Should The EEVblog Meter Be Open Source?

[Fungus]

Should really have used AVR these days. Oh, well.

You mean the same Atmel that was just bought by PIC and is having the guts cut out of the company? That Atmel? Yeah, that would have been a smart choice...

I wasn't aware they'd bought them when I wrote that (it's happening right now as we speak...)

Let's hope they don't do anything awful.

[Poe]

According to my dictionary a clone is "A person or thing regarded as an exact copy of another". Surely having ready access to the design files enables that process of cloning.

Not if you don't release the PCB or case CAD files.

The mind boggles.
OSHW doesn't facilitate cloning because if no design files are released, they're not readily accessible and therefore can't enable the cloning process? 

The more information released, the easier you make it for cloners.  Simple as that. 

I doubt this product has to worry about clones though.  Similar to a Kardashian handbag, success will be due to branding and not technical innovations funded by large profit margins, the life-blood of cloners. 

To facilitate the milking of the OSHW fan-boys, definitely at least say it's OSHW.  There's really no downside, regardless of how little, late or inaccurate the information you release eventually is.  Like you said, people mostly just want to think OSHW can be part of a viable business model.  Just sell that hope and you'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

[charlespax]

The more information released, the easier you make it for cloners.  Simple as that. 

I agree that not having readily available source files makes a device more difficult to clone, but how much more difficult? All someone has to do is create design files by looking at the hardware. How does that amount of difficulty compare to the overall difficulty of making a device? The cost of creating those files is very small compared to the cost of actually making a device. I would even say that cost is negligible. If a person believes cloning some hardware makes good business sense for them, spending a few hundred bucks reverse engineering a device isn't going to stop them.

Since I live in Shenzhen, I think it would be fun to grab a closed source multimeter from the electronics market and make an open source clone. It would be a fun series of videos. Would anyone be interested in seeing that?

[EEVblog]

Let's hope they don't do anything awful.

It's already started:
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1329412

[EEVblog]

Since I live in Shenzhen, I think it would be fun to grab a closed source multimeter from the electronics market and make an open source clone. It would be a fun series of videos. Would anyone be interested in seeing that?

Not of practical interest because the meters available at the Shenzhen markets are universally crap. Why clone crap?
But for kicks, sure.

[blacksheeplogic]

I don't open source any of my work.

I don't open source much of my work either.
I open source all of my play however. You think you're so clever someone gives a shit about your software and they'll steal it? Give me a break.

You have no idea what I do or the time spent. It's my choice to not to open source my work. Deal with the fact not everyone sees the world though your eyes. There is no right or wrong here except the judgment and insults because I don't share your views.

It's like leading out my equipment, it's cost the user nothing so they don't take care of it.

It's nothing like that. It couldn't be further from that. What are you thinking?

Sure it is, it is called perceived value.

If it's free the work that went into it is perceived as of no value.

Most of the time that perception is right. Occasionally someone might help with a bug report, feedback, a patch. These things do have value to you and don't impart any obligation. That's kind of amazing isn't it? That, right there, is a free lunch.

Kind of amazing too that those that contribute something also provide feedback. In fact their involvement makes it more likely, amazing as it may seem.

My time is worth something, if someone came to me and offered their time towards the project no problem I would give them the code.

My time's worth something too. I wouldn't waste it dicking around with a fence sitter.

You calling me a fence sitter, do you draw a salary/wage from your employer for your work? I'm not demanding, waiting, or expecting a community contribution to my work. I get to chose and I've chosen not to just give away the work without a contribution to the work. Again there is no right or wrong. As I have you get to chose what you want to do with your work & time.

Try showing a little respect for others rather than resorting to insults for those of us who don't share your views. Your no more right than I am.

[hlavac]

Good idea. Release firmware, schematic and maybe component layout diagram to enable hacking & repair. Keep the PCB and case CAD files to stop chinese pasting this into a factory without any work. Also maybe add some spare I/O pins & power breakout on the PCB internal header footprint, and space for a little expansion board would be cool

[Pack34]

If you have to sign an NDA for the code, then it would be much more of a hassle than it's worth.

As for open sourcing the code at all, it would only really be useful if some sort of I/O data connector was available so people could turn the handheld into a DAQ device. Slap on a Bluetooth module, or USB to ttl cable to do their own thing. Otherwise, tinkering with the code would be much less useful.

[lapm]

Personally i would love open source multimeter and would seriously consider buying on if its reasonably priced and acceptable quality.

If the communication link docent use any super secret special protocol, then it can be pretty much just ascii text over serial. Few simple commands depending on features and anyone can make program to turn it datalogger with computer/raspberry pi/etc...

[charlespax]

Personally i would love open source multimeter and would seriously consider buying on if its reasonably priced and acceptable quality.

What do you think your price point would be for a multimeter based on the STM32F103 ARM microcontroller with an appropriate analog front end? What features are most important to you?

[bitseeker]

Charles, if you're hinting at potentially making one, this'd be a great time to make a thread for it. I'm sure you'll get lots of folks chiming in.

[CM800]

To be honest I think there are enough DMMs in the world... how about an open source SMU?

[EEVblog]

Charles, if you're hinting at potentially making one, this'd be a great time to make a thread for it. I'm sure you'll get lots of folks chiming in.

There have been many OSHW multimeter threads on here over the years, and they all, without exception, turn into chaos.

[Fungus]

There have been many OSHW multimeter threads on here over the years, and they all, without exception, turn into chaos.

Yep. That's what happens when you ask a lot of people what features they want.

[ataradov]

There have been many OSHW multimeter threads on here over the years, and they all, without exception, turn into chaos.

The trick is to have someone actually driving the design. With "community" project chaos appears real fast, but if there is someone actually keeping track of the list of features and adds/removes those features based on the discussion, then project may have a chance to succeed.  It will not please everyone, of course.

Doing something after a few weeks of discussions will help as well. There are threads discussing a community meter/scope that have been going on for years. It is just a place for people to dream and vent, not an actual project creation place.

[Siwastaja]

"Community projects" are most often something that are not projects at all, not even close. It's just some chit-chatting. It's not a project when you start talking along the lines: "it would be nice to have blah blah ". Actually, it has nothing to do with projects whatsoever, yet most "OSHW" "projects" are just like that.

A real project has at least one person who is actually doing the actual thing. This is the minimum requirement. Asking around for features isn't even called planning, it's only "market research" or some kind of pre-project study. If the usual "I'm going to do it" escalated into chaotic chitchat, the OP didn't have any real commitment to actually do anything to begin with. Those who do, take the input and go on.

So, maybe project topics wouldn't get into chaos, we don't know because project topics are rare; the ones we call project topics are not about projects, but just normal everyday chaotic socializing.

[bitseeker]

There have been many OSHW multimeter threads on here over the years, and they all, without exception, turn into chaos.

That may be the case, but better to have that chaos in its own thread.

Since Charles already has some experience bringing a device to fruition, if he finds value in producing a DMM, he may pull it off despite the chaos.

[void_error]

There have been many OSHW multimeter threads on here over the years, and they all, without exception, turn into chaos.

Yep. That's what happens when you ask a lot of people what features they want.

In that case I want my multimeter to peel potatoes all by itself.

Joke aside, I'd buy it if it's going to be open source.

[charlespax]

I've made a new thread about a potential Pax Instruments MultiLogger. I don't want to call it a multimeter at this point since I'm still in the product discovery phase. Before I can discover what product to make I have to discover what problems to solve.

In the other thread I'd love to hear about what projects you're working where a normal multimeter doesn't quite do the job. The focus would be on what you're doing and what you would like to better rather than what specific features or specifications. See y'all there 

[blacksheeplogic]

"Community projects" are most often something that are not projects at all, not even close.

A real project has at least one person who is actually doing the actual thing. This is the minimum requirement.

So, maybe project topics wouldn't get into chaos, we don't know because project topics are rare; the ones we call project topics are not about projects, but just normal everyday chaotic socializing.

That's one aspect, but from personal experience group projects are hard to put together unless you know the people involved and their capabilities. Often a case of learn & move on, no real commitment and no real work ever done.

[Krakonos]

Yes, please! The huge selling point is that the device becomes hackable tool. I would buy one just for that. There is no way you can make a meter that does everything people could. But it's powerful tool to script. Even something simple, like reading voltage and current at the same time (like my Fluke 45 does, but without the terrible clicking :-)), reading different temperature sensors...

It will not happen overnight, but there is a good potential some people will write a good firmware, and a lot of others will use it. Who didn't hack their Rigol scope :-)

Just keep in mind that people will want to do weird stuff with the open meter, so keep enough headroom in the flash & ram territory.

Good luck!

[jancumps]

Reading voltage and current at the same time would require 'twisting the knob'. How would you do that in firmware?

[3db]

Reading voltage and current at the same time would require 'twisting the knob'. How would you do that in firmware?

Well you could detect the presence of a plug in the current socket.

[Half Man Half Saab]

Hi,

I listened to the latest Amp Hour episode and was quite confused with your arguments against going open source. You said there wasn't much folks could do to alter the device. I don't know what this new thing you are developing does however it people will always surprise you with what they want to do/change with things. I also don't get the points on why the firmware should be closed source. Surely being open means the community can improve and share their improvements?

There are different levels of open source too. You don't have to go Open Source certified and get all legal with it. Surely you could just release it as "hacker friendly"? Release the code under a MIT/BSD licence or something?

In short, seems an odd thing to decide to go closed source just because you can't see what anyone could do to 'improve' it.

[IanJ]

Hi all,

If the code goes open source then you'll likely get lots of questions from folks "I tried to modify this routine but it didn't work, can you help me"............so somebody has to pay for that support yes?

Maybe I'm old school, but as much as I like to be on the user end of open source, I just don't like the idea of being in the manufacturers position.......a lot of additional hoops and ducks to get in a row before you do it.

If there's not 'that' much gain for the manufacturer doing it then meh, give it a miss.........

Ian.