#Login Register
Thoughts on the state of Project ARA
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average


05-27-2016, 04:23 PM #1
a_guy Ambassador and Forum Helper

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:6/107 Joined:Jan 2016
Last week there was an update about Project Ara and the creator of the Phoneblocks concept, Dave Hakkens, shared his thoughts on the new state of Project ARA.

Here is the most important :

It is less modular, the skeleton will include the CPU, display and battery which means that if you want to upgrade your CPU or break your display you will have to buy a new phone. It also means that the modules become add-ons (camera, speaker,...)

Google is now in charge, they make the rules. They can decide to suddenly change the connectors, making all previous modules you have obsolete.

Read by yourself : https://davehakkens.nl/news/re-think-project-ara/


What are your thoughts on the new state of the Project ARA ?
This post was last modified: 05-27-2016, 04:24 PM by a_guy. Edit Reason: Changed title


Ambassador, Maker, Fan of 3D printing, Supporter of modularity (PhoneBlocks, project ARA, Blocks, FairPhone)

I do remember when the connectors looked like stereo jacks

05-27-2016, 04:46 PM #2
Alessandro G. Developer & Designer

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:11/188 Joined:Jan 2016
Moved this to the industry section. There's already a discussion going on there, so it would be nice to have the two threads in the same place.
BTW, I really did not like what Google did with Ara, and I am pretty confident that decision had 50% to do with technical issues involving having a CPU not directly connected to RAM and other key components, and 50% to do with increasing profits releasing updated versions of the skeleton. But Google is no charity foundation, so I really cannot blame them for doing so. They are probably trying to get more "standard" users, while losing most (if not all) the die-hard DIYers niche. Just look up the XDA forums. They are basically going nuts about this. This is not what they promised, but it is still very much modular. In fact, it now has the same level of modularity BLOCKS has. We won't be able to change the CPU and other key components on the Core either, will we? And the space constraints of a smartwatch aren't unlike those of a smartphone, particularly one that has to make room for the whole modules handling system.

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand / And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, [...]" (W. Blake, "Auguries of Innocence", 1-2)

05-27-2016, 07:17 PM #3
Georgio New Member

Status: Offline Threads/Posts:0/6 Joined:Jan 2016
I think it was better before but it would have been ok to put the SoC in the skeleton if the display was still removable.
They probably done it to make software side easier and aim it at more every day users that just want something that runs but can be customised
Hopefully there will be a version that is more customisable while remaining compatibility in the future or coprocessor module for more power/better GPU






Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)