0

Almost ALL mobile processors are ARM, but sure a design can be made with an ARM Processor which is open source. This question is different from the question asked on How is Raspberry Pi "open source" if it uses ARM?.

Both BBB and Raspberry PI use ARM chips, but I would like to know the differences in open-source-ness of these two designs.

This link directs to a page which states that the Raspberry PI is not fully open source hardware. I do not understand this statement. I believe the schematics are available and the IC numbers are available. What more needs to be opened up?

The statement is as follows:

What will matter the most to many people is the fact that the Pi is still closed source hardware with limited documentation of the design and no ability to customize or manage the supply chain. This is only part of why many people consider the Bone more suited to higher educational and professional use. Quality manufacturing in the US is also frequently seen as a bonus by a developer community with many professional Linux consultants looking to help create real products. Open hardware derivatives like the Ninja Spheramid and BBP (BeagleBone 3D Printer) are just the start of new Bone-related designs popping up this year. This is possible due to the open hardware nature of the Bones and use of the Sitara devices that are available for nearly anyone to buy.

Community
  • 1
Denis
  • 147
  • 6
  • 2
    See piman's answer on the dupe. The pi will never have completely open source hardware unless they ditch the Broadcom SoC, which is the core of the whole thing. – goldilocks Feb 19 '15 at 18:11
  • It's a sterile argument. The Broadcom chip and the binary blobs needed to boot are the primary complaint. A lot of it comes across as sour grapes from competing platforms. – joan Feb 19 '15 at 18:12
  • 1
    This is NOT a dublicate question. These binary blobs are not there in the beagle bone black? I am asking in comparison with the beaglebone, is there still a chance the beaglebone be not fully open source too? – Denis Feb 19 '15 at 18:18
  • 1
    This isn't a discussion forum, so open ended questions which lead to further questions ("is there still a chance the beaglebone be not fully open source too") don't work. It's a duplicate in the sense they both boil down to, "In what way is the pi hardware not open source?". Questions about the beagle bone are obviously better somewhere else, but, to clarify a bit, the kernel itself is one big "binary blob", and in that sense, all systems do need one to boot. "Open source" refers to the source code from which a binary is compiled. Some of the pi firmware is not open source. – goldilocks Feb 19 '15 at 20:09
  • 1
    Here's Broadcom's position. Note "redistribution and use in binary form, without modification" -- no source code, no modifications == not open source. – goldilocks Feb 19 '15 at 20:09
  • So as per my understanding, it is yet possibe to compile a kernel to the raspberry PI but there are some files (blobs) we know what they do but we do not have an idea about their code. Am I right? – Denis Feb 20 '15 at 01:30
  • A new interview with Eben http://www.raspberrypi.org/the-raspberry-pi-guy-interviews-eben-and-gordon/ where he state this year they will be move than ever trying to get away from the binary blobs. – rob Feb 20 '15 at 08:14
  • Obviously the kernel is open source (the GPLv2 at work , folks !) , and in an unprecedented incident Broadcom even released something bearing resemblance to a datasheet for the BCM2835 to the general public ! This all bears Mr. Uptons handwriting ... – flakeshake May 30 '16 at 08:13
  • For hysterical reasons the Pi boots the GPU first , and the GPU firmware is closed-source. The GPU then starts the ARM , ergo without a libre GPU bootloader an libre ARM bootloader doesn't make sense for most Free Software Enthusiasts – flakeshake May 30 '16 at 08:16

0 Answers0