[Arm-netbook] Slowly but surely...

[lkcl luke]

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Gordan Bobic <gordan at bobich.net> wrote:

> And there we have a textbook example of why being a freetard is
> completely uneconomical. You would have easily made back more than $10K
> over the past year selling the modules.

 ... but the people who would be so paid would feel resentment at
having been left out, having been paid a tiny fraction of what the
project utlimately could make.  there's a few other subtle things here
i could say but they're so subtle i've forgotten what they are ;)

 that, and the fact that nobody's stepped forward with $10K makes it
all a non-issue :)


>>   ... but we're deploying a different kind of investment strategy from
>> that.  it's about doing deals, where everyone in the chain benefits in
>> the long-term from their contributions to the project.
>
> But they don't. If it ultimately makes your product so late to the
> market that it is deprecated anobody wants it, then all that effort
> amounts to just being a waste of everyone's time.

 i have answered this already: i'm not going to answer it again.

> When you want to upgrade to a newer SoC you will have to get all the PCB
> work done again. And if you again want it done for free you'll repeat
> the whole cycle again.

 again: i have answered this already.  i'm not going to answer it again.

> If, OTOH, you are going to use the profits from the first series of
> EOMAs (assuming anybody still wants them by the time they actually
> become available) to pay somebody to develop the second series in a
> timely fashion,

 *hand-waving* - yes, i'd thought about that: see above however.
expediency vs encouraging people to collaborate and benefit from the
fruits of their collaboration?  it's a tough call: we'll have to do an
analysis on a case-by-case basis.

 one SoC manufacturer we're talking with for example they are quite
likely to *have* to do the EOMA68 card themselves, simply because
they're, well... a bit paranoid.  so that CPU Card would be "for
free".  one EOMA68 CPU Card - the iMX53 one - we've managed to slot in
to a client's design requirements, so we (the free software community)
get an iMX53 EOMA68 CPU Card "for free" in a different way.

 there are a ton of ways.

> then that means you are essentially trying to get a
> freebie bootstrap to your own capitalist business which while ingenious,
> seems somewhat dishonest toward other parties involved, especially the
> volunteers who are contributing for free the kernel code that your
> product would be worthless without.

 gordan - at this point i'm actually getting deeply concerned.  it
sounds increasingly like you have some agenda that you're pushing, and
that the agenda you're pushing is "make the EOMA project fail".
whilst i'm sure that that's not your intent, i would ask you to review
the manner in which you communicate publicly on this list.

 if you know anything about me, you'll know that i have a list of free
software people who have helped me at various points over the past 15
years that i've been involved in free software, and that i've made
myself a promise to ensure that when i make sufficient money such that
i no longer have any financial issues to deal with, then each and
every one of the people who have helped me will receive considerable
sums of money.

 in this case however, even beyond my own personal committment to what
must be over 15 people now, there is a business requirement to ensure
that people who have volunteered their time so far are financially
compensated in order to encourage them to stick around.

 it's also worthwhile saying: can i please remind you that the
underlying company behind rhombus tech is a CIC *not* a plc or a Ltd
Company?  if there was ever any intent to fuck everyone over, grab
whatever they did and say "bye", we would have set up a Ltd Company,
which allows people to pathologically lie through their teeth for the
benefit of shareholders.

> Either way, it doesn't sound like the way forward toward the long term
> abundance of good will.

 well if your fears or whatever stresses caused you to say what you
said were in any way true, i would absolutely agree with you.
however, as the *complete* opposite is true, i'm actually taken aback
and slightly alarmed by what you've said.

>>   if you've read "millionaire mind" you will recognise this strategy.
>> any company or individual that wants cash up-front payments rather
>> than being prepared to work on a deal-basis or a percentage-basis we
>> have eliminated *instantly* from further discussions.
>
> So when are the free software developers getting a percentage of this
> business for their contribution?

 when the products have been sold and we've received the sales
commissions.  when else would it be??!

>>   by following this approach it means we have not needed any investors,
>> nor any investment, of any kind.
>
> "We" being?

 myself and my associates.

>>   * coming up to a deadline back in april or so, bari refused to work
>> to a deadline.  this made several people extremely angry, as everyone
>> - you, me, everyone on this list, the factory _and_ our clients - had
>> been relying on him to complete the PCB layout.  so: goodbye
>> engineering team no 2.
>
> Expecting somebody to work to a deadline in their own time for free to
> help bootstrap somebody else's commercial business is a bit rich, don't
> you think?

 gordan... what the hell's going on??  what's the matter?  i can tell
there's something _very_ strange going on with you at the moment, but
because i'm seeing only these emails not anything else, obviously, i
can't put my finger on it.  i'm seeing "symptoms" not the "cause".

 so.  patiently.  let's address this.

 1) did you read the bit where i said "bari was offered a deal"?  did
you also read the bit where i said "he refused to sign it"?  we
offered him a percentage of sales - repeatedly, in both IRC and email;
we then sent him the contract and he didn't sign it.

 2) please read above, about the CIC.

>>   * this third PCB engineering company agreed to a deal: again, no
>> money exchanged either way.  they love the project, have seen the
>> number of preorders and are really looking forward to supplying
>> everyone with CPU Cards.
>>
>>   so that's where we are.  we've had to alter accordingly.
>
> So how much has doing this for free cost you in lost revenue since the
> beginning of the project?

 it's a good question - one i don't like to think about :)

> Is it worth the bad will it creates among people who were genuinely
> interested in the product,

 products plural.

> if only it were available a year ago?

 if you feel strongly that an alternative approach should be taken,
find at least $10,000 of investment from somewhere: we'll do it the
paid-for route.


>> also there is the possibility of a 2nd CPU Card, using the iMX53.  a
>> provisional cost has been worked out.  if the client goes for it, then
>> that CPU Card will be available as well.  the reason why the client
>> picked the iMX53 as opposed to the A10 is because freescale have a
>> guaranteed timeline and lifecycle for the iMX53, as well as having
>> Industrial Temperature Grade processors (at reduced clock speed).
>
> Sounds another case of getting what you pay for, and somebody realizing
> that they couldn't afford cheap.

 gordan, what's wrong?  why are you being so critical, all of a
sudden?  it's as if someone's flipped some sort of switch in your mind
and you've decided to go into all-out "attack" mode.  the question is:
why?


>>> The main difference is that if you ask very nicely and get in with the
>>> right crowd, you can plausibly get your hands on one of those server
>>> chassies - unlike with EOMA.
>>
>>   these calxeda-based servers are not going to be sold in quantities of
>> a million per week, gordan.
>
> Maybe not, but right now a lot of people are happy to settle for them
> being sold at all. This is the point I have been making for a while.

 then find some investment: let's get it done!

>>   I/O Boards do not need to change.  casework (which is over 10x more
>> expensive than PCBs) does not need to change.  by merely taking a new
>> SoC's EVB schematics direct from the SoC manufacturer, it's possible
>> to cut/paste that into a new EOMA-68 CPU Card within a matter of weeks
>> [if you use a competent team].
>
> If it has taken this long to not ever get as far as the first EOMA PCB,
> it does not bode well for the future.

 again, i'll repeat it again: bootstrapping up to a whole new
strategic level of product development and deployment was always going
to be tough, for the first release.  "the first EOMA PCB" is only a
*small* fraction of the number of tasks required to be coordinated.
any replacement component in a modular design is - assuming that the
interfaces are all adequately designed - reduced to an "incremental"
improvement.

 so, stepping back from this actual conversation a bit, i have to say
that i'm getting really quite alarmed at the adversarial approach
you're taking, gordan: it's really not necessary.  can i please ask
you to rack it down a notch (or five)?

 you could have said, for example, "are there any plans for
compensating free software developers once there are profits coming
in?" and i would have been able to say "yes there are, i'm sure i
mentioned that before, apologies if i haven't: i'm really looking
forward to it".

 instead, the adversarial and negative approach you took forced me to
first deal with the negativity, then of course it that context, having
had to deal with the negativity, that entirely ruined any possibility
for me to make a positive community-encouraging statement.

 so can we please change the nature of this conversation?  it's not
very nice right now and the archives are going to be around for a
considerable number of years.

 l.