Pebble Watch software is now open source

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Manufacturing, batches, and hardware choices

  • Delay between pre-CNY and post-CNY batches is attributed to factories losing workers over the holiday, retraining, re-spinning the supply chain, and multiple downstream test/pack/ship stages.
  • Early and later units are expected to be identical; issues should manifest as yield loss, not quality differences.
  • Pebble 2 Duo was explicitly a limited run using leftover components; no feasible path to remake it, disappointing fans who prefer monochrome e‑ink over color (citing cost, durability, contrast, and battery).
  • Time 2’s screwed-on back and user-replaceable battery are widely praised; water resistance is described as “splash-safe” rather than for swimming or hot showers, with gasket reuse not guaranteed.

“100% open source” vs. binary blobs

  • Core claim: all software they wrote is open source; some third‑party blobs (e.g., heart-rate, Memfault, some services) are optional and not needed to run the watch.
  • Critics argue the headline “100% open source” is misleading if any non‑free components are involved now or in future.
  • Supporters counter that this is comparable to Debian or Linux with firmware blobs: practically very open, especially versus mainstream smartwatches.
  • Long subthread debates what “100%” should mean, where to draw the firmware/hardware line, and whether such purity is realistic in modern hardware.

New app store and Rebble relationship

  • New app store/feed supports multiple repositories and archives apps/watchfaces to Archive.org; users can choose and combine feeds.
  • Many see this as an ideal outcome: resilience against any single org failing and freedom to use either Repebble’s or Rebble’s feed (and paid services).
  • Opinions diverge on the recent Core–Rebble conflict:
    • Some feel Rebble preserved the ecosystem and deserves compensation and credit, and view Core as dismissive.
    • Others see Rebble’s earlier accusations as overreach that backfired, with Core’s open-sourcing and multi-feed design going beyond what was required and ultimately benefiting everyone.

Licensing, CLA, and contributions

  • CLA grants Core broad rights to contributor code but requires distribution under an OSI‑compatible FOSS license, aiming to prevent proprietary capture.
  • Some warn that contributors often later feel “exploited” in similar setups; others say the CLA is unusually transparent and acceptable if you read it.

Developer stack, ecosystem, and reaction

  • Companion app is Kotlin Multiplatform targeting Android and iOS; developers are interested in the architecture and potential for more cross‑platform tooling.
  • Hardware design files (KiCad) are appreciated as serious open hardware; seen as proof that complex, multilayer consumer devices can be built with open EDA tooling.
  • Many commenters are enthusiastic, pre‑ordering or wearing new/old Pebbles, valuing week‑plus battery life, always‑on display, buttons, and hackability over feature‑rich but short‑lived Apple/Google watches.
  • Meta-discussion highlights tension between strict software-freedom ideals and shipping a usable, mostly‑open consumer device.