My latest blog looks at the importance of choosing the right drone software platform to support your business.
Just like Google vs. Apple
When the Apple iPad first appeared on the market in 2010, I didn’t jump in to buy one. I didn’t own an iPhone, I had a company-issued Blackberry, so I wasn’t motivated. Besides, I figured there would be a better model a year or so later. So I waited. By the time Apple released the iPad 2 in 2011 all my friends had one. It looked and felt great in the hand. I thought the user interface (UI) was pretty slick. But I also heard about this thing called Android in development by Google and the Open Handset Alliance (OHA) with a similar and perhaps better UI. I was conflicted about which to buy first. I eventually got an Android tablet on the promise of what could be an open source model. However, after one disappointing experience after another, I got rid of it and switched a year later to an iPad first generation. I stayed on that path and haven’t looked back since.
As Diffen says:
Google’s Android and Apple’s iOS are operating systems that provide a good example of open source vs. proprietary. Both are used primarily in mobile technology, such as smartphones and tablets. Android, which is Linux-based and partly open source, is more PC-like than iOS, in that its interface and basic features are generally more customizable from top to bottom. However, iOS’ uniform design elements are sometimes seen as being more user-friendly.
But wait, I thought we were going to discuss drone software. We are.
For all drones, the interaction between the user and the aircraft, and the aircraft and its hardware is mediated by software. As I have written here, the quality of the pilot experience can be driven by the features and the quality of implementation, but the comparison with tablet and smartphones is a good one. Just as with your smartphone and tablet systems, choosing the wrong software platform for your drone can produce some very high switching costs should you decide later you need to change. In this post, I’m going to look beyond manufacturers’ claims and help you understand the differences with the following explanations of what is it, who makes it, who uses it, and what you need to know.
Read more here: http://droneanalyst.com/2014/05/23/which-is-better-open-source-or-proprietary-drone-software/
Comments
A risk for open source - Google's Android operating system can be used—and changed—by anyone. Now the search giant might be losing control of its creation:
http://time.com/money/3093863/google-android-biggst-threat-aosp/
@David, that's an interesting comment. Not that i think differently but i'm interested in your reasoning. Mind elaborating it a bit based in your experience?
Best is relative and even variable.
For me anyway (A DYIer since about 7 yrs old) it would take a life or death emergency to buy closed source prioprietary.
I DO buy Windows, but at least I have Visual Studio and a few other IDEs to get inside.
And if you are just in for the hobby, a proprietary UAV gets real boring real quick.
At the end of the day unless you have operated the autopilots in real conditions day in day out you can't tell which is best.
@hotelzulalima: I don't think Mikrocopter is open source. They post the code, but do not allow reuse. Here's their license. Am I missing something?
Closed means no opportunity to learn anything except how much does it cost.
@Seb,
"If I wanted to strap a geiger counter to my quad to collect data, how would I do that?"
This is exactly my argument in favour of open source.
I can buy a gorgeous quad with all the bells and whistles and pay $20,000. Fine it does everything except lift a geiger counter. Now what? I NEED a geiger counter.
At least with open source, I can make the modifications I need to run my geiger counter, and even find help on line to do it.
The RD department of my $20,000 "Ace Fly-by-wire" is going to get back to me soon.
I can't even buy a cheap RTF from Giants Incorporated to do R&D. The minute I need to do anything other than bolt something on to it, it's useless.
@Colin good article, congratulations.
@Chris I quite like the way you are talking about “Building the Android of UAVs.”. Nice talk, quite inspiring for me. Hope that at BeaglePilot we can construct the lower level layers of this ecosystem being cooked.
From Erle Robotics we are pushing BeaglePilot and hopefully soon we'll take part at the DroneCode Foundation.
@swift.. try learning how to spell, my little troll.. until then dont be rude...
hzl
couple of points Colin.. an Open SDK or an Open API do NOT mean the Flight controller code is open source(like the parrot AR drone(Closed source FC) for one example).
As to Open Source Flight controllers.. there are plenty out there that are NOT apm/pixhawk..
Paparazzi the distant hardware grandparent of APM(APM inherited the IR stabilization sensors of Paparazzi originally and thankfully abandoned same :)
OpenPilot REVO etc
and you mentioned MikroCopter in your article which predates APM by a bit but its NOT a closed source FC .. its Opensource also http://svn.mikrokopter.de/listing.php?repname=FlightCtrl.
There is even some FC boards based on
the parallax 8 core propellor cpu :)
And as to your conclusion about closed source in the article..
hmm if you have a dangerous software fault in an UAS
AND say the manufacturer has just shined the community on(DO YOU FEEL ME DJI???)
you and the manufacturer could be held jointly and severally liable in a tort action were property damage to occur or harm come to another because you chose to continue flying where a defect in the product was known to you.
While certain manufacturers DONT choose to address matters like gps glitches causing flyaways with open source that type of defect CAN be addressed and resolved fairly quickly by a large community of developers.
All it has to do is cause enough pain and the itch gets scratched..
no one not even developers likes crashes(hmm I lied.. the Game of Drones folks LOVE crashes and causing them:)
UAS safety is too important to leave to the known defective black box model of FC firmware deployment,
ie there really is no such thing as "just works".. its always just a glitch away from a flyaway or crash, and it wont get better as DJI does NOT log the performance of their controllers for after crash analysis.. a factor where APM/Pixhawk stands way out from the closed source crowd in being able to fix bugs quickly(and yes lots of APM implementations crash.. if you log you will know why at least.)
Open Source really is the only model going forward given what a LOT of us have personally experienced in the grip of a black box deployment mode company such as DJI(closed source).
hotel zulu lima
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next