Just came across this Pixhawk clone, so thought I would share.
http://witespyquad.gostorego.com/flight-controllers/rtfhawk-2-4.html
Ready to Fly Quads is a reputable distributor, and I have made a few purchases from them already. They already have a clone of the APM2.x, that has been somewhat successful. Will this new clone be just as good. for under $100USD, might be work a try.
Comments
Sorry, Bill, if I it came across as a rant it certainly wasn't intended, I was trying to be constructive. I used to design embedded microprocessor systems so I understand the workings here and I understand that source and schematics are available. Anyway, have a great weekend and thanks for your work on this!
I agree with the donate thing. The only problem is the donate, at least morally, makes the software/firmware completely open, which it is for the 2.6 and is not for the Pixhawk.
The service charge fiddles with the open source idea but if it's to cover the cost of the server, then not so much. Maybe I'm wrong but the problem seems to be we have three groups of people. 1/ Users. 2/ Those who have selflessly donated their time. 3/ a company or entity trying to maintain a server. When the server costs become burdensome all suffer.
Opentx (used on the taranis) has versions for each radio which allow for hardware differences. I'm not sure if there is any protection if someone made a clone taranis and used the firmware.
In any event, right or wrong, protectionism hasn't worked well in other industries. This will be an interesting journey. :)
I always thought once someone commits code or designs to open source it becomes fair game.
@Terry,
That is the reason they have something called 'Donate', where users can donate what they would like to contribute. However, I do not think this 50$ solution may work on the main products, since it turns down the whole 'Open source' thing upside down.
However, one thing might be possible, such as done by plugins for Ubuntu. They charge a fee for users wanting to use additional features with Ubuntu. 3DR can think on those lines!!
It seems to me that the whole open/not open clone/not clone thing can be easily solved and make 3DR or whoever a decent amount of money while giving the platform traction. Blackberry may be a good example of how not to do this. Sadly, they fell out of the hardware race and, I'm not sure, but 3DR may be at risk too. Blackberry took too long to wake up but they are now trying to turn the company into a software and service provider.
To solve the clone problem, would it not make sense for whoever has control of the ongoing firmware and mission planner to simply charge an access fee or subscription fee. I'd gladly pay $50 or whatever to support the folks putting in so much effort and I'm sure a LOT of others would too. Problem solved!!!!
I'm really feeling like this is Déjà vu ?
http://witespyquad.gostorego.com/flight-controllers/kk2-0-multi-rot...
"Designed by the Grand father of the KK revolution, Rolf R Bakke, exclusively for , the KK2.0 is the evolution of the first generation KK flight control boards."
At least you managed to edit out "HobbyKing" after "exclusively for."
And then....
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2159471
"sorry for the confusion. I do not have a link for donation . I would love to pop one on the page so people can donation what they can,. I am only selling them for 20$ to get them out to the people. this should leave some room so people can donate. it is better if the people donate direct."
I'm interested to know if Rolf has agreed to you manufacturing and selling his designs? Simple Yes/No would suffice.
MP1:
There was a (short) time on Github, day or few days, when MP was released with
a new binary bootloader with no corresponding source code. When that happened, forking,
modifying it and building was not possible. My pointing this was not criticism
at M.O. but concern. It’s a moot point now and no big deal, these things happen, as that source code
was released.
And here comes yet another clone - the BLACKhawk:
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-black-hawk-helicopter-yeah-fro...
@John
Tridge thinks it’s a problem, just about any open source person would think it’s a problem, and I doubt M.O. doesn’t think it’s a problem, unless he has a real and personal beef with RTFHawk, in which case I would acknowledge his opinion yet respectfully disagree.
ME:
Thats not what he said. He said he didnt like the check and that others are free to fork and change the code as they wish.
You are mispresenting both Tridge and Michael, inventing actions they have not done and changing words.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 29 Next