Pixhawk

=== Zurich ===
Px4 has university backing, while APM Diydrones arducopter doesn't and is BSD3. 
http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/pixracer-with-ardupilot , http://www.auav.co/product-p/xr-v1.htm , https://pixhawk.org/
* https://dev.px4.io/en/
http://pixhawk.ethz.ch/downloads/
git hub code https://github.com/pixhawk
http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/p9x-design-files-in-public-domain?xg_source=activity
* https://github.com/p9x
* http://www.goodluckbuy.com/9dsmart-p9x-pixhawk-v2-4-6-32bits-open-source-flight-contoller-for-rc-airplanes-multicopter.html
https://github.com/PX4/Flow PX4 FLOW is a smart camera processing optical flow directly on the camera module. It is optimized for processing and outputs images only for development purposes. Its main output is a UART or I2C stream of flow measurements at ~400 Hz. Project: http://px4.io/modules/px4flow Dev guide / toolchain installation:
https://github.com/Dronesmith-tech/Firmware , https://medium.com/@Dronesmith/why-we-chose-px4-vs-apm-as-lucis-default-firmware-ea39f4514bef PX4 is BSD license, APM is GPL3. 
http://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/new-guy-here-trying-to-make-sense-of-it-all/9255/9 
In terms of what is better for beginners....here's my take. I've been flying for 6 months and I have 3 APM systems and 2 Pixhawk platforms. I prefer the Pixhawk. I have no idea if it's the new software or what, but my Pixhawks just fly better right out of the box with stock settings. Minimal tuning. APM flies fine but lots more tuning. And it still just didn't feel as "locked in". For example, loiter performance on the Pixhawk is vastly superior in high wind, every time. Again with fairly minimal tuning.
=== Levebre ===
http://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/px4-vs-ardupilot-when-to-choose-what/14262
=== links ===
px4
Category:Sasecurity
Category:Uav quad
Category:Uav project
Category:Uav pixhawk
Category:Uav px4