Skip to content(if available)orjump to list(if available)

Pebble Watch software is now 100% open source

janpio

Also includes news about a new Appstore, which can probably be seen as a reaction to the stories from last week:

    We’ve created our own Pebble Appstore feed (appstore-api.repebble.com) and new Developer Dashboard. Our feed (fyi powered by 100% new software) is configured to back up an archive of all apps and faces to Archive.org (backup will gradually complete over the next week). Today, our feed only has a subset of all Pebble watchfaces and apps (thank you aveao for creating Pebble Archive!). Developers - you can upload your existing or new apps right now! We hope that this sets a standard for openness and we encourage all feeds to publish a freely and publicly available archive.
https://ericmigi.com/blog/pebble-watch-software-is-now-100pe...

zeta0134

Honestly this feels like the best possible outcome. It's pretty unusual for an appstore implementation to support multiple feeds[0], but it's great resilience to large company failures when they do. This way, users can totally still access Rebble's feed (and pay for a subscription if they like) just as before, but they are free to also use something else.

It is the *end user* who decides which feeds to trust, as it should be. And since it's built right into the app as a core concept, it doesn't take massive engineering effort to switch feeds if some sort of drama occurs.

[0] I'd normally call these repositories, but I've used Eric's term for consistency with the article.

weinzierl

"Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, You hereby grant to Core Devices and to recipients of software distributed by Core Devices a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute Your Contributions and such derivative works."

A few years from now we will see the usual HN thread were contributors lachrymosely complain about how their precious work was stolen by a good-turned-evil organization.

erohead

Please note our CLA explicitly include a clause to require Core Devices to distribute all contributions under an OSI-compatible FOSS license (e.g. GPLv3). So no contributions can be 'stolen'.

https://ericmigi.notion.site/Core-Devices-Software-Licensing...

weinzierl

I agree with you but read the threads I'm referring to. People will complain anyway if you stop supporting a component or distribute your focus between a free and a paid tier.

Also, thank you for putting the CLA right in the repo where it belongs and people can easily find it. Many organizations[1] put a license upfront and bury the CLA.

[1] For a particularly bad example try MonoDB.

notpachet

> lachrymosely

Learned a new word, thank you!

MangoToupe

Pebble was bought a long time ago by google yea? So this already happened

amwehrli

Wearing my new white pebble right now and am very happy with how open source the comeback has been. Incredibly happy with it and if you want a geeky, simple watch I really can't recommend it enough. The battery life and always on screen alone (especially at this price point) is reason enough.

Cheers to Eric for bringing back pebble in the way that he has !

apparent

In terms of long-term market viability, have you considered whether your success could encourage Apple or other large competitors to make a battery life-optimized version of their smartwatches?

I understand that some Pebble fans are all about the customization, and will be with you forever. But probably many people care mostly about the battery life, which is severely lacking in watches from Apple, Google, etc.

If Apple realized there was a big enough market to justify making a $200 Apple Watch Basic, how much could that undercut your business?

Relatedly, when will we learn more about the other "core" devices that you're contemplating, and which you alluded to in the video? Building more of a unique ecosystem could help with the moat.

jsheard

> In terms of long-term market viability, have you considered whether your success could encourage Apple or other large competitors to make a battery life-optimized version of their smartwatches?

Companies like Garmin, Coros and Suunto already make less-smart-watches with weeks of battery life, and those haven't convinced Apple to budge from only making watches that do everything but barely last a day. Another long-lasting watch from a tiny niche brand probably isn't going to move the needle.

apparent

IDK about Coros or Suunto, but the only Garmins with a battery life approaching 30 days cost ~$1,000. This could be competition for AWU, but wouldn't communicate that there is demand for a more basic/long-lasting Apple Watch.

apparent

I'm excited that the back will screw off so we can replace the battery. I'm curious about waterproofing. Will that hold? Will we need to replace a gasket or other parts, in addition to the battery?

erohead

In the video, the green thing is the gasket. It should be reusable, but nothing's guaranteed in the world of waterproofing.

ortusdux

I really like the look of the Pixel watch 4's approach to this:

https://www.ifixit.com/News/113620/the-pixel-watch-4-is-the-...

freedomben

Love to see this! I personally find this incredibly exciting. There is a major death of hardware out there that is user-respecting and hacker-friendly, and it warms my heart immensely to see such committments. I'm buying two today (one for me and one for my wife)!

apparent

Is it me or is the "Rivian blue" that he refers to in the video not that close to the color of actual Rivians? IMO the watch band/insert color is less green and quite a bit lighter. Not bad, per se, but I feel like this is not the best descriptor since it might make people think it's a different color.

erohead

Material color is very tough, especially comparing metallic paint to polycarbonate. Lighting matters, reflections matter. We tried our best, but yes, obviously it's not exactly the same.

apparent

And of course, video adds another layer of complexity. Would you say that the video looks accurate to you, or does calling it "Rivian blue" help people understand what it looks like in real life?

erohead

I don't actually own a Rivian. I've seen them from afar. They look cool. I have not held a Pebble Time up to a Rivian yet. Maybe I'll creepily do that in downtown Palo Alto today :)

apparent

> We are trying our best to get into mass production and ship out at most several thousand Pebble Time 2s before CNY [which starts in January].

> Realistically, at this time we’re forecasting that the majority of people will receive their PT2 in March and April.

If the factories close for 3 weeks for CNY, then why will the second batch arrive 2-3 months after the first batch?

erohead

Good question! (I am the Pebble founder)

When factories restart, not all of the workers who were working there before actually come back to work. Some of them stay in their hometowns or they get other jobs. This means that restarting the production line actually means retraining people on how to assemble the product. There is also an entire supply chain behind the assembly line that takes time to restart. Think of all the sub-components like plastics, metal components, etc. that need to be built at respective factories. It takes time to ship them to the primary factory for final assembly and test.

After the product gets assembled, there are several stages of testing, like gluing, environmental testing, final assembly test, and packaging, that take time as well. Then the product has to be shipped to the fulfillment center, packaged, labeled, and then shipped out. Each step time, and the process needs to completely re-start after CNY.

apparent

Thanks for explaining this. Would you estimate that the January units will be more likely to have issues than the later ones, since they'll be first off the line? Or will there be no changes to the components/process that might make the later units more reliable?

erohead

They should be identical.

small_scombrus

I may be wrong, but I think they mean ship from the factory to the distribution point so that could add some time between an item being made and shipped to a customer

But I've never done anything like this, so ¯ \ _ ( ツ ) _ / ¯

diego_moita

This is precious.

Almost every tech company wants to continue the IBM "surrounded by blue" strategy, fencing customers into their "walled garden" and blocking obsessively any competitor that wants to breach in. Google mandates that every Android application must be signed by developers verified by them, Microsoft demands that users open an account with them, ... and just don't get me started with AWS, Apple, etc. Meanwhile, I fail to see any real contender in the smartphone arena.

But, in wearables, Pebble puts up a fight. The platform/product has proven resilient, mostly because of its users passion and commitment. It is more alive today than Fitbit, the company that bought and buried it.

And will only get stronger.

Now I'll be anxiously waiting for my PT2. It will be the 5th Pebble in my collection.

yjftsjthsd-h

> Yesterday, Pebble watch software was ~95% open source. Today, it’s 100% open source. You can download, compile and run all the software you need to use your Pebble. We just published the source code for the new Pebble mobile app!

Except...

> Another important note - some binary blobs and other non-free software components are used today in PebbleOS and the Pebble mobile app (ex: the heart rate sensor on PT2 , Memfault library, and others). Optional non-free web services, like Wispr-flow API speech recognizer, are also used. These non-free software components are not required - you can compile and run Pebble watch software without them. This will always be the case. More non-free software components may appear in our software in the future. The core Pebble watch software stack (everything you need to use your Pebble watch) will always be open source.

So 100% FOSS, except for the parts that are closed source now, and any that they add later.

dec0dedab0de

I'm not sure if you're splitting hairs or not. I definitely thought this post would be about them finding open source alternatives to binary firmware, but if it doesn't interoperate with optional non-free software then it is not Open Source.

It seems to be comparable to debian, and that's as open source as it gets.

modeless

The important thing is that all the code written by Core Devices is open source. They can't force third parties to open their code, but they're opening all of their own work. And that proprietary code is not required to use the watches. Most of them don't even have heart rate sensors, and clearly Memfault is not required. They're committing to maintaining a 100% open source version that still allows you to use the watches with minimal compromise.

yjftsjthsd-h

Then say "Pebble Watch Software written by Core Devices Is Now 100% Open Source", or "Pebble mobile app open sourced" (that seems to be the major actual change?), or something like that. The thing they've actually done should be commended, but that doesn't mean ignoring that they've chosen to make a claim in the headline that isn't actually true.

fao_

Part of this is driven by necessity, for example, cellular network chips are typically binary blobs, etc. as mentioned, the heart rate sensor is a binary blob and that's likely because there are no good OSS solutions for those components.

A lot of battery firmwares are closed source, the way that they fixed this for the early pinephone was literally just staring at a memory listing and aiming a heat gun at the battery to see how it reacted when it went hot.

yjftsjthsd-h

Sure; I'm aware that embedded sucks. And to be clear, this is (IMHO) tolerable so long as the blobs are redistributable. But then maybe don't headline with "100% open source". It's better to be honest about it.

pseudosavant

I see your point, but it feels more like the difference between 99% fat free and 100% fat free. Technically measurable, but irrelevant in practice when the alternatives are all basically closed source.

jdiff

I see that kind of thing more often labeled "open hardware" rather than open source.

fragmede

Yeah, it's weird because they're the ones writing that headline, and the claim is that it's 100% open source. They didn't have to word it that way, they chose to.

traverseda

Yeah, but it's running on a device that has closed source blobs in it. Hell, even the linux kernel often has firmware blobs for wifi devices.

lawn

They've made two big changes that are surely the result of the recent drama:

* The companion app is now completely open source, ensuring that the community can continue supporting the watches if Core goes under.

* You can subscribe to multiple app stores while optionally paying for services, and Core will maintain their own store. This seems to placate Rebble so they can do their thing and provide their paid services.

Seems like very good steps forward overall.

vessenes

Eric, congrats. Typo in the first photo caption: "in all it's glory" -> "in all its glory"