Steve Mosher steve at
Mon Apr 6 00:02:15 CEST 2009

Dr. N

  We are thinking down similar paths. See my other other posts.

  I will check out the satilite site. My sense is, without even looking,
  that a fair number of people working on the project probably had some 
aerospace background and were well schooled in the process of 
requirements driven product design. I dont want to clog up community 
with this talk so I'm trying to get a new list set up.


Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi Lothar, Jörg, Sean, Steve, and all others who are interested in a 
> future GTA03,
> I have also been thinking for a while in exactly the same direction. 
> Making the development of the GTA03 a community activity. Supported and 
> sponsored by individuals and companies who are interested in the results.
> On one hand HW development needs a clear and close communication between 
> people. On the other hand it needs a large number of supporters who keep 
> their fingers out until they are asked. But synchronizing activities is 
> much more difficult than with SW (using SVN or GIT).
> What we IMHO therefore need is:
> * a core team that works (at least semi-)professionally on it. I think 
> the community is large enough to provide enough members with all 
> expertise that is required (from mechanics over battery to RF etc.).
> * a clear milestone plan as in every successful hardware development 
> project
> * a specification freeze at some point in the milestone plan
> * openness to ask for help into the community to judge between several 
> similar technical solutions for the same requirement
> * funding of the project organization (e.g. we can set up a community 
> funds or society or association or however the legal form has to be 
> choosen). Funding levels could start at 5€ per year for students and go 
> upwards for individuals and companies. And special services (e.g. 
> managing the production of 100 customized units) could even provide more 
> funding for the organization.
> A word to all those who think Hardware can not be developed by a 
> community should take a look at:
> Building, launching and operating not only 1 but approx. 50 satellites 
> in the past 30 years is definitively more complex than building an open 
> smartphone.
> Nikolaus
> Am 05.04.2009 um 19:39 schrieb Lothar Behrens:
>> Am 05.04.2009 um 18:14 schrieb Joerg Reisenweber:
>>> Am So  5. April 2009 schrieb Lothar Behrens:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I am mostly reading and sometime writing here. If it was useful or
>>>> useless - I don't know. But anyway.
>>>> Isn't it possible to also develop hardware collaboratively?
>>> [...]
>>> Hi Lothar,
>>> nope this won't fly. It's basically the sw pov approach to hw
>>> development
>>> Steve mentioned in one of his current posts.
>> I may read his post...
>>> Developing hw is more than creating a good looking schematics in
>>> Eagle, and
>>> tasks like layout are partially done by autorouter and the other
>>> half is a
>>> *close* *interactive* process between the layout gal, the EE guys,
>>> the RF
>>> guys, the ME dept, sourcing dept etc etc.
>> It is indeed difficult. But otoh are many hw projects 
>> (
>>  or for sample),
>> or at least hw related.
>>> IIRC OM had some really nasty experience when outsourcing some
>>> layout task.
>>> Just because the layout didn't understand exactly what EE had in
>>> mind when
>>> creating the schem, and EE didn't closely check the work of layouters.
>> I don't speak about outsourcing. I have made similar experiences with
>> outsourcing:
>> An EE project (motor control) should be outsourced, but the schematics
>> were sent by faximile!
>> The result was about writing an application to compare the netlists to
>> compare the then distinct
>> projects (different wire names and the like).
>> So don't split any EE project or work with different versions without
>> a CVS or SVN!
>> But giving development boards or mobile phone development kits would
>> be an option to
>> broaden the idea behind open mobile phone. Say, a GSM kit could be
>> used for the carPC hobby
>> engineer. And there are really GSM modules sold by other companies. 
>> (
>> )
>> Then you have the control about your pcb design, but propably broaden
>> your product palette.
>> Not all developers need a complete telephone. But you could indeed get
>> more value if the
>> 'components' of a mobile device also spread the globe - as a
>> development kit or separately.
>>> for your Q about project files instead of pdf: OM is making money by
>>> selling
>>> hw, so there's not much sense in publishing data that doesn't help
>>> EE guys in
>>> community to understand the hw but instead is only needed for
>>> production
>>> purposes. In the end you can't do anything on a single-device basis
>>> with
>>> layout or schem proj data you couldn't do without it. Or are you the
>>> guy
>>> who's etching 8-layer at home and soldering uBGA by hand? ;-) You
>>> can't patch
>>> a ready-done 8layer PCB, no matter what your document files are (sw
>>> POV on
>>> hw!). And no company is going to invest in producing some dozen
>>> proto PCB
>>> done by "anonymous" community guys, without checking each and every
>>> trace and
>>> footprint again what in the end for sure is more work than doing it
>>> inhouse
>>> from scratch.
>> I don't mean that you grab the prototypes blindly for your use. But
>> didn't you think, the comunity
>> will also help in hardware aspects?
>> Maybe the devkit could be coubled with a contest, who develops the
>> best mod or addon. Or as an early preview
>> for developers of software (the display discussion for sample:
>> Touchscreen Capacitive (was Re: OT: iPhone howto)).
>> Did someone yet really implemented drivers for a multitouch display?
>> Wouldn't it good to get one preassembled from OM to develop for it?
>> Therefore a kit would be good. Also selling kits for parts only.
>> Gerald: It is worth to publish the private post :-)
>>> Other companies tend to keep schematics closed to protect their IP,
>>> so we at
>>> OM at least don't want to give asian cloners a kickstart without
>>> adding *any*
>>> benefit for our customers.
>> Do you really think, they don't get any value just from the PDF version?
>> Time will tell us this.
>> Other companies think about using the same idea behind open source for
>> hardware. It's because
>> of one big issue today: The technologie changes so fast, that
>> individual development is too expensive.
>> Opencores as mentioned above is impressing me. Another group is going
>> similar steps in automotive. Even yet
>> closed and membership is propably very expensive, But there is
>> movement in how to develop technical products.
>> Lothar
>> -- | Rapid Prototyping | XSLT Codegeneration |
>> Lothar Behrens
>> Heinrich-Scheufelen-Platz 2
>> 73252 Lenningen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openmoko community mailing list
>> community at

More information about the community mailing list