April 9, 2016 at 4:10 pm #3046Omar StradellaKeymaster
Consumer Physics announced the new SCiO (V1.1) via email. Why they didn’t announce it in this forum? I don’t know. Anyway, as expected the new SCiO is more stable and accurate (especially at the upper end of the spectrum) and, apparently, temperature compensated too which would obviously improve reproducibility. Models created with V1.0 can be used on V1.1 but not viceversa. You can’t combine that from both versions into one model either. Now, in the email they say that “the only users who have 1.0 units are our Developers and Researchers communities. All regular users will receive SCiO 1.1 unit“. Furthermore, developers and researchers are expected to purchase the new version at the full price. So our options as developers and researchers are:
- to keep using the 1.0 version creating models for an obsolete sensor that are not as good as they can be with the prospect that some developers will purchase the 1.1 version and create better models than ours
- to pay full price for the new model
In my opinion, this is completely unacceptable. Swapping the old for the new at no cost would be the right thing to do or, at the very least, offer the new one as a very significant discount. Between this and the lack of implementation of long ago requested features in SCiO LAB, I’m losing confidence in Consumer Physics. Very disappointing !!!April 10, 2016 at 12:54 am #3047
Omar: – May I suggest that you post an email to CP.
I did.April 18, 2016 at 7:26 am #3108Alexandros LibParticipant
I totally agree with Omar. It is unacceptable to pay it at full price. I will accept if I have to pay a small commission and exchange it with the new one but this will not stop me from be disappointed with Consumer Physics.April 19, 2016 at 6:56 pm #email@example.comParticipant
I have to 100% agree with Omar,
I know going in early with a new product is always a risk but I didn’t expect my device to be obsolete before the majority of devices shipped.
I am pleased that the device overall has been improved (it needed it) but I’m not pleased with the current situation.
I would hope it would be just an oversight rather than a thought through deliberate decision to disadvantage the early adopters.
Is there an official response from Scio on this?
PaulApril 20, 2016 at 4:19 pm #3115
Paul, I suggest that you talk to CP about it directly.
The Forum is fine for us to exchange ideas, but not so good for getting issues resolved.May 3, 2016 at 12:09 am #firstname.lastname@example.orgParticipant
I agree rejsharp. I contacted CP directly as well.May 3, 2016 at 5:12 am #3146
I have always found CP to be helpful.May 4, 2016 at 1:04 pm #3150
We would like to clarify a few points that seem to have been misunderstood:
We have gone through significant engineering efforts to provide full backwards compatibility with the release of SCiO 1.1. This means that any model built with SCiO 1.0 is applicable to users of SCiO 1.1, with the same level of accuracy. In other words: if you built a successful model with your SCiO 1.0 devkit, users of SCiO 1.1 will be able to use it. Your Devkit is not obsolete and can you continue to use it to build models which will serve the whole community of SCiO users: both 1.0 and 1.1.
However, please note that only one version of SCiO can be used in a single collection when creating a model and collecting data – either 1.0 or 1.1.
We are committed to continually improving our products, and our customers expect us to continue innovating and delivering better products over time.
As we continue innovating, backward compatibility is very important to us. We will naturally strive to continue releasing improved versions of the SCiO, but as we do this we will continue to ensure that work already done by our developer community remains effective for newer models of the product.
The Consumer Physics TeamMay 4, 2016 at 8:26 pm #3151worldburgerParticipant
@Ayelet (or anyone at CP): how can you tell the difference between the v1.1 and 1.0 hardware revisions? Is there a different number? Different color of the housing? Part numbers? Who got 1.0 Hardware? Was it only devs?May 5, 2016 at 8:40 am #3158
The two versions differ by some of the hardware components. You can tell the difference by sight – 1.0 device has a temperature sensor in the optical head whereas 1.1 device has only one sensor, the illumination source.
The external temperature sensor does not perform well enough to use it for model creation – therefore it has been removed.
We have shipped SCiO v1.0 to developers. Currently, we only ship v1.1 devices.
The Consumer Physics TeamMay 5, 2016 at 4:39 pm #3165worldburgerParticipant
Thanks, Ayelet. Does that mean Kickstarter backers (non-dev) got v1.1 hardware?May 24, 2016 at 9:40 am #3415
Yes, Kickstarter backers (non-dev) will get v1.1 hardware.
AyeletMay 25, 2016 at 2:23 pm #3423pbiaParticipant
any update about the shipment plans of KS backers SCIOs ?
PaoloJune 19, 2016 at 7:58 am #3509
Sorry for the delayed response.
We are happy to tell you that we have begun shipping our Superstar, Early Bird, and Early Adopter kits.
Please note that we have several thousands of these complex units to make for you, and each one must pass our stringent quality control before being released.
Once we are ready to ship, we will contact you to confirm your shipping address.
June 21, 2016 at 3:25 pm #email@example.comParticipant
- This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Ayelet.
I am hoping you can help me… I have been communicating with Miriam off and on for several months, and have several inquiries in to support. I am getting nowhere and I have a product with customers and funding who are very angry with me. I have a need to measure brix in wine and beer fermentation and I need to submerse the unit. Miriam had told me she could get me one of your first liquid vessels, but then came back and said there was a delay. My last reply from her said there was now a liquid kit that I could purchase and to let her know, so I replied immediately asking to purchase this. This was some weeks ago and I have not even had a reply. Further, I have asked several times about the process of upgrading to a researcher license, as I understand I may need that for the cloud work I am doing (we have our own cloud). Miriam had also said she was copying support on my liquid questions and they would be able to help me. Again, not a single response from your company. I am about to loose hundreds of thousands of dollars on my product. I bought your developer kit at your company’s suggestion and assurance. Here again are my questions:
1. How do I get the liquid kit ASAP?
2. How do I upgrade to a researcher license, do I need to? (I can describe further my process)
3. I believe I have an SCiO 1.0 (part number CP-SC001), do I need a 1.1? Do I need one of these newer dev kits?
4. I was told there was some info available from your work on alcohol content measurement, please elaborate?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.