PINE64: Open Source Hardware Phenomenon
The Internet of Things (IoT) has become a buzz phrase with the rapid rise of connected devices and companion services. While a great deal of the protocols that allow these devices to communicate are open for anyone to peruse, the software on chips used in these devices is usually closed to the public. While hiding the workings of the gadgets is reasonable as it reduces the chances of security vulnerabilities and preserves competitive advantage, it also allows for incessant snooping by various parties. These privacy concerns and outcomes have resulted in myriad pleads, accusations and legal battles which have been heavily reported. Another direct result is the increased development of open source consumer hardware.
Open Source Hardware (OSH) has justifiably been associated with development boards from Arduino or Beaglebone aimed at tinkering and education. Most people have not seriously considered the possibility of consumer devices being open and those that have envisioned it have had limited choices. Enter PINE64, a collective that might change that.
PINE64 is a company that designs, manufactures and sells community-supported, open source hardware. The company first received recognition with a Kickstarter campaign to launch its first single board computer, the PINE A64. The A64 was marketed as a low-cost, efficient board capable of competing with the then best-in-class Raspberry Pi in terms of performance and versatility. Logistical hiccups notwithstanding, the crowdfunding effort was a success for the company and allowed it to grow its footprint. Their extensive line now includes phones, laptops, a smartwatch as well as an IP camera. Their emphasis on the production everyday consumer electronics differentiates them from similar groups. Combined with the belief that users should understand and control their devices as much as possible, it’s an attractive prospect for tinkerers and the privacy-conscious. While there have been and continue to be efforts to create one or more of the aforementioned devices, this is the largest effort I’ve ever seen.
The typical modus operandi seems to be that Pine mostly handles the hardware side while the community crafts the software to be used. Usually a product be developed is announced possibly with a prototype or reference design and community feedback is invited. An early model is then sent out to the community for initial testing and software support before mass shipping and wider development. Devices are then produced in batches of tens or hundreds and made available online for ordering at very affordable prices. From there community members often share their contributions online with active cooperation the norm.
Several close working relationships have developed with PINE64 and different software ecosystems as a result. This is evidenced by the numerous operating systems and apps that support Pine’s gadgets. With this mutual understanding, PINE64 devices often funnel new users into various software ecosystems while favourable reviews drive greater adoption to their devices. A prominent example of these partnerships is the software branded initiative with the PinePhone in which an operating systems logo is printed on the phone and that OS receives a percentage of sales generated. Couple this with a very informational wiki, blog as well as consistent transparency in planning and operations and a sense of trust is fostered.
One of the marvels for such a relatively small outfit is the number devices produced and the longevity of support. This is possible through what the official website refers to as “device convergence” made possible through the use of the same System on a Chip (SoC) on multiple devices. Currently, mobile devices employ the Allwinner A64 chip is used while the Rockchip RK3399 is used for the PineBook, the laptop offered. The common factor between these chipsets is that they are both based on ARM64 and are expected to offer long-term support. This is crucial since it allows for more reliable planning as well as increased familiarity among hardware designers and software developers alike. Since it is also used by other OSH projects, there are there a vast amount of open drivers and user-facing software available. This reduces the burden on R&D and allows for more time for innovation. For example, porting software between devices is relatively simple as the architecture is often the same.
On the other hand, this reduces the degree of flexibility and scalability in both product design and selection. An AI focused device, for example, might require a specialized processor which will take time to understand and resources to implement and maintain in the open. This may mean that such a device may take a longer time to be created or may be shelved all together. Another disadvantage is the reduced build quality and/or support expected by the general consumers. The build concerns are directly linked to the limits of making the devices open, affordable and in small batches which is foreign to those used to products from larger tech companies and these concerns increase in conjunction with the growing user-base. Fortunately, these growing pains are being addressed by new measures aimed at creating an experience closer to what is typically expected. Nevertheless, this trade-off is understandable since the clear goal is to increase accessibility and understanding of personal devices.
While I’m unable to speak on the device as I haven’t used any of the devices (hopefully soon) I’m impressed by the effort. The next generation of devices aren’t too far away and I’m intrigued to see where PINE64 will head next.
All images are courtesy of PINE64
