Not quite all. It's a very very simplistic conceptual discussion and in the end there's a reason why it took 5 years before it actually made it into a product -- it's not anywhere near that easy.
Anyone notice the mention of self-calibration?
I disagree slightly. I wouldn't say it was as much "hard to implement" as I would say that "the processing power required to implement in a device small enough was not cheap enough yet to implement at a price point that would allow the final product to be affordable for enough consumers to purchase in order for a company to recover development costs and actually make a profit".
Yeah and it could be a coincidence that the industry suddenly widely released TC independently exactly one cloning/reverse engineering cycle after Evolv released it.
And made it look and work just like the Evolv product, in many cases, or marketed it just like the Evolv product. Coincidentally.
Standard thing in a free market system that "new products" are what generate the most revenue. Hard to sell a new product that doesn't at least have the same features as the product they are competing against.
Other than the use of a pure, single element (consistent from sample of wire to another vs an alloy that is wildly different in composition between samples) heating coil material that can provide a predictable ΔR to ΔT curve, and using resistance to calculate the ΔT, the similarities end there. Using resistance to measure temperature is nothing new. This is how. Thermocouples used with multimeters and even home thermostats use this concept, and have for years. The different devices useradically different ways to manage the temp regulation.
You know it's a common belief that Thomas Edison invented the electric light. Fact is other inventors had previously demonstrated illumination of a filament with electricity almost 80 years prior to him. He just made it more economical / practical and history has credited the invention to him.
There are many cases of Edison stealing others ideas, and using shady practices all along...don't get me started on Edison lol
I have yet to see a TC-enabled mod that works anything like Evolv's approach. Just looking at the Oscope captures on pbusardo's videos, one can see they are all quite different in how they approach temperature control.
I agree. Evolv likes to modulate the amount of power to change temp while YiHi likes to vary pulses to help regulate it (a concept that is used quite frequently in resistance brazing/soldering/welding processes-- and has for years. Each method has its merits and drawbacks.but both methods do work.
No, that shows they are different in how they approach power regulation. Same as it has always been.
Earlier you said they did things exactly the same way as Evolv. So which statement do you stand by?
For Comparison... yet another reviewer....
Reviewer or used car salesman. His reviews are more infomercial than unbiased review
Retird does enjoy this. This is typical behavior from him. He keeps a careful log of every complaint he can find and saves it for a big reveal later that he can post to prove a mod should not be trusted and has far more problems than any product should have. Of course, he doesn't do this with Evolv products. But that's probably because the amount of posted problems would exceed the maximum post size so it can't really be done. But that does speak to a lack of consistency on his part.
But that's just the way Retird is, so since he gets enjoyment from this just let him have his fun in his twilight years.
Evolve doesn't have that many problems, just one or two that they just haven't been able to correct yet.
To save the reader any unnecessary drudging through other threads here is the problem and solution to firmware ver 2.1 "at least until firmware patch is released."
Problem: Check Battery error after inserting a new battery when in Eco mode
Solution: Do not remove / replace battery when in Eco mode, Switch to any other mode prior to battery removal.
In the IT world (as with other areas as well), issues that have a reasonable workaround like this, and that do not cause any significant impact on time to work around are RARELY show-stoppers, so in addition to finding the fix, it's common practice to go through a rigorous regression testing process - to insure nothing else was broken trying to fix the initial problem. In other words they would rather take the time to do it right under moderate pressure from a few users who are mildly annoyed than to resolve under a LOT of pressure from a LOt of users who are quite angry.
I'd say your out to lunch. To request a update with major functional changes to be pulled due to a nuisance bug is absurd. On the other hand if there were a safety issue or critical problems then of course it should be pulled. I think I've used the words "over exaggeration" before and yes they apply again here.
I agree, the bugs introduced are no more than a minor nuisance, that I would bet a majority of users would never experience. I bet if you asked ALL SX mini users how they charge their batteries, you would find that outside of the small sampling of users you see on here, almost all users are utilizing the USB port for charging so would never experience the issue-- if they even upgraded at all!
Yup. if your not willing to suffer any unforeseen problems it's a good idea to wait on any patches. Back in the 90's we adopted a methodology that any new code, Including Microsoft, Oracle, Antivirus or anything that would change a system would go through the exact same rigors as our in house developed code. First through the development servers, then test servers, then staging servers and then finally to the production servers if no problems were found. It would typically take about a week to make it through the change control process and make it through to production. And yea we still came across problems occasionally that weren't detected in the test & verification process.
This update is not a mandate, it's optional and people can use their device just fine without it.
I would venture to say this is how IT in many large companies operates. I know my company is like that. We are not known as an IT company, but are the leader in areas of electrical, automotive, truck, aerospace and hydraulics. With that said, we only made the move within the last 2 years or so toward migrating all users from Windows XP into Windows 7.
I have a buddy that has a DNA 40 that is persistently getting a scrambled screen. It goes away but randomly reappears and is bothersome to him. Can you tell me what firmware version he's running? Or how he can check his firmware version? Are there any firmware updates he could get to fix his problem. He's stated he's contacted his vendor and they tell him it's the latest version. He's contacted the DNA 40 board manufacturer and they won't help him and redirect him back to the vendor. Should I contact the Manufacturer on his behalf?
In many sectors, the heavily discounted pricing that the OEM of the final product get on components comes with the expectation that the producer of the final product takes on the burden of managing the support of the component when used in their product...so that explains why Evolv is sending folks back to the maker of the mod. Unfortunately, not all mod makers have been the best at handling the issues.
You do not need to know any of those things. No there are no firmware updates that will fix the problem. The fix is hardware and every version of the board has the same fix.
Yet, there has been at least one big board change since the DNA40 was released (when they added the header to allow different screens), yet, they still didn't fix the big problem causing the garbled screens?
Have you contacted Evolv and Vapor Shark? If ya want just PM me with your buddy's phone number and I'll call him and get the info and try to help him...
Good luck dealing with VaporShark. They have been less than helpful with any concerns.
So you want to chastise the beta testers again without any idea of the process... fine.... you are also chastising Pbusardo also and all the other beta testers.... that has nothing to do with me wanting to help your buddy....
FYI I have already communicated your buddy's situation (early this morning) ( with the info you stated) and will let ya know the results....
Many of us who purchased feel like we were beta testers with the whole DNA40 fiasco
I'm not some YiHi fanboy and Evolv basher. I own 3 DNA40 devices, and 2 SX devices. Both have their merits and disadvantages. It's like comparing my full size pickup to the wife's more compact car. Both get me from point a to point b, but if I know parking is going to be tight, I'd rather take her compact car vs my truck. If I want room to sit comfortably for a longer period of time, want a little more power for managing traffic, want better visibility and want to be more comfortable, I take my truck. If I want a more compact, simplified Vape device, I grab my VaporShark. If I want a little more control over my vaping experience, a little more flexibility and the convenience of quickly swappable batteries, I grab my SX mini or Ipv mini. With that being said, there is no denying that Evolv may have made a few bad choices in how they handled the DNA40 issues...but they need to start making it right, or they will soon go the way of Blackberry.
