DMX King supplied us with updated firmware for their board. We loaded it and tested it. Then, just out of curiosity we used their app and loaded the same firmware into the ENTTEC and it worked. I can say the same thing vice-versa. (And by the way, we have new firmware for the ENTTEC that works better... ) I was surprised by all of this, and it was Aaron in our office who discovered it.
To me it means that the one design is a copy of the other design. But as I understand it (and I don't know all of the history so I may very well misunderstand it), ENTTEC has an open-source project too as well as these "paid" products. It could be that the open-source project came first, and the paid one came later, making it very easy to duplicate since all of the schematics, firmware, etc. etc. and so on were already public.
Bill
suppose you're thinkin' about a plate o' shrimp. Suddenly someone'll say, like, plate, or shrimp, or plate o' shrimp out of the blue, no explanation. No point in lookin' for one, either. It's all part of a cosmic unconciousness.
Yes, well, me too, but being somewhat of a misanthrope, I am often disappointed by this. After all, sometimes the guy doing the copying has either better marketing or worst ethics (or both), and never acknowledges the original person whom they copied.
For example, I am always disappointed when customers are amazed by some of the features our competitors have (but who have no access to Pangolin software) and believe the competitor must have come up with the idea themselves. This is even worst (for me) at trade shows, when these customers come to our tradeshow booth and say something like "AHA you have that **too**????". Yes, we have it "too" and in fact, we're the guys who invented it!! But such is the way of the world...
For decades I always wondered what Steve Jobs and the Mac users were complaining about. Microsoft Windows had features, and the Mac had them **too**. It wasn't until I got a Mac myself and then started looking into the history that I discovered that "yes, we have it too, and in fact we're the guys who invented it" really started with Apple. (Or at least those are the guys who commercialized it, since the very very very first was actually people at Xerox PARC, or were they???)
I do wish that there was greater awareness of exactly who came up with what first. I was always frustrated when competitors touted "new features" and never acknowledged where they got the ideas for those "new features". Eventually we started patenting things, if, for no other reason, to establish an undeniable public record of exactly who thought of what, and when...
Bill
Just excavated this thread and think the initial question is still unanswered. Maybe needs a little update. Which present dmx controllers are supported by LSX ? Got an Medialas hyperport pro with integrated DMX port, but couldn`t manage to get it working with LSX. Do I need a special .dll library or in addition an extra Enttec interface ?
LSX isn't particularly good at DMX. You're better off using another program for DMX and sync it with LSX over MIDI timecode.
Last edited by LightFox; 01-06-2017 at 05:33.
I think your info is dated, my friend. I have been using DMX controlled with LSX a lot lately and find it to be spot-on. I have an Entec Pro device and a DMX King device and they both work equally well. (Note that the cheap Entec Lite device is NOT supported and won't work.)
I am currently controlling over a hundred channels very reliably. The signal response is fast and stable. Sure, it is not as elegant or easy for DMX control when you have lots of DMX devices, but its more than adequate for controlling lumia devices, ILDA switchers, DMX foggers and so forth.
Lightfox: As I recall, LSX should detect your device as soon as it is connected and associate it with the first timeline. Be sure not to check the 'use DAC controller' because that tries to use the DAC's DMX control, if any, instead of the Entec/DMX King device that you have attached.
-David
Last edited by dkumpula; 01-06-2017 at 07:02.
"Help, help, I'm being repressed!"
I never got my DMX King to work but it's been a while (and several LSX versions) since I tried.
LSX' DMX implementation is a bit cumbersome as you need to place an event for every channel and every change in configuration (but you can use expressions which is cool). Still better than Chamsys' MagicQ of course. Especially for small setups.