Steve Mosher steve at openmoko.com
Sun Apr 19 20:01:05 CEST 2009

Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Am 12.04.2009 um 00:14 schrieb Steve Mosher:
>> Let me share with you my initial cut at this process. Dr. N and I have
>> been exchanging ideas for a short bit, and I also participate in two
>> invitation only lists that are discussing the GTA03. I'd like to try  
>> to
>> open up the whole process. With the exception of Dr. N ( and a couple
>> others) everyone who posts on these lists has "implementitis" They  
>> each
>> have a vision of the "perfect phone" They are all jumping to a  
>> solution
>> when the problem  is ill posed. The question is not " what's the  
>> perfect
> Exactly.
> What we need to solve first is *how* do we have a chance to get a  
> GTA03 completed (independently of how it looks like).
> This involves questions about:
> * which community contributions to hardware design are possible
> * how can this be funded (by community)
> * which role has OM, Inc. in this game (the lead sponsor? lead project  
> manager?)
> * how is a small team of capable project members selected and brought  
> togehter?
> * how do they work together in practice?
>> phone?" the question is not "what should an open smart phone be" Those
>> are not the questions. The question is this. What is the next phone  
>> that
>> Openmoko should build. or more generally what is the next Open
>> source/open hardware phone that the community can build?. When you  
>> pose
>> the question this way you impose realistic business constraints on the
>> engineering and design process. You focus on defining the requirements
>> up front, on setting cost targets, and price targets, and schedule
>> targets. That is you get the product process right.
>> I tend to think top down. I believe Dr. N and I share that approach.
> Yes. It is business planning - not implementation.
>> It's an approach I have used to build everything from jet aircraft
>> to Mp3 players. Our thought is to have a more organized process that  
>> the
>> community can share in. As for OM involvement. I will donate as much
>> time as I can and hopefully respond to all relevant mails on this  
>> list.
>> Keeping my inbox clean on a weekly if not daily basis.
>> If the activity here starts to show promise, I'll devote more time.  
>> I'll
>> volunteer to all the business planning or show others how to do it. (
>> its dead easy)
>> If people just want to have debates about resistive versus capacitive
>> or 3G versus no 3G, then I'll just reiterate that that approach is a
>> broken process. As a marketing guy I'me used to having engineering  
>> ideas
>> and products thrown over the wall. "hey steve, sell this!" Once in a
>> while you actually get something compelling. usually I toss it back
> Agreed.
>> As to your questions about funding. I'll spend some time coming up
>> With budgetary guidelines for Phone development. So that everyone
>> invloved can have an understanding of the scope of work involved.
>> So things like: man months of labor, prototype costs, EVT costs,
>> PVT costs, etc. ballpark figures. We may for example be able to
>> make it through a prototype phase with dues and contributions.
>> Don't know yet.
> What about opening also production in a FOSS sense - whoever  
> contributes to
> the GTA03 project can use the results as sort of a reference design  
> and go to any small or large EMS
> to have it produced. Or the project can help to choose such an EMS.
> So that OM, Inc. does not necessarily have to invest into final  
> production? Well, this ruins your business
> model of making some money by selling hardware...

   One thought.. License existing design to the "oganization"
   No fee, but royalities on derivative works. members in
   the organization ( dues paying) own a piece of the
   organizations equity.
> _______________________________________________
> Gta03 mailing list
> Gta03 at lists.openmoko.org
> https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/gta03

More information about the Gta03 mailing list