FTDI pisses off Arduino fanboys, then launches Arduino-compatible boards

[mikeselectricstuff]

Great timing guys! 
http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/business/ftdi-chip-launches-arduino-compatible-vm800p-daughter-cards-2014-10/

[SirNick]

What happened between FTDI and the Arduino crowd?  (Sorry, I'm not on the Facebook.) 

[LoyalServant]

Yeah I am really interested... another device for them to brick! 

[SirNick]

NM, just saw the rant video.  Bit of a **** move, but I'm not too fussed.  vi /usr/src/linux/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio_ids.h, change the ID to 0, recompile.  No problem.    I'm sure someone will write a utility to change the PID back soon enough.

[Paul Moir]

Of course, already done.  And a patch making it's way up to mainline to accept PID 0 as a 6001. 

Now why anyone would ever want to use an operating system where no 3rd party vets driver code is the million dollar question.   

[Chipguy]

Yeah sure, now everybody who got just bitten or worried by #FTDIgate is now in the mood to start playing around with EVE 

Good on ya, Fred 

[chickenHeadKnob]

 I read that press release mike linked to backwards and forwards and I still  didn't have a good idea what it was until I went to the FTDI page: http://www.ftdichip.com/EVE.htm.

 So the tldr version is that this thing is a "serial backpack" type of lcd controller which takes I2C or spi input from a micro and then controls a color graphic lcd / touchscreen. Ok, now that I know I can see it does have some value in that you don't need a frame buffer in the micro. but that press release -Sheesh!-

[westfw]

The relevant "Arduino compatible" board is here: http://www.ftdichip.com/Products/Modules/VM800P.html
It actually sounds sorta nice, and is a perfectly valid "arduino compatible" product unlikely to piss off anyone, IMO.

FWIW, Official Arduino boards haven't used FTDI chips in quite a while (since "uno"); there may be a story there, but it's an old one.  You can still get clones, counterfeits, and derivatives with FTDI chips (and presumably some of them are counterfeit FTDI chips as well, and these are the board that people are afraid will stop working.)  (although most of the really cheap clones I've seen recently are "legitimately re-engineered" products using non-FTDI USB/Serial chips (Prolific[sic], cp2102 [?], ch340g [where did that come from?]...)

[tggzzz]

It's actually quite a nice graphics controller, just a shame it only connects to LCDs. Of course, FTDI's reputation is in tatters now, especially with the Arduino crowd, and it's likely to be really expensive so I doubt they will sell many.

You can find whether you think they are "really expensive" by looking at the Mouser page http://uk.mouser.com/new/ftdi/ftdi-vm800p-eve-plus-module/ which contains a "buy" link to their price list.

[JoeO]

Around $100 American.

[BigClive]

Hmm, quite expensive.  I'll wait for the clone.   

[SirNick]

Tatters?  I dunno about that... I suspect this will blow over.

The cheap knockoff houses will just use a different chip (or a different driver).  The big companies with any real stake in the matter aren't using fake parts, so they (and their customers) will never feel it.  The only ones affected are the con-artists stealing someone else's USB vendor ID (who kinda deserved it) and their users.  The users are kind of innocent victims, but when you troll eBay for the cheapest gadget you can get from China, your expectations shouldn't be all that high.

[Richard Head]

I don't suppose there's any way to actually identify a counterfeit FT232RL, is there?
I'm designing them into two different products as we speak.

[wraper]

I don't suppose there's any way to actually identify a counterfeit FT232RL, is there?
I'm designing them into two different products as we speak.

1. Use the new driver and see if it kills them. 2. Measure current when active and suspend on a test jig (slightly modified UART usb adapter from ebay will do) and compare to the datasheet / known good IC from reputable supplier. IMO that will detect 99% of the knockofs.

The FT232R is capable of operating at a voltage supply between +3.3V and +5V with a nominal
operational mode current of 15mA and a nominal USB suspend mode current of 70µA.

[nctnico]

It's actually quite a nice graphics controller, just a shame it only connects to LCDs. Of course, FTDI's reputation is in tatters now, especially with the Arduino crowd, and it's likely to be really expensive so I doubt they will sell many.

You can find whether you think they are "really expensive" by looking at the Mouser page http://uk.mouser.com/new/ftdi/ftdi-vm800p-eve-plus-module/ which contains a "buy" link to their price list.

That is pretty expensive. You can get LPC1768 boards with TFT+touch for less than that (including shipping) from Ebay. Software to create your GUI (free for personal use AFAIK) is included.

[LukeW]

Now why anyone would ever want to use an operating system where no 3rd party vets driver code is the million dollar question.   

So you think that the FT232 "attack" never made it into Windows Update as a vetted, signed, "genuine" driver?

[VK3DRB]

I see FTDI's point of view. Any user who has used pirated FTDI chips have effectively been receiving stolen goods, albeit unknowingly. These chip pirates have been stealing IP because they simply don't have the brains to be innovative. As with most criminal activity, we all have to pay. And like with all criminals, it is innocent people who are adversely affected. Something needs to be done to force the Chinese government to destroy their lucrative piracy industry. Forget about making chips that Hoo Flung Dung Enterprises cannot copy... it won't work.

One solution is for the chip pirates to be taken out and executed with a bullet to the back of their skulls in front of their employees and family members and their factories bulldozed. That will solve the problem.

[LukeW]

But when you actually look at the silicon, it is not just a ripoff of the mask artwork for the FT232R... they have actually designed their own cleanroom copy from scratch, and the chips seem to work well. So if they simply marketed their own USB virtual UART chips under their own brand, completely compatible with the FT232R but half the price, everybody would be happy and customers would still buy them.

[wraper]

But when you actually look at the silicon, it is not just a ripoff of the mask artwork for the FT232R... they have actually designed their own cleanroom copy from scratch, and the chips seem to work well. So if they simply marketed their own USB virtual UART chips under their own brand, completely compatible with the FT232R but half the price, everybody would be happy and customers would still buy them.

They designed their own, but definitely not clean room.

[Rufus]

So if they simply marketed their own USB virtual UART chips under their own brand, completely compatible with the FT232R but half the price, everybody would be happy and customers would still buy them.

No because they would still be ripping off FTDI drivers. If they also produced their own drivers and joined USB-IF to get their own VID to make sure their drivers were used then everybody would be happy.

[westfw]

That CH340 chip that has been showing up (on arduinos and serial converters) is a good example of how other vendors ought to be doing it.  Apparently adequate chip with interesting aspects (SO16 package!), their own sets of drivers, and ... very cheap...

[rob77]

that FTDI display module is nice.. i like it  but the price is a bit high... i would happily pay approx 40-45Eur (including VAT) for the 4,3'' version but definitely not the price they're asking 

[SirNick]

No because they would still be ripping off FTDI drivers. If they also produced their own drivers and joined USB-IF to get their own VID to make sure their drivers were used then everybody would be happy.

 

That CH340 chip that has been showing up (on arduinos and serial converters) is a good example of how other vendors ought to be doing it.  Apparently adequate chip with interesting aspects (SO16 package!), their own sets of drivers, and ... very cheap...

Doesn't Windows have a generic CDC driver for emulated serial ports?  I know FTDI and Prolific use their own, but I thought I heard at one time that you could create a generic virtual COM port device with a USB-enabled microcontroller, and wouldn't need to supply drivers at all.  If that's the case, I don't understand why anyone would even bother trying to clone a chip that does require specific drivers.  It's just an added hassle.

I really need to learn more about USB.

[LukeW]

Doesn't Windows have a generic CDC driver for emulated serial ports?  I know FTDI and Prolific use their own, but I thought I heard at one time that you could create a generic virtual COM port device with a USB-enabled microcontroller, and wouldn't need to supply drivers at all.  If that's the case, I don't understand why anyone would even bother trying to clone a chip that does require specific drivers.  It's just an added hassle.

Yeah, that's the way a lot of Arduino-style stuff is doing it these days, the official Arduino boards are using ATmega16U2s, no FTDI or FTDI-like chips.

[LukeW]

So if they simply marketed their own USB virtual UART chips under their own brand, completely compatible with the FT232R but half the price, everybody would be happy and customers would still buy them.

No because they would still be ripping off FTDI drivers. If they also produced their own drivers and joined USB-IF to get their own VID to make sure their drivers were used then everybody would be happy.

True.