5 ms·

Except that Broadcom released "full documentation for the VideoCore IV graphics core, and a complete source release of the graphics stack under a 3-clause BSD l

Except that Broadcom released "full documentation for the VideoCore IV graphics core, and a complete source release of the graphics stack under a 3-clause BSD license" [1], enough to enable a blob-free graphics driver. Code has already been committed to Mesa [2]. That is a lot more than you can say about the PowerVR core in the Beaglebone advocated by another response to this post. [1] http://www.raspberrypi.org/a-birthday-present-from-broadcom/ http://www.raspberrypi.org/a-birthday-present-from-broadcom/ [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_graphics_device_driver#Broadcom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_graphics_d...

throwaway000002 12y ago
Of course you're referring to me. Arguing the whole openness of the video driver is a dead end [1]. If you want an open video driver use Intel, or AMD and be done with it. Give me a hand-cranked universal Turing machine and I've basically got the same device as a RPi. The only difference, it's cheap, and I don't have to get a workout hand-cranking it. Video is just a (semi-)fixed functional unit. Sure, it'd be nice to have open drivers, but so would having the RTL of the processor, and the netlist and gerber of the board. Then they could actually talk about teaching kids something they actually couldn't learn with just having access to a hand-cranked universal Turing machine. The fact that the foundation and Broadcom get their free goodwill from their claim of "for-the-sake-of-the-children" is the real source of my ire. Look at how many references to "industry" the article quotes from representatives of the foundation. Like the embedded SOM has anything at all to do with education, or the continuance of production of older models. Please... [1] http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eZd0IYJ7J40 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eZd0IYJ7J40
- jvdh 12y ago
  Do you think it is feasible to release a similarly priced, similarly capable device with completely open hardware? The RPi has sold immensely to home users, but also in education. The foundation is also open to criticism and has shown in the past that they are willing to change their production when given the opportunity. They have moved most of their production to the UK for example, whereas the first boards were all manufactured off shore.
  - userbinator 12y ago
    As much as they are "open to criticism", I very strongly doubt that they are going to use anything other than Broadcom. Do you think it is feasible to release a similarly priced, similarly capable device with completely open hardware? https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/A20/A20-OLinuXino-LIME/open-source-hardware https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/A20/A20-OLinuXino-... Certainly not as widely known as the RPi, but I'd attribute that more to a general lack of marketing/"presence" in education.
    - pjc50 12y ago
      That doesn't meet the (absurdly high) openness standard of "RTL of the processor" mentioned by throwaway000002.
      - throwaway000002 12y ago
        My, overly-impassioned, exaggerated point is that the RPi is no better that many other competing devices on the market and should me measured solely on technical/business merit. The popularity of the device has spawned a product category of itself. However, at this point in time, claiming something about education is total rubbish. Take the old Pi, run ARMv7 QEMU on it et voila you have the new Pi. There is nothing new to learn, to grow, to probe questions about. The GPIO of the device could just as easily be be provided by a USB breakout board, etc, etc. Cypress had a $4 PSOC prototype board and if anyone (especially Cypress) bothered to develop open-source tooling for it, it would have be a far more useful device to learn from. (As an aside: thank you to HNer asb and colleagues for the lowRISC project. Also, thank you to people like "bunnie" and "xobs" for Novena. These are real people, with real projects working with the best of intentions.)
        lsaferite 12y ago
        It pleases me to see you mention the PSoC 4. I think it's a highly underrated educational tool due to the software stack used to develop on it. If they were to open up the platform I know several places that would love to use it when teaching kids about hardware and software development.
seba_dos1 12y ago
Beaglebone can be at least booted without non-free blobs, so it can be 100% free if you don't need to use 3D acceleration. Raspberry Pi cannot - even now with free GPU drivers, you still cannot get Linux working without providing non-free firmware blob to it first.

throwaway000002 12y ago

Of course you're referring to me. Arguing the whole openness of the video driver is a dead end [1]. If you want an open video driver use Intel, or AMD and be done with it. Give me a hand-cranked universal Turing machine and I've basically got the same device as a RPi. The only difference, it's cheap, and I don't have to get a workout hand-cranking it. Video is just a (semi-)fixed functional unit. Sure, it'd be nice to have open drivers, but so would having the RTL of the processor, and the netlist and gerber of the board. Then they could actually talk about teaching kids something they actually couldn't learn with just having access to a hand-cranked universal Turing machine. The fact that the foundation and Broadcom get their free goodwill from their claim of "for-the-sake-of-the-children" is the real source of my ire. Look at how many references to "industry" the article quotes from representatives of the foundation. Like the embedded SOM has anything at all to do with education, or the continuance of production of older models. Please... [1] http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eZd0IYJ7J40 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eZd0IYJ7J40

jvdh 12y ago
Do you think it is feasible to release a similarly priced, similarly capable device with completely open hardware? The RPi has sold immensely to home users, but also in education. The foundation is also open to criticism and has shown in the past that they are willing to change their production when given the opportunity. They have moved most of their production to the UK for example, whereas the first boards were all manufactured off shore.
- userbinator 12y ago
  As much as they are "open to criticism", I very strongly doubt that they are going to use anything other than Broadcom. Do you think it is feasible to release a similarly priced, similarly capable device with completely open hardware? https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/A20/A20-OLinuXino-LIME/open-source-hardware https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/A20/A20-OLinuXino-... Certainly not as widely known as the RPi, but I'd attribute that more to a general lack of marketing/"presence" in education.
  - pjc50 12y ago
    That doesn't meet the (absurdly high) openness standard of "RTL of the processor" mentioned by throwaway000002.
    - throwaway000002 12y ago
      My, overly-impassioned, exaggerated point is that the RPi is no better that many other competing devices on the market and should me measured solely on technical/business merit. The popularity of the device has spawned a product category of itself. However, at this point in time, claiming something about education is total rubbish. Take the old Pi, run ARMv7 QEMU on it et voila you have the new Pi. There is nothing new to learn, to grow, to probe questions about. The GPIO of the device could just as easily be be provided by a USB breakout board, etc, etc. Cypress had a $4 PSOC prototype board and if anyone (especially Cypress) bothered to develop open-source tooling for it, it would have be a far more useful device to learn from. (As an aside: thank you to HNer asb and colleagues for the lowRISC project. Also, thank you to people like "bunnie" and "xobs" for Novena. These are real people, with real projects working with the best of intentions.)
      - lsaferite 12y ago
        It pleases me to see you mention the PSoC 4. I think it's a highly underrated educational tool due to the software stack used to develop on it. If they were to open up the platform I know several places that would love to use it when teaching kids about hardware and software development.

seba_dos1 12y ago

Beaglebone can be at least booted without non-free blobs, so it can be 100% free if you don't need to use 3D acceleration. Raspberry Pi cannot - even now with free GPU drivers, you still cannot get Linux working without providing non-free firmware blob to it first.