On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:21:43 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
<l...@lkcl.net> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Gordan Bobic <gor...@bobich.net>
wrote:
in the first place), why has the MX53QSB not been chosen as the
board
for the freedombox foundation to honour its obligations to its
kickstarter sponsors?
Another thing worth considering is the cost. SheevaPlugs go for
about $99,
and they don't require anything else to be functional - just plug in
and go.
The Freescale boards you mention cost 50% more (without the
discount), and
still require a PSU and some kind of a box to put them into. That
gives a
total cost of about double what you'll pay for a SheevaPlug.
for the small supply of hardware to sponsors, that would work. the
freescale boards are based on low-volume pricing.
I cannot really comment on that, I can only comment from the end-user
point of view, and from that point of view, SheevaPlugs come out ahead
in terms of cost and in terms of how well the mainline kernel supports
the hardware.
so it depends what's more important to the freedombox foundation.
to
put out a message that it's "ok that CPU Manufacturers are
dishonourable and only provide information under NDA, and we, the
FreedomBox Foundation fully and actively support and endorse this
behaviour, as evidenced by our supply of units to our Sponsors".
I wouldn't call the behaviour you describe as dishonourable, merely
business limiting (or at least it should be, contrary to the example we
are discussing here). I can understand the moreal-hazard aspect of your
argument, though.
Gordan
_______________________________________________
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss