Post by thread:[OT] Morality of Microchip ICD2 versus Olmex PIC-I

At 18.06 2005.04.21 +0200, you wrote: {Quote hidden}>This is the info I get from the Microchip site. > >> >>Now, I have to find out what the difference is between these : >> >>3866397 DV164006 MICROCHIP "MPLAB-ICD2 DEV KIT", $356. >> >Part Number: DV164006 - MPLAB ICD 2 EVALUATION KIT (w/PICDEM 2 PLUS) > This kit includes the MPLAB ICD 2 Evaluation Kit (DV164005), a PICDEM 2 Plus demonstration board, power supply, serial cable and USB cable. > > > >>3956477 DV164007 UNBRANDED "MPLAB-ICD2 DEV KIT", $197. >> >This kit is the same as the DV164005, plus the RS-232 serial cable and a power supply. > > >>4156924 DV164005 MICROCHIP "KIT-ICD2 BASE MOD AND USB CABLE", $245. >> >This kit contains the MPLAB ICD 2 module, an ICD interface cable and an USB cable. > > >Strange... ;-) > >/Ake Some time ago there was a thread about how to make a DoItYourself ICD2 (a clone). Really, I was going to make one myself mostly because I really can't stand the look of the original ICD2 and its telephone-like connector. But.. Lotsa bad things were said about it, that it's unfair towards Microchip because the money doesn't go where the development was made, etc.. And that stopped my intent, at least for the moment. I may be very limited in my mind, but I really can't see how the Olimex "clone" (although totally redesigned and with a totally rewritten firmware) is morally any better than that. What makes it morally more acceptable to give $100 (or whatever it is) to Olimex for a product that means less sales for from Microchip's ICD2, versus investing in my sweat to make my own ICD2 clone? Sure legally the two things are different (although I don't think so if I'm the only user of my work, i.e. if it's not for resale), but.. morally? Food for thought.

I'm very sure that Microchips business focus is on making components not development tools. They have to make tools so we can use there stuff but I'm sure they will applaud any tool that see the market as it most certain will increase there component sales. I'm also sure they probably would not say this on there web page but I can assure you that the will not see a cloning as a bad thing. If you put Microchip name on it it would have been a different thing of course. Business is business and is about making money and nothing else. Its no emotions in this. So when Microchip and other vendors "is kind" and ship free samples to us this is a well calculated action. The shipping cost is the chip makers only (OK almost) cost and this and the account used for this is the same as previously was used for different marketing materials and printed matters that we now download and print out ourselves. Things that had a much higher postage cost then what components have. To help someone who's main business is to sell components to sell more of them can by no means be something you should have morality problems over! Cheers /Ake ThePicMan wrote: {Quote hidden}>At 18.06 2005.04.21 +0200, you wrote: > > >>This is the info I get from the Microchip site. >> >> >> >>>Now, I have to find out what the difference is between these : >>> >>>3866397 DV164006 MICROCHIP "MPLAB-ICD2 DEV KIT", $356. >>> >>> >>> >>Part Number: DV164006 - MPLAB ICD 2 EVALUATION KIT (w/PICDEM 2 PLUS) >> This kit includes the MPLAB ICD 2 Evaluation Kit (DV164005), a PICDEM 2 Plus demonstration board, power supply, serial cable and USB cable. >> >> >> >> >> >>>3956477 DV164007 UNBRANDED "MPLAB-ICD2 DEV KIT", $197. >>> >>> >>> >>This kit is the same as the DV164005, plus the RS-232 serial cable and a power supply. >> >> >> >> >>>4156924 DV164005 MICROCHIP "KIT-ICD2 BASE MOD AND USB CABLE", $245. >>> >>> >>> >>This kit contains the MPLAB ICD 2 module, an ICD interface cable and an USB cable. >> >> >>Strange... ;-) >> >>/Ake >> >> > > >Some time ago there was a thread about how to make a DoItYourself ICD2 (a clone). > >Really, I was going to make one myself mostly because I really can't stand the >look of the original ICD2 and its telephone-like connector. > >But.. > >Lotsa bad things were said about it, that it's unfair towards Microchip because >the money doesn't go where the development was made, etc.. And that stopped my >intent, at least for the moment. > >I may be very limited in my mind, but I really can't see how the Olimex "clone" >(although totally redesigned and with a totally rewritten firmware) is morally >any better than that. > >What makes it morally more acceptable to give $100 (or whatever it is) to Olimex >for a product that means less sales for from Microchip's ICD2, versus investing >in my sweat to make my own ICD2 clone? Sure legally the two things are different >(although I don't think so if I'm the only user of my work, i.e. if it's not for >resale), but.. morally? > >Food for thought. > > > > > -- --- Ake Hedman (YAP - Yet Another Programmer) eurosource, Brattbergavägen 17, 820 50 LOS, Sweden Phone: (46) 657 413430 Cellular: (46) 73 84 84 102 Company home: http://www.eurosource.se Kryddor/Te/Kaffe: http://www.brattberg.com Personal homepage: http://www.eurosource.se/akhe Automated home: http://www.vscp.org

Thanks Ake, I'll build the ICD2 clone then, at least it looks much better (IMHO of course) than that weird Microchip's ICD2 round thing. ;-) At 09.29 2005.04.22 +0200, you wrote: {Quote hidden}>I'm very sure that Microchips business focus is on making components not development tools. They have to make tools so we can use there stuff but I'm sure they will applaud any tool that see the market as it most certain will increase there component sales. I'm also sure they probably would not say this on there web page but I can assure you that the will not see a cloning as a bad thing. If you put Microchip name on it it would have been a different thing of course. > >Business is business and is about making money and nothing else. Its no emotions in this. So when Microchip and other vendors "is kind" and ship free samples to us this is a well calculated action. The shipping cost is the chip makers only (OK almost) cost and this and the account used for this is the same as previously was used for different marketing materials and printed matters that we now download and print out ourselves. Things that had a much higher postage cost then what components have. > >To help someone who's main business is to sell components to sell more of them can by no means be something you should have morality problems over! > >Cheers >/Ake > >ThePicMan wrote: > >>At 18.06 2005.04.21 +0200, you wrote: >> >> >>>This is the info I get from the Microchip site. >>> >>> >>> >>>>Now, I have to find out what the difference is between these : >>>> >>>>3866397 DV164006 MICROCHIP "MPLAB-ICD2 DEV KIT", $356. >>>> >>>> >>>Part Number: DV164006 - MPLAB ICD 2 EVALUATION KIT (w/PICDEM 2 PLUS) >>> This kit includes the MPLAB ICD 2 Evaluation Kit (DV164005), a PICDEM 2 Plus demonstration board, power supply, serial cable and USB cable. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>3956477 DV164007 UNBRANDED "MPLAB-ICD2 DEV KIT", $197. >>>> >>>> >>>This kit is the same as the DV164005, plus the RS-232 serial cable and a power supply. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>4156924 DV164005 MICROCHIP "KIT-ICD2 BASE MOD AND USB CABLE", $245. >>>> >>>> >>>This kit contains the MPLAB ICD 2 module, an ICD interface cable and an USB cable. >>> >>> >>>Strange... ;-) >>> >>>/Ake >>> >> >> >>Some time ago there was a thread about how to make a DoItYourself ICD2 (a clone). >> >>Really, I was going to make one myself mostly because I really can't stand the >>look of the original ICD2 and its telephone-like connector. >> >>But.. >> >>Lotsa bad things were said about it, that it's unfair towards Microchip because >>the money doesn't go where the development was made, etc.. And that stopped my >>intent, at least for the moment. >> >>I may be very limited in my mind, but I really can't see how the Olimex "clone" >>(although totally redesigned and with a totally rewritten firmware) is morally >>any better than that. >> >>What makes it morally more acceptable to give $100 (or whatever it is) to Olimex >>for a product that means less sales for from Microchip's ICD2, versus investing >>in my sweat to make my own ICD2 clone? Sure legally the two things are different >>(although I don't think so if I'm the only user of my work, i.e. if it's not for >>resale), but.. morally? >> >>Food for thought. >> >> >> > > >-- >--- >Ake Hedman (YAP - Yet Another Programmer) >eurosource, Brattbergavägen 17, 820 50 LOS, Sweden >Phone: (46) 657 413430 Cellular: (46) 73 84 84 102 >Company home: http://www.eurosource.se >Kryddor/Te/Kaffe: http://www.brattberg.com >Personal homepage: http://www.eurosource.se/akhe >Automated home: http://www.vscp.org > > >