Just curious why the higher end brands (Ace Beam/Fenix/Nitecore/ETC) have not adopted ANDURIL?
Seems to be a budget interface for a budget light.
I think ANDURIL is free as (I think) its open source so price does not seem to be the issue…
Is it reliability or something else altogether?
Sorry, DELETED due to wrong assumptions and unfounded explanations.
I can think of some reasons:
1. These companies want to distinct themselves from other companies and one way is by the UI.
2. Some people (including me), finds Anduril too complicated it is great for lights enthusiasts but not for common users.
3. High end lights use constant current drivers instead of PWM
Please do. Is Andúril really tied to unregulated drivers? If so, why is this? Any pointers are welcome.
My answer would be: It’s too complex. And maybe doesn’t even work with preferred MCUs?
Sometimes I think Sofirns “ramping os” could be the better Andúril. No blinks when changing the channel, the one-click back from turbo is nice, the stop after Moon is very good. Sofirn took ideas from Andu and made it the way most “muggles” would like it. But then I miss candle mode 
. And the thermal regulation is good. But TrustFire seems to get there, too. The new Minix and the MC1 is very well made, when it comes to the algorithm.
Sorry, DELETED due to wrong assumptions and unfounded explanations.
Please refer to SammyHP and ToyKeeper comments for better information 
Anduril doesn’t care on what type of driver it is used.
It works fine on low-power lights.
See above, Anduril runs perfectly fine on a constant current driver without PWM.
No, it isn’t.
That can be disabled at compile time. Your idea for “don’t ramp up after direct to moon” sounds good and I will make it a compile time option as well. ToyKeeper has to accept it, of course.
Overall I think that most manufacturers have their own preferred UI or they think that Anduril is too complicated.
The primary reason isn’t about the technology… it’s about social factors. Most flashlight companies have not yet figured out how free software works, and have not contacted anyone here for help. For some, it may be that they just haven’t thought about it or aren’t aware of it. For others, they might not understand it or know how to do it.
And for some, it may be that they specifically don’t want to do open-source, because they want to have their own unique interfaces. In many industries, especially industries which are old-fashioned, “proprietary” is considered a good thing… and they tend to fear openness because it shares power and is what typically puts an end to proprietary business models.
The secondary reason is that, so far, Anduril only works on attiny-based MCUs. Support for other MCU brands hasn’t been added yet. The companies may be using other types of MCUs, and it can be expensive to develop new circuits.
A third reason is that Anduril is designed for a single e-switch (optionally with a tail clicky for momentary usage), and a lot of fancier lights use multiple switches. So the interface is fundamentally incompatible. It would have to be completely redesigned to work with a different arrangement of input devices… and then it would be a new interface.
Some companies may also simply be concerned about the legal implications of using GPL-licensed software. They would be required to share any changes and improvements they make, and that can be a scary idea.
Some might not want to have to deal with the expectations of the community. If they use firmware which gets updated on a regular basis, the community would probably ask them to make the lights easy to reflash, and to keep their version up to date, and stuff like that.
None of the reasons have anything to do with PWM, constant current, pocket rockets, etc. It works fine on moderately-driven lights, not just hot rods. It works on constant current drivers like buck, boost, and linear, and open-source lights of all these types are already available.
TL;DR: It’s mostly not because of what is inside the flashlights. It’s mostly because of what is inside people’s heads.
Thanks for correcting my assumptions SammysHP and for your comments as well Toykeeper. As the developer of the software I trust your explanation better than in mine!
Most of my assumptions were based on the fact that I normally just see Anduril on relatively “high drain” lights (except the forthcoming SP10 Pro). I guess i was not correct, then :zipper_mouth_face:
As for what’s in people’s heads, again, even liking Anduril and ackowledging it’s quality and options, I still think that not all the brands need to have it!
Thanks for correcting me, once again :+1:
Oh, um, some background might be helpful…
Anduril is an application, like MS Word.
Anduril runs on top of a layer called FSM, which is somewhat more like Windows in this analogy.
FSM supports a bunch of different types of hardware, and new types are being added all the time. It takes care of the hardware details so the application doesn’t have to care.
Anduril is not the only application which runs on FSM… it’s just the most popular. Other applications (basically, other interfaces) can be made too, and the process is pretty simple. For example, there are already some interfaces available which work like a Zebralight or an Olight. People don’t have to use Anduril in order to benefit from the portability of the hardware abstraction layer underneath… they can make their own interfaces, or make their own version of an existing interface.
The idea is to make it work more like other types of computing devices, where people can mix and match hardware and software freely. Like, if you get a Dell computer, you don’t have to run Dell software. Pick your favorite hardware, give it your favorite software, and you get the best of both worlds. But for flashlights, this effort is still in its early phases, with only a handful of hardware brands participating, and only one popular piece of software running on top.
Maybe it won’t get past this point though. Maybe what it does now is all it’ll ever be. But I’ve laid the foundations for something bigger, and only time will tell if people choose to build beyond that or if it’s already as far as it’s going to get.
For me, the hard part to understand is the relationship between hardware, software and firmware.
My take is that Anduril provides a very poor user experience for the average flashlight customer. Almost nobody has any need for any functionality Anduril provides beyond setting a brightness level, and even that’s too complicated compared to other UIs if we’re being honest.
Compare it to a kitchen knife: Do you think there is a market for a knife that lets you configure its blade shape, primary and secondary edge, etching pattern, HRC, and switch between European and Japanese style handles? Sure it’s a novelty, but almost everyone would prefer to buy two standard knives and be done with the topic.
I was laughed at numerous times when I explained what my lights can do. And rightly so. It’s a flashlight, and people don’t expect it to be so complicated like it’s got a freaking Linux running on it.
None of this is to say that Anduril isn’t great. I spent a lot of cash making sure almost all of my flashlights run it. But I’m a hobbyist, not an average user. Big companies don’t necessarily want to afford the luxury of catering to niche markets.
I am under the impression they’re too proud on their products and knowledge to ask, and rightly so. I discussed this with one rep, and after that it was clear he won’t take other opinions. But in that case, I cannot say he was wrong. His ideas were quite good and likely he knows the market better than me. See my comment about Sofirns or TrustFires Firmware. It is quite good imo, maybe better accepted by the broader audience.
Anduril 1 was very much created for a niche enthusiast community… mainly for me, because it did what I wanted, but I also added things other people requested.
Anduril 2 is modified to make it more friendly for a general audience. The fancy stuff is still available, but it’s all turned off by default and can’t really be turned on by accident.
The core interface is the same as I’ve seen in several other places, including a light switch at the nearby home improvement store — Tap for on/off, hold to change brightness. Everything beyond that is just optional extras.
Wellp, there are a few reasons, and I don’t want everyone to dogpile on me for saying so. 
First, people who buy high-end lights aren’t paying for candle- or party- or lightning mode. They want a high quality reliable light, that’s easy to use even if limited. Simple trumps complex. If you’re a cop buying a Suefire or a homeowner buying a Nitecore, you want a light that Just Works. You don’t want to grab a light and have to screw around trying to figure out what mode you’re in, or worse, be checking out a noise downstairs and end up in some unknown mode. If you get stuck in manual memory or thermal config or who knows what, because you didn’t tap out the proper Morse code to turn on the light, it’s useless.
People don’t want ¼ drills; they want ¼ holes. Hence, they want a light that’s predictable in a pinch or emergency situation.
One of my fave lights, the Acebeam EC50, has as simple and useful a UI as you’ll get. Click on/off. Press’n’hold for moonlight. 2click for turbo, press’n’hold from on to bump through the modes. Done. Not even a single stoopit blinky to be found. Memorise those 3 ops, and you mastered it.
My Anekin UC20 in PC-green is a 1-mode light, on/off only. My UC20 in white with 12 modegroups (like bis-whatever) I set similarly to 100-only. That’s all I really need. My old (still got, works beautifully) ’502 was/is a 1-mode light that did 95 of what I needed a light for, and I EDCed that for a long time.
Then again there are different switch configurations. My Nitecore MH20s/-GTs have a 2stage switch like a DSLR. Press’n’hold halfway for moonlight, all the way for turbo, otherwise click on/off. Half-press once on to switch modes. Here’s your diploma, you just graduated MH20 school.
Nitecore TM03? Dual tailswitch, both momentary-on from off, power for last-used mode, mode-select for turbo. Else click full for on/off, modesel to switch modes. Done.
Sofirn TF84, similar to the TM-series with dual-tailswitch.
GTmini, ’micro, Q8, all use narsim, nice ramping with shortcuts to moon/turbo, plus temp config and some other settings. Intuitive right out of the box, if you know basic shortcuts.
One huge complaint I have about andy is the convoluted UI, press vs press’n’hold, press from on vs press from off, etc., how they do sometimes drastically different things. You try to get into blinkies and end up locking yourself into manual memory and have no idea why it doesn’t remember that you kept it on moonlight for a few minutes, turned it off, and are now blinded at midnight because it “remembered” 90% brightness. There’s no distinction between normal/common operations and locking in settings.
Someone (Funtastic?) refuses to sell lights with andy because people who buy his lights just flat-out hate it.
And finally, people who buy high-end lights (think PD, FD, S&R, etc.) are NOT necessarily “enthusiasts”. They want high-reliability, ruggedness, etc., but do not want an overloaded UI with modes they’ll never use and which can very likely get in the way, possibly at the worst possible time.
Too many people conflate the two groups, thinking everyone who buys an Acebeam/Nitecore/Suefire/etc. must must must have andy as the underlying UI, and that’s more often than not, not the case. They want a tool, not a toy.
That said, I have an assload of lights which have andy as the UI, and I like them, but I keep coming back to lights which don’t. Nothing against andy, just that a simple UI is so much easier to use and more predictable.
@Lightbringer
Keep an eye on your autocorrection. It repeatedly replaced “Anduril” with “andy”.
It was always autocorrecting to “andouille”, so I turned off AC altogether.
That about sums it up. We’ll put.
I think if we are all on a spelling B show and we were asked to spell anduril, most would fail, including myself. Andy=much better.
You mean Andúril, right? 
It sounds like you might like Anduril 2. It was made for exactly this reason. I heard people complaining about the UI being too convoluted and error-prone, and they were right. Also, manufacturers wanted something more “normal” for regular people to use, so … I fixed it.
By default, it uses a mode called “Simple UI”. In that mode, it’s click on/off, press’n’hold for moonlight, 2click for the brightest mode, press’n’hold from on to change brightness. Remember those basics, and nothing else is needed. There’s no way to accidentally change a config setting, because all configuration is blocked in the simple mode.
The worst the user can do is lock it to prevent accidental activation, which is 4 clicks to enter or exit. Even in that mode though, it still functions as a light… just not as bright.
The extra stuff is still available, of course, but it’s virtually impossible to reach by accident. The user must manually go to the “Advanced UI” mode to get to any of it. Even then, though, the things people tended to trip over have been moved to make them much harder to hit by accident.
Hopefully it’ll become more widely used soon.
Older lights can be updated too, but for some, it requires soldering to access the control chip… so it’s not always an easy process.
If I get time, I hope to make a tutorial for Anduril 2, documenting all the features in stages or levels, from simplest to most complex… so people can start at the beginning, and stop whenever they feel they’ve reached the depth they’re comfortable with. So… level 1 would be click for on/off, hold to change brightness. Level 10 would be how to customize and reflash the code. They can stop at any point, because the only required parts are at level 1.