• Welcome to ScubaBoard

  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

So, Will Shearwater offer Gas Integration

Discussion in 'Shearwater Research' started by guyharrisonphoto, Nov 14, 2014.

  1. drrich2

    drrich2 ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Southwestern Kentucky
    I meant what % use nearly all the features it's got. People opposed to adding A.I. often use the argument - I don't want to pay for something I don't need & won't use. Yet with a powerful computer made to handle a range of environmental parameters, you're probably already paying for some things you don't need or use.

    This is an interesting point, easy to miss. I think some tec. divers believe for Shearwater to divert resources into developing a recreational Petrel version would somehow take away from improving the 'tec.' Petrel. Thing is, people speak of the Petrel as 'already awesome,' in different words. So I'm curious...

    What further improvements/refinements/features do tec. divers desire in the Petrel?

    If the answer's nothing, there's little reason not to put the effort into making a recreational version. If there are substantial technical (no pun intended) hurdles to implementing desired improvements, then I understand a fairly small company might not want to divide its focus that way.

    Much as Apple views itself as trying to do a few things with excellence, vs. Microsoft's 'a hand in every pie' approach. Of course, both make a lot of money...

    Dhboner likes this.
  2. Dr. Lecter

    Dr. Lecter Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: NYC/Honolulu
    Nope. Trimix? Check. Planning? Check. VPM? Sometimes. CCR mode? Check. OC mode? Check. Gauge mode? Every once in a while. Logging? Check. Oodles of gasses? Check. The list goes on, but I think you get the idea.

    For plenty of us, it literally has everything we use and nothing we don't.
  3. Dhboner

    Dhboner DIR Practitioner

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Toronto
    What he said :)
  4. Jim Lapenta

    Jim Lapenta Dive Shop

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Canonsburg, Pa
  5. victorzamora

    victorzamora Solo Diver

    Like I said, it depends on what you mean. To me, its biggest features are the dependability, ease of use, fantastic screen, great customer support, and complete inability to lock out. I also love its ability to treat me like a rational adult and not be a babysitter.

    If you mean the list like Dr Lecter meant, there are tons of divers that use the majority of its features. Mine doesn't stretch its legs as much as Dr Lecter's....but I use mine a whole lot more aggressively than most computers are capable of.

    Smaller, lighter, better battery life, better planning onboard, transferring settings from the PC to the Petrel, etc. Plus a bunch of other things PDC experts could think of if they were spending their resources (time, money, etc) on that goal.
    Dhboner likes this.
  6. Baron015

    Baron015 Divemaster Candidate

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: London
    I'm a technical diver. I would welcome air integration, and would use it to monitor diluent and O2. At the moment I only look at the gauges before the dive and after the dive. Gas use usually matches the plan.

    I have never used gauge mode and never will. I might use rec mode on one holiday trip a year. After that the least used feature is OC mode, I have never had to bail out since I got the Petrel.

    So each to their own. People like D Boner don't speak for all tech divers. Bring on AI in a future release, especially if you have already solved the reliability issues for the dive supervisor product.
  7. WarrenZ

    WarrenZ The Ultimate Bad Example ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Las Cruces NM
    I think that the option of air integration would make sense if Shearwater wanted to broaden the appeal for their products. Also if someone does not want AI then turning off the reciever in the Petrel shouldnt be a problem people already turn off Closed circuit mode when diving open circuit right? Im not sure if I would use AI even if I was given the transmitters after seeing some of the Suunto ones but it would open up more of a market for them as there has been several threads recently where people were looking for essentially the petrel 2 but went to something else since they couldnt get AI with it.
    scubadada likes this.
  8. tbone1004

    tbone1004 Technical Instructor ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I'm a Fish!
    Location: Greenville, South Carolina, United States
    AI as mentioned in the divecan is an entirely different concept than what most people think of when AI. You saw Bruce himself say that wireless AI isn't in the plan. So C dub, guess you can try to fire the owner of that company. You don't understand the purpose of that company, it is not a corporation out to maximize the profits, it is a small niche manufacture set out to make the best possible dive electronics out there.

    The AI that could be incorporated into the Divecan, would likely be a HP quick disconnect, that plugged into the head, into a digital pressure sensor. No different than the ones used in the QD AI computers. It would output to the handset or HUD as just another data point that it would read out. That would require nothing other than a software update on the controller and monitor, but they would have to be wired in, same as they are to monitor PO2.
    Dhboner and jboneng like this.
  9. jboneng

    jboneng Nassau Grouper

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Norway
    The more complex any computer software is the more likely something is going to bug up or break, and less code means less bugs, that's one of the strengths of the petrel, it does the core functionality exceptionally well, without a lot of unnecessary secondary functionality, bells and whistles and chrome to potentially bug up the core functionality. The more complications that is thrown at a system the more likely one of the complication will make the core functionality unstable and the more complex the system the more complex the UI becomes. You could say "just don't use those functions", but the problem is that the code for those functions is still there, buried in the firmware making the system more complex. One of the arguments I made for the petrel when I bought one was the low complexity of the system.
    Dhboner and Jim Lapenta like this.
  10. Lorenzoid

    Lorenzoid idling in neutral buoyancy ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Atlanta, USA
    In another thread, some time ago, someone made an argument along the lines that it's possible to make the code for the deco system and the code for the AI system separate or independent enough that a bug in the AI code wouldn't affect the deco system. I suppose anything is possible with enough engineering effort.

Share This Page