Can we expect any further comment from anyone official?
I for example would very much like to hear, what part of the hardware _is_ open source, and to what extent, as the Pine64 is being sold as
"an open source platform from both hardware to software", as stated on the homepage.
At the moment, and judging by tllim's responses, I fail to see anything open when it comes to the hardware...
Cheers,
enoCeniP
(01-23-2016, 12:58 PM)tllim Wrote: We did not see the reason of release PCB source file is necessary. In general, schematic and PCB image file already enough for board modification which I have been practiced for more than 30 years.
One main reason is we don't mind DIY modify the board for their project needs but we don't plan to support the modified board such as optimized DRAM path for overclocking.
Pine64 is NOT an open source hardware project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_op...e_projects).
Indeed, traditionally it is very uncommon to release the full details (including the PCB source files) of the board.
The trend is changing, slowly.
Here is an example from Olimex, that not only do they release the PCB source files, but they also switched to using Kicad (open-source) instead of EAGLE,
https://olimex.wordpress.com/2016/01/08/...cad-files/
If anyone wants to make a new device from the Olimex design, they need to use a different brand name because they do not have access to the trademark.
The idea is that anyone can make compatible boards, however the consumer should trust the brand when they buy.
Pine64 is quite strong as a new brand and the boards are very cheap for competitors to start copying.
So silence is all we get from Pine64 officials?
That's even more disappointing than the original problem that the Pine is sold as "Open Source Hardware Platform" although it clearly isn't.
(02-10-2016, 05:53 AM)enoCeniP Wrote: So silence is all we get from Pine64 officials?
That's even more disappointing than the original problem that the Pine is sold as "Open Source Hardware Platform" although it clearly isn't.
The Kickstarter page does not say verbatim Open Source Hardware Platform (the words in that order, or with such capitalization).
The correct term, anyway, would be Open Source Hardware (OSHW).
If there was a claim on Kickstarter for Open Source Hardware (OSHW), then there would be a requirement to release all design files.
Because OSHW is defined at http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW and is explicit as to what is expected to do.
For those that would claim OSHW, they would also add the OSHW logo (does not appear either on the Kickstarter page).
For those that design hardware that is meant to be released as OSHW,
it makes sense to have in mind that it will be released as OSHW before they start designing.
In addition, if someone makes the effort to design OSHW, they should make the effort to use KiCad instead of Eagle.
Well, the Kickstarter page contains links to http://pine64.com, where it says:
"Why PINE64?
PINE64 is an open source platform from both hardware to software. "
And that is quite explicitly saying that the hardware is open source, too.
I don't care if it's written "Open Source Hardware" or "open source platform from both hardware to software"!
The meaning is clear.
And it's even in the "Why PINE64?" section. So it's definitely one key argument to buy this particular board.
And no matter if I tell you a product is Open Source Hardware, or the hardware is open source, or an open source platform, it means that in some way people will be able to access the hardware sources! If not, the statement is wrong!
02-11-2016, 04:55 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2016, 05:11 AM by Ghost.)
(02-11-2016, 02:13 AM)enoCeniP Wrote: Well, the Kickstarter page contains links to http://pine64.com, where it says:
"Why PINE64?
PINE64 is an open source platform from both hardware to software. "
And that is quite explicitly saying that the hardware is open source, too.
I don't care if it's written "Open Source Hardware" or "open source platform from both hardware to software"!
The meaning is clear.
And it's even in the "Why PINE64?" section. So it's definitely one key argument to buy this particular board.
And no matter if I tell you a product is Open Source Hardware, or the hardware is open source, or an open source platform, it means that in some way people will be able to access the hardware sources! If not, the statement is wrong!
I think the statement has been mistranslated, in a similar way that the Pine64 website seems to indicate that Android is 'built-in':
( https://www.pine64.com/our-story)
"The PINE64 can be purchased with the latest Android software built in"
This doesn't mean that Android has been installed and stored on some eMMC chip or something, just that you can buy it with a pre-installed micro sd card with Android on it. But the wording is imprecise and clumsy.
In the same way, I think what was meant by the statement "open source platform from both hardware and software" was that the user has some degree of control over the system via its two interfaces (pi-2 and euler bus) and has the choice of which operating system to use. Just that the wording is somewhat misleading. Better words than 'open source' might be 'user modifiable'.
You could probably also argue that according to some definitions, the Pine is not a 'supercomputer'.
I hear a lot of tap-dancing and word parsing. What is next? A discussion of the meaning of the word "is" is?
Your advertising/promoting of this product is duplicitous at best. It is very frustrating. And as far as what files are distributed, it seems that matters less whether they are KiCAD or EAGLE than the fact that the source is published.
02-11-2016, 01:59 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2016, 02:01 PM by sdwhwk.
Edit Reason: Forgot to add something.
)
The PCB question has been asked before two months ago.
Quote:(12-13-2015, 05:50 AM)hazerty Wrote:
quote:
schematic diagram will be open source or not?
We plan to release the schematic once got clearnace from technical partners. However, we will not release PCB and Gerber file.
So they knew this discussion could come up for a while, but the wording has not changed or that stipulation has not been added. The only thing brought up was rewording or adding words to the phrase, but all meaning the same thing; open source hardware. No license has been listed, and there are a few open source licenses, so open source means everything in this case. That would be like the airlines saying they fly everywhere from New York to California, but then say "we don't really fly directly there, but we have people that live there and we can give you their address to drive there and then they can fly you to the city you want there." and still keep the same statement. This isn't a translation error. This is two weeks and as of this post, same statement and no clarity.
Now i love this project, but i too was expecting schematics, PCB layout, data-sheets, and (probably reaching) a parts list, just like the OP. I backed under that assumption. For me, this isn't a deal breaker, but for others it might be. The only reason given was because of overclocking and support. I don't need a Gerber file to do that. All I need is Google and someone with the will to by enough of these cheap computers to figure it out or someone with knowledge about the board to post it. End result will be the same with or without PCB; no support. Pine builds the boards. They support the boards they build, if warranty is the sit, and original design. You make it yourself, it is your support. It's now your board. I can think of many things other than overclocking for the PCB; customize layout, add/remove/change out unneeded/needed parts, repair purposes, changing form factor size to fit the need, make it with even cheaper parts so a student can learn how to do it or more expensive for better quality and piece of mind (I'd lean to the cheap route), the list goes on. But a license does need to be produced to protect the company from someone making a clone and profiting it. It doesn't mean, though, they have to support modifications. If that was the case, they'd have to support 3rd party shields as well, even older ones for rpi. That just wouldn't make sense.
it's not hard to remake the schematic diagram on eagle or cadence, or design spark or other software, it's just very long...
after you must be to have NDA with all component maker ( allwinner, samsung for memory, ect) for buying component..
Depends on who you are, but yes. It's a minor request, but they have something already, (obviously, they wouldn't be making them). it wouldn't be hard to just post the file. Few clicks and done. The reasoning just doesn't make sense though for the same reason of making a PCB file yourself; it isn't that hard to figure out.
|
