It’s a matter of time. Just like with software, you have to have a bias toward open source, freedom respecting objects and support them with your cash.
Time is a concept which comprises of events. Things don’t happen on their own and cash is of course the thing lacking but “support” is the wrong word here. Free software should earn cash!
I think mainly because it’s a lot harder to make a physical object than software, so the smaller players and nonprofits who support open source are essentially unable to compete with conventional hardware companies, who have no desire to go open source.
It happen because unlike software (programs) that is governed by the licenses (copyright) the hardware (physical objects) is governed by the patents, and mostly of the time these patents are share among several manufactures, and sometimes they are extremely ridiculous (you can patent practically any idea, no matter how simple and unclear it may be) that whatever product you bring out you have probably violated some of these.
My guess would be due to competetitve advantage and a lack of economic incentive. It takes a lot to build any number of those things and a lot of them benefit from trade secrets that likely would be public if the whole thing was open source.
Everyone here is most welcome to my talk on libreplanet which would occur in a couple of days, Survival of Free Software
It’s a matter of time. Just like with software, you have to have a bias toward open source, freedom respecting objects and support them with your cash.
Time is a concept which comprises of events. Things don’t happen on their own and cash is of course the thing lacking but “support” is the wrong word here. Free software should earn cash!
I think mainly because it’s a lot harder to make a physical object than software, so the smaller players and nonprofits who support open source are essentially unable to compete with conventional hardware companies, who have no desire to go open source.
Because money? Currently it’s not a small feat to achieve and people/companies want to be compensated and make profit off of it.
Open source hardware projects rely heavily on grants and donations for which most people are hesitant.
deleted by creator
It happen because unlike software (programs) that is governed by the licenses (copyright) the hardware (physical objects) is governed by the patents, and mostly of the time these patents are share among several manufactures, and sometimes they are extremely ridiculous (you can patent practically any idea, no matter how simple and unclear it may be) that whatever product you bring out you have probably violated some of these.
There are f.E.:
https://www.openmotors.co/product/tabbyevo/
https://hackaday.com/2022/02/23/novena-open-source-laptop-reborn-as-desktop-machine/
https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop
https://www.kosagi.com/w/index.php?title=Novena_Main_Page
More
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_hardware_projects
Search open hardware projects, not open source, with the last you searched software, not objects.
My guess would be due to competetitve advantage and a lack of economic incentive. It takes a lot to build any number of those things and a lot of them benefit from trade secrets that likely would be public if the whole thing was open source.