[HN Gopher] DJI Virtual Flight (iOS) has been broken for five mo...
___________________________________________________________________
DJI Virtual Flight (iOS) has been broken for five months
Author : curiousexplorer
Score : 138 points
Date : 2023-09-09 14:38 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (forum.dji.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (forum.dji.com)
| instagraham wrote:
| DJI once bricked all Vision 2+ drones with a software update a
| year or two after launch and offered _zero_ support because it
| had newer models in the market.
| hh3k0 wrote:
| DJI may be the best of all the Chinese drone companies but it
| is ultimately still a Chinese company.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| This behavior isn't unique to Chinese companies
| bowsamic wrote:
| DJI have likely got many more, more important projects on the go.
| They delivered it, stop complaining
| lisardo wrote:
| Apple did the breaking change from their side. I don't think DJI
| is to blame.
| threeseed wrote:
| It is the responsibility of app developers to target the latest
| SDK.
|
| Apple has always made it clear and so DJI is absolutely to
| blame.
| wrs wrote:
| This is just how iOS works. Sometimes you have to update your
| app. If it takes you a month, maybe you get a pass. If it's
| been 162 days and you don't even have a definite answer for
| whether you're ever going to fix it, then you just shouldn't be
| making apps.
| DarkmSparks wrote:
| This is the best advert for not buying an IOS device I've
| heard in a while....
|
| never had any such problem on android, I still have working
| apps that target android 6...
| Lammy wrote:
| Starting in Android 14 you will have to use ADB to install
| any APK targeting lower than API Level 23 (Android 6):
| https://developer.android.com/about/versions/14/behavior-
| cha...
|
| Obviously expect that boundary to ratchet up with time,
| plus the single point of failure if they ever decide to
| remove `--bypass-low-target-sdk-block` from the dev tools.
| DarkmSparks wrote:
| android 6 runs on phones dating back to 2013.
|
| Thats 10 years ago, and only 5 years after the very first
| iPhone (2007)
|
| 6 was a milestone, because it was the first to actually
| feature restricted app access to
| contacts/microphone/camera.
|
| facebook, twitter, linkedin and a load of others
| (especially facebook games) got where they are from
| stealing everyones contacts via that method and then
| spamming them with adverts. TF those days are behind us.
| Lammy wrote:
| Justify your e-waste any way you want. I still use my old
| Kitkat phone offline for MP3+OBD in my car, and it still
| gets brand-new versions of the apps I like:
| https://krosbits.in/musicolet/
| lm411 wrote:
| Google is worse, in my opinion.
|
| "Currently, existing apps (across mobile, Android Auto,
| Android TV) must target API level 31 or above by August 31,
| 2023 (target API 30 or up API level 33 for Wear OS).
| Otherwise, they will stop being discoverable to all Google
| Play users whose devices run Android OS versions newer than
| your app's target API level"
|
| https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-
| developer/answ...
|
| It is now a yearly requirement to target the latest API
| version.
|
| You might have "working apps that target Android 6" but no
| one with a phone built after 2017 can find them. I often
| run into incompatibilities between API versions.
| DarkmSparks wrote:
| Thats only new listings. And while old ones dont get
| listed for new installs.
|
| They dont stop working if you installed them before the
| minimum requirements for new apps came into force, and
| you can still install them on new phones from the list of
| applications attached to your account.
| lm411 wrote:
| Right.
|
| But there have been changes in the Android API that have
| been non-backwards compatible and if your app is using
| those API's, they will break when run on newer versions.
| Same as for iOS.
|
| Many simple apps targeting very old versions of their
| respective API/SDK will still work on both platforms.
|
| Ultimately, keeping an app active and functional does
| require maintenance.
| lelanthran wrote:
| > Otherwise, they will stop being discoverable to all
| Google Play users
|
| Sounds like they still work though. GP's Android 6
| application won't stop working, would it?
| natch wrote:
| Breaking changes are part of the deal. It's no secret that iOS
| has a new major version every year. If there's blame here, it's
| on DJI.
|
| And usually the breaking changes only come after many years of
| advance notification from Apple, unless it's an urgent change
| to address for example abusive developers doing egregious
| infringement of privacy.
|
| Those developers tend to be hit harder. Maybe that's the case
| here.
| mig39 wrote:
| So something's changed about DJI's API as well.
|
| In the past, you could use 3rd-party apps that extended features,
| and offered new ones. One popular app is Litchi
| https://flylitchi.com
|
| However, DJI seems to have stopped updating their iOS API, so
| 3rd-party iOS apps won't work with any newer drones and Android
| stuff seems to be available only by side-loading.
|
| Perhaps there's something in the newer APIs that neither Apple or
| Google like? Sending back too much data to DJI?
| ballenf wrote:
| It may not be there choice entirely with all the new FAA flight
| tracking regulations that recently came into force.
| voakbasda wrote:
| This seems to be assured. Another comment mentions the
| collection of the phone's IMEI.
|
| I'd love to see a proper security analysis of their packages,
| because I would be willing to bet cash money that every app
| they offer does multiple nefarious things to collect your
| personal and flight data.
|
| Sadly, such revelations still would probably not be enough to
| damage their reputation and sales in a meaningful way.
| entropie wrote:
| > to collect your personal and flight data.
|
| Its no secret they save flight data (like everything you
| input, temperature, gps points...) in their cloud.
|
| I think there are workarounds for this, a friend of mine
| never paired his drone with a smartphone connected to any
| network. Iam pretty sure this will not work for a long time.
|
| Its very daunting if you ask me, the amount of data they
| gather. Not a small part of drones used in active wars, like
| ukraine right now, is by DJI. This is alot of power in the
| hands of a few.
| phero_cnstrcts wrote:
| Yet a DJI done just managed to fly off my wishlist.
| bri3d wrote:
| Most hardware companies operate this way: their devices are on
| fixed release schedules, and once they're done, they're "done."
| Virtual Flight was part of the release cycle for some drone or
| another (I think the FPV potato, if I recall correctly?) and now
| that it's done, there's nobody allocated to or tasked with fixing
| it.
|
| So, software is treated the same way. Engineers copy and paste
| whatever stuck-together yarn ball of code off Gitee they need to
| produce an artifact which passes QA, then ship it.
|
| The problem comes in when there's software that needs to live for
| a long time in the real world - Virtual Flight, for example, was
| broken by some Apple update or another, and their Fly app has to
| support a broad range of drones so it creaks under the weight of
| everything being pasted together.
|
| IMO, almost all "hardware" companies trying to make software are
| the same way. From industrial controls to mobile phone vendors.
| If anything, DJI have gotten better in recent years about after-
| sales updates, fixes, and support than they used to be.
| cm2187 wrote:
| There is also the fact that this particular software is running
| on a platform that seems to wear breaking changes and backward
| incompatibility as a badge of honour.
| qorrect wrote:
| I am just imagining this, or did it feel like 10-15 years ago
| breaking changes were a big deal, and companies went out of
| their way to provide an upgrade path. Now my flutter app from
| 3 months ago won't even compile.
| wrs wrote:
| The major platform companies have different historical
| attitudes that haven't changed much.
|
| Microsoft: We told you what not to do, and you did it
| anyway, so we'll put code in our OS specifically to keep
| your app running.
|
| Apple: We didn't tell you that was OK to do, and you did
| it, and our latest cool stuff broke your app. Over to you.
| Also, we didn't mention this earlier, but no more 32-bit
| apps next year, sorry.
|
| Android: We try to keep your app running, for a while, but
| TBH a lot of the platform comes from manufacturers who only
| care for about 18 months. Let's all just try to survive.
| cm2187 wrote:
| not just 32bit. No more powerpc (and soon x86), no more
| system 7/8/9 apps, etc. It's now a long tradition.
| mrandish wrote:
| A depressingly accurate summary...
| sswr wrote:
| Do you think this is related to the fact that they only sell
| hardware (i.e., no subscription costs for the software)?
|
| Shouldn't they already factor in the cost of app support for
| the next X years when selling the product?
|
| I assume the same principle applies when you purchase an
| iPhone. Though in this case, DJI may not see Virtual Flight as
| core software for their product.
| bri3d wrote:
| Yes, 100%. In places where they get software residuals
| (agriculture and enterprise, via FlightHub and other
| services), development is constant because a team stays
| assigned to it.
|
| I do think that in recent years DJI have gotten way better at
| budgeting for after-sales support on mainline products. The
| Mavic 3 series have gotten consistent and meaningful updates
| for quite some time now. This Virtual Flight app was always
| kind of a joke and I'm not really surprised it's abandoned.
| jon-wood wrote:
| I suspect some of this is why more recent DJI drones have an
| OS and screen on the controller, because that way they have a
| single set of hardware to target, and even if some future
| Android release breaks backwards compatibility they can
| simply choose not to update to it and the controller will
| still work.
| bee_rider wrote:
| I think hardware companies just view programmers as, like, EE
| that aren't even trustworthy enough to put in charge of
| keeping the magic smoke in the chips.
| dronodeath wrote:
| > Shouldn't they already factor in the cost of app support
| for the next X years when selling the product?
|
| Depends what you mean by "should". If you mean that they
| should because it would be the right thing to do, sure. If
| you mean it would be competitively advantageous, well I
| rather doubt it. Consumers have almost uniformly demonstrated
| that price trumps all.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Price and marketing. For better or worse[0], the consumers
| are putting trust into marketoids and their emotionally
| manipulative messaging, that focuses on imaginary nirvana-
| like experience, and completely omits how the experience is
| likely to look like a few months after purchase.
|
| --
|
| [0] - Sadly, it's likely for better. The world after most
| people get an accurate feel for how much they can trust
| companies will be a very bad place to live in.
| tetris11 wrote:
| Yep. Take a look at Parrot's support for the Disco and Bebop
| drones. As of a few months ago, the FreeFlightPro app[1] no
| longer connects to Parrot servers so that you can login to your
| account on their servers, and only then connect to the drone a
| few feet away from you.
|
| All this obsolence, just so that they can sell you the new
| Anafi drones (which will be similarly obsolesced).
|
| Thank god for the Ardupilot community[2tT] stepping in to open
| up their drones for at least some semblance of autonomy, so
| that people can once again control the devices that they've
| purchased...
|
| 1:
| https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.parrot.fre...
|
| 2: https://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/controlling-parrot-drones-
| us...
|
| t: admittedly some ex-Parrot developers helped port some stuff
| over.
|
| T: Andrew Tridgell (of "reason for chaging VC in Linux from
| BitKeeper to Git", and other true-coder fame) is pretty active
| here. It's a very talented community.
| aftbit wrote:
| Thanks for the post about this. I have a Parrot Disco that I
| was planning to take for its first flight in about two years
| next weekend. Honestly these companies need to be sued over
| this behavior. Shutting down the servers without updating the
| app to work without needing login essentially bricks a
| product that I paid for.
| tetris11 wrote:
| For Disco you're in luck, there are some really decent
| ardupilot-based projects out there[1]. Plus, unlike the
| Bebop camera which is inaccessible via the shell (you can
| only use the Parrot SDK), the Disco camera can be commanded
| to stream/record with a few simple commands, and even bound
| to controller inputs.
|
| A caveat with the controller: it needs to have custom
| firmware[2] to get it communicating with ardupilot, and to
| get the firmware onto the controller you need telnet/adb
| into it via SkyController-usb-ethernet-usb-Laptop
| adaptor(s) setup.
|
| For a ground control system (GCS), there's three to choose
| from: Mission Planner, APM Planner, and QGroundControl[3]
| (ignore the rest, use this one).
|
| For configuring the drone, mission planner is pretty
| good... but you can also just use MavProxy[4] which is a
| fantastic commandline program that all the GCSes use in
| some way, and can even be installed in Termux/Android.
|
| 1: https://github.com/uavpal/disco4g/
|
| 2: https://github.com/ArduPilot/dema-rc/
|
| 3: https://github.com/mavlink/qgroundcontrol
|
| 4: https://github.com/ArduPilot/MAVProxy
| squirrel6 wrote:
| I like this use of "artifact"
| xattt wrote:
| K'nex had a roller coaster kit that came with Google Cardboard-
| style glasses and an app. The app was released when iOS 13 was
| current. iOS 14 broke whatever orientation alignment API the VR
| app used.
|
| The app reviews are flooded with people complaining it's
| broken. I absolutely have no hope it will ever get fixed.
| pacifika wrote:
| Ok you're saying DJI doesn't understand that modern software is
| build on top of a moving base whose interface changes over
| time. It's called lifecycle support
| howinteresting wrote:
| Sounds like the world in which the platform keeps moving and
| breaking APIs is a pretty bad world!
| clnq wrote:
| [flagged]
| Shaanie wrote:
| >it might be illegal to support an existing product when
| more profit can be extracted from building a new one.
|
| Lol no, that's just a reddit opinion. Business judgment
| rule means businesses have a huge leeway on how to do
| business, outside of fraud or intentionally trying to
| cripple the company.
| bobbob1921 wrote:
| Unrelated to drones (but is a hardware/software
| manufacturer)- I would like to call out Axis (as an Axis
| network cameras) as one of the rare positive lights in
| this mess. They clearly state how long their products
| will be software supported, and they stick to that
| minimum and frequently go well beyond that minimum.
|
| Axis has products that are over 10 years old that still
| receive frequent security only firmware updates. If they
| can do it across hundreds of different hardware products,
| then these companies can too. (in fact, Axis was doing it
| well before this became a main stream issue)
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _If they can do it across hundreds of different
| hardware products, then these companies can too._
|
| It's pretty clear the issue isn't "we can't", but rather
| "we can, but why would we want that".
| lazide wrote:
| I think they're saying every hardware company is this way,
| with rare exceptions.
| saidinesh5 wrote:
| A lot of hardware companies also just tend to just outsource a
| lot of software development to other third parties. Once the
| software is delivered, sometimes these third parties just move
| on/go under and the bugs in the software never get fixed.
| [deleted]
| numbsafari wrote:
| This is why hardware manufacturers should be required to place
| schematics and software source code for all components into
| escrow, and it becomes public when they discontinue meaningful
| support and or shipping a product.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| The problem is that the software is most likely not composed
| by them in any meaningful way. If you take apart any
| proprietary firmware and controlling application you are
| almost certain to find boilerplate code provided by the
| chipset vendors (protected by NDA) glued together with other
| code from other vendors with a GPL violating Linux backend.
|
| Recent example: I patched in to my 3D printer's mainboard
| using a TTL to USB and opened up putty and guess what shows
| on the console?
|
| > Linux version 3.4.39+ (zhanglei@ubuntu Revision:543)
|
| * https://pastebin.com/CPB7RBdK
| dvdkon wrote:
| That's less of a problem for a hypothetical law requiring
| either longer-term maintenance or enabling users to perform
| that maintenance themselves. Manufacturers would just have
| to make adequate contractual arrangements.
| Aurornis wrote:
| That would be a great way to guarantee that nobody builds
| hardware in your country.
|
| It would also do absolutely nothing in this situation where
| the product already comes from a foreign country.
| bigtunacan wrote:
| Maybe if it's a tiny country that makes up virtually no
| market share. If it's a major market like the USA companies
| will find a way to comply with the laws to continue
| marketing their products.
| prox wrote:
| Maybe a software-esque "right to repair"
| Valodim wrote:
| Sounds pretty close to what the GPLv3 does, doesn't it?
| theK wrote:
| Can you elaborate? AFAIK the GPL just naively enforces
| that something needs to be and remain open source. How
| can it turn closed source into open source?
| ohyes wrote:
| This is the most accurate description of dealing with a
| hardware manufacturer I've ever read. I've never experienced
| getting for example, drivers from a hardware company where it
| wasn't exactly as you described.
| Tepix wrote:
| I've had a very good experience with DJI recently. On my DJI Mini
| 2 the IMU was malfunctioning and they repaired it for free
| (including shipping both ways), despite it being out of warranty.
|
| I was able to buy DJI care after the repair which came in handy
| for my upcoming high risk flights ;-)
| bambax wrote:
| > _problem started when apple upgraded iOS to 16.4+ version
| (27.3.2023 exactly 162 days ago)_
|
| Every single comment blames DJI, but shouldn't it be Apple's
| responsibility to not break existing apps with iOS "upgrades"?
|
| Apple is free to decide they don't care one bit about retro
| compatibility, but it's just weird we would simply accept that
| and think of updates like a kind of act of God that just happens.
| crazygringo wrote:
| On the one hand, there are _always_ going to be changes with
| upgrades that break things, even if not intended -- especially
| when apps inadvertently rely on undocumented API behavior.
|
| But on the other hand, that's a well-known difference between
| Apple and Microsoft philosophies. Microsoft bends over
| backwards to support old software (e.g. hard-coding old
| buggy/undefined behavior for specific legacy apps), while Apple
| fully expects app developers to maintain their software and
| upgrade it as necessary with each new iOS release, using new
| versions of libraries etc.
|
| I don't think either is "correct", they're just different
| philosophies. The Microsoft way leads to incredibly complicated
| OS behavior that must be hell on the Windows devs. But if you
| develop an iOS app, you should know this going into it, that
| you'll need to budget for a certain level of occasional
| maintenance or risk that the app breaks.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| The that cultural difference causes some pretty important
| secondary differences too - for example, Microsoft's way
| enables software to be a product - written once, working
| approximately forever; Apple's way pretty much forces a
| subscription model.
| howinteresting wrote:
| The Microsoft way is absolutely better than the Apple way.
| Platform holders, Apple in particular, reap enormous profits.
| They have at least some basic responsibility here. It's hard?
| Tough shit, software is hard. Start putting in the work for
| your 400k TC.
|
| This is also why Apple will never be a long-term gaming
| platform for anything other than gacha pull and otherwise
| exploitative games. I can still play the original Dark Souls
| with DSFix on modern Windows (or Linux via Proton for that
| matter). The game is timeless and should never be lost to
| lazy platform holders.
| s3p wrote:
| Microsoft is not shipping mobile phone software! I fault
| them for breaking older apps, yes, but this is not always
| the case. I have an app that is 7 years old and it hasn't
| been updated for any phone since the iphone 7. I see the
| black bars when I open it. It's a drink making app that
| since got taken off the app store, but I'll never delete it
| because it was a one time purchase and got me access to the
| easiest explanations for making drinks I have ever seen in
| my entire life. And _every_ drink is there. Apple has
| never, I repeat *never*, broken it for me. It still opens.
|
| Your mileage may vary. I think backwards compatibility is
| important, but we can't expect Apple to do a quality test
| on every last app on the app store for hours and hours
| making sure it opens on every phone on every software
| version.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Except that it's easy to make the exact opposite argument:
| that making apps is so tremendously easy and cheap compared
| to making hardware, or even writing and physically
| distributing software back in the 1980's and 1990's. It's
| never been so easy for a handful of developers to to make
| millions via app stores and cloud computing. So app makers
| have at least some basic responsibility here. It's hard?
| Tough shit, software is hard. Start putting in the minimal
| work to keep your apps up to date.
|
| Apps are more interoperable than every before so the idea
| of something you write once and never touch again stops
| making any sense. Encryption standards progress, privacy
| entitlements become more granular, image formats get added,
| retina compatibility becomes expected, dark mode becomes
| expected, etc. etc. etc.
| the__alchemist wrote:
| Same thought. I don't blame DJI for not playing this fast
| moving ballgame; stability matters. I suspect there are
| cultural issues at play between firmware and phone devs. I'd
| like to see conventional wisdom on regular updates being
| critical, ostensibly for security, going away.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| Exec orders aren't the same as culture issues among workers
| kmlx wrote:
| > but shouldn't it be Apple's responsibility to not break
| existing apps with iOS "upgrades"?
|
| according to the comments in the thread it doesn't work even on
| ios 15.7?
| Brosper wrote:
| We don't know what is exact issue. I wouldn't jude it so
| quickly.
| comboy wrote:
| It depends on what exactly happened. Sometimes documentation
| will say stuff like "order of execution of these methods can be
| random" which if ignored may lead to a bug after a perfectly
| compatible upgrade.
| Oras wrote:
| You're not wrong, however it is still making DJI support
| questionable.
| galad87 wrote:
| If the app breaks every minor iOS update I would start
| wondering on what exactly are DJI coding practices.
| basisword wrote:
| Apps rarely break on dot releases of iOS. If you're using
| private API's though when you're explicitly told not to, shit
| happens. I'd bet my house on this being a DJI issue as opposed
| to Apple breaking a public API in a dot release.
| latchkey wrote:
| I wonder if this was intentional, given the Ukraine war. It would
| affect people's ability to train.
| rlex wrote:
| their simulator for PC has been broken and not updated for quite
| some time too. It doesn't work with new controllers (anything
| from mavic 2 and up i think)
| mosfets wrote:
| Try the free FPVSIM drone simulator[1], you can train there!
|
| [1] https://store.epicgames.com/p/fpvsim-2a20cb
| voakbasda wrote:
| This is why I will only buy a drone that can be supported fully
| by an Open Source software stack. Yes, that will require far more
| work to set up and maintain, but it literally can last as long as
| I need it, without future restrictions, for as long as the
| hardware shall live.
|
| Proprietary hardware _will always_ be abandon by its
| manufacturers eventually. Always!! This is not the first drone to
| be dust-binned by software obsolescence. It will not be the last.
| What will it take for people to realize this fundamental truth?
| mcculley wrote:
| Can you recommend a good drone with an open source stack? I
| would very much like to buy one but it is unclear which are
| comparable or better than something I would buy from DJI.
| voakbasda wrote:
| The PX4 stack would be where I would start if I were in the
| market to buy today. They have a list of compatible hardware
| and drones, including some relatively off-the-shelf drones.
| The list of drones provides a lot of detail about the various
| levels of support and functionality available.
| mcculley wrote:
| I just went to the PX4 website and found a lot of broken
| links. Do you have any experience with fully open source
| drones that you can recommend?
| saidinesh5 wrote:
| I think they meant this page:
| https://px4.io/ecosystem/commercial-systems/
|
| But it depends on your budget/use case really (just to
| fly around with a camera like payload, drone racing,
| autonomous missions using gps). A lot of the drones out
| there use a lot of open source software for one thing or
| another.
|
| Ardupilot, PX4, Betaflight, iNav etc.. are open source
| drone flight control software which run on drone flight
| controllers. flight controller = a little microcontroller
| + gyro/accelerometer + connections to some peripherals
| like radio receivers , GPS, sensors like sonar etc.
|
| Blheli_S, AM32 etc.. are Open Source ESC firmware. ESC =
| Electronic Speed Controller. The component that is
| responsible to spin the motors as the flight controller
| wants it to.
|
| Sik Radio, ExpressLRS, mLRS etc.. are Open Source RC
| control link software that let you send control messages
| from your ground station to your drone.
|
| As for Video Transmission, you can use anything from
| OpenHD/wifibroadcast(doesn't use Wifi. just Wifi hardware
| in monitor mode.) to webrtc over 4g to transmit video
| from quad to your ground station. And optionally record
| it on the drone side too.
|
| Mix and match these open source components to build your
| own drone as per your needs.
|
| I mostly fly racing drones and every single component on
| my quads is open source to one extent or another.
| mcculley wrote:
| That's the page I went to that led me to some 404s
|
| I appreciate all of the info you have supplied.
|
| I would very much like to buy a complete multicopter to
| which I can add payloads and program routes/waypoints and
| otherwise customize. Do you or anyone else reading this
| have good experience with any vendors of open source
| drones?
| dreday wrote:
| Please don't give Tony DJI a hard time. He's just a support
| person who's taking the brunt for a large corporation's
| priority's decisions.
| can16358p wrote:
| What do you expect from a company whose app requires you to re-
| login every other week to be able to fly your drone?
|
| But if you ask them that doesn't exist, once you login you never
| need to login again... except, well, you do.
|
| Their hardware is excellent. I wish their software was at least
| remotely on par with that.
| hunter2_ wrote:
| Might you be using an unusual configuration, like having
| changed an OS privacy setting where the weaker default is
| relied on by the app for a persistent session, or is this bug a
| consensus among all users?
| oh_sigh wrote:
| DJI is the only major company that I've experienced demands you
| install an APK on your android instead of providing something via
| the app store. Something is completely broken with their software
| development, though their hardware seems quite nice.
| outside1234 wrote:
| Or there is something strange in that APK from China
| doublerabbit wrote:
| I own a HEXA robot, I was a kick starter and paid a price for
| it.
|
| When I first purchased the robot it never required phone GPS.
| And that now if you disable it at any point it disconnects
| you from the robot. It sits gaining dust because I wish not
| to use an IOS app with GPS enabled for no reason.
|
| Questioning support to why this is required they said "people
| are happy with GPS on" and that was that.
|
| I look at it sadly because it runs Linux, has full root
| access and so much potential. But, I just don't like the fact
| that could be potentially tracking GPS coords back to HQ.
| heliodor wrote:
| Frustrating stuff!
|
| The one good experience I've had with customer support for
| a hardware+software company was for the Eufy cameras by
| Anker.
|
| Opening the app would stop the audio stream that was
| playing. No reason to do that while showing me a list of
| cameras. The audio stream should have been interrupted only
| once one selects a camera to view and listen to.
|
| I wrote customer support and after some explanation and
| friction, they understood and a fix was released about two
| months later.
| tbyehl wrote:
| Eufy, the company who'd send your footage to their cloud
| unencrypted even if you didn't have cloud storage
| enabled?
|
| https://gizmodo.com/eufy-local-security-camera-cloud-
| unencry...
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| On that note, does there exist a company I could buy
| cameras to install at home, that 1) _doesn 't_ force me
| to go through some cloud, and 2) sells products to
| European market? I was excited about buying some Amcrest
| cameras, only to then discover it fails point 2) - I
| can't just get them without complex and expensive
| sourcing process, and should I do it anyway, jumping over
| the voltage difference between US and EU grids.
|
| (I mean, I probably _could_ make Amcrest stuff work if I
| tried hard enough, but I am at the age where spare time
| is precious, so I was looking for something that I could
| order and install without hassle or tinkering with mains
| electricity.)
| selectodude wrote:
| Ubiquiti cameras check all three of those boxes.
| xxpor wrote:
| I assume HEXA isn't a drone then? There's legit (well, at
| least regulations) reasons why they'd need GPS for that.
| But if it's ground based that's silly.
| doublerabbit wrote:
| Hexa is advertised as a multi-functional all-terrain
| robot. No drone capacities.
|
| My educated guess is that the company Vincross sold their
| tech to the Chinese Military back in 2017 and China is
| being China.
|
| It is a very nifty robot, the company still exists but
| feels as an empty shell.
| meatmanek wrote:
| Is the connection to the robot using Bluetooth Low Energy?
| I believe certain BLE-related APIs are gated behind the
| permission setting because scanning for BLE beacons can
| give the app very precise location.
|
| Would be nice if users could give BLE permissions but _not_
| GPS or wifi-based location permission to an app.
| izacus wrote:
| > Would be nice if users could give BLE permissions but
| _not_ GPS or wifi-based location permission to an app.
|
| Not sure about iOS, but Android supports that for several
| years now (to the point where a given app only gets BLE
| access to one device it cares about which prevents data
| leakage).
| doublerabbit wrote:
| Unfortunately not. the connection is via WiFi, you
| connect to it's WiFi network.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| If you have full root access can't you fake the GPS toggle?
| doublerabbit wrote:
| I've looked in to that. The GPS toggle is app-bound where
| that if the app detects it's off, it kills the
| connection.
| sschueller wrote:
| That maybe due to US sanctions against DJI and they can't put
| apps in the play store. [1]
|
| [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59703521
| coder543 wrote:
| Nope. They have apps on the iOS App Store just fine. DJI Fly
| for iOS was last updated 4 days ago.
| sschueller wrote:
| Apple may have paperwork DJI can fill out while Google may
| not. Being compliant can be a huge ordeal and it is quite
| possible Google does not offer what is required.
|
| Alternatively it's probably a lot cheaper to offer an apk
| while for Apple there is no other option than the app store
| requiring all kinds of paperwork and lawyer fees.
| avel wrote:
| DJI used to have the "Mimo" app in the play store. It was
| rated very low, 2.3 stars. The app required users to allow
| the permission to read the phone's IMEI. If you denied that
| permission, the app closed. Myself, and I'm sure plenty of
| others, have reported this to the play store as something
| against the play store policies. Perhaps Google gave in to
| the complaints eventually and told DJI, enough is enough with
| your crap, who knows... And that made DJI say, "enough is
| enough with _you_, we're big enough to distribute these
| outside the play store and keep our invasive tracking and
| permissions".
|
| Page visible only if you have installed the app in the past:
| https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=dji.mimo
| bmurphy1976 wrote:
| The drone apps work for me although installing the APKs is
| annoying and I moved on to litchi anyway. At least my very
| old spark still works.
|
| The mimo app on the other hand is straight up garbage. The
| thing never works right if it even connects to the device
| at all. I regret buying that thing (it's the osmo mobile
| version 2 or 3). It's so bad I don't think I will ever buy
| a new dji device.
|
| I love flying my spark but the battery life is trash and my
| Air 2 isn't fun to fly (it's more of a utility van than a
| fun little sports car). I'd love to get a replacement for
| my spark. It's probably better to just build my own at this
| point.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-09-09 23:01 UTC)