I don’t understand you, sorry, it’s embarrassing for me: who denies to give a code to someone?? I have a licenced Simhub version, and I can use it for whatever is included in my licence. Or what you mean??
There is no need for my wheels to be in a way to be electronically/electric connected with a DD. All it needs it’s a mechanical connection, a simple QR technic wise, and a precise and strong one in regards to forces ¹
I think vpg wheels don’t use Arduino code. They also don’t show up as Arduino devices in Simhub. I never had to use or look for something in the Simhub section of Arduino. I have Arduino deactivated in Simhub.
You can mechanically connect any wheel to any wheelbase using any 3rd party QR of your choice.
All that rambling for 5 pages just to admit that you don’t care about cableless connection.
This is attention seeking shit posting just to derail the discussion, sorry.
Also what the hell with that authoratitave insulting tone, are you drunk posting all that time or it’s something else?
Brion is referring to proprietary software /firmware ‘code’
I just received the answer from Emanuele: VPG wheels will work without problems with the Asetek QR system. It’s not necessary to use powered USB hub.anymore
1 Like
Very niceeee, thanks for confirming.
Simhub is still needed, according to VPG
We don’t use arduino but another MCU. Yes we do use VoCore
That other MCU could be using Arduino generated code, which could be a grey area.
The wheel manufacturers using SimHub by way of the GPL license MUST upon request provide you with the Source code (doesn’t matter if it is for the Arduino directly or not) to anything that includes ANY part of that GPL Licensed Software… SO VPG if they have SimHUB code in their firmware ANYWHERE to abide by the GPL license for that code MUST be willing to give you the Source code for their firmware at your request… IF they do not then they are in violation of the GPL license and could be sued by anyone.
This is basically why Granite is wary of integration… and I am probably pretty sure that VPG doesn’t realize that they have set themselves up in that manner… Basically VPG (or any other manufacturer that is using a half SimHUB firmware cannot keep their firmware proprietary… They can however hold it as much under wraps as they can and hope no one requests it.
If VPG has figured out how to intercept VoCore output from SimHUB without actually having to tell SimHub that it exists then they probably have found a way around using any of their code and would not be subject to this… Only the coders for them would know for sure though OR someone comparing binaries.
I’m not sure if you got that right. Vocore drivers are not GPL and neither is the Simhub in general. But parts of Arduino are.
VPG uses teensy to upload wheel firmware. And they developped Nextion templates. Simhub reports “no Arduino devices conected”.
The SimHUB Arduino code which SimHub places onto Arduino’s is under the GPL license. So if any of that code is used within anything then by license it must to fall under GPL as you probably know… SimHUB has kept their main program out of public license.
I am not sure what the VoCore drivers are under as I have not investigated that since we haven’t had to actually possibly use anything regarding those. Hopefully they are MIT.
In any case this whole thread deviation was in response to the comment of why Granite cannot make a Wheel with a screen when others have and if you are looking from a licensing perspective (which I am sure Granite has because they have pockets someone else might want to get into) the route many have taken to make it easier by using SimHub is full of with possible peril…
If SimHub is offering up a different API to wheel manufacturers that does not use the Arduino connection code or any of used reading methodology within it then all is well and good as it is not in the public domain. Im not sure if they are I haven’t looked into it.
However, I hate to say that if SimHub is even offering up alternative connection methods that are using the code they released under GPL then they have opened the door for their clients to be sued by anyone. That is unfortunately how BROAD the GPL license is.
The thing is code is code it doesn’t matter if it is for Arduino or Windows under the GPL and most code is somewhat universal.
This would mean one of two things… either they are using the SimHub connection routines within their firmware which would be the issue we are talking about… so that SimHub sees it as a SimHub device but not one it can install to… OR SimHub has provided them as mentioned above with an alternative connection method to SimHub.
SimHub doesn’t support installation to Teensy but 99% of the code from the Arduino can be used on a Teensy so it is an Arduino Device. I have gotten a Teensy to connect to SimHub by essentially just compiling the Arduino code to it and supplying it with a unique GUID which that along with the connection is all that is needed to differentiate devices within SimHub…
I don’t know if SimHub is strictly necessary in order for granite to create a wheel with a display. Ofcourse that is the ideal road to take for them if it’s possible because of how open and flexible it is but if they decide it can’t be done the question then remains how much effort will they place into developing their own software to support displays even if it’s their own software.
Ofcourse the thread was created due to the question being placed over the simucube based slew rate and I tried to develop that into how the simucube brand itself can develop in order to keep up with the competition, naturally a fight ensued about what’s best or not and thankfully we seem to be past that phase and now we are back on the topic of what direction can granite take to make the improvements I think we all would like to see.
From my perspective it comes down to a couple of things, that being the development of the software further to support things like displays, LED’s… and leading on from that ofcourse then needs to come the hardware to take advantage of that software, I get excited by the thought of wheels with displays capable of controlling the true drive software, it’s never been such an important part of the simucube ofcourse, we are all very used to not having that finer in game control like other manufacturers but I think it’s features like this that bring the simucube forward to keep up.
So yes I’m glad it seems granite are exploring the possibility of using SimHub but my question would be what’s the backup plan and how do they carry the brand forward, would it be further (potentially big) developments on current hardware or do they go big with a simucube 3 and true drive 2.0?
My only concern with my simucube is the sense it’s stuck in a moment, we don’t see much in the way of software development these days, hardware is slow to roll out, the pedal while fantastic is clearly a look what we can do but you can’t have. So naturally for me personally it makes me take a look around, makes me crave something new I guess.
@jinx20001 It’s not necessary, there are many ways to do this. I have discussed some ideas with GD Guys when I was at their HO some months ago, but they are anyway aware of all those 
1 Like
I think the thing is that Hardware wise for the DD wheels unless something is just discovered to be better than what the SC2 is as far as tech… there is not much other to do besides software…
Lately developments that Granite have done seem to be more about building a community rather than pushing the capabilities of the wheel further as pretty much all of the past few years has seemed to focus on Paddock. Which some like and others see little to no value in, sort of like social media.
Only they really know what direction things are headed but with the Pedal it appears they are working toward a complete ultra high end system of components…
I do know generally the philosophy I have been given is “high end and that is it”. They are not interested in courting, using, or developing things for the low to middle market. This means I would be Very, Very, Very, surprised if they ever come out with something of the likes of a CSL, SimMagic, or MOZA level low power wheelbase… Though, if they could make one close to the price of those, that could outshine them, they would probably make a FORTUNE… Im not a huge fan of low powered DD’s as they lack going to that next level but at the same time they are a big step up from the belt/gear drive units so there is a massive market there where the high end is much more limited.
I am with you though in that there hasn’t really been much “development” on existing product done and they seem to be riding the wave of market position. Maybe they have a bunch of stuff behind the scenes and they are just sitting on it until they start losing market position but again only they know for sure.
All that being said from the DD standpoint I don’t believe they have been surpassed by anyone in the overall FEEL of the wheel. Though that won’t last forever as others are of course working to take that position.
Back to the wheel thing a little they also tread a fine line here with making their own wheels in that as a company make their own “accessories” or sponsor certain companies with exclusive packages, as with Gomez, that are tied to their product they can start to alienate the “aftermarket” if you do that too badly then you lose that external support.
2 Likes
It is easy to not use any GPL code on the wheel side, you only need to implement the Simhub protocol (which, as such, is not GPL). Only caveat is to flash any processor on the wheel with
- Arduino bootloader (GPL) + code from Simhub generated by Arduino which will make it GPL or at least very high risk of being so
or - Arduino compatible bootloader (not GPL) + code from Simhub generated by Arduino which will make it GPL or at least very high risk of being so.
If wheel manufacturer implements wheel fw without using Arduino, then it is likely not poisoned by GPL.