EvoScan v0.98 Now with Power & Torque Graphing - Map Tracing completed also!
Feb 22, 2007, 03:19 PM
#47
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So i'm assuming those are different new cables? So what gives? Are they better than the Tantrix cables we already have? Are they nessesary? What do they have to do with this new software upgrade?
Feb 22, 2007, 06:19 PM
#50
Evolving Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are there still any plans to make the source available? I feel very strongly about being able to contribute to the source, and especially considering a big part of the reason I purchased the software in the first place was the agreement stating that source was available.
Also - I'm interested to know how you are going to implement real time tuning? Are you ahead of the guys at AktiveMatrix regarding the design for implementing this? If you are, and you can deliver real time tuning on the date you have stated, then I'm pretty impressed.
Feb 22, 2007, 07:17 PM
#52
Nah, you don't need to pay additional for upgrades, the goal of the project is to get everyone out there datalogging as cheaply as possible 
but if you feel really guilty about using all these cool new features without paying, you are more than welcome to donate to paypal@limitless.co.nz (no more than a small amount though cause I don't want people to think they have to)
but if you feel really guilty about using all these cool new features without paying, you are more than welcome to donate to paypal@limitless.co.nz (no more than a small amount though cause I don't want people to think they have to)
That would suggest you make the application free software, and I'm not talking about price.
d
Feb 23, 2007, 01:30 AM
#57
I have seen minimal bugs in the software I write, to require spending any time on debugging. And if you were a programmer like MalibuJack you would already know that EvoScan is not obfuscated, and already contains .NET CLR source code.
Feb 23, 2007, 04:36 AM
#58
Now that I have a chance,
You are the author of the guages and widgets, right? If so what are the chances of being able to incorporate a Cental Aural Warning system within the gauge template? That is, while running EvoScan having the capability of turning my laptop volume control to max and using warning horns to signify knock conditions over a count of - say 5 or having an audible warning to indicate WB readings leaner than 12:1
You are the author of the guages and widgets, right? If so what are the chances of being able to incorporate a Cental Aural Warning system within the gauge template? That is, while running EvoScan having the capability of turning my laptop volume control to max and using warning horns to signify knock conditions over a count of - say 5 or having an audible warning to indicate WB readings leaner than 12:1
Feb 23, 2007, 06:35 AM
#59
To say that the code isn't obfuscated really isn't all that useful, I really have no interest in reverse engineering someone elses code even though I have been indirectly accused of it several times. Heck I wish I would have noticed that before I spent weeks working on mine before I got something that worked with a single requestID using information posted on OpenECU and Opendiag, and some third party assistance. Prior to the log analyzer I wrote, I had no experience with VB.NET and wrote almost everything in VB6.
I only purchased the program because of the promise of source code I had no interest in making any changes except for things I needed to support my own car.
Ya know, I do understand why the source wasn't released though. Part of the problem with open source is some projects frequently split off into new features based on code that is no longer compatible with the core. Also, VB.NET projects don't lend themselves very well to group development using something like sourceforge.
I wish I never had to develop my own program, but it was because there was no intention of adding the features I was looking for at the time, I didn't want .NET 1.1, and I didn't want the gauge features.
You should release the information on the different protocols and other info, as that would benefit the community and I personally think its something everyone can benefit from.
You did originally claim the charge was to cover the cost of your third party gage components.. If thats the case, why didn't you invest in the new updated components? .NET 1.1 is considered depricated and microsoft has urged developers to migrate away from it if possible.
I'm looking forward to the features you've announced.. Many are similar to things I had planned that may no longer be necessary to work on.
But my ultimate problem was if people were promised source code, then you should have made it available. This was made in writing, and would constitute a breach of contract. But besides all of that, if people had the source, they would be contributing new code snippets and other good bits to you. I took a very modular approach so I could potentially do that if I lose interest in continuing development.
Anyway, I'll end it here, because its really not appropriate for this thread, and for as critical as I am, I do think what your doing is a great service for the community, I just think it would have been better served to share what you have learned with the community.
I only purchased the program because of the promise of source code I had no interest in making any changes except for things I needed to support my own car.
Ya know, I do understand why the source wasn't released though. Part of the problem with open source is some projects frequently split off into new features based on code that is no longer compatible with the core. Also, VB.NET projects don't lend themselves very well to group development using something like sourceforge.
I wish I never had to develop my own program, but it was because there was no intention of adding the features I was looking for at the time, I didn't want .NET 1.1, and I didn't want the gauge features.
You should release the information on the different protocols and other info, as that would benefit the community and I personally think its something everyone can benefit from.
You did originally claim the charge was to cover the cost of your third party gage components.. If thats the case, why didn't you invest in the new updated components? .NET 1.1 is considered depricated and microsoft has urged developers to migrate away from it if possible.
I'm looking forward to the features you've announced.. Many are similar to things I had planned that may no longer be necessary to work on.
But my ultimate problem was if people were promised source code, then you should have made it available. This was made in writing, and would constitute a breach of contract. But besides all of that, if people had the source, they would be contributing new code snippets and other good bits to you. I took a very modular approach so I could potentially do that if I lose interest in continuing development.
Anyway, I'll end it here, because its really not appropriate for this thread, and for as critical as I am, I do think what your doing is a great service for the community, I just think it would have been better served to share what you have learned with the community.
