Estel | # 251 | 2013-09-01, 22:02 | Report

My bad for not using term MHL - in part, it was due to me being unable to remember exact market name for this "technology", but I also didn't wanted to suggest that I'm all about certain way of doing it - I just wanted to indicate, that there *are* methods of achieving it even if N900's case is used.
---

Now, I know reality'n'stuff, but this would *really* be a "killer feature" (I dislike this term, frankly, but it fits here). Worth quite an increase in price, if working flawlessly. I strongly encourage to at least consider it, evaluating how much it would change price (if doable at all), etc.

/Estel

---

Last edited by Estel; 2013-09-01 at 22:57.

dos1 | # 252 | 2013-09-01, 22:29 | Report

Don't worry, it will be evaluated. If it turns to be technologically and economically possible then for sure it'll happen

t-b | # 253 | 2013-09-01, 22:36 | Report

Personally I would go for the lowest price possible and no additional features at all (except the already mentioned improvements) .
There are not a lot of people willing to pay 700 and every additional feature will increase the price even more.
I am not interested in MHL, 4G or any other fancy features. Just give me a solid, bug free and open N900 that has slightly better specs and good battery life.
An improved microsd slot would also be welcome if it will not increase costs.

joerg_rw | # 254 | 2013-09-01, 22:51 | Report

As explained in my one post above, additional features are mostly "for free", since the BOM increase is only "a few cents" for many of them. I'd say when dropping all the nice additional features like gyro, baro, compass, etc pp, we might be able to reduce price by maybe 50 bucks max.
LTE vs 3G is probably also 50 to 100 bucks but that might actually well be an option on ordering, since the 601 and 801 are pin compatible and it doesn't matter which one we solder onto your board.
Generally I think people who are already willing to pay a steep 700 bucks for a device like this one would probably rather be interested in getting the best, a real feature monster for a slightly higher price like 739, than the bare minimum for a still steep 690 bucks.

On a sidenote: it seems N900 camera is easily sourceable (particularly when it's correct that it is same module as used in N95 and several other phones), alas it costs ~50EUR. Well, as already mentioned you can re-use an already available broken or retired N900 to canibalize the parts, and you just buy the "bare bones board" GTA04-N900 to swap DIY, just like for GTA04. This will be significanlty lower price than a complete Neo900

cheers
jOERG

[EDIT] Sorry I completely forgot: what do you mean by "improved uSD card slot"? SDXC?

---

Last edited by joerg_rw; 2013-09-01 at 23:57.

Estel | # 255 | 2013-09-01, 23:02 | Report

Absolutely agree, and judging by dos1's and yours answer, I feel much more "relaxed" about how the device will turn out. You know, the kind of feeling that "all that is possible will be delivered". and if something is not going to made it, there will be a damn good technical reason for it (instead of political one, as often seen with product from "big companies").

Keeping my thumbs (and neons) even harder!

/Estel

xes | # 256 | 2013-09-01, 23:56 | Report

Well, in my opinion, this point of view is something that we can't avoid to consider.
Probably, i'm the first one ready to spend a lot of money for great features...
But, OPEN should also mean a device available for many people...also for the ones that can't or don't want spend too much.

So what? Yes, i know, our name is not ZOKIA.. And engineering, production costs.. are really high. BUT we should keep always an eye on modularity and components that could be optional.
The maximum would be have a basic board filled with sockets....just like an upgraded N800 where everyone could add the modules he needs. (gsm module,camera,connectivity module, sdr module.... ...)
This could also ensure some future upgrade of the modules that could be changed when a new technology will become avalable.

---

Last edited by xes; 2013-09-02 at 00:10.

joerg_rw | # 257 | 2013-09-02, 00:32 | Report

This often discussed modularity concept, however obvious and plausible and intuitive it may appear on first glance, is basically a logical hoax, a trick of the senses. There's a lot of implications, but for sake of the S/N ratio in this thread, I just say: sockets for chips cost more than the chips themselves, are not reliable, and often 4 times the size of the chip.
Please start a separate thread for discussing modularization in embedded! Thanks!

PS: Apropos GPS. we might just use the GPS that comes with basically all WWAN (GSM) modules nowadays, definitely the Option GTM(6|8)01 come with GPS already. I'm aware of the security/privacy and openness implications this introduces, but some of the security/privacy can get re-established by controlling the GPS antenna which is pretty simple to disable programmatically via a "switch" that's under exclusive control of the application processor.

cheers
jOERG

---

Last edited by joerg_rw; 2013-09-02 at 01:45.

Estel | # 258 | 2013-09-02, 04:12 | Report

Re GPS:
I know it may not be kind of idea that get through - and I can perfectly live without it, so think about it as something like SDR ideas, just this one being easier to implement - but, I wonder, how costly would it be to use hybrid GPS/GLONASS module, instead of only-GPS one?

Rationale:

1. Combined GPS/GLONASS receivers offer better accuracy and greatly reduced lock time, even without support from techniques like A-GPS. Accuracy gain compared to sole GPS or GLONASS is most visible in urban/mountain/canyon areas.

2. On high latitudes (north or south), GLONASS' accuracy is better than that of GPS due to the orbital position of the satellites. Being hybrid GPS/GLONASS, both systems can compliment themselves, resulting in square increase of accuracy even in situations, where ne system alone is severely lacking.

3. Both systems use selective, area-based denial of service (countries inside conflict zones, usually), controlled by US for GPS and Rus. Fed. for GLONASS. Hoever, considering political situation (contrary interests of said goverments), it is highly unlikely, that both systems will get (purposely) off-line for the same area, at the same time.

The last point is especially important for people who (like me) often travel to/through "unstable" countries.
---

Now, as said, I understand that there may be marginal interest for such feature, so it is only feasible if hybrid receivers aren't much more pricey. Still, *if* feasible, it would be nice thing to have - considering rapid development of GLONASS, hybrid receivers seems to be future for mobile devices, too (quite a lot of tablets/phones have it already, and most car systems produced from 2015 will mandatory contain hybrid modules).

/Estel

---

Last edited by Estel; 2013-09-02 at 04:20.

joerg_rw | # 259 | 2013-09-02, 04:34 | Report

See http://www.roundsolutions.com/techdocs/ds/GTM801U.pdf http://www.qualcomm.com/media/blog/2...ion-your-phone
:-D

/j

---

Last edited by joerg_rw; 2013-09-02 at 05:57.

qwazix | # 260 | 2013-09-02, 05:13 | Report

white version?