Dreaming Of Pandoras Future - Open Source Hardware Design

[Positron]

What if Pandora was released as open source hardware design?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_hardware

If you look at the list of open hardware systems on the Wikipedia page there is not much in the systems department. There is the NanoNote which is so low spec that is almost useless although it is a nice start. http://sharism.cc/specs/


Well, yes before you stop me, I know this will probably not happen but just let me dream a bit about it. Lets`s just for a moment hypothetically presume that it was possible.


Of course I know Pandoras developers have invested a lot of money and time in this Project and this cannot be given up for free. I thought about doing it like Blender but on a bigger scale.


http://www.blender.org/blenderorg/blender-foundation/history/what-s-the-deal/


Pandora is probably worth much more than 100.000 Euros, but you get the idea. If 100.000 Euros where raised in a few weeks what could you raise in a year?


Just look a Blender now it has become the standard open source 3d animation package for Linux in such a short amount of time.

I also know that Arm and PowerVR won`t release their processor and board designs and I know nothing about licensing conditions / contracts for them. But as time goes by proprietary components could be replaced by open components in future product cycles, you have to start somewhere.


And dreaming on there is my wish list for Pandora in the future:

- just a small reduction of size and weight

- a capacitive multi touch enabled display

- all hardware / batteries / connections under the display so that it can have a

- replaceable or removable keyboards for gaming / fun / web / business

- dock-able phone module with 3G/4G/UMTS/GPS etc.

- a overall better case design to be more competitive

- running a completely open Android distribution maybe on dual boot

- or an API compatible Android wrapper sort of like Wine

 

[kingoddball]

Arrrgghh :angry: ... You might get attacked by grumpy people here. :huh:

Just let the Pandora get released. They will not open the hardware. They are making a BUSINESS! Not a charity.

 

[mali]

ED indicated that they might release the schematics in the future(check the CeBit vids), so everything is well

 

[kingoddball]

Haven't they said a few times that they do not want to release the hardware? MWeston has put so much work into it.. He doesn't want to be screwed over for his hard work and theirs.

 

[SNESFAN]

why not take this http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/home/index.htm

and make your own gaming keyboard, add phone/modem into it, maybe even shrink it down some.

they do modification projects and embeded systems as well. http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/company/services.htm

make one, mass produce it and sell it.

that's pretty much what you're wanting right? I think you'll be hitting a dead end here with OP if these are your goals, they seem to have a specific design in mind and only want to upgrade it rather than change it.

 

[mali]

Haven't they said a few times that they do not want to release the hardware? MWeston has put so much work into it.. He doesn't want to be screwed over for his hard work and theirs.

Yes, but ED indicated they might publish the schematics in the future. It was mentioned in one of the CeBit vids.

 

[Mr B]

ED did, if the translation was right, hint at a possible future release of the hardware design bits. Of course, this will most likely only be a list of what you need in the hardware category, and a schematic showing how its wired. You'll have to make your own motherboard design. Connectors, analog pads, buttons and god knows what else probably wont be included either. What i mean is you get the essentials. Your going to get told how it all goes together, in theory. And from there you have to go on your own.

It's not like your going to want to mash a Panda together on a prototype board, and carry it around anyway...

Oh. And it wont happen until they made there money back. For obvious reasons.
B!

 

[greendots]

Its not practical for various reason. Would you really want a schematic of how closed source, patented IP, chips talk to eachother? There is already open hardware from cpus, ram, dsp, media decoders etc.

http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Main_Page
http://harkopen.com/
http://www.opencores.org/

 

[kingoddball]

It just seems stupid to open up all the hard work to make it even easier to clone (look at the arduino and beagleboards - Many, MANY clones available now).

Why ruin all the hard work and effort? I personally would not want anything other than the original!

 

[crackerjacker]

It just seems stupid to open up all the hard work to make it even easier to clone (look at the arduino and beagleboards - Many, MANY clones available now).

Why ruin all the hard work and effort? I personally would not want anything other than the original!

I don't think it would be ruined, and I am curious as to why you believe it would be.

Linus Torvalds created Linux, and gave all the code away for free. With the help of people the world over, that product is way better than Linus could have ever imagined, and in a way makes projects like OP possible. He is doing very well himself and all thanks to the brilliant idea of open source. Wide spread acceptance through openness appears to work very very well and makes people with good ideas very very rich.

 

[WizardStan]

Linus Torvalds created Linux, and gave all the code away for free.

Linus Torvalds didn't mortgage his house to pay for research and prototype development.

 

[Exophase]

software != hardware

Open source hardware is VERY different from open source software. I have no idea how anyone can fail to see the differences in application. Sadly we have a lot of people who think open source is the way to do everything now.

Open source hardware will never catch on that large scale outside of inherently hobbyist stuff (like dev boards) because it benefits too few while being in the manufacturer's worst interests.

But I kinda wish it would become more mainstream because now we're seeing people use it as a gimmick excuse to put bad hardware on the market. If someone was trying to sell a piece of software that was junk compared to what's already out but went "yeah, but ours is open source!" they'd get laughed at, because it's so not novel. And that's even considering that bad open source software can still be improved in time with low additional costs. As a consumer you can't use potential for improved hardware as an incentive because you've already made your purchase and are stuck with what you got. But that's just part of what I was saying about how it's not the same as software.

Besides, anyone can do hardware then release the schematics. It might be a bad move but it at least doesn't cost any money or innovation on their part to do this. Not exactly worthy of recognition, IMO.

But I do think it's kinda silly for a company like OP to put emphasis on the hardware being non-locked down (basically, I would call it "non-embedded") and running Linux, when this is far from a novel product approach in this day and age. Yes, it's not something by Nintendo, Sony, or even Apple... but I that standard was set from conception.

 

[DaveC]

Arrrgghh :angry: ... You might get attacked by grumpy people here. :huh:

Just let the Pandora get released. They will not open the hardware. They are making a BUSINESS! Not a charity.

Actually right now it is a charity. Since it costs more to make a Pandora then the pre-order amount it is like Craig is giving you free money

 

[Exophase]

Actually right now it is a charity. Since it costs more to make a Pandora then the pre-order amount it is like Craig is giving you free money

Haha, so when Sony does the same thing are they being charitable too?

It's not a charity, it's an investment.

 

[DaveC]

Actually right now it is a charity. Since it costs more to make a Pandora then the pre-order amount it is like Craig is giving you free money

Haha, so when Sony does the same thing are they being charitable too?

It's not a charity, it's an investment.

Sony does it because they subsidize it with game sales. That don't work with Pandora since there are no commercial games that have licence fee paid to OP.

 

[Exophase]

Sony does it because they subsidize it with game sales. That don't work with Pandora since there are no commercial games that have licence fee paid to OP.

Sony sells (initially) under BOM costs. I'm certain Pandora isn't doing that - they just aren't yet recouping R&D costs with their first 4000. Do you think very many hardware vendors do?

OP isn't a non-profit organization, nor do they intend to suffer irrecoverable losses from this. They (or at least some of them?) do intend to actually make money in the long term. Whether or not they happen to isn't really relevant, it's still their intention.

 

[typs lik dis]

The costs include the design of the boards/cases/nubs and creating the tools to manufacture them. I don't think it would be charity unless the tools became useless after 4000 uses.

 

[Alpha2]

It's charity until they make a profit. Most consoles aside from Nintendo's dont make a profit for at least 3 years. They have to hope that their devices stay relevant long enough to make a profit on anything other than the games (or downloadable content now).


As for open source hardware, it'd seem to me like that's just giving away your work so that someone can slap a few extra doodads in there and sell it as their own device, assuming the person making is has the engineering skill to make something of it. But thinking about it whats so different between the concept of Open source hardware and PCs? You can slap all the memory and drives and mother boards in a PC as you like... actually that's what OP did with the beagleboard isnt it?

So it's not really up to OP to open their design anyway since someone could already just grab a BB and bash out their own product too.

 

[Exophase]

It's charity until they make a profit. Most consoles aside from Nintendo's dont make a profit for at least 3 years. They have to hope that their devices stay relevant long enough to make a profit on anything other than the games (or downloadable content now).

Seriously this is not what charity means >_> There are some really wrong connotations here.

 

[Alpha2]

Well true I'm just rolling with the idea. I mean the point in the long run most of those companies are still selling things at a large loss to their own pockets until they turn a profit on something else. To charge what they actually cost or just to make a profit wouldnt get those products in to half the homes they eventually get into.