VCDS Mobile email notification this morning...

bizzle

Veteran Member
Joined
May 21, 2013
Location
Southern California
TDI
2015 GSW SEL (totaled), 2013 Touareg Executive
It is what it is, they are not going to change it to suit you.

If you like it, buy it. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It is really that simple.
It might be a bit more complicated than you stated because they designed this current product in response to vocal demand about a need and desire for it. I don't understand why people feel the need to white-knight Ross-Tech all through this thread. So far the comments have consisted of valuable feedback. Not everyone needs to like every single product a company releases.
 

tadawson

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Location
Lewisville, TX
TDI
2013 Passat TDI SEL, 2015 Passat TDI SEL
Frankly, if there was a product that was truly cross platform that did what VCDS did at even twice the price, I would buy it. I have not run Win (or Mac) personally or professionally for close to 20 years, and about the only thing I can't do is BSOD . . .

Don't confuse popularity and proprietary lockin with quality . . . . Truly good stuff doesn't need to try to lock you in . . .

And I am only having this discussion to let RT know that not everyone is happy with thier choices. That's part of my job professionally, to pass feedback uphill. The only difference is that we are not so arrogant as to tell folks ther are wrong in thier desires . . . but I guess that's the difference between high end professional development, and product more targeted at the individual.

- Tim
 
Last edited:

Uwe

Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Location
Lansdale, PA, USA
You simply implement the timing dependent stuff in the dongle, and walk away from the problem. Granted, not at the same level, but this is what the better OBD tools do - comm and timing are buffered by the dongle hardware.
Wait, this whole sub-thread started out when someone asked why we didn't make VCDS-Mobile to work with generic, cheap, off-the-shelf OBD-II wireless interfaces. It's kinda tough to implement the timing dependent stuff in someone else's generic interface, don'tcha think? ;)

Ross-Tech implemented the timing dependent stuff in the dongle, and then used HTTP as the transport, and JavaScript as the client side code.
Yeah, more-or-less, while trying to keep client-side code to a minimum.

Frankly, if there was a product that was truly cross platform that did what VCDS did at even twice the price, I would buy it.
Serious question: Why do you think "Cross-Platform" is superior to "Platform independent"?
 

tadawson

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Location
Lewisville, TX
TDI
2013 Passat TDI SEL, 2015 Passat TDI SEL
Web based interfaces historically have issues, since they are no were nearly as tightly coupled with the hardware as native, and for me, no matter what my connectivity status, cloud dependency is a deal breaker. I buy tools to work 100% of the time not *IF* I can get to some remote site. Platform native tools are also more easily dealt with on problems - I can run on any computer, and reload/replace at will, but if an embedded device such as HexNet has a software burp, bad update, etc. I'm likely SOL until it can be exchanged. Yes, cables/dongles can die, but it's far less likely than a fully SW defined device.

And I never advocated RT using someone elses hardware. My point is that handling timing issues in the dongle is common, and you could (perhaps) do it yourselves in something liie a Bluetooth implementation of HexCan or MicroCan.

"Platform Independent" far too often means, once the marketing blow is scraped off, "Bloated as hell, slow, and sub-optimal on everything". Cross platform (or platform native) makes no compromises (well, not if coded correctly) and can more fully utilize the power of the platform, which will likely be far more powerful than the external device, and will be far more flexible in what future features can be supported.

- Tim
 

romad

Top Post Dawg
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
Prescott, AZ
TDI
2005 Jetta GLS Wagon "Cranberry"
Serious question: Why do you think "Cross-Platform" is superior to "Platform independent"?
"Cross-Platform" means it runs independent of a particular platform, while "Platform Independent" means it runs across different platforms. Basically, they are synonymic to describe the same action. YMMV. :D
 

tadawson

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Location
Lewisville, TX
TDI
2013 Passat TDI SEL, 2015 Passat TDI SEL
"Cross-Platform" means it runs independent of a particular platform, while "Platform Independent" means it runs across different platforms. Basically, they are synonymic to describe the same action. YMMV. :D
False. The only commonality is some level of support for more than one platform. It does *NOT* imply that that support is in any way equal. You could also argue that HexNET is locked to a proprietary platform, in that it only *DISPLAYS* on other platforms, and runs nothing there. Platform independent implies an interpreted language available on multiple platforms, wheras cross platform implies platform specific optimized builds for each. Remote display is neither . . .

- Tim
 
Last edited:

ymz

Top Post Dawg
Joined
May 12, 2003
Location
Between Toronto & Montreal
TDI
2003 Jetta TDI Wagon, 2003 Jetta TDI Wagon
Is "cross-platform" related to the practice of combining Blue Cheese with Thousand Islands and calling it "cross-dressing"?


Yuri
 

romad

Top Post Dawg
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
Prescott, AZ
TDI
2005 Jetta GLS Wagon "Cranberry"
Is "cross-platform" related to the practice of combining Blue Cheese with Thousand Islands and calling it "cross-dressing"?


Yuri
Well, I always thought it was combining French and Russian that was "Cross-Dressing", but that is now illegal Putin's mini Soviet Union.
 

MonsterTDI09

TDIClub Enthusiast, Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Location
NoVa/NJ
TDI
2010 Jetta DSG/ up keep on 2009 Jetta DSG 2006 Jetta Pag 2 in North SEA Green
When will we have a review on Hex net mobil.
 

Uwe

Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Location
Lansdale, PA, USA
Web based interfaces historically have issues, since they are no were nearly as tightly coupled with the hardware as native, and for me, no matter what my connectivity status, cloud dependency is a deal breaker.
At the risk of repeating myself, VCDS-Mobile does most "non-invasive" diagnostics without needed a cloud connection, and of course, there's the ultimate back-up is to use the HEX-NET as an interface for the original VCDS program running on a PC.

if an embedded device such as HexNet has a software burp, bad update, etc. I'm likely SOL until it can be exchanged. Yes, cables/dongles can die, but it's far less likely than a fully SW defined device.
All of our dongle interfaces have been "fully SW defined" devices for 12 years now, and they regularly get firmware updates.

And I never advocated RT using someone elses hardware. My point is that handling timing issues in the dongle is common, and you could (perhaps) do it yourselves in something like a Bluetooth implementation of HexCan or MicroCan.
Because Bluetooth works so well on everything, right? :rolleyes:

"Platform Independent" far too often means, once the marketing blow is scraped off, "Bloated as hell, slow, and sub-optimal on everything".
I can assure you that the code in VCDS-Mobile is anything but bloated. It's amazing what you can do when you have true, native access to the all of the hardware you're running on, and you're not at the mercy of the whims of someone else's OS.

Cross platform (or platform native) makes no compromises (well, not if coded correctly) and can more fully utilize the power of the platform, which will likely be far more powerful than the external device, and will be far more flexible in what future features can be supported.
There's a huge difference between "Cross platform" and "Platform native", and you're now mixing the two.

In the end, I understand that it's impossible to please all the people all the time. What I did 14 years ago is make the product that I thought was right for the times, and that was a "Platform Native" 32-bit Windows product, because that was by far the dominant computing platform. Of course there were people that complained that it didn't run on their old, obsolete Windows 3.1 (or even DOS) laptops, and there were people that complained it didn't run on various other niche platforms. What we've done now is to make the product that I believe is right for these times, and can be used on ALL modern computing platforms. If it's not right for you, well, OK, I guess you won't buy one. I can accept that.

-Uwe-
 
Last edited:

oilhammer

Certified Volkswagen Nut & Vendor
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Location
outside St Louis, MO
TDI
There are just too many to list....
Man, the hex-net is darn fast. Once you have it bookmarked on the device you are using, it connects and works quickly. First time setup took a minute or so, but you only need do that once.

Looks like Uwe may have been the catalyst for even ME finally getting a smart phone. :p
 

tadawson

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Location
Lewisville, TX
TDI
2013 Passat TDI SEL, 2015 Passat TDI SEL
At the risk of repeating myself, VCDS-Mobile does most "non-invasive" diagnostics without needed a cloud connection, and of course, there's the ultimate back-up is to use the HEX-NET as an interface for the original VCDS program running on a PC.


All of our dongle interfaces have been "fully SW defined" devices for 12 years now, and they regularly get firmware updates.


Because Bluetooth works so well on everything, right? :rolleyes:


I can assure you that the code in VCDS-Mobile is anything but bloated. It's amazing what you can do when you have true, native access to the all of the hardware you're running on, and you're not at the mercy of the whims of someone else's OS.


There's a huge difference between "Cross platform" and "Platform native", and you're now mixing the two.

In the end, I understand that it's impossible to please all the people all the time. What I did 14 years ago is make the product that I thought was right for the times, and that was a "Platform Native" 32-bit Windows product, because that was by far the dominant computing platform. Of course there were people that complained that it didn't run on their old, obsolete Windows 3.1 (or even DOS) laptops, and there were people that complained it didn't run on various other niche platforms. What we've done now is to make the product that I believe is right for these times, and can be used on ALL modern computing platforms. If it's not right for you, well, OK, I guess you won't buy one. I can accept that.

-Uwe-
Your code is not bloated because it is clearly *NOT* platform independent - it is locked to the HexNet hardware. All you have done is decouple the display. . . Good for performance in the device, not so good for interactive display response. (And one of the reasons that the product I work with didn't consider going that way . . . . it just plain didn't work for us, we require a far more realtime gui response . . . ).

The dongles are SW defined, but more at a firmware level. I think, realistically, that the frequency of update (and corresponding risk of sw upgrade failure) will be lower than for HexNet, but that remains to be seen over time.

RE Bluetooth, I have yet to have a device fail me - headset, OBD device, or dive computer (yeah, it's an oddity . .. ). I am not a heavy user, but for me it's been 100%. I suspect that the bulk of issues, once again, are companies trying to circumvent the standards, and do proprietary things . . . . and shoddily written Windows driver code by idiots right out of school . . (but hey, they work CHEAP!!!!). The bottom line is don't blame the protocol/standard for bad implementations!

And I am working on the definitions of 'cross platform' and 'platform independent' that I see as a senior engineer with global scope in a Fortune 100 (maybe 50) technology company, so I think my definitions are 100% on point. (I choose to not name my employer, since it is not relevant, but if anyone wants to know, ask and I'll consider "outing" myself :) :) ).

Different markets, but my users will *NOT* tolerate single platform tools, so we accommodate. Your either do, or tolerate being forced to a platform due to the unique nature and high value of your product. And likely your volume is low enough to not warrant anything else based on volume. I just take exception to folks that claim technology reasons to not support alternate/superior platforms - that dog won't hunt! The issue is almost always $$$ and the lack of desire, funding, or justification to do so - not technology.

What you have done is not a bad approach, and the main thing that chaps me is the connectivity requirement. You say it can do most things standalone, or go grab the Win box (that this is designed to eliminate the need for . , ? ? ). The first case is like an adjustable wrench that can do any size but 1/2". . .seemingly unimportant until it fails you - and the second purely hypocritical, and continues to display your naive belief that everyone has a Win box . . . Since one of the main goals was to eliminate that requirement.

Oh, and pick a standards defined OS (which Windows clearly is not!) and you don't have much in the way of issues moving forward. Choose a propritary/predatory vendor who has vested interest in making everyone keep $pending for upgrades by deliberately breaking thing, and you get what you asked for. I note that in the high end IT marketplace, very few devices these days are not based on an open-source standards based OS under the covers . . . simple because it's more stable, faster, cheaper, and far, far, more supportable . . .

And does this imply that you are 'ground up' in HexNet and wrote 100% of the code in it - no embedded OS or other drivers or tools? If not, I would argue that you have the same issue, but get to control the timing - IE you users won't be upgrading without figuring out if things work or not, and then blaming you for thier bad judgement! You get to evolve the platform when *YOU* want to, which is definitely a good thing, much like selling a standalone tool, either handheld, or locked down task specific PC based.

Since you have all the VCDS intelligence decoupled from the display platform, have you considered adding a display and making a standalone device?

And lastly, thank you for taking the time to have this discussion! As you likely know, I do own your wired product, and it's already paid for itself!

- Tim
 
Last edited:

TomJD

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Location
St. Louis
TDI
2000 Jetta TDI GLS, 2015 Golf TDI
It is amazing how hostile this thread has been since the beginning. Everyone is throwing in their opinions and it really detracts from the point of the VCDS and the superior capabilities it gives us.

I'd expect some of these comments over on Vortex, but not here. That is my $0.02.
 

VeeDubTDI

Wanderluster, Traveler, TDIClub Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 2, 2000
Location
Springfield, VA
TDI
‘18 Tesla Model 3D+, ‘14 Cadillac ELR, ‘13 Fiat 500e
It is amazing how hostile this thread has been since the beginning. Everyone is throwing in their opinions and it really detracts from the point of the VCDS and the superior capabilities it gives us.

I'd expect some of these comments over on Vortex, but not here. That is my $0.02.
Agreed. I just cleaned up the most recent outburst.

Please be respectful of one another ... there is no need to attack each other over some computer software or operating systems or anything else in this thread. :rolleyes:
 

MonsterTDI09

TDIClub Enthusiast, Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Location
NoVa/NJ
TDI
2010 Jetta DSG/ up keep on 2009 Jetta DSG 2006 Jetta Pag 2 in North SEA Green
Play nice people:D.
 

Uwe

Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Location
Lansdale, PA, USA
Your code is not bloated because it is clearly *NOT* platform independent - it is locked to the HexNet hardware. All you have done is decouple the display. . . Good for performance in the device, not so good for interactive display response. (And one of the reasons that the product I work with didn't consider going that way . . . . it just plain didn't work for us, we require a far more realtime gui response . . . ).
What kind of product is that (in general terms)?

VCDS-Mobile is a scan tool, where the modules in the car are generally the limiting factor in performance and throughput. Unless of course you're using VW's own scan-tool (which Windows-based, but serious bloatware). Ours make theirs look bad that way. :D

RE Bluetooth, I have yet to have a device fail me.
Depends on what you consider "fail". Have you tried making a BT scan tool that works iPhones or iPads? Like 'em or not, they're a big (and relatively loyal) segment of the mobile device market.

as a senior engineer with global scope in a Fortune 100 (maybe 50) technology company
.... you have a totally different perspective than I do as small business owner. I think I understand yours, because I spent 10 years in such an environment. I'm not sure you understand mine, including the part that we're awfully tired of having our work stolen...

I just take exception to folks that claim technology reasons to not support alternate/superior platforms - that dog won't hunt! The issue is almost always $$$ and the lack of desire, funding, or justification to do so - not technology.
So tell me, if I gave you $1 million and told you I wanted you to develop a scan tool for brand X cars, and I wanted it to be usable on ANY mobile device, no matter what the OS, present or future, as well as any real computer made in the last 5 years, no matter what the CPU architecture, OS, etc, what tool(s) would you use? I'm just curious.

What you have done is not a bad approach
Why thank you!

and the main thing that chaps me is the connectivity requirement. You say it can do most things standalone, or go grab the Win box (that this is designed to eliminate the need for . , ? ? ).
No, grabbing a Windows box is the alternative if you have no connectivity, and you need functionality that isn't available in the product stand-alone mode. We believe that once the VCDS-Mobile is mature, the need to resort to "VCDS Classic" will be exceedingly rare.

Since you have all the VCDS intelligence decoupled from the display platform, have you considered adding a display and making a standalone device?
How does it make sense to add a display and make this a stand-alone device when everyone already has perfectly good display in their pocket? How many people would pay for that?

-Uwe-
 

romad

Top Post Dawg
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
Prescott, AZ
TDI
2005 Jetta GLS Wagon "Cranberry"
No, grabbing a Windows box is the alternative if you have no connectivity, and you need functionality that isn't available in the product stand-alone mode. We believe that once the VCDS-Mobile is mature, the need to resort to "VCDS Classic" will be exceedingly rare.

-Uwe-
Uwe, out of curiosity, could a "mature" version be able to do what "VCDS Classic" does without EITHER a Win laptop or an Internet connection? Maybe by having the entire VCDS software loaded into a small flashdrive chip?

BTW, UPS finally delivered about 3:30 PM.
 
Last edited:

owr084

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Location
Northern Virginia (NoVA)
TDI
Passat GLS, 2005, Stonehenge Gray
Uwe -

So, does this do everything my hex USB can VCDS cable can do now? In other words if I decide to sell it to one of the folks here and then buy a hex-net, am I giving up any functionality?
 

Uwe

Vendor , w/Business number
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Location
Lansdale, PA, USA
In principle, if you use it with VCDS on a PC, you shouldn't be giving up anything. But I wouldn't recommend selling your HEX-USB first. The HEX-NET is a BETA product. It may have rough edges, glitches, and things that don't work quite as well as they should, yet.

-Uwe-
 

G3TDI

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Location
CA
TDI
1994 Golf TDI http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=305898
Man, the hex-net is darn fast. Once you have it bookmarked on the device you are using, it connects and works quickly. First time setup took a minute or so, but you only need do that once.
Looks like Uwe may have been the catalyst for even ME finally getting a smart phone. :p
Have you found a way/place to check VE TDI timing with VCDS mobile? Or are you using it with a PC mainly?
 

gregfl450

New member
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Location
West Chesterfield, NH
TDI
2014 Passat SE MT, 2006 Jetta MT
Wow, I agree about it being a bit hostile! I just ordered a Hex-Net 10 user yesterday, and hope to get plenty of use from it with the three VW's in my household. Thanks Uwe for being so responsive, I'm sure I'll have some questions as I'm new to VagCom.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

DieselHuffer

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Location
North of Indy
TDI
02 Jetta Wagon GLS TDI 5-spd
Awesome idea. 10 user limit is what it is. Having priced scan tools, and not manufacturer specific ones, this is a bargain and then some.

Had I not bought my Hex-can last Summer, Id have gotten this one, the unlimited version too. I may or may not use it on more than 10 cars, but I dont like limits, and its a bargain at that.

The idea that I could use my phone or Ipad to do what I use my old IBM Thinkpad for is pretty slick. Packing it along on a long road trip would be a piece of cake!
Maybe I can talk the CFO into it down the road!
 

JSWTDI09

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
TDI
2009 JSW TDI (gone but not forgotten)
Does the TDI timing checker work when connecting to the HEX-Net from a Windows laptop over wifi?
It is just a different interface (or connection method). If you are using the Windows VCDS program and not the VCDS-Mobile program in the interface, all the work (and functionality) is in the Windows program. Therefore the short answer to your question is yes. It is the VCDS-Mobile program that runs in the Hex-Net device that (currently) has this limitation, not the connection method (wire vs. Wi-Fi).

Have Fun!

Don
 
Top