Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open-Sourcing our Firmware

frame.work

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 382 posts

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#171

Post by p_l »

Shared404 wrote: post #47
p_l wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FCC doesn't prevent you from opening the firmware (now, trade secrets inside is another thing) - they just do not allow unlicensed devices i.e. you can't just build your own radio firmware and have it operate legally.

So open firmware from the manufacturer is fine, but if you were to modify it and re-flash it yourself you would be breaking the law? I guess that makes sense, thanks for the clarification!

Exactly - the FCC certification is that a specific device, despite having purposeful (or accidental) transmitters, operates within the law and rules set by it for use of radio spectrum. The maker of the device is then able to sell it to people who are then indemnified should the device break those rules (and aren't required to have expensive in time and effort radio license themselves).

With significant portion of the regulated behaviour being done in software, things can become a bit problematic if the end user can load any code they want. This is also why "BIOS whitelists" exist, as the certification applies to the whole radio equipment, which means the certification must cover the antenna - and those are built into laptops, meaning you can't certify the cards separately as their exact characteristics depend on the connected antennas.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#172

Post by ask_b123 »

cptskippy wrote: post #163
vaylian wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From reports I've read the Framework laptop has poor build quality. Sources please. That's news to me.

Yeah, the cited source doesn't rea mentioned build quality. It's mostly software bugs, muffled speakers and fan noise. None of that is build quality.

From the cited source:

> Build quality is clearly a step down from my old Thinkpad X1 Yoga. The hinge doesn't feel as strong, some keys are mushy/creaking and I'm skeptical my Framework will survive as many falls as my old laptop.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#173

Post by imiric »

cptskippy wrote: post #163
vaylian wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From reports I've read the Framework laptop has poor build quality. Sources please. That's news to me.

Yeah, the cited source doesn't rea mentioned build quality. It's mostly software bugs, muffled speakers and fan noise. None of that is build quality.

I would categorize the laptop not turning on for 2 weeks, poor speakers, fan noise, mushy/creaking keys, and weak hinge all to be part of build quality. And yes, software issues are also a problem.

We can argue about how subjective all of those points are, and if a single report has any merit on its own, but it was enough to disuade me from making the purchase.

If I could test the laptop locally before buying it, I would do that. Otherwise I don't want to risk it on a first gen product, since I _can_ wait for gen 2 and 3.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#174

Post by p_l »

treesknees wrote: post #138
Shared404 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So open firmware from the manufacturer is fine, but if you were to modify it and re-flash it yourself you would be breaking the law? I guess that makes sense, thanks for the clarification!

I don't think that makes sense at all. One major part of Part 15 from the FCC covers this. A device would fall under the category as an intentional radiator in part 15.1. And in part 15.23, considered a home-built device. § 15.23 Home-built devices. (a) Equipment authorization is not required for devices that are not marketed, are not constructed from a kit, and are built in quantities of five or less for personal us…

The problem starts with the fact that the device doesn't have any way of showing that it was modified, and some of the frequencies involved are license-restricted (especially in 5GHz wifi bands - 2.4GHz is dumping ground free-for-all because of aircraft ovens anyway).

So, let's say you modify something with your own firmware, break rules about ISM spectrum - or worse, mess with SDR hard enough you break some licensed spectrum, and upon investigation FCC certification marks are found and the number. Since certification points to vendor, vendor now has to explain why their device went outside of those limits, and might or might not be able to prove that you ran it with unlicensed firmware.

So an obviously home build device will go under §15.23 easily, but inconspicuously modified commercially sold device won't - without possibly long court case, that is.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#175

Post by [deleted] »

ohazi wrote: post #124

I've been so happy to see what Framework has been doing lately, and really want to support them, but I already have a desktop as my primary computer and two Thinkpads that are already set up nicely, but that I rarely use. I moved from 15" laptops to 14" when Lenovo added the numpad on the larger variant, and 14" is about as small as I want to go. I kind of want to buy a framework though, just to support them? But I h…

[deleted]

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#176

Post by Eduard »

smoldesu wrote: post #122
yurishimo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was the design on MacBook's for almost 5 years. Apple rolled that change back in late 2020 but it will take other OEM's a while to update their available SKUs to match the Apple of today.

My ex-boyfriend called me "insane", but I genuinely prefer ye olde 6-key arrow cluster from the Thinkpads of yore. I quickly got used to browsing with pgup and pgdown, now any keyboard without those keys adjacent to the arrows just feels wrong to me. In any case, the keyboard on the Framework is fully replaceable. If there's significant enough demand for an inverted-T cluster, you can bet there are people who will ma…

And I hate the ThinkPad 6-key cluster because of accidentally hitting the pgup and pgdown buttons. I decapped both buttons because of it. Same with the the fn button next to ctrl.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#177

Post by poyu »

ad8e wrote: post #165

I checked the keyboard debouncing logic [0] and it was fine. Some keyboards from other manufacturers, notably Lenovo Thinkpads, have absurd debouncing algorithms that scramble keys or add delays, so it's good to see Framework has a correct solution. [0]: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/EmbeddedController/blob...

Debounce is an interesting topic[0], I tend to use hardware debounce whenever possible on my own projects.

[0]: https://hackaday.com/2010/11/09/debounce-code-one-post-to-ru...

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#178

Post by COGlory »

fancy_pantser wrote: post #167

A thread from two weeks ago gave me pause; I will wait a couple iterations until considering a Framework laptop to see if at least the software issues can be resolved and observe how the team navigates the waters. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29806430

That thread does not mirror any of my experiences at all, and I've been using the laptop since it was launched.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#179

Post by sangnoir »

ask_b123 wrote: post #172
cptskippy wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the cited source doesn't rea mentioned build quality. It's mostly software bugs, muffled speakers and fan noise. None of that is build quality.

From the cited source: > Build quality is clearly a step down from my old Thinkpad X1 Yoga. The hinge doesn't feel as strong, some keys are mushy/creaking and I'm skeptical my Framework will survive as many falls as my old laptop.

That is not the same as saying the build quality is poor though: it's clearly a comparative statement. "The Tesla Model S is cheaper than the Model X" does not imply "The Model S is cheap".

Replacing "Model S" in the sentence with a beat-up '97 Honda civic and it may be true, but there is not enough evidence contained in the sentence to support an absolute statement.

Re: Open-Sourcing our Firmware

#180

Post by shepherdjerred »

nathancahill wrote: post #145
xvector wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The M1 MacBook Air honestly feels so far ahead of any other laptop I've used that it's not even funny. Fanless, powerful, absolutely bonkers battery life. M1 + Nix is ideal, IMO.

You have Nix running on M1?

Nix is the package manager, NixOS is the OS.

https://nix.dev/tutorials/install-nix#macos

Post reply on HN