[Nut-upsdev] 答复: I love NUT

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at mittelstaedt.us
Thu Jun 11 18:12:40 UTC 2015

You can buy milk with cream on top.  You buy "whole" milk, they sell it 
in the grocery store.  (at least around here they do)  Let it stand in
your refrigerator for a day or so and you get the cream.

But while milk is a victim of the "health nut crowd" who have carried
on a tirade against anything with fat in it for so long that normal
people nowadays don't even know how milk is supposed to taste and spit
out the whole milk if served it.  That's why it occupies a corner of the
grocery store refrigerator and the tasteless milk occupies a whole shelf.

NUT cannot speak the APC new protocol even though apcupsd now has 
support for it and NUT could take that open source support if it wanted.


On 6/11/2015 2:55 AM, Carsten Burkhardt wrote:
> Many Thanks for your explanation, Ted!
> All the necessaries to produce (and live from) new UPS-Equippment I
> understand. Because of this I decided years ago to sell MGE-UPS. MGE did
> have the greatness to pay Arnaud Quette to improve the Metasoftware NUT.
> So we have one Software for brand new models and over 20years old IT
> dinosaur. We earn money with replacement of accumulators and save in
> this way our planet. For instance with NUT it is possible to use a APC
> Smart-UPS with the old protocol. Linux brings the tools to adopt serial/
> USB/ Network. With vendors software or Windows it would be impossible. A
> new model with greatness and Power-HID is
> http://www.online-usv.de/de/produkte/ze/intro.php
> Now to your example, a gallon of milk hasn't changed much over the last
> 30 years. You have seen anymore milk with cream on top? This product is
> rarely. You can buy "Milk" without taste (no fat), without water
> (powder) or without cow (soy). The human being creative.
> Am 28.04.2015 um 21:19 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt:
>> Carsten,
>> This is a common issue in technology when you have complex products
>> that the majority of consumers of those products do not understand how
>> they operate.
>> If most UPS customers understood the importance of standardization they
>> would have refused to purchase non-standard UPSes and all UPSes would
>> have long ago standardized on a single management protocol.
>> The normal thing is that product manufacturers do not want standard
>> commodity products. They want custom, specialized products. That
>> creates customer lock-in.
>> With simple products - like a toaster or a gallon of milk - the consumer
>> thoroughly understands what they are buying - and most of them will not
>> buy a product that significantly differs from the standard.
>> They do not want to buy a toaster that only toasts 1 bakery's bread.
>> With complex technical products consumers are easily fooled, and all the
>> manufacturers need to do is create the appearance of similarity and
>> consumers think they have a choice when in reality they don't.
>> When you buy a car for example and 3 years later it needs a new
>> alternator - you will rapidly find that there's no standardization on
>> alternators, so you will end up paying a very large amount of money
>> for a replacement. that benefits the manufacturer, not you. No car
>> consumers are demanding that cars use standardized parts like
>> alternators.
>> In many markets the government gets involved and enforces some
>> standardization, that's why for example most cars are the same width
>> in size, have turn signals, and headlights. But, that standardization
>> does not generally help the consumer.
>> The other issue is refinements of products cost a lot of money to
>> develop. So manufacturers have to pay for them by higher prices, and a
>> commodity market cannot support prices high enough to pay for
>> innovation. That's why, for example, a gallon of milk hasn't changed
>> much over the last 30 years.
>> And, in this vein, refinements cannot be used/stolen by competitors
>> until the cost to develop them has been paid for. Thus the need for
>> patents, and you cannot patent something that has prior art (well you
>> can but you won't be able to defend it)
>> UPSes are complex technical products that are not understood by most
>> people who buy them. Consumers may demand the lowest price on a UPS
>> but the only market where there is any significant competition in UPSes
>> is the non-managed UPS market, the so-called "desktop" UPSes that are
>> 500va or less with runtimes of less than 5 minutes, fully loaded. With
>> more expensive UPSes, other factors than marketing against a competitor
>> are more important.
>> Some of these factors are:
>> Protocols like APC's UPSLink predate USB Power-HID
>> USB Power-HID also does not carry all datapoints that a UPS maker may
>> want to make available
>> Older mainframes did not have USB only Serial. A modern UPS maker may
>> want to produce new UPSes that work with older equipment.
>> There is no public standards-body standard for UPS data. Only a
>> de-facto standard.
>> Backwards compatibility is huge - people run older software quite a lot
>> in industry. New devices need to be compatible with older software,
>> this is a barrier to dropping support for older/superseded protocols.
>> not everything protected by a UPS is a PC. An industrial machine like
>> a 3D printer may only use a set of contacts to signal a trigger of
>> a shutdown sequence.
>> UPSes also depreciate an enormous amount. You can easily find 3-4 year
>> old UPSes on the secondary market selling for very cheap, and they
>> still work fine since power standards have not changed. That tends to
>> create large market inertia to changing protocols.
>> Ted
>> On 4/28/2015 6:17 AM, Carsten Burkhardt wrote:
>>> Dear Developer and Tester,
>>> I love NUT, because of the great interoperability. So I have the choice
>>> and freedom on the operating system or the device. Many thanks on all
>>> developers and the manufacturer, they support with informations,
>>> material, wages and so on.
>>> Dear Hyouko,
>>> I am interested in to know, why every manufacturer use their own
>>> protocol.
>>> The USB Power Device protocol is already 20 years introduced. In my
>>> opinion a unique protocol is easier to handle. Just to use one protocol
>>> makes the soft- and hardware more efficient, reliable, sustained… What
>>> is your opinion or you know the reason why everybody makes their own?
>>> http://www.networkupstools.org/protocols/powercom/Software_USB_communication_controller_SKP_series.doc
>>> Sincerely Carsten
>>> Am 23.04.2015 um 02:57 schrieb κΰ(bluefish_wei):
>>>> Dear Hyouko,
>>>> Thank you very much !
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Bluefish
>>>> -----邮件原件-----
>>>> 发件人: hyouko at gmail.com [mailto:hyouko at gmail.com]
>>>> 发送时间: 2015年4月23日 7:25
>>>> 收件人: 魏伟(bluefish_wei)
>>>> 抄送: nut-upsdev at lists.alioth.debian.org
>>>> 主题: Re: [Nut-upsdev] How to upload new ups driver to NUT
>>>> 2015-04-21 8:23 GMT+02:00 魏伟(bluefish_wei)
>>>> <bluefish_wei at voltronicpower.com.cn>:
>>>>> Can anyone tell me how to upload new ups driver to NUT website ?
>>>> You can either open a pull request/create a new issue on GitHub [1] or
>>>> send a gzipped patch to this list.
>>>> A quick read of the developer guide [2] should make it easier to get
>>>> the code merged faster and to avoid possible problems.
>>>> Also, documenting the protocol behind your driver [3] goes a long way
>>>> in making it easier for others to support it and effectively extends
>>>> its life.
>>>> As we are here, since you appear to be working for Voltronic Power,
>>>> I'd like to take the chance to ask if it's possible for you to release
>>>> (and give us permission to redistribuite) the protocols adopted by
>>>> your various devices (present and past): we have already done some
>>>> work [4] and support for P15/P16/P30/P34/P35/P36 protocols is under
>>>> way, too.. but we still lack some information and, obviously, knowing
>>>> the protocols in full directly from the manufacturer would be a lot
>>>> better (not to mention the huge amount of time I would save in reverse
>>>> engineering...).
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen
> Carsten Burkhardt
> _______________________________________________
> Nut-upsdev mailing list
> Nut-upsdev at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev

More information about the Nut-upsdev mailing list