Tom_E
(Tom E)
April 8, 2020, 2:54am
2253
Ok, that's pretty bad. Mostly the small guys I've worked for were basically honest, innovative, trying their best to bring something new to the market. But I've heard other stories around, too.
Knew a fairly big local distributor of computers/parts/etc. that used to go "shopping" thru his warehouse for stuff he'd sell on the side, then write it off as employee theft, and meanwhile having cameras and security everywhere to be sure nothing disappears.
Lightbringer - didn't realize you were in the biz. Been doing this stuff wayyy too long, since 78, and bought the original IBM PC for like $3500 just to play with. Ended up being a good investment though.
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 8, 2020, 6:50am
2254
Sirstinky:
Usually it’s easy to trace where VCC and Ground get connected to the MCU, and that, along with the package and pins, can narrow down the choices of MCU’s. PIC’s are usually one config for VCC/Grnd, different from Atmel’s.
It’s kind of despicable what’s going on here - open source firmware running on proprietary hardware, where secrecy seems to be the goal. Do they really think they have something so special and unique, they want to copy protect the design but use someones else’s firmware they don’t have to pay for? Of course we know there’s lots of stolen ideas/designs there - it’s the wild wild west, but a simple flashlight driver? I dunno…
As I understand it, the Chinese electronics market is incredibly competitive, with so many firms making parts for each other and then selling them at a premium to one or discounting the others. Some manufacturers sell to only certain companies with the promise their identity is kept secret, otherwise other competitors might get wise and copy the design or undercut them on pricing. If you’ve ever opened up products from different manufacturers, you get an idea of this. An LG vs Memorex versus a Coby portable DVD player,for example. The LG will have better quality control, probably some better design (more SMD vs through hole) with better parts. The other brands might have cheaper plastics, more theough hole with bodging and solder flux, etc. However, the same company might supply ICs or parts to all the big OEMs. In China everything is counterfeited or copied (even flashlights folks).
Thanks for your explanation, there is indeed such an objective fact in China.
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 8, 2020, 6:53am
2255
ToyKeeper:
To clear up any confusion…
I have not given Convoy any special licenses. If this product ships without providing full source code, it will probably be a license violation, and Convoy would lose the right to sell anything based on my code.
Full details are in the license (translated: zh-cn , zh-tw ).
It is not difficult to satisfy, and usually costs nothing. It is a “share and share alike” style license, meaning that anyone who distributes a compiled version (including derivatives) must also provide the complete source code for that same version, under the same license, retaining all the original copyright marks.
Usually people satisfy the license by doing the following:
Publish a message somewhere prominent stating that the product uses copyrighted code released under the GNU Public License v3 (GPLv3).
Include information about how to get the exact source code used in the product. If it is an unmodified version, a link to the upstream code works. Or if it’s modified, they must find a way to publish the version they used.
That info generally goes on the product page and/or in the included paper manual. Ideally both:
The license applies to anyone who distributes the code in a compiled form, which includes companies who sell products based on the code. In other words, it applies to every vendor and reseller. So it’s a good idea to put the information in a printed manual which ships with the product, because that means the vendor doesn’t have to know or care about the license.
Even if the license info is in the manual, it is also a good idea to include the license info on the original manufacturer’s product page too. This allows people to verify the license is being fulfilled, which means I don’t have to bother the manufacturers with messages like this one.
The concept of “trade secret” is completely incompatible with the concept of free software. The whole point is that nothing is secret — anyone can use it however they want, as long as they make sure the same freedom is passed on to others.
I will continue to communicate with the driver manufacturer
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 8, 2020, 7:14am
2256
ToyKeeper:
To clear up any confusion…
I have not given Convoy any special licenses. If this product ships without providing full source code, it will probably be a license violation, and Convoy would lose the right to sell anything based on my code.
Full details are in the license (translated: zh-cn , zh-tw ).
It is not difficult to satisfy, and usually costs nothing. It is a “share and share alike” style license, meaning that anyone who distributes a compiled version (including derivatives) must also provide the complete source code for that same version, under the same license, retaining all the original copyright marks.
Usually people satisfy the license by doing the following:
Publish a message somewhere prominent stating that the product uses copyrighted code released under the GNU Public License v3 (GPLv3).
Include information about how to get the exact source code used in the product. If it is an unmodified version, a link to the upstream code works. Or if it’s modified, they must find a way to publish the version they used.
That info generally goes on the product page and/or in the included paper manual. Ideally both:
The license applies to anyone who distributes the code in a compiled form, which includes companies who sell products based on the code. In other words, it applies to every vendor and reseller. So it’s a good idea to put the information in a printed manual which ships with the product, because that means the vendor doesn’t have to know or care about the license.
Even if the license info is in the manual, it is also a good idea to include the license info on the original manufacturer’s product page too. This allows people to verify the license is being fulfilled, which means I don’t have to bother the manufacturers with messages like this one.
The concept of “trade secret” is completely incompatible with the concept of free software. The whole point is that nothing is secret — anyone can use it however they want, as long as they make sure the same freedom is passed on to others.
I got a reply.
Although the same function has been achieved, driver manufacturer does not use the existing open source code because of the different circuit principle. This circuit currently uses code written by the driver manufacturer itself.
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 8, 2020, 7:53am
2257
The component in this picture is MOS FET AON7524, I will announce the MCU model later.
DMS
(DMS)
April 9, 2020, 5:00am
2258
d_t_a
(d_t_a)
April 9, 2020, 6:16am
2259
I earlier asked if it’s the same “Biscotti” driver (as used in the Convoy C8+ with Biscotti firmware).
Based on this explanation, the SST40 “Biscotti” is not the same “Biscotti” but “something similar function”.
I’m curious then, would it also have the same 12- mode groups, enable/disable mode memory? Or maybe just “something similar” in concept?
Would be good if someone has already gotten the “SST40-Biscotti” driver and put it to the test.
(As of the moment, our country is in lockdown, so most overseas sellers have stopped shipping to our country for a full month now and may still not be able to do so in another 2 weeks…) [eg. Banggood says “No shipping method available” for ALL products now, whereas before, only “pure battery products” have “No shipping method available”]
oweban
(oweban)
April 9, 2020, 6:35am
2261
So it’s a Biscotti clone, but not Biscotti. And given that information is being withheld, I can’t modify it and flash my own version like I’ve been able to with Biscotti (custom modes etc).
Thanks, no thanks.
(I’d strongly suggest using another name - even “Biscuit (Biscotti-clone)” or similar. Because it’s not the same firmware.)
Agro
(Agro)
April 9, 2020, 6:58am
2262
oweban:
So it’s a Biscotti clone, but not Biscotti. And given that information is being withheld, I can’t modify it and flash my own version like I’ve been able to with Biscotti (custom modes etc).
Thanks, no thanks.
(I’d strongly suggest using another name - even “Biscuit (Biscotti-clone)” or similar. Because it’s not the same firmware.)
I agree. Knowing whether we can use our own customized variants is a big deal and re-using the name may mislead people to think that it’s possible.
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 10, 2020, 6:25am
2263
d_t_a:
I earlier asked if it’s the same “Biscotti” driver (as used in the Convoy C8+ with Biscotti firmware).
Based on this explanation, the SST40 “Biscotti” is not the same “Biscotti” but “something similar function”.
I’m curious then, would it also have the same 12- mode groups, enable/disable mode memory? Or maybe just “something similar” in concept?
Would be good if someone has already gotten the “SST40-Biscotti” driver and put it to the test.
(As of the moment, our country is in lockdown, so most overseas sellers have stopped shipping to our country for a full month now and may still not be able to do so in another 2 weeks…) [eg. Banggood says “No shipping method available” for ALL products now, whereas before, only “pure battery products” have “No shipping method available”]
i have no difficulty with delivery to Philippines.
Even mailing a mask is no problem.
the function is the same instead of “similar”
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 10, 2020, 6:29am
2264
oweban:
So it’s a Biscotti clone, but not Biscotti. And given that information is being withheld, I can’t modify it and flash my own version like I’ve been able to with Biscotti (custom modes etc).
Thanks, no thanks.
(I’d strongly suggest using another name - even “Biscuit (Biscotti-clone)” or similar. Because it’s not the same firmware.)
This was my mistake. At first, I thought that the driver manufacturer used the biscotti code. Later, I realized that it was the code he wrote himself.
I havent given a name to this, so simply call it 12 groups sst40 driver
1 Thank
oweban
(oweban)
April 10, 2020, 6:28am
2265
No probs Simon - we can all get blindsided.
Barkuti
(Barkuti)
April 10, 2020, 6:57am
2266
Smells like surströmming , sorry to say.
So who is going to dump the MCU's code?
Rayoui
(Rayoui)
April 10, 2020, 9:46am
2267
I did notice a difference with mine but wasn’t sure if it was just a quirk with my build (used it in a photo red triple). When set to the five mode group, there seems to be a large jump between modes 2 & 3. My other Biscotti drivers have very linear mode spacing. Not really a complaint, just an observation.
JaredM
(JaredM)
April 10, 2020, 6:06pm
2268
I have a quirk in a 20mm “SST40” driver that I recently bought from your AE store. Between modes 1 and 2 there is a bright “pre-flash”. Is this normal? Anybody else experiencing this? It’s installed in an S21a running a triple XPL_HD from an LG M50.
Simon, what’s the order code (or at least CRI bin, the 16th digit which can be B, H, or U) for the XHP35 HI 4000K B4-40E?
Barkuti
(Barkuti)
April 11, 2020, 3:51am
2270
zak.wilson:
Simon, what’s the order code (or at least CRI bin, the 16th digit which can be B, H, or U) for the XHP35 HI 4000K B4-40E?
I asked this to Simon nearly two weeks ago via message in AliExpress. I told him that, according to datasheet, a B4-40E should be U CRI code or CRI90+, whereas the D2-1A (6500K) should be H CRI code or CRI80+. Simon replied “uh, sorry, the LED I sell is not high CRI LED”. Confusing, I know.
Simon_Mao
(Simon Mao)
April 11, 2020, 4:21am
2271
Rayoui:
I did notice a difference with mine but wasn’t sure if it was just a quirk with my build (used it in a photo red triple). When set to the five mode group, there seems to be a large jump between modes 2 & 3. My other Biscotti drivers have very linear mode spacing. Not really a complaint, just an observation.
This may be caused by a high internal resistance somewhere, or it may be a driver problem.
oweban:
So it’s a Biscotti clone, but not Biscotti. And given that information is being withheld, I can’t modify it and flash my own version like I’ve been able to with Biscotti (custom modes etc).
Thanks, no thanks.
(I’d strongly suggest using another name - even “Biscuit (Biscotti-clone)” or similar. Because it’s not the same firmware.)
This was my mistake. At first, I thought that the driver manufacturer used the biscotti code. Later, I realized that it was the code he wrote himself.
I havent given a name to this, so simply call it 12 groups sst40 driver
So, to amend the mistake, the post title should be changed… or not?