or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › $999 Calyx M with DXD + DSD, 64GB + SD + µSD storage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

$999 Calyx M with DXD + DSD, 64GB + SD + µSD storage - Page 195

post #2911 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebear View Post

Just take a look at Robert Watts' reply when people asked him if Chord can come up with a transport to pair with Hugo in the future. He felt that making a tranport or a DAP kind of device is far harder and involves too much additional technicality and skills that Chord is not ready to deal with. All the software development and bug fixing issues when it comes to dealing with DAP development are hard to handle properly without a very experienced team of software engineers.

Yeah very true not only do they have to deal with the different facets of software engineering but they also need to deal with one of the most difficult area of firmware development; real time processing which complicates the matter even further, not only should you have the steps in the right sequence, you should also have it done at the correct time and if you have a process that competes with it, you need to properly optimize and prioritize it and make the other process wait due to time constraint. Hard to explain but when you dabble with low level chip op code in order to gain ounces of speed them you really know how hard the environment is. For the company who hires those skillful technical savvy software engineers, you gotta keep them happy and have a proper backup strategy if any of those key employees leave. I feel the pain for those firms but the bottom line, they decided that they wanted to get into that business hence they have to make the appropriate decisions to enter, continue or leave that business segment and keep themselves true if they hit bumps on the road. The other facet of that business is customer relationship, if you want to sell to the public you need to be able to handle the public in a respectful, humble and honest manner. If you can't make the deadline or see your features not living up to expectation then be honest enough to let the customer know and fix the situation sooner than later else you are not going to have repeated business and it will be a one off disaster which will impact your reputation long term.
post #2912 of 5497

If you think about it, it is very natural that Calyx, a hardware company with proven experience with high-end DACs, and based in Korea, home of Samsung, LG and a vast market of mobile-related suppliers, would eventually release a DAP. Kind of take advantage of expertise + environment advantage. And because of that, for the software part, I am sure they found experienced software analysts in their country to hire. Strategically it was a wise move for Calyx.

post #2913 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post
 

I saw his response, too, but the potential for sub-contracting was notable by its absence from the discussion :rolleyes:

 

 

I think it's quite obvious that there does seem to be quite a pool of DAP-firmware-coding talent in Korea - why specifically in Korea, I'm not entirely sure, but I suppose there must be a lot of Samsung cellphone engineers there, dominating the world from their secret base, so many of those skills may be transferable to DAP engineering, particularly as DAPs these days do harness quite a few cellphone components.

 

Cowon, iRiver, Samsung, and now D&A... and others.

 

 

But I don't see why that should preclude a British or European firm from taking a stab at the DAP market, eventually, even if the firmware may, perhaps, need to be sub-contracted to Korea, China, or India.

 

You see, the idea of sub-contracting the firmware and outsourcing its development in itself is already a potential disaster ready to happen, not to mention sub-contracting it to another 3rd party company on the other side of the world half the way around the globe. Introducing an external party to perform a crucial/critical part of your production chain such as the firmware will not only increase the cost of production (thereby increasing the price of the product to the consumer because 3rd party would want profit too), you may also run into quality control and compatibility issues with your hardware which is developed in-house. So instead of solving the problem and making it easier to develop a competent firmware/UI for your DAP, you potentially end up introducing more complexity, problems and delays to your design and production timeline. And then when it is time to patch bugs in the firmware, you are again at the mercy of the 3rd party sub-contractor. Testing and debugging takes even more time trying to communicate with a 3rd party.

 

A very good example of such a scenario is in the mobile industry where you see Apple products are well-built with very well-integrated software and hardware features across all their devices because everything from hardware design, features development to software and firmware programming are done in-house. This versus Android mobile phones with the Android OS distribution highly-fragmented especially in the early days because we have phone manufacturers developing the hardware and then taking the vanilla Android software from Google and putting their own companies' software customization on top of it. The integration of the Android OS with various phone models were pretty bad and the responsiveness of the UI and stability of the OS is lagging far behind that of Apple's iOS. Google had to step in to interfere and most Android phones now are also much better thanks partly to the more advanced and speedy hardware chipsets available to compensate for sub-standard code optimization of the OS. Anyway you get the idea. It is not always good to outsource part of your product development, especially something as critical/crucial as firmware.


Edited by Bluebear - 5/23/14 at 12:41pm
post #2914 of 5497

You certainly make some valid points

 

I can understand the reticence of established companies towards the prospect of collaborating with / subcontracting to a 3rd-party firmware developer.

 

However, in spite of the potential risks, I still think we will see some collaboratively-created DAPs at some point. Business is getting ever more global, and sourcing, manufacturing, and coding will inevitably follow this trend, in spite of the elitists trying to maintain a fragmented economically-exploitative system.

 

Something else that is also evident, is the increasing interest, from the Chinese cellphone vendors, in improving the audio performance of their devices. That's been a bit half-baked so far, with some rather lacklustre implementations of the ES90182KM chip, but it's a step in the right direction.

 

So there's scope for more convergence in audiophile terms, and exciting times ahead, either way.

 

Logical, it may be, but I never foresaw D & A entering the DAP market, so here's hoping their venture turns out to be worthwhile, so this trend can continue, for everyone's benefit.

post #2915 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post

 

However, in spite of the potential risks, I still think we will see some collaboratively-created DAPs at some point.

 

Already there.  How many of these are now running Android as opposed to an in house OS?  Sony, Calyx, AK, iBasso are some that come to mind.

post #2916 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

 

Already there.  How many of these are now running Android as opposed to an in house OS?  Sony, Calyx, AK, iBasso are some that come to mind.

 

Calyx M's M:use is based on Android?

post #2917 of 5497

I reread the article and it said Android users will like that it works the same.  Somehow over the last couple of months that became... based on Android.  My bad.  Or not, it isn't clear.

post #2918 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

I reread the article and it said Android users will like that it works the same.  Somehow over the last couple of months that became... based on Android.  My bad.  Or not, it isn't clear.

 

While it perhaps has never been said that it isn't based on Android, everything that I have read suggests a unique interface programmed from scratch. That is probably the best assumption unless announced otherwise.

post #2919 of 5497

I can think of at least 2 reasons M doesn't run on android (besides Calyx not mentioning android):

 

1. The 625mhz cpu Calyx went with would not be able to run android without lag and jerkiness.

2. Calyx went with a 625mhz cpu to save power, so using android which can sometimes be a power hog would go against that logic.

post #2920 of 5497

M:use is based on Android 4.2.2. FW 0.6 is available for download. Just extract it an check the contents.

post #2921 of 5497

And then it was =)

post #2922 of 5497

Well there you go. It's ubiquitous, that Android!  :-)

post #2923 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3hwx9 View Post
 

M:use is based on Android 4.2.2.

 

Oh, dear. . . . I do hope they upgrade it to at least version 4.3--preferably 4.4. Version 4.2 was infamous for its stability problems, and it was hampered by bugs of every description. 4.3 was a major improvement, as it included superior resource management. Still, 4.4 would be ideal; Google streamlined the code so it would work efficiently on even the oldest devices.

post #2924 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcarr112281 View Post

Oh, dear. . . . I do hope they upgrade it to at least version 4.3--preferably 4.4. Version 4.2 was infamous for its stability problems, and it was hampered by bugs of every description. 4.3 was a major improvement, as it included superior resource management. Still, 4.4 would be ideal; Google streamlined the code so it would work efficiently on even the oldest devices.

Has anyone bothered to check the poster's claims? Where is the link to this firmware version? confused.gif

It's not that I don't want to believe it but D&A is very secretive about the M and if there is any firmware upgrade, that would be the one available and not necessarily the original one, at least until they make the first upgrade available.
post #2925 of 5497
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post


Has anyone bothered to check the poster's claims? Where is the link to this firmware version? confused.gif

It's not that I don't want to believe it but D&A is very secretive about the M and if there is any firmware upgrade, that would be the one available and not necessarily the original one, at least until they make the first upgrade available.


http://www.calyx.kr/xe/notice/4752 → https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B649F9e4fTB-UHI5VzJGa1JYeVk/edit?pli=1

Contents of /META-INF/com/android :
 

Quote:
post-build=Calyx/full_m805_892x/m805_892x:4.2.2/JDQ39/eng.taohammer.20140516.183400:user/release-keys
post-timestamp=1400232947
pre-device=m805_892x
 

 

Actually, 0.6 is the first public firmware upgrade.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › $999 Calyx M with DXD + DSD, 64GB + SD + µSD storage