<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>Hi Pablo!<br><br></div>I didn't wanted to name specific manufactures because I don't want to give the impression that I have something against any specific manufacturer. But if you want examples just take a look at the descriptions of Hardware-related projects in kickstarter or less-know manufacturers of Arduino-compatible boards around the world and you'll find that OpenSource (or similar phrases) is listed as one of their main features.<br><br></div>Getting back to this topic, practically all of the most popular SBC in the market are using in a way or another "Open-Source" or "Open-Source compatible" in their descriptions, some of them even give you full access to their schematics, PCB Layouts and BOMs so you can easily think that they are "Open-Hardware".<br><br>However when you try to replicate this kind of boards for educative or commercial purposes you'll find:<br><br></div>1-They require a component/s that only can be bought after signing a NDA or in really big bulk orders.<br></div>2-Part of (or all the firmware) is provided as a pre-compiled binary and there are no datasheets available for critical components.<br><div><div><div>3-As a result of #2 an important part of the functionality cannot be modified or used in a different way that the one specified for the manufacturer.<br><br></div><div>I can almost say that I have seen this pattern repeat over time and different products: If it has a lots of functionality packed or highly integrated on the device and it's really, really cheap. It's almost guaranteed that is using some kind of propietary technology that you only have access (and is economically feasible to manufacture) when you plan to make them by thousands.<br><br></div><div>It's not always easy to clasiffy a project as Open-Source Hardware, but it's really easy to detect if not. At least for me: If ANY of its components requires some kind or NDA or commercial licensing OR if a critical design consideration or specification it's not available I don't consider it as Open-Source Hardware.<br></div><br><div>Regards,<br>Mario.<br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Pablo Kulbaba <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pablokulbaba@gmail.com" target="_blank">pablokulbaba@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Mario: can you list some of the "many pseudo-"Open-Source" boards."
?<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<div>On 05/02/2015 01:48 p.m., Mario Gómez
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi Michael!<br>
</div>
<div><br>
Yes it can be called Open because you could easily
reaplicate it in another CAD software or convert it to
another CAD format to comply with the EAGLE License terms.
Even it's possible to share the diagrams as non-editable
formats (JPG, PDF, others) if a CAD design file it's not
available. As I understand, the latter is accepted but not
recommended for obvious reasons.<br>
<br>
</div>
However if for example your PCB layout requires a really
precise differential-signalling considerations and you dont
provide the details or the specs for the only reason to
difficult making copies. I wouldn't think that design could
be considered OpenSource-Hardware beause you are hiding or
making difficult to access critical details of the design
needed for the proyect to work.<br>
<br>
</div>
And that's the "trap" of many pseudo-"Open-Source" boards.<br>
<br>
</div>
Regards,<br>
Mario.<br>
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM,
Michael McCormack <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mike@themccormacks.com" target="_blank">mike@themccormacks.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">To Hal's list of requirements - if I release
Eagle files, which can't be used commercially without a
commercial Eagle license can it be called "open" ?
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Cheers</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Mike</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@lists.oshwa.org" target="_blank">discuss@lists.oshwa.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
<a href="mailto:discuss@lists.oshwa.org" target="_blank">discuss@lists.oshwa.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><pre cols="72">--
PabloK</pre>
</font></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@lists.oshwa.org">discuss@lists.oshwa.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>