Free board offer to OBB developer with a CMU200
laforge at gnumonks.org
Sun Apr 7 18:39:09 UTC 2019
On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 09:39:25PM -0800, Mychaela Falconia wrote:
> Craig wrote:
> > I have been working with osmocom-bb since around 2010,
> So you have been at it for at least 3 y longer than I have, and you
> still haven't offered much to show for it..
Once again, there is no competition here. Not everybody has the same
time and resources, level of technicality, etc.. Not everyone has the
same goal. Maybe some people just want to have a fun hobby learning a
bit more about GSM, reverse engineering, etc. ?
> > dabbling in porting layer1 to nutt-x
> What is the deal with that NuttX thing? What makes all of you think
> that it is such a good idea? Just because someone said so?
That Someone would likely have been me.
> None of the mainstream, commercially successful GSM modem firmwares from any
> reputable vendor use NuttX, they all use Nucleus, ThreadX or L4
So what? None of the mainstream operators are using network-side Osmocom
components, but still they generally work, and some smaller operators have
been running them very successfully so ;)
None of the mainstream IT companies were using Linux in the mid-1990ies,
still it was quite capable back then.
> > and starting 2-3 years ago working more earnestly on
> > understanding layer1 and porting it to fernvale.
> 2-3 y ago is the same time when I went from running FreeCalypso purely
> as a software project to producing my current FCDEV3B hardware. So far
> my approach has worked out a lot better: FCDEV3B is now a practically
> usable commercial-quality GSM+GPRS modem that is fully fit for
> operation on live GSM networks, which cannot be said for Fernvale.
Did it occur to you that Fernvale had completely different goals?
Also, how long do you think that your "commercial quality" modem will
continue to be available, given the ancient, end-of-life components it
MTK still produces newer baseband chips with GSM/GPRS support, and from all we
know they didn't significantly change that 2G part in ages. Why would they? It
just lives next to their 3G/4G modem parts, probably copy+pasted from the older
> In other words, operating those MTK chips as general-purpose
> microprocessors without any cellular radio functionality, right? What
> you are doing here would indeed be a necessary foundational step *if*
> you had some *realistic* plan for how you are going to bring up
> cellular radio functionality, but it does not sound like you have any
> such realistic plan.
Please stop that negative attitude. Nobody needs any realistic plan if they
want to play/hack around.
> This is the part that shows most clearly how out of touch you are with
> reality when it comes to your idea of OBB on MTK.
Maybe it's you who is out of touch with Craigs reality? I think Craig
is quite realistic when it comes to his ability to create a "production
ready GSM/GPRS modem". But did he state anywhere that this is what
he's aiming for?
> I am part-time too, I am NOT independently wealthy to where I could
> work on FreeCalypso full-time. Yet having a limited time budget is
> not an excuse for making poor judgments as to what is realistically
> doable and what isn't, deluding yourself and misleading others into a
> land of false hopes.
Please respectfully leave it up to others to make whatever judgements
they want on how they spend their spare time. We're not telling you
how to spend yours either.
Having said this, please feel free to share your points of view in a
neutral way - but don't be judgemental and/or attack other people just
because they are doing something that's not according to your taste,
or which you think is inferior.
To put it in the words of Rosa Luxemburg:
"Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters."
- Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
More information about the baseband-devel