A message from a COBB engineer
Feb 28, 2011, 09:58 AM
#91
Ok, horse beaten to death at this point.
My sentiments:
1) (echoing others) - The premium that AP is charging gets you OTS maps and customer support. I'll reserve comments from my past experience with that support other than I hope it has gotten better for the Evo community (and from comments from users and Cobb, it seems it has).
2) By buying the cable, you are paying for a bit of ECUFlash development. This is a good thing because we all want new features and better code. The "open" part of the equation is no longer the program code, but the ability to share definitions and look at non-obfuscated ROM files.
3) Sometimes there is only one way to solve a problem efficiently. When it comes to finding a table and it's purpose, it generates alot of respect (but possibly some lost business for the completely clueless) when you give credit to that person who originally found it and documented it. If you are including it in your software you should give that credit where it is due (a notation is fine, it looks like Tephra has not requested payment and I don't think it is necessarily due here). If you are using it as a selling point for your product, you should definitely give credit in the form of a notation.
4) While questionably ethical, it would probably be foolish of Cobb to *not* look at the code Tephra has written. In this case it is absolutely unethical IMHO to not give credit (again, at least in the form of notation). Map switching=old news. The method for map switching=Tephra's hard work. Credit him for it if you use the same method/code (same goes for minimum IPW, direct boost, or any other idealogical patch). It is not clear if this is done since, as we recently experienced, it looks like the minimum IPW code does not work as intended on AP's first release.
5) Sharing is huge for helping the community. When someone has done the work to cut down on your own work or make your life better, you should at least pay respect. If you don't then you have nothing to complain about when things break down around you. Even if business is business, prove that your product's extra features (AKA:What you are actually selling in the form of customer service, OTS maps, nice little hardware device, etc) are worth it. If you feel comfortable taking a patch from the community, I see no reason you shouldn't share an image or any iota about something you have found (*NOT* developed) that can help that community in return. Good business would further all development along (granted, without paying someone on staff to simply spill this information out and push back other projects), rather than wasting people's time re-inventing the wheel who are obviously contributing to your product with no expectation of return.
My sentiments:
1) (echoing others) - The premium that AP is charging gets you OTS maps and customer support. I'll reserve comments from my past experience with that support other than I hope it has gotten better for the Evo community (and from comments from users and Cobb, it seems it has).
2) By buying the cable, you are paying for a bit of ECUFlash development. This is a good thing because we all want new features and better code. The "open" part of the equation is no longer the program code, but the ability to share definitions and look at non-obfuscated ROM files.
3) Sometimes there is only one way to solve a problem efficiently. When it comes to finding a table and it's purpose, it generates alot of respect (but possibly some lost business for the completely clueless) when you give credit to that person who originally found it and documented it. If you are including it in your software you should give that credit where it is due (a notation is fine, it looks like Tephra has not requested payment and I don't think it is necessarily due here). If you are using it as a selling point for your product, you should definitely give credit in the form of a notation.
4) While questionably ethical, it would probably be foolish of Cobb to *not* look at the code Tephra has written. In this case it is absolutely unethical IMHO to not give credit (again, at least in the form of notation). Map switching=old news. The method for map switching=Tephra's hard work. Credit him for it if you use the same method/code (same goes for minimum IPW, direct boost, or any other idealogical patch). It is not clear if this is done since, as we recently experienced, it looks like the minimum IPW code does not work as intended on AP's first release.
5) Sharing is huge for helping the community. When someone has done the work to cut down on your own work or make your life better, you should at least pay respect. If you don't then you have nothing to complain about when things break down around you. Even if business is business, prove that your product's extra features (AKA:What you are actually selling in the form of customer service, OTS maps, nice little hardware device, etc) are worth it. If you feel comfortable taking a patch from the community, I see no reason you shouldn't share an image or any iota about something you have found (*NOT* developed) that can help that community in return. Good business would further all development along (granted, without paying someone on staff to simply spill this information out and push back other projects), rather than wasting people's time re-inventing the wheel who are obviously contributing to your product with no expectation of return.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
maperformance
Vendor Announcements
23
Mar 3, 2020 08:19 AM
COBB Tuning
Evo X Engine Management / Tuning Forums
33
Jul 21, 2011 09:33 PM
HeadGames
EvoM New Member / FAQs / EvoM Rules
5
Feb 3, 2009 11:29 AM
