Hacking and why Intel and AMD now support it.

Rick Burnett said:
And there is a HUGE misconception that Android is open to use on electronic devices. Just like the iPhone, if you root your Android phone you void all warranty on the device. It's not as free and open as people want. Not to mention the fragmentation that exists now among Android devices, applications only available to to certain manufacturer phones, or apps that do not work across the different phones. Talk to the developer of the TouchOSC app for Android and see how difficult it was for him to make his TouchOSC app that is available on the iPhone on the Android OS.

I work on Linux machines everyday, along with OSX machines. This so called stability doesn't exist on almost any platform. If people didn't install a ton of crap on their PCs or use them on the web without protection, they'd run for VERY long periods of time. Hell, even Solaris machines from Sun outperform open source machines in length of time up. I've yet to see a linux machine stay up for more days than a Sun box in the 18+ years I've been around all platforms. Open source machines are no more secure or stable than closed source machines. ESPECIALLY in the audio world. ALSA and all the audio variants have NEVER worked as smoothly as CoreAudio on OSX. Using an open source machine for music production is a joke. Sure, there are decent DAW software available like Ardour, but I wasn't impressed with the LADSPA plugin architecture and apparently, no one else was either since the majority of good plugins exist on OSX and WIN only.

The problem here is that designs are built to a specification that is desired and some parts of the system may exceed that where others don't. People don't go into engineering blind, they set a target, and that target involved yield and lifetime. If a hacker were to eliminate the temperature shutoff in the Canon cameras and then someone removed the firmware and send it in saying they don't know what happened, this is NOT fair to Canon. Outside of wanting to protect their intellectual property, they want to make sure cameras are used within the realm of protecting them from damage.

I used to overclock my Celeron machines back in the day. What I discovered is they worked great most of the time, but, when I unzip a file, that was the true test. The machine would unzip the file incorrectly because I was getting bit errors in the processing in the CPU. I was exceeding the setup/hold margins on the CPU and was introducing error into its operation that was MY fault.

While people can push certain aspects of things like the GH1 further, they are still limited. You can't watch your footage in camera with certain settings, which is clearly a minus. Don't get me wrong, I think there is a point where they could add features and they don't, but they are a business. They want you to continue to buy their products and continue to add incremental features to entice you. Nothing is making you buy their product, so if they think you aren't getting your moneys worth or are being nickel and dimed to death for small features updates, then choose another manufacturer.

*ALMOST* all manufacturers work this way. Look at cellphones, apple laptops, game systems, televisions, the list goes on and on. Even cars. I cannot replace the stereo in my car with the stereo out of the next year model because they aren't compatible anymore, yet, they added two new features. I have to buy a new car now to get them. I am keeping with the old car!

I am an electrical engineer and work on chip design for a living, so I see this stuff first hand. Very few people I've worked with haven't been absolutely brilliant. They have deadlines, as do I, that are CRAZY. They are told what specs they need to meet, and that is what they meet, within a cost margin. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

Exactly. As an ex- software engineer I can testify to pretty much the exact development model. Folks, there really is a method to development that has NOTHING to do with "conspiracy theories."

It really does come down to this: a company is willing to spend a certain amount of money to build a product that they feel they can sell a certain number of units at a certain retail price. They then factor in what it will take, hardware and software and time wise, to develop that product. They factor in a certain amount of testing time. And then they make it. And they make it to certain standards that they can guarantee. They have a testing department and a support staff of engineers to maintain a certain level of customer satisfaction and a uniform customer experience.

And that is how the business works. Rick's point about overclocking introducing bit errors is well noted -- yes, you can sometimes push a component here or there, but then you have stepped outside the design guidelines and all bets are off.

I haven't kept up on CPUs and what Intel and AMD are doing, but if they support "hacking" I can pretty much guarantee you that it is an idea that was born and bred in the marketing department, and the hacking you can do is supported within the design guidelines of the chips themselves. Everybody loves the idea of getting something for nothing (even if there are quite a few Aesop's Fables about that concept), so I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if AMD and Intel have decided to engineer chips to perform at a certain level (say, 2GHz) and then actually throttle them back to 1.7GHz for sale, and leave a portal so that you, the end buyer, can then ramp it up to 2GHz and get something for nothing. Even if, five years ago, they would have just sold that chip throttled to 2GHz and called it a day.

I understand the desire among some of our membership for getting something for nothing. But I also can guarantee you that if Panasonic gets wind of any hack effort for any of their professional line, they will shut it down instantly. There is no way that they're going to let the reputation of their pro line be subject to the whim of hackers, especially when the potential exists for those who would use such openness for nefarious purposes. You've seen just how virulent the Red/Sony/Panasonic discussions can get, can you imagine someone writing and releasing some firmware that has some manner of virus or other negative effect, and then installing it in some rental house cameras? There is *ZERO* possibility that Panasonic would allow or tolerate ANYONE changing ANYTHING about their system like that. The company's whole marketing slogan is "When It Counts", based on reliability. Reliability of performance, reliability of P2, reliability of their SDHC/SDXC cards with their "Super Intelligent Controller", etc.

Furthermore, the typical AF100 customer is far less likely to embrace a "hack" than the GH1-level customer. An AF100 customer is more likely to be someone who makes their living off the camcorder, and who has therefore weighed carefully that "When It Counts" promise. A GH1 guy, sure -- hack away. But as much as I enjoyed playing with the GH1 and seeing what new capabilities were brought to it, there is no way in hell that I would trust a job to it. No. Way. Heck, I wouldn't use an unhacked GH1 on a job, much less a hacked one. Do you think thoe AMD and Intel chips are being hacked in server and enterprise systems? I'd venture a guess and say heellllll no. The hacking is being done by gamers in their living rooms, not in corporate america. And that's the same approach I would expect among GH1/AF100 users -- the GH1'er would do it, but the AF100'er would shy away from it. Not all, of course -- I'm sure there are plenty of unhacked GH1s out there, and I'm sure there are some who would hack their AF100s given the chance. In general, I would expect far fewer AF100 customers to be interested, than GH1 customers.

Good luck to those who want a hack. Just -- don't expect Panasonic to embrace it. I've talked to those engineers, and to the marketing team, and I cannot possibly imagine a scenario under which they would embrace any such hack effort. And most definitely not in some sort of open-source way. And if you publish your ideas and bring attention to it, I guarantee you beyond a shadow of a doubt that they will lock it down just like they did with the GH1. You want to pursue this, you would be best served to keep as absolutely quiet about it as possible.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
The reason they don't push the envelope further is called profit - you're right.
If they put out 'the perfect camera' that worked perfectly 90% of the time they would lose the trust of their customer base, the respect of the industry, and then exactly what you said would happen would happen. You wouldn't want the new Panasonic camera next year. Why would you?

So sure - it's because of profit. It's because if they don't put out cameras that work predictably well 100% of the time, we would all go out and buy cameras from other manufacturers that we can count on to be able to do our jobs. Same goes for my clients and my work - if I don't deliver reliably, I'm pretty sure my clients will find someone who will. And they'd be right to do so.

Companies give us the best they can put out reliably for the best price they can.
Otherwise they wouldn't stay in business.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. Said in three brief paragraphs what it takes me a novel to say, but yes -- this is exactly it.
 
Sure Barry, what you and Luis and earlier Rick say is correct as it currently applies to Panasonic and no doubt all the major Japanese camera makers but that attitude is old / conservative.
Many other companies, in both the digital hardware and software worlds have moved on from that approach and are actively engaging their customers in ways which use such activities as hacking to test and provide feedback on their products.
We all know about companies that use their customers as "beta testers."
Firmware updates are just a small example of how the digital realm provides opportunities for improvements which don't exist in the analog realm. All early adopters are "beta testers" to some degree and I would be rather surprised if Panasonic don't listen to your feedback on the AF100 et al and make changes accordingly.
The modern world / economy is moving so quickly nowadays that if a company cannot keep up with the competition ( and potential competition) it is doomed.
Korean, Taiwanese and Chinese companies are more than happy to take market share from old, slow thinking companies who are stuck in the past and still cling to engineering principles from the analog age.
Whilst I personally find Red's marketing / public relations strategies rather off putting at times they make a big point of engaging their potential customers, listening to what they say and changing their products accordingly.
They are constantly pushing out firmware updates which improve the Red One's performance and the performance of their other related products.
Having a section of your customer base who are prepared to do testing on your products at their risk (all companies that I am aware of, including Intel and AMD, make it clear that hacking voids their warranties) is a big help given the pressure that company engineers are under, as Rick talked about in his post.
Leveraging the skills and experience of your customers is a sound business strategy for success in todays world.
Did Vitaliy's hack on the GH1 help or harm Panasonic?
Obviously a rhetorical question, as we all know the answer.
Cheers.
 
Vitaliy Kiselev said:
Of course you can't see any benefit, as you don't never saw such things :-)
Click to expand...

I watched Andromeda for the DVX. Seems similar enough. What did they get? A camera no longer supported and void warranty.

For example, do you want electronic follow focus for $50? It could be done with such SDK at very small time.
3D cameras synch. I can count many many things.
Click to expand...

Not unless it is coming out of Panasonics' engineering department with the notion that it will work on the job 100% of the time, all the time.

I think I understand your angle here Vitaliy, in terms of having an SDK available for people to come up with interesting things for their camera to do, but this isn't a phone, or an OS. It is a very specifically designed tool and the people buying it are most likely making their living off of it (I will). If my iOS device goes down because of an app problem (even unjailbroken I have had this happen) I'm not really out that much. If my camera goes down I have not only lost possibly a shot, but the day and most importantly, the client.

I just cannot think of it as a risk worth taking. The GH-1 was a consumer toy in comparison. A sub $1,000 item where the consequences weren't so high if failure occurred.

Comparison? Go ahead, strap a turbo to that '94 civic, knock your socks off. Don't be surprised if you spend a lot of time in the garage though or blow your engine. Heck you might actually enjoy it. But if I want performance, repeatable, every single time I'll take a Ferrari please. More money? Sure. Designed from the ground up to perform at the highest levels all the time? You bet.
 
Let me talk about the iPhone here. It actually shows what a future camera could be like. The iPhone has physical devices like the camera. Now on top developers can program the use of this camera via iOS apps. That is how I envision the future of camera control.

Hacking is only needed because these devices are not designed to allow additional programs.

>that it will work on the job 100% of the time, all the time.

Want that camera 100% working all the time.
 
Well people are wrong if they think cameras manufacturers aren't getting ready to embrace SDK API interfaces for their cameras, well, at least Red :) They have specifically said that you'll be able to interact with the camera through an external device and they will be providing an SDK for doing this. Now granted, this isn't the same thing exactly, but it is a step in the direction of allowing people to write their own control interfaces to do things in the camera, which is pretty cool.

Pertaining to camera manufacturers, I would argue that it is NOT a conservative method of design but a cultural one. I've designed chips with Korea and Japan for companies like Samsung and NEC and I can tell you that their work ethics are just different. This includes India as well. They work VERY STRICTLY to a specification written out painstakingly in huge documents. The project has to work EXACTLY like the specification says. And this, as I have witnessed first hand, is to a fault at times. I've seen projects that didn't question the specification that had problems, only to produce a part that didn't work properly. I've not seen that model change for ten years, and I don't see it happening anytime soon. We know that Red struggled with the Red One and how well it worked in the beginning. We also know the incredibly huge time to market the Epic and Scarlet have taken now, where they've realized they need to work out the problems FIRST before their product is released, and not have to replace circuit boards in the camera later on. We'll have to wait and see the reception and reliability of the Epic and Scarlet once they reach full scale production. Because YOU KNOW people will be watching them to see if their promises (beyond schedule) come true.

Panasonic released the AF100 in a pretty fast release schedule. No one else has released something as fast as they have, or, is anything coming at a similar price point. They no doubt had to make decisions to get it to market that fast, all of which even I am not fully happy with, but, it is what it is. It exists and for my projects, it is a good enough improvement over the 7D that I don't mind committing to disk a screenplay I've spent over 10 years developing. They filled a gap for me because there was nothing in the $5k range that I wanted to shoot on before the AF100 came out. Would I want to shoot my screenplay on an Alexa, F3, Epic? Hell yeah! But I'm not in that place and this is a self financed short so I am shooting within my means.

Unlike some of the people here, I'd be willing to use a hack to just get the few features I want in my AF100. Namely, as mentioned elsewhere, ISO on the back dial, 1:1 zoom on LCD, audio monitoring off during VFR, as a minimum. I know Panasonic's stance on some of these, but it doesn't change my desire to have them to the point I don't think their inclusion in a hack would be detrimental to the functioning of the camera. It's a personal decision, and one that I would pour over the hack details to make myself comfortable with trying it, also, it would require being able to go back to the original firmware if a problem exists. I am a programmer and I understand the complexities of these types of systems.

That said, do I really want to use the hack? No. I'd love for Panasonic to implement at least some of these. Do I think they will? I have no idea. My experience with Canon has been sour. They could have easily added the functions they did to the 5D to the 7D for audio and they did not. Is it Canon's fault? No. I was well aware of the limitations of the 7D before I bought it and knew what I was getting for my money. Same with the AF100. I knew all these limitations before I got it, so while disappointed they aren't there, Panasonic in no way deceived me or anyone as to what they were getting. As long as a business is honest with me, I still respect them even if I think they could give me more.

Very few electronic devices have I purchased get upgrades that make them better other than bug fixes. The only exception is my Access Virus TI synthesizer, which gets MASSIVE upgrades for free that are amazing :)

If I were doing film as my primary income, I too would be reluctant to use a hacked camera, for all the reasons given. But, I do like to push the envelope. I mean hey, I was shooting on a 7D before this anyways :)
 
Guys,
This thread started great but it ruined immediately :(

I fully agree with Vitaliy. Some quick remarks:

- The given example (cpu/gp amd/intel) is not the most appropriate to our beloved camera :)
The best examples are maybe the western digital WDTV, some netgear routers and dlink routers.
WD was caught using open source software and forced to fully disclose their firmware. In few months a strong community created tons of releases solving nasty bugs and implementing the most requested features. The wd tv became shortly the best selling media player of the planet. Only because WD disclosed the source code.

Same history for several linksys routers. I have a five years ago dlink router and there is still someone that bring some new firmware...

- Someone said: I will never use an hack for production things. Nobody is forcing you to do so.
You can always buy a new camera and live with it, upgrading them only with the official distributions... always referring to the above wd tv example, western digital did not leave its customers alone: it continued to release official upgrades. After one year we have maybe three wd release and ten unsupported release. After two year or so the product is declared end of production (from WD) but the parallel community continue to improve it.

- About products which cannibalize themselves AKA I will not buy a GH2 because I have a GH13 with chromed mufflers... Just look at what happened here ;) Referring to the wd tv example. WD went out with the wd tv live and other successfully products without problems.

Most players are opening to listening their customers. Look at Adobe and their Lightroom. The open forum Lightroomforum.net (paid by Adobe but outside theri servers and without Adobe employee) is a key aspect of the product adoption.

So, there are plenty of examples of products that were successful because someone hacked it. The GH13 it's an example. Panasonic it's very stupid to not understand this and anticipating the market. Would be the Columbus eggs of photography. A key decision to gain market shares. Here in Italy it's very difficult to find the GH in local retailers. 50% of point and shoot camera are Panasonic but when you move towards DSLR... well you know ;)

I think that the camera market it's so resilient about this because this market is well older than computer market so it's difficult accepting this way of thinking.


Last but not the least...

I remember a metropolitan legend about autocad. At the beginning it was not the best software and not very famous but... At that time it was the easiest to crack ;) In few years it became one of the most adopted software of that kind. Autodesk was crying and complaining about piracy but without it maybe... ;)

Good night
 
Hardware hacking is nothing new. It's not like it came out of nowhere, or, that cameras haven't been hackable for some time, so this whole idea that companies need to get with the times is ludicrous. I'm not sure how many ways it can be explained that locked firmware is about reliability and intellectual property protection. Do you really think it would be wise for a company to release their method of noise reduction to the public when that might be the differentiator between their equipment and the next guy?

This argument makes NO sense from a historical standpoint. It can easily be shown that certain people in this world have had their lives saved because they were not wearing a seatbelt and thrown from a car that did something afterwards that they wouldn't survive. Yet, statistically speaking, wearing a seat beat is more advantageous than not wearing one in the driving scenarios.

The same thing is true with firmware. Like I said earlier, if someone puts a hack in that disables temperature shut-off on the Canon cameras and the hacker that wrote the firmware never told anyone, and the user used that firmware and destroyed their camera, they are stuck. They took a risk that they didn't even know about. Do you think Canon wants there equipment being used and it failing, and then someone not telling people they hacked the camera, that is was Canon's fault because now they are mad they destroyed their own camera.

While I would possibly use a hack on the AF100 to get some features I want, it doesn't mean I don't understand why Panasonic might go the same route now with the AF100 that the GH1 did. Being a handful of people on a forum wanting hackable cameras is NOTHING compared to the number of people that will be using them. There will always be people willing to take the risk, but Panasonic has to protect themselves as much as possible as well. I've used a hackintosh before as well, but guess what, the machine was so unstable that I just bought another mac and was done with it. Best Decision Ever.
 
I think the fact that all pro video cameras these days have HDSDI and or HDMI kind of negates a lot of this conversation. If I was Panasonic, profit or no profit I would not want customers hacking the products. It is a quality control/reputation issue. Also, are we really supposed to think that people hacking have the same access to testing and diagnostic equipment? Or know as much as the Panasonic engineers?. Or care about 100% reliability? I'll pass on the hack...
 
Rick Burnett said:
I'm not sure how many ways it can be explained that locked firmware is about reliability and intellectual property protection. Do you really think it would be wise for a company to release their method of noise reduction to the public when that might be the differentiator between their equipment and the next guy?
Click to expand...

Rick,
I though I was clear: it's not my opinon, it's the whole it appliance market that it's changing. And believe me most of the time the word hackable has meant fortune, chance, money. Ask to Western Digital what did it means for them releasing the firmware: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

This argument makes NO sense from a historical standpoint. It can easily be shown that certain people in this world have had their lives saved because they were not wearing a seatbelt and thrown from a car that did something afterwards that they wouldn't survive. Yet, statistically speaking, wearing a seat beat is more advantageous than not wearing one in the driving scenarios.
Click to expand...
Rick, please stay IT we are not speaking to hack a lifesaving device, so your example doesn't fit. If I burn my AF100 or my GH13 nobody dies.

The same thing is true with firmware. Like I said earlier, if someone puts a hack in that disables temperature shut-off on the Canon cameras and the hacker that wrote the firmware never told anyone, and the user used that firmware and destroyed their camera, they are stuck. They took a risk that they didn't even know about. Do you think Canon wants there equipment being used and it failing, and then someone not telling people they hacked the camera, that is was Canon's fault because now they are mad they destroyed their own camera.
Click to expand...
Please go on the GH forum and ask how many people that frozen their camera while hacking went to Panasonic complaining.

There will always be people willing to take the risk, but Panasonic has to protect themselves as much as possible as well. I've used a hackintosh before as well, but guess what, the machine was so unstable that I just bought another mac and was done with it. Best Decision Ever.
Click to expand...
Nobody would forced you to do so. What's the problem?
with my best respect, but your statement seems coming from another era.
 
It is an opinion as I see no proof of it changing due to a few products going through such a cycle. Are my brand new Western Digital drives open source? No. Is any of the other devices I have purchased over the last year open source? My projector, my PS3, my new LCD monitors, televisions, stoves, routers? No. Sure, my router from YEARS ago that was a Linksys ran Linux and a third party company created the Talisman OS for it and it was great, but are all new Lynksys routers hackable? No. Companies releasing their firmware are giving up control of their intellectual property. It doesn't make sense for businesses to do this, and Western Digital got lucky they found money in it, as I am sure they did not want to do what they did. Are you a worker for Western Digital? No. So until they are on here telling me that is the best decision for their products moving forward, this is what is known as an outlier statistically.

And this has nothing to do with lifesaving devices, it's called an example of showing how just because something can be seen as a benefit in one scenario doesn't mean it is a benefit overall. That is the point being made. If you burn out your AF100 during a shoot, and if none are available, money is lost in more than one way. How do you think an investor is going to feel when you say "Well, I hacked the camera to get a feature, but it looks like that caused the camera to break, and I cannot get another one today" Not so good professionally. That's the point being made.

I'm on the GH forum, I know all about the hack and what's been going on with it. I also know that I've lost data before over clocking my CPU. People are taking a risk, and sometimes, it's a risk they don't know about because they just heard from a person who great a hack was and they are not technically inclined to understand what those risks are going to be. When it comes to reputation and protecting IP, you cannot understand why a company would want to protect those things?

No disrespect, but you don't understand how protection of intellectual property works. Your statements seems coming from another universe :P
 
Rick, please stay IT we are not speaking to hack a lifesaving device, so your example doesn't fit. If I burn my AF100 or my GH13 nobody dies.
Click to expand...

Right, but putting food on the table and keeping your house warm is going to get awful difficult if your main bread-winning camera is nice and crispy after a nasty bout with some messy firmware.

Please go on the GH forum and ask how many people that frozen their camera while hacking went to Panasonic complaining.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, they still ended up with a frozen camera.

Nobody would forced you to do so. What's the problem?
Click to expand...

The problem is Panasonic Broadcast supplies professional solutions to professionals. That is, people who make their living with that equipment. There is an expectation synonymous with their equipment. If I go to a rental house for a AF-100, 370, 3700 I expect it to be true to how Panasonic's engineers tested, decided, and constructed that particular camera. I have an expectation of how it will perform. If it doesn't because of some firmware foul up from open source code someone wrote in their basement then later installed by that rental house, who do you think if going to bare the brunt of that blame? Joe Hacker? The rental house? No, Panasonic will for right or wrong.

Just look at the criticism RED still deals with after years of having RED One's in the field because of the initial instability of some of their earlier cameras. It's not just the people who have their hands directly on the tools, its the producers determining budgets and acquisition formats hearing things here and there about the flaws of this system or another that can greatly affect the perception of a brand or product. As a cooperation, why, why would you ever voluntarily open yourself to that possibility?

I think the idea is grand and in a perfect world it seems like a viable option. But as it stands today there are too many variables to reliably introduce this to the mass market with a professional product.

Again, my $100 WD home theater drive goes down, not a big deal. My GH-1 goes down, not a big deal. My Linksys router goes down, not a big deal. My AF-100 eats it, and I may not be for a while.
 
I think the biggest issue of all here is how people feel about risk vs reward. Sure, eating the $5k for a busted AF-100 sucks but the money is relative. IMO it doesn't seem like the wisest investment to purchase anything that can't be easily replaced especially if your livelihood depends on that item. I am speaking in the context of tools and not house, car etc. However, I would never buy a BMW unless I could also afford to fix it/replace it when needed. Of course people who put all of their eggs in one basket aren't going to take risks but that doesn't mean others wont.

I think the AMD & INTEL example in the OP is a great one and brings up another point. CPUs aren't all able to overclock to the same speed (which is universal). Just like CPUs cameras have a base where they will all operate at the same level. What I wonder is how many of these cameras take into consideration the hard drive speed. I'm sure they aim for some type of middle ground but I know the GH13 would preform great on my sandisk extreme 30mbs vs some class 2 card (or whatever).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top