3 ms·

Ah, the obligatory "WhAt If No InTeRnet" comment that happens every time someone complains software support for board is shit. For one, to not have to keep anc

by ilyt 3y ago

Ah, the obligatory "WhAt If No InTeRnet" comment that happens every time someone complains software support for board is shit. For one, to not have to keep ancient dev environments around when you need to make small change. Also when you decide to repurpose it for something else, which is far more likely for hobbyist board like this. > For most embedded stuff, your choices are leave it in the field or recall. Sure if you want to get fired. "Sir, you need to pack the $200k worth, 300kg CNC and send it to us so we can upgrade your firmware".

wongarsu 3y ago
The "we can fly one of our field techs to you to upgrade your firmware" option seems to still be somewhat popular in industrial settings. Though I guess that strongly depends on the specific industry.
- ilyt 3y ago
  Of course but poster above talked about "recall or throw away" which is two worst possible outcomes for both sides. And for technician to be able to do that you need someone that develops the fixes anyway, and it's far cheaper in the long term if you don't need to get the software versions from 10 years ago just to run a compile...
lelanthran 3y ago
> Ah, the obligatory "WhAt If No InTeRnet" comment that happens every time someone complains software support for board is shit. There's no what-if - internet is not on that board. Sure, available as a add-on board, but if you use that standard then everything has internet via an add-on i2c/USB device. > Sure if you want to get fired. I don't think you work in the field. > "Sir, you need to pack the $200k worth, 300kg CNC and send it to us so we can upgrade your firmware". You honestly think that every single factory has every single automation controller internet-connected? I mean, I dunno what else that snark was supposed to mean, but I can assure you that factories don't let their equipment talk to the internet. Anything that the equipment needs will get shipped out to the deployment. You aren't working in this field, that much is clear.
- ilyt 3y ago
  > You honestly think that every single factory has every single automation controller internet-connected? It's not about being internet connected, the point you seem to consistently miss or ignore on purpose and that I already commented on. Learn to read before you start flailing nonsense at keyboard, I wrote ONLY about software stack problems. It's about having software stack to continue developing without wasting time keeping some legacy crap just so you can compile a code change. But I already wrote it in previous comment. I wrote nothing about internet connectivity aside from criticizing people like you that use it as a logic-bankrupt argument to excuse shit software stack > I mean, I dunno what else that snark was supposed to mean, but I can assure you that factories don't let their equipment talk to the internet. Anything that the equipment needs will get shipped out to the deployment. Multiple failures of people accessing SCADA enabled unsecured control systems over internet prove your baseless assumptions wrong. >You aren't working in this field, that much is clear. You seem like a guy that needs 6 followups to explain to him how to set up electronic torque wrench then still breaks the bolt so I'm glad I'm not.
  - ComputerGuru 3y ago
    There's no reason for this discussion to devolve to personal attacks.
  - lelanthran 3y ago
    See, if you were working in the field (any field, really) you'd know that the software stack is usually certified for that particular field. For EMV, for example, it actually doesn't matter if you have an internet-connected device; you aren't loading a new kernel that hasn't been certified onto the device, and considering that the cost of recertification can sometimes be more than simply moving the customer to new hardware, it's very rarely done. So, yeah, for hobbyists, having updates is important. For industry, once something is certified they aren't going to want to eat the cost of recertification unless there's a really good reason. PS. You shouldn't be this arrogant in an area where you yourself claim to have no expertise. I actually am an expert experienced in large-scale deployments of devices, and I'm keeping my tone as level as possible. You should do the same as well.

by ilyt 3y ago

wongarsu 3y ago

The "we can fly one of our field techs to you to upgrade your firmware" option seems to still be somewhat popular in industrial settings. Though I guess that strongly depends on the specific industry.

ilyt 3y ago
Of course but poster above talked about "recall or throw away" which is two worst possible outcomes for both sides. And for technician to be able to do that you need someone that develops the fixes anyway, and it's far cheaper in the long term if you don't need to get the software versions from 10 years ago just to run a compile...

lelanthran 3y ago

> Ah, the obligatory "WhAt If No InTeRnet" comment that happens every time someone complains software support for board is shit. There's no what-if - internet is not on that board. Sure, available as a add-on board, but if you use that standard then everything has internet via an add-on i2c/USB device. > Sure if you want to get fired. I don't think you work in the field. > "Sir, you need to pack the $200k worth, 300kg CNC and send it to us so we can upgrade your firmware". You honestly think that every single factory has every single automation controller internet-connected? I mean, I dunno what else that snark was supposed to mean, but I can assure you that factories don't let their equipment talk to the internet. Anything that the equipment needs will get shipped out to the deployment. You aren't working in this field, that much is clear.

ilyt 3y ago
> You honestly think that every single factory has every single automation controller internet-connected? It's not about being internet connected, the point you seem to consistently miss or ignore on purpose and that I already commented on. Learn to read before you start flailing nonsense at keyboard, I wrote ONLY about software stack problems. It's about having software stack to continue developing without wasting time keeping some legacy crap just so you can compile a code change. But I already wrote it in previous comment. I wrote nothing about internet connectivity aside from criticizing people like you that use it as a logic-bankrupt argument to excuse shit software stack > I mean, I dunno what else that snark was supposed to mean, but I can assure you that factories don't let their equipment talk to the internet. Anything that the equipment needs will get shipped out to the deployment. Multiple failures of people accessing SCADA enabled unsecured control systems over internet prove your baseless assumptions wrong. >You aren't working in this field, that much is clear. You seem like a guy that needs 6 followups to explain to him how to set up electronic torque wrench then still breaks the bolt so I'm glad I'm not.
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  There's no reason for this discussion to devolve to personal attacks.
- lelanthran 3y ago
  See, if you were working in the field (any field, really) you'd know that the software stack is usually certified for that particular field. For EMV, for example, it actually doesn't matter if you have an internet-connected device; you aren't loading a new kernel that hasn't been certified onto the device, and considering that the cost of recertification can sometimes be more than simply moving the customer to new hardware, it's very rarely done. So, yeah, for hobbyists, having updates is important. For industry, once something is certified they aren't going to want to eat the cost of recertification unless there's a really good reason. PS. You shouldn't be this arrogant in an area where you yourself claim to have no expertise. I actually am an expert experienced in large-scale deployments of devices, and I'm keeping my tone as level as possible. You should do the same as well.