Open source mechanical Swiss watch movement(openmovement.org)
openmovement.org
Open source mechanical Swiss watch movement
https://openmovement.org/
44 comments
People always argue what "open source" means, but we all know damn well what it means in the colloquial sense now.
It means the source is available, and you can use it under some very permissive terms, and there is no barrier to access.
This is like how a "free" game used to mean actually free, but now free means "with IAP and ads", so now we don't have a single word to just mean "free as in beer" for games. So now I can't tell someone my hobby project is just plain free, I have to explain "no I don't mean full of bullshit, I mean free".
FWIW I agree, it's a violation of our standard idea of open source.
Tangentially, watchmaking is cool, and there are many free/open plans in various mechanical and 3D printing type communities.
Also, I feel like sharing this link which shows this guy's shop, it's not huge or complex, and makes the art of watchmaking seem approachable. Just need an old pantograph milling machine and a few other things https://watchesbysjx.com/2017/05/portrait-masahiro-kikuno-ja...
It means the source is available, and you can use it under some very permissive terms, and there is no barrier to access.
This is like how a "free" game used to mean actually free, but now free means "with IAP and ads", so now we don't have a single word to just mean "free as in beer" for games. So now I can't tell someone my hobby project is just plain free, I have to explain "no I don't mean full of bullshit, I mean free".
FWIW I agree, it's a violation of our standard idea of open source.
Tangentially, watchmaking is cool, and there are many free/open plans in various mechanical and 3D printing type communities.
Also, I feel like sharing this link which shows this guy's shop, it's not huge or complex, and makes the art of watchmaking seem approachable. Just need an old pantograph milling machine and a few other things https://watchesbysjx.com/2017/05/portrait-masahiro-kikuno-ja...
It happens in many areas, if descriptivists are more common than prescriptivists, you can't win - the term/phrase will change its meaning. We've lost some good words to that fight and we'll lose more.
Unlimited means limited? What a country!
Apologies to Dr Nick
Apologies to Dr Nick
I guess that's why RMS don't like the idea of term "Open Source". The term "free" in English is ambiguous and it has it's problem. But the term "Open Source" is worse. It just feel like source code is available but it doesn't matter the rest of the strings attached to it.
When I think of a "free game", I think of shareware. In what era did "free game" mean really free?
Free full game on a demo disc in the 90s/00s, you could sell magazines giving away an old gane
Free release of old game to promote new game (lots of these)
Free on steam / epic / origin (to get new users)
Free in a cereal box (chex quest anyone)
Free because the author doesn't want to sell it anymore but wants people to play it
Free because it's open source now AND the assets are included (like ur quan masters)
Free because its a hobby (like https://thedarkmod.com/ or 0 A.D. or other 'real' games that are hobbies)
Lots of games have been free as in beer some time or other
Free release of old game to promote new game (lots of these)
Free on steam / epic / origin (to get new users)
Free in a cereal box (chex quest anyone)
Free because the author doesn't want to sell it anymore but wants people to play it
Free because it's open source now AND the assets are included (like ur quan masters)
Free because its a hobby (like https://thedarkmod.com/ or 0 A.D. or other 'real' games that are hobbies)
Lots of games have been free as in beer some time or other
Remember "open source" is an ambiguous term, which is why RMS explains and carefully defines free software and other terms.
"The terms “free software” and “open source” stand for almost the same range of programs. However, they say deeply different things about those programs, based on different values. The free software movement campaigns for freedom for the users of computing; it is a movement for freedom and justice. By contrast, the open source idea values mainly practical advantage and does not campaign for principles. This is why we do not agree with open source, and do not use that term."
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....
"The terms “free software” and “open source” stand for almost the same range of programs. However, they say deeply different things about those programs, based on different values. The free software movement campaigns for freedom for the users of computing; it is a movement for freedom and justice. By contrast, the open source idea values mainly practical advantage and does not campaign for principles. This is why we do not agree with open source, and do not use that term."
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....
in the late 1990s I ran into GCC c++ template issues. I reached out to the ML and I got the reply that those were fixed in the cygnus version, which I could buy. I'd get the fixed source then.
and several GNU projects, too, had the source to future releases only accessible to approved members and closed circles.
rms was very clear that the license meant: once you got the tech, you had the right to also get the source. If that meant to pay for the tech, that was perfectly fine. freedom. not free beer.
and several GNU projects, too, had the source to future releases only accessible to approved members and closed circles.
rms was very clear that the license meant: once you got the tech, you had the right to also get the source. If that meant to pay for the tech, that was perfectly fine. freedom. not free beer.
...and what when the "cost" to purchase it exceeds an amount no person or corporation would ever pay? $1bn for source code? Or 10x the USA GDP? Effectively one cannot get the sources.
Even GPL2 didn't allow that
> Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
> Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
oh of course it did.
neither gpl forces you to put your software source to a public server.
all it says is: if I give you binaries under gpl, and only then, I also have to give you the source, and you then have the right to modify and redistribute, under the same terms.
if I give the binaries to you under gpl 3, then in addition I have to provide you with tools to install your updated software into your specific drm protected device (and you're explicitly good wrt parents I may hold)
neither gpl 2 not gpl 3 anywhere talk about making the source code (or the software) available to anybody free of charge.
edit: the key is 'corresponding', with paragraph 3 being about software distribution. 'any third oarty' in the quoted clause b of paragraph 3 references your recipients of the software, not anybody and their neighbor.
the meaning is: if you give someone the software, you also give them the source.
neither gpl forces you to put your software source to a public server.
all it says is: if I give you binaries under gpl, and only then, I also have to give you the source, and you then have the right to modify and redistribute, under the same terms.
if I give the binaries to you under gpl 3, then in addition I have to provide you with tools to install your updated software into your specific drm protected device (and you're explicitly good wrt parents I may hold)
neither gpl 2 not gpl 3 anywhere talk about making the source code (or the software) available to anybody free of charge.
edit: the key is 'corresponding', with paragraph 3 being about software distribution. 'any third oarty' in the quoted clause b of paragraph 3 references your recipients of the software, not anybody and their neighbor.
the meaning is: if you give someone the software, you also give them the source.
nono. you don't buy the source... you buy whichever product. and for the software parts of it, you get the sources.
so you buy $PRINTER, comes with a driver, you also get the source.
and with secure boot, you also get a way to update it in the device.
if there is no device, like with a compiler, you get some binaries, and the source. which enables you to fix the binaries.
the idea behind it was: no lock-in, and the right to repair and evolve what you own. freedom.
the anecdote for the origin of software freedom 'enforcement' and protection indeed was a printer:
https://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html
so you buy $PRINTER, comes with a driver, you also get the source.
and with secure boot, you also get a way to update it in the device.
if there is no device, like with a compiler, you get some binaries, and the source. which enables you to fix the binaries.
the idea behind it was: no lock-in, and the right to repair and evolve what you own. freedom.
the anecdote for the origin of software freedom 'enforcement' and protection indeed was a printer:
https://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html
It's perfectly fine for them to ask for information before showing you the download links. From the information on the website they seem to want to create a community in their Association, where members will contribute.
They say that "All published plans are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0).", so anyone who gets the plans can definitely redistribute them (put them in a GitHub repo or something).
They say that "All published plans are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0).", so anyone who gets the plans can definitely redistribute them (put them in a GitHub repo or something).
Open source != zero cost.
I'm glad that this is a thing but I don't know what it means for the average horological enthusiast. Lots of the goodness of a movement comes down to manufacturing tolerances, grading, and regulation at the factory. My ETA 2824-2-powered Damasko loses one second per day on the wrist despite having been dropped, jogged with, and high-sided on a motorcycle; there are watches that cost five times as much with the same model of movement that came from the factory running way worse.
The engineering is already there as Chinese factories are cranking out affordable 4Hz movements, it's just that the finishing and assembly still leave some to be desired (according to random YouTube reviews and forumites at least). This isn't a knock on Chinese factories by the way - they do FANTASTIC work for the money (and I'd love to add a PT5000-powered piece to my modest collection) but they just aren't on the same level as their Japanese/German/Swiss counterparts.
The engineering is already there as Chinese factories are cranking out affordable 4Hz movements, it's just that the finishing and assembly still leave some to be desired (according to random YouTube reviews and forumites at least). This isn't a knock on Chinese factories by the way - they do FANTASTIC work for the money (and I'd love to add a PT5000-powered piece to my modest collection) but they just aren't on the same level as their Japanese/German/Swiss counterparts.
My Omega Seamaster gains ~2-3 minutes a month (so roughly 4-6 seconds a day.), it's rather annoying but I understand that it's pretty common for an automatic mechanical watch.
> My Omega Seamaster gains ~2-3 minutes a month (so roughly 4-6 seconds a day.)
That falls within the bounds of accuracy required of a Swiss certified mechanical chronometer (that is to say, a clock accurate enough for marine celestial navigation) and is pretty good.
As a marine engineer I have a genuine and real appreciation of mechanical chronometers, though any working watch/clock I use will always be quartz as for accuracy and price, nothing else comes close.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_chronometer
That falls within the bounds of accuracy required of a Swiss certified mechanical chronometer (that is to say, a clock accurate enough for marine celestial navigation) and is pretty good.
As a marine engineer I have a genuine and real appreciation of mechanical chronometers, though any working watch/clock I use will always be quartz as for accuracy and price, nothing else comes close.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_chronometer
For something mechanical operating under random g forces and over a wide temperature range, that accuracy is truly astonishing.
Fully agree, automatic mechanical watch movements are truly a marvel of engineering. The fact that the movement is powered purely by the kinetic forces naturally applied from wearing it, and can reasonably accurately keep time over years, under a wide range of conditions… is truly impressive.
Did you have it regulated? Asking because my Tudor Heritage Black Bay 79220R uses the same movement, but will lose around 30 seconds in a week... I mostly wear it when I'm not all that active (e.g. in the office, out about in the city, etc.), but it still seems too much to me.
Loosing 4 seconds per day (28 per week) falls within the bounds of accuracy required of a Swiss certified mechanical chronometer and is pretty good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSC
[I made a similar comment further down.]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSC
[I made a similar comment further down.]
Nope... came from Germany that way.
As other have notes though losing ~4 seconds a day is pretty accurate all things considered. Seiko's 3Hz movements can gain or lose _half a minute_ a day and still be considered within spec.
As other have notes though losing ~4 seconds a day is pretty accurate all things considered. Seiko's 3Hz movements can gain or lose _half a minute_ a day and still be considered within spec.
That seems surprising bad. Maybe not strictly out of tolerance, but definitely something that could be considerably improved by having the movement regulated (or perhaps serviced, if required). Is it still under warranty?
Not from the manufacturer, no. I bought it second-hand and the seller does offer a 36-month warranty for any mechanical dysfunctions, though I'm not sure whether something like this would qualify. Even if it did, I'm not all that enthused about bearing the costs of sending the watch to way across Europe if it could just be regulated by my local watch shop instead. Am I understanding correctly that if I had it regulated, then it the deviation would be minimal for years to come or how exactly would that pan out accuracy-wise?
I have swiss (ETA based), Japanese (Seiko) and Chinese watches. I think one of the Chinese watches I own is the most accurate and reliable of all of them.
which model chinese watch?
It's a sea-gull aqua Terra homage. With a sea-gull movement.
The hobby machinist community has been buying cheap Chinese milling machines and lathes for decades and disassembling them to fix poor finish and assembly (replacing bearings, scraping or polishing bearing surfaces, better fasteners, etc.) and then reassembling to result in a much higher quality machine at a reasonable price. Could something similar happen with watch movements?
It not only can be done, it routinely is.
Especially with the Chinese watches, they often come from the factory with less-than-perfect attunement. Watch repairmen will take a watch like this, clean everything, maybe replace a bearing or two, use high quality lubricant, possibly even swap a gear or so if it needs it.
They can also take an older mechanical in pretty bad shape and restore it to health. There's a point of no return for any mechanical device, of course.
Especially with the Chinese watches, they often come from the factory with less-than-perfect attunement. Watch repairmen will take a watch like this, clean everything, maybe replace a bearing or two, use high quality lubricant, possibly even swap a gear or so if it needs it.
They can also take an older mechanical in pretty bad shape and restore it to health. There's a point of no return for any mechanical device, of course.
For anybody really interested in this, I recommend that you go find a copy/PDF of "Practical Benchwork for Horologists" by Louis Levin.
It's an awesome look into the watchmaking craft of the 20th century. Its explanation of bearings finally made me understand why "sapphire" was such a thing.
It's an awesome look into the watchmaking craft of the 20th century. Its explanation of bearings finally made me understand why "sapphire" was such a thing.
Interesting! Care to give me a hint as to why sapphire is such a thing? I'm curious, but my reading list is full atm :P (I did a quick google search and nothing came up).
Friction reduction: https://www.prestigetime.com/blog/what-are-the-jewels-in-a-w...
Wear resistance and, somewhat, accuracy as well.
Sapphire/ruby in really hard so tends not to wear.
You can also lap sapphire more accurately because it is so hard.
And interesting aside is that the sapphire cups are supposed to hold oil so that the metal pin end kind of "floats"--but not too much and not too little.
It's remarkable to see something like a mechanical watch that was the end result of a century of gradual engineering improvements.
Sapphire/ruby in really hard so tends not to wear.
You can also lap sapphire more accurately because it is so hard.
And interesting aside is that the sapphire cups are supposed to hold oil so that the metal pin end kind of "floats"--but not too much and not too little.
It's remarkable to see something like a mechanical watch that was the end result of a century of gradual engineering improvements.
Kiss of death: https://web.archive.org/web/20210321114916/https://openmovem...
Here's a randomly Googled article: https://journal.hautehorlogerie.org/en/openmovement-aims-to-...
Here's a randomly Googled article: https://journal.hautehorlogerie.org/en/openmovement-aims-to-...
At first I wondered if "Swiss" was just being used as a marketing word, but was pleased to see that the people behind it are indeed from Switzerland.
That said, the "OMxx" moniker reminds me more of diesel engines... and following from that thought, in the automotive world there is a huge aftermarket of parts that were clearly copies/derived from the originals, so I think "open source" applied to a physical object has a somewhat strange connotation: "open source" as a concept originated because software is licensed and not sold, but physical objects are usually sold, not licensed.
That said, the "OMxx" moniker reminds me more of diesel engines... and following from that thought, in the automotive world there is a huge aftermarket of parts that were clearly copies/derived from the originals, so I think "open source" applied to a physical object has a somewhat strange connotation: "open source" as a concept originated because software is licensed and not sold, but physical objects are usually sold, not licensed.
Watch movements are mechanical software. They move around information. They’re algorithms for turning a constant mechanical force into seconds/etc/a representation of the passage of time. Convert linear force into rotational force with an acceleration of 6 radians per second, etc.
Plans for physical objects that are commonly sold at high prices are often valuable trade secrets.
Site is down for me too, but on a related note, if you have never seen a watchmaker practice their craft, it is fascinating.
https://youtu.be/6qIe4O8kxbY
https://youtu.be/6qIe4O8kxbY
Thank you! This was really fascinating.
This site didn't explain to me as an ignorant outsider what the disadvantages of the current solutions are (apparently they are closed source) and what the advantages of a this solution is. It just says "you have a chance to buy x", so it just smells like yet another money grabbing venture, and one that doesn't even convince the rubes why they should open their wallets...
They are looking for 10 sponsors, each paying Swiss Francs 30.000 (USD 33.000) within 20 days and in return each will receive one of 10 limited version watches in April 2023. The plans will be available to everybody (but I guess a limited production will be difficult anyway).
Most of the patents on ETA movements are expired so I don't know why this is necessary.
The site's down, and you raise a valid point. But:
Even starting from an ETA, there are improvements and variants that can be made. (For example, some Chinese clones of the 7750 added a safety mechanism to the date's quick adjust mechanism. It's a really simple and elegant design change, too.) The open source aspect of this project isn't just that there's a movement, but that there's a development process. Or that's what they say, anyway!
Also, pretty much every non-ETA/Sellita movement in the cheaper-than-Rolex market is just about marketing. The movement offers nothing of interest to buyers if it's just some tweaked CAD files of a 2892, because those buyers would just get an SW-300, which is the same thing [1] with better reliability.
[1] Or not the same thing; there are probably differences just like with the SW-200, but everybody in the market will think that way.
Even starting from an ETA, there are improvements and variants that can be made. (For example, some Chinese clones of the 7750 added a safety mechanism to the date's quick adjust mechanism. It's a really simple and elegant design change, too.) The open source aspect of this project isn't just that there's a movement, but that there's a development process. Or that's what they say, anyway!
Also, pretty much every non-ETA/Sellita movement in the cheaper-than-Rolex market is just about marketing. The movement offers nothing of interest to buyers if it's just some tweaked CAD files of a 2892, because those buyers would just get an SW-300, which is the same thing [1] with better reliability.
[1] Or not the same thing; there are probably differences just like with the SW-200, but everybody in the market will think that way.
My name, address etc has value. So this is not free.
Thumbs up however for creating this movement.