Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by thomastjeffery 1165 days ago
What cost?

Competition? That isn't definite.

Support overhead? I don't buy it.

> If you are easily able to change the firmware, you are easily able to destroy the hardware, and if that's under warranty, companies are going to be concerned.

...so void the warrantee when flashing 3rd-party firmware.

How often, in reality, are people going to fry their hardware? It's not as if 99.99999% of 3rd-party firmware users are writing that firmware themselves! Hardware damage should be expected as an extreme edge case, not a broad looming risk.

---

If we are going to put this much effort into speculating cost, we should put equal effort into speculating value.

Open firmware is significantly likely to reduce the costs of compatibility and edge-case support. It is also likely to increase the value of the product by making it auditable and maintainable. It also factors out the cost of anti-user-maintenance efforts like DRM.

Most importantly, open firmware can stabilize the value of a product, increasing its resale price and delaying price decline. Unfortunately, this is the point that many companies consider negative, because they don't want to compete with themselves.

3 comments

What do you mean that isn't definite? I'm very in favor of open firmware, but there have been multiple examples of clones popping up whenever firmware is public and open source.
Can hardware be protected (and defended in court) if copycats just copy a device wholesale?

If they construct a new device but reuse the firmware, it's sort is the point of having open firmware.

Open-source firmware wouldn't exactly be the same thing as public domain firmware. And even if a product's firmware isn't getting the benefit of copyright protection, the product as a whole can still be protected by patents and trademarks.
Exactly firmware shouldn't protect the hardware that should be done in hardware as firmware can go wrong.
> Most importantly, open firmware can stabilize the value of a product, increasing its resale price and delaying price decline. Unfortunately, this is the point that many companies consider negative, because they don't want to compete with themselves.

Can you share some examples of this?

Linksys got GPL'd when they released the WRT54G which spawned off OpenWRT, ddwrt, and friends. This blunder on their part sparked a boon of open source firmware development, which ultimately made the WRT54G very popular. Compatibility with open source firmware is a hard requirement for any new router purchases that I make
The GPL code release also only happened because of GPL enforcement, some of the history is written about here:

https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/enforcement-st...

Several years back, I put Tomato firmware on an old WRT54G when all my old 802.11N devices were constantly crashing.

It was 100% worth the bandwidth downgrade. I practically never had to touch that router again.

I hope to never buy a router without DD-WRT (or equivalent free software) support again.