IsEcuflash a pirated software from Ecutek?
IsEcuflash a pirated software from Ecutek?
I was wondering what the difference between the two. Is there a support and upgrades for Ecuflash, like Ecutek? Does the Ecuflash has the same tunning capabilities as Ecutek? TIA
There is no relationship between the two applications.. I think someone had mentioned the GUI had a similar look, and some of the tables were named similarly, but there is no shared code between the two.
ECUFlash is an open-source effort, support is handled by the members who contribute to the project.
ECUTek is a commercial product, its two completely different animals.
When it comes to tuning capabilities, their both similar, as more effort is contributed to the disassembly of the available ECU's roms, there will be even more configurable items available. As far as I know, ECUFlash already can do more.
ECUTek has some tuner conveniences, but they only benefit the tuner, it has no bearing on the resulting tune, as that is still based on a stock EVO rom.
Additionally ECUTek is not available to the end user, and they make an effort to additionally lock an end-user out of their own car's ECU. Considering the roms are in no way proprietary, this is not an intellectual property issue. AFAIK it was done to prevent OEM Mitsubishi diagnostic tools from overwriting the tunes.
ECUFlash is an open-source effort, support is handled by the members who contribute to the project.
ECUTek is a commercial product, its two completely different animals.
When it comes to tuning capabilities, their both similar, as more effort is contributed to the disassembly of the available ECU's roms, there will be even more configurable items available. As far as I know, ECUFlash already can do more.
ECUTek has some tuner conveniences, but they only benefit the tuner, it has no bearing on the resulting tune, as that is still based on a stock EVO rom.
Additionally ECUTek is not available to the end user, and they make an effort to additionally lock an end-user out of their own car's ECU. Considering the roms are in no way proprietary, this is not an intellectual property issue. AFAIK it was done to prevent OEM Mitsubishi diagnostic tools from overwriting the tunes.
Last edited by MalibuJack; Jan 31, 2007 at 07:58 AM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
The products break down into four basic pieces:
Hardware to communicate with the ECU
Software to read and write ECU memory
Software to to edit tables in fetched ECU memory
Definition files to locate those tables in a memory fetch for a particular ECU
Regarding HW, the history of the OpenPort cable is pretty easy to trace. It is a very simple, logical offshoot of a bunch of other open project ISO 1941 type cables.
Regarding read/write code, again, just looking at posts and forum histories (not just with OpenECU, but OpenDiag and other areas, there appears to be plenty of evidence that this development effort is wholly seperate from that of commercial vendors. The fact that EcuFlash has sometimes been first on particular ECUs seems to bolster that conclussion as well.
Regarding software to edit ROM files. I have heard complaints that EcuFlash has a similiar look and feel. However, it is clearly written in a different language using different graphical libraries. So, if there is any imitation, it is wholly redeveloped. Personally, I don't find the look and feel argument that compelling. Almost all applications that edit tables for automotive tuning look quite a lot alike. EcuTek really doesn't appear to have been the first to offer, say, colorized tables, so it is hard to argue that they, as opposed to some other application, are really being mimiced.
Regarding defintion files, basically the hard work that goes into reverse engineering the contents of the ECU well, EcuTek may have a point. As far as I can tell, the definition files that are generally provided with EcuFlash come from folks who are clearly doing ECU reverse engineering. However, defintion files that the software will read and edit based on also sometimes appear from other sources. It seems clear to me that some of those sources have gotten information from commercial products, like EcuTek.
It is actually a bit ironic. The commercial vendors reverse engineer ECUs and sell the knowledge, but then other people reverse engineer the knowledge and give/sell it again. I won't even hazard a guess on the legality questions involved. However, I don't think it is fair to blame EcuFlash or Enginuity for the XML files some users feed into them.
As far as equivelent, upgrades, etc. you are comparing apples and oranges. If you want gurantees, support, upgrades, etc., that is part of what you are paying for with a commercial vendor. With OpenPort cables, EcuFlash, etc. you are utilizing an open community. Such communities can generate cool stuff, but it is all volunteer based. Even someone like me, who has a day job with a motorsports related company, has to do the free, open stuff on my own time.
-jjf
Hardware to communicate with the ECU
Software to read and write ECU memory
Software to to edit tables in fetched ECU memory
Definition files to locate those tables in a memory fetch for a particular ECU
Regarding HW, the history of the OpenPort cable is pretty easy to trace. It is a very simple, logical offshoot of a bunch of other open project ISO 1941 type cables.
Regarding read/write code, again, just looking at posts and forum histories (not just with OpenECU, but OpenDiag and other areas, there appears to be plenty of evidence that this development effort is wholly seperate from that of commercial vendors. The fact that EcuFlash has sometimes been first on particular ECUs seems to bolster that conclussion as well.
Regarding software to edit ROM files. I have heard complaints that EcuFlash has a similiar look and feel. However, it is clearly written in a different language using different graphical libraries. So, if there is any imitation, it is wholly redeveloped. Personally, I don't find the look and feel argument that compelling. Almost all applications that edit tables for automotive tuning look quite a lot alike. EcuTek really doesn't appear to have been the first to offer, say, colorized tables, so it is hard to argue that they, as opposed to some other application, are really being mimiced.
Regarding defintion files, basically the hard work that goes into reverse engineering the contents of the ECU well, EcuTek may have a point. As far as I can tell, the definition files that are generally provided with EcuFlash come from folks who are clearly doing ECU reverse engineering. However, defintion files that the software will read and edit based on also sometimes appear from other sources. It seems clear to me that some of those sources have gotten information from commercial products, like EcuTek.
It is actually a bit ironic. The commercial vendors reverse engineer ECUs and sell the knowledge, but then other people reverse engineer the knowledge and give/sell it again. I won't even hazard a guess on the legality questions involved. However, I don't think it is fair to blame EcuFlash or Enginuity for the XML files some users feed into them.
As far as equivelent, upgrades, etc. you are comparing apples and oranges. If you want gurantees, support, upgrades, etc., that is part of what you are paying for with a commercial vendor. With OpenPort cables, EcuFlash, etc. you are utilizing an open community. Such communities can generate cool stuff, but it is all volunteer based. Even someone like me, who has a day job with a motorsports related company, has to do the free, open stuff on my own time.
-jjf
