A good API would be awesome so I can set up software or control it however I like. And along with that, your open source forum could soon offer some great options for anyone that wanted a ready made solution. You could then ship some of the best software offerings with future deliveries.
OS X, eh? I'm still waiting for them to bring back OS 8. That was solid
We have a couple Mac users, so we should be able to do some development. Open-source of that project would be nice as we don't do a lot on that platform. (Last thing I programmed for a Mac was in REALbasic, which surprisingly is still around)
We'll keep you updated as we get more formalized data prepared to show; we'll also start a forum/Wiki to discuss this further.
Wait, you can program on a Mac? According to those commercials with John Hodgeman and Justin Long, it comes with everything already. What's to program?
I keed! I keed! It's cute. It really is.
But seriously, the "lightweight web server" approach would cover all platforms in one shot, if you went that way. Custom programs could use a request-response type system for control and XML data returns would satisfy all platform data issues. Downside is that you trade out your multi-platform headache for increased module complexity. At this stage, you may be well beyond those sorts of changes to the system.
I'll be interested to see the software implementation.
__________________ George
Smyrna, GA
25g reef
Coming Soon: 60g Ocea Cube (24"^3)
But seriously, the "lightweight web server" approach would cover all platforms in one shot, if you went that way. Custom programs could use a request-response type system for control and XML data returns would satisfy all platform data issues. Downside is that you trade out your multi-platform headache for increased module complexity. At this stage, you may be well beyond those sorts of changes to the system.
We actually made a decision yesterday to make a few changes:
* The controller and light fixture will no longer need to be purchased together. Based on what others have said regarding cost and necessity of features, we decided to separate the two devices in an effort to address these points.
The lighting fixture will have a USB port on it that will allow the average user to plug it into their PC, launch the control application and set the sunrise/sunset times, max intensity, and a few other items. For the power user, you will be able to leave the fixture plugged in to your PC and stream data back and forth to the device.
Bluetooth will also be an option in the fixture to 'cut the wires'.
* The controller/data acquisition system will be available separately and have a controllable power strip, as well as the other sensor options as discussed.
With regards to the software and its implementation, nothing is set in stone - we want the end user's input as we develop it so we can cater to your needs.
We'll have additional info as more solidifies - the lighting fixture itself will likely be available before the controller, but it'll shortly follow.
I'm open to the community's thoughts on this; please let me know what you think.
Best regards,
-Chris
AI-KD
Quote:
Originally Posted by George
But seriously, the "lightweight web server" approach would cover all platforms in one shot, if you went that way. Custom programs could use a request-response type system for control and XML data returns would satisfy all platform data issues. Downside is that you trade out your multi-platform headache for increased module complexity. At this stage, you may be well beyond those sorts of changes to the system.
I'll be interested to see the software implementation.
actually what george is getting at makes a lot of sense, and i would think would be easier to support and develop for...
instead of having a cable (or bluetooth) and fat client.. do it like many network appliances do.
the controller has a mini menu to change the IP (or leave it on DHCP by default) then have and RJ-45 ethernet port and/or wireless
it attaches to the network and then its accessible via a webpage.
using a static IP or a zero config protocol like bonjour would make this easier
but then the webpage has all of the programing settings and then also has output data. this way people could publish this existing web page to the internet if they want to (something MANY people go to great lengths to do).. nothing extra since its already there.. if the web page is built using back-end XML those files could then be downloaded VIA http or ftp for all the ubergeeks that want to play with it
but it seems like with a wireless/wires enabled network webserver you have everything we have been looking for. accessibility, no fat client, internet publishing, graphing, platform independent, upgradability (by uploading firmware files). none of this is new, this is how any network appliance works today..
the other nice thing is it should be a lot cheaper for you to add a wireless card than a bluetooth adapter, and more people are familiar with this.. not to mention faster transfer speeds.
i know i dont see the "big picture" but i dont see a downside (other than its a major direction change...lol)
__________________
Show people you appreciate there advice, click the icon under there name and give them Reputation points
Do you guys not like the idea of having USB or Bluetooth, and would rather Ethernet?
We've done devices like this in the past, but weren't sure if this is something that would be accepted (running Ethernet to your tank).
We could probably do an 802.11 version too... that's a bit out though.
If DHCP is acceptable we could do some sort of discovery mechanism. I'd like to avoid putting a display on the fixture if at all possible.
We'll discuss this internally and see what we can come up with - keep the input coming!
-Chris
AI - KD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob
actually what george is getting at makes a lot of sense, and i would think would be easier to support and develop for...
instead of having a cable (or bluetooth) and fat client.. do it like many network appliances do.
the controller has a mini menu to change the IP (or leave it on DHCP by default) then have and RJ-45 ethernet port and/or wireless
it attaches to the network and then its accessible via a webpage.
using a static IP or a zero config protocol like bonjour would make this easier
but then the webpage has all of the programing settings and then also has output data. this way people could publish this existing web page to the internet if they want to (something MANY people go to great lengths to do).. nothing extra since its already there.. if the web page is built using back-end XML those files could then be downloaded VIA http or ftp for all the ubergeeks that want to play with it
but it seems like with a wireless/wires enabled network webserver you have everything we have been looking for. accessibility, no fat client, internet publishing, graphing, platform independent, upgradability (by uploading firmware files). none of this is new, this is how any network appliance works today..
the other nice thing is it should be a lot cheaper for you to add a wireless card than a bluetooth adapter, and more people are familiar with this.. not to mention faster transfer speeds.
i know i dont see the "big picture" but i dont see a downside (other than its a major direction change...lol)
Sounds great! The USB and separate controller that is. The web interface would be nice too. But just having the USB and a PC app sounds great. I always wondered how hard the other LED lighting solution is to program with a little LCD and a couple buttons. It seems with all the options and possibilities, that the PC interface is practically a necessity for ease of use.
wireless/wired would be similar work, wireless would only add the complexities if you are using WEP or WPA.
my thoughts are it would be easier to run a long Ethernet cable than get a PC close to my tank since there is a limit to the length of USB cables you can get. all my tanks are downstairs, where i have no close by computer. running a Ethernet cable would not be a big deal, but a USB cable? yeah, that would not be easy or even possible.
it would be even easier with wireless.. that said, i think the difference in wired or wireless is minor. most of the development at a high level is the same. the whole back end web delivery interface woudl be the same, only the controller hardware would need to be modified to accept the handle the wireless interface
__________________
Show people you appreciate there advice, click the icon under there name and give them Reputation points
personally, the less wires that I have to deal with in my tank room, the better off I am. I would opt for something wireless.
Is there a problem with doing Bluetooth? This would seem like the most advanced and simple way to do it....you could even send the info to your mobile if you don't want to lug your computer within range of your tank!
well thats the thing, wireless has a range that dwarfs bluetooth, its still easy to setup, more compatible (most computers come standard with wireless, many dont have bluetooth standard)
wireless would be easier and cheaper since its a more standard and widely adopted technology. everything you need from bluetooth you can get from wireless (except connection to a phone, which may not work with alot of phones anyways, and would require phone apps to get and receive the data from the controller unit, not to mention many phones will only connect to a headset
__________________
Show people you appreciate there advice, click the icon under there name and give them Reputation points
I think that range would be the issue with bluetooth. If your computer is in another part of the house it may not have the range to connect.
Wireless is OK but i would need to configure it to connect to my secured router.
Also I'm not sure if DHCP is that great. If you have a router DHCP is OK but you still have to find out which address it is to connect from the PC. If you dont have a router and would be just directly connecting from a PC then you would need DHCP server on your PC. But at the same time with an initial static IP you need to still know what it is and be in the same subnet... Like Rob said you need someway to initially configure it as needed for the connection. I guess this coudl be over USB. You could configure the fixture while attached to the PC then take it off to the fish room.
well, most network appliance allow you to setup the network IP, subnet, gateway, etc all using the little admin panel.. so that could be done here.. or if on DHCP, there could be a menu item that "shows Network IP" or something so you can see what it is
__________________
Show people you appreciate there advice, click the icon under there name and give them Reputation points
icon under there name and give them Reputation points
