It’s an interesting debate, and I think it highlights a fundamental tension between the flexibility of open ecosystems like PhotonVision and the convenience and support often provided by closed systems like Limelight.
If CTRE, REV, or another vendor were to win a bid for similar technology, I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to open everything up, as most vendors (even those we rely on heavily in FRC) keep certain elements of their systems proprietary. For instance, CTRE’s Phoenix ecosystem and REV’s SparkMAX ecosystem have proprietary components while still offering robust APIs and integration. Even National Instruments’ tools like the Driver Station have significant proprietary elements, yet they’re integral to our competition experience.
That said, it’s also true that teams today are rarely restricted from creating or replacing solutions as they see fit. Limelight itself allows teams to flash their own operating system onto the hardware, so those wanting a custom vision process can pursue it without being locked out.
Ultimately, it seems like the focus should be on ensuring the tools available, whether open or closed, empower teams to achieve their goals. Both ecosystems have their merits. Open-source solutions like PhotonVision can foster collaboration and innovation among teams, while proprietary tools often provide polished, team-ready solutions with vendor support. The good news is that the FIRST ecosystem continues to offer a spectrum of choices, so teams can opt for the tools that best meet their needs.
Things are relatively on topic in the main thread, so let’s keep the discussion going over there.
3 Likes