "open SOURCE hardware" (which I call "free hardware") http://www.ohanda.org/ = "Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance" 2. OpenPhoenux was and is never claiming to be open SOURCE hardware (like Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, RasPi [1], ... never did) And some organizations fostering open SOURCE hardware and free hardware are falsely recognized (e.g. by media) to cover ANY open hardware? -- hns [1]: http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=45583&p=360559 ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 21:51 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > Nikolaus denies access to the source files for his hardware. > No, he does not. I disagree. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat 05 October 2013 21:03:44 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > But none of them is building modular devices. I wonder why. > > For the same reason they don't make their hardware open, for the same > reason they don't make their software Free, for the same reason they > don't want you to have root access on your phone. > > > Stefan Nonsense, read very enlightening post of Ian Sterling (Hi speedevil! :-D) somewhere in this thread! /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 21:05 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 20:10 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 05:37:59PM +, Bob Ham wrote: > >>> I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. You seem to >>> be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open >>> hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore >>> this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because >>> it accords with your own personal definition. >> >> I'm sorry but I think you're doing the same, just from the other side. >> >> From this thread it's clear that different people understand "open >> hardware" differently, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong or >> dishonest. > > I disagree. I've quoted a number of different bodies on their idea of > what constitutes open hardware and they all concur. And I claim the right to have another idea. We are not in "1984". > > Meanwhile: > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> And for me any printout that I can read is open source. > > Nikolaus goes by his own definitions, regardless of what is generally > accepted. I have never been asked to "accept" such a definition as binding. And probably nobody else. So it is not "generally accepted". Rather there are some organizations that called themselves "open hardware something". And are pushing forward "Freedoms". And members and supporters of that organizations have of course accepted their definitions. But can they define what "open hardware" is? They can define it for themselves. And let me ask: which organization are you representing in this discussion? Or are you talking as a private person? > We've even got people making up their own meaningless > phrases: > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: >> In my dictionary, it's definitely free platform. > > The way I see it, on one hand there is a bunch of individuals on a > mailing list with their own ideas about what the phrase "open hardware" > should refer to, and on the other hand there are a number of > well-organised bodies with clear definitions which are not only in > accord with each other but with (1) the open hardware community that I > know and (2) the principles of the free software movement and the open > source community, the progenitors of those bodies. > > == >> "open hardware" isn't AFAIK any registered "sticker" or "trade mark" >> with clearly defined meaning, so it's pity that different people >> associate it with different meanings/freedoms, but that's not their >> fault. > > The people here seem to have their own meanings. Everybody else seems > to have a pretty consistent idea about what constitutes "open hardware". Please send me a list of "everybody else". And don't forget: even the majority may be wrong... I think here on this list we have a quite long track record of experiences with these topics. Maybe one of the longest. > You're right though, there is no trade mark. I would hope that by > clearly demonstrating how Nikolaus's ideas conflict with the basic ideas > of the open hardware community, he will respect the fact that there is > an incompatibility and refrain from misrepresenting his product. It now looks to me as some group of people tries to capture the term "open hardware" (althoug they mean "free hardware") and that is something we have to fight against - in the name of freedom... > > > == >> Your "source code" citations from licenses are nice, but license text is >> the right place where you should find definition of what's meant by term >> "source code" > > The quotations from license are there as evidence of the principles of > the free software movement and the open source community. Licenses are > explicit manifestations of the ideas and motivations behind these > groups. If you want to find out what the open source community or the > free software movement believes, the licenses they create are the place > to go. > > What we see when look at those expressions of principles is a common > theme of requiring source code to be in the preferred form for making > modifications. This idea has been inherited by the open hardware > community. The inheritance is expressed in the Open Source Hardware > Definition and elsewhere. Again you are mixing Open and Free. Please make yourself familiar with the distinction. Hint: I can "open" my "closed" book without any license. But I need a licence to guarantee a CopyLeft. I.e. closed - open is a description of the ability to get information closed/open - free is a licence definition > To me, those people who disagree are not part of the open hardware > community. Haha. It is quite easy to denounce and ban those with a different opinion (1984 again?). > They're part of some other community which does not share > the principles of the open design movement. Please, please start to make the distinction between Free and Open!
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 07:05:10PM +, Bob Ham wrote: > > Your accusations sounds like if Nikolaus is using OHANDA clearly defined > > label without fulfilling requirements defined by OHANDA. > > Well, I'm not sure how you get that impression. It's not like it's a > matter of adherence to a collection of finely detailed criteria. In source code repository you also need to explicitly say which license is applied and only after that you're obliged to follow selected license rules. If wiki page related to the project says that the code is "free" or "open" then it doesn't automatically mean that it's GPL-2.0 or any other open license - so you don't have detailed criteria if that project can say that it's "free" or "open" on their own page. We're not talking about license text delivered with gta04, we're talking about home page of project which is trying to attract normal people (who maybe never heard about floss). > Nikolaus denies access to the source files for his hardware. It's not a > subtle conflict. It flies in the face of the open hardware movement. > To be honest, I'm dumbfounded that there can be any confusion over it. No, he does not. You cannot download them in format most convenient for you, but that doesn't mean it's not "open hardware" (without any footnote that OHANDA or any other official terminology is used) -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On 05/10/13 18:37, Bob Ham wrote: > 'Access to the *complete* design is precondition to this' > http://www.ohanda.org/ (My emphasis) Long time has passed since I post to this list. Dearest all, "open" software is something quite easy do define - it's written in common languages, so that it's purpose, function and behavior is pretty much easy to replicate. The "openness" refers to what the author wanted - he wanted *that piece of design* to be able to be used elsewhere, with or without some associated constraints. Hardware is a bit different, unfortunately, if you don't actually focus on the "scope" of the openness. It is not possible to actually design an hardware apparatus, such as the complex ones we're dealing with, and fully open all of the design. Objectively speaking, a fully open hardware design would imply all of the hardware components to be open. This means all of the design components (including the chemical components used for all of the process) would be disclosed. This is not feasible, is it ? An open source windows application uses components which are not open, and whose behavior is sometimes not fully understood. Does that make that specific piece of software less open ? An hardware design is open, as far as all of the design that actually can be made open is indeed open - as specified by the developers of that hardware part (schematics, so on). If I draw a diagram connecting two components whose purpose and functional specifications were made available to me by means of some NDA, that does not make my diagram less open - I just cannot disclose the information regarding some of the components on it (like there is no full information on the Windows API). And please, please, don't throw GPL/Apache and such as examples of open source. They impose several restrictions on what can be done with the design, rendering them less open than some of their counterparts (like BSD). Best, Alvie ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
> But none of them is building modular devices. I wonder why. For the same reason they don't make their hardware open, for the same reason they don't make their software Free, for the same reason they don't want you to have root access on your phone. Stefan ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 20:10 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 05:37:59PM +, Bob Ham wrote: > > I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. You seem to > > be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open > > hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore > > this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because > > it accords with your own personal definition. > > I'm sorry but I think you're doing the same, just from the other side. > > From this thread it's clear that different people understand "open > hardware" differently, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong or > dishonest. I disagree. I've quoted a number of different bodies on their idea of what constitutes open hardware and they all concur. Meanwhile: On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > And for me any printout that I can read is open source. Nikolaus goes by his own definitions, regardless of what is generally accepted. We've even got people making up their own meaningless phrases: On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > In my dictionary, it's definitely free platform. The way I see it, on one hand there is a bunch of individuals on a mailing list with their own ideas about what the phrase "open hardware" should refer to, and on the other hand there are a number of well-organised bodies with clear definitions which are not only in accord with each other but with (1) the open hardware community that I know and (2) the principles of the free software movement and the open source community, the progenitors of those bodies. == > "open hardware" isn't AFAIK any registered "sticker" or "trade mark" > with clearly defined meaning, so it's pity that different people > associate it with different meanings/freedoms, but that's not their > fault. The people here seem to have their own meanings. Everybody else seems to have a pretty consistent idea about what constitutes "open hardware". You're right though, there is no trade mark. I would hope that by clearly demonstrating how Nikolaus's ideas conflict with the basic ideas of the open hardware community, he will respect the fact that there is an incompatibility and refrain from misrepresenting his product. == > Your "source code" citations from licenses are nice, but license text is > the right place where you should find definition of what's meant by term > "source code" The quotations from license are there as evidence of the principles of the free software movement and the open source community. Licenses are explicit manifestations of the ideas and motivations behind these groups. If you want to find out what the open source community or the free software movement believes, the licenses they create are the place to go. What we see when look at those expressions of principles is a common theme of requiring source code to be in the preferred form for making modifications. This idea has been inherited by the open hardware community. The inheritance is expressed in the Open Source Hardware Definition and elsewhere. To me, those people who disagree are not part of the open hardware community. They're part of some other community which does not share the principles of the open design movement. And in fact, Nikolaus admits as much: On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 09:11 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > I simply don't believe in the "Free Hardware" ideology. == > Your accusations sounds like if Nikolaus is using OHANDA clearly defined > label without fulfilling requirements defined by OHANDA. Well, I'm not sure how you get that impression. It's not like it's a matter of adherence to a collection of finely detailed criteria. Nikolaus denies access to the source files for his hardware. It's not a subtle conflict. It flies in the face of the open hardware movement. To be honest, I'm dumbfounded that there can be any confusion over it. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 20:10 schrieb Martin Jansa: > On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 05:37:59PM +, Bob Ham wrote: >> On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 17:17 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>> Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: >>> On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are > "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: >> You're also contradicting your own previous statements: >> This admission makes your announcement here seem deceitful: >> >>> Hm, I wonder what you want to prove? >> >> I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. You seem to >> be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open >> hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore >> this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because >> it accords with your own personal definition. > > I'm sorry but I think you're doing the same, just from the other side. > > From this thread it's clear that different people understand "open > hardware" differently, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong or > dishonest. > > "open hardware" isn't AFAIK any registered "sticker" or "trade mark" > with clearly defined meaning, so it's pity that different people > associate it with different meanings/freedoms, but that's not their > fault. ++ > Your "source code" citations from licenses are nice, but license text is > the right place where you should find definition of what's meant by term > "source code", OpenPhoenux page doesn't say that it's using terminilogy > from ohanda or oshwa. ++ and not from GPL or BSD or MIT licenses etc. We use CC and it defines: "THE WORK (AS DEFINED BELOW) IS PROVIDED UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS CREATIVE COMMONS PUBLIC LICENSE ("CCPL" OR "LICENSE")." "Work" means the literary and/or artistic work offered under the terms of this License including without limitation any production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain, whatever may be the mode or form of its expression including digital form, such as a book, pamphlet and other writing; a lecture, address, sermon or other work of the same nature; a dramatic or dramatico-musical work; ..." I.e. paper is explicitly included and all forms of its expression. > "open hardware" is imho closest term you can use to describe advantage > of gta04 for other people asking why you don't use cheaper android phone > or why they should buy gta04. or even more closed buy an iPhone or Lumia... > Using "open-hardware-but-without-CAD-files" is maybe less misleading for > people who has great understanding of all free/open definitions used in > the world (and wikipedia), but also more misleading for "normal" people. > > Your accusations sounds like if Nikolaus is using OHANDA clearly defined > label without fulfilling requirements defined by OHANDA. ++ this confirms my own answer (was written before reading yours). Tnx -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 19:37 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 17:17 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: >> >>> On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. >>> >>> That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: > >>> You're also contradicting your own previous statements: > >>> This admission makes your announcement here seem deceitful: > >> Hm, I wonder what you want to prove? > > I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. Ah, you are an "idelogic activist". I should have taken that into account from the beginning of any discussion. Because prefer to discuss with common sense and not needing to weigh one's words ... > You seem to > be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open > hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore > this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because > it accords with your own personal definition. Did you consider the option that all others may be wrong? And, please give me the officially approved definition of "Open Hardware" by ISO or some other official standardization body. If that exists, I will follow it. Otherwise there are several personal definitions. > I want to make it undeniably clear that describing the GTA04 as "open > hardware" is wrong. This is your personal opinion. I only agree that it is not "Free Hardware". And since it is obviously not closed hardware (like an iPhone, Lumia etc.) it follows from logic that it must be "open hardware". > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> If I remember there was a printout of the ssl code on paper, exported as a >> book >> from the US and then typed in again by volunteers to found openssl. >> >> Was it non.open source? > > It was not open source. > This issue has been discussed previously. The > source must be in the form customarily used for making modifications to > it. This is an important factor. Why? I see the distinction between closed and open not in the convenience of sharing information. > > From the GNU GPL 2: > > 'The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for > making modifications to it' preferred != required > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html > > From the Apache License 2.0: > > '"Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications' > https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html preferred != required > > From the MPL 2.0: > > '“Source Code Form” means the form of the work preferred for making > modifications.' > https://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/ preferred != required > > From the CDDL 1.0: > > '“Source Code” means (a) the common form of computer software code in > which modifications are made and (b) associated documentation included > in or with such code.' > http://web.archive.org/web/20090305064954/http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html The common form of Schematics is a piece of paper with lines, circles and arcs. > If a software company refused access to their software's source code in > electronic text form and only released it in paper form (or in the form > of a bitmap image inside a PDF), that software would not be considered > "open source". The phrase that seems most appropriate for such > software, I think, would be "encumbered source". > > > Wikipedia gives a fair description of open(/free) hardware: > > 'Open-source hardware consists of physical artifacts of technology > designed and offered by the open design movement.' > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware > > And of the open design movement, it says this: > > 'Open design is the development of physical products, machines and > systems through use of publicly shared design information. ... The > process is generally facilitated by the Internet and often performed > without monetary compensation. That is an description of the status quo and not a normative definition of "Open Hardware". > The goals and philosophy are identical > to that of the open-source movement, but are implemented for the > development of physical products rather than software.' > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design Wikipedia is not a definition. It is a description of how authors see the world. > The Hardware Freedom Day website states the following: > > 'Goals and philosophy of the Open Hardware movement are closely > aligned with the ones of the Free Software movement.' > http://www.hfday.org/open-hardware They call themselves "Freedom Day" but try to coin the word "Open Hardware". I would be happy if they would talk about "Free Hardware". > > The free hardware and open hardware communities derive their ethos from > free software and open-source software. Access to source files in the > preferred format for making modifications is there
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
on a sidenote: Was KDE no open source software when Qt wasn't FOSS (for those who still remember that time)? In layout project files they might even be (C) non-free libraries for e.g. component footprints, which would *forbid* disclosing them to the general public. Is the hardware less open then? Should EE create their own footprint lib to be allowed to give the rest of the docs to the community, since without footprints in project file the whole project isn't open anymore? I think sometimes it's pretty tedious to discuss hw subjects with people who come from a sw background. So I will stop contributing to this futile discussion now. /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat 05 October 2013 19:37:59 Bob Ham wrote: > > Hm, I wonder what you want to prove? > > I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. You seem to > be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open > hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore > this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because > it accords with your own personal definition. > > I want to make it undeniably clear that describing the GTA04 as "open > hardware" is wrong. According to your own personal definition. > What you're doing is nothing to do with open hardware. The idea that > you can pop some schematic bitmaps in the back of your manual while > refusing access to the source files, and then rightfully label your > company's product as "open hardware" is fallacious. > > Please stop labelling your company's product as "open hardware". I seems that all your quotations and arguments refer to some form of licence finally. You can't request anybody who's disclosing his sourcecode to refrain from calling it "open source" as long as s/he's not claiming it adheres to a certain licence like e.g. GPL. Same applies to calling a hardware "open hardware" as long as it doesn't claim to adhere to whatever open-hardware-licence (and heck, there are so many diferent licences like there are different open-hardware projects out there, see the wili pages you quoted). Bottom line: when GolDeliCo's definition of "open hardware" doesn't meet yours, there's hardly anything you can do about it. I suggest you just check the particular project's licencing to find out about the details of "open" just like you have to do with every arbitrary other "open hardware" project. cheers jOERG -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 05:37:59PM +, Bob Ham wrote: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 17:17 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: > > > > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > > > > >> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are > > >> "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. > > > > > > That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: > > > > You're also contradicting your own previous statements: > > > > This admission makes your announcement here seem deceitful: > > > Hm, I wonder what you want to prove? > > I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. You seem to > be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open > hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore > this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because > it accords with your own personal definition. I'm sorry but I think you're doing the same, just from the other side. From this thread it's clear that different people understand "open hardware" differently, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong or dishonest. "open hardware" isn't AFAIK any registered "sticker" or "trade mark" with clearly defined meaning, so it's pity that different people associate it with different meanings/freedoms, but that's not their fault. Your "source code" citations from licenses are nice, but license text is the right place where you should find definition of what's meant by term "source code", OpenPhoenux page doesn't say that it's using terminilogy from ohanda or oshwa. "open hardware" is imho closest term you can use to describe advantage of gta04 for other people asking why you don't use cheaper android phone or why they should buy gta04. Using "open-hardware-but-without-CAD-files" is maybe less misleading for people who has great understanding of all free/open definitions used in the world (and wikipedia), but also more misleading for "normal" people. Your accusations sounds like if Nikolaus is using OHANDA clearly defined label without fulfilling requirements defined by OHANDA. It's like saying that gta04 is "small phone" and then arguing if it's small enough and that someone seen smaller phone and someone seen a lot bigger phone and that some other project define "small microwave" as box 10x10x10cm so the "small" in "small phone" should be something like that. > I want to make it undeniably clear that describing the GTA04 as "open > hardware" is wrong. > > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > If I remember there was a printout of the ssl code on paper, exported as a > > book > > from the US and then typed in again by volunteers to found openssl. > > > > Was it non.open source? > > It was not open source. This issue has been discussed previously. The > source must be in the form customarily used for making modifications to > it. This is an important factor. > > From the GNU GPL 2: > > 'The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for > making modifications to it' > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html > > From the Apache License 2.0: > > '"Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications' > https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html > > From the MPL 2.0: > > '“Source Code Form” means the form of the work preferred for making > modifications.' > https://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/ > > From the CDDL 1.0: > > '“Source Code” means (a) the common form of computer software code in > which modifications are made and (b) associated documentation included > in or with such code.' > http://web.archive.org/web/20090305064954/http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html > > > If a software company refused access to their software's source code in > electronic text form and only released it in paper form (or in the form > of a bitmap image inside a PDF), that software would not be considered > "open source". The phrase that seems most appropriate for such > software, I think, would be "encumbered source". > > > Wikipedia gives a fair description of open(/free) hardware: > > 'Open-source hardware consists of physical artifacts of technology > designed and offered by the open design movement.' > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware > > And of the open design movement, it says this: > > 'Open design is the development of physical products, machines and > systems through use of publicly shared design information. ... The > process is generally facilitated by the Internet and often performed > without monetary compensation. The goals and philosophy are identical > to that of the open-source movement, but are implemented for the > development of physical products rather than software.' > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design > > The Hardware Freedom Day website states the following: > > 'Goals and philosophy of the Open Hardware movement are closel
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 17:17 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: > > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > > >> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are > >> "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. > > > > That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: > > You're also contradicting your own previous statements: > > This admission makes your announcement here seem deceitful: > Hm, I wonder what you want to prove? I want you to stop describing the GTA04 as open hardware. You seem to be aware that there is a difference between what you describe as "open hardware" and what others describe as "open hardware" and yet you ignore this discrepancy and continue as if what you're saying is true because it accords with your own personal definition. I want to make it undeniably clear that describing the GTA04 as "open hardware" is wrong. On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > If I remember there was a printout of the ssl code on paper, exported as a > book > from the US and then typed in again by volunteers to found openssl. > > Was it non.open source? It was not open source. This issue has been discussed previously. The source must be in the form customarily used for making modifications to it. This is an important factor. From the GNU GPL 2: 'The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it' https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html From the Apache License 2.0: '"Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications' https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html From the MPL 2.0: '“Source Code Form” means the form of the work preferred for making modifications.' https://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/ From the CDDL 1.0: '“Source Code” means (a) the common form of computer software code in which modifications are made and (b) associated documentation included in or with such code.' http://web.archive.org/web/20090305064954/http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html If a software company refused access to their software's source code in electronic text form and only released it in paper form (or in the form of a bitmap image inside a PDF), that software would not be considered "open source". The phrase that seems most appropriate for such software, I think, would be "encumbered source". Wikipedia gives a fair description of open(/free) hardware: 'Open-source hardware consists of physical artifacts of technology designed and offered by the open design movement.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware And of the open design movement, it says this: 'Open design is the development of physical products, machines and systems through use of publicly shared design information. ... The process is generally facilitated by the Internet and often performed without monetary compensation. The goals and philosophy are identical to that of the open-source movement, but are implemented for the development of physical products rather than software.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design The Hardware Freedom Day website states the following: 'Goals and philosophy of the Open Hardware movement are closely aligned with the ones of the Free Software movement.' http://www.hfday.org/open-hardware The free hardware and open hardware communities derive their ethos from free software and open-source software. Access to source files in the preferred format for making modifications is therefore an important requirement for free/open hardware just as it is for free/open software. The Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance have taken the four freedoms of the Free Software Definition and modified them to apply to free hardware. They stipulate the following in freedoms 1 and 3 of their criteria for use of the OHANDA label: 'Access to the *complete* design is precondition to this' http://www.ohanda.org/ (My emphasis) The requirement is made explicit by the Open Source Hardware Association which has the following in its Open Source Hardware Definition 1.0: 'The documentation must include design files in the preferred format for making changes, for example the native file format of a CAD program.' http://www.oshwa.org/definition/ The idea that a circuit schematic in bitmap form constitutes the source for open hardware is fallacious. Furthermore, continuing to quote Wikipedia on open design: "Open design is a form of co-creation, where the final product is designed by the users, rather than an external stakeholder such as a private company." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design What you're doing is nothing to do with open hardware. The idea that you can pop some schematic bitmaps in the back of your manual while refusing access to the source files, and then rightfully label your company's product as "open hardware" is fallacious. Please stop labelling your company
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 17:42 schrieb Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller: > > Am 05.10.2013 um 14:14 schrieb Bob Ham: > >> On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: >> >>> I can agree that the usage of "free >>> hardware" term may be a bit confusing. >> >> Describing the GTA04 as "Open Hardware" on openphoenux.org is, I >> believe, not just confusing but dishonest. > > > Ok, what would be a better wording for a well documented hardware > so open in documentation that everyone can write and install any > free and open operating system he/she likes? > > I.e. there is no documentation hidden voluntarily that is needed to s/voluntarily/intentionally/s > > reach this goal (you don't need Gerber files to make Linux, OpenBSD, > whatever work). > > Maybe the usual distinction made between "Open" and "Free" software > holds here as well? > > "Open" does not necessarily mean "Free(dom)". But "open" is definitively > the opposite of "closed". > > So what is wrong with describing it as "Open Hardware" on > openphoenux.org? > > -- hns > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 14:14 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > >> I can agree that the usage of "free >> hardware" term may be a bit confusing. > > Describing the GTA04 as "Open Hardware" on openphoenux.org is, I > believe, not just confusing but dishonest. Ok, what would be a better wording for a well documented hardware so open in documentation that everyone can write and install any free and open operating system he/she likes? I.e. there is no documentation hidden voluntarily that is needed to reach this goal (you don't need Gerber files to make Linux, OpenBSD, whatever work). Maybe the usual distinction made between "Open" and "Free" software holds here as well? "Open" does not necessarily mean "Free(dom)". But "open" is definitively the opposite of "closed". So what is wrong with describing it as "Open Hardware" on openphoenux.org? -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On 10/05/2013 02:14 PM, Bob Ham wrote: On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: I can agree that the usage of "free hardware" term may be a bit confusing. Describing the GTA04 as "Open Hardware" on openphoenux.org is, I believe, not just confusing but dishonest. When the PC was released by IBM it was considered open hardware. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 14:14 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > >> I can agree that the usage of "free >> hardware" term may be a bit confusing. > > Describing the GTA04 as "Open Hardware" on openphoenux.org is, I > believe, not just confusing but dishonest. Who did put you into the position to make such offensive judgements? -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > >> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are >> "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. > > That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: > > "Open Hardware Devices. > > Letux 2804 / GTA04 Smartphone" > > http://www.openphoenux.org/ > > > You're also contradicting your own previous statements: > > "I see the role of GDC [Golden Delicious Computers] to provide future > open hardware but remain software agnostic" > > http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2012-May/066835.html > > > > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 09:11 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > >> I simply don't believe in the "Free Hardware" ideology. > > This admission makes your announcement here seem deceitful: > > "we are happy that we can make an announcement to the Free and > Open Hardware Community, right in time for X-mas and New Year: We > have finally tested, understood and patched the bugs of the > first GTA04 sample board" > > http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/pipermail/discussion/2010-December/006585.html Hm, I wonder what you want to prove? Shaking heads only... -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat 05 October 2013 11:09:02 Parchet Michaël wrote: > Hello, > > Your free hardware idon't use the Planned obsolescence concept isn't it ? > > Thanks for your answer. > > Best regards > > mparchet Now THIS is a good question! And the answer is: of course NO planned osolescence, we build that stuff for ourselves first and foremost :-) I want to *use* my device, once it's built, and I want to do that for a looong time to come. cheers jOERG (please read http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/User:JOERG ! "jOERG" is my signature, I don't like to see it "counterfeit" ;-D ) -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 14:07 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > I can agree that the usage of "free > hardware" term may be a bit confusing. Describing the GTA04 as "Open Hardware" on openphoenux.org is, I believe, not just confusing but dishonest. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Bob Ham wrote: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 13:34 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > >> You're nitpicking about different meanings of "open" and "free". > > This is hardly nitpicking. If I had known what Nikolaus's position was > back in 2010, I doubt I would ever have bought a GTA04. There seems to > be (1) the meaning that Nikolaus gives "free hardware" and "open > hardware"; and (2) the meaning everyone else gives "free hardware" and > "open hardware". > > It seems to me that Nikolaus has falsely advertised the GTA04, and is > continuing to do so. I think everything needed to evaluate if GTA04 is an "open hardware" as in your dictionary was already available before ordering. Still, GTA04 is in this regard just as free as GTA02 and maybe even more (there were no schematics for GTA02 published on launch, and even now not all of them are publicly available. And those which are, are also only in PDFs) In my dictionary, it's definitely free platform. One of the only ones in mobile world. But yes, I can agree that the usage of "free hardware" term may be a bit confusing. -- Sebastian Krzyszkowiak, dos http://dosowisko.net/ ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On 10/05/2013 01:34 PM, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Bob Ham wrote: On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: "Open Hardware Devices. Letux 2804 / GTA04 Smartphone" http://www.openphoenux.org/ You're also contradicting your own previous statements: "I see the role of GDC [Golden Delicious Computers] to provide future open hardware but remain software agnostic" http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2012-May/066835.html You're nitpicking about different meanings of "open" and "free". This discussion is no better than arguments about the freedom of GPL versus BSD. It leads nowhere. +1 ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 13:34 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > You're nitpicking about different meanings of "open" and "free". This is hardly nitpicking. If I had known what Nikolaus's position was back in 2010, I doubt I would ever have bought a GTA04. There seems to be (1) the meaning that Nikolaus gives "free hardware" and "open hardware"; and (2) the meaning everyone else gives "free hardware" and "open hardware". It seems to me that Nikolaus has falsely advertised the GTA04, and is continuing to do so. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Bob Ham wrote: > On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > >> Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are >> "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. > > That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: > > "Open Hardware Devices. > > Letux 2804 / GTA04 Smartphone" > > http://www.openphoenux.org/ > > > You're also contradicting your own previous statements: > > "I see the role of GDC [Golden Delicious Computers] to provide future > open hardware but remain software agnostic" > > http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2012-May/066835.html You're nitpicking about different meanings of "open" and "free". This discussion is no better than arguments about the freedom of GPL versus BSD. It leads nowhere. -- Sebastian Krzyszkowiak, dos http://dosowisko.net/ ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 07:50 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are > "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. That isn't what your OpenPhoenux page says: "Open Hardware Devices. Letux 2804 / GTA04 Smartphone" http://www.openphoenux.org/ You're also contradicting your own previous statements: "I see the role of GDC [Golden Delicious Computers] to provide future open hardware but remain software agnostic" http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2012-May/066835.html On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 09:11 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > I simply don't believe in the "Free Hardware" ideology. This admission makes your announcement here seem deceitful: "we are happy that we can make an announcement to the Free and Open Hardware Community, right in time for X-mas and New Year: We have finally tested, understood and patched the bugs of the first GTA04 sample board" http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/pipermail/discussion/2010-December/006585.html -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hello, Your free hardware idon't use the Planned obsolescence concept isn't it ? Thanks for your answer. Best regards mparchet > Le 5 oct. 2013 à 09:11, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a > écrit : > > >> Am 05.10.2013 um 08:28 schrieb Paul Wise: >> >>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>> >>> You are mixing Free dom with Free Beer. >> >> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html >> >>> But: some people are able to jump out of the window. So do you do as well? >> >> I followed the FSF and Debian out the window a long time ago and I am >> fairly happy with the result. > > Yes, but they all decided themselves to volunteer to contribute to FSF and > Debian. > For no payment (or by being paid by others). And I have done that as well. > > But it was always *my* decision to volunteer or not. And that is not something > we can discuss or you can convince me. > >> >>> Strange argument... jOERG is right... >> >> To me his mail was a bizarre overreaction to a request for >> clarification of your reasons for wanting to keep goldelico in control >> of gta04 production. > > I agree with him. We don't owe the community anything beyond what we > have voluntarily done or will do. > > In general the offer of Free projects is: look, here is something others have > piled up in the past years. If you want to use it, please use it. But you are > obliged to give back your changes to support the community. > > You are argueing from an egocentric point of view: look, there is something, > others have piled up in the past years. I want to use it. So they are obliged > to give me everything I think I need (even if you don't really need it) to > support > me or others. > > At least this is what I read from rah's and your arguments. > > >> >> The request for clarification was probably not needed though, you have >> made it fairly clear over a few threads over the years that you aren't >> interested in making the gta04 "Free Hardware" as rah and myself >> appear to define it. > > I simply don't believe in the "Free Hardware" ideology. > > The reason is that there is the idea of an "allmende" or "community" > behind, where everyone gets back as much as he/she invests by > volunteer work. This is good - in theory. > > With Free Hardware I simply don't see that being balanced. I.e. you > can't expect to get back enough high quality volunteer contributions > from the general public to balance what you have to invest yourself > to get something 100% done. And hardware must be finished 100% > at some deadline (contrary to community software projects - just send > out 3.12-rc4). > > The GTA02-core project has clearly demonstrated that some years ago. > The engineering community development model does not work for > hardware. So there is no need for Free hardware licences to regulate > the interworking of a big worldwide engineering team. > > Let's say it with some perspective: everybody should do what he/she > can do best. E.g. donate money so that experts can live from that and > invest their time to develop great hardware that allows to run as much > free software as possible (and is well enough documented for that > purpose - but not more). This does not need "Free Hardware" in your > definition. > >> So end of discussion for me, I'll try to avoid replying to any further >> mails on the gta04 topic. > > Yes, there is no need for discussions about the "freedom" of GTA04. > > But technical discussions are always welcome. > > -- hns > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 08:28 schrieb Paul Wise: > On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > >> You are mixing Free dom with Free Beer. > > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html > >> But: some people are able to jump out of the window. So do you do as well? > > I followed the FSF and Debian out the window a long time ago and I am > fairly happy with the result. Yes, but they all decided themselves to volunteer to contribute to FSF and Debian. For no payment (or by being paid by others). And I have done that as well. But it was always *my* decision to volunteer or not. And that is not something we can discuss or you can convince me. > >> Strange argument... jOERG is right... > > To me his mail was a bizarre overreaction to a request for > clarification of your reasons for wanting to keep goldelico in control > of gta04 production. I agree with him. We don't owe the community anything beyond what we have voluntarily done or will do. In general the offer of Free projects is: look, here is something others have piled up in the past years. If you want to use it, please use it. But you are obliged to give back your changes to support the community. You are argueing from an egocentric point of view: look, there is something, others have piled up in the past years. I want to use it. So they are obliged to give me everything I think I need (even if you don't really need it) to support me or others. At least this is what I read from rah's and your arguments. > > > The request for clarification was probably not needed though, you have > made it fairly clear over a few threads over the years that you aren't > interested in making the gta04 "Free Hardware" as rah and myself > appear to define it. I simply don't believe in the "Free Hardware" ideology. The reason is that there is the idea of an "allmende" or "community" behind, where everyone gets back as much as he/she invests by volunteer work. This is good - in theory. With Free Hardware I simply don't see that being balanced. I.e. you can't expect to get back enough high quality volunteer contributions from the general public to balance what you have to invest yourself to get something 100% done. And hardware must be finished 100% at some deadline (contrary to community software projects - just send out 3.12-rc4). The GTA02-core project has clearly demonstrated that some years ago. The engineering community development model does not work for hardware. So there is no need for Free hardware licences to regulate the interworking of a big worldwide engineering team. Let's say it with some perspective: everybody should do what he/she can do best. E.g. donate money so that experts can live from that and invest their time to develop great hardware that allows to run as much free software as possible (and is well enough documented for that purpose - but not more). This does not need "Free Hardware" in your definition. > So end of discussion for me, I'll try to avoid replying to any further > mails on the gta04 topic. Yes, there is no need for discussions about the "freedom" of GTA04. But technical discussions are always welcome. -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > You are mixing Free dom with Free Beer. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html > But: some people are able to jump out of the window. So do you do as well? I followed the FSF and Debian out the window a long time ago and I am fairly happy with the result. > Strange argument... jOERG is right... To me his mail was a bizarre overreaction to a request for clarification of your reasons for wanting to keep goldelico in control of gta04 production. The request for clarification was probably not needed though, you have made it fairly clear over a few threads over the years that you aren't interested in making the gta04 "Free Hardware" as rah and myself appear to define it. So end of discussion for me, I'll try to avoid replying to any further mails on the gta04 topic. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/User:PaulWise ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 05.10.2013 um 05:09 schrieb Paul Wise: > On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > >> I already told you that the hardware source files are open and public. > > I agree with Bob Ham on this. The source files are not public and even > the PDFs are not open, they are licensed under a non-commercial > license (CC-BY-NC-SA). You are mixing Free dom with Free Beer. > Even the BeagleBone Black people are able to release some sort of > hardware source files: > > https://github.com/CircuitCo/-BeagleBone-Black-RevA5/ Yes, they did decide to do it that way. But: some people are able to jump out of the window. So do you do as well? Strange argument... jOERG is right... -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 04.10.2013 um 21:26 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 20:16 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> Am 04.10.2013 um 19:48 schrieb Bob Ham: > >>> I don't think FSF has a definition of "Free Hardware". Possibly we're >>> ascribing different meanings to the phrase. >> >> Yes they have one and even do a certification (which would not be >> possible with a definition): >> >> http://www.fsf.org/news/endorsement-criteria >> http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Hardware/Certification_criteria > > They don't use the term "Free Hardware" to describe what they're > endorsing. Yes, you are right. > > >>> I'm using "Free Hardware" >>> to refer to free or libre hardware with the four freedoms, as described >>> by the (unfortunately named) Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance: >>> >>> http://www.ohanda.org/ >>> All of them have been as open as it could be practically done at the moment when some design decisions had to be made. >>> >>> You've previously said that the reason you refuse to release the >>> hardware source files, making the device more "open", is because you >>> expect money in return. Are you now saying restricting access to the >>> hardware source files is somehow a "design decision"? >> >> ??? >> >> I already told you that the hardware source files are open and public. > > The source files are not public. The only thing that is public is a PDF > file containing bitmap images generated from other (Eagle?) source > files. The other source files themselves are not available. Yes. > I don't understand how you can maintain that the source files are > public. If I remember there was a printout of the ssl code on paper, exported as a book from the US and then typed in again by volunteers to found openssl. Was it non.open source? >> Just not in the format you would like to see them but you are free to >> convert them. > > You don't seem to understand that the difference in "format" is > critical. It is the difference that prevents the GTA04 being described > as free hardware. Yes, I don't really understand, because I don't care that much about sophistry and ideology. I want to get things materialize. And for me any printout that I can read is open source. A missing printout is closed source. Tertium non datur. > > By your logic, all binary software executables are "open" because the > "format" can be converted into assembler. While it may be true that one > can disassemble binaries and modify the resulting assembler, this is not > what we're referring to by the phrase "free software". > > Similarly, the GTA04 is not "free hardware". > > > And by the way, I looked into your idea of scanning PCB schematics. > It's bogus. I tried to see whether any suitable software was available > but here's what I found instead: > > "there is no direct way to translate pure graphical data to an > intelligent schematic, EDA schematics contain a lot of intelligent > information that simply is not available on a sheet of paper" > http://www.edaboard.com/thread8258.html > > "No, nothing like that exists. ... Such a tool would be difficult to > create, and impossible to realistically support considering the > multitude of ways even a single IC could be represented. ... In short, > it's unrealistic." > http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/66432/any-research-to-turn-schematics-as-a-picture-into-a-simulation > >> Here I am referring to the typical discussion about binary blobs and >> firmware drivers - because we decide(d) to use chips we can buy. > > You're obviously using the phrase "free hardware" to mean hardware that > can run with entirely free software. This seems to be non-normal usage. > For example, see > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_Freedom_Day Hm. That doesn't tell me much. Neither the Openmoko, OpenPandora, Ubuntu Edge, GTA04 are "open hardware" - and never were intended to be. They are "well documented hardware for free and open software". Generally, I agree with jOERG's comments. If you don't like this situation, start your own project and make it "open hardware" (in your definition), but don't expect us to do that step for you. -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > I already told you that the hardware source files are open and public. I agree with Bob Ham on this. The source files are not public and even the PDFs are not open, they are licensed under a non-commercial license (CC-BY-NC-SA). Even the BeagleBone Black people are able to release some sort of hardware source files: https://github.com/CircuitCo/-BeagleBone-Black-RevA5/ -- bye, pabs http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/User:PaulWise ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 20:16 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Am 04.10.2013 um 19:48 schrieb Bob Ham: > > I don't think FSF has a definition of "Free Hardware". Possibly we're > > ascribing different meanings to the phrase. > > Yes they have one and even do a certification (which would not be > possible with a definition): > > http://www.fsf.org/news/endorsement-criteria > http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Hardware/Certification_criteria They don't use the term "Free Hardware" to describe what they're endorsing. > > I'm using "Free Hardware" > > to refer to free or libre hardware with the four freedoms, as described > > by the (unfortunately named) Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance: > > > > http://www.ohanda.org/ > > > >> All of them have been as open as it could be practically done at the moment > >> when some design decisions had to be made. > > > > You've previously said that the reason you refuse to release the > > hardware source files, making the device more "open", is because you > > expect money in return. Are you now saying restricting access to the > > hardware source files is somehow a "design decision"? > > ??? > > I already told you that the hardware source files are open and public. The source files are not public. The only thing that is public is a PDF file containing bitmap images generated from other (Eagle?) source files. The other source files themselves are not available. I don't understand how you can maintain that the source files are public. > Just not in the format you would like to see them but you are free to > convert them. You don't seem to understand that the difference in "format" is critical. It is the difference that prevents the GTA04 being described as free hardware. By your logic, all binary software executables are "open" because the "format" can be converted into assembler. While it may be true that one can disassemble binaries and modify the resulting assembler, this is not what we're referring to by the phrase "free software". Similarly, the GTA04 is not "free hardware". And by the way, I looked into your idea of scanning PCB schematics. It's bogus. I tried to see whether any suitable software was available but here's what I found instead: "there is no direct way to translate pure graphical data to an intelligent schematic, EDA schematics contain a lot of intelligent information that simply is not available on a sheet of paper" http://www.edaboard.com/thread8258.html "No, nothing like that exists. ... Such a tool would be difficult to create, and impossible to realistically support considering the multitude of ways even a single IC could be represented. ... In short, it's unrealistic." http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/66432/any-research-to-turn-schematics-as-a-picture-into-a-simulation > Here I am referring to the typical discussion about binary blobs and > firmware drivers - because we decide(d) to use chips we can buy. You're obviously using the phrase "free hardware" to mean hardware that can run with entirely free software. This seems to be non-normal usage. For example, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_Freedom_Day -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 04.10.2013 um 19:48 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 21:32 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> Am 03.10.2013 um 20:09 schrieb Bob Ham: > >>> I would note that the GTA04 is not a Free Hardware project. >> >> Yes that is correct. It is not Free Hardware in the strict FSF definition > > I don't think FSF has a definition of "Free Hardware". Possibly we're > ascribing different meanings to the phrase. Yes they have one and even do a certification (which would not be possible with a definition): http://www.fsf.org/news/endorsement-criteria http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Hardware/Certification_criteria > I'm using "Free Hardware" > to refer to free or libre hardware with the four freedoms, as described > by the (unfortunately named) Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance: > > http://www.ohanda.org/ > >> All of them have been as open as it could be practically done at the moment >> when some design decisions had to be made. > > You've previously said that the reason you refuse to release the > hardware source files, making the device more "open", is because you > expect money in return. Are you now saying restricting access to the > hardware source files is somehow a "design decision"? ??? I already told you that the hardware source files are open and public. Just not in the format you would like to see them but you are free to convert them. Nobody is taking this freedom from you... Here I am referring to the typical discussion about binary blobs and firmware drivers - because we decide(d) to use chips we can buy. E.g. the WLAN chip. -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Fri 04 October 2013 19:48:19 Bob Ham wrote: > You've previously said that the reason you refuse to release the > hardware source files, making the device more "open", is because you > expect money in return. Are you now saying restricting access to the > hardware source files is somehow a "design decision"? Refuse? RESTRICTING access? Honestly guys, what are you thinking we are doing here? Does Nikolaus owe you something (more) since he already gave you more than anybody else usually does? This is a project as open as defined by the author, thus everything that's not open/free is not open/free, and everything offered to the community as CCbyCA or whatever is a gift to community, with no liabilities whatsoever arising from that for the one donating it. Period. End of discussion. Do we have to feel bad about the decision not to disclose project files? Definitely NOT! May you _ask_ why they don't get disclosed? Sure. But don't _question_ the answer you get, and don't even complain when you get no answer at all either. You're not entitled to anything. NOBODY needs project files to use this product and make the most of it, in any way you like. You get schematics and component placement and technical manual and datasheets. And on reasonable request GolDeliCo probably will even hand out layout as a number of pdf files, so you could check whether it's possible to drill a hole at pos X-Y into PCB. That's it. Be happy or get over it. jOERG -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 21:32 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Am 03.10.2013 um 20:09 schrieb Bob Ham: > > I would note that the GTA04 is not a Free Hardware project. > > Yes that is correct. It is not Free Hardware in the strict FSF definition I don't think FSF has a definition of "Free Hardware". Possibly we're ascribing different meanings to the phrase. I'm using "Free Hardware" to refer to free or libre hardware with the four freedoms, as described by the (unfortunately named) Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance: http://www.ohanda.org/ > All of them have been as open as it could be practically done at the moment > when some design decisions had to be made. You've previously said that the reason you refuse to release the hardware source files, making the device more "open", is because you expect money in return. Are you now saying restricting access to the hardware source files is somehow a "design decision"? -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 03.10.2013 um 20:09 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 23:15 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> It would have its own cost (in money and in size), but in the long run, >> I hope the benefits of relying on standardized interfaces would make up >> for it. >> >> From what I can tell, Free Hardware projects don't benefit nearly enough >> from each other's efforts. Not sure we have enough Sisyphus around to >> keep them all alive. > > I would note that the GTA04 is not a Free Hardware project. Yes that is correct. It is not Free Hardware in the strict FSF definition, and it didn't ever try to be. Like the GTA01, GTA02 and the Ubuntu Edge (if it had reached its crowdfunding goals), Raspberry Pi, BeagleBoard, OpenPandora, ... All of them have been as open as it could be practically done at the moment when some design decisions had to be made. Yes, it is nice to have an unreachable goalto keep all those Sisyphus people working :) -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 23:15 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > It would have its own cost (in money and in size), but in the long run, > I hope the benefits of relying on standardized interfaces would make up > for it. > > From what I can tell, Free Hardware projects don't benefit nearly enough > from each other's efforts. Not sure we have enough Sisyphus around to > keep them all alive. I would note that the GTA04 is not a Free Hardware project. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu 03 October 2013 08:56:43 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > I know. But I'm not talking about swapping the actual CPU or the > > actual display. I'm talking about swapping the "CPU module" or the > > "display module". I.e. create a standardized module interface around > > off-the-shelf (i.e. non-standardized) components. > > Yes, there is even a standard for an interface between displays and CPU. > Well, even two or three: > > MIPI, LVDS, HDMI/DVI. > > > It would have its own cost (in money and in size), but in the long run, > > I hope the benefits of relying on standardized interfaces would make up > > for it. > > MIPI is already doing all this: > > http://www.mipi.org/specifications > http://mipi.org/about-mipi/mipi-interfaces-mobile-platform > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Industry_Processor_Interface > > Everyone is there, ARM, TI, even Apple: Remains to annotate that all those interfaces have rather tough electrical specs, e.g. MIPI HSI (often used to interface to modems) has a max PCB trace length of 15..20mm iirc, among other requirements that basically forbid usage of any connectors at all, for sure the iuse of cheap connectors. /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hi, Am 03.10.2013 um 05:15 schrieb Stefan Monnier: >> Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one >> person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. > > As you know, that has not been the experience with the GTA02, where > audio quality output (works fine for line-out but not for headphones), > GPS issues, and the "1024 issue" have appeared over time and some of > them took a long time to track down and fix. > > I can bet that your tests for GTA04 did not catch problems along the > lines of power consumption issues that will only show up in particular > usage scenarios that will only be used by the customer number 1462. Yes, I agree that such tests can only be found by a field test (beta test or however you like to call it). But they are not "production problems", but problems in the circuit design. With production I mean making n identical copies of a piece of hardware. And a production problem is if those are not really identical. Compared with software, they are not compiler of kernel problems but in the source code of some application. Running field tests is a common practice in hardware development and that is why some guys did loose their new iPhones before they were announced in some bar... And even Apple did not find the antenna problems before product launch. So this type of bugs need a big community of persons really using a design. > >>> Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might >>> attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do >>> like the idea of customizing their phones. >> That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different >> connector (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different >> signals and power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an >> OMAP3530 or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or >> i.MX6. Because they are not designed for this way of use. > > I know. But I'm not talking about swapping the actual CPU or the > actual display. I'm talking about swapping the "CPU module" or the > "display module". I.e. create a standardized module interface around > off-the-shelf (i.e. non-standardized) components. Yes, there is even a standard for an interface between displays and CPU. Well, even two or three: MIPI, LVDS, HDMI/DVI. > It would have its own cost (in money and in size), but in the long run, > I hope the benefits of relying on standardized interfaces would make up > for it. MIPI is already doing all this: http://www.mipi.org/specifications http://mipi.org/about-mipi/mipi-interfaces-mobile-platform http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Industry_Processor_Interface Everyone is there, ARM, TI, even Apple: http://www.mipi.org/member-directory But none of them is building modular devices. I wonder why. > > From what I can tell, Free Hardware projects don't benefit nearly enough > from each other's efforts. Not sure we have enough Sisyphus around to > keep them all alive. The problem for us is that we do not that easily get MIPI compliant components or documents (for members only) than others. And we have to use components that someone is willing to sell to us at a reasonable price. BTW: their monthly fees are public (different type of openness :): http://mipi.org/join-mipi -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
> Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one > person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. As you know, that has not been the experience with the GTA02, where audio quality output (works fine for line-out but not for headphones), GPS issues, and the "1024 issue" have appeared over time and some of them took a long time to track down and fix. I can bet that your tests for GTA04 did not catch problems along the lines of power consumption issues that will only show up in particular usage scenarios that will only be used by the customer number 1462. >> Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might >> attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do >> like the idea of customizing their phones. > That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different > connector (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different > signals and power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an > OMAP3530 or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or > i.MX6. Because they are not designed for this way of use. I know. But I'm not talking about swapping the actual CPU or the actual display. I'm talking about swapping the "CPU module" or the "display module". I.e. create a standardized module interface around off-the-shelf (i.e. non-standardized) components. It would have its own cost (in money and in size), but in the long run, I hope the benefits of relying on standardized interfaces would make up for it. >From what I can tell, Free Hardware projects don't benefit nearly enough from each other's efforts. Not sure we have enough Sisyphus around to keep them all alive. Stefan ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hello, Is there a phone or tablet with GTA04A5 ? Thanks for your answer ? Best regards mparchet > Le 26 sept. 2013 à 11:47, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a > écrit : > > >> Am 26.09.2013 um 11:42 schrieb Parchet Michaël: >> >> Hello, >> >> Can you send me the URL for GTA04A5 ? > > https://shop.goldelico.com/wiki.php?page=GTA04 > > A5 is the board revision/variant: > > http://projects.goldelico.com/p/gta04-main/page/Versions/ > >> >> Best regards >> >> mparchet >> >> Envoyé de mon iPhone >> >>> Le 26 sept. 2013 à 11:18, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a >>> écrit : >>> >>> Am 26.09.2013 um 11:06 schrieb Parchet Michaël: Hello, Is there a device on production with witch I can choice the os I want install or install several os (multi boot) ? >>> >>> Almost. The GTA04A5 can go on production (again) as soon as we get enough >>> orders. >>> >>> -- hns >>> Best regards mparchet > Le 25 sept. 2013 à 21:32, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" > a écrit : > > > Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: > >>> I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type >>> of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, >>> production, or availability. >> >> Small production runs means very few people have a chance of >> discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. > > Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one > person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not > need > to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And if > you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as > if you have 2 bad in 20. > >> >>> In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically >>> drives >>> cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) >>> and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. >> >> In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than >> smaller. > > Only in dimensions - but they became much slimmer in the same step. > I.e. the volume has been constant. > >> And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies >> of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of >> developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused >> in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. > > Of course it can. It is a matter of calculation. > >> Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might >> attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do >> like the idea of customizing their phones. > > That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different > connector > (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different signals and > power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an OMAP3530 > or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. > Because they are not designed for this way of use. > >> I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't >> necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP >> works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, >> I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. >> >>> It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of >>> units for different projects), so that we get existing modules >>> cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, >>> they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and >>> UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". >> >> Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides >> similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). >> >>> So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal >>> out if it every day. >> >> Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool >> their resources. > > Yes but I have no idea how this could happen. > > BR, > Nikolaus > > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> Openmoko community mailing list >>> community@lists.openmoko.org >>> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community >> >> ___ >
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 26.09.2013 um 11:42 schrieb Parchet Michaël: > Hello, > > Can you send me the URL for GTA04A5 ? https://shop.goldelico.com/wiki.php?page=GTA04 A5 is the board revision/variant: http://projects.goldelico.com/p/gta04-main/page/Versions/ > > Best regards > > mparchet > > Envoyé de mon iPhone > >> Le 26 sept. 2013 à 11:18, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a >> écrit : >> >> >>> Am 26.09.2013 um 11:06 schrieb Parchet Michaël: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Is there a device on production with witch I can choice the os I want >>> install or install several os (multi boot) ? >> >> Almost. The GTA04A5 can go on production (again) as soon as we get enough >> orders. >> >> -- hns >> >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> mparchet >>> Le 25 sept. 2013 à 21:32, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a écrit : Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: >> I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type >> of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, >> production, or availability. > > Small production runs means very few people have a chance of > discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not need to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And if you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as if you have 2 bad in 20. > >> In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives >> cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) >> and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. > > In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than > smaller. Only in dimensions - but they became much slimmer in the same step. I.e. the volume has been constant. > And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies > of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of > developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused > in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. Of course it can. It is a matter of calculation. > Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might > attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do > like the idea of customizing their phones. That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different connector (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different signals and power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an OMAP3530 or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. Because they are not designed for this way of use. > I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't > necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP > works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, > I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. > >> It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of >> units for different projects), so that we get existing modules >> cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, >> they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and >> UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". > > Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides > similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). > >> So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal >> out if it every day. > > Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool > their resources. Yes but I have no idea how this could happen. BR, Nikolaus ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community >>> >>> ___ >>> Openmoko community mailing list >>> community@lists.openmoko.org >>> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community >> >> >> ___ >> Openmoko community mailing list >> community@lists.openmoko.org >> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hello, Can you send me the URL for GTA04A5 ? Best regards mparchet Envoyé de mon iPhone > Le 26 sept. 2013 à 11:18, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a > écrit : > > >> Am 26.09.2013 um 11:06 schrieb Parchet Michaël: >> >> Hello, >> >> Is there a device on production with witch I can choice the os I want >> install or install several os (multi boot) ? > > Almost. The GTA04A5 can go on production (again) as soon as we get enough > orders. > > -- hns > >> >> Best regards >> >> mparchet >> >>> Le 25 sept. 2013 à 21:32, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a >>> écrit : >>> >>> >>> Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: >>> > I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type > of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, > production, or availability. Small production runs means very few people have a chance of discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. >>> >>> Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one >>> person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not need >>> to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And if >>> you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as >>> if you have 2 bad in 20. >>> > In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives > cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) > and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than smaller. >>> >>> Only in dimensions - but they became much slimmer in the same step. >>> I.e. the volume has been constant. >>> And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. >>> >>> Of course it can. It is a matter of calculation. >>> Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do like the idea of customizing their phones. >>> >>> That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different >>> connector >>> (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different signals and >>> power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an OMAP3530 >>> or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. >>> Because they are not designed for this way of use. >>> I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. > It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of > units for different projects), so that we get existing modules > cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, > they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and > UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). > So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal > out if it every day. Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool their resources. >>> >>> Yes but I have no idea how this could happen. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikolaus >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> Openmoko community mailing list >>> community@lists.openmoko.org >>> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community >> >> ___ >> Openmoko community mailing list >> community@lists.openmoko.org >> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community > > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 26.09.2013 um 11:06 schrieb Parchet Michaël: > Hello, > > Is there a device on production with witch I can choice the os I want install > or install several os (multi boot) ? Almost. The GTA04A5 can go on production (again) as soon as we get enough orders. -- hns > > Best regards > > mparchet > >> Le 25 sept. 2013 à 21:32, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a >> écrit : >> >> >> Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: >> I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, production, or availability. >>> >>> Small production runs means very few people have a chance of >>> discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. >> >> Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one >> person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not need >> to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And if >> you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as >> if you have 2 bad in 20. >> >>> In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. >>> >>> In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than >>> smaller. >> >> Only in dimensions - but they became much slimmer in the same step. >> I.e. the volume has been constant. >> >>> And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies >>> of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of >>> developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused >>> in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. >> >> Of course it can. It is a matter of calculation. >> >>> Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might >>> attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do >>> like the idea of customizing their phones. >> >> That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different >> connector >> (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different signals and >> power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an OMAP3530 >> or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. >> Because they are not designed for this way of use. >> >>> I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't >>> necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP >>> works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, >>> I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. >>> It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of units for different projects), so that we get existing modules cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". >>> >>> Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides >>> similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). >>> So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal out if it every day. >>> >>> Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool >>> their resources. >> >> Yes but I have no idea how this could happen. >> >> BR, >> Nikolaus >> >> >> ___ >> Openmoko community mailing list >> community@lists.openmoko.org >> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hello, Is there a device on production with witch I can choice the os I want install or install several os (multi boot) ? Best regards mparchet > Le 25 sept. 2013 à 21:32, "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" a > écrit : > > > Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: > >>> I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type >>> of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, >>> production, or availability. >> >> Small production runs means very few people have a chance of >> discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. > > Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one > person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not need > to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And if > you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as > if you have 2 bad in 20. > >> >>> In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives >>> cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) >>> and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. >> >> In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than >> smaller. > > Only in dimensions - but they became much slimmer in the same step. > I.e. the volume has been constant. > >> And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies >> of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of >> developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused >> in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. > > Of course it can. It is a matter of calculation. > >> Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might >> attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do >> like the idea of customizing their phones. > > That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different connector > (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different signals and > power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an OMAP3530 > or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. > Because they are not designed for this way of use. > >> I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't >> necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP >> works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, >> I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. >> >>> It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of >>> units for different projects), so that we get existing modules >>> cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, >>> they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and >>> UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". >> >> Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides >> similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). >> >>> So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal >>> out if it every day. >> >> Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool >> their resources. > > Yes but I have no idea how this could happen. > > BR, > Nikolaus > > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Wed 25 September 2013 21:32:13 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: > Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one > person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not > need to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And > if you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as if > you have 2 bad in 20. Yield of 995/1000? Amazing!! A Yield of 950/1000 is already considered good. That's what PV runs (and later on production QA) are for, to determine and (if necessary) improve, and sustain your production yield. No users needed for that. Actually it would be a very poor idea to ship PV devices without tests to users and hope for them to find the "lemons". > > Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might > > attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do > > like the idea of customizing their phones. > > That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different > connector (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different > signals and power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an > OMAP3530 > or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. > Because they are not designed for this way of use. Layman's idea of modularization, which never will fly in embedded. All the real progress made in embedded been based on new interfaces that were smarter and faster and smaller than the previously used ones. So it's like saying "if Industry PC Standard Architecture had used a standardized interface (like ISA) then Pcs had evolved faster and were cheaper than they are today". Actually it needed PCI since ISA wasn't appropriate for the next generation of hardware technology. Same with embedded chips, just there you have like 5 duzen interfaces, and most chips have more than one interface, SoCs have like 20 of them. /j - () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 25.09.2013 um 20:45 schrieb Stefan Monnier: >> I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type >> of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, >> production, or availability. > > Small production runs means very few people have a chance of > discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. Production problems show almost immediately, even if there is only one person. And they show after making let's say 20 units. I.e. it does not need to produce let's say 1000 units to find real production problems. And if you produce 1000 and find that 5 are bad, you don't worry as much as if you have 2 bad in 20. > >> In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives >> cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) >> and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. > > In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than > smaller. Only in dimensions - but they became much slimmer in the same step. I.e. the volume has been constant. > And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies > of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of > developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused > in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. Of course it can. It is a matter of calculation. > Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might > attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do > like the idea of customizing their phones. That is a dream that is not realistic. Every display has a different connector (there is no standardization!). And every CPU has different signals and power supply needs. I.e. you can swap an OMAP3505 for an OMAP3530 or an DM3730 but nor for an OMAP4 or OMAP5 or Snapdragon or i.MX6. Because they are not designed for this way of use. > I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't > necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP > works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, > I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. > >> It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of >> units for different projects), so that we get existing modules >> cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, >> they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and >> UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". > > Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides > similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). > >> So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal >> out if it every day. > > Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool > their resources. Yes but I have no idea how this could happen. BR, Nikolaus ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
> I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type > of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, > production, or availability. Small production runs means very few people have a chance of discovering, let alone, fixing the various problems that can show up. > In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives > cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) > and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. In my part of the world, phones have been getting bigger rather than smaller. And while modularity has a cost, it can be offset by economies of scale (both in terms of production as in terms of developping/debugging the kernel support) if that module can be reused in more places. Free Software strives on standards and modularity. Also, if you can upgrade the screen and the CPU separately, you might attract a few other users, who aren't so interested in Freedom but do like the idea of customizing their phones. I'd be very happy to have a Free Phablet (and I actually wouldn't necessarily need it to have cell-phone connectivity, as long as VoIP works well), even if that's not my favorite form factor: at this stage, I'm willing to settle for anything smallish. > It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of > units for different projects), so that we get existing modules > cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, > they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and > UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". Right. That is a lower-leve of modularity than EOMA but it provides similar benefits (not only direct cost, but also development&debugging). > So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal > out if it every day. Exactly. The various "Free Hardware" communities need to pool their resources. Stefan ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Hi Stefan, Am 25.09.2013 um 05:01 schrieb Stefan Monnier: > The main problem I see with such Free and/or Open phone is the "small > production" syndrome. Small productions mean high prices and low > reliability, whereas we need reasonable prices and reliability. Yes, small production is the key problem. I don't see reliability as a problem because it depends on what type of reliability you are thinking of: component, software, hardware, production, or availability. Each one can also be achieved with small production batches and improves with experience of the team running such a project. > > So we need to focus on making larger production. For that, we need to > widen the target "market". Yes, this is the core idea behind the Neo900 project - find a new "market" for an almost existing design and modifying it a little while sharing as many components as possible. In essence the Letux 3704 and Letux 7004 projects are no different from that. > I'm not sure how best to do that, but > I think the key is in making products that can be used in more > situations. > E.g. the EOMA project comes to mind: a single "SoC card" can potentially > be used in various devices (tablet, router, NAS, ...). > > If the core part of the hardware could be shared between communities > such as Openmoko (free phone), Raspberry, etc.. then it'd be easier to > get that core part produced at reasonable cost, and to have a reasonably > reliable kernel running on it. In essence it goes to a modular approach - but "modular" typically drives cost up (at least for the version having the highest production numbers) and is in strong contradiction with miniaturization of handheld devices. And another factor is that producing anything in higher quantities in advance means that someone is willing to put more money on the table in advance, not knowing if the product finally sells. I.e. the financial risk goes up. We all know that there are 10 times as many who would like to have something different than what is available... And sometimes nobody wants what has been made available. Some other thought: it must not be a module that *we* produce (like EOMA) to get production numbers up. It would be sufficient to bundle buying power (by summing up # of units for different projects), so that we get existing modules cheaper. I.e. if all projects would use let's say an DM3730+Memory, they still can be soldered into different devices. Or WLAN/BT and UMTS are already coming as SoC/MCP "modules". So the trick is to use a bigger shopping bag and make a different meal out if it every day. BR, Nikolaus ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
The main problem I see with such Free and/or Open phone is the "small production" syndrome. Small productions mean high prices and low reliability, whereas we need reasonable prices and reliability. So we need to focus on making larger production. For that, we need to widen the target "market". I'm not sure how best to do that, but I think the key is in making products that can be used in more situations. E.g. the EOMA project comes to mind: a single "SoC card" can potentially be used in various devices (tablet, router, NAS, ...). If the core part of the hardware could be shared between communities such as Openmoko (free phone), Raspberry, etc.. then it'd be easier to get that core part produced at reasonable cost, and to have a reasonably reliable kernel running on it. Stefan ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Battery graphs - was Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
also check video bus. We know on GTA02 the display used iirc 20mA plus for a black screen. Oh and for the 1kR "termination", just driving high a dataline that runs to an unpowered chip will eat quite some current via clamp diodes from input pin to 0V-VDD, often even enough to power the chip ;-D Called reverse feeding /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Battery graphs - was Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Wed 28 August 2013 00:29:18 NeilBrown wrote: > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:46:12 +1000 NeilBrown wrote: > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 15:31:19 +0200 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" > > > > wrote: > > > Hm. That sounds quite different from the situation about 1 year ago > > > when you did the first releases of QtMoko and I always thought that > > > the 3.7 kernel is working well enough, so that I started to add new > > > features. > > > > > > Has it become worse since then? > > > > I like drawing graphs. So I did - see attachment. > > > > For the last year or so my GTA04 has been logging the power usage during > > suspend for every suspend cycle longer than a few seconds. I do this by > > reading the "charge_now" value from the bq27000 in the battery, comparing > > the "before" and "after" values, and dividing by the number of seconds. > > > > I currently have my phone configured to wake from suspend every 5 > > minutes, check that the modem is still working, and go back to suspend. > > This has helped collect quite a lot of values. > > > > To get the graphs I collected all those values, discarded negative > > numbers (when the battery was charging) and a few numbers that were > > clearly ridiculous (numbers more than 1 amp), and sorted the remainder. > > > > > > So we get a cumulative frequency graph of different current levels. > > > > The red line ('/tmp/uamp') is for the last couple of days since last > > reboot. This is running 3.7 with offmode disabled. > > The green line ('tmp/uamp2') is for the last year, running a variety of > > different kernels. > > > > Obviously there is a very different number of samples in each. 342 in > > uamp 10031 in uamp2. So I normalised the X values so the graphs are > > comparable. They are much the same shape which suggests the pattern is > > fairly robust. > > > > The Y axis is microamps. > > The green values below 2 (20mA) are with offmode enabled I assume. > > The red values are all greater because I have offmode turned off to > > improve reliability. > > > > The steps are a bit of a surprise. They are all about 2mA. I don't > > think this is an artefact of the precision with which measurements are > > taken as the charge value read from the battery has a much higher > > precision. > > I think it must be an actual 2mA difference in (average) current usage. > > This could be 2mA more for the whole time, or 4mA more with a 50% duty > > cycle etc. > > > > So if we can make off-mode really usable (which possibly means find and > > fix some bug in the omap usb code) and if we can find out what is > > causing these 2mA steps and resolve that, then might might be a little > > closer to acceptable power usage. > > > > I might try running for a while with the modem turned off and see what > > result I get. > > Here are results with modem powered off. > > 1/ The minimum current is higher!!! without the modem at work. - 28mA > rather than 24mA. > 2/ The maximum is much lower. 36mA vs 97mA. > 3/ We still see a 2mA step. Most of the values are 30mA or 32mA. A few > are 2mA lower, or 2,4,6 mA higher (roughly). > > This is very strange. The very rare high values when modem is working are > quite believable. The steps and the high minimum are harder to explain. > > Suppose some parallel bi-directional buss ended up in suspend with both > ends driving outputs. Suppose also that if they were driving the same > value it would cause minimal current drain, but if they were driving > different values it would cause 2mA drain on each line that was > unbalanced. > Then if the actual output bits on one side were random as we enter suspend, > we would see a range of different multiples of 2mA in current drain. > > If this parallel bus were related to the modem, then when the modem wasn't > in use we would see much less variability. But maybe higher average as > some bits might stuck on a "bad" value. > > Now there is a bi-directional bus between the OMAP and the USB PHY. But I > would be very surprised if both (or either) side were driving outputs on > suspend, and I count at least 12 steps in the green line, so it would have > to include the 8 data line and 4 control lines ... which is getting > increasingly unlikely. > > I might be able to try holding the PHY in reset during suspend. That > should force all pins to tri-state. However first I think I'll try 15 > minute suspends rather than 5 minute and see if that makes a difference. > > Is there another credible explanation for the 2mA steps? > > NeilBrown check ULPI. also check the bus from CPU to musb core. And why would both ends need to be driven? In my book a 2mA is sth like 1.8V into 1kR termination, for example /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://ww
Battery graphs - was Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:46:12 +1000 NeilBrown wrote: > On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 15:31:19 +0200 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" > wrote: > > > Hm. That sounds quite different from the situation about 1 year ago when > > you did the first releases of QtMoko and I always thought that the > > 3.7 kernel is working well enough, so that I started to add new features. > > > > Has it become worse since then? > > I like drawing graphs. So I did - see attachment. > > For the last year or so my GTA04 has been logging the power usage during > suspend for every suspend cycle longer than a few seconds. I do this by > reading the "charge_now" value from the bq27000 in the battery, comparing the > "before" and "after" values, and dividing by the number of seconds. > > I currently have my phone configured to wake from suspend every 5 minutes, > check that the modem is still working, and go back to suspend. This has > helped collect quite a lot of values. > > To get the graphs I collected all those values, discarded negative numbers > (when the battery was charging) and a few numbers that were clearly > ridiculous (numbers more than 1 amp), and sorted the remainder. > > > So we get a cumulative frequency graph of different current levels. > > The red line ('/tmp/uamp') is for the last couple of days since last reboot. > This is running 3.7 with offmode disabled. > The green line ('tmp/uamp2') is for the last year, running a variety of > different kernels. > > Obviously there is a very different number of samples in each. 342 in uamp > 10031 in uamp2. So I normalised the X values so the graphs are comparable. > They are much the same shape which suggests the pattern is fairly robust. > > The Y axis is microamps. > The green values below 2 (20mA) are with offmode enabled I assume. > The red values are all greater because I have offmode turned off to improve > reliability. > > The steps are a bit of a surprise. They are all about 2mA. I don't think > this is an artefact of the precision with which measurements are taken as the > charge value read from the battery has a much higher precision. > I think it must be an actual 2mA difference in (average) current usage. > This could be 2mA more for the whole time, or 4mA more with a 50% duty cycle > etc. > > So if we can make off-mode really usable (which possibly means find and fix > some bug in the omap usb code) and if we can find out what is causing these > 2mA steps and resolve that, then might might be a little closer to > acceptable power usage. > > I might try running for a while with the modem turned off and see what result > I get. > Here are results with modem powered off. 1/ The minimum current is higher!!! without the modem at work. - 28mA rather than 24mA. 2/ The maximum is much lower. 36mA vs 97mA. 3/ We still see a 2mA step. Most of the values are 30mA or 32mA. A few are 2mA lower, or 2,4,6 mA higher (roughly). This is very strange. The very rare high values when modem is working are quite believable. The steps and the high minimum are harder to explain. Suppose some parallel bi-directional buss ended up in suspend with both ends driving outputs. Suppose also that if they were driving the same value it would cause minimal current drain, but if they were driving different values it would cause 2mA drain on each line that was unbalanced. Then if the actual output bits on one side were random as we enter suspend, we would see a range of different multiples of 2mA in current drain. If this parallel bus were related to the modem, then when the modem wasn't in use we would see much less variability. But maybe higher average as some bits might stuck on a "bad" value. Now there is a bi-directional bus between the OMAP and the USB PHY. But I would be very surprised if both (or either) side were driving outputs on suspend, and I count at least 12 steps in the green line, so it would have to include the 8 data line and 4 control lines ... which is getting increasingly unlikely. I might be able to try holding the PHY in reset during suspend. That should force all pins to tri-state. However first I think I'll try 15 minute suspends rather than 5 minute and see if that makes a difference. Is there another credible explanation for the 2mA steps? NeilBrown <> signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 15:31:19 +0200 "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" wrote: > Hm. That sounds quite different from the situation about 1 year ago when > you did the first releases of QtMoko and I always thought that the > 3.7 kernel is working well enough, so that I started to add new features. > > Has it become worse since then? I like drawing graphs. So I did - see attachment. For the last year or so my GTA04 has been logging the power usage during suspend for every suspend cycle longer than a few seconds. I do this by reading the "charge_now" value from the bq27000 in the battery, comparing the "before" and "after" values, and dividing by the number of seconds. I currently have my phone configured to wake from suspend every 5 minutes, check that the modem is still working, and go back to suspend. This has helped collect quite a lot of values. To get the graphs I collected all those values, discarded negative numbers (when the battery was charging) and a few numbers that were clearly ridiculous (numbers more than 1 amp), and sorted the remainder. So we get a cumulative frequency graph of different current levels. The red line ('/tmp/uamp') is for the last couple of days since last reboot. This is running 3.7 with offmode disabled. The green line ('tmp/uamp2') is for the last year, running a variety of different kernels. Obviously there is a very different number of samples in each. 342 in uamp 10031 in uamp2. So I normalised the X values so the graphs are comparable. They are much the same shape which suggests the pattern is fairly robust. The Y axis is microamps. The green values below 2 (20mA) are with offmode enabled I assume. The red values are all greater because I have offmode turned off to improve reliability. The steps are a bit of a surprise. They are all about 2mA. I don't think this is an artefact of the precision with which measurements are taken as the charge value read from the battery has a much higher precision. I think it must be an actual 2mA difference in (average) current usage. This could be 2mA more for the whole time, or 4mA more with a 50% duty cycle etc. So if we can make off-mode really usable (which possibly means find and fix some bug in the omap usb code) and if we can find out what is causing these 2mA steps and resolve that, then might might be a little closer to acceptable power usage. I might try running for a while with the modem turned off and see what result I get. NeilBrown <> signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Mon 26 August 2013 13:17:09 Radek Polak wrote: > On Saturday, August 24, 2013 03:20:10 PM joerg Reisenweber wrote: > > On Sat 24 August 2013 14:22:55 Radek Polak wrote: > > > 1/ poor power management > > > > [...] > > > > > something. But i always worked in userspace. I barely understand kernel > > > and i have no EE skills and equipment to contribute. I can contribute > > > only as a tester. I thought that i will deliver working userspace and > > > IMO QtMoko is very good at it. But without working kernel and HW there > > > is not much point to improve it. > > > > many thanks for this contribution, it's already a better help than much > > of the discussion about what's wrong with our community and the GTA04 > > project at large. > > > > However one remark about it: it's not that simple to blame kernel for > > poor power management. What we learned from last maybe 6 years of > > different OM distros and from maemo and mer and nitdroid etc is: poor > > power management is way too often caused by userland, like sensorfw and > > WLAN connection manager and X11/windowmanager and audio (alsa/PA) and > > whatnot else. > > Yup, after playing with alsa settings i could save a few mAmps on GTA04 > too. > > > Often it's even rogue apps that do silly stuff like updating their system > > status icon 25 times per second or constantly chatting with internet or > > even just polling files when you should use inotify instead. > > Kernel power saving measures are relatively simple to test and fix, and > > usually it's not kernel to blame for abysmal standby time and/or > > operation time. > > > > To give you a simple example: on N900 maemo you have "scanning period" in > > settings-internet, which makes device scan for WLAN APs only every 5, 10, > > ... even 30 min. This is needed since the WLAN chip cuts thru the battery > > in less than 3 hours when you constantly scan for APs. Clearly a userland > > issue where kernel can't do much. Now you can start to blame kernel WLAN > > driver for not doing proper powersaving but that won't help establish a > > decently working usable OS on N900. > > I think in case of QtMoko on GTA04 we can blame kernel/HW a little bit > more, since we are using suspend to RAM whereas N900 is always on (which > really cool btw). So while GTA04 is in standby there should be idealy just > PMU+RAM+modem turned on, everything else should be off. But something is > wrong and noone has yet figured what it is. At best there is ~16mA with > omap enable_off_mode - but then we hit "imprecise external abort" bug so > currently we have ~22mA at best. If you compare this with GTA02 or N900 > it's really bad. GTA02 is 12mA and i'd say N900 is even better. Together > with reenumerating modem it makes GTA04 barely usable even for a few > hardcore supporters but unusable for normal users. > > Regards > > Radek Yes, absolutely (I can't confirm neither deny your facts). N900 easily goes down to ~10mA in *standby*, see http://wiki.maemo.org/N900_Hardware_Power_Consumption and also http://wiki.maemo.org/N900_software_power_management What I can think of are floating lines making chips eat more than they should - may particularly due to suspend mode. Let's hope we'll iron that out during next few months cheers jOERG -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Saturday, August 24, 2013 03:20:10 PM joerg Reisenweber wrote: > On Sat 24 August 2013 14:22:55 Radek Polak wrote: > > 1/ poor power management > > [...] > > > something. But i always worked in userspace. I barely understand kernel > > and i have no EE skills and equipment to contribute. I can contribute > > only as a tester. I thought that i will deliver working userspace and > > IMO QtMoko is very good at it. But without working kernel and HW there > > is not much point to improve it. > > many thanks for this contribution, it's already a better help than much of > the discussion about what's wrong with our community and the GTA04 project > at large. > > However one remark about it: it's not that simple to blame kernel for poor > power management. What we learned from last maybe 6 years of different OM > distros and from maemo and mer and nitdroid etc is: poor power management > is way too often caused by userland, like sensorfw and WLAN connection > manager and X11/windowmanager and audio (alsa/PA) and whatnot else. Yup, after playing with alsa settings i could save a few mAmps on GTA04 too. > Often it's even rogue apps that do silly stuff like updating their system > status icon 25 times per second or constantly chatting with internet or > even just polling files when you should use inotify instead. > Kernel power saving measures are relatively simple to test and fix, and > usually it's not kernel to blame for abysmal standby time and/or operation > time. > > To give you a simple example: on N900 maemo you have "scanning period" in > settings-internet, which makes device scan for WLAN APs only every 5, 10, > ... even 30 min. This is needed since the WLAN chip cuts thru the battery > in less than 3 hours when you constantly scan for APs. Clearly a userland > issue where kernel can't do much. Now you can start to blame kernel WLAN > driver for not doing proper powersaving but that won't help establish a > decently working usable OS on N900. I think in case of QtMoko on GTA04 we can blame kernel/HW a little bit more, since we are using suspend to RAM whereas N900 is always on (which really cool btw). So while GTA04 is in standby there should be idealy just PMU+RAM+modem turned on, everything else should be off. But something is wrong and noone has yet figured what it is. At best there is ~16mA with omap enable_off_mode - but then we hit "imprecise external abort" bug so currently we have ~22mA at best. If you compare this with GTA02 or N900 it's really bad. GTA02 is 12mA and i'd say N900 is even better. Together with reenumerating modem it makes GTA04 barely usable even for a few hardcore supporters but unusable for normal users. Regards Radek ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller писал 2013-08-24 17:31: For me GTA04 is not usable as daily phone. It's now collecting dust in shelf. Why? 1/ poor power management 2/ bugged reenumerating modem GTA04 is good enough only in some situations. E.g. ok if i carry it to work where i can anytime charge it. When i am on bike 150km from home i must have reliable phone in case that the bike breaks up or in case that i need map. I took GTA04 with 2 batteries and N900 on my bike trip this summer. I used N900 as a phone with SIM card. GTA04 was switched off - i just used it for GPS. But after 4 hours one battery was empty and second battery was 50% empty during one night in suspend. On the other hand N900 was working whole 4 days. I used it for calls, for wifi in camps and in the end even for GPS. That is something I still don't understand. From a power budget the modem is specified to have 3-10 mA in suspend while registered to a base station. I have even verified this with an ampere-meter. And there is only one potential deviation - if there is some attenuation (e.g. wall) there may be a situation where the modem receives the base station well and tries to answer/register. But since the base station does not receive it at all, it tries with high power. In this case the modem current increases to 50-100 mA. BTW: this is the same with almost all mobile devices. So it must be something in the OMAP system and that is IMHO the same as the N900 has... So pure kernel code. BTW: this would not change by redesigning the GTA04 into a spare N900 case... At that time, as the main developments are in the "care" of the common / production / communication problems, the community should try to implement the microkernel (eg arm port gnu / hurd) on the existing architecture GTA02/04, to see the resources consumption of core servers (to give chance new mobile platform based on open hardware stack). ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Modem reenummerating (was: Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone)
On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 23:24:29 +0200 Lukas Märdian wrote: > Am 24.08.2013 23:04, schrieb NeilBrown: > > On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:22:55 Radek Polak wrote: > >> And the reenumerating modem - i really dont understand why we havent > >> tried newer firmware. For me missed calls is quite serious problem. > > > > I'm starting to think the the re-enumeration could be an omap-usb > > problem. I turned off a couple of power-saving features and the rate > > at which my modem reenumerates went way down. Sometimes the the modem > > Hmm could this by any chance have something to do with the infamous > Linux-USB problem, recently pointed out by Sarah Sharp? > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/93288 > Certainly worth testing - thanks for the link! NeilBrown signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Modem reenummerating (was: Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone)
Am 24.08.2013 23:04, schrieb NeilBrown: > On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:22:55 Radek Polak wrote: >> And the reenumerating modem - i really dont understand why we havent >> tried newer firmware. For me missed calls is quite serious problem. > > I'm starting to think the the re-enumeration could be an omap-usb > problem. I turned off a couple of power-saving features and the rate > at which my modem reenumerates went way down. Sometimes the the modem Hmm could this by any chance have something to do with the infamous Linux-USB problem, recently pointed out by Sarah Sharp? http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/93288 > disappears and comes back. Sometimes it disappears and doesn't come > back. In those cases if I rmmod the relevant modules and > modprobe them again it sometimes comes back and sometimes doesn't. > When rmmod/modprobe doesn't work, a reboot does. > But the reboot doesn't remove power from the modem so just resets the > omap. So it seems that the problem must be in the omap-usb driver. At > the very least if we could get it to reset the connection to the same > level as a reboot resets it, then we should be able to improve > reliability. > > Oh, and by the way: Don't "rfkill block wwan" :-( It doesn't > actually cause the modem to stop transmitting, but it does cause it > to be behave very badly in intermittent ways. My phone had been very > unstable for quite a while and I eventually traced it to an "rfkill > block all" that I had in my startup scripts. Removing that helped a > lot. BR, Lukas signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:22:55 +0200 Radek Polak wrote: > > And the reenumerating modem - i really dont understand why we havent tried > newer firmware. For me missed calls is quite serious problem. I'm starting to think the the re-enumeration could be an omap-usb problem. I turned off a couple of power-saving features and the rate at which my modem reenumerates went way down. Sometimes the the modem disappears and comes back. Sometimes it disappears and doesn't come back. In those cases if I rmmod the relevant modules and modprobe them again it sometimes comes back and sometimes doesn't. When rmmod/modprobe doesn't work, a reboot does. But the reboot doesn't remove power from the modem so just resets the omap. So it seems that the problem must be in the omap-usb driver. At the very least if we could get it to reset the connection to the same level as a reboot resets it, then we should be able to improve reliability. Oh, and by the way: Don't "rfkill block wwan" :-( It doesn't actually cause the modem to stop transmitting, but it does cause it to be behave very badly in intermittent ways. My phone had been very unstable for quite a while and I eventually traced it to an "rfkill block all" that I had in my startup scripts. Removing that helped a lot. NeilBrown signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
Hi Radek, Am 24.08.2013 um 14:22 schrieb Radek Polak: > On Friday, August 23, 2013 10:21:33 PM arne anka wrote: > >> the missing money is just the indicator for this project's failure to >> create sufficient public interest or even awareness. >> while the GTA01/2 was a nice idea, it was already slightly outdated when >> it appeared -- and since then nothing has changed, the gap between what's >> considered standard and what the GTAxx is prepared to deliver rather has >> widened. >> >> to get even close to standard (and thus being a realistic alternative for >> smartphone users), the project would need backing of a far more potent >> entity than this tiny community is -- both money- and publicitywise. >> >> since the GTA02 i spend about 2000€ on this project, maybe more (well, i >> can afford it and it was worth supporting the idea behind it), and in my >> very personal and subjective opinion, the GTA04 has been a huge >> disappointment. i wouldn't spend the equivalent of a highend, state-of-art >> smartphone or even tablet just to buy yet another even more outdated >> device, free or not. compared to the shortcomings of the GTA04, even >> complete freedom is not sufficient to justify that amount of money. >> >> whenever i told somebody who had heard of OpenMoko that there's a >> successor, they were surprised -- and when i told them the features and >> the price, i got an incredulous grin and the question if someone really >> believed that people would spend that amount for such a device. >> >> i am still undecided if i should admire or pity the thread starter, if he >> honestly believed that this community would be able to succeed where >> ubuntu failed -- and on top of that to jump from todays GTA04 to the >> device as imagined by ubuntu ... >> >> all things considered, the realistic path is imo to cater to a tiny niche >> of institutional customers -- like jörg(?) proposed. >> while i am personally rather fond of the original GTA01 case (and think >> that's almost the only tangible unique feature), i, too, would prefer it >> to pick up where the n900 left. maybe then it could even tap into the pool >> of still active n900 fans ... > > Very well written. I can add a few more points. > > For me GTA04 is not usable as daily phone. It's now collecting dust in shelf. > Why? > > 1/ poor power management > 2/ bugged reenumerating modem > > GTA04 is good enough only in some situations. E.g. ok if i carry it to work > where i can anytime charge it. When i am on bike 150km from home i must have > reliable phone in case that the bike breaks up or in case that i need map. > > I took GTA04 with 2 batteries and N900 on my bike trip this summer. I used > N900 as a phone with SIM card. GTA04 was switched off - i just used it for > GPS. But after 4 hours one battery was empty and second battery was 50% empty > during one night in suspend. On the other hand N900 was working whole 4 days. > I used it for calls, for wifi in camps and in the end even for GPS. That is something I still don't understand. From a power budget the modem is specified to have 3-10 mA in suspend while registered to a base station. I have even verified this with an ampere-meter. And there is only one potential deviation - if there is some attenuation (e.g. wall) there may be a situation where the modem receives the base station well and tries to answer/register. But since the base station does not receive it at all, it tries with high power. In this case the modem current increases to 50-100 mA. BTW: this is the same with almost all mobile devices. So it must be something in the OMAP system and that is IMHO the same as the N900 has... So pure kernel code. BTW: this would not change by redesigning the GTA04 into a spare N900 case... > > I though that self-made open source phone will have good power management. I > though it will be easy or at least possible to identify where the power goes. > I am even more dissapointed that noone except Neil Brown tried to improve the > situation. Yes, that made me wonder as well. It appears that it needs some very special skills we don't have in our community. Or we have but those members have no time. > Event GTA02 is s much better in this area. For me this is so > important that GTA02 is now much more usable then GTA04. It's like having car > that can go just 30km. > > And the reenumerating modem - i really dont understand why we havent tried > newer firmware. For me missed calls is quite serious problem. Because the upgrade firmware did not run on the kernels for unknown reasons (failed with segfaults). And because we must make RMS believe that there is no way to upgrade the modem firmware from user space. > I dont understand why produce more phones until these problems are fixed. I don't know how to fix these problems without producing more phones. Especially there is one issue in the IrDA/RS232 driver which prevents the kernel to power down both and the ITG3200 m
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Sat 24 August 2013 14:22:55 Radek Polak wrote: > 1/ poor power management [...] > something. But i always worked in userspace. I barely understand kernel and > i have no EE skills and equipment to contribute. I can contribute only as > a tester. I thought that i will deliver working userspace and IMO QtMoko > is very good at it. But without working kernel and HW there is not much > point to improve it. many thanks for this contribution, it's already a better help than much of the discussion about what's wrong with our community and the GTA04 project at large. However one remark about it: it's not that simple to blame kernel for poor power management. What we learned from last maybe 6 years of different OM distros and from maemo and mer and nitdroid etc is: poor power management is way too often caused by userland, like sensorfw and WLAN connection manager and X11/windowmanager and audio (alsa/PA) and whatnot else. Often it's even rogue apps that do silly stuff like updating their system status icon 25 times per second or constantly chatting with internet or even just polling files when you should use inotify instead. Kernel power saving measures are relatively simple to test and fix, and usually it's not kernel to blame for abysmal standby time and/or operation time. To give you a simple example: on N900 maemo you have "scanning period" in settings-internet, which makes device scan for WLAN APs only every 5, 10, ... even 30 min. This is needed since the WLAN chip cuts thru the battery in less than 3 hours when you constantly scan for APs. Clearly a userland issue where kernel can't do much. Now you can start to blame kernel WLAN driver for not doing proper powersaving but that won't help establish a decently working usable OS on N900. cheers jOERG -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Friday, August 23, 2013 10:21:33 PM arne anka wrote: > the missing money is just the indicator for this project's failure to > create sufficient public interest or even awareness. > while the GTA01/2 was a nice idea, it was already slightly outdated when > it appeared -- and since then nothing has changed, the gap between what's > considered standard and what the GTAxx is prepared to deliver rather has > widened. > > to get even close to standard (and thus being a realistic alternative for > smartphone users), the project would need backing of a far more potent > entity than this tiny community is -- both money- and publicitywise. > > since the GTA02 i spend about 2000€ on this project, maybe more (well, i > can afford it and it was worth supporting the idea behind it), and in my > very personal and subjective opinion, the GTA04 has been a huge > disappointment. i wouldn't spend the equivalent of a highend, state-of-art > smartphone or even tablet just to buy yet another even more outdated > device, free or not. compared to the shortcomings of the GTA04, even > complete freedom is not sufficient to justify that amount of money. > > whenever i told somebody who had heard of OpenMoko that there's a > successor, they were surprised -- and when i told them the features and > the price, i got an incredulous grin and the question if someone really > believed that people would spend that amount for such a device. > > i am still undecided if i should admire or pity the thread starter, if he > honestly believed that this community would be able to succeed where > ubuntu failed -- and on top of that to jump from todays GTA04 to the > device as imagined by ubuntu ... > > all things considered, the realistic path is imo to cater to a tiny niche > of institutional customers -- like jörg(?) proposed. > while i am personally rather fond of the original GTA01 case (and think > that's almost the only tangible unique feature), i, too, would prefer it > to pick up where the n900 left. maybe then it could even tap into the pool > of still active n900 fans ... Very well written. I can add a few more points. For me GTA04 is not usable as daily phone. It's now collecting dust in shelf. Why? 1/ poor power management 2/ bugged reenumerating modem GTA04 is good enough only in some situations. E.g. ok if i carry it to work where i can anytime charge it. When i am on bike 150km from home i must have reliable phone in case that the bike breaks up or in case that i need map. I took GTA04 with 2 batteries and N900 on my bike trip this summer. I used N900 as a phone with SIM card. GTA04 was switched off - i just used it for GPS. But after 4 hours one battery was empty and second battery was 50% empty during one night in suspend. On the other hand N900 was working whole 4 days. I used it for calls, for wifi in camps and in the end even for GPS. I though that self-made open source phone will have good power management. I though it will be easy or at least possible to identify where the power goes. I am even more dissapointed that noone except Neil Brown tried to improve the situation. Event GTA02 is s much better in this area. For me this is so important that GTA02 is now much more usable then GTA04. It's like having car that can go just 30km. And the reenumerating modem - i really dont understand why we havent tried newer firmware. For me missed calls is quite serious problem. I dont understand why produce more phones until these problems are fixed. I even dont understand the efforts to make PVR, camera, radio and other components working, unless we have working phone and not mobile heat generator. Well you can answer why i am just writing mails instead of doing something. But i always worked in userspace. I barely understand kernel and i have no EE skills and equipment to contribute. I can contribute only as a tester. I thought that i will deliver working userspace and IMO QtMoko is very good at it. But without working kernel and HW there is not much point to improve it. Regards Radek ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:21 PM, arne anka wrote: > i am still undecided if i should admire or pity the thread starter, if he > honestly believed that this community would be able to succeed where ubuntu > failed -- and on top of that to jump from todays GTA04 to the device as > imagined by ubuntu ... Go with "admire". :) I'm not saying we'd succeed, I'm just suggesting that we could do with "failing" the way Ubuntu did. By putting out a bold idea, Ubuntu moved the idea of an open source phone forward from the standard "it's gotta be Android" mentality, spurred themselves to innovate, and proved there was a demand for something else. Of course, what that something "else" is is different for everybody, but we don't have to please everyone. Our community's niche is not in being the most whizbang or the cheapest or the prettiest. I believe the folks in this community have the ability to offer the only free-as-in-freedom phone/computer and that's worth something. Not to everybody, but to some percent. Ubuntu's "failure" included over 5000 orders for units at $700 each. Could we have 5% as much fail as Ubuntu? Yes. But we'd need to get the word out and I'm just suggesting now might be a good time, while people are still wondering what to do with that extra $700 PayPal just refunded to them. :) —Ben ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
I don't think money is the only problem. the missing money is just the indicator for this project's failure to create sufficient public interest or even awareness. while the GTA01/2 was a nice idea, it was already slightly outdated when it appeared -- and since then nothing has changed, the gap between what's considered standard and what the GTAxx is prepared to deliver rather has widened. to get even close to standard (and thus being a realistic alternative for smartphone users), the project would need backing of a far more potent entity than this tiny community is -- both money- and publicitywise. since the GTA02 i spend about 2000€ on this project, maybe more (well, i can afford it and it was worth supporting the idea behind it), and in my very personal and subjective opinion, the GTA04 has been a huge disappointment. i wouldn't spend the equivalent of a highend, state-of-art smartphone or even tablet just to buy yet another even more outdated device, free or not. compared to the shortcomings of the GTA04, even complete freedom is not sufficient to justify that amount of money. whenever i told somebody who had heard of OpenMoko that there's a successor, they were surprised -- and when i told them the features and the price, i got an incredulous grin and the question if someone really believed that people would spend that amount for such a device. i am still undecided if i should admire or pity the thread starter, if he honestly believed that this community would be able to succeed where ubuntu failed -- and on top of that to jump from todays GTA04 to the device as imagined by ubuntu ... all things considered, the realistic path is imo to cater to a tiny niche of institutional customers -- like jörg(?) proposed. while i am personally rather fond of the original GTA01 case (and think that's almost the only tangible unique feature), i, too, would prefer it to pick up where the n900 left. maybe then it could even tap into the pool of still active n900 fans ... ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
Am 23.08.2013 um 12:08 schrieb Bob Ham: > On 2013-08-23 09:38, joerg Reisenweber wrote: >> On Fri 23 August 2013 10:35:38 Bob Ham wrote: >>> On 2013-08-23 07:26, openm...@pulster.de wrote: > >>> The GTA04 *is* out of production and no longer for sale. >> >> Says who? > > Says Golden Delicious: > > "Note: we currently have no stock since we need to collect at least 200 > orders so that we can produce in big enough batches." > > -- First sentence on https://shop.goldelico.com/wiki.php?page=GTA04 > > >>> > There are no other >>> > reasons why it isnt available, just damn investment $$ are missing. >>> >>> If money is the only problem then why is nobody running a fundraising >>> campaign? I don't think money is the only problem. >> >> I think it's up to you to answer your own question, instead of implicitly >> accusing highly honored guys like Nikolaus and Christoph of not telling the >> truth. > > There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I'm not accusing anybody of > hiding problems. I'm saying that there are problems other than money which > are preventing the successful production of a free phone. Those other > problems have been discussed openly on this list and others. To some extent you are right. There is a problem one would call a "structural problem". Sort of an equation system with 0 solutions. >> everybody (even you) can start a fundraiser. > > Of course they *can*. But they're *not*. That's the point. We see from this discussion that everybody wants something else, but not what would be easily available. If 200 people agree to put 599 EUR on the table we could start production tomorrow (well, we need 6-8 weeks to get the components) and 200 GTA04 boards would be available in November. We could also order 200 3D-printed cases, earpieces etc. to make complete phones. One issue is that we have just ~70 display modules, and they are out of production for a long time. But there may be some remaining stock in Asia, so it appears to be a solvable problem. Doing a redesign for a different display, different case (N900) is also possible, but takes more time (estimate 4-6 months). But it also needs 200 * 599 EUR on the table. Not to start design or production (that has become my hobby), but to buy components. Now back to the "everyone wants something different" issue of the problem: * people want a different device (N900 keyboard) * people want an Überphone (Ubuntu Edge) * people want 100% freedom in WLAN, UMTS modem etc. (discussions on this list) * people want to have a device more innovative than Apple and Samsung together And of course - as Christoph points out - cheaper than anything else. I can completely understand all these wishes. Even that it should be cheaper than everythin else. But having the best at the lowest price is a contradiction in itself. It can be fulfilled better, the higher the production volume is. It is a basic law of economy that only #1 and #2 producers can get big margins, big enough to stay #1 and #2 by spending a lot of money for innovation. It is a law that nobody can break - like force of gravity... If you want to study this, please ask yourself why you get the high capacity memory chips you would like to see in a GTA0x only from Micron, Samsung these days and nobody else. At what position are we? We (with this I mean any team formed from the community) are probably #5000 in the smart phone or portable computer business... >From this, I think nobody is doing fundraisers or developing a new GTA0x >because they either know and see these economical implications or at least >have a good gut feeling that they can only loose money they don't have. There are unsuccessful campaigns (Ubuntu edge) and successful ones. If you go deeper into successful campaigns, they offer something really new (wrist phones, wrist displays) which the big companies do not even have. So for a short time frame the "early innovator" is #1 (Pebble) and #2 (Meta-Watch). But as soon as Apple and Samsung will enter the game arena, things will change rapidly... There is only one factor I can see that would change the game: if more people see a real value in supporting what we all would like to see. And supporting by paying more (and not expecting less). -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On 2013-08-23 09:38, joerg Reisenweber wrote: On Fri 23 August 2013 10:35:38 Bob Ham wrote: On 2013-08-23 07:26, openm...@pulster.de wrote: The GTA04 *is* out of production and no longer for sale. Says who? Says Golden Delicious: "Note: we currently have no stock since we need to collect at least 200 orders so that we can produce in big enough batches." -- First sentence on https://shop.goldelico.com/wiki.php?page=GTA04 > There are no other > reasons why it isnt available, just damn investment $$ are missing. If money is the only problem then why is nobody running a fundraising campaign? I don't think money is the only problem. I think it's up to you to answer your own question, instead of implicitly accusing highly honored guys like Nikolaus and Christoph of not telling the truth. There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I'm not accusing anybody of hiding problems. I'm saying that there are problems other than money which are preventing the successful production of a free phone. Those other problems have been discussed openly on this list and others. everybody (even you) can start a fundraiser. Of course they *can*. But they're *not*. That's the point. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On Fri 23 August 2013 10:35:38 Bob Ham wrote: > On 2013-08-23 07:26, openm...@pulster.de wrote: > > the GTA04 is a ready-to-use OpenSource smartphone. > > The GTA04 *is* out of production and no longer for sale. Says who? > It *could* be > the motherboard in a ready-to-use smartphone but it *isn't*. UHUH! > > > There are no other > > reasons why it isnt available, just damn investment $$ are missing. > > If money is the only problem then why is nobody running a fundraising > campaign? I don't think money is the only problem. I think it's up to you to answer your own question, instead of implicitly accusing highly honored guys like Nikolaus and Christoph of not telling the truth. To be utterly clear: hardware talks louder than (your) words, I had a complete GTA04 in my mail, and everybody (even you) can start a fundraiser. /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone
On 2013-08-23 07:26, openm...@pulster.de wrote: the GTA04 is a ready-to-use OpenSource smartphone. The GTA04 *is* out of production and no longer for sale. It *could* be the motherboard in a ready-to-use smartphone but it *isn't*. There are no other reasons why it isnt available, just damn investment $$ are missing. If money is the only problem then why is nobody running a fundraising campaign? I don't think money is the only problem. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 21:46:28 + Bob Ham wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 23:30 +0200, joerg Reisenweber wrote: > > > If this Shuttleguy really been interested in > > building a Edge , he'd simply DO it instead of starting nonsensical > > crowdfunding. > > Don't you see this is a marketing gag, nothing else? > > No, I don't. It was indeed a wonderful marketing campaign for > Canonical's mobile efforts but that doesn't necessarily mean they > didn't want the phone to be made. > > We can speculate about why Shuttleworth was not prepared to invest his > own money in the project but that's all it is, speculation. I can't oversee Canonical's budget but it looks like the strategy was to keep specifications and calculations closed for greater opportunities, be it for negiotiations or even profit. They started with 1.600$ and offered 300$ per phone for early birds (without giving the whole community the chance to know about) but instead of a safe calculation they fired up the second community phone campaign in 2013 at least doubling the target of the fairphone. What is this? A shoot in the sky with the aim to be best, not? If they really wanted to build Mark's "labour of love", they would have filled the gap (60%) to sell the rest as in Triple LTS Ubuntu Gold Pack Full Featured Anything with 10 years warranty and user support (think something attractive for Ubuntu fanatics here). Instead his comment was "they didn't want to get into the hardware business" [1]. I'm holding my sides .. And from his comment I can't read any disappointed but the attitude "Hey, it was a cool exercise. Now we know how many of you trust us and what it's worth." - "Thousands of you clearly want to own an Ubuntu phone and believe in our vision of convergence, and rest assured you won’t have much longer to wait." Now I am confused what that is supposed to mean. Kardan [1] http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/feature/2284272/canonicals-crowdfunding-of-ubuntu-edge-stretches-credibility-to-the-breaking-point -- Kardan Encrypt your email: http://gnupg.org/documentation Public GPG key 9D6108AE58C06558 at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr: F72F C4D9 6A52 16A1 E7C9 AE94 9D61 08AE 58C0 6558 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 23:30 +0200, joerg Reisenweber wrote: > If this Shuttleguy really been interested in > building a Edge , he'd simply DO it instead of starting nonsensical > crowdfunding. > Don't you see this is a marketing gag, nothing else? No, I don't. It was indeed a wonderful marketing campaign for Canonical's mobile efforts but that doesn't necessarily mean they didn't want the phone to be made. We can speculate about why Shuttleworth was not prepared to invest his own money in the project but that's all it is, speculation. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 23:20 +0200, joerg Reisenweber wrote: > On Thu 22 August 2013 21:44:13 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > Producing new cases is a matter of enough money, not of capabilities... > As already suggested by me[1], you also could go the other way and adapt the > PCB shape (plus a few circuit addons like hw matrix kb) to fit into a widely > available convenient existing case, more convenient and available than > Openmoko shower-radio housing. Think N900 [2]. Nikolaus, could you release the source files for the GTA04 PCB so that others can work on this? -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu 22 August 2013 23:00:52 Bob Ham wrote: > muddled view of the situation. The idea that it would be possible for > the community to produce a phone with the same kind of specs as the > phone that Canonical, with its billionaire owner, just tried and > *failed* to build, seems to me to be rooted in a view so detached from > reality as to be almost pathological. To even *ask* the question shows > that there is a problem. The only problem here is you fell for the story of the BILLIONaire(!) that "failed" to drum up ridiculous-in-his-balancebook 30some MILLIONS(!), while Nikolaus probably would be able to pull of same project on 10% of that budget. Canonical big hoax, sorry! If this Shuttleguy really been interested in building a Edge , he'd simply DO it instead of starting nonsensical crowdfunding. Don't you see this is a marketing gag, nothing else? /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu 22 August 2013 21:44:13 Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > Am 22.08.2013 um 21:28 schrieb Bob Ham: > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:19 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > >> Well, there are (or were) complete phones based on GTA04 available to > >> buy from Golden Delicious, so yes, OpenPhoenux has already achieved > >> "production of any phone". > > > > The phones consisted of GTA04 motherboards inside second-hand GTA01/02 > > cases. These cases were produced by Openmoko, not "OpenPhoenix". > > Producing new cases is a matter of enough money, not of capabilities... > > -- hns > As already suggested by me[1], you also could go the other way and adapt the PCB shape (plus a few circuit addons like hw matrix kb) to fit into a widely available convenient existing case, more convenient and available than Openmoko shower-radio housing. Think N900 [2]. I know for sure there's a (comparatively) huge community interested in such device with true hw kbd and resistive touchscreen, even more so when the platform inside is so close to original maemo platform [3] that even porting maemo to gta04 gets into vicinity. cheers jOERG [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.maemo.community/5428 [2] http://www.ebay.com/bhp/nokia-n900-housing [3] http://wiki.maemo.org/N900_Hardware_Schematic -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments (alas the above page got scrapped due to resignation(!!), so here some supplementary links:) http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On 08/22/13 23:11, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: So what? Those are still phones. Working, functional phones which have much better specs than GTA02. User wants a free phone, user orders a free phone, user gets a free phone. Without the need of owning GTA02 and replacing motherboard by himself - and that's what matters. OpenPhoenux project provides full phone. If there'll be higher demand, it'll provide new cases. Demand is too low right now, so old cases are used. I can't see the point of your argument in this discussion. Did anyone try to use Ubuntu on the gta04 ? It could be a nice show case to have some video's of working gta04's running Ubuntu Edge. Kind regards, Ed ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Bob Ham wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:19 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > >> Well, there are (or were) complete phones based on GTA04 available to >> buy from Golden Delicious, so yes, OpenPhoenux has already achieved >> "production of any phone". > > The phones consisted of GTA04 motherboards inside second-hand GTA01/02 > cases. These cases were produced by Openmoko, not "OpenPhoenix". So what? Those are still phones. Working, functional phones which have much better specs than GTA02. User wants a free phone, user orders a free phone, user gets a free phone. Without the need of owning GTA02 and replacing motherboard by himself - and that's what matters. OpenPhoenux project provides full phone. If there'll be higher demand, it'll provide new cases. Demand is too low right now, so old cases are used. I can't see the point of your argument in this discussion. -- Sebastian Krzyszkowiak, dos http://dosowisko.net/ ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:44 +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > The phones consisted of GTA04 motherboards inside second-hand GTA01/02 > > cases. These cases were produced by Openmoko, not "OpenPhoenix". > > Producing new cases is a matter of enough money, not of capabilities... The "OpenPhoenix" community doesn't have enough money so the answer to the original question of whether it can produce *any* phone is: no. I don't mean to belittle the community or detract from the activities of those who are actually doing but I think it's harmful to operate with a muddled view of the situation. The idea that it would be possible for the community to produce a phone with the same kind of specs as the phone that Canonical, with its billionaire owner, just tried and *failed* to build, seems to me to be rooted in a view so detached from reality as to be almost pathological. To even *ask* the question shows that there is a problem. There are limits on what the community can do. Engaging in pie-in-the-sky fantasies isn't going to help. Please allow me to address a question to the community as a whole: if you can produce a free phone then why aren't you? Do it! What are you *waiting* for? -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 22.08.2013 21:44, schrieb Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller: Am 22.08.2013 um 21:28 schrieb Bob Ham: On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:19 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: Well, there are (or were) complete phones based on GTA04 available to buy from Golden Delicious, so yes, OpenPhoenux has already achieved "production of any phone". The phones consisted of GTA04 motherboards inside second-hand GTA01/02 cases. These cases were produced by Openmoko, not "OpenPhoenix". Producing new cases is a matter of enough money, not of capabilities... -- hns The case is a good topic for further discussion: A new case, espacially Radek's ALU case, in combination with new, easy aviailable hardware components, and an sunlight readable display, should make the Moko more attractive. Due to the PRISM's and lack of free phones, there should be a real chance to acquire more users. -- Kind regards Sebastian Reinhardt ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 22.08.2013 um 21:00 schrieb Joshua Judson Rosen: > Ben Wong writes: >> >> Here's Shuttleworth's upbeat closing comment: >> http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge?c=activity >> >> I wonder if OpenPhoenix has an opportunity now, with all those >> frustrated would-be buyers out there. > > Maybe some; I'm pretty sure that there were some number of people who > actually pledged to the Ubuntu Edge campaign *because* it was clear that > the funding trigger-amount was not actually going to be reached. They > decided that it was probably important to _make a showing of support_ > for the mobile-phone industry to see, even if that was all that they > were doing (what's a term for that? `guerrilla market research'?). Well, the mobile-phone industry thinks in Billions of $$$ and Millions of units. Therefore 12 Mio $$$ doesn't look attractive and will not change any of their strategies. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 22.08.2013 um 21:28 schrieb Bob Ham: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:19 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > >> Well, there are (or were) complete phones based on GTA04 available to >> buy from Golden Delicious, so yes, OpenPhoenux has already achieved >> "production of any phone". > > The phones consisted of GTA04 motherboards inside second-hand GTA01/02 > cases. These cases were produced by Openmoko, not "OpenPhoenix". Producing new cases is a matter of enough money, not of capabilities... -- hns ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:19 +0200, Sebastian Krzyszkowiak wrote: > Well, there are (or were) complete phones based on GTA04 available to > buy from Golden Delicious, so yes, OpenPhoenux has already achieved > "production of any phone". The phones consisted of GTA04 motherboards inside second-hand GTA01/02 cases. These cases were produced by Openmoko, not "OpenPhoenix". -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Bob Ham wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:10 +0200, Paul Wise wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Bob Ham wrote: >> >> > No. I think a better question is whether "OpenPhoenix" can achieve >> > production of *any* phone? >> >> Not currently in stock, but as I understand it, GTA04 exists and is a phone. > > The GTA04 is a motherboard, not a phone. > > -- > Bob Ham > > for (;;) { ++pancakes; } Well, there are (or were) complete phones based on GTA04 available to buy from Golden Delicious, so yes, OpenPhoenux has already achieved "production of any phone". -- Sebastian Krzyszkowiak, dos http://dosowisko.net/ ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:10 +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Bob Ham wrote: > > > No. I think a better question is whether "OpenPhoenix" can achieve > > production of *any* phone? > > Not currently in stock, but as I understand it, GTA04 exists and is a phone. The GTA04 is a motherboard, not a phone. -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Bob Ham wrote: > No. I think a better question is whether "OpenPhoenix" can achieve > production of *any* phone? Not currently in stock, but as I understand it, GTA04 exists and is a phone. https://shop.goldelico.com/wiki.php?page=GTA04 -- bye, pabs ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 20:22 +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Ben Wong wrote: > > > I wonder if OpenPhoenix has an opportunity now, with all those > > frustrated would-be buyers out there. > > Are the Ubuntu Edge specs (or something close) achievable by OpenPhoenix? No. I think a better question is whether "OpenPhoenix" can achieve production of *any* phone? -- Bob Ham for (;;) { ++pancakes; } signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Ben Wong writes: > > Here's Shuttleworth's upbeat closing comment: > http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge?c=activity > > I wonder if OpenPhoenix has an opportunity now, with all those > frustrated would-be buyers out there. Maybe some; I'm pretty sure that there were some number of people who actually pledged to the Ubuntu Edge campaign *because* it was clear that the funding trigger-amount was not actually going to be reached. They decided that it was probably important to _make a showing of support_ for the mobile-phone industry to see, even if that was all that they were doing (what's a term for that? `guerrilla market research'?). And it's easier to `put your money where your mouth is', even if (especially if) you think that you can't really afford it, when you know that you'll get your money back in a month. -- "'tis an ill wind that blows no minds." ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Ben Wong wrote: > I wonder if OpenPhoenix has an opportunity now, with all those > frustrated would-be buyers out there. Are the Ubuntu Edge specs (or something close) achievable by OpenPhoenix? -- bye, pabs ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Well, the deadline is up. The pledges rolled in and they got $12.8 million, which sounds amazing until you see that their goal was for $32 million. I guess that means all that money is getting refunded and there will be no Ubuntu Edge. Here's Shuttleworth's upbeat closing comment: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge?c=activity I wonder if OpenPhoenix has an opportunity now, with all those frustrated would-be buyers out there. --B On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Patryk Benderz wrote: > [cut] >> what will happen with all that funded money if Ubuntu fails to reach >> their goal? > OK, finally found it: > http://www.indiegogo.com/how-pricing-works-on-indiegogo > > -- > Patryk "LeadMan" Benderz > Linux Registered User #377521 > () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail > /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments > > > ___ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Crowdfunding an Ubuntu smartphone (right now)
Am 30.07.2013 22:43, schrieb Carsten Gerlach: > Am 30.07.2013 20:59, schrieb Joshua Judson Rosen: >> They've already raised just over $7-million in just over 7 days; if >> they can keep up that momentum, maybe they /can/ actually meet the >> goal. > > Well, I wish them that they reach this goal, but it will be a hard > way, see http://ubuntu-edge.info/ > > Btw: Does anybody know if Ubuntu Touch is or will be working on the > Freerunner / GTA02 /GTA04? Hi, up to now nobody stepped up to show a running Ubuntu Touch on the OpenPhoenux GTA04, but technically it should absolutely be possible. Currently the GTA04 comes pre-installed with Debian, which is very similar to the Ubuntu system. Also I easily installed and ran Ubuntu-Core once. Running the Ubuntu Touch GUI should only be a matter of apt-get install'ing the missing parts and doing a correct configuration (this is probably the harder part). Even (non-free) 3D drivers are available, if needed for the Ubuntu Touch GUI. Best regards, Lukas signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community