[Galaxy S III General] egzthunder1:
Err... lulwut?!? Please tell me you are not serious. What you are stating is the equivalent of wondering why Coca Cola does not share their recipe with the rest of the world. It is not a matter of it being a secret, it is intellectual property. They made and developed the SoC, why should they share documentation on how it is made, least of all with us? It isn't a matter of it being a selfish act, it is how the real world business' operate.

No. PR will have to obey whatever decision comes down from Engineering, and Sales, and other branches of management, not the other way around.

Ok, you guys may or may not know who I am and what I do around here. Out of everything, one of my biggest things is to advocate for a more open atmosphere and general openness coming from device mfgs to us (the development community). We have had numerous "movements" hosted on xda including petitions, news articles, and more, which were all directed to companies asking them to open up their stuff to us, and normally I fully support those.

Having said that, and I know I will earn the hatred of a few people in here, I cannot support what you guys are doing in here. Bombarding communication channels of a company because you want something out of them? Might as well try to DDoS them and threaten them in the process. But I am getting ahead of myself... lets take a step back for a second here.

The OP on this thread titled this thread "Let's get some Exynos sources". Nothing wrong with that, perfectly good request. However, having looked through the entire 18 -19 pages that this thread has grown into, I see that what you guys are truly asking for has nothing to do with what you are explicitly asking to get. The documentation for the SoC is information that the likes of AdamOutler, Rebellos, E:V:A, Entropy and just a handful of other people could make some use out of. What you guys are asking for in here are:

* codecs

* libs

* API

and various other pieces of code that seldomly relate to the processor in any way, shape, or form (the graphic libs relate to the gpu, so there is a small connection there, but nothing of the caliber of the kind of documentation that you get with the information about the chips). These pieces of code are more or less related to ROM and kernel and, like someone pointed out earlier in this thread, are either proprietary or licensed under Apache, which does NOT force anyone to release any kind of source. GPL is the code that needs to have the source shared, not Apache. So, what you guys are doing here is wrong from the get go as you are not even sure of what you are asking for in the first place. If I was working with Samsung, the first (and likely ONLY) question I would ask whoever asks for this information would be

"Why do you need it? What are you intending to do with it? Can you give me specific examples of projects/improvements you would like to work on with this information?"

I can almost guarantee you that, aside from XplodWild (only name I have seen in this thread), likely not a single one of you could answer this question with a precise answer. Answers of the kind

"I want to make the phone better"

"I want to make the phone faster"

"I want to make the phone less laggy"

"I want to run CMx with a working cam and better sound"

"I want my SGS3 cam to make me an espresso while I take a picture"

and answers of that sort are ALL invalid and will take you absolutely nowhere. The kind of things you could use this information for would be to do things of the caliber that Adam does (Unbrickable Mod Resurrector, etc). Documentation about the SoC would allow you to communicate and interact with the chip via some sort of interface (UART, etc) as you would know stuff about the schematics of the damn thing. Unless you are into really heavy low level coding (ie making a kernel from scratch) or hardware hacking, you will not need this simply because you cannot use it.

The devs who have a need for this have already requested this without any success (like xplodewild has stated before). I know for a fact that Adam has done so as well and Entropy during the brick bug dilemma. Understand that Samsung is under NO obligation whatsoever to provide anyone with anything. To them, we represent a very small number (about 1% in total sales), which I believe are BS statistics tbh as there is no way to effectively determine this without literally asking people at the time of purchase if they are developers or not. Let alone the fact that we do have an effect on indirect sales (referrals, word of mouth, etc). I digress though... One of the posts that I quoted stated that without us, they would not be as big as they are right now. I am sorry but while that may hold true for the likes of HTC who ONLY manufacture mobile devices, when you have a company like Samsung, with a name THAT big... I am sorry to burst your bubble, but we did not make Samsung the company they are today.

Now, doing what you are doing is extremely unprofessional, and by hosting it/organizing it on xda, you are making the entire community (including those devs who actually need these docs) to look like a bunch of whiny kids who throw a tantrum because they don't get what they want. Hypothetically speaking, if I was working with Samsung and I had already dealt with requests for this from devs, and all of the sudden I saw a mass move like this, I would personally reconsider ever paying attention at all to the developer world mainly due to the high level of childishness and whining.

If you guys decide to go ahead with this, please do not use xda-developers as a home base because quite frankly, we do not condone this kind of behavior (bombarding comm channels and mass mailing a company to get something), regardless of motives. If you want to do it in a more polite and professional way, make a petition in change.org or something along those lines. This has worked wonders with Motorola and Asus in the past with the locked bootloaders (this is a different beast though). However, based on the responses I have seen already in this thread, I can almost guarantee you that this is not going anywhere as it is right now. Samsung never released docs for the Hummingbird or even earlier iterations of the Exynos... whatever makes you think that they will release the docs for their latest flagship (proprietary) chip is really beyond my understanding.

Again, sorry if this comes out harsh. I do want to see Samsung being more open (like all of you do), but this is certainly not the way to go about it.