"Cellular connectivity is provided by the SM5100B GSM Module...". Meh. No way a DYI. It's like you assemble your desktop PC from pieces like motherboard and power supply and say that you built a DYI PC.
Do we say that Apple doesn't build computers themselves because they buy the CPU from Intel? Or because they use Qualcomm transceivers (and lots of other off-the-shelf components) in their phones? On the other hand, we probably wouldn't say someone made a phone if they just put it into a different enclosure.
I can say that I spent a lot of time selecting all the components, putting together the schematic, routing the board, and writing the UI software. (All of that took a lot longer than laser-cutting the case.) Of course, it probably took a lot more work than that to create the GSM module. But that's also true of the microcontroller I'm using, the LCD, even the battery. Just about everything is built on top of the work of others (see the Toaster Project for an example of how hard it is to do otherwise).
Interestingly, this critique hasn't really come up from the people I've worked with to build the phone. I explain the function of the GSM module (and the rest of the components) but after putting it all together, people don't seem to think of the phone as just a box for the module -- in part, I'd argue, because they realize how many other things are in there too.
Again, though, there's a fundamental question here that I'm trying to explore with my research: what does it mean to do it for yourself?
It's the same as:
"I don't code python, that isn't a real language, it does everything for you, unlike C!"
Really? Does everything for you? Good to know that you built your own transistors from scratch via materials that you mined out of the ground, while naked, using only tools that you scavenged out of the forest, and that you came up with the entire process yourself.
Seriously, this is cool.
OpenCell - my 2008 entry into the DIY cell phone game: http://web.archive.org/web/20080709054225/http://www.widgetr...
If anything, this would be more akin to saying "I'm using hardware features on my microprocs to do this neat thing". Not amazing engineering.
On a related note, does anyone know if we can get these modules to do data? Or if there's a cheaper version of these modules?
More generally, I am a believer in the idea I first read from Clay Shirky that as more people get involved in an area average quality goes down but innovation goes up a lot as you get lots of people trying lots of new things, which in the end is only goodness. Except, perhaps, for those that prefered it remain elite so they could feel special (not saying this is you, but I see this attitude in a lot of pioneers in areas that later become more mainstream).
[1]https://www.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Cellular%20Modules/CEL-0...
For example device, see http://www.windowsfordevices.com/c/a/News/Opensource-hardwar...
For PPP info, see http://ernstagn.home.xs4all.nl/GPRS-HOWTO/
[EDIT:] It's been a while, but Telit was also pushing their embedded python interpreter pretty hard back when I was into all of this. I had need for an embedded micro for other parts of my application so I never bothered too much with it, but it looked pretty interesting.
Edit: And you can easily use it for data.
At least, that's what I find impressive about it.
While certainly not intended for every day use, it's very handy to atleast have something for research and learning where you can access all the protocol layers. Just imagine the TCP/IP world if no one could ever send/receive any packet/frame/bits/protocol below the application layer.(i.e. TCP/UDP/IP/Ethernet was just a black box on a silicon chip).
That's basically the GSM world, at least until the osmocom guys made their own stack, running on cheap and old nokia phones.
I cant see this as DIY at all, but equally, its not a bought phone. More kit phone than DIY phone.