locked Re: A public message to Hugen
Peter Ide-Kostic <on7yi.pik973@...>
This is very much understandable and unavoidable given the way the nanovnatoggle quoted messageShow quoted text
v2 story developed.
Going for open hardware makes sense as long as the product gets improved
by people/organisations who copy it so user gets a better experience and
the size of the market also eventually grows.
The V2 is not a copy of the V1, except at the conceptual level, it is a
fresh pcb design resulting in outstanding technical specifications compared
to the V1. The hardware could have been closed but it was kept open with
the hope that the product would be further improved by the community.
Open hardware should be more about colaboration than competition, everybody
should enjoy the ride including of course the original designer of the
Unfortunately it did not happen with the Nanovna v2. I own a genuine model
and two clones so I know what I am talking about. The clones are copy paste
the original design: there was no attempt to further improve the dynamic
range or isolation, the sweeping speed, the return loss improvement on
port 2 , the frequency range, etc... .
It was also suggested at some early stage of the V2 saga on some forums
that cloners of the V2 offer the functionality to swap port and 1 and 2 to
ease measurements of the 4 s parameters but it did not happen.
The only benefit for users was a somewhat lower price compared to the
genuine model. On the other hand, the return loss above 1.5 Ghz of port 2
of the two clones that I own is not as good as the one of the genuine
model. Quality control of clones seems to be an issue. One of my two
clones was shipped initially defective by the way... .
The designer of the V2 didn't draw any fruits of his open hardware
strategy, he only faced harsher competition, what happens was just
unavoidable, expecting the hardware to remain open would be unreasonable
very unfortunately. It could have happened differently though.
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020, 07:51 , <aleks07111971@...> wrote:
Your words are legally null and void!