ecuEdit v2.4 - ECU Tuning & Logging solution

Developer topics relating to software that provides a tuning UI to alter ECU code and data

Moderator: Freon

Postby JRSCCivic98 » Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:54 pm

epifan wrote:
JRSCCivic98 wrote:You have to pay because he's a money hungry Russian.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Why are you not attack to EVO4MAD or Colby (he also take some profit from Tactrix cables)??? I can give you many examples of functionless diagnostic (tuning) software which have same cost or more expensive.

JRSCCivic98 wrote:I personally wouldn't have a problem paying if it included defs for all ECUs out there.

I'm not selling XML defs

JRSCCivic98 wrote:fuch you!!!

perhaps this is not permissible on the forum? Where is moderator???

JRSCCivic98 wrote:Not only that, but we're all beta testing this software for him and reporting errors for him to fix as needed. The god damn thing should be free.... just like all the other programs on here. Cuz this is OPENEcu.org... not PAYEcu.org!

dude, I give 75% discount to you if you shut up :lol: :lol: :lol:


OK, asking me why I don't get mad at Colby for charging for a cable that he makes is stupid. That is a piece of hardware that is needed. It's also COMPLETE, which your software is not (cuz it doesn't have defs in it). Also, coming to a board which tries to distribute FREE software and beta testing yours while you decompile it (yeah, I said it...) and then turning around and charging for it goes completely against what this board is about.

I have to say, I can't help but see the vast similarities between ecuEdit and another software package out there.... makes me wonder if that's not the major reason why you're not including defs in the software. Make it incomplete and then you might be able to argue that it's not a working piece of software... hummm. :roll:
JRSCCivic98
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:45 am

Postby epifan » Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:14 pm

05GarnetLGT wrote:
epifan wrote:I'm not selling XML defs


no, you just steal those with a converter :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
hey, why don't you make a cobb AP map converter, and bundle that?

Steal??? Don't make me laugh :lol:
Give me example of AP map and I build converter - this is not a steal - this is competition :lol:
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

Postby epifan » Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:43 pm

JRSCCivic98 wrote:OK, asking me why I don't get mad at Colby for charging for a cable that he makes is stupid. That is a piece of hardware that is needed. It's also COMPLETE, which your software is not (cuz it doesn't have defs in it).

This is only you opinion. I think, peoples who buying ecuEdit don't agree with you. ecuEdit is complete - it have logger, log viewer, tracer and editor - all that need for powerful tuning. And many other useful features are in "to-do" list :wink:

JRSCCivic98 wrote:Also, coming to a board which tries to distribute FREE software and beta testing yours while you decompile it (yeah, I said it...) and then turning around and charging for it goes completely against what this board is about.

Decompile??? dude, you don't know nothing in programming.
BTW, I never said/promise/announce that ecuEdit will be FREE. Some "opensource" projects is locked/dead since I start developing ecuEdit...
p.s. I think ecuFlash will be selling soon :wink: So what are you will do after this? :lol:
p.s.2. My offer to you still in force :wink:
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

Postby Nemis » Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:28 pm

epifan wrote:BTW, I never said/promise/announce that ecuEdit will be FREE. Some "opensource" projects is locked/dead since I start developing ecuEdit...
p.s. I think ecuFlash will be selling soon :wink: So what are you will do after this? :lol:
p.s.2. My offer to you still in force :wink:


Image

i read OPENSOURCE here, if some soft is PAYsoft...emhh this is NOT good...
some people can build the tactrix cable because there is schematics ... open-schematics :-D
Nemis
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:58 am
Location: italy

Postby epifan » Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:44 pm

Nemis wrote:i read OPENSOURCE here, if some soft is PAYsoft...emhh this is NOT good...

If you have a some free time, please reread this thread - you can find many answers... Opensource is a only label, most of projects on this site is not opensource, including ecuFlash. I think, Colby don't open last ecuFlash source, in spite of all his promises (about half-year ago). I know only one opensource project - enginuity... So, Java rules :wink:
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

Postby New2Scoobs » Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:19 am

"dude, I give 75% discount to you if you shut up :lol: :lol: :lol:"

Is this offer open to anyone who complains? :wink:
New2Scoobs
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 5:55 am

Postby epifan » Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:39 am

New2Scoobs wrote:"dude, I give 75% discount to you if you shut up :lol: :lol: :lol:"

Is this offer open to anyone who complains? :wink:

ony for most embittered :lol: :lol: :lol:
may be, during september, I issue some limited special offer...
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

Postby Nemis » Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:11 am

epifan wrote:
Nemis wrote:i read OPENSOURCE here, if some soft is PAYsoft...emhh this is NOT good...

If you have a some free time, please reread this thread - you can find many answers... Opensource is a only label, most of projects on this site is not opensource, including ecuFlash. I think, Colby don't open last ecuFlash source, in spite of all his promises (about half-year ago). I know only one opensource project - enginuity... So, Java rules :wink:


i have look into forum and not fount other PAYware ...

ps what is "Innovate Motorsport Copyright" in your soft?
Nemis
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:58 am
Location: italy

Postby JRSCCivic98 » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:24 am

epifan wrote:ecuEdit is complete - it have logger, log viewer, tracer and editor - all that need for powerful tuning. And many other useful features are in "to-do" list :wink:


IT'S NOT COMPLETE!!!! You can't do shit in ecuEdit without xml defs. So people are left with (now) 3 options... make the xml yourself if you know how, use xmlwrite to create one (which may not be 100% correct and that programmer doens't want to release an update either for obvious reasons), or steal it from Enginuity with the converter you put into ecuEdit.

BTW, the similarities between ecuEdit and xxxxx99 are too vast. Tell me I'm wrong on this...
JRSCCivic98
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:45 am

Postby epifan » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:33 am

Nemis wrote:i have look into forum and not fount other PAYware ...

Too bad...
Look at http://forums.openecu.org/viewtopic.php?t=709
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

Postby epifan » Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:10 am

JRSCCivic98 wrote:
epifan wrote:ecuEdit is complete - it have logger, log viewer, tracer and editor - all that need for powerful tuning. And many other useful features are in "to-do" list :wink:

IT'S NOT COMPLETE!!!! You can't do shit in ecuEdit without xml defs.

:lol: :lol: :lol: this is your problem! I hear it only from you.

JRSCCivic98 wrote:So people are left with (now) 3 options... make the xml yourself if you know how, use xmlwrite to create one (which may not be 100% correct and that programmer doens't want to release an update either for obvious reasons), or steal it from Enginuity with the converter you put into ecuEdit.

OMG! another "steal" word. Are you idiot? It cannot be stealed because enginuity xml defintion is not copyrighted. its FREE! "free" cannot be stealed!

xmlwrite xml's is more accurate than enginuity. I found many mistakes in enginuity xml. So nothing wrong, because it is free opensource project.

If you need most accurate map descriptions - go to EcuTek. They are working many years for this. You know the price of most accurate descriptions and support.

JRSCCivic98 wrote:BTW, the similarities between ecuEdit and xxxxx99 are too vast. Tell me I'm wrong on this...

I don't know what is xxxxx99

p.s. May be Enginuity steal XMLs defs from XMLWrite? :lol: :lol: :lol:
How they can prove that they did not do this? And more, if many peoples think that XMLWrite steal defs from EcuTek, than it means that Enginuity also steal from EcuTek! And peoples who use Enginuity use stoled software because stoled XML included in enginuity package!
Nice logic!? :lol: Where is FBI or something???? :lol: :lol: :lol:
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

Postby Tea cups » Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:20 am

epifan wrote:OMG! another "steal" word. Are you idiot? It cannot be stealed because enginuity xml defintion is not copyrighted. its FREE! "free" cannot be stealed!

xmlwrite xml's is more accurate than enginuity. I found many mistakes in enginuity xml. So nothing wrong, because it is free opensource project.

You have found "many mistakes" in Enginuity's defs, yet you create a converter to convert it to Ecuedit's format. :roll: Sounds to me like you are just trying to bash Enginuity. Why don't you point out the "many mistakes" in the current definitions?

epifan wrote:p.s. May be Enginuity steal XMLs defs from XMLWrite? :lol: :lol: :lol: How they can prove that they did not do this? And more, if many peoples think that XMLWrite steal defs from EcuTek, than it means that Enginuity also steal from EcuTek! And peoples who use Enginuity use stoled software because stoled XML included in enginuity package! Nice logic!? :lol: Where is FBI or something???? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Xmlwrite uses the defs from Ecutek...period. I'm curious what xml defs are included for Ecuedit pay customers - those created by Xmlwrite? And you are selling the software. :roll: If Enginuity stole the defs directly from xmlwrite, we would have been done months ago. Yet there are tables and revisions supported by Enginuity defs that are not supported by xmlwrite, among other things like cel fixes which xmlwrite also doesn't have. Yet you recently updated your converter to convert the Enginuity CEL fixes for Ecuedit. :roll: Strange that you would spend time updating your converter for a bunch of mistake laden defintions. lol
Last edited by Tea cups on Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am, edited 2 times in total.
Tea cups
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:41 am

Postby m3n0ch3 » Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:44 am

Guys,

I have seen these flame fight cause lots of damage to other projects..

Instead of fighting on ideologies, can't we all cooperate and have a nice product.

We'll all be loosing if you guys keep on fighting.

I'd be more than happy to help write code is you'd all stop fighting ;)

Phil
m3n0ch3
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:46 am

Postby JRSCCivic98 » Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:26 am

Well, sorry if it seems like we're causing problems here, but I just can't believe people would start these many projects at first for free and then turn arround and charge for it. These programmers on here started making these apps to help people that wanted other solutions for their cars. Well, at first this was great because it was new and inventive, not to mention free to use by anyone at any time. With that said, my only gripe from the beginning has always been with the fact that there is not a SINGLE piece of software that does everything it's capable of... with the exception of Enginuity, no other piece of software currently available on this board or other free software boards based on these projects is complete. I don't care too much about the fact that someone would have to use 2 or more pieces of software to do logging/flashing/editing. My main gripe is with the editing packages. They are not complete because they don't have complete/correct xml defs. Without those defs the software is basically worthless. Sure, once you have your xmls created it's easy from there, but if you're going to build an app that has those capabilities, build it with the nessacery information to do a complete job of whatever it's intentions are.

Think of it this way... what is MS sold you a program that did document editing, but it didn't include the nessacery library files to allow you to open any document that's out there... instead they required you as the user to somehow build those libraries to open up the files in editable format. Yeah, kinda stupid isn't it...

From various posts by people (even tinywrx who made xmlwrite) he's led everyone to think that there will be further development on xmlwrite, but he will not be releasing this to the public... well, this can only mean a few things... either he's tired of not getting paid for his work/he doesn't want to get in trouble for his work/he never planned on continuing to help develop those defs beyond his own personal needs. So, which is it? I'm just getting the feeling that there's a bunch of secrecy about all of these tools.... in the end it's causing tuners (professional ones) out there not to want to use your products because they are scared that they are not correct and they might be held liable for damages some of their clients will suffer. Everyone that's made these programs (those that are not complete) have basically crated a gun, but no the amunition you need to make it work. I don't know how much simpler I can put it.

I can say this though... with all the BS that this has turned to, I'm seriously staying with the commercial products available to the public now. In the end it's just not worth the headache. At least with that I know that my money is going to a COMPLETE product... regardless of what it costs.
JRSCCivic98
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:45 am

Postby epifan » Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:01 pm

Tea cups wrote:
epifan wrote:OMG! another "steal" word. Are you idiot? It cannot be stealed because enginuity xml defintion is not copyrighted. its FREE! "free" cannot be stealed!

xmlwrite xml's is more accurate than enginuity. I found many mistakes in enginuity xml. So nothing wrong, because it is free opensource project.

You have found "many mistakes" in Enginuity's defs, yet you create a converter to convert it to Ecuedit's format. :roll: Sounds to me like you are just trying to bash Enginuity. Why don't you point out the "many mistakes" in the current definitions?

Enginuity defs mistakes directly converted to ecuEdit XML. Sorry, I can't on-fly correct your mistakes :lol:

Tea cups wrote:
epifan wrote:p.s. May be Enginuity steal XMLs defs from XMLWrite? :lol: :lol: :lol: How they can prove that they did not do this? And more, if many peoples think that XMLWrite steal defs from EcuTek, than it means that Enginuity also steal from EcuTek! And peoples who use Enginuity use stoled software because stoled XML included in enginuity package! Nice logic!? :lol: Where is FBI or something???? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Xmlwrite uses the defs from Ecutek...period. I'm curious what xml defs are included for Ecuedit pay customers - those created by Xmlwrite?

No, I have another defs source :wink:

Tea cups wrote:And you are selling the software. :roll: If Enginuity stole the defs directly from xmlwrite, we would have been done months ago. Yet there are tables and revisions supported by Enginuity defs that are not supported by xmlwrite, among other things like cel fixes which xmlwrite also doesn't have. Yet you recently updated your converter to convert the Enginuity CEL fixes for Ecuedit. :roll: Strange that you would spend time updating your converter for a bunch of mistake laden defintions. lol

So, you are not refuse that you are using xmlwrite defs for create "enginuity defs" :lol: Ok, this is noble act :wink:
CEL fixes are only primitive involve of users :wink: CEL table is simple accessible for most users with some experience :wink:
Some of ecuEdit users request CEL support for enginuity converter and I made it.

About maps that xmlwrite doesn't have: this is only advertising - this maps are not useful or they are not accurate (now).

P.S. Please stop fling mud! I don't understand why are you attack me? You have incredible accurate XML defs created by your own, powerful unique FREEWARE software - so rule the world!!! I cannot be your competitor :lol:
epifan
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 am

PreviousNext

Return to Tuning Software

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron