A letter from Ecutek to the Subaru Tuning Community

Nobody's got anybody's panties in a wad, I just thought that if the intent wasn't to slam OpenECU then a different title or maybe a disclaimer of some form (certainly not 'I thought "the community" should know the real origin of OpenECU. ') would've been appropriate. Not trying to pick a fight here, though.

But, my comments are more or less in relation to a particular spin-off of the openECU initiative, and Scott's are in relation to another, so take that for what it's worth...

 

ever the business student

 

moose: how would you like this thread titled? if you and SS can come to a consensus, i will be happy to change it

 

Well, currently it makes it sound like all things OpenECU are ripoffs; however the entire EcuTek email and Scott's comments in the initial post keep referring to 'OpenECU' so I think it's kind of pointless to try and revamp it... hopefully people will read through the thread and come to their own conclusions. I just hate seeing ambitious and honest projects like Enginuity get a bad rep just because one single developer on a completely different software app decided to lift some code from EcuTek.

 

I changed the title just to make it a little more accurate...hope that helps...

 

I would call it "EcuTeK faces reality, and realizes that they can't handle it"

--
Brian

 

exactly: ituner....sold :wavey:

instead of complaining about what's hurting their sales...get creative and fix the problem through innovation...

 

Agreed, I mean, what percentage of people have an openECU vs an Accessport? What percentage of people even know what openECU is?

ECUtek is too much money for not enough product. It's as simple as that. Cobb has done a teriffic job with Accessport and it does more for less.

Step up ECUtek, I refuse to pay you another dime until you do....

 

I choose option number four, no tune at all

 

Well, if you want to stay is ASL, they yes, Option 4 would be the winner.

 

i like power... and im not competitive... so i like a good tune

 

I like power and I am competative, so I choose.......well you know.

 

I like slamming everything since moose is all about slamming stuff.

*goes back to the AEM and MS world*

 

ROFL

 

Competition should push the companies to create a reason for consumer to use their specific product. Don't attack the consumer. That's the whole point of our economy is choice. Ecutek must step it up or continue to lose market share.

 

Ya know not to go too far off topic, but as a comparison, I place Coolingmist into the mix. Here is a company that not only does not trash the DIYers, they actually try to help them and give them advice. If you are secure in your product and the VALUE of your product you don't have to worry about people trying to do it themselves.

 

If either of you two have some personal grudge with me, feel free to take it offline via PM/phone/person rather than shitting up the thread. Thanks.

PS: looking back at the whole debate, one thing really stands out: like the RIAA blaming p2p networks for a decline in sales (not that I defend p2p sharing), Ecutek has found a convenient scapegoat and excuse for lowering their prices. Blaming 'open source stealing from us' sure sounds a lot better than 'we are getting our asses kicked by Cobb.'

 

:bigthumb:

 

let me ruffle some feathers here or tickle moose for a min

"Enginuity FTW"

Its all good.
Im a consumer and I have choices (in fact many)
To Stay on Topic: I think everyone has a choice and each company has an option. I have a product myself in fact several and I welcome +ve competition. I also have a few patents and I enjoy looking at other patents to see how one tries to beat mine and how I can come up with solutions to be marketable. In order to compete a good product is only good for a day and it has to be renewed or improved to stay ahead.

 

Is it true that you can can't un-marry Ecutek? If it's true, maybe that's another down fall.

But after reading that email, I feel that Ecutek is just whining about their dwindling business, perhaps with such attitudes the market is better off without them...

 

I second that. But what is america with out choice!

 

If "one" wants market share they better know what the consumer wants and willing to purchase or have something to distinguish from the competition.

Whinning will get you noticed but not market share.

 

There was a discussion on here a while ago about it; if memory serves EcuTek was monkeying around with the handshake effectively keeping Cobb and other solutions from recognizing the ECU as valid to reflash. So they tried to lock you into using EcuTek and nothing else.

 

The ecu can be flashed back to a stock map by an authorized ecutek tuner. This map still has the ecutek license attached but it can then be flashed with other tools to overwrite the license and bring it back to a true stock state.

 

But they only provided the tool to do so after a bunch of people complained, right?

 

Yes it's true. We tried to read mine for giggles and couldn't. That is fine with me. Keeps me from messing with my ECU. Also I paid for SS's tune and that is his tune. If I was able to read and copy that map then I could send it to whomever I pleased and SS would lose money. Would you work on one car for a customer to only have that customer have 10 friends with the same mods take it? i don't think so. The locking of the ECU wasn't to combat the other companies. It was purely to protect the tuner. I have SS's maps on my laptop so that I can switch between them (have a 93 octane map and my methanol map....did have the dyno map which netted my 11.5 but it boosted 26-27 psi and it almost blew up my car so I deleted it).

I'm all for Ecutek and Cobb. I had Cobb first but when I went 18g, neither Doug or SS had Protuner yet so I was sorta forced to go with the only option at the time. Not a month later Doug got Protuner and SS shortly followed suit.

 

Once again Moose you have you're panties in a wad about nothing, Will and I were just discussing AEM and Megasquirt and how superior AEM is to most of the products available for Subaru's. So try and not take the Internet so seriously.

Matt

 

Yep. A perfect example of them listening to their customers

 

Matt,
I think you will agree that telling a guy he "has his panties in a bunch" is a little inflammatory. After meeting and talking to you, I imagine you would say it in a chiding way with a smile on your face, its just not how it comes across on the interweb (after having met you I also know you're smart enough to know that...)

 

I feel that this is a really valid comparison. With the internet being as it is today, opensource software is going to be more and more common. As has been said on here a number of times, Ecutek needs to step it up (offer much more than opensouce ecu software can) or else I feel they have no reason to complain. Of course, this under the assumption that the opensource software was not ripped directly from Ecutek.

 

I have been contacted by Enginuity, and they have a slightly different side. I would love to see something showing that Enginuity started from scratch (no stealing). I'll ask Jared to post here. If Enginuity honestly hacked the Subaru ECU from scratch like Ecutek, I'll have no more bad to say about them ***EXCEPT*** that there is no company behind it. If Ecutek locks up an ECU, they have a recovery protocol. If that doesn't work ECUTEK BUYS THE CUSTOMER A NEW ECU. Same with Cobb. If I have a problem with them, THEY STAND BEHIND IT.

In order to stand behind a product you have to be making money off of it. I understand that Enginuity is sharing their stuff for free. This is good, but for me, as a business to use it, what if I have a problem, who do I go to?

IF I see evidence that Enginuity has honest origins, I'll retract anything I've ever said bad about them. However, as slowwrx posted, it's hard to beat talking to the programer at Cobb on Saturday night about little details. That kind of customer service is normally only provided by a company that's turning an appropriate profit.

One note on Ecutek's statement about American's and the "my product is better because it's cheaper." They are exactly right. People here love to buy from the new vendor offering the rediculous deals on group buys. That vendor is making like $5 on each piece they sell. That's NOT enough to run a business. Those are people working out of their, or their parents basements that are thrilled to turn $500 a month. $500 a month is not enough to run a business. So now that vendor has de-valued a product, REAL business have lost the money of selling those products at enough profit to RUN A BUSINESS that will be around long enough to support their customers. All that does is damage the industry. It's not a real business practice. Unfortunately there seems to be an unending supply of new people that want to "get started" by selling products at a loss. They go out of business and there is another guy right behind them selling stuff at a loss...

Off the soap-box.

Please show us evidence that Enginuity has honest origins.

SS

 

Alright Scott, you've talked me in to it. Let me first say a few things about myself.

I've done my best to avoid conversations about Enginuity. I noticed quite early there are a whole lot of clueless people that spread false information and reading it wasn't doing me any good. I have no motive for defending Enginuity other than the same motive to developing it -- to give to the community. I have a real job (I'm a software developer in the Air Force), a familiy and all the normal responsibilities, plus I spend a good deal of my free time working on Enginuity. I don't have the time, desire, or even a good reason to present my case to all of these people.

However... In this case, I'll tell you my point of view, because Scott's endorsement of Ecutek holds a lot of water in this community. And being a South East regional forum, it's right in my back yard.

I bought my 2004 WRX in September of 2003. I did my research and decided very early that the cost engine management was more than I was willing to spend (not necessarily overpriced, mind you) and lived that way until the middle of 2005, when I found openecu.org.

At the time, Colby had written a command line utility for writing and flashing the ECU (which I'll discuss this more later in this post). To make any modifications, members of the forum were using a hex editor to change binary data by hand. One member fixed the OL/CL delay in my car using this method. Here's how it looks, if you aren't a computer nerd:

Don't bother trying to tune a car this way. So I started writing Enginuity -- from scratch. The thought of charging $50 a copy or whatever was entertaining, but I stood on the back of many of the members of openecu to write the software, so I didn't feel I had the right to the money. I also felt by making it open source, I could encourage other developers to help make it a better tool than I could by myself. Today there are 4 programmers and many others who contribute in some way or another.

Writing Enginuity's frontend is fairly straight forward for someone with a reasonable amount of programming experience. The real world values are stored as binary data in the ECU's ROM. Once you use ECUFlash to read the rom, all you have to do is find and display the data, provide a method to modify it, and save it back, just like you would with any other file. It's not rocket science, and Ecutek certainly isn't the only entity capable.

So there you have it -- the background.

Scott asked for proof that Enginuity has honest origins. I have none. The story above is the best I can provide. More importantly, there is absolutely no evidence anything was ever stolen from Ecutek. But the screenshot, you say? Let's analyze.


In this screenshot, you see a copy of what, apparently, is Ecutek's tuning suite, with a list of the tables they allow you to tune. Next to it is a copy of ecuEdit, displaying the same tables, verbatim. Looks like the OpenECU projects have been caught redhanded, yeah?

I say "the OpenECU projects" rather than just "OpenECU" for reasons already stated (but evidently skipped, ignored or discounted) earlier in this thread. I'll save you the rereading -- OpenECU is a forum, not software. The application most closely associated is ECU Flash, written by the forum owner, Colby Boles. My application is, of course, Enginuity -- not associated with OpenECU. The application in the screenshot is ecuFlash which, again, is not associated. So strike 1: that screenshot is not OpenECU, it is not all of the projects you associate with OpenECU, it is not ECU Flash, the project most closely associated with OpenECU.

Lets now discuss the method by which new data is made accessible to these projects. All three use what we call XML ECU definitions. These definitions tell the applications all the information it needs to know to read a ROM and display any of the parameters contained in it. Here's an example of a single table from Enginuity:

Code:

 <table type="3D" name="Target Boost" category="Boost" storagetype="uint8" endian="big" sizex="8" sizey="9" userlevel="1" logparam="P202">
      <scaling units="Boost (psi relative)" expression="(x-94)*.15425" to_byte="x/.15425+94" format="#0.00" fineincrement=".1" coarseincrement="1" />
      <table type="X Axis" name="Throttle" storagetype="uint16" endian="big" sizex="8" logparam="P13">
      <scaling units="%" expression="x*.00230414" to_byte="x/.00230414" format="#" fineincrement="1" coarseincrement="5" />
      </table>
      <table type="Y Axis" name="Engine Speed" storagetype="uint16" endian="big" sizey="9" logparam="P8">
      <scaling units="RPM" expression="x*.1953125" to_byte="x/.1953125" format="#" fineincrement="50" coarseincrement="100" />
      </table>
      <description>This map contains the desired boost targets. Boost control is a closed loop system, adjusting the wastegate duty cycle as needed in an attempt to achieve target boost. Actual boost is influenced by a number of factors. In addition to the wastegate maps, various compensation tables can impact the final boost result. There are also limits to what a specific turbo and motor combination can produce at a given rpm, throttle position and in a particular gear.</description>
 </table>

This describes everything Enginuity needs to know to open a specific ROM and display its target boost table. The reason we use XML is to provide the ability for anyone that can find these parameters in any ECU (that means not just Subaru) the ability to add support for it in our tools without modifying the code. On the Enginuity forums, Bill Gregg has taken on the responsibility of developing and maintaining the definition file that is distributed with Enginuity. He has reverse engineered the stock ECU images and found patterns among them and can derive this information from Subaru ECUs (which are all very similar) quite quickly. The same way Ecutek (presumably) does it.

One thing that is not stored is the names of these tables. Using the information you discover while reverse engineering the code, you can make an educated guess, but the names are not explicitly defined. This is Ecutek's point -- the names of the tables in ecuEdit are identical to their own, and by all knowledgable accounts, would not be unless they were taken directly from Ecutek. But there is a very simple explanation.

Another party, also unassociated with OpenECU, Enginuity and ecuEdit, wrote a utility that can read a Subaru ROM and output a full featured definition file. The output of this utility is what looks identical to Ecutek's tables. It is not associated with and is not distributed with any of these tools. I won't tell you the name here as 1) it does have questionable origins and 2) Enginuity's definitions are already complete enough that you don't need it anyway (and if you want more, you can ask Bill -- he's good).

So there you have it. I urge you to at least read through this post and understand it before propagating Ecutek's misinformation.

And as an aside, 420: Your statement that Linux is a ripoff of Windows is seriously the most ridiculous and ignorant thing I've ever read about open source software.

Jared @ Enginuity

 

We're all eyes I'm going to pre-empt his post with the statement that I can admit when I'm wrong (and I wouldn't mind being wrong in this case). (It doesn't happen often with tuning and other "performance engineering" but maybe it happens with opinions of software)

I do want to know what happens if an ECU locks up during a flash.

SS

 

Alright, I just got home from work, so I've now actually been able to read some of Scott's questions in the email he sent me.

He asked why I would do this for free. I think I hinted at it in the post above, but let me elaborate. As I said, I was very reliant on the work of many of the people at openecu. Colby did the toughest part by writing ECU Flash and creating an interface (the OpenPort). Others posted ROMs from their car that I analyzed to help. Jon [in CT] was able to derive many of the data locations I used in early versions of Enginuity. Calvin from Tari wrote an excellent datalogger. Some others were able to figure out equations for converting the binary data in the ECU to real world data. All I did was write a GUI for all of this.

More importantly, like I said above, I always felt the cost of engine management was too high for my budget. After I got a better understanding of what was involved, I began feeling the cost was unreasonable. I feel Ecutek only demanded the licensing fees they did because they were the only option and they were able to sell them for more than they are really worth. I started writing Enginuity for two reasons -- to get more experience with Java and hopefully benefit myself personally, and to tune my car for free. Here I am, almost a year and a half after tuning my own car for free, still working on it, because I'm still learning, and I'm helping to transform the entire market. It's incredibly rewarding -- hearing the praise people give me and seeing them use my software definately outweighs the criticism, misinformation and lies I also get a hear share of. Enginuity is the biggest thing I've ever done with my life. I'm sure people can appreciate that.

Also, I'm not a business man, and I've got an obiligation to the military for another year even if I wanted to be. I don't care to compete with Ecutek and Cobb. I've got an honest job making a humble salary and I'm happy with it. For those counting, over the last 16 months, between donations, google ads and sponsors, I've made well under a dollar an hour for the work I've spend designing and coding Enginuity, without including the time I've spent on the forums discussing and supporting it.

Scott also wants to know about when an ECU locks up during reflashing. I'm sure you remember contacting me about a month ago, and I would assume you checked back to read my response, but anyway.. I've never heard of this happening. I've heard of a couple dead ECUs that were being flashed with ECU Flash. The major risks are disruption in power or connection to the ECU, which are valid problems and apply equally to ECU Flash, Ecutek and Cobb. And you already know the answer, I'm sure -- there is nothing we're obligated to do for you, as stated in our disclaimers.

However, in the three cases of dead ECUs I've seen, two of them were sent to Colby of OpenECU, who was able to recover them. The third, after asking on the forums, was hard-reset by the owner and also recovered. The fact that you could buy a used replacement ECU if something were to happen and still be saving a few hundred bucks over the commercial applications probably isn't a very professional reply, but what the hell.. I already said I'm not a business man.

I'll leave you with this -- if "my product is better because it's cheaper" is not a valid statement, is "my product is better because it costs more" valid?

 

I'm all for Jared and all open source software developers, espicially since I do quite a bit with it. Little secret for you all.. me and a buddy are working on getting a Nintendo DS to sync up with your ecu to make changes on the fly without a laptop. we'll see how that turns out.

 

This still seems like a hard one to me... It appears that the basis for the recent software is still based on something that was stolen from Ecutek. I see that there are a lot of people working hard on stuff right now, and on one hand, Ecutek didn't patent it, but on the other, I'm still not convinced it's "right" to do that. It still seems to me that the original technology was stolen from Ecutek...

The names of the tables have been changed, which makes the proof hard, but the main question is;

"If somebody hadn't originally hacked Ecutek, would the current software be around?"

I hope that it's clear that I'm not "slamming" anyone, I really would like to know; "is the modern open source ecu editing software a derivative of technology "stolen" from Ecutek?"

To me, it doesn't matter how much effort is being put in now to improve your product, if it's based on stolen "technology" it's just not right.

I'm sure most people on here know that I normally do not even begin to comment on any "ethical" type stuff... for the most part I don't care. But I would like to know whether I can "endorse" this.

SS

 

You might want to read my post again. Here I will make it easy for you.

Sorry, I put a period instead of a ? I never claimed that Linux was a MS ripoff, I asked others if it was, because I have no personal knowledge or experience with it.

 

Did you even bother to read Jared's full posts, or are you just out to continue to spread misinformation?

I understand that you are a vendor, and it is in your best interest to push all this stuff aside, and call this an ethical issue.... but is it ethical to spread misinformation?

I felt that Jared very adequately explained his software, and provided a history for it's development. I appreciate the time he took to do this, and it was nice to have an informative explanation. I would suggest that you take the time to read it.

--
Brian

 

You do know Scott that lots of technology and software code we use is stolen at some point to make a new product?

 

You know what they say about assuming, it makes an ASS out of U and ME.

You are assuming he is telling the truth about his softwares development. He might be, he might not be, who knows.

 

I know that this adds nothing to the topic of discussion but is any of this really important to any of you? does this affect your lives in any personal way? Im most certain that it probably doesnt, so dont worry about it.

arguing over the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win you are still retarded.

 

awesome.....definitely gonna steal that line :rofl: :rofl:

 

A car design rolling down the road was copied and improved from ............. ??? We still drive it and constantly improve on it.

Even if there is a patent it will expire. Patents exist but it wont cover much of anything. A lot of ideas were intentionally not patented so that it remains a secret. A patent is very detail and most of the time it reveals more than it protects.

 

What, exactly, do you think the OS tools have stolen from Ecutek?

Imagine someone like Nick on Nasioc (he's the king there, right?) were to say something along the lines of this, along with a photograph of you with a book from Evolution Driving School (or whatever the proper name is):

Yes, they have an authentic photo of you with their IP. Did you steal anything? Now I admit, this is an unfair comparison, because I've never had a copy of Ecutek's software or even seen it.

 

I've read everything Jared wrote at least 4 times now. What "mis-information" am I spreading??? There is no answer for why some of the original open source stuff had the EXACT same names as Ecutek.

I don't even understand this statement. Why would being a vendor make me want to push it aside. I can tune with Enginuity, and I still get my $120 an hour... Again, what in the world mis-information are you talking about??? Do you see the screen shot??? Do YOU have an explanation for the copied names?

BrianGT, I've never understood why you choose to instigate so much here... I posted a letter, and have since made it clear that I want to know what whether I can endorse the use of Enginuity.

All, I hope my "tone" of honest desire to know whether I can endorse Enginuity, or if it got it's start with technology or techniques stolen from Ecutek. I'm not making statements, I'm asking questions and providing my opinion. Mis-information isn't even the right term...

SS