|
|
Post by schmurfy on May 27, 2016 1:34:41 GMT -7
I was quite surprised to receive an email from them concerning our issues this morning, althought I am sure this is just a marketing thing there was some interesting bits. Did anyone tried their latest firmware ? I don't plan to go back to their firmware after trying open-dobot but I am curious what they could have possibly improved. Their reasons for not open sourcing everything right away as promised are just stupid, it is like they already knew that the hardware would be easy to replicate and the software would be their only key difference with any competitor, saying they might open it in october is just silly... What do you guys think ? Did they felt threatened by your last comments on the kickstarter page Max ?  The timing seems quite weird to me with this kind of email arriving an hour after your last comment about reporting the project, I wonder if reporting it might have any effect after the money has been transfered to them. |
|
|
|
Post by Max on May 27, 2016 7:11:59 GMT -7
I haven't tried their updated firmware and not planning to as, according to their description, there are only bugfixes and it is still closed and doesn't support limit switches/photointerrupters at minimum. Moreover, I feel like staying on RAMPS now. There are only two thing left for RAMPS to finish: gripper and wring documentation. So I'm planning to release it today (Mountain Time).
Their reasoning for not opening the firmware doesn't make any sense:
1. Their firmware can be run on a cloned control box
2. A cloned control box can run open-dobot
3. open-dobot can run on RAMPS, so there is no point to even clone the control box
Their email and comment on KS is not hours after my last post on KS. I posted that on May 8 and it shouldn't affect the funds, but may affect their ability to create new projects on KS, which is the only point of reporting a project after it has been funded. To affect the funds at this point the only option is to sue them (there is someone in CA) for fraud of some sort.
Overall, it is no more than a marketing move, and quite dirty TBH.
Could you post their email here (without your email address) to see how it is addressed and how dirty the move is?
|
|
|
|
Post by rgrbic on May 27, 2016 8:15:22 GMT -7
I got the arm couple of days ago. It appears that it has some differences from the first version (9600 bps communication speed, black FPGA board, different accelerometers). I am not sure what version of firmware was in arduino. I tried their official dobot software and everything worked. However, due to lack of documentation and proper source code I moved quickly to open-dobot project.
|
|
|
|
Post by schmurfy on May 30, 2016 1:17:08 GMT -7
The email is mostly what they posted in the comments:
Hi Julien,
My name is Evan, marketing specialist(?) from Dobot Team. I’m writing this email on behalf of the Dobot team, as a sincere message in response to your concerns expressed on Kickstarter under Dobot’s project.
I’ve read all your comments, and let them circle in the Dobot development team, and they are valuable ones, thank you very much for these. Above all, our concerns to Dobot are well received, and now please allow me to address them here:
1. Open source
Open source means the same thing in China, don’t worry about that. Dobot has gained so much attention since day one it was published, and cheap copies appeared on the market even before we had a team. Thus we made a difficult decision to postpone open-sourcing Dobot.
Also, back to the time when the Kickstarter project was running, we found out that the controller only based on Arduino was not stable during long time running, and we upgraded the controller to a FPGA based solution which endures 1000+ hours running. Therefore, we have limited user access to directly control the FPGA board firmware due to the high risk of stability problems.
As an alternative, we have worked hard to improve communication protocols and making API for Dobot. Writing software to control Dobot to do wonderful things instead of modifying the firmware would be a better approach to make applications with Dobot. API (both binary and source code) and demos with c#, python, java and JavaScript are going to be released this Friday (can be downloaded here: dobot.cc/download). While we are still testing upgrades on the controller and protocol, users can expect the release of Arduino code of Dobot in October 2016(estimated).
Now we realize that open source is such a heavy promise to deliver, and apologies for not making you and many other users happy on this. We won’t stop here, and we’ll keep working hard to do things right.
2. Software & firmware completion
After the KS shipment, we have updated the software and firmware two and three times respectively. We had just released a DobotTools v1.3, which has a few things improved:
-> [from v1.2] Improved Teach & Playback function: the playback list can be imported (exported), added functions like: insert a row, run to this row, override and etc.
-> Connection detection: the connection status with Dobot is going to be checked and information will be given for helping you solve the problems that caused a lot ‘not moving’ situation.
-> Most importantly, automatic-update function: any new firmware and software update will be noted and can be automatically downloaded from the server.
-> A new version of firmware will come with the DobotTools v1.3 and supporting the new iOS app and removed a few limitations.
Furthermore, we have released a new iOS Dobot App on 12 May 2016 that has a “Teach & Playback” function, which makes Dobot much easier to control for small applications.
3. Tech Support
Now we have a dedicated team with eyes on the support email, to officially find product support, you can write to support@dobot.cc and expect a prompt reply. We have also set up a FAQ that will be updated frequently here. If you still have concern on this, please simply cc me at evan@dobot.cc when you email, and I will personally help you push on it.
Once again I thank you for your opinions, suggestions and even criticisms. We don’t take them easily, and we will always be motivated as long as there are users like you to speak, especially when we’re only 10 months old and new to the market, with our minds on continuously developing a better Dobot. Our heart remains unchanged, that we’re dedicated to bringing robotic arm technologies into daily life, and let both consumers and developers find their new worlds of endless possibilities.
If you find any unanswered concerns, please don’t hesitate to email me back, let’s keep in touch. Have a nice day!
Yours Sincerely,
Evan from Dobot Team
Evan Chow | Marketing Specialist
Shenzhen Yuejiang Technology Co.,Ltd
Skype: zhouwenbin.dalian
Tel: +86-0755-33077021
Mob: +86-18680513495
Add: 18F, Building C2, Nanshan iPark, NO. 1001, Xueyuan Road, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China. 518055
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dobotarm/
Web: www.dobot.cc
|
|
|
|
Post by Max on May 30, 2016 6:30:00 GMT -7
I got exactly the same email, only my name was in the header. Pretty dirty move to give one explanation on KS and another in private email. Especially the part "...and will personally help you push on it" - that's really great, because it sounds like they have thousands people employed  |
|
|
|
Post by schmurfy on May 31, 2016 2:36:43 GMT -7
hehe, one thing I was sure when I received this is that it was clearly not a personnal email which was confirmed rather quickly by looking at the comments, what I find sad is that it hurts all the other crowdfunded projects. I am less willing to give my money and especially if they are from china and I doubt I am the only one.
That's my second failure (both from china, I am done with them) but at least in that case thanks to your awesome work we can still use it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max on May 31, 2016 19:21:20 GMT -7
It is not crowdfunding that is the problem, but the owner of the crowdfunding resource that doesn't care about anything and takes no responsibility for anything that really hurts trust. Taking KS as an example - I had a chat with the Director of the Support team, Katherine, and she told me that additionally to all the agreements and policies that you agree with when backing a project they also have some internal policies (e.g. Integrity Team policy) that you don't know about but still agree to. Their policies and agreements are such that lift any responsibility off them, so they have no liability but only profits, which are quite big www.kickstarter.com/help/feesI will not back any project until they change their policies and agreements to take responsibility to make every effort to protect backers from frauds and make creators liable. Of course, statistics show that projects from China are likely to be fakes or lies, but, IIRC, at the time the Dobot campaign was running that Maryanna Bock, which is showing as the Dobot Creator, was showing as registered in California, USA. I don't know when that has changed to Shenzhen, China. Plus, the largest failed campaign so far was created by a guy from Wales medium.com/kickstarter/how-zano-raised-millions-on-kickstarter-and-left-backers-with-nearly-nothing-85c0abe4a6cb#.z8l36e8ne |
|
|
|
Post by schmurfy on Jun 8, 2016 3:27:20 GMT -7
I didn't say or think crowdfunding is the issue and I totally agree with you that more control should be in place, the article you link is a really interesting read I wasn't aware of this campaign. There was also huge failures in the games section, the most notable one is with Double fine, they got much more than expected (I am think that's one of the most funded campaign) and as result added a lot of things to the original idea, burned all the money and had to release half of the game to sell it in order to make the second part, the result was not so good and clearly not what was expected by the backers. What I find really annoying is there are great projects on kickstarter (I don't even consider indiegogo as they are way too permissive for my taste with the projects they host) but big failures like this will (and already do) cast a shadow on them  I am not sure what kickstarter can really do especially when the creators act in good faith but are just really bad at managing ressources, unless they check what is done with the money on a regular basis which I doubt will ever be done. |
|
