Blogs

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

  • Cala June 16, 2016 at 5:41am

    mmm......I open the page for curious and same price and name than the original :O , only people can buy it who confuses with the true one :( I'm dissapointed with a shop like HKing doing this, in the past they change the name to OSource things, as a client I'm going to express them my concern and invite others to do the same, this, not only affect developers, affect consumers with good intention too.

  • Phillip Kocmoud June 16, 2016 at 4:30am

    Copy freely, but support the crap you produce. Selling cloned and shoddy boards branded AUAV serves to damage my brand, reputation and utterly confuse customers!

    Not sure if this translates for you because you seem to miss the point here!

  • Phillip Kocmoud June 16, 2016 at 4:00am

    OG, You have quite the opinion and much of which we disagree.

    We have made no effort to ever shop our products around. Maximum profit is not AUAVs motive. We proudly make our boards outside of China.

    Our initial production designs were published freely as required by the open source license we applied to the board. That said, every clone I have seen is our R12 design and not the R14 we currently offer.

    My main dispute with these cloners is they did not even attempt to personalize the silkscreen. Consequently, I have had to modify our support policy to require a valid AUAV order number.

  • T3
    Thorsten June 15, 2016 at 11:43pm

    Why not building a semi-open source board and share the design only with "certified" devs (Lorenz, Nick, Phillip K., Philip R., ...)? 

  • Marc Dornan June 15, 2016 at 9:53pm
    @Adam of course we would. This is an implementation of PX4 v4. Nothing to do with 3DR. Arsov are only talking about not putting factory ready designs up for anyone to knock off.
  • Developer
    Kabir June 15, 2016 at 8:44pm
    The Pixhawk hardware design was never 3DR's to open source.
  • Adam Kroll June 15, 2016 at 7:51pm

    Would we have the pixracer today if 3dr didn't open source the pixhawk hardware?  Perhaps it would have cost AUAV a lot more money to develop it without the pixhawk schematics and they wouldn't have bothered. 

    Open sourcing has its negatives, but it has a lot of positives too. 

    I'm sure AUAV recognise the negatives and are already working on the next version of the board that will render HK's version obsolete.

  • Marc Dornan June 15, 2016 at 5:29pm
    @Fnoop. +100. I would like also reputable vendors to collect this donation at the checkout as well. It is the best way. You would have to remove the donation from your purchase.
  • Fnoop June 15, 2016 at 3:00pm

    It's clear that opensourcing the pixhawk hardware was a disaster, commercially, for 3dr.  Hopefully it isn't for the pixracer.  As a consumer I'd much rather have the firmware opensource than the hardware, and a sustainable model for the vendors.  From what I read it looks like the people who buy the cheap clones contribute the least to the overall project anyhow.  I'd love to see a donate button for the ardupilot devs to help fund the firmware development.  

  • Rob_Lefebvre June 15, 2016 at 2:54pm

    +1

    We don't need anything more than the pinout, and to know which chips are on it.  The internal traces do not concern us.  The only people that really need to know that are whomever is helping you with the HAL layer.  Anybody else can get the info reading the source.

    I do know of one company that made their own Pixhawk integrated into a custom motherboard, but it's exceptionally rare.

This reply was deleted.