My opinion about this maker and firmware

azchrisf

azchrisf

Active Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
146
Reaction score
52
Country
United States
Guys, I'm sorry to post this.
After the last reply by the maker of my post, I am upset. All I see is excuses in replies.

As much as I appreciate the forum, and the creator of the device being here, I must say that the
developer/manufacturer has no real interest in integrating community-requested features - i.e. the REAL users requests. Plain and simple - they want to "look" like they are doing something, but in reality, aren't doing much at all.

At first, I saw a beta thread of updates, and thought "wow! new features!". Yeah...not really. The developer has even admitted not being good about updates and finally made a Beta thread - because people complained. Why does it take this?

Look thru the Changelogs - at most a basic change, if anything every couple months.

When you request something, it's a series of replies of how it can't be done, "we'll think about it" or any number of blow-off replies. I understand some features cannot be done. But many others can, and I seriously feel the developer just doesn't want to do it, either because they plan to release another model with it to make money, don't know how, or just plain don't care and want to appear "concerned" so their sales keep up.

I saw a suggestions thread that never really saw anything implemented.

New firmware updates have nothing of any value to them for the most part - last one was "IQ update". Woopy? No details except something about Shadows at night, and that was AFTER someone inquired specifically what changed. I am a developer too. When you put out Firmware updates, they should detail EXACTLY what was fixed for those who want to know, or a basic "XX Fixed" for those who aren't technically inclined.

Unfortunately, what I see with this developer is something I know all too well.
You take a reference board (i.e A118/B40), play with it a bit, see how it works, and then add better hardware within how the software works, or tweak it a bit. Even if not, it doesn't change the fact you aren't doing development of the features people have asked for.

But again, because you don't know much about the software, you can't do much. If your platform is so limited, then say so. But don't keep leading people
on with "were working on this or that" or "considering it", and it never appears, even in Beta.

Sorry state of affairs with Dashcam makers. Of course, there will be a rebuttal. All makers must defend their brand and actions - but it is up to you all to make up your minds about what I have said.

The Street Guardian SG9665GC has excellent hardware/software "out of the box" - but that's all you can expect -- out of the box.
 
Last edited:
Hi @azchrisf
Firstly I am a car manufacturer as well but NOTHING to do with Street Guardian.

After reading your post I can see that you love the camera but hate the lack of updates - let me try and help you with a few things regarding this.

Adding new features is a bit like catching a venomous snake with your bare hands - it temporarily feels freaking awesome until the snake tries to kill you. Plus adding more features are incredibly expensive and not just time consuming but beyond stressful. When you have a nice reliable code like SG the last thing you want to do is mess with it uneccessarily - when the developer states, 'they'll consider it', 'they'll look into it', 'they'll try' they probably are and when it does not make it into the code it's probably because that feature messes up another aspect - good firmware testing takes a LONG time, not just a week or two, but a month or two. Every option, every setting, every environment the camera needs to be tested in, because trust me, when you release the firmware to the public they'll find a bug.

Each feature has to be added with regards to the rest of the code and the SDK - now as SG grows their influence hopefully will slowly grow with the SoC manufacturer and as such can hopefully get a bit more leeway on the SDK. However, this does not dismiss the fact that some features are simply not compatible with each other - such as motion detection and parking mode. Whilst yes they are compatible (kind of) the amount of problems it will throw up for the customer service plus the stability issues it will bring are just simply not worth it. The knock on bugs, the customer confusion, the implementation, all have to be counted and costed for. In an ideal world the developer would release all the features everyone wanted, everyone would understand, there would be no bugs, and boom - he gets incredibly rich. Sadly the real world isn't that at all.

The developer also has his brand to think about - his brand is built on 'IQ' and reliability one of the reasons people love it so much. So imagine all the features people want implemented, imagine the chaos that is going to ensue.

You take issue with his changelog but I'm really not sure why, the developer can release any changelog he wants to, if he really wants to he could release a changelog saying: I LIKE PINK SHEEP which yes, whilst bizarre, he could. A changelog is good practice and cursory but not 'the law'. Furthermore, how detailed a changelog you have no right to whine about. Why does he have to be specific?* Why does he have to be as detailed as you want him to be? Am i wrong but is the shadow alteration an IQ update? You also have to remember that a lot of companies will be watching his brand - I know at least one that follows it a bit 'tooo closely' if you know what I mean, and as such any alteration and modification he puts out will instantly cascade through the rip off world and the edge he has created for himself rapidly disappears. So his vagueness may be on purpose and is a decision I wholeheartedly support.

Lastly, you appear to have this sense of greivance that the developer has not updated the camera with new features - whilst trust I have never bought an SG, I have seen plenty of packaging and their websites and not at one point does it state that you are buying a product that will be constantly updated with new features? Yes a product in my eyes should be updated but as far as I am aware it is - he released an IQ update for what his product is known for. This links nicely back to the 'he is probably working on it point' I made earlier, the manufacturer is under no obligation to share every detail every thing he working on, and feature he is adding, whilst sometimes in forums users get this air of arrogance around them that because they have close contact with the manufacturer they should be kept up-to-date with exactly what is going on, the user has no such grounds for such demands.

Forum participation is fantastic by manufacturers but at the end of the day their job is to look after their business and the decisions they make reflect this - and whilst your retort may be 'well if he doesn't look after us on the forum....etc etc etc' this unfortunately is not true as the reality is about 95% of customers don't belong to DCT.

Anyway that's just my two cents from a manufacturers perspective - just to state I do things differently from the SG developer but that doesn't mean I'm right and he's wrong or visa-versa, it just means we both have slightly different styles.

Kind regards,

Dan

*Apple, MicroSoft, GoPro, Sony etc have all release firmware updates in the past for their products that literally just say 'minor modifications' 'various bug fixes'
 
I am not technically minded. I wanted a camera that is simple to use gives good clear night and day footage. I want a camera that is small neat and easy to fit . I want good back up if I have problems . I want a set and forget camera. I want a camera with a filter that fits easily onto the camera so that I have the choice to use or not. I have all this and more with the SG9665GC. I am sure I am just one of the many very satisfied owners who is happy with what came out of the box.. Please don't make the camera more complicated, after all the main thing is that it records any incident that occurs on the road and surely that is what a dash cam is for. From past experience I have had cameras where the manufacturers are not interested once they have the money, not the case here. As far as I am concerned if a camera works well the less firmware the better.
 
As others have said, my experience with the SG9665GC has been nothing but good. If I've had a question or concern, or anything else, I can start a conversation on here and I generally have a reply within MINUTES. This is my first dash cam, but I chose to pass up cams with more features (lane departure warning beeps, ect) when I saw videos of this camera and compared them to everything else. First and foremost, a dash cam needs to record what's in front of it, and this one does that extremely well.
 
See Jokiin, doesn't matter what you do, even give them away for free..... and there'll still be whining pussies. :D
 
You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time....
 
azchrisf,

I can agree with only one sentence in your post:

"The Street Guardian SG9665GC has excellent hardware/software "out of the box" - but that's all you can expect -- out of the box."

The rest is one long whine.

Every manufacturer of a software-controlled device has to balance capability with desirability, utility, and cost when making the decision to roll out added functionality. I expect bugs to be squashed; any other functionality upgrades are appreciated, but don't justify posting dissatisfaction when your suggestions don't pan out. If you need a hug, join a cuddle party.

This camera does exactly what it's advertised to do, and it does it very well. The exceptional support (both timely and informative) from the vendor via this forum and their website is the gold standard by which I measure all dashcam vendors and manufacturer's against. I have yet to see anyone else that bears watching that comes close to this level of support.

This is a DVR --not an app-enhanced iPhone. Looking thorough your previous posts, I see a pattern:

"One last suggestion:

Integrate G-Sensor data while driving into the Video's data stream like speed.
Why? Sometimes it can show a lead-foot (US term for someone who likes to be heavy on the gas pedal) that they need to let up a little...also if they are turning too hard, etc."

Are you kidding? You already have a (larger) speedometer. Will taking your eyes off the road to squint at a speed reading on a 1.5" screen make you a better (or safer) driver?

One of the main reasons I installed a dashcam is to record people who can't control their "lead feet" and end up causing accidents, --just in case one of them decides to include me. The rest, I leave up to the police to catch, "educate" and fine.

Do you really expect a g-meter to inform and educate you when you're "turning too hard, etc?"

Try this for a training aid: Watch your recorded video, if it gets really blurry and you end up in the wrong lane or against a tree: YOU"RE TURNING TOO HARD!

G-force is only one factor to consider when measuring cornering agility. Driving skill, the chassis, engine, and braking dynamics of the vehicle, including prevailing road conditions are also important. It's a DVR, --not a nannycam.

If you have the time to potentially review data to log g-forces, surely you can make the time to attend driving school. I'm not trying to be condescending (--that means talking down to you.)

A realistic, useful suggestion or post is sure to generate lots of "Likes." If your suggestion to add g-meter functionality knocked it out of the park with overwhelming user community support, it might be worth considering. The vendor gave you a PC answer without offending your sensibilities - or so I thought, until I read the above post which compelled me to respond.

Slamming the vendor for not implementing your suggestions or conforming their business model to your version of reality won't generate any sympathy or groundswell of support for your weak opinion, that starts with, "Guys, I'm sorry to post this . . . "

If you truly believe in your opinion, there's no reason to apologize before you express it --unless your know deep down that you don't.
 
Last edited:
CCClarke said:
If your suggestion to add g-meter functionality knocked it out of the park with overwhelming user community support, it might be worth considering. The vendor gave you a PC answer without offending your sensibilities .
Click to expand...

actually I wasn't making any judgement about whether it would be a good feature or not so my answer wasn't about trying to be politically correct, it's something that is impossible to implement on our hardware as there is no data output from the G-Sensor to work with, there's some other complexities to get over as well but those aside without the data there is nothing to show, I'm always open to suggestions and quite a lot of things we've done over the years have been a direct result of end user suggestions , even if something is not possible here doesn't mean it couldn't happen on a later product, I don't want to stifle ideas or discussion about features
 
I have to take exception to just about everything in your post except for the very last sentence, and even the second half of that sentence is wrong. I've owned the SG9665GC (2 of them actually) since it was first released and in that time there have been a number of F/W upgrades that have addressed both 'bugs' and 'improvements'. In addition the hardware is now different, and I assume improved, to the point where firmware development has to be done in parallel to support the various hardware platforms and is ongoing. I don't know what kind of developer you are (I was for 30+ years) but I would suspect it has nothing to do with dealing with limitations of hardware or you would not be making some of the statements you did.

If you're truly dissatisfied with how SG deals with these matters I suggest you buy some other manufacturer's product and make your 'product improvement suggestions' known to them. With the possible exception of @JooVuu I doubt you would even get a response.
 
jokiin said:
actually I wasn't making any judgement about whether it would be a good feature or not so my answer wasn't about trying to be politically correct, it's something that is impossible to implement on our hardware as there is no data output from the G-Sensor to work with, there's some other complexities to get over as well but those aside without the data there is nothing to show, I'm always open to suggestions and quite a lot of things we've done over the years have been a direct result of end user suggestions , even if something is not possible here doesn't mean it couldn't happen on a later product, I don't want to stifle ideas or discussion about features
Click to expand...

@jokiin,

I understand completely and agree with your point. You expressed it with a clear and valid explanation that didn't warrant a negative reaction toward the firmware or the support team. Of course you listen to customer feedback; that's just one way good products become even better.
 
azchrisf said:
Guys, I'm sorry to post this.
Click to expand...
well everyone is entitled to their own opinion, its an open forum, we cant deny anyone that opportunity.
CDNinHH said:
You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time....
Click to expand...
how true this is. I was going to post this as well but you beat me.
 
What are you expecting a dashcam to do?

Adding too many bells and whistles just causes issues as you have to keep on top of memory leaks and things that can occur.

It's a balance and stability is the most important aspect of these which the Street Guardian's are great at (as well as many other things).
 
reverend said:
What are you expecting a dashcam to do?

Adding too many bells and whistles just causes issues as you have to keep on top of memory leaks and things that can occur.

It's a balance and stability is the most important aspect of these which the Street Guardian's are great at (as well as many other things).
Click to expand...

KISS :)
 
Exactly right mate :)
 
Keep it simple, stupid :)

A saying we use lots at work ;)

For the OP I just saw your post in another thread - Lukas do something around driving style via an OBD connector which only works with a very limited subset of cars - you'd be losing image quality to gain features like that though.
 
Wait...... my disdain for fanbois forces me to have a foot on both sides of the fence and support the whinging OP. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top