On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:27 PM, <sandy(_at_)weijax(_dot_)net> wrote:
The URL you provide says:
"ANT/ANT+ are managed by ANT Wireless, a division of Dynastream Innovations
Inc.......Dynastream was established in 1998 and became a wholly owned
subsidiary of Garmin Ltd. in December 2006. "
So, there is the most likely reason for using a new proprietary solution.
They OWN the company. Clearly, the company's software is superior to any
solution that was 'Not Invented Here'.
Sorry, but no -- that is an entirely reasonable supposition for
Garmin, but ANT/ANT+ is used by a significant number of other
companies as well -- for example, I know them from Peloton exercise
bikes, Samsung phones, etc.
A quick glance at their "directory" shows what looks like a few
hundred brands, and >600 products.
From a *very* quick glance it seems that, for simple things, it is
simpler to integrate than programming against bluetooth directly (e.g
the Nordic RNF5283 is ~$2.00, and does BLE, ANT and NFC) -- there are
a number of friendly looking libraries and demos for things like
talking to bikes, etc. ANT *feels* like it provides a higher layer /
abstraction to program against -- for example, this datasheet
https://www.thisisant.com/resources/fit2-fitness-module-datasheet/...
'tis been many years since I tried to integrate a bluetooth module
into something, but when I did, there seemed to be so much rope that
getting started was tricky...
I suspect that the root answer to Alessandro question is a combination
of 1: NIH, 2: because other devices I need to talk to already do this,
and 3: better abstractions / nicely defined and documented stack.
[ Note: This is just from a brief skim of their website - I may be
completely wrong, BT / BLE may have progressed and libraries improved,
and better, clearer profiles created, etc... ]
W
-Sandy
----- Original Message -----
From:
"Alessandro Vesely" <vesely(_at_)tana(_dot_)it>
To:
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc:
Sent:
Sat, 21 Jan 2017 21:10:57 +0100
Subject:
What is Ant's Fit Protocol?
Hi,
I annoyingly see this stuff in some GPS devices. It seems to be a
proprietary
protocol for wireless communication, also used as a file format. It is
resumed
here:
https://www.thisisant.com/company/
I'm wondering why companies use that protocol instead of an open standard.
Is
it because there is no suitable open standard or just because they hate open
standards?
I would try and dissuade open source packages, e.g. gpsbabel, to try to
support
it, since that protocol seems to be going to change unpredictably and hence
their software will never work. Opinions?
TIA for any reply
Ale
--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
---maf