Open ECU?

[Hix]

Originally Posted by Visconti

How do you think "open source" happened , do you think a team of guys came together and did free work?

Yes. Google Linus Torvalds, Richard Stallman (rms), Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), and Open Software Foundation (OSF) AKA the people who created the basis of everything you are using and creators of the systems that run the world.

[Visconti]

Originally Posted by D-VO

Damn thats really too bad. I guess the guys over at evom really love evos to do all this work. I thought the only real work would be getting toyotas protocol then doing an ecu disassembly and making it usable for ecuflash (open ecu).

Yeah evom guys have a pretty good thing going... They got a real good head start when ecuteks evo9 software was hacked and given out for free. If that never happened the evos would be MUCH MUCH further along with Ecu tuning then they are today. They would have custom maps like the frs/brz has now.

There's nothing wrong with free, but stealing is a entirely different thing. Yes they defined the evox Ecu themselfs but don't have half the tables that i have with commercial software had at day 1. I also like knowing I'm working with stuff that actually works correctly.

Originally Posted by Hix

Yes. Google Linus Torvalds, Richard Stallman (rms), Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), and Open Software Foundation (OSF) AKA the people who created the basis of everything you are using and creators of the systems that run the world.

Don't be an idiot.

[D-VO]

Originally Posted by Visconti

Yeah evom guys have a pretty good thing going... They got a real good head start when ecuteks evo9 software was hacked and given out for free. If that never happened the evos would be MUCH MUCH further along with Ecu tuning then they are today. They would have custom maps like the frs/brz has now.

There's nothing wrong with free, but stealing is a entirely different thing. Yes they defined the evox Ecu themselfs but don't have half the tables that i have with commercial software had at day 1. I also like knowing I'm working with stuff that actually works correctly.

What more would you need than mivec, idle, timing, fuel, maf, map, and emissions controls? Nlts, and launch control are there too.

Anyway, there has to be some way to collaborate efforts to create either a software based on ecuflash or just brand new software for the masses for $500. The AEM and Hydra ECU's are $1500 and thats hardware and software.







Don't be an idiot.[/QUOTE]

[Visconti]

Originally Posted by D-VO

What more would you need than mivec, idle, timing, fuel, maf, map, and emissions controls? Nlts, and launch control are there too.

Anyway, there has to be some way to collaborate efforts to create either a software based on ecuflash or just brand new software for the masses for $500. The AEM and Hydra ECU's are $1500 and thats hardware and software.







Don't be an idiot.

[/QUOTE]

Yup all done by a guy that doesn't do it for free anymore, David aka Tephra. Notice how they're aren't any new evox patches or evo8/9 patches.. Golden is the only one keeping that stuff a live IMO. The day he stops defining the new cars everyone is fucked.

Lots of little things in the evox Ecu that aren't in the free XML... Yes the majority of the stuff is defined, now anyways.

Anyways that's why I use commercial stuff... I've been talking about having ecutek go back to do to the evox Ecu.. Would really like SD, better boost control and custom maps

[Silverpike]

Originally Posted by Visconti

User base ? Lol no

How do you think "open source" happened , do you think a team of guys came together and did free work?

Yes, that's how it happens. Linux, to choose a random example, was a bunch of guys working together for free to produce something that was good quality.

Ecutek was hacked , then ecuflash a company that gave away free software as so long you bought they're cable came around. How ecuflash came around and was funded is a entire different story. Anyways ecuflash comes out with Ecu defs that were identical to ecuteks.. Sooo strange.

How convenient that a guy selling EcuTek claims that everyone else stole from Ecutek originally. I've heard that story 100 times over the last 10 years for every major manufacturer, and for the most part it's bullshit.

Then some guys who to this day still don't understand Ecu flashing continue to build Ecu definitions... All by the way are based on stuff that was already stolen. Yes a lot of great stuff has been done for free but none of it could have been done if stolen stuff wasn't put in their hands

Once again bullshit. Building XML tables is very straightforward, and indeed you don't need to be an actual tuner to do it. It does require knowledge of how speed-density or mass-flow systems work in general, and a little bit of energy to disassemble a ROM dump.

Dumping a ROM isn't "stealing" anything. The hardest part of course is getting past the boot loader, but it's not like this is some great proprietary secret that only 1 company can know how to do. Once the method becomes known, any motivated person can exploit it and dump ROMs. From there it's a matter of finding tables.

So show me someone that knows how to figure out Ecu communication do the work and give it all to you for free with nothing to gain......

I know lots of them, found over a period of about 10 years or so of open source tuning. I'm not going to bother listing them all here, because you aren't here to argue facts anyways.

Trust me I already know someone that can build this software and write custom code and has nothing todo with ecutek.. But he wants $$$

I could do it too, I'm just too busy and I don't yet own a BRZ.

Options and competition are good for keeping pricing and feature advancements in check.

So why is it that in every single thread in this forum about ECU tuning you keep showing up and crapping on every company that's not ECUTek? At one recent point in time there were no less than 4 1st page threads in this forum advertising for either your services or some new whizzbang ECUTek feature. I and many others would seriously appreciate you stop using this forum as your own personal sales channel, and more importantly stop crapping on the threads of the other vendors. I'm shocked that the forum admin even permits this crap, but seeing as how I've reported you and nothing has changed, I'm now raising the issue myself.

[Sportsguy83]

[Visconti]

Originally Posted by Silverpike

Yes, that's how it happens. Linux, to choose a random example, was a bunch of guys working together for free to produce something that was good quality.

How convenient that a guy selling EcuTek claims that everyone else stole from Ecutek originally. I've heard that story 100 times over the last 10 years for every major manufacturer, and for the most part it's bullshit.


Once again bullshit. Building XML tables is very straightforward, and indeed you don't need to be an actual tuner to do it. It does require knowledge of how speed-density or mass-flow systems work in general, and a little bit of energy to disassemble a ROM dump.

Dumping a ROM isn't "stealing" anything. The hardest part of course is getting past the boot loader, but it's not like this is some great proprietary secret that only 1 company can know how to do. Once the method becomes known, any motivated person can exploit it and dump ROMs. From there it's a matter of finding tables.


I know lots of them, found over a period of about 10 years or so of open source tuning. I'm not going to bother listing them all here, because you aren't here to argue facts anyways.

I could do it too, I'm just too busy and I don't yet own a BRZ.


So why is it that in every single thread in this forum about ECU tuning you keep showing up and crapping on every company that's not ECUTek? At one recent point in time there were no less than 4 1st page threads in this forum advertising for either your services or some new whizzbang ECUTek feature. I and many others would seriously appreciate you stop using this forum as your own personal sales channel, and more importantly stop crapping on the threads of the other vendors. I'm shocked that the forum admin even permits this crap, but seeing as how I've reported you and nothing has changed, I'm now raising the issue myself.

Well there you have it everyone one.... This is your guy.

Clearly everything is easy..

Let him borrow your car, he's just going to dump that rom and build XML and everyone will be all set.

Lol

I've been very clear with my statements, I never said rom dumping was stealing.

Taking someone's software hacking it , taking its guts out and giving it out trying to be robin hood, thats stealing.

It's super obvious that you don't know the history of any of this stuff, so you chiming is comical.

As long as people keep posting up bullshit ill be here to speaking the truth.

John

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Visconti

Well there you have it everyone one.... This is your guy.

Clearly everything is easy..

Let him borrow your car, he's just going to dump that rom and build XML and everyone will be all set.

Lol

I've been very clear with my statements, I never said rom dumping was stealing.

Taking someone's software hacking it , taking its guts out and giving it out trying to be robin hood, thats stealing.

It's super obvious that you don't know the history of any of this stuff, so you chiming is comical.

As long as people keep posting up bullshit ill be here to speaking the truth.

John

John, it's really starting to come across from you that ANY open source option stole their solution.

That seems excessive.

Within the computer, electronics and amateur robotics communities open source is exactly a bunch of people working on advanced problems and distributing solutions for free. It's common.

So painting every open source solution as having its origins from 'The Great EcuTek Theft' is really unfair.

But intellectual property theft isn't something I agree with. Could you link to some info on what happened so we can get a picture of what happened and judge for ourselves?

[Visconti]

Originally Posted by Dimman

John, it's really starting to come across from you that ANY open source option stole their solution.

That seems excessive.

Within the computer, electronics and amateur robotics communities open source is exactly a bunch of people working on advanced problems and distributing solutions for free. It's common.

So painting every open source solution as having its origins from 'The Great EcuTek Theft' is really unfair.

But intellectual property theft isn't something I agree with. Could you link to some info on what happened so we can get a picture of what happened and judge for ourselves?

Open source doesn't mean stolen. But in the Subaru and EVO it's different.

Everyone talks about ecuflash and open source. Ecuflash which is suppose to be open source, claims to be open source still to this day hasn't published their open source code.. Except for evox boost loader all the stuff in ecuflash was stolen.

So yes there's a lot of new XML/Ecu defs for the subie that's true open source but you gotta flash it in with software that's not open just free when you buy their $200 cable.

I don't need to provide you links, google it and some of the stuff will appear.

I remember the day all these "open source" Ecu definitions came out , one of the map names had " Merv something something ?" Merv is one of the owners of ecutek and his name was put on the map so he would be reminded to review and check map function.. Don't know how some guy could come up with that map name unless it was ripped.


Anyways I'm all for open source just people need to have a understanding of the past.

John

[Pete]

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Visconti

Open source doesn't mean stolen. But in the Subaru and EVO it's different.

Everyone talks about ecuflash and open source. Ecuflash which is suppose to be open source, claims to be open source still to this day hasn't published their open source code.. Except for evox boost loader all the stuff in ecuflash was stolen.

So yes there's a lot of new XML/Ecu defs for the subie that's true open source but you gotta flash it in with software that's not open just free when you buy their $200 cable.

I don't need to provide you links, google it and some of the stuff will appear.

I remember the day all these "open source" Ecu definitions came out , one of the map names had " Merv something something ?" Merv is one of the owners of ecutek and his name was put on the map so he would be reminded to review and check map function.. Don't know how some guy could come up with that map name unless it was ripped.


Anyways I'm all for open source just people need to have a understanding of the past.

John

I did Google 'Ecutek technology theft', and only found the OS side of the argument from 2007:

http://www.romraider.com/RomRaider/R...ourceCommunity

They reference an email that Ecutek sent out which would be a good counterpoint to the OS blurb. Is it something you can share?


The area that I see being difficult to understand here is both Ecutek and OS are ripping information out of a system that is not theirs. Plus us common people don't have a solid grasp of the language.

So what are the infringements? If Denso ECU data is ripped, it will be the same no matter who or how it is done, right?

So when you say 'Define' the ECU, is that the ripping party basically 'annotating' the raw data? ie: memory address xxxx = 'ignition trim' as an example. So the functionality isn't changed, but Ripper A may call it 'Ignition Trim', Ripper B may call it 'ignition trim' and Ripper C may call it 'ign trm'.

So Ecutek's argument would be if all the ECU data is annotated exactly the same, then that is evidence that their work was ripped off? This seems reasonable.

But there is nothing they can really do there, since they are basically infringing on Denso's property in the first place. They don't own it. Their only recourse is with regards to how the other party got Ecutek's work.

(In an analogy, they stole something and keep it in their house. Then someone breaks into their house and steals it. So the second party didn't steal 'their' property. But they sure as fuck broke into their house.)

As for the programs used for ripping and flashing, this is where Ecutek would own the intellectual property 100%. There is little room for argument on the OS side if they reverse engineered and are using Ecutek software, branded as 'open source'. This is no good. However that type of software is old news in the electronics field. Coupled with OBD2 being designed for reflashes it seems less likely that it was directly stolen. But still possible. Without a look at the source code, we can't know for sure. But it is a bit odd that the OS software isn't actually open source.

Last thing would be maps and changes which should be 100% the IP of the tuners themselves, like yourself. Someone should not be able to sell a renamed copy of your Stage1 as 'Jim Bob Supertune Alpha!!!' However modified versions of a shop's tune doesn't seem any different than a shop modifying a factory tune.

My $.02

Thoughts?

[Silverpike]

Originally Posted by Visconti

Taking someone's software hacking it , taking its guts out and giving it out trying to be robin hood, thats stealing.

Which we know didn't happen, and yet that doesn't stop you from repeating the lies, now does it?

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=401

Originally Posted by tea cups

Pure BS. No one in the open source community gives two craps about Ecutek maps or software. Nor is there any discussion about ripping off Ecutek. On the RomRaider site, we don't allow any commercial maps to be posted - Cobb, Ecutek, nor any discussion about hacking commercial software and the like - nothing even remotely close to it is tolerated. There have been many developments (such as new ECU tables and logger parameter support added) that don't even exist in the Cobb and Ecutek software and some of these that were later added to the commercial software at the request of pro-tuners who tune with OS and commercial. There are detailed discussions on the RomRaider site about ECU logic for which I've never seen anything remotely close presented by any commercial company. I have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours reverse engineering the factory ECU for RomRaider, so for someone who doesn't have the first clue what they are talking about to say we are not doing the work ourselves, pisses me off.

Back in 2006 or so, some dude not associated with the ROM editor development did hack Ecutek's table definitions and created a utility called xmlwrite which generated definitions based on Ecutek's table defs for each of the major ROM editors. These definitions were never included in any RomRaider or Ecuflash release, but the utility was used early on by users when there was little support. It was not known at the time how the definitions were created (or from where). However, it quickly became irrelevant as people began to work on the disassembly of the factory ROMs and the RomRaider/Ecuflash defs improved. And after it became apparent where the table definitions had come from and that it wasn't "ethical" to have this discussed or files of this nature posted at the RomRaider forums, we removed all traces of xmlwrite generated defs posted by users and anything remotely related to xmlwrite. That was back in 2006 or so. That is what Ecutek is clinging to when they make these claims about OS which are false. What they are correct about is that a program called Ecuedit, which is not open source and not associated with any of the open source editors or developers, is using xmlwrite definitions in their product to this day. The dude that creates Ecuedit lives in Russia and has a habit of lifting stuff from other software including logger descriptions lifted verbatim from Cobb's manual and even logger addresses straight from RomRaider. Ecutek tries to lump in Ecuedit with the OS editors (RomRaider/Ecuflash), for, I can only imagine, the purpose of trying to give OS a bad name since they lost a lot of market share in the U.S.

I don't know Bill personally, but I've followed his work since 2005 in the Subaru world.

Let's not forget the whole ECU locking fiasco that came out in 2006. It's one thing to lock a customer's ECU, but it's quite another to do it without their knowledge or consent, in a way that's irreversible. This is why ECUTek is not and will never be a reputable company. Claiming that Open Source people rip off ECUTek is simply part of the propaganda machine.

[Visconti]

Bill is a awesome guy, he's done a lot of stuff for the Subaru community... His work is his work.

You can quote which ever post makes you feel best but doesnt change anything.

Ecus flash is suppose to be open source, no source code has been given.. Geez I wonder why.

And why is it that when the community actually started from scratch on the evox it took well over a year to get all the tables needed to actually fully tune the car... I remember, one week the fuel table was found, then timing, then cam timing. That all happened with a well organized group of people. Took a while but they did it. Subaru community over had over 50 maps with perfect names , definition all done by a handful of people ( before bill was actually doing his magic ).


Always easy to take something and improve it... And even if you claim that all the ecus definitions were 100% legit, which they are not - you would still have to use a closed source program which contains stuff that was ripped off...I'm trying to remember its been while, I think ecru flash came about from a hacked accessport... Doesnt matter where it came from , stolen is stolen.

John

[cuddefred]

I know now why it took a while for me to get my tune! With all these arguments going back and forth I am suprised you have any time to do anything else