While setting way points, it appears I have a limit on distance, about 1500+ feet. Is this a configurable setting?
W
W
FPV Booster App DOUBLE Vision+ FPV Range
- Thread starter PVFlyer
- Start date
Such a shame mr.Pvflyer!!!
DCI I congratulate you on both your intelligence and guts to come on a thread like this with so many users who were so fond of the FPV booster app.
Although it DOES do something (increases wifi power), the point is he lied about the "intelligent" algorythm.
Personnnally, it is the selling price is what I am angry with. It should have cost no more than 0.99cents period!
DCI, I believe YOU should write an app with the wifi signal strength boosted along with the "intelligent" algorythm discussed. YOU should charge 10bucks and I'm sure we will all support you.
DCI I congratulate you on both your intelligence and guts to come on a thread like this with so many users who were so fond of the FPV booster app.
Although it DOES do something (increases wifi power), the point is he lied about the "intelligent" algorythm.
Personnnally, it is the selling price is what I am angry with. It should have cost no more than 0.99cents period!
DCI, I believe YOU should write an app with the wifi signal strength boosted along with the "intelligent" algorythm discussed. YOU should charge 10bucks and I'm sure we will all support you.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2014
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 0
victor said:
Victor, You're angry about the selling price and only want to spend 99 cents, but then you tell DCI to sell his version for 10 bucks and you'll buy it. You're talking out of both sides. Be careful DCI, some people you just can't trust. I don't agree with how PVFlyer marketed his product as well, but look at all the praise he got from some of these people and now they want to trash him. Come on people be a little more civil!
I think your right sir. The mob is turningNCAAwrestling said:
For anyone that's wants a one click solution that actually verifiably increases fpv range then it works.
The anger is over false claims of superiority over the other 'clones'. Had the arguments about what others were doing not got so nasty then maybe people would have been kinder.
I do not condone the lies told but at the end of the day the product works. Expensive in my eyes for what it is and I think the costs were justified in a real way by the claims of how difficult this was to achieve.
Now there is proof that it wasn't really that hard, the original info on how to gain entry to the systems is really the only hard work carried out here, people feel cheated. But... Don't uninstall and stamp your feet if its working. You can learn a lesson and still enjoy your enhanced range.
I'm actually more sceptical about the non plus version in terms of real benefit. It went from beta to live sale very quickly when this argument started and in my opinion there is very little evidence either way on that one that its giving real benefit. Tests read as being a very mixed bag.
I was waiting for the none plus version for a long time and accepting it was much harder, and from early tests that did seem to be the case as it appeared to make little difference. Some reports now seem to show it works but there is just not enough info to know for sure.
RE700 now seems a more expensive but reliable way to go for me. 3,700ft with good quality antennas so couple those with RE700 and at least I'll know what I'm getting.
My two cents.
NCAAwrestling said:
NCAAwrestling, I believe Victor's points were: 1) where does PVFlyer get off charging what he did for such a simple app, and 2) if DCI can write an app that does what PVFlyer'd does AND incorporate the additional function, then 10 bucks seems reasonable.
I think a number of readers and posters are annoyed that PVFlyer has claimed things about his app and then diappears into the ether when a rational and calm discussion ensues.
NCAAwrestling said:
No sir! I said I'd pay 10bucks IF it had the intelligent algorythm discussed! NOT for just the simple boost (which is apparently only a couple of coding lines)!
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2014
- Messages
- 31
- Reaction score
- 0
I believe I've waited long enough. Claiming that "Interference Control Algorithm" is "some additional tweaks", being a step towards telling all the truth about the program, still does not count as apologies, so I have to keep my word.
http://www.filedropper.com/boosters
In the linked file you will find decompiled (human-readable) phone parts, disassembled (not so human-readable, but well commented) phantom-side and repeater-side parts for both V+ and V boosters and a small document describing all the code.
If any of you decide to use this knowledge to create free (or even better -- free and ad-free) one-touch app -- I think it will be a right thing to do.
http://www.filedropper.com/boosters
In the linked file you will find decompiled (human-readable) phone parts, disassembled (not so human-readable, but well commented) phantom-side and repeater-side parts for both V+ and V boosters and a small document describing all the code.
If any of you decide to use this knowledge to create free (or even better -- free and ad-free) one-touch app -- I think it will be a right thing to do.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2014
- Messages
- 172
- Reaction score
- 1
Thanks alot dci both for opening our eyes and in advance for anything your choose to share with the community.
Don't really care about the negative comments on this app or it's author. I got 3.3 kilometers today. Something I was never able to do before, without using this app. Haters will hate.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2014
- Messages
- 172
- Reaction score
- 1
aristosv said:
Just like you I'm overall happy with the app but without using a strong word like 'hate' I don't have high thoughts about people who lie to get other's money...simple as that.
I conveyed most of the accusation messages to the developer who is currently out of town for business trip. Per his preliminary feedback, DCI probably disassembled the shell scripts/commands. Other coding does NOT go through shell script.
DCI further claimed the same accusation to P2V Booster (non-Plus). He disassembled 3 lines of shell scripts/commands, BUT definitely missed the majority part of coding WITHOUT going through shell script. I’m not the developer, I don’t know which part of coding missed.
Test1: I flew complete stock P2V and RE500 repeater without booster nor DCI scripts as a reference. It reached 225m and showed Phantom Connection Broken.
Test2 (start from 3:30): I pulled back P2V and ran the DCI disassembled scripts in the air. I flew again along the same path. It reached 190m and showed Phantom Connection Broken.
Test3 (start from 5:45): I pulled back P2V within 100m and BOOST it with P2V booster app in the air. I flew again along the same path all the way to 400m with smooth FPV. I can fly farther, but that’s not the point. It’s good enough for the test as a proof.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFkV18ptosE[/youtube]
Obviously, those 3 lines of shell scripts alone had no effect at all (or even worse in this test case) to boost FPV range. This simply implies DCI disassembled scripts is WRONG or at least INCOMPLETE, which is probably a small part of the booster coding. I can guarantee such 3 lines of script is unable to boost 100% FPV range on P2V/RE500.
I think any of P2V pilot can easily test/prove this by running such 3 lines script on RE500 repeater as I did in the field test. I don’t believe running such 3 lines script can boost any significant FPV range. Again, I’m not the developer. That’s all I can do to test and prove at my best knowledge though my knowledge may be insufficient or something I’m incapable to explain, but I'm not lying.
I’m still **** sick thus unable to post in the next several days. I leave it to you guys to test and judge yourselves, what is right or wrong, who is discrediting.
DCI further claimed the same accusation to P2V Booster (non-Plus). He disassembled 3 lines of shell scripts/commands, BUT definitely missed the majority part of coding WITHOUT going through shell script. I’m not the developer, I don’t know which part of coding missed.
However, I’m forced to PROVE such accusation WRONG though I’m sick for several days. I decided to do a simple field test with DCI scripts and P2V booster at 640x480 15fps and ~60m altitude. I recorded a video of my Nexus 7 screen as a proof to share with you all.dci said:Update on the booster for vision (non-plus):
- App shares a lot of code with v+ and uses the very same concept, but now it also changes tx power on the repeater.
- Phantom-side binary is now called 'fpvmonitor'. It's the same 'fpvbooster' from v+, it has the same size and checksum, but now its second (tx power) invocation parameter is set to 20 in the phone-side app.
- Repeater-side binary is called 'fpvbooster'. It's a brand new binary that just executes a batch of console commands and exits. That's all. Commands are also encrypted with the same lame code shift, they are:
Code:iw reg set BO iw phy phy0 set txpower fixed 2000 iw phy phy0 set distance 1000
Test1: I flew complete stock P2V and RE500 repeater without booster nor DCI scripts as a reference. It reached 225m and showed Phantom Connection Broken.
Test2 (start from 3:30): I pulled back P2V and ran the DCI disassembled scripts in the air. I flew again along the same path. It reached 190m and showed Phantom Connection Broken.
Test3 (start from 5:45): I pulled back P2V within 100m and BOOST it with P2V booster app in the air. I flew again along the same path all the way to 400m with smooth FPV. I can fly farther, but that’s not the point. It’s good enough for the test as a proof.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFkV18ptosE[/youtube]
Obviously, those 3 lines of shell scripts alone had no effect at all (or even worse in this test case) to boost FPV range. This simply implies DCI disassembled scripts is WRONG or at least INCOMPLETE, which is probably a small part of the booster coding. I can guarantee such 3 lines of script is unable to boost 100% FPV range on P2V/RE500.
I think any of P2V pilot can easily test/prove this by running such 3 lines script on RE500 repeater as I did in the field test. I don’t believe running such 3 lines script can boost any significant FPV range. Again, I’m not the developer. That’s all I can do to test and prove at my best knowledge though my knowledge may be insufficient or something I’m incapable to explain, but I'm not lying.
I’m still **** sick thus unable to post in the next several days. I leave it to you guys to test and judge yourselves, what is right or wrong, who is discrediting.
Similar threads
