CheshireCat Posted June 2, 2013 Share #1 Posted June 2, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Samsung just did it for their mirrorless. Way to go ! I really hope Leica will follow this smart move, and focus on the rest. Firmware is the soul of a digital camera, and it will really make the difference when Sony comes up with the FF NEX (presumably with the same old unusable NEX firmware for kids). I am not the only one who wants this gear: 1) Best in class FF sensor. 2) Leica lenses. 3) Essential firmware for advanced photographers. Very soon Sony is gonna get 1 and 2 (via adapter), so 3 will make the difference. And there is no better firmware for me than the one I can create Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 2, 2013 Posted June 2, 2013 Hi CheshireCat, Take a look here Open Source Firmware, please. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted June 2, 2013 Share #2 Posted June 2, 2013 Not a chance, I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share #3 Posted June 2, 2013 Not a chance, I think. What makes you think so ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl G Posted June 2, 2013 Share #4 Posted June 2, 2013 Because, in general, it's a daft idea. Consumers have expectations that products housing computer chips will reliably perform their functions as advertised. After extensive development and testing, firmware frequently contains bugs that require yet more testing and resources to correct. Open source software that OEMs do not control, test, or have any input in that subsequently bricks the device would be a nightmare for the consumer and manufacturer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted June 2, 2013 Share #5 Posted June 2, 2013 I really don't get the open source model. I made my living - and now retirement - by protecting my IP and taking the toughest line with those who tried to misuse it. Software source code is nothing more than an embodiment of IP and there is no way I would have ever made it open source to allow others to profit at my expense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted June 2, 2013 Share #6 Posted June 2, 2013 Well, I do get the open source model and a few of our staff members have contributed to Eclipse. Interview with Mike Milinkovich about the past, present and future of Eclipse However, I doubt Leica fits into that mold, but they may surprise us. Why not? It will be interesting to see if and how Samsung and their camera users will benefit. IBM made open source work for Eclipse, maybe Samsung can do as well for their things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 2, 2013 Share #7 Posted June 2, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) To cite just one case, there are a number of good hacks for Panasonic camera firmwares, largely done by decompiling or reverse engineering the firmware. Leica's cameras simply have such an unprofitable position that the entrepreneurs of such do not bother with Leica. Been there. Why Leica will not support open code? Perhaps they are afraid to disclose their poor expertise. I am 100% for cracking Leica's firmware, but I am not smart enough to do it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
krooj Posted June 2, 2013 Share #8 Posted June 2, 2013 This would be very, very cool if they did it. Depending on the design of their software, it might be harder than you think. A lot of these cameras have common hardware: SoCs, sensors, etc... So, the value or distinguishing characteristics lie mainly in things like image processing algorithms, which are probably tightly guarded. It would be nice to think that each manufacturer could release their firmware as OSS with the highly proprietary bits pruned out as modules that a community could fill in. This gets really exciting for hackers and researchers, because it gives them an off the shelf hardware platform for testing their code on. There are other benefits that the manufacturers and community might see as well, such as unlocked features and better batter life, to name a few. While we're at it: why not a standardized communication protocol for things like AF / Lens communication? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted June 2, 2013 Share #9 Posted June 2, 2013 I see little chance Leica will do this and that is okay. I would not be eager to start applying hacks to the firmware that runs a $7000 camera. I am not viscerally against it, just not enough of a risk taker. When I had Motorola mobile phones, there were a variety of ways to provide new features and I was pretty adept at doing that. But there were also stories about people who had "bricked" their phones. Those were cell phones that cost a few hundred not cameras costing several thousand. The issue to me is whether Leica would allow a bit more customization within the firmware so as to tweak certain things (exposure compensation; turn off or repurpose movie button, etc.). I would would like to see those options built in by Leica not by some guy down the blosk who fancies himself a software engineer because he once wrote a BASIC program on an Apple II. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted June 3, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted June 3, 2013 Interesting discussion. It must be noted that it is not possible to brick a camera if the SDK (Software Development Kit) is properly architected. Firmwares are made of different layers of software, and we do not need to change low-level stuff, just user interface and DSP algorithms. A good supervisor subsystem can make it possible to revert to standard firmware anytime (a sidecar flash partition can be used for this). About IP (intellectual property), I really don't think Leica has anything worth protecting, as almost any algorithm they use is subpar compared to the competition. Then again, there may be third-parties restrictions as the MAESTRO is actually old Fujitsu technology (also used in some Nikon products). Leica's core business and expertise is "hardware", namely camera bodies and lenses. It has never been software (and this is perfectly clear to anyone). Leica will soon be producing lenses only, if they don't do something quick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted June 3, 2013 Author Share #11 Posted June 3, 2013 I really don't get the open source model. I made my living - and now retirement - by protecting my IP and taking the toughest line with those who tried to misuse it. Software source code is nothing more than an embodiment of IP and there is no way I would have ever made it open source to allow others to profit at my expense. Open Source has two basics reasons to be alive and kicking: 1) Passionate people, caring more about achievements than money. 2) Profitable companies leveraging passionate people to improve their core business. This synergy is continuously raising the bar. Below the bar is commodity (free), and above the bar is premium (buy). This is progress, it is good, and even if you don't get it, it will make your life better Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted June 3, 2013 Share #12 Posted June 3, 2013 My experience of open source software is that it is prone to be bug-ridden, inadequately tested and both functionally and operationally unstable. Would you fly in a plane or live next to a nuclear power station whose control software depended on the skills of some passionate geek? No thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted June 3, 2013 Share #13 Posted June 3, 2013 Sure, slap a Leica M on one side, an iOS 7 or Jelly Bean device on their other and download Flickr, WhatsApp and everything else to take your eye off the subject. I personally would like my experience tried, tested and certified by Leica. And if I have to wait, so be it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted June 3, 2013 Share #14 Posted June 3, 2013 My experience of open source software is that it is prone to be bug-ridden, inadequately tested and both functionally and operationally unstable. Would you fly in a plane or live next to a nuclear power station whose control software depended on the skills of some passionate geek? No thanks. I am sorry for the bad experiences you made, but your statement is far to generalized. Open source means that you can access and modify the source of software. There are many different software offering under these condition. Some might be done by amateurs, but plenty of it is actually done by professionals. Not that one can generally say that professionals write better code than amateurs. Well-known open source software products often enough are much better tested and higher quality than some professional products. For one, because they are used by a wider audience, and also because the users have access to the source. The open source works not only because of geeks giving away their time, but for all software developers for which it is more efficient (time and money wise) to use open source software, tweak it to their needs and donate their changes back to the community. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted June 3, 2013 Share #15 Posted June 3, 2013 Issues I've had include unexpected interactions between changes added by different developers, appalling lack of in-code documentation, variable names in foreeign languages which mean nothing to me. I'd rather not spend my time chasing bugs added by someone who knows little and cares less. Besides, as a business model - where your business is providing software - it's a non-starter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 3, 2013 Share #16 Posted June 3, 2013 It would be great for the bandwidth of the forum to host all the complaints threads by people messing with their firmware. I only recall one instance of user modified camera firmware and that was when some Russian hacked the Canon Rebel. Installing the hack automatically voided your warranty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted June 3, 2013 Share #17 Posted June 3, 2013 Examples of widely used and robust open source software: Android, Firefox, OpenOffice, R statistical software, Moodle virtual learning system, Scratch educational software, Python, Pearl, GNU C compilers. To quote IBM: "Open Source & Standards are key to making our planet smarter and improving the way we live and work." Something like R is now far ahead in terms of advanced methods than commercial statistical software precisely because it is open source and researchers want to contribute their new methodological tools. One should look at the ecology of that type of dynamic and innovative software community before dismissing the open-source model. On the subject of electronic devices, many people are very keen on their mobile devices that run the Android Open Source Project led by Google. Leica may well have had some bug fixes provided for the discrete mode crashes and banding issues, by now, if the firmware source code was open source. For example, how hard really is it to disable and grey-out the two discrete options from the menu system, when shooting in continuous mode? Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 3, 2013 Share #18 Posted June 3, 2013 Many people could appreciate to work on their Leica's firmware... but I don't see any business motivation by the point of view of Leica... the impact on sales (camera and lenses) I think would be negligible... Maybe some mass vendor can find a niche offering a camera with open source firmware, to create and promote a "community" of users/developers exchanging there ideas and tools... a community that, of course, would be very "locked" into that camera... so creating a stable base of users for a certain camera / system which could follow a developing path (and a marketing) of its own...I think it is risky, in terms of warranty/service, to treat a "open source" camera like a normal one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted June 3, 2013 Share #19 Posted June 3, 2013 Issues I've had include unexpected interactions between changes added by different developers, appalling lack of in-code documentation, variable names in foreeign languages which mean nothing to me. I'd rather not spend my time chasing bugs added by someone who knows little and cares less. Besides, as a business model - where your business is providing software - it's a non-starter. Hmmm.. Consider MySQL, open source software with a business model that was profoundly successful. The company was profitable when acquired by Sun Microsystems for big $. There are lots other examples of working business models around open source software. Typically, fees are charged for support, maintenance, and enhancements to the open source core. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 3, 2013 Share #20 Posted June 3, 2013 I can't really see a big necessity for it........ yet. I had SDK software on an old Canon G model (can't remember which) and the basic idea was to access useful things the camera could do that weren't in the OEM options menu's, and switch off some of the annoying things it did. It worked. But an old Canon P&S is still more menu driven than a new Leica is. And isn't a software hack all about making something better for the user? Yes you can look at the word 'hack' negatively because that's the only way it is used on the news, but if it was possible just by ticking a few boxes to turn your M into a simpler 24mp M9 clone some people might like the idea, especially if they could get rid of the video menu and assign that button to something useful. If you never ever use JPEG you could get rid of the JPEG options of Colour, Contrast etc. Clutter is what makes OEM software worth hacking. But unfortunately I don't think even the M is cluttered enough to generate the interest and user base to bother with hacking it. It is still in the stone age compared to a modern P&S camera that can do ten times more and requires multiple page menu's for the user to control it. And of course it would be embarrassing for Leica if they polled the user base and discovered all but a retired couple living in Florida had turned off the much trumpeted video function. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.