Posted by Gary Mortimer on November 29, 2009 at 12:34am
Chris might pull this post down fast when he sees it!!I am getting increasingly angry at the attitude of UNAV towards Ardupilot, most people know I don't use an Ardupilot, I'm not clever enough to put one together, but I like the project.http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1030817&page=19I will let you guys read and decide.
In complex system development more human interactions is actually a good thing and I can say for a fact that it is actually encouraged in most environments. I work in an environment at the moment that does this and does it well. By using / having access to more people you inevitably pick up issues / problems much quicker. In-fact, the collaboration often takes place with people that have no background in the system being developed. This has the advantage of gaining a different perspective or range of perspectives.
What you talk about is one such model or method of complex system design. Just remember there are many of them, each with their advantages and disadvantages. Unfortunately it is counterintuitive to take a single approach for every circumstance.
Guys, I thought this was such an important debate, it deserved its own post, so I've created it here, starting with my own thoughts on the subject.
PS: Krzysztof. The code has matured tremendously over the past year. Please check out the 2.5 beta, which will be out in a week or so. I think you'll find it "worth re-using" ;-)
'10 times more developers '
In complex system development, quantity of human interactions is the last thing you need. The community has many advantages like instant data gathering. But the number of loosely coupled/remote ppl participating in the project part-time is the last thing I would cite as an advantage. A community is the best in defining what has to be done, but then, there is the dirty job of keeping the gained grounds in technology domain (regression, testing, storage, change tracking). This is another very weak spot of ad-hoc community, no matter how devoted they are, nobody works full-time.
About Ardupilot code, I looked at it twice the last year, maybe 2h in total.
It is very good, but not excellent enough to be worth re-using and adapting for a typical small company.
For me what is excellent here is the occasional inspiration, but this comes in verbal or T3 contest form, not in the code.
Ithink we should all just accept that we are here for different reasons. Some, like me are here to have some fun and learn some new skills. Others however, are here for more commercial orientated reasons. One thing that does annoy me is people that are here for commercial reasons and have a wealth of knowledge, but never contribute any of that knowledge. I wish I had more knowledge to share, but alas my background is international relations / policy / politics. As i said before, this is a hobby for me. Something I can do to take my mind of everything else around me and relax, when things actually work that is!!! :)
There are no exceptions for the poor attitude of UNAV towards Chris. Critiquing a product is not a personal attack and to take it as such just highlights that the staff at UNAV are insecure about their product.
Morli, I would like to explain, but I am not sure I understand all of the phrases. Not that I wouldn't like to, but the altimeter I am working on needs some workarounds and no community on earth is going to solve this. In most cases your arguing is well thought and has many valid points...
Why are we having to justify the existence of our hobby or even DIYDrones?
This is another example of the corporate world attacking the worth of open-source, which is based on the resistance to such things as "bloatware".
To quote Opensource.org: "The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in."
Corporate America does not have a copywrite on quality and innovation.
'I think Krzysztof has a lot to gain by having UAVs go mainstream through Ardupilot.'
That's right and this is why I like contests even if I am far from winning them.
I'm glad Krzysztof is here and he has a point about professionalism vs. hobbies. I do design work as a profession. Anyone can do design and everyone should do it to some degree. But with professionalism, comes a reliable expectation. And that's value people will pay for. I think Krzysztof has a lot to gain by having UAVs go mainstream through Ardupilot.
@Krzysz, I often wonder about your committment to the DIY community.
We see that you are working on a commercial product, and with your background, I am sure you will do well.
But what I don't know is what this site can do for you?
You obviously have the engineering and hardware side of the business taken care of and are ahead of many of us technologically, but other than gaining access to prospective customers of your company, why are you here?
From your threads, I cannot see that you are backing the amateur side of the hobby or it's members.
If Chris starts out to experiment with the developing technologies and sets a goal of sub $100 AP for education and the hobbiest alike, who can critizise him for going ahead and doing just that?
I cannot see that Chris had any intention of developing an aerospace industry to compete with Boeing, UNAV, or your AerialRobotics.
This site is fantastic for those amateur hobbiests and R/C flyers how want to learn and try to build something our selves, and have fun sharing in a community. Yes, we do get alot of kids looking for off the shelf "Toys", but they soon see thats not what DIYDrones is about.
(maybe we'll send them your way?)
Comments
In complex system development more human interactions is actually a good thing and I can say for a fact that it is actually encouraged in most environments. I work in an environment at the moment that does this and does it well. By using / having access to more people you inevitably pick up issues / problems much quicker. In-fact, the collaboration often takes place with people that have no background in the system being developed. This has the advantage of gaining a different perspective or range of perspectives.
What you talk about is one such model or method of complex system design. Just remember there are many of them, each with their advantages and disadvantages. Unfortunately it is counterintuitive to take a single approach for every circumstance.
PS: Krzysztof. The code has matured tremendously over the past year. Please check out the 2.5 beta, which will be out in a week or so. I think you'll find it "worth re-using" ;-)
In complex system development, quantity of human interactions is the last thing you need. The community has many advantages like instant data gathering. But the number of loosely coupled/remote ppl participating in the project part-time is the last thing I would cite as an advantage. A community is the best in defining what has to be done, but then, there is the dirty job of keeping the gained grounds in technology domain (regression, testing, storage, change tracking). This is another very weak spot of ad-hoc community, no matter how devoted they are, nobody works full-time.
About Ardupilot code, I looked at it twice the last year, maybe 2h in total.
It is very good, but not excellent enough to be worth re-using and adapting for a typical small company.
For me what is excellent here is the occasional inspiration, but this comes in verbal or T3 contest form, not in the code.
There are no exceptions for the poor attitude of UNAV towards Chris. Critiquing a product is not a personal attack and to take it as such just highlights that the staff at UNAV are insecure about their product.
Keep up the great work Chris!
This is another example of the corporate world attacking the worth of open-source, which is based on the resistance to such things as "bloatware".
To quote Opensource.org: "The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in."
Corporate America does not have a copywrite on quality and innovation.
That's right and this is why I like contests even if I am far from winning them.
We see that you are working on a commercial product, and with your background, I am sure you will do well.
But what I don't know is what this site can do for you?
You obviously have the engineering and hardware side of the business taken care of and are ahead of many of us technologically, but other than gaining access to prospective customers of your company, why are you here?
From your threads, I cannot see that you are backing the amateur side of the hobby or it's members.
If Chris starts out to experiment with the developing technologies and sets a goal of sub $100 AP for education and the hobbiest alike, who can critizise him for going ahead and doing just that?
I cannot see that Chris had any intention of developing an aerospace industry to compete with Boeing, UNAV, or your AerialRobotics.
This site is fantastic for those amateur hobbiests and R/C flyers how want to learn and try to build something our selves, and have fun sharing in a community. Yes, we do get alot of kids looking for off the shelf "Toys", but they soon see thats not what DIYDrones is about.
(maybe we'll send them your way?)
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next