Is this not suppose to be an open source project though? As much as I would love to follow the experience of getting a custom display designed and produced, does it not go against the point of this particular project, if we can't build our own one without buying one of your custom displays?And the problem with that is..?
I'm sure Dave will (if only out of necessity/MOQ) have plenty of displays available
The cost of buying parts (whether from Dave or making your own batch) has no bearing on the open-sourceness or otherwise.
Had a product with similar custom LCD display from GPEG in UK and very low cost, no big MOQ, and their own graphic design software. Hit'em up and see. It was refreshing to not have to spend big bucks.
What's terrible about it?
Apart from open-source ramblings, I feel like the proposed design change is for the better. Whether Dave ends up using any of this is up to him, of course, but I'd say this thread was productive.
Apart from open-source ramblings, I feel like the proposed design change is for the better. Whether Dave ends up using any of this is up to him, of course, but I'd say this thread was productive.
I agree with the concept around redesigning the display layout, after all that is the point of the OP, it’s all the other nonsense about whether or not it constitutes open source, that adds no value, it’s divisive and a net complete waste of everyone’s time.
Leave an empty space in the set part (may be add preset indicators there?). And move CC, CV and ON/OFF to the right vertically, where they are located virtually on any power supply.
I also don't like too bright units, I know that voltage is measured in volts, no need to yell. Yet I'd like to be yelled at about CC/CV stuff.
Is this not suppose to be an open source project though? As much as I would love to follow the experience of getting a custom display designed and produced, does it not go against the point of this particular project, if we can't build our own one without buying one of your custom displays?
Is this not suppose to be an open source project though? As much as I would love to follow the experience of getting a custom display designed and produced, does it not go against the point of this particular project, if we can't build our own one without buying one of your custom displays?
No, the "point" of this project is for me to produce a commercial quality and commercial looking product I can sell, and have fun doing it.
Yes it may well be "open source" in many respects, but it would be silly to strictly design it around having the ability from a few people (and it is literally a few people, like 0.01% of customers) to be able to make it themselves using all off-the-shelf parts and use that as the driving design factor. That is almost zero on my priority list which is (in rough order):
1) Design a product that I want for myself (and close to my original concept for the uSupply)
2) Design a good looking and well engineered product
3) Design a product that is commercially viable (David2 who is doing a bulk of this work is a full time employee on real professional engineering Australian wages, and this will cost me a lot to design and I want a return on that investment), that means BOM cost matters. I cannot live on advertising money forever so I'm also moving into commercially viable niche products, and that is basically why I hired David full time.
4) Design something that makes for some good video content (custom LCD would make for a good how-to video).
and right down the bottom:
5) Think about were OSHW comes into it.
But ultimately why a custom LCD? Because I think they look better and that's what I want.
Trust me, we have debated for many hours and endless google searching for LCD solutions that might be suitable, and ultimately we think that custom LCD is just nicer, as well as being potentially cheaper and more suited to the case design we have.
You can design a good looking commercial product using all Digikey off-the-shelf parts, but it's ultimately not going to be as nicely polished as what you can do with some custom stuff.
The goal of open hardware should be about learning and sharing of designs and ideas, not making sure every product can be built 100% identical by just anyone.
If you have not seen my video, there are many aspects to OSHW, it's not just some ideal uptopian thing of everything is free and readily available:
While I hope that it doesn't set a fashion for members of the open source community to rush out and start adding custom components into designs; my biggest oversight and acceptance is that you rightly have commercial drivers, and this turns out to be a commercial product, which is appreciable; you have to pay the bills.
And if it's open source, and people want to build one, and they don't want to try and get one of your custom LCDs.. well, it's open source. They can change the design, put a graphic LCD in, and change the display code to use it. Yay, open source.
It's about learning, sharing, and adapting, not outright copying.
And if it's open source, and people want to build one, and they don't want to try and get one of your custom LCDs.. well, it's open source. They can change the design, put a graphic LCD in, and change the display code to use it. Yay, open source.
It's about learning, sharing, and adapting, not outright copying.
Some people might just want to make one themselves. That's why the design files (all of them) are made available on open source projects. People who make their own copy ought not be regarded as lesser members of the community than those who can, or want to make changes. Outright copying is perfectly valid. It certainly isn't an issue with software.
A custom component on what is claimed to be open source hardware may just be a way to hinder copying on a commercial scale and confine people to maybe only making firmware changes to single sourced commercial hardware.
I regard true open source as facilitating the copying of the device. That way those who want one can make it and those who see a way to make improvement or modifications can do that and share it. In that way the community can set in train a process of evolution that leads to a place the original make may not have envisaged. Successful open source projects share that in common. The ones that attempt to make sharing more difficult face a steeper hill to climb. That gradient may be custom components, binary-blobs, design files in proprietry formats or single language documentation.
Dave can quite easily provide you with the specs for the display, and you can go and have the display made yourself. Then it's still open source.
I regard true open source as facilitating the copying of the device.
That way those who want one can make it and those who see a way to make improvement or modifications can do that and share it.
In that way the community can set in train a process of evolution that leads to a place the original make may not have envisaged.
Successful open source projects share that in common.
The ones that attempt to make sharing more difficult face a steeper hill to climb. That gradient may be custom components, binary-blobs, design files in proprietry formats or single language documentation.