Reverse Engineering discussed

I see this expression used here on this forum.

[www.merriam-webster.com]

And yes I'm sure it is done at times.

But I don't think we should assume just because a detector manufacturer tests brand x model y made by another manufacturer --- that their intentions are to reverse engineer

I think many times doing such testing is just to see the strengths and weakness of such a detector

To maybe set goals -- lay down markers so they have a better idea of where they want their engineering to lead them.

All this associated with future increased performance of a manufacturer's past designed and built detectors.

Always remember Tesoro selling a used Whites XLT that was bought and reviewed by them so imagine quite common practice used to examine other manufactures products.

There's lots of reasons for doing it, it's a common industrial practice. You can learn from it.
It's useful to help sort out 'marketing talk' from real facts.
Also, you can check to see if there's any Patent infringements, for example. This is particularly troublesome nowadays, as many 'techiques' are implemented in software/firmware, and reverse-engineering such code is difficult and expensive.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2016 04:44PM by Pimento.

I have always been interested in engineering.

Starting in the 6 th grade-- I had many teachers tell me they thought I should pursue a career in engineering or computer programming.

And when I was in the Air Force-- again many officers, both junior and senior in grade, many with engineering degrees themselves, kept trying to get me to commit myself to an educational degree in engineering.

Well it never happened.

You know what the say about hindsight??

20/20

I feel I made a mistake by not persuing.

Maybe if I would have-- I indeed could have made a more significant impact on society as a whole.

But then again, for now--- I'll settle for having discussions on this great forum.

There are many wise ones here, educated too.

Gives me a sense of belonging.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2016 05:10PM by tnsharpshooter.

Im sure their aware of whats out there and have a look, theyd be naive not to. But the comments about first texas shaking in their boots every time a new machine rolls out of an eastern block country is ridiculous. Read whats out there from the actual engineers, they just dont think like that. They have budget constraints and bean counters to answer to in a field thats been beat to death (VLF anyway). Progress inches along as processors get better, batteries advance, modern DD coils get tighter and machines can communicate info in new ways. But we really have nearly stalled out. Vlfs could hit and ID a copper penny at 11" on turf in the 90's, dont think theres a production machine that can do better now. Individual projects take them so long to develop and work through a littany of obstacles, paticularly all new platforms. Thats what their time is consumed with.

When I think of reverse engineering I think China. Sometimes they do good copies but usually it is junk and if nothing else unethical and illegal. When I see detectors coming from China from a company that doesn't seem to staff experienced detector engineers I have to wonder how they produced their machines. If a given design is stolen and reverse engineered I wonder how far off the duplicate has to be from the original to declare it as original and not copied.

Tns said- Starting in the 6 th grade-- I had many teachers tell me they thought I should pursue a career in engineering or computer programming.

Computers?....they didn't even have telephones when you were in the 6th grade, lol......................kidding aside....reading your posts, I believe you could have been a contender in the engineering biz.
I am one who thinks I would have been better at a different occupation/career,... oh well.

ozzie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tns said- Starting in the 6 th grade-- I had many
> teachers tell me they thought I should pursue a
> career in engineering or computer programming.
>
> Computers?....they didn't even have telephones
> when you were in the 6th grade,
> lol......................kidding aside....reading
> your posts, I believe you could have been a
> contender in the engineering biz.
> I am one who thinks I would have been better at a
> different occupation/career,... oh well.

Well we did have telephones in my neck of the woods back then.
[www.scientificamerican.com]

Nokta Velox = XP Gold Maxx Power
Nokta Fors Core = Teknetics T2/Fisher F75
Makro Racer = Teknetics T2/Fisher F75
are these detectors reversed engineered ? software wise ? the Veolx especially seems to be a clone of the XP GMP.

I've seen internal pics of the Racer (circuit boards), it doesn't look at all like a T2/F75. But you've got to admit the FT machines' mechanical arrangement must have left an impression on them.
I'm not sure what the Fors is like, looks like a ML Relic Hawk....

Off-topic: I have a mild yearning to try and make a ridiculously-long 'tin can telephone', I think 1000 feet (300 metres) is achievable.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2016 10:23PM by Pimento.

Pimento Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've seen internal pics of the Racer (circuit
> boards), it doesn't look at all like a T2/F75. But
> you've got to admit the FT machines' mechanical
> arrangement must have left an impression on them.
> I'm not sure what the Fors is like, looks like a
> ML Relic Hawk....
>
> Off-topic: I have a mild yearning to try and make
> a ridiculously-long 'tin can telephone', I think
> 1000 feet (300 metres) is achievable.

While the circuit boards may be different its the software on the chips that seems to be the same as or very similar to the GMP/T2/F75 the Nokta Fors Core target ID numbers are exactly the same as T2 ones on like for like targets and the audio is similar on the Nokta Velox the sounds are 100% identical to the XP GMP.

It's funny that they must be aware of what is out there and yet are they going to top it copy it..A lot of the US companies seem to be waiting but for what?

LowBoy

TAKE A LITTLE TIME KICKBACK AND WATCH SOME OF MY DETECTING VIDEO'S BELOW ON YouTube

[www.youtube.com]

If you don’t dig it, then how are you going to know what you’re missing!
How can you have your pudding if you don’t eat your meat!

I suppose if you put in the effort, you could make a machine produce the 'sound of a T2', without actually directly copying 'how' Teknetics achieved the sound.
They have completely different microprocessors in them, which is just one reason why it's improbable there's any direct copying.
The Racer has a Microchip PIC 24F..xxx processor, the FT machines have a Texas Instruments part.