![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Could someone put a metric ruler instead of a coin in the gumstix picture?, coins are quite country specific and means little outside the specific nation. Electron9 09:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It appears as though the principal editing of this page has been performed by the corporate officers of Gumstix, in violation of
Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. Gumstix officers: Please read and pay attention to
Wikipedia:Suggestions_for_COI_compliance since you clearly wish to participate in the evolution of this article about your company.
The subject has potential encyclopedic merit and does not meet the "Blatant advertising" criteria for
speedy deletion. However, the article is presently written in the style of an
advertisement masquerading as an article, and has severe
linkspam that needs to be removed immediately. The
notability of Gumstix has not been established in the article. Since Gumstix probably is notable, I have tagged it with
Template:Importance rather than
Template:Notability. Regardless, the article should be
proposed for deletion if notability cannot be established within a reasonable period of time.
Oskay
22:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
The COI editing has not ceased, and has included a very inappropriate removal of a template requesting information about the notability of this subject. There are indeed constructive ways, allowed by Wikipedia policy, that even those with a conflict of interest can contribute to this article and shape its development. However, please note that per Wikipedia policy, "Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of this guideline should be warned and made aware of this guideline. If the same pattern of editing continues after the warning, the account may be blocked." You have been warned. Oskay 06:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, i'll try to help adding information the CMO of Gumstix forgot to mention here -lack of documentation and contradictions, limited warranty-. Feel free to correct my small contribution if it's somehow biased and comment here if citations to a mailing list archive are invalid or more are needed. Iunaw ( talk) 19:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
http://gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page -- Emesee ( talk) 06:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I've added the neutrality dispute flag because almost all information on this article has been written by a Gumstix Inc employee, and now, after i made a contribution, i see it has been removed and replaced by, in my opinion, misleading information by Dvescovi (please, do not mess with my edit again, leave this to someone neutral). I've asked Oskay if he could help, as he is a neutral party. We should make a list of facts/contributions here, on the discussion page, to let that someone neutral takes the information to the article. Iunaw ( talk) 01:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi continues to add incorrect/misleading information deliberately in violation of Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest, Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view and Wikipedia:Consensus. He or his company sells products/services based on Gumstix [1] but makes COI edits anyway, Troll's on my talk page and on this discussion page and is exhausting my patience. His last change was to replace "closed source" for "open source" on the description of his project on the article, giving incorrect, false and misleading information (again) on Wikipedia. Additionally his account appears, based on the edit history, to exist for the sole purpose of promoting a company, product, service, or organization in violation of Conflict of interest and anti-spam guidelines, and should not be tolerated. Iunaw ( talk) 13:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi: your (undone) "contribution" after deleting mine is in my opinion misleading: "Most Gumstix documentation, schematics and Printed Circuit Board layouts are online and made available under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license"
You are telling that most documentation is online, which is considered a feature, but omitting that there is no printed documentation, something that any customer would expect, even for a toaster. You say that most schematics are available in CC license, but omit to say that motherboard schematics are proprietary/closed-source. We are not here to say if that is good or bad, but to give complete information. If this article is only here to explain how wonderful Gumstix is, that is, to promote Gumstix (aka SPAM) it should be proposed for immediate deletion.
You have deleted:
I consider this information as very useful to any potential customers/interested persons. Usually this kind of products come with lots of printed documentation, schematics, examples and application notes, and Gumstix comes with NONE. Only part of them are online, and spread on their wiki/web servers and mailing list archives with some contradictions. I've never seen a product documented this way
Iunaw ( talk) 01:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Update: I would even add that Gumstix Inc does not seem to have any interest in having it's products documented, as most wiki edits on their wiki have been done by it's users themselves, the gumstix.net website has lots of "coming soon" sections and no serious efforts have been done by the company to correct this lack of documentation (in years!). It should be added on a criticism section, as this is more a subjective issue. I'll add it to the list as optional. Customers should know what they can and cannot expect from the company. Iunaw ( talk) 04:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
3rd Party Projects:
If 3rd party WinCE info and links to projects are added, it should be clear that WinCE is not supported by Gumstix - it could be put on a separate section for 3rd party Iunaw ( talk) 02:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Links:
A link to the gumstix mailing list on nabble could be added, if it's considered useful info: http://www.nabble.com/Gumstix-f22543.html
And information of the article should be updated, as currently gumstix uses OpenEmbedded Linux- there are some users that use the older buildroot (the SDK mentioned on the article) through. There are two wikis, the new one (linked on the article) is on http://gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page the old one in http://docwiki.gumstix.org/Main_Page -do we add both? Iunaw ( talk) 03:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
We should remove the external link 'Microsoft Presentation by Don Anderson, Gumstix CMO' (to http://content.digitalwell.washington.edu/msr/external_release_talks_12_05_2005/14736/lecture.htm) as it's either a broken link or a broken page that works only in microsoft's universe Iunaw ( talk) 09:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
lunaw obviously has an ax to grind and this should not be a forum for his opinions. This is quite apparent from his over use of the words “I” and “in my opinion” in both his comments on this and his edits on the main page. Everyone in the community is quite aware that Gumstix does not release their motherboard schematics. My original edit stated, “Most schematics and board layouts are available” which is absolutely true and should have not been deleted. In any case, I reworded to state “peripheral interface ..” to make it clearer. Also, my original edit clearly stated that the “Windows CE” development was not associated with Gumstix Inc. I am aware of the legal implications and there is a disclaimer at the top of the page if you care to follow the link and in the original edit.. Gumstix software development is very much “community” driven, much like this web site. As such, we are use to getting most of our information online. Wikipedia is a testament to this. I restated to say no “printed” documentation is available, to say, “Gumstix comes with no documentation at all” is just plan wrong and only shows your obvious frustration. Dvescovi ( talk) 13:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
If you count you will see 5 uses of the word "I" in just the above comment alone. Everyone is all for factual repersentation. Commentary belongs in a commentary section and not on a product description page. So what is the CIO entered the original content information, is was factual, informative and allowed under the Wikipedia rules. There was to blatant attempt to advertise .. only to inform. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Point by point:
Not true, just not "printed" documentation ..corrected on main page.
I fail to see how correcting to read "Does not come with printed documention.." could in anyway be construded as missleading information. I was only attempting to make the page better. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
This is only true if you do not have any electronics, computer background or are a novice.
This is just a fact of community development. Communities are composed of the whole spectrum of users from the novice to the experts. Many times the information is contradictory or in some cases just plane wrong. This should not be a reflection of Gumstix Inc. but the community at large. Place comments like these in a "rant" section but I would be carefull, I don't think you would get much sympathy here as Wikipedia operates in very much the same way. A constructive comment would be to suggest a "moderator" to filter commentary and content correctness.
Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Somtimes.
Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi ( talk) 15:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi's deletions have been restored, a warning has been added to his talk page and discussion continues here. We'll try to seek consensus and avoid an edit war. We could need a neutral party for a final check for biased information after discussion ends and consensus is reached. Information on the article has to be complete and not misleading, and no relevant information can be omitted deliberately. Iunaw ( talk) 03:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC) I totally agree. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC) If you agree why are you still deleting relevant information you don't like? You are not discussing it here to try to reach consensus, you are editing the article on your own to remove that parts, and you say here "i agree"? you say A and make then B. are you interested in improving the whole article? (other parts that need upgrade as i mentioned) because it seems you come here only to change some parts to reflect your POV and forget the rest Iunaw ( talk) 18:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Other updates to the article: the dead link mentioned above has been removed, a section for 3rd party has been added and the new openembedded build system on gumstix has been mentioned. Should we remove now any information from the old buildroot build system and update it to the current openembedded build system or do we mention both in the article? Iunaw ( talk) 03:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Update i forgot to mention: I've added the following paragraph: "Gumstix motherboard schematics are proprietary and are kept secret, but expansion board schematics images and layouts are available online under the Creative Commons Share-alike license." This is more accurate than just saying "Most Gumstix schematics and Printed Circuit Board layouts are online and made available under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license" because you think that "Everyone in the community is quite aware that Gumstix does not release their motherboard schematics" (I'm starting to think you are here to SPAM, as you deliberately delete and omit everything negative to Gumstix) Iunaw ( talk) 04:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC) I corrected to state "moterboard board schematics are proprietary" and included a link to definition of "proprietary". To say "kept secret" is wrong. Please read the definition of "propritary" there is a difference.
The comment "Most Gumstix schematics and Printed Circuit Board layouts are online" was corrected in a previous edit (again, which you saw to delete).
Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I have asked for page protection until dispute is resolved as Dvescovi keeps removing content ignoring the discussion page, the neutrality dispute and the uw-npov3 warning on his talk page. Has no interest in seeking consensus and has no appreciable interest in expanding the article with any contributions. He doesn't even know what a discussion page is and how Wikipedia works (i'll add some links to his talk page)
Dvescovi: You are removing information ("Some parts are not documented anywhere yet") because you consider it's negative for Gumstix, but this is not your private place to make SPAM, i have told several times that we have to seek consensus, give accurate and complete information and to avoid omitting relevant information deliberately. I even told you we should ask for help to a neutral party, but this doesn't seem to interest you (no comments on this issue so far) Iunaw ( talk) 14:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I totally welcome independent third party resolution. Please, I invite it. Also please read the definition of Shared Source, a link has been provided on Wikipedia. Please be informed before posting, especially on legal issues.
Dvescovi ( talk) 14:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Iunaw (
talk)
14:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I have done my very best to say neutral and provide information like the links and definition like "Shared Source" and "proprietary". I do not think personal attacks like "He doesn't even know what a discussion page is and how Wikipedia works" helps your case.
I would invite ANY neutral third party to review the discussion and edits. I have no interest in "flameing" anyone and I do not work for, or are in anyway affiliated or associated with Gumstix. I love Wikipedia and hate to see it used in this way:(
Someone obviously took great pains to put together the main page only to inform, its a shame you choose to trash it this way.
Dvescovi (
talk)
15:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
So we are trashing the contributions to Wikipedia from a Gumstix Inc employee because it's not advertising anymore and includes the negative aspects too? That is not the purpose of Wikipedia, i'm sorry. As i'm repeating again and again, we are here to give complete and accurate information, avoiding to omit intentionally relevant aspects. You really want that information on this article remains incomplete, inaccurate and misleading, and that's why you don't discuss how it could be rewritten, you simply remove what you don't like! Iunaw ( talk) 19:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Please be aware I would never suggest baring anyone from this or any other page, as Mr. lunaw has, especially those most knowledgeable of the product line. These are just desperate attempts at POV pushing, as most of us are quite aware. The over use of adjectives, and his inability to speak in a neutral, “third person” voice are all evidence to that fact. If anything we should encourage Mr. lanaw to continue, after all he himself presents my best evidence. I would encourage Mr. lanaw to familiarize himself with the Wikipedia rules, which would allow him to make more compelling arguments. I am sorry Mr. lanaw had a bad experience with the product but there are others who use it quite successfully and enjoy working with it. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi You have changed on your project description on the article "closed source" with "open source" [2], adding (again) misleading information to the article. The source code of your project is not openly available as described on the open source article but is only available when you sign an NDA and for a 300$ fee (according to the information on the website of your project [3]) so it is considered closed source. I'll quote it from the article pages for you:
STOP! Your COI edits with false and misleading information do not benefit Wikipedia in any way. This is not the place to promote your products/services Iunaw ( talk) 17:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
STOP! Please quit trying to insinuate this is “my” web site. Codeplex and GumstixIII is a community development project of which I am a coordinator. The initial work was done by several dedicated developers and we are actively looking for more. All are welcome to join by just asking..even Mr lanuaw … that is if he promises not to trash it. Dvescovi ( talk) 02:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I'll change it to closed source again, leaving the rest untouched, as it is *false* that it is an open source project. Iunaw ( talk) 18:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Please also change your refference list, I don't think "popper" is a very nice word. Even as bitter as you are, I don't think you ment to say that. Dvescovi ( talk) 08:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, there is plenty of source code include. But I guess that does not count as with your POV pushing anything but "printed" documentation does not count "real" documentation and email and news group postings do not count as "real" technical support. Dvescovi ( talk) 06:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I've changed it *again* to closed source. This is like dealing with a small child, you keep doing what you want and give false information on the article Iunaw ( talk) 18:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
This article has been included in the COIN. You can follow the discussion here: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Gumstix dead link Iunaw ( talk) 18:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
While by today's standards, the gumstix are fairly small (smaller than so called micro atx, for instance), Microcomputer is a term from early computing used to refer to what we would call a desktop computer today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.0.26 ( talk) 04:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
lunaw and Dvescovi: Cool it, both of you. No magic administrator is going to step in and solve everything or protect the article, so it's up to both of you to approach this article with a more responsible perspective and good wikipedian practice.
lunaw: Read a few other articles here on Wikipedia. Look at the tone of the writing, and then compare to your own:
"Gumstix products come with no printed documentation[2][3], customers have to search themselves on the mailing list archives or on the user wiki, with information split on different faq's, articles and mailing list posts that sometimes contradict each other[4][5]."
While it looks to me as though your contributions (like this one) are factually correct and do add valuable information to the article, your edits come across as slightly negative: a little bit bitter and mean-spirited. That attitude doesn't have any place on Wikipedia. Your end of the bargain-- that you get to edit the articles-- comes with the restriction that you conform to the style manual and maintain a neutral tone. In practice, that means that you need to write articles with a presumption of good faith unless you can cite clear evidence to the contrary. Here's another way of thinking about it: There are a lot of other embedded computer platforms. If you trash this one but not all of them, how does that achieve neutrality?
Here is an example of how one might phrase the above sentence in a more neutral fashion: "Gumsticks products are supported through several different forms of online documentation, including articles, FAQ lists, and a user-maintained wiki and mailing list." This really is neither a good nor bad thing.
Dvescovi: If, as lunaw contends, you are selling gumstix-related products or services, you do have a very real conflict of interest and you should abstain from editing this article. That should be perfectly clear to you. Wikipedia is not here to provide advertising for you, whether or not you are in business. You have no inherent right to add a link to your project from any wikipedia article. Any suggestion that you have about what should appear on an article should be suggested from the talk page and, if someone else agrees that it is worthwhile to add to the page, they will add it. Now, I can hardly list how many times I wanted to add a link to one of my projects or web pages from a wikipedia page-- but I don't, because it's not the right thing to do. Get with the program.
Now, I have made a few edits to the article. Unless anyone objects, I'm going to make a separate edit to remove the COI and NPOV flags from the article-- I think that the article, as I've just revised it, is actually in pretty good shape. But of course, I'm happy to discuss it further.
Oskay ( talk) 20:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Gumsticks products have no printed documentation(-) but are supported instead through several different forms of online documentation(+) spread(-) on articles, FAQ lists, an user-maintained wiki and a mailing list archive. Because it is under constant development(+), some information may be missing, contradictory our outdated(-), but questions get answered on the mailing list, that is very active.(+).
Gumsticks products have no printed documentation but are supported instead through several different forms of online documentation spread on articles, FAQ lists, an user-maintained wiki and a mailing list archive. Because it is under constant development, some information may be missing, contradictory our outdated, but any questions users have get answered on the mailing list, that is very active.
Gumsticks products have no printed documentation but are supported instead through several different forms of online documentation spread on articles, FAQ lists, an user-maintained wiki and a mailing list archive. It is under constant development and some information is missing, contradictory our outdated.
As far as I can tell, Gumstix computers do not feature "out-of-the-box" support for traditional VGA/DVI displays, support for traditional input devices like keyboards or mice, or plug-n-play support for usb peripherals since the usb port is only for connection to a desktop PC. As such I question the use of the term "full-function" as this leaves the impression that Gumstix can be used as a desktop computer. If the Gumstix lacks support for certain functions it logically follows that one should not describe it as "full-function".
Rather than simply removing the words "full-function" from the article, I decided it would be better to solicit suggestions for a better term. My preferred alternative is "user-configurable headless computer" to acknowledge that describing Gumstix as a "computer" is perfectly accurate, but that Gumstix is not at this time appropriate as a desktop computer. Further support for this terminology can be found at the Wikipedia entry for " headless" that includes the following definition:
"In computer hardware, headless refers to a server with no monitor, graphics card, or keyboard attached. Interaction with it depends on the use of a network connection, serial communications, or the use of a "crash cart."
I have not edited the Gumstix entry myself yet because the Gumstix is not limited to functioning as a server so it doesn't meet the Wikipedia description for "headless". As such I would like to get other people's opinion on the most appropriate term to use.
correction - newer overo gums do have video output, and even verdex versions had touchscreen LCDs we use! If only all this discussion effort had gone into creating a useful page rather than bickering Bravekermit ( talk) 22:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The release of the overo seems like a natural time to take another look at this article. A gumstix is now clearly a fully functional computer, in the sense that it can be used as a desktop (provided you're happy with Windows CE). But really the thing is good for prototyping embedded devices, so the angle that it'll make the world's smartest vaccuum cleaner should be emphasized. When I go to this wiki I expect to learn about embedded devices and embedded OS's. I agree with you, kermit, that if the bickering is behind us (and Don Anderson agrees to keep his paws off), this article can be easily improved. Teufelsdroch ( talk) 03:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Other possible alternatives might include "programmable" or "customizable" instead of "full-function", and "Linux appliance", "Linux device", or "microcontroller" instead of "computer". Roystonlodge ( talk) 19:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I've made some major changes to the verbiage of the article in an effort to objectify. I did not add any new content, only re-worded existing text to provide a more objective tone. John O'Connor ( talk) 18:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I made some edits before I checked the (riveting) talk page. Now I'm questioning the rewording/re-ordering of the 2nd paragraph I was considering. I'm going to go ahead and save the changes that don't affect factual content. However I'm not really sure what to do with the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. It seems like it says the same thing as (or very similar to) the last sentence of the 1st paragraph, but I don't know enough about the topic to fix it. WarEqualsPeace ( talk) 05:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm surprised to see that this article has so many troubles, but on reflection it is obvious: The Gumstix is not notable enough to be on wikipedia. Let me disclose that I think the notability requirement is generally lame. I also think the Gumstix is pretty cool. But it seems as if all of the contributions to the article either come from people who sell Gumstix or people who bought it. There is precious little reviewing going on in the tech media, and I suspect that when it happens those writers use Wikipedia as a reference. So I can't suggest a remedy (though it seems I am implying removal). I just think all of the issues with this article are dancing around this severe notability problem. 67.175.146.68 ( talk) 14:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Full Disclosure: I am a web content writer at Gumstix, Inc. I would like to request some changes to this article for the sake of accuracy. All of my proposed changes are meant only to reflect updates to existing information on the page.
Headquarters: Gumstix, Inc.'s headquarters has moved to Redwood City, California, although our mailing address remains in Portola Valley.
[1] Done
Products: Can be generalized to something like " Computers-on-module, single-board computers, expansion boards, electronic design services, electronic accessories.
Computers On Module, Overo Series: The Overo STORM series employs Texas Instruments' Sitara AM3703 and DaVinci DM3703 [2], in addition to the original Overo series that uses the OMAP3.
Motherboards: The photograph in this section gives a good idea of the scale. The rest of the information, however, is essentially a duplicate of the above. This section could be removed.
Discontinued motherboards and the Computers section immediately following it: Can be merged into a section about discontinued products since none of these are in production any longer [3] if this is clearer for readers.
Software Development Kit: Gumstix now supports
the Yocto Project as its main software development platform
[4]. Currently, some information in this section is historical (e.g., OpenEmbedded, compact flash, MMC, ipkg) and overly generic. Done
I am happy to make any of these edits myself under the auspices of another editor if they are deemed appropriate and neutral. We would like to present neutral, accurate information without any conflict of interest.
Ahsimpson ( talk) 00:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
References
(The above requested edit was made by clicking on a link in an automatically added notice.)
Good start User:Ahsimpson. I'm a little uncomfortable with
An essential component of the Yocto Project is its open source build system based on the OpenEmbedded architecture.
The phrasing, especially "essential component", reads a little like PR speak. If I had an obvious option, I would just change it. Please give it some thought and try an alternative, or I'll come up with something.
Can we, at the same time, move on to the Products comments? The first word suggested that it referred to the section, but the rest made me think you were talking about the lead. Can you clarify, and or make a proposed edit?
I have made some pretty significant trims regarding content that was unsourced or sourced to primary sources like the company website. Most of it was about individual products, their features and technical specifications, which was out-of-compliance with WP:NOT a product directory, buyer's guide, or a mirror of the company website, etc.. A proper article should be built on credible, independent sources, like EE Times, InformationWeek, and EDN.
I notice that notability has been raised before and I haven't seen anything yet to confirm whether the company qualifies for an article under the requirements at WP:CORP, however I prefer to stub rather than delete articles on marginally notable topics if we can get a solid 2-3 paragraphs together from properly independent sources. CorporateM ( Talk) 23:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gumstix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:16, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Could someone put a metric ruler instead of a coin in the gumstix picture?, coins are quite country specific and means little outside the specific nation. Electron9 09:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It appears as though the principal editing of this page has been performed by the corporate officers of Gumstix, in violation of
Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. Gumstix officers: Please read and pay attention to
Wikipedia:Suggestions_for_COI_compliance since you clearly wish to participate in the evolution of this article about your company.
The subject has potential encyclopedic merit and does not meet the "Blatant advertising" criteria for
speedy deletion. However, the article is presently written in the style of an
advertisement masquerading as an article, and has severe
linkspam that needs to be removed immediately. The
notability of Gumstix has not been established in the article. Since Gumstix probably is notable, I have tagged it with
Template:Importance rather than
Template:Notability. Regardless, the article should be
proposed for deletion if notability cannot be established within a reasonable period of time.
Oskay
22:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
The COI editing has not ceased, and has included a very inappropriate removal of a template requesting information about the notability of this subject. There are indeed constructive ways, allowed by Wikipedia policy, that even those with a conflict of interest can contribute to this article and shape its development. However, please note that per Wikipedia policy, "Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of this guideline should be warned and made aware of this guideline. If the same pattern of editing continues after the warning, the account may be blocked." You have been warned. Oskay 06:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, i'll try to help adding information the CMO of Gumstix forgot to mention here -lack of documentation and contradictions, limited warranty-. Feel free to correct my small contribution if it's somehow biased and comment here if citations to a mailing list archive are invalid or more are needed. Iunaw ( talk) 19:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
http://gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page -- Emesee ( talk) 06:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I've added the neutrality dispute flag because almost all information on this article has been written by a Gumstix Inc employee, and now, after i made a contribution, i see it has been removed and replaced by, in my opinion, misleading information by Dvescovi (please, do not mess with my edit again, leave this to someone neutral). I've asked Oskay if he could help, as he is a neutral party. We should make a list of facts/contributions here, on the discussion page, to let that someone neutral takes the information to the article. Iunaw ( talk) 01:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi continues to add incorrect/misleading information deliberately in violation of Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest, Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view and Wikipedia:Consensus. He or his company sells products/services based on Gumstix [1] but makes COI edits anyway, Troll's on my talk page and on this discussion page and is exhausting my patience. His last change was to replace "closed source" for "open source" on the description of his project on the article, giving incorrect, false and misleading information (again) on Wikipedia. Additionally his account appears, based on the edit history, to exist for the sole purpose of promoting a company, product, service, or organization in violation of Conflict of interest and anti-spam guidelines, and should not be tolerated. Iunaw ( talk) 13:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi: your (undone) "contribution" after deleting mine is in my opinion misleading: "Most Gumstix documentation, schematics and Printed Circuit Board layouts are online and made available under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license"
You are telling that most documentation is online, which is considered a feature, but omitting that there is no printed documentation, something that any customer would expect, even for a toaster. You say that most schematics are available in CC license, but omit to say that motherboard schematics are proprietary/closed-source. We are not here to say if that is good or bad, but to give complete information. If this article is only here to explain how wonderful Gumstix is, that is, to promote Gumstix (aka SPAM) it should be proposed for immediate deletion.
You have deleted:
I consider this information as very useful to any potential customers/interested persons. Usually this kind of products come with lots of printed documentation, schematics, examples and application notes, and Gumstix comes with NONE. Only part of them are online, and spread on their wiki/web servers and mailing list archives with some contradictions. I've never seen a product documented this way
Iunaw ( talk) 01:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Update: I would even add that Gumstix Inc does not seem to have any interest in having it's products documented, as most wiki edits on their wiki have been done by it's users themselves, the gumstix.net website has lots of "coming soon" sections and no serious efforts have been done by the company to correct this lack of documentation (in years!). It should be added on a criticism section, as this is more a subjective issue. I'll add it to the list as optional. Customers should know what they can and cannot expect from the company. Iunaw ( talk) 04:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
3rd Party Projects:
If 3rd party WinCE info and links to projects are added, it should be clear that WinCE is not supported by Gumstix - it could be put on a separate section for 3rd party Iunaw ( talk) 02:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Links:
A link to the gumstix mailing list on nabble could be added, if it's considered useful info: http://www.nabble.com/Gumstix-f22543.html
And information of the article should be updated, as currently gumstix uses OpenEmbedded Linux- there are some users that use the older buildroot (the SDK mentioned on the article) through. There are two wikis, the new one (linked on the article) is on http://gumstix.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page the old one in http://docwiki.gumstix.org/Main_Page -do we add both? Iunaw ( talk) 03:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
We should remove the external link 'Microsoft Presentation by Don Anderson, Gumstix CMO' (to http://content.digitalwell.washington.edu/msr/external_release_talks_12_05_2005/14736/lecture.htm) as it's either a broken link or a broken page that works only in microsoft's universe Iunaw ( talk) 09:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
lunaw obviously has an ax to grind and this should not be a forum for his opinions. This is quite apparent from his over use of the words “I” and “in my opinion” in both his comments on this and his edits on the main page. Everyone in the community is quite aware that Gumstix does not release their motherboard schematics. My original edit stated, “Most schematics and board layouts are available” which is absolutely true and should have not been deleted. In any case, I reworded to state “peripheral interface ..” to make it clearer. Also, my original edit clearly stated that the “Windows CE” development was not associated with Gumstix Inc. I am aware of the legal implications and there is a disclaimer at the top of the page if you care to follow the link and in the original edit.. Gumstix software development is very much “community” driven, much like this web site. As such, we are use to getting most of our information online. Wikipedia is a testament to this. I restated to say no “printed” documentation is available, to say, “Gumstix comes with no documentation at all” is just plan wrong and only shows your obvious frustration. Dvescovi ( talk) 13:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
If you count you will see 5 uses of the word "I" in just the above comment alone. Everyone is all for factual repersentation. Commentary belongs in a commentary section and not on a product description page. So what is the CIO entered the original content information, is was factual, informative and allowed under the Wikipedia rules. There was to blatant attempt to advertise .. only to inform. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Point by point:
Not true, just not "printed" documentation ..corrected on main page.
I fail to see how correcting to read "Does not come with printed documention.." could in anyway be construded as missleading information. I was only attempting to make the page better. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
This is only true if you do not have any electronics, computer background or are a novice.
This is just a fact of community development. Communities are composed of the whole spectrum of users from the novice to the experts. Many times the information is contradictory or in some cases just plane wrong. This should not be a reflection of Gumstix Inc. but the community at large. Place comments like these in a "rant" section but I would be carefull, I don't think you would get much sympathy here as Wikipedia operates in very much the same way. A constructive comment would be to suggest a "moderator" to filter commentary and content correctness.
Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Somtimes.
Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi ( talk) 15:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi's deletions have been restored, a warning has been added to his talk page and discussion continues here. We'll try to seek consensus and avoid an edit war. We could need a neutral party for a final check for biased information after discussion ends and consensus is reached. Information on the article has to be complete and not misleading, and no relevant information can be omitted deliberately. Iunaw ( talk) 03:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC) I totally agree. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC) If you agree why are you still deleting relevant information you don't like? You are not discussing it here to try to reach consensus, you are editing the article on your own to remove that parts, and you say here "i agree"? you say A and make then B. are you interested in improving the whole article? (other parts that need upgrade as i mentioned) because it seems you come here only to change some parts to reflect your POV and forget the rest Iunaw ( talk) 18:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Other updates to the article: the dead link mentioned above has been removed, a section for 3rd party has been added and the new openembedded build system on gumstix has been mentioned. Should we remove now any information from the old buildroot build system and update it to the current openembedded build system or do we mention both in the article? Iunaw ( talk) 03:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Update i forgot to mention: I've added the following paragraph: "Gumstix motherboard schematics are proprietary and are kept secret, but expansion board schematics images and layouts are available online under the Creative Commons Share-alike license." This is more accurate than just saying "Most Gumstix schematics and Printed Circuit Board layouts are online and made available under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license" because you think that "Everyone in the community is quite aware that Gumstix does not release their motherboard schematics" (I'm starting to think you are here to SPAM, as you deliberately delete and omit everything negative to Gumstix) Iunaw ( talk) 04:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC) I corrected to state "moterboard board schematics are proprietary" and included a link to definition of "proprietary". To say "kept secret" is wrong. Please read the definition of "propritary" there is a difference.
The comment "Most Gumstix schematics and Printed Circuit Board layouts are online" was corrected in a previous edit (again, which you saw to delete).
Dvescovi ( talk) 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I have asked for page protection until dispute is resolved as Dvescovi keeps removing content ignoring the discussion page, the neutrality dispute and the uw-npov3 warning on his talk page. Has no interest in seeking consensus and has no appreciable interest in expanding the article with any contributions. He doesn't even know what a discussion page is and how Wikipedia works (i'll add some links to his talk page)
Dvescovi: You are removing information ("Some parts are not documented anywhere yet") because you consider it's negative for Gumstix, but this is not your private place to make SPAM, i have told several times that we have to seek consensus, give accurate and complete information and to avoid omitting relevant information deliberately. I even told you we should ask for help to a neutral party, but this doesn't seem to interest you (no comments on this issue so far) Iunaw ( talk) 14:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I totally welcome independent third party resolution. Please, I invite it. Also please read the definition of Shared Source, a link has been provided on Wikipedia. Please be informed before posting, especially on legal issues.
Dvescovi ( talk) 14:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Iunaw (
talk)
14:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I have done my very best to say neutral and provide information like the links and definition like "Shared Source" and "proprietary". I do not think personal attacks like "He doesn't even know what a discussion page is and how Wikipedia works" helps your case.
I would invite ANY neutral third party to review the discussion and edits. I have no interest in "flameing" anyone and I do not work for, or are in anyway affiliated or associated with Gumstix. I love Wikipedia and hate to see it used in this way:(
Someone obviously took great pains to put together the main page only to inform, its a shame you choose to trash it this way.
Dvescovi (
talk)
15:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
So we are trashing the contributions to Wikipedia from a Gumstix Inc employee because it's not advertising anymore and includes the negative aspects too? That is not the purpose of Wikipedia, i'm sorry. As i'm repeating again and again, we are here to give complete and accurate information, avoiding to omit intentionally relevant aspects. You really want that information on this article remains incomplete, inaccurate and misleading, and that's why you don't discuss how it could be rewritten, you simply remove what you don't like! Iunaw ( talk) 19:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Please be aware I would never suggest baring anyone from this or any other page, as Mr. lunaw has, especially those most knowledgeable of the product line. These are just desperate attempts at POV pushing, as most of us are quite aware. The over use of adjectives, and his inability to speak in a neutral, “third person” voice are all evidence to that fact. If anything we should encourage Mr. lanaw to continue, after all he himself presents my best evidence. I would encourage Mr. lanaw to familiarize himself with the Wikipedia rules, which would allow him to make more compelling arguments. I am sorry Mr. lanaw had a bad experience with the product but there are others who use it quite successfully and enjoy working with it. Dvescovi ( talk) 12:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Dvescovi You have changed on your project description on the article "closed source" with "open source" [2], adding (again) misleading information to the article. The source code of your project is not openly available as described on the open source article but is only available when you sign an NDA and for a 300$ fee (according to the information on the website of your project [3]) so it is considered closed source. I'll quote it from the article pages for you:
STOP! Your COI edits with false and misleading information do not benefit Wikipedia in any way. This is not the place to promote your products/services Iunaw ( talk) 17:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
STOP! Please quit trying to insinuate this is “my” web site. Codeplex and GumstixIII is a community development project of which I am a coordinator. The initial work was done by several dedicated developers and we are actively looking for more. All are welcome to join by just asking..even Mr lanuaw … that is if he promises not to trash it. Dvescovi ( talk) 02:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I'll change it to closed source again, leaving the rest untouched, as it is *false* that it is an open source project. Iunaw ( talk) 18:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Please also change your refference list, I don't think "popper" is a very nice word. Even as bitter as you are, I don't think you ment to say that. Dvescovi ( talk) 08:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, there is plenty of source code include. But I guess that does not count as with your POV pushing anything but "printed" documentation does not count "real" documentation and email and news group postings do not count as "real" technical support. Dvescovi ( talk) 06:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I've changed it *again* to closed source. This is like dealing with a small child, you keep doing what you want and give false information on the article Iunaw ( talk) 18:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
This article has been included in the COIN. You can follow the discussion here: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Gumstix dead link Iunaw ( talk) 18:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
While by today's standards, the gumstix are fairly small (smaller than so called micro atx, for instance), Microcomputer is a term from early computing used to refer to what we would call a desktop computer today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.0.26 ( talk) 04:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
lunaw and Dvescovi: Cool it, both of you. No magic administrator is going to step in and solve everything or protect the article, so it's up to both of you to approach this article with a more responsible perspective and good wikipedian practice.
lunaw: Read a few other articles here on Wikipedia. Look at the tone of the writing, and then compare to your own:
"Gumstix products come with no printed documentation[2][3], customers have to search themselves on the mailing list archives or on the user wiki, with information split on different faq's, articles and mailing list posts that sometimes contradict each other[4][5]."
While it looks to me as though your contributions (like this one) are factually correct and do add valuable information to the article, your edits come across as slightly negative: a little bit bitter and mean-spirited. That attitude doesn't have any place on Wikipedia. Your end of the bargain-- that you get to edit the articles-- comes with the restriction that you conform to the style manual and maintain a neutral tone. In practice, that means that you need to write articles with a presumption of good faith unless you can cite clear evidence to the contrary. Here's another way of thinking about it: There are a lot of other embedded computer platforms. If you trash this one but not all of them, how does that achieve neutrality?
Here is an example of how one might phrase the above sentence in a more neutral fashion: "Gumsticks products are supported through several different forms of online documentation, including articles, FAQ lists, and a user-maintained wiki and mailing list." This really is neither a good nor bad thing.
Dvescovi: If, as lunaw contends, you are selling gumstix-related products or services, you do have a very real conflict of interest and you should abstain from editing this article. That should be perfectly clear to you. Wikipedia is not here to provide advertising for you, whether or not you are in business. You have no inherent right to add a link to your project from any wikipedia article. Any suggestion that you have about what should appear on an article should be suggested from the talk page and, if someone else agrees that it is worthwhile to add to the page, they will add it. Now, I can hardly list how many times I wanted to add a link to one of my projects or web pages from a wikipedia page-- but I don't, because it's not the right thing to do. Get with the program.
Now, I have made a few edits to the article. Unless anyone objects, I'm going to make a separate edit to remove the COI and NPOV flags from the article-- I think that the article, as I've just revised it, is actually in pretty good shape. But of course, I'm happy to discuss it further.
Oskay ( talk) 20:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Gumsticks products have no printed documentation(-) but are supported instead through several different forms of online documentation(+) spread(-) on articles, FAQ lists, an user-maintained wiki and a mailing list archive. Because it is under constant development(+), some information may be missing, contradictory our outdated(-), but questions get answered on the mailing list, that is very active.(+).
Gumsticks products have no printed documentation but are supported instead through several different forms of online documentation spread on articles, FAQ lists, an user-maintained wiki and a mailing list archive. Because it is under constant development, some information may be missing, contradictory our outdated, but any questions users have get answered on the mailing list, that is very active.
Gumsticks products have no printed documentation but are supported instead through several different forms of online documentation spread on articles, FAQ lists, an user-maintained wiki and a mailing list archive. It is under constant development and some information is missing, contradictory our outdated.
As far as I can tell, Gumstix computers do not feature "out-of-the-box" support for traditional VGA/DVI displays, support for traditional input devices like keyboards or mice, or plug-n-play support for usb peripherals since the usb port is only for connection to a desktop PC. As such I question the use of the term "full-function" as this leaves the impression that Gumstix can be used as a desktop computer. If the Gumstix lacks support for certain functions it logically follows that one should not describe it as "full-function".
Rather than simply removing the words "full-function" from the article, I decided it would be better to solicit suggestions for a better term. My preferred alternative is "user-configurable headless computer" to acknowledge that describing Gumstix as a "computer" is perfectly accurate, but that Gumstix is not at this time appropriate as a desktop computer. Further support for this terminology can be found at the Wikipedia entry for " headless" that includes the following definition:
"In computer hardware, headless refers to a server with no monitor, graphics card, or keyboard attached. Interaction with it depends on the use of a network connection, serial communications, or the use of a "crash cart."
I have not edited the Gumstix entry myself yet because the Gumstix is not limited to functioning as a server so it doesn't meet the Wikipedia description for "headless". As such I would like to get other people's opinion on the most appropriate term to use.
correction - newer overo gums do have video output, and even verdex versions had touchscreen LCDs we use! If only all this discussion effort had gone into creating a useful page rather than bickering Bravekermit ( talk) 22:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The release of the overo seems like a natural time to take another look at this article. A gumstix is now clearly a fully functional computer, in the sense that it can be used as a desktop (provided you're happy with Windows CE). But really the thing is good for prototyping embedded devices, so the angle that it'll make the world's smartest vaccuum cleaner should be emphasized. When I go to this wiki I expect to learn about embedded devices and embedded OS's. I agree with you, kermit, that if the bickering is behind us (and Don Anderson agrees to keep his paws off), this article can be easily improved. Teufelsdroch ( talk) 03:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Other possible alternatives might include "programmable" or "customizable" instead of "full-function", and "Linux appliance", "Linux device", or "microcontroller" instead of "computer". Roystonlodge ( talk) 19:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I've made some major changes to the verbiage of the article in an effort to objectify. I did not add any new content, only re-worded existing text to provide a more objective tone. John O'Connor ( talk) 18:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I made some edits before I checked the (riveting) talk page. Now I'm questioning the rewording/re-ordering of the 2nd paragraph I was considering. I'm going to go ahead and save the changes that don't affect factual content. However I'm not really sure what to do with the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. It seems like it says the same thing as (or very similar to) the last sentence of the 1st paragraph, but I don't know enough about the topic to fix it. WarEqualsPeace ( talk) 05:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm surprised to see that this article has so many troubles, but on reflection it is obvious: The Gumstix is not notable enough to be on wikipedia. Let me disclose that I think the notability requirement is generally lame. I also think the Gumstix is pretty cool. But it seems as if all of the contributions to the article either come from people who sell Gumstix or people who bought it. There is precious little reviewing going on in the tech media, and I suspect that when it happens those writers use Wikipedia as a reference. So I can't suggest a remedy (though it seems I am implying removal). I just think all of the issues with this article are dancing around this severe notability problem. 67.175.146.68 ( talk) 14:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Full Disclosure: I am a web content writer at Gumstix, Inc. I would like to request some changes to this article for the sake of accuracy. All of my proposed changes are meant only to reflect updates to existing information on the page.
Headquarters: Gumstix, Inc.'s headquarters has moved to Redwood City, California, although our mailing address remains in Portola Valley.
[1] Done
Products: Can be generalized to something like " Computers-on-module, single-board computers, expansion boards, electronic design services, electronic accessories.
Computers On Module, Overo Series: The Overo STORM series employs Texas Instruments' Sitara AM3703 and DaVinci DM3703 [2], in addition to the original Overo series that uses the OMAP3.
Motherboards: The photograph in this section gives a good idea of the scale. The rest of the information, however, is essentially a duplicate of the above. This section could be removed.
Discontinued motherboards and the Computers section immediately following it: Can be merged into a section about discontinued products since none of these are in production any longer [3] if this is clearer for readers.
Software Development Kit: Gumstix now supports
the Yocto Project as its main software development platform
[4]. Currently, some information in this section is historical (e.g., OpenEmbedded, compact flash, MMC, ipkg) and overly generic. Done
I am happy to make any of these edits myself under the auspices of another editor if they are deemed appropriate and neutral. We would like to present neutral, accurate information without any conflict of interest.
Ahsimpson ( talk) 00:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
References
(The above requested edit was made by clicking on a link in an automatically added notice.)
Good start User:Ahsimpson. I'm a little uncomfortable with
An essential component of the Yocto Project is its open source build system based on the OpenEmbedded architecture.
The phrasing, especially "essential component", reads a little like PR speak. If I had an obvious option, I would just change it. Please give it some thought and try an alternative, or I'll come up with something.
Can we, at the same time, move on to the Products comments? The first word suggested that it referred to the section, but the rest made me think you were talking about the lead. Can you clarify, and or make a proposed edit?
I have made some pretty significant trims regarding content that was unsourced or sourced to primary sources like the company website. Most of it was about individual products, their features and technical specifications, which was out-of-compliance with WP:NOT a product directory, buyer's guide, or a mirror of the company website, etc.. A proper article should be built on credible, independent sources, like EE Times, InformationWeek, and EDN.
I notice that notability has been raised before and I haven't seen anything yet to confirm whether the company qualifies for an article under the requirements at WP:CORP, however I prefer to stub rather than delete articles on marginally notable topics if we can get a solid 2-3 paragraphs together from properly independent sources. CorporateM ( Talk) 23:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gumstix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:16, 25 October 2017 (UTC)