Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Hardware Projects, 2009
ptorrone writes "MAKE's yearly open source hardware guide is now online with over 125 projects in 19 categories. The creators of all of these projects have decided to publish completely all the source, schematics, firmware, software, bill of materials, parts list, drawings, and 'board' files to recreate the hardware. They also allow any use, including commercial. In other words, you can make a business making and selling any of these objects. This is similar to open source software like Linux, but hardware-centric."
Just because you have the tools and skills doesn't mean you don't need the blueprints.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
They also allow any use, including commercial. In other words, you can make a business making and selling any of these objects. This is similar to open source software like Linux, but hardware-centric."
No, more like open source software like BSD. Stallman doesn't approve of anything commercial, or anyone making any profit off of anything at all. Witness GPL 3.0.
Well, programming isn't that easy either. I mean, in theory, all you need is a computer, but in practice it takes a lot of time to learn properly.
I think that getting started in electronics wouldn't be that expensive. Soldering irons are cheap, and components like capacitors are sold for prices like $0.05/unit. Of course microcontrollers and such are more expensive, but you don't need those in large amounts.
Make is not about making stuff cheaper than off-the-shelf, so if the price of mag puts you off, you're not going to make anything with it anyway. The idea behind Make is a form of self-empowerment, to understand hardware and to enable individual constructions. One-of prices are always going to be much higher than the price of mass-produced merchandise.
I'm a die hard free market capitalist and I have to say you are clueless. If legit software can't provide value beyond what is freely available, it deserves to fade away. This is even more true for legit hardware -- whatever that is...
The creators of all of these projects have decided to publish completely all the source, schematics, firmware, software, bill of materials, parts list, drawings, and 'board' files to recreate the hardware.
Why must everything be labeled "open source?"
Plans and projects for the technically-minded hobbyist are at least as old as Popular Mechanics, first published in 1902.
Quite a lot of money? As far as hobbies go, electronics is extremely affordable. Try "car racing", or "remote heli/plane" or even wood-working. You can make many interesting electronic projects for under $50 AU. Spend a bit more for an Arduino, and there are a nearly limitless number of projects you can build. As hobbies go, I don't think electronics can be classed as "expensive".
The "Arduino" is innovative in the way it's packaged and used. I'm not much of a hardware guy, but I looked into microcontrollers like six or seven years ago and was pretty much scared away. The Arduino has made entry into the world of microcontrollers very easy and lets people get really creative without a steep learning curve. Rather than just getting a microcontroller to work, you can think about what you can hook up to it and the software, which is great for software nerds like me who have little experience in hardware. Before this the most I had done was build a kit distortion pedal in high school. If you know how to write simple programs, that same level of hardware knowledge can now be used to do far more interesting and useful things.
Choosing an odd word to name an interface specification doesn't qualify its users as belonging to a 'cult'.
So, the FCC has no problem with hacking GSM, but not 3G?