This is an appeal to the developers of these individual protocols.
Please work together.
In the beginning, the ASCOM collaboration created a unified device interface for the Windows OS. Its impact propelled the industry forward.
We now have multiple OSs and an increasing deployment of small powerful PCs that permit users to operate devices from a client PC or tablet.
The aim of Alpaca, INDI and INDIGO are similar, in so much that they allow flexible systems, with different host and client machines, without creating additional complexity for the application and hardware developers. Each group is doing a fantastic job and are generously working to make life easier for a group of users.
I'm not a developer but a user and a retired engineering manager. With three standards, however, the burden increases on software and hardware developers, with two potential outcomes; higher R&D costs and prices, or poorer execution with finite resources.
I don't care which is 'best', nor should anyone who adds a comment, because the whole point of this thread is an appeal for these good folks to work together and agree on a common approach. I do not know what that looks like but suspect, if it is efficient, there will be casualties rather than be a kludge of all three.
ASCOM was/is not perfect, but we live with it. The experience of working with ASCOM devices over the years, however, is a vast and important resource on how things work and, just as significantly, fail. It is shared resources like these that help shape robust protocols.
The industry trend is moving towards smaller computing units and alternative OSs and increasing use of WAN/LAN communication between host and client systems.
This is a personal perspective. I think we need an approach that reduces complexity, rather than increases it.
Edited by Chris W, 04 May 2021 - 06:28 AM.