Open source firmware

[atte]

The best thing arturia could ton was to release the firmware as open source. I'm pretty sure bugs would be fixed and new ideas be implemented pretty fast then.

Hard to understand and accept they keep the firmware closed when they obvious struggled to handle the bug reports and feature requests from the community.

[Steinberger]

To words: Intellectual Property

You can't own or direct the development of anything if you open source everything.

[jahasw]

To words: Intellectual Property

You can't own or direct the development of anything if you open source everything.

Well, they're not making money with the software in case of BSP, if anything it's hampering the sales.
They're selling a physical product for the money, firmware comes free.
And a working firmware is required to have a working product in this case.

Open Sourcing and getting more developers on it would not only help with speed of bugfixing, but forking
to OSS projects would make specialized firmwares available, where users pick which they want to use.
And as such, it would be survival of the fittest, and benefit everyone.

[kfrm]

YES!

[Zymos]

Of course they are making money on the software, it's an integral part of the BSP.
Without it, it would be a completely non-functional box with pads and knobs.
     Also, the idea that there are numerous people out there with the knowledge and time to just leap in and fix bugs that even the people who coded the thing in the first place are having trouble with- if only mean greedy Arturia would set free their source code- is amusingly irrational.

     I'd like to know how you are so sure that anything is hampering sales. Every major retailer was back-ordered on the BSP, sold out their initial allotment, got more, and continued to sell them. A handful of complaints on a forum isn't a very accurate picture.

[jahasw]

I'm not pointing finger at Arturia, they're doing the best they can, I'm sure.
BSP has had a rough start, as I'm sure everyone here has noticed, and continue to notice until documented features are working as they should.

Yes, software is essential part of the product, but it also is a part that needs continuing resources in labour and therefore money they need to invest.
Until a reasonably working firmware and feature-set finds way to users.

But it is an option, to release for example an SDK for enthusiasts that believe in the hardware concept, to make it meet it's full potential.

[Zymos]

I don't know if I've ever seen that happen, even with discontinued abandoned products.
But with something brand new and still in production? Not a chance. More likely for someone to just hack it, like the Zaquencer.

    They said a few weeks ago that new firmware should be out by the end of Sept. Which seemed like a long time when I first read it. Hopefully it will wait for a sequence to end before starting the next one- that's the only thing I'm really missing. (And supposedly that feature had already been implemented but didn't make it into current OS)

[Steinberger]

A plea to create an API with hooks to the firmware is more appropriate. They will probably need to allow an area in memory to be used for sandbox play if they want to allow the unit to be used standalone and not be bound to a PC when using 3rd party mods. I'm on board with the idea but I'm waiting for their so-called big update with lots of bug fixes for now.

[sunflowr]

Yes! I'd love this to happen! I for one would love to be able to code my own sequencer-modes instead of having to wish that maybe, just maybe they add some of all the stuff I wish for

[RadicalAns]

Bump because this is totally a thing that needs to happen! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!! I would love to see the BSP have a Euclidean Rhythms mode, but I know that is something Arturia would never actually do. Not to mention the ability to fix a bug myself! That would be sooooo rad!

[blueprint]

Anyway, Open source isn't really necessary.
A simple 'Native Mode' that let user get all the interaction informations from the BeatStep and messages to control every visual feedback on it
It has been done before on the Launchpad, Monome, Apc40, Padkontrol, etc...
Many custom mod have been done with those very simple access

It generally consist in a series of:

• midi notes to light up any Led with the color parameter in the velocity value (like it was done on the launchpad)
• same midi notes, aftertouch for the input pads
• simple midi cc for the knobs
• obviously the 7segment Led display is gointg to need Sysex or NRPN messages (better for ableton users)

Then even users with no C++/harware knowledge can easily build whatever they want without any risk to compromise the hardware's firmware.
Making a new sequencer, would be possible through :

• Max
• Pure Data
• Max4live
• Live midi remote script
• Processing
• Arduino
• Raspberry Pi
• ...

Actually whatever can execute code and send/receive midi.

[smutek]

Also, the idea that there are numerous people out there with the knowledge and time to just leap in and fix bugs that even the people who coded the thing in the first place are having trouble with- if only mean greedy Arturia would set free their source code- is amusingly irrational.

Edit:

Just noticed how old this response is, but it is so far off the mark that I'm going to just leave this bit -

- This forum is a Simple Machines Forum, Simple Machines is free, open source forum software.
- Simple Machines is written with PHP, a free, open source scripting language.
- The pages are being served by Apache 2.2, free open source web server software
- All of this is running on an Ubuntu server, Ubuntu of course, being a free, open source operating system.

[atte]

Anyway, Open source isn't really necessary.
A simple 'Native Mode' that let user get all the interaction informations from the BeatStep and messages to control every visual feedback on it
It has been done before on the Launchpad, Monome, Apc40, Padkontrol, etc...

I would not at all be happy with that. I would need a computer, which defies the point of the BSP.

[teknoid]

i think giving an SDK free for the BSP would save this product.
i think the product is not finished in its current (firmware 1.4) state.
And it is my experience that arturia most probably does not fix this itself (see microbrute midi sync problem).
bitter but true.

[mantrak]

Absolutely agree. Every hardware manufacturer should look into releasing the firmware as open source (public domain). Those who would do that first will get a huge advantage. Just think of circuit bend community and how passionate they are about the hardware mods. Now imagine what kind of excitement would firmware bending generate.

And, I really don't understand people here quacking about intellectual property. How on earth would releasing a firmware for a proprietary piece of hardware device harm the manufacturer? 

If there are other concerns, perhaps they can release the firmware after some time say, two years after the product has been released. Or at least when the product goes out of production.

Let's see who is going to do that first!