Go Down

Topic: Will FDTI destroy the Arduino? (Read 1 time) previous topic - next topic

BrendaEM

Arduino's are supposed to be open hardware.

Supposed I want to mix and match Arduino's and Ch340 serial enabled products. The Ch340 chips are clearly marked, so they are not counterfeit.

AFAIK, chips have been destroyed by FTDI's attempts to thwart both imposters and competition alike. It appears that they are still inhibiting other serial chips. While FDTI should not have to support their competition, they have done bad things to people as well as their competition.

I wanted to try the CH340 Arduino compatibles. They aren't a little less that a real Arduino; they are 1/5th as much. Though, even if they have Atmel chips, I do have USB issues. Is that FDTI's intentional doing, or not.

I have FTDI drivers on my system. Why is there no uninstaller? What other product would your tolerate on your system that has Windows drivers with no installer? Would you put up with having to put up with plug and pray stings to uninstall a printer driver?

More problems and questions arise. Does any of the current Arduinos/Genunos have FTDI chips in them? Do I send my money to a company that engages in anti-competitive practices, casting doubt that even the whole Arduino thing is open, or not.

When I buy a new official, what do I also buy?

ballscrewbob

#1
Jul 27, 2016, 04:38 am Last Edit: Jul 27, 2016, 04:42 am by Ballscrewbob
I have a mix of products and no issues with them.

The FTDI thing was sorted out a while ago now.

CH340's work just as well on clone Arduino and that has nothing to do with FTDI

Your USB issues could be anything but you have not given enough information for anyone to try help you.

Lots of drivers don't have uninstallers but you can uninstall from DEVICE MANAGER very easily.

I know a few bits of hardware and software that make removal a PITA not least of all Apple and Canon and Epson so its not like its deliberate.

Some Arduinos have FTDI and some don't. There are a few USB interface chips available and so it can often depend on where you buy your Arduino.

From my perspective its about as open as you can get if you disregard the litigation between Arduino and Arduino LOL


So is your post a rant or a request for help...its hard to tell


Oh and FTDI will NOT destroy an arduino...sheesh such nonsense.
It may not be the answer you were looking for but its the one I am giving based on either experience, educated guess, google or the fact that you gave nothing to go with in the first place so I used my wonky crystal ball.

CrossRoads

I use FTDI modules with my 328/1284/2560 boards, onboard and offboard.
Digikey & Mouser don't carry CH340, I won't design in something I can't purchase.
Designing & building electrical circuits for over 25 years.  Screw Shield for Mega/Due/Uno,  Bobuino with ATMega1284P, & other '328P & '1284P creations & offerings at  my website.

Coding Badly

Does any of the current Arduinos/Genunos have FTDI chips in them?
They do not.  And have not for years.


Robin2

I have FTDI drivers on my system. Why is there no uninstaller? What other product would your tolerate on your system that has Windows drivers with no installer?
Use Linux ?

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

westfw

Quote
chips have been destroyed by FTDI's attempts to thwart both imposters and competition alike.
Do you have a reference for the FTDI drivers ever "destroying" a chip that didn't present an FTDI USB Vendor ID?  I haven't heard of any such thing (though I've seen a couple people claim that non-FTDI implementations trying to use the driver are somehow "legitimate" rather than imposters:  "It's a completely different chip with an FTDI vendor code; you can't call that a "clone", can you?"  grr.)
I've also never heard of the FTDI drivers hurting a CH340 chip...


Quote
Quote
Does any of the current Arduinos/Genunos have FTDI chips in them?
They do not.  And have not for years.
"Official-ish" Arduino Nanos still use an FTDI chip.  Something that claims to be an FTDI chip, anyway.  It's not clear that even the official, genuine, Arduino Nanos ever used "genuine" FTDI chips - Nano users who claimed to have bought them from official distributors were hard hit by the FTDI driver updates...

dmjlambert

Arduino's are supposed to be open hardware.

Supposed I want to mix and match Arduino's and Ch340 serial enabled products. The Ch340 chips are clearly marked, so they are not counterfeit.

AFAIK, chips have been destroyed by FTDI's attempts to thwart both imposters and competition alike. It appears that they are still inhibiting other serial chips. While FDTI should not have to support their competition, they have done bad things to people as well as their competition.

I wanted to try the CH340 Arduino compatibles. They aren't a little less that a real Arduino; they are 1/5th as much. Though, even if they have Atmel chips, I do have USB issues. Is that FDTI's intentional doing, or not.

I have FTDI drivers on my system. Why is there no uninstaller? What other product would your tolerate on your system that has Windows drivers with no installer? Would you put up with having to put up with plug and pray stings to uninstall a printer driver?

More problems and questions arise. Does any of the current Arduinos/Genunos have FTDI chips in them? Do I send my money to a company that engages in anti-competitive practices, casting doubt that even the whole Arduino thing is open, or not.

When I buy a new official, what do I also buy?
FTDI counterfeit chips are clearly marked as FTDI.   If there are CH340G counterfeits they will be clearly marked too, and you won't know the difference.   A counterfeit is only counterfeit because you can't tell it's genuine or not.   For all you know, all the CH340G chips you have are counterfeit.    If you ran the FTDI company, what would you do to battle counterfeits?  FTDI is not anti-competitive when they take action to prevent their drivers from working with chips they didn't manufacture.  They did one thing in one version of their drivers to brick non-genuine chips, and that may be stinky and an unpopular move, but it was not anti-competitive.

ChrisTenone

No, it's hyper-competitive. Refusing to run is benign, yet effective competition. Damaging the customer's property crosses the line.

Sony has been bending over backward, apologizing for a long time, yet their reputation (and sales) continue to suffer for their transgression.
What, I need to say something else too?

Go Up