"Build-it-yourself" Category under Hardware

wjcroftwjcroft Mount Shasta, CA
edited August 2017 in Build-it-yourself
This is a new category under Hardware, for those hardware hackers building their own OpenBCI PC boards; using primarily the OpenBCI board and hardware designs. This is a catch-all category regardless of which board: Cyton, Ganglion, etc.


For those with completely different hardware designs, there is still the category, "Other Platforms",  which is not under "Hardware". This is so Hardware mainly applies to OpenBCI products and build-it-yourself hackers.


Some of the previous threads under Other Platforms have been moved to this Build-it-yourself category.

Below we mention some of the previous thread posters with build-it-yourself content, so they are aware of this change.


Regards,

William

PS in case it's not obvious, building PC boards like this is REALLY time consuming and difficult; taking many many hours; likely dozens. So unless you really enjoy this sort of thing, (or are treating it as a learning experience) -- purchasing a board from the OpenBCI store will likely cost less if you are honest about how you are valuing your time. (What you would pay yourself per hour.)

Comments

  • With clear and comprehensive gerber files and component lists, building should NOT be very time consuming or difficult. All you have to do with those is then order the boards & components, and solder them. I paid something like $100 for board fab, and have a current component cost estimate list of approximately ~$200-250 not including cap and electrodes (should not be significant percentage of cost using typical leads/caps). For probably a maximum of a few hours of soldering, this appears radically less expensive than the purchase price of pre-made boards.

    I am more than a little dismayed at lack of any response to my pull requests to post more comprehensive gerber and component files to the github page (so others might collaboratively try to figure out to more cheaply and efficiently make the boards):
    https://github.com/ak1n/V3_Hardware_Design_Files
  • wjcroftwjcroft Mount Shasta, CA
    @xris, hi. Your statement "so others might collaboratively try to figure out to more cheaply and efficiently make the boards" contains a double edged sword. Here is another related thread:




  • p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }

    I appreciate the point that OpenBCI has contributed much, and want to see them succeed because of it. But to assert that building the boards is necessarily expensive and difficult when this is not the case (or doesn't have to be the case), just because of fear of original contributors not getting what some think they deserve, is incredibly disingenuous. I see repeated that OpenBCI is free in the libre sense and open source (FLOS), and I would presume much support for it is predicated on these points. To make it difficult for others to replicate the OpenBCI is profoundly contrary to the libre/open-source ethos. Redhat excellently demonstrates how the libre/open-source model does not mean you can't make money and succeed/develop on a large scale. Amazing things far beyond the current state of OpenBCI could be accomplished in a collaborative FLOS model that are otherwise impossible. As a technically-inclined neurologist with some bitcoin, I'm inspired by the OpenBCI model to try and contribute. But if it's not fully FLOS, I'd devote by time/finances to independently re-generating an EEG setup in true FLOS form.

  • wjcroftwjcroft Mount Shasta, CA
    Open source hardware projects are considerably different than open source software development. Hardware production and support has many times the overhead costs. Boards and headsets are not produced one at a time by hand, but rather in large batches with automated assembly. Once a Kickstarter has completed, subsequent production runs must be carefully managed, since one cannot predict supply and demand, etc.

    Redhat gets their cash flow from support and maintenance primarily. OpenBCI gets no support, staff or maintenance funding; all must come from hardware sales.


  • You didn't respond to production cost or FLOS points. Granted the hardware is different. But the point still stands that even in small batches the boards could be produced radically cheaper than the purchase price of the OpenBCI boards, without significant effort. Unless the OpenBCI license is changed nothing can be done to prevent this. If OpenBCI helps people make their own boards, they can still make money in various ways. On the longer time horizon selling free and open source boards and trying to prevent others from building them is going to lead to another project taking over. If presented with a choice to contribute to a project that supports anyone building boards vs. another project that doesn't, who is going to choose the latter?

    If OpenBCI doesn't want to support people making their own boards, that's fine since they've done most of the work and the websites are theirs. But then why toot the open software/hardware horn? I'm frankly a bit confused at the core group's stance on this point, since all the responses to my messages to them about whether the project was fully libre/open were "yes" - so either the hardware github maintainers are busy with other things or they don't want people making their own boards easily. If the latter, I'm wasting my time here and will consider hiring some engineers to design/fab some boards in a more open/collaborative model (inevitable on the long horizon). If the former, I'd really like to get to work and move some projects forward - with responses from the main team being a significant catalyst for this.
  • wjcroftwjcroft Mount Shasta, CA
    edited August 2017
    I suggest you write to contact at openbci.com with your questions. I'm just a volunteer here @openbci.

    The staff in the Brooklyn lab are always busy, it's a very small staff. You have already posted your Github on the other thread (and this one), and that is now publicly available.

    I'm sorry for any stress this process has caused for you. Thanks again for setting up your Github repo.

    William

  • Thanks for your thoughts. No stress, just trying to push projects forward! The only point of emphasis I think I have here is that board fab need not be expensive or time consuming. I figure most or all of us here have the shared goal of wanting to see this tech succeed and proliferate, and differ just in how we think that should unfold. I appreciate your time and input.
This discussion has been closed.