![]()
|
2010 Aurora Status / DMX beta |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1234 10> |
Author | ||
LightsOnLogan ![]() Admin Group ![]() Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 3187 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
For those who have been asking:
I have considered an open beta with our current progress so far. What is holding us back from doing this is: 1) Although Aurora itself is working with the new copy/paste and all sorts of goodies, we did make a slight change to the DLS file. With that comes a file converter to upgrade old DLS files to new ones, and there is one bug left remaining in the DLS upgrade code that is outstanding (specifically, there are glitches with the ramp durations post-upgrade). I don't want to release a version which is known to trash sequence files. 2) There is a licensing issue to deal with. We've added a new third party component to Aurora. We don't have to license this for beta testing (we just use demo mode), but before we can release it to the public we need to license the component. Paying for this is scheduled just prior to release because a new version generates sales (to pay for the component); an interim beta does not. 3) D-Light and LOR output is known to be broken in the current version because it contains the broken protocol changes. You can write sequence files with it, but you can't do anything with them. Due to the DLS changes, the files created with the new version may or may not be compatible with the old scheduler. For a public beta, items #1 and #2 would have to be addressed immediately. Item #3 can be fairly easily rolled back to the old protocol for the D2XX driver only (not VCP). This plan would require another beta test cycle which would take about a month or so to make sure everything is working together properly. That is a throw away month because it is already known that the protocol is going away anyway. I know it is controversial, but we need to be moving forward right now, not backward. If we stay stuck in the mud we will have another chaotic 2009 support situation all over again. As for how niche of a market this is, I'm going to share some aggregate statistics (something few businesses will do): over a five year development cycle, we have issued 313 Aurora keys. Over two thirds of those were issued in 2008. The majority of keys were not issued at full price. Even if we had a spotless reputation (which we by far do not), almost everyone who would consider buying Aurora has already done so. Our year-to-date sales: one. Our expected sales with a flawless release: maybe 10 if we are lucky. I have dropped in and out of development to pursue other projects because this one clearly does not pay the bills. To top it off, I have dealt with serious family illnesses, which, when your business isn't profitable anyway, take priority. We have enough changes to Aurora in the beta cycle right now that by all means I should be stamping "2.0" on it and asking for money all over again. I never expected the 1.x version to endure a 5+ year life cycle. The problem is, I made a promise to deliver DMX as a part of the 1.x series and, even if it takes longer than expected, I intend to deliver on that promise. It's pretty bad when I wouldn't even buy my own software right now because things are such a mess. That is why it is time to put aside the proprietary stuff (LOR & D-Light protocols, FTDI based dongles and drivers, etc.) which have been nothing but support trouble for years now and to move on by focusing on stability and standards (DMX over E1.31 [TCP/IP stack]). When stability returns to normal instead of the exception, then we can discuss re-introducing some proprietary protocols as plugins. Until then, this is the direction Aurora must go. BTW - If a version 2 ever happens as a commercial product, it will be priced near the $300 target (instead of $100) and will only come with one year of support (instead of entire major version support like we did with 1.x) *or* it will introduce a tiered pricing system. LOR will always have the advantage over the competition here because, due to hardware sales, they can keep the software discounted to the $100 price point where nobody else can compete price wise. With the number of competitors out there right now it really isn't possible for anyone not tied to a hardware operation to keep selling the software at the $100 price point. The only sales traction anyone has with this many competitors is that everyone loves to jump from software to software looking for the next best thing... which is where Aurora is at a loss because we're still stuck dealing with problems from 2009! It's time for Aurora to move on past this. Michael |
||
![]() |
||
ChrisL1976 ![]() Beta Testers ![]() Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Kankakee, Ill Online Status: Offline Posts: 1341 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
If definitely requires some creative balance to not just push into a stage production and stay with a Christmassy feeling display. |
||
Chris
www.lightsonsixth.com |
||
![]() |
||
Buckeyelights ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 04 Feb 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 124 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
This is the one thing that surprises me with the amount of RGB sales you hear of today on different boards. People are spending thousands on RGB without a total sequencing software solution being available. I bet there are a lot of crossed fingers. Of course there is always next year. ![]() |
||
![]() |
||
ChrisL1976 ![]() Beta Testers ![]() Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Kankakee, Ill Online Status: Offline Posts: 1341 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I think that is going to be the biggest hurdle for developers. How do you balance development/support with final cost estimates in a market that is used to paying $100 for 500 channel software support that now suddenly is in the thousands and require support levels near or above commercial software that costs significantly more. All while keeping your doors open and the lower channel users happy as well. Its not a pair of shoes I would want to be in.
This is the one thing that surprises me with the amount of RGB sales you hear of today on different boards. People are spending thousands on RGB without a total sequencing software solution being available. I bet there are a lot of crossed fingers. Of course there is always next year. ![]() Edited by ChrisL1976 - 17 Jul 2011 at 12:16pm |
||
Chris
www.lightsonsixth.com |
||
![]() |
||
MrChristmas2000 ![]() Beta Testers ![]() Joined: 06 May 2008 Location: Georgia Online Status: Offline Posts: 344 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I think this was your question. ![]() IMHO There is only one person that can answer that question and he hasn't posted. I bet if he answers that question for now it would be throught a personal PM.
|
||
![]() |
||
BigDPS ![]() Beta Testers ![]() ![]() Joined: 13 Dec 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 471 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
And yet, no one can still answer my question....sheesh.
|
||
![]() |
||
MrChristmas2000 ![]() Beta Testers ![]() Joined: 06 May 2008 Location: Georgia Online Status: Offline Posts: 344 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
This has sparked more lively conversation that anything else has for a while.
Right on about this being a hobby. If you go look at the cost of software for running professional light shows at concerts etc. you would have a heart attack. No one piece of software out there has everything running perfectly. Some are getting close but still have a ways to go. The lighting hardware community is outpacing the software by leaps and bounds. It's not DMX that is the problem for them it's the RGB and huge amounts of 'channels' it takes to run the newer devices. Now there is the ability to program down to a single rgb led. If you have just one string with 75 or 100 leds that is 225 to 300 channels just for that string. Then put 16 strands of 75 leds on a Mega Tree and that is 3600 channels alone. You have to have new hardware interfaces alone to handle that channel count not to mention a software package and PC with the horsepower to drive it. Think of this as building a car from scratch. Even an experienced automobile engineer would require require many more hours than a team of his peers doing the same task. The reason for the move to the DMX communications protocol vs LOR is that it is simply a lighting industry standard. That let's the hardware community develop new hardware without worrowing about whether it will run with XYZ piece of software. They all talk the same language. Why do you think that LOR and d-light has now come to support that protocol. The last thing I have to say about development is that when you are a one man band and you get sick or have family problems there is no one else there to beat the drumb. Family comes first and this software development is way down the list at that point. I will step down from my soapbox now as well. Tom
|
||
![]() |
||
caretaker ![]() Newbie ![]() Joined: 27 Nov 2009 Location: Ferndale, MI Online Status: Offline Posts: 3 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Ok so I will throw my 2 cents in here... When I started this hobby I bought D-Light controllers and LOR software and for the first two years my show ran almost flawlessly. Then D-Light decided to introduce there own software "Spectrum" and I jumped on the band wagon and bought it. Needless to say I never had a show run on spectrum and when D-Light announced they were discontinuing Spectrum and offering a discount for Aurora I purchased it and ran my show with it albeit a few minor glitches. Then it was announced Aurora was no longer supporting it's software due to poor sales I ended up going back to LOR for my 2009 season.I purchased Light Show Pro and after finding out the learning curve for it was a little steeper than I anticipated and finances became tight I canceled my 2010 show and began doing research. This hobby is changing by leaps and bounds first with DMX and then RGB and the software is this point is having a hard time keeping up with it. Companies like Animated Lighting and LOR can create hardware products that interface perfectly with there software because there engineers talk back and forth and work out the bugs. When you go the DIY route or D-light you can only hope that the software people can work out the bugs and if there lucky talk to the hardware people for further help. Ultimately you as the hobbyist have a decision to make: If you want to go with the latest and greatest gadgets you will need software that is able to keep up with them and that may mean you have to wait till that software matures to a stable point. You can decided to bypass the latest and greatest and stick to the trusted and true and wait till all the bugs are worked out of the latest and greatest. Or you can go with a free ware approach like vixen and if it doesn't work your not out any money. My wife has a $7000 sewing machine and does machine embroidery design. She has one software package that cost her $1800 and is now obsolete because the company stopped supporting it and it will not run and Windows 7. She also has another software package which cost her $2400 and they want her to upgrade to the next version for $1200. Why am I pointing this out? Because niche market software (yes animated lighting software is niche market) does not sell the millions of copies a game program does so the companies sell it at a higher cost to try to recover there expenses. So as xmas light hobbyists we can either decide we are going to pay a premium price for a piece of software that does what we want it to do OR we can continue to hope other hobbyists like ourselves continue to develop software in there spare time and realize we are getting what we paid for. Does this mean we don't have the right to complain when we are promised something and it is not delivered? No, but put yourself in the shoes of a programmer like the one doing Aurora and say you spent close to 200 hours programming, couple hundred and a website and when you only sell a couple hundred copies of your program you quickly realize it is not going to pay the bills so you work on it when you can and now you have a crowd complaining about this problem and that you try to fix as many bugs as you can but there is still more complaints. At this point you can see how easy it would be to toss in the towel and shut every thing down. So let's just all behave like adults, wait till the program is ready and if your still unhappy well chalk it up as a bad investment and move on. Either that or think about investing several thousand dollars to pay for the programmers time to get it done they way you want. Soapbox mode off Edited by caretaker - 16 Jul 2011 at 5:39pm |
||
Jeff Squires aka Caretaker
http://www.ahazelhurstchristmas.com |
||
![]() |
||
tonyjmartin ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 11 Dec 2007 Location: Traverse City, MI, USA Online Status: Offline Posts: 144 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I disagree with your assessment of the situation, but I have certainly not attacked you. |
||
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
||
![]() |
||
JohnnyL ![]() Pre-Order User ![]() ![]() Joined: 17 Dec 2007 Location: Merced Ca Online Status: Offline Posts: 67 |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
ok, Tony attack me if you wish. i could care less. in my opinion you are way out of line.
John
|
||
"In God We Trust" all others pay cash
|
||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1234 10> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |