Sigma Launches the Sigma USB DOCK

[Brymills]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Well, yes. They could easily have used a cross platform library for writing the application and then it would have worked everywhere. I am tired of companies offering software for Windows and Mac OS alone. It smacks of laziness.

it smacks of good business sense, you don't waste money and stay in business.

I think what JohnnyWashngo is trying to say is, it likely could have been done in a fully cross-platform for little to no additional cost (money/personal/etc). Not sure if he's completely correct or not, but it very well may be correct since the only cross-platform stuff I've developed has been Java, and that has it's own quirks and issues.

If the cost had actually be very minimal, it might very well have been nice to release it. However, I'm sure some enterprising person will sniff the USB packets and reverse engineer the protocol. Then all of us linux geeks (well, ok, I use Windows for Lightroom. I'm sorry ) can put together our own application as we will.

Which Linux distribution, and what about Android for tablets?

[Drizzt321]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Well, yes. They could easily have used a cross platform library for writing the application and then it would have worked everywhere. I am tired of companies offering software for Windows and Mac OS alone. It smacks of laziness.

it smacks of good business sense, you don't waste money and stay in business.

I think what JohnnyWashngo is trying to say is, it likely could have been done in a fully cross-platform for little to no additional cost (money/personal/etc). Not sure if he's completely correct or not, but it very well may be correct since the only cross-platform stuff I've developed has been Java, and that has it's own quirks and issues.

If the cost had actually be very minimal, it might very well have been nice to release it. However, I'm sure some enterprising person will sniff the USB packets and reverse engineer the protocol. Then all of us linux geeks (well, ok, I use Windows for Lightroom. I'm sorry ) can put together our own application as we will.

Which Linux distribution, and what about Android for tablets?

That's the great thing of once the protocol is completely reverse engineered, it can be implemented just about anywhere on almost anything that has a USB Host. I wouldn't be surprised if Sigma releases an Android/iOS app for it either, it just makes too much sense so that you can make adjustments in the field easily if you need to.

[dilbert]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Well, yes. They could easily have used a cross platform library for writing the application and then it would have worked everywhere. I am tired of companies offering software for Windows and Mac OS alone. It smacks of laziness.

it smacks of good business sense, you don't waste money and stay in business.

I think what JohnnyWashngo is trying to say is, it likely could have been done in a fully cross-platform for little to no additional cost (money/personal/etc). Not sure if he's completely correct or not, but it very well may be correct since the only cross-platform stuff I've developed has been Java, and that has it's own quirks and issues.

If the cost had actually be very minimal, it might very well have been nice to release it. However, I'm sure some enterprising person will sniff the USB packets and reverse engineer the protocol. Then all of us linux geeks (well, ok, I use Windows for Lightroom. I'm sorry ) can put together our own application as we will.

Which Linux distribution, and what about Android for tablets?

Which Linux distribution is the problem. They're all different and together they represent an insignificant percentage of the marketplace for consumers that makes it unattractive to service as a vendor.

[FunPhotons]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Well, yes. They could easily have used a cross platform library for writing the application and then it would have worked everywhere. I am tired of companies offering software for Windows and Mac OS alone. It smacks of laziness.

Well no, says somebody who actually has written cross system software, it's quite difficult and expensive. Have you ever done this, or are you simply giving us your unfounded opinion? That smacks of laziness.

[verysimplejason]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Well, yes. They could easily have used a cross platform library for writing the application and then it would have worked everywhere. I am tired of companies offering software for Windows and Mac OS alone. It smacks of laziness.

Well no, says somebody who actually has written cross system software, it's quite difficult and expensive. Have you ever done this, or are you simply giving us your unfounded opinion? That smacks of laziness.

+1.  If you say do it in Java, that will still entail a lot of work.  I've done multi-platform programming and I'd say it's not easy.  Even when they say sure it will work, in reality, some codes just doesn't work.  I'm now doing some SAP web applications and a lot of patches are being done just to make one code work in another platform.  It's still easier to work with few platforms.  It's a lot cleaner that way.

[mcintoshi]

Forgive my ignorance, but from the description of this USB Dock, I have no idea what this product is, or how it is used.  Does it mount onto a lens or something?

[Drizzt321]

Forgive my ignorance, but from the description of this USB Dock, I have no idea what this product is, or how it is used.  Does it mount onto a lens or something?

Yes, it mounts onto the bayonet mount of the lens, and allows communication between a computer and the lens for things like firmware updates, AF tweaks, setting the focus limiter limits, and things like that.

[mcintoshi]

Ah ok, thanks

Yes, it mounts onto the bayonet mount of the lens, and allows communication between a computer and the lens for things like firmware updates, AF tweaks, setting the focus limiter limits, and things like that.

[PeterJ]

I don't have any Sigma lenses but reading this made me think it was odd that Canon have never had a way to update the lens firmware through the body. Just taking a look though I see they've added that ability for the 5D3 and later .

[Marsu42]

I see they've added that ability for the 5D3 and later .

Canon is a very conservative company - the lens fw update mainly seems to be designed to ensure compatibility of lenses with newer camera bodies, on each new generation release there are a few lenses (even newer ones) that need a trip to Canon service because they have issues. But Canon isn't enthusiastic about (too?) many customizations or features, they leave that to Sigma and Magic Lantern.

[PeterJ]

I see they've added that ability for the 5D3 and later .

Canon is a very conservative company - the lens fw update mainly seems to be designed to ensure compatibility of lenses with newer camera bodies, on each new generation release there are a few lenses (even newer ones) that need a trip to Canon service because they have issues. But Canon isn't enthusiastic about (too?) many customizations or features, they leave that to Sigma and Magic Lantern.

Yep fair point, and I guess in Canon's case they already know likely incompatibilities in advance unlike 3rd parties that need to react / reverse-engineer changes later if previously unused commands are used.

[JohnnyWashngo]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Well, yes. They could easily have used a cross platform library for writing the application and then it would have worked everywhere. I am tired of companies offering software for Windows and Mac OS alone. It smacks of laziness.

Well no, says somebody who actually has written cross system software, it's quite difficult and expensive. Have you ever done this, or are you simply giving us your unfounded opinion? That smacks of laziness.

Yes I have done this... I write software for a living. Making the decision to be cross platform would have been easy, writing the software not so much. But if you are going to invest in Widows and Mac versions of the application, you may as well go that extra step and support Linux. Imagine the goodwill that would engender. Instead of 'Oh well, another company not willing to support Linux', it would be 'Wow, check out Sigma and the awesome Linux app'.

Without actually seeing the software in action, it's hard to tell how complicated it is, but I imagine a library/framework like QT would have been an option for a piece of software like this.

That being said, once the software and hardware is released I imagine it won't take long until the protocol is reverse engineered

Anyway, I can't wait for this to be released. I love a new gadget and this one looks like it could be fun. I have already been playing with the MFA of my copy of the 35mm f/1.4 through my Mark3 and would love to see how that compares with changing the settings using the USB dock.

[cayenne]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Actually, considering that OSX and Linux are very similar under the hood (both are flavors of unix)...it would seem reasonable to have them develop for Linux too.

And with the fiasco that Win8 seems to be...well, there might be more people trying out Linux, not to mention, there are a lot of pro houses out there using Linux servers.

And with Mac seemingly unwilling to put out an updated mac pro....building a high end linux box is somewhat appealing.

But again, since osx and linux are so similar, I could see them porting it pretty readily.

For the time being...just run Win or OSX as a VM on your Linux box...and you have all your bases covered.

[Drizzt321]

^ Do you really expect corporations to code their software to work with Linux, representing a whopping under 2% of computer users?

Anyways, if sigma would have had this accessory years ago it would have saved their brand an awful lot of hurt over bad AF!

Actually, considering that OSX and Linux are very similar under the hood (both are flavors of unix)...it would seem reasonable to have them develop for Linux too.

And with the fiasco that Win8 seems to be...well, there might be more people trying out Linux, not to mention, there are a lot of pro houses out there using Linux servers.

And with Mac seemingly unwilling to put out an updated mac pro....building a high end linux box is somewhat appealing.

But again, since osx and linux are so similar, I could see them porting it pretty readily.

For the time being...just run Win or OSX as a VM on your Linux box...and you have all your bases covered.

At a low level, OS X and Linux might be fairly similar, but there are a lot of subtle differences. Especially when it comes to the UI level, totally different libraries (sure, OS X does ship with an X11 server...) and frameworks. The core protocol could probably pretty easily simply be a library that's shared, but all of the GUI/UX is not just as simple as recompiling with a few macro tweaks and it'll work nicely. Especially if the OS X GUI is based on Objective-C, while I bet the Windows is either .NET, or using VisualC++ or similar.

[Marsu42]

Actually, considering that OSX and Linux are very similar under the hood (both are flavors of unix)

But MacOSX is BSD and Linux is, well, Linux - the unix versions have split decades ago and are often very different, just because they both use a forward slash for directories and run gcc doesn't mean much for porting software, esp. if it relies on hardware features like usb.