6 ms·

I'm displeased with the association that open means unapproachable by all but the chosen, but the project is indeed worthwhile and maybe, just maybe, it can be

I'm displeased with the association that open means unapproachable by all but the chosen, but the project is indeed worthwhile and maybe, just maybe, it can be honed to a level that a normy could use it. :)

qwertyboy 13y ago
Displeasure aside, having access to the source directly benefits people who can read and edit the source. In the long run this benefits everyone, of course, but it's only the techies who can actually use the source, and that's why it's mostly the techies who care about it being open.
joezydeco 13y ago
I don't think people realize that we're standing on the shoulders of giants when we use most of this current technology. The processor, for example, has a 5,000 page technical reference manual[1]. That's just describing how to use the chip. It doesn't go into detail about how each part works internally. But to the layman it's just a 2cm^2 chip so how complicated can it be? Everyone wants the sausage but nobody wants to learn (or even know) what goes into it. [1] http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQRM.pdf http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQ...
georgemcbay 13y ago
The limitations bunnie was talking about in terms of sales aren't about technical elitism, but rather a practical decision of not wanting to be pulled into a huge support nightmare when it is almost literally just two guys in a garage working on this as a side project. This is something he is right to be concerned about. No matter how many warnings you slap on something that it is currently only suitable for advanced users, you will always get a bunch of people who want some shiny new thing and buy it and then bitch and moan that it doesn't have Apple-style end-user polish. It is all being developed in the open (in all senses of the word), so if some other entity who does want to get into the mass manufacturing and support side thinks doing so is worth it, that can always happen.

qwertyboy 13y ago

Displeasure aside, having access to the source directly benefits people who can read and edit the source. In the long run this benefits everyone, of course, but it's only the techies who can actually use the source, and that's why it's mostly the techies who care about it being open.

joezydeco 13y ago

I don't think people realize that we're standing on the shoulders of giants when we use most of this current technology. The processor, for example, has a 5,000 page technical reference manual[1]. That's just describing how to use the chip. It doesn't go into detail about how each part works internally. But to the layman it's just a 2cm^2 chip so how complicated can it be? Everyone wants the sausage but nobody wants to learn (or even know) what goes into it. [1] http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQRM.pdf http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQ...

georgemcbay 13y ago

The limitations bunnie was talking about in terms of sales aren't about technical elitism, but rather a practical decision of not wanting to be pulled into a huge support nightmare when it is almost literally just two guys in a garage working on this as a side project. This is something he is right to be concerned about. No matter how many warnings you slap on something that it is currently only suitable for advanced users, you will always get a bunch of people who want some shiny new thing and buy it and then bitch and moan that it doesn't have Apple-style end-user polish. It is all being developed in the open (in all senses of the word), so if some other entity who does want to get into the mass manufacturing and support side thinks doing so is worth it, that can always happen.