Date
1 - 6 of 6
Driver
|
Bill G
Is anyone successfully using the Advanced LX200 driver withe CdC?
When I open a VSP, then push Connect Telescope, The VSP closes immediately preventing a connection.
The only way I can use CdC is with the SciTech driver over bluetooth.
BG
|
|
|
|
Bill,
The only way to get support for the Advanced LX200 driver is from it's author. CdC do not know anything about COM port or other connection to the mount. Patrick
|
|
|
|
Bill G
Thank you Patrick,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I have not been able to contact the author. Maybe, in time, ASCOM/Alpaca, et al, will will come up with something.
BG
-------- Original message --------
From: Patrick Chevalley <pch@...> Date: 5/5/22 3:11 AM (GMT-05:00) To: skychart@groups.io Subject: Re: [skychart] Driver Bill,
The only way to get support for the Advanced LX200 driver is from it's author. CdC do not know anything about COM port or other connection to the mount. Patrick
|
|
|
|
Bill, Just to adjust your expectations: The ASCOM team has their hands full with supporting and enhancing the ASCOM platform. Over the 20+ years of ASCOM, the core team has stayed away from developing drivers for mounts, cameras, and other devices. The team is not scaled for the development and maintenance of ASCOM device drivers. Also, they don't have direct access to the variety of hardware that manufacturers produce. The best ASCOM drivers have been written by intensely devoted external programmers. (The Gemini and Celestron ASCOM drivers are the gold standard.) Some manufacturers have commissioned the development of drivers for their mounts and other devices. But not enough manufacturers respect the need for a robust, vendor-supported ASCOM driver. Some ignore the topic completely -- leaving the customers without a well developed and supported forward-looking ASCOM driver. It seems like a bad business decision at first glance. But very few consumers buy a telescope/mount based on the quality of the ASCOM drivers available. So the negative consequences of an ASCOM-blind vendor are minimal. Joe
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 7:19 AM Bill G <izar21093@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Bill G
I understand. Thanks Joe.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
BG
-------- Original message --------
From: Joe Shuster <iamhondo@...> Date: 5/5/22 3:19 PM (GMT-05:00) To: skychart@groups.io Subject: Re: [skychart] Driver Bill,
Just to adjust your expectations: The ASCOM team has their hands full with supporting and enhancing the ASCOM platform. Over the 20+ years of ASCOM, the core team has stayed away from developing drivers for mounts, cameras, and other devices. The team
is not scaled for the development and maintenance of ASCOM device drivers. Also, they don't have direct access to the variety of hardware that manufacturers produce. The best ASCOM drivers have been written by intensely devoted external programmers. (The Gemini
and Celestron ASCOM drivers are the gold standard.)
Some manufacturers have commissioned the development of drivers for their mounts and other devices. But not enough manufacturers respect the need for a robust, vendor-supported ASCOM driver. Some ignore the topic completely -- leaving the customers without a well developed and supported forward-looking ASCOM driver. It seems like a bad business decision at first glance. But very few consumers buy a telescope/mount based on the quality of the ASCOM drivers available. So the negative consequences of an ASCOM-blind vendor are minimal. Joe On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 7:19 AM Bill G <izar21093@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Hello if i may chip in, an Ascom / Alpaca score card rating for the various mounts would be very helpful to prospective users and might inspire the mfrs to participate more wink* Paul
On May 5, 2022, at 5:34 PM, Bill G <izar21093@...> wrote:
|
|
|