Some info on the Open Pandora (PYRA Pandora) Game Console
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios
Some time ago on 2008, I asked on the fsf's IRC channel about how free was the Open Pandora, but for some reasons I can't remember it seems I never shared with you guys.
This is the device I'm talking you about: https://pyra-handheld.com/boards/pages/pandora/
Matt Lee is the name of the FSF representative that help me out back then. This is his last email I got from him:
"Hey, I remember you :)
Since then we've spoken to the developers, and Craig got quite heated on
his forum. Basically, it has a lot of firmware blobs and there's little
effort being done to fix some of them.
http://boards.openpandora.org/index.php?/topic/7085-how-free-is-the-openpandora"
Back then I was hopping to support a free software developing device, and ended up losing interest on the Open Pandora for that reason. Now days I believe that the best option today is to support the replicant project, since in my opinion, a cellphone or a tablet with a joystick would do the same things an Open Pandora would, and replicant's goal is free software, unlike the Open Pandora and its community.
The subject came back to me from this forum thread https://trisquel.info/es/forum/libre-cell-phones-and-tablets and I made some other comments about the matter over there in case some one is interested :)
See you all.
The Pandora works fine as a fully free device with the Debian port-- you can even use a ThinkPenguin USB wifi dongle.
I've used mine as a free device, and Onpon has as well.
The only things that don't work are internal wifi and 3D graphics acceleration, if memory serves.
It looks like the Pyra will have the same problems, sadly. :s
I wouldn't worry about Craig. Everyone in the Pandora community hates him at this point, and he isn't involved in the development of the Pyra at all.
Also, calling the OpenPandora the "Pyra Pandora" is misleading. The Pyra was conceived and named long after the Pandora, and Pyra is a (yet to be released) product, not a company.
As Jade mentioned, the OpenPandora can work with 100% libre software, albeit running slower because of the lack of hardware acceleration, a bit of work first to remove the proprietary firmware blobs added for the Pandora's wireless controller, and a bit esoteric. I did so until the SD card I had Pandian on stopped working properly (I guess it must have reached its write limit), causing my system to break in really strange ways.
Interesting to note: the Pandora's internal WiFi sucks so bad that using the mini wireless adapter from Think Penguin is remarkably preferable even on shallow practical grounds.
The Pyra will indeed have the same problems as the OpenPandora; I've already asked this on the Pyra forums. Apparently, there will also be an additional problem of sound quality suffering from not having some sort of proprietary software.
But in another sense, the Pyra could be a major step forward. If the default Pyra OS has its repository split off any added proprietary software into a "non-free" section, it will be much easier to make it a completely libre system just by using vrms. I've suggested that this be done.[1] No one actually behind Pyra development (like EvilDragon) has answered; maybe I should ask EvilDragon directly.
The Pyra also shouldn't be as dependent on a supplementary source of software as the Pandora is, since it will be possible to install any software available in the Debian repository (of the version of Debian the Pyra's default OS is based on).
So I'm actually quite excited about the Pyra, and I'll be interested in getting one when it's available. It should be a very decent portable computer running entirely libre software, even with the missing features.
I kind of envy you. I would have liked to buy one back then if I knew it was possible use it more or less on freedom as we already use most of the devices which are not free software oriented now days. Now that I think of it, I can't think of any devices whose objective is free software. I understand that putting together a computer that runs only free software is near impossible without the collaboration of the manufacture companies, but at the time I felt like the people from the Open Pandora made it seem so simple to put together a new device.
I do think that supporting the replicant project is a better option now days, but I guess that if you have made your homework, and you've been good, you could buy a Pyra and go play out side a little xD
Sorry if that was a bad joke, English it's my second language, I'm just making fun of my own ideas and ideals and didn't meant to be miss respectful to anyone xD
I do think that supporting free software is important, but playing around it's also good and doesn't harm anybody. I do remember something funny I read on this forum some time a go, when some one was outrage when he found out that one time Richard Stallman said that it would be better and healthier for kids if they went out side to play instead of playing video games xD
Regarding "supporting Replicant", keep in mind that the Replicant project is only working on getting libre software working on existing devices. It's a worthwhile thing to do, but ultimately, the hardware comes from some company that doesn't care about the issue at all. Long-term, supporting hardware projects like the Pyra, Novena, and others is probably better for us.
Well, that's the thing. Is it Pyra's objective freedom? At lest in the past it didn't seem like it. Is it now?
I don't know if Novena's objective is it, but I kind of remember that it also have some issues with some drivers needed, or the bios, I just can't recall.
I know we don't need to look for perfection and we should try to support those who are trying and looking for better. What I can't understand is why aren't those projects listed as viable options by the FSF. Look I do not worship or follow blindly the FSF, everybody should make their own mind about this kind of issues, but the FSF dedicates its existence to tackle them and I believe it's a good source to make one's own opinion.
Why is it that the FSF openly supports replicant and other projects and not Novena and Pyra? There for is the reason I thought that supporting replicant can be consider first before Novena and Pyra. It may just be a different of opinion, I just want to hear others about it and make my own stand as well.
> Well, that's the thing. Is it Pyra's objective freedom
No, but that wasn't Samsung's objective when they designed the Galaxy S2, either. Projects like the Pyra are better for us, though, because these are people who do prefer "open source" and are trying to avoid proprietary software dependencies to an extent.
> What I can't understand is why do those projects are not listed as viable options by the FSF.
The FSF doesn't list much of anything as a viable option. All it lists are devices currently available for purchase which have been granted RYF certification, and vendors which currently sell computers pre-installed with GNU FSDG distros.
> Why is it that the FSF openly supports replicant and other projects and not Novena and Pyra? There for is the reason I thought that supporting replicant can be consider first before Novena and Pyra.
Please note that supporting Replicant is not even close to the same type of thing as supporting the Pyra. The Pyra is a piece of hardware being designed and manufactured. Replicant is an operating system. It's kind of like, supporting Trisquel is a good thing to do, but it's not a substitute for supporting Think Penguin.
Of course, the people behind the Pyra are more like e.g. ZaReason than Think Penguin. Their objective is not the same as ours. But you have to put it into context. I would say that it does us more good to support ZaReason than to support ASUS, for example. Similarly, I think it's probably better for us to support the Pyra than to support Samsung phones.
I think is a matter of opinion and taste. As you said, you can not compare one thing or another. One is hardware and the other is software. I didn't meant to say that we should support samsung phones as much as support replicant and participate on its community, which may mean you may have to use a cellphone to participate on it.
I used to think that creating our own device was a better way, but then I realize that would left out many people which own and android phone already, which is the majority.
In any case, is a matter of opinion and taste what you consider is the way to go, and what you prefer to support the better.
If one could support both the same that would be preferred xD
Of course.
You could probably even use Replicant on the Pyra, though it would probably be pointless to do so.
Also, by "supporting Replicant", I meant donating and participating to the project. Also, it is worth notice, that excluding the majority of the people in the world that uses android wouldn't be wise either.
I was very happy to hear some time a go RMS talking that developing hardware was becoming something important, and that we should consider supporting both things as much: Reverse engineering and hardware developing. Sure is difficult to do both things at the same time but both are worth trying.
+1 on the suggestion that open source development of libre hardware designs is a priority now. There are just too many examples of hardware manufacturers and retailers blocking the growth of free code OS into consumer devices, from Microsoft's exclusive Windows licenses, which prevent any company who accepts them selling a line of GNU/Linux desktops and laptops, to NVidious helping maintain the Windows monopoly on high-end gaming PCs.
A recent example, I've been looking into the FairPhone (FP). The company behind it are working with Jolla on a custom SailFish ROM for FP 1 and 2, and it may become the new default OS for FP3. SailFish is an improvement on Android in some ways (no Google dependencies), but it's also a step backwards in others (chunks of the UI are proprietary). A number of people, including Stallman himself, have been trying to convince them to make Replicant the default OS, and you'd think that wouldn't be that hard since the FP is an Android phone, but Replicant aren't event supporting FP because of some of the hardware choices the FP company have made (presumably to satisfy their other ethical criteria; conflict-free minerals etc).
Part of the problem is that the FP Company don't yet fully the ethical issues of software freedom that make Replicant an obvious choice of SailFish. But even if they did, they would have a challenge finding manufacturers who could provide them with hardware that Replicant can support, while also meeting all their other ethical criteria. If open source communities were designing generic hardware for mobile devices, under libre licenses, Replicant would be able to support any phone made using that hardware, and companies like FairPhone would be able to find manufacturers to produce it, while meeting their other needs.
That is one time RMS was asked what he thought about the proprietary software on game consoles.
Has anyone heard of the GCW Zero?
Look it up. Ftom what the devs told me(I don't remember names) they say it has no blobs. I am thinking of getting one.
It has exactly the same problems as the Pandora does: proprietary software needed for hardware acceleration and wireless. But then it also has practical problems of a very low resolution, no keyboard, and a severe lack of software. Really, the total number of programs that have been ported to the GCW Zero is less than a hundred, I think. For its intended purpose (emulation for running old proprietary games), it's probably quite good; after all, it only takes one emulator for each system you want to emulate. Not so great as a libre gaming device, though.
I don't doubt what you say onpon4, but may I inquire of where you confirmed it? I probably went looking in the wrong place and spoke with the wrong people to confirm there were no binary blobs. Is it in the source code of the distro they're running?
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios