uSupply Custom LCD

[EEVblog]

Specifically that those who copy an OSHW design to make one for themselves are not entering in to the true spirit of OSHW. And secondly that claiming this project is open source when Dave has basically said right at the bottom of the list is considering OSHW aspects.

Questions:
What if I gave you the vector image file for the custom LCD, would you still complain?
Would you like the name of the supplier and the part number so you can take advantage of my tooling cost and order it direct yourself in volume? If so, why? If not, why not?
What if I have a custom case because that makes the product that I am selling better? Would you demand the design files for that? Why? for what purpose?
Would you also demand the suppliers name and the part number so you can make use of my tooling cost for that and order direct in volume? Why? If not, why not?

What if I did extensive videos teaching people how I designed the product, how it works etc etc (above and beyond most OSWH people BTW), and released everything but the custom LCD files, would you still still think I'm not doing things "in the true spirit" of it?

Who adds the most value to the community in this case: me who does all the design videos and teaches people everything in detail but retains the say the LCD file, or someone who provides no such design videos, teaches people almost nothing, and simply puts the same files + the LCD file on a Github repo?

[jaycee]

The way I see it, making the design open source does NOT exclusively mean it is free for everyone to replicate as they wish. More that it is an open design which others can take and build upon, customise to their needs etc.. or even develop mods/improved software for the end devices Dave produces and sells.

I really hope this freetard ecosystem that has plagued software doesnt start to leak over into hardware too.

[wilfred]

Once again, got proof of that?, or is that just your opinion?

No proof, It is just my opinion that OSHW projects that are in a single language or use proprietry file formats and so on, restrict access to those who are fluent in the language or can afford the software eg Altium. Hence the project can't as easily draw input from the widest range of community participants. Hence it is my opinion that the metaphor that it faces a steeper hill to ready acceptance is a valid one. And if I'm wrong, what of it?

But I accept completely that you are making a commercial product and generating interesting (also to me) content for the blog. The original uSupply videos remain a favourite of mine.

[EEVblog]

I really hope this freetard ecosystem that has plagued software doesnt start to leak over into hardware too.

Not sure what you mean by "freetard" but I'm pretty sure I know what you are getting it.
There are already two camps in the OSHW industry, those who want everything to be absolutely open as per the "definition" and will not even entertain the idea that their can be value in something less, and those who are more grounded in the real world.
The former consider my OSHW logo idea video tantamount to sacrilege.

[EEVblog]

Once again, got proof of that?, or is that just your opinion?

No proof, It is just my opinion that OSHW projects that are in a single language or use proprietry file formats and so on, restrict access to those who are fluent in the language or can afford the software eg Altium.

Ok, so what if I designed the uSupply in the choice of OSWH champions, Eagle, but it's a bigger board than the free version can open and you have to pay $$$ for the licenses version to modify it. How is that different to say Altium Circuit Studio that costs about the same?

[Monkeh]

Once again, got proof of that?, or is that just your opinion?

No proof, It is just my opinion that OSHW projects that are in a single language or use proprietry file formats and so on, restrict access to those who are fluent in the language or can afford the software eg Altium.

Ok, so what if I designed the uSupply in the choice of OSWH champions, Eagle, but it's a bigger board than the free version can open and you have to pay $$$ for the licenses version to modify it. How is that different to say Altium Circuit Studio that costs about the same?

Eh what, Eagle is the choice of champions? Okay, it's at least free to look..

I'm an Eagle user, and I think it's a crap choice for OSHW, very nearly as crap as Altium (again, at least you can look with Eagle..)

Oh, you can modify larger boards - it's just XML, after all..

However, IMO, as long as you release entirely up to date schematic PDFs, BOM (to avoid ambiguities), and gerbers, doing it in Altium (or anything else) is acceptable. If you don't.. well, it's not open: People can't even look.

[jaycee]

Not sure what you mean by "freetard" but I'm pretty sure I know what you are getting it.
There are already two camps in the OSHW industry, those who want everything to be absolutely open as per the "definition" and will not even entertain the idea that their can be value in something less, and those who are more grounded in the real world.
The former consider my OSHW logo idea video tantamount to sacrilege.

Yes, the former group. The ones who, for example in Linux complain about the use of firmware blobs in open source drivers. Even if they had the source to the firmware, they wouldn't be able to do anything useful with it and it's more of a "just because".

Open hardware, to me, means you can see the design, derive from some of it, customise it to your own needs, etc.. it does NOT necessarily mean you can 100% clone it yourself. Thats what it should mean.

Incidentally, i'm not a fan of the GPL either. That tends to piss MANY freetards off

[ataradov]

The former consider my OSHW logo idea video tantamount to sacrilege.

Or another idea - if I made it, I chose what I release. If it does not fit some arbitrary definition of "open" - I could not care less. Can't afford the tools I used, don't know the language - too bad. I release tings (HW and SW) for people that know things.

[jaycee]

Once again, got proof of that?, or is that just your opinion?

No proof, It is just my opinion that OSHW projects that are in a single language or use proprietry file formats and so on, restrict access to those who are fluent in the language or can afford the software eg Altium.

Ok, so what if I designed the uSupply in the choice of OSWH champions, Eagle, but it's a bigger board than the free version can open and you have to pay $$$ for the licenses version to modify it. How is that different to say Altium Circuit Studio that costs about the same?

Eh what, Eagle is the choice of champions? Okay, it's at least free to look..

I'm an Eagle user, and I think it's a crap choice for OSHW, very nearly as crap as Altium (again, at least you can look with Eagle..)

Oh, you can modify larger boards - it's just XML, after all..

However, IMO, as long as you release entirely up to date schematic PDFs, BOM (to avoid ambiguities), and gerbers, doing it in Altium (or anything else) is acceptable. If you don't.. well, it's not open: People can't even look.

When there are good open tools to do the work, then proprietary toolsets may go away. Currently, there isnt. No, KiCAD and gEDA are not good tools.
As for visibility, well thats simple. Schematics can be printed as PDF. Board layouts can similarly be supplied as PDF or Gerber. Im sure automated generation of those can be done fairly easily with Altium just as it could with EAGLE.

One advantage to EAGLE is it has a significantly lower cost of entry. Altium is just out of the question for hobbyists.

[Monkeh]

The ones who, for example in Linux complain about the use of firmware blobs in open source drivers. Even if they had the source to the firmware, they wouldn't be able to do anything useful with it

Wanna bet? I have an AP which works mostly okay.. so long as I don't use the vendor-supplied radio firmware. A third party with source access has made huge improvements to it - and if it were open source, many others would assist..

[EEVblog]

Eh what, Eagle is the choice of champions? Okay, it's at least free to look..
I'm an Eagle user, and I think it's a crap choice for OSHW, very nearly as crap as Altium (again, at least you can look with Eagle..)

I was taking the piss a bit, but Eagle is indeed the "defacto" choice of the OSHW industry, many of the major players like Adafruit et.al use it.

Oh, you can modify larger boards - it's just XML, after all..

Yeah, good luck...

[Monkeh]

Oh, you can modify larger boards - it's just XML, after all..

Yeah, good luck...

Don't need it - been there, done that, and not the only person I know who has. The format's actually quite pleasant to work with, it's one of the upsides of Eagle. I've even been through and fixed up entire libraries that way.

[ataradov]

Don't need it - been there, done that, and not the only person I know who has. The format's actually quite pleasant to work with, it's one of the upsides of Eagle. I've even been through and fixed up entire libraries that way.

I actually edit Eagle XML directly for parts as well. It is easier to create MCUs/FPGAs this way. But editing schematics is not going to happen.

[Monkeh]

Don't need it - been there, done that, and not the only person I know who has. The format's actually quite pleasant to work with, it's one of the upsides of Eagle. I've even been through and fixed up entire libraries that way.

I actually edit Eagle XML directly for parts as well. But editing schematics is not going to happen.

It can be done. So can boards. The board's probably the easier - also where you run into size limits.. (okay, multiple schematic sheets are also a problem, I believe).

[EEVblog]

Open hardware, to me, means you can see the design, derive from some of it, customise it to your own needs, etc.. it does NOT necessarily mean you can 100% clone it yourself. That's what it should mean.

I agree, which is why I developed my new creative commons type OSHW logo idea.
But the "official" OSHW organisation does not see it that way, nor do many of the major players (Adafruit et.el) for example.
The problem is many of these OSHW companies have often never actually developed (and put huge $ and time into) any real polished commercial products. They just make bare boards, kits etc, which is great  of course, but then they think that every commercial company should do the same as they do. It a position that lacks any sense of practical commercial reality.

[jaycee]

Open hardware, to me, means you can see the design, derive from some of it, customise it to your own needs, etc.. it does NOT necessarily mean you can 100% clone it yourself. That's what it should mean.

I agree, which is why I developed my new creative commons type OSHW logo idea.
But the "official" OSHW organisation does not see it that way, nor do many of the major players (Adafruit et.el) for example.
The problem is many of these OSHW companies have often never actually developed (and put huge $ and time into) any real polished commercial products. They just make bare boards, kits etc, which is great  of course, but then they think that every commercial company should do the same as they do. It a position that lacks any sense of practical commercial reality.

This is why I refer to GPL as "All your code are belong to GNU". it is basically an ecosystem which does not want developers to get paid to write code.

My attitude to this ? Fuck em. Idealists can preach all they want about everything being free and open - but they still expect to be paid to do work and put food on the table.

[Monkeh]

This is why I refer to GPL as "All your code are belong to GNU". it is basically an ecosystem which does not want developers to get paid to write code.

And yet, most of the big projects have paid developers..

[wilfred]

Specifically that those who copy an OSHW design to make one for themselves are not entering in to the true spirit of OSHW. And secondly that claiming this project is open source when Dave has basically said right at the bottom of the list is considering OSHW aspects.

Questions:
What if I gave you the vector image file for the custom LCD, would you still complain?

I'm principally making a generic point about OSHW  and not complaining because I accept you are placing OSHW at the bottom of the list of considerations for this particular project. But since you ask me directly. I will say that a generic display would make the project IF it was OSHW more readily reproducable to individual makers. A vector image file would help mostly those who wanted to reproduce it on a commercial scale. An individual maker would, if faced with an unavailable custom display probably not bother. Some with stronger skills and motivation may adapt it to a non custom display.

Would you like the name of the supplier and the part number so you can take advantage of my tooling cost and order it direct yourself in volume? If so, why? If not, why not?
What if I have a custom case because that makes the product that I am selling better? Would you demand the design files for that? Why? for what purpose?
Would you also demand the suppliers name and the part number so you can make use of my tooling cost for that and order direct in volume? Why? If not, why not?

Really the same answer applies. All these custom engineered parts make for a better commercial product. But if you were making the product as an OSHW project for a community of individual makers then they form a barrier to those without the resources to exploit them. It is a different argument about whether a project is less OSHW if it is reproducable only in commercial quantities.

What if I did extensive videos teaching people how I designed the product, how it works etc etc (above and beyond most OSWH people BTW), and released everything but the custom LCD files, would you still still think I'm not doing things "in the true spirit" of it?

If you used a custom LCD then I would think it a less accessible OSHW project if making an OSHW project was your aim. If you kept the custom LCD design files secret then I would not consider it OSHW. As I've said in the past it would be a well documented commercial product.

Who adds the most value to the community in this case: me who does all the design videos and teaches people everything in detail but retains the say the LCD file, or someone who provides no such design videos, teaches people almost nothing, and simply puts the same files + the LCD file on a Github repo?

There's a perrenial debate. But like the riddler's riddle on Batman. "when is a door not a door?"
A: " when it's ajar"
If a door is not open then it is closed and the same is true for OSHW. If it is not open then it is closed. Or well documented, but still not open.

But at the end of the day if you are not touting this as an OSHW project I fail to see how a debate about OSHW helps you. I've had this debate with you before when you announced your restricted grades of open classification. I didn't agree with you then and I thought you were being disingenuous and self serving. If you later try to represent this project as OSHW without complete design files then I'll think it again.

However, if you make an entertaining series of videos and a successfull commercial product then I wish you good luck. Maybe I'll even buy one, and be glad of the good doco that accompanies it.

[EEVblog]

Who adds the most value to the community in this case: me who does all the design videos and teaches people everything in detail but retains the say the LCD file, or someone who provides no such design videos, teaches people almost nothing, and simply puts the same files + the LCD file on a Github repo?

There's a perrenial debate. But like the riddler's riddle on Batman. "when is a door not a door?"

No, it was a simple question asking you who is providing the most value to the community.
If you don't want to answer then that's fine.

I'm done talking about OSHW though, it is essentially off-topic for this thread.

[TimNJ]

Here's another. I don't know...might be crap...hard (impossible) to judge your own work objectively.

Switched from dark background/light letters to light background/dark letters. Ultimately, I think I prefer light letters on a dark background but I think the contrast won't be good enough especially on a small LCD. Don't have much experience with that though. Black letters might be cheaper/more available...but I have no idea if that's actually true.

This all said I do like Whales design a lot. I just found it a bit confusing/haphazard on first glance. I loaded my design on my phone just to see what it would look like small and I think it's quite reasonable.

[wilfred]

Once again, got proof of that?, or is that just your opinion?

No proof, It is just my opinion that OSHW projects that are in a single language or use proprietry file formats and so on, restrict access to those who are fluent in the language or can afford the software eg Altium.

Ok, so what if I designed the uSupply in the choice of OSWH champions, Eagle, but it's a bigger board than the free version can open and you have to pay $$$ for the licenses version to modify it. How is that different to say Altium Circuit Studio that costs about the same?

The more accessible the design is to people the better. I'm less interested in the debate about the cost of tools and entirely uninterested in confining things to strictly open source toolchains. I approach the debate about OSHW from the point-of-view that someone WANTS others to reproduce and exploit it. If it looks like they are keeping something secret  then it looks like they don't want it reproduced and hence I start to consider the design closed. The more they want to have people get involved the more likely  the barriers will be lowered. But throwing a design out there in expensive proprietry tool is OK with me.

I think the debate about open-closed is unresolvable by ordinary practical people so looking at it from the POV of the likely intent of the designer will get you a good approximation. If some design info is available to be published but isn't then I'd stick solidly with calling the project closed. If everything is available but unusable to ordinary makers then I'd say who cares it is as good as closed.

[EEVblog]

Since you're doing it for commercail gain I don't see it as such a simple question.

It's very simple, I'll do whatever I want, release whatever I want, and use my OSHW logo idea however I want, the end.
Can we please stop the OSHW discussion now.

[Monkeh]

How very dare you do what you want with your own work. It's unthinkable.

[boffin]

Please please please make the decimal points bigger

(and at least line up the watts under the volts/amps)


More like this

[floobydust]

About the LCD display. I have questions about the requirements.
I thought to work towards getting concrete numbers from a vendor like gpeg, instead of speculating.

Size? Direct-drive or muxed? Pins on the edge or zebra strips?
5V drive or do we have a charge pump LCD driver.
Transreflective or trans fluid for 100% backlit led use.

Cost hit from using many mcu pins/LCD driver may cause a cheap simple display to cost more in the end.
Added plastic parts needed for diffuser or edge lit. Added mounting plastic bezel if zebra strips verses dip pins. So consider the whole display assembly+driver might be a hassle verses using an off the shelf graphic display with SPI. You'd have to do a bill of materials costing for this to compare.

I like negative contrast and the layout improvements by Whales and others.