Gerald A wrote: > Hi all, > I originally wrote Lothar in private, and asked for his permission to repost > to the list. There have been a few replies in the meantime, but there were > some good points here. > > Now, I'm not a hardware guy, so take my input with a grain of salt, but I > have been watching the project for a while, and as a software person I hope > we can make it work. > > Lothar -- new comments are inline. > > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Lothar Behrens <lothar.behr...@lollisoft.de >> wrote: > >> >>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 7:08 AM, Lothar Behrens < >>> lothar.behr...@lollisoft.de> wrote: >>> >>> Ok I cannot buy expensive equipment to test hardware that I may have >>> developed, but I virtually could >>> develop hardware. But many developers at one subject could spend money for >>> a rent to let one of the >>> team do outstanding tests. >>> >>> Isn't it possible to also develop hardware collaboratively? >> > >> I have to say -- at this point, I don't think so. It's not that the concept >>> is impossible, or as you mention above, that testing can't be done. But >>> based on what OM and FIC before them have reported, it would be very hard. >>> >> Yes, it would be hard, but FIC and OM have made a great job. We have a >> fully functioning phone, but we couldn't easy create our own prototypes to >> play with. Good ideas are published as the robotics project. If having a >> really open schematics and even the board design. one could change the >> formfactor and add his/her needed stuff to play with. If you have to worry >> about how to enter a completely new schematics from the PDF, the fence is >> higher to think about jumping over and just DO it. > > > Steve has commented a bit about this, as far as a packaging and final > production are concerned. There might be a possibility to build "modular > kits" so different hardware (and software) combos could be tried out, but > translating that into a widget that can be sold as a phone is also a > consideration. We could put together an awesome phone as a kit that is about > the size of a CD drive, but then find out that some parts we used aren't > available in quantities or timelines that make sense to produce a phone. The > concept is awesome, but I'm not sure it can feed into a real product -- but > it's something to think about.
Werner and I are discussing various possibilities. I rule nothing out. > > > >> Principally, this is due to a moving target. Since everything is obsolete >>> in a few months, the shelf life of products in the embedded space is very >>> small. The next big hurdle is in getting specs. OM/FIC were producing >>> thousands of devices and possibly more, so had better quantities then a >>> hobby group might muster -- and still had poor access to hardware specs, >>> when they got them. Now, of course, some of their decisions might have been >>> practical too (we can get >1000 more closed pieces from company X, while we >>> can only get ~100 more open pieces from company Y), we don't know. >>> >> Yes, the technique is moving forward fast - for the real phone, not for a >> GSM module for sample :-) >> >> Today I have searched for a GSM module and indeed found one with a complete >> ARM based Linux stack. It would be much too expensive, but when having only >> the next planned GSM module that will appear in the phone, one could test it >> on a standard pc. Or even participate in GSM related development only. > > > I love the idea of being able to mock up hardware, as it lets the software > move forward too. But if our test platform can't be translated into a > suitable form factor, it might be a waste. YUP. Just to review the GTA03. At one stage the WIFI and GPS had to be removed because it didnt fit in the case. If "thin" is in, then using a module is out, for the most part. How thin is thin? Typical marketing answer would be "thinner than the iPhone" but obviously some fat phones ship > > >> I had an idea about my car radio. The idea came because I use my Neo to >> transmit music over bluetooth, then over a FM transmitter to the radio. This >> is bad quality. >> There are really much entusiasts building their own carPC in double DIN >> factor or similar - even small PC barebones. Why not equip it with a GSM >> module to become a real handsfree carPC + phone. They will benefit from such >> a module and propably participate in development. On of our early partners, in fact, was designing such a carPC and wanted to use FR as a dev platform. Alas they demanded a different processor ( Intel) so that deal didnt go through. >> >> Open the development by also selling parts of a phone for the hobby >> electronics would increase the audience and the feedback. >> I don't know how this component has to be deliverded, but I think it must >> be compilant to some law. > > > The current phone stuff already passes those laws. Would it be possible to > adapt them, on the electronic side? I have no doubt. Steve or someone on the > OM side might be able to speak to the regulations issue. You change the RFs ( antenna/circuits etc) and you have to recert. I'll have to take a closer look. I know this, I could not sell the STREAKER ( a freerunner with no case) without a recertification. Antenna and case are a system. > > Now, there are many people who like the idea of an "open source" phone, but >>> I think that a lot of them assume it will be polished to the level that >>> modern Linux distros are up to nowadays. And the truth is, the open linux >>> phone isn't there yet. >>> >>> Now, these aren't impossible hurdles to climb, but they aren't going to be >>> simple either. >>> >>> >>> What I also think about, is why are there only PDF schematics available? >>> >>> I think there were other formats too, but that might have only been case >>> design. My feeling is that OM isn't trying to be closed about hardware -- >>> but rather make some money selling it and be able to subsidize software >>> development. >>> >> Selling a mobile phone lab with components and the full schematics would >> propably taken from other companies to participate. They may be able to pay >> for the kit and inturn >> help development and give feedback. Think about opencores or the other >> projects and sites. The open hardware movement is at the way. >> >> With such a kit OM could get money, but also feedback - maybe in schematics >> and board design parts. I am not sure if a board could be divided in >> subdesigned subboards >> as schematics could (KICAD). But at least a part could be developed or the >> design could be overtaken. >> >> Small companies could jump onto that train, if such a kit is available. And >> it eases the jump, if Schematics would be based on open source software like >> KICAD :-) >> >> Dont always think about selling ready usable phones. Think about kits that >> help driving the idea behind an open phone in general (car PC for sample). >> The carPC hobby entusiast propably won't buy a not 'ready' phone, but think >> about adding the hands free phone option in his/her project. This is because >> he/she is acting in building the carPC. > > > > If it is possible to delegate hardware development tasks to the >>> comunity why isn't it done yet? >>> >>> I think this is a good idea. Maybe the community could launch a proposal >>> for what should go into an "GTA0X, X >2". The only problem here is that you >>> get everyone coming out of the woodwork to add their dream widget to a >>> phone. And if that got built, we'd need wheels on it to truck it around. :) >>> What we really need then is a way to get community involvement, but also a >>> realistic "put your money where your mouth is" way to solicit $$ from people >>> who are willing to buy the things. Something like, but stronger then, "if >>> the phone had features (x, y, z), would you pony up $AAA bucks for it?" >>> >> Therefore a site with adding votes would be valuable. This eliminates these >> ideas only few have and push ideas many have. >> Then propably membership could be enabled to help in that idea... > > > Votes are nice, but even with voting you'll end up with lots of good ideas > and perhaps not so many marketable ones. My thought above there was to put > your money on the table with a "vote". "My company will by 10 GTA0X.Ys if > they have sexy widget Z in them, for $500 a pop". Now, that quantity is too > small to mean anything, but if you get 100 people like that, it might be > more interesting. > > >> Then if there are some results that have a chance to become a real >>> 'next' phone, a company like openmoko could >>> think about producing some prototypes. So the company has a reduced cost. >>> >>> That's a good question -- what would producing prototypes cost? Maybe >>> that's the line to take with OM -- we can do the hardware specs, you produce >>> a few prototypes to see if they work, and then we go to production? >>> >> The strength behind the comunity would propably reducing cost of >> prototyping. Here is a cost sample: >> >> http://www.eurocircuits.com/index.php/PCB-production-service-overview/PCB-proto-the-new-PCB-prototype-service-from-Eurocircuits.html >> >> I know of another printed circuit manufacturer my mother was visiting with >> her friend. I'll ask him about such prototyping issues. Maybe he could offer >> cheaper. >> >> The comunity is big and some came to quite good hardware ideas, so why not >> push the comunity be selling parts as premanufactured elements and let them >> have fun. >> Good ideas could be communicated (by voting), cost could be saved when an >> idea finds more attract and the chances of usable ideas for the next phone >> could be taken, because the hardware is open source. > > >> Swapping prototypes in the comunity would also be an option. Not always a >> new prototype is nessesary. One may build a wirewrap circuit and an engineer >> could catch up >> the prototype to work for a first layout that needs some HF knowledge to >> get properly working. Others that are interested in a first prototype >> printed circuit could be served by voting to add room for their ideas needed >> space on the board as breadboard. >> >> It's always the comunity that drive good ideas and thus cost is saved. More >> boards are cheaper :-) > > > Would a prototype with GSM stuff be ok to be shuffled around? Would the > cost to produce such boards really be in the affordable range? > > There is one really good electronics project: The internal debug board. >>> I'm not sure about that. The debug board(s) are one tact, but there are >>> lots of different neat knobs in the FR. Early on, someone was using the FR >>> for a small remote boat. Some of that stuff needs a creative mind, and it >>> might be external to the FR, but it can show what can be done with it. >>> >>> >> I know about the boat, I have watched his video :-) >> >> A hardware project site and using open source software for board design, >> such as KICAD would help to enlarge the comunity. Not all must be inside a >> phone, something could >> be at a Eurocard sized board. Say the remote boat or in general a device >> that supports remote appliances would find more attraction if it would be >> 'pluggable' on a stacked board. I am not sure how much electronics the >> remote boat needs, but at least controlling servos. >> >> BTW, I had developed a train station clock driven by a Microchip PIC 16F84, >> a stepup DC/DC converter and a simple H bridge to drive the 'motor' of the >> clock. >> Good ideas must be publisched open sourced (I think about that now :-) >> >> The project died, because it stuck at soldered wirewrap level board >> prototype, it was not communicated, therefore no interest came back thus no >> printed circuits were developed at a next development step. It would have a >> chance to grow and improve, when it were open sourced and other hobbyists >> get knowledge about it - the comunity. >> >> The project is more than 10 years ago :-( >> >> My current hobby is software development and I follow a movement that other >> argue to be unusable, or only at university level, (so it will be called >> 'arsed around'), but I don't agree to them. It's great stuff about code >> generation, MDA / MDSD and the like. It's a movement to a new methology how >> to develop software. It's not always understood by a mortal developer. They >> must see that new methologies work. >> >> Even a stupid idea like distributed hardware engineering may be a way to >> earn money. Services like board layout could be payd for. So it will >> propably not always >> at a hobby level. Another area is distributed music making - as reported at >> one of our local TV broadcaster. Things seem not realizeable but must >> thought twice. >> Link: http://www.3sat.de/neues/sendungen/magazin/132217/index.html >> That isn't really related to this thread, but points out, that things are >> possible. >> >> Developing on a board design could also done that way. We have Skype, could >> share the project files and even could keep versions of design ideas in the >> CVS >> or SVN repository. There is only the question if an open source board >> design could easily converted in a format that - for sample is required for >> electromagnetic compatibility >> tests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_compatibility) >> >> Renting equipment or swapping parts would save money, who better could >> spend in a good layout. Using colaboration like the music sample could also >> save money. >> An electromagnetic compatibility specialized firm could inspect a layout, >> before it will go to a real hardware test. >> (If the format conversion from open source SW to expensive ECAD SW is >> possible) >> >> Many ideas when sitting at home :-) >> > > I've been to installathons and other software type events, where the idea is > to fiddle around with stuff. Would it make sense to do something like this > in the community? A hack-a-moko day, whether it was sponsored by OM or not? > While it might not lead to a design that translates 100% into something > mass-produceable, could that inspire something that is, or it it too far > away? > > (I apologize for the quoting -- something seems a bit off there) > > Gerald > _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community