Open Source Hardware Definition Hits 0.3

ptorrone writes "A group of open source hardware makers have put together a draft of the open source hardware definition, now at version 0.3, which hopes to further define the making, sharing and selling of hardware within an 'Open Source Hardware license.' This fall, the day before Maker Faire New York City, the group hopes to have the license finalized for v1.0, and they are holding the first Open Source Hardware Summit. There are currently dozens of companies making open source hardware, altogether worth millions of dollars."

Comments

Apple?

[courteaudotbiz]

Isn't Apple part of this initiative? Their stuff has been jailbroken so many times and so easily, they can almost call their iPhone "Open Source Hardware"! ;-)

Re:I have to say

[NegativeK]

What exactly are they dreaming about? I've only dealt with a few, but the open-source hardware companies I've purchased from are catering to individuals who don't need a PC motherboard or a 3GHz processor for their project. Think Arduino or GPS breakout board. In reality, cost barriers to open source hardware are progressing quite nicely. Access to fab resources in China and pick and place machines are dropping in price; doing it on your own is much more accessible. For examples, check out the aforementioned Arduino or the stuff Makerbot creates. 3d printers at a price-point of $1,000 were a pie in the sky dream 10 years ago. And lastly, open source isn't always about free as in bear. People still pay for Linux. I still pay for open source hobbyist hardware. I purchase it instead of other roughly equivalent devices because it's more easily modifiable, is easily hacked upon, is often quite well documented, and it's easy to find support. Adafruit has recently mentioned that "[t]here are 13 million-dollar open-source hardware companies". It seems to be working for some of us.

Re:I have to say

[Michael Kristopeit]

you're completely wrong. computer chip fabs are extremely automated, and many silicon valley chip makers don't even own their own fabs, and instead drop ship them from shared fabs in china. if a standard was created for manufacturing instructions, as the open hardware people are trying to do, then utilizing the fabs to make a one off product of an open design would be accessible to anyone.

you're right that current manufacturing company's testing and development equipment wouldn't match... the entire point of open hardware is to make that fact not matter.

Re:I have to say

[vlm]

The reason why open source software works is that it is easy for people to contribute and it is essentially free to give someone a copy. That is not the case with hardware.

Are you ever going to be confused when you learn about FPGAs.

http://www.opencores.org/

Re:Open Source Hardware

[localman57]

for most hardware of any significance

What is significant varies a lot from person to person. Building an inexpensive circuit that does something fun is significant if you find it to be so.

a provider of open source hardware has to expend significant manufacturing

Not so. If I build a single circuit to satisfy my own urges, I can still open source the schematic, pcb layout, parts footprint, etc. in a way that other people can use. They can fab it as is, or they can modify it, then fab it. Or, just look at it out of curiousity. No one says you have to manufacture your design in bulk, in the same way that you can create your own distro without having to send it to Best Buy in shrink-wrapped boxes. You can fab a prototype PCB these days for tens of dollars if you don't need it in a couple of days.

Re:Open Source Hardware

[vlm]

The problem with "Open Source" hardware, and any other tangible thing, is simply that for most hardware of any significance, a person would need a factory and expensive resources handy to go about trying to make it.

You are soooo obviously not a modern electronics entrepreneur. You rent all that stuff. Yes, over the internet. Just like I don't need my own personal silk screen offset printing press I just use cafepress and competitors.

There's about a dozen board houses where you upload a PCB file, and in a couple days they mail you ready to solder PCBs. Multi layer, exotic substrates, plating, solder mask, these guys do it all. Generally PCB manufacture is completely automated, about as much slow human touch as buying a book from amazon. This is not vapor ware or a nebulous student business plan, but a pretty big business. Most PCB houses are glad to do one offs for a price, although theres obvious quantity discounts.

If you will lower yourself to talking on the phone to a salesweasel, "most" board houses either have inhouse assemblers or a "special relationship" with a local assembler. You will need to talk extensively about assembly service, and FAX custom contract back and forth. Someone could probably make a killing in the business by "semi-automating" this process much like happened to ultra-small run PCB business over the last decade. The main problem with assemblers is their "JIT" sourcing of parts and their pre-soldering inspection of parts... um... has some stereotypical problems.

There are at least half a dozen businesses where you upload a certain CAD file and in a couple days you get all manner of metal front panels, cases, and just plain ole random metalwork. Again all automated, about as difficult as uploading a picture to cafepress or uploading a "gerber" file to a PCB house. Not as popular as PCB houses, but up and coming.

There would probably be a business opportunity for someone to set up an expediting service over the internet to coordinate all these guys. But trust me, at least for open source electronics devices, if you know how to use google its pretty much ask and ye shall receive (if ye have a thick enough wallet, of course).