Nanonote End of life
werner at almesberger.net
Tue Feb 11 20:52:04 EST 2014
Ron K. Jeffries wrote:
> The world has changed a lot since the Nanonote was launched.
Indeed. Picking four random trends:
- the world has a lot more cheap yet featureful devices. This
raises the bar for a potential future Nanonote.
- keyboards have been replaced by touch screens and there is a
growing number of people who hate that. This means that the
Ben's "killer feature" (the keyboard) is more valuable than
Note that it should be relatively easy to make a "skablet"
(skinny tablet) spin-off from a future Nanonote design.
- a new market segment has been born with DIY-friendly boards
for the masses, like the Arduino, RPi, et al.
- NSA spokesman Snowden and the Android update tragedy have each
done their part to increase awareness that openness has more
than just ideological value.
> And how much will these enthusiastic, dedicated
> (almost fanatical..) people pay?
For something like the Ben, I'd aim at the USD 100-200 price
bracket. Go lower and you'll race yourself to the bottom. Go
much higher and you get too much competition - even if it's
just feature comparisons - with smartphones.
Project prices for 100+ kunits but make sure you can survive
a 10 kunits first run. Anything smaller should be considered
development and be covered by burn money.
> Note that the Neo900 project is very interesting. However it want to be a
> mobile phone,
Neo900 is worth watching for connectivity. That's a challenge
their project shares with a future Nanonote. For a lot of other
things they're much less open than we'd want to be (e.g., they
use the original N900 case and several sub-assemblies, they have
blobs in their system, they use Eagle), but that largely (*) make
sense for them, given their goals and capabilities.
(*) I'd disagree with using Eagle, though.
> -- why people want an open device.
Learn and tinker, avoid planned obsolescence and forced migration,
> -- what are the main use cases
Learn and tinker, "brain" of DIY projects (so include convenient
connectivity options, UBB or better), single-purpose portable
device. I.e., I'd aim mainly at the current Arduino and RPi
market. An all-open design could very easily morph into any
specific role that's desired there.
Looks good to me. For wireless, I'd say Wifi and/or BTLE. I'd
view it mainly as a "terminal" (as far as communication is
concerned), so it doesn't have to have both. Of course, if there's
a possibility, the more the merrier.
> fits in a front pocket,
I'd translate this to "roughly same footprint and volume as
Ben". E.g., a bit longer may be okay but it shouldn't be much
bulkier. So the front pocket should be that of a delicate
Asian woman, not that of The Hulk.
More information about the discussion