MKS-SERVO42C
MKS-SERVO42C copied to clipboard
makerbase-mks
Release of the firmware
Is there any plan for the release of the source code (and the binaries) of this updated model? Thank you.
We may open source in the future, I hope everyone likes and supports us.Thank you.
I really hope so! It would be great to let us tinker and extend the firmware as it is already possible with the 42B. :smile: Good luck!
+1 i am considering purchasing a couple of these boards as well, would love the firmware to become open source - surely that'll attract a lot more enthousiasts !
Dear cricket2009, I'm really looking forward to download your new firmware v1.1. At present, our projects are urgently waiting for the new feature "smoothly moving at very low speeds". Could you give a hint, when the download will be available, or are you already working on version 1.2 to address the remaining issues (like deactivating the coils with the encoder still working)? If so, I'd flash v1.1 instantly today ... and wouldn't mind to flash my SERVO42Cs later on a second time :-) All the best and happy easter! Yours Martin
+1 would like to buy a few of these boards but I can't use them without a fw release since i need to make some small changes to the fw for my purposes
Please release the fw code, thx
With a release of firmware source code, the firmware could be modified to support using these boards as servo control boards.
Oh, I see. The firmware is a modification of a GPL firmware, yet MKS isn't following the license terms and providing the source code. That's not awesome.
I thought MKS made a point of following open source licenses, so this is a disappointment.
Why not follow the legal requirements in this case?
PLEASE release the 1.1 source code!!!! I like the board, but need/want to make some improvements to the code. I would share the improvements with you per the terms of the open source license...
Add me to the list I just ordered about 10 of these assuming they would have open source firmware so I could fix potential issues I might encounter only to find the C revision doesn't have the open source firmware. I hope you guys will re-consider open sourcing it.
Well, it has been over a year and it seems like MKS decided to keep their model closed source. And no, releasing the windows client to configure these boards via UART does not qualify. Which is ok, their software, their decision. Still, the fact we do not get to upgrade older units to the latest version is just plain silly.
I am not an open source maximalist, but they made an excellent case of how closed source software can be awful for the final user: I bought some units from their very first batch, and the fact I cannot have bugfixes nor new features without buying new units is just beyond any measurable metric of absurdity.
Now that it is about time to build a new printer I guess I will have to look for different solutions. Kinda bad since I liked the product.
@KaruroChori my time to give you a 2 cent view :) They earn more money putting out (copying other vendors) new products then maintaining older, or even answering messages it seems. They released the MKS-THR36-THR42-UTC, I don't see much happening here in the foreseeable future. Extra bonus, 2 cents more... They lost me as a customer, I suppose I'm not the only one. I am even wondering if I should ask for a refund for the lack of support.
If (big IF) Makerbase reads, I give them a suggestion too. Why bother setting up a git repository when you don't use it.
Oh, I see. The firmware is a modification of a GPL firmware, yet MKS isn't following the license terms and providing the source code. That's not awesome.
I thought MKS made a point of following open source licenses, so this is a disappointment.
Why not follow the legal requirements in this case?
Do you happen to know where/how to get the GPL code it was modified from?
Oh, I see. The firmware is a modification of a GPL firmware, yet MKS isn't following the license terms and providing the source code. That's not awesome. I thought MKS made a point of following open source licenses, so this is a disappointment. Why not follow the legal requirements in this case?
Do you happen to know where/how to get the GPL code it was modified from?
It may come from https://github.com/Misfittech/nano_stepper
