Author Topic: FTDIgate 2.0?  (Read 232535 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16317
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #625 on: February 07, 2016, 10:46:11 pm »
Again there is a difference between 'should do' and 'actually do'. In many cases the cost to involve lawyers is more than the product is worth. For example: the dealer I bought a total crap Siglent scope from didn't want to take it back after I had given him more than enough time to pressure Siglent into fixing it. However getting lawyers involved would be wasting of time & money than the oscilloscope was worth.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline ion

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 129
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #626 on: February 07, 2016, 11:07:33 pm »
I've seen no one here do that.  The blame is being placed on FTDI for their destructive choices in how they deal with clones.
Their first choice was impairing the fake chip, pretty aggressive but not destructive.

For most end users, having a device essentially bricked would probably be seen as destructive.

Their 2nd choice was obfuscating the fake chip, less aggressive but not destructive either.

Less agressive, sure, but if you don't know what the chip is used in who knows what the garbage data will do to the device?

And can the average user even see the non-genuine message?  If not, how is it any different to just not working from their perspective?
 

Offline Karel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1303
  • Country: 00
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #627 on: February 08, 2016, 02:42:19 am »
Again there is a difference between 'should do' and 'actually do'. In many cases the cost to involve lawyers is more than the product is worth.

That's not the fault of FTDI. Refrain from buying from shady sources.

The difference between theory and practice is less in theory than
the difference between theory and practice in practice.
Expensive tools cannot compensate for lack of experience.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16317
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #628 on: February 08, 2016, 02:56:49 am »
Again there is a difference between 'should do' and 'actually do'. In many cases the cost to involve lawyers is more than the product is worth.
That's not the fault of FTDI. Refrain from buying from shady sources.
The scope I bought came from an official Siglent dealer in the NL (the one with the eu domain). Unfortunately you don't know what a company's customer service is worth until you need it for the first time.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Karel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1303
  • Country: 00
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #629 on: February 08, 2016, 03:54:53 am »
Again there is a difference between 'should do' and 'actually do'. In many cases the cost to involve lawyers is more than the product is worth.
That's not the fault of FTDI. Refrain from buying from shady sources.
The scope I bought came from an official Siglent dealer in the NL (the one with the eu domain). Unfortunately you don't know what a company's customer service is worth until you need it for the first time.

I know that the world is far from ideal and sometimes it's difficult to get what you paid for.
But FTDI can not be held responsible for the actions of some shop that sells devices with counterfeit chips.
Aim your anger to the shop, not to FTDI.

The difference between theory and practice is less in theory than
the difference between theory and practice in practice.
Expensive tools cannot compensate for lack of experience.
 

Offline Simon

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12743
  • Country: gb
  • Did that just blow up? No? might work after all !!
    • Simon's Electronics
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #630 on: February 08, 2016, 03:58:56 am »
If the new FTDI driver simply refuses to talk to the fake chips then I see no problem. But personally I'd never trust them. Their attitude is childish at best. If you look for the driver on their website there is now a long paragraph in red text that goes all around the houses to tell you that they accept no liability for any damage caused by use of their drivers (on fake chips).

Anyways, I thought arduino boards used an AVR as the UART/USB bridge ?
https://www.simonselectronics.co.uk/shop
Varied stock of test instruments and components including EEVblog gear.
Also, if you want to get ripped off: https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/simons_electronics?_trksid=p2047675.l2559
 

Offline C

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1345
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #631 on: February 08, 2016, 04:36:08 am »

No harm?

Nice old serial printer that was converted to USB with FTDI chip.
That rugged work horse is now printing,

"NON GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!"

but only if that string causes the printer to print.
Remember some printers only print when the printer receives a CR, LF or FF.

If printer maker added FTDI's the blame hits the printer brand and is increased by fact that the printer was never a problem in the years before.

After a lot of wasted time the end user that is using the USB to RS-232 adapter might figure out that it is the adapter.

Look at that message

"NON GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!"

It should say

" WINDOWS DRIVER CREATED BY FTDI TALKING TO NON GENUINE FTDI DEVICE"

or

" FTDI WINDOWS DRIVER TALKING TO NON GENUINE FTDI DEVICE"

Is "FTDIgate 3.0" any hardware using a FTDI's windows driver.
Any VID/PID where the driver thinks it's not FTDI hardware.

What is the end user telling people?

The end user gets a better device if the device is not using a USB to serial converter chip.


Simon
I think you will find three different interfaces used.
The old arduino using serial port.
The step using a USB to serial bridge.
And the latest using a USB micro controller.
 

Offline amyk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6052
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #632 on: February 08, 2016, 04:42:43 am »
It's getting interesting. Which chips exactly don't have the FTDI name/logo and do use FTDI's USB VID & PID?
Please show me a link or a Farnell/Mouser/RS Components product number.
Go back a few pages and read my posts... there's the Supereal SR1107/RD232A (likely the bulk of the clones) and Integral IZ232R (bare die). I also referenced this post from the first FTDIgate.

I followed your links but I couldn't find any real information about those chips like where I can buy them, and where to find
the datasheet. Can you please provide links with some real useful info?

You can find the Integral IZ232R datasheet here http://www.bms.by/eng/spec/index.php?pass=inf1

Thanks. Unfortunately, I'm not able to find any info regarding the USB VID & PID.
Also, they don't provide any information about which driver to use.

Please let me know if you know where to find this info.

So, if this IZ232R isn't using the USB VID of FTDI, that's completely fine to me.
And if that's the case,  it will not be harmed by FTDI's driver.
|O Apparently reading comprehension isn't your strong point? Follow the links I gave in my posts and read some more... these are directly compatible with FT232 and use the same driver, so must use same VID:PID. Ditto for Supereal SR1107/RD232A, the one that's most likely being remarked by someone else with FTDI logo.
 

Offline mtdoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3574
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #633 on: February 08, 2016, 05:49:03 am »
Given the choice I would happily pay a bit more for devices with a known authentic chip as I'm sure most would.
But I don't have that option so my choice is to no longer buy any devices that have "FTDI" chips..

So, when you buy a car and it brakes down, you don't go back to the place where you bougth it but
buy another brand instead?

Sure, I'd bring it back and likely demand a refund - as with any product. But I would never trust or buy that brand again.  Same goes here.  I am not going to buy the "FTDI brand" because their reliability cannot be trusted.  That is, once again, one of the main points being made here - FTDI's actions are just harming themselves.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 05:52:13 am by mtdoc »
 

Offline Karel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1303
  • Country: 00
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #634 on: February 08, 2016, 06:12:44 am »
It's getting interesting. Which chips exactly don't have the FTDI name/logo and do use FTDI's USB VID & PID?
Please show me a link or a Farnell/Mouser/RS Components product number.
Go back a few pages and read my posts... there's the Supereal SR1107/RD232A (likely the bulk of the clones) and Integral IZ232R (bare die). I also referenced this post from the first FTDIgate.

I followed your links but I couldn't find any real information about those chips like where I can buy them, and where to find
the datasheet. Can you please provide links with some real useful info?

You can find the Integral IZ232R datasheet here http://www.bms.by/eng/spec/index.php?pass=inf1

Thanks. Unfortunately, I'm not able to find any info regarding the USB VID & PID.
Also, they don't provide any information about which driver to use.

Please let me know if you know where to find this info.

So, if this IZ232R isn't using the USB VID of FTDI, that's completely fine to me.
And if that's the case,  it will not be harmed by FTDI's driver.
|O Apparently reading comprehension isn't your strong point? Follow the links I gave in my posts and read some more... these are directly compatible with FT232 and use the same driver, so must use same VID:PID. Ditto for Supereal SR1107/RD232A, the one that's most likely being remarked by someone else with FTDI logo.

I checked the datasheet and there's no mention about which VID & PID or which driver it uses.
The website says it's pin-compatible. It doesn't say it's compatibel with FTDI's driver.

Please tell me on which page of the datasheet is written that this chip is using FTDI's USB VID?

Could it be that they don't mention it because they don't have an agreement with FTDI about using FTDI's driver?

Could it be that they do use the FTDI driver without the permission of FTDI? That should be really stupid to make your
product dependent to a driver of your competitor. If this is really the case, those morons (the cloners) deserve to be punished.
It also means that those cloners don't care shit about their customers. I really don't get it why people want to buy cheap
clones that doesn't come with their own driver.

The difference between theory and practice is less in theory than
the difference between theory and practice in practice.
Expensive tools cannot compensate for lack of experience.
 

Offline Karel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1303
  • Country: 00
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #635 on: February 08, 2016, 06:17:35 am »
No harm?

Nice old serial printer that was converted to USB with FTDI chip.
That rugged work horse is now printing,

"NON GENUINE DEVICE FOUND!"

Just replace the fake conversion cable with this one and you are fine:

http://shop.clickandbuild.com/cnb/shop/ftdichip/cnb/shop/ftdichip/cnb/shop/ftdichip?productID=55&op=catalogue-product_info-null&prodCategoryID=84
The difference between theory and practice is less in theory than
the difference between theory and practice in practice.
Expensive tools cannot compensate for lack of experience.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16317
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #636 on: February 08, 2016, 08:45:01 am »
Again there is a difference between 'should do' and 'actually do'. In many cases the cost to involve lawyers is more than the product is worth.
That's not the fault of FTDI. Refrain from buying from shady sources.
The scope I bought came from an official Siglent dealer in the NL (the one with the eu domain). Unfortunately you don't know what a company's customer service is worth until you need it for the first time.

I know that the world is far from ideal and sometimes it's difficult to get what you paid for.
But FTDI can not be held responsible for the actions of some shop that sells devices with counterfeit chips.
That wasn't the point which started this sub-thread. The point is that you can't be sure a seller is shady until it is too late.
Reflected back to 'FTDI gate': don't buy any FTDI products from any seller because that is the only 100% sure way to not get burned.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #637 on: February 08, 2016, 09:31:38 am »
It's funny how much the Yay FTDI side keeps getting back on "counterfeiters are bad" every few comments, as if that addresses the other side's points at all...
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5549
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #638 on: February 08, 2016, 09:42:16 am »
What is funny is that you think FTDI is loosing customers, we have no evidence to this either way.

Other than the few here that keep on saying they won't, easy, then don't!

Adafruit has not dropped them, and that's heavily a hobbyist shop.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #639 on: February 08, 2016, 09:51:18 am »
I don't see anybody in the recent few comments saying they've lost a significant number of customers.
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5549
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #640 on: February 08, 2016, 09:57:32 am »
Only things like Dont buy FTDI, or FTDI is harming themselves. Well it's their company and I'm sure they'll prevail.

As mentioned before, that driver has been active for seven months, nothing new other than this thread and of course the media thirsty for stories, specially if they are scandalous, but that's not new either.
 

Offline c4757p

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7805
  • Country: us
  • adieu
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #641 on: February 08, 2016, 10:09:09 am »
"Don't buy FTDI" is a recommendation not to be their customer, not a statement that they've lost customers. "FTDI is harming themselves" is possibly a statement that they've damaged their reputation, not lost customers - something that could expand into lost customers in the future, perhaps - or not, it's possible to damage your reputation but still seem a better choice than the other guys. (You've lost safety margin, though.)

Personally, I'm done with them. I forgave them after "FTDIgate 1.0", as they seemed to have learned their lesson, but now have demonstrated that they don't learn. I'm not under any misconception that the loss of my business is going to hurt them in any way, though. I'm not trying to injure them.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 10:10:59 am by c4757p »
No longer active here - try the IRC channel if you just can't be without me :)
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5549
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #642 on: February 08, 2016, 10:17:58 am »
Their customers are probably happy, that they don't have to compete with cheap clones.
 

Offline mtdoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3574
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #643 on: February 08, 2016, 10:23:06 am »
Personally, I'm done with them. I forgave them after "FTDIgate 1.0", as they seemed to have learned their lesson, but now have demonstrated that they don't learn. I'm not under any misconception that the loss of my business is going to hurt them in any way, though. I'm not trying to injure them.

That's how I feel as well. I'll admit that based on the number of "I'm done with FTDI" comments I've seen on this and other forums, I've presume they've lost or are going to be losing business.  I have no way of knowing how much and I don't know how big a percentage of their overall business that USB-serial converter chips are for them.  My admittedly complete outsider guess is that their behavior means that it's not a trivial part of their business and that they have been losing customers - A loss they are attributing to the clones.  As others have pointed out and I agree, I think it's more likely mostly due to their lack of innovation in this area and the availability of less expensive chips of equal or better functionality from other manufacturers.  I just think they're making it worse with their actions.  This is all IMHO of course..
 

Offline westfw

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2839
  • Country: us
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #644 on: February 08, 2016, 03:35:35 pm »
You know, I'm pretty much done with Nth party products claiming to contain FT232s (Arduino Nano, USB/Serial adaptors and cables) because of FTDIgate, and I'm pretty much done with "probably genuine" FTDI cables/etc from trusted distributors because of price, but I think I'd still be willing to put FTDI chips in my hypothetical product (yeah, the newer, cheaper ones.)
 

Online all_repair

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 530
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #645 on: February 08, 2016, 03:38:57 pm »
It is almost certain that the reasons of FDTI moves are either: FDTI is desperate now, or they are aiming at the makers community, or they are both.  I just noticed a link from the post here that FDTI are selling cable directly now, but I was paying for more.  My cable was better shielded and with better interlocking mechanism.  Now my cables physically need to be the same, but just cannot have a FDTI inside. Who care what is going to happen to FDTI sale, I just care my installation don't come and report sick in the future for unknown reason.   Can a body by adopting a spirit that is the reverse of the maker community sell to the community?  People in the maker community sometime are too generous beyond words can describe, I can't match them but I do respect them.   By being a bit more magnificent, go for a softer approach and a bit of FUD would have scored a much longer distance for FDTI.  FDTI apparently could not afford any additional physcial scheme for people to identity or verify their purchase. Don't bet too much on them if you are trapped with their chips now.
 

Online FrankBuss

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2121
  • Country: de
    • Frank Buss
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #646 on: February 08, 2016, 05:38:31 pm »
Personally, I'm done with them. I forgave them after "FTDIgate 1.0", as they seemed to have learned their lesson, but now have demonstrated that they don't learn. I'm not under any misconception that the loss of my business is going to hurt them in any way, though. I'm not trying to injure them.
I think the best way is to use a microcontroller, which shouldn't be too difficult on the PC/Mac side either with libusb (they have digitally signed drivers now as well). Any ideas for a good USB high speed microcontroller? Most are only full speed. The FT2232HL, with high speed USB and the useful 245 FIFO mode, costs only EUR 4.93 for 100 at Digikey. I think I'll try the PIC32MZ0512. Costs EUR 5.99 for 100, but has a lot of nice features, like 512 kB flash, 128 kB RAM, ethernet, 200 MHz MIPS core, 12 bit ADC with 18 (!) Msps etc.
So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
 

Offline blueskull

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 10925
  • Country: cn
  • Power Electronics Guy
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #647 on: February 08, 2016, 05:42:36 pm »
I can get all FT232's functions emulated with a SRM32F030, costs $1 at 1kpcs, plus 12 bit ADC and a shitload of timers.
 

Online FrankBuss

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2121
  • Country: de
    • Frank Buss
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #648 on: February 08, 2016, 06:03:09 pm »
I can get all FT232's functions emulated with a SRM32F030, costs $1 at 1kpcs, plus 12 bit ADC and a shitload of timers.
Is this high speed USB? Where can I get it? The only website I can find looks like a Chinese forum, which links to a Taobao article which looks broken (some anime in tears).
So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
 

Offline blueskull

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 10925
  • Country: cn
  • Power Electronics Guy
Re: FTDIgate 2.0?
« Reply #649 on: February 08, 2016, 06:12:00 pm »
Is this high speed USB? Where can I get it? The only website I can find looks like a Chinese forum, which links to a Taobao article which looks broken (some anime in tears).

Only FS or LS, no HS. I said FT232, not FT232H.
You can get STM320F030 or 070 everywhere. 030 has lower flash capacity.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf