4 ms·

It looks terrible. These are the kinds of machines that bring bad name to the concept of free/open source hardware. Nothing that is the fault of Bunnie, but som

by chatman 11y ago

It looks terrible. These are the kinds of machines that bring bad name to the concept of free/open source hardware. Nothing that is the fault of Bunnie, but something that reflects a sad reality.

avmich 11y ago
This is a machine for early adopters - not the followers.
- chatman 11y ago
  The sad part is that we are talking about "early" adoption with just 2 months to go for 2016!
tdicola 11y ago
I'm sure people said the Apple I looked ugly too. That didn't stop it from revolutionizing home computing.
Yaggo 11y ago
It's about priorities. This [small budget] project priorities open source hw/sw, not industrial design. Good industrial design isn't cheap, easy nor comes for free.
- vlehto 11y ago
  I think its more about people. I'd love to work for something like this. I might not even need money for it. But I would not do it just to "sleek up this box", I would want to take part in the design process. (Or some money. I can do boring stuff with salary.) 1. These people probably don't know anybody like me. 2. Nobody wants to give away decision power when it's about their pet project.
mikekchar 11y ago
Glass-half-full-guy here. Free software, as a movement, started in the early 80's. Writing free software is incredibly easy because you need only a bare minimum of building blocks. Also once the initial tool set is built, anyone can join with virtually no cost to entry (for example, if you had emacs and GCC binaries and a computer capable of running them, you could participate in free software). Free hardware is completely different. You have to rely on other organizations all the way down the chain. And even if you manage to build a tool set to build something, it's not like anyone else can simply copy it and get started. They end up having almost the same struggle that you did. Consider as well how long it took for the free software view point to become acceptable to mainstream thinking. Even today, almost 2016, there are huge populations of programmers who think free software is crazy. But now there are companies built on free software with near billion dollar valuations, and other companies mostly built with free software that are in the many-billions-of-dollars of valuation. The concept has gotten over the hump, though it was a huge struggle for decades (and it continues to be necessary to make sure that legislation doesn't take our freedom away). Software was crazily hard. Hardware is nigh on impossible. And yet, they have accomplished this! It's not sad, it's amazing! I understand that you wish that the world was made up in a way that would make free hardware easy, but it's not. It never will be. It will take the concerted effort of dedicated pioneers to drag it into the consciousness of the masses. I suppose it is sad that it isn't easier in the same way that it is sad that it doesn't occasionally rain candy instead of raindrops. But that is no reason to be disappointed.

by chatman 11y ago

It looks terrible. These are the kinds of machines that bring bad name to the concept of free/open source hardware. Nothing that is the fault of Bunnie, but something that reflects a sad reality.

avmich 11y ago

This is a machine for early adopters - not the followers.

chatman 11y ago
The sad part is that we are talking about "early" adoption with just 2 months to go for 2016!

tdicola 11y ago

I'm sure people said the Apple I looked ugly too. That didn't stop it from revolutionizing home computing.

Yaggo 11y ago

It's about priorities. This [small budget] project priorities open source hw/sw, not industrial design. Good industrial design isn't cheap, easy nor comes for free.

vlehto 11y ago
I think its more about people. I'd love to work for something like this. I might not even need money for it. But I would not do it just to "sleek up this box", I would want to take part in the design process. (Or some money. I can do boring stuff with salary.) 1. These people probably don't know anybody like me. 2. Nobody wants to give away decision power when it's about their pet project.

mikekchar 11y ago

Glass-half-full-guy here. Free software, as a movement, started in the early 80's. Writing free software is incredibly easy because you need only a bare minimum of building blocks. Also once the initial tool set is built, anyone can join with virtually no cost to entry (for example, if you had emacs and GCC binaries and a computer capable of running them, you could participate in free software). Free hardware is completely different. You have to rely on other organizations all the way down the chain. And even if you manage to build a tool set to build something, it's not like anyone else can simply copy it and get started. They end up having almost the same struggle that you did. Consider as well how long it took for the free software view point to become acceptable to mainstream thinking. Even today, almost 2016, there are huge populations of programmers who think free software is crazy. But now there are companies built on free software with near billion dollar valuations, and other companies mostly built with free software that are in the many-billions-of-dollars of valuation. The concept has gotten over the hump, though it was a huge struggle for decades (and it continues to be necessary to make sure that legislation doesn't take our freedom away). Software was crazily hard. Hardware is nigh on impossible. And yet, they have accomplished this! It's not sad, it's amazing! I understand that you wish that the world was made up in a way that would make free hardware easy, but it's not. It never will be. It will take the concerted effort of dedicated pioneers to drag it into the consciousness of the masses. I suppose it is sad that it isn't easier in the same way that it is sad that it doesn't occasionally rain candy instead of raindrops. But that is no reason to be disappointed.