Open Hardware?

[zaoin]

Probably this haven't sense.

Will the pandora design be as the msx?

An standard like PC from IBM?

And then all kind of enterprises from all kind of countries will build lots of cheap pandora's based devices?

And Craigx&Co have a percentage of selling those machines?

(Sorry for my english and probably this "idea")

 

[atomicthumbs]

no

 

[bnolsen]

Since english isn't his first language I'll try to explain better.

Yes, the pandora is totally open, drivers and all (please correct me if i'm wrong).

Yes there is a very good possibility developers who are interested in developing for the cell phone market will use pandora as a development unit.

Craig & Co won't get money for this technology, Texas Instruments will.

Honestly with the Cortex A8 only supporting 128MB DDR it's not in a position to take on the PC market. Just like intel's new Silverthorne is in no way ready to take on the embedded market.

It's a shame the ARM folks couldn't see into the future and see how utterly friggin cheap DDR2 is today, otherwise it would be better positioned to move into extreme low powered laptops.

 

[atomicthumbs]

bnolsen: he was asking if the Pandora hardware would be an open standard, and if Craig & co would license it to outside people so that various companies could make Pandora-based equipment.

I.E., what 3DO did with the 3DO, licensing it to Goldstar, Samsung, and various others.

My response is no.

 

[Zarneth]

I don't think making the pandora hardware completely open would be a good thing. The Dev's are likely investing a LOT of money into this, it's only right that they be allowed to make a profit.

 

[javaJake]

no

Since english isn't his first language I'll try to explain better.

<snip>


:lol:

You made my day!

I don't think making the pandora hardware completely open would be a good thing. The Dev's are likely investing a LOT of money into this, it's only right that they be allowed to make a profit.

Folks, this is where the Open Source model breaks: business. Open Source is exactly opposite to a business model, and, although very cool and often more productive, produces less profits than a business does. This is unattractive for people who want to develop hardware/software for a living.

Thankfully, there are compromises.

 

[jedisolo]

I thought opensource was just for software only?

 

[Chip]

I thought opensource was just for software only?

No, you can have open source hardware too. This generally means supplying schematics and firmware and technical details. This information allows users to better understand the hardware and modify and improve it.

You don't see open source hardware very often because a lot of money (not just time) goes into designing and testing a physical product. It is difficult to recoup this cost when you're basically giving other companies step-by-step instructions for making a cheaper, knockoff version of your product.

 

[Squidge]

I thought opensource was just for software only?

No, you can have open source hardware too. This generally means supplying schematics and firmware and

Firmware is software

I believe the latest example of open source hardware was documented by the NY Times on 6th January this year :- http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/business...amp;oref=slogin

 

[cj1138]

Yes, the pandora is totally open, drivers and all (please correct me if i'm wrong).

Unfortunately, I think you're wrong. Will someone in the know please elaborate? What, if any, binary-only blobs will be required for this machine to operate? I'm thinking firmware, boot loader, drivers...

 

[ldesnogu]

It's a shame the ARM folks couldn't see into the future and see how utterly friggin cheap DDR2 is today, otherwise it would be better positioned to move into extreme low powered laptops.

Do you know what market ARM targets? Do you see many DDR2 based phones?

Also it's up to the SoC creator to add DDR2 support. ARM even has a DDR2 controller (look for PL341).

 

[b._.o._.b]

As far as I know there is not much completely open hardware. A great initiative for developing an open videocard is to be found here http://wiki.opengraphics.org./tiki-index.php
When its released, I will be surely buy this one.

First announced in 2005 and still waiting. I'm sure it will come one day, but I don't know what it is with new open source projects/companies, they always tend to take a lot longer than expected.

 

[Squidge]

Unfortunately, I think you're wrong. Will someone in the know please elaborate? What, if any, binary-only blobs will be required for this machine to operate? I'm thinking firmware, boot loader, drivers...

You can download the source code to the primary and secondary boot loaders, linux kernel and loads of drivers already

 

[javaJake]

You can download the source code to the primary and secondary boot loaders, linux kernel and loads of drivers already

Would you mind expanding that comment a few sentences?

 

[ldesnogu]

You can download the source code to the primary and secondary boot loaders, linux kernel and loads of drivers already

Does TI provide full access to the IVA2+ and its C6x? Could be fun to program

You can download the source code to the primary and secondary boot loaders, linux kernel and loads of drivers already

Would you mind expanding that comment a few sentences?

Perhaps does Squidge refer to this?

 

[bnolsen]

It's a shame the ARM folks couldn't see into the future and see how utterly friggin cheap DDR2 is today, otherwise it would be better positioned to move into extreme low powered laptops.

Do you know what market ARM targets? Do you see many DDR2 based phones?

Also it's up to the SoC creator to add DDR2 support. ARM even has a DDR2 controller (look for PL341).


Yes, I know...and the DDR2 spec is far superior to DDR for power consumption.

My main point is that a 128MB limit seems pretty absurd in today's market DDR2 prices are less than 1/2 DDR prices.

The mobile cpu market doesn't seem to work on an 18 month or so cycle that the desktop guys do. With intel deciding they want a piece of that market they may have to or be faced with competing against intel's manufacturing capability.

 

[ldesnogu]

It's a shame the ARM folks couldn't see into the future and see how utterly friggin cheap DDR2 is today, otherwise it would be better positioned to move into extreme low powered laptops.

Do you know what market ARM targets? Do you see many DDR2 based phones?

Also it's up to the SoC creator to add DDR2 support. ARM even has a DDR2 controller (look for PL341).


Yes, I know...and the DDR2 spec is far superior to DDR for power consumption.

My main point is that a 128MB limit seems pretty absurd in today's market DDR2 prices are less than 1/2 DDR prices.

The mobile cpu market doesn't seem to work on an 18 month or so cycle that the desktop guys do. With intel deciding they want a piece of that market they may have to or be faced with competing against intel's manufacturing capability.

Again I don't see why you say "ARM folks". ARM does not build anything, ARM provides IP to silicon vendors which in turn provide silicon to hardware vendor.

You should direct your concerns to the hardware vendors

 

[Squidge]

ARM does provide reference designs to selected companies, and those companies don't normally change a fat lot under the "It works, why break it?" philosophy. You can be sure when there is a demand for 256MB devices, the support will be there.