[Discuss] is intel edison open-source hardware?

Fri Mar 6 11:48:21 UTC 2015

Hi Mastro,

OSHW definition is clear, it's not correct to name something OSHW while 
it doesn't comply with the requirements.
No problem Intel to keep their boards/designs closed, this is their 
choice, but then they should not marketing their boards as OSHW if they 
are not.

Best regards
Tsvetan

On 03/06/2015 01:28 PM, Mastro Gippo wrote:
> Hi everybody, I'm all in for OSHW and I hate anyone using the image of a
> community to promote stuff, but I didn't like the tone of the letter. I
> don't think that threatening people is a good way to get what we want. From
> what I see here, no one batted an eye when people agreed that GPS, GSM and
> all sort of modules are ok to use on OSHW designs, even if they are black
> boxes, but now we're bashing Intel for the same thing.
> I think that even if Intel released their Altium design files, they would
> still be borderline compliant because Altium is commercial, so why bother?
> Sure, they could have designed it with kicad, but IMHO kikad is not
> complete enough for Intel's (industrial) designs (or else everyone would
> use it and Altium would go bankrupt).
> So, given the GPS module "agreement", I think that Intel could just release
> the docking boards design files to be able to say that they are compliant.
> I don't understand the point of the footnote either; what's the matter with
> Solidworks in this discussion??? Am I missing something? Aren't they free
> to make a commercial product and sell it?
>
>
>
> 2015-03-06 4:42 GMT+01:00 Jeffrey Warren <jeff at publiclab.org>:
>
>> +1 w Nancy and +1 letter!
>>
>> (Hi Seth!)
>>   On Mar 5, 2015 8:23 PM, "Nancy Ouyang" <nancy.ouyang at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Re: Galileo, Why can't they just stay away from the words "open source
>>> hardware"? I don't understand what's so blinking hard about that.
>>>
>>> I'm fine with Edison being closed-source and Intel protecting something
>>> they spent a lot of resources on. That's because they* don't claim it's
>>> open source hardware*.
>>>
>>> Sure, I'm drafting a letter. I'm working on etherpad and will ask for
>>> help editing soon.
>>> http://etherpad.mit.edu/p/oshw-may-2015
>>>
>>> ~~~
>>> narwhaledu.com, educational robots
>>> <http://gfycat.com/ExcitableLeanAkitainu> [[<(._.)>]] my personal blog
>>> <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals
>>> arvados.org (open source software for provenance, reproducing, and
>>> scaling your analyses)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Hunter, Seth E <seth.e.hunter at intel.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Hi Everyone,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here are the Edison Source files they provide:
>>>> http://www.intel.com/support/maker/edison.htm   The Edison unit is
>>>> closed – but everything around it should be well documented. I think the
>>>> reason is that the SOC and Edison package is a 9 layer board and the
>>>> Tangier team spent a long time turning a mobile phone SOC and the Broadcom
>>>> Wifi/Bluetooth into a small unit that could be integrated with products in
>>>> a modular way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What I want to figure out is if you can convert an Allegro and Orcad
>>>> files into a format that makers can work with.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regarding Galileo here is what I could find:
>>>>
>>>> Galileo gen 1:
>>>> https://communities.intel.com/community/makers/galileo/documentation/galileodocuments
>>>>
>>>> Galileo gen 1 reference design:
>>>> http://downloadmirror.intel.com/24514/eng/Galileo%20Reference%20Design.zip
>>>> (its in a format called brd)
>>>>
>>>> Galileo gen 2:
>>>> https://communities.intel.com/community/makers/galileo/documentation/intel-galileo-gen-2-development-board-documents
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What’s weird is that at one point I downloaded the board files for
>>>> Galileo Gen 1 to try and understand if makers/developers could use them to
>>>> go to product with the Quark SOC – and they were on the web and easy to
>>>> find.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don’t work directly with the software groups that make these boards
>>>> but I’ve gotten to know their org fairly well. We are trying to find a way
>>>> to gently push them towards OSH standards. If folks can send me feedback
>>>> about this I’ll gather it together to see where these products are with
>>>> regard to the checklists – I’m not sure if anyone has ever done this… but
>>>> it would be useful to present that information to the right people and I
>>>> know the right channels I think.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seth Hunter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------------
>>>> Seth Hunter
>>>> PhD, MIT Media Lab - Research Scientist at Intel Labs
>>>>
>>>> website <http://www.perspectum.com/>  |  inspiration
>>>> <http://arplay.tumblr.com/> |  life
>>>> <http://flickr.com/photos/sethismyfriend/>
>>>>
>>>> -------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* discuss-bounces at lists.oshwa.org [mailto:
>>>> discuss-bounces at lists.oshwa.org] *On Behalf Of *Nancy Ouyang
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 05, 2015 4:39 PM
>>>> *To:* The Open Source Hardware Association Discussion List
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss] is intel edison open-source hardware?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> sorry, the galileo. i couldn't figure out from the web if Intel claims
>>>> edison is open-source or not, but a friend told me it wasn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       ~~~
>>>> narwhaledu.com, educational robots
>>>> <http://gfycat.com/ExcitableLeanAkitainu> [[<(._.)>]] my personal blog
>>>> <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals
>>>>
>>>> arvados.org (open source software for provenance, reproducing, and
>>>> scaling your analyses)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Nancy Ouyang <nancy.ouyang at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/do-it-yourself/galileo-maker-quark-board.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Providing users with a fully open source hardware* and software
>>>> development environment, the Intel Galileo Gen 2 board complements and
>>>> extends the Arduino line of product
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 10 clicks in all I found was a PDF of the schematic.
>>>> http://www.intel.com/support/galileo/sb/CS-035168.htm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While better than nothing, that certainly doesn't fulfill the definition:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The hardware must be released with documentation including design
>>>> files, and must allow modification and distribution of the design files. "
>>>>
>>>> "These are the original source files that you would use to make
>>>> modifications to the hardware’s design. *The act of sharing these files
>>>> is the core practice of open-source hardware*."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.oshwa.org/definition/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just checking if someone knows better than me what's going on here.
>>>>
>>>> ~~~
>>>> narwhaledu.com, educational robots
>>>> <http://gfycat.com/ExcitableLeanAkitainu> [[<(._.)>]] my personal blog
>>>> <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals
>>>>
>>>> arvados.org (open source software for provenance, reproducing, and
>>>> scaling your analyses)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>