Incoming update

[Jcrx]

Any body have any insight to this new update coming out???DJI to restrict non-compliant drones at next software update - sUAS News - The Business of Drones

 

[msinger]

You can read more about this here on DJI's website.

 

[Jcrx]

You can read more about this here on DJI's website.

I have read it . I wanna hear the hobbyists version of what it means . I'm not very savvy with software issues.

 

[SteveNPhx]

City fliers get ready to start going out to the country side?? That sounds scary.

 

[msinger]

Here's the important part:

"the aircraft will not have access to the correct geospatial information and flight functions for that region, and its operations will be restricted if you update the upcoming firmware: Live camera streaming will be disabled, and flight will be limited to a 50-meter (164-foot) radius up to 30 meters (98 feet) high"

If you never update your firmware again, then you will not be affected by this. However, if you plan on continuing to update your firmware (if DJI releases new P3 firmware), then you'll run into the restrictions noted above.

 

[Jcrx]

Here's the important part:

"the aircraft will not have access to the correct geospatial information and flight functions for that region, and its operations will be restricted if you update the upcoming firmware: Live camera streaming will be disabled, and flight will be limited to a 50-meter (164-foot) radius up to 30 meters (98 feet) high"

If you never update your firmware again, then you will not be affected by this. However, if you plan on continuing to update your firmware (if DJI releases new P3 firmware), then you'll run into the restrictions noted above.

I just reverted to 1.7.9 I think it's better. So your sayin if I keep it on that I can ignore this all together right ? In general it sounds like it's just gonna place further restrictions on the ac in already restricted airspaces. Am I understanding this correctly ?

 

[GMack]

Sounds like they lock it into "Beginner Mode" until registered with DJI.

With the FAA losing on the registration part with hobbyists, now DJI takes over the registration and control. I could see this leading to the 107 fliers being area unlocked maybe further than say a hobbyist too.

 

[msinger]

In general, it sounds like DJI is going to limit some fight functions based on your location. The article is kind of vague, so we'll have to wait and see what (if anything) changes.

 

[Jcrx]

In general, it sounds like DJI is going to limit some fight functions based on your location. The article is kind of vague, so we'll have to wait and see what (if anything) changes.

Thanks for the input

 

[mark99]

I think DJI are about to commit commercial suicide.
They are determined to data mine and subscription all users.

Can you envisage a car maker selling you a brand new car then when you have had it six months saying you can now only drive it where we say and with our permission or we will software lock it to your drive.

This company DJI are far too big and cocky for their boots and they will fk it right up as number 1 in the market.
Autel are not far behind and if they can learn from this mistake and trust customers they will pull the rug here.

What DJI will do here is serve up your private data and details to people you would rather not have it.
Authorities will be able to see who flew where with one mouse click from DJI database.

I predicted this step and was lambasted and ridiculed by forum users.

Well look here and look now.

Are you going to spend thousands on new products in the hope DJI will keep allowing you to use it and dictate how you use it ?
Nope, the market has just opened up wide for the competition and I hope they teach DJI a lesson in manners and trust.

 

[GMack]

I think DJI are about to commit commercial suicide.
...
This company DJI are far too big and cocky for their boots and they will fk it right up as number 1 in the market.
Autel are not far behind and if they can learn from this mistake and trust customers they will pull the rug here.
....

Only bad part is that Autel Robotics is so far behind DJI in their technology as their Premium is still only a 12 MP camera and nothing else made like the Inspire 2 series. DJI has great and timely engineering and marketing, even though they often have severe quality control, late delivery promises, features that marketing claims but are not there or altered when it hits the streets, and later on with software and firmware issues, and then followed by lackluster service. Besides, DJI is so far ahead in the game that they sue anyone who comes up close to their gear.

Too bad there isn't more competition. I'd like to see a Japanese firm jump in which might offer better quality control too. There are good ones out there from other countries like the USA Freefly Alta and Norwegian Altura Zenith 8 series (Which I'd like to own!), but their prices are that of a new car.

 

[SteveNPhx]

My P4 will stay on current firmware, my P4P I will update since it is under warranty and DJI care. At least if there are some over the top restrictions, I will have one drone that works right (unless they make the new go4 incompatible with the older firmware.

Here's the important part:

"the aircraft will not have access to the correct geospatial information and flight functions for that region, and its operations will be restricted if you update the upcoming firmware: Live camera streaming will be disabled, and flight will be limited to a 50-meter (164-foot) radius up to 30 meters (98 feet) high"

If you never update your firmware again, then you will not be affected by this. However, if you plan on continuing to update your firmware (if DJI releases new P3 firmware), then you'll run into the restrictions noted above.

 

[bhartwell]

I understand and certainly agree with the concerns expressed here. DJI is in a bad spot, the current regulatory situation is hazy at best, with various federal and local authorities imposing haphazard legislation, policy and restrictions based on perceived and largely unsubstantiated risks. As such, DJI has no clearly defined or established regulatory standards to fall back on.

Unfortunately, all it will take is one or two news worthy accidents, and DJI could find itself tied up in the courts indefinitely. Let's say a drone hits a plane and there is a loss of life. In that event, DJI would most certainly get sued by those impacted for selling an "unsafe" product. They would also likely get sued, if not charged criminally, for selling a none compliment product that puts the safety of the public at risk.

So, while the basis of these arguments may or may not be sound, DJI clearly understands the risks and is attempting to mitigate them by taking as proactive a stance as possible in being compliant with the various rules, laws and regulatory agencies. It sucks, I agree, but do they have a choice?

 

[mark99]

I understand and certainly agree with the concerns expressed here. DJI is in a bad spot, the current regulatory situation is hazy at best, with various federal and local authorities imposing haphazard legislation, policy and restrictions based on perceived and largely unsubstantiated risks. As such, DJI has no clearly defined or established regulatory standards to fall back on.

Unfortunately, all it will take is one or two news worthy accidents, and DJI could find itself tied up in the courts indefinitely. Let's say a drone hits a plane and there is a loss of life. In that event, DJI would most certainly get sued by those impacted for selling an "unsafe" product. They would also likely get sued, if not charged criminally, for selling a none compliment product that puts the safety of the public at risk.

So, while the basis of these arguments may or may not be sound, DJI clearly understands the risks and is attempting to mitigate them by taking as proactive a stance as possible in being compliant with the various rules, laws and regulatory agencies. It sucks, I agree, but do they have a choice?

They should stick to the actual law and not dance with authority.
Authority wants drones banned, make absolute no mistake of this, they are flying cameras that can record events and the video can mean covering things up gets a lot harder.
They see them as a threat to authority and they want them banned.
By dancing along with "request" they can not step back and slowly they walk along the path to a total ban witch is now just a small step as they walked themselves to the gallows.

DJi are forcing "contact" on to its customers where one did not exist at time of sale, I will lock down the Ipad to no updates

 

[GMack]

...

Unfortunately, all it will take is one or two news worthy accidents, and DJI could find itself tied up in the courts indefinitely. Let's say a drone hits a plane and there is a loss of life. In that event, DJI would most certainly get sued by those impacted for selling an "unsafe" product. They would also likely get sued, if not charged criminally, for selling a none compliment product that puts the safety of the public at risk.

...

I doubt if DJI will be harmed any more than a gun, arms, or bullet maker would. It's the person who committed the act who is behind it that they will be after, not the manufacturer of a drone or arms maker.

Aside, I'm curious as to how this will be implemented in Litchi and Autopilot as well. Will those both get flight restrictions somehow?

 

[Vega]

Well, right off the bat I will defer all future updates for both firmware and goapp. As a city dweller, this will definitely postpone my mavic purchase as I research other products and even save some bucks. I am loyal only until it begins to hurt. This would hurt.

 

[yawnalot29]

I understand and certainly agree with the concerns expressed here. DJI is in a bad spot, the current regulatory situation is hazy at best, with various federal and local authorities imposing haphazard legislation, policy and restrictions based on perceived and largely unsubstantiated risks. As such, DJI has no clearly defined or established regulatory standards to fall back on.

Unfortunately, all it will take is one or two news worthy accidents, and DJI could find itself tied up in the courts indefinitely. Let's say a drone hits a plane and there is a loss of life. In that event, DJI would most certainly get sued by those impacted for selling an "unsafe" product. They would also likely get sued, if not charged criminally, for selling a none compliment product that puts the safety of the public at risk.

So, while the basis of these arguments may or may not be sound, DJI clearly understands the risks and is attempting to mitigate them by taking as proactive a stance as possible in being compliant with the various rules, laws and regulatory agencies. It sucks, I agree, but do they have a choice?

Pretty much every car I own can go far beyond any speed limits that come across in the US. I am not aware any law suit holding car manufacturer responsible for making a car none compliance to vehicle code.

 

[WilliamM]

I think DJI are about to commit commercial suicide.
They are determined to data mine and subscription all users.

Can you envisage a car maker selling you a brand new car then when you have had it six months saying you can now only drive it where we say and with our permission or we will software lock it to your drive.

This company DJI are far too big and cocky for their boots and they will fk it right up as number 1 in the market.
Autel are not far behind and if they can learn from this mistake and trust customers they will pull the rug here.

What DJI will do here is serve up your private data and details to people you would rather not have it.
Authorities will be able to see who flew where with one mouse click from DJI database.

I predicted this step and was lambasted and ridiculed by forum users.

Well look here and look now.

Are you going to spend thousands on new products in the hope DJI will keep allowing you to use it and dictate how you use it ?
Nope, the market has just opened up wide for the competition and I hope they teach DJI a lesson in manners and trust.

I highly doubt this: "What DJI will do here is serve up your private data and details to people you would rather not have it.
Authorities will be able to see who flew where with one mouse click from DJI database." Too much conspiracy theory to me.

 

[mark99]

They has to be a limit, we accepted spyware and them even having permission to download your phones call lists and browsing data, because hey, we just want to fly our toys right ?
But to give them retrospective rights to force you to contract with them, give them your credit card details or they will disable your property.
Hey, now come on folks, time to wake up here.

I see a "jailbrake app" or restore to first firmware app with updates off on the horizon here for DJI products, the writer of any such app will be a millionaire overnight.

 

[mark99]

I highly doubt this: "What DJI will do here is serve up your private data and details to people you would rather not have it.
Authorities will be able to see who flew where with one mouse click from DJI database." Too much conspiracy theory to me.

Why do they need it then ?