Doesn’t Windows 10 already do that? I could never get the freaking thing to leave my files behind and disable itself.

Windows 10 LTSC for the win if you have software you can’t yet abandon.

I’m both. Somehow. I apparently switch between them.

I think the only way it makes sense for Framework to get into the phone market is to follow the footsteps of Pine64 trying to create Linux phones. There’s no point making a phone at an inherently higher cost to make it more durable and repairable with a “closed SDK” SoC that has a fixed EoL date. I made a more detailed comment about this in the main thread.

I as far as I know the best OpenWRT AP’s / Routers you can buy right now is the Banana Pi R64, R3, R4(Still in development). Open source firmware with a long support life of updates and security patches and a nice metal casing.

I say as far as I know because I have not bought one yet as I don’t have the funds for that right now. It is my next AP replacement though.

Framework tackling phones is useless if they go the mainstream SoC route (Qualcomm, Mediatek) as they don’t have the software team needed to make those work properly (I would argue alot of handset manufactures don’t either). From what I hear you need a hell of software team to “fix” the garbage Android SDK released for those chips. Most importantly is if they go the closed mainstream SoC route which have EoL SDK support dates then what’s the point of building a durable repairable phone at a higher price point when you have to throw it out at the same as everyone else?

I want to see Framework enter the Linux phone market using “open” chips like Rockchip alongside Pine64’s Pinephone (Pro) and the Librem 5 as I think they would more likely have the funds, dev time and community support to help bring say PostmarketOS into a usable state then have to rework the SDK. This way the phone’s EoL date would be determined be the local phone infrastructure shutdowns. A much longer amount of time.

It’s silly to be an absolute open source purist when it comes to Valve anyway. They arguably deserve the money for the amazing ecosystem they have compared to the competition and are one of the biggest contributors to getting GUI frameworks and other Linux systems developed for the Linux based steam deck.

Valve will likely be the party that gets VR working mainstream on Linux for the upcoming Valve Decard standalone headset. You want to talk about the power of open source… well… an affordable VR headset that’s at least mostly open source in the software department that is also good for gaming. Sign me up. It’ll be miles better than what Facebook shits out for it measly 3-4 years of support.

I have an OG Vive that I use as the multiplayer setup for when friends come over and it’s still fully supported. 8 years later.

Valve may not be completely committed to everything open source but until someone out shines them they are the best option for flexibility and longevity.

Also someone need to be paid to develop open source software. This being the beginning of the topic and all. I’m happy for that to be Valve at the moment as they have shown the industry how to be better.

No I don’t work for Valve, I’m just sick of closed restrictive platforms as well as open janky platforms for gaming and hardware with fixed EOL dates. I see Valve as the best balance/compromise.

Sorry for my brains wall of text mode.

Steam is my dirty little secret when it come to my interest in open source. I believe that Valve will continue to hold it’s long tradition of user first business as a private business with lord Gaben at the helm (yes I know he’s mostly in the background at this point). I know that GOG exists however I really like steam forums, achievements, steam deck integration, steam link streaming and most importantly steamVR. Buying through GOG is going to massively impact my steamVR experience if you can even at all. steamVR compared to Oculus makes steamVR look like a very open platform. I hate Facebook with a passion for a variety of reasons so steamVR it is.

FOSS is a great tool/concept but at this time it doesn’t apply to gaming and I don’t really care to massively inconvenience my gaming experience for a small amount more of open source code. I say this as someone who daily drives a PinePhone, runs a Linux server with ZFS and is looking at a Framework laptop for my next laptop to run Linux on. Windows is still where gaming is at, especially for VR, and I don’t care to try and fight to run close source games on an open source operating system. Seems like a waste of effort to me.

I should add that I am broke myself so it’s a bit high and mighty of me to say people should donate when I have not done so yet.

I have started by at least supporting game developers on Steam. Mostly indie to medium size studio ones. Again, I can’t stand the AAA game DRM key crap.

I am interested in paying donations to free and open source software I regularly use and have into my workflow. I will completely ignore your project if you make me deal with license keys. The Grayjay method is ok but would prefer that code and buttons not be dedicated to getting in my way. I hope that the mentality of paying for what you use becomes more common in FOSS culture so that prompts aren’t needed.

That said if your broke, don’t dontate. Take advantage of it being free and when you get a good job again, then consider helping out the developers.

In recent personal experience, I recently changed the motherboard on my Winblows VR gaming PC and It wouldn’t recognize my legit product key anymore. I don’t have patience for DRM shit so I activated it with KMS. Activation keys are a pain in the arse.

I emphasized It’s use for VR gaming just in case someone tries to sell me on the Linux Proton compatibility system. Someday soon steamVR will hopefully have good compatibility and I will give it a go. However I will always at minimum be stuck with windows on a secondary ssd as I have some Oculus games I also like and Oculus+revive will likely never work under Linux.

My major issue with copyright is how published works can have major cultural significance. How it can shift ideas and shape minds. But your not allowed to have some fun with on a personal level. How can it be the norm that the most important scientific knowledge and other culturally significant material is locked behind such restrictive measures. Essentially ensuring that middle class and especially poor people are locked out.

If you publish something, even if it’s paid, you don’t deserve such restrictive rights. You deserve to be compensated for your work but you don’t deserve to make it into a extortion racket.

My view on your second point is if you have posted it publicly with no paywall, maybe you should still get some percentage revenue but you don’t have a say in what it can be used. To place restrictions on what it can be used for when posting it publicly is academic as it’s basically unenforceable.

We live in a society which revolves around the discovery and sharing of ideas. We are all entitled to a certain amount of the sharing of that information. That’s the whole point. To have some business man who was in the right place at the right time create an extortion racket out of something culturally significant they almost certainly didn’t create is wrong.

Sorry if this is all over the place. I’m writing this while tired.

Absolutely. Should have clarifying that I’m not defending the attitude and abuse of developers. However driving non technical end users to insanity with ill thought through processes is also wrong. Such as expecting users to write bug reports when an automated tool should be being used. An unclear installation guide where 90% of user run into the same problem. etc.

Linus’s (LTT) Linux challenge was the ultimate test of the open source community and they failed miserably. Blaming linus for bricking the system. Um hello, he never should have been incentivized to open the command line at all.

All the AI race has done is surface the long standing issue of how broken copyright is for the online internet era. Artists should be compensated but trying to do that using the traditional model which was originally designed with physical, non infinitely copyable goods in mind is just asinine.

One such model could be to make the copyright owner automatically assigned by first upload on any platform that supports the API. An API provided and enforced by the US copyright office. A percentage of the end use case can be paid back as royalties. I haven’t really thought out this model much further than this.

Machine learning is here to say and is a useful tool that can be used for good and evil things alike.

The entitlement of the open source community can be astonishingly deaf. You tell users that open source is better, users try it and your response is, oh it’s free software, you get what you pay for.

Pay who? If I donate do I get paid support? Almost any other paid product/service based off that project almost certainly won’t be open source and probably subscription spyware. So your answer to use open source is don’t use open source???

If this is your attitude on your repo then don’t imply/demonstrate it as for production ready use. It a personal fun dev project not fit for mainstream use. Pick a side, you can’t have both.

Open source developers: Why aren’t more people using open source software software for everything. It’s better.

Also open source developers: Oh it broke your computer, well that’s your problem. You should have had a software engineering degree in order to vet the software yourself.

User goes back to closed source paid spyware… ahem software.

Open source developers: Why aren’t more people using open source software software for everything. It’s better.

Dumbass. YouTube has single-handedly proven how broken the copyright system is and this dick wants to make it worse. There needs to be a fair-er rebalancing of how people are compensated and for how long.

What exactly that looks like I’m not sure but I do know that upholding the current system is not the answer.

Aww. I liked the free batteries.

Intel Boot Guard stores the public signing key in OTP fuses inside the PCH. Meaning that you need the private key to sign new BIOS firmware. This “feature” has existed since Haswell 4th gen processors.

This is a simplified description of how it works because it’s still beyond my full understanding.

More info here: https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner/wiki/Intel-Boot-Guard

It’s the ultimate cash grab in my opinion. Just imagine how much faster the SSD will wear out from all the swap that’ll be needed. The SOLDERED SSD.

I’m not dismissing it just critiquing. There is a reason I’m still rocking this late-2013 MacBook Pro. Apple MacBook Pro 2016 and onwards are a total showstopper for me for an evolving list of reasons.

I use my laptop for an almost equal share of movies/tv and general work/programming. So black bars being bigger are potentially annoying. The speaker downgrade is also not great, not that things are great on this machine either. Stupid rubber has disintegrated and the speakers are now worthless.

However the measly 3 ports on the framework when you using the powersupply is a reason I’m holding off. Given that I understand the architectural limitations, all I’m asking for from framework is two builtin usb-c ports running at 2.0 speeds with PD support. I think there would be room at the back between the rear-most module and the display. This means I can charge from either side and have 5 ports left over. 4 hi-speed ports and 1 usb 2.0. That plus bringing the new dual driver speakers from the new 16" would make me very happy.

Heck even Apple backpedaled on only 4 usb-c ports in 2020. It’s too low a number of ports.

Good. I don’t like sim trays. They’re small and flimsy and irritating and are easily lost. Not like here. Here everything is built-in and solid.