Who ownes the tune?
- Thread starter TooManyFords
- Start date
TooManyFords
Action figures sold separately
How's everyone doing so far? Some really good opinions being expressed ^ there. Sure beats arguing about blowers.
I'm seeing some repeated opinions and I think I'll weigh in now.
Some of you know my background, most probably do not. I'll try to keep this part short. Back in the days of the first PC's, Shareware came about because a few of us programmers back then didn't have the money to compete head-on with the big boys at Lotus, Microsoft and IBM. I was one of a handful of programmers that produced Shareware. Turbo Pascal was the rage and everyone was just finding out that there was more then just CompuServe to chat with. I helped create some of the first BBS software out there (Colossus) and also wrote one of the first Shareware communication programs (Qmodem for those of you old enough to remember what a 1200 baud modem was and ran DOS 2.0). Shareware was new! Give the software away and just -hope- the end user pays?!? Let me tell you, it grossed me over a million $ in 8 years and it never sat on a shelf in a store. Those were the days!
Fast-forward...
Today we still have variations of the same theme, but the buzzword now is "open source". Look at what Linux has done to the server market! I support just as many tux boxes as I do windows. Just built a router for a local utility Monday from a spare PII and a couple ethernet cards and Linux.
As for our cars and our tunes, here's the way I see it. The tuner that creates a custom chip is not unlike myself, the programmer. I never gave away the source to Qmodem and I don't feel they should give away the source to their chip. You see, I'm buying just a chip and it just -happens- to have a better tune for my car than the one Ford gave me. I'm good with that. I expect the tuner to tell me the basics about what they did and it can be in general terms. The tranny shifts at these points and the torque converter locks and unlocks under these conditions. On a dyno I should get xxx RWHP etc. General terms.
However, when I go and pay for a "custom dyno" session, I expect to receive the whole enchilada. I am contracting that tuner to do my car just for me since it would be useless for anyone else. It might end up being a good place to start for another, but I wouldn't run it. The S/C builders have "generic, safe tunes" for a reason, they are a good starting place and it reduces their warranty claims. Are they perfect? Perfect is in the eye of the beholder but suffice to say the tune combined with the hardware makes it head and shoulders above factory!
When I get my custom dyno session, I want it downloaded into whatever form I need and I want to be able to make the changes. I "sub-contracted" him to do so and I should get it.
Now, where does "open source" come in? Look at LS1Edit! Here is a free package that people are sharing their ideas and such to make the LS1, LS2 and LS6 engines more than what GM wanted to release. They share everything!
My question to all of you is; Why are we not sharing? I guarantee that when I get my custom tune next week that I'll be glad to share what I had done. Remember, it worked for me but may not work for you. When we all get software like LS1Edit, then we all can tweak everything. SCT Pro Racer is close but certainly not free.
Bottom line, I'm not against the guy who creates secret Plug Gaps. He should make money. But I do expect the rest of us that pay to tune to share. I've shared all my life and it feels good!
Cheers
John
I'm seeing some repeated opinions and I think I'll weigh in now.
Some of you know my background, most probably do not. I'll try to keep this part short. Back in the days of the first PC's, Shareware came about because a few of us programmers back then didn't have the money to compete head-on with the big boys at Lotus, Microsoft and IBM. I was one of a handful of programmers that produced Shareware. Turbo Pascal was the rage and everyone was just finding out that there was more then just CompuServe to chat with. I helped create some of the first BBS software out there (Colossus) and also wrote one of the first Shareware communication programs (Qmodem for those of you old enough to remember what a 1200 baud modem was and ran DOS 2.0). Shareware was new! Give the software away and just -hope- the end user pays?!? Let me tell you, it grossed me over a million $ in 8 years and it never sat on a shelf in a store. Those were the days!
Fast-forward...
Today we still have variations of the same theme, but the buzzword now is "open source". Look at what Linux has done to the server market! I support just as many tux boxes as I do windows. Just built a router for a local utility Monday from a spare PII and a couple ethernet cards and Linux.
As for our cars and our tunes, here's the way I see it. The tuner that creates a custom chip is not unlike myself, the programmer. I never gave away the source to Qmodem and I don't feel they should give away the source to their chip. You see, I'm buying just a chip and it just -happens- to have a better tune for my car than the one Ford gave me. I'm good with that. I expect the tuner to tell me the basics about what they did and it can be in general terms. The tranny shifts at these points and the torque converter locks and unlocks under these conditions. On a dyno I should get xxx RWHP etc. General terms.
However, when I go and pay for a "custom dyno" session, I expect to receive the whole enchilada. I am contracting that tuner to do my car just for me since it would be useless for anyone else. It might end up being a good place to start for another, but I wouldn't run it. The S/C builders have "generic, safe tunes" for a reason, they are a good starting place and it reduces their warranty claims. Are they perfect? Perfect is in the eye of the beholder but suffice to say the tune combined with the hardware makes it head and shoulders above factory!
When I get my custom dyno session, I want it downloaded into whatever form I need and I want to be able to make the changes. I "sub-contracted" him to do so and I should get it.
Now, where does "open source" come in? Look at LS1Edit! Here is a free package that people are sharing their ideas and such to make the LS1, LS2 and LS6 engines more than what GM wanted to release. They share everything!
My question to all of you is; Why are we not sharing? I guarantee that when I get my custom tune next week that I'll be glad to share what I had done. Remember, it worked for me but may not work for you. When we all get software like LS1Edit, then we all can tweak everything. SCT Pro Racer is close but certainly not free.
Bottom line, I'm not against the guy who creates secret Plug Gaps. He should make money. But I do expect the rest of us that pay to tune to share. I've shared all my life and it feels good!
Cheers
John
BruteForce
Stooge Certified
Smokey said:I still have my Qmodem software! I purchsed it new waaaay back in the days before I started my BBS, which is still online today. I ran my first BBs using a 2400 baud modem, now it's on the 'net. Nice to know someone is around that remembers those days.
I too recall using Qmodem with my 20MHz 386SX. 800 Baud modem built in and 4 x 1 MB 30-pin SIMMs. Upgraded it to its max of 16 MB for $850. HA! The good old days (not)!
Mr Johnson
Member
Been away for a bit... Here are my additional comments.
John as I'm sure you are aware there is a very significant difference between shareware and open source, which you touched on. One is completely free. I give you the rights to what I have done and you are free to change it and do with it what you like. The other is providing a set of functionality for free in the hopes that folks will support your good work. So where do I disagree? The tuner that creates a custom tune chip is not a programmer. I doubt that most tuners could write the actual code to run on our engine computers. In most cases they are instead simply manipulating data tables and variables that some other program makes sure is written to the FLASH memory in a recognizable way for the EEC to continue to function. So the value I will ultimately put in the program (Eg. LS1Edit, SCT tuner code) vs. the "tune" aka parameters is much, much higher. Regarding the statement about keeping a tune proprietary. As you said the LAMP folks have killed a lot of companies that didn't add significant value above and beyond providing what are essentially "tuning" parameters. The model will work for some time and like the Free Software Foundation you will find "consultants" that make their living showing people how to use the free tools but.... In any case I agree with most everything you say and I too remember Qmodem and the days of 300 baud modems!
I wish you were both correct but I fear the opposite. Companies today are doing everything they can to not allow you to own anything and instead want to simply give you specific rights to use what you buy. Remember DiVX DVDs? Self-destruct after two plays? Think about how the RIAA would love nothing better than to have copy protection on every CD you bought because of "piracy". All the DRM (Digital Rights Management) solutions are there because movie studios and recording companies don't want you to control the content you bought. They want to control how you use it.
It isn't quite so clear cut though. Two very significant cases have held that reverse engineering a companies product is OK under specific circumstances. The two cases in question were Compaq vs. IBM when Compaq cloned the PC BIOS via reverse engineering. The other is, I believe, Accolade vs. Sega whereby Sega attemted to limit what games could run on their Genesis game system (the ones they got approval/money from). In both cases it was cited as "fair use" that Compaq and Accolade reverse engineered the code in the BIOS and console. The court held that it was fair use "if a legitimate reason for the use exists".
Gives me hope for the "we own it, etc.. . above it really does.
Sorry for the long posts. These just happen to be two topics I'm passionate about (Cars and Computers)!
John as I'm sure you are aware there is a very significant difference between shareware and open source, which you touched on. One is completely free. I give you the rights to what I have done and you are free to change it and do with it what you like. The other is providing a set of functionality for free in the hopes that folks will support your good work. So where do I disagree? The tuner that creates a custom tune chip is not a programmer. I doubt that most tuners could write the actual code to run on our engine computers. In most cases they are instead simply manipulating data tables and variables that some other program makes sure is written to the FLASH memory in a recognizable way for the EEC to continue to function. So the value I will ultimately put in the program (Eg. LS1Edit, SCT tuner code) vs. the "tune" aka parameters is much, much higher. Regarding the statement about keeping a tune proprietary. As you said the LAMP folks have killed a lot of companies that didn't add significant value above and beyond providing what are essentially "tuning" parameters. The model will work for some time and like the Free Software Foundation you will find "consultants" that make their living showing people how to use the free tools but.... In any case I agree with most everything you say and I too remember Qmodem and the days of 300 baud modems!
and
I wish you were both correct but I fear the opposite. Companies today are doing everything they can to not allow you to own anything and instead want to simply give you specific rights to use what you buy. Remember DiVX DVDs? Self-destruct after two plays? Think about how the RIAA would love nothing better than to have copy protection on every CD you bought because of "piracy". All the DRM (Digital Rights Management) solutions are there because movie studios and recording companies don't want you to control the content you bought. They want to control how you use it.
It isn't quite so clear cut though. Two very significant cases have held that reverse engineering a companies product is OK under specific circumstances. The two cases in question were Compaq vs. IBM when Compaq cloned the PC BIOS via reverse engineering. The other is, I believe, Accolade vs. Sega whereby Sega attemted to limit what games could run on their Genesis game system (the ones they got approval/money from). In both cases it was cited as "fair use" that Compaq and Accolade reverse engineered the code in the BIOS and console. The court held that it was fair use "if a legitimate reason for the use exists".
Gives me hope for the "we own it, etc.. . above it really does.
Sorry for the long posts. These just happen to be two topics I'm passionate about (Cars and Computers)!
TooManyFords
Action figures sold separately
Heh heh..Mr Johnson said:
25 years ago you needed to know 3270 and 360 Assembler (IEFBR14 ring bells?)
20 years ago you needed to know 6502 and 8080 asm, Cobol and Fortran were the norm and Basic was just getting on a roll...
15 years ago the tools changed again. Graphic interfaces were becoming popular and the tools were getting better.
10 years ago the tools changed yet again and now anyone who could run move a mouse and drop an icon on a form could create Windows programs with Visual Basic.
The point is that as the tools get easier and easier to use, the line becomes blurred between what -used- to be called a programmer and what can -now- be called a programmer. Even what can be programmed has changed. Used to be only mainframes, then mini's and finally everyone has a PC. Oh, and then came the engineers for everything else! My god, my vcr is now a fancy Linux box! My car stereo is (Empeg) is a freakin Linux box! My car has a computer more complex than my DVD player!
A tuner is now a programmer, it's just a different compiler and a computer with a gas pedal for a keyboard. haha. Sometimes I type things that make me laugh too!
I think I'll go dig my TSR-80 out of the box and pretend it has lowercase. (Ok, it does because I soldered extra chips into mine along with reverse video and overclocked it back when you needed a soldering iron to make it happen!)
Cheers
John
PS: thanks to all of you who actually remembered Qmodem! Thank you!
Last edited:
Mr Johnson
Member
TooManyFords said:
And as the tools become easier to use the output of using the toolsbecomes a commodity thereby decreasing what an end-user is willing to pay for it.
But someone still has to do the nitty gritty... and they typically get paid pretty well.
imp:LOL... I remember having to solder some wires to make 1200 baud communication reliable on the Apple IIe serial ports. Here's to the "old" days.. :beer:
SergntMac
Shelby GT X2--Back In Black
I'm still using 3270 stuff to run my "Hot Desk" today. Boring and slow, but still in place. We're looking for a few good programmers...TooManyFords said:
If you need a power supply, you can borrow mine.TooManyFords said:
I want to get back to the bottom line on this train of thought, which is (IMHO) that Ford owns the territory we are homesteading on. This is true, yes? Ford owns, we rent, no matter how many guns we got. And, any "tuner" who feels his "refinement" of this landscape is strictly his own creative genius, needs some time away from his keyboard. Tuners are just more homesteaders, and just one rung above us consumers.
Ford locked the door. We want in. Tuners got the key. What did you miss here?
We use tuners the same way tuners use Ford. Tuners are overall nice folks, and smart too. But, God's gift to fast 4 doors? Hardly. I've been an SCT customer since before it was called SCT. My MM never would have started up, let along run record numbers back in 2002 without a custom tune. Nonetheless, today, can I get what I want/need from Diablo? Hypertech? Jet? You bet.
Tuners work for us. How (and when) did we forget this?
When tunes get too expensive, no one wants to buy a tune, and the tuners are dead in the water. Tunes get too cheap, and no one needs to pay for them. Tuners are again dead in the water. Tunes get priced just right, and do what we want them to do for us, and everyone stays happy. It's the American way.
So, who's steering this software boat? I am. Me. You. Owners. End users. Folks buying tunes. We all steer this software boat with our desire to go faster, and our willingness to spend money. Truncate either one, the tuners will be looking for work.
So...Tuners are hired labor, and there's a brand new tuner with another twist on things waiting on us just around the next corner. One tuner gets full of himself as the "master" (as we have seen), while another "master" is in the wings, and begging for the chance to step up. One tuner gets lazy, or, difficult to deal with? Ditto...Someone waits for this exact moment. Don't believe me? Just ask Bill Gates.
John...You want shareware? Open source? (like I know the difference) Motoviate the masses, break it down to features and coins...It's the American way, yes?
TooManyFords
Action figures sold separately
You bet! And along with the American way, the balance is usually what happens regardless of how we steer the boat. (grin!) I don't know if Logan will allow it, but I would like to see a database of Tune Information like we currently have for the 1320. If not, I'll host it on my website. I'm going to start searching other forums (like the one for LS1Edit) and see what works and then, in another greate American tradition in software, CLONE it!SergntMac said:
I'll keep everyone posted.
John
magindat
Lemonade
The geeks above will get this....
I do I.T. for a living. For Banks. Among other things, I do a lot of database writing. Database writing? I use Microsoft's Access (or other products) to 'author' a database. I then 'test' my developing database with users as it comes along. I tweak, fix, refine until it suits the user...until it does what they wanted it to do. When I'm done the customer (the bank) or privately (my client) owns the database. If they purchased a copy of Access from Microsoft, they are free to manipulate it. If they screw it up, they pay me more to fix it. Throughout the process, I freely discuss the principles and practices of authoring this database. There is no warranty any further than "It worked when you took it." If it breaks later they pay to fix... since the only way it could break is by their intervention.
In this case I am the 'tuner'. The database or 'tune' is not mine. It's theirs. They paid me to do it. If they break it, I have 2 choices. I either refuse to help them (as Ford does when they void warranty) or they pay me to fix it it (as Ford or a tuner would charge to do the same). Further, (as in the case of Ford) my fix may simply be to re-install my original database.
At the end of the day, it's all about how the tuner (or author) wants to handle their work as compared to what the client is willing to pay within the tuner or authors wishes.
Anything beyond the tuner or author's wishes is theft. Personally, I don't really care if my client gives or sells or otherwise messes with my database. I'll end up getting paid more to fix it for the recipient than I could have charged for the original database!!!! So, in that case they are not stealing. If I felt strongly about such a thing and told them so, then it WOULD be theft.
All in all it's about how people feel. Open sourcers like to share. Others don't. Is it a hobby or a livleyhood?
It's simple to me. If you want good work and ongoing support, maintain a relationship with whomever does work for you and adhere to their wishes.
I do I.T. for a living. For Banks. Among other things, I do a lot of database writing. Database writing? I use Microsoft's Access (or other products) to 'author' a database. I then 'test' my developing database with users as it comes along. I tweak, fix, refine until it suits the user...until it does what they wanted it to do. When I'm done the customer (the bank) or privately (my client) owns the database. If they purchased a copy of Access from Microsoft, they are free to manipulate it. If they screw it up, they pay me more to fix it. Throughout the process, I freely discuss the principles and practices of authoring this database. There is no warranty any further than "It worked when you took it." If it breaks later they pay to fix... since the only way it could break is by their intervention.
In this case I am the 'tuner'. The database or 'tune' is not mine. It's theirs. They paid me to do it. If they break it, I have 2 choices. I either refuse to help them (as Ford does when they void warranty) or they pay me to fix it it (as Ford or a tuner would charge to do the same). Further, (as in the case of Ford) my fix may simply be to re-install my original database.
At the end of the day, it's all about how the tuner (or author) wants to handle their work as compared to what the client is willing to pay within the tuner or authors wishes.
Anything beyond the tuner or author's wishes is theft. Personally, I don't really care if my client gives or sells or otherwise messes with my database. I'll end up getting paid more to fix it for the recipient than I could have charged for the original database!!!! So, in that case they are not stealing. If I felt strongly about such a thing and told them so, then it WOULD be theft.
All in all it's about how people feel. Open sourcers like to share. Others don't. Is it a hobby or a livleyhood?
It's simple to me. If you want good work and ongoing support, maintain a relationship with whomever does work for you and adhere to their wishes.
TooManyFords
Action figures sold separately
I agree totally! If I were a competent TUNER, I would want to give everyone I know a copy of a program that lets the customer tweak and twiddle with every setting that is possible. For every customer that is actually able to wrap their brains around the nuances of tuning an engine, there will be hundreds that won't and will need to return back to the tuner to "make it right".
Even with the vast resources of the Internet, my customers still can't fix their own computers and I make money fixing it for them. The computer looks different, is all.
For the TUNERS to make $$$, they need more customers...
And to get customers, the cars need to break...
And for the cars to break, we need free software so users can break them!
I see only a win-win for all of us in this!
John
Even with the vast resources of the Internet, my customers still can't fix their own computers and I make money fixing it for them. The computer looks different, is all.
For the TUNERS to make $$$, they need more customers...
And to get customers, the cars need to break...
And for the cars to break, we need free software so users can break them!
I see only a win-win for all of us in this!
John
TooManyFords
Action figures sold separately
You're right, THEY DON'T!!martyo said:And they say lawyers have no business ethics.....
:laugh:
Cheers!
John
Paul T. Casey
Senior Member
I wonder what the tuners think. Also, to throw in another monkey wrench, if the OBD2 laws are taken verbatum, aren't ALL custom tunes basically illegal?
C
Captain Steve
Guest
Ford is in the business of manufacturing and selling cars. That is their main concern. They created software to run their hardware. They also warrant that their hardware/software combination will work for a set duration.
I'm sure Ford is happy to share their software with companies like SCT and Diablo. It's in their best interest as it allows for greater value of their product in the consumers eyes. If you could modify Chevys but not Fords, then the Chevys would gain value relative to the Fords for any customer that even considers modding. Ford doesn't honor the warrantee if you change from their software, because they're warranteeing THEIR software to work with their hardware.. they don't warrantee your electric water pump either.
SCT is in the business of selling handheld tuners(or chips or laptop software) to modify Ford's software. The tune is what the customer wants, but SCT is in the business of selling you the means to get it. SCT doesn't care what tune you use for your car, as long as you're buying thier product to load it into your car. The pre-packaged tunes that they develop are really just a sales incentive to buy their brand vs another.
Tuners (the people, not the equiptment) are in the customer service business. They are selling a service (tweaking the software). The value of their service depends on how well the tweaks to the software work. Some things that affect that are experience and research. A less experienced tuner who has done no research will be able to command much lower prices than a more experienced tuner who has done better research. A tuner is selling you a service, their tweaking of your software and the piece of mind of knowing it's not going to hurt your car.
If you buy a tune from a tuner, then go ahead and copy it and sell (or give)it to someone else(who would otherwise have also bought it), you're stealing from the tuner. He's invested time and money into perfecting a tune for your car, and deserves a payment for it. You in effect are stealing his research and selling it as your own.
Bottom Line:
Ford doesn't care if you distribute a different tune, they're happy so long as they are selling cars.. anything that makes the car more attractive (and thus sells more cars) is fine by them.
SCT doesn't care if you distribute a different tune, they're happy so long as they are selling handhelds.. anthing that makes the handheld more attractive (and thus sells more handhelds) is fine by them.
Tuners care if you distribute THEIR tune for free. They've worked at tweaking the tune and developing a reputation ... if you give it away for free, then you're causing them to lose money.
Edit: I forgot to answer the original question.
It's like buying a book from the bookstore, you can take the book home and cut it up into little pieces and re-arange the words however you like.
You can even take the book home and scan the contents into your computer if you like.
Heck, you can scan it in and print it back out again for your own amusement.
So far, everyone's happy.
What you can't do, is scan the book into the computer, and then post a link on the internet, so all of your friends can read it. It breaks copyright laws.
I'm sure Ford is happy to share their software with companies like SCT and Diablo. It's in their best interest as it allows for greater value of their product in the consumers eyes. If you could modify Chevys but not Fords, then the Chevys would gain value relative to the Fords for any customer that even considers modding. Ford doesn't honor the warrantee if you change from their software, because they're warranteeing THEIR software to work with their hardware.. they don't warrantee your electric water pump either.
SCT is in the business of selling handheld tuners(or chips or laptop software) to modify Ford's software. The tune is what the customer wants, but SCT is in the business of selling you the means to get it. SCT doesn't care what tune you use for your car, as long as you're buying thier product to load it into your car. The pre-packaged tunes that they develop are really just a sales incentive to buy their brand vs another.
Tuners (the people, not the equiptment) are in the customer service business. They are selling a service (tweaking the software). The value of their service depends on how well the tweaks to the software work. Some things that affect that are experience and research. A less experienced tuner who has done no research will be able to command much lower prices than a more experienced tuner who has done better research. A tuner is selling you a service, their tweaking of your software and the piece of mind of knowing it's not going to hurt your car.
If you buy a tune from a tuner, then go ahead and copy it and sell (or give)it to someone else(who would otherwise have also bought it), you're stealing from the tuner. He's invested time and money into perfecting a tune for your car, and deserves a payment for it. You in effect are stealing his research and selling it as your own.
Bottom Line:
Ford doesn't care if you distribute a different tune, they're happy so long as they are selling cars.. anything that makes the car more attractive (and thus sells more cars) is fine by them.
SCT doesn't care if you distribute a different tune, they're happy so long as they are selling handhelds.. anthing that makes the handheld more attractive (and thus sells more handhelds) is fine by them.
Tuners care if you distribute THEIR tune for free. They've worked at tweaking the tune and developing a reputation ... if you give it away for free, then you're causing them to lose money.
Edit: I forgot to answer the original question.
The answer is.. you own the tune in your car. You can play with it all that you like.. in your car.TooManyFords said:
It's like buying a book from the bookstore, you can take the book home and cut it up into little pieces and re-arange the words however you like.
You can even take the book home and scan the contents into your computer if you like.
Heck, you can scan it in and print it back out again for your own amusement.
So far, everyone's happy.
What you can't do, is scan the book into the computer, and then post a link on the internet, so all of your friends can read it. It breaks copyright laws.
Last edited: