201–208 of 208 posts
Whither capitalism? Why are companies not marketing along the lines of: "You can tinker with this. Our product does not treat you like the product." I'd pay a 20% premium or so not to be spied upon and enslaved. "Freedom isn't free. There's a heavy [FLOWERBED] fee."
Because most consumers don't want that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh please. I'm sorry, air compressor regulation does not require software. Compressor units have been working for decades without software. If the current industry is anything to go on, the reliance on software for compressor regulation has reduced, not increased, reliability. Older fridges would last 20-30 years. Last year I threw out a fridge that was a free hand-me-down. The gasket was so old that the door would n…
Software control enables far more efficiency.
Most software of that type i've written is based in control theory, which can be replicated in analog circuits fairly simply.
Surprisingly often, you even see people writing code for this type of thing using ladder diagram programms, literally designing electronic circuits to do the job that then get converted into code
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>We don’t, so it’s not clear why you’re even saying this. Because you demanded the user should chose if the wants a product with the "repairable" feature , so I assume your logic should be consistent and you would also like to have the option to say pay less and get an iPhone with no warranty. For some reasons we force warranty and IMO for the exact same reason we should for basic repair ability ( diagnostic software…
> so I assume your logic should be consistent and you would also like to have the option to say pay less and get an iPhone with no warranty. What did I say that has anything to do with warranties? > For some reasons we force warranty This is just false. We don’t force warranties. Companies are free to sell products without warranties. Customers generally prefer warranties so companies provide them. > and IMO for the…
I will disagree that computers are special, why should replacing a fan or changing the disk on my computer be only done by approved people or even worse I have to buy a new one?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Software control enables far more efficiency.
How? Like really though, what would software do to control a compressor unit that would be expensive or difficult to do on a PCB? Especially given that a little microchip to run that software likely is far more complex and expensive than the PCB itself. Most software of that type i've written is based in control theory, which can be replicated in analog circuits fairly simply. Surprisingly often, you even see people…
On a refrigerator:
Software can choose to run a compressor at a lower, more efficient power setting for longer when the temperature just needs to be maintained. It can automatically time a defrost cycle based on when the doors are most often opened. It can tell when the door was opened and kick in the compressor at high power to quickly return the internals to the target temperature. It can debounce the door openings, delaying the cooling cycle until the door has been closed for a while.
It's also far easier to iterate and experiment with software.
> Especially given that a little microchip to run that software likely is far more complex and expensive than the PCB itself.
Active analog components like op-amps are often more expensive than an MCU, especially if you can build up a single package with all of the components that would have been on the PCB.
Control systems with negative feedback etc are just great tools, so it's not surprise that software systems also make use of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They may have a lower useful lifetime, but that is completely unrelated to their repairability.
This is false. iPhones are built to last longer by being more physically integrated, and the trade off is that they are less repairable.
iPhones last longer because their software lasts longer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My TV runs WebOS. It's all open-source by LG. That still doesn't mean I can run my own code on it without LG specifically allowing me to.
LG's use of the Linux kernel in WebOS means that you have at minimum the right to replace the Linux kernel on your device, otherwise LG are in violation of the GNU GPL and cannot distribute Linux as part of WebOS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LG's use of the Linux kernel in WebOS means that you have at minimum the right to replace the Linux kernel on your device, otherwise LG are in violation of the GNU GPL and cannot distribute Linux as part of WebOS.
The kernels is gpl-2 though, which afaik doesn't prevent tivoization
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of them run on ARM chips, or other SOCs, so you'll be stuck trying to get hold of binary blob drivers.
Blob drivers are generally a violation of the GPL license.
It can be argued that the blob and the shim are the same work from the perspective of the kernel license (likely IMHO). Until it's tested in court that's a matter of opinion though.