Open Source Hardware
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Scott_Ruecker Mar 28, 2007 9:26 PM EDT |
The title of the article is misleading, it talks about collaboration and quicker production and such with a couple of examples but does not talk about actual Open Source hardware designs. With M$ trying to lump the hardware specifications into their EULA I believe that in the long run we will have to design and manufacture Open Source hardware in order to run anything other than Windows on it. Making it illegal to run anything other than Windows is what M$ wants, and ultimately will need to have happen if they are going to survive the onslaught of Open Source. Vista represents the beginning of tying the hardware that Vista runs on to their EULA. What if running non-M$ software on certain hardware (as in consumer retail desktops and laptops) becomes a crime? I refuse to believe that it will really happen but in some form or another it just might. If M$ can sign a deal with Novell to create the perception that if you use SuSE Linux it will keep you from being sued by them, then they could do the same thing with hardware too. All they need to do is get their foot in the door to start dictating their terms and conditions to all the manufacturers. I am not trying to make a mountain out of a molehill but this is an issue that we will eventually have to deal with because of Microsoft and their self preservation tactics. |
| tracyanne Mar 28, 2007 9:50 PM EDT |
I think that a lot more effort should be put into ceating Open Source hardware simply from the perspective that it would support Linux. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 29, 2007 3:05 AM EDT |
Quoting:I refuse to believe that it will really happen It can happen qiute easily. All MS has do to is invent a good piece of must-have hardware, patent it, pressure the OEM's in including that hardware into their boxes and then include a patent license for the hardware with Windows (and only Windows). Voila. Computers that legally can only run Windows. Just keep an eye on hardware patents that MS files or hardware companies that MS buys. It'll happen. Soon. Before Vista +1 is out. |
| tuxchick Mar 29, 2007 7:35 AM EDT |
It's already happening. DRM BIOSes have been shipping for a couple of years now, which have little to do with giving users good security tools, and everything to do with preventing us from running other operating systems. They haven't quite taken the final step, but you can bet your grandpappy's best dentures they're planning on it. |
| Scott_Ruecker Mar 29, 2007 7:42 AM EDT |
So I guess I should continue hoarding older working computers huh? If it is going to happen then why are there not more Open Source hardware designs? I know of a video card in the works but I haven't heard of much else. What will happen in the future when our hardware breaks down and we have no more replacement parts in the vault? |
| dcparris Mar 29, 2007 8:08 AM EDT |
There is a Free/Open Bios project, and I believe a few other projects. However, unlike software, the cost of such designs is fairly prohibitive, especially when it comes to prototyping. I know the more knowledgeable in this area will correct any errors in my thinking. |
| jimf Mar 29, 2007 8:53 AM EDT |
To my mind, the bios project makes the most sense in combating DRM, but, I'm not seeing blazing progress there. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 29, 2007 1:59 PM EDT |
The LinuxBIOS project is doing quite nicely, but it's just that: a BIOS -- targetted to run on existing hardware. They don;t design new hardware themselves. |
| jimf Mar 29, 2007 2:12 PM EDT |
> They don;t design new hardware themselves. I understand... And your point is??? |
| tracyanne Mar 29, 2007 2:30 PM EDT |
quote:: unlike software, the cost of such designs is fairly prohibitive, especially when it comes to prototyping. ::quote Hardware prototyping is a fairly expensive process, especially when one is using multi layered boards like computer boards, The most expensive part of the operation is not the components themselves, but tooling up to actually build a prototype that will reflect the usage requirements of the final product. (I believe I know what I'm talking about here, as I used to design production lines (Methods Engineering) and work in QA for an Electronics manufacturer in NZ) |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 29, 2007 2:41 PM EDT |
> I understand... And your point is??? My point is that LinuxBIOS isn't and open hardware project in the sense that the Open Graphics project is (http://wiki.duskglow.com/tiki-index.php?page=Open-Graphics). |
| dcparris Mar 29, 2007 2:54 PM EDT |
You're right, Sander, but I believe there are other projects geared toward hardware. The FSF/GNU Project should have a link somewhere to some Free/Open hardware projects. |
| jimf Mar 29, 2007 3:01 PM EDT |
@sander Well yeah, but it is something that will (or at least could) have a more immediate impact. Hardware solutions??? I'm somewhat doubtful... |
| Scott_Ruecker Mar 29, 2007 3:47 PM EDT |
jimf, You speak to exactly why I started this thread. What we are talking about likely will not become a 'critical' issue for some time but if there really isn't much past a BIOS and Graphics card in the works what will happen? I am not trying to be combative in any way, I am just proposing the question.. What are we going to do when the day comes that we have no options left for us to run non-propitiatory software? What tracyanne says is true, it takes a serious amount of resources just to make a prototype let alone start production on something and have the level of quality and consistency needed. |
| jdixon Mar 29, 2007 3:55 PM EDT |
> What are we going to do when the day comes that we have no options left for us to run non-propitiatory software? Well, China's got a working processor and seems to be making their own machines. Whether they'd be any better I can't say. |
| jimf Mar 29, 2007 4:24 PM EDT |
> China's got a working processor Why am I not reassured... |
| jdixon Mar 29, 2007 4:32 PM EDT |
> Why am I not reassured... It probably has something to do with your limited faith in governments, but that's just a guess. :) |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 29, 2007 4:33 PM EDT |
I've recently been pointed to these: http://www.opensparc.net/ http://www.gaisler.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task... ...which are the OpenSPARC systems. Unfortunately, I can see "demand" being the real problem with the OpenSource CPU/Architecture. Could speed keep up with what AMD and Intel produce? Would the difference in price, because the information it is made from is non-proprietary, make up for the difference in speed/features? Personally, I prefer features in software and efficiency in hardware. It is much easier to update software when a new technique increases the efficiency of a process than it is to forge new silicon. |
| jimf Mar 29, 2007 4:47 PM EDT |
> ...which are the OpenSPARC systems. Absolutely! Nice processors, I'd choose one in a heartbeat. Now all we need are motherboards, controllers, etc, etc to get it off the ground, and all at a price that's affordable to the average consumer. I'd really like that to happen. I 'really' wish that would happen. But, I seriously doubt it will. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 30, 2007 12:46 AM EDT |
For true open hardware to become the norm of the day, the entire manufacturing process of computer parts needs to be revolutionized. What you need is some kind of machine that can take a design and produce a product. They are already working on printers that can print circuit boards with metallic ink (e.g: http://www.engadget.com/2004/11/02/epson-prints-1mm-thick-ci...). Someone needs to come up with a way to do the same thing for integrated circuits. The first one who comes up with the technology to do so is going to be a gazillionaire, even if the machine can only make IC's in the micrometer scale instead of the nanometer scale (E.g. Pentium 1). Such a machine, combined with projects such as Open Cores (http://www.opencores.org/) could revolutionize open hardware. Last year there was an excellent series of articles on Free Software Magazine that described the necessity for such machines (Towards a Free Matter economy (7 parts): http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/free_matter_eco...). The gist: If we are ever going to colonize space (even as close by as the moon) then such machines are an absolute requirement. A colony cannot rely on shipments from earth to replace broken parts. They must be able to manufacture them independently from designs transmitted from earth. |
| Scott_Ruecker Mar 30, 2007 1:33 AM EDT |
Quoting:A colony cannot rely on shipments from earth to replace broken parts. They must be able to manufacture them independently from designs transmitted from earth. I can hear the construction company now.."What, you mean there's not going to be a service contract for this thing?" Now you know why we will never do much more that fire satellites into orbit. The only way we will ever get anything going in space is by helping big business figure out a way to make money on it. They are the only ones with enough capital to do it with any amount of seriousness. Which of course means that ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING will be as propitiatory as possible. If not, it will continue to be only military personnel looking busy and the ultra rich taking joy rides. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 30, 2007 1:42 AM EDT |
Well, let's hope that the prospect of becoming one of the ultra rich is enough incentive for someone to figure out how to "print" IC's without the expensive master fab process. |
| NoDough Mar 30, 2007 9:19 AM EDT |
Microsoft locks up the PCs with DRM'd hardware.
IBM turns their Cell processor server hardware into desktop hardware.
Linux blows Microsoft's doors off. And the problem is??? Come to think of it, I believe I read somewhere that you can add a hard drive to a Sony PS3 and have a killer Linux box. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 30, 2007 1:09 PM EDT |
"The only way we will ever get anything going in space is by helping big business figure out a way to make money on it." Obviously someone who never read Victor Koman's _Kings of the High Frontier_. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kings_of_the_High_Frontier But really, what would you pay for a OpenSPARC chip, motherboard and OpenBIOS ROM, and an OpenVideo card? $400? Keep to open industry standards for the IO cards and memory slots, I'm pretty sure it could run Linux right out off the starting block. There are a bunch of custom ASIC manufacturers who could easily make the chips, who cares if they're made in Vietnam? But _finding_ a market for them is the hard part. Maybe someone like Penguin Computing as an outlet would work. There's a huge demand, supposedly, for Linux based hardware. Where, oh where, can we find our deep-pocket "Shuttleworth" to jump-start the process? |
| jimf Mar 30, 2007 1:39 PM EDT |
> Where, oh where, can we find our deep-pocket "Shuttleworth" to jump-start the process? Oh, I'm sure the Gates Foundation has a few hundred million to shell out... Just tell them it's a start-up for poor starving penguins in Antarctica... No?... Don't think they'd buy that huh? Well, it was worth a try. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 30, 2007 3:08 PM EDT |
> There are a bunch of custom ASIC manufacturers who could easily make the chips. The startup costs are still prohibitive. That's exactly how OGP got underfunded back in 2005. They designed a chip, had an ASIC master made and discovered that it had a bug that prevented it from working properly. $1.000.000 out the windows and now the project is struggling to get enough funds for a second try. These costs simply limit how many iterations you can make of a design. For software it's unlimited. Just change a few lines, recompile and benchmark. This is what lowers the treshhold for contribution. It costs little more then time. That's not possible with hardware design currently. Software emulation is simply too slow and FPGA's are limited in size as well as expensive to buy. |
| DarrenR114 Mar 30, 2007 3:34 PM EDT |
@jimf, Just tell them that "Happy Feet" was a real documentary. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!