Should The EEVblog Meter Be Open Source? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 02, 2016, 11:42:19 pm
content: As the title says.This is NOT the BM235, it's the fully custom meter that is being worked on.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:02:40 am
content: The question is not clear. If you are even considering making it open source, then there is really no drawback to doing so, just publish all you have in the end.Another question if you want to run it as an open source project accepting contributions from people. Then it becomes more of a hassle.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:17:30 am
content: Sure, I vote yes. I think it adds value to it. So, assuming it fits your business needs - do it!It would be even cooler to open source if it were a bench instrument that can be expanded with custom acquisition boards and firmware! For example, make multiple units potential operate in a master-slave mode to make multiple time-synchronized measurements, controlled from and stored onto a microSD card on the master.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:21:36 am
content: One thing that comes to mind, is that if it is FULLY open sourced. Others can make custom firmware for it, which may extend its functionality. E.g. Turning it into a powerful data logger, etc etc.Because most other multimeters are closed source, it should be useful to have an open sourced one. Especially if it is of good build quality and reasonably accurate.One (E.g. some Canons) or more cameras (even though it is NOT officially open sourced), can have custom firmware. So firmware has been made available (by the community), to give low cost cameras powerful features, such as time lapse photography etc etc.Maybe a similar thing could happen to the multimeter, if successful.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:22:12 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on May 03, 2016, 12:02:40 amIt is not just me doing this, another company is involved who is unsure of the value of open sourcing.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:23:20 am
content: Quote from: bson on May 03, 2016, 12:17:30 amIt is not that. Handheld meter.

author: lukier
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:29:40 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 12:22:12 amI think it would be a nice to have feature, but no a dealbreaker.Is this company really keen on releasing open source? It would be very surprising, as I expect they used codebase they've been developing for years for a range of products, some dependencies might come from external vendor under NDA, yadda yadda.Also, let's hope certification bodies (UL, CAT) are OK with this.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:30:52 am
content: Software, hardware or both?

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:31:19 am
content: For purpose build hardware with little to no room for software hacking schematics for repair are all that's needed really.If it was a micro driven device it would be different.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:34:52 am
content: Quote from: lukier on May 03, 2016, 12:29:40 amI was thinking this as well. Seems like a big can of worms.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:35:25 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 12:22:12 amI don't know how it goes for hardware, but for software, I open source all my personal projects and I see a huge value in that. If software is of any interest, then you will be getting free contributions and functionality extensions.

author: Satch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:36:53 am
content: As a newbie to the forum I don't really want to cast a vote so to speak but if it hinders the release then I would think really hard about whether it was absolutely necesaary. I haven't been this jacked about a new piece of kit since I was a kid daydreaming in the Heathkit catalogue.

author: bitseeker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:37:09 am
content: For that company, open sourcing it would be a good learning experience as to the value of making at least the firmware and schematics available. I very much hesitate to purchase devices that I can't at least repair when the need arises. Conversely, I'm much more drawn to devices that can be hacked (in the true sense of the word) as well as repaired. Even if I don't have the time to do the hacking myself, there's intangible value to the possibility of doing so at any time. And it's fun seeing what others are able to accomplish. That's what open source is really about, not blantantly replicating designs for profit.So, yes, at least make the firmware and schematics available. I'd also be interested in the rest of what goes on with an open hardware product (i.e., the process of bringing it to market, working with partners, keeping the product alive and fresh despite inevitable mass copying, etc.).

author: HackedFridgeMagnet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:42:15 am
content: If you can get it I would say yes. ( if UL and the manufacturer allow it)But obviously you would need to price fairly competitively to beat the clones.It would be good for the EEVBlog brand I think, your clients being engineers, electronic hackers, hobbyists, people with an interest in what is going on under the hood.It would be good if people need to customise their meter for some specific purpose that they cant get with other meters.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:42:26 am
content: The Chinese will copy it badly.If you're selling it at a fair price and the quality is reasonable then you have nothing to fear. In fact, you just won over 100% of the worlds 'makers'If you're taking the piss with the price then the Chinese clones might be a real threat. (Some. Most?) People intuit when they're getting screwed. I doubt many people will be buying them for work.Personally, I think it'd be awesome to open source it. I don't need another meter. I doubt I'd buy one of yours if it was closed.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:47:51 am
content: Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 12:42:26 amOnly if it actually adds value over most of the meters on the market.UNI-T makes reasonable meters at a reasonable price. They are good enough for most day to day low-voltage work. There is no point in competing with that.And you need to do a lot of marketing before volumes on this thing will become big enough to justify tooling for plastics and all that good stuff. I doubt that any Chinese vendor will be interested even if all active users of this forum make a preorder.I think the bigger questions is, what are the main killer features? Having uCurrent built-in would be a nice one, for example.

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 01:01:45 am
content: Depends, do you want to deal with the whiny osh crowd complaining about file formats, software libraries and such?

author: TheDirty
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:03:46 am
content: Tough choice and I'm not sure what a forum poll will do. We have everything to gain from it being open source and nothing to lose.As a manufacturer you have to juggle the benefit of extra sales with the chance of lost sales due to copies and the possibility of extra support and possible legal costs. Having it open source may imply the manufacturer supports diy modification.

author: tombi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:22:17 am
content: Definitely open source firmware - I mean really is there any significant IP in that? On the other hand people might implement features that could be merged back into the 'official' distribution. Does it have a comms interface? Are you planning to provide Linux/Mac support? If the protocol is open somebody might do it for you!If you are aiming for the hobbyist market, some of the HobbyKing RC hardware is a good example. It's popularity stems from it's hackability (like the Turnigy transmitters and the AfroTech ESCs, KK and MuiltiWii control boards etc).Hardware - at least make the schematic and component placements open - think of all the broken HP/Agilent/Tektronix gear we all buy and fix because the service manuals contain full schematics.Open sourcing doesn't imply anything in terms of warranty I think - you can write what you want in the license. Physical modification has to void warranty (for safety if nothing else)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:25:51 am
content: Quote from: lukier on May 03, 2016, 12:29:40 amLike most companies they do not understand it and are hesitant.QuoteInteresting thought, but I can't see why they wouldn't be. They certify the meter they are given. And meters have upgradeable firmware all the time.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:29:06 am
content: Quote from: HackedFridgeMagnet on May 03, 2016, 12:42:15 amOpen sourcing does really enable clones, they will happen regardless.In fact, open sourcing under a suitable license can protect the company, because it legally forces any company to that uses the code or schematic to also open source their product and improvements.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:31:34 am
content: Quote from: tombi on May 03, 2016, 02:22:17 amThat's what I'm trying to convince them, that there really isn't any IP in it.The code that talks to the chipset? Meh, every other meter makes uses the same chip and likely has their own code.Code for the functions? Meh, every other meter maker already has their own code to do that.Code for the Bluetooth and data logging etc, same thing.etc

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:32:13 am
content: Quote from: ConKbot on May 03, 2016, 01:01:45 amI'll include a big fat ASCII middle finder in the code

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:33:57 am
content: Quote from: TheDirty on May 03, 2016, 02:03:46 amAny cloner can get the code out of even a code protected micro. PCB's can be reverse engineered in days. You can't stop them.PCB files and CAD case files etc will not be released for that reason though.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:35:29 am
content: Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 12:42:26 amThat's the point.Zero open source meters on the market, so this one becomes defacto standard.QuoteGood data point, thanks.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:45:51 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on May 03, 2016, 12:35:25 amI don't open source any of my work. It's like leading out my equipment, it's cost the user nothing so they don't take care of it. If it's free the work that went into it is perceived as of no value.My time is worth something, if someone came to me and offered their time towards the project no problem I would give them the code.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:58:18 am
content: BTW, the other thing the manufacturer suggested is perhaps an NDA or signed license agreement type thing for the source code for those who want to play with it.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 03:08:33 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 02:58:18 amJust a thought, once the meter is "rooted", there should be a "permanent" sign or notice that can easily spotted like at LCD when turned on for the 1st time.Of course this feature can not be "easily" turned off by hacking / script kiddies. Although I'm not sure if this feature is feasible and economically to be implemented.As long it's easy to spot if the firmware had been altered by user, this may ease at Dave/manufacturer's side on supporting, like support/warranty will be gone once rooted, and also useful for 2nd hand market where people are starting to sell/buy used ones.

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 03:13:44 am
content: True open source is usually very hard for companies since they are probably using libraries from all over the place with different licenses. For GPL, they would have to get permission from the authors/copyright holders of every single library.However, if they have an open API with something like embedded Lua language, with a powerful enough API, they could achieve essentially the same thing. The API would still leave the manufacturer in low level control over what is happening, and that might make them feel more comfortable. Lua would only needs something like 200Kbytes of ROM, and is under MIT license which is excellent for commercial manufacturers.The trick would be to set up the API to be as general as possible and to have a license for the API that encourages other companies to use it. There are probably people in this forum that would probably jump at the chance to help document the API in really great way. Especially if they get the multimeter free for their efforts.If you look at something like the Blender 3D interface, every button and control you see has an attached python script that calls underlying API commands. All these scripts can be easily edited and changed by a user, if they wish. If the multimeter had all the switched functions and display functions as Lua scripts, then all those script could be customised by end users. So a user could take, say, a standard DC voltage range and add to it extra averaging, standard deviation calculations, logging - whatever they can thing of.This would also make it easy to have a "reset to factory" option to save people, and to also help in warranty situations.No need for an assembler package and no need to open their source code.Richard

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 03:15:03 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on May 03, 2016, 03:08:33 amI think you are getting ahead of yourself. The biggest challenge here is to find people wanting to buy one, apart from people wanting to support Dave personally.Why would anyone need another standard meter, especially if there is a tricky procedure for rooting.In case of Rigol and Flir there is significant value to be gained. What can you "unlock" in a meter? The biggest mod I ever seen people do is to hack back light into a cheaper model. I see no evidence of demand for much more.If it had graphical display, then possibilities are opening a little bit.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:00:21 am
content: Quote from: amspire on May 03, 2016, 03:13:44 amIt's a hand held multimeter. Pretty sure the code is all custom.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:02:33 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on May 03, 2016, 03:15:03 amSo every meter manufacturer in the world shouldn't bother bringing out new models any more?

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:07:55 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 04:02:33 amThat's not what I'm saying.If making meters and marketing them accordingly is something you want to do, then by all means. But thinking how open or closed source can affect anything at this point is a bit premature, IMO.I guess I'm just missing the point of the original question. Open source is better than closed source all other things being equal, but I don't think it is a huge selling point.

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:11:19 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 04:00:21 amIt could be, but they wouldn't rewrite the code completely for every multimeter. If they have re-used code libraries that are in all their multimeters, then when they open source this code, they are opening some of the code used in every other multimeter. It may be they do not want that. They are showing their libraries to every other multimeter manufacturer.A thing I have often seen is a programmer needs to do something they haven't done before, and so they go to the web to find a code snippet that does the job. They put the snippet in their closed source product and no one knows. If you then try and make that source open, you have to find all code snippets like this that were pulled from other sources, track down the authors and ask for permission.The API approach does mean it is much more accessible to an average user. If I want the meter to average over 10 seconds and return an extra digit or two - I could just edit a python script to increase averaging, and find a way to send the extra digit(s) somewhere - perhaps the secondary numeric display. Simple and quick- Windows Notepad, an RS232 connection and 5 minutes of time.If I have to open up an assembler, spend a day working out what the obscure assembler does at least enough to add my changes, compile, and then completely rewrite the firmware with the risk I may brick the multimeter, I wouldn't bother.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:15:42 am
content: QuotePress that "No" button you have. Most of tinkerers who would otherwise play with the meter or adopt to their custom needs may not bother going thru hassle asking manufacturer (which likely will want to ask them questions, why you need firmware, what you want to do, etc-etc). It's also prevents easy sharing of "mods" and "tweaks" which otherwise could be popping up on forum here like mushrooms. Make it open and friendly (remember Red Pitaya hassle?) or don't open at all, I'd say.It can go big if meter have decent hardware and PC interface (infrared, BT or otherwise) with readily provided API/code examples. Should not be hard to open a dedicated forum section "EEVBlog DMMxxx - tweaks and user mods" - and have all those young players posting all their stuff and their code for your meter there. I'm sure big guys would see this and be thinking "why we did not think of this years ago?". This works for smartphones obviously, there is large community posting custom OS images for their Droids of every manufacturer, you name it.I'm seeing this kinda users even with bench DMMs, doing their own mods for their often 1K+$ units, given zero support, no firmware, often even no schematics at all. Or the scope haxors, which I'm sure you aware of. Or take other scale - usual PC gamers, who make their custom levels, mods, addons and such for favorite old games they like. Make it funEven better if someone "forgot" on assembly line to remove handy SPI/I2C header from the meter's PCB, which allows to connect custom sensors to meter!

author: bitwelder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:33:16 am
content: Yes, it would be an interesting to see an 'Arduino of multimeters': it has a certain set of basic functions when it comes out of the box, but if you want to hack it and make it into a specialized instrument, you at least have the possibility to try that.In that sense, I hope this multimeter will be designed with an 'expansion port' (carrying I2C, SPI or whatever bus fits best) and e.g. BLE connectivity (and a decent API).

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 05:26:13 am
content: It would be a great selling point to have it open source. I think it could be problematic for warranty purposes but there are ways to mitigate this. Make the source available by NDA and with an agreement that the warranty might be void if the firmware is changed. Control this by serial number. The problem is that the source will get leaked. So maybe have the firmware have a flag that changes with any update so that any meter sent in for warranty would be obvious whether the firmware was changed or not. Of course this is not a perfect solution neither......

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 05:33:56 am
content: Schematic: Yes, of course.Firmware: I say it depends on whether or not the screen is dot-matrix and whether you're doing it as a way of offloading the programming instead of doing it yourself.A dot matrix screen gives a lot of possibilities.Letting other people write the firmware makes sense if you don't enjoy that or don't have much free time. The worst possible thing would be to waste a lot of time writing some firmware that's instantly replaced by everybody who buys the meter.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 05:36:18 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on May 03, 2016, 05:26:13 amI'm not sure how firmware could blow the circuitry of a multimeter. It won't be able to switch out the input protection or anything like that.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 05:45:11 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 12:23:20 amOh I know, I was just dreaming!

author: IanJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:06:16 am
content: QuoteIf in doubt then don't do it......I guess you can always change your mind later when you see how sales go.Ian.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:12:15 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 03, 2016, 05:36:18 amWithout knowing how the multimeter works at the very least someone might be able to brick their meter.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:49:54 am
content: Quote from: amspire on May 03, 2016, 04:11:19 amIt's written in C

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:50:44 am
content: Quote from: IanJ on May 03, 2016, 06:06:16 amTrue.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:52:09 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 03, 2016, 05:33:56 amNope, dual 7 segment.The idea is that people can tweak the meter to do what they want.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 07:14:03 am
content: I would love to see open source firmware for a meter. Could be a real thing, dumbed down meters for custom applications. Super good idea.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 07:36:51 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on May 03, 2016, 06:12:15 amIf it uses a bootloader-style programming interface then it shouldn't be brickable - look at how many idiots^Wpeople upload programs to Arduinos all day long without bricking them.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 07:54:48 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 06:52:09 amThat kinda limits how much value people could really add over decent stock firmware.It would be nice for people to be able to update the first firmwares, sure, but after a couple of months it would be "finished" and not much point in changing anything else. Maybe somebody would reprogram it to play a crap version of Frogger, but...I guess it comes down to how much effort it would take to document it and provide the programming tools.(I know - a hack to turn the display upside down for people who live in the northern hemisphere!)

author: bktemp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 07:56:40 am
content: I don't see any benefit in making a handheld multimeter open source:The functionality is limited by the chipset used and the hardware in the device, therefore it is impossible to add many new features in software unless the necessary hardware is already on the pcb (like flash memory for data logging or IR transceiver for communication). Adding new hardware in a handheld multimeter is pretty much impossible because of the restricted space.If it would be a benchtop multimeter with a large graphical display and room in its case for own extensions (like bluetooth or wifi) it would be a completely different story, but for a handheld multimeter I think open source is useless.

author: han
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 08:27:33 am
content: Open source for Ordinary DMM = NO.But for niche app like interval data loging, custom sensor metering,.. an DMM with open source HW/SW is very promising.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 08:31:44 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on May 03, 2016, 12:47:51 amFair point.Quote from: ConKbot on May 03, 2016, 01:01:45 amThe OSH crowd may be pedants, but you've clearly missed the self-entitlement of the other crowd if you think there's smooth sailing ahead.Quote from: blacksheeplogic on May 03, 2016, 02:45:51 amI don't open source much of my work either.I open source all of my play however. You think you're so clever someone gives a shit about your software and they'll steal it? Give me a break.Quote from: blacksheeplogic on May 03, 2016, 02:45:51 amIt's nothing like that. It couldn't be further from that. What are you thinking?Quote from: blacksheeplogic on May 03, 2016, 02:45:51 amMost of the time that perception is right. Occasionally someone might help with a bug report, feedback, a patch. These things do have value to you and don't impart any obligation. That's kind of amazing isn't it? That, right there, is a free lunch.Quote from: blacksheeplogic on May 03, 2016, 02:45:51 amMy time's worth something too. I wouldn't waste it dicking around with a fence sitter.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 08:49:15 am
content: It would be nice, and allow some user customisation, but not a huge deal. There is the issue of warranty. certifications etc. ( do safety certs cover things like showing an erroneous low reading?).This could easily be addressed as follows :Manufacturer updates can be done without opening the cover, using signed code.If you want to load your own code, you have to open the case (e.g. to solder-blob a link on the PCB), breaking a warranty seal.Or at least have some sort of irreversable software function to enable loading other code.Thinking about it, maybe a secure bootloader is the answer here - the bootloader is not open sourced, and protected ( most MCUs have mechanisms for this). It will only load signed code, unless you do some special action, which then allows it to load unsigned code.It would also be possible to reload a manufacturer update to return it to a 'factory' stateThe bootloader would show some clear indication at power-up to flag that it is running non-factory code.If the company believes that not open sourcing will protect against copying, they should also believe that the combination of a secure loader and OS application software will achieve the same thing.If nothing else the "Open Source" label with undoubtedly get you some free publicity (though you will also get the more religious factions whinging that it's not "OS enough", but there's no pleasing some people!).the NDA thing is stupid - nobody will be interested, except maybe someone who will do it and then allow it to "escape"

author: timgiles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 09:31:06 am
content: Prehaps I should change my vote!In relation to whether I would purchase the meter, the Open Source nature of it makes little difference, so I voted as such.Would it be preferred - yes. Why? Well, if it is going to be an EEVBlog meter, then surely it should be built on the foundations of the EEVBlog. Namely, dont turn it on, take it apart. So the more available and open the product, the more fully meter reflects its heritage. While this starts with the schematic, opening the firmware helps enormously. It might also mean that fixes can be suggested by the community, improvements etc...

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:12:04 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 03, 2016, 08:49:15 amQuoteQuite a lot I suspect, it's main benefit.QuoteDeath, taxes, and people whinging about open source details.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:15:24 am
content: Quote from: timgiles on May 03, 2016, 09:31:06 amYes, I think I worded the poll wrong. The answer will be obviously fairly biased.Maybe I'll start another one - "Would an Open Source EEVblog meter be of benefit to you (or make you want to buy it)"I might edit this one and reset the stats?QuoteIt's possible to just release the schematic and then maybe provide some libraries like custom LCD driver, chipset driver etc.

author: stmdude
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:24:28 am
content: Yup, I'd be interested, but I don't think I would care about the "Open Source" part of it.If I wanted to mess around with the meter, the first thing I would want is accessable ISP pins, to recover from my own issues. Also, a way to restore the original firmware.After that, I'd want to be able to find the datasheets for things like LCDs and other special chips in use (ADCs, etc).Lastly, some rudimentary schematic (doesn't need to be complete) that shows me what's hooked up to which pins on the MCU.Once I have all that (I could even figure out the schematics on my own), there's nothing stopping me...Then again, I've got some experience with bringing up stuff, so I might not be the average target audience.However, only _one_ person outside of the OEM needs to do this, and share with the others.This could be an easier sell to the OEM than giving away their code.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:29:23 am
content: Quote from: stmdude on May 03, 2016, 10:24:28 amStandard Microchip ICSP header is there.QuoteYes. I suspect someone would do it anyway once they see the ISCP header.QuoteI would be a much easier sell.I'm kind of liking the idea of schematic + drivers + an info page with datasheets etc.

author: obiwanjacobi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:48:23 am
content: Add a prototyping area on the pcb

author: technix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:54:43 am
content: You can open source the hardware with nice doumentation but keep the software closed source. Opening the hardware or not does not impede cloners but as you have pointed out opening the hardware will allow easier enforcement of some license terms on them. Software, especially libraries can fall under proprietary license terms and hence unsuitable for releasing. So just release the hardware and documentation for the software can be enough. The community can cook up their own software based on exclusively open source tools and libraries. Just don't implement any form of DRM that prevents the community to load an alternative firmware onto it.Or you can release some code without triggering NDA, by releasing the NDA-covered parts through binary blobs (that is, proprietary-licensed libraries that have an open and well documented interface, as well as allowing free usage of the libraries.) Linux kernel currently does this, while the bulk of the kernel is free and open source some drivers comes with blobs.About UL, you can have a clear warning on the documentation that the certifications only applies to meters when using with official firmware: custom firmware = use at your own risk.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 10:58:04 am
content: I voted yes. If the microcontroller is easy to program with freely available tools it could open up the possibility to add new features or fix things which aren't so well implemented. It all comes down to how much room there is left in the microcontroller, how well the initial firmware is written and how well documented & flexible the hardware really is. I'd expect that the open source firmware will end up being a complete rewrite of the original firmware quickly.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 11:00:36 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 10:29:23 amThe problem with that is it greatly reduces the usefulness of open-sourcing it - I think the most likley thing people will want to do is make minor tweaks and mods , not rewriting the whole thing from scratch.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 11:04:18 am
content: Schematic - YESDocument any interface it has for logging - YESIf logging, provide source for communications - YESDocument alignment procedure - YESWell written manual - YESParts placement / Layout - MaybeMechanical parts 3D files - No interestSource code for the meter itself - Can't see a need as long as the code supplied is solidI guess that's a depends.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 11:14:25 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 03, 2016, 11:00:36 amWell it's not really open sourcing it. It's closed source, but some helpful technical details are provided so that people can do their own thing if they really want.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 11:40:51 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 03, 2016, 11:00:36 amYup, the reason for buying an open source DMM is to be able to add some odd features I need or which would simplify my measuring tasks, like automation (especially with a Bluetooth interface available). Automation is a feature which you get only with expensive bench multimeters. I think an open source DMM could be a niche product for this kind of application, mainly for the hobbyist and the maker crowd.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:02:19 pm
content: Quote from: madires on May 03, 2016, 11:40:51 amI don't see why this would/should solve that problem. There's dozens of programmable open-source Bluetooth/USB/RS232 data acquisition boards out there (Arduino based or otherwise).

author: AF6LJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:32:42 pm
content: I always say Yes to open source, because in the end it works to the user's advantage.Does it justify the extra work the manufacturer has to do? I don't know.Depending on who the meter is marketed to would determine the value of making it open source. If you could get SparkFun to carry it and market as an open source meter you might pick up some sales there. Maybe get it in the Hack A Day store also.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 12:53:51 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 03, 2016, 12:02:19 pmWhat about ranges, input protection or isolation (USB/RS232)?

author: bktemp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 01:06:10 pm
content: Quote from: madires on May 03, 2016, 12:53:51 pmHow do you get a BT module or USB/RS232 into a handheld multimeter without breaking the isolation? I doubt it will be possible to add such features unless Dave integrates it into the hardware.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 01:12:32 pm
content: Quote from: bktemp on May 03, 2016, 01:06:10 pmBluetooth is wireless, so pretty good isolation

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 01:23:30 pm
content: Source would be nice, but I'd just buy it if it came with a Schematic. My 20 odd year protek 506 came with a full schematic that has been used A number of times over the last 20 years. The meter is getting long in the tooth now. If I could get a replacement that came with a set of documents ( and source would be gravy ), I'd buy 2.Having said that, I use the thermocouple and 20A shunt a lot, so it'd need those too

author: bktemp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 01:24:12 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 01:12:32 pmBut you still need a BT module inside the multimeter.My point is: You have to add a lot of additional hardware or at least unpopulated places on the pcb to allow for all the expansions. Otherwise it is impossible to add BT, IR or any other communication to a handheld multimeter. And that makes the DMM probably more expensive and larger.If you want to design an open source multimeter, why not make it benchtop? A benchtop multimeter can be much larger and nobody cares. Here you can add a lot of spare connectors for expansions. And because most benchtop multimeters internally use an isolation between the frontend and the digital section, it is safe to make modifications to the digital part without touching the sensitive analogue section.

author: ChunkyPastaSauce
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:02:39 pm
content: Open sourced firmware and easily accessible programming/debug interface would be awwweeessssoomeee and fun

author: jolshefsky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:27:23 pm
content: My first thought was "don't care". But then reading the responses, I decided to say "yes".Basically, I don't want another multimeter. But if I had one that I was able to tweak, then I might be inclined. I could see reason to do things like make a rolling-average function, or tweak the autorange trips/limit autoranges. Or maybe add a transistor checker!"Open source" conjures the same anxiety as people who talk of the utopia of anarchy: I say, "ok, so how would that work ... you know, REALLY?" The goal of open source (as I mistakenly see it) is to have this non-discriminatory mix of people providing input and making improvements. Yet without a benevolent dictator/dictators, it runs afoul of lousy code and runaway design (if you can even call it "design"). Then there's the issue of version control which is fairly mature for computer code. But for any kind of CAD (mechanical, schematics, layout, etc.) it might be available in big commercial packages like Altium, although my "system" of KiCAD and CVS just ain't gonna cut it with multiple users.Nonetheless, just having access to the code and schematics would be enough to make it useful to the hobbyist or to someone with a specialized need. Whether that person bothers to release that code (also open source) isn't really relevant (or, IMHO, likely.)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:44:47 pm
content: Quote from: bktemp on May 03, 2016, 01:24:12 pmGood thing it already has one

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 02:47:19 pm
content: Dave, if you open source the firmware, you want to have a clear indication that the device doesn't run the official firmware. Similar to the unlocked sign that an unlocked Android shows on boot. This will help you with support and warranty and will help users to adjust their trust in the readings. Kind of "we are not responsible anymore to displayed values".Also, think about the safety and certification issue. Can a firmware change can make the device less safe in any way or cause it to no pass safety certification? For example, if the modified firmware has arithmetic overflow and 220V is displayed as 1mv.The event of crossing from stock and supported configuration to an aftermarket hacking mode should be clear with well understood implications.Anyway, being open source will be a great selling point if your market are hackers/makers. It will give you great exposure and good will as somebody that is part of the community.

author: QuantumLogic
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 03:05:59 pm
content: For a device that is supposed to display "calibrated" values that stay constant over time (ie. measuring voltages, currents, resistances to within some 0.3% of actual), I don't see value in fiddling with the circuitry/programming inside it after purchase.As a toy/learning device (like Arduino), sure, open source it and have fun. Is that the purpose of this project? Is it aimed at becoming the first open source DMM just for the novelty of it? Add bluetooth for remote control/monitoring/datalogging, etc. I don't know what else you'd want a DMM to do that existing ones don't already do. I have no imagination nor thought about it much.I suppose price is a factor, so if the open source meter has features (or can add features over time via community updates) X, Y and Z which only DMMs that cost >$500 have, yet the open source meter only costs 1/2 that (note: I have no idea the price point of this meter), then sure it would be neat and give a real smack to the industry as a whole. "Look at this cool relatively low cost open source DMM that has more features than (insert well-known DMM manufacturer name here) and more features are being added every month for free!" Yeah, that would be cool. I can see value in that for sure.But once modifications have been made to the meter the trust in output accuracy/lack of drift/whatever decreases, except for the hardcore modder/experimenter who compares with reference equipment to ensure reliability/accuracy after changes have been made. As a basic hobbyist, I doubt I'd want or need to modify a handheld meter nor take advantage of firmware updates nor develop mods of my own. When I pick up a DMM, I want and expect it to "just work and be somewhat accurate" in its readings. If I just fiddled with the circuitry or code (done by me or someone else), I'd still have that feeling of "is this right?" in the back of my mind as I take measurements. I don't want to have to think about that when working on a circuit that is being measured because my focus is on that circuit, not the meter being used.The only update I'd see as useful would be some sort of accuracy increase due to better code algorithms that had been thoroughly tested across many samples and statistics to back up the claims. Only then would I consider upgrading my "testing device that is supposed to be reliable and accurate". But due to the limitations of the chosen chipset/hardware, I doubt such a thing would happen in reality because the percentage gains would be rather tiny.If the open-source stuff was limited to everythingoutsidethe measuring circuitry and code, then obviously I'm worrying about the wrong thing here and you can just ignore what I said. Adding fog lights, ground effects and a rear spoiler to a DMM could be great fun knowing the engine is still going to pass emissions.All that said, I may not be the intended audience for this type of product. I totally get that. I see a DMM as more of a tool than a plaything. It has one job to do, kind of like a microwave. Sure, an open source microwave could act as a calculator (if it has the full keypad like most do), but I'd not have any interest in that. If I had an idea of a use for open-sourcing a DMM, like adding bluetooth to it for remote control because of "reasons", then sure, this project would be of very high interest to me. But I don't.

author: stmdude
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 03:21:55 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 11:14:25 amMight I suggest using the word "hackable" instead of open-source if you go this route? It would cut down on the "this isn't pure OSHW/OSS" complaints..

author: 10101
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 03:54:51 pm
content: So being the beginner i am i chose yes, why is that ?Well the main reason is that we (beginners) can learn alot from other people's designs specially from an experienced person like Dave the aussie.Then when we (beginners) screw up and for some reason break/burn a multimeter it could be easier to repair (that's a plus in terms of wanting to buy).And the last one is that even if your sales aren't what they could be open source stuff spread quickly and that's more advertisement for your youtube channel.PS: if possible maybe make a diy kit so we can solder it ourselfs with proper leaded solder ?

author: Kilrah
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:09:36 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on May 03, 2016, 04:07:55 amWell IMO it can be - for example I'm currently in need of a meter, obviously this one is going to interest me and has made it into my list of choices, if it was open source I wouldn't look anywhere else anymore. I use many pieces of open source equipment and do software mods and contributions to mainline on those projects and there is no doubt it give a whole different dynamic to the products. I can add details if anybody's interested in reading me.But then when I read this...Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 11:14:25 amThat isn't open source and would have an impact close to zero. The whole point of open sourcing is to allow for quick and easy modifications to the current code to add desired behavior or fix something that is either buggy or somewhat badly designed. Say the secondary display that only shows temp... when you've got access to the source it's a matter of a couple of hours to "fix" that and put something more useful there. If it requires rewriting a complete firmware from scratch there's pretty much no chance anyone will bother even if they have a bit of technical data. The kind of person who would start such a project would only need a day to reverse engineer the hardware anyway.This isn't unheard of (the main OSS project I'm part of started that way), but can be counted on one hand's fingers.

author: charlespax
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 04:45:02 pm
content: MyT400 temperature dataloggeris open source and my experience has been wonderful. Several people from the community have contributed ideas and bug reports. A few customers have been hacking on it to meet their specific needs. Only a small portion of users will ever hack on the hardware, but to them the ability is invaluable.There is very little risk in making hardware open source. If your project is a simple PCBA, it is easy to copy with or without the source code, so there is little advantage of keeping things a secret. Something more complex like a multimeter is a bit more difficult to copy, but is certainly possible. The enclosure, schematic, layout, and BoM can be reverse engineered for a few hundred dollars. Someone would have to write new software, but that can be done very cheaply.The real thing that protects your hardware from being copied is neither the engineering cost nor the development cost, but the opportunity cost. Why would someone copy the $100 EEVblog meter when they could spend the same effort copying a $400 Fluke meter? If anything, an open source design would put off some copiers. If I were a copier, why would I copy an open source device that anyone else could easily make? The arguments against making something open source are the same arguments against making clones.When I made the MakerBot Replicator I made sure everything was released as open source. Outsiders thought we were crazy, that people would just copy us. And they did. I remember counting at least ten clones at MakerFaire New York in 2014. They were all the same interface, mechanical system, and even injection molded parts. But even with all the source files available, nobody was more successful than we were. Engineering design files are not what makes a product succeed; it is the people who make it and the brand that represents those people. It's the reason why Arduino stands taller than the clones, it's the reason Adafruit gets a 6x markup on the WS2812 LED, and it's why people will buy the world's best open source multimeter from Dave Jones.

author: Brutte
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 05:39:10 pm
content: Handheld is out of the question.It is a matter of the trust you have in that device. Handhelds main usage is to do some mains diagnostics - I do not want to scratch my head and wonder if the sw revision I have used does 230V properly or freezes after 128 samples.. Competing with that market with openness and tweaks is IMHO pointless (would require some signed drivers) and even if that open source DVMs were given away - I'd still prefer a $4 ICL7106 for mains measurement, KISS.However, a desktop (like in : "not size and weigh constrained"), low voltage (<48V) open arduino shield with decent case, capable of doing all the autorange voodoo is the way to go. No certification, no lethal voltages, occasionally some

author: dadler
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:01:24 pm
content: I vote yes on open source firmware.This is not necessarily because I need an open source multimeter, but because there are no other open source multimeters of this calibre available. I want one, I do not need one.If it is open source, sales volume will likely be much increased due to exposure via publications/word-of-mouth/blogging/etc.Most people do not need to be able to hack the firmware on their multimeter, but the ability to/novelty of the option will be a big selling factor.If your intended market segment is bulk sales to companies and enterprise, then of course I don't see much value in open sourcing the firmware. If your target market is the sorts of individuals on this forum, people who do electronics because they enjoy it, I see lots of marketing potential in open source firmware.

author: Kilrah
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:04:53 pm
content: Quote from: Brutte on May 03, 2016, 05:39:10 pmThen leave it as it is when you receive it and don't play with firmware, end of story. If others want they can and that's the point.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 06:30:05 pm
content: Quote from: Kilrah on May 03, 2016, 06:04:53 pmJust like any modified equipment in the lab, a label describing the mod and what not to trust.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 08:47:05 pm
content: I think a lot of people are missing the point.Just because youcanhack on it, doesn't mean youhaveto.Will it affect resale value? Depends if the new owner wants to be able to hack on it. Christ, just reflash the original firmware and it's either in spec or it isn't. If it isn't, you can fix it.How awesome is that?I always prefer open source. Do I mod everything I use? Of course not. Is it handy sometimes? Bloody oath it is!Can I see a use for an open meter? No. Can I see the future? Of course not! Why limit your options?I don't know if it's too late, but if it's going to be open, a dot matrix display would be nice. That opens a whole world of opportunity. I think I read that there's already mcu headroom limitations though.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 08:48:41 pm
content: This isn't really the thread for it, but while I think of it, threaded metal inserts for the case screws would be a good thing.

author: AlxDroidDev
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2016, 09:25:18 pm
content: I have more meters than I need, but if there were an open source meter that I could build at home with easy to find parts and ICs (like the ICL7107, ICL7135, MAX133, MAX134, MAX1499, just to name a few) and microcontrollers (like STM F0..F4, AVR, etc), than I would love to build one of those every now and then and just see how far I can push it w/o the fear of destroying it. I certainly would make this my "default" meter.

author: bitwelder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 05:03:58 am
content: Quote from: stmdude on May 03, 2016, 03:21:55 pmAgree. False claim of open sourcing is even worse than a fully closed sourcing. So IMHO better to use a different term or make it really clear, even on the on the outside package the limits of the 'open source' clause.Where is the "No bullshit" ethics when it counts?

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 06:21:56 am
content: Quote from: madires on May 03, 2016, 11:40:51 amYou would only need a documented API to automate measurements. That can be a long way short of open-source. Automated measurements is already a niche application, and an open source DMM would be a second degree of "nicheness" (yeah "niceness" if you prefer).If you sold 10000 of these things, would more than 100 people attempt to modify the firmware? I think it would be more like 1 individual who might bother. Then they can do a speaking tour of the makerfaires.

author: jancumps
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 06:38:26 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 10:12:04 am... aaaaand they arrived

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:02:50 am
content: Quote from: stmdude on May 03, 2016, 03:21:55 pmGood idea. If not fully open source then I like that term if say the schematic and protocols etc are available.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:08:27 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on May 04, 2016, 06:21:56 amI'd say 1 in 100 would bother if that. That's pretty typical of open source hardware.Peoplelikethe idea of open source hardware more than they will actually ever take advantage of it.I'd be willing to bet that hyping it as being the worlds first open source multimeter in a crowd funding campaign would double the number of backers.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:08:56 am
content: Anything you choose to do, please just do not scam people by using "open source" as a meaningless buzzword for a closed project with some API and basic data available. This happens way too often.Opensourcing means that you publish all relevant schematics and code. It would be a very nice thing to do, but a closed-source project with good APIs and a custom user code layer would be almost as good,if done right. Both would be good selling points for me, but calling a closed-source project "open source" would make me leave immediately.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:11:03 am
content: Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 08:48:41 pmFor the case, no.For the battery/fuse cover, yes, and captive too.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:14:12 am
content: So will it have an unmarked button?

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:45:29 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 07:08:27 amMmmmm..... yeah... if it really did double the number of backers then maybe it would be worth it. But it would have to actually be proper open source.The trouble is OS fans are zealots for a cause. Borderline religious zealots in some cases and they are loud when the strict letter of the license terms are violated. It's a can of worms. I can't help thinking for a DMM which has always primarily been a tool you might as well make it the right tool for the buyer right from the start.If it was a logic analyser that you could add new protocol support or a router which is basically a computer with sort of standard i/o ports I could sort of understand it, but a DMM? If people wanted to hack it to add built in SD card data logging storage then why not just add that on right up front or coloured backlighting for whatever functional reason or even MP3 continuity buzzer sounds and so on.Basically it seems kind of sad to have hacking the DMM as the project rather than using it to debug an actual project.

author: stmdude
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 07:50:23 am
content: I hope Dave is putting in some kind of easter-egg on the PCB.. I love the old marked track on the Blizzard accelerator. "Do not cut"

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 08:40:26 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 07:08:27 amAlthough few people would actually mod the code, if someone did a really useful mod, quite a few more may use it.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 10:19:22 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 10:29:23 amMy first hack will to to make an adapter to use the connector as a transistor tester.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 10:45:13 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 10:29:23 amI was already affraid it would contain a PIC. Don't bother open sourcing it because the required tools aren't available for free. Yeah sure there are free PIC compilers but I bet the memory will be small so you really need the full optimising compiler version to have any success at making your own code fit AND implement additional features.Edit: if you open source something make sure it can be modified by others as easy as possible. For the circuit boards this is a bit of a non-starter due to absense of a data interchange standard between CAD packages but at least make sure the software can be modified using non-crippled freely available tools.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 02:10:20 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2016, 10:45:13 amI was a bit worried about that too, I know Dave is a PIC fan. I forgot about the expensive PIC compilers and development kits though.Should really have used AVR these days. Oh, well.(this thread can now devolve into a PIC vs AVR flamefest)

author: stmdude
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 02:25:18 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 04, 2016, 02:10:20 pmYea, I'm not a big fan of the whole PIC thing either. Ancient technology, that's not only small in CPU and RAM/Flash, but also very expensive for what they are.But. It's Daves product. He calls the shots, and I'm hoping there's more behind the decision than "I know PICs, so that's what we should use".Either way. Hopefully it's hackable with decent schematics. If so, I might even consider making a replacement board (if physically possible) that has an MCU that I like. I'd re-use Daves/OEMs design for the analog stuff, because I truly suck at analog, and anything beyond 5V gets me nervous.Hmm. I wonder if Dave would consider selling just the empty cases with LCD, buttons/switches or whatever is on it ?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 02:50:03 pm
content: Quote from: stmdude on May 04, 2016, 02:25:18 pmI think PICs are slightly cheaper than AVRs for equivalent features, but ... as noted: The compilers are proprietary/expensive/crappy and AVR has far more online momentum these days.PICs were king 15 years ago (when Dave learned?) but not any more. You'll not see many youngsters using them.

author: stmdude
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 03:07:27 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 04, 2016, 02:50:03 pmYep, I think the AVRs would be even more expensive. I was thinking more along the lines of a Cortex-M based MCU.Free tools and cheap chips with tons of peripherals built in.Edit: I'm still very psyched about the meter though. I can't wait to see what Dave cooked up, and what would set this meter apart from others. I'll probably buy one just to take apart, unless Dave beats me to it.

author: Dielectric
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 03:33:33 pm
content: Going with "Hackable", some STL files or equivalent of the case would be cool to have so we can make custom mounts and stuff. I could import the STL of the meter and do a "subtract" to make a nice fitting pocket then print some kind of funky stand or mount on my 3D Printer. No need to have the original mechanical design files that include the internal bosses, etc.

author: EI6JA
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 04:01:06 pm
content: If the schematic and alignment procedure were available, it would be great. Perhaps a feature for a user calibration with just a single voltage reference, for example I have a reference that is 4.987 volts can I tell the meter this is my reference and work out the corrections from this. Full open source would not intrest me but ability to repair and calibration would be a big plus in my book.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 04:24:43 pm
content: Quote from: stmdude on May 04, 2016, 03:07:27 pmI'm thinking more along the lines of the way the Arduino Leonardo works: You can upload firmware via. a USB cable and afterwards the exact same cable transforms into an RS232 port for data logging, etc. No ICSP/JTAG/JLink programmer needed.I'd definitely go down that route if I were using "user programmable" as a selling point.AVR makes it very easy to do that and all the bootloader code is freely available. I believe ARM could do it, too. You'd have to weigh the $1 saved on the ARM CPU against the extra complexity of getting it all working. The $1 might not be worth it in real terms (especially if there's a $20 ADC in there or whatever).(I assume the extra processing power and RAM of an ARM vs. AVR isn't really a factor for a multimeter).Quote from: stmdude on May 04, 2016, 03:07:27 pmYes, it will be interesting to see the features and final selling price. What can a bunch of enthusiasts come up with compared to the big boys? Competing directly in "multimeter" world seems silly, it's hard to imagine they can produce Fluke quality at Uni-T prices. The manufacturing setup cost is too high for the volumes they're likely to sell.Nope, I'm imagining more of a cross between a bench meter and a handheld meter. Something designed as a useful lab instrument rather than something to throw in a toolbox, eg. like that temperature logger from last week's mailbag (EEVBLOG#872).Then again, Dave said it's it's a 7-segment display, not dot matrix. I'd want dot-matrix in something like that.Time will tell...

author: Kilrah
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 04:58:41 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 04, 2016, 08:40:26 amExactly, that's the point. It only takes ONE guy to come up with a good idea and implement it for it to be worth it for all the others.Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 07:08:27 amIn the line of products I work for with our open source software there are an estimated 100k users, and we are currently 3 developers. We only gained one from the jump from 1k users to 100k.BUT, the 100k are nevertheless happy about the open source "idea" because even if they don't participate at all, or "only" through feature suggestions and bug reports they've seen that they actually take advantage of it a lot, through what they gain in the form of new features, things that nobody else would bother implementing for them, and fixes that would take months to be taken care of if ever without it.The lack of marketing-driven artificial crippling is the one thing that makes a huge difference too. In that field the whole open source thing has kicked the well established players quite hard and is with no doubt getting them to start doing something again instead of sitting on their laurels, which is good for everybody.The software for a multimeter has more limited expandability, but still someone might come up with something awesome that nobody has thought about before, and just that would make it worth it.Hardware wise I'd also be for a dot matrix display.

author: Poe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 05:17:34 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 03, 2016, 02:29:06 amAgree that OSHW enables clones.At least once a month, companies which otherwise couldn't justify a ground-up design, come to us with what suspiciously looks like someone's OSHW project (copy/paste) asking for an engineering quote to "just make some small changes and polish it off".In regard to your second sentence.... You're only talking about software, correct? Obviously that doesn't apply to hardware.How would this EEVblog meter compare to the Mooshimeter or Voltset? Those are nice because the bits you never need to change (hardware/firmware that just ships out readings) don't. All the fun stuff you'd like to change is just app programming.The first opensource multimeter I ran accross was this thing:http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/bluetooth-multimeter-p-1535.html

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 05:47:24 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 04, 2016, 02:50:03 pmSo that would be why Microchip bought Atmel, not the other way round then ?

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 05:50:07 pm
content: Quote from: Kilrah on May 04, 2016, 04:58:41 pma full matrix has major downsides ( contrast, power), but a small matrix section at a sensible mux rate to show menu stuff more legibly than trying to do it on 7-segs would be a useful compromise.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 05:52:32 pm
content: Quote from: zapta on May 03, 2016, 02:47:19 pmAnything like an unlocked sign can be hacked and I don't see how malfunction due to modification of the firmware can put Dave at risk. It should be easy to prove whether it's running the original firmware or not and if the customer modifies it, causing it to mess up, it's their problem.Quote from: Poe on May 04, 2016, 05:17:34 pmClones aren't a problem. Register a trademark which only the original product can have. That way the customer can distinguish between the real thing and a copy.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 06:08:05 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 04, 2016, 05:47:24 pmYep. They saw the writing was on the wall for PIC vs. AVR and did the sensible thing while they still had some cash left.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 06:39:17 pm
content: Quote from: Poe on May 04, 2016, 05:17:34 pmIn the OSHW world there is no such thing as clones. Everybody can produce a circuit in any quantity they want.

author: Poe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 06:42:43 pm
content: FDTI's trademark prevented clones?I can't wait for Tindie to pick up this Microchip strategy and buy Amazon. Probably just old people keeping Amazon afloat anyways.Anyways, just do it like the Mooshimeter. That way, the hardware becomes so easy to clone there's no fear of loosing any IP.Programming the phone side also becomes trivial so no fear of loosing an afternoon's worth of IP.It also produces the cheapest and most useful, easiest to configure solution for the people who would actually take advantage of the open-source-ness.All arguments for a meter-mounted display can be satiated with on-board LEDs and buzzer IMHO.Reading within 7.642V and 7.645V = Green LED, Beep and record time.Reading outside of that = Red LED onlynctnico - Tell Dave that.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 11:13:20 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on May 04, 2016, 10:33:29 pmNot if you don't release the PCB or case CAD files.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 11:15:02 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 04, 2016, 05:50:07 pmNo point talking about the LCD, dot matrix is not going to happen, the 7 segment display is done and dusted.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 11:21:04 pm
content: Quote from: stmdude on May 04, 2016, 02:25:18 pmThe designer/manufacturer picked the PIC16, not me. At one point they wanted to change it to some obscure Chinese architecture for some reason, I said stick with the PIC.QuoteNope, not worth the hassle. Who's going to want that, one or two people?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 11:22:18 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 04, 2016, 02:10:20 pmYou mean the same Atmel that was just bought by PIC and is having the guts cut out of the company? That Atmel? Yeah, that would have been a smart choice...

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 11:29:17 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 11:13:20 pmI can't argue the finer points of what OSHW is. I just assumed it was sufficient information to replicate the product. I don't actually see a point to less than that because it wouldn't be entirely open. I thought the intent of OSHW was to enable others to create a replica.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2016, 11:43:19 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 11:21:04 pmWhat about availability of spare parts for repair?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 12:08:07 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on May 04, 2016, 10:33:29 pmHow can you make a clone if you are using the same design files? It is just like two factories making the exact same product using the same specifications and drawings.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 12:43:26 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 04, 2016, 11:43:19 pmAFAIK the only company in the world that offers spares for handheld multimeters is Fluke.I ain't Fluke.You'll have the schematic and part numbers, buy them on Digikey.It's not really viable to keep and offer spares for everything, which is why hardly anyone does it.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 12:57:12 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on May 05, 2016, 12:30:32 amOne of the projects I'm working on uses open hardware initiated by CERN:http://www.ohwr.org/This hardware and software evolves around picosecond timing synchronisation between various network nodes.One of the designs is a PCIe base board for FMC Vita57 modules:http://www.ohwr.org/projects/spec/wikiIf you scroll down you can see you can buy this base board from various companies who produce it.The software is maintained by various people from various companies (including CERN).

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 12:31:53 pm
content: Previously I did suggest an interpreter but I was thinking the processor would be more powerful then a PIC.But I am still going to suggest the idea again modified for a 8/16 bit processor but with a second element thrown in that I think makes the idea worth a look.As much as I like the idea of an open source multimeter, I really think a quickly flexible but totally reliable multimeter is more important. I think the manufacturers probably do a decent job reading voltages, resistances, etc and I am not sure there is much to gain rewriting this. Also the display is not great for an open source design as it will have the numbers and symbols to match the factory software. Cannot go dot-matrix display as without backlight, the contrast is lousy.However, if there is an interpreter layer between measurement and display that can be replaced, it really does give you something, especially if a NFC reader could be added near the terminals. NFC tags for under 20c can contain 1K or more of eeprom memory - plenty for a new script for the interpreter. The reason for choosing NFC is it allows passive tags - this is important.How would this work? You could build a RF SWR meter plugin containing some balun magic and a diode rf level detector. The moment this is plugged in, the meter could read the script on the tag in the plugin, which can blank out the "V" symbol, put the decimal point in the right place, can linearise the diode reading and can include calibration data. Once this plugin works on one meter, it will work and be calibrated on every meter. Unplug it and you have a factory standard meter again. Tags could be used for quick settings - like to set the range to 40K/60K range, and to measure relative to 10K. You could have a tag to change AC volts to dB (if the meter doesn't do it already). Change Ohms to Siemens. To connect to a second meter and combine measurements. You could even have a mode that you can get the meter to write a script to set the present operating mode - three taps of the tag and the multimeter writes a script for current settings/range to the tag.But an interpreter is a huge job? No, if you make the right choices, the main part of a fast reliable interpreter can be a hundred lines of code. Once this exists, it almost trivial adding functions assuming similar functions already exist in the meter. I have added interpreters on systems of far lower power then a typical 8 bit PIC, and I can do details if anyone is interested. I am a slow programmer and I had my first go at an interpreter running in half a day back in about 1979 on an HP 9825A calculator/GPIB controller.This would be the first ever meter with a NFC reader to detect the insertion measurement plugin devices that are unknown to the firmware and adapt to them. This is not something that an Open Source meter can do.One of the key underlying principals with this approach would be opposite of Open Source - the code can never do anything that can damage the meter, and since code can be added instantly, there is no need to change the factory firmware, and so no warranty is affected. Every time the meter is switched on and there is no NFC tag, it can return to factory firmware mode. It would still be a ground-breaking meter, and in a way more useful then Open Source if a rich set of interpreter functions are added. NFC tags can go to 1M eeprom, and so tags can also be used to store and transfer data.It is just an idea. I thought it was worth suggesting, even if it is not possible right now.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 12:55:06 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 11:22:18 pmI wasn't aware they'd bought them when I wrote that (it's happening right now as we speak...)Let's hope they don't do anything awful.

author: Poe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 01:13:31 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 04, 2016, 11:13:20 pmThe mind boggles.OSHW doesn't facilitate cloning because if no design files are released, they're not readily accessible and therefore can't enable the cloning process?The more information released, the easier you make it for cloners. Simple as that.I doubt this product has to worry about clones though. Similar to a Kardashian handbag, success will be due to branding and not technical innovations funded by large profit margins, the life-blood of cloners.To facilitate the milking of the OSHW fan-boys, definitely at least say it's OSHW. There's really no downside, regardless of how little, late or inaccurate the information you release eventually is. Like you said, people mostly just want to think OSHW can be part of a viable business model. Just sell that hope and you'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

author: charlespax
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 02:10:50 pm
content: Quote from: Poe on May 05, 2016, 01:13:31 pmI agree that not having readily available source files makes a device more difficult to clone, but how much more difficult? All someone has to do is create design files by looking at the hardware. How does that amount of difficulty compare to the overall difficulty of making a device? The cost of creating those files is very small compared to the cost of actually making a device. I would even say that cost is negligible. If a person believes cloning some hardware makes good business sense for them, spending a few hundred bucks reverse engineering a device isn't going to stop them.Since I live in Shenzhen, I think it would be fun to grab a closed source multimeter from the electronics market and make an open source clone. It would be a fun series of videos. Would anyone be interested in seeing that?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 03:26:46 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 05, 2016, 12:55:06 pmIt's already started:http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1329412

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 05, 2016, 03:30:14 pm
content: Quote from: charlespax on May 05, 2016, 02:10:50 pmNot of practical interest because the meters available at the Shenzhen markets are universally crap. Why clone crap?But for kicks, sure.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2016, 12:23:13 am
content: Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 08:31:44 amYou have no idea what I do or the time spent. It's my choice to not to open source my work. Deal with the fact not everyone sees the world though your eyes. There is no right or wrong here except the judgment and insults because I don't share your views.Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 08:31:44 amSure it is, it is called perceived value.Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 08:31:44 amKind of amazing too that those that contribute something also provide feedback. In fact their involvement makes it more likely, amazing as it may seem.Quote from: apelly on May 03, 2016, 08:31:44 amYou calling me a fence sitter, do you draw a salary/wage from your employer for your work? I'm not demanding, waiting, or expecting a community contribution to my work. I get to chose and I've chosen not to just give away the work without a contribution to the work. Again there is no right or wrong. As I have you get to chose what you want to do with your work & time.Try showing a little respect for others rather than resorting to insults for those of us who don't share your views. Your no more right than I am.

author: hlavac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2016, 09:35:41 pm
content: Good idea. Release firmware, schematic and maybe component layout diagram to enable hacking & repair. Keep the PCB and case CAD files to stop chinese pasting this into a factory without any work. Also maybe add some spare I/O pins & power breakout on the PCB internal header footprint, and space for a little expansion board would be cool

author: Pack34
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2016, 05:25:10 pm
content: If you have to sign an NDA for the code, then it would be much more of a hassle than it's worth.As for open sourcing the code at all, it would only really be useful if some sort of I/O data connector was available so people could turn the handheld into a DAQ device. Slap on a Bluetooth module, or USB to ttl cable to do their own thing. Otherwise, tinkering with the code would be much less useful.

author: lapm
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2016, 08:06:23 pm
content: Personally i would love open source multimeter and would seriously consider buying on if its reasonably priced and acceptable quality.If the communication link docent use any super secret special protocol, then it can be pretty much just ascii text over serial. Few simple commands depending on features and anyone can make program to turn it datalogger with computer/raspberry pi/etc...

author: charlespax
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 02:39:39 am
content: Quote from: lapm on May 08, 2016, 08:06:23 pmWhat do you think your price point would be for a multimeter based on the STM32F103 ARM microcontroller with an appropriate analog front end? What features are most important to you?

author: bitseeker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 04:08:37 am
content: Charles, if you're hinting at potentially making one, this'd be a great time to make a thread for it. I'm sure you'll get lots of folks chiming in.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 09:23:28 am
content: To be honest I think there are enough DMMs in the world... how about an open source SMU?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 12:07:46 pm
content: Quote from: bitseeker on May 09, 2016, 04:08:37 amThere have been many OSHW multimeter threads on here over the years, and they all, without exception, turn into chaos.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 03:52:09 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 09, 2016, 12:07:46 pmYep. That's what happens when you ask a lot of people what features they want.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 04:28:59 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 09, 2016, 12:07:46 pmThe trick is to have someone actually driving the design. With "community" project chaos appears real fast, but if there is someone actually keeping track of the list of features and adds/removes those features based on the discussion, then project may have a chance to succeed. It will not please everyone, of course.Doing something after a few weeks of discussions will help as well. There are threads discussing a community meter/scope that have been going on for years. It is just a place for people to dream and vent, not an actual project creation place.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 05:00:27 pm
content: "Community projects" are most often something that are notprojectsat all, not even close. It's just some chit-chatting. It's not a project when you start talking along the lines: "it would be nice to have blah blah". Actually, it hasnothingto do with projects whatsoever, yet most "OSHW" "projects" are just like that.A real project has at least one person who is actuallydoingthe actual thing. This is the minimum requirement. Asking around for features isn't even called planning, it's only "market research" or some kind of pre-project study. If the usual "I'm going to do it" escalated into chaotic chitchat, the OP didn't have any real commitment to actually do anything to begin with. Those who do, take the input and go on.So, maybe project topics wouldn't get into chaos, we don't know because project topics are rare; the ones we call project topics are not about projects, but just normal everyday chaotic socializing.

author: bitseeker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 05:34:28 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 09, 2016, 12:07:46 pmThat may be the case, but better to have that chaos in its own thread.Since Charles already has some experience bringing a device to fruition, if he finds value in producing a DMM, he may pull it off despite the chaos.

author: void_error
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2016, 06:02:54 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on May 09, 2016, 03:52:09 pmIn that case I want my multimeter to peel potatoes all by itself.Joke aside, I'd buy it if it's going to be open source.

author: charlespax
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2016, 12:00:20 pm
content: I've made a new thread about a potentialPax Instruments MultiLogger. I don't want to call it a multimeter at this point since I'm still in the product discovery phase. Before I can discover what product to make I have to discover what problems to solve.In the other thread I'd love to hear about what projects you're working where a normal multimeter doesn't quite do the job. The focus would be on what you're doing and what you would like to better rather than what specific features or specifications. See y'all there

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2016, 09:04:53 pm
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on May 09, 2016, 05:00:27 pmThat's one aspect, but from personal experience group projects are hard to put together unless you know the people involved and their capabilities. Often a case of learn & move on, no real commitment and no real work ever done.

author: Krakonos
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2016, 10:14:30 pm
content: Yes, please!The huge selling point is that the device becomes hackable tool. I would buy one just for that. There is no way you can make a meter that does everything people could. But it's powerful tool to script. Even something simple, like reading voltage and current at the same time (like my Fluke 45 does, but without the terrible clicking :-)), reading different temperature sensors...It will not happen overnight, but there is a good potential some people will write a good firmware, and a lot of others will use it. Who didn't hack their Rigol scope :-)Just keep in mind that people will want to do weird stuff with the open meter, so keep enough headroom in the flash & ram territory.Good luck!

author: jancumps
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 12, 2016, 05:36:29 am
content: Reading voltage and current at the same time would require 'twisting the knob'. How would you do that in firmware?

author: 3db
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2016, 09:26:30 pm
content: Quote from: jancumps on May 12, 2016, 05:36:29 amWell you could detect the presence of a plug in the current socket.

author: Half Man Half Saab
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 13, 2016, 09:38:25 pm
content: Hi,I listened to the latest Amp Hour episode and was quite confused with your arguments against going open source. You said there wasn't much folks could do to alter the device. I don't know what this new thing you are developing does however it people will always surprise you with what they want to do/change with things. I also don't get the points on why the firmware should be closed source. Surely being open means the community can improve and share their improvements?There are different levels of open source too. You don't have to go Open Source certified and get all legal with it. Surely you could just release it as "hacker friendly"? Release the code under a MIT/BSD licence or something?In short, seems an odd thing to decide to go closed source just because you can't see what anyone could do to 'improve' it.

author: IanJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 14, 2016, 03:41:40 pm
content: Hi all,If the code goes open source then you'll likely get lots of questions from folks "I tried to modify this routine but it didn't work, can you help me"............so somebody has to pay for that support yes?Maybe I'm old school, but as much as I like to be on the user end of open source, I just don't like the idea of being in the manufacturers position.......a lot of additional hoops and ducks to get in a row before you do it.If there's not 'that' much gain for the manufacturer doing it then meh, give it a miss.........Ian.

author: blackketter
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 14, 2016, 04:35:56 pm
content: I was the CTO of Slim Devices (eventually purchased by Logitech). Our Squeezebox music players were open source to the extent that it was possible. We got great value out of publishing as much of the hardware and software designs and code as possible and over the 7 years we were making product we never had a single regret. Some of the benefits:1. Marketing - We had a substantial number of customers who bought the products because they were open source.2. Quality - More eyes on the design means that bugs are found and fixed faster. In fact we had some very tricky, hard, low-level bugs that were found and fixed by our customers before we even got a chance to look at them.3. Community - Our customers were techie people, generally, and the customers of the EEVblog Meter will be even more so. The community that built up around the shared understanding of the product meant that people were substantially invested in the product and would buy the new version to stay in the tribe. Even if a given user wasn't going to even look at the source/schematics, they would feel a sense of membership.4. Improvement - Community members had more and better ideas than any of our engineering team and had the means to implement them themselves and contribute back to the community. This meant that the product kept getting better after it was shipped and we could take these enhancements and ship them in future products (that were therefore more valuable) to everybody, not just the users who were capable of taking advantage of the open source material.SO, my vote is a strong YES!

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2016, 05:55:07 pm
content: Quote from: IanJ on May 14, 2016, 03:41:40 pmNot an issue for the manufacturer- you make it very clear that it's unsupported. I think most people will understand that.You have a mechanism to make it obvious that a unit is running non-factory code, and a means to revert it.And a community will build around it to help each other out. It[s not even like anyone has to set up a new forum for it....QuoteI think the main issue here is that the code needs to be well structured and reasonably documented, and in the rush to get things out the door, things can often get messy. One option Dave mentioned on the Amp Hour is OSing it later, however this may detract significantly from the initial impact of OS-ness as a sales/publicity differentiator, and just look like an afterthought.However IMO to cover issues like approvals, warranty etc., the secure bootloader type approach has a number of advantages, and that would need to be implemented from day one to be of any use.This could work as follows :Bootloader is in a protected area of memory and can only be programmed by opening the case and accessing the ISP connector ( or peeling off a label over the connector). In this case all bets are off, which they always would be anyway. PIC32 has several options to select areas that are protected from software writes, so this is entirely doable.Bootloader will by default only load a signed firware image.User can perform some action to allow the BL to load any firmware image, however in this case, the BL will display a clear message at startup before starting the main code.User could reload factory code to revert to factory state. If users come up with something useful, manufacturer could approve it by publishing a signed version.As regards the issue of copying etc., OSing it may actualy have some benefits. If the code is published, and the license states that use is conditional on being used on the manufacturer's own hardware, it is easier to show if someone else has copied it and using it in another product than if it's not publicly available.Of course there is the issue of enforcement, but that's no different to the situation closed source. At least with OS, it's easier to show that something is acopy, and if nothing else get bad publicity for the perpetrator, and make it easier to get it taken off ebay etc.It's not like DMM software will have any significant "special sauce" or contain trade secrets, or that it will contain bought-in IP that can't be re-published.However I think the biggest problem in practice is that Dave is communicating through multiple people to a company with Far-East culture, so I'd be highly surprised if they could be sufficiently convinced to do it right, or at all. Or even understand how it could be done right, or why it's a good idea.The fact that they've not even answered the question of why they won't use the bigger PIC24 and instead make extensive hardware & software changes to use something different (which could potentially have poorer battery life) doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

author: ludwig
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 04:57:28 am
content: yes it should be os, but having a chip that is recognizable does the job too. soldermask over the pads and any tinkering is easily visible.

author: ludwig
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 05:33:27 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 14, 2016, 05:55:07 pmi see a thought of mine confirmed here. a programmer who implements the basic features. then it will take a pcb layout, a person on the ground and someone who will take responsibility for the kickstarter project to make a os dmm from scratch, with lots of expansion pins. with mike, charles and dave onboard, would it float? at least i would buy one.( feel free to put it somewhere else if this is not the place)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 08:26:03 am
content: Quote from: Half Man Half Saab on May 13, 2016, 09:38:25 pmIt's a multimeter with fixed hardware functionality. Changes people could make would likely be limited to tweaking a few features, maybe adding a mode or two over the stock multimeter features.QuoteOf course that's what open source means.But there are downsides too.QuoteThere is more to it than that. Read some of arguments here.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 08:31:31 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 14, 2016, 05:55:07 pmCorrect. They literally have zero idea about open source, open hardware, or any of the culture behind it, as would most big T&M companies. I'm trying to educate them.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 01:19:07 pm
content: Assuming OS isn't going to happen, then in adidiotn to schematic, somethingt else that should be documented is the format of the nonvolatile memory - factory cal data as well as any user options, so any user-written replacement software could make use of it.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 01:44:13 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 15, 2016, 01:19:07 pmI have the factory cal procedure, and the only harm in releasing it is the usual people who goof it and try to claim under warranty.Could have an EEPROM cal counter to detect attempts.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 05:38:56 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 15, 2016, 01:44:13 pmIt's not about the cal procedure, but that if someone wanted to write alternate sofwtare,that software would need to make use of the existing factory cal data, so would need to know how to use it.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 07:23:30 pm
content: Quote from: jancumps on May 12, 2016, 05:36:29 amUse a second ADC for the current channel? You'll need it for power measurements anyways.

author: Basp
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 11:21:04 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on May 15, 2016, 05:38:56 pmThey can read the source to see how the original firmware uses the cal data.

author: Maxlor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2016, 11:46:48 pm
content: I'd love to have a meter that I could reprogram how I see fit. Many ideas come to mind immediately:- set the default settings to what I need to reduce the number of button presses required- add some sort of acoustic readout, e.g. make it sound like a geiger counter.- have it change the backlight intensity/pwm duty cycle with the measured signal, so something like approximate frequency could be observed from accross the room.- turn it into a pass/fail testing unit for some specific test. Pass/fail could be indicated right on the display.- add some conversion math for external devices like the uCurrent, so the right value is displayed instead of some intermediate one that you need to convert yourself.I can see that people might end up screwing up their meter when doing stuff like that. So how about this: use two firmware storage areas in parallel (separate memory regions if flash in big enough, or even just two different flash chips.) One contains the stock firmware, and that one would be difficult to change; the other one the user can put their own firmware into; which firmware is run would depend on whether a button is pressed when turning the meter on. If that sounds complicated, with an open source meter, you probably don't even have to do it yourself; if there's enough spare space in flash, someone will eventually write a bootloader that does this.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2016, 12:04:41 am
content: Quote from: Maxlor on May 15, 2016, 11:46:48 pmThis should be a factory feature - a nonovolatile option to either retain last settings or always power up the same way.

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2016, 02:13:51 am
content: Quote from: Maxlor on May 15, 2016, 11:46:48 pmWhich is exactly what you could do if the meter was not open source, but had an open reprogrammable scripting layer as I suggested earlier. Much faster to customise and much safer. My proposal included the addition of being able to use NFC tags to store script and calibration factors for attachments and so no re-programming of the meter was needed at all. It would also mean that a fixture that worked on one of these meters would work with the same accuracy on every one of these meters without modification.Richard

author: Zad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2016, 04:03:54 am
content: I realise I am late to the party with my comments, but I hope I can contribute something, or at least crystallize out some thoughts.I am surprised that Dave allowed a third party company to design a product with his name, especially given how distant he seems to be from the design and production team. But hey, we all have bills to pay and mouths to feed, and a few more bucks in the kids' college fund is never a bad thing. I have a couple of potential Kickstarter projects in the pipeline. Both these started out as pure "open" projects, then I went through the whole cycle of wanting to keep full control of "my baby", and then I got real and worked out that if it was good enough it would be ripped off anyway, so what the hell. I have the dubious advantage that I am currently in control of the whole shooting match. So I have thought about this issue quite a lot.Realise that as soon as the product gets delivered into "our" hands, it is going to be reverse engineered, flash dumped, analysed, decompiled and documented pretty much down to the individual electron. Whether the manufacturer likes it or not, such is the nature of both engineers in general, and this community. I seem to remember $200 was the going rate for professional micro decapping and reading, should it be read protected. All engineers think that they can do better than everyone else, and that nobody will be able to improve on our work. Time has proven the latter to be utterly false. Everything electronic is capable of improvement!We have already seen suggestions about how to improve a product we haven't even seen yet, and this sort of product improvement gives a total lie to the premise that a product is made perfect and fully formed. Let me give two real world examples of this, close to both Dave and Myself;- The Sinclair Scientific calculator. Using a chip that could barely perform "four banger" maths squeezed out of 320 words of memory, it was nevertheless turned into a 12-function RPN scientific calculator. I realise this was effectively a closed design, but it is an example of a product which was widely thought to be perfected and pushing the full capabilities of the hardware, yet was subsequently made into something considerably greater.- The HP-30B derived WP-34S. A fairly basic (open architecture from Hewlett Packard!) financial calculator with limited resources, turned into an absolute beast of a machine.Like Dave, I am from an era and an ethos where all design was effectively open. One where lawyers didn't yet get their grubby money making hands on everything. I believe in the progress of mankind, and bringing people together to make life just that bit better. To lock people out from improving, or at least changing, a product, seems to go against many things we as engineers believe in. I also appreciate that the business actually funding this has their own principles, which may be in conflict with this. I also think the hipsters arguing the toss over the details of what "open" means should get some perspective on the world and stop whingeing.Here is what I would do:Forget making itformallyopen. Forego the little gearwheel logo on the PCB and enclosure. You'll never please everyone, least of all the manufacturer. Instead, publish the schematic diagram and PCB layout in a PDF technical manual, similar to the style of those classic Sony manuals from the 80s and 90s. Leave people to make their own CAD files. The enclosure can be reverse engineered with calipers and a ruler in not many hours, into whatever file format the hacker desires.Secondly, publish the functionality of the (robust) boot loader. Source code isn't needed. Publish what I/O ports map where, and the nature of the cal data. You might as well, because it is going to happen anyway. Leave the existing core program as property of the manufacturer. My bet is that within a week there will be an alternative fully open and public alternative "OS" for it. If people screw it up, then that's their problem and not yours.TL:DR; Do what you like, we are going mod this thing to the Moon and back anyway!Mike (Not that Mike, a different British Mike)

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2016, 05:36:28 am
content: Dave,Just quit messing around with this OSHW stuff and get your meter to market. Open source makes sense for some things, but not this. It's a huge distraction, particularly with getting all the players involved to agree. You'll lose 10X in lost market opportunity dicking around with this than you'll ever get in sales just because your meter was "open."

author: Half Man Half Saab
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 23, 2016, 07:09:12 pm
content: QuoteI've read the other comments, not sure I see any that convince me it needs to be open source. I'm not suggesting you should get it certified open source and use it as a marketing tool, just mention where people can get the firmware if they want to play with it. In essence a sort of MIT licence.You could even run some sort of competition to see what ingenious hacks people can do to their devices.

author: Half Man Half Saab
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 23, 2016, 07:18:10 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 17, 2016, 05:36:28 amI agree getting the product to market is the most important thing. I don't see how providing the source code after could hurt though. Maybe people could learn from the code. I for one would be interested in adding speech capability somehow (to read out values). Or enabling some sort of basic connection link between two or more devices (again, for me this would be useful).

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 23, 2016, 08:48:21 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 17, 2016, 05:36:28 amBut if you look at what Dave's actual business is - it's videos and online content, with an educational angle. Open source plays well with an educational audience and it's pretty clear open sourcing it can provide lots of material for videos and presentations. Assuming this is what Dave wants of course. If all he does is crank out and sell meters he's just another name, without the cachet of the big A-brands so will be competing on price. To me, open source design is a no-brainer for what Dave does.

author: The Soulman
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2016, 09:33:44 pm
content: So what about making a general purpose (commercial design) multimeter but whit some sort of extension port to plugin/attach the widest range of modules conceived and developed by enthusiasts?Basic empty "add-on" module cases could be made available to match the multimeter colour and design (of course one could still develop 3d printed personal designs).The interface bus needs to be discussed but could be really simple, perhaps only driving the upper line of characters of the dual linedisplay, leaving the bottom line untouched for the multimeter itself so no interfering with its functionality.When not driving the upper line from the outside (optically separated?) it could refer back to a internal 2000 count (at least)voltmeter (200.0mV full scale?) connected by a extra set of banana jacks on the top (also could be used for mechanical attachment of modules)to be able to use for instance a external current shunt to simultaneously measure current and voltage.The number of options could be countless, just to get the ball rolling:Analogue (200mV display):micro current...large current shuntfour wire resistance tester........Digital (display data input):Transistor tester (yeah!!)advanced variable frequency ESR meterbleutooth module to display your phone text massages on your multimeter......

author: ZeroStatic
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2016, 12:25:25 am
content: If open source is possible then do it. It's impossible to know the applications that other people may use this meter for that would not be possible with a closed source option.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 24, 2016, 12:35:54 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 17, 2016, 05:36:28 amThe OSHW aspect of this is not delaying the project one bit.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 24, 2016, 12:38:34 am
content: Quote from: Zad on May 17, 2016, 04:03:54 amBecause only a fool would do it any other way.There is much less risk involved in having a company that has designed and manufactured countless meters and other handheld gear.I would have had to hire people to do a ton of stuff anyway, and it would suck all my (very limited) time away for a year.And it's not costing me a cent, they are taking all the financial and development risk.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2016, 01:42:36 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 24, 2016, 12:35:54 amGlad to hear. There was just a lot of teeth gnashing over it on the Amp Hour, so I had a different impression.

author: Moran
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 16, 2016, 07:11:36 am
content: You would be surprised how inventive people can be they could possibly create new functions you never thought possible and everyone could benefit