- Joined
- Jan 18, 2010
- Messages
- 11,411
Well maybe it can, the devboard can get pretty hot.Of course it cannot literally do everything. It does not toast bread, for example.
Well maybe it can, the devboard can get pretty hot.Of course it cannot literally do everything. It does not toast bread, for example.
Weren't you planning on using a frying pan as a heatsink?Well maybe it can, the devboard can get pretty hot.Of course it cannot literally do everything. It does not toast bread, for example.
There does not have to be any fee for RYF certification. At least, it's something that can be negotiated (there is no fixed fee), and for a small scale indie project like this, the FSF would probably not try to get money out of it. They're a non-profit organisation after all.Another way to consider the FSF/RYF:
What do you call paying a license fee (and more) to a company for their certification stamp that your device is free from licenses?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy
That's the explanation I've always heard, not just on embedded but for the longest time the reason behind NVidia's and ATI's reluctance to provide any sort of source or documentation for their chips as well.Or they want to obfuscate their hardware design?
Except for a few cases, the GLES output of glshim is much more like what the video card wants than the original OpenGL was. I'm not sure an open-source driver would have a much different implementation of glshim at all. Besides, it works on every card, not just the PowerVRI wonder, if PowerVR had a fully FOSS driver, how much easier it would have been for lunixbochs to add OpenGL support. Perhaps more performance would also be possible, if the chip is sufficiently well-documented and GL can be implemented more directly than through translation to GLES.
I remember reading somewhere (no quotes to offer, truth value of the following is unknown) that it's because of a tangle of cross-licensed stuff with a multitude of partners and competitors. They can't make an open driver nor expose some things about their chips without disclosing stuff the licences prevent them from disclosing. They may support others making open drivers clean-room and offer patches for some stuff they're sure they are on the clear with, Because it's a tangle, they're playing it safe and work on the open drivers based on a white-list rather than a black-list of things they could help with. Even if they wanted to do a chip with open drivers, they'd need to basically make an entirely new chip architecture and drivers to go with it that provably don't contain any licensed stuff.That's the explanation I've always heard, not just on embedded but for the longest time the reason behind NVidia's and ATI's reluctance to provide any sort of source or documentation for their chips as well.Or they want to obfuscate their hardware design?
I think we are saying the same thing then - strengths and weaknesses while it can do many things. And avoiding false expectations.The point is: it's a unique device with lots of strengths and weaknesses, but the versatility, openness and universality is the main advantage it has. Nearly everything it can do, can be done better by some dedicated device, but if you want to carry around all those dedicated devices, you're going to need two backpacks instead of just a cargo pants pocket.
Wasn't it Qualcomm who bought ATIs mobile division?PowerVR got their stuff back in the day from ATI, at one point it was a scaled down graphics card that had a lot to do with regular ati cards, and it has lots of licensed things from other parties, so they cant open it. It gets worse and worse too, the SGX6 series is even more cancer.
You forgot to add pop some popcorn to that listHow to achieve happiness:
1. Register to OP Forum
2. Create a thread asking if [device] can be truly "Open"
3. Sit back, and watch as thirty pages or so of argumentative drivel spews forth
How I miss this.
D.
That's the real issue with Pandora marketing, actually. While geeky individuals see why such a device is worth €300, it's really hard to explain to a typical user what are all those features you're talking about and how do they apply to real life. Most of those users are actually better off using a tablet with gaming controls, priced at €100-150. And believe me, the argument "you can code on it" works for maybe 100 people out of 4000 pandora users.I think we are saying the same thing then - strengths and weaknesses while it can do many things. And avoiding false expectations.The point is: it's a unique device with lots of strengths and weaknesses, but the versatility, openness and universality is the main advantage it has. Nearly everything it can do, can be done better by some dedicated device, but if you want to carry around all those dedicated devices, you're going to need two backpacks instead of just a cargo pants pocket.
Of course, I don't think we should limit it to gaming only - because then the price point would not be justified easily.
Well Ive seen a lot of people who have one for the musical abilities that don't care about gaming at all, and who wouldn't have come across it anyway.. They did come across it via the conference ED has been going to or pandora owners who bragg about their pandora (like me)I think pushing it as a emulation device with enough buttons and really good battery life is what attracts users, anything extra just justifies the price to people who would want one anyway.
And how many people is "a lot", exactly? Qjackctl has around 500 downloads over 10 releases, which gives an estimate of some 50 people interested in it. The same calculation done for Drastic computes to about 1000.Well Ive seen a lot of people who have one for the musical abilities that don't care about gaming at all
I know 5 and that 5 out of 5 other pandora owners I know, so for me it feels like 100%And how many people is "a lot", exactly? Qjackctl has around 500 downloads over 10 releases, which gives an estimate of some 50 people interested in it. The same calculation done for Drastic computes to about 1000.Well Ive seen a lot of people who have one for the musical abilities that don't care about gaming at all
I'm not saying we should discard small communities, not at all. But if we're talking marketing here, we should assume that any effort spent on emulation (like latest 3D drivers available out of the box) is 20 times more valuable than effort spent on audio features-du-jour.
Now, if someone tells me that he wants Pyra to ship with only free software because it's the right thing to do, I can respect that and even agree to some extent. But asking for Pyra to be RYF (and drop 3D drivers) and using marketing arguments to justify it is just nonsense.
IMHO RYF is nonsense to begin with. A proprietary standards advertising organization to ensure that there are no proprietary standards used... Not worth the licensing fees.I know 5 and that 5 out of 5 other pandora owners I know, so for me it feels like 100%And how many people is "a lot", exactly? Qjackctl has around 500 downloads over 10 releases, which gives an estimate of some 50 people interested in it. The same calculation done for Drastic computes to about 1000.Well Ive seen a lot of people who have one for the musical abilities that don't care about gaming at all
I'm not saying we should discard small communities, not at all. But if we're talking marketing here, we should assume that any effort spent on emulation (like latest 3D drivers available out of the box) is 20 times more valuable than effort spent on audio features-du-jour.
Now, if someone tells me that he wants Pyra to ship with only free software because it's the right thing to do, I can respect that and even agree to some extent. But asking for Pyra to be RYF (and drop 3D drivers) and using marketing arguments to justify it is just nonsense.
And I agree on the nonsense bit
I know what you are trying to say, but this is not actually the case. I have had several multitools since I was under 10. I use them regularly and know many others that do as well. Many people prefer the ones with pliers that are more rugged and heavy. Some of us prefer the smaller, lighter weight swiss army knives. I have used the phillips screwdriver on the current one I carry many times, yet I do prefer a better screwdriver if I have the option, and sometimes the one on the knife is not long enough. When it does get used I am glad I have it. I use the blades and scissors frequently, and have used the file and awl a few times. The only things I can't remember using are the saw and that stupid hook thing, and I avoid the toothpick.BTW, swiss army knives are useless toys for kids aged 20+ who happen to use its screwdriver maybe twice in the knife's lifetime: once to check it out, and a second time to impress a friend.