Why not a nexus chipset ?
mhtajik at gmail.com
Wed Oct 3 21:52:26 UTC 2012
TI or Qualcomm will not sell "you" their IP , no matter what . there is a very complicated "legal" process behind these kinds of deals , specifically a regulation process done outside the vendor , that is usually a government organization . you would however be able to purchase protected DSP style working components and NDAed dox with 6-figure deals .
there is a different type of business you can look into though , take a look at Lyrtech's stuff for example . you can buy at least as good as HDL crystal clear IP from them licensed and hassle free with support and dox and all , but they target specially built systems , usually huge expensive SDRs .
the alleged TI's leaks , mo matter what the circumstance , are not to my experiences of much practical importance . if you got the engineering resources and enough money to put such stuff into use , you may as well code it all from scratch , since most specs are already public . the Patents usually prevent people from certifying , therefore , prevent selling big time for serious profit and limiting the market . its not like they are Nuclear missile code secrets . difference between engineering and reverse engineering in Software ecosystem and Telecom ecosystem is exactly in the time/resource/profit formulation . kids code a virus or crack a code over a couple of nights using ollydbg , although they need to learn a lot of math and electric shit before doing baseband scale maneuver . they almost never do , or Apple offer them Jobs ;)
On چهارشنبه, مهر ۱۲, ۱۳۹۱ at ۲۱:۲۲, John Case wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2012, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
> > > But, do you have links to the datasheet, programmers manual and source
> > > code of the baseband ?
> > We were discussing this on IRC and Peter pointed out this:
> > http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1483053
> I am looking at the list of devices covered by this xda-dev posting - most
> interesting is the Samsung Galaxy Nexus - again, this is a reference
> handset, something that in the past was in the hands of developers only,
> but now many people around the world are using.
> So that's very interesting, which was the point of my OP - the google
> nexus phones represent a particularly ripe avenue for osmocom since they
> are reference handsets, and presumably the "warez" that you need are in
> many more hands than previous chipset docs and code. Perhaps there is a
> flaw in my assumption ?
> The bad news is that the list of devices from the xda-dev posting does NOT
> include the Galaxy S II GT-i9100, which was mentioned earlier in this
> I wonder:
> - how did the calypso docs leak in the first place ? Was it indeed a real
> breach of intellectual property, or did they just get published by TI
> since they were uninteresting in some way ? How nefarious is the story
> there ?
> - What would it actually cost to get the documentation and code needed for
> either of these two items we are discussing above ? If I go to Qualcomm
> and sign up as a developer (under a corp name, etc.) .... is it $10k ?
> $100k ? Or are the docs you need not available at any price ?
> I would like to think that the "warez" needed for one of these targets are
> so widely distributed (because of the android ecosystem and the aggressive
> push there) that simply putting out a loud and wide "call for leaks" would
> yield some results...
More information about the baseband-devel