DNA40 vs SX350j

Status
Not open for further replies.

JimScotty0

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 10, 2014
961
1,258
Garden Grove, CA, USA
www.facebook.com
I think we are talking about two different events...by two different facebook members posting in different facebook pages....but in fairness I'm still checking....I assume nothing but like to verify... like Reagan always said... "trust but verify"
It may have been posted in more than 1 FB group. This FB guy is a member of over 3 dozen FB vaping groups so he may have posted it in many places and I don't blame him getting a bad device. I feel for him. But watching the video and his SXM screen they appear to be the same to me. Maybe here you posted a different photo but I believe it is the same unit.
 

retird

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 31, 2010
5,133
5,862
North Side
It may have been posted in more than 1 FB group. This FB guy is a member of over 3 dozen FB vaping groups so he may have posted it in many places and I don't blame him getting a bad device. I feel for him. But watching the video and his SXM screen they appear to be the same to me. Maybe here you posted a different photo but I believe it is the same unit.

If it is the same guy he is using two different facebook names in different pages..... I'll let ya know what I find.... I've asked to join the group you mentioned.... maybe you could link the video if it was a YouTube video....

EDIT: Here is what I found.....A bunch of folks just added to the facebook page where the video was seen (not a YouTube).... watched the video.....it was posted 23 hours ago from Ohio and has different display settings, much glitching, and many firings with glitches (full screen glitches). The Picture I posted was posted from Wisconsin on May 16 by a different named poster.
 
Last edited:

JimScotty0

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 10, 2014
961
1,258
Garden Grove, CA, USA
www.facebook.com
If it is the same guy he is using two different facebook names in different pages..... I'll let ya know what I find.... I've asked to join the group you mentioned.... maybe you could link the video if it was a YouTube video....

EDIT: Here is what I found.....A bunch of folks just added to the facebook page where the video was seen (not a YouTube).... watched the video.....it was posted 23 hours ago from Wisconsin and has different display settings, much glitching, and many firings with glitches (full screen glitches). The Picture I posted was posted from Ohio on May 16 by a different named poster.
Actually the video was posted Yesterday at 9:50pm · Toledo, OH, not Wisconsin. The same Ohio that you said your picture was posted from.

And your point is? :tumble:
 
Last edited:

JimScotty0

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 10, 2014
961
1,258
Garden Grove, CA, USA
www.facebook.com
Clarification of previous posts.... two separate events by two separate posters on two different Facebook groups...that's all....
And both from Ohio? The one you posted and the one I stated was on FB. One from Toledo Ohio and the other one from somewhere in Ohio? So by what assumption are you saying they are not the same unit?
 

retird

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 31, 2010
5,133
5,862
North Side
Actually the video was posted Yesterday at 9:50pm · Toledo, OH, not Wisconsin. The same Ohio that you said your picture was posted from.

And your point is? :tumble:

THX .,,, I mixed up the states of the posters... will correct... doesn't change the facts... thx for finding my error...I had it right in my post 240 but it was a double post (past my bed time)...lol
 
Last edited:

Vlad1

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 8, 2014
1,444
1,459
Earth
Still haven't really had a chance to look "not really into Facebook" but giving the benefit of the doubt of two separate devices with failures and using a conservative estimate of 5000 devices sold would put the Failure Rate at .04% which I would think to be well below a manufacturers expected fault range.

Comparing this fail rate to that of the DNA 40 displays, I've heard 5% & 6% but don't really know and we have numerous individual reports that have had multiple devices exhibit the problem which leads me to believe it's a much higher percentage than stated on the DNA 40. At any rate there's no comparison in the fail rate or anything that would support that the SXmini M has any type of design or functional problem with the display anything remotely close to that of the DNA 40, other than 1 or 2 possible failures.
 

Yozhik

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 4, 2015
925
1,359
Chicago, IL
It's disappointing to see people claim that one company copied another company's IP, merely because they have similar products. For people who want to claim that Evolv invented temperature control, one serious problem they will need to overcome will be substantial prior art by other inventors. For example:

Int'l Patent Pub. No. WO2011050964 A1, claiming a priority date of 2009 and assigned to Philip Morris, describes "a heater in an electrically heated smoking system, the heater comprising one or more electrically conductive tracks on an electrically insulating substrate, the one or more electrically conductive tracks having temperature coefficient of resistance characteristics such that the one or more electrically conductive tracks can act as both a resistive heater and as a temperature sensor."

Int'l Patent Pub. No. WO2007066374 A1, claiming a priority date of 2005 and assigned to a European company, describes with reference to an e-cig "it is contemplated the possibility to use as electric resistance materials of any typology of resistive material with whatever characteristic and value (included the ohmic value), as for example . . . Positive Temperature Control"

U.S. Patent Pub. No. US20110265806, Allarcon was specifically cited by a patent examiner, with respect to pending patent claims by Evolv that could arguably cover temperature control, as prior art. See Office Action response dated 11/08/13 regarding U.S. Patent App. No. 13/661,184. The examiner stated that Allarcon "teaches a controller component for an electronic smoking device comprising a voltage sensor, current sensor, and a resistance sensor (first component) to detect an internal voltage, current, and/or resistance of the heating element . . . . This implicitly teaches that an actual measured power output is determined as power is simply equal to voltage times current. Alarcon teaches a controller and signal generator (second component) that is configured to control a power source that powers the heating element. The first component is used for heating element calibration. In other words, the second component controls and adjusts current and voltage level (power source) based on the actual measured power output to generate a selected power output."

In response to this rejection, Evolv notably amended their claims in that application to describe a power manager to regular the power level to the heating element "regardless of heating element parameters and a state of the power source".

Please note that I am not saying that Evolv does not have any patentable features with respect to their particular implementation of temperature control. In time, we may see what those specific improvements to the known art of temperature control are. The same can be said to YiHi's own particular implementation of temperature control. However, it is generally unwise to assume that merely being first to market is the same as first to invent, especially when it comes to broader arguments of what was invented.
 

dr g

Moved On
ECF Veteran
Mar 12, 2012
3,554
2,406
Paradise
Yihi is not a good choice for trying to make the case that other companies don't infringe Evolv's IP. They are probably the most egregious violators.

The basis of the power control required to do temperature control in ecigarettes is patented by Evolv. This is the IP that probably half the industry is violating.

YiHi, as all Chinese producers of TC products, copied Evolv's implementation of TP. The timeline of communications and product releases effectively proves it, but it's also exactly what the companies have been doing for years now. Before Evolv's release temperature sensing via resistance shift in the coil wasn't anywhere on any Chinese company's radar.

BTW Alarcon is blu's patent. i.e. BT, and it covers vv ecigs.
 
Last edited:

Yozhik

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 4, 2015
925
1,359
Chicago, IL
Yihi is not a good choice for trying to make the case that other companies don't infringe Evolv's IP. They are probably the most egregious violators.

The basis of the power control required to do temperature control in ecigarettes is patented by Evolv. This is the IP that probably half the industry is violating.

YiHi, as all Chinese producers of TC products, copied Evolv's implementation of TP. The timeline of communications and product releases effectively proves it, but it's also exactly what the companies have been doing for years now. Before Evolv's release temperature sensing via resistance shift in the coil wasn't anywhere on any Chinese company's radar.

BTW Alarcon is blu's patent. i.e. BT, and it covers vv ecigs.

On what basis, if any, do you make this claims? More specifically:

1) Please state the specific patent or patent application assigned to Evolv or belonging to inventors affiliated with Evolv that specifically claim temperature control.

2) Describe with respect to the patent claims each aspect of YiHi's product that performs each required element of each claim.

If you cannot meet either condition, then your naked assertion that YiHi is copying patented IP from Evolv fails. It doesn't matter in terms of intellectual property when products are released, so your claim that the "timeline of communications and product releases effectively proves it" is completely irrelevant. For example, one can obtain a patent, delay or never release a product, and they can still sue for someone using that IP if they make a product using it before the IP owner does.

As to your notion that no one but Evolv knew about using thermal resistance to control power to a coil. U.S. Patent Pub. No. US20140014126, claiming a priority date of July 11, 2012 (years before any Evolv product offered temperature control) and assigned to an Israeli company, specifically describes such an approach for an e-cig. Similarly, Chinese inventors describe such approaches. See, e.g., Chinese Pat. Pub. No. CN100577230, priority date of Dec. 22, 2004; CN101862038, priority date of April 15, 2009, CN203759472, priority date of January 24, 2014.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vlad1

retird

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 31, 2010
5,133
5,862
North Side
So now we talk patents (this can easily cause a thread to be closed)... one only needs to read Evolv's patent and can plainly see anybody using Power Regulation (variable wattage) is..... well you have read this before...... as John said "the wheels of justice move slower than the cloners". This subject won't be settled here and debate is futile....social media will decide nothing.....

FACT..... Yihi is using Power Regulation (variable wattage) patented by Evolv.... nuff said.... for comparison.... the DNA40 is covered by a patent and Yihi is naked....

May be a good idea to drop the patent talk... IMO....
 
  • Like
Reactions: dr g

dems86

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 3, 2014
3,441
8,146
Sacramento, CA, US
Contender #3 has just stepped up in this bia bia

53df1aa93b7e43de5f55aceaab927b3b.jpg


THE WGU CLUB
Card Carrying Member/Co-Founder
 
  • Like
Reactions: jstrong

mcclintock

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
  • Oct 28, 2014
    1,547
    1,787
    So now we talk patents (this can easily cause a thread to be closed)... one only needs to read Evolv's patent and can plainly see anybody using Power Regulation (variable wattage) is [...]
    Humm, one of the most interesting and worthwhile things to talk about. I'm not going to talk patents, though, just point out:
    The first wire hooked to a battery as a heating element had a degree of temperature regulation due to constant voltage drive and positive temperature coefficient. Later, wires such as nichrome and Kanthal were invented to have a constant power draw over temperature instead.
    The self-regulation of temperature of heating wires with a temperature coefficient is negated if the power flow is regulated continuously, instead of voltage.
    Due to this, the idea of temperature control occurred to me about 60 seconds after hearing the purpose of variable power, although I did not follow up on it.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: aldenf

    Yozhik

    Super Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Feb 4, 2015
    925
    1,359
    Chicago, IL
    So now we talk patents (this can easily cause a thread to be closed)... one only needs to read Evolv's patent and can plainly see anybody using Power Regulation (variable wattage) is..... well you have read this before...... as John said "the wheels of justice move slower than the cloners". This subject won't be settled here and debate is futile....social media will decide nothing.....

    FACT..... Yihi is using Power Regulation (variable wattage) patented by Evolv.... nuff said.... for comparison.... the DNA40 is covered by a patent and Yihi is naked....

    May be a good idea to drop the patent talk... IMO....

    Reading a patent is not the same as understanding it in terms of Intellectual Property law. First, the specification of a patent confers no legal rights. Only the claims of a patent can provide legal rights. The specification is useful to understanding the claims, but one should not assume everything it describes is inventive. For example, it is quite routine in patent prosecution to discuss a considerable amount of prior art in the specification that helps enable an embodiment of the invention.

    Now as to the actual claims of Evolv's patent, it does not claim every and all aspects of power regulation. In fact, the claims generally make a clear disclaimer otherwise, which is that any power manager that is configured to regulate the power level delivered to a heating element based on heating element parameters and a state of the power source is not covered by Evolv's patent. The prosecution history as well supports this as disclaimer by the applicant toward any interpretation of the claims otherwise. This disclaimer can be actually quite broad. For example, if the power manager takes into account that the heating element has no resistance and thereby changes its operation, that power manager can arguably be outside the scope of Evolv's patent claims. As another example, if the power manager detects that the battery is in a low charge state and adjusts its operation, that power manager can also arguably be outside the scope of Evolv's patent claims.

    So the facts here are actually as following:
    YiHi is using some form of Power Regulation.
    Evolv has a patent claiming a particular aspect of power regulation, but not all aspects of power regulation.
    Whether YiHi's form of power regulation falls under the particular aspect of power regulation claimed by Evolv's patent is unclear, as it depends on the extent to which YiHi's power management approach utilizes (or not) elements disclaimed by Evolv.
     

    dr g

    Moved On
    ECF Veteran
    Mar 12, 2012
    3,554
    2,406
    Paradise
    Yihi's history didn't start with the SX350J. Or the SX350 for that matter.

    What you are saying is a technical version of the common bleat that Evolv's patent is "too broad" and "will be invalidated" ... until such time as it is proven so, we can clearly see that any existing VW implementation is in violation of the patent.

    Bunch of wishful thinking if you ask me, and frankly disgusting that the actual innovator of these technologies is held in such scorn.
     
    Last edited:

    Yozhik

    Super Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Feb 4, 2015
    925
    1,359
    Chicago, IL
    Yihi's history didn't start with the SX350J. Or the SX350 for that matter.

    What you are saying is a technical version of the common bleat that Evolv's patent is "too broad" and "will be invalidated" ... until such time as it is proven so, we can clearly see that any existing VW implementation is in violation of the patent.

    Bunch of wishful thinking if you ask me, and frankly disgusting that the actual innovator of these technologies is held in such scorn.

    No, I'm not saying that Evolv's patent will be invalidated, though that is a possibility for any patent holder should they seek or threaten enforcement. Rather, the point I've made is that Evolv has legal rights with respect to certain aspects, but not all aspects, of power regulation. Thus, to conclude that Evolv's patent applies to Yihi's products merely because products are similar is not a credible argument. Rather, one needs to look at the patent claims in view of the specification and prosecution history, then argue that any disclaimers or amendments with respect to those claims' scope doesn't apply to YiHi's products that perform power regulation. For example, if Yihi is taking into account heating element parameters and a state of the power source to provide power regulation that appears the same as Evolv's power regulation, it is very unlikely that Evolv could ever prevail on a claim of patent infringement. Further, since Kanthal is generally highly stable in terms of heating parameters, it would be rather unlikely that a consumer could figure out if that approach is being taken or not merely from using the device for that purpose.

    Finally, my first couple posts were about temperature control, in which I pointed out that there is a lot of prior art. Thus, it isn't reasonable to claim that Evolv invented temperature control. They may have invented particular new approaches to temperature control, but then so may have Yihi, as there's rarely only one way to solve a problem.
     

    jstrong

    Super Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Dec 7, 2014
    849
    862
    Virginia
    Still haven't really had a chance to look "not really into Facebook" but giving the benefit of the doubt of two separate devices with failures and using a conservative estimate of 5000 devices sold would put the Failure Rate at .04% which I would think to be well below a manufacturers expected fault range.

    Comparing this fail rate to that of the DNA 40 displays, I've heard 5% & 6% but don't really know and we have numerous individual reports that have had multiple devices exhibit the problem which leads me to believe it's a much higher percentage than stated on the DNA 40. At any rate there's no comparison in the fail rate or anything that would support that the SXmini M has any type of design or functional problem with the display anything remotely close to that of the DNA 40, other than 1 or 2 possible failures.
    100% DNA 40 Failure rate with me. My Vaporflask, Hana V4 and 3 Vaporsharks have all gitched even with the newest board :facepalm: MY SX Mini once I got the joules and temp correct is perfect minus the paint issue which I will have a new one Tuesday finally.
     

    Vlad1

    Ultra Member
    ECF Veteran
    Apr 8, 2014
    1,444
    1,459
    Earth
    100% DNA 40 Failure rate with me. My Vaporflask, Hana V4 and 3 Vaporsharks have all gitched even with the newest board :facepalm: MY SX Mini once I got the joules and temp correct is perfect minus the paint issue which I will have a new one Tuesday finally.

    From what I'm reading the "fix" for the DNA is a screen reset that refreshes the screen periodically so it's not as problematic for the consumer. So the bug is still there just mostly hidden in the background so the user isn't staring at the scrambled screen.

    The paint on the SXmini M, at least in the batch I received mine from is definitely a manufacturing problem. I just covered mine with Monokote as I didn't want to send it back. The overall build of the device is so solid and nice and functionally almost flawless aside from the stinking paint. I'm glad Yihi is standing behind their product and replacing the units that people are having paint issues with. Not all manufacturers are standing behind their product in today's market. Varitube received a new batch yesterday I'm hopeful that those that he received have better paint. Guessing your getting a new batch as well.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: dems86
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread