3 ms·

> Yesterday, Pebble watch software was ~95% open source. Today, it’s 100% open source. You can download, compile and run all the software you need to use your P

> Yesterday, Pebble watch software was ~95% open source. Today, it’s 100% open source. You can download, compile and run all the software you need to use your Pebble. We just published the source code for the new Pebble mobile app! Except... > Another important note - some binary blobs and other non-free software components are used today in PebbleOS and the Pebble mobile app (ex: the heart rate sensor on PT2 , Memfault library, and others). Optional non-free web services, like Wispr-flow API speech recognizer, are also used. These non-free software components are not required - you can compile and run Pebble watch software without them. This will always be the case. More non-free software components may appear in our software in the future. The core Pebble watch software stack (everything you need to use your Pebble watch) will always be open source. So 100% FOSS, except for the parts that are closed source now, and any that they add later.

modeless 11mo ago
The important thing is that all the code written by Core Devices is open source. They can't force third parties to open their code, but they're opening all of their own work. And that proprietary code is not required to use the watches. Most of them don't even have heart rate sensors, and clearly Memfault is not required. They're committing to maintaining a 100% open source version that still allows you to use the watches with minimal compromise.
- yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
  Then say "Pebble Watch Software written by Core Devices Is Now 100% Open Source", or "Pebble mobile app open sourced" (that seems to be the major actual change?), or something like that. The thing they've actually done should be commended, but that doesn't mean ignoring that they've chosen to make a claim in the headline that isn't actually true.
  - micromacrofoot 11mo ago
    I understand the desire for more literal communication, but it's not the world we live in
fao_ 11mo ago
Part of this is driven by necessity, for example, cellular network chips are typically binary blobs, etc. as mentioned, the heart rate sensor is a binary blob and that's likely because there are no good OSS solutions for those components. A lot of battery firmwares are closed source, the way that they fixed this for the early pinephone was literally just staring at a memory listing and aiming a heat gun at the battery to see how it reacted when it went hot.
- yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
  Sure; I'm aware that embedded sucks. And to be clear, this is (IMHO) tolerable so long as the blobs are redistributable. But then maybe don't headline with "100% open source". It's better to be honest about it.
  - jdiff 11mo ago
    I see that kind of thing more often labeled "open hardware" rather than open source.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
      That's a different thing. They're also doing at least some degree of open hardware: > We’ve also published electrical and mechanical design files for Pebble 2 Duo. Yes, you can download the schematic (includes KiCad project files) right now on Github! This should give you a nice jumpstart to designing your own PebbleOS-compatible device. But this is about the software/firmware running on it.
  - fragmede 11mo ago
    Yeah, it's weird because they're the ones writing that headline, and the claim is that it's 100% open source. They didn't have to word it that way, they chose to.
  - pseudosavant 11mo ago
    I see your point, but it feels more like the difference between 99% fat free and 100% fat free. Technically measurable, but irrelevant in practice when the alternatives are all basically closed source.
traverseda 11mo ago
Yeah, but it's running on a device that has closed source blobs in it. Hell, even the linux kernel often has firmware blobs for wifi devices.
dec0dedab0de 11mo ago
I'm not sure if you're splitting hairs or not. I definitely thought this post would be about them finding open source alternatives to binary firmware, but if it doesn't interoperate with optional non-free software then it is not Open Source. It seems to be comparable to debian, and that's as open source as it gets.
- yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
  Yeah, it's a perfectly fine place to land. My objection is completely to claiming to be 100% open source when it isn't; if they'd just said 99% open source, or that everything they'd written was now open, then I wouldn't mind (or at least, I'd view it as unfortunate, but I wouldn't be upset with them).
  - bookofjoe 11mo ago
    This is classic HN. At first infuriating if it corrects ME, and then amusing.
micromacrofoot 11mo ago
They don't really have a choice with those modules
theodric 11mo ago
95% is 100% free

modeless 11mo ago

The important thing is that all the code written by Core Devices is open source. They can't force third parties to open their code, but they're opening all of their own work. And that proprietary code is not required to use the watches. Most of them don't even have heart rate sensors, and clearly Memfault is not required. They're committing to maintaining a 100% open source version that still allows you to use the watches with minimal compromise.

yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
Then say "Pebble Watch Software written by Core Devices Is Now 100% Open Source", or "Pebble mobile app open sourced" (that seems to be the major actual change?), or something like that. The thing they've actually done should be commended, but that doesn't mean ignoring that they've chosen to make a claim in the headline that isn't actually true.
- micromacrofoot 11mo ago
  I understand the desire for more literal communication, but it's not the world we live in

fao_ 11mo ago

Part of this is driven by necessity, for example, cellular network chips are typically binary blobs, etc. as mentioned, the heart rate sensor is a binary blob and that's likely because there are no good OSS solutions for those components. A lot of battery firmwares are closed source, the way that they fixed this for the early pinephone was literally just staring at a memory listing and aiming a heat gun at the battery to see how it reacted when it went hot.

yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
Sure; I'm aware that embedded sucks. And to be clear, this is (IMHO) tolerable so long as the blobs are redistributable. But then maybe don't headline with "100% open source". It's better to be honest about it.
- jdiff 11mo ago
  I see that kind of thing more often labeled "open hardware" rather than open source.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
    That's a different thing. They're also doing at least some degree of open hardware: > We’ve also published electrical and mechanical design files for Pebble 2 Duo. Yes, you can download the schematic (includes KiCad project files) right now on Github! This should give you a nice jumpstart to designing your own PebbleOS-compatible device. But this is about the software/firmware running on it.
- fragmede 11mo ago
  Yeah, it's weird because they're the ones writing that headline, and the claim is that it's 100% open source. They didn't have to word it that way, they chose to.
- pseudosavant 11mo ago
  I see your point, but it feels more like the difference between 99% fat free and 100% fat free. Technically measurable, but irrelevant in practice when the alternatives are all basically closed source.

traverseda 11mo ago

Yeah, but it's running on a device that has closed source blobs in it. Hell, even the linux kernel often has firmware blobs for wifi devices.

dec0dedab0de 11mo ago

I'm not sure if you're splitting hairs or not. I definitely thought this post would be about them finding open source alternatives to binary firmware, but if it doesn't interoperate with optional non-free software then it is not Open Source. It seems to be comparable to debian, and that's as open source as it gets.

yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
Yeah, it's a perfectly fine place to land. My objection is completely to claiming to be 100% open source when it isn't; if they'd just said 99% open source, or that everything they'd written was now open, then I wouldn't mind (or at least, I'd view it as unfortunate, but I wouldn't be upset with them).
- bookofjoe 11mo ago
  This is classic HN. At first infuriating if it corrects ME, and then amusing.

micromacrofoot 11mo ago

They don't really have a choice with those modules

theodric 11mo ago

95% is 100% free