Rockbox future strategy

[saratoga]

Away from low-end point and shoots, not cameras generally.  Canon will not abandon successful product lines just because unrelated product lines aren't working out. 

It doesn't work like that.  To have a successful product line, you have to make money.  But as volume falls, the cost of each component goes up because you are making fewer of them.  As costs go up, you make less money, and successful products become unsuccessful because people no longer want to pay what they cost to make.  I worked with Canon before, you should not underestimate how disruptive losing a huge source of revenue that used to pay for factories and sensor development was to them.  It doesn't also help that SLRs are selling less than they did before.

This is exactly what happened with DAPs by the way.  It is not actually possible to sell high end DAPs without also selling low and medium end devices, since you need to maintain a very high volume of sales to pay for things like software development, engineering, factory time, etc.  So as volume fell, one by one vendors became unprofitable.  Now most of what is left is repurposed Android phones, and low end equipment (by historical standards) sold at a high price, which just further depresses sales, which then raises prices even more, etc. 

There's probably a market unfolding for a high-value DAP that delivers exceptional performance and reliability and is built to last (upgradeable capacities; internal and external modularity and serviceability).

There is a market for that product, just not at the cost it would take to make it profitable.  Electronics and software is about volume.  If you have to have each unit pay off hundreds or thousands of dollars of development and engineering costs, you don't have a product.  That is what people don't understand when they ask why no one makes something as good as the Sansa Clip anymore.  You can't because in the numbers you'd sell them, they'd be extremely expensive, so you have to cut costs, and you end up with a Clip Sport. 

[ethanay]

I seriously doubt that Canon has been subsidizing its SLR line with point and shoot revenues!  It depends on how the company manages its product line, though.  Most components are not interchangeable, and the few that are don't undergo a ton of R&D and are often just "off the shelf" components. 

Often times, it works in reverse:  the high end equipment comes first and subsidizes the R&D for the low-end stuff.  We commonly use materials now that were developed specifically for NASA.  This trend is common in manufacturing:  successful high-grade products spur a proliferation of lower-grade "more affordable" products.  Guitar manufacturing is a great example of this.  You don't see much innovation coming out of Korea in guitars.  You see a lot of copying.  And a lot of really good (and some really bad) copying.  And yet, the specialized use scenarios and form factors between consumer and pro-grade doesn't necessarily mean that "today's consumer grade" uses "yesterday's pro-grade" equipment.  But that just means completely different revenue streams, unless a company is mission driven and feels it is necessary to subsidize something important but not viable with something with more market viability.  That rarely happens.  Companies just want their stuff to sell.  Canon's DSLR is not a charity.

Regardless, not sure where you are coming from since it looks like DSLR sales are going up, not down.  DSLRs have their own revenue stream.  Canon expanded into point and shoots from SLRs and related technologies, not the other way around.  If we start with product A, and then expand to product B, and then product B drops, we still have product A.  It might require downsizing, but a multinational company like Canon still sells plenty of SLRs to cover its costs in producing them.  Otherwise its SLR line would contract, not expand.  And that's what we are seeing:  a large contraction of low-end special purpose hardware, and a small or moderate expansion of high-end special purpose hardware.  Smartphones and DSLRs don't really compete.

Which comes back around to the discussion:  It does not sound like those currently involved in Rockbox are interested, willing or able to refocus and adapt to changing market conditions, which is completely different than blaming market conditions for killing off Rockbox.  It's not bad.  It's just different, but I think a little goes a long way:  If people in Rockbox want to only make Rockbox for affordable consumer grade DAPs, then that's fine, let's just be clear about it.  It has its challenges and there may be potential to pull together multi-sector partnerships (e.g., Rockbox + OEMs + institutional vs individual bulk consumers) to overcome, but again that depends on willingness to explore that as an option.

[saratoga]

I seriously doubt that Canon has been subsidizing its SLR line with point and shoot revenues!

Then I don't think you understand how this works.  Product lines absolutely subsidize one another.  This is how manufacturing works. 

Regardless, not sure where you are coming from since it looks like DSLR sales are going up, not down.

DSLR sales have been in decline for a while now.  Google it.

Which comes back around to the discussion:  It does not sound like those currently involved in Rockbox are interested, willing or able to refocus and adapt to changing market conditions, which is completely different than blaming market conditions for killing off Rockbox. 

I think you aren't listening to what people are saying, which makes people less interested in talking to you. 

[ethanay]

Your assertion about subsidizing conflicts with this data:
"Interchangeable lens cameras, including ILCs and DSLR cameras, brought in 5% more revenue than compact cameras in sales in 2012, and that difference is likely to continue growing."
http://petapixel.com/2013/12/18/crunching-numbers-4-insights-camera-sales-data/

Also, the downward dips more closely follow devalued currency, not trends in smartphone sales, which greatly conflicts with any assertion that smartphones are negatively impacting high-level camera sales.

and also:  "2. DSLR Sales Show Strong Growth Sometimes it seems like there’s no room for anything but doom and gloom when discussing sales forecasts for the photo industry. Even if analysts are willing to write off the fixed-lens compact market, there’s still good news: while the total number of cameras shipped has fallen off rather dramatically since a peak in 2010,  DSLR sales have shown steady growth."

Even with mirrorless taking market share, DSLR use still grew by 1% on flickr:
http://petapixel.com/2015/12/18/heres-how-camera-brands-have-fared-on-flickr-over-the-past-5-years/
And even that is with a lot of professional photographers moving over to 500px

Declines are more likely macroeconomic factors as well as a market maturity that has (over)reached saturation.  Professionals do not like to upgrade equipment.  And if an industry can't handle a stable market and only functions with constant growth, then it simply doesn't have a sustainable business model and is guilty of intertemporal discounting, which is basically a self-imposed Ponzi scheme.  I don't see where you get your info other than "I worked at Canon."

Canon and Nikon haven't been adapting.  They could have participated in new format lens and sensor development, but they didn't.  To expect revenue growth from each of a stable and mature saturated market and from a mature market getting the rug pulled out from under it is magical thinking.

Here's a good example of market adaptation and success with a technology that in your argument should be dead or not viable:  http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/fujifilms-instax-instant-film-business-booming/

This trend indicates market contraction and stabilization, not collapse: http://petapixel.com/2015/11/14/camera-sales-may-be-stabilizing-after-a-few-years-of-freefall/  New technologies with usage overlap destabilize the market for a while, but well managed projects regularly weather such storms.

Smartphones do not cause the contraction, not the collapse of the camera industry.  If the camera industry dies, it's more likely due to mismanagement or other contextual economic factors.  We can same the same for DAPs.

You clearly care about Rockbox, but I don't understand how it is that you work so hard to try to prove that it is not viable and worth adapting to changing market conditions, especially when using abstract arguments that appear to conflict with reality without providing any backing information.  Again, it indicates to me you are trying to prove that the project is done, whereas maybe you are just done with the project?  Someone who wants a project like this to continue doesn't ask, "Can it continue?"  They ask, "How can it continue?" and explore all those options.  I don't see anyone involved in the project asking that question.  All I hear is, "It won't continue."  And so it probably won't.  Self-fulfilling prophecy more than anything else.

Well, I came here to engage about possibilities, not participate in cynical navel gazing.  I'm still interested in exploring many possibilities, if someone reads this and wants to. 

[wodz]

So to conclude whats your silver bullet to salvage rockbox?

[gomezz]

This is the point that the first article makes at the end:  "Sometimes, it’s better to be convenient than good."  That is the smart phone:  Convenient, but not really Good.  Rockbox will find its niche in a focused market that is already not concerned so much about convenience as it is about actual hardware and software performance, which are enthusiast (vs casual) consumers and professionals.  And this niche will always exist regardless of convergence and miniaturization trends (which have probably maxed out anyway, Apple even had to scale up its Nano because they were getting too small for comfort

I seem to be out of step then as I use my inexpensive Rockbox'd Clip+ hooked up to the work van radio which limits the audio fidelity but it also would not be such a disaster if someone broke into the van and stole it compared to having my more expensive phone loaded with personal information taken.

At home I use the FLAC'd version of my music from my laptop or tablet to play through my hi-fi compared to the MP3 version I have on my Clip+ and on my phone.

[[Saint]]

The number one problem that I see with assertions made by OP in this thread is that plainly and simply, Rockbox is not a product.

The thing that people really don't seem to understand is that by and large, no one really actually cares what the community gets out of it or what the market dictates. Rockbox is made by developers, for developers.

If Joe Everyman gets a kick out of it, that's great, but they are not the target audience.


[Saint]

[ceemsc]

So to conclude whats your silver bullet to salvage rockbox?

I'd say play to ROCKbox's strengths, it can provide music customisation that no other DAP or APP can provide.

Based on what I've read on this forum ; I think public crowdfunding for a unique hardware specific device which can run the firmware, with a basic screen & button input similar to the Sandisk Clip is the way to go.

Assuming that the end-user is going to be an audio enthusiast & a Rockbox fan; the first batch run need not include DAC or Headphone AMP - this project is not supposed to compete with Apple or Smartphones.

So keeping it basic, inputs would be USB for recharging & file upload. Maybe a flash card port if onboard storage is not an option. Output would be pure digital via a 3.5mm SPDIF port and that's it. Pretty much like an Ibasso DX50 but with the handling of a Sandisk Clip. It would be up to the user to purchase a separate external DAC/AMP/Headphone/Speaker combo.

[faelnor]

A dedicated player is a wonderful dream but it's a lot of overhead for a software project. The best bet right now, until someone manages to design and finance the manufacturing of an open architecture that pleases everyone, is to have a non-binding hardware partnership with chinese companies like xDuoo and AGPtek that produce DAPs of reasonable quality and are open to replacement software as they have previously shown by helping people from rockbox.

According to hunterleo of AGPtek, their next player will be rockbox-compatible and on the paper sounds like a great lower-end solution. In addition to that, the xDuoo X3 is a great higher-end DAP with proven hardware with an already functional port.

To me, the future of Rockbox starts with 100% functional ports for both players (meaning Vorbis support and 192 kHz/24 bit playback on the X3 -- and yes, I know it's snake oil, but the success of a player and its software is also made by audiophiles). No other dedicated player or phone app has the capabilities and ease-of-use of Rockbox, so with big brands closing their hardware for no good reason and stopping the production of Rockbox-compatible players, I think it's important to have some flagships, even though I agree that RB is not a "product" per se.

[IdahoBlind]

I'd just like to add that Rockbox is the only viable, simple and functional tool for allowing blind users to have a large-library DAP, capable of holding a big library of audiobooks.

The market for music and audio devices is dominated/saturated by devices with big shiny, colour touchscreens - which are worse than useless for blind users. I am not blind myself, but have previously set up rockbox on  sansa clip for a blind friend of mine. He was an avid reader before he lost his sight - but then had to rely on people to read to him (severely limiting), or cd audio books (which disk am I up to? What happened to disk #4, etc). None of those solutions allowed him to listen to audiobooks by himself, keep track of bookmarks, scroll through books, have more than one book on the go.

Rockbox did all of this for him. He said to me that it was like having his sight back. He gave me £20 cash to donate to the rockbox site (which I just donated). He is also a big music fan - and being able to scroll through his library and be the dj for the evening has reawakened his love of music.

So while Rockbox might not fit into the corporate money-making world - it is potentially life changing for blind people. The sansa clip has just died, and I am trying to get the xduoo working with rockbox... but it's not quite there yet. I am going to get another clip and get him back up and running while I wait for the xduoo port to come online (I am keen to help test or in any way I can on this). Once (if?) the xduoo port is up - I am thinking of setting up a webpage specifically for people to set up blind users with a functioning DAP. This site is great - but it's very much for the technical specialist. I am reasonably competent (as a technology user) but it make my eyes cross at times!

So thank you all for doing what you do. You have the potential to bring many thousands of people music and books, who otherwise are ignored or are not commercially interesting to big companies. Keep up the great work.

[towerofbabel]

What some of the pessimistic commentators are missing has to do with the free and open source movement. Sure, if your criteria is "convenience," then maybe you won't see the utility of a digital audio player. But what if your criteria is different?

A) The free (as in freedom) hardware / software movements widely support disabled users, as the person above me has discussed in depth. This alone is reason enough to continue support for this project. Since this was already discussed, I won't elaborate here.

B) There is a decent sized community of people who are willing to develop free (as in freedom) hardware / software because they are philosophically opposed to proprietary services.

With respect to point B, there is a growing number of people who dislike being tracked, micro-charged, and locked down by service oriented companies like Apple and Spotify and increasingly Microsoft. As more people discover how much their personal information is worth--and how they have no choice with these "convenience" services but to sign the rights to that information away--people get bent out of shape. I certainly did upon this discovery. Actually reading the terms of service is an eye opener.

For computer operating systems? Enter GNU/Linux distros like Trisquel and Parabola and others. For computer hardware? Enter the EOMA68 standard or the white hat hackers known as Libreboot trying to liberate BIOS from the intel management engine or the AMD trust platform. And besides them, the maker community is getting more sophisticated all of the time.

Sure, maybe carrying a Bluetooth enabled smartphone with Spotify is more "convenient." But guess what? Millions of people around the world don't want to pay a monthly service fee to Apple or Spotify. They don't want to buy smartphones, I mean, even the "cheap" ones required expensive data plans to function. So you pay for the data, you pay for the hardware, but guess what? They serve you ads on the data you pay for! They run trackers--again, on the data you pay for--and vacuum personal data and turn around and sell it for more profit. And the hardware you bought? You're renting it. You don't even own what you buy with these "services." Look at John Deer. Farmers can't even fix the tractors they buy anymore because of DRM. John Deer is forcing them to pay expensive fees and travel for dozens of miles with their broken down tractor to fix what they could have fixed on their own in the field in a day.

We all know that trend isn't reversing any time soon. Holding signs and protesting isn't magically going to give us the power back. It's up to us to do the work.

So what do we have for audio hardware?

We have Matt Keeter's "Bumpy" which is a free (as in freedom) and open source hardware project. The issue with that is that the encoder is out of date, and, in general, the PCB layout / components could use an upgrade for 2017. And, sure, it needs an LCD screen and buttons. But imagine the impact with the free software community (perhaps with a partnership with the free software foundation) if we had a modern music player that was free (as in freedom) and open source.

What do we have for audio software? We have Rockbox.

What does all of this mean? Is it even viable?

Well, go onto the website Crowdsupply and just look at all the funding going towards liberated hardware and software. It's incredible. If we could put together a capable team, we could be on that site and get paid to develop a new music platform.

It could be sold at first but if it wasn't terribly profitable and the developers wanted to get back to their lives, they could, and then the project could go into a sustainable mode until further development was required several years from now. Or maybe a proper github could be setup and the community at large could run the project in a decentralized fashion. A dream? Maybe. But we could make it real with the right team and the right leadership.

Is a digital audio player valuable? Yes because some people like to own the things they buy and guess what? A sandisk sansa clip+ goes for 30 to 40$ on ebay right now. The price will keep rising. Eventually, someday, there won't be anymore left.

The plans would be listed under a GPLv3 license and any maker could get the plans off github, print a small run (1 to 3) with a prototyping service, and do at home surface mounting with a toaster oven. You could make 3 of these things (minimum PCB run for the company Matt Keeter uses to prototype extremely small runs, I believe they're called OSA) and probably, buying extra components even, you're looking at a total manufacturing cost of maybe $100, plus tons learned, for a maker to build three of them. That's not bad, is it? Just go with off the shelf components that are already produced in huge numbers. Right there is your economy of scale. What about a housing? Just use a 3d printer. Lots of cities have these available to the public these days. And if you can't do that because you don't have access to a 3d printer? Well, there's prototyping services that will do a run for you.

It doesn't have to be centralized and it doesn't have to all be done at once either. This could be a hobby for a few devs and people who want to learn how to make things. A contribution here, an update there--bit by bit, piece by piece--that's all it takes. It doesn't have to be hard. It doesn't have to even be crowd sourced. It just needs a few dedicated people who are willing to help.

What if you're not technically talented? Well, you could write manuals. You could give presentations at a local library to spread the word. Be creative. Maybe you could partner with a band where they would release their music on one of the devices, free and open for sharing. Why not? It's up to you and me to make a difference.

One last thing on the rant: for me, I don't see the value of companies like AGPTEK. If the hardware isn't free (as in freedom) and the software isn't free (as in freedom), I don't want anything to do with it. I already hate my existing players because the hardware is proprietary. This doesn't have to stop at digital audio players either. I mean, maybe it would for us, but developers could create a paper printer that is free (as in freedom) and open source where you can re-fill ink yourself. Have you ever been infuriated by a printer that just decides your print cartridge is too old, even though it has ink, and refuses to print? Say no to planned obsolescence. Do something for the environment.

So where do we go from here? Are you still with me? Did I make you mad? If so, I'm not trying to be offensive, I'm trying to be encouraging and positive. There is a way forward because our competitive advantage is the fact that we're not tracking people and we're not proprietary. Proprietary stuff has an end of life. Free and open source stuff does not.

A good place to start is to define requirements. I'm not great at that. But I like what the EOMA68 team is doing, though. There's a whole host of problems to discuss and a requirements definition could take a while to develop. But, hey, why not start now? What do people want out of these devices? Should there be multiple versions? Should the entire project be abandoned?

These are all valid topics for discussion.

I hope I got your brain moving. Let's make the world a better place. If you love music like I do, and if you love freedom, you know there's got to be a better way. Let's find it.

[gomezz]

free (as in freedom)

Have to say that repeated use of that phrase totally distracted me from any merits your dissertation may or may not have had. 

[ljones]

I apologise if I'm posting this in the wrong place. But could a rasberry pi plus a small screen be a possible answer to a "new device that [might possibly one day] run rockbox"?

Examples:
3.5" screen - https://shop.pimoroni.com/products/pitft-plus-320x240-2-8-tft-resistive-touchscreen-pi-2-and-model-a-b
4.5" screen - https://shop.pimoroni.com/products/pitft-plus-480x320-3-5-tft-touchscreen-for-raspberry-pi-pi-2-and-model-a-b
a case - https://shop.pimoroni.com/products/pitft-plus-pibow

All that would need then is rockbox to be compiled (guessing it can be compiled somehow on a linux system as opposed to its own os?). The only question then would be powering this device - a rasberry pi compared to a sansa is going to use a *lot* more power but in theroy maybe just use some sort of USB battery power supply? Prehaps a 18650 "power bank" and then underclock the rasberry pi to increase battery life?

*If* that worked then maybe add things. e.g. an FM Radio. The TDA7000 is an old (but I think still avaliable) FM radio chip though it is only mono. Would require custom circuitry for sure (although it wouldn't be *that* hard to make; a circuit diagram exists -- you could even buy a kit to build an FM radio from maplin electronics (UK) many moons ago with that chip).  No idea if you could control it with a rasberry pi though!

Just a thought.

ljones

[saratoga]

I apologise if I'm posting this in the wrong place. But could a rasberry pi plus a small screen be a possible answer to a "new device that [might possibly one day] run rockbox"?

A few people have setup rockbox on the Pi in custom made systems.  It is not a great choice for a portable device however.

[gomezz]

But portability isn't always needed.  I use my 10" tablet to play music through my hi-fi when at home and I could see me using Rockbox with all its versatility for that in preference to any of the usual apps.