6 ms·

> exclusively for Mac Why not just have it connect as a generic mass-storage device?

Suppafly 2y ago
Yeah, even if you're a mac guy, it doesn't make sense to make hardware that is mac only.
jackstraw14 2y ago
It looks like the companion app is in the App Store, but yeah if it's going to be open source then I don't understand either.
rasz 2y ago
Saw it on EEVBlog, even owning a Mac is not sufficient if its not the latest OS version. SD Card doesnt store pictures in windows readable format either.
- davekeck 2y ago
  Dang I haven't mustered the courage to watch Dave's critique yet! I wrote/tested Photon Transfer (the companion app) on macOS 10.15 (Intel), so it should work on that and above. If not it's a bug that I need to fix!
  - rasz 2y ago
    I cant find the video now somehow (otherwise would link it). TLDR: he loved it, both idea and design, but could test due to Mac store requirements.
  - CamperBob2 2y ago
    He gave you a pretty good review, I thought. I'd have been interested in the camera myself if it supported Windows. Given the rate at which the data flows -- nothing at all for a long time, then a burst that isn't particularly time-sensitive, then nothing at all again for a while -- I wonder if the right way to do something like this is with LoRA. That way the camera could be mounted someplace hard to access, with no need for a file system at all. There would then be a separate receiver module that could listen for traffic from multiple cameras and store it for later access by a PC/Mac/whatever.
  - zelse 2y ago
    Your handling of folks' feedback in this thread is impressively graceful, fwiw.
- mjard 2y ago
  Most recent mailbag, EEVblog1619: https://youtu.be/ABqDGjcwMsg?t=1118 https://youtu.be/ABqDGjcwMsg?t=1118
miahi 2y ago
I (as a non-mac user, but impulse buyer of odd camera gear) appreciate the "exclusively for Mac" label put just after the fold. I usually have to read pages (about software) on HN for minutes before finding out (in a footer or "get it here" link) that it's Mac-only. This way I just know it's not for me and I can continue with my boring life.
davekeck 2y ago
Totally fair question! My reasons were: 1. To maximize Photon's battery life I tried to make the hardware do the absolute minimum to record imagery. To that end, Photon stores images on an unformatted SD card (ie one huge linear array of bytes) which is easy and fast to index into. 2. A 16-bit MSP430 handles writing the image data, and the MSP430's codespace is 99% exhausted without dealing with the complexities of a filesystem like FAT32, so adding support for a filesystem wouldn't currently fit. (This line of MSP430, MSP430FR2433, has a maximum of 16 KB of FRAM, but perhaps I could use a different line.) 3. Photon stores images as RAW image data that require post-processing to view the images. Since I wanted to provide a polished app to view the imagery anyway, I figured I'd just make it a requirement. I'm not saying those are all particularly good reasons, but that was my reasoning anyhow.
- tredre3 2y ago
  It's pretty cool that your MSP handles the SD Card directly! Personally I think you should keep the focus on a polished mac app. For other platforms you can do just the bare minimum with a web app that uses WebUSB. People will bitch that it's Chromium only but, I mean, chromium has 95% market share outside Apple world (and I say this as a FF user). A hardware solution could be to add a cheap microcontroller that would handle the usb port. It wouldn't be powered by the battery, only USB and it would act as a proxy between the raw sd card and the computer. Presenting a mass storage to the computer with folders, converting images to PNGs. Such capable MCUs are very cheap (rp2040, esp32-s3) but it certainly adds complexity to your project...
  - foofoo55 2y ago
    I would suggest the same hardware solution, where the USB powers a device-side presentation of the raw data into a more universal mass storage device. This also allows file transfer to any device without requiring special software. I did something like this in 2008 or so (using a FTDI chip and PIC mcu, and boy was it ever slow).
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >It's pretty cool that your MSP handles the SD Card directly! SD cards aren't really black magic since they "speak" SPI, meaning people have been interfacing basic microcontrollers to them since forever.
Rohansi 2y ago
The software being exclusive to Mac is apparently a feature in this case.
- davekeck 2y ago
  I'm admittedly trying to "celebrate my constraints" of finite time and money haha. I would love to support more systems if there's enough interest.
  - Rohansi 2y ago
    Nothing wrong with prioritizing one platform. It's just presented in a strange way on the website which suggests to me that it will only ever work on Mac.
asdfman123 2y ago
The website states he's a "big fan of native apps." You shouldn't build software based on what you're a fan of. You should built it based on its usefulness to users. Very silly to limit the customer base so much to perfect something very tangential to the experience.
- caseyohara 2y ago
  > You shouldn't build software based on what you're a fan of. Why not? For a solo/passion/hobby product like this, I'd argue you 100% absolutely should build it based on what you're a fan of. My experience is people like Dave who approach things with opinionated laser focus and solve a personal/niche need tend to build things with much higher quality and better experience because they essentially build it for themselves. They are the customer. > Very silly to limit the customer base so much to perfect something very tangential to the experience. This presupposes the goal here is to reach the broadest customer base possible, like this camera+software is supposed to be a rocket ship. What if it's not? What if the goal is to build a high quality, highly-polished product? Focusing on a single OS (one that the maker is obviously a fan of) makes a ton of sense. The style of the website and the focus of the product remind me a lot of the software company Panic (https://panic.com https://panic.com). They make extremely high quality software, with excellent design & experience, and a very narrow focus (unapologetically Apple-only). They don't make any concessions or sacrifice user experience to appease users of other operating systems. I respect them a whole lot more for that.
  - NBJack 2y ago
    It's being sold, presumably for a profit, on a platform with a ~14% market share. Less if we count compatible devices based on OS version. That is entirely the author's choice, but it isn't without consequence. For example, I have never heard of Panic despite owning a Mac myself.
- manuelmoreale 2y ago
  > You shouldn't build software based on what you're a fan of. If you’re doing something as a passion project you should absolutely do things based on what you’re a fan of.
kekub 2y ago
Amazing project. Would consider buying one, if you sent to Germany. Did you consider writing your app using the Web Serial API? If you did, why did you decide to go the native route?
- davekeck 2y ago
  > Did you consider writing your app using the Web Serial API? If you did, why did you decide to go the native route? I went the native route mainly because I love native software, particularly native Mac software. I never quite enjoy using web apps, but I certainly understand the appeal. Until I get the ordering system taking international addresses, send me an email (support@toaster.llc) with your address and I can send a Stripe invoice.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
squarefoot 2y ago
> Why not just have it connect as a generic mass-storage device? Actually have it present itself as a MTP (0) compatible device would have been better, but that would require an underlying filesystem, and as the author explained there's no space to add more features. The product is interesting though, and the code is free (thanks!) so I'm positive that Linux support will eventually happen. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Transfer_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Transfer_Protocol
- TeMPOraL 2y ago
  Why MTP? It's strictly less functional and more annoying to user than presenting as mass-storage device, and since you need a filesystem either way, might as well go with a protocol that gives you access to files, instead of a slow, half-working abstraction over them.

Yeah, even if you're a mac guy, it doesn't make sense to make hardware that is mac only.

It looks like the companion app is in the App Store, but yeah if it's going to be open source then I don't understand either.

rasz 2y ago

Saw it on EEVBlog, even owning a Mac is not sufficient if its not the latest OS version. SD Card doesnt store pictures in windows readable format either.

davekeck 2y ago
Dang I haven't mustered the courage to watch Dave's critique yet! I wrote/tested Photon Transfer (the companion app) on macOS 10.15 (Intel), so it should work on that and above. If not it's a bug that I need to fix!
- rasz 2y ago
  I cant find the video now somehow (otherwise would link it). TLDR: he loved it, both idea and design, but could test due to Mac store requirements.
- CamperBob2 2y ago
  He gave you a pretty good review, I thought. I'd have been interested in the camera myself if it supported Windows. Given the rate at which the data flows -- nothing at all for a long time, then a burst that isn't particularly time-sensitive, then nothing at all again for a while -- I wonder if the right way to do something like this is with LoRA. That way the camera could be mounted someplace hard to access, with no need for a file system at all. There would then be a separate receiver module that could listen for traffic from multiple cameras and store it for later access by a PC/Mac/whatever.
- zelse 2y ago
  Your handling of folks' feedback in this thread is impressively graceful, fwiw.
mjard 2y ago
Most recent mailbag, EEVblog1619: https://youtu.be/ABqDGjcwMsg?t=1118 https://youtu.be/ABqDGjcwMsg?t=1118

miahi 2y ago

I (as a non-mac user, but impulse buyer of odd camera gear) appreciate the "exclusively for Mac" label put just after the fold. I usually have to read pages (about software) on HN for minutes before finding out (in a footer or "get it here" link) that it's Mac-only. This way I just know it's not for me and I can continue with my boring life.

davekeck 2y ago

Totally fair question! My reasons were: 1. To maximize Photon's battery life I tried to make the hardware do the absolute minimum to record imagery. To that end, Photon stores images on an unformatted SD card (ie one huge linear array of bytes) which is easy and fast to index into. 2. A 16-bit MSP430 handles writing the image data, and the MSP430's codespace is 99% exhausted without dealing with the complexities of a filesystem like FAT32, so adding support for a filesystem wouldn't currently fit. (This line of MSP430, MSP430FR2433, has a maximum of 16 KB of FRAM, but perhaps I could use a different line.) 3. Photon stores images as RAW image data that require post-processing to view the images. Since I wanted to provide a polished app to view the imagery anyway, I figured I'd just make it a requirement. I'm not saying those are all particularly good reasons, but that was my reasoning anyhow.

tredre3 2y ago
It's pretty cool that your MSP handles the SD Card directly! Personally I think you should keep the focus on a polished mac app. For other platforms you can do just the bare minimum with a web app that uses WebUSB. People will bitch that it's Chromium only but, I mean, chromium has 95% market share outside Apple world (and I say this as a FF user). A hardware solution could be to add a cheap microcontroller that would handle the usb port. It wouldn't be powered by the battery, only USB and it would act as a proxy between the raw sd card and the computer. Presenting a mass storage to the computer with folders, converting images to PNGs. Such capable MCUs are very cheap (rp2040, esp32-s3) but it certainly adds complexity to your project...
- foofoo55 2y ago
  I would suggest the same hardware solution, where the USB powers a device-side presentation of the raw data into a more universal mass storage device. This also allows file transfer to any device without requiring special software. I did something like this in 2008 or so (using a FTDI chip and PIC mcu, and boy was it ever slow).
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >It's pretty cool that your MSP handles the SD Card directly! SD cards aren't really black magic since they "speak" SPI, meaning people have been interfacing basic microcontrollers to them since forever.

Rohansi 2y ago

The software being exclusive to Mac is apparently a feature in this case.

davekeck 2y ago
I'm admittedly trying to "celebrate my constraints" of finite time and money haha. I would love to support more systems if there's enough interest.
- Rohansi 2y ago
  Nothing wrong with prioritizing one platform. It's just presented in a strange way on the website which suggests to me that it will only ever work on Mac.

asdfman123 2y ago

The website states he's a "big fan of native apps." You shouldn't build software based on what you're a fan of. You should built it based on its usefulness to users. Very silly to limit the customer base so much to perfect something very tangential to the experience.

caseyohara 2y ago
> You shouldn't build software based on what you're a fan of. Why not? For a solo/passion/hobby product like this, I'd argue you 100% absolutely should build it based on what you're a fan of. My experience is people like Dave who approach things with opinionated laser focus and solve a personal/niche need tend to build things with much higher quality and better experience because they essentially build it for themselves. They are the customer. > Very silly to limit the customer base so much to perfect something very tangential to the experience. This presupposes the goal here is to reach the broadest customer base possible, like this camera+software is supposed to be a rocket ship. What if it's not? What if the goal is to build a high quality, highly-polished product? Focusing on a single OS (one that the maker is obviously a fan of) makes a ton of sense. The style of the website and the focus of the product remind me a lot of the software company Panic (https://panic.com https://panic.com). They make extremely high quality software, with excellent design & experience, and a very narrow focus (unapologetically Apple-only). They don't make any concessions or sacrifice user experience to appease users of other operating systems. I respect them a whole lot more for that.
- NBJack 2y ago
  It's being sold, presumably for a profit, on a platform with a ~14% market share. Less if we count compatible devices based on OS version. That is entirely the author's choice, but it isn't without consequence. For example, I have never heard of Panic despite owning a Mac myself.
manuelmoreale 2y ago
> You shouldn't build software based on what you're a fan of. If you’re doing something as a passion project you should absolutely do things based on what you’re a fan of.

kekub 2y ago

Amazing project. Would consider buying one, if you sent to Germany. Did you consider writing your app using the Web Serial API? If you did, why did you decide to go the native route?

davekeck 2y ago
> Did you consider writing your app using the Web Serial API? If you did, why did you decide to go the native route? I went the native route mainly because I love native software, particularly native Mac software. I never quite enjoy using web apps, but I certainly understand the appeal. Until I get the ordering system taking international addresses, send me an email (support@toaster.llc) with your address and I can send a Stripe invoice.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

squarefoot 2y ago

> Why not just have it connect as a generic mass-storage device? Actually have it present itself as a MTP (0) compatible device would have been better, but that would require an underlying filesystem, and as the author explained there's no space to add more features. The product is interesting though, and the code is free (thanks!) so I'm positive that Linux support will eventually happen. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Transfer_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Transfer_Protocol

TeMPOraL 2y ago
Why MTP? It's strictly less functional and more annoying to user than presenting as mass-storage device, and since you need a filesystem either way, might as well go with a protocol that gives you access to files, instead of a slow, half-working abstraction over them.